Annex X -
Nuclear Safety Convention

(October 2, 1994)
The INSC
wishes to present to the IAEA, that will
provide the secretariat for the meetings of
the Contracting Parties, some suggestions
related to the process for reviewing the
reports on the measures taken by each
Contracting Party to implement its
obligations of the Convention. In writing
these suggestions, the INSC made a large use
of the clarification document attached to the
Convention.
SUGGESTIONS FOR THE REVIEW
PROCESS
The reports
submitted pursuant to Article 5 of the
Convention will hereinafter be referred to as
"the national reports". The process
for reviewing them, under Article 22, will be
established by the Contracting Parties at the
preparatory meeting held pursuant to Article
21; this process will be hereinafter referred
as to "the review process".
The INSC has
examined two steps in the review process:
Step 1:
The preparation of the national reports
Step 2: The review meetings of the
Contracting Parties (Article 20), hereinafter
referred as to "the review
meetings".
Step 1
The national reports will be prepared under
the sole responsibility of the member States.
Their form, structure and date of submission
will follow the guidelines and directives
established by the Contracting Parties
(Article 22). The INSC suggests that:
The
national reports should, as
applicable, address separately
each obligation of the
Convention, and demonstrate how
it has been met, with specific
reference to - inter alia -
legislation, procedures and
design criteria.
When
a national report states that a
particular obligation has not
been met, that report should also
state what measures are being
taken or planned to meet that
obligation.
Each
national report should include,
when applicable, the response of
the Contracting Party to
conclusions and recommendations
of the previous review meetings.
The
national report should make
reference inter alia to the
results of recognized
international peer review
mechanisms such as IAEA, OECD/NEA
and WANO services, when
available.
Before
submission to the Convention
review process, the national
reports may be reviewed, under
national responsibility, by
experts independent from the
regulatory and operating
organizations; the results of the
review would be attached to the
national report. When a
Contracting Party cannot rely
upon an existing national group
of recognized experts, it should
be able to request the assistance
of international experts selected
from a list endorsed by the
Contracting Parties.
The INSC
considers that the preparatory meeting
(Article 21) could recommend that all
national reports should be reviewed by
international experts before submission to
the Convention process. A list of recognized
experts would have to be endorsed by the
preparatory meeting and made available to
each Contracting Party. The INSC could
provide in due time suitable lists of experts
from all over the world, kept up-to-date.
Prior to the
review meetings, each Contracting Party will
have to analyze the national reports from
other Contracting Parties. If it needs the
assistance of experts for this task, the
Contracting Party could use that same list of
international experts.
Step 2
Under Article 20, sub-groups may function
during the review meetings, and each
Contracting Party shall have a reasonable
opportunity to seek clarification of the
national reports. The INSC suggests that the
review meetings should be organized in the
following way:
A. The
first part of the meeting would be
devoted to a plenary discussion of the
national reports with the main purpose of
clarification; there would be no official
record of the discussions.
B. In the
second part, the meeting would split into
sub-groups, each group examining a
topical area; the list of the areas, and
the names of the corresponding
chairpersons of the sub-groups, will have
been selected at the previous review
meeting, and, for the first meeting, at
the preparatory meeting (Article 21), by
the Contracting Parties . The purpose of
a sub-group meeting would be the review
of all national reports in its topical
area.
In each
sub-group, experts would identify
problems, concerns, uncertainties, or
omissions in national reports, focusing
on the most significant concerns, in
order to ensure efficient and fruitful
debate. Experts would be selected by a
steering committee composed of the
chairperson of the meeting and the
assembly of all sub-group chairpersons.
Representatives
of the Contracting Parties would have the
possibility to ask questions about the
treatment of relevant safety questions in
other national reports and to summarize
their views based upon the work done
before the meeting for examination of
other national reports.
The
chairperson of each group would produce a
summary document dealing with the safety
issues raised during the discussions,
without specifying individual countries.
C. The
last part of the meeting would be
plenary; the conclusions of all
sub-groups would be presented, and a
document available to the public would be
adopted by consensus (Article 25). The
topical areas for the next meeting would
be selected, and the chairpersons of the
meeting and the sub-groups designated;
they would constitute the steering
committee of the next meeting.
The
effectiveness of the suggested review process
will rest upon the quality and competence of
recognized safety experts. The INSC
reiterates its proposal to provide the
Contracting Parties with lists of experts
from all over the world, with due
consideration to the geographical
distribution of the Contracting Parties, and
to keep them up-to-date.