Appendix 9: ARPANSA's action plan addressing Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) recommendations
ANAO 2014 Recommendations | Action | Status at 30 June 2014 | Target Date |
---|---|---|---|
To maintain stakeholder confidence in the independence and impartiality of its regulatory operations and decisions, the ANAO recommends that ARPANSA:
|
|
|
July 2014 |
To streamline its applications process and more effectively use its limited resources, the ANAO recommends that ARPANSA implements a documented risk-based approach to assessing licence applications, having regard to the:
|
Incorporate into Delivery Model Project2 | Delivery Model Working Group established; first meeting held 4 June to discuss scope. A range of efficiency and deregulation activities are under investigation. | June 2015 |
To strengthen its risk-based approach to monitoring compliance, the ANAO recommends that ARPANSA more directly links its management of licences to risk rankings, focusing particularly on:
|
Incorporate into Delivery Model Project2 | Delivery Model Working Group established; first meeting held 4 June to discuss scope. A range of efficiency and deregulation activities are under investigation. | June 2015 |
To improve transparency and support continuing public confidence in the regulation of licences held by ARPANSA, the ANAO recommends that:
|
|
|
July 2014 October 2014 |
1 Required under CEI6.
2 The Delivery Model Project will explore and develop a graded approach to the regulation of low risk sources to relieve regulatory burden.
ANAO 2005 Recommendations | ANAO 2014 Assessment | ARPANSA Action | Status at 30 June 2014 |
Target Date |
---|---|---|---|---|
The ANAO recommends that ARPANSA enhance its risk management framework to identify risks to achievement of regulatory outcomes, mitigation strategies to manage those risks, residual risks, and a process of systematic monitoring of residual risks and their treatment. | Partial Chapter 2 has noted deficiencies with ARPANSA's regulatory risk management, including clear identification of risks, clearly developed mitigation strategies, and residual risks. |
Address in planned review of risk register. | The risk register has been revised in the annual update performed in June 2014. A process of systematic monitoring of residual risks and their treatment is now in place. | Completed |
The ANAO recommends that ARPANSA strengthen management of the potential for, or perceptions of, conflict of interest, in accordance with legislative responsibilities, by:
|
Partial Chapter 2 has noted inadequate documentation of conflicts of interest, limited action and insufficient implementation to address self-regulation, and an empty conflict of interest register. |
|
Conflict of interest declarations completed by all regulatory staff; register maintained by Office of the General Counsel. Inspector from Qld Health participated in an inspection of ARPANSA-owned sources in June 2014; considering a generic co-operative agreement for use with state & territory regulators to provide for independent oversight of regulatory activities in relation to ARPANSA's own licences. A diversity of oversight is required depending on availability and expertise. |
Completed October 2014 |
The ANAO recommends that ARPANSA:
|
Partial Chapter 6 has noted no evidence that ARPANSA review and assess performance against charter standards. |
Implement a complaints management system. Future annual reports will include assessment of performance against the revised service charter. | The Customer Service Charter has been revised and a plan established to develop and implement a Customer Complaints Management process. This will provide the ability to review, assess and report on that performance against the Charter beginning in the 2014–2015 Annual Report. | July 2014 |
The ANAO recommends that, in order to provide assurance that cost recovery is consistent with better practice and government policy, ARPANSA:
|
Insufficient Chapter 5 has noted ARPANSA's cost recovery arrangements do not consistently reflect better practice and government policy. Cross-subsidisation continues and fees and annual charges are not clearly aligned with regulatory effort. The ANAO has noted these arrangements are currently under review. |
ARPANSA will continue to advance its cost recovery model in a staged approach in consultation with licence holders, supported by the current review of the regulatory delivery model to reduce regulatory burden. Phase 1 – develop a robust cost model accurately accounting for all regulatory activities associated with licence holders. Phase 2 – identify all regulatory activities not associated with licence holders and review funding and cost recovery arrangements (commencing 3rd quarter 2014). |
Time Tracker implemented for regulatory activities. Preliminary definitions of other elements of cost recovery are being developed. |
Phase 1: completed Phase 2: April 2015 |
The ANAO recommends that ARPANSA introduce appropriate systems to ensure its application processing complies with the requirements of the ARPANS Act and Regulations | Insufficient Chapter 3 has noted that, in the current ANAO audit sample, 6 out of 100 applications were being processed and even approved before payment was received. This approach is not consistent with the relevant legislation and documented procedures for managing applications. |
Incorporate into Delivery Model Project. | Delivery Model Working Group established; first meeting held 4 June to discuss scope. A range of efficiency and deregulation activities are under investigation. |
June 2015 |
The ANAO recommends that ARPANSA develop and implement an explicit, systematic and documented overall strategic compliance framework that:
|
Partial Chapter 4 has noted that ARPANSA's compliance effort is not clearly linked to assessed licensee risk. ARPANSA's guidance also does not clearly articulate the interrelationships between the various compliance approaches. |
Incorporate into Delivery Model Project. | Delivery Model Working Group established; first meeting held 4 June to discuss scope. A range of efficiency and deregulation activities are under investigation. | June 2015 |
The ANAO recommends that ARPANSA develop standard procedures, for the consideration and assessment of reports, that address:
|
Partial Chapter 4 has noted a lack of monitoring of reported information to identify trends and support a risk-based approach. |
Incorporate into Delivery Model Project | Delivery Model Working Group established; first meeting held 4 June to discuss scope. Some analytical functions of Licence Administration Database implemented; others to come in Stage. |
June 2015 May 2015 |
The ANAO recommends that ARPANSA establish a systematic, risk-based framework for compliance inspections that includes:
|
Partial Chapter 4 has noted ARPANSA's inspection program is not directly liked to assessed licensee risk ratings. Report findings are not subject to trend analysis to inform future compliance activity. |
Incorporate into Delivery Model Project Stage 2 of the Licence Administration Database to allow for interrogation of inspection findings. |
Delivery Model Working Group established; first meeting held 4 June to discuss scope. Noted in change management register |
June 2015 May 2015 |