Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

IAEA International Atomic Energy Agency Self-Assessment of the National Safety Infrastructure for a NPP 4 th Steering Committee, competence of regulatory.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "IAEA International Atomic Energy Agency Self-Assessment of the National Safety Infrastructure for a NPP 4 th Steering Committee, competence of regulatory."— Presentation transcript:

1 IAEA International Atomic Energy Agency Self-Assessment of the National Safety Infrastructure for a NPP 4 th Steering Committee, competence of regulatory bodies | 05 December 2012 Jean-René JUBIN Regulatory Activities Section | Division of Nuclear Installation Safety Department of Nuclear Safety and Security

2 Contents  Self-assessment against SSG-16  IRIS - Methodology  IRIS – Software  Conclusion JR Jubin, Dec. 2012 | IRIS 2

3 Contents  Self-assessment against SSG-16  IRIS - Methodology  IRIS – Software  Conclusion JR Jubin, Dec. 2012 | IRIS 3

4 Self-Assessment against SSG 16 |1 o Safety Guide SSG 16 constitutes a “road-map” for the progressive application of IAEA safety standards according to 20 Elements through 200 actions. These actions are a “step” towards the full application of IAEA safety standards during the early phases of the implementation of a nuclear power programme JR Jubin, Dec. 2012 | IRIS 4

5 Self-Assessment against SSG 16 |2 20 Safety Elements, divided in phase 1, 2 and 3 o Relevant requirements are listed o Actions (should statements) are numbered o Additional text provides 1.rationale for the should statements 2.guidance on how to get prepared and how to reach this statements 5 Abida Khatoon– Nuclear Safety Infrastructure development National Policy and Strategy for Safety Global safety regime Legal framework Regulatory framework Transparency and openness Funding and financing External expert support Provision of technical services Leadership and management for safety Human resources development... Safety qualification of industrial organizations Technical infrastructure reliability Design safety Preparation for commissioning Transport safety Interfaces with nuclear security JR Jubin, Dec. 2012 | IRIS

6 Self-Assessment against SSG 16 |3 o To facilitate the use and implementation of SSG 16, upon Member States’ request, it has been decided to develop a self-assessment mechanism o IRIS, Integrated Review of Infrastructure for Safety JR Jubin, Dec. 2012 | IRIS 6

7 Self-Assessment against SSG 16 |4 What is self-assessment o a learning and investigation process to review the current status of an organisation, its processes and performance against predefined criteria in order to identify areas for improvement of its efficiency and effectiveness o an opportunity to develop safety culture across the involved organisations o an integral part of the development of organizations aiming at excellence o resource intensive activity which request a strong commitment JR Jubin, Dec. 2012 | IRIS 7

8 Self-Assessment against SSG 16 |5 What is the aim of self-assessment o assess the current situation and progress made to build up the safety infrastructure for a nuclear power programme o create a common understanding among stakeholders of the progress made in the development of the safety infrastructure o identify gaps between the current situation and expected status of the national safety infrastructure, and list areas where improvement is needed o take appropriate actions to strengthen the current safety infrastructure if necessary, in order to comply with IAEA standards o Progress made during a period can be measured by repeating the self-assessment as the national power programme develops JR Jubin, Dec. 2012 | IRIS 8

9 IRIS is based on 20 question-sets developed for the 20 Elements of Safety Infrastructure (Legal framework, regulatory framework, funding and financing, safety research, etc.) Self-assessment Question-sets based on 200 SSG-16 Actions Self-Assessment against SSG 16 |6 9 JR Jubin, Dec. 2012 | IRIS

10 Self-Assessment against SSG 16 |7 o For each action, one primary question and subsidiaries to develop some aspects of the answer o Primary question o Has the Government recognized the need for an effectively independent and competent Regulatory Body, and considered the appropriate position of the Regulatory Body in the State’s Governmental and legal framework for safety? o Subsidiary question o What are the role and responsibilities going to be assigned to the future regulatory body? 10 Governmental programme management Global safety regime Legal framework Regulatory framework Transparency and openness Funding and financing External expert support Provision of technical services Leadership and management for safety Human resources development Safety research Radiological protection and safety Safety assessment Radioactive waste safety and decommissioning Emergency preparedness and response Site selection and evaluation Operating organization Safety qualification of industrial organizations Technical infrastructure reliability Design safety Preparation for commissioning Transport safety Interfaces with nuclear security JR Jubin, Dec. 2012 | IRIS

11 Contents  Self-assessment against SSG-16  IRIS - Methodology  IRIS – Software  Conclusion JR Jubin, Dec. 2012 | IRIS 11 I ntegrated R eview of I nfrastructure for S afety

12 IRIS – Methodology |1 Pre-conditions The Government o should commit itself to complete the self-assessment in accordance to an agreed scope o should ensure that SA is performed at a meaningful stage in the NPP so that benefits from the SA can be expected o should ensure coordination arrangements to be established and implemented between organizations taking part in the SA 12 JR Jubin, Dec. 2012 | IRIS

13 IRIS – Methodology |2 Pre-conditions The Senior Management of the involved organizations should commit itself to: o allocate adequate resources for completion of the SA o encourage staff to perform the SA in a frank and honest manner and in a blame free environment o consider the SA conclusions in a frank and transparent way in a no- blame culture o fully implement the subsequent actions 13 JR Jubin, Dec. 2012 | IRIS

14 IRIS – Methodology |3 o The lifecycle of an IRIS self-assessment comprises 5 different steps o Can be repeated to measure regularly the progresses made to establish the infrastructure for safety 1 Preparation 2 Answering 5 Follow Up 4 Action Plan 3 Analysis JR Jubin, Dec. 2012 | IRIS 14

15 IRIS – Methodology |4 o Constitution of a Project Organisation (coordination, management, Respondents and Analysts o Preparation of a National Plan o scope for each involved organization o Selection of the corresponding question- sets o Main steps and schedule o Training concerned persons JR Jubin, Dec. 2012 | IRIS 15 1 Preparation To prepare and organise the whole assessment project Preparation

16 IRIS – Methodology |5 Preparation: project management structure JR Jubin, Dec. 2012 | IRIS 16 Coordination Group (CG) Project Manager (PM) Local Project Management Team (LPMT) Local Project Manager (LPM) Local Project Management Team (LPMT) Local Project Manager (LPM) Local Project Management Team (LPMT) Organisation 1 Organisation 2 Organisation 3 Project Management Team (PMT) Senior representatives of all relevant organizations (in early phase, it will be the NEPIO), in charge of defining the objectives and scope Senior managers, specialists and technical staff from cross-functional areas within the relevant organizations, divided in: - Respondent Team (RT) in charge of the elaboration of the answers - Analysis Team (AT), if possible, not directly involved in the elaboration of the answers Operational Team

17 IRIS – Methodology |6 Answering o Performed by the Respondent Team(s) o descriptive response, reflecting the current factual situation and not the desired state o all relevant evidence o quality check the responses JR Jubin, Dec. 2012 | IRIS 17 1 Preparation 2 Answering

18 IRIS – Methodology |7 o Review the answers and further evidence and references o Clarify answers, when needed (interview the RT, etc.) o Analyse information o Make recommendations o Produce an analyst report 1 Preparation 2 Answering 3 Analysis JR Jubin, Dec. 2012 | IRIS 18 o Performed by the Analysis Team(s) independent of the RT. Analysis

19 IRIS – Methodology |8 Developed by the Project Management Team under the authority of the Coordination Group o Based on the Analysis Report, including the recommendations o Addressing all recommendations made during the analysis phase o Addressing priorities, timelines and responsibilities (organisations) JR Jubin, Dec. 2012 | IRIS 19 1 Preparation 2 Answering 4 Action Plan 3 Analysis Action Plan

20 IRIS – Methodology |9 Responsibility of Senior management of every organization to implement the action plan and follow-up Coordination Group should regularly follow-up the action plan JR Jubin, Dec. 2012 | IRIS 20 1 Preparation 2 Answering 5 Follow Up 4 Action Plan 3 Analysis Follow-up

21 Contents  Self-assessment against SSG-16  IRIS - Methodology  IRIS – Software  Conclusion JR Jubin, Dec. 2012 | IRIS 21

22 IRIS Software |1 To facilitate the implementation of a Self-Assessment JR Jubin, Dec. 2012 | IRIS 22 1 Preparation 2 Answering5 Follow Up 4 Action Plan 3 Analysis

23 IRIS Software |2 o IRIS is a module of Self-Assessment Tool, which also includes SARIS Self-Assessment of Regulatory Infrastructure for Safety o IRIS will address the Specificities of self-assessment against SSG 16 (multiple involved organisations, phases). It will possible to select: Phase(s) Organisation(s) JR Jubin, Dec. 2012 | IRIS 23

24 IRIS Software |3 o IRIS includes the following main self-assessment steps o To answer questions thoroughly and provide facts and evidences to support their answer (Respondent role) o To analyse answers (SWOT) in order to identify rooms for improvements and provide recommendations (Analyst Role) o To develop the action plan (Action Planner Role) from gaps identified and recommendations made during the Analyst Phase JR Jubin, Dec. 2012 | IRIS 24 2 Answering 4 Action Plan 3 Analysis

25 IRIS Software |4 o Within IRIS, can be created o Self-assessment lifecycles (scope, phases, etc.) o Users and assign role and responsibilities o Administrators (managers of the system and lifecycle) o Readers o Respondents (responsible to answer questions and gather all necessary data and information) o Analysts (responsible to analyse the responses and made recommendations) o Action planners (responsible to develop an action plan) o Produce reports, interim and final JR Jubin, Dec. 2012 | IRIS 25

26 IRIS Software |5 JR Jubin, Dec. 2012 | IRIS 26

27 Contents  Self-assessment against SSG-16  IRIS - Methodology  IRIS – Software  Conclusion JR Jubin, Dec. 2012 | IRIS 27

28 JR Jubin, Dec. 2012 | IRIS 28

29 JR Jubin, Dec. 2012 | IRIS 29

30 JR Jubin, Dec. 2012 | IRIS 30

31 JR Jubin, Dec. 2012 | IRIS 31

32 JR Jubin, Dec. 2012 | IRIS 32

33 JR Jubin, Dec. 2012 | IRIS 33

34 JR Jubin, Dec. 2012 | IRIS 34

35 JR Jubin, Dec. 2012 | IRIS 35

36 Conclusion |1 -SSG-16 provides guidance to apply progressively the IAEA Safety Standards in the development of a NPP -IRIS is developed to facilitate a self-assessment of national safety infrastructure -Self-Assessment is time and resource consuming but there are many motivations to use IRIS-self-assessment, including to o Identify areas of improvement and to fix them at organisational level and national level (SSG 16) o Develop safety culture and competences for safety across the involved organisations o Promote staff commitment and involvement to their organization and its processes and its performances o Inform all stakeholders of the NPP of the progress made to establish an infrastructure for safety and to help for coordination JR Jubin, Dec. 2012 | IRIS 36

37 IAEA International Atomic Energy Agency Thank you 37 IRIS Integrated Review of Infrastructure for Safety


Download ppt "IAEA International Atomic Energy Agency Self-Assessment of the National Safety Infrastructure for a NPP 4 th Steering Committee, competence of regulatory."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google