1. Preparations of the Dutch IRRS-mission 1st ENSREG IRRS-WS Brussels, 23-24 January 2014 By: R.Jansen (KFD)/A.Sedee (NIV)

2. Inspectie Leefomgeving en Transport IRRS IN THE NETHERLANDS THE LAST ONE…………… …………… FOR THE FIRST TIME 2

3. Inspectie Leefomgeving en Transport Contents 1.General time schedule and planning 2.Organisation of the RB in the Netherlands 3.Choice of scope 4.Organization and Resources 5.SARIS-tool 6.Question sets 7.Summary 3

4. Inspectie Leefomgeving en Transport General time schedule and planning (1) 1.Start of preparation: after IAEA IRRS-WS in USA end of 2011 2.Beginning 2012: startup of projectteam and steering group 3.2nd Quarter 2012: –exchange visits with Germany and Sweden –Quick and dirty self assessment looking at 36 requirement by project team 4.August 2012: formal request by the responsible Minister 5.2nd half of 2012: (inofficial) self assessment because of outcome quick and dirty self assessment (using WORD questionsets) 6. 1st quarter 2013: 1st improvement plan and implementation 4

5. Inspectie Leefomgeving en Transport General time schedule and planning (2) 7. 2nd Quarter 2013: –exchange visit Belgium –visit IAEA about scope, SARIS, moving targets 8.2nd half of 2013/1st quarter 2014: - training SARIS - formal self assessment, 9.1st quarter 2014: Preparation of preparatory meeting (May 2014) 10. 2nd and 3rd quarter 2014: –ARM production/translation of documents –Training of experts (personal effectiveness/English) November 2014: mission 5

6. Inspectie Leefomgeving en Transport Organization of the RB in the Netherlands The Minister of Economic Affairs is the primary responsible authority. Several organizations have been mandated formally to carry out regulatory activities: –Ministry Economic Affairs:  NIV (Nuclear Installations and Safety Directorate)  AgNL, team radiation protection and society –Ministry Infrastructure and Environment:  ILT/KFD (Inspectorate of Nuclear Safety, Security, Safeguards and Radiation Protection)  ILT/TAN (emergency preparedness) –RIVM: monitoring and back office emergency preparedness –Small entities in other ministries, mainly Social Affairs, Health, Fin. 6

7. Inspectie Leefomgeving en Transport Organization of the IRRS project 1.Projectteam IRRS: ~ 10 persons, 5 fte General PL NIV: Aad Sedee/ PL KFD; Rob Jansen Organizations have their own internal project structure 2.Steering Group - Management of NIV and KFD 3.Meetings with representatives of all involved entities 4.Counterparts/deputy counterparts/staff/support IRRS triggered (or stimulated) a number of (ongoing) actions 7

8. Inspectie Leefomgeving en Transport Choice of scope Scope: general philosophy: full scope (cf. advice IAEA) all modules/activities Other ministries have been approached (Health/Social Affairs/Finan.):  Already involved in answering SARIS-questions  No final decisions yet  Regulatory Body meeting in February 8

9. Inspectie Leefomgeving en Transport Resources spent and planned Projectteam 2012 2013 2014 NIV; 1,5 2,0 2,5 fte KFD; 1,0 2,0 2,5 fte Additional estimated capacity 2012+2013+2014 (in days) NIV: SA : 500preparation phase 100 mission150 KFD: 500 130170 Others:100 50100 Total number of days (rough estimate): 1800 days + 11 fte + support Thus apart from implementation action plan: ~ 22 fte (180d/fte). 175 K€ (training and IRRS-mission); 300 K€ ARM (translation) 9

10. Inspectie Leefomgeving en Transport Experience with SARIS tool User-friendly, well structured approach but need to stay alert Invites to discuss findings Confronts with shortcomings in regulatory body SARIS explains what IRRS means Works well with different organizations and from anywhere SARIS-training of two days was enough -Just one respondent or analyst on a module at a time  hampers -As soon as just a word has been filled in: √ on a half way concept -No possibilities for lay out of the text -Many times difficult to choose Yes or NO: with no you “loose” valuable subquestions 10

11. Inspectie Leefomgeving en Transport Experience with question sets (1) General: Expectation is not always available Consistency: subjects are dealt with in several places using the same or similar questions: –E.g. Inspection and enforcement (regulatory body, MS, inspection and enforcement modules); Room for rationalizations? Look for reduction of too detailed questions? Nuclear installations: Number of questions differs between NPP, RR and FCF’s Structure of modules is not the same; no graded approach –Proposal: one set covering all types of installations per regulatory function 11

12. Inspectie Leefomgeving en Transport Experience with question sets (2) Transport and Emergency preparedness: Number of question sets quite high, there is potential for simplifications/integrations Additional modules: In many of the additional modules (e.g. Code of Conduct, Public exposure control) the questions are too much or only/mainly directed at regulations and only in a very limited way at supervision, which is also called differently: “verification”, “control”, “inspection”. A graded approach seems to be advisable. 12

13. Inspectie Leefomgeving en Transport Summary Netherlands is the last EU country with Nuclear Power programme receiving an IRRS: so it is for us the first time to receive an IRRS We are currently completing the SA phase. Final scope and participation still to be determined SARIS is a very helpful tool Improvement potential in the question sets Advisable to do a preliminary assessment Important improvements are already carried out We expect to have spent about 22 fte 2012-2014, including the mission. 13

14. Inspectie Leefomgeving en Transport Recommendations Start early if it is the first time Make a project and project structure from the beginning Learn from recent missions in other countries (do’s and don’ts) Keep close contact with IAEA Use SARIS Start early coordination with the organisations involved in the country 14