Executive Summary
EC Directive 2009/71/Euratom, as amended, (NSD) requires member states to undertake topical peer reviews (TPR) every 6 years, starting in 2017. The topic for the first TPR was ageing management.
The member states, acting through the European Nuclear Safety Regulators Group (ENSREG), have decided that the topic for the second topical peer review (TPR-II) is
fire safety.
The Swedish nuclear facilities covered by TPR-II Swedish National Assessment Report (NAR) are Ringhals 3, Forsmark 2, Oskarshamn 3, the central interim storage for spent fuel (Clab) and the Westinghouse fuel fabrication facility, representing Nuclear Power Plants, dedicated spent fuel storage facilities and fuel cycle facilities. Sweden screened out non-reactor nuclear facilities (research reactors, nuclear power plants under decommissioning and radioactive waste facilities) from the Swedish NAR, primarily due to the expected much lower nuclear radiation risks from such facilities.
The TPR II Terms of Reference specifies that participating countries should develop a National Action Plan (NAcP) with planned follow-up actions with regards to the findings – if any – from the TPR II process. The NAcP template developed by the TPR Board is structured with three main chapters, i.e.; i) follow-up of findings from the peer review, ii) follow-up of other findings resulting from the self-assessment, and iii) optional consideration of other findings from the peer review.
This document corresponds to the National Action Plan (NAcP) that is expected to be developed by TPR II participating countries.
It should be noted, however, that the outcome from the TPR II process as documented in the TPR-II Summary report does not identify any specific national areas for improvement for Sweden.
It should also be noted that the TPR Team considered some weaknesses identified in the Swedish self-assessment to have been already satisfactorily addressed through improved design features or supplementary safety analyses.
SSM has decided to exclude follow-up actions concerning good practices and areas of good performance in this National Action Plan. Follow-up of Good practices and areas of good performances is considered an important element of already established experience feedback procedures.
There are no identified follow-up actions for Sweden. Thus, the conclusion from the Swedish NAR is still valid: “The conclusion by SSM is that all facilities included in this national report have an adequate fire protection.”