Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) Annual Report 2006-2007
Outcome Measures
The CSNC's outcome measurement framework is derived from the CNSC Logic Model (see Part V). During the year, the CNSC sought to implement the initial set of outcome measures it initially published in its 2005-06 Annual Report. Some of the CNSC's outcome measures indicate licensee performance within the regulatory framework: These measurements inform the licensee and the CNSC on licensee performance, as well as indicate to the CNSC the overall effectiveness of the regulatory framework. The outcome measurement framework was given increased emphasis in 2006-07, and the following table presents a revised list of outcome measures for which information will be gathered in 2007-08.
| Outcome | Outcome Measure | |
|---|---|---|
| 1. | A clear and pragmatic regulatory framework | Percentage of regulations under review/revision in each year (this will ensure a complete rolling review over five years) |
| Number of regulations published in Canada Gazette | ||
| Number of regulatory documents finalized and published | ||
| 2. | Individuals and organizations that operate safely and conform to safeguards and non- proliferation requirements | Number of cases of delays in implementing effective regulatory control (licensing action) pursuant to the NSCA or Significant Development Reports subsequent to licence approval |
| 3. | High levels of compliance with the regulatory framework |
Level of licensee performance ratings assessed by the CNSC on each of the power reactors, as per the CNSC
Report Card on Nuclear Power Plant Performance. The CNSC gives separate ratings to (i) the quality of the
existing safety program and (ii) its implementation. The ratings provided are as follows:
|
| Annual IAEA statement indicating Canada's compliance with international standards with respect to safeguards and non-proliferation 100% provision by the CNSC of nuclear transfer notifications and reports pursuant to bilateral administrative arrangements | ||
| 4. | CNSC cooperates and integrates its activities in national/ international nuclear fora | 100 % verification by the CNSC of bilateral nuclear material inventory reports, annually |
| 5 | Stakeholder understanding of the regulatory program | Level of stakeholder confidence in the CNSC's ability to regulate the use of nuclear energy and materials To obtain this information, the CNSC will conduct a survey of stakeholders every three years and will publish the results |
Performance Standards
Performance standards have been developed for interactions with both external and internal stakeholders. In line with the User Fees Act (2004) and the Treasury Board Policy on Service Standards for External Fees, a list of performance standards focusing on the needs and expectations of external stakeholders has been developed in consultation with stakeholders. Work to implement these standards continues to progress, and reporting commenced in the CNSC's 2005-06 Annual Report. The following table reports the 2006-07 performance compared to that of 2005-06.
Table 1 presents the CNSC's defined immediate outcomes, measures and associated targets and performance standards.
| Immediate Outcome |
Outcome Measure |
Target 2006-07 |
Performance 2005-06 | Performance 2006-07 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. | A clear and pragmatic regulatory framework | Percentage of regulations under review/ revision in each year (This will ensure a complete rolling review over 5 years) | 20% | 27% (3 of 11) | 36 % (4 of 11) In addition, development work on one new regulation |
| Number of regulations published in Canada Gazette | 3 | 1 | 1 | ||
| Number of regulatory documents finalized and published | 15 | 5 | 3 | ||
| 2. | Individuals and organizations that operate safely and conform to safeguards and non-proliferation requirements | Number of cases of delays in implementing effective regulatory control (licensing action) pursuant to the Nuclear Safety and Control Act or Significant Development Reports subsequent to licence approval. | Still in development | Under further development | |
| 3. | High levels of compliance with the regulatory framework |
Level of licensee performance ratings assessed by the CNSC on each of the power reactors, as per the CNSC
Report Card on Nuclear Power Plant Performance. The CNSC publishes an annual report on the performance of
nuclear power plants in established safety areas. The 2006 report can be found at
Annual CNSC Staff Report for 2006 on the Safety Performance of the Canadian Nuclear Power Industry. The CNSC measures separately (i) the quality of the existing safety program and (ii) its implementation.
The ratings provided are as follows:
|
Available at www.nuclear safety.gc.ca | See section VIII | |
| Annual IAEA statement indicating Canada's compliance with international standards with respect to safeguards and non-proliferation. | Achieved | Achieved | |||
| 100% provision by the CNSC of nuclear transfer notifications and reports pursuant to bilateral administrative arrangements | Achieved | Achieved | |||
| 4. | CNSC cooperates and integrates its activities in national/international nuclear fora | 100% verification by the CNSC of bilateral nuclear material inventory reports, annually | Achieved | Achieved | |
| 5. | Stakeholder understanding of the regulatory program | Level of stakeholder confidence in the CNSC's ability to regulate the use of nuclear energy and materials. To obtain this information, the CNSC will conduct a survey of stakeholders every three years and will publish the results. | Survey to be conducted every three years | Survey to be conducted every three years | |
| Level of stakeholder participation in the CNSC's decision- making process. | Under development | Under development | |||
| Activity | Performance standard |
Performance 2005-06 |
Target 2006-07 |
Performance 2006-07 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Compliance1 | ||||
| Verification: upon completion of the verification activity, the CNSC will: | ||||
| Issue Type I Inspection Report2,3 | Within 60 business days | 50% | 80% | 58% |
| Issue Type II Inspection Report4 | Within 40 business days | 86% | 80% | 90% |
| Issue Desktop Review Report2 | Within 60 business days | 70% | 90% | 79% |
| Enforcement: upon an Order being made, the CNSC will: | ||||
| Confirm, amend, revoke or replace the Order (see Regulatory Guide G-273) | Within 10 business days | 100% | 100% | 100% |
| Licensing1: for requests pertaining to an existing licence, the CNSC will: | ||||
| Screen the request for completeness and issue notification that the licensing request is / is not complete5 | Within 20 business days | 100% | 90% | 97% |
| Issue a licensing decision when a public hearing is not required (assuming an environmental assessment under the CEAA is not required) | Within 80 business days | 97% | 80% | 98% |
|
Issue a licensing decision when a public hearing is required (assuming an environmental assessment under the CEAA is not required) (see INFO-0715)5,6 |
Within 160 business days | 100% | 90% | 83% |
| Publish the Records of Proceedings, including Reasons for Decisions, upon conclusion of the public hearing | Within 30 business days | 78% | 90% | 73% |
| Access to Information (ATI) | ||||
| Respond to requests under the ATI and Privacy Acts | Within legislated time periods as stated in the Acts | 94% | 90% |
ATI - 82% Privacy - 100% |
| External Communications | ||||
| Place public hearings advertisements | Within deadlines stipulated in the regulations | 95% | 100% | 100% |
| Response time to public inquiries | Same-day acknowledgement with response time for completion of request depends on complexity | 100% | 100% | 100% |
| Low - same day | 100% | 100% | ||
| Medium - within 5 business days | 95% | 95% | ||
| High - within 10 business days | 80% | 75% | ||
| External Reporting to Central Agencies | ||||
| File annual Report on Plans and Priorities and Departmental Performance Report (Annual Report on Performance) | Within required timelines | 100% | 100% | 0%7 |
Notes:
- Compliance and licensing results are based on a subset of the performance data available.
- Using the CNSC's risk-informed approach to regulation, initial priority was given to the completion of reports whose results were of greater significance.
- CNSC workload increases were observed as a result of the rapid expansion of nuclear medicine facilities in Canadian hospitals.
- For power reactors, unless major issues arise, findings from field inspections and control room inspections will be reported on a quarterly basis, within 40 business days of end of quarter.
- The screening and hearing processes do not apply to Directorate of Nuclear Substances Regulation operations.
- The magnitude of public interventions in some licensing decisions required an extension of the time required to complete the hearing process.
- All reports experienced delays of a few days due to delays in final approvals and in document production. All delays were pre-cleared and were acceptable to the Treasury Board Secretariat.
Table 3 - Commission decisions during 2006-07
| Number of decisions made in 2006-071 | 49 |
|---|---|
| Average days to release decision2 | 18 |
| Decisions released within 30 days | 36 |
| Decisions released after 30 days | 13 |
| Longest decision to release (number of days)3 | 60 |
The following circumstances affected the results presented in Table 3:
-
Volume of activity was significantly higher during the past year (49 decisions versus 29 the previous year, representing a 69% increase)
- The number of complex hearings in the third quarter, representing more than 40% of public hearings and putting a strain on the ability to get decisions released
Notes:
1 Decisions following hearings held in December, 2006, February 2007 and May 2007 regarding ESI Resources Limited and Enviropac were not made in 2006-07 and thus are not counted in this report.
2 Average time to release a decision was significantly below the performance standard (18 vs. 30 days, recognizing many decisions were from one-member panels).
3 Decisions that took the longest time (60 days) were issued prior to their expiry dates, as the hearing schedule had been planned to factor in that these decisions would require more time based on their complexity, level of public interest, and that these matters were heard during the peak third-quarter period.
Page details
- Date modified: