| Main |
1.1. |
Over the past few decades, there has been a growing societal awareness of the need for transparency and openness, and the participation of interested parties, in matters relating to nuclear and radiation safety. Members of the public usually have incomplete knowledge and a great deal of uncertainty regarding any issue involving nuclear and radiation safety because of the complexity of the topic. Such incomplete knowledge and uncertainty influence the public’s perception of the radiation risk associated with nuclear energy, radioactive waste and the use of radiation sources. The public rightly expects to have access to reliable, comprehensive and easily understandable (plain, unambiguous and jargon-free) information about safety and regulatory issues in order to form opinions and make fully informed decisions. The public also expects to have fair and reasonable opportunities to provide their views and to influence regulatory decision making processes. |
| Main |
1.2. |
Communication and consultation are strategic instruments that support the regulatory body in performing its regulatory functions. They enable the regulatory body to make informed decisions and to develop awareness of safety among interested parties, thereby promoting safety culture. The establishment of regular communication and consultation with interested parties will contribute to more effective communication by the regulatory body in a possible nuclear or radiological emergency. |
| Main |
1.3. |
Principle 2 of IAEA Safety Standards Series No. SF-1, Fundamental Safety Principles [1], states in para. 3.10 that, among other aspects:Set up appropriate means of informing parties in the vicinity, the public and other interested parties, and the information media about the safety aspects (including health and environmental aspects) of facilities and activities and about regulatory processes;
Consult parties in the vicinity, the public and other interested parties, as appropriate, in an open and inclusive process.”
|
| Main |
1.4. |
In addition, communication and consultation are subject to the safety requirements established in IAEA Safety Standards Series No. GSR Part 1 (Rev. 1), Governmental, Legal and Regulatory Framework for Safety [2], in particular: |
| Main |
1.5. |
Under Requirement 3 of IAEA Safety Standards Series No. GSR Part 3, Radiation Protection and Safety of Radiation Sources: International Basic Safety Standards [3], the regulatory body is required to establish a regulatory system for protection and safety that includes provision of information to, and consultation with, parties affected by its decisions and, as appropriate, the public and other interested parties. |
| Main |
1.6. |
The role of the results of the safety assessment in communication and consultation with interested parties is indicated under Requirements 22–24 of IAEA Safety Standards Series No. GSR Part 4 (Rev. 1), Safety Assessment for Facilities and Activities [4]. A regulatory requirement on those responsible for performing the safety assessment is established in para. 5.9 of GSR Part 4 (Rev. 1) [4]: |
| Main |
1.7. |
In relation to the management of radioactive waste, IAEA Safety Standards Series No. GSR Part 5, Predisposal Management of Radioactive Waste [5], also establishes requirements for communication and consultation. Paragraph 3.4 of GSR Part 5 [5] requires that the government consider: |
| Main |
1.8. |
In relation to decommissioning, IAEA Safety Standards Series No. GSR Part 6, Decommissioning of Facilities [7], states in para. 3.3 that: |
| Main |
1.9. |
In relation to the disposal of radioactive waste, IAEA Safety Standards Series No. SSR-5, Disposal of Radioactive Waste [8], states in para. 3.9 that “The regulatory body has to engage in dialogue with waste producers, the operators of the disposal facility and interested parties to ensure that the regulatory requirements are appropriate and practicable.” |
| Main |
1.10. |
The involvement of interested parties is a mandatory component of various international conventions and treaties that detail the role of governments. This includes, but is not limited to, conventions and treaties covering nuclear facilities. Development of a national policy for nuclear and radiation safety, such as the introduction of a nuclear power programme, is subject to environmental restrictions, and specific facilities and activities may be subject to environmental impact assessment. |
| Main |
1.11. |
The legitimate concerns of interested parties regarding nuclear and radiation safety matters are best addressed through a culture of transparency and openness, and a strategy to involve, when appropriate, interested parties in decision making. Supporting rationales for such an approach include the following:Accountability: Transparency and openness promote accountability of the regulatory body, which is a key contributor to safety culture, as stated in Requirement 5 of GSR Part 3 [3]. Furthermore, accountability increases the confidence of interested parties that their views will be properly taken into account by the regulatory body and enhances their confidence in the regulatory body itself.
Credibility and legitimacy: Transparent and open communication about regulatory decision making and the provision of opportunities for the involvement of interested parties reinforce an awareness of the role and responsibilities of the regulatory body. They also contribute to informing interested parties about how the regulatory body is discharging its duties and seeking to maintain and continuously improve safety. The use of a transparent and open regulatory decision making process helps to demonstrate and reinforce the distinction between the regulatory body, the proponents of nuclear and radiation activities, and those organizations concerned with public acceptance of nuclear energy.
Quality in the performance of regulatory functions: The active involvement of interested parties allows individuals and societal groups to participate in the regulatory decision making process and to influence or even challenge the regulatory body and the information it uses to perform its regulatory functions. The knowledge of interested parties (e.g. the local residents’ knowledge of the local environment; different social factors, values and meanings) can inform how issues are framed. This will allow the regulatory body to better understand — and, therefore better consider — the concerns of interested parties as it performs its regulatory functions.
Independence: A high level of transparency and openness allows the regulatory body to demonstrate its ability to make independent judgements and decisions, and contributes to ensuring its freedom from undue influences that might adversely affect safety.
|
| Main |
1.12. |
Decision making mechanisms differ considerably from State to State, depending on the State’s culture, history and form of government, and on the legal framework in the State. Therefore, for the establishment of processes for communication and consultation, factors such as cultural prerequisites, international conventions, legal frameworks and institutional systems are taken into account. |
| Main |
1.13. |
There is no ideal or prototypical best practice on communication and consultation. Instead, a ‘best practice’ or ‘good practice’ might to a large extent be nationally or even locally defined, in that it fits within the overall legal and regulatory structure in place. Nevertheless, regulatory bodies of all States should establish and implement mechanisms for enhancing transparency and openness, and the participation of interested parties. |
| Main |
1.14 |
This Safety Guide provides recommendations on meeting the safety requirements concerning communication and consultation with the public and other interested parties by the regulatory body. It addresses communication and consultation about the possible radiation risks associated with facilities and activities, and about processes and decisions of the regulatory body. |
| Main |
1.15. |
This Safety Guide can be used by authorized parties in circumstances where there are regulatory requirements placed on them to communicate and consult with interested parties. It may also be used by other organizations or individuals considering their responsibilities for communication and consultation with interested parties. |
| Main |
1.16 |
This Safety Guide provides general recommendations on communication and consultation with interested parties by the regulatory body for all facilities and activities, for all stages in their lifetime. Further guidance and recommendations for specific facilities or activities are provided in a complementary manner by other Safety Guides. |
| Main |
1.17 |
This Safety Guide does not provide guidance on communication and consultation in a nuclear or radiological emergency, or on communication and consultation on nuclear security issues. These topics are covered in other IAEA publications [10–20]. However, it is recognized that effective communication and consultation with the public and other interested parties generally involve knowledge of all three areas of safety, nuclear security, and emergency preparedness and response. In implementing the recommended measures contained in this Safety Guide, consideration will need to be given to the protection of sensitive information [19, 20]. The need for coordination between different organizations involved in the preparedness for and response to an emergency, including the regulatory body, is not to be underestimated [10]. |
| Main |
1.18. |
Section 2 of this Safety Guide provides general recommendations that should be applied to meet the relevant safety requirements. Section 3 addresses the provisions of the regulatory framework that the regulatory body should take into account when establishing means and provisions for communication and consultation with interested parties. Section 4 provides recommendations on effective leadership and describes provisions for developing and implementing a communication strategy. Section 5 provides recommendations on tools and methods for effective communication and consultation with interested parties. Appendix I and Appendix II present, respectively, examples of a template for a communication strategy and a template for a communication plan. The Annex provides explanations to aid understanding of certain terms in this Safety Guide. |
| Main |
2.1. |
This section provides general recommendations that should be applied with the aim of establishing and implementing a strategy for communication and consultation with interested parties to enhance safety. |
| Main |
2.2. |
The effective independence of the regulatory body is a key factor in ensuring safety. In any interaction with interested parties, the regulatory body should not be unduly influenced to take any action that could compromise safety or that would call its independence into question [21, 22]. In this respect, it is to be recalled that the final decision on regulatory matters always lies with the regulatory body. |
| Main |
2.3. |
The regulatory body is responsible for the regulatory oversight of safety and should not be biased in favour of or against the use of nuclear or radiation technologies. This message should be communicated to interested parties, including the regulatory body’s own staff. |
| Main |
2.4. |
The concepts of transparency and openness should underlie the regulatory body’s strategy for communication and consultation with interested parties, so that trust in its independence, competence, integrity and impartiality can be established. |
| Main |
2.5. |
The regulatory body should be committed to ensuring a high level of transparency and openness. To this end, the regulatory body should communicate proactively, and initiate dialogue, with the public, and should demonstrate a willingness to listen and respond to a broad variety of concerns. The regulatory body should also enable genuine participation of the public in the regulatory decision making processes. |
| Main |
2.6. |
When necessary, the regulatory body should ensure that interested parties are involved at the earliest opportunity; in certain situations, such involvement should be ensured even before formal regulatory activities have been launched, for example in review and assessment activities relating to radioactive waste management facilities [6, 9]. The early involvement of interested parties provides the following benefits:It can provide early insights into the potential for ‘conflict’ situations and increase the chances of solving such problems early, at a time when a solution may be more tractable.
It can prevent, or decrease the likelihood of, a situation where not all possible relevant aspects are taken into account, which could later prove a significant deficiency and lead to a less effective regulatory process.
It makes it possible for interested parties to influence the regulatory process and to share their perspectives at a stage when such perspectives may be more easily incorporated into that process.
|
| Main |
2.7. |
The regulatory body should communicate the arrangements for informing and involving interested parties to the interested parties. |
| Main |
2.8. |
The outcomes of communication and consultation with interested parties should be documented and made available to the interested parties. |
| Main |
2.9. |
The regulatory body should be competent in its fields of expertise, objective, reliable, transparent and responsive, and should respect interested parties and behave fairly in interactions with them. Trust can be further enhanced by the public perception that the regulatory body has these competences. Trust, once gained, is easy to lose and it needs to be earned on a continuous basis. |
| Main |
2.10. |
For any process of participation, there needs to be a certain degree of trust among all parties. If any interested party does not trust the regulatory body in a particular process setting, it might not participate fully in the process and consequently the legitimacy of the process might be weakened. |
| Main |
2.11. |
Consultation with interested parties should be an integral part of the regulatory process. Interested parties should be regarded as an asset that can contribute knowledge to that process. The interaction of interested parties with the regulatory body should enable well informed decisions to be made and the best possible outcomes to be achieved. |
| Main |
2.12. |
The regulatory body should take the necessary actions to meet the requirement established in para. 4.67 of GSR Part 1 (Rev. 1) [2]: |
| Main |
2.13. |
Within its budget, the regulatory body should allocate appropriate resources to support communication and consultation with interested parties [23]. |
| Main |
2.14. |
The regulatory body should establish and implement appropriate arrangements for communication and consultation in order to:Provide interested parties with timely, reliable, comprehensive, understandable and easily accessible information on safety, radiation risks and regulatory issues.
Establish meaningful two-way interactions with interested parties to ensure that they have fair and reasonable opportunities to provide their views. The regulatory body should listen to and strive to understand the concerns, issues and questions raised and should address them in a manner that is responsible and as understandable as possible.
Take account of international relations and in particular transboundary relations with neighbouring countries. In this respect, together with the competent national authorities, the regulatory body should explore the possibilities of involving the interested parties of neighbouring States.
|
| Main |
2.15. |
The regulatory body should adapt its methods for communication and consultation to the objectives and the expected interested parties, and in accordance with a graded approach . The methods should be used in accordance with national circumstances, and with the concerns and interests of interested parties. |
| Main |
2.16. |
The regulatory body should continuously improve communication and consultation by taking into consideration other experience at the national and international levels, feedback from the interested parties, and results of evaluations of the communication and consultation activities conducted. |
| Main |
2.17. |
All interested parties should be given appropriate access to the information concerning safety held by the regulatory body. The regulatory body should facilitate and encourage public awareness and participation by making such information widely available. While some sensitive information cannot be disclosed (e.g. information concerning nuclear security, proprietary information), any restriction on information should be kept to a minimum and fully justified on the basis of national legislative criteria. |
| Main |
2.18. |
The regulatory body should ensure that information on access to administrative and judicial review procedures is made available to any interested party [22]. |
| Main |
3.1. |
The regulatory body should identify — in regulations or legislation, or by other mechanisms — means and provisions for effective communication and consultation with interested parties [2, 3]. Such means and provisions may include, where appropriate:Mechanisms for involving interested parties in relevant decision making processes, including provisions for informing interested parties in a timely and effective manner (e.g. by public notice or individually) of:
The proposed action (e.g. the issuing of a licence);
The nature of possible decisions that could be taken or a draft decision, if available;
The procedure by which relevant information will be provided to interested parties;
Whether the activity on which a decision is to be taken is subject to a national or transboundary environmental impact assessment.
Reasonable time frames for the different stages of the regulatory process, which should allow sufficient time for informing interested parties and for enabling them to prepare and participate effectively.
|
| Main |
3.2. |
The regulatory body should place requirements on authorized parties to inform and, when appropriate, consult interested parties about the radiation risks associated with the operation of a facility or the conduct of activities, including the results of the safety assessment [4]. The regulatory body should also place requirements on authorized parties to make available to relevant interested parties decisions with regard to measures for protection and safety [3]. These requirements should be specified in regulations promulgated by the regulatory body, in the authorization or by other legal means. |
| Main |
3.3. |
The regulatory body should carefully scrutinize prospective changes in regulatory requirements, in order to evaluate the possible impact on the existing regulatory framework in which communication and consultation with interested parties is carried out. The regulatory body should inform and, as necessary, consult interested parties regarding the basis for such proposed changes in regulatory requirements. |
| Main |
3.4. |
When several authorities have responsibilities for safety within the regulatory framework, the provisions established for ensuring effective coordination between them for relevant regulatory activities should address communication and consultation aspects. |
| Main |
3.5. |
The regulatory body should make available safety related information, subject to exceptions provided for under national law [21, 24–26]. Specific time limits should be established within which information requested should be made available, in order to avoid unnecessary delay. Reasons for non-disclosure of information may include:International relations, national defence or public security, including nuclear security [18–20];
The confidentiality of the proceedings of public authorities, where such confidentiality is provided for under national law;
The course of justice, the ability of a person to receive a fair trial or the ability of a public authority to conduct an enquiry of a criminal or disciplinary nature;
The confidentiality of commercial or industrial information, where such confidentiality is protected by law in order to protect a legitimate economic interest;
Intellectual property rights;
The confidentiality of personal data and files relating to a person, where that person has not consented to the disclosure of the information to the public, and where such confidentiality is provided for under national law;
The interests of a third party that has supplied the information but where that party was not under or was not capable of being put under a legal obligation to supply the information, and where that party does not consent to the release of the material.
|
| Main |
3.6. |
Refusal of a written request for information should be provided in writing. A refusal should state the legal basis for not disclosing the information and should briefly describe how the decision to deny the request for information was taken. The refusal should be made as soon as possible and within specific time limits established by the regulatory body. |
| Main |
3.7. |
The regulatory decision making processes should be reviewed regularly to identify opportunities for improving communication and consultation with interested parties. |
| Main |
4.1. |
This section addresses the provisions that should be developed and implemented by the regulatory body to ensure a transparent and open approach to communicating and consulting with interested parties [21]. These provisions include leadership and strategy, and a management system for effective implementation. This section also addresses elements that should be considered when developing any communication and consultation process, and provides some examples of interested parties. |
| Main |
4.2. |
Senior management should provide leadership and a clear commitment to a high level of transparency and openness in regulatory activities, going beyond, when practicable, the minimum level imposed by laws and regulations, while ensuring compliance with legislation and regulations. Merely following the minimum legal and regulatory requirements in an administrative way can result in a low level of meaningful public participation. Efforts should be made to promote the importance of, and to support, an organizational culture of transparency and openness among the regulatory body’s own staff. |
| Main |
4.3. |
A communication strategy appropriate for the role and functions of the regulatory body should be developed and implemented (see Appendix I). This strategy should be integrated within the overall strategy of the regulatory body. |
| Main |
4.4. |
Clear responsibilities for communication and consultation activities should be established within the regulatory body. |
| Main |
4.5. |
Arrangements for communication and consultation with interested parties should be part of the regulatory body’s management system. Such arrangements should be part of a formal process that is based on specified policies and principles and associated criteria, and that follows specified procedures and guidance. |
| Main |
4.6. |
The regulatory body should develop a process for responding to the concerns of interested parties in a systematic manner. |
| Main |
4.7. |
When several governmental authorities have responsibilities for safety or have authority that overlaps with that of the regulatory body, constructive liaison should be achieved through relevant means (e.g. memoranda of understanding, periodic meetings) to ensure effective communication, consultation and, as necessary, coordination. |
| Main |
4.8. |
The regulatory body should develop and maintain its competence to communicate and consult with interested parties in an efficient and professional manner. Staff members involved in communicating with interested parties should be trained accordingly, including in public outreach techniques (e.g. facilitation of public meetings, conduct of press conferences, use of social media). |
| Main |
4.9. |
The regulatory body may use external professional support for communication and consultation (e.g. communication experts, translators, web site designers, meeting facilitators or moderators, academics). Such support could complement the competences of the regulatory body staff and provide new ideas and methods to make communication and consultation more effective. |
| Main |
4.10. |
An information and knowledge management system should be established to allow staff easy access to historical information on past incidents and emergencies, inspection reports, annual reports, information brochures, fact sheets and other relevant publications and information [24]. Such a system will help to provide interested parties with requested information in a timely manner. Information and knowledge management arrangements should also be established under this system, to manage relevant records relating to communication and consultation activities. |
| Main |
4.11. |
Procedures should be developed regarding: (a) the types of information that can be released to the public; and (b) the way in which information should be made available to interested parties (use of media, the Internet and other channels; schedules for releasing information; use of easily understandable information; the languages to be used (e.g. in States where several languages are used)). |
| Main |
4.12. |
When relevant, and provided it can do so without compromising its independence, the regulatory body should consider participating in meetings, conferences or other public gatherings sponsored by other organizations. |
| Main |
4.13. |
Different interested parties may have different needs or agendas. Therefore, it is important to identify the interested parties, and to determine their particular interests, needs, expectations and concerns. This is essential for selecting effective options from a variety of strategies and approaches to communication and consultation. Interested parties differ from State to State, depending on culture, history, government philosophy, and legal and organizational factors. The following paragraphs briefly describe the roles of typical interested parties. |
| Main |
4.14. |
The public relies on various sources of information to form its opinion. News media, especially television and both printed and on-line press, have a large impact on how people perceive issues. Social media also have significant influence. |
| Main |
4.15. |
People living in the vicinity of a facility or activity usually have different needs than the public living elsewhere [27, 28]. The importance of the role of community leaders - such as local elected officials and religious and social leaders - in framing public perception should not be underestimated. |
| News and social media |
4.16. |
News and social media are important tools for the regulatory body to communicate with interested parties. Usually, there is no way to control how a message is disseminated through the media; for this reason, all communications with the media should be concise and in easily understandable language. |
| Local liaison groups (or committees) |
4.17. |
Local liaison groups (or committees) with an interest in local initiatives in respect of a particular facility may be organized in accordance with legal requirements or in response to local requests for information and dialogue with the public, as well as for education purposes. Local liaison groups comprise individuals having a special interest regarding the safety of the facility (e.g. local elected officials, trade union representatives, local association representatives). The regulatory body may work with such local liaison groups to provide the local population with independent information, in addition to the information that is being provided by authorized parties and by special interest groups. |
| Special interest groups |
4.18. |
Special interest groups are linked to particular constituencies that are often motivated to achieve specific goals. They include non-governmental organizations such as labour unions, consumer groups, environmental groups and anti-nuclear groups. Special interest groups can be a valuable resource in highlighting issues that may otherwise be neglected and in providing input from new angles. |
| Governmental authorities and decision makers |
4.19. |
Within the governmental, legal and regulatory infrastructure, consultation and the exchange of information among governmental bodies and other regulatory authorities are paramount for the coherent and efficient regulation of safety [2, 21]. |
| Governmental authorities and decision makers |
4.20. |
The regulatory body should establish provisions for effective and direct communication with other governmental authorities at a high level when necessary for effectively performing the functions of the regulatory body. |
| Governmental authorities and decision makers |
4.21. |
Elected officials should be kept informed of the regulatory body’s actions in protecting people and the environment, and in relation to safety related events. |
| Professional bodies |
4.22. |
The regulatory body should engage in dialogue with professional bodies (e.g. operating organizations and their supply chain, facility designers, radiation source users, medical societies) when necessary, including in the drafting of regulatory requirements [2, 3, 8]. The regulatory body should provide safety related information to professional bodies. Such information may include new developments relating to safety regulation, and findings relating to protection and safety gained from regulatory experience and operating experience, and from incidents, including accidents. |
| Professional bodies |
4.23. |
Medical professionals and health professionals can be among the most credible sources of information for the public. Information provided by the regulatory body to these parties should be tailored to their needs. |
| Professional bodies |
4.24. |
Academics, teachers and researchers in relevant fields (e.g. the nuclear field, the medical area), and other third party experts who are not involved in commercial uses of nuclear technologies and other applications using ionizing radiation can help provide information to the news media and the public as experts. This applies in particular to advisory bodies and support organizations that provide the regulatory body with external technical and other expert opinion and advice. |
| International organizations and national regulatory bodies |
4.25. |
The regulatory body should establish links with other national regulatory bodies and with international organizations such as the IAEA. The regulatory body should communicate all relevant information with such organizations, including feedback from operating experience and regulatory experience [2, 23]. |
| Staff of the regulatory body |
4.26. |
The regulatory body’s own staff communicates with the public, both formally and informally, on a routine basis. Therefore all staff should be kept informed about the decisions and activities of the regulatory body, and other relevant safety related information. They should be made aware that their communication might affect the public’s perception of the regulatory body, particularly when using media channels that can reach large audiences (e.g. statements to journalists, comments on web sites, social media). |
| Staff of the regulatory body |
4.27. |
As shown in Fig. 1, a communication and consultation process should include a series of steps, from identifying the objective to evaluating the consultation process and identifying areas for improvement. |
| Staff of the regulatory body |
4.28. |
Before any communication or consultation process is initiated, the role and functions of the regulatory body, its independence, and its strategy for interacting with interested parties need to be clear. The legal and regulatory requirements for a communication and consultation process should also be identified, including requirements applicable to restriction of disclosure of information. |
| Staff of the regulatory body |
4.29. |
Through the communication and consultation process, the limits of what the regulatory body can and cannot do should be made clear. If interested parties have unrealistic expectations, they are more likely to be disappointed and lose confidence in the process and in the regulatory body itself. |
| Preparation |
4.30. |
A communication strategy should include a logical, coherent and efficient process for communicating and consulting with interested parties. This process should allow the regulatory body to, inter alia [2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 22, 23, 29–32]:Increase public trust and confidence in the regulatory body by keeping the public informed in a transparent and open manner about how safety requirements are established and enforced. The results of evaluation of the organization and performance of the regulatory body through self-assessment and through external assessments such as Integrated Regulatory Review Service missions should be made available to the public.
Disseminate information on safety to interested parties, such as information on incidents in facilities and activities, including accidents and abnormal occurrences, as well as radiation risks associated with facilities and activities.
Publish or make available on request, as appropriate, results from source monitoring and environmental monitoring programmes and assessments of doses from public exposure.
Communicate on requirements for protecting people and the environment; processes of the regulatory body; and regulatory judgements and decisions, and the bases for them, including those relating to optimization of protection and safety and limitation of risks to individuals.
Notify interested parties of the principles and associated criteria for safety established in its regulations and guides, and make its regulations and guides available.
Involve interested parties in the decision making process through consultation or collaboration mechanisms. In this respect, interested parties residing in the vicinity of current or proposed authorized facilities and activities should, when appropriate, be consulted by means of an open, inclusive and responsive process.
Receive such documents and opinions from interested parties as may be considered necessary and appropriate.
Cooperate with other authorities and governmental organizations.
Cooperate with other States and with international organizations.
|
| Preparation |
4.31. |
The overall objective of the communication and consultation process should be established by use of the rationales mentioned in para. 1.11 concerning accountability, credibility and legitimacy, high quality in regulatory decision making, and independence. |
| Preparation |
4.32. |
The communication and consultation process should be flexible enough so that specific communication plans can be tailored to target audiences, depending on the types of interested party that are involved in a particular issue, facility or activity. A variety of communication tools, methodologies and subject matter expertise should be available within the regulatory body to give maximum flexibility to staff when developing communication plans. |
| Preparation |
4.33. |
The regulatory body should ensure that adequate resources are available to achieve the goals of the communication and consultation process. |
| Planning |
4.34. |
For effective and efficient implementation of the communication and consultation process, a communication plan should be established (see Appendix II). This is a key tool for properly addressing a specific issue and for efficient use of the human and financial resources available for communication and consultation with interested parties. |
| Planning |
4.35. |
For effective communication and consultation, specific and adapted methods and organizational approaches should be employed in accordance with:The legal and regulatory requirements;
The goals for informing and involving interested parties;
The nature of the interested parties to be targeted and their concerns and expectations;
The topics and the issues involved.
|
| Planning |
4.36. |
A communication plan should include the overall objectives, key messages, and appropriate timing and resources to engage interested parties; a list of interested parties to be consulted and their concerns, expectations and perspectives; and channels and tools for communicating and consulting with them. Responsibilities and prioritizations should also be addressed. The communication plan should be sufficiently flexible to take account of possible changes. |
| Planning |
4.37. |
In developing a communication plan, groups that could be affected by or interested in the issue should be identified. Such groups may have conflicting agendas, priorities, sensibilities, needs and expectations, all of which should be taken into account in the communication plan. Specific attention should be given to people residing in the vicinity of facilities or activities. |
| Planning |
4.38. |
Different communication plans could be developed by the regulatory body for different purposes (e.g. for routine circumstances) or for specific aspects of a complex project (e.g. the siting of a radioactive waste repository, the remediation of legacy sites with contamination). The development of such different communication plans by the regulatory body should be effectively coordinated and made subject to approval so as to optimize the use of financial and human resources and to ensure coherence and consistency among plans. Consistent use of communication plans helps ensure efficient implementation of the communication strategy. |
| Planning |
4.39. |
Communication plans will differ depending on the issue being addressed. For some issues, simply the provision of information may be sufficient, whereas for a more complex, major issue (e.g. licensing of a new nuclear installation, the siting of a radioactive waste repository), the regulatory body may decide to implement a specific process to give interested parties the possibility to participate actively and to be involved, when appropriate, from the very beginning of the decision making process. |
| Planning |
4.40. |
The needs of interested parties range between the need for information only and the need for active participation in and consultation as part of the decision making process. Some interested parties may be reluctant to participate fully in the consultation process in order to preserve their independence and autonomy. Such differing needs of interested parties should be considered when developing a communication plan. |
| Planning |
4.41. |
The communication plan may combine different approaches and methods in accordance with the purposes, issues, people and groups involved. The regulatory body should take into account cultural, organizational and other relevant factors in deciding how best to make information available to the largest number of people possible. Such an approach will decrease the likelihood that people will decide not to participate in, or to withdraw from, the process. |
| Implementation |
4.42. |
The senior management of the regulatory body should be made responsible for ensuring implementation of the communication plan. Staff involved in communication and consultation should understand the purpose of the plan, their own functions and responsibilities, and how the various organizations will interact. The necessary training for proper implementation of the plan should be carried out. |
| Implementation |
4.43. |
Activities that are carried out should be recorded. Regular reviews of the progress of the communication plan should be carried out. Any difficulties with its implementation should be identified and any necessary adjustments should be made. |
| Implementation |
4.44. |
The use of the communication plan should be flexible, as its content may evolve throughout its implementation. Events may lead to changes in the priorities of the regulatory body, which may necessitate amending the communication plan’s schedule or key messages. |
| Monitoring and evaluation |
4.45. |
The regulatory body should monitor and regularly evaluate its communication and consultation process to identify successes, lessons and potential improvements to help the process achieve its overall objectives and to enhance public confidence in the regulatory system. |
| Monitoring and evaluation |
4.46. |
Such reviews should consider the expectations and opinions of interested parties, including the staff of the regulatory body. The regulatory body should actively solicit feedback from interested parties. The expectations and opinions of interested parties may be collected in a variety of ways, including by means of the regulatory body’s web site, email campaigns or monitoring of mass media, or by the use of more sophisticated tools, for example surveys of the public or ‘satisfaction committees’. |
| Monitoring and evaluation |
4.47. |
The regulatory body should also put in place procedures for dealing with unsolicited requests for information, and for monitoring and evaluating the effectiveness of these procedures. |
| Monitoring and evaluation |
4.48. |
Benchmarking against other experiences in communication and consultation with interested parties at the national and international levels should be considered, although political, cultural and societal differences may limit the extent to which this is possible. |
| Monitoring and evaluation |
5.1. |
Depending on the issue, communication and consultation activities may necessitate only the provision of information or may involve fuller participation of interested parties. More interactive participation gives interested parties the possibility of a better understanding of complex issues. It allows them to develop their understanding of the issue, to debate, to state their position and, in some instances, to collaborate with the regulatory body. Various communication and consultation methods are outlined below. |
| Monitoring and evaluation |
5.2. |
The regulatory body should routinely make as much information as possible available to interested parties. This should include the relevant legal and regulatory requirements; conclusions from reviews and assessments, including critical comments; findings of inspections; and regulatory decisions [25]. The regulatory body should also inform interested parties about its strategy, policies, procedures and management system. |
| Monitoring and evaluation |
5.3. |
The regulatory body should make available information on events that might affect safety. Specific tools should be used for promptly and consistently communicating the safety significance of events. For instance, a Member State may decide to use the joint IAEA and OECD Nuclear Energy Agency International Nuclear and Radiological Event Scale (INES). |
| Monitoring and evaluation |
5.4. |
All information delivered by the regulatory body should be easily understandable, reliable, based on facts and evidence, accessible, and provided in a timely manner. |
| Monitoring and evaluation |
5.5. |
The regulatory body should ensure that relevant parts of the safety case and supporting safety assessment provided by the authorized party for facilities and activities are easily understandable [5, 8]. This means that they should be written in such a way that the interested parties for whom the documents are intended can gain a good understanding of the safety arguments and their bases. |
| Monitoring and evaluation |
5.6. |
The regulatory body should publish an annual report on safety to provide interested parties with as comprehensive a picture as possible of the national safety infrastructure and the actual status of nuclear and radiation safety, as well as information on regulatory activities, decisions and judgements. |
| Monitoring and evaluation |
5.7. |
The regulatory body should take special care to ensure the consistency of background information and key messages. The annual report should be used as a basis for ensuring this consistency. |
| Monitoring and evaluation |
5.8. |
Information should be conveyed through a variety of communication channels, either general or targeted to specific audiences. Such channels could be uncontrolled by the regulatory body (e.g. interviews with journalists, television programmes, Internet discussion forums) or controlled by the regulatory body (e.g. the regulatory body’s web site, brochures). |
| Monitoring and evaluation |
5.9. |
Communication channels should be selected with the aim of most easily reaching the intended audience. They should be combined in a complementary manner, considering that some people may have access to only a limited number of tools for communication and information. For example, some members of the public might not have access to the Internet or know how to use it. |
| Monitoring and evaluation |
5.10. |
The regulatory body should consider using or participating in educational activities (e.g. seminars, educational films made available on the Internet, university courses) to provide, explain and discuss factual, independent and non-biased information on radiation risks associated with facilities and activities, and on the regulatory body’s own processes and decisions. This approach is recognized as an effective way to increase the knowledge and understanding of interested parties on such those topics. |
| Monitoring and evaluation |
5.11. |
Different types of printed material should be used to provide information, such as information sheets, leaflets and brochures. |
| Monitoring and evaluation |
5.12. |
Press conferences or technical briefings for the media should be organized, when appropriate, to announce important information or explain complex issues that are subject to significant media or public interest. Press conferences and technical media briefings should be announced in a timely manner, and advance information may be provided to facilitate the participation of journalists. If possible, press conferences should be recorded and made available on the Internet. |
| Monitoring and evaluation |
5.13. |
The Internet is a very effective channel of communication. Large quantities of focused information can be made widely accessible and delivered through this channel, in different languages when necessary. The regulatory body should use its web site as one of the key tools to communicate with the public and other interested parties. This facilitates the dissemination of updated information and the collection of concerns, questions and comments. The regulatory body should also consider using other Internet based tools such as social networks and discussion forums, bearing in mind the specific characteristics of these tools (e.g. users’ expectations regarding the speed and frequency with which content is published) and the resources needed to ensure that they are effective. |
| Monitoring and evaluation |
5.14. |
Internet based tools used by the regulatory body (e.g. web sites, social networks, on-line encyclopaedias) should be user friendly and kept up to date. Internet based tools should enable interested parties to efficiently retrieve information, submit questions and provide comments. |
| Monitoring and evaluation |
5.15. |
The extent to which information is made publicly available depends on the national legislative criteria. If the regulatory body provides general information to the extent possible and explains the reasons for withholding any details, interested parties usually will understand the need for such restrictions, as long as such rules are applied properly and are not abused. |
| General provisions for participation |
5.16. |
The effective participation of interested parties (through dialogue, consultation, collaboration, or a combination thereof) is essential for furthering understanding of the issues by both sides and clarifying the issues in question [28]. The regulatory body should strongly encourage effective participation when appropriate, including, when necessary, by government representatives and local elected officials. The provisions for participation by interested parties should be clearly explained as early as possible. Interested parties with different viewpoints should be given opportunities to participate in the communication and consultation process. |
| General provisions for participation |
5.17. |
Proceeding step by step and setting goals for the participation process may be beneficial, and such an approach should be considered. If, on the other hand, the decision making process is close to the final stage, participation should be oriented more toward supporting decision making by clarifying the remaining options. |
| General provisions for participation |
5.18. |
The relationships between the participation process and political and regulatory issues should be clarified as much as possible at an early stage. |
| General provisions for participation |
5.19. |
The participation process should include discussions on the form and the structure of the decision making process and the regulatory process, as much as on their technical and scientific contents. Enough time for proper participation should be allowed for. |
| General provisions for participation |
5.20. |
It can be beneficial to the development of the participation process, both for practical work and for research purposes, to obtain a broader perspective by involving international experts in related fields. The aim should be to systematically gather experience and views and to draw comparisons with similar situations in other States. |
| General provisions for participation |
5.21. |
The possibility of forming new initiatives and taking part in the participation process may be dependent on the resources of interested parties. Therefore, the regulatory body should consider the possibility of providing support to enable interested parties to contribute more fully. |
| Dialogue |
5.22. |
In some cases, to increase the effectiveness of communication, a dialogue should be established between the regulatory body and interested parties [5]. A dialogue is an exchange of information based on discussions between two or more parties as equals and with mutual respect. Even if no consensus can be reached at the end of the process, all participants should have the possibility to express and discuss their positions and views in order to further one another’s understanding of the issues. Depending on the complexity or sensitivity of the issue being discussed, the dialogue process may take time and require multiple exchanges. |
| Dialogue |
5.23. |
For a successful dialogue, it is important to establish the working format. This should include the provision of a ‘safe space’. A ‘safe space’ is an environment in which all interested parties can participate without fear of reprisal and without committing themselves to any kind of consensus building. |
| Dialogue |
5.24. |
Specific arrangements for dialogue should be agreed upon, and adhered to, by participants. Such arrangements could include the timing of meetings, choice of venues, management of discussions, facilitation of the debate, agreements on the credibility of the process itself and reports of the discussion. |
| Dialogue |
5.25. |
Public meetings may be conducted at the national or local level as part of the process of dialogue. Public meetings allow direct verbal communication between participants to share information, discuss developments, and obtain comments and opinions. To gain the maximum benefit from a public meeting, all aspects of it should be thoroughly prepared. The targeted interested parties should be informed in a timely manner regarding the scope, purpose, planning, venue and agenda of the meeting. Attention should be paid to the conduct of the meeting to ensure fruitful dialogue between participants. |
| Consultation |
5.26. |
In accordance with national legal and regulatory provisions, such as those relating to the licensing process [27] or the development and implementation of protection strategies for existing exposure situations [3], the regulatory body should consult with interested parties. In addition, the regulatory body should also consider asking for input on other issues such as complex or major topics (e.g. when drafting legislation or regulations). |
| Consultation |
5.27. |
For each of the different stages of consultation, appropriate communication channels and tools should be used. The use of the Internet and the conduct of meetings with interested parties are two specific channels that seem particularly adapted to consultation. In all cases, the roles and responsibilities of each interested party should be explained to all participants. |
| Consultation |
5.28. |
Consultation includes several different stages, which should be followed to comply with legal and regulatory requirements and to give the process a better chance to succeed. To design a consultation procedure, the following aspects should be considered:Clarification of the objectives of the consultation;
Identification of targeted interested parties;
Identification of applicable legal and regulatory requirements;
Establishment of plans and time frames that are sufficient for effective participation and are adapted in accordance with the needs of the interested parties;
Preparation of relevant documents to be published or otherwise made publicly available;
Establishment of mechanisms and tools for consulting with interested parties and for enabling for them to comment, directly or through representative consultative bodies;
Conduct of public meetings, formal hearings and other appropriate means of consultation;
Establishment of provisions for reviewing and considering the results of the consultation in the decision making process.
|
| Consultation |
5.29. |
When necessary, and in order to ensure the proper organization and effective conduct of the consultation, the regulatory body should meet with the relevant applicants or authorized parties and relevant governmental authorities and agencies early in the process. |
| Consultation |
5.30. |
A process of consultation should start with the provision of initial information to targeted interested parties. This information should include a clear explanation of the issue(s) (e.g. a new regulation, a licensing decision), the process (e.g. planning and timescale, activities such as public meetings, use of the Internet) and the way the final outcome will be reached. |
| Consultation |
5.31. |
Interested parties should be provided with access to relevant information relating to the consultation, free of charge and at designated locations. Interested parties should be given the possibility to comment freely and sufficient time to do so, and it should be explained how their comments will be taken into account in the process. |
| Consultation |
5.32. |
The arrangements for consultation should allow interested parties to submit, in writing or, as appropriate, orally at public hearings, meetings or inquiries, any comments, information, analyses or opinions that they consider to be relevant. |
| Consultation |
5.33. |
The regulatory body should review the results of consultation and should take them into account, where appropriate. These results and how they have been considered should be made publicly available. |
| Consultation |
5.34. |
The regulatory body should promptly inform interested parties of its final decision in accordance with the appropriate procedures and should make the text of the decision, along with the reasons and considerations on which the decision is based, available to interested parties. |
| Collaboration |
5.35. |
To explore potential solutions to regulatory issues, such as the development of regulations, policies and guidance, a collaborative process may be implemented to directly involve different interested parties. In this way, involved interested parties are active participants in developing a regulatory process with a focus on finding common ground. |
| Collaboration |
5.36. |
Different mechanisms may be used to make a collaborative process efficient. The mechanisms used should encourage interaction among participants and give them the opportunity to provide, discuss and debate their perspectives. In the discussion, the concerns and interests behind the participants’ positions on the issues should be identified. This allows the participants to find common ground in the resolution of the issues. |
| Collaboration |
5.37. |
Before starting a collaborative process, the scope, objective, main steps, timescale, and participants should be established, although these may need to remain flexible. |
| Collaboration |
5.38. |
A collaborative process may include task groups made up of a limited number of representatives of interested parties. A task group may be beneficial in the development of a possible draft solution prior to consideration of the issue in the wider collaborative process.
|
| Collaboration |
I.1. |
Paragraph 4.3 of this Safety Guide states that “A communication strategy appropriate for the role and functions of the regulatory body should be developed and implemented…. This strategy should be integrated within the overall strategy of the regulatory body.” |
| Collaboration |
|
TITLE, Period of validity |
| Collaboration |
|
Purpose and vision |
| Collaboration |
|
Key messages |
| Collaboration |
|
Interested parties |
| Collaboration |
|
Communication strategyFor the staff of the regulatory body, it may address the improvement of the communication and consultation system; the support of organizational changes within the regulatory body; and the promotion of safety culture, transparency and openness.
For other interested parties, it may address dialogue with the public, engagement of the news media, participation in industrial forums and the establishment of relations with relevant organizations in other States or with relevant international organizations.
|
| Collaboration |
|
Evaluation |
| Collaboration |
II.1. |
Paragraph 4.34 of this Safety Guide states that “For effective and efficient implementation of the communication and consultation process, a communication plan should be established…. This is a key tool for properly addressing a specific issue and for efficient use of the human and financial resources available for communication and consultation with interested parties.” |
| Collaboration |
|
TITLE, Date |
| Collaboration |
|
Key messages |
| Collaboration |
|
Background |
| Collaboration |
|
Audience |
| Collaboration |
|
Communication team |
| Collaboration |
|
Communication channels and toolsMeetings;
Press conferences;
Speeches;
Forums or seminars;
Public information centre;
Talking points;
Reports, including annual reports;
Press releases;
Advertisements;
Newsletters;
Brochures, posters or fliers;
Videos;
Transcripts;
Lists of frequently asked questions and fact sheets;
Web pages;
Social media;
Direct mailings;
Phone calls.
|
| Collaboration |
|
Schedule |
| Collaboration |
|
Challenges |
| Collaboration |
|
Evaluation |
| Collaboration |
|
Questions and answersEUROPEAN ATOMIC ENERGY COMMUNITY, FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS, INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, INTERNATIONAL LABOUR ORGANIZATION, INTERNATIONAL MARITIME ORGANIZATION, OECD NUCLEAR ENERGY AGENCY, PAN AMERICAN HEALTH ORGANIZATION, UNITED NATIONS ENVIRONMENT PROGRAMME, WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION, Fundamental Safety Principles, IAEA Safety Standards Series No. SF-1, IAEA, Vienna (2006). INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Governmental, Legal and Regulatory Framework for Safety, IAEA Safety Standards Series No. GSR Part 1 (Rev.1), IAEA, Vienna (2016). EUROPEAN COMMISSION, FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS, INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY INTERNATIONAL LABOUR ORGANIZATION, OECD NUCLEAR ENERGY AGENCY, PAN AMERICAN HEALTH ORGANIZATION, UNITED NATIONS ENVIRONMENT PROGRAMME, WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION, Radiation Protection and Safety of Radiation Sources: International Basic Safety Standards, IAEA Safety Standards Series No. GSR Part 3, IAEA, Vienna (2014). INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Safety Assessment for Facilities and Activities, IAEA Safety Standards Series No. GSR Part 4 (Rev. 1), IAEA, Vienna (2016). INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Predisposal Management of Radioactive Waste, IAEA Safety Standards Series No. GSR Part 5, IAEA, Vienna (2009). INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, The Safety Case and Safety Assessment for the Predisposal Management of Radioactive Waste, IAEA Safety Standards Series No. GSG-3, IAEA, Vienna (2013). INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Decommissioning of Facilities, IAEA Safety Standards Series No. GSR Part 6, IAEA, Vienna (2014). INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Disposal of Radioactive Waste, IAEA Safety Standards Series No. SSR-5, IAEA, Vienna (2011). INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, The Safety Case and Safety Assessment for the Disposal of Radioactive Waste, IAEA Safety Standards Series No. SSG-23, IAEA, Vienna (2012). FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS, INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, INTERNATIONAL CIVIL AVIATION ORGANIZATION, INTERNATIONAL LABOUR ORGANIZATION, INTERNATIONAL MARITIME ORGANIZATION, INTERPOL, OECD NUCLEAR ENERGY AGENCY, PAN AMERICAN HEALTH ORGANIZATION, PREPARATORY COMMISSION FOR THE COMPREHENSIVE NUCLEAR-TEST-BAN TREATY ORGANIZATION, UNITED NATIONS ENVIRONMENT PROGRAMME, UNITED NATIONS OFFICE FOR THE COORDINATION OF HUMANITARIAN AFFAIRS, WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION, WORLD METEOROLOGICAL ORGANIZATION, Preparedness and Response for a Nuclear or Radiological Emergency, IAEA Safety Standards Series No. GSR Part 7, IAEA, Vienna (2015). FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS, INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, INTERNATIONAL LABOUR OFFICE, PAN AMERICAN HEALTH ORGANIZATION, WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION, Criteria for Use in Preparedness and Response for a Nuclear or Radiological Emergency, IAEA Safety Standards Series No. GSG-2, IAEA, Vienna (2011). INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Communication with the Public in a Nuclear or Radiological Emergency, EPR-Public Communications, IAEA, Vienna (2012). INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Method for Developing a Communication Strategy and Plan for a Nuclear or Radiological Emergency, EPR-Public Communication Plan, IAEA, Vienna (2015). INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Operations Manual for Incident and Emergency Communication, EPR-IEComm, IAEA, Vienna (2012). INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, IAEA Report on Enhancing Transparency and Communication Effectiveness in the Event of a Nuclear or Radiological Emergency, IAEA, Vienna (2012). INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, IAEA Report on Preparedness and Response for a Nuclear or Radiological Emergency in the Light of the Accident at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant, IAEA, Vienna (2013). FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS, INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, INTERNATIONAL LABOUR OFFICE, PAN AMERICAN HEALTH ORGANIZATION, UNITED NATIONS OFFICE FOR THE COORDINATION OF HUMANITARIAN AFFAIRS, WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION, Arrangements for Preparedness for a Nuclear or Radiological Emergency, IAEA Safety Standards Series No. GS-G-2.1, IAEA, Vienna (2007). INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Security of Nuclear Information, IAEA Nuclear Security Series No. 23-G, IAEA, Vienna (2015). INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Objective and Essential Elements of a State’s Nuclear Security Regime, IAEA Nuclear Security Series No. 20, IAEA, Vienna (2013). INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Nuclear Security Recommendations on Physical Protection of Nuclear Material and Nuclear Facilities (INFCIRC/225/Revision 5), IAEA Nuclear Security Series No. 13, IAEA, Vienna (2011). STOIBER, C., BAER, A., PELZER, N., TONHAUSER, W., Handbook on Nuclear Law, IAEA, Vienna (2003). FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS, INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, INTERNATIONAL LABOUR OFFICE, PAN AMERICAN HEALTH ORGANIZATION, WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION, Regulatory Control of Radiation Sources, IAEA Safety Standards Series No. GS-G-1.5, IAEA, Vienna (2004). (A revision of this publication is in preparation.) INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Organization and Staffing of the Regulatory Body for Nuclear Facilities, IAEA Safety Standards Series No. GS-G-1.1, IAEA, Vienna (2002). (A revision of this publication is in preparation.) INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Review and Assessment of Nuclear Facilities by the Regulatory Body, IAEA Safety Standards Series No. GS-G-1.2, IAEA, Vienna (2002). (A revision of this publication is in preparation.) INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Regulatory Inspection of Nuclear Facilities and Enforcement by the Regulatory Body, IAEA Safety Standards Series No. GS-G-1.3, IAEA, Vienna (2002). (A revision of this publication is in preparation.) INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Documentation for Use in Regulating Nuclear Facilities, IAEA Safety Standards Series No. GS-G-1.4, IAEA, Vienna (2002). (A revision of this publication is in preparation.) INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Licensing Process for Nuclear Installations, IAEA Safety Standards Series No. SSG-12, IAEA, Vienna (2010). INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Remediation Process for Areas Affected by Past Activities and Accidents, IAEA Safety Standards Series No. WS-G-3.1, IAEA, Vienna (2007). (A revision of this publication is in preparation.) INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Leadership and Management for Safety, IAEA Safety Standards Series No. GSR Part 2, IAEA, Vienna (2016). INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Safety of Research Reactors, IAEA Safety Standards Series No. SSR-3, IAEA, Vienna (2016). INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Safety of Nuclear Fuel Cycle Facilities, IAEA Safety Standards Series No. SSR-4, IAEA, Vienna (in preparation). INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Establishing the Safety Infrastructure for a Nuclear Power Programme, IAEA Safety Standards Series No. SSG-16, IAEA, Vienna (2011). (A revision of this publication is in preparation.) INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, IAEA Safety Glossary: Terminology Used in Nuclear Safety and Radiation Protection, 2016 Revision, IAEA, Vienna (in preparation). INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, INES: The International Nuclear and Radiological Event Scale User’s Manual: 2008 Edition, IAEA, Vienna (2013). INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, The Use of the International Nuclear and Radiological Event Scale (INES) for Event Communication, IAEA, Vienna (2014).
|
| Collaboration |
A-1. |
In this Safety Guide, the following terms are used. Explanations are provided in this Annex to aid understanding of the text, but they do not represent consensus definitions of the terms as they are used in the IAEA safety standards. |
| Collaboration |
|
Communication |
| Collaboration |
|
Communication plan (or communication and consultation plan) |
| Collaboration |
|
Communication strategy |
| Collaboration |
|
Consultation |
| Collaboration |
|
Transparency and opennessBy which information relating to the regulatory body’s responsibilities, including its decision making process, is proactively made easily accessible to and understandable by interested parties;
That promote active participation of interested parties in decision making, in order to enable full consideration of their views and opinions.
|