When is it planned to fulfil the number of permanent staff according to European Union mission RAMG (1993)?

At very At this moment 35 permanent positions out of 48 at SNSA are occupied. As it can be seen from a scheme in page 27 of the Slovenian National Report the number of employees in SNSA is increasing from year to year. But at the same time there are some financial and budgetary restriction at the governmental level which do not allow - for time being - to fulfil in whole the organisational chart.

As per paragraph 8.1 SNSA decrees can be appealed to the Ministry of Environment and Physical Planning, the same point about effective independence of SNSA can be made as it will be in the comment under Clause 

Clause 1. Financial and Human Resources

The question of adequacy in human resources available to the Slovenian Nuclear Safety Administration (SNSA) (page 27) ought to be addressed, inter alia because the SNSA Division of Nuclear and Radioactive Materials appears also to be responsible for supervision of trade, transport and handling of radioisotopes used in medicine, industry and research (see on page 28).

Clause 2.

The question of effective separation between the functions of the SNSA as regulatory body and other bodies concerned with promotion or utilisation of nuclear energy is not entirely clear. As the Slovenian Nuclear Safety Administration comes under the Ministry of Environmental and Physical Planning, the functions and the responsibilities of the latter ought to be expanded upon.

With respect to human resources see answer to Brazilian question above.

With respect to separation of regulatory and promotion function of different regulatory bodies we believe that the historical background and present status of SNSA are well explained in the National report on page 24.

It is stated that SNSA is an independent State administration, but no Information is provided on how this is accomplished and preserved. Since SNSA reports to the Government, how it is assured the independence of regulatory policies from Government policies supporting or opposing the use of nuclear energy? Is that reflected in the appointment and removal of the SNSA Director?

SNSA has been in the past (from 1987 to 1991) an independent and functionally autonomous body and directly responsible to the Government and to the Parliament of the Republic of Slovenia. In 1991 it become a part of the Ministry of Environment and Physical Planning. The Government policies supporting or opposing the use of nuclear energy had no direct influence on the work / independence of the SNSA since its responsibility is to insure that the nuclear safety provisions of our legislation are applied by licensee. For the time being there was no evidence of ?political? influence on the work of the SNSA. As stated in the National report, page 25, the Director of SNSA is appointed and discharged by the Government on the motion of the Minister. Based on legislation there is a possibility that Government which opposes the use of nuclear energy would discharge the Director of SNSA but since SNSA is not a promoter of nuclear energy but rather promoter of nuclear safety this is not expected to happen.

It appears that SNSA has not its own budget, but is part of the budget for the Ministry for Environment and Physical Planning. It is stated that more than 30 % of the staff positions in SNSA are not occupied at present. Are current resources sufficient for fulfilment of the basic functions?

SNSA has not its own budget but it is a part of the budget of the Ministry of Environmental and Physical Planning. Once approved by the Parliament SNSA has all the rights for its execution. SNSA's share in Ministry?s budget was in 1998 around 2 %). Budget is the only source for financing the SNSA basic activities. Most expense incured in the licensing process (expertize, analyses, etc.) made by independent TSOs are reimbursed by the licensee. The amount of available financial resources in the budget is estimated to be sufficient for the regulatory tasks. However the amount allocated for financing of R&D shows trend of decreasing in the last few years. There is a Governmental restriction in available funds for opening new posts.

Several relevant organisations are mentioned in the report with regulatory or control function. How is the co-ordination of these agencies with SNSA ensured?

The co-ordination of several relevant organisations (or better relevant authorities) with the SNSA is ensured through participation of their experts in the work of the Nuclear Safety Expert Commission which is attached to the SNSA. This Commission has only advisory role but important licenses issued to the nuclear facilities and drafts of the laws and regulations have to get the commission's positive opinion. Co-ordination between all these relevant regulatory authorities with respect to inspection activities is done on the ad-hoc basis and it must be pointed out that there were some minor problems in the day to day activities with respect to the overlapping of the competencies in some areas such as fire protection, physical protection of nuclear materials and facilities, radiation protection, etc.

How is the technical support to SNSA on issues of nuclear reactor physics performed?

For the reactor physics issues (reactor core design, criticality analysis, start-up physics tests, etc.) SNSA has support of TSO, in this case Institute Jozef Stefan Reactor Physics Dept.

It is mentioned in 8.1 that in 1991 SNSA lost some of its independence and autonomy and further that SNSA decrees can be appealed to the Ministry of Environmental and Physical Planning. Please explain how this could restrict the regulatory work.

SNSA is autonomous in issuing decrees within its field of competencies to the licensees. In the licensing process SNSA has newer been influenced by the Ministry. The independence might be questioned regarding budget and manpower planning. Reporting to the Government and to the Parliament is channelled through the Ministry. SNSA has no competence for issuing regulations, the drafts prepared by SNSA are adopted by the Minister or by the Government. There is a legal provision in the legislation, which would empower the Minister to issue obligatory instructions to all subordinate Bodies within the Ministry; but these instructions are related only to general administrative issues and do not interfere with the regulatory process. With respect to the appeal process it has to be stressed that the procedure could take few months on the second level (Ministry) and might be even longer (few years) if the next level is supreme court at which the case may come. In all this period the important safety related issue is unsolved and open.

From what is reported in 8.1 it could be concluded that concerning nuclear emergency, physical protection and radiation protection the responsibilities are divided between different authorities and also shared with the Jozef Stefan Institute. It is also mentioned that some responsibilities are overlapping. How clearly are these responsibilities defined? Which problems are created by the overlapping responsibilities?

Responsibilities (or better field of activities) are defined generally in the Act on Organisation and Field of Activities of the Ministries. Within this Act the competencies of different ministries are more or less well defined but there is always possibility of misinterpretation of same provisions. On the other hand competencies and responsibility of ministries and / or regulatory bodies on lower level are defined also in acts and regulations which are covering different areas of nuclear and / or radiological matters. 

Just for clarification it must be pointed out that Jozef Stefan Institute has no regulatory function, it is only one of several TSOs which provide support to SNSA in the licensing process and which does R &D in the field of nuclear safety.

Overlapping of responsibilities does not create a major problem; potentially the Government could always solve the problem if any of involved ministries would require the solution of so called "positive dispute of competence".

How many inspectors are included in the staff of SNSA? Are they stationed at Krsko? It is reported that only 33 positions out of 48 at SNSA are occupied? What are the reasons for the vacancies? How do they affect the work of SNSA? What is planned to remedy this situation?

The Division of Inspection Control of the SNSA has a head of division and four inspectors (together 5 inspectors). There are no resident inspectors who have an office on site (Krsko NPP) but the continuos monitoring of the NPP's performance is carried out through the planned inspections twice a week by (normally) two inspectors (see more in National Report on page 27, 28).

The reason that only 35 positions out of 48 are occupied is basically in the fact that SNSA started back in 1988 with only 5 staff members. Due to the fact that increasing of employment in state administration is unpopular among general public and that Government general policy in this respect is for several years very restrictive we believe that the trend presented in scheme on page 27 of the National Report is encouraging.

The fact that the SNSA is understaffed is reflected in the pressure on existing staff members who are engaged in many different tasks not only on nuclear and radiological safety issues but also on administrative, financial, personal and other. In worst cases this results in young engineers quiting the jobs in SNSA. Since we are part of international "nuclear" community with (sometimes) demanding on-going activities and since we are in the middle of the accession process towards the European Union, the day to day activities which should be done are sometimes delayed. Plan for the correction of this situation is basically a part of the overall governmental policy to improve efficiency and effectiveness of the Governmental administration possibly also by increasing its staff.

Does SNSA have an implemented QA-programme for regulatory work? How is it structured and audited?

SNSA has no overall QA-programme for the regulatory work. QA procedures are being developed with lower priority although the need for the programme has been recognised. There are in use Administrative Procedures for the functioning of the Administration, Inspection Manual Procedures and Emergency Plan Procedures. Help is received in the preparation of the procedures from the EU through the RAMG (Regulatory Assistance Management Group) Programme. SNSA is subject of auditing for the regulatory work by the Ministry of Justice and by the Ministry of Finance for the financial policy. Besides, SNSA work is reviewed by different missions of the IAEA and EU. IRRT mission is planned for the end of 1999.

It is mentioned that the Division of Nuclear Safety performs different analyses but has rather limited resources. Which is the role of SNSA with regard to performing vs. reviewing PSA, event analysis, experience feedback analysis as compared to TSOs and the operating organisation?

SNSA does not perform complex safety analysis by itself but requests the licensee to provide necessary analysis in the licensing process and TSOs to perform independent review of such analysis. SNSA is developing capabilities for review and regulatory assessment of safety analyses, experience feedback analyses, etc. performed by plant or TSOs.

Nothing is said in the report about the budget of SNSA. How is the budget determined? Which is the estimation of sufficiency with regard to the regulatory tasks? Which resources exist to contract the mentioned TSOs and to sponsor research and development to support regulatory development?

Budget of the SNSA is determined on the basis of the realisation in the previous year, taking into account new needs in the planning year which have to be well justified. Budget is the only source for financing the SNSA basic activities and is about 1.36 Mio EURO. Most expense incured in the licensing process (expertize, analyses, etc.) made by independent TSOs are reimbursed by the licensee. The amount of available financial resources in the budget is estimated to be sufficient for the regulatory tasks. However the amount allocated for financing of R&D shows trend of decreasing in the last few years. There is a Governmental restriction in available funds for opening new posts.

What is the reason of the decision by the Slovenian Government that has lead to a decrease in the independence of the regulatory body?

When established in 1987 SNSA was an independent regulatory body reporting directly to the Government and to the Parliament. New Act on Organisation of the State Administration of 1991 abolished at the Governmental level all the independent bodies without any exception and put them under the Ministries. So the SNSA became a part of the Ministry of environment and physical planning.