[en] This series of slides focuses on expectations from NPP operators concerning key points and role of TSOs (Technical Safety Organizations) related to -) skills and competence, with the need for broad systemic views regarding safety issues, -) the whole licensing and regulatory framework, for an efficient safety management in a competitiveness context (the requirements must be clear, reliable, stable, timely and internationally aligned), and -) the harmonization and the standardization in the licensing process to foster nuclear renaissance

[en] This extended abstract discusses a sample of the various issues that small reactor applicants or vendors may encounter in the lead-up to the submission of a construction licence application to the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission. (author)

[en] Full text of publication follows. Legal framework. The decommissioning of a Basic Nuclear Installation (BNI) is a lengthy and complex operation involving risks. To date, about 30 BNIs of all types have been shut down or are undergoing decommissioning in France. The current regulations relative to BNI decommissioning are based on Act of 13. June 2006 relative to transparency and nuclear safety. It has been supplemented in 2015 by the Act relative to Energy Transition for Green Growth (TECV Act): -) The principle of immediate dismantling is enshrined in law. -) The law differentiates between final shutdown and decommissioning of a BNI. -) The final shutdown of a BNI is the responsibility of the licensee, who must notify the Minister responsible for Nuclear Safety and ASN of the date no later than two years (or less if justified) prior to final shutdown. As of this date, the installation is considered to have final shutdown status and must be decommissioned. -) Decommissioning (time-frame and procedures) is prescribed (and no longer authorized) by Decree, issued on the advice of ASN. Until the decommissioning decree comes into force, the facility remains governed by the provisions of its Creation Authorization Decree and the ASN prescriptions, which may be added to or modified if necessary. -) An installation which has ceased to function for two consecutive years is considered to be finally shut down. The decommissioning file presented by the licensee undergoes the same consultations and inquiries as those applicable to a BNI creation authorization application and in accordance with the same procedures. The decommissioning decree determines the characteristics of decommissioning, its completion deadline and, as necessary, the operations under the responsibility of the licensee after decommissioning. The technical provisions during decommissioning must comply with general safety and radiation protection rules regarding workers' exposure, criticality risk, production of radioactive waste, liquid and gaseous releases to the environment, and measures to reduce the probability of accidents and mitigate their consequences. The waste management procedures are systematically assessed when reviewing the overall decommissioning strategies adopted by each licensee. For getting the de-licensing decision after completion of decommissioning, the licensee must demonstrate that the foreseen final status has indeed been reached and assess the state of the site and remaining constructions. To preserve the memory of the past existence of BNIs, or if a residual contamination remains, ASN may condition the de-licensing to the implementation of land-use restrictions or precautionary measures. In order to clarify the regulations on decommissioning and waste management, updated by the Ordinance of February 2016, ASN will continue to develop new guides in these fields as well as in the field of BNI contaminated sites and soils. (authors)

[en] Full text of publication follows. The decommissioning of a Basic Nuclear Installation (BNI) is a lengthy and complex operation involving risks. To date, about thirty BNIs of all types have been shut down or are undergoing decommissioning in France. In order to clarify the regulations on decommissioning and waste management, updated by the Ordinance of February 2016, ASN develop new guides in these fields as well as in the field of BNI contaminated sites and soils. Concrete implementation of the legal framework: The ASN guides was created as an educational tool for professionals. They detail the recommendations, propose methods for achieving the objectives set in the texts and present methods and best practices stemming from experience feedback from significant events. In order to clarify the regulations on de-commissioning and waste management ASN continued to develop new guides in these fields. Namely 2 guides were updated. In 2016, ASN updated and published the new version of guide Nr. 6 concerning final shutdown, decommissioning and de-licensing of BNIs. It indicates the possibility of carrying out decommissioning preparatory operations after the final shutdown (waste evacuation, radioactivity reduction operation). These preparatory operations were especially implemented by the BNIs Nr. 40, 72 and 93. They allowed a decrease in the nuclear risks. The new version of Guide Nr. 14 relative to the post-operational clean-out of the structures in BNIs explains the notions of complete clean-out based on 3 lines of defence. In the event that, depending on the characteristics of the contamination or pollution, this approach would pose difficulties of implementation, the ASN considers that the operator must go as far as reasonably possible in the process of remediation. It must justify, from a technical or economic point of view, that the reference process defined by the ASN cannot be implemented in its entirety, and that the remediation operations cannot go further with the methods, remediation and decommissioning techniques available under acceptable economic conditions. These provisions allow a reduction of nuclear waste production as it was the case during the BNI Nr. 18 decommissioning. (authors)

[en] There is an emerging need in the nuclear industry for regulatory bodies to process applications for licenses/permits in order to allow nuclear license applicants to prepare a nuclear site by undertaking early construction activities before the issuance of a construction permit by the regulatory organization or the selection of a specific facility design. This is proving to be a challenge as most regulators have no experience in dealing with this issue. Furthermore, there are no explicit IAEA guidelines addressing the issue. Some countries such as Canada, UK and USA have established local practices based on current projects they are engaged in. However, such practices are both country and project specific. This challenge presents increased opportunities for TSOs to participate in licensing activities for which regulatory bodies are not routinely structured to undertake. It also presents an opportunity for regulatory bodies to diversify their organizational structures in order to meet increasing industry demands and expectations. The aim of this paper is to disseminate information on the process currently being followed by the National Nuclear Regulator (NNR) of South Africa to address the challenge highlighted above in a country and project specific context. The paper presents the operational model chosen by the NNR to address the issue, provides a summary of the project deliverables accomplished so far in order to formalize their acceptance and closure, highlights lessons learnt, outlines the strategic objectives for future deliverables. Major risks for mitigation are also outlined to ensure that subsequent phases of the project remain on track. The successful completion of the phases of the project completed so far, despite some challenges, serves as an important demonstration that similar projects can be planned and completed with products that have direct use by other regulatory bodies. (author)

[en] Both global warming and the need for dependable sources of energy continue to make nuclear power generation an appealing option. But a history of cost overruns, project delays, and environmental disaster has pushed the industry to innovate and design a more flexible, scalable, and safe source of nuclear energy - the small modular reactor. Innovation in generation technology creates disruption in already complex licensing and regulatory processes. This paper discusses how the application of systems engineering and requirements management can help combat confusion, rework, and efficiency problems across the engineering and compliance life cycle. The paper is based on the PhD Dissertation 'Licensing Model Development for Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) - Focusing on Finnish Regulatory Framework', approved in 2013. The result of the study gives recommendations and tools to develop and optimize the licensing process for SMRs. The most important SMR-specific feature, in terms of licensing, is the modularity of the design. Here the modularity indicates multi-module SMR designs, which creates new challenges in the licensing process. Another feature impacting licensing feasibility is the plan to build many standardized power plants in series and use factory-fabricated modules to optimize the construction costs. SMR licensing challenges are under discussion in many international forums, such as World Nuclear Association Cooperation in Reactor Design Evaluation and Licensing Small Modular Reactor group (WNA CORDEL SMR) group and IAEA INPRO regulators' forum. This paper also presents an application of the new licensing process using Systems Engineering, Requirements Management, and Project Management practices and tools. (author)

[en] The International Reactor Physics Experiment Evaluation Project (IRPhEP) and the International Criticality Safety Benchmark Evaluation Project (ICSBEP) are sources of evaluated integral benchmark data that may be used for validation of reactor physics / nuclear criticality safety analytical methods and data, nuclear data testing, and safety analysis licensing activities. The IRPhEP is patterned after its predecessor, the ICSBEP, but focuses on other integral measurements such as buckling, spectral characteristics, reactivity effects, reactivity coefficients, kinetics measurements, reaction-rate and power distributions, nuclide compositions and other miscellaneous types of measurements in addition to the critical configuration. Both projects will be discussed.

[en] The following topics are discussed: Education concept (Educational system; Types of education and training; Education and training groups); Qualifications and competencies (Staff groups); Certifications, licences and authorisations; Educational and training facilities, training programmes; educational plans, education and training assessments, records. (P.A.)

[en] The regulatory process for new power plant licensing in Canada, from receipt of the initial application to commercial operation, can be divided into three phases: - Environmental Assessment (EA) and License to Prepare Site; - License to Construct; and - License to Operate. The Nuclear Safety and Control Act (NSCA) does not have provisions for combined licenses for site preparation, construction, or operation. Separate licenses must, therefore, be granted for each phase, and would be issued in sequence. However, applications to prepare a site, to construct and to operate a new nuclear power plant could be assessed in parallel. The total duration from the application for the License to Prepare Site to the issuance of the License to Operate (which is a prerequisite for first fuel load) has been established as 9 years subject to certain factors. To help facilitate this timeline, the CNSC has undertaken an aggressive program of documenting regulatory practices, requirements and guidance to assist applicants in submitting complete applications. Working level procedures to assist CNSC staff in their review of submissions are also under development. Extensive program and project management has been introduced to ensure that timelines will be achieved. In parallel with the above activities, regulatory oversight measures to be employed during site preparation activities and plant construction and commissioning are also being developed. On the international front, the CNSC is participating in the MDEP program to leverage the resources and knowledge of other national regulatory authorities in reviews the CNSC is undertaking. The CNSC also participates in IAEA and other international activities to utilize/adapt international practices as appropriate in Canada. (authors)

[en] In accordance with the Nuclear Energy Act, the use of nuclear energy constitutes operations subject to license. The licensing process and conditions for granting a license is defined in the legislation. The licenses are applied from and granted by the Government. This paper discusses briefly the licensing process in Finland and also the roles and responsibilities of main stakeholders in licensing. Licensing of a nuclear power plant in Finland has three steps. The first step is the Decision in Principle (DiP). Goal of DiP is to decide whether using nuclear power is for the overall good for the Finnish society. The second step is Construction License (CL) and the goal of CL phase is to determine whether the design of the proposed plant is safe and that the participating organisations are capable of constructing the plant to meet safety goals. The third step is the Operating License (OL) and the goal of the OL phase is to determine whether the plant operates safely and licensee is capable to operate the plant safely. Main stakeholders in the licensing process in Finland are the utility (licensee) interested in using nuclear power in Finland, Ministry of Employment and the Economy (MEE), Government, Parliament, STUK, the municipality siting the plant and the general public. Government grants all licenses, and Parliament has to ratify Government's Decision in Principle. STUK has to assess the safety of the license applications in each step and give statement to the Ministry. Municipality has to agree to site the plant. Both STUK and the municipality have a veto right in the licensing process