New Regulations for Nuclear Installation in Slovenia

Transcription

1 New Regulations for Nuclear Installation in Slovenia Tea Bilić Zabric INKO, consulting Kolezijska 5a, SI-1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia Author. ABSTRACT How is legislative and regulatory framework for nuclear installation established in Slovenia especially regarding the building a new nuclear plant? Comprehensive and up-to-date safety regulations are one of the bases in nuclear and radiation safety. Qualitative regulations provide good rules for both the users of nuclear energy and radiation sources and regulators so the special attention has to be paid to the quality of the rules. How we can judge current regulations with regard to important qualitative criteria like: Stable Regulatory Environment Requirements clearly defined Consistent-defined guidance Roles and responsibilities of regulators, oversight, and operators clearly defined Consistent approach to hazard classification Cost benefit process Unambiguous, single point of regulatory jurisdiction in each regulated area Flexibility to regulate a broad spectrum of applications and issues A number of regulations are related to security matters or indirectly related to nuclear safety and cover areas such as land use planning, protection of the environment and landscape, forestry, water protection, fire protection and occupational safety as well as technical safety and radiological protection aspects of the transport of radioactive substances, including fuel assemblies. How these acts are established and on which way is assured no overlap in jurisdiction among different authorities? 1 INTRODUCTION Expanding the role of nuclear energy to reduce carbon emissions and fuel dependence is seriously discussed in many countries. What sort of changes in regulatory oversight would be required to ensure both the public's safety and to allow nuclear power to grow? A strong, credible, and efficient regulator is necessary for nuclear energy to play a critical role in fulfilling the nation's future energy and environmental needs. In the case that Slovenia make a

2 decision about installation a new nuclear unit in the following few years, the Slovenian Nuclear safety Administration - SNSA, should be well organised to take on new plant licensing and in the same time maintain its oversight of operating facilities. The primary factor influencing the construction of new plant is the performance of the existing nuclear fleet. The application for new plant licenses will be difficult if the currently operated nuclear plant(s), not only in Slovenia bur worldwide, would not operate with outstanding safety and reliability. From an industry perspective, maintaining the high performance of existing plants is the highest priority and a prerequisite to building new ones in the future. What is changed in Slovenian regulation in the last years? The turning points were accession of Slovenia to the European Union and development of the National Energy Strategy of Slovenia. In July 2002 the Parliament of the Republic of Slovenia adopted a new Act on Ionising Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety (Off. Gaz. RS, 67/ hereinafter referred to as 2002 Act ). With regard to nuclear safety, the 2002 Act is the most important document, providing requirements for protection from the effects of ionising radiation and nuclear safety measures which main purpose is to regulate ionising radiation protection, with the aim of reducing the detrimental effects on health and reducing to the lowest possible level radioactive contamination of the environment due to ionising radiation resulting from the use of radiation sources, while at the same time enabling the development, production and use of radiation sources and performing radiation practices. The 2002 Act entered into force on October 1, 2002 and with that day two previous Acts ceased to apply: Act on Radiation Protection and the Safe Use of Nuclear Energy (1984 Act), and Act on Implementing Protection against Ionising Radiation and Measures on the Safety of Nuclear Facilities (1980 Act). An Act amending the 2002 Act was adopted on 25 February It has resulted in amended National Program for the Protection of the Environment as regards radioactive waste and spent fuel management and in decision that the site for a low- and intermediate-level waste repository should be approved by 2008 and licensed for operation by New amendments of the 2002 Act were adopted on 29 April The amendments were introduced to reflect the fact that from 1 May 2004 Slovenia became a Member State of the European Union. The aim of this last revision was mainly to harmonise the provisions of the act with the European Union s legal requirements, especially in the area of shipment of radioactive waste and sources. Complete transposition of the European Union directives into Slovenian legislation was achieved by the adoption of the Government Decree on Dose Limits, Radioactive Contamination and Intervention Levels and the Government Decree on Radiation Practices in April Based on the provisions of the 2002 Act new regulations were issued which replaced the regulations issued on the basis of the 1984 and 1980 Acts. Based on the 1984 Act, ten regulations for carrying into effect radiation protection and four regulations for carrying into effect nuclear safety provisions were in force. The 2002 Act provides that the regulations which have been issued on the basis of 1984 Acts shall apply until new regulations stipulated by 2002 Act are issued. Based on the 2002 Act, 25 decrees and regulations have been issued. Regarding the first approximation there are some changes in the number and contents of the regulations and decrees. Based on the 1984 Act four regulations for carrying into effect radiation protection and nuclear safety provisions are still in force. In preparing are 5 decrees and four regulations [6].

3 Table 1: Status of the regulations based on the provisions of the Act 2002 THE FIRST APPROXIMATION (YEAR 2003) CURRENT APPROXIMATION (YEAR 2008) ISSUED (YEAR 2008) Decrees Regulations in the responsibility of the SNSA * 4 IN PREPARATION Regulations in the * - responsibility of the SRPA Regulations in the responsibility of the Ministry of the Interior * Regulation on the Use of Radiation Sources and on Radiation Practice is a common for SNSA and SRPA Above mentioned regulations and decrees are applied to nuclear and radiation safety. The responsibilities for radiation protection are divided among two authorities. The responsibility for supervision of nuclear safety in nuclear facilities and radiation practices outside medicine and veterinary activities lies with the Slovenian Nuclear Safety Administration - SNSA, while the responsibility for supervision of radiation practices in medicine and veterinary activities lies with the Slovenian Radiation Protection Authority SRPA. Besides the SNSA and the SRPA, also some other administrations, ministries and organisations are entrusted with the implementation of the legislative frame which governs the safety of nuclear and radiation installations. The second important document for regulation framework was development of the National Energy Strategy. Slovenian National Committee of the World Energy Council in the year 2002 prepared the draft of the National Energy Strategy of Slovenia of the nuclear part, which main conclusions were: NPP Krško should operate until the end of its lifetime. Possibilities for the extension of the operating lifetime of NPP Krško should be investigated. Possible new nuclear unit of smaller size should be seriously considered after Advantage should be taken of established knowledge basis and infrastructure and the option for construction of additional nuclear unit for production for European electricity market should be kept open. The site for the low and intermediate waste repository should be found as soon as possible, while the spent nuclear fuel should be stored temporarily until some regional solutions are available. Nuclear safety is and must remain one of the main objectives of everybody involved in nuclear energy. In April 2004 the Parliament of the Republic of Slovenia adopted the Resolution on the National Energy Programme [10], which addresses nuclear power (It was stated that Slovenia would support joint construction of nuclear power plant in Croatia). The main principles of this Programme are sustainability, ecological acceptability and reliability of supply of energy. In October 2005 the Government of the Republic of Slovenia approved the proposal of the Resolution on the National Programme on Radioactive Waste and Spent Nuclear Fuel Management, which was adopted by the Parliament in February 2006.

4 In October 2006 the Government of the Republic of Slovenia adopted the Resolution on National Development Projects for the period for faster economic impetus and realisation of economic development goals of Slovenia, which includes large and concentrated planning of investments with multisectorial results. The Resolution contains key projects; whose implementation at the national and regional level will result in the development of the whole country. One of the key projects in the Resolution is a construction of unit 2 for the Krško Nuclear Power Plant, which objective is to ensure a safe and highquality supply of electricity. At the moment are under public debate two regulations, one regarding the safety criteria, licensing, safety documentation for design of new nuclear and radiation facilities; and the second one regarding the control of safety in nuclear and radiation facilities after start of operation. Through the regulator s scope of activities it was required to additionally adopt regulation considering a lifetime extension of the existing NPP Krško. 2 SAFETY REGULATION 2.1 New safety-focused rules in a nuclear industry The regulator mission is to ensure adequate protection of people, society, environment and future generations from the harmful effects of radiation by licensing individuals and organisations to use radioactive materials for beneficial civilian purposes and then ensuring that the performance of these licensees is at or above acceptable safety levels. One of the most challenging tasks for any nuclear regulator is to establish an effective regulatory programme that provides assurance that any problems will be discovered early, but at the same time, is not overly intrusive for a licensee. Recognising these, sometimes conflicting issues, some nuclear regulators have established integrated oversight approaches to safety, to enable regulators to take adequate and effective action whenever weaknesses in safety provisions are detected. The integrated assessment process give the opportunities to integrate various information sources relevant to licensee safety performance, make objective conclusions regarding their significance, take actions based on these conclusions, and effectively communicate these results to the licensees and to the public. This comprehensive oversight strategy includes the following activities: Develop and update performance based standards and regulations Maintain ongoing and consistent oversight of licensees Why performance-based approach? A performance-based requirement relies upon measurable (or calculable) outcomes (i.e., performance results) to be met, but provides more flexibility to the licensee as to the means of meeting those outcomes. A performance-based regulatory approach establishes performance and results as the primary basis for regulatory decision-making. In the USA it was noticed that improved performance of the nuclear power plants occurred during a time of transition at the NRC [2], when it began to focus on performance-based and risk-informed regulation and enforcement. By focusing on the key safety issues, the NRC gave utilities more time to concentrate on the day-to-day business of operating and maintaining nuclear power plants and enhancing their performance. With the onset of energy deregulation, plants were forced to improve performance further. Today, a significant

5 percentage of U.S. nuclear plants are deregulated merchant plants that sell electricity to the grid based on market prices what force them to perform their operations even more efficient. Deregulation mostly concerns the regulator because it fears the utilities would focus more on reducing costs than on maintaining plant safety. The lesson learned from the experience is that a well-maintained and well-operated nuclear plant is a safe and profitable plant. However, the pressure between safety and commercial interests is still a real concern. At present, most utilities have come down in favour of increased safety. Utilities are well aware of their obligations, not only to shareholders and consumers, but also to the rest of the industry whose reputation would suffer from poor and unsafe performance at individual nuclear plants. The confidence expressed by the nuclear industry is largely based on the outstanding performance levels of the nuclear fleet. Even the new nuclear plant will be very costly; most of the electricity producers think that nuclear power have the biggest chance for stable electricity rates over a long-term period. Still, the continuing challenge is to keep plants maintained and operated with safety in mind. The regulator focus on a risk-informed and performance-based regulatory system allows the industry to make closer safety and economic performance. 2.2 EU safety approach WENRA activities The main objectives of Western European Nuclear Regulators Association - WENRA [4] are to develop a common approach to nuclear safety, to provide an independent capability to examine nuclear safety in applicant countries and to be a network of nuclear safety regulators in Europe exchanging experience and discussing significant safety issues. WENRA has established a nuclear safety benchmark and evaluation process among its members. Eighteen safety reference levels, selected to cover important aspects of reactor safety, have been published in January 2006 and WENRA invited stakeholders to comment on the levels. Comments were received from about 20 different stakeholders. Most of the comments were received from a consortium of European Nuclear Utilities called ENISS, many of which were of a detailed technical nature. ENISS also asked for a more clear structure of the reference levels for design. In January 2007 WENRA published a first revision of the reference level as a result of comments by stakeholders on the report published in January The latest revision of the reference level was published in January 2008 and has taken into account the latest concepts related to Management Systems, as described in a Safety Requirements document issued by the IAEA in 2006 (GS-R-3). SNSA uses WENRA safety reference level for development new regulations or revising existing ones. 3 ASSESSING THE REGULATIONS Potential new plant licensing will impact regulator as its workload expands. One of the bases in nuclear and radiation safety is regulation. In Slovenia are at the moment two regulations under public debate, which cover this area; one which apply to new nuclear and radiation facilities and includes safety criteria for design of nuclear and radiation units, licensing process, safety documentation, management systems; and the second one which

6 apply to safety control of nuclear and radiation facilities after start of operation. INKO consulting has performed review of these two regulations [5]. The bases for review were DOE criteria for judging regulatory regulations [1], Finland safety regulations [3], U.S. NRC regulations [2] and Slovenian regulations [6]. Department of Energy - DOE has developed useful recommendations [1] for assessing the regulatory approach and regulations by providing prioritized desirable and undesirable criteria. The both of the regulations were reviewed regarding the following stated principles and criteria: Principles Clearness and understandability Openness to public Consideration of different interests and their documentation including the final decision Usage of the best available knowledge Criteria Improvement of the safety Roles and responsibilities clearly defined Clear basis for enforcement Consistent approach to hazards classification Cost-benefit process Unambiguous, single point of regulatory jurisdiction in each regulated area Practicability Clearness and understandability Regulations should be coherent, logical, and practical. A consistent set of requirements are used equally by regulators, licensee, and other authorised organisations. The regulations must be enough clear and understandable that different sites or organisations do not interpret requirements differently. All positions should be readily understood and easily applied. Openness Nuclear regulations are a subject of public interest, and they must be transacted publicly and candidly. The public must be informed about and have the opportunity to participate in the regulatory processes as it is allowed by law. Open channels of communication must be maintained with government agencies, licensees, and the public. Different interests The highest possible standards of ethical performance and professionalism should influence regulation. All available facts and opinions must be sought openly from licensees and other interested members of the public. The many and possibly conflicting public interests involved must be considered. Final decisions must be based on objective, unbiased assessments of all information, and must be documented with reasons explicitly stated. Best knowledge Regulations should be based on the best available knowledge from research and operational experience. Systems interactions, technological uncertainties, and the diversity of licensees and regulatory activities must all be taken into account so that risks are maintained at an acceptably low level. Regulation should be reliable and justifiably. Each article in the regulations was assessed against above-quoted criteria and principles. The results of the review [5] are presented in the following figures. The main reasons for lower score of the criteria clearness was opinion that requirements could be interpreted

7 differently by different users; a clear link to requirements from Act 2002 and to other relative regulations was missing; clear basis for enforcement was missing; practicability of the requirements were questionable. Figure 1: Regulation compliance with defined principles *It is believed that SNSA documents all available facts and opinions from licensees and other interested members of the public (this is not avaialble on the website of SNSA). Figure 2: Regulation compliance with defined criteria The both regulations are written more convenient for nuclear plants than for other nuclear and radiation facilities. High setting demands for nuclear plants are not always appropriate for other nuclear or radiation facilities. Construction of new ones or required improvements of existing nuclear and radiation facilities should request high financial and technical investments, what impacts on lower score for principles cost-benefit process and practicability. It is a questionable should these investments give adequate benefit to the safety level. Clear roles and responsibilities of the different organisation inside the same ministry or different ministries are missing, especially in the articles related to licensing and approvals. There should be no overlap in jurisdiction, a clear demarcation of responsibility should be

8 specified and documented. Those impact on lower score for principles roles and responsibilities clearly defined and ambiguous, single point of regulatory jurisdiction in each regulated area The draft regulations are not completely written in accordance with performance-based approach. They do not give enough flexibility to licensee how to meet preferable performance but set strict rules for ensuring a safety. The examples are requirements for assessment of different programmes in the facilities; the most repeated assessment period is two year. Good performance-based approach should allow a licensee flexible period of assessment instead of strict one. Finnish safety regulations are good examples of regulations written in accordance with performance-based approach. 4 CONCLUSIONS A regulatory structure focused on performance based and risk-informed criteria makes it possible to improve the overall regulatory and facility performance and most importantly to improve a safety. The regulatory process is mostly a strict process in which innovation in enforcement is not always a good option but with an attentive review a regulatory framework should be made more focused on safety than on process. Deterministic rules, developed to respond to uncertainties and conservatisms are sometimes obstructions to safety. The industry has experienced enforcement of regulations, which has resulted in great amounts of money wasted without meaningful improvement in safety. For the end, the words from Mr Diaz speech from NRC Regulatory Information Conference regarding the Principles of Good Regulation Today, you and I are enjoying the stability of good work and the expectation of better things to come. Rather than end on a technical note, allow me to close by expanding way beyond his original intent, a few chosen words from Paul of Tarsus. I am sure Saint Paul did not have regulation in mind when he wrote to the Corinthians, but minor details like that have never bothered me much. So... REGULATION it does not put on airs it is not snobbish it is never rude it is not self-seeking it is not prone to anger neither does it brood over injuries it does not rejoice in what is wrong, but rejoices with the truth. REFERENCES [1] Advisory Committee on External Regulation of DOE Nuclear Safety, Draft Staff Paper, Criteria for Judging Regulatory Options, U.S. Department of Office of Environmental Management, [2] U.S. NRC Our Values Principles of Good Regulation website, [3] Finland Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority, Regulations, website,

9 [4] Harmonization of Reactor Safety in WENRA Countries, website, [5] INKO, consulting, Review of draft regulations (JV5, JV9) related to installation new nuclear and radiation facilities and assessment in accordance with DOE criteria, Ljubljana 2008 [6] SNSA, Legislation and documents website, [7] Draft regulation JV5 Regulation on factors important to nuclear safety, [8] Draft regulation JV9 Regulation on safety assurance of operating nuclear and radiation facilities, [9] Act on Ionising Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety [10] Office gazette RS, no.57/2004, Resolution on the National Energy Programme