Following last year’s withdrawal of the referendum on a second unit at Slovenia’s sole nuclear power plant, Krško, the year 2028 has emerged as a decisive point for defining the country’s long-term energy strategy. That year is expected to bring a public vote on what could become the largest infrastructure project in Slovenia’s history, followed by a final political decision on whether a new unit will be constructed and which company would undertake the project.
To prevent delays if the expansion proceeds, Gen Energija, the main investor, has continued preparatory work, including commissioning technical feasibility studies for the Krško site. These studies, presented publicly in early September, were prepared by US-based Westinghouse and French EDF. Both concluded that their standard reactor designs could be deployed at Krsko with site-specific adjustments, enabling a potential comparative assessment of the technologies based on technical complexity, costs, and capacity.
In early December, the state secretary responsible for the national nuclear program emphasized that the supplier selection process is intended to remain competitive. Initially, three potential suppliers were considered—from South Korea, the United States, and France—but South Korea withdrew, leaving two candidates under ongoing discussions.
However, documents indicate that even before the feasibility studies were completed, a draft intergovernmental agreement (IGA) between Slovenia and the United States had reached the Prime Minister’s office. Prepared during the previous government’s term, the draft envisaged detailed cooperation on the Krško expansion. After remaining inactive for some time, the draft was forwarded to the Ministry of Environment, Climate and Energy in July for review. The Ministry responded in mid-August, finding the draft conceptually unacceptable and highlighting multiple contentious elements.
Despite this, the Prime Minister and the state secretary decided to proceed with further work on the agreement, releasing a slightly revised version of the text. The Ministry warned that the proposed IGA defined cooperation in a detailed and binding manner, which could effectively prevent Slovenia from concluding agreements with other countries. It noted that such a move could limit competition in the supplier selection process and potentially conflict with both Slovenian and EU public procurement rules.
The Ministry also highlighted the potential financial consequences, arguing that limiting competition could prevent the state from securing the most economically advantageous offer. The draft agreement was seen as undermining Gen Energija’s strategy, which seeks to maintain multiple suppliers to strengthen negotiating positions. While the draft claimed it would not create direct financial obligations for the Slovenian government, the Ministry questioned the certainty of this claim for all involved parties.
Additional concerns raised included unclear provisions regarding project documentation financing, absence of exit clauses, and dispute resolution mechanisms, which could expose the state to significant future costs. As Slovenia moves closer to the pivotal 2028 vote, balancing international cooperation with a competitive and transparent selection process remains a key challenge for policymakers.
