Link to the study - European Parliament - Europa

Nuclear Decommissioning: Management of Costs and Risks
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Note that in Figure 30 substructures between the receiving country and EBRD have been omitted.
These are discussed in more detail in later chapters (see chapters 4.3 and 4.4).
This shows that according to the structural arrangements EBRD has immense and diverse
responsibilities. It has a considerable power over funding generally as well as over the decision and
implementation process. EBRD, not the Decommissioning organisation, prepares the projects to be
decided (project presenter), and so acts as a filter between the implementer and the decision maker.
Fund volumes and EU contribution
The following countries were contributors to these funds: Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Ireland,
Greece, Spain, France, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Austria, Poland, Finland, Sweden, the United
Kingdom, Norway and Switzerland. Their contribution amounted to EUR 60 million. From 2004 the EU
is the only contributor (ECoA 2011), but fund management arrangements were not changed.
The complete volume of EU-funded assistance is given in Figure 31.
Figure 31: EU contribution from 1999 to 2013 and their share
Source: (ECoA 2011)
The EU contribution totals at EUR 2 850 million in 2013, with different shares among the three
receiving countries (Ignalina/Lithuania received about half of the total contributions).
4.3. THE ORGANISATIONAL FRAMEWORK OF DECOMMISSIONING IN BULGARIA,
LITHUANIA AND SLOVAKIA
As described in chapter 4.1, all three countries were, to a more or less high degree, unprepared and
practically had not established national structures to organize and administer the decommissioning
phase of their nuclear power plants.
99