What changed

DRAFT EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION

P10_TA(2026)0301

on the proposal for a Council regulation establishing the nuclearNuclear decommissioning assistance programme of the Ignalina nuclear power plant in Lithuania for the period 2028-2034, and repealing Regulation (EU) 2021/1012028-2034

(COM(2025)0476 – C100271/2025 – 2025/0268(NLE))

Committee on Industry, Research and Energy

PE785.118

European Parliament legislative resolution of 16 September 2026 on the proposal for a Council regulation establishing the nuclear decommissioning assistance programme of the Ignalina nuclear power plant in Lithuania for the period 2028-2034, and repealing Regulation (EU) 2021/101 (COM(2025)0476 – C10-0271/2025 – 2025/0268(NLE))

(Consultation)

– having regard to the budgetary assessment by the Committee on Budgets,

– having regard to RuleRules 84 and 58 of its Rules of Procedure,

– having regard to the report of the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy (A10-0197/2026),

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

✦ Formal Drops the heading "Article 1".

Article 1

Subject matter

This Regulation establishes the nuclear decommissioning assistance programme of the Ignalina nuclear power plant in Lithuania (‘the Programme’) and lays down the objectives of the Programme, its budget for the period from 1 January 2028 to 31 December 2034, the forms of Union funding and the rules for providing such funding.

✦ Formal Drops the heading "Article 2".

Article 2

Definitions

(2) ‘decommissioning plan’ means a document containing detailed information on the proposed decommissioning and covering the selected decommissioning strategy; the schedule, type and sequence of decommissioning activities; the waste management strategy applied, including clearance; the proposed end state; the storage and disposal of the waste from decommissioning; the timeframe for decommissioning; the cost estimates for the completion of decommissioning; and the objectives, expected results, milestones, target dates, as well as the corresponding key decommissioning indicators, including earned value based indicators. The plan is prepared by the nuclear facility license holder and is reflected in the multiannual work programmes of the Programme.

✦ Formal Drops the heading "Article 3".

Article 3

Programme objectives

4. The detailed description of the specific objective referred to in paragraph 3 of this Article is set out in the Annex. The Commission may amend, by means of implementing acts, the Annex. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 11(2). Implementation of the Programme and its specific objectives shall be guided by clear targets and milestones and a focus on cost-efficient and transparent spending of the budget.

✦ Formal Drops the heading "Article 4".

Article 4

Budget

4. The financial envelope referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article and the amounts of additional resources referred to in Article 5 may also be used for technical and administrative assistance for the implementation of the Programme, such as preparatory, monitoring, control, audit and evaluation activities, corporate information technology systems and platforms, information communication and visibility activities, including corporate communication on the political priorities of the Union, and all other technical and administrative assistance or staff-related expenses incurred by the Commission for the management of the Programme.

✦ Formal Drops the heading "Article 5".

Article 5

Additional resources

2. Resources allocated to Member States under shared management may, at their request, be made available to the Programme. The Commission shall implement those resources directly or indirectly in accordance with Article 62(1), point (a) or (c), of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509. Such resources shall be additional to the amount referred to in Article 4(1) of this Regulation. Such resources shall be used for the benefit of the Member State concerned. Where the Commission has not entered into a legal commitment under direct or indirect management for additional amounts thus made available to the Programme, the corresponding uncommitted amounts may, at the request of the Member State concerned, be transferred back to one or more respective source programmes or their successors.

✦ Formal Drops the heading "Article 6".

Article 6

Alternative, combined and cumulative funding

2. Award procedures under the Programme may be jointly conducted under direct or indirect management by Member States, Union institutions, bodies and agencies, third countries, international organisations, international financial institutions, or other third parties (‘partners to the joint award procedure’), provided the protection of the financial interests of the Union is ensured. Such procedures shall be subject to a single set of rules and lead to the conclusion of single legal commitments. For that purpose, the partners to the joint award procedure may make resources available to the Programme in accordance with Article 5 of this Regulation, or the partners may be entrusted with the implementation of the award procedure, where applicable in accordance with Article 62(1), point (c), of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509. In joint award procedures, representatives of the partners to the joint award procedure may also be members of the evaluation committee referred to in Article 153(3) of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509.

✦ Formal Drops the heading "Article 7".

Article 7

Implementation and forms of Union funding

2. Union funding under the Programme may be provided in any form in accordance with Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509, in particular, prizes, procurement and non-financial donations.

✦ Formal Drops the heading "Article 8".

Article 8

Eligibility

2. The work programmes referred to in Article 110 of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509 may further specify the eligibility criteria set out in this Regulation or set additional eligibility criteria for specific actions.

✦ Formal Drops the heading "Article 9".

Article 9

Co-financing rates

The overall maximum Union co-financing rate applicable under the Programme shall be as close to 86% as possible. The remaining financing shall be provided by Lithuania and additional sources other than the Union budget.

✦ Formal Drops the heading "Article 10".

Article 10

Work programme

2. The work programmes shall reflect the applicable decommissioning plan that is to serve as the baseline for the programme monitoring and evaluation.

✦ Formal Drops the heading "Article 11".

Article 11

Committee

3. Where the opinion of the committee is to be obtained by written procedure, that procedure shall be terminated without result when, within the time limit for delivery of the opinion, the chair of the committee so decides or a simple majority of committee members so requests.

✦ Formal Drops the heading "Article 12".

Article 12

Repeal

Regulation (EU) 2021/101 is repealed with effect from 1 January 2028.

✦ Formal Drops the heading "Article 13".

Article 13

Transitional provisions

2. The financial envelope for the Programme may also cover technical and administrative assistance expenses necessary to ensure the transition between the Programme and the measures adopted under Regulation (EU) 2021/101.

✦ Formal Drops the heading "Article 14".

Article 14

Entry into force and application

The President

✦ Formal Drops the heading "ANNEX".

ANNEX

The following activities are covered under the specific objective set out in Article 3((3):

(IVa) The protection of nuclear decommissioning site against hybrid threats, including attacks from unmanned systems on critical infrastructure, as well as strengthening of preparedness, risk awareness, and prevention capacities.

EXPLANATORY STATEMENT

Decommissioning of the Ignalina nuclear power plant (INPP) is a first-of-a-kind, highly technically complex challenge for the European nuclear safety. It is also about the EU delivering on its commitment to solidarity with Lithuania.

Under Protocol No. 4 of Lithuania’s EU Accession Treaty, the country was required to prematurely close the Ignalina nuclear power plant due to serious safety concerns in Europe. The graphite-moderated Chernobyl-type reactors, although significantly more powerful, lacked full containment, and were inherently unsafe due to a fundamentally flawed design. Politically, closing the plant was a very difficult decision for Lithuania, where nuclear power, at its peak in 1993, covered some 88% of domestic electricity demand. However, the decision was taken in the interest of safety of Europe and based on a clear promise enshrined in the Accession Treaty: that the European Union would provide “adequate” financial assistance for the decommissioning of the Soviet-era plant. The Rapporteur welcomes the proposed Regulation which sets the amount and conditions for the next MFF 2028-2034. Discontinuing the Programme would have undermined the credibility of the Union. However, the Rapporteur aims to further strengthen the proposal, especially taking the account current geopolitical challenges, through a series of targeted amendments:

1. Predictable and stable funding

The Rapporteur welcomes the Commission’s proposal to set the Programme’s funding in the next MFF at EUR 678 000 000 in current prices. However, both in the recitals and in the main text, this amount is referred to as “indicative” (“indicative financial envelope “), potentially implying that this amount is negotiable and can be reduced. This is disconcerting, particularly as this was not the case in the previous periods. The rapporteur considers the term “indicative” as misleading: it could reduce confidence that the Programme will be funded adequately. During the next MFF, the dismantling of the reactor cores will begin, and once started, this work cannot be interrupted to prevent risks and radiological hazards. Any funding uncertainty therefore raises serious nuclear safety concerns.

2. Anti-drone systems

The physical protection of the plant currently falls outside of the Ignalina Programme’s scope and remains the responsibility of the Lithuanian state. However, in recent years, nuclear power plants have become target of military strikes - for instance in February 2025, when a drone has caused nearly irreparable damage to the sarcophagus of the Chernobyl reactor, resulting in significant economic cost. Therefore, the Rapporteur proposes to include the anti-drone protection of the site within the scope of the Programme, to safeguard the population and prevent environmental and economic losses. This would also serve to protect the investments the Union has made over the years into the decommissioning of this object.

3. Strengthening the Union’s technological sovereignty

It is the view of the Rapporteur that Union funding under the Ignalina Programme should be limited to legal entities established in a Member State or in a country associated to relevant Union programmes, unless otherwise justified by duly substantiated security or technical necessity. Limiting eligibility would strengthen the protection of sensitive technologies, critical infrastructure and strategic know-how. It would also support the Union’s objective of reinforcing technological sovereignty and strategic autonomy. Exceptions can be made only by substantial security or technical necessity.In order to strengthen the Union’s technological sovereignty and strategic autonomy in the nuclear decommissioning sector, knowledge generated under the Programme should primarily reinforce Union industrial and technological capacities, while dissemination beyond the Union should be conducted in a manner that safeguards the Union’s security interests, intellectual property, and technological leadership.Sharing the knowledge indiscriminately risks empowering Europe’s competitors, including geopolitical rivals at the expense of the Union’s interest.

4. Geological repository

The Commission’s proposal excludes the disposal of spent fuel and radioactive waste in deep geological repository, while the Rapporteur calls for keeping it in the Programme. Due to the premature shutdown, INPP was unable to generate financial resources for the final disposal of spent fuel and radioactive waste generated during its operation and fulfil its responsibility as a radioactive waste generator as provided for in the Article 9 of the Council Directive 2011/70/Euratom and national legal acts.Although Lithuania should take due responsibility for spent fuel and radioactive waste management, including final disposal, the magnitude of the financial burden placed on Lithuania (to co-finance INPP decommissioning and simultaneously fund the implementation of the deep geological repository) puts Lithuania in an exceptionally problematic situation. The cost of the final disposal is estimated at staggering 6.5 billion Euros. EU solidarity therefore must be also reflected in financial support for Lithuania‘s effort to implement final disposal solutions and avoid undue burden for future generations.

BUDGETARY ASSESSMENT OF THE COMMITTEE ON BUDGETS

for the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy

on the proposal for a Council regulation establishing the nuclear decommissioning assistance programme of the Ignalina nuclear power plant in Lithuania for the period 2028-2034, and repealing Regulation (EU) 2021/101

(COM(2025)0476 – C100271/2025 – 2025/0268(NLE))

Rapporteur for budgetary assessment: Rasmus Nordqvist

The Committee on Budgets has carried out a budgetary assessment of the proposal under Rule 58 of the Rules of Procedure and has reached the following conclusions:

The Committee on Budgets,

A. whereas the nuclear decommissioning assistance programme for the Ignalina nuclear power plant in Lithuania (Ignalina programme) is intended to assist Lithuania in addressing the safety challenges associated with the decommissioning of a nuclear power plant, while generating knowledge to be shared with other EU Member States and non-EU countries for their own decommissioning activities; whereas the proposed programme is a continuation of activities that have been conducted since the early 2000s and are expected to run until 2049;

B. whereas nuclear safety is a public good, and past programmes have demonstrated the added value of collecting and disseminating knowledge linked to nuclear safety and the decommissioning of nuclear power plants;

C. whereas high levels of nuclear safety limit the risks associated with the management of nuclear facilities;

D. whereas the EU’s financial and technical contribution to the decommissioning of the Ignalina power plant is enshrined in Lithuania’s Accession Treaty as a demonstration of European solidarity;

1. Agrees that the programme envelope should be set at EUR 678 000 000 in current prices (EUR 602 720 000 in 2025 prices) in order to fulfil the programme’s objectives;

2. Considers that sufficient human and technical resources must be available from the outset and throughout the entire programming period of the 2028-2034 multiannual financial framework to ensure the effective implementation of the Ignalina programme;

3. Stresses that decommissioning activities meet long-term legal and technical obligations; considers, therefore, that stable and predictable financial programming is a condition for sound budgetary management;

4. Takes note of the suggested complementarity between the Ignalina programme and other programmes, such as the Instrument for Nuclear Safety Cooperation and Decommissioning and the Cohesion Fund; stresses that enhanced complementarity between instruments must not come at the expense of expenditure traceability or the prerogatives of the budgetary authority; stresses, in this regard, that any such contribution must be duly reflected in the programme performance statement for the Ignalina programme; insists that the budgetary authority retain full control over how resources are combined across instruments and over the effective contribution of each programme to EU priorities, specifically through detailed budgetary nomenclature; stresses that enhanced complementarity between programmes must not lead to disproportionate complexity for beneficiaries; calls for EU funding to be clearer, more accessible and more coherent in order to facilitate uptake and maximise the impact of investments;

5. Stresses that the use of external assigned revenue under the Ignalina programme must be clearly circumscribed, fully transparent and subject to effective parliamentary scrutiny; takes note, in that regard, of the provisions relating to additional financial contributions from any participating non-EU countries and other donors; underlines that, should the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy consider amending the provisions relating to external assigned revenue, this should be done in coordination with the Committee on Budgets and the other committees in order to ensure a consistent approach;

6. Recalls the proposal for a regulation establishing a budget expenditure tracking and performance framework and other horizontal rules for the Union programmes and activities (performance regulation), which establishes a single streamlined list of performance indicators and monitoring and evaluation provisions, some of which are relevant to the Ignalina programme; underlines that any change to the architecture, objectives and eligible actions under the programme will need to be appropriately reflected in Annex I of the performance regulation, as part of the process of amending and negotiating that regulation; points out that while sectoral legislation can supplement the performance regulation, for instance as regards programme evaluations, it should remain consistent with the provisions of that regulation;

7. Recalls that under Article 6(2) and (3) of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509 (Financial Regulation), a general regime of conditionality in cases of breaches of the the rule of law applies to the establishment and implementation of the budget; underlines, furthermore, that the Member States and the Commission must, in the implementation of the budget, ensure compliance with the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and respect the values on which the EU is founded, as enshrined in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union.

AMENDMENT

As part of its budgetary assessment, the Committee on Budgets also submits the following amendments to the proposal:

Article 4 – Paragraph 1: The programme envelope for the implementation of the Programme for the period from 1 January 2028 to 31 December 2034 is set at EUR 678 000 000 in current prices (EUR 602 720 000 in 2025 prices).