Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission
nuclearsafety.gc.ca
Home > Laws and Regulations > Comment on a Document > Draft for Public Consultation
Nuclear power plants (NPPs) in Canada are subject to the ongoing regulatory oversight of the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) to ensure that their operation does not pose unreasonable risk to health, safety, security and the environment, and conforms to Canada’s international obligations regarding the peaceful use of nuclear energy.
GD-360 contains guidance information to assist licensees in meeting the requirements of regulatory document RD-360 version 2, Life Management of Nuclear Power Plants (draft) [1] which describes the regulatory requirements for the long-term operation of an NPP and for the end of its operation.
Long-term operation of an NPP is the operation beyond the assumed design life of the plant. GD-360 provides guidance for the activities required to support the continued operation of an NPP up to its permanent shutdown and activities to support long-term operation.
The end of operation is the final, permanent shutdown of an NPP’s reactor operation. GD-360 provides guidance regarding the activities during the transition period from reactor unit shutdown and safe state of storage until the NPP enters the decommissioning phase.
Other health and safety, environmental and nuclear security considerations may dictate adherence to additional requirements. It is the responsibility of the licensee to identify any other applicable legislation or standards.
1.0 Introduction
1.1 Purpose
1.2 Scope
1.3 Relevant regulations
1.4 National and international standards
2.0 Long-term Operation
2.1 Integrated safety review
2.2 Integrated safety review basis document
2.2.1 Scope
2.2.2 Communication protocol for timelines and deliverables
2.2.3 Statement of licensing basis at the time of initiating the ISR
2.2.4 Safety and control area reviews
2.2.5 List of modern codes, standards and practices
2.2.6 Identification and disposition of findings
2.2.7 Risk management decision making process
2.2.8 Global assessment
2.2.9 Management system applied to the ISR
2.2.10 Change control
2.3 Safety and control area reviews
2.3.1 Management system
2.3.2 Human performance management
2.3.3 Operating performance
2.3.4 Safety analysis
2.3.5 Physical design
2.3.6 Fitness for service
2.3.7 Radiation protection
2.3.8 Conventional health and safety
2.3.9 Environmental protection
2.3.10 Emergency management and fire protection
2.3.11 Waste management
2.3.12 Security
2.3.13 Safeguards
2.3.14 Packaging and transport
2.3.15 Safety and control area reports
2.3.16 Integrated safety review final report
2.4 Integrated implementation plan
2.5 Continued operation plan
2.6 Refurbishment and project execution plan
2.6.1 Plant configuration
2.6.2 Refurbishment programs and processes
2.6.3 Construction activities
2.6.4 Commissioning program
2.6.5 Return to normal operation
2.6.6 Project monitoring
3.0 End of Operation Plan
3.1 Sustainable operation plan
3.2 Safe state of storage plan
3.2.1 Stabilization activity plan
3.2.2 Storage and surveillance plan
3.3 Decommissioning
Glossary
Appendix A: Life Management of Nuclear Power Plants
Appendix B: Technical Content Guidelines: Sufficiency Checks
Appendix C: CNSC Safety and Control Areas
References
Additional Information
As a nuclear power plant (NPP) approaches the end of its assumed design life, the licensee implements the required steps and measures for extending or ending its operation.
Long-term operation (LTO) is the operation beyond the assumed design life of the NPP, which has been justified by the results of an integrated safety review (ISR). The licensee may decide to continue operation of the facility up to its refurbishment or permanent shutdown, or may initiate refurbishment activities to support the period of long-term operation.
End of operation is the final, permanent shut-down of reactor operation of an NPP; the NPP facility remains subject to a power reactor operating licence (PROL) that authorizes activities during the transition period from reactor unit shutdown and safe state of storage until it enters the decommissioning phase.
This document provides guidance regarding activities a licensee must undertake to support long-term operation or to prepare for the end of operation, pursuant to RD-360 version 2, Life Management of Nuclear Power Plants.
This document covers activities to be completed during the operating phase of the NPP, under the authorization of a PROL issued by the Commission, and excludes activities that are to be undertaken under the decommissioning licence.
The provisions of the Nuclear Safety and Control Act (NSCA) and regulations made under the NSCA relevant to this guidance document are as follows:
Other Acts, regulations, and codes are also applicable to projects to support operation beyond assumed design life. They include the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (CEAA) [2] and associated regulations [3, 4, 5, 6 and 7] and the Canada Labour Code, Part II, Occupational Health and Safety [8]. Other relevant legislation is listed in the Additional Information section at the end of this guidance document.
Key principles and elements used in developing this guidance document are consistent with national and international standards, guides, and practices. The document is also consistent with:
Long-term operation may require the repair or refurbishment of major components, or substantial modifications to the plant, or both. The need for refurbishment will be largely dictated by the proposed period of LTO. The licensee then prepares for an integrated safety review (ISR) and the resulting integrated implementation plan (IIP). Modifications and upgrades described in the IIP for the safe operation of the facility are commensurate to the scope of the review performed and the proposed period of LTO. Once the ISR is completed and the IIP established, the licensee submits either a continued operation plan or a detailed refurbishment project execution plan including return to commercial operation considerations.
In multi-unit stations, different plans can to be applied to each unit. For example, if the licensee decides to refurbish a multi-unit station it may plan for a staggered refurbishment of each unit instead of a single continuous outage of all units at once. In this case, the plan would require considerations for both continued operation and refurbishment.
The work required in the IIP may constitute a project under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act and be subject to an environmental assessment (EA). There is flexibility in the order in which the EA and the ISR are conducted. Information to assist the licensee in developing the project description is provided in the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency’s publication, Preparing Project Descriptions under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act [11].
The activities the licensee must undertake for LTO include:
The ISR is a project that includes the following activities:
The results are used to establish corrective actions and safety improvements to be included in the IIP. If an extended outage for refurbishment is necessary then a refurbishment and project execution plan is also required.
The licensee should apply the principles of IAEA Safety Report No 57, Safe Long Term Operation of Nuclear Power Plants, and IAEA Safety Standard No.NS-G-2.10 Periodic Safety Review of Nuclear Power Plants, for completing the ISR for LTO.
International experience has demonstrated that licensees spend considerable time and effort to complete an ISR. The benchmark for time and effort is the conduct of a periodic safety review as described in IAEA NS-G-2.10. The licensee should plan accordingly and begin discussions with the CNSC to ensure expectations are clear and to manage project risks.
The first deliverable for the ISR project is the ISR basis document, which sets out the scope and methodology for the conduct of the ISR. The basis document describes the general terms of the ISR project. To ensure the licensee and regulator have the same expectations for the scope and results of the project, the licensee should prepare and submit the basis document to the CNSC for review prior to any work on the SCA reviews.
A high level project plan should be laid out in the ISR basis document and the following should be established:
In some cases, the basis document will require revision. As part of the basis document, the licensee should prepare a method for proposing, tracking and documenting any changes. Additionally, guidelines on the type of changes that would require the basis document to be revised should be provided.
The basis document describes the scope of the reviews to be carried out as part of the ISR. To establish a common understanding of what is being reviewed, the basis document identifies facilities; structures, systems and components (SSC); and the time period covered by the review. The type of LTO (with or without refurbishment) will dictate the breadth of scope required.
The proposed period of LTO can span from a minimum of ten years, to a period comparable to the original assumed design life of the plant. When scoping the ISR, the licensee should be conservative and scope several years beyond the proposed LTO period; if the decision is made to continue operating beyond the proposed LTO period, the preparatory work is in place to identify upgrades and modifications required to continue safe operation.
At the outset of the ISR, an appropriate protocol should be established between the licensee and the CNSC. The licensee should provide details to address the administrative process for submissions and management of deliverables. This protocol applies to the entire project. The protocol should facilitate adherence to schedules and ensure timely submissions of complete and comprehensive information.
This protocol should facilitate meeting the requirements of all applicable regulations and RD-360, and should address the following four key items:
No further guidance is needed at this time.
The method that will be applied in the SCA reviews should be described in the basis document to show how the licensee plans to achieve the objectives of each SCA. The type of review (clause by clause, high-level) applied to each review element should be listed. The method of addressing interdependencies on common services and site-wide issues should also be described.
An integral element of the ISR is the comparison of current plant state to modern codes and standards used in NPPs. An agreed upon code effective date and a list of codes and standards to be applied is established prior to any work being carried out. This ensures a common and consistent expectation for the reviews.
Codes and standards should be selected taking into consideration the CNSC’s regulatory framework philosophy, as well as current international practice, relevant research or new findings, any relevant operation experience, and any CNSC regulatory documents. Primary consideration for selection of standards should rest with those referenced in licenses or other regulatory documents. IAEA documents and other appropriate international standards should also be considered. If an appropriate Canadian standard is not available, the licensee should propose a reasonable substitute.
A list of common operational standards, methods and industrial best practices should be established that indicates things to be considered in the performance of the reviews.
As the SCA reviews and global assessment are carried out, findings will be identified. The licensee should propose a method for identifying, categorizing, ranking risk, and addressing any such findings. The rationale behind the categorization of all findings should be justified by the licensee using technical arguments and supporting evidence. Priority is given to findings that do not conform to the licensing or design basis and these findings are addressed as quickly as practicable.
A list of proposed corrective actions should be submitted to CNSC for acceptance. Typically, the licensee will be able to make a selection between several different methods of dispositioning findings. During the development of the corrective actions, the licensee should decide how to address and resolve the findings of the ISR.
The licensee’s process for decision making should be submitted to the CNSC for review. This process may include risk informed decision-making process, cost-benefit analysis, deterministic analysis and professional judgment. This decision-making process is applied throughout the ISR and should be clearly described in the basis document.
The global assessment is an evaluation of the overall risk associated to the NPP. To carry out the review, the licensee should use a group of non-biased specialists (i.e., people who were not directly involved in performing the SCA reviews) with sufficient expertise in the subject matter. The team should review the findings of the SCA reviews and provide an analysis of any interface issues between the SCA reviews and between any specific deviations. From this work, the licensee should be able to present an assessment of the overall risk of the NPP, including the assessment of interface issues and the risk associated with deviations identified in the ISR. The results of the global assessment should also address the extent to which the following requirements are fulfilled: safety goals and limits; defence in depth; and other fundamental safety methods.
The licensee should describe the method applied in performing the global assessment and the method used to make the risk assessments for the findings, as well as the overall risk judgment of acceptability of LTO.
If the licensee proposes to apply an accepted cost-benefit analysis approach to resolve a gap or a group of gaps, develop a corrective action, implement a safety improvement, or any combination thereof, the global assessment methodology can be used to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the outcomes.
The licensee should outline the management system applied in the performance of the ISR. The licensee should ensure:
During the period between the acceptance of the ISR basis document and the start of the refurbishment activities, the codes and standards identified in the basis document may be revised or new ones may come into effect. The licensee should outline the process that will be used to address new or current revisions of codes and standards. The code effective date should be used to disposition any findings. The process should describe the methodology for assessing the safety significance of the findings.
The decision to proceed with LTO of an NPP is determined mainly by economic considerations associated with the ISR outcomes. The licensee should outline the process for communicating these changes to the CNSC. Through this process, the licensee should notify the CNSC of the change itself and of any significant implications, such as changes to the schedule, scope or processes.
The following sections describe the expected content of each SCA review. The licensee should carry out the SCA reviews after CNSC staff has accepted the ISR basis document. Appendix C lists the SCA and the topics to be considered for each area. Continuous improvement is an important aspect of each SCA review, so the licensee should develop initiatives for this in each review and describe the benefits to existing practices.
To ensure the reviews are consistent, the licensee should refer to Appendix B to verify that the documentation is adequately prepared and provides the required information. It is recommended that the licensee ensures that the scope of each review addresses its own requirements, and the requirements of any related SCA as applicable.
The safety and control area reviews are carried out by the licensee, who assesses the actual state of the nuclear facility against modern expectations rather than comparing old and new editions of the codes, standards and practices.
The review should confirm the management system’s organizational arrangements, processes, resources and plans are valid and effective to achieve the business objectives and strategies for long-term operation or end of operation, and should make adjustments as appropriate.
The review should further confirm the implementation of a management system in accordance with CSA N286 Management System Requirements for Nuclear Power Plants [13] which identifies principles and generic requirements of the management system.
Through implementation of CSA N286 and other management systems (ISO 14001 [14], OHSAS 18001 [15], etc.), the review should explore further opportunities to integrate its processes for managing the business and the actions necessary to satisfy business requirements.
2.3.1.1 Organizational performance
The organizational performance review area considers the influence that leadership, management, culture processes, and policies can have on the safety performance of licensees. This review area addresses:
The management system should integrate safety management into general management. Safety culture is a subset of organizational culture and can be assessed to determine the extent to which there are healthy attitudes towards risk and safety. Although safety culture itself is difficult to measure, by promoting safety culture, a licensee is able to monitor organizational health and intervene where necessary. The CNSC considers the following elements to be crucial for a strong safety culture:
Contractor management is included within the review area of organizational performance, as safe performance is a requirement of all workers, including contractors.
The review of the safety program and its implementation should include:
The review of the program and implementation of safety culture should confirm:
For contractor management, the review should confirm:
Licensees are expected to develop and implement a program that continuously monitors and improves human performance, identifies human performance weaknesses, and reduces the likelihood of human-performance related causes and root causes of nuclear safety events.
Human performance programs for a facility should be developed, reviewed for effectiveness and updated continuously, from the construction through to decommissioning of nuclear facilities.
The review should confirm that the human performance programs:
The following elements should be reviewed to ensure there is an effective interface between them:
The program should ensure that the organization supports safe work activities, and human performance information and activities are effectively integrated. The licensee should support the human performance program by ensuring the following:
2.3.2.1 Procedures
Procedures should be technically accurate, comprehensive, clear and concise, and should contain adequate information and direction for staff (for example, operators, maintainers or testers) to complete their tasks. They should be unambiguous and relevant to the current plant configuration; this ensures that procedures fit the purpose for which they are intended.
Information from task analyses should be used to develop the various technical steps in the procedure, and the format and organization of procedures are to be based on a writer’s guide that considers usability of the procedures. Procedures need to be verified for technical accuracy, and validated by a walk-through of the task(s) with representative end users, to ensure that the procedures can be carried out as intended and that the technical requirements of the tasks can be achieved.
The review of the process to develop and implement procedures should address the following:
The review of the process for ensuring procedural compliance should include:
2.3.2.2 Work organization and job design
Work organization and job design relates to the organization and provision of adequate staff, as well as the organization and allocation of work assigned to staff, in order to ensure that work related goals are achieved in a safe manner. G-323, Ensuring the Presence of Sufficient Qualified Staff at Class I Nuclear Facilities - Minimum Staff Complement [16] describes the CNSC’s expectations for ensuring the presence of a sufficient number of qualified staff at Class I nuclear facilities. G-278, Human Factors Verification and Validation Plans [17] describes the CNSC’s expectations for validation of adequate staffing.
The review of the work organization and provision of adequate staffing should include:
Implementation of the process to manage the minimum shift complement should include:
2.3.2.3 Fitness for duty
The objective of this portion of the review is to confirm that workers who carry out tasks that could impact safety are fit for duty. An evaluation of a worker’s fitness for duty can be conducted by considering components of the program, circumstances of duty and the degree of fitness of workers. The review should describe the method used to assess the degree of worker fitness, ranging from fit to unfit, and may be classified as temporary or permanent.
In evaluating the fitness for duty program, the following components should be reviewed
The fitness for duty program should consider different circumstances of worker duty, including:
The licensee should have a system for keeping records of all incidents and evaluating their safety significance. In addition, records of plant operation, maintenance, testing, inspection, replacement and modifications should be regularly evaluated to identify any unsafe situations or trends. The results of these evaluations should be suitably summarized to give an overall assessment of operating performance. Performance indicators (PIs) of both failures and successes should be utilized. The ISR should review all relevant PIs, which should be subjected to trend analysis to highlight potential safety problems. The licensee can also compare the PIs with other nuclear facilities to benefit from their experiences.
Experience from other similar and dissimilar NPPs, combined with research findings, can occasionally reveal unknown safety weaknesses or can help in solving existing problems. The licensee should have arrangements for assessing information and feedback received as part of its normal activities. The SCA report should include a review of the adequacy of these arrangements and the timely implementation of any findings.
The following elements should be reviewed and verified for effectiveness:
2.3.3.1 Performance monitoring and improvement
Performance monitoring and improvement is the process of gathering data and information about the performance of an organization’s activities, analyzing the data, developing and implementing improvement plans, and monitoring the effectiveness of changes intended to bring about the improvements.
Human actions either cause or contribute to majority of events so event analysis should include identification of such causes and contributing factors. This information should be used to make changes to reduce the likelihood of these events occurring in the future.
The following processes should be reviewed and verified for effectiveness:
2.3.4.1 Deterministic safety analysis
The SCA review should update the current safety analysis as necessary to ensure that it is based on the actual plant design, reflects the current state and predicted state of SSC at the end of the review period, and considers all postulated initiating events that are appropriate for the plant design and plant location.
Current, accepted and analytical methods should be used, particularly with regard to computer codes for transient analyses. The assumptions used in these calculations (conservative or best estimate) should be justified with respect to the inherent uncertainties in order to gain greater insight into existing safety margins.
The following elements should be reviewed:
The review of the deterministic safety analysis should determine whether the actual plant design is capable of meeting the prescribed regulatory limits for radiation doses and radioactive releases resulting from postulated accidents. It should also identify or confirm any major weaknesses or strengths of the plant design in relation to the application of defence in depth, and should evaluate the importance of systems and measures to prevent or control accidents, with a complete set of postulated initiating events taken into account.
If the safety concept of the plant design differs from current practice, any advantages or disadvantages inherent in that safety concept should be addressed.
The current state of this safety analysis should be reviewed for completeness of the set of postulated initiating events and for its scope, methods and assumptions.
2.3.4.2 Probabilistic safety analysis
The SCA review should update the probabilistic safety analysis (PSA) as necessary to ensure it is valid as a representative model of the plant when the following aspects are taken into account: changes in the design and operation of the plant; new technical information; current methods; and new operational data.
The PSA should include a human reliability assessment (HRA). HRA is a method of estimating the probability of human errors in terms of the probability that a system-required human action, task or job required for safety will not be completed successfully within a required time period. HRA can also consider the probability that extraneous tasks or actions detrimental to system reliability or availability will be performed.
The results of a PSA should be compared with the probabilistic safety criteria (for example for system reliability, core damage and releases of radioactive material) when they have been defined for the facility.
The PSA should be kept sufficiently up to date during the plant lifetime to make it useful in the decision-making process. The PSA should be used to identify opportunities for future improvements by revealing weaknesses in the plant design and operation.
The accident management program for beyond design basis accidents should be reviewed. It should be determined whether the program is suitable for preventing severe core damage or to mitigating its consequences.
The following should be addressed in the review:
2.3.4.3 Hazard analysis
The review should confirm adequate protection of the NPP against internal and external hazards and should consider the actual plant design, site characteristics, condition of SSC and their predicted state at the end of the period covered by the PSA, and current analytical methods, safety standards and knowledge. The review should establish a list of internal and external hazards that could affect plant safety, taking into account plant design, the condition of SSC and site characteristics. The licensee should also consider changes in plant design, climate, flood potential, and transport and industrial activities near the facility site.
The following analyses should be addressed:
internal hazards such as fire (prevention and suppression), flooding, pipe whip, missiles, steam release, spray, toxic gas, explosion and crane movements
external hazards such as changes in site characteristics, flooding and tsunami, high winds, temperature extremes, seismic hazards, aircraft crash, toxic gas and explosion
for relevant hazards, the review should use current analytical techniques and data to demonstrate either that the probability or consequences of the hazard are sufficiently low so no specific protective measures are necessary, or that the preventive and mitigating measures against the hazard are adequate; any deficiencies should be identified
2.3.4.4 Human factors in safety analysis
The licensee should examine the contribution of human error and human reliability in identifying hazards and risks, and also consider human actions during normal and accident conditions in operability studies, failure modes, and effects and hazard analyses.
Industry best practice should be followed in the assessment, analysis and modeling of human actions. Factors that impact on human performance (human factors) should be considered, and validation of human actions should be conducted to ensure that they are achievable. Human actions should be considered consistently across different safety analyses and in system design activities.
The review of human factors in safety analysis should include:
The objective of the review of the design of the nuclear power plant is to determine the adequacy of the design and its documentation in an assessment against current international standards and practices.
The review of the plant design should confirm the list of SSC that can directly or indirectly have an adverse effect on the safe operation of the NPP is complete and comprehensive. The review of the plant design should be subdivided into review topics by systems and/or subject matter areas, such as:
The review of the plant design should identify the differences in plant design in an assessment against current safety standards (including relevant design codes) and determine their safety significance (strengths or weaknesses) in relation to the application of defence in depth. The licensee should ensure that the plant configurations and conditions assumed in the safety case reflect the actual plant state. Adequate design information, including information on the design basis, should be available to provide for the safe operation and maintenance of the plant and to facilitate plant modifications.
The SCA review for plant design should include:
For some older plants, documentation relating to the safety of the design basis will not have been supplied in full to the operator at the commissioning stage. The SCA report should ensure that all significant documentation relating to the original design basis has been obtained, securely stored, and updated to reflect all the modifications made to the plant and procedures since its commissioning.
2.3.5.1 Human factors in design
Human factors (HF) are factors that influence human performance as it relates to the safety of a nuclear facility or activity over all phases, including design, operation, maintenance, and decommissioning. Factors may include the characteristics of the person, task, equipment, organization, environment, and training. It encompasses overall facility layout and design (for example, access and the physical working environment), the design of the workstations and work areas both in control areas and field locations, and the design of specific human-machine interfaces that have the potential to impact safety (for example, control panels, computer-based displays, alarms, and tools).
The licensee should consider any changes made to the design of facilities, systems, or equipment, and then ensure that the impact upon other areas such as training and procedures is determined and addressed. There should be a systematic process for effectively incorporating human factors considerations into system requirements, definition, analysis, design, verification, and validation activities. This process should be carried out by suitably trained, and qualified, specialists.
The review of human factors in design should confirm:
G-276, Human Factors Engineering Program Plans [18] and G-278, Human Factors Verification and Validation Plans describe CNSC staff’s expectations of human factors engineering program plans and human factors verification and validation plans, for Class I nuclear facilities and uranium mines and mills, respectively. Expectations for human factors in long-term operation projects are contained in RD-337, Design of New Nuclear Power Plants [19].
2.3.6.1 Actual condition of SSC
The licensee must determine the actual condition of the SSC of the NPP, including any existing or anticipated obsolescence of plant systems and equipment. This determination should be made at an early stage of the ISR and should then be updated periodically throughout the service life of the NPP or SSC. The process used in carrying out condition assessment of SSC should be documented prior to the start of work. These include, but are not necessarily limited to:
Existing records should be checked to ensure that they accurately represent the actual condition of the SSC, including any significant findings from ongoing maintenance and inspections. It may not be possible to determine the actual condition of some areas of the plant, owing, for example, to plant layout or operating conditions that preclude a necessary inspection. Such areas should be highlighted and their safety significance considered.
The review of the actual condition assessment of SSC should include:
Having determined the current condition of the SSC important to safety, each of the SSC should then be assessed against its design basis to confirm that aging has not significantly undermined the design basis assumptions. Where consistency with the design basis cannot be fully demonstrated, alternative arrangements should be made to show that the SSC is fit for its purpose and safety margins remain adequate until the end of the proposed LTO, or proposals should be made for corrective actions. This may include additional inspections or, in some cases, component replacements. It may be necessary to use the safety analysis to determine any revised duties or loadings on SSC during normal operation and under accident conditions.
The results of the review of actual condition of SSC should provide information on:
Where measured data is unavailable, the assessment of an SSC should be based on its safety significance and derived from other reliable resources, such as industry reports and special tests or inspections.
2.3.6.2 Equipment qualification
Plant equipment important to safety should be properly qualified to ensure its capability to perform its safety functions under postulated service conditions, including those arising from internal and external events and accidents (such as loss of coolant accidents, high energy line breaks, seismic or other vibration conditions, flooding, fires) in a manner consistent with the safety classification. A qualification procedure should be used to confirm that the equipment is capable of meeting, throughout its service life, the requirements for performing safety functions while subject to the environmental conditions (vibration, temperature, pressure, jet impingement, irradiation, corrosive atmosphere and humidity) prevailing at the time of need, with the aging degradation of the equipment that occurs during service taken into account.
Qualification of plant equipment important to safety should be achieved through a process that includes generating, documenting, and maintaining evidence that equipment can perform its safety functions during its installed service life. This should be an ongoing process, from the plant design to the end of service life; plant aging, modifications, repairs and refurbishment, equipment failures and replacements, and abnormal operating conditions should be taken into account.
Although many parties (such as plant designers, equipment manufacturers, and consultants) are involved in the equipment qualification process, the licensee has the ultimate responsibility for the development and implementation of a plant specific equipment qualification program that includes generating and maintaining the documentation demonstrating qualification.
The review of equipment qualification should include:
The review of equipment qualification should determine: (a) whether assurance of the required equipment performance capability was initially provided and (b) whether equipment performance has been preserved by ongoing application of measures such as scheduled maintenance, testing, and calibration, and has been clearly documented. It should be noted that a review relating to (a) above may not be necessary if a previous review has concluded that adequate initial equipment qualification was established and a review relating to (b) above should provide assurance that equipment qualification will be satisfactorily preserved in future. A plant walk down of installed equipment should be performed to identify for qualified equipment any differences from the qualified configuration (abnormal conditions such as missing or loose bolts and covers, exposed wiring, or damaged flexible conduits).
2.3.6.3 Aging management
All SSC of nuclear plants are subject to some form of physical changes caused by aging, which can eventually impair their safety function and service lifetime. The rates of these changes vary considerably. Special attention should be paid to cases of prolonged construction and extended shutdown. Aging of all materials (including consumables, such as lubricants) and SSC that could impair their safety functions should be understood and controlled. Managing aging for nuclear power plants means ensuring the availability of required safety functions throughout the service life of the plant (including period of LTO), with account taken of changes that occur with time and use.
Whereas the review of the actual condition of the SSC establishes the condition of the SSC at the time of the ISR, the SCA aging management is primarily concerned with the programs and arrangements in place to ensure condition of the SSC in the future. The SCA review of aging management should be conducted in accordance with RD-334, Aging Management of Nuclear Power Plants [20] and IAEA Safety Report Series No. 57 Safe Long Term Operation of Nuclear Power Plants. It should determine whether a systematic and integrated aging management program framework is in place and effective, whether adequate arrangements have been made to fulfill required safety functions during future plant operation, and whether there are any features that would limit plant life. Both programmatic aspects (for example, procedures, performance indicators, staffing) and technical aspects of aging management (for example, understanding of relevant aging phenomena, SSC specific acceptance criteria, aging detection and mitigation methods) should be evaluated.
The review of aging management should confirm a systematic and comprehensive aging management program framework is in place for the facility. It should also demonstrate:
all safety analyses involving time limited assumptions are validated for the proposed period of long term operation to ensure that the aging effects will be effectively managed (i.e., to demonstrate that the intended function of an SSC will remain within the design safety margins throughout the planned period of long term operation)
The SCA report on aging management should include:
The review of radiation protection should demonstrate:
The licensee should identify all sources of exposure and evaluate radiation doses that could be received by workers as a result of the operation of the plant. The licensee should provide the information on the design and operational arrangements that have been made to minimize the number and locations of radiation sources and the radiation fields associated with them. A review should be included that identifies areas of high activity and their impact on the safety of the plant and site personnel.
The licensee should demonstrate the design and layout of the reactor facility meets CNSC regulatory expectations for radiation protection as set out in, RD-337 Design of New Nuclear Power Plants and RD/GD-369 Licence Application Guide: Licence to Construct a Nuclear Power Plant.
The review of the RP equipment and instrumentation should confirm that there is adequate radiation monitoring in operational states and accident conditions and, as practicable, beyond design basis accidents. The licensee should review the physical condition of radiation instrumentation and equipment and the NPP’s dependency on obsolescent radiation protection equipment for which no direct substitute is available.
2.3.7.1 Radiation protection program
The licensee should evaluate the following aspects of the RP program:
The review of the radiation protection program should confirm that radiation protection requirements are implemented by addressing the generic management system principles in Section 3.3.1 Management System, as they relate to radiation protection, by following relevant national and international standards and guidance, and by good industry practice. The licensee should review the arrangements for each controlled area in response to accidents and malfunctions, to include access to PPE, instrumentation and equipment.
The review should confirm the NPP has an appropriate process for the routine recording and evaluation of safety related operating experience, including:
Records of radiation doses should be reviewed to determine whether these are within prescribed limits and adequately managed. Although radiation risks need to be considered generically across the ISR, the review of this SCA should specifically consider data on radiation doses and the effectiveness of radiation protection measures. The review of radiation doses needs to consider the types of activity being undertaken. This will provide an indication of the risk posed to plant personnel.
Conventional health and safety influences all aspects of safety in an NPP. The review should establish confidence that there is a safe work environment and examine the status of occupational safety within the plant to determine whether or not the licensee complies with accepted good practices and whether there is any unreasonable contribution to risk from non-radiological hazards. Hazardous waste management is addressed in this review, including the licensee’s control practices.
The following elements should be included in the review:
The scope of the environmental protection review includes programs that identify, control, and monitor all releases of radioactive and hazardous substances, and the effects on the environment from the facility’s licensed activities. In addition, it also includes effluent and environmental monitoring; estimation of the dose to members of the public; radioactive waste management; hazardous waste management; response to unplanned releases; and assessment of environmental protection compliance with regulatory requirements including the environmental elements of the management system.
The design and operation of a nuclear power plant should ensure that the release of substances affecting the health of workers and the public are minimized to the extent practicable. Planning for the possibility of such releases is a necessary action, not only by the licensee, but also by local, provincial and national authorities.
The licensee should perform an overall review to verify that the emergency planning at the plant continues to be satisfactory. Emergency plans should be maintained in accordance with current safety analyses, accident mitigation studies, and good practices. Emergency exercises should demonstrate and identify possible gaps in the training of on and off site staff, the required functional capability of equipment (including communication equipment) and the adequacy of planning.
The review should confirm that consideration has been given to significant changes at the nuclear plant site, and in its use, such as organizational changes and changes in the maintenance and storage of emergency equipment, and of industrial, commercial and residential developments around the site.
The following elements should be addressed:
The licensee should put in place a waste management plan and a system for keeping a record of all issues related to radioactive waste management. Records of waste quantities, storage, inspections, and transfers should be regularly documented in order to identify any unsafe situations or trends. The results of these records should be suitably summarized to give an overall assessment of the management of radioactive waste during each year of plant operation.
The strategy for managing all wastes should be described in the waste management plan, covering both the short term and where possible, the long term. A waste management plan should include:
The procedures for the management of waste resulting from normal operations are also important factors. Relevant information on the procedures for the waste management processes should cover classification, minimization, segregation, clearance, handling, volume reduction, treatment, packaging, storage, transportation, and final disposition.
The following elements should be addressed and verified:
The annual site security plan, prepared and submitted by the licensee, encompasses key areas for review in support of the security safety factor. These areas are verified through the review of security performance via promotion, inspection, and verification activities of the nuclear facility. These activities are conducted in conjunction with performance indicators that are used to assess security performance of a facility, for example, CNSC regulatory documents and guides:
In addition, the review should confirm the accuracy and completeness of documentation of the facility’s site security plan. CNSC expectations are that the nuclear facility will assess the extent to which it meets the security goals and requirements, address all gaps identified, and provide a clear justification for any exemptions, including any associated with their waste management plants or areas.
The review should include the following elements:
CNSC’s regulatory mandate includes ensuring conformity with measures required to implement Canada’s international obligations under the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. Pursuant to the Treaty, Canada has entered into a safeguards agreement with the IAEA. This agreement provides the IAEA with the right and the responsibility to verify that Canada is fulfilling its international commitment on the peaceful use of nuclear energy.
CNSC provides the mechanism for the IAEA to implement the safeguards agreement through the NSCA, and its regulations and facility licences. Essential requirements for the application of IAEA safeguards are stated as specific licence conditions.
The essential requirements on the facility to ensure Canada can continue to meet its international safeguards obligations include:
The safeguards review should verify:
The review should focus on the regulatory requirements as they relate to the transport activities performed. The regulatory requirements should be used as criteria for evaluation purposes for each review element.
The SCA reports contain the licensee’s results for the specific review topics in each SCA. The results of the conformity reviews and the comparison against modern codes, standards, and practices are also included. Any findings are categorized and dispositioned in accordance with the process indicated in section 3.2.5.
Each SCA report is expected to contain a number of standard elements. The overall structure of each report should be: a summary of the review followed by detailed reporting and conclusions. The report should include:
SCA reports should not contain: unsupported personal opinion, conjecture, or claims; the names of any individuals; or criticisms of internal processes, procedures.
The licensee should prepare the ISR safety and control area reports to be as self-contained as practicable, avoiding excessive referencing. Where a standard or practice addresses more than one safety and control area, the results of such reviews should be cross-referenced.
It is preferred that the safety and control area reports are submitted concurrently or in a single package because some safety and control area reports may be needed as input for other reports. For example, the report for fitness for service may be used as input for the reports on physical design and safety analysis.
The licensee should prepare the ISR final report using the results of SCA reports and the global assessment. The ISR final report addresses the objectives of the ISR and the SCA review topics, and should include the following elements:
The IIP is prepared using:
The objective of the IIP is to establish as many corrective actions and safety improvements as reasonably practicable. The IIP should include an analysis of the identified short comings and the proposed corrective actions and safety improvements that would address them, to ensure the changes will suit the intended purpose. The method applied in developing corrective actions and safety improvements addressing each of the gaps or grouping of gaps should be described. Corrective actions and safety improvements should be prioritized, and the cost-benefit analysis should be made available as part of the submission where possible.
Another important aspect of the IIP is the inclusion of an implementation schedule for the improvements. Required material and human resources should be specified in this schedule to allow for proper lead time for the acquisition of resources. In the case where the licensee identifies a corrective action or safety improvement that results in a significant safety benefit mid-way through the ISR process, the licensee should implement this change immediately, if possible. Consideration should be given to any interactions between the corrective actions and safety improvements, using appropriate configuration control.
An overview of the acceptability of LTO in view of the proposed changes should be included, to demonstrate the outcome of safety improvements serves the intended purpose of the ISR.
In the IIP the licensee:
The licensee should have a well-defined process for the control of any changes to the IIP clearly described as part of the proposed IIP. In some cases, approval would be required for the changes, for example:
If licensee chooses to operate the NPP beyond the assumed design life for a period less than 10 years, the licensee must prepare a continued operation plan. In this plan the licensee commits to the required corrective actions and improvements that ensure the safe operation of the NPP from the end of assumed design life to the end of LTO. The period of the continued operation plan covers should be stated, and an end of operation date provided. As the continued operation plan is implemented and the end of operation date approaches, the licensee should decide whether to move toward refurbishment or decommissioning.
In the continued operation plan, each SCA should be addressed, describing the depth of the review and results proposed. With these results, the licensee may decide to revise the IIP to narrow the scope to the changes and modifications most applicable to a limited period of LTO. Maintenance of operational fitness of the NPP should be addressed.
The licensee should describe each change, including those related to scheduling, with justifications for any items that have not been dispositioned or have been removed from the original IIP. Any changes to programs, processes or procedures should be described.
Significant extension in operation beyond the assumed design life, for more than 10 years, will generally involve major refurbishment activities including:
The licensee should describe how it will ensure the safe and satisfactory completion of all construction activities during the refurbishment outage, and the return to service activities. All activities carried out during refurbishment should be governed by the provisions of the management system, to ensure that there is controlled turnover of SSC from the construction phase to return to service.
The licensee should also describe the return to service activities, including the commissioning activities, that will confirm that the equipment, SSC, and plant as an integral unit will perform and function in accordance with the design specifications, regulatory requirements, and as credited in the safety analyses.
The plan should address the following:
Sections following describe more specific expectations regarding the establishment of the safe plant configuration during the refurbishment outage, including modifications to programs and measures in place to ensure safe conduct of the refurbishment activities, and return to service of the plant.
The licensee should provide the specific plant configuration under which the outage will be carried out. This configuration should take into consideration:
In cases of multiple unit stations, the following considerations should also be taken into account:
The licensee should provide a documented case demonstrating that relevant considerations have been taken into account in the establishment of the plant configuration during the outage, and that potential safety impacts have been identified, assessed, and appropriately addressed.
Some changes to the plant configuration may require regulatory approval. These should be clearly identified and included in the licensee submission.
The refurbishment outage includes extensive design, construction, and return to service activities that will be carried out in an unusual plant configuration. It typically involves a large number of workers of various qualifications, performing tasks and working in an environment significantly different from that of an operating plant. In this context, the licensee has to ensure that acceptable programs and processes are in place to address the conduct of the refurbishment outage.
Areas of primary importance include programs and processes related to assurance of adequate engineering design, procurement, construction, worker qualification, worker health and safety, overall plant safety, and assurance of compliance with regulations and international obligations.
Relevant programs and processes include:
The licensee should refer to CNSC requirements and appropriate legislation and standards when addressing these considerations, both for guidance in their development, and to determine how program outcomes will be measured.
CNSC staff will assess whether the programs and processes are adequate for the control of the project and that they are being implemented appropriately.
The plan should describe the proposed construction program to be implemented during the refurbishment outage. The plan should demonstrate that the construction program is well planned, controlled and properly documented, and that it adequately covers:
Construction activities should be documented in a controlled construction documentation program that includes construction work plans showing:
The construction program should also show that the following considerations are addressed:
The licensee should describe the commissioning program that will be implemented. The ultimate objective of commissioning is to demonstrate that the as-refurbished plant performs in accordance with the design intent and the licensing requirements. The commissioning program should be comprehensive, verifiable and detailed in order to provide the necessary assurance that the plant has been duly commissioned before it can be declared in service. The commissioning program should be structured in a systematic sequence so that the plant is exposed to less onerous conditions before more onerous ones with clearly defined commissioning control points to allow assessment and acceptance of the test results before proceeding further.
The commissioning program should address the following considerations:
The commissioning program should provide a case demonstrating the safety of the proposed sequence of commissioning tests.
The commissioning program should be divided into four phases as described below:
The licensee should describe the return-to-service activities for the facility. Return to service involves returning the nuclear facility, the nuclear systems, and the non-nuclear systems back to commercial operation.
The return-to-service activities should incorporate a set of completion assurance documents for design, construction, and each phase of commissioning. The licensee should ensure that the completion assurance documents:
Return to service activities should provide a demonstration that all planned activities were completed, that the refurbished plant is compliant with the conditions of the licence and licensing basis, and that the plant can safely return to commercial operation. The licensee should also ensure that operational, engineering, and maintenance documents are available and have been validated to support facility operation.
2.6.4.1 Extent of Commissioning
The extent of commissioning activities described in the commissioning program may be adapted and be commensurate with the scope and duration of refurbishment activities. The commissioning program should provide a case for sufficiency of the scope of commissioning testing both at the individual system level, and for integrated testing of one or multiple systems at the plant.
The extent of commissioning for specific systems should be adapted to the state of the systems during the refurbishment outage and the extent of changes to the systems during the refurbishment. To define the extent of commissioning, the following categories of systems are recommended:
The commissioning program should describe the level of necessary commissioning for such systems taking into account the above considerations, and taking into account existing knowledge, aging, and need to re-establish baseline information for future system monitoring.
During refurbishment, extensive design and construction activities are expected to take place involving maintenance, replacement, modification and addition of new SSC. It is expected that the level of commissioning at the facility will demonstrate design and safety analysis assumptions are met. Integrated testing of facility systems should be conducted based on the extent of modifications to the facility and their potential to alter design or safety report assumptions. In the commissioning program, the licensee should describe and justify the adequacy and completeness of the integrated system testing activities.
It is expected that the extent of this testing would be driven by the significance of refurbishment activities. The following need to be considered in the development of the scope of the commissioning program:
2.6.4.2 Hold points
The commissioning program should be structured in a systematic sequence so that the plant is exposed to less onerous conditions before more onerous ones with clearly defined hold points before proceeding further. Hold points are imposed to ensure proper assessment of available commissioning results against pre-defined acceptance criteria.
To facilitate the release of hold points, the licensee should develop detailed matrices of the pre-requisites that must be formally demonstrated for prior agreement of all the stakeholders. The commissioning program should describe the formal process used for the release of hold points.
A subset of the hold points will require formal regulatory approval in order to be released. Typically, regulatory hold points will be aligned with commissioning phases, and key commissioning tests or power levels.
CNSC approval to remove a regulatory hold point is contingent on licensee submission of a Completion Assurance Document, which presents evidence that all project commitments scheduled for completion before removal of the respective hold point have been met, that all relevant design, construction, and commissioning completion assurance reports have been completed, and a written confirmation that the plant condition are such that the facility may proceed safely to the next phase of commissioning. The CNSC must accept the Completion Assurance Document before authorization to remove the hold point can be issued.
To facilitate the release of regulatory hold points, it is recommended that the licensee develop detailed matrices of the pre-requisites that must be formally demonstrated for prior agreement of all the stakeholders.
The selection of the hold points will generally be agreed between the licensee and the CNSC and incorporated in the licence.
Once all CNSC approvals have been granted and hold points have been removed, the licensee may proceed to normal operation. After return to service, the licensee is expected to monitor the adequacy of performance of the nuclear facility and new or updated programs.
The licensee is expected to monitor the project for progress, safety, and quality at all phases of execution. All risks that are identified should be appropriately managed.
Monitoring includes (but is not limited to):
At the conclusion of the project, the licensee is to ensure that all outstanding commitments have been completed, including any improvements that have been committed for post-restart completion. These items shall be tracked through the normal licensing processes.
The sustainable operation plan (SOP) describes the licensee’s actions to transition the NPP from normal operation to safe state of storage (SSS). The licensee should address the following general elements:
The purpose of the SSS plan is to verify the licensee’s ability to place and maintain the NPP into a condition of safe long term storage prior to decommissioning. The plan is composed of:
At all stages of the preparation and implementation of the SSS plan, it is the licensee’s responsibility to ensure that workers, the public and the environment are well protected from radiological and conventional hazards. Prior to being placed in safe state of storage, measures should be taken to reduce the hazards associated with an NPP to the extent practicable. By utilizing this method the licensee is able to reduce general maintenance needs of the NPP, as well as allow time for decommissioning considerations.
The principle task in developing the SSS plan is a thorough safety assessment, addressing all elements of each SCA authorized by the PROL. This assessment forms the basis of the SAP and the SSP. As the basis for measures to be taken during both the transition into SSS and through the SSS period, the safety assessment should be as comprehensive as possible, considering both radiological and conventional hazards for the entire facility, not just the reactors. This assessment establishes confidence in the licensee’s ability to safely maintain the facility and is the basis of baselines for monitoring, maintenance, surveillance and future dismantling. Dependant upon the period of SSS, it may be beneficial to the licensee to reassess the safety using new measured data at predetermined intervals. This safety assessment and any revisions using new data should be submitted to the CNSC.
The SAP applies to the NPP as it transitions from normal operation into SSS. This portion covers activities and tasks to be carried out as the NPP is prepared for SSS.
This plan should address all actions and activities required to transition the NPP from a permanent de-powered state to SSS. Activities such as removal of fuel, draining of the moderator, and isolation of residual radioactive sources are undertaken to reduce the radioactive source term are examples of actions included in the SAP. Safety culture and occupational health and safety programs should be reviewed to ensure that workers who will remain on site understand the effects the change to the NPP will have on general safety practices.
As the transition from normal operation to SSS occurs, certain areas of the facility will become more or less restricted due to new or modified hazards. The SAP should review access controls to all areas of the facility during the transition to SSS and throughout the SSS period. Radiation protection is an important consideration during this process because the changing configuration of the facility may induce new radiological hazards not present previously. This review will ensure that worker exposure to hazards are minimized to the extent possible, and where exposure cannot be removed, proper consideration is given to minimize exposure and time at risk.
Site preparation is another aspect of the SAP. The licensee should review all SSC at the facility to identify which will require modification or upgrade to accommodate SSS, and which can be removed from service. Once these are identified, and submitted to the CNSC for review, the licensee can implement the changes in support of SSS.
The storage and surveillance plan describes the measures applied to ensure that the facility is kept in a safe condition throughout the SSS. The tasks in this plan are centered on equipment, systems, processes and procedures that require maintenance and the plan states the required frequency of the activities. Frequency of maintenance typically decreases while the facility is in SSS, but the methods used to monitor and maintain equipment should be generally unchanged.
This plan should use existing procedures to the extent practicable to minimize the need for development of new and specific procedures. Some new procedures or programs will be needed due to the nature of special considerations while the NPP is in SSS, such as ground water leakage and inspection of the condition of the structural elements of the facility.
The plan should also describe:
When the licensee has put the NPP into SSS, the preliminary decommissioning plan should be updated and a detailed decommissioning plan prepared. The detailed decommissioning plan should be prepared in support of the application for a decommissioning license in accordance with the regulatory guide G-219: Decommissioning Planning for Licensed Activities [26], and CSA N294-09: Decommissioning of Facilities Containing Nuclear Substances [27].
As the license to decommission is separate from the PROL, decommissioning is outside the scope of this document.
Completeness
Comprehensiveness
Correctness
Appropriateness
a. The objectives and scope of the submission are clearly stated.
b. The subject-matters are explicitly and unambiguously described in the submission.
c. The requirements and expectations of all applicable acts, regulations, regulatory documents, codes and standards, as well as CNSC and IAEA guidance documents are identified.
d. OPEX and industry best practices, where applicable, are considered.
e. Where applicable, conformance of plant state with current codes and standards is included (as opposed to comparing current with old versions of codes and standards).
a. All elements, aspects and activities related to the subject matters expected to be addressed are covered. (That is, is the submission self-standing?)
b. Licensee’s level of demonstration of conformance/compliance is substantiated by rationale, justifications, discussions or evidence contained in the submission, to a depth sufficient to allow CNSC staff to make regulatory determination.
c. The rationale, justifications, discussions, and evidence given in the submission are structured, organized and auditable.
d. The submission has been subject to a formal approval process indicating the licensee has assumed accountability for the technical integrity and accuracy.
a. The requirements and expectations of all applicable acts, regulations, regulatory documents, codes and standards, as well as CNSC and IAEA guidance documents are correctly interpreted and applied.
b. The approach and methodology are in conformance with applicable requirements.
c. Supporting analyses are performed in conformance with applicable standards and industry best practices.
b. Assumptions and premises used in the submission are consistent with the stated objectives and scope and are justified.
c. Rationale, justifications and other statements in the submission are supported by specific and agreed codes, standards and practices, as well as relevant research and development results, and licensee’s documents.
d. Statements in the submission are substantiated by credible reference material; verified by recognized experts or established best practice; and likely to gain the approval of an independent subject-matter-expert.
a. Relevant requirements and expectations of all applicable acts, regulations, regulatory documents, codes and standards, as well as CNSC and IAEA guidance documents are used and met.
b. Materials, methods or resources used (references, recognized experts or established best practices) are relevant, current and known by subject-matter-experts in the field.
c. The content of the submission addresses and focuses on meeting the stated objective(s) and scope.
d. Approach, methods, processes, procedures and programs used in the submission are relevant, proven by practice, or, where applicable, accepted by the CNSC.
e. Conclusions and recommended actions are consistent and commensurate with licensee’s existing commitments, obligations or concurrent activities.
f. Conclusions are consistent with the objectives and scope of the submission and are consistent with, and supported by, the information stated throughout the submission.
Functional Area
Safety and Control Areas
Specific Areas (including but not limited to)
Management
Management System
n management system (including safety management) / quality management oversight
n organizational structure, roles and responsibilities, resource management, leadership
n strategic/business planning
n internal communications
n monitoring and review of safety management performance
n organizational / change management
n management of safety issues (including R&D programs)
n safety culture
Human Performance Management
n personnel training
n personnel examination and certification (where required)
n work organization and job design (minimum shift complement, hours of work limitation)
n human performance programs (procedural adherence, event free tool, identification of error)
n fitness for duty
n procedures and job aids (development and validation)
Operating Performance
n conduct of licensed activity
n adequacy of procedures
n operating experience (corrective actions programs, root cause analysis, effectiveness review)
n reporting and trending
n outage management performance
Facility and Equipment
Safety Analysis
n deterministic safety analysis
n hazard analysis (internal and external) including
n fire hazard analysis
n seismic hazard assessments
n flood hazard
n safe operating envelope
n probabilistic safety analysis (including human reliability analysis)
n robustness analysis
n criticality safety
Physical Design
n system classification
n site characterization
n engineering change control
n equipment qualification
n facility safety systems
n reactor control systems
n human factors in design
n configuration management
n pressure boundary design
n fuel design
n nuclear design
n process and control systems
n waste management systems
n electrical and distribution systems
n environmental qualification and control systems
n instrumentation and control systems (including software)
n emergency and service water systems
n cables
n device and package certification
n master equipment list
Fitness for Service
n equipment fitness for service/equipment performance (for example, system health report)
n maintenance (including outage management process)
n reliability
n structural integrity
n life cycle management
n aging management
n chemistry control
n condition monitoring
Core Control Processes
Radiation Protection
n application of ALARA
n dosimetry services
n worker dose control
n contamination control
Conventional Health and Safety
n compliance with applicable labour code
n house keeping (fire, chemical, tripping hazard)
Environmental Protection
n effluent and emissions control (releases)
n environmental monitoring
n estimated dose to public
n environmental risk assessment
n environmental management system
Emergency Management and Fire Protection
n nuclear emergency management
n fire protection and response
n conventional emergency response
n business continuity
Waste Management
n waste minimization, segregation and characterization
n waste storage and processing
n preliminary decommissioning plans
Security
n facility security
n material security
n security systems
n cyber security
Safeguards
Packaging and Transport
n adherence to CNSC, Transport Canada, and international regulations on packaging and transport
1 IAEA, INSAG 12, Basic Safety Principles for Nuclear Power Plants 75-INSAG-3 Rev. 1, Vienna, 1999.
The following documents contain additional information that may be of interest to persons involved in long term operation of a nuclear facility:
Table of Contents