Overview of IAEA CGULS activities (Coordination Group on Uranium Legacy Sites)

Transcription

1 , UMREG August Skalsky Dvur, Prague Overview of CGULS activities (Coordination Group on Uranium Legacy Sites) Russel Edge and Oleg Voitsekhovych International Atomic Energy Agency

2 CGULS (Coordination Group for Uranium Legacy Sites) Coordination group comprised of national and international stakeholders Provide forum for information exchange Support project planning and implementation issues Address radioactive waste management issues Coordination mechanism to avoid duplication of efforts and optimize resources Technically supported by secretariat

3 Technical Cooperation Projects on Uranium Legacy Sites Project Number Project Title Target countries RER/9/122 ( ) RER/3/010 ( ) RER/9/086 ( ) UKR ( ) KIG/9/003 ( ) KIG/9/004 ( ) KIG/7/002 ( ) Supporting Safe Management of Uranium Production Legacy Sites Supporting Preparation for Remediation of Uranium Production Legacy Sites Safe management of Residues from Former Mining and Milling Activities in Central Asia Development of an environmental remediation strategy to be used in the former uranium production sites in Ukraine. Establishment of a Radioecological Monitoring and Assessment Network Assessment of the Radiation Situation and Public Exposure at the Former Uranium Mining Sites of Minkush Enhancing Radio-ecological Monitoring BUL, HUN, KAZ, KIG, RUS, SLR, SRB, TAD, UKR, UZB + SLO, POL KAZ, KIG, RUS, TAD, UKR, UZB, CZR, SLO KAZ, KIG, TAD, UZB UA KIG KIG KIG TAD/9/002 ( ) Application of International Safety Standards on the Management of Uranium Milling Residues TAD TAD/9/003 ( ) Establishment of the Radiation Monitoring System Around Open Radioactive Wastes of Northern Tajikistan TAD RER/ INT9175 Improving the capabilities towards the implementation of integrated programs for the remediation of uranium mining and processing legacy sites Promoting safe and efficient clean-up International of Atomic radioactively Energy Agency contaminated facilities and sites EU, AS, AM 3

4 Basis for cooperation and development The funded projects addressing remediation preparatory aspects towards developing the remediation capacity in the affected region :, TC 1. Regulatory framework, 2. Safety assessment, 3. Site specific monitoring, 4. QA/QC in analytical laboratories and monitoring, 5. Risk communication, and institutional controls EC 1.To promote cooperation and common understanding of issues among affected countries. 2.To provide expert services and advice to Member States in support of efforts to develop comprehensive environmental impact assessments and feasibility studies for legacy uranium production sites. 3.To provide technical oversight and support in the field as needed. 4.To reinforce the regulatory framework. 4

5 Coordination Group for Uranium Legacy Sites

6 Strategic Plan Development A strategic plan was developed with the input and concurrence of the CGULS MS and Institution working group representatives An overarching strategic goal was identified To support affected MS (Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Ukraine and Uzbekistan) in the preparedness, planning and implementation of the remediation of uranium legacy sites. Four specific objectives were developed 1. Coordinate the actions of the members to maximize synergies and avoid duplication of effort 2. Provide a forum for information exchange 3. Promote harmonization and implementation of regulatory frameworks 4. Promote involvement, awareness, and capacity development among the affected stakeholders Detailed actions supporting the objectives and aligned with the goal were developed and currently are implementing

7 Example Objectives and Actions Objective 1: Coordinate the actions of the members to maximize synergies and avoid duplication of effort ACTION 1B: Establish an expert working group for Taboshar with representatives from: /CGULS, Tajikistan, EurAsEC, EC to identify suggested modalities for coordination, reported to CGULS for incorporation into future site projects. ACTION 1C: Establish an expert working group for Minkush with representatives from: /CGULS, Kyrgyz Republic, EurAsEC, EC to identify suggested modalities for coordination, reported to CGULS for incorporation into future site projects First meeting targeted for November 2013 to be held in Moscow and will discuss key principles for cooperation and coordination. It is expected to achieve consensus in harmonization of the Standard Content of the Remediation Plans, Remediation and Design criteria between EC and EurAsEC Responsibility: Secretariat

8 Objective 1: Coordinate the actions of the members to maximize synergies and avoid duplication of effort ACTION 1D: The secretariat will develop a comprehensive survey of national analytical capabilities relevant to ULS site characterization and monitoring to support a future TC program recommendation; prepare a compilation report (analogous to the technical baseline document). CGULS members (MS, international organizations) will respond. ACTION 1E: The secretariat will develop a comprehensive survey of national monitoring capabilities relevant to ULS management, to summarize CGULS MS monitoring program capacity throughout the region, and recommend enhancements to improve monitoring effectiveness. CGULS MS will respond. On the basis of CGULS MS responses, the secretariat will prepare a compilation report (analogous to the technical baseline document) with an analysis of analytical gaps and recommendations. The initial actions already done in July 2013 during Workshop organized by in Kazakstan (Almaty) for Comprehensive analyses of the Technical capabilities and preparedness of the analytical laboratory in a Region to provide efficeint support of the site specific monitoring programs at the UPLS

9 W O R K I N G M A T E R I A L (Limited Distribution) Objective 2: Provide a forum for information exchange Regional Technical Cooperation Project RER/9/086 Safe Management of Residues from Former Mining and Milling Activities in Central Asia ACTION 2A: Establish a CGULS web presence in /CONNECT, create accounts for each CGULS member, post available relevant reports (such as ToRs, EIS/FS examples, site characterization studies, engineering studies, risk assessments), and compile membership list. Project Results International Atomic Energy Agency November 2009 http: // nucleus.iaea.org/sites/connectmembers/cguls/ ACTION 2C: will prepare and disseminate a revised Assessment and Way Forward for Uranium Legacy Production Sites in Central Asia: An International Approach ( technical baseline document ). CGULS members will provide requested information for inclusion.

10 Objective 3: Promote harmonization and implementation of regulatory frameworks Action 3A: will develop and distribute to CGULS members a best practices document summarizing key characteristics of comprehensive regulatory frameworks relevant to ULS. Action 3B: MS will provide existing regulatory framework documents to be posted on CONNECT Action 3C: Review Regulatory Framework Summaries provided by EC and EurAsEC. EC and EurAsEC will provide to CGULS members the results of ongoing and planned surveys of the existing regulatory frameworks in CGULS MS. Action 3D: Establish a regulatory framework working group for influencing implementation of MS regulatory frameworks over time.

11 Objective 4: Promote awareness, understanding, and capacity development of stakeholders in support of remediation actions Action 4A: UNDP/ENVSEC will convene workshops in national/provincial capitals or field sites aimed at facilitating consultation of relevant organizations and national partners in stakeholder engagement for discussion of approaches and agreement upon division of labor. will support Action 4 relevant activities with dissemination of the materials, documents, and promoting the actions and results, including Best Practice experience

12 Key elements for cooperation and harmonization ( technical assistance and experience exchange) Regulatory requirements and guides Principle and standard content for Remediation Planning (and also Checklist for Safety Assessment, EIA and Feasibility study) Harmonization in developing Site characterization and Site specific Monitoring Programs (analytical methods and procedures, data processing and interpretation) Legacy site management and licensing Technical capabilities and technology transfer Educational component ( group and face-to-face trainings, workshops, training materials, demonstration of best technology application Developing Communication Platforms and Forums 12

13 Regulatory frame for Remediation Preparedness (1) Regulation ( gaps and harmonization needed) General Requirements General aspects (purpose, definitions, scope) General Responsibilities ( Regulators and Operators) General Principles (Regulation, Site operation, Optimization, Remediation Criteria) Remediation Actions Monitoring and Surveillance (Site characterization, Safety Assessment content, Remediation Plans, Monitoring and Surveillance, Institutional Control, Radiation Protection Plan, Radioactive discharges, Clearance of materials) Detailed requirements to be adopted in the MS for: Exposure Assessment, Procedure for Remediation Strategies Planning Procedures and methods in the investigation programs Responsibilities and contents for review (Remediation Plans, Monitoring & Surveillance, criteria and methods for assessing safety, data records and data exchange et sat) Detailed Responsibility of the site Operator ( Licensing process, Permits, staff qualifications, site management, responsibilities for radiological surveys and radiation protections, safety management) 13

14 Regulatory Guidance to be prepared to meet the requirements (2) Principle and Criteria (dose criteria, risks for workers and Public during and after the completion of remediation activity, justification and optimization principles) 1.Development of Remediation Plan ( Standard content and procedure for development, reviewing of documents. This Plan should include consideration for Preparedness Phase, Planning Phase, Implementation and Completion Activities) 2.Development of Radiation Protection Plan (qualification and responsibilities of personnel, training requirements, identification of radiation hazards, dose assessment, action levels, Personnel dosimetry requirements, personnel protective equipment, Control procedure, decontamination, waste management, records keeping, emergency response, Accidents et sat.) 3.Site characterization (Site conceptual model, historical aspects, inventory, environment baseline information, Radioactive and chemical contamination profile, Reporting, Data records) 4.Monitoring and Surveillance (Program Planning, Implementation, Hazards inspection, Analyses and Interpretation, QA\QC, Reporting and dissemination) 5.Safety Assessment (EIA, SA, Procedures, models, scenarios, uncertainties Risks) 6.Waste management (categorization, criteria, clearance, re-use and recycling, disposal) 7. Qualification of Personnel, Requirements for Site management 8. Contents of Lice applications (Permits) 14

15 Remediation Process Legal &Regulatory Framework exist ULS Operator established, staff skilled, Licensed End-State Conditions, Remediation objectives Safety criteria approved Guidelines to meet regulatory requirements, Clearance and design Criteria adopted Detailed Remediation Plan approved. Funds available. Mechanism for Funding is established. Local Project Managers and Executing Companies are ready Review process is clear, Regulator and Operator are ready for LTSM Step-1 Step-2 Step-3 Step-4 Step-5 Step-6 Step-7 Contamination & Hazards Discovered Initial Hazards Characterization Initial Safety & EI Assessment Prioritization of the facilities and area as a candidate for Remediation Concept and Strategy Development, Prepare and submit Remedial Action Plan, including Radiation Protection, Waste Management and preliminary cost assessment (selected facilities and strategies) for review and approval Remedial Action Plan Implementation Completion Report forwarded to Regulator, Statement that no further remedial action is required Long-Term Institutional Control Site Specific Monitoring and Surveillance Program to be in place Additional Site investigation & Detailed Safety Assessment if appropriated 15

16 Analytical Capabilities Development During in the frame of National and Regional TC projects a lot of sampling techniques, analytical devices and miscellaneous items have been procured for the MS to improve their technical capabilities. Additional equipment is needed. At least one expert mission to the existing Laboratories in a Region took place and reasonable recommendations on improvement needed were prepared The absence of efficiently functioning analytical laboratory is a matter of lack of institutional and financial support of the existing laboratories in the region. The actual problems of the current status of analytical capabilities for 14 laboratories in the region and opportunities for improvement were discussed in Almaty in a regional Workshop July The Strategic Action Plan for analytical capabilities development will be prepared on a basis of detailed analyses to be done on the Lab-specific level of description in October 2013 to submit MS, and EC 16

17 Laboratory code Overall performance evaluation of RER 3010 PT 6 8 Summary evaluation This PT was organized and conducted under Regional TC- RER 3010 Supporting Preparation for Remediation of Uranium Production Legacy Sites / being assisted by the Chemistry Unit of the 's Lab. Seibersdorf A W N NR Number of reported results A- Acceptable W- Warning N- Not acceptable NR- Not reported In sets of test samples of reference materials RM (1 soil mixed sample, Th and U ore samples) were prepared. All registered laboratories were provided with detailed instructions how the RM have to be analyzed and also forms for reporting of the results As the result 12 laboratories from the 14 initially registered had reported to the their results. The analytical results of the participating laboratories were compared with the reference values assigned to the reference materials, and a rating system was applied.

18 Laboratory code Overall laboratory performance score in percentage Summary evaluation ( n( A)*2) n( w) O. Score *100 TNR Where: n(a) : Number of acceptable results n(a) : Number of Warnings TNR : Total number of requested results Percentage of overall laboratory performance score Overall score Not reported, 43% Not acceptable, 11% Acceptable, 38% Warning, 7% Acceptable Warning Not acceptable Not reported

19 Monitoring Program and Analytical network strategy Currently, a single laboratory in the region can not satisfy all of the exhausting set of data required for Site Characterization and Site specific monitoring Development of a well coordinated integrated program combining existing capabilities and experience is a potential solution. The network of different laboratories which can supplement particular capabilities at the national level may bring significant benefits for the Agencies responsible for implementation of Remediation Program At the regional level networking of the laboratories and monitoring teams, can improve laboratory performance. Utilizing a lead laboratory which could play a significant role in the training and assistance at the regional level may be beneficial. The members of networking laboratories can more readily adopt and establish best international practice. Their contribution in the analytical support of the Regulatory bodies and Site Operators may not be overestimated in case of emergency and trans-boundary safety analyses 19

20 Safety Assessment Methodology Since 2009, TC has been supporting development of Safety Assessment Methodology in application to the Former Uranium Legacy Sites ECOLEGO tool development and Application (10 Code copies were procured to the project participants) Three regional Training Courses (for beginners (Almaty 2009, Tashkent, 2010) and for advanced users (Stockholm, 2011) have been supported by. National Training course related to the Safety Assessment Methodology Application in application to the Uranium Legacy Remediation Programs is currently planned for the first week in July in Bishkek for about 20 people. The dose assessment, using ECOLEGO tool at the moment has been carried out for preliminary Assessment at several legacy sites (Taboshar, Degmai in Tajikistan, Charkesar in Uzbekistan, Pridneprovsky Chemical Plant in Dneprodzerzhinks, Lermontovo in Russia). Future plans include application of Ecolego for Dose Assessment for Minkush and Mailuu Suu MODARIA project is developing NORMALISA Dose Assessment tool SAFRAN ( tool for radwaste Safety management is) now under application to the Uranium former Uranium extraction Facility Clean up 20

21 ECOLEGO modeling tool for Radionuclide transport and Dose assessment has been developed FACILIA AB (Sweden), Tailings (gamma-dose expose, Rn ) Adapted for all former U facilities and territory UPLS Groundwater transport module was developed and applied for long-term dose assessment via water pathways Aerosol fallout and Inhalation Agriculture lands and irrigation Inter-active matrix easy in use ( LEGO) Open system for development and improvement and function extension Large Library for model parameters and simple screening models Module for statistic and Probability functions analyses Assessment applied for the contaminated buildings and settlement International Atomic Energy Agency Dose and Risk assessment modules to be extended for Chemo toxic risks Generation of Reports

22 &Inter-Agencies activities a basis for further Assessments in the framework for EC Remediation Tajikistan (Taboshar and Degmai) Kyrgyzstan (Minkush and Mailuu Suu) Uzbekistan (Charkesar and Jangiabad) Data and Research NATO Taboshar, Degmai, Jangiabad EC Minkush Taboshar Jangiabad EurAsEC Minkush Taboshar WB Mailu Suu 22

23 Case Studies Activities recently carried out Kadji Say Taboshar, Degmay Minkush Jangiabad, Charkesar Planned activities Minkush Borehole Program (2013) Mailuu Suu Dneprodzerzhinsk PLANS Till the end 2013, has Plan to Publish a Joint Report, which will integrate the Outcomes from the number of Regional and National Projects ( ) related to the Uranium Production Legacy Site Remediation Projects Preparedness issues That will make the large set of data and assessment regarding, Regulatory support and Site characterization studies, Monitoring survey and Analytical Laboratory capacity building development, Safety Assessment results and other available a basis for Remediation Project Planning at the regional level 23

24 Тaboshar The main hazards factors: Relatively high Rn-222 exhalation and ambient activity concentration Acid drainages and high content of U and other toxic elements in the mine and drainage waters 24

25 Annual doses (Sv/y) to Public estimated for Taboshar Population Group Group 1. People that live relatively far from the tailing site, and stay most of the time in clean houses. The drinking water from the non-contaminated river Group 2. People from this group have the same occupancy of the hazardous areas as the they use water from the mine for drinking and for irrigation of vegetables ( at least 30% of annual needs) Group 3. People from this group use water from the mine for drinking and irrigation as Group 2. They also live in Taboshar, relatively far from the tailing dump site, and stay most of the time in houses, but they regularly visit the uranium waste rock piles Group 4. People from this group make the same use of the water from the mine as people from the Group 3. They differ from the others group in that spend some time at the tailings pasturing their cows and sheep and in that they obtain 30 % of the meat and milk from cows that drink tailing waters. Dose. Sv/y Contribution. % Min Max Ext ern Radon Others 9.3E E E E E E E E

26 New Technology in Site Characterization. Min Kush, 2013 Tuyuk Suu. Gamma dose rate survey May 2013 Min-Kush Site Characterization Exercise, May

27 Minkush U-Legacy Site in Kyrgyzstan Minkush

28 Further activities for Minkush planned The bore-hole drilling program on a uranium tailing dumps is developed in continuation with prior carried out gamma-dose surveys. 5 wells to be drilled during a week; vertical gamma-dose survey and samples of the uranium residues will be carrying out. The primary objective is to perform a characterization of the tailings, including the following information: Depth localization of the tailing materials, Type and consistency of the tailing materials, Degree of saturation by water, Identification of the radio-nuclides measurement of their activity concentration, Presence and concentration of other toxic materials, Potential risks of remobilization by washing out from the tailing compound by water. Training for the local staff in the tailing materials sampling as the exercises in aerosols and the drainages acid waters from the tailing dumps will be provided by experienced experts as a part of Site characterization and monitoring at the Minkush UPLS 28

29 CGULS /EC expert missions and peer review of the international and national Remediation activities In 2012 UA Government requested peer-review of the New State Remediation Program which is now under revising for period experts visited Ukraine former Pridneprovsky Chemical Plant, which is now one of the largest UPLS in Europe (42 mln. tons of residues). The report was submitted to the Government in October 2012 (State Program will be revised according recommendation) In 2013 Kyrgyz Government requested to carry out /EC expert s mission to Mailuu Suu, to elaborate Strategic view on further development of the Remediation activities in Mailuu Suu. The mission is prepared and will be implememted during 7-13 September 2013,

30 Overall View on the Mailuu Suu The WB Disaster Hazards Mitigation Project has been recently accomplished through key mitigation measures designed to: isolate and protect abandoned uranium mine tailings and waste rock dumps from disturbance landslides and floods, and from leaching and dispersal processes associated with ground- and surface-water drainage; The projects objectives of reducing the potential risk of exposure to the radioactive substances for human population has been achieved by the way of relocation of TP -3 to the TP-6 However still many hazards are remained in Mailuu Suu related to the Former Uranium Legacy Sites. The Government of Kyrgyzstan requested to carry out international expertize and help to elaborate the Overall Strategic Action Plan for further actions needed to reduce risk of Public exposure. The expert mission is planned on September The radiological analytical laboratory in the local branch of the State Sanitary Epidemiological Service (Mailuu Suu) was delivered, installed and put into operation. Local staff was trained and proposals for optimizing site specific Monitoring program was elaborated with in the frame of MB Project. will continue train people with already nominated activities 30

31 Water contamination at Mailuu Suu is a key exposure pathway Former U-exraction facility, 2012 Mailuu Suu River affecting by acid drainages Former U-exract. facility Isolit is flooded in 2005 Primitive water supply system in Mailuu Suu

32 U (ug/l) 1 Mailuu Suu Monitoring Data set are sufficient for Model validation µg/l (WHO) Max. 75 perc. Median 25 perc. Min. Data BGR Deep GW Tributaries Technogene: River M-S Tailings, Dumps M-S Shallow GW WB-Report Data, January 2012 Station activity concentration in Bq/l п/п Gross beta Gross alpha U-238 U-234 Ra-226 Pb-210 Po Station 28 0,36± 0,11 0,15±0,045 0,05±0,02 0,05±0,02 0,04±0,01 0,13±0,04 0,01±0,003 3 Seepage TP-5 50,1± 15,0 230± ±31 103±31 8,58±2,57 0,15±0,05 0,02±0,007 2 Station 34 0,83±0,25 0,32±0,1 0,10±0,03 0,09±0,03 0,08±0,02 0,09±0,03 0,015±0,005

33 Continuation of WB initiated activities in Mailuu Suu Monitoring surveys WB assisted in procurement of eaquipment to Mailuu Suu Lab. is continue train people in determination of radionuclides in water samples. 3 staff members will take part in face-to face training in the Lab. Sept.-October 2013

34 UA Case Study Site characterization The former State Industrial Enterprise «Pridneprovskiy Chemical Plant» (PChP) was one of the largest metallurgical facilities, where uranium ores were processed from 1948 until There has been no regular surveillance of the Uranium residue and other toxic waste and releases control from the UPLS. The regular monitoring programme is established since 2006 being founded by Ministry of Fuel & Energy of Ukraine At the moment the PChP UPLS is responsibility of SE Barier which is licensee of the NRCU

35 Uranium Production Legacy at Dneprodzerzhinsk ( ) Dneprodzerzhinsk industrial site Sukhachevskoe Legacy Site Contaminated legacy site, 2 RW storage facilities, 7 U-residue tailings, 28 contaminated building and engineering facilities used for U- production in past, which required clean-up technology application Potential risks for workers at the industrial site and for Public at surrounding areas seems to be high. LTSM is still not defined Clean-up and Remediation required significant financial resources

36 Gamma-dose rate spatial distribution at the PChP 25-30% of Southern sector has gamma dose rate 0,5 µsv/h (Data UHMI) Northern Sector µsv/h Southern Sector µsv/h Territory and facilities at the former UPLS belongs to many different enterprises

37 The highest Gamma dose rates reaches µsv/h on the top of the columns near building 103 µsv/h Working place area High contaminated area is adjacent to U-extraction facility 103 Remediation Strategy has to be developed

38 Condition inside of the former U-extraction facility (103)

39 Building-103 LEVEL-3 (first floor) µsv/h The strategies and safe technology for demolishing is still a question Level 3 Specific radionuclide in the spilled materials, Bq g -1 dry, w U-238 Ra-226 Pb-210 Po-210 Th-230 Th-228 mean 12,1-24,5 13,5-17,4 5,6-7,7 5,6-7,7 9,7-24,0 0,2-0,3 min 5,5 4,3 1,38 1,38 2,3 0,02 max ,5 28,5 98,4 0,05

40 Building 103. Level 9,300 12,400 1,00E-03 9,00E-04 9,03E ,00E ,00E ,00E ,00E ,00E-04 3,00E-04 3,02E ,00E-04 1,51E ,00E-04 0,00E+00 Scenario 1 (average) 6,53E-07 Scenario 2 (minimum) Scenario 2 (maximal) Scenario 3 (worst) Scenario 1 (average) Scenario 2 (minimum) 66 Scenario 2 (maximal) 22 Scenario 3 (worst) 14% Sv/h hours 0% 3% 0% External Aerosols Rn 83% min worst 100%

41 Existing Radiological Safety criteria and Current sitiation Personnel (A) - 20 msv/y Personnel (B) msv/y Public 1 msv/y Specific admissible activities for are established by Norm of Radiation Safety (NRB-97) for specific activities in air (annual limit inhalation and permissible concentration for specific activities, and Rn-222; as well for surface contamination for premises, equipments and working dresses Maximal annual equivalent doses for workers at the PChP site at present (no remediation) can reach 5-20 msv, depend of expose scenarios. In most of cases expected doses for Public living at the surrounding inhabitant areas are less of 0,1 msv a year.

42 Development of radiation protection plans in the new UA revised State Remediation Program Planning Phase ( ) Concepts for Remediation of the various elements of the site will be developed at a conceptual level Further Site Characterization if required Preliminary Safety Assessment of Concepts Optimization of Concept options for each element MCDM ( Prioritization of the various elements of the Site Remediation. Selection of remediation techniques Sequencing of remedial activities Next level Safety Assessment of preferred options and further optimization. Acquisition of necessary manpower, resources. Development of individual Remediation Action/Implementation Plans. Licence Application Priority Actions Implementation ( )

43 Lesson learned and challenges (1) Remediation will remain to be challenged widely and intensively. International effort need be maintained and enhanced. Remediation can be improved by improving: Awareness; Strategic thinking and planning; Domestic and international coordination; National State Remediation Programs have to be established. Best international Practice can help Stakeholder involvement. Application of international standards and good practices to be disseminated and applied 43

44 Lesson learned and challenges (2) Regulatory framework must be enhanced Enhanced State support of these activities is essential to the successful and sustainable implementation of Technical Assistance The relevant infrastructure (responsible institutions, monitoring and analytical capacity buildings, regulatory capacities) to be developed and optimized The national counterparts and stakeholders need to be better coordinated International efforts need to be coordinated to make country specific support effective and sustainable Inadequate state support to the national laboratories for operational expenses, rendering the assistance less efficient More progress is needed to enhance and actually launch state programs for development of the remediation strategy and Environmental Monitoring 44

45 RSLS Working Groups WG1: Enhancing Regulatory Infrastructure National strategies and plans Regulatory basis and regulatory infrastructure Lessons learned WG2: Safety Assessment Methods and EIS, guidance on Methodological criteria for operators Methodological criteria for regulators Guidance on review methodology WG2: Professional Development for Regulators Project management Technical competencies Inspection 45

46 RSLS Activities Currently Planning Meeting, December 2009, Oslo, Norway Scientific Visit / International Workshop to USA, August st TM, October 2010, Vienna 2 nd TM, September 2011, Vienna 3 rd TM, October 2012, Vienna Next RSLS TM to be held in Vienna October 2013 in Vienna 46

47 THANK you for participation () () 47