ASN Report 2017

09 ASN report on the state of nuclear safety and radiation protection in France in 2017 Editorial by the Director General ASN has built a decision-making process that is rigorous, collective and open. Rigorous: each decision on a complex subject is the result of an investigation conducted by ASN in accordance with procedures. This demands real know-how, that of being able to identify the issues, ask oneself questions, listen to the licensee, collect the opinions of experts and check that all aspects of importance for the decision have been examined. Collective: the decisions are prepared within ASN by several persons who together assess various options and their consequences. Open: ASN consults the public on its draft resolutions, both directly and indirectly, via the Local Information Committees. Finally, ASN is particularly active in networks involving foreign counterparts, with which it has built up a relationship of trust enabling difficult subjects to be discussed. With regard to the carbon segregation anomaly in the steels used to manufacture certain large components, the discussions between ASN and its counterparts in 2017 will thus lead to this subject being better incorporated into the industrial standards in the future. On a different topic, at its plenary session of October 2017, the Western European Nuclear Regulators Association (WENRA) decided to start work on the safety improvements to reactors that could be reasonably envisaged beyond forty years in service. This work will be of great value to ASN when preparing its own resolutions on the subject. With regard to resources, ASN has so far obtained the resources it needs to carry out its duties. Fifty positions were created at ASN between 2015 and 2017, together with an increased workload which, in the current public budget context, represents a significant effort on behalf of the regulation and oversight of nuclear safety and radiation protection. For the coming three years, ASN evaluates its needs at 15 additional posts, both to absorb the workload involved in the ongoing subjects and to allow the implementation of regulation to address the problem of fraud. At the same time, ASN is working on making its regulation and oversight more efficient: After creating a categorisation of nuclear facilities according to the potential consequences, in 2016, ASN extended the remote-notification system in 2017 and reviewed the regulation and oversight arrangements for small-scale nuclear facilities. Actions in this area will continue in 2018, together with the new ASN Strategic Plan. A new strategic plan and a new regulation and oversight policy Throughout the course of 2017, ASN worked on an in-depth overhaul of its strategy and on an adaptation of its regulation and oversight methods to present and future issues. Apart from an analysis of the current context, ASN listened to the various stakeholders, including interviews with the licensees and activity managers, the representative learned societies in the medical nuclear field, representatives of civil society, trade union organisations in the nuclear industries, the main administrations and organisations with which ASN is in contact, as well as foreign counterparts. All the ASN staff contributed to drafting a new three-year strategic plan and a new regulation and oversight policy, which they will be implementing on a daily basis, as of this year. The regulation and oversight policy thus defined emphasises the reinforcement of a graded approach. Two parameters must be taken into consideration when evaluating regulation and oversight priorities: on the one hand, the risks inherent in the activities for individuals and the environment and, on the other, the behaviour of those responsible for the activities and the means they deploy to manage these risks. ASN thus intends to reinforce its regulation and oversight of fields or facilities considered to have priority; one example of this being the “reinforced monitoring” of a facility. Conversely, when the potential consequences are low, or for situations considered to be positive in terms of protection of individuals and the environment, it aims to scale back its regulation and oversight. This graded approach must apply not only to regulation and oversight, but also to the procedures andmethods for information of and participation by the public and the stakeholders: these