1. Michael Webster (Cameco Corporation) Tamara Yankovich (IAEA, Formerly Saskatchewan Research Council) Martin Klukas (Atomic Energy of Canada Limited) IAEA – MODARIA (Working Group 1) WG1 11 November, 2013 Decision-Making Framework A Compilation of Information Presented in Kiev IAEA WG1- Decision Making Process

2. IAEA – MODARIA (Working Group 1) WG1 Kiev June 2013 2 IAEA WG1- Decision Making Process

3. IAEA – MODARIA (Working Group 1) WG1 Kiev June 2013 ●Presentations made by all member states ●Discussion centred on what member states were doing regarding remediation of radiologically contaminated sites. –What has been done –Issues arising –What tools can be used to assess potential remedial options –Decision processes followed to determine remediation requirements 3 IAEA WG1- Decision Making Process

4. Kiev summary Decision Making Process – Provided for Discussion 4 IAEA WG1- Decision Making Process ●In response to Action Item 2-4a ●A single flowchart was created (for discussion with WG1 members) –In general the decision making processes presented in Kiev were similar –The flowchart presented is a compilation of the different decision making processes presented in Kiev  Belgium  France  Canada –Will hopefully spark discussion regarding the process to follow when assessing the need for remediation as well as the additional considerations and the tools available to assess potential remedial options

5. IAEA MODARIA WG1 Draft Decision-making flowchart 5 IAEA WG1- Decision Making Process

6. Potential Remedial Options Assessment (sub-process) 6 IAEA WG1- Decision Making Process

7. Risk Based Decision Making Framework 7 1.Definition of the issue to be addressed; 2.Assessment of information / assessment of site history and existing situation / “characterization”; 3.Assessment of risk; 4.Evaluation of remedial options; 5.Determination of path-forward; and 6.Post-remediation closure / acceptance. IAEA WG1- Decision Making Process

8. Step #1 Identify and define issue to be resolved 8 IAEA WG1- Decision Making Process ●Stakeholder engagement critical early on ●Identify expected endpoints – Establish site(s) end use –Clean up guidelines applicable or relevant? –Determine risk acceptability ●Develop basic site(s) understanding (CSM) Note: determine the relevant stakeholders and engage them early and often

9. Step #2 Characterize the site(s) to be remediated 9 Determine if site knowledge is satisfactory to assess risk Fill gaps in knowledge Characterize Site Move to next phase (Assess Risk) IAEA WG1- Decision Making Process

10. Step #3 Assessment of Risk 10 ● ●Assess risk posed by existing condition ‒ ‒ Public Safety ‒ ‒ Human Health ‒ ‒ Ecological ● ●Assess of “acceptability” of risk using a graded, risk- based approach ● ●Is residual risk acceptable? – –Yes. Move site(s) into final phase. – –No. Begin potential remedial options assessment IAEA WG1- Decision Making Process

11. Step #4 Evaluation of Potential Remedial Options 11 IAEA WG1- Decision Making Process

12. Step #4 Evaluation of Potential Remedial Options 12   Identify decision making criteria and tools and apply to decision making. (i.e., what are the factors to be considered in the development of decision-making approaches, criteria or tools?); ‒ ‒ Established Criteria Available ‒ ‒ Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) ‒ ‒ Qualitative Assessment (direct engagement with stakeholders) ‒ ‒ Others?   Additional discussion will be required to develop a list of factors that should be considered in evaluating remedial options. IAEA WG1- Decision Making Process

13. Step #4 Evaluation of Potential Remedial Options 13   Look at and reuse similar cases to develop suggested solutions, etc., as appropriate, for lessons learned, as per of Wolfgang’s flow diagram; IAEA WG1- Decision Making Process

14. 14   Assess options with respect to (but not limited to); ‒ ‒ effectiveness, ‒ ‒ human health and public safety criteria, ‒ ‒ environmental management and protection criteria, ‒ ‒ technical feasibility, ‒ ‒ cost-benefit, ‒ ‒ side effects, ‒ ‒ social and ethical considerations, ‒ ‒ stakeholder input, and ‒ ‒ other constraints   Alternative risk management strategies (e.g., fish and water- use consumption advisories, posting signs, land use restrictions, site access restrictions, counter-measures, etc.) Step #4 Evaluation of Potential Remedial Options IAEA WG1- Decision Making Process

15. Step #5 Determination of path-forward 15 ● ●Implement options based on outcome of remedial options assessment ● ●Consider alternative risk management strategies ● ●Assess options to determine of objectives were met. ● ●Adaptive management, as required (based on outcome of verification) IAEA WG1- Decision Making Process

16. Step #6 Post-remediation closure / acceptance ●Critical for framework success ●The goal of the decommissioning plan ●Long term aftercare, likely different for each jurisdiction ●Having the post remediation expectations and process defined at the beginning is critical 16 IAEA WG1- Decision Making Process

17. IAEA MODARIA WG1 Draft Decision-making flowchart 17 IAEA WG1- Decision Making Process

18. IAEA – MODARIA (Working Group 1) WG1 Thank you! IAEA WG1- Decision Making Process Decision-Making Framework for discussion A Compilation of Information Presented in Kiev