1. Department of Nuclear Safety and Security
Self-Assessment of the National Safety Infrastructure for a NPP 4th 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. Self-assessment against SSG-16 IRIS - Methodology IRIS – Software
Contents
Self-assessment against SSG-16
IRIS - Methodology
IRIS – Software
Conclusion
JR Jubin, Dec | IRIS

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

4. Self-Assessment against SSG 16 |1
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 | IRIS

5. Self-Assessment against SSG 16 |2
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
20 Safety Elements, divided in phase 1, 2 and 3
Relevant requirements are listed
Actions (should statements) are numbered
Additional text provides
rationale for the should statements
guidance on how to get prepared and how to reach this statements
JR Jubin, Dec | IRIS
Abida Khatoon– Nuclear Safety Infrastructure development

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

7. Self-Assessment against SSG 16 |4
What is self-assessment
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
an opportunity to develop safety culture across the involved organisations
an integral part of the development of organizations aiming at excellence
resource intensive activity which request a strong commitment
JR Jubin, Dec | IRIS

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

9. Self-Assessment against SSG 16 |6
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
JR Jubin, Dec | IRIS

10. Self-Assessment against SSG 16 |7
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
For each action, one primary question and subsidiaries to develop some aspects of the answer
Primary question
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?
Subsidiary question
What are the role and responsibilities going to be assigned to the future regulatory body?
JR Jubin, Dec | IRIS

11. Integrated Review of Infrastructure for Safety
Contents
Self-assessment against SSG-16
IRIS - Methodology
IRIS – Software
Conclusion
Integrated Review of Infrastructure for Safety
JR Jubin, Dec | IRIS

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

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

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

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

16. Coordination Group (CG) Project Management Team (PMT)
IRIS – Methodology |5
Preparation: project management structure
Senior representatives of all relevant organizations (in early phase, it will be the NEPIO), in charge of defining the objectives and scope
Coordination Group (CG)
Project Manager (PM)
Project Management Team (PMT)
Operational Team
Local Project Manager (LPM)
Local Project Manager (LPM)
Local Project Manager (LPM)
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
Local Project Management Team (LPMT)
Local Project Management Team (LPMT)
Local Project Management Team (LPMT)
Organisation 1
Organisation 2
Organisation 3
JR Jubin, Dec | IRIS

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

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

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

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

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

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

23. IRIS Software |2
IRIS is a module of Self-Assessment Tool, which also includes SARIS
Self-Assessment of Regulatory Infrastructure for Safety
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 | IRIS

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

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

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

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

28. JR Jubin, Dec | IRIS

29. JR Jubin, Dec | IRIS

30. JR Jubin, Dec | IRIS

31. JR Jubin, Dec | IRIS

32. JR Jubin, Dec | IRIS

33. JR Jubin, Dec | IRIS

34. JR Jubin, Dec | IRIS

35. JR Jubin, Dec | IRIS

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
Identify areas of improvement and to fix them at organisational level and national level (SSG 16)
Develop safety culture and competences for safety across the involved organisations
Promote staff commitment and involvement to their organization and its processes and its performances
Inform all stakeholders of the NPP of the progress made to establish an infrastructure for safety and to help for coordination
JR Jubin, Dec | IRIS

37. Integrated Review of Infrastructure for Safety
IRIS
Integrated Review of Infrastructure for Safety
Thank you 37