Is there any proposal to establish a requirement on Periodic Safety Reviews in Slovenia?

The question whether to insert into the new legislation (which is under preparation) a requirement on Periodic Safety Reviews is still under consideration. 

(See also the response to a French question on Article 6 and to a Italian question on Article 7).

It is not clear which Slovenian body reviews applications for NPP site and construction licences from radiation protection viewpoint; the Slovenian Nuclear Safety Administration (SNSA) appears only to review aspects related to nuclear safety (see on page 22 of the Report).

The term nuclear safety on page 22 of the report should be interpreted broadly as nuclear, radiation and waste safety. SNSA has overall competence in reviewing also the radiation protection aspects of the application in the licensing process. The Act on Organisation and Field of Activities of the Ministries of 1994 sets the competence of the SNSA also in the field of radiation protection in nuclear facilities.

As to enforcement two questions arise. The first is that nowhere in paragraph 7.3 on pages 23-24 of the Slovenian National Report suspension and revocation of licences are mentioned. How are these two administrative measures, explicitly provided for in the Convention, enacted?

The 19 Yes, the 1984 Act in its Section 62 covers also these aspects of the enforcement. The competent authority (SNSA) has a power to discontinue the operation of sources of ionising radiation (suspend the license) and to revoke the licence for the utilisation of radiation sources.

The second question is: if there is a case of sanctioned non-compliance by the licensee, who decides on legal action being brought against the licensee?

SNSA has the power to independently decide on legal action being brought against the licensee. SNSA may submit a request to bring legal action for an offence or a notification of a criminal act if, in the course of its supervision it establish non-compliance with regulations which are sanctioned according to the provisions of the 1984 Act and other regulations.

Considering that the operating license in Slovenia is not explicitly limited in time and that there are no formal requirements for performing Periodic Safety Reviews (PSR), what regulatory instruments are in use to ensure that a systematic approach to an integrated assessment of the plant safety is guaranteed? Are there any plans to enact formal requirements to this effect in regulations?

Although there is no formal requirement for performing Periodic Safety Reviews in the legislation, Regulation E-1 requires from the licensee to permanently follow and analyse the safety status of the plant bearing in mind experience of the nuclear industry and technological development. Slovenia is considering inserting requirement for the Periodic Safety Review into new legislation which is under preparation. The Regulatory body has followed the intention of the PSR.. After the first ten year period SNSA requested from the NPP Krsko to perform complete PSA: level 1 and 2 for internal and external events and shutdown PSA and several deterministic analyses (Station Blackout, Fire Hazard, etc). The seismic input to the original design has been reinvestigated.

Are there plans to update the 1984 Act? If so, what is the schedule for the completion of this review? What will be the new aspects included in this revision?

From the very beginning of Slovenian independence there was intention to update / review nuclear safety legislation. The first step was done already in 1993 when the draft of new "nuclear and radiation safety Act" and new "Third party liability Act" were prepared for internal use. At that time also some pieces of international legal frame were under preparation as for example Nuclear Safety Convention, Revision of Vienna Convention, Convention on Supplementary Compensation for Nuclear Damage and Joint Cconvention on the Safety of Spent Fuel and on the Safety of Radioactive Waste Management. Waiting for outcome of these international instruments delayed the process of updating the domestic legislation in this field. On the other hand Slovenia is approaching the European Union which means that we will have to harmonise our legislation with EU legislation. Transposition of different directives into Slovenian legal system has already started. It is planed that by the end of 2000 the new "nuclear and radiation safety act" and "new third party liability act" will be in Parliament procedure.

Regulatory functions in Slovenia are assigned to SNSA. Due to the fact that Krsko plant is owned 50 % by Croatia, what is the regulatory responsibility of the Croatian agencies, if any?

Since the Krsko NPP is located on Slovenian territory 100 % of the regulatory responsibility rests and is executed by the Slovenian regulatory authorities respectless of the ownership of the plant.

More information about the ownership is given in the National report on page 38 and in our answer to the Austrian question on Article 11.

Section 7.2 states that four phases of licensing are established in Slovenia. Given this, at the first two phases the competent authority is the Ministry of Ecology and Territorial Planning while at the subsequent phases the competent authority is the SNSA. So, who issues licenses for all the above phases?

As it is stated in Slovenian National Report on page 19 under the subtitle ?Licensing system? the Ministry of Environmental and Physical Planning issues the site and construction license. SNSA as the regulatory body (for nuclear, radiation and waste safety) within this Ministry is engaged only in the form of a previous consensus; in this two stages SNSA only reviews and evaluates environmental impact assessment for site license and PSAR for the construction permit. The commissioning and operating licenses are granted based on the review of the FSAR by the SNSA itself.

How is the process of issuing operation and decommissioning licenses defined by legislation?

We believe that the process of issuing the operation license is extensively described in our national report under the subtitle Licensing System (pages 19-22); references and even quotations of relevant sections of the 1984 Act and relevant regulations (E2 and E1) are also given. With respect to decommissioning license the 1984 Act is rather short. In its Section 43 it is stated that the operating organisation (licensee) shall, pursuant to the provisions of 1984 Act, pass and apply instructions and other acts related to the operation of the nuclear facility, among others also - programme of measures and procedures for the decommissioning of the nuclear facility. Some provisions on decommissioning can be find also in section 12 and 13 of the 1984 Act:

Section 12

If the operator of the nuclear facility has the intention of decommissioning the facility, he shall submit prior notification to that effect to the competent body".

Section 13 

The operator of the nuclear facility who has decommissioned the facility shall within the time-limits determined by the competent body undertake adequate remedial measures at the site, the facility itself and its surroundings in the manner which, pursuant to this Act, provides for the environmental protection from ionising radiation". 

Further more the section 32/2 requires:

"The safety report shall be amended in accordance with the changes which arise in the project design during construction, commissioning, start of operation, operation and decommissioning of the nuclear facility".

Some detailed provisions could be find in Regulation E-1. Most important is section 46 of the Regulation:

"The decommissioning programme of a nuclear facility is performed pursuant to a license issued by the competent regulatory body (SNSA).

The licence referred to in Para 1 of this Section shall be granted, if, according to the decommissioning programme and other required documents, the radiation protection has been assured".

Section 7.2 states that the competent authority who issues the license for the start of operation defines operating limits and conditions for a nuclear installation. How and on the basis of what are these limits and conditions formed?

Operating limits and conditions are based on StandardTechnical Specifications for Westinghouse (NUREG). On the basis of safety analyses (FSAR Chapter 15) the licensee prepares plant specific operating limits and conditions for a nuclear installation. The Regulatory Body afterwards extensively reviews them. They are required by the 1984 Act to be submitted with the application for the Operating License. The Operating limits and conditions (Technical Specifications) become licensing document with issuance of the Operating License. Any changes to the operating limits and conditions are subject to prior Regulatory Body review and approval.

Krsko NPP is still jointly owned (50-50) by Slovenia and Croatia. How does this affect the ultimate responsibility for nuclear safety and emergency preparedness, not least with regard to financial and liability provisions? Which formal relations exist between the two owners and the operating organisation?

The information about the ownership is given in the National report on page 38 and in our answer to the Austrian question on Article 11.

Since the Krsko NPP is located on Slovenian territory the whole regulatory responsibility and functions rest on Slovenian regulatory authorities (including responsibility for nuclear safety and emergency preparedness). Also all financial and liability provisions with respect to safety of Krsko NPP are governed by Slovenian legislation which includes (beside domestic laws) also international legal instruments to which Slovenia is a party. Relations between two "owners" and the operating organisation (Krsko NPP) are formalised by establishment of Managing Board where the representatives of both, Slovenian and Croatian side are represented.