Skip to main content
Nuclear Safety Cooperation

Off Site Emergency Preparedness KA

Status
Closed
All Countries
Benefitting Zone
Worldwide
€ 64,068.97
EU Contribution
Contracted in 1997
TACIS
Programme
Technical Assistance to the Commonwealth of Independent States

Details

Type of activity

Emergency Preparedness

Nature

Services

Contracting authority

European Commission

Method of Procurement

Direct Agreement & AV DA

Duration

04/08/1997 - 04/01/1998

Contractor

ENCONET CONSULTING GMBH

Project / Budget year

WW9608 Nuclear Safety 1996 / 1996

Background

An assessment of needs for assistance in the area of Off-site Emergency Preparedness (OSEP) for nuclear accidents in 14 Eastern and Central European countries was performed in the first years of TACIS. The results of this assessment were evaluated by the OSEP Inter-Service Group of the European Commission. A number of projects were then established on the basis of the priorities identified and the EC budgetary resources available in 1996 and 1997. One of them was related to the off-site monitoring and early warning systems for radiological emergency around nuclear sites in Kazakhstan.

The assistance under this project was aimed at enhancing the area monitoring and early warning capabilities in the emergency planning zones around operating NPPs in Kazakhstan.

Objectives

An assessment of needs for assistance in the area of Off-site Emergency Preparedness (OSEP) for nuclear accidents in 14 Eastern and Central European countries was performed in the first years of TACIS . The results of this assessment were evaluated by the OSEP Inter-Service Group of the European Commission. A number of projects were then established on the basis of the priorities identified and the EC budgetary resources available in 1996 and 1997. One of them was related to the off-site monitoring and early warning systems for radiological emergency around nuclear sites in Kazakhstan.
The assistance under this project was aimed at enhancing the area monitoring and early warning capabilities in the emergency planning zones around operating NPPs in Kazakhstan.
Project Aims
The objective of the project was the development of the Terms Of Reference (TOR) for the project on "Off-site monitoring and early warning capabilities for radiological emergencies in Kazakhstan". The TOR was agreed with the beneficiary state to assure its fast endorsement. The other objective of the project was to perform the strategic review of the whole OSEP in Kazakhstan and establish the basis for future assistance projects.
The scope of work on the project included collection of information, on-site investigation in Kazakhstan, evaluation of information and findings from the reviews, comparison of actual situation with theoretical EU benchmark, development of TOR and the preparation of the strategic review report which defined the basis for future OSEP assistance to Kazakhstan.

Results

To fulfill the objectives, the project was organized in two tasks, one focused on the development of TOR and another on strategic review. On-site investigation and information collection was important for both tasks, so some of the site investigations would be shared.

Task No1 Development of the TOR for Monitoring and early warning system

The current status of monitoring and early warning in Kazakhstan was reviewed. There are numerous nuclear sites in Kazakhstan, but from the general off site emergency perspective, the emergency zone of the Aktau NPP was the critical installation.

The project for on-line monitoring system around nuclear facilities was designed to achieve adequate monitoring with optimal costs. The system may include three parts:

  • Monitoring systems installed around nuclear sites.
  • Information transmission between a site and emergency headquarters in Almaty.
  • A data link with an organization in EU.

Some major characteristics of those three parts are discussed below:

In the case of the Aktau power plant, the solution for the monitoring system which was being implemented under Tacis sponsored projects at some Russian NPP sites (Kursk, Kalinin, and Balakovo) or the experience of Gamma project in Ukraine may be considered as appropriate.

For other nuclear sites, a different system may be appropriate. The choice of this was made upon the review of the local conditions.

In case of Kazakhstan, a specific challenge was to establish the communication between the NPP site and the central authorities in Almaty which is several thousand kilometres away. At that time the communication was through a notoriously unreliable public telephone system. A reliable communication system, either a land based microwave communication, leased dedicated lines or some other system had to be proposed, based on the cost and reliability assessment. Because of the distance, a fixed link satellite communication may be the most cost effective alternative.

For other nuclear sites where the monitoring system was to be installed, appropriate solutions were identified and proposed. This was done in close contact with Kazakh emergency authorities and considering their present experience with different communication systems.

Ultimately the goal of the off site monitoring system is to provide an early warning not just within a country but also to its neighbours and beyond. The data link with an institution within EU was the objective of several other projects sponsored by Tacis or PHARE (like Data exchange project, or Early warning in Russia). The Contractor believed that this should be the aim of this project as well. However, such a connection, in addition to solving the technical issues, needed a political support and agreement (For some reason, Kazakhstan was not a signatory of IAEA Early notification convention). Within the framework of the preparation of TOR, possible technical solutions had to be investigated and general country's position on the connection to a EC organization would be preliminary discussed. The information collected would be transmitted to the EC as a separate report.

The product of this task was a fully developed technical terms of reference for the project. Another product of the task was a report providing the background information on the installation of monitoring systems, optimal data links etc.

The working methods for this task consisted of the document reviews and site investigations. The document review was the preparatory activity and consisted of collecting all available information on nuclear sites in Kazakhstan and the monitoring systems available. This also included document review from previous missions, including the IAEA assessment. This part of the work was done in the contractor premises.

The site investigation included visits to Kazahk nuclear sites, where local conditions were inspected to determine the most optimal design of a monitoring system. In addition, options for the installation of a central station at each site (where all the monitoring data had to be collected) were investigated.

The possible data links between sites and central offices in Almaty were investigated. This part of the work was done in Kazakhstan.

After the site investigation was completed, the information collected was processed to generate necessary reports and TOR.

To complete the Task #1, the following resources were envisaged:
Labour: 35 man-days. Travel: 1 trip of 10 days for 1 expert (visit to all three sites and national HQ)

Task No 2 Strategic review of OSEP in Kazakhstan Task Description

The aim of the strategic review was to evaluate the status of OSEP to be able to clearly define the roles and responsibilities of participating organizations and their interactions. The ultimate aim was to establish the conditions where the assistance projects would be efficiently implemented. The strategic review and identification of respective organizations and their activities within the country-wide OSEP framework was a precondition for the fulfilment of needs identified by the 1996 OSEP Needs assessment study.

The strategic review was focused on five issues:

  • Review of responsibilities and levels of authority of governmental organizations involved in the OSEP, with emphasis on the interface interactions and taking into account international or regional arrangements.
  • Review of functions, responsibilities and affiliations of supporting institutions involved in the OSEP, with emphasis on the interfaces with the governmental authorities and the co-operations among those institutions.
  • Review of the requests for technical support, expressed by the national counterpart or other individual organizations, in the areas of monitoring and early warning systems, countermeasures, impact forecasting and decision support, and emergency response services.
  • Review and assessment of the available national capabilities as a whole in each of the specified areas requesting supports in consideration of the minimum level to meet the benchmark OSEP requirements.
  • Review of all relevant international or bilateral assistance projects (on-going and planned) and estimation of their effectiveness with regard to the supporting requests and the minimum level of the OSEP requirements.

The product of this task was a consolidation of information with an indication of how the projects could be best implemented to fulfill the needs on OSEP in Kazakhstan. This would enable an immediate planning and implementation of some (or most) needs which were identified as "pending".

The EC would receive comprehensive information related to the national strategy and capability in OSEP and be able to plan its assistance effectively. Overlaps and gaps in responsibilities and in technical means would be identified, which would help to undertake necessary actions (e.g. assign responsibility to specific institutes, initiate training or purchase equipment) to enhance the status of the country wide OSEP.

The deliverable of this task was a country report indicating the situation on OSEP in Kazakhstan in all five above indicated areas, and a short justification of each of the needs prioritized as A or B in the 1996 Needs assessment study. Further, the product was a list of other projects which were of interest to OSEP.

The working methods for this task consisted of document review and two site investigations. Before the visit to Kazakhstan, all available documents were collected and reviewed. The counterparts were informed and their support in the organization of site visits sought. The document to be used included but was not limited to:

  • Needs assessment study report.
  • IAEA missions, projects and technical cooperation country information.
  • IAEA project planning and implementation.
  • EC projects and mission reports.

After review of available information, the first site visit was conducted. It included the review and examination of specific institutions and their activities as well as their interactions. During the site visits, the information collected previously was consolidated and new information identified.

On the basis of the information collected, the strategic review was performed. This was done in ENCONET's Vienna offices. A draft report of the strategic review was prepared with an indication of the priorities and conditions, as well as identification of the areas where the assistance was provided including the priorities.

The report was mailed to national OSEP institution in Kazakhstan, for a review. About 4 weeks after mailing the report, the second visit to Kazakhstan was conducted. This visit was used to verify appropriate understanding of the situation. In addition, the second visit was used to perform the final planning and prioritization for projects to be proposed for next 3-5 years.

During the second visit, additional information was collected on projects which are high priority. This would enable development of the terms of references for those projects on a short time scale, (for some projects even without further visits or discussion with Kazakhstan).

To complete the Task No 2, the following resources were envisaged:
Labour: 63 man-days. Travel: Site visit No 1: 1 trip of 10 days for 1 expert (shared with Task No 1). Site visit No 2: 1 trip of 6 days for one expert.

All requested deliverables were provided in English, both as hard copies and in an electronic format. These deliverables are specified below:

  • Deliverable 1: TOR for Monitoring and early warning project. The Technical TOR for the project was developed corresponding with the EC Tacis rules. The TOR delivered to EC was already agreed with Kazakh authorities to assure a fast endorsement.
  • Deliverable 2: Report on strategic review.

The report described the results of the strategic review in terms of the important institutions and their interaction. The attachment to the report contained necessary project related information for all projects assessed to be of high priority.

The project was completed within 18 weeks from the order date. To fulfill the time schedule required by the TACIS 1997 programme, the TOR was worked on early in the project and delivered within 7 weeks (or 5 weeks ahead of requested schedule). Due to a large amount of work involved in the preparation of the Strategic review more time was needed for that task.