MEP Jorge Martín Frías (PfE) has asked the European Commission to explain why radioactive minerals used as nuclear fuel are not granted the same regulatory treatment as other strategic minerals under the Critical Raw Materials Act, warning that this asymmetry undermines the technological neutrality of the European Green Deal.
The written question, submitted on 7 April 2026, highlights that while the Commission and Council recognise nuclear energy as essential for decarbonisation and security of supply, uranium and other nuclear fuel materials fall under the Euratom Treaty and the Euratom Supply Agency, excluding them from the Critical Raw Materials Act. Frías argues this creates a regulatory gap that could jeopardise the EU's energy security.
Concrete asks Frías poses three specific questions: (1) how the Commission ensures equivalent treatment for nuclear fuel supply chains; (2) whether it will propose a specific Euratom instrument with security-of-supply and diversification objectives similar to those in the Critical Raw Materials Act; and (3) what impact the regulatory asymmetry has on the Green Deal's proclaimed technological neutrality.
The questions are concrete in their demand for policy justification and future legislative intent, but do not set numerical targets or deadlines.
Policy orientation The MEP advocates for elevating nuclear fuel to the same strategic priority as lithium or rare earths, pushing for a dedicated security-of-supply framework under Euratom. This reflects a broader cleavage between supporters of nuclear energy and those prioritising renewables, with implications for EU energy sovereignty and industrial competitiveness.
Expected follow-up The Commission must reply within approximately six weeks. Its answer will signal whether it views nuclear fuel as strategically equivalent to other critical raw materials, and whether it plans to propose new legislation under Euratom to address the perceived asymmetry.
← Atlas › News › Energy