Link to the study - European Parliament - Europa

Policy Department D: Budgetary Affairs
____________________________________________________________________________________________
d) The counterpart of reporting requirements of the management.
In the two best case examples, decommissioning by EDF in France (see chapter 3.2.2) and in Germany
at EWN (see chapter 3.4.2) the driving factor for achieving consistent and well-controlled
organisation structures was in the economic as well as the political self-interest of the responsible
organisations: to reduce the costs by effective re-structuring and by achieving a well-balanced accord
between decommissioning targets and effective cost control (EDF: on behalf of its shareholders; EWN:
on behalf of the taxpayers). In the cases of EDF and of EWN the achieved cost optimization had direct
advantages for these organisations.
Another difference between the best cases and the decision-making in the Bulgarian, Lithuanian and
Slovakian cases is the quality of supervision imposed on the managing organisation. It is neither
directly required to report on its performance nor to achieve consent for their projects in the Donor
Assembly, because EBRD acts on behalf of them. If delays or excess costs have to be reported it is not
the managing organisation that has to take over responsibility. Supervision by the Donor Assembly is
not imposed on the management organisation but on EBRD. Thus, the continuous supervision
imposed by BMF on EWN’s management cannot be compared with the much less rigorous practice
in this case.
Over the past years the national structures to steer and supervise the managing organisations have
progressed in all three countries but never reached intensity and tightness like in the two described
best cases. One reason for that might be that the vast majority of the spent resources stems from
external sources so that cost optimization has a much smaller advantageous effect for those
countries.
4.3.3. Development of a proposal to strengthen the national framework
In this current situation, opportunities to strengthen the role of the national administering and
supervising agencies could be to
a) Principally co-share the decommissioning projects, and to
b) Implement a joint supervision over the managing organisation.
The following develops a proposal on how these structures could be improved.
Co-financing the decommissioning costs would increase the country’s interest in controlling the
managing organisation’s strategic decisions towards increased cost effectiveness. In the co-financed
projects both institutions financing the activity (EC and National Administration) should equally and
in a co-directed manner oversee their effectiveness. The share should be defined at a fixed level, but
allowing the EC’s contribution to be lowered when projects are only in part related to
decommissioning. The fixed level should be depending upon the country’s abilities, but should not
be below certain thresholds to achieve the desired goal. Shared financing is a well-known EU
instrument, e.g. with structural funds in regional policy to improve development in needy regions
(EU 2013).
Strengthening the overall control over the management’s organisation could in parallel be achieved
by implementing a joint control institution, following BMF’s approach at EWN. In the case of EWN,
BMF was the only supervising agency, so the design of control structures was easier than in Bulgaria,
Lithuania and Slovakia. As there are two institutions co-financing the decommissioning – the EC and
104