COUNTRY GROUP 1 : BELGIUM
Questions coming from outside Group 1 were raised by :
Austria, Czech Republic, France, Germany, Japan, Rep. of Korea,
Luxembourg, The Netherlands, Romania, Sweden, Switzerland.
Delegates of all these countries participated in the Belgian country group session with the exception of Rep. of Korea, Luxembourg, Romania and Switzerland.
The Belgian presentation described thoroughly the evolution of the Belgian situation compared to the previous Convention review meeting, the improvement programmes achieved and those still being implemented. Emphasis was given to a detailed description of the Safety Authority reorganization, as well as the start-up of the Federal Agency for Nuclear Control (FANC), which results from the merging of existing bodies.
The answers to the questions were provided in written form and also orally and in such a way that the other delegates were satisfied with them. The various aspects of this reorganization gave rise to a long and intensive discussion.
1. Legislative and Regulatory Framework
Detailed explanations were provided regarding the use of regulations and guidance documents. Due to the use of USA based technology, Belgium originally adopted the USA regulations with adaptation to the Belgian situation. Since the mid-80's this is being complemented by guidance derived from the Belgian experience and from other designer countries' regulations practices. There is no intention to develop a new comprehensive set of Belgian nuclear safety regulation. However, new issues might be addressed in the future. Detailed comparisons are made with regulations of other countries and differences analyzed.
It is noted that Belgium has a dual situation: the Federal Agency, which has the regulatory power, and the authorized body AVN, which has the technical assessment power. Belgian safety authority actions are more based on approved procedures and plant specific licensing conditions than on general safety regulations.
2. The Regulatory Body
The new Federal Agency for Nuclear Control (FANC) was made operational by the Royal Decree of 20 July 2001. A control structure with 3 levels (first by the licensee then by an independent authorized inspection organization and finally by the Safety Authority) is maintained in Belgium. The complementary and partially redundant distribution of responsibilities between FANC and AVN (and other authorized organizations) was explained in detail.
The existing structure of the Belgian Regulatory Body raised the question of delegation of authority if AVN is not considered as part of the Regulatory Body. In fact the Belgian delegation affirmed that AVN is to be considered as within the perimeter of the Regulatory Body.
It demonstrates the importance of adjustment of a regulatory infrastructure to national circumstances and requirements.
3. Safety of Nuclear Installations
3.1. Monitoring of safety, including ageing management
Belgium has implemented a programme of 10 year periodic safety reviews. The timing of these reviews for the 2 sites ensure consistency in the criteria used. The Belgium approach for ageing management is mainly dealt with by a plant by plant approach supported by the results of the periodic safety reviews.
Concerning performance indicators to monitor safety, the Belgian delegation clearly answered that they were not following the recent NRC approach.
3.2. Severe accident management
Written and oral answer to the questions were considered satisfactory and did not raise further issues
3.3. In addition the country group discussed siting policies of Belgium, mainly restrictions on the land use in the vicinity of plants after the construction.
In conclusion
In conclusion oral and written answers were considered satisfactory by other contracting parties.
The recent creation of the Federal Agency for Nuclear Control formed a significant part of the discussion; it was noted that it represented an orderly transition from the previous organization, paying particular attention to the maintenance and improvement of competence; it also gives a more precise definition of the position of the authorized body AVN. However, it is obviously a topic that should be dealt with again, after a few years of experience, at the next review meeting.
The review process has not identified areas of non-compliance with the provisions of the Convention on Nuclear Safety
