Feedback on IRRS Missions to EU Member States

Follow up mission to Spain. January 2011.

Feedback on IRRS Missions to EU Member States

Memorandum of Understanding between the ENSREG and IAEA on international peer review missions to the EU member States concernsalso feedback on the conduct of IRRS missions to EU Member States.According to Article 9 feedback will be provided to the IAEA to assist development of the IRRS Guidelines and to improve the implementation of the future European IRRS programme. Accordingly, feedback on each IRRS mission to EU Member States will be collected. For this purpose Member States are expected to provide the ENSREG IRRS Coordination Group with a feedback summary covering the following issues:

• general aspects on the conduct of the mission.

Scope of the exploratory mission: It is very important to define very well in advance the scope of the exploratory mission. The scope is different concerningthe exploratory missions and the follow-up missions. It is important that the team of experts recognize the defined scope. The scope of the follow up mission should focus on the recommendations and suggestions of the exploratory mission, unless it is agreed differently between the host country and the team of experts or the IAEA(EU IRRS missions). After the outcomes included in the report of the IRRS mission are released, the recipient country sets up an action plan for addressing the recommendations and suggestions performed. The scope of the follow up mission should be on the accomplishments of the action plan.

Selection of the team of experts for the follow up mission. It is highly recommendable that the team of experts for the follow up mission is the same or a sub-set of the participating experts in the IRRS mission. Due to the elapsed period of time between the IRRS mission and the follow up people might retired. This should be taken in consideration.

Guidelines used during the follow up mission. The guidelines used in the follow up mission performed to Spain were not revised by the Member States. The guidelines used were modified by the IAEA officials without any possibility of comments by the recipient country or the Member States. It was difficult for the recipient country to know which revision of the guidelines were to be used by the IAEA coordination the preparation of the follow up mission and the team experts. It is absolutely necessary to define the revision of IRRS guidelines in order to be able for the hosting country to accommodate all the necessary requirements for the preparation meeting and the follow up mission itself.

It is important that a formal process for revision of the guidelinesbe established so that each Member State knows which revision is applicable at the time of the IRRS mission or in the follow up mission. Member States should be able to comment and participate in the guidelines revision.

Duration of the follow up mission. In principle the duration of the follow up mission should be shorter that the IRRS mission. The actual guidelines do not fix clearly the duration of the follow up mission. The expected duration has to be clarified and fixed in the guidelines, in accordance with the scope of the mission.

• Logistics aspects. Translation of documents. Available information in advance to the IRRS mission or the follow up mission. The IAEA should have in place a secure website for the missions, in which the recipient country and the team of experts could download the necessarydocumentation as appropriate. In the IRRS mission and the follow up mission performed to Spain, the CSN provided to the IAEA with a web site including user identification and password for the team experts. the IAEA was in charge of providing on time this information to the team of experts, which was made with a delay.
• Experts of the mission team (expertise, familiarity with the IRRS Guidelines and IAEA Safety Requirements, familiarity with the advance material etc.)

It is important the team of experts be familiar with the mission guidelines and with the national framework of the hosting country. For instance, in the EU we have the Euratom Directives which include different requirements that those included on the IAEA Safety Requirements , and must be taken into account that meanwhile the Euratom Directive are binding for all EU Member States that is not the case for the IAEA BSS.

The team leader of the IRRS mission, or the follow up mission, should have participated in a prior IRRS mission or a follow up mission as expert, so that he or she is familiar with the process, so that he or she will be able to produce the mission report in the established period of time and be able to monitor and supervise all the peer review mission is running as it is appropriate

The documentation for the team of experts should be available three months in advance of the scheduled dates forthe mission. The recipient country must perform an additional effort to translate the documentation into English language. This aspect is necessary to be taken into account for the preparation of the mission

• deficiencies in the IRRS Guidelines

as indicated before the Member States should have the capability to participate in the revision and improvement of the IAEA guidelines

• relevance of the mission findings (recommendations, suggestions) on the Member States’ needs

The recipient country should set up an action plan with the recommendations and suggestions of the missions. In order to manage adequately the action plan the recipient country should have in place a management system capable to deal with the recommendations and suggestion.

In order to improve and learn from each other it might be interesting that the results of the IRRS missions and the follow up missions be widely disseminated, and published in the Website, presented in review meetings of the Conventions (mainly in the Convention on Nuclear Safety). The IRRS missions and follow up process should be transparent.

• other issues.

The financial resourcesassociated to the missions are important.

Consideration must be given to the human resources involved:

• to attend the missions
• to set up the action plan to accomplish the recommendations and suggestions

It is highly recommendable that the IAEA develops a user-friendly webpage with clear distinction between the reports of the IRRS missions and the reports of the follow up missions. Also it is important to know in advance which are the countries that have requested an IRRS mission, and the schedule established, so that in the review meetings of the Convention on Nuclear Safety information regarding the results of the mission can be asked for.