COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 
Brussels, 22.04.1997 
COM(97) 164 final 
COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION 
TO THE COUNCIL. THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT 
AND THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE 
Evaluation of the Joint Research Centre 
1992-1996 
it 

OPINION 
OF THE BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF THE JOINT RESEARCH CENTRE 
ON THE EVALUATION OF THE CENTRE AND ITS ACTIVITIES 
General 
1. As set out in the Commission Decision of 10 April 1996 on the 
reorganisation of the Joint Research Centre, the Board of Governors shall 
deal in particular with "evaluation of the latter (implementation of research 
activities) by Visiting Groups' composed of independent experts and the 
follow-up of their recommendations". Since the 4th Framework 
Programme is at present under evaluation, the Board accordingly launched 
an evaluation to complement that published in March 1995 (COM (95)60 
final) which included an overall analysis of progress by Sir Hermann Bondi, 
This is in compliance with Article 7.3 of the Council Decisions on the JRC 
Specific Programmes 1995-19981. 
2. The present report again provides individual reports annexed on each of 
the JRC Institutes, together with an analysis and synthetic report of the 
present state and recommendations for the future by Professor Juan M. 
Rojo of the University Complutense, Madrid and former Secretary of State 
of Universities and Research in Spain. 
Opinion 
The Board of Governors has examined the individual Institutes' evaluation 
reports and Professor Rojo's overall report on the JRC and is pleased to 
note a continuation of the general progress reported in the previous 
evaluation. Most of the recommendations made in that earlier report were 
acted upon and they remain an important tool for the Board in assessing 
progress and steering a forward course. 
The Board notes that in most cases inputs for the reports have been 
sought from users of JRC services, both within the Commission and 
outside. The Board recognises and points out for the benefit of the terms 
of reference to be given to future Visiting Groups that, with the trend 
towards providing more support to Commission services, this form of 
feedback assumes a more important role. 
OJ L361, 31.12.1994; p. 114 and p. 132 
5. According to the report of Professor Rojo, the last two years since the 
previous report have shown progress in project management, quality 
management and marketing which the Board notes with satisfaction, while 
commenting, as Professor Rojo does, that further improvements are still 
possible and called for. Furthermore, all actions that would increase the 
transparency of JRC activities, make the Centre less impenetrable and 
improve its perceived image should be taken. The Board of Governors is 
pleased to note that this report and also the reports from the seven Visiting 
Groups include an important set of recommendations providing an 
important basis for the way forward in the Joint Research Centre. The 
Board will positively address these recommendations with a view to 
implementation to the fullest possible extent. This should include the 
recommendation on the need for the JRC to focus its activities. 
6. Once again, the problems of staff policy and notably the procedures for 
recruitment of first class scientists within the confines of the relatively rigid 
Commission procedures is noted by all reports. It is presently a particularly 
critical matter for the JRC in view of the many staff members reaching the 
statutory age for retirement. The Board will continue to push the 
Commission, through the Commissioner for Research, for further flexibility 
in these administrative areas. Existing rules have been pushed to their 
limit and the Board notes Professor Rojo's recommendation that new 
approaches and structures need to be examined with urgency. 
7. Finally, the Board notes with satisfaction the efforts made by the Director 
General and his staff to implement the recommendations made during 
previous evaluations for the benefit of JRC efficiency and the fulfilment of 
its mission, including European industry competitiveness. The application 
of the recommendations has had a beneficial and apparent effect on the 
Joint Research Centre and the Board of Governors intends to continue 
using the Visiting Group system as an additional means for facing JRC 
scientists with the larger world. 
8. The careful and valuable work of Professor Rojo, the devotion of the 
Chairmen of the Visiting Groups and indeed of all their members, is hereby 
warmly acknowledged and the Board wishes to thank all concerned. 
\o^ 
Joint Research Centre 
JRC 
1992-1996 
Overall Evaluation 
and 
Synthesis of Visiting Groups Reports 
j.M.Rojo 
Universidad Complutense 
Madrid 
16 December 1996 
1b 
INDEX 
Executive Summary 
1. Introduction 
2. Analytical remarks on the Individual Institutes 
3. General assessment of the JRC achievement 
4. A look into the future 
5. Conclusions and recommendations 
ANNEX I Visiting Groups' reports on the individual Institutes 
ANNEX II Condensed list of recommendations for the individual 
Institutes from the different Visiting Groups 
ANNEX III Composition of Visiting Groups 
ANNEX IV Terms of Reference of Visiting Groups 
Executive Summary 
I have the clear impression that further progress has taken place in the JRC since the encouraging 
analysis of Sir Hermann Bondi three years ago. Both the management of the Centre and the Board of 
Governors guidance deserve much credit for this steady evolution. It is also worth remarking that 
most of the recommendations made in the previous evaluation have been actually implemented. I am 
confident that the recommendations that are included in the excellent reports elaborated by the 
present Visiting Groups will also be of great benefit to the Institutes. 
Under the guidelines of the Council, the JRC has obtained a much clearer definition of goals and has 
become much more open and accessible to the outside, with increasing activities of support to the 
Commission services and Union policies and widespread networking with research organisations, 
authorities and industries. In particular, the Centre has reacted quickly to the new mandate of 
competitiveness on all fronts: it has successfully engaged in shared cost actions of the Framework 
Programme of the Union and is becoming progressively more involved in joint ventures with 
industries. With the refreshment of the management team, new and intensive drives towards project 
control, quality management and marketing are being introduced to increase the visibility of the 
scientific and technical activities and to render the Centre's operation more transparent and 
understandable. Moreover, a change of culture is discernible in which much of the staff now seems 
convinced of the benefits accruing from the more competitive stance of the JRC. Continuous support 
of this succesful policy is imperative and, following the advice of some of the Visiting Groups, I 
recommend fostering it even further by setting up on a progressive basis a user advisory panel for 
each Institute, that would promote relevance in project missions and channel the needs of the users 
and their views on the operation of the Institutes, particularly in relation to transfer. 
In order to accomplish their mandated activities of institutional and competitive research the JRC has 
to be an exceptionally qualified partner and it is gratifying to note that the JRC has succeeded in 
maintaining a number of core areas of scientific excellence and is struggling to establish new ones. 
To nurture the search for quality, I propose the creation of a permanent scientific advisory panel 
reporting to the Board of Governors. This panel would assess the quality of the ongoing research, 
with particular regard to identifying high quality units in the Institutes, and would also advise on 
exploratory research. They would also provide valuable inputs to the Visiting Groups. 
An adversary of excellence is uncontrolled diversification. Focusing is imperative as it seems that 
the JRC has much too broad a spectrum of subjects. It is surely much better to have a restricted 
number of areas in which the JRC is recognised as first-class than to have at one's disposal a kind of 
low-profile general-purpose partner. After all, one must consider JRC activities with reference to 
subsidiarity and there is no point in duplicating national facilities if there is no definite advantage. 
Much in the same line, the JRC has to make every effort to avoid routine work, even if it is requested 
by third parties. 
In order to maintain the positive evolution of the JRC, special attention should be given to the issues 
of staff management. In relation to recruitment, I have the most serious reservations for the future. 
As noted in previous evaluations one has to remark yet again on the difficulties in trying to use a 
system apparently designed to recruit government officials to obtain high grade scientists. It is far 
too rigid, and much too slow to meet the demands of 1996, let alone those of the coming century. 
Some slight improvement has been noted but a substantial overhaul is needed and I suggest the 
urgent setting up of a specific panel to deal with the subject including possible changes of current 
regulations. I have great hopes that the recent transformation of the JRC into an independent 
Directorate General might help to implement the specific requirements of a research centre in the EC 
structure. Mobility is another key issue that requires revitalisation. The continuous flux of ideas to the 
Institutes should be encouraged by stimulating the temporary attachment of trainee scientists from 
other institutions and the regular presence of research students, particularly at the post-doctoral level. 
A final word about energy. I fully support the concems of my distinguished predecessor regarding 
the decline in nuclear relevant research. Independently of personal or political attitudes towards 
nuclear energy in Member States, nuclear safety, waste treatment, non-proliferation and other issues, 
are still with us. They are no respecters of national frontiers and deserve our attention at European 
level. It is worth underlining that the JRC has first class expertise in some areas of this field. 
In summary, I believe that the JRC is now on the right track and that present policies are workable 
and satisfactory and, being supported by efficient management, have already transformed the Centre 
into a useful partner of institutions and industry in Europe. In order to maintain this satisfactory 
trend a number of steps, for which recommendations are given, should be taken, at least in relation to 
staff management, support of quality, and focusing of research subjects. 
1. Introduction 
Research, technological development and demonstration (RTD) is one of the key policies of the 
present Treaty of the Union, being third in rank in terms of economic volume. The reason for this 
high profile is the conviction that those basic objectives of the European Union (EU), industrial 
competitiveness and improvement of the quality of life, can only be built on the solid foundations of 
science and technology. Whereas the commitment of the EU to RTD has been permanent and 
increasing, the emphasis on the different areas, or even in the type of activities required, has been 
continuously changing. The role of the Joint Research Centre (JRC) has also undergone a number of 
realignments. 
Following the dwindling interest in fission research in the past, specialised nuclear establishments in 
Member States had to face arduous reconversions. The JRC was no exception and, in fact, some of its 
present specialisations, like environment or safety, coincide with the goals of some of the reconverted 
national nuclear centres. On these grounds it is not unexpected that in the past the JRC strategy was 
often defensive, nor is it surprising that in the last few years, there have been a number of definitions 
from the European decision-making bodies in relation to the goals to be attained by the Centre and to 
the various procedures of evaluation and assessment of its performance. The last of them, in 1994, is 
the so-called 'modified role' of the JRC as agreed by the Council, Parliament and Commission. 
Among other issues this new role emphasised the need for the JRC to be more involved in the 
denominated 'competitive actions', often in partnership with enterprises. 
Although the present assessment is supposed to cover the period of five years 1992-1996 (with full 
recognition of the previous evaluation for the 1992-1994 period, the Bondi report), the introduction at 
mid-term of the modified role of the JRC referred to above suggests that stress should be laid on the 
performance of the Centre in terms of this modified role, i.e. during the last two years. This has been 
well understood by the Visiting Groups to the individual JRC institutes which, in their reports, have 
given special attention to the implementation of the new more competitive activities. These reports 
underline the positive evolution of the JRC performance over the last two years, confirming the 
earlier expectations of the Bondi assessment. 
The significance of the individual reports of the Visiting Groups can hardly be over-emphasised as 
they have been conducted in the most competent and professional way. Apart from a limited input 
derived from personal meetings with Institute Directors and staff, most of the present assessment is 
based on those reports. The scheme of my own report is as follows: In Section 2, I underline key 
points from the individual reports, trying to look for unifying issues. I then proceed to a more 
general discussion of the achievement of the JRC in the last five years (Section 3), keeping in mind 
the objectives defined in the corresponding decisions of the European bodies. In Section 4, on the 
basis of the positive evolution of the Centre, I look into the future in search of those R&D problems 
which the JRC can actually undertake more efficiently than national laboratories. Finally, Section 5 
deals with conclusions and recommendations, the latter being general in scope. They are to be 
considered as complementary to the specific ones suggested for the individual Institutes by the 
Visiting Groups, which are summarized in Annex II. 
2. Analytical remarks on the Individual Institutes 
The full reports of the individual Visiting Groups are included in Annex I. They encompass an 
evaluation of the activities of the Institutes, in the light of the objectives defined by the Council 
decisions, and specific recommendations for the future. In the present Section 2, I attempt to select 
from those reports some guidelines that I find most illuminating or representative of current issues. 
Institute for Reference Materials and Measurements (IRMM): 
* The Institute appears to occupy an important place in the EU structure of the sector. Indeed, it 
seems that if the Institute did not exist, a centre of this type would have to be created. 
* The Institute seems to have attained a satisfactory degree of competence and respectability, 
particularly in nuclear reference and measurements. It also embodies special experimental facilities. 
* Accountancy and management procedures require improvement and adaptation to the Institute's 
particular role. 
* Original research work must not be neglected. In this respect 10% of the resources seems a 
judicious figure for exploratory research. 
Institute for Transuranium Elements (ITE) : 
* In my view, this is the most qualified Institute in the JRC. Every effort should be made to maintain 
this status, particularly in recruitment issues in the face of coming retirements. 
* The Institute has also been successful in incorporating competitive activities into their former, 
mostly research oriented, ones. 
* Avoid remaining in areas which become routine: rather transfer work to other establishments when 
routine approaches. One should make sure that room for stimulation of creativity exists in all areas 
(i.e. in safeguards analysis). 
* In the two directions of exploratory research some novel ideas have originated recently in other 
European laboratories (i.e. the 'energy amplifier and waste burner'). ITE should evaluate them, 
report to the Commission and, if convenient, network. 
Institute for Advanced Materials (IAM) : 
* Very much restructured, the Institute has gained recognition in the field of high temperature 
materials, although there is still room for improvement in other fields. Diversification into already 
well-covered fields should be avoided. 
* The future of the tritium handling laboratory (ETHEL) should be examined in view of the evolution 
of the ITER and related fusion programmes. The relevance of this facility, in relation to existing ones 
in Member States, should be clarified. 
* Concern is expressed in a decrease in researchers being exchanged with external well-known 
institutions, compared to an earlier situation. This seems to me a critical issue. 
* Transfer to the outside seems to be improving although research at the Institute should better 
remain generic and near, but upstream, of industrial research. The Visiting Group considers that 
shared cost actions should be favoured and encouraged. 
Institute for Systems, Informatics and Safety (ISIS) : 
* This Institute has been formed from the merging of two former ones, a new Director has been 
appointed and is, naturally, still defining goals and procedures. The management showed good 
perception as well as determination and should reap future rewards. 
* In recent times, the Institute has made a great effort in working together with external research and 
industrial bodies and this competitive attitude has to be stimulated and supported. The proposed 
exchanges of personnel with Directorates General in Brussels appear as a good practice for 
reinforcing a users approach with these units. 
* Quality seems to be generally satisfactory. Perhaps the very wide spectrum of interests of the 
Institute could be modulated by actual capabilities at the highest level. In some areas, improving 
scientific leadership seems desirable. 
* The Institute includes some unique facilities whose maintenance at the highest level of performance 
is mandatory. Enhanced use of these facilities by outside users is recognised. 
Environment Institute (EI) : 
* The Institute seems to be on the right track to the fulfilment of both institutional and competitive 
activities with a fair level of quality. The willingness of the management to convert it into 'the 
leading institute in Europe' with 'a high degree of visibility' has to be made compatible with 
increasing activities at national level in these areas and certainly requires careful focusing of the 
actions. 
* Along with a proper management control the management seems to be successful in stimulating the 
generation of new ideas, without which institutional and competitive activities could not be carried 
out efficiently. 
* Institutional activities are crucial in this domain. For example, the EI has produced amazing results 
from the comparison of pollution measurements in blind tests performed by different national 
reference laboratories with a scatter of more than 50%. It is hard to overemphasise the incidence of 
this work on implementation of environmental policies. 
* I strongly support the Visiting Group's suggestion of developing to capacity the activities in water 
research and management of water resources. An independent and neutral reference, along with the 
required scientific quality, is mandatory in this field. 
Space Applications Institute (SAI): 
* Institute with unique experience on télédétection and earth observation. It would benefit from 
stricter control of scientific quality (stimulate publications in prestigious journals) and performance 
in competitive projects (better definition of specific goals and milestones). 
* As remote sensing is generic by nature and aids in resolving so many different problems, one has to 
restrain the tendency of the Institute to become specialised in too wide a range of subjects. It would 
be better to restrict activities to the Institute's core competences (remote sensing and application of 
networks). 
* Interdisciplinary requires improved co-operation with other Institutes, particularly the 
Environment Institute. 
Institute for Prospective Technological Studies (IPTS): 
* Practically new-born, the Institute is starting to establish a sound reputation with its customers and 
set up infrastructure to meet their future demands. The location needs communications and world­
wide-web to be developed to full strength. The Institute has still to demonstrate high quality and gain 
full recognition. 
* Previous recommendations on recruitment for Seville and launching of the European Science and 
Technology Observatory (ESTO) have been accomplished. 
* The general recommendations on 'focusing' are still more meaningful for IPTS. Work should not 
be encouraged in areas where European industries and laboratories have a long established tradition. 
* The Institute is taking advantage of its geographical position for developing leadership in 
Mediterranean and North African problems. I firmly believe that this approach should be reinforced, 
perhaps, as the Visiting Group indicated, by developing a programme outside the TEC (Technology, 
Employment, Competitiveness). 
3. General assessment of the JRC achievement 
In his report for the period 1992-1994, Sir Hermann Bondi stated that 'the JRC is well on the way to 
becoming a recognised centre of excellence in many of its areas of activity'. It is a pleasure to be 
able to confirm steady progress towards this desirable goal two years later. By taking together the 
five year period, from 1992 till the present, one can safely say that the JRC has successfully found a 
specific position in the European RTD system and that it is performing its role with increasing 
capabilities. 
Under the guidelines of the Council the JRC has attained a much clearer definition of goals and has 
become much more open and accessible to the outside, with increasing activities of support to the 
Commission services and Union policies, and in widespread networking with research organisations, 
authorities and industries. With the refreshment of the management team, new and intensive drives 
towards project control, quality management and marketing are being introduced to increase the 
visibility of the scientific and technical activities and to render the Centre's operation more 
transparent and understandable. Moreover, a change of culture is discernible in which much of the 
staff now seem convinced of the benefits accruing from the more competitive stance of the JRC. It is 
perhaps too early to assess the impact of new distribution of tasks among the Institutes, as some 
merging and reorientation has recently taken place, but it is clear that further strengthenening the 
coordination among the Institutes is desirable. 
It is to be remarked that business-like management can never be at odds with scientific and 
technological quality. One cannot speak of transfer if there are neither significant ideas or know-how 
to be transferred. An unreasonable fixation on demonstrating 'usefulness' should not obscure the fact 
that in order to gain competitiveness, recognition and selected support of high quality units in the 
Institutes should be assigned a high priority. In fact, the JRC has succeeded in maintaining a number 
of core areas of scientific excellence and is struggling to establish new ones, although much thought 
has to be given to recruitment policy if one wants to maintain that promising trend. Also, the JRC 
seems to have been evolving into less bureaucratic and more transparent managerial procedures. 
With regard to both items, it is satisfactory that the JRC has recently become an independent 
Directorate General as it is hard to use a system apparently designed to manage administrative offices 
to run an RTD centre. 
Whereas the present situation of the JRC can be regarded with confidence, there are a number of 
issues that are still a matter of concern. I refer to the most important ones perceived by the Visiting 
Groups, and in full agreement with my own experience: 
1. Personnel. A matter of common concern as this is certainly the key point for the future of the JRC. 
One should make sure that the massive retirement that is expected in the coming years is offset by 
hiring younger people of the highest quality. Recruitment procedures are still far from efficient. The 
whole process of recruitment should be tuned so that 3 years contracts could be used as a test of RTD 
capabilities for future candidates to temporary (semi-permanent) positions. I believe that only an 
overall evaluation of the problem can lead to substantial improvement and I specifically, advise 
setting up a special panel for this purpose. As is often stated that much needed reforms are contrary 
to EU rules, maybe changing some of these rules for RTD centres could be one of the 
recommendations of that panel. 
2. Exchange of researchers. An action much praised by some of the Institutes in the past, 
particularly in strengthening capabilities and training young researchers in emerging areas. It also 
facilitates networking. However, it seems to be receding and correction of this trend should be 
undertaken. 
3. Focusing. There seems to be much too broad a spectrum of subjects. It-is surely much better to 
have a restricted number of areas in which the JRC is recognised as first class than to have at one's 
disposal a kind of low-profile, general-purpose partner. 
4. Management and Accountancy. Some advance since the last report is recognised (i.e. rapid 
response to manpower needs in third party projects). However, improvements are still widely 
requested. An appraisal of general accountancy procedures is suggested. 
5. Co-ordination. Further advances since the last report are recognised, but stronger co-ordination 
among the Institutes is required. The Directorate of Programmes seems to be working at a very 
reduced staff level and requires examination. 
6. Nuclear energy. Apart from its historical origins, the JRC is the depository of much European 
knowledge in this subject, perhaps the only one in which it is recognised as the true European leader 
in some areas. In no way should this capital asset be wasted. 
4. A look into the future 
The JRC has received the mandate of performing three types of activity: institutional, competitive 
inside the Framework Programme (FP) and competitive outside the FP. Positive response in the 
period under examination to this challenge suggests that the time may be ripe for a further step, 
which would be that of progressively concentrating JRC actions on those in which its European 
added value (EAV) is fully exploited. In other terms it would mean proceeding from the question: Is 
there anything useful that we can do with the infrastructure and personnel in the JRC? to the much 
more engaging one: Are there R&D areas or activities in which the existence of a European-owned 
research laboratory is desirable or even necessary? Indeed, the overall RTD policies of the European 
Union (EU) are built on the principle of subsidiarity. As is well known, the EU Member States have 
a number of excellent laboratories, both at their universities or national institutes and at their 
industries. One may wonder whether there is in principle scope for an institute at European level, in 
which targeted research is performed. If the functions of such a centre can be recognised, one can 
further analyse if the JRC is presently capable of fulfilling these requirements. 
On the basis of the Council Conclusions of 26 April, 1994 one could envisage three possible domains 
in which the JRC would have full EAV: 
The first domain would be that of specific and difficult problems that required, for their solution, 
critical mass of scientific and technical excellence. Excellence would be promoted by drawing from 
the pool of bright people in the different Member States and integrating that talent in first-class units 
of critical mass, that would furthermore pervade through the European RTD system by means of 
suitable networking and partnership. The second domain would be that of developing, maintaining 
and managing large experimental facilities, which could not be run independently by Member States. 
In the past a number of large experimental facilities have been set up, or upgraded, in Europe on the 
basis of transnational co-operation among different countries. The third domain would be that of 
carrying out research and development actions in which impartiality and neutrality were mandatory. 
Needless to say, these virtues would have no practical use if they were not accompanied by scientific 
quality and recognition. 
Let us now turn to the crucial question, that is if one can realistically consider that the JRC can be 
competent in all these three domains at the present time: 
• First, its possible role as hosting units of excellence is analysed. Needless to say, I refer to 
both scientific and technical excellence. Gaining excellence is not at all an easy task: if an 
institute has little prestige, it will hardly attract the brightest people, which in turn will result 
in further stagnation. One has to recognise that the JRC has rarely become a reference point 
in the past, but the situation is steadily improving as discussed in Section 3. The present 
management has succeeded in injecting morale and determination into the staff, which now 
seems to believe in its own capabilities. Nevertheless, some bureaucratic remnants are still 
noticeable; for example, some officers when describing their work appear to be seized by the 
how but reluctant to emphasise the what. Full support of emerging new and promising ideas 
should be prevalent in all the Institutes. 
As support must always be selective, the management of the Institutes would much benefit 
from accurate information concerning the external appraisal of the quality of the different 
groups. I believe that the Board of Governors (and the Visiting Groups for their periodic 
assessment) would very much benefit from the creation of a scientific advisory panel that 
assessed the quality of the ongoing research, with particular regard to identifying high quality 
units in the Institutes, and advised also on exploratory research. One must not forget that only 
high quality units can actually provide EAV to their competitive partnerships with European 
industries and institutions. 
In the pursuit of excellence, there are a number of issues in which improvement is desirable. 
Ensuring that the best young people apply and that selection is efficient is second to none 
among the elements to maintaining high standards. My advice about personnel reforms is 
here crucial, as is my recommendation about focusing. A further suggestion in relation to 
mobility also seems relevant. It is always difficult to attract on a permanent basis first-class 
scientists or technologists who are well established in other institutions. However, 
OJNo. C126, 7.5.1994, p.l 
10 
incorporating them into the JRC groups for limited (but not too short) periods could result in 
immense benefit. Perhaps, previous practices of the Institutes to incorporate external 
researchers could be reinforced by developing a special programme which took advantage of 
sabbatical leave and included some convenient incentives for attracting these highly rated 
researchers. 
Let me now turn to the second function, that of managing large facilities, which can become 
also reference points for networking with other European institutions. It is worth remarking 
that none of the recently developed large facilities in Europe has been undertaken under the 
JRC umbrella. Even the first European tokamak (JET), although funded by the Framework 
Programme of the EU, was conceived and developed outside the JRC. The positive evolution 
of the JRC, continuously alluded across this report, might change the attitudes of the Member 
States in the future and some thought should be given to alleviate some of the pending 
obstacles. The new Articles 130 k, 1 and n of the Union Treaty might also help to implement 
this function. 
Finally, I address the function of impartiality and neutrality. It is often stated that Union 
policies require support from the JRC but very often this support is thought of in terms of 
routine or bureaucratic work. This is certainly wrong and creative and original work is 
mandatory for these purposes. This is perhaps the role in which the JRC has made a most 
visible progress recently. The support of this role should continue, but one must not forget 
that this support would become meaningless if the quality of JRC research failed and, 
consequently, a subtle equilibrium between the first and third domains is imperative. 
Last, but not least, the development of a body of independent knowledge in scientific and 
technological prospection is crucial for complementing the inputs from the different Member 
States in order to formulate the basis of future framework programmes. Previous framework 
programmes have suffered from the lack of a neutral and recognised scientific and 
technological prospection and some of their programmes have become a mere list of Member 
States' interests, often without much EAV. The JRC has still to gain prestige and full 
recognition in this task but the rewards can be vast. 
5. Conclusions and Recommendations 
I have the clear impression that considerable further progress has taken place in the JRC since the 
encouraging analysis of Sir Hermann Bondi. Both the management of the Centre and the Board of 
Governors guidance deserves much credit for this steady evolution. In particular, it is worth 
remarking that most of the recommendations made in the previous evaluation have been actually 
implemented. 
The mandate to enter the competitive arena, and the general positive answer to this challenge in the 
different Institutes, has had a number of favourable consequences: 
0 Providing a check of quality (competing with national teams, having to attract potential users etc.) 
0 Opening the JRC groups to the outside, i.e. networking, etc. 
0 Improving management procedures, like quality management, project management and active 
marketing. 
The first recommendation is, consequently, that of maintaining and supporting the present policies. 
One has to realise, however, that even for consolidating the present advances, a number of 
11 
improvements have to be made, particularly in the area of personnel management. Also, looking into 
the future, one has to aim at establishing the JRC as an institution with full EAV in the European 
RTD community and this will require further adjustments. In the following, I summarize a number of 
recommendations that derive from the analysis of the previous sections: 
a) Recommendations for specific action. 
• Set up urgently a special panel of experts, including specialists in European legislation, to 
advise on the subject of personnel status and recruitment procedures, including possible 
changes of current regulations. 
• 
• Explore the possibilities of developing a special programme for the incorporation of first-
class scientists into JRC laboratories during their sabbatical leave, that would reinforce 
previous individual action by the Institutes. Ensure a continuous incorporation of research 
students, particularly at post-doctorate level to the Institutes. 
Set up an external scientific advisory panel, reporting to the Board of Governors, that 
would assess the quality of the ongoing research, with particular regard to identifying 
high quality units in the Institutes, and advise also on exploratory research. The panel 
would also help with the selection of new scientific staff and exchanges. 
Set up user advisory panels at the Institutes in which the convenience of their existence, 
has been manifested (for example, ISIS) and, on the basis of ongoing experience, extend 
them to all the Institutes. 
b) Recommendations for general policy 
• Avoid excessive proliferation of subjects in the Institutes. Instead, try focusing on 
activities leading to attainment of first-rate status in a limited number of subjects. 
• Emphasise, in the current accounts of the JRC activities, concrete results obtained in JRC 
Institutes rather than organisational issues. Periodically publish and disseminate news 
about those achievements. If possible select those cases in which the JRC has been given 
significant recognition (as opposed to 'listing customers'). 
• Stimulate an ambience in which original, promising ideas can arise and support them in 
order to explore their possibilities. Encourage publication in prestigious journals in order 
to gain recognition. Ensure that sufficient effort is devoted to exploratory research. 
• Avoid routine work even if it is sought by third parties. Try to step out of certain lines, 
and leave their continuation to other centres once the EAV of the action has vanished. 
Nevertheless, be careful in this respect in those areas in which the JRC has unique 
facilities. 
• Undertake the necessary steps to support the JRC as a candidate for future European large 
facilities. Explore the possibilities of using Articles 130 k, 1 and n as a 'driving force'. 
12 
A note on the evaluation process itself 
In general, the evaluation process itself seems to fulfil its original purpose. In fact, previous 
evaluations have actually contributed to marked improvements in different aspects of JRC 
management. There are, nevertheless, aspects that can be ameliorated: 
• The Visiting Groups' task could be supported by an external evaluation of the quality of 
the output of the Institutes and by a unified view of the users appreciation of transfer, 
competitive partnership and related matters. The proposed panels could well fill this gap. 
• The first point of the terms of reference of the Visiting Groups states that the evaluation 
refers to all the objectives of the Council Decisions of 15 December, 19942. However, the 
Visiting Groups' reports appear rather unbalanced in relation to the different objectives; for 
example, the sixth objective of the JRC "contributing to the reduction of scientific and 
technological disparities between Member States" does not seem to have played an easily 
recognisable role in the evaluation. 
Acknowledgements 
I acknowledge very useful discussions with the Board of Governors and members of the Management 
of the Centre and of the Visiting Groups. The exchange of views on the report with Sir Hermann 
Bondi has been of immense benefit to me. I am indebted to Mr. H.J. Helms and Mr. S. Lloyd for their 
very valuable assistance in the preparation of this report and to Mrs. P.Garcîa de la Rasilla for 
continuous support during the evaluation process. 
OJNo. L361, 31.12.94, p.l 14 and p.132 
13 

ANNEX I 
V" 
JOINT RESEARCH CENTRE 
JRC 
REPORTS OF THE VISITING GROUPS TO THE 
JRC INSTITUTES 1996 
•v 
M 
CONTENTS 
Page 
1. Institute for Reference Materials and Measurements, Geel 7 
2. Institute for Transuranium Elements, Karlsruhe 11 
3. Institute for Advanced Materials, Petten and Ispra 21 
4. Institute for Systems, Informatics and Safety, Ispra 34 
5. Environment Institute, Ispra 48 
6. Space Applications Institute, Ispra 62 
7. Institute for Prospective Technological Studies, Seville 72 
N.B. Annexes I and II mentioned in each Visiting Group report are given at the end of this overall 
evaluation report as Annexes III and IV, respectively 
f\- u 
Rome, 22 November, 1996 
REPORT OF THE VISITING GROUP 
FOR THE EVALUATION OF THE 
JOINT RESEARCH CENTRE'S 
INSTITUTE FOR REFERENCE 
MATERIALS AND MEASUREMENTS 
A-ÏK 
CONTENTS 
I. Introduction 3 
II. General Observations 4 
III. Scientific and Technical Activities 5 
111.1 Nuclear Physics and Measurements 5 
111.2 Stable Isotope Measurements 6 
111.3 Reference Materials 6 
111.4 Analytical Chemistry . 8 
IV.Implementation of Research 8 
IV.1 Mission 8 
IV.2 Transfer 8 
IV.3 Output 8 
IV.4 Networking 8 
IV.5 Quality 9 
IV.6 Areas of concern 9 
V.Executive Summary . 9 
VI.Recommendations 10 
VI.1 S&T Activities 10 
VI.2 Infrastructure 10 
VI.3 Management 10 
Annex I: Members of the Visiting Group 
Annex II: Terms of Reference of the Visiting Group 
A -2. 
Report of the Visiting Group for the Evaluation of the 
Joint Research Centre's Institute for Reference Materials 
and Measurements (IRMM), Geel, Belgium 
I. Introduction 
At the invitation of the Board of Governors of the Joint Research 
Centre (JRC), a Visiting Group of independent experts (see Annex I) 
spent the 16 and 17 September, 1996 at the Institute for Reference 
Materials and Measurements at Geel in Belgium, reviewing its work, 
meeting the staff and visiting the laboratories and other installations. 
The present exercise follows that performed by Visiting Groups in 1993 
and 1994 and the implementation of recommendations made at that 
time will be an important factor to be considered. 
Since that time, certain changes have occurred and the JRC has 
become independent from DG XII and is now an autonomous 
Directorate General of the Commission (Commission Decision of 10 
April 1996 on the Reorganisation of the JRC). Furthermore, the 
Council has further clarified the JRC's role by clearly distinguishing 
between institutional and competitive activities (Council Conclusions of 
26 April 1994 on the Role of the JRC) and in Council Decisions of 15 
December 1994, adopting the present "specific programme for 
research and technological development, including demonstration, to 
be carried out for the European Community " by the JRC under the 
Community Framework Programme. This requires that an evaluation is 
carried out by external experts on work performed during the 
preceding five years. 
The above changes, together with efforts intended to increase 
efficiency and reduce costs, have led to some internal reorganisation 
of the JRC structure. This in its turn has resulted in a reduction of the 
number of Institutes from eight to seven and in consequence, a 
redistribution of certain tasks and projects. 
The general scientific and technological objectives and content for the 
Joint Research Centre's specific programme are set out in Annex I of 
the Council Decisions of 15 December 1994. Institutional research 
activities are included in this annex which also includes institutional 
scientific and technical support. Together, these two areas comprise 
the JRC Direct Action and specific rules for its implementation are 
given in Annex III of the Decisions. The scientific and technological 
objectives and contents of the competitive support activities are to be 
found in Annex IV and the specific rules for their implementation in 
Annex VI. This action is managed by the Commission Secretariat 
General together with the interested Directorates General. 
The particular aims and objectives of the Institute for Reference 
Materials and Measurements are defined as follows: 
to make available reference materials and carry out reference 
measurements of the highest quality and integrity, 
to respond to basic harmonisation efforts of the Commission on 
European level, 
to contribute to maintain the wealth and prosperity in Europe by 
supporting European enterprises to strengthen their international 
competitivity, 
ft -3-
to provide its share in caring for the population by cooperation in 
surveillance systems such as nuclear safeguards and consumer 
protection, 
to provide assistance and service on request from national and 
European institutions, 
to serve the Commission as its independent Centre of Reference 
with a growing potential and by consolidation of competence, 
directed towards becoming a cooperative European reference 
and standards institute in the long term, 
to provide nuclear and analytical nuclear measurements for all 
Commission services and in support of the European nuclear 
industries. 
The Visiting Group has applied the Terms of Reference given in Annex 
II of this report on the understanding that although the present 
evaluation will contribute to the general evaluation of the Framework 
Programme being performed at present, which requires assessments 
to be made covering the past five years, it is nevertheless based on a 
somewhat different premise. The JRC by its nature and by its 
assigned tasks is evaluated institute by Institute rather than by a 
programme oriented approach. 
The presently applied system of visits by teams of independent 
experts covering the whole spectrum of activities of each individual 
institute has been proven and widely accepted as the best practical 
method of assessing the JRC and indeed is that favoured for many 
other research organisations worldwide. 
The present evaluation will therefore cover the period from Autumn 
1993, when the last visit took place, up to the present time, and 
together the two reports will review the whole period in question. 
II. General Observations 
The Institute, both for its unique facilities as.an advanced installation 
for sophisticated preparation of biological and environmental reference 
materials, combination of ultra-clean chemical laboratory and modern 
mass spectrometry, high energy resolution accelerators for neutron 
and charged particle production - LINAC and Van de Graaff and the 
excellent preparation of staff in these areas, operates in an almost 
unique situation in Europe, where such advanced activities, especially 
in the nuclear field, are not practised in the Member States to the 
extent they were ten years ago and it holds a lead position in the world 
in some of its specialist areas. 
The Visiting Group is convinced of the need for a European institute of 
this type and believes the IRMM has to maintain European leadership 
in the field of reference materials and measurements and sustain a 
key role parallel to that in similar institutions in the USA and Japan. 
Particular attention has to be given, therefore, to the recruitment of 
specialized staff, in order to maintain this role. Consideration should 
be given to easing- the burden imposedon the Institute- by-some 
internal European Commission procedures. 
During the two days spent at the IRMM a presentation of the Institute 
and its programmes was made by the Director. In addition, the Visiting 
Group had the opportunity to listen to several presentations by IRMM 
senior staff on the major topics of work and was able to visit a number 
of laboratories and facilities. The presentations were generally of good 
standard evidencing the competence and the professionalism of the 
staff. 
The Group would like to thank all those concerned. 
However, as stated in the previous report of the Visiting Group 
(September 1994), the Group believes that two days is an insufficient 
period of time for reviewing the Institute and its work according to the 
Terms of Reference detailed in Annex II. 
A few documents should be checked in detail to understand if the 
Institute is well managed. Moreover, it would be more useful to have a 
global presentation of the Institute in terms of projects (institutional, 
competitive, etc.) as well as the activities of units. 
In visiting the Institute, particular attention was paid, therefore, to the 
above-mentioned report published by the Commission in Evaluation of 
the Joint Research Centre and its Multi-annual Programme 1992-1994, 
COM(95)60 final of 8 March, 1995 and the follow up of the Visiting 
Group Recommendations listed in document CA(95)54 of 18 August, 
1995 for the JRC Board of Governors. It was felt that it was important 
to see how much progress had been made in following the initial 
recommendations. 
Owing to the unique role of IRMM, the majority of the work carried out 
by the Institute falls within the area of institutional research and 
institutional support. For this work the Institute has well defined users, 
but not, for the majority of its activities, customers in the true sense of 
the word. The Visiting Group therefore missed an opportunity to verify 
the parameter of "the satisfaction of the customer". 
Evidently with its specialised modern or modernised equipment and 
facilities the Institute appears rather expensive and it is not yet fully 
equipped for commercial activities. 
The Visiting Group believes that accounting procedures should be 
thoroughly overhauled, preferably with the guidance of outside 
professionals, in order to carry out the work in the most efficient way. 
III. Scientific and Technical Activities 
HI.1 Nuclear Physics and Measurements -NPM -
The unit performs world class work that is essential in a society where 
nuclear power is a fact of life. 
The unit is equipped with a 150 MeV linear electron accelerator and 
two Van de Graaff accelerators. The linear accelerator was refurbished 
in April 1995. In this original core activity area of the Institute, 
equipment and scientific staff are found to be of a level to be expected 
in an international institute of high repute. Some of these scientists, 
however, are approaching retirement age. If the Institute wishes/has to 
maintain leadership in this field, the recruitment policy based upon a 
reserve list of prior validated general applicants cannot be applied. 
This recruitment policy, in fact, is totally unsuited for the recruitment of 
specialist scientists at the highest level. For many of the posts that will 
become vacant in the coming five years; there are only a very few 
world class scientists who would be able to continue the work at the 
leading edge of nuclear science. The present rule, if applied to the 
NPM unit entails the danger of a descent into mediocrity and the 
recruitment of excellent scientists is mandatory for the future of the 
Unit and its value for the money invested. 
A-5 
The Director of IRMM and the Governors of the JRC should have the 
freedom to target the best candidates from anywhere, firstly in Europe 
and then in the world, and in addition to recruitment procedures, the 
use of the scheme of visiting scientists is recommended as it allows 
competences to be drawn from anywhere, on a temporary basis. The 
value of a continuing highly competent staff on a permanent basis 
should, however, not be underestimated. 
The NPM's work is predominantly associated with meeting "Treaty 
obligations" and it is funded under specific programmes. With due 
respect to the Treaties, orientation towards present" priorities is 
recommended. 
It is recommended that, every five years, a critical review of the actual 
need against activity is carried out. 
In the previous report concern was expressed about the ability of the 
NPM unit to meet the Council Conclusions of 26 April 1994 on the 
Role of the JRC, in that the JRC should pursue and reinforce its move 
towards a more competitive approach on the basis of a genuine 
customer-contractor relationship. 
Attempts have been made in this direction, but a better cost 
accounting procedure has to be set up. In particular, the market 
oriented work has to be done, in finding a better compromise and 
encouraging collaborations with all Member States without 
concentrating on private power companies in a few Member States. 
111.2 Stable Isotope Measurements 
The Visiting Group believes that this unit has the potential to become 
the international centre for chemical metrology and traceability. 
However goals and timescales for achieving this have to be more 
clearly defined. 
The world class work of the group involved in traceability and the 
associated IMEP (International Measurement Evaluation Programme) 
work must be developed and networking through such organisations 
as EURACHEM, CITAC, etc., should be a fundamental part of this 
unit's activities. 
There appears to be a need for a major improvement in the cost 
accounting system used, as calculation of real costs is necessary for 
the activity. Likewise, it is recommended that an infrastructure be set 
up to bring this Unit more to the attention of the potential market. 
The issue of replacement of senior staff on retirement is not as critical 
as in the case of NPM, however, it is also necessary to ensure 
continuity of staff quality in this field. 
111.3 Reference Materials 
The Management of Reference Materials Unit (MRM) has made 
excellent progress in commercialising the supply of BCR (Bureau 
Communautaire de Référence) certified reference materials, but in so 
doing has highlighted the fundamental structural weakness in both the 
infrastructure and the management systems needed to adopt a 
commercial role. It is necessary that the Commission, in requiring the 
JRC to adopt a more commercial approach, makes fundamental 
changes to the accounting and management procedures presently 
used. 
ft -6-
The following highlights areas of particular concern: 
a) Much of the existing stock of BCR Reference Materials has now 
fallen under the responsibility of the MRM unit. It is recommended by 
the Visiting Group that IRMM ensures that recent EC, and relevant 
national, regulations concerning the packaging, labelling and storage of 
hazardous goods and the production of Statutory Health and Safety 
Data Sheets are fully observed and that the Commission makes 
available adequate additional resources to ensure that the IRMM can 
observe all applicable regulations in full, now and in the future. 
b) The BCR "Trademark" has significant commercial value, but has 
not been registered as a trademark. 
c) Reference Materials sold by the IRMM are produced by contractors 
to the Commission, funded by the SMT (Standards, Measurements and 
Testing) Programme. Whilst there is an established and reasonably 
comprehensive quality procedure that should be followed by these 
contractors, there is no obvious mechanism to ensure that these 
procedures are followed. The MRM unit must have the responsibility 
for controlling the quality of all candidate reference materials, and 
developing with the contractors a stability testing programme. This may 
include acting as a sub-contractor to the main contractor. The best 
solution would be for the MRM unit to take over the project 
management of this part of the procedure from the SMT unit in 
Brussels. 
d) The product liability status of the MRM unit is somewhat ambiguous 
in respect of reference materials manufactured by contractors working 
under the SMT Programme. 
e) The excellent facilities of the sample preparation unit could be 
better utilised by offering custom preparation of candidate reference 
materials if the unit were able to easily enter into ad hoc commercial 
arrangements. 
f) The accountancy procedures of the JRC are not completely suitable 
for an organisation involved in daily commercial transactions, as they 
do not allow the IRMM to manage received funds in an efficient way 
for this type of transaction. Unless improvements can be made to the 
procedures with higher efficiency the • direct ^ selling- of certified 
reference materials by IRMM is not feasible and could be made 
entirely through authorised distributors. 
g) The procedure followed, once the analytical work has been 
completed and the report drafted, appears to be very slow. This is due 
to the need to refer decisions to a body that is only called infrequently. 
h) The replacement of certified reference materials originally produced 
by SMT contractors is a primary role of the MRM, yet they do not have 
sufficient project management officers nor a statistician to perform the 
administrative and statistical activities that would have been 
undertaken by the SMT and contractors, respectively, when the 
reference materials were first certified. 
i) The lack of a better and more transparent accounting system 
including all costs: salaries of the people involved in this activity, 
equipment/machine hours, buildings, energy, etc., does not allow a full 
understanding whether the activity is a profitable one rather than 
playing an institutional role (i.e. paid service) for the EC Member 
States. 
ft-7-
111.4 Analytical Chemistry 
The activity of this unit concerns reference materials and methods, 
metrology, life and environmental sciences, materials analysis and the 
safety of products. The majority of the work falls into the nuclear area. 
With regard to non-nuclear activity, the only customer of the unit is the 
Commission. This, of course, guarantees the line of work is 
developed along the aims of the Institute but makes it more difficult to 
find a valid method for checking performance in a field where it is 
normally rather easy to judge competitivity. Further clarification of 
goals, as well as a system for evaluating the efficiency of the work, is, 
therefore, recommended. 
The Visiting Group was very impressed by the first attempt at the 
application of quality criteria. 
IV. Implementation of Research 
IV. 1 Mission 
The Visiting Group judges that the stated mission for IRMM falls well 
inside the overall mission of the JRC. It is noted that the JRC Is now 
an autonomous Directorate General of the Commission and it is hoped 
that this will open up wider possibilities for further development and 
implementation of the mission of the JRC and thereby that of IRMM. 
IV.2 Transfer 
Transfer both inwards and outwards with the outside world is generally 
good, however, more contacts should be made with industry. This 
could help to form objectives, develop management skills and facilitate 
technology transfer. 
IV.3 Output 
This was seen to take diverse forms such as data, reference materials, 
certificates, as well as articles in learned journals, presentations at 
conferences, etc. The publication of papers in journals, or posters at 
scientific meetings seems to be one of the important elements of 
assessing the performance of staff members. (Further elements are 
the two yearly reports which consider the full professional activities of 
the staff). 
In the time available it was not possible to make anything but a 
superficial judgement of the quality of the work, but from the number of 
IRMM publications which are accepted by respected journals it seems 
that the work done is of high quality. Nevertheless, it should be 
checked how many publications are relevant to the same subject. 
More effort towards patents is desired. 
IV.4 Networking 
This essential function seems to be well established, but it seems that 
more support could be given if the various unit managers could have 
more flexibility in the funding of networking activities. 
A-8-
•V.5 Quality 
It is strongly recommended to realise, laboratory by laboratory, EN 
45001 accreditation for those laboratories which work for third parties. 
Priority should be given to those units for which their customers 
require such registration. ISO 9002 certification is recommended for 
Reference Materials production. 
An overall approach for the whole Institute according to ISO 9001 is 
not seen as urgent and is certainly not the most practical nor the 
easiest way to ensure overall-quality. - The magnitude of this work 
cannot be underestimated. When determining the scope of registration 
for accreditation, the involvement of other JRC units in centralized 
administration must not be overlooked and there may be difficulties in 
making sure that work done for the IRMM by other JRC sites is 
included in the scope of IRMM registration. 
The need to secure the right calibre of senior level scientists to 
replace those shortly to retire has already been highlighted. The 
importance of this issue and the damage to the IRMM (and the JRC) 
which is inevitable if existing procedures are not eased, cannot be 
over emphasized. 
Additionally, consideration should be given to retaining pensioners on 
a 6 month to 1 year consultancy basis, to ensure a smooth handover. 
The plan to employ scientists on a 3-year non-renewable contract is a 
doubtful improvement, as experience with this type of appointment in 
U.S. universities shows that, at best, the employee is productive for 
only 20 to 24 months. The first six months are spent learning, 18 
months working, and much of the last year in finding a new job. 
IV.6 Areas of concern 
The Visiting Group identified a number of areas where problems arise 
from the requirements of the European Commission itself. 
Improvements would lead to better management. 
Executive Summary 
The Visiting Group judges that the work undertaken by the Institute is 
of high quality. The management is professional and adequate for a 
research institute. The scientific staff is competent and knowledgeable. 
IRMM has a valuable role to play in maintaining leadership in reference 
measurements and reference materials. However, the Institute is 
clearly hampered in its work by the procedures and requirements 
stipulated by Community regulations. This is evident in the case of the 
Management of Reference Materials Unit, where commercialisation is 
stronger. Therefore, it could be difficult to acquire further work from 
third (non EU) parties. IRMM should develop as a European centre of 
fundamental research with fully adequate funding. Clear objectives 
and efficient, preferably on-line, project management are, however, 
necessary. These would stimulate performance, generating peer 
pressure on individuals and further improving value for money. 
The Visiting Group welcomes the exploratory research carried out at 
the Institute. This is seen both as a means of exploring possible new 
areas of activity for the Institute and of trying out ideas for later 
incorporation into core activities. In order to guarantee long term 
developments and competence, 10% of the budget should be spent 
on "free" fundamental research work. 
fV9 
Work on nuclear measurements and data should continue, as well as 
work on IDMS (Isotope Dilution Mass Spectrometry). 
Quality assurance criteria have to be applied for those laboratories 
which work for third parties, including other Commission services. 
VI. Recommendations 
VI. 1 S&T Activities 
The JRC has to continue to remain-a centre of excellence, producing 
world class output and for this reason attention should be paid to the 
maintenance of a suitable level of resources, especially in the core 
activity. 
As regards the NPM unit, it must avoid in future giving advantages, in 
terms of profits, to private nuclear industry in a few countries. 
More effort should fc>e concentrated on chemical metrology, but a 
critical review of the proposals is necessary. 
It is recommended that the MRM unit become the EU centre of 
excellence in the preparation of biological and environmental reference 
materials. Big business is not expected in the reference materials 
area. Selling and dispatching of reference materials have to be 
carried out fully according to the actual laws and directives of Member 
States of the EU. The sample preparation area, coupled with the 
analytical facilities and the MRM unit provide a critical mass. However, 
the organisation needs to be restructured so this unit remains a true 
world class centre. 
VI.2 Infrastructure 
It is recommended that the facilities of the Institute are available, to a 
higher degree than at present, on a broad market and not only 
reserved for specific groups of researchers. 
VI.3 Management 
The management of JRC Institutes should have the possibility to use 
commercial "head hunting" agencies to target specific people and 
employ them on competitive terms. 
Recruitment should be based on ability and if necessary, schemes 
should be found to attract human resources from all over the world. 
The Director should have greater flexibility in selecting, promoting and 
removing scientific staff and the internal progress review system 
should be better oriented towards the needs of the Institute (efficacy 
and efficiency). 
With the role of the JRC, as given by the Community, the need for a 
business like approach is even more necessary. 
The accounting procedures applied by the Institute should be 
thoroughy overhauled, preferably with the guidance of outside 
professionals, and whenever possible, operational decisions delegated 
to unit management. 
Improved accounting procedures should include all relevant 
parameters and also encompass depreciation of equipment 
Objectives should be stated in clear forms and milestones set up to 
mark progress defining cost and time parameters. 
Selected staff from each Unit should follow a marketing course. 
£ -10-
Roskilde, 20 November, 1996 
REPORT OF THE VISITING GROUP 
FOR THE EVALUATION OF THE 
JOINT RESEARCH CENTRE'S 
INSTITUTE FOR TRANSURANIUM ELEMENTS 
Q -1 1 
CONTENTS 
I. Introduction 13 
II. Activities at ITE 13 
III. Specific Programmes 14 
Institutional Research 14 
, 1. Basic Actinides Research 14 
2. Safety of Nuclear Fuels 14 
3. Mitigation of Long Lived Actinides 14 
4. Spent Fuel Characterisation 15 
5. Safeguards R&D 15 
6. Radionuclides for medical applications 15 
7. Exploratory Research 15 
Institutional Support 15 
IV. Competitive Activities 17 
V. Quality Management (QM) 17 
VI. Collaboration 17 
VII. Organizational Matters 18 
VIII. Follow up of the Recommendations of the 
1994 Visiting Group 19 
IX. Recommendations 19 
Annex I: Members of the Visiting Group 
Annex II: Terms of Reference of the Visiting Group 
Report of the Visiting Group for the Evaluation of the 
Joint Research Centre's Institute for 
Transuranium Elements, Karlsruhe, Germany 
1. INTRODUCTION 
2. A group of scientists and industrialists experienced in various aspects 
of nuclear fuel and actinide research and development (R&D) and 
among whom were three representing customers, was invited by the 
Board of Governors of the Joint Research Centre (JRC) to evaluate the 
work of the JRC's Institute for Transuranium Elements (ITE) in 
Karlsruhe, Germany. Members (see Annex I) visited the Institute on 
21 - 23 October, 1996 and assessed the Institute and its activities on the 
basis of the Terms of Reference set out in Annex EL 
The visit comprised a presentation of the Institute and its programmes 
by the Director and presentations by unit heads on the following 
activities: 
A 
B 
C 
D Institutional Research in Fuel Cycle Safety 
Institutional Scientific and Technical Support Activities 
Competitive Activities under the Framework Programme 
Competitive Activities outside the Framework Programme. 
Discussions were held with staff responsible for the organisation, 
finance and management of the Institute; future scientific perspectives 
were examined and a number of laboratories were visited. 
The following report is, in its structure, based on the report of the 
February 1994 Visiting Group1 and refers particularly to the 
implementation of the recommendations contained in that report. 
II. ACTIVITIES AT ITE 
1. The Visiting Group noted that the structure of the JRC's, and thereby 
the ITE's, 1995-1998 programme differs from that of the former 1992-
1994 period. The specific programmes under the Framework 
Programme now comprise both research and scientific-technical 
support activities, plus exploratory research. The competitive activities 
are not alone work for outside third parties, but also participation in the 
Community shared-cost action programmes and Community 
programmes outside the Framework Programme. 
2. The ITE's programme and projects during the 1995-1998 programme 
period are distributed as follows: 
• Specific Programmes 
Basic Actinides Research 
Safety of Nuclear Fuels 
Mitigation of Long Lived Actinides and Fission Products 
1. Evaluation of the Joint Research Centre and its Multi-annual Research Programme 1992 
1994, COM(95)60 final, 08.03.1995, pp. 63 78 
fV13-
Spent Fuel Characterisation in view of long term storage 
Safeguards Research and Development 
Scientific-technical Support on Safeguards for DG XVII 
(Euratom Safeguards Directorate General), including 
detection of illicit nuclear materials and support on 
Safeguards for Directorate General I (for the IAEA) 
Competitive Activities 
Exploratory Research 
III. SPECIFIC PROGRAMMES 
Institutional Research 
1. Basic Actinides Research 
Basic Actinides Research with the objective of performing experimental 
and theoretical studies of the solid state and physico-chemical 
properties of actinides and actinide compounds, elucidating their 
electronic structure and its effect on their behaviour under conditions of 
technological relevance. 
The new user laboratory is welcomed and all efforts should be made to 
facilitate access. It is an excellent training ground for young scientists 
with a scope for increased international collaboration and output in the 
form of scientific publications. 
This is an absolute core activity for the ITE. The Institute has, for 
many years, gained the position of the leading laboratory in Europe in 
this field, and that should also be maintained in the future as basic 
knowledge on actinides is essential for a proper understanding of the 
safety of the nuclear fuel cycle and reactor safety. 
2. Safety of Nuclear Fuels 
Here the research contributes to improvements in nuclear safety by 
studying phenomena which occur in light water reactor fuel rods at 
extended times of operation and which may endanger the integrity of 
fuel rods, and by improving fuel fabrication technologies from the 
safety point of view. 
The Visiting Group, notes that'ITE has unique equipment with 
demonstrated capability to perform structural investigations and basic 
studies to determine the safety limits of Light Water Reactor fuel. 
Third Party Work in that direction should be encouraged, whereas 
institutional research may be more limited. 
Further development of high temperature measurement techniques 
applicable to irradiated fuel should continue as institutional research, 
but for a limited period. 
Fuel performance code development should be seen primarily as a tool 
to support nuclear fuels safety investigations. 
3. Mitigation of Long Lived Actinides 
Mitigation of Long Lived Actinides and Fission products, where the 
research aims to minimise secondary actinides and other radionuclides 
with long half-lives in the nuclear fuel cycle. 
This useful research with selected studies is based on long experience at 
ITE and should continue at its present level. 
f\-14 
4. Spent Fuel Characterisation 
Spent Fuel Characterisation in View of Long. Term Storage has as its 
objectives to characterise unprocessed spent fuel with respect to its 
behaviour under long-term storage conditions, to determine its 
radiotoxic potential and to investigate the leaching of this waste form, 
under realistic conditions. 
The Visiting Group agrees with the research, for which it sees a 
continuing need. 
5. Safeguards R&D 
Safeguards R&D is strategic research in an area where the JRC is 
responding to a Treaty requirement. The rather limited research 
assigned to ITE is concerned with analytical measurement techniques, 
including the establishment of methods for environmental monitoring. 
It is discussed further below. 
6. Radionuclides for medical applications 
This activity forms part of the objectives of the -specific programme 
1995-1998 as institutional research. The highly specialized capability 
of the Institute has been fruitfully utilized to provide specific nuclear 
isotopes for medical and other non-nuclear applications. A good 
example is the Institute's collaboration with the medical community in 
the clinical trials of a-immunotherapy for certain types of cancer. This 
is an effective way for the Institute to contribute to research in other 
areas. However, once the need for specific nuclear isotopes becomes 
routine, the Institute needs to concern itself.with how to transfer the 
technology so that the research mission is not threatened by more 
routine production requirements. 
7. Exploratory Research 
The Visiting Group welcomes the exploratory research carried out at 
the ITE. This research should, however, be performed on a theoretical 
level, as long as there is no manifest expression of interest. 
Exploratory research is being carried out in two directions: 
the theoretical development of innovative fission concepts like, 
e.g., the use of subcritical fission assembly with external neutron 
source; 
the analysis of different options to dispose of excess plutonium 
like, e.g., particle fuel in gas reactors. Knowing that the new fuel 
type needs probably about two decades before being introduced on 
an industrial scale, this programme arouses some controversial 
discussion. 
Institutional Support 
The JRC in general, and the ITE in particular, has an important activity in 
providing scientific-technical support to the implementation of nuclear 
safeguards as required by the Euratom Treaty, thus to the Safeguards 
Directorate General (DG XVII) and to the IAEA in the framework of the 
Non-Proliferation Treaty and the corresponding agreements with EU 
Member States. 
At ITE the institutional support services committed to safeguards are 
primarily in the form of analytical services provided to the EURATOM 
Inspectorate (DG XVTJ). These services are in transition from a system 
r\-15-
where samples are transported to the Institute for analysis to a system where 
a significant portion of the analyses are carried out on-site. The 
establishment and continuous staffing of on-site analysis laboratories (at 
Sellafield and Cap de la Hague) is a cost-effective approach to safeguarding 
large through-put reprocessing facilities. However, it is a challenging 
assignment for both the technical and management staff of ITE that, among 
other things, will require a very disciplined application of quality assurance 
principles. 
The collection and analysis of environmental samples has been demonstrated 
to be a very powerful tool for strengthened safeguards. Both the IAEA and 
EURATOM Inspectorate are- proceeding to the routine implementation- of 
environmental sampling as a means to detect undeclared nuclear materials 
and activities. Implementation requires the existence of ultra-sensitive 
analytical methods that can detect and characterize nuclear material which 
may be present in a sample in femtogram (10-15 g) quantities. The IAEA 
does not have the capability to do most of these analyses and has proceeded to 
develop a network of analytical laboratories around the world that provide a 
whole suite of analytical methods. The IAEA places a great importance on 
the efforts at ITE to establish a clean laboratory for handling environmental 
samples and the developing capability to do individual particle analysis. 
This capability is important to EURATOM and Community Member States 
for their own needs but, for the IAEA^ the developing capability at ITE not 
only provides needed capability and capacity to the network, but it also 
provides a necessary political balance. This work is a vital ingredient in the 
continuing evolution of the non-proliferation regime and it needs continued 
emphasis. 
Safeguards R&D is very limited at the present time, representing less than 
3% of the institutional budget. This investment seems inconsistent with the 
effort committed to the routine analysis of safeguards samples, which 
amounts to 30% of the institutional budget. 
An effort needs to be made to improve this ratio, both in terms of improved 
analytical methods and in identifying new areas where the unique 
capabilities of ITE can contribute to more cost-effective safeguards. 
The analytical capabilities of the Institute in support of the forensic analysis 
of illegal or vagabonding nuclear material goes alongside the safeguards 
activities and is a relatively modest, but extremely important undertaking. 
In the view of the Visiting Group, Institute management has given this work 
a high priority and should be encouraged to maintain a capability to respond 
to requests as the need arises. 
r\-16-
IV. COMPETITIVE ACTIVITIES 
Particular attention was given to ITE's activities in Work for Third 
Parties and in the competitive field, Competitive Activities (shared cost 
actions, other Community Programmes), where the goals set by the 
Council for 1995-1998 seem to be more than met. 
The Visiting Group feels that it is wise to continue in this direction 
(foreseeing future budget restraints in basic fields) and as, for the time 
being, basic research does not seem to be negatively affected. 
The competitive activities also add a welcome additional opportunity 
for collaboration with industry, national research centres and 
universities. 
V. QUALITY MANAGEMENT (QM) 
The Group was informed about the QM activities and appreciates the 
standard already achieved. The way QM is implemented demonstrates 
that the driving force has been on immediate demands from customers, 
especially in areas of safeguards and post-irradiation examination of 
fuel rods. 
The consolidation of a number of specific QM plans to one quality 
management system for the whole Institute may increase efficiency and 
also improve the competitiveness of the Institute for third party work. 
The introduction of such a complete system will, however, require a 
good QM understanding, especially from the scientific staff and the 
Group, therefore, fully supports the Institute's support of a step-wise 
approach with a certification of the quality management system in at 
least one area in 1997. 
The Group also recommends the Institute's proposal to achieve the ISO 
90001 certificate and to consider accreditation according to EN 45001 or 
similar. It is.the Group's opinion that accreditation should be aimed 
for, in due time, in order to demonstrate the institutional competence of 
the Institute and to fulfill demands from markets, including licensing 
authorities. 
The step-wise approach to certification and accreditation is therefore 
reasonable and recommended by theVisiting Group. 
VI. COLLABORATION 
The Group took notice of the effective international collaboration in 
practically all research areas of the Institute, either with other research 
organizations or with industry. 
The following types of collaboration are at the moment either limited or 
non-existent: 
collaboration with other institutes of the JRC; 
exchange of scientists/technicians with other oganizations via 
temporary secondments of ITE staff. 
The Visiting Group sees possibilities for fruitful, wider collaboration 
with other JRC institutes, notably the Institute for Advanced Materials 
(Petten and Ispra). Temporary secondments of ITE staff to national 
bodies may consolidate existing collaborations or lead to new ones. 
Participation in competitive activities may be useful to this end. 
A-17-
VII. ORGANIZATIONAL MATTERS 
As for the discussions on the scientific aspects of the ITE activities, the 
Visiting Group acknowledges with pleasure the discussions and clear 
information provided on organisational, financial and managerial 
aspects of the Institute. 
The salient points discussed were: 
1. The Group noted the objective of ITE to conform* by mid 1997, to 
the Radiation Protection Ordinance of German law and that in 
view of the renewal of the nuclear operating licence, at the latest 
on 31st October, 1997. 
2. The Group enquired about the direct expenses of the ITE during 
1995. For a total institutional budget of 31.4 MECU (without 
competitive income) the staff expenses amounted to 15.3 MECU; 
technical services, health physics/physical protection, 
administration and overheads were in total 12.6 MECU; 
institutional support 1.1 MECU and Fuel Cycle Safety research 
2.4 MECU. Of the latter there was an extraordinary expenditure 
on waste disposal, while 1 MECU was expended on functioning of 
the laboratories and new acquisition of scientific equipment. 
The ITE management expressed the need for new competitive 
activities to maintain that acquisition level. The Visiting Group 
shared that view. 
3. The Group took notice of the age distribution of the high level 
scientists and of the ITE management staff. A large number of 
people (70% at the managerial level) are going to retire within 5 
years. 
4. The Visiting Group expressed some concern about the efficiency of 
the coming scientific staff under the new scheme of non-renewable 
3 year contracts. 
5. The project/programme management system at the Institute 
confirmed its good working and helped: 
to educate young scientists in the management of their own 
activities; 
to cope with a still increasing number of smaller projects. It 
was reported that the Institute, at present, manages around 
50 projects. 
ft -18 
VIII. FOLLOW UP OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE 1994 
VISITING GROUP 
8 recommendations were given by the 1994 Visiting Group and the 
follow-up of these recommendations was discussed in-depth between 
the Group and the management of the Institute. The Group noted with 
satisfaction that most of the recommendations have been followed. 
The following were especially noted: 
(i) the effort to establish a user facility for European scientists in the 
area of actinide research, 
(ii) the increased effort to introduce results from Third Party Work 
into the institutional research, and 
(iii) the contribution of the Institute to the establishment of on-site 
laboratories for analysis of samples taken by safeguards 
inspectors. 
The recommendations of the 1994 Visiting Group regarding flexibility 
in the distribution of personnel between units have been followed to a 
certain extent by improving the coordination between the units. It is, 
however, the Group's opinion that more could be done regarding this 
point. 
As regards the recommendation that the work at the Institute could be 
further disseminated by further increasing the number of post­
graduates and post-doctoral fellows in the Institute, this has not led to 
significant changes. On the contrary, a certain decrease has been noted 
which, according to the management, reflects the termination of the 
Human Capital and Mobility theme of the JRC specific programme in 
1994. 
This point will be further addressed in the recommendations of the 
present report. 
IX. RECOMMENDATIONS 
• As a general observation the Visiting Group confirms the high 
international position of ITE in its field of activities proven by the 
extensive scientific collaboration with research centres and 
universities world-wide and by the amount of applied work 
executed by it for paying customers in Europe and Japan. 
The Institute should be allowed to maintain this position, which is 
essentially based on the human resources available. The Institute 
is facing the almost simultaneous retirement of several leading 
scientists. 
Their replacement with equally highly qualified personnel should 
be given the highest priority. 
Arrangements should be made for a smooth transfer of know-how 
by early appointments or alternatively, by employment of 
pensioners for a limited period. 
A-19-
• As a specific observation, the Group confirms that the ITE has a 
world-wide reputation in the field of basic actinide research and it 
is recommended that this position should be maintained. An 
important initiative in this area has been the establishment of a 
user's laboratory for actinide research and it is recommended that 
this initiative is followed up by steps to facilitate access to the 
laboratory and to introduce newcomers into the complex field of 
actinide research and the related safety issues. 
• As another specific observation the Group confirms the extensive 
contribution of ITE to the implementation of nuclear safeguards, 
especially in the form of analytical services. The Group notes that 
the safeguards research at ITE is very limited and it recommends 
a strengthening in order to ensure the development of improved 
and more cost-effective analytical methods to the benefit of later 
routine safeguards analyses. 
• With regard to human resources, it is recommended that ITE 
should draw together in an optimal fashion all available 
competencies in the Institute, for example, when organising large 
projects involving more than one unit. ITE should also let 
management at all levels profit from the project management 
system of the Institute, and from an improved transparency of the 
Institute systems for cost accounting. 
• With regard to new staff it is recommended that the Institute 
should be allowed to follow an early planning and the necessary 
flexibility in recruitment porocedures for the new concept of 3-
year non-renewable contracts for staff employment and that 
adequate arrangements be maintained to continue to host young 
scientific fellows, including Ph.D students, at the Institute. 
With regard to the concept of 3-year contracts ITE should try to 
benefit most by careful planning of the activities of the new staff 
in the contract period foreseen. 
The Group believes that in some highly specialised research 
areas of the ITE, 3 year work periods will be too short. 
• Concerning management issues the Group recommends that the 
Institute should continue the necessary efforts with adequate 
resources in order to maintain the existing nuclear 
authorizations: this is a sine qua non condition for the 
perenniality of ITE. 
• In the important area of certification and accreditation of the 
activities the Group suggested a stepwise approach. 
ft-20-
Paris, 26 November, 1996 
REPORT OF THE VISITING GROUP 
FOR THE EVALUATION OF THE 
JOINT RESEARCH CENTRE'S 
INSTITUTE FOR ADVANCED MATERIALS 
fl-21 
CONTENTS 
I. Introduction 23 
II. General Observations 24 
III. Scientific and Technical Activities 25 
111.1 Materials Engineering 25 
111.2 Surface Engineering 26 
111.3 Structural Component Integrity (SCI) 27 
111.4 Structural Materials and Tritium Technology 28 
111.5 Energy Systems Testing 28 
111.6 Cyclotron 29 
111.7 Testing, Analysis and Mechanical Engineering 29 
111.8 High Flux Reactor 29 
IV. Implementation of Research 30 
IV.1 Mission . . 30 
IV.2 Transfer 30 
IV.3 Quality 31 
IV.4 Areas of concern 31 
V. Executive Summary 32 
VI. Recommendations 33 
Annex I: Members of the Visiting Group 
Annex II: Terms of Reference of the Visiting Group 
ft-22-
Report of the Visiting Group for the Evaluation of the 
Joint Research Centre's Institute for Advanced Materials (1AM) 
at Petten, The Netherlands and at Ispra, Italy 
Introduction 
At the invitation of the Board of Governors of the Joint Research 
Centre (JRC), a Visiting Group of independent experts (see Annex I) 
spent the 17 and 18 September, 1996 at the Institute for Advanced 
Materials in Petten, The Netherlands and the 14 and 15 October, 1996 
at the Institute's location in Ispra, Italy, reviewing its work, meeting the 
staff and visiting the laboratories and other installations. 
The present exercise follows that performed by Visiting Groups in 1993 
and the implementation of recommendations made at that time will 
be an important factor to be considered. 
Since that time, certain changes have occurred and the JRC has become 
independent from DG XII and is now an autonomous Directorate 
General of the Commission (Commission Decision of 10 April 1996 on 
the Reorganisation of the JRC). Furthermore, the Council has further 
clarified the JRC's role by clearly distinguishing between institutional 
and competitive activities (Council Conclusions of 26 April 1994 on the 
Role of the JRC) and in Council Decisions of 15 December 1994, 
adopting the present "specific programme for research and 
technological development, including demonstration, to be carried out 
for the European Community " by the JRC under the Community 
Framework Programme. This requires that an evaluation is carried out 
by external experts on work performed during the preceding five 
years. 
The above changes, together with efforts intended to increase 
efficiency and reduce costs, have led to some internal reorganisation of 
the JRC structure. This in its turn has resulted in a reduction of the 
number of Institutes from eight to seven and in consequence, a 
redistribution of certain tasks and projects. 
The general scientific and technological objectives and content for the 
Joint Research Centre's specific programme are set out in Annex I of 
the Council Decisions of 15 December 1994. Institutional research 
activities are included in this annex which also includes institutional 
scientific and technical support. Together, these two areas comprise 
the JRC Direct Action and specific rules for its implementation are 
given in Annex III of the Decisions. The scientific and technological 
objectives and contents of the competitive support activities are to be 
found in Annex IV and the specific rules for their implementation in 
Annex VI. 
The particular objectives of the Institute for Advanced Materials are 
defined as follows: 
to conduct basic and technological research on advanced 
industrial materials; 
to conduct prenormative research in engineering materials to 
contribute in European industrial and safety standards; 
to validate non-destructive methods for checking the integrity of 
large critical industrial plants and components; 
to stimulate the industrial application of advanced materials with 
industrial interests; 
A -23-
to integrate the fragmented research and resources in European 
institutions through networks running projects on critical 
industrial plant components; 
to improve the dissemination of information on materials and 
structural aspects by networking schemes, in particular towards 
Small and Medium sized Enterprises (SME's). 
The Visiting Group has applied the Terms of Reference given in Annex 
II of this report on the understanding that although the present 
evaluation will contribute to the general evaluation of the Framework 
Programme being performed at present, which requires assessments to 
be made covering the past five-years, it is nevertheless based on a 
somewhat different premise. The JRC by its nature and by its assigned 
tasks is evaluated Institute by Institute rather than by a programme 
oriented approach. 
The presently applied system of visits by teams of independent experts 
covering the whole spectrum of activities of each individual institute 
has been proven and widely accepted as the best practical method of 
assessing the JRC and indeed is that favoured for many other research 
organisations worldwide. 
The present evaluation will therefore cover the period from Autumn 
1993, when the last visits took place, up to the present time, and 
together the two reports will review the whole period in question. 
II. General Observations 
In July 1995 a new Director was appointed to lead the Institute and in 
January 1996, in a JRC reorganization, the activity on solar energy and 
tritium handling laboratory, both in Ispra, were transferred to the IAM 
from the former Institute for Systems, Engineering and Informatics and 
from the former Institute for Safety Technology, respectively. 
Furthermore, a simplification of the Institute's internal structure was 
carried out in September 1996, to better correlate unit tasks and 
competence, to simplify management, improve efficiency, to respond 
better to today's situation and prepare for the future. 
In evaluating the Institute, the Visiting Group was particularly 
interested to explore the effect of these and other changes which have 
occurred since the- last review in '1993, especially in the light of the 
recommendations made by the Visiting Group at that time. The status 
of these recommendations, which were systematically followed-up, 
was reported to the JRC Board of Governors in mid-1995 in which nine 
of the fourteen recommendations had been completed and one, the 
transfer of non-destructive testing staff, had to be delayed due to 
customer requirements and will be completed by the end of 1996. Of 
the four other recommendations, Commission rules limit directors' 
authority, particularly where recruitment procedures are concerned. 
The adoption of a plan to install a simplified procedure for short three 
year contracts will hopefully bring some benefits in that respect. 
Mobility of "permanent" staff is another much debated issue and 
limited by family and working practices in the JRC; further incentives 
should be sought to improve both temporary and longer term 
mobility. JRC-IAM is now a source of advice and information on 
advanced materials and their performance in the field and is a 
collaborator with the Institute for Prospective Technological Studies in 
this respect. Finally, in accordance with the recommendation, an 
important increase in the amount of computer modelling is noted with 
satisfaction in all areas of the Institute's research activities. 
Pi -24-
111. Scientific and Technical Activities 
As a result of the reorganization and reassignment of activities at the 
beginning of September 1996, the Institute is at present organized into 
the following functional units based on scientific or technical activities: 
Materials Engineering PETTEN 
Surface Engineering ISPRA 
Structural Component Integrity PETTEN 
Structural Materials and Tritium Technology ISPRA 
Energy Systems Testing ISPRA 
Cyclotron ISPRA 
Testing, Analysis and Mechanical Engineering PETTEN 
High Flux Reactor* PETTEN 
111.1 Materials Engineering 
The Visiting Group noted with approval the significant growth of 
networking in this area since the last visit. It was apparent that 
considerable effort had been made to the development of modelling 
and towards maximising responsiveness to the needs of the end-user. 
It is in the materials engineering area that the Institute's most 
recognized and successful core-competencies are to be found at the 
present time. Areas of mechanical properties and complex corrosion 
continued to be of great importance in practical large-scale and in 
environment sensitive applications in metallic, ceramic and composite 
materials, with considerable demand for investigations from third 
party clients. However, where research on processes for the 
improvement of composite materials is concerned the Group warns 
against strayinq too far from the development of coating techniques 
into the field of process development, an area more appropriate to the 
industrial sector. It is recognised that work in this area of interfaces 
has already led to a number of patents and that some of the activities 
relate to Brite-Euram or EUREKA projects where further work is 
evidently justified. Interface engineering has largely developed since 
the last review and is now providing some useful and challenging 
results and the characterisation of composite materials still requires 
much work. 
The Visiting Group noted that experimental work on the Marangoni 
effect had reached a successful conclusion and that applications could 
now be studied using modelling techniques. The high-power laser 
should be made available to the workshops for general use if found to 
be suitable. 
The proposed venture into the area of materials recycling and 
environmental considerations raises issues of some concern and may be 
an appropriate matter for future activities. However, a cautious 
approach is advised; there being quite some activity in the area already 
and a careful appraisal of the value of a contribution at the present 
time should be made before beginning. 
The High Flux Reactor (HFR) is not comprised in the 4th Framework Programme and is not 
reviewed m this report. It is customer driven and has a separate review mechanism. j 
ft -25-
The Visiting Group considered that the High Temperature Materials 
Data Bank was now providing an efficient client service and that the 
part played by Institute scientists in evaluating data and the interactive 
operation with other important European research centres was 
providing a unique facility. It was, however, important to avoid a 
situation where mundane operational or IT jobs were being carried out 
by skilled research staff and the opportunity of outsourcing such tasks 
should be constantly borne in mind to maximise the materials 
orientation. The achievement was recognised and the unit is 
encouraged to extend its activities to encompass other areas as is 
envisaged 
There was good evidence in several sectors in the Materials 
Engineering Unit of some hard managerial decisions having been 
taken, in view of priorities and available resources. 
Surface Engineering 
This activity area was in its infancy at the last visit in 1993. Today, the 
equipment has been commissioned and experimental work is in 
progress. Tasks are now more clearly defined and are carried on in 
three sectors dealing with plasma assisted chemical vapour deposition, 
thick films and thin films respectively. 
Plasma Assisted Chemical Vapour Deposition (PACVD) is being 
extensively studied at Ispra and the techniques developed are being 
shown to have a large range of potential industrial applications. The 
sector collaborates in the IPACERC on helicopter turbines, INBORN on 
boron nitride and titanium carbide films for optical use, CERCODERM 
on ceramic coatings for dental application and HALU on hard coatings 
with lubricant dispersion. The first project is a EUREKA one and the 
three others are under BRITE/EURAM. There is also a Brite/Euram 
proposal on turbine blade coatings and the unit is operating a network 
"TEMPUS" as part of the COPERNICUS network. This is obviously an 
active area in which the Institute is playing a leading role in a very 
promising field and until full industrialisation of this group of 
techniques is achieved, the Visiting Group sees a very useful future for 
the activity. In concentrating the surface engineering activities in 
Ispra, the unit has recently received staff and equipment from Petten. 
Thick film research includes an activity on biomedical applications in 
which surface modification techniques are applied to prosthetic joint 
surfaces to improve tribological properties, to improve adhesion of 
implants and on the adhesion of glass-ceramic coatings to titanium 
alloys as a substitute for gold or noble metal alloys in orthodontics. 
The work is carried out in association with a network of hospitals as a 
concerted action. The area is considered to show some promise as an 
area for future development, but in which standardisation is lacking, 
but attention must be paid to the activities of manufacturers. Other 
thick film activities concern the improvement of land-based gas 
turbine blade protective coatings to meet higher temperature service 
conditions. The work is a result of a EUR Directive on increasing power 
generator efficiency to greater than 50% and is thus of considerable 
importance to manufacturers and operators. 
The Thin Film sector is doing original work on the synthesis of high 
hardness coatings using various techniques and their characterisation. 
Systems under exploration are B-N-C, where diamond-like properties 
are encountered, in collaboration with five other European research 
organisations, low friction coefficient Ti-B-N based hard coatings for 
dry machining of materials and possible substitutes for conventional 
zinc coatings, Brite/Euram Shared Cost Actions exist for the latter two 
subjects, but such research should remain generic. The Visiting Group 
A-26-
was impressed by the characterisation laboratory which is particularly 
well equipped and with the expertise shown by those working there. 
Structural Component Integrity (SCI) 
Five important European networks covering various aspects of 
structural integrity and inspection in both nuclear and non-nuclear 
environments had been set up and SCI is the operating agent to ensure 
their impartial functioning. Thus the Unit has a key role in managing 
the input needed to set up structural integrity codes of practice and 
standards. Development appeared satisfactory. 
The Visiting Group advises that all the more important networks 
should be critically examined for their contribution to European 
technology. Subsidiarity in relation to other international or national 
networks is an important consideration here. In view of the more 
specific safety requirements and engineering codes of practice applied 
to nuclear applications and to the wider range of needs met with in 
other industries, it is suggested that networks serving these different 
categories should be kept separate. 
With reference to the European Network for Evaluating Steel 
Components (NESC), the Group felt concerned that full participation by 
US or Japanese interests could injure the European competitive 
position. Perhaps some form of associate membership with limited 
access to data of possible industrial sensitivity could be envisaged. 
It was recognised by the Visiting Group that since the 1993 evaluation, 
the work of the Non-Destructive Evaluation unit had been considerably 
consolidated with a high standard of equipment and experienced staff. 
It was noted, however, that the recommendation to move all unit staff 
to Petten would only be complete at the end of the present year. It 
was understood that the delay had been caused by-pressure from local 
customers to complete certain work before relocating the whole unit. 
It was felt that after the move was completed, a more research 
oriented approach could bring useful benefits and in that connection, 
the Visiting Group welcomed the work on ageing of materials which is 
a particularly important issue and brings a scientific activity to the 
more technological side of the unit. 
The Institute's European Networks Advanced Information Systems-
(ENAIS) now has a web site on INTERNET and is engaged in making 
available advanced data handling and transformation facilities in the 
NDE field and maintaining an information network in the area. A 
European Network on Structural Integrity information and technology 
Transfer (ENSIT) is being set up and these information activities will be 
followed by the Group with interest. However, care must be exercised 
in avoiding duplication of services and some coordination at Institute 
level is desirable. As remarked above, outsourcing should be used 
wherever feasible and recruitment of staff should concentrate on 
securing materials competencies wherever possible. 
Component integrity and testing is helping to provide the link 
between the materials specimen and engineering component scales. 
The whole area of model development and validation for component 
behaviour prediction is of considerable industrial importance and the 
difficult experimental techniques developed are believed to be unique. 
In view of this, the strong emphasis placed on the use and 
management of networking is encouraged. 
A-27 
Structural Materials and Tritium Technology 
The research activities performed by this unit are related mainly to the 
EU Thermonuclear Fusion programme and indeed, this part of the 
programme was described as being similar to an "Association", the 
form adopted by research laboratories performing tasks under the EU 
Fusion Research programme in Member States. With present doubts 
about the ITER (International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor) 
project the Visiting Group finds it difficult to discuss the future 
relevance of these activities. It may be wise, therefore, to examine the 
experimental mechanics and microstructural modelling part of the 
activity in relation to work performed elsewhere in the Institute. Much 
of the hydrogen interaction work and that on fluid separation and 
catalysis has high technological relevance to other fields of application. 
Therefore, the Visiting Group was pleased to note the efforts already 
undertaken in the units to create interest in alternative applications 
for their developments. Spin-off from such advanced R&D is in any 
case highly desirable. 
The Experimental Mechanics and Microstructural modelling sector 
appeared to be well equipped for its tasks and the brittle material 
characterisation work on high purity chromium and its-alloys was 
noted as was that on silicon carbide fibre/silicon carbide matrix 
composite materials. A network on photothermal hardness 
measurements has been set up and the method seems promising for 
some industrial applications; proposals are being prepared for a 
Brite/Euram thematic network and for a research project and two 
proposals on other subjects have been put forward and one on nuclear 
safety is in execution. Such proposals are strongly encouraged by the 
Group. 
The Hydrogen Materials interaction sector develops coatings on 
structural materials for fusion reactor first wall, diverter and breeding 
blanket to reduce the permeation of hydrogen isotopes. Good results 
have been obtained using aluminide coatings on steels and silicon 
carbide fibre/silicon carbide matrix composite materials and spin-off 
into aerospace and petrochemicals sectors is being investigated. The 
Group hopes that alternative applications for this know-how will prove 
possible. 
Work on Fluid Separation and Catalysis has made important original 
contributions to tritium handling technology and in this area, 
technology transfer to other applications would appear to be 
particularly promising. 
The European Tritium Handling Laboratory (ETHEL) is a large facility, 
unique in the quantities of tritium that can be managed and in thé size 
of components that can be tested. Such a facility will be essential 
when the new generation of fusion machines is undertaken. Years of 
careful preparation and testing have demonstrated the safety of the 
installation and a licence to operate at designed levels of tritium is 
expected shortly from the national authorities concerned. It is evident 
that the standards achieved are of a quality not encountered 
elsewhere. 
Energy Systems Testing 
This unit comprises two sectors, the European Solar Test Installation 
(ESTI) and Energy Systems Analysis and Support (ESAS). The Unit, 
although somewnat remote from the Institute's other core activities, 
was seen to be very well organized and managed and rendering a 
worldwide service to major photovoltaic module manufacturers and 
installers as well as providing consultancy and monitoring support to 
research and demonstration projects in the energy sector. 
The ESTI applied for accreditation under EN 45001 "General 
Requirements of Test Laboratories" at the end of 1995, was audited in 
June 1996 and was informed by the"Electrical Test" Commission of 
COFRAC of a successful outcome in September. The laboratory also 
undertakes R&D into various aspects of photovoltaic technology and 
has sold 600 irradiance sensors for the validation and intercomparison 
of photovoltaic systems throughout the world; an improved device is 
underdevelopment. The laboratory also provides PV module approval 
to international standards IEC 1215 and calibrates reference devices to 
I EC 904. 
The Visiting Group was also presented with selected projects from 
ESAS including monitoring services, Demand Side Management 
services and participation in the development of three databases in 
support of Directorate General XVII (Energy). Other actions for DG 
XVII include setting up a laboratory for measuring,electricity 
consumption and harmonic distortion in office appliances, thé creation 
of climatic severity indicators, criteria for standards in the solar thermal 
energy sector, the integration of solar energy in buildings and many 
others besides. The sector is also concerned with energy project 
evaluation and participates in a number of shared cost actions. The 
sector also provides technical scientific and administrative support to 
the Ispra ECOCENTRE project. This is a pilot project for the energetic 
and ecological modernisation of ageing research centres with future 
application to other sites. The Visiting Group considered the extensive 
portfolio of work for other Directorates General and outside clients 
and successful SCA participation as evidence of excellence, efficiency 
and acceptance of the central role of this unit. 
111.6 Cyclotron 
At the last visit in 1993 it was seen that utilisation of the cyclotron had 
fallen to a low level and that there was very little interest from outside 
customers. The Visiting Group is pleased to report that the situation 
has been reversed by persistent efforts by the unit's staff and 
management and that in 1996 44% of the 1,580 Mio ecu costs were 
derived from competitive sources, the third party contract share being 
34.8%. The predicted figures for 1997 are 51% and 2,150 Mio ecu 
respectively with assured third party contracts providing 44%. 
The facility's main activities centre around two principal lines. The 
first, surface performance studies using thin layer activation (TLA) 
techniques for wear testing for industrial applications and biomaterial 
development. TLA is also applied to a wide range of corrosion 
problems and includes an engine test facility is under construction in 
collaboration with the automobile industry. Radioisotope production 
is the second line and includes isotopes for environmental studies such 
as Pd, PT, and Rh release from exhaust gas catalysers and short half-life 
isotopes for biomedical purposes in the region. Both lines are 
expanding at the present time and the cyclotron is proving to be a very 
useful tool. 
111.7 Testing, Analysis and Mechanical Engineering 
This group of activities provides technical services for Institute units 
engaged in research and development and success or failure is 
reflected in that of the user units. 
111.8 High Flux Reactor 
(Not reported here). The Institute also makes some use of the HFR for 
analytical work such as neutron scattering and for irradiation creep, 
A-29-
creep/fatigue and in-pile thermal fatigue irradiations for 
thermonuclear fusion materials research. 
IV. Implementation of Research 
IV.1 Mission 
The Institute's mission is to contribute through knowledge on 
advanced and conventional materials to enhancing the technical and 
scientific infrastructure of Europe and thereby its industrial 
competitiveness and citizen welfare,- mainly-in the energy, transport, 
environment, life science, manufacturing and nuclear sectors. 
The Visiting Group sees that the Institute fills an essential place at 
European Union level, somewhat akin to that of the National Institute 
for Science and Technology (NIST) in the US and others elsewhere. The 
field of materials is a generic one, with implications common to most 
human activities, industrial as well as social in which rapidly changing 
conditions are generating fresh requirements, which are demanding a 
steady stream of new materials or novel conditions of application for 
existing ones. Pre-normalisation, characterisation and the supply of 
reliable information, together with the interpretation of the scientists' 
results and their translation into models usable by the engineer and 
manufacturer, requires collaboration on an international scale. We 
believe that this institute goes some way towards fulfilling this need in 
the EU context within its area of competence. 
Management and staff with whom the Visiting Group had direct 
contact, gave the impression that this mission was understood and 
accepted. At a more detailed and practical level, however, the 
acceptance of rigorous project control and a formal quality 
management system by the individual scientist is still in the future. We 
are pleased to see the efforts of the Director and his senior staff to 
improve this. 
IV.2 Transfer 
Transfer of results, know-how and information to the final user is still 
considered to be the critical point in Community research in general, 
and every opportunity must be seized to market the Institute's 
products and services. In that respect, the-Institute appears to be 
conscious of its role as a European Centre and conferences, seminars 
and workshops (on ongoing and future projects) clearly play an 
important and visible part in its operations and are considered to be 
one of its fundamental tasks. 
Publications such as reports, monographs, poster-session contributions 
and conference papers are maintained at an appropriate level for an 
institute in which some of the output is raw data, especially in the case 
of contract work for third parties, where confidentiality is also a 
consideration. We believe that the public status of the Institute 
dictates that whenever possible, such work must be published at an 
early date. Other than the EUR technical reports, publication is in 
reputable reviewed scientific or technical journals or in books. One 
criticism is that detailed lists of publications do not appear to be 
available. The Group believes that all output, except that of an 
explicitly sensitive nature, should appear on an openly accessible and 
frequently updated list, if only as a showcase to the outside world. 
The Visiting Group noted a steady improvement in the two-way 
communication between the Institute and the outside world, 
particularly with the development of an extensive system of networks 
in all appropriate branches of the Institute's activities. At the same 
time, a healthy relationship with third party clients had emerged, 
R-30-
although sometimes inhibited by staff availability and the lingering 
feeling among certain scientists that such work carried a lower priority. 
The new generation of scientists and tighter project control was 
improving the situation. In that respect, the success of doctoral 
students in obtaining PhDs for research performed at 1AM and the 
presence of visiting scientists clearly had an important revitalising and 
invigorating effect on permanent staff, apart from the valuable 
training received by themselves. The reduction in numbers in 
comparison to the previous period is regretted and it is hoped that this 
important European function can continue at its old, or an even higher 
level in the future. The Institute and indeed the entire JRC must be 
seen as an important meeting place for the up and coming scientists 
and as a means of sowing the seeds of "natural" European networks 
that can endure throughout their working life. In this respect, the 
presence of senior visitors on attachment from other organizations can 
play an important role and enhance the reputation of the Institute. 
"Open door" activities are seen as being essential to the health of any 
Europe-wide scientific institute, at the same time providing 
coordination through experience to future scientists. The education 
aspect is considered to be an important service to the citizen and as 
such, worthy of further consideration. 
In general, the Institute's track record in transfer to the outside is good 
to very good and the management is encouraged to further efforts in 
this direction. Collaboration with other JRC institutes is seen as a 
sector where improvement is needed and problems have also become 
evident in performing work for other Commission services. 
IV.3 Quality 
From the presentations and laboratory visits by the Visiting Group, 
publications, success in contract work for third parties and 
participation in Shared Cost Actions, we are able to form the opinion 
that the Institute is well equipped with a well trained and professional 
staff. In most cases, the work is judged to be of a high, and in certain 
cases, excellent quality. 
Principle reservations lie in the more practical matters of ensurin-g that 
schedules are maintained and that overall quality is transparently 
demonstrated. These points are becoming of much greater 
importance than in the past and experience in many other research 
organizations is showing that scientific excellence is no longer 
sufficient to provide customer confidence but that overall quality of 
management also has to be demonstrated. The Visiting Group 
understands that the Director has these difficult matters in hand and 
looks forward to a successful outcome, but suggests that credibility 
outside could be further enhanced with an annual quality audit by an 
acknowledged external expert. 
IV.4 Areas of concern 
Follow-up and project management. This is being actively 
pursued and a system is expected to be implemented during 
Summer 1997. 
Total Quality Management: a comprehensive system will be 
installed before Autumn 1997. However, an external audit is also 
desirable. 
Competence map of staff: at present lacking but under 
preparation for strategy planning. 
Recruitment: particularly in view of demography. This remains a 
continuing problem. 
Decline in the number of doctoral students and post-doctoral 
fellows. 
f\ -31-
Future investment plan: this is being developed in line with the 
strategic planning. 
Work for industry: needs immediate action to secure contracts. 
A means of anticipating delays in formalities is highly desirable, 
(i.e. a small financial advance, staff allocation, etc ) 
Executive Summary 
The Visiting Group points out that the visit has taken place at a time 
when it is particularly difficult to assess all the activities in the Institute 
and that a strict comparison with results of the previous visit will not be 
easy. This is partly due to the units transferred from the previous 
Institute for Systems Engineering and Informatics and the Institute for 
Safety Technology. These comprise the European Tritium Handling 
Laboratory (ETHEL) and the Energy Systems Testing activities. 
Following the acquisition of these new fields, the new Director set 
about reorganising the Institute into a more rational structure by 
concentrating closely related activities into new functional units and 
assembling all surface-related research at Ispra. The action was 
launched on 1 September 1996 and was thus only a few weeks old at 
the time of the visit. The new functional units are shown in Chapter III. 
Scientific and Technical Activities. 
At the present time, a detailed future strategy for the Institute is under 
development to meet the new demands that will arise with the fifth 
Framework Programme and to further enhance competitiveness and 
prepare for the future by developing the Institute's competence. 
The most apparent change, other than the transfer of activities from 
other Institutes in Ispra, and the recent internal reorganization has 
resulted from the introduction of competitive bidding for work both in 
Shared Cost Actions (SCAs) and in providing services to other 
Commission Directorates General. Participation in SCAs is considered 
by the Visiting Group to be a fruitful method of working with the 
outside world and the Institute's success in the area is noted 
favourably. Whilst impressed by the number of contacts with 
programmes such as BRITE/EURAM, the Group feels bound to draw the 
management's attention to the dangers of diluting its area of core-
competence by spreading its activities too thinly over too wide a 
horizon. A realistic and cautious approach is advised in buildingon its 
present success. 
It is very encouraging to note a much more positive staff response to 
the competitive challenge where, in many cases, even older staff 
members have shown their conviction of its value to the JRC. Healthy 
progress has been made in this respect, but some pockets of doubt still 
remain. 
In view of the experience and expertise of the staff and the extensive 
worldwide contacts enjoyed by the Institute, the Visiting Group 
suggests that greater attention should be focussed on the provision of 
regular training courses on suitable subjects for outside participants. 
As a mark of the Institute's recognition by other bodies, the Visiting 
Group notes with satisfaction the positive reference made to a number 
of the Institute's activities by the European Committee for 
Standardization (CEN) in a recommendation recently published as an 
"Addendum to the CEN/STAR contribution for the preparation of the 
Vth Framework Programme". Specifically mentioned are advanced 
materials, photovoltaic energy, solar energy, energy conservation, 
materials for clean technologies, plant and component ageing and 
inspection methods, as areas in which contributions are made by the 
JRC to standardization in the European Union. 
ft-32-
VI. Recommendations 
Except in third party work activity should be sited near, but 
upstream of industrial research. 
Some work, particularly in the coatings sector, needs examining 
to see that it remains generic or pre-competitive. 
Provision of open access databases is encouraged with attention 
to possible outsourcing of routine tasks 
Where logistics allow, duplication between Ispra and Petten 
activities or important equipment should be avoided. 
Characterisation of materials is an important core competence 
for the Institute. 
Shared Cost Action participation is favourably considered and to 
be encouraged. 
Seek to collaborate more with other JRC institutes. 
Expedite work underway to introduce project management and 
total quality management in the Institute. 
Recruitment of scientists is still a problem needing further 
attention. 
The educational role of the Institute should be enhanced and the 
number of doctoral students and post-doctoral fellows increased. 
Staff mobility, although better, could be increased with short 
term attachments. 
Seek improved methods of bringing forward the starting date of 
industrial third party contract work. 
Seek contacts with the best experts in Europe for every (new) 
field of activity. 
B-33-
London, 11 November, 1996 
REPORT OF THE VISITING GROUP 
FOR THE EVALUATION OF THE 
JOINT RESEARCH CENTRE'S 
INSTITUTE FOR SYSTEMS, INFORMATICS 
AND SAFETY 
Pl-34 
CONTENTS 
I. Introduction 36 
II. General Observations 37 
III. Scientific and Technical Activities 38 
111.1 Industrial Hazards 38 
111.2 In Pile Experiments 39 
111.3 System Modelling and Assessment 39 
111.4 Safeguards and Verification Techniques 40 
111.5 Software Technologies and Automation 40 
111.6 Advanced Techniques for Information Analysis 41 
111.7 Structural Mechanics 42 
111.8 Sicily Project 43 
IV. Implementation of Research 43 
IV.1 Mission 43 
IV.2 Transfer 43 
IV.3 Quality 44 
IV.4 Competition 44 
V. Executive Summary 45 
VI. Recommendations 45 
VI.1 S&T Activities 45 
VI.2 Infrastructure 46 
VI.3 Management 46 
Annex I: Members of the Visiting Group 
Annex IhTerms of Reference of the Visiting Group 
A-35 
Report of the Visiting Group for the Evaluation of the 
Joint Research Centre's Institute for Systems, Informatics and Safety (ISIS), 
(Ispra, Italy) 
I. Introduction 
At the invitation of the Board of Governors of the Joint Research 
Centre (JRC), a Visiting Group of independent experts (see Annex I) 
spent the 12 and 13 September, 1996 at the Institute for Systems, 
Informatics and Safety at Ispra reviewing its work, meeting the staff 
and visiting the laboratories and other installations. 
On 5 and 6 September a preliminary visit was made to the Institute by 
the Chairman and one of the members of the Visiting Group who was 
not able to join the subsequent meeting held on 12 and 13 September. 
The present exercise follows that performed by Visiting Groups in 1993 
and the implementation of recommendations made at that time are an 
important factor to be considered. 
Since that time, certain changes have occurred and the JRC has 
become independent from DG XII and is now an autonomous 
Directorate General of the Commission (Commission Decision of 10 
April 1996 on the Reorganisation of the JRC). Furthermore, the 
Council has further clarified the JRC's role by clearly distinguishing 
between institutional and competitive activities (Council Conclusions of 
26 April 1994 on the Role of the JRC) and in Council Decisions of 15 
December 1994, adopting the present "specific programme for 
research and technological development, including demonstration, to 
be carried out for the European Community " by the JRC under the 
Community Framework Programme. This requires that an evaluation is 
carried out by external experts on work performed during the 
preceding five years. 
The above changes, together with efforts intended to increase 
efficiency and reduce costs, have led to some internal reorganisation 
of the JRC structure. This in its turn has resulted in a reduction of the 
number of Institutes from eight to seven and in consequence, a 
redistribution of certain tasks and projects. 
The general scientific and technological objectives and content for the 
Joint Research Centre's specific programme are set out in Annex I of 
the Council Decisions of 15 December 1994. Institutional research 
activities are included in this annex which also includes institutional 
scientific and technical support. Together, these two areas comprise 
the JRC Direct Action and specific rules for its implementation are 
given in Annex III of the Decisions. The scientific and technological 
objectives and contents of the competitive support activities are to be 
found in Annex IV and the specific rules for their implementation in 
Annex VI. 
The mission of the Institute for Systems, Informatics and Safety is 
defined as follows: 
- ISIS is the impartial centre of expertise of the European Union in 
the science and technology of safety management, the multi-
disciplinary analysis of industrial, socio-technical and 
environmental systems and the innovative application of 
information technology. 
h-36-
ISIS develops and applies its expertise and unique test facilities 
in many fields, including: 
nuclear safety and the safeguarding of nuclear materials 
industrial and transport safety 
seismic protection of buildings and civil engineering works 
natural resource and environmental management 
support to antifraud measures 
preservation of cultural heritage and architectural work. 
The Visiting Group has applied the Terms of Reference given in Annex 
II of this report on the understanding that although the present 
evaluation will contribute to the general evaluation of the Framework 
Programme being performed at present, which requires assessments 
to be made covering the past five years, it is nevertheless based on a 
somewhat different premise. The JRC by its nature and by its 
assigned tasks is evaluated Institute by institute rather than by a 
programme oriented approach. 
The presently applied system of visits by teams of independent 
experts covering the whole spectrum of activities of each individual 
Institute has been proven and widely accepted as the best practical 
method of assessing the JRC and indeed is that favoured for many 
other research organisations worldwide. 
The present evaluation will therefore cover the period from Autumn 
1993, when the last visits took place, up to the present time, and 
together the corresponding reports will review the whole period in 
question. 
II. General Observations 
The Institute for Systems, Informatics and Safety (ISIS) was created 
following a reorganisation of the JRC at the beginning of 1996 by the 
merger of the Institute for Systems, Engineering and Informatics (ISEI) 
and the Institute for Safety Technology (1ST). 
Some sectors of the two former Institutes were allocated to other JRC 
Institutes and today the scientific and technical activities of ISIS are 
grouped into the following Units: — 
# Industrial Hazards 
# In Pile Experiments 
# System Modelling and Assessment 
# Safeguards and Verification Techniques 
# Software Technologies and Automation 
# Advanced Techniques for Information Analysis 
# Structural Mechanics 
These blocks, plus one on the 
# Sicily Project 
are used for the discussion in this report. 
The above activities are performed and financed within one or more of 
the scientific and technological objectives specified in the Council 
Decisions of 15 December 1994 and its annexes, as indicated in the 
introduction to this report. These include institutional and competitive 
work within the 4th Framework Programme of Community RTD 
activities and competitive work outside the Framework Programme. In 
comparison with the past, the new possibility of bidding for Shared 
ft -37-
Cost Actions (SCA) was given to the JRC by the above Council 
Decisions. 
The Visiting Group noted that ISIS made full use of the various 
possibilities mentioned above, performing in each Unit a mix of 
institutional and competitive work. 
Whereas in some Units the institutional work within the Framework 
Programme predominates, in other Units the competitive work reaches 
60% of the total. The Visiting Group noted in particular the good rate 
of success in participating in Shared Cost Actions, and welcomed the 
wider relationships formed with partners in these projects. 
For the visits to the laboratories and presentations of the activities, a 
selection of topics was made, in cooperation with the Director of the 
Institute, during the preliminary visit of the Chairman a week before the 
general meeting. As indicated in the following, the more relevant and 
recent activities were reviewed in detail for each scientific/technical 
Unit. A special session was devoted to debate governance issues, 
with participation of representatives of the JRC administration. 
The criteria used for the analysis of each observed scientific/technical 
activity were based on four main tests: 
0 Mission: Is it proper to the Institute and to the JRC? Is it useful? 
Is it well understood? 
0 Transfer: Are parallel and upstream ideas accepted and 
implemented? Is transfer of science and technology out into 
external institutions and industry performed in an efficient way? 
0 Quality: Is the work rigorous, fresh and creative? Are the results 
commensurate with resources consumed? 
0 Competition: Has a good degree of success been obtained in 
competition, particularly in SCA's? Has the competitive work 
been usefully integrated with institutional work? 
The assistance given by the Director and staff to the Visiting Group 
was well structured and openly provided. 
III. Scientific and Technical Activities 
111.1 Industrial Hazards 
Under the Institutional Research chapter, experimental investigations in 
prototypical conditions on safety of nuclear reactors and industrial 
plants are carried out in two major facilities (FARO - Fuel melting And 
Release Oven and STORM (Simplified Tests On Resuspension 
Mechanism), modelling activity is also performed to evaluate the 
experimental results and to validate models. A Major Accident 
Hazards Bureau has been set up to serve as a Community 
documentation centre on industrial risk. Support is provided to the 
Commission services also on environmental matters, with some new 
activities concerning biotechnology and bioenergy. 
The Visiting Group focussed on four themes: 
0 Major Accident Hazards Bureau 
0 Biotechnology 
# Severe Core Melt Experiment - FARO facility 
0 Aerosol Behaviour - STORM facility 
ft-38-
The Group noted that the Major Accident Hazards Bureau, set up for 
support to DG XI, is an ordered data collection which does not appear, 
however, to have a proactive nature. Quality of input information 
depends entirely on reporters in Member States, and may therefore be 
variable. 
The biotechnology activity, although appropriate for the Institute 
(institutional support to DG XI), calls for scientific skills unusual for the 
Institute - or indeed the JRC. Quality should be carefully monitored by 
external reference. 
The visit to the FARO facility gave an initial impression of repetitive 
and costly procedures in long duration experiments. However, it was 
made clear that the mission of this facility, with its large scale and high 
melt temperatures for uranium oxide, makes a valuable contribution to 
institutional and international research on Nuclear Safety. 
The work on aerosols appears to have an appropriate and clear 
mission, is of good quality and good transfer capability to the users. 
The project is forward looking and is likely to be fruitful in the Nuclear 
Safety field and other applications can be envisaged outside the 
nuclear world, both for catastrophic and non-catastrophic conditions. 
111.2 In Pile Experiments 
This activity is concerned with technical/scientific support to the 
experiments in the PHEBUS-FP (Fission Product) facility at Cadarache 
(France). A small team from the Institute is detached there with the 
role of "local laboratory management". 
The mission and the potential for transfer of this action seem to be 
appropriate, as part of the institutional research on Nuclear Safety. 
111.3 System Modelling and Assessment 
This activity encompasses theoretical investigations and development 
of models and numerical codes, both for nuclear and non-nuclear plant 
safety, development of decision support systems, particularly 
multicriteria decision models for environmental management and 
integrated environmental assessments. 
New activities cover,, amongst others, the study of human factors in 
transport safety and energy management in multimodal transport. 
The Visiting Group inspected the following activities in the nuclear field: 
0 Reactor Safety Modelling 
0 Process Plant Safety 
and in the non-nuclear field: 
0 Integrated Environmental Assessment 
0 Hydro Systems Modelling 
0 Integrated Systems Modelling 
0 Transport Safety 
0 Demo ECC-AIRS (Aircraft Incident Data Base) 
The Group considered that the system integration work underlying 
most of the above activities is appropriate for the Institute with its 
broad scientific capability. Indeed the high competitive element, 
around 60% of the non-nuclear field listed above, indicates external 
respect for the Institute's capability in this work. Participation in 
Shared Cost Action projects was seen to sharpen missions and 
improve transfer. 
Pi -39 
The Group noted, in particular, the good potential for the work on 
human factors within the Transport Safety activity, aimed at computer 
aided interactive training. The desirability of standardised reporting of 
air traffic safety incidents, envisaged in AIRS, was noted. The utility of 
such data and analytical tools would clearly be enhanced if a 
European standard could be accepted by ICAO (International Civil 
Aviation Organisation) as a United Nations standard. The JRC should 
be encouraged to finalise the definition of AIRS promptly: this could 
encourage the US authorities to follow a European lead, rather than 
selecting one of the currently competing North American systems. 
The Hydro Systems Modelling activity seems to be appropriate, but 
judgment on its value depends on further assessment against 
experiments. 
Safeguards and Verification Techniques 
The development and implementation of several techniques required 
for the safeguards control of nuclear material are carried out mainly 
within institutional research and institutional support, especially for the 
benefit of EURATOM and IAEA safeguarding authorities. They include 
mass and volume determination techniques for liquids in tanks, non­
destructive measurement techniques, sealing and identification 
methods, performance assessment of instruments and components, 
and computerised systems for nuclear material balance evaluation. 
Detailed presentations were made to the Visiting Group on the 
following laboratories and projects: 
PERformance LAboratory for safeguards - PERLA 
Safeguards TÀnk MEasurement Laboratory - TAME 
Safeguards Sealing Bolts 
Safeguards Instruments Performance Assessment 
Animal Tagging 
The Group concluded that this activity corresponds to a clear and 
appropriate mission for the JRC, where its independence from 
Member States and its impartiality vis-à-vis any industrial interest play 
a valuable role. 
The Group appreciated the high quality of the work performed in this 
field and considers that an effective transfer of the know-how takes 
place, particularly through mechanisms such as the training of the 
safeguards inspectors and the training of trainers for Russia, as well as 
through the development of measurement devices for use in the field. 
The substantial research that supports this institutional function may 
produce interesting spin-offs in other fields. The Animal Tagging work, 
started recently, is an example of such a spin-off. 
111.5 Software Technologies and Automation 
Institutional support activities are performed in fields concerning 
software dependability measurements and methodologies, multi-media 
network applications for Earth Observation data, development of 
surveillance and remote sensing systems for safeguards applications. 
Inter-institute contracts cover part of the above activitiesv Institutional 
research is related essentially to robotic technology for remote 
handling applied to fusion reactors and to some work on safeguards. 
Competitive activities concern, e.g., sensor based robot control and 
3-D reconstruction of indoor environment. 
The Visiting Group reviewed by presentations and visits: 
f\ -40 
0 Multimedia Network Applications 
0 Dependable Software Applications 
0 Sensor Based Applications 
0 Heavy Robotics (ROBERTINO facility) 
The Group welcomed the transfer mechanism set up through Internet 
(World Wide Web) for the Earth Observation data. 
The Group noted that the work on dependable software is serving the 
Commission as institutional support. In order to check whether this 
work is actually up to best practice, an element of competition would 
be advisable. 
The test of competition can also usefully be applied to the robotic 
measurements performed under the heading Sensor Based 
Applications, as nowadays there are many places where this kind of 
work is performed. The work on Brain Waves, developing control 
systems for severely disabled people, would benefit from active 
exchange of ideas with researchers in parallel fields. This project is at 
a very preliminary stage, and the results achieved were therefore quite 
limited. 
The Group was informed that prospects for new utilisations of the 
ROBERTINO facility and of the know-how built around it exist and are 
actively pursued. They concern subjects like laser welding for heavy 
components, tanker inspection systems, multi sensor data fusion in 
heavy robotics and software for safety critical control. In general, 
ROBERTINO may become the host for a variety of heavy robotics 
experiments. The practicality of such alternative uses for this 
expensive facility should be checked urgently, in view of the imminent 
decline in the Fusion Programme. 
Advanced Techniques for Information Analysis 
This chapter covers techniques for data analysis and handling, high 
performance computing and networking, and photonic technologies. 
The institutional part of the work is carried out in support of the 
Commission (DG III and UCLAF). About 60% of the work is 
competitive. 
The following activities were presented to the Visiting Group: 
0 Photonics 
0 Antifraud: UCLAF 
0 Neural Networks 
0 High Performance Computing and Image Processing 
The Group appreciated that some effective transfer of the 
competences in photonics took place through the application of 
photogrammetry techniques to the Sicily project. 
The antifraud activity is considered to be appropriate to the Institute's 
mission, it appears to give valuable support to the antifraud unit of the 
Commission and it has been proven in competition. 
The activity on neural networks is developing a valuable technique, 
which could be of wider application, both within the JRC and externally 
in competitive projects. 
Under High Performance Computing and Image Processing, advanced 
achievements in 3-D holographic images were presented. They are 
protected by patents and may have industrial potential. The Visiting 
Group recommends testing these revolutionary concepts on a panel of 
potential users. 
R -41-
In this case, and in others where patents have been taken, the Group 
concluded that transfer and commercialisation would be improved if 
the initiating Institute took the responsibility and reward for exploitation. 
Structural Mechanics 
Work is concerned with experimental activities in the field of the safety 
assessment of civil engineering structures exposed to earthquake 
loading and in the field of transient dynamic response of materials and 
mechanical components under impulsive phenomena. Development 
and validation of computational methods in connection with this 
experimental activity are performed. 
Two main facilities are used: 
0 the reaction wall ELSA (European Laboratory for Structural 
Assessment) 
0 a Large Dynamic Test Facility (LDTF) 
In reference to the objectives set out in Council Decisions 94/918 EC, 
the Structural Mechanics Unit has: 
a) contributed considerably to Institutional Research Activities 
(prenormative research in the field of structural safety and 
research on Car safety) and 
b) successfully participated in several competitive research projects. 
On the other hand, referring to the recommendations formulated in the 
Evaluation Report issued in 1995 (COM(95)60 final), diversification and 
spreading of activities were kept at a reasonable level, especially in 
view of the new customers' demands (as imposed by the new 
"competitive approach"). 
At the level of this Unit, mechanisms to set scientific objectives, 
monitor progress and evaluate outputs were not clear. At present there 
is a vacancy for Head of the Unit. 
Most of the research activities were of good scientific quality, taking 
advantage of the opportunities and funding conditions. 
Further senior management effort is needed to: 
a) improve guidance to the numerous and excellent young 
researchers; 
b) scrutinise more thoroughly the wealth of test results and 
scientific findings; 
c) promote publication of papers containing conclusions of broader 
significance. 
£-42-
It is concluded that this-Unit made efficient and economical use of 
resources available. 
The Unit has taken successful initiatives in creating external scientific 
links with Universities, Research Centres, Industry and Regions of 
Member States. Competitive research projects were won via such 
collective undertakings. 
This scientific work has contributed towards an improvement of 
European competitiveness in the field of earthquake engineering and 
dynamic testing. The use of advanced computer packages has 
strengthened the scientific bases in this field. 
111.8 Sicily Project 
This activity is a good example of work for third parties performed 
within the framework of the regional development policy of the 
European Union. 
The size of the project and the number of partners involved require an 
efficient management. The Visiting Group noted that a good project 
management system has been put in place at ISIS for this purpose 
and the work is effectively coordinated and under control. 
IV. Implementation of Research 
IV.1 Mission 
The mission of the Institute as broadly recalled in Chapter I of this 
report, is judged to be appropriate, considering the mix of institutional 
research and support activities allocated and the competences existing 
at the Institute. The substantial competitive activities recently 
developed improve transfer and ensure clarity in the results of the 
Institute's work. 
There is a need continually to recharge the basic scientific 
competencies within the Institute, to support continuing competitive 
activities;" this requires a good balance among exploratory, institutional 
research and support and competitive activities. 
In order to enhance the relevance of the project missions, the 
formation of Programme User Advisory Boards is supported. 
IV.2 Transfer 
The increased volume of competitive work, particularly the newly 
established participation in Shared Cost Actions and in PHARE and 
TACIS, has improved transfer. Relationships with external research 
organisations and with European industry, are both wider and 
increasingly project driven. 
Transfer out is generally good and very good in some cases, as in 
Safeguards, where methods and techniques developed at the Institute 
are passed directly to the operating bodies (both EURATOM and 
IAEA), including through specific training courses for inspectors. 
Transfer in and out is also particularly effective in cases such as the 
research in ELSA, where good networks of collaborative laboratories 
have been established. This is also the case for Safeguards and for 
the major facilities in the field of nuclear reactor safety. 
PH3 
However, for further improving transfer and for providing a direct route 
to market for products, the Visiting Group suggests that the feasibility 
of incubator structures, like a Science Park or an Innovation Business 
Centre on the JRC site, should be evaluated. 
The Visiting Group considered that the present arrangements for 
administering patents were not conducive either to practical definition 
of inventions, or to active commercialisation. If the rights in patents 
were to be transferred from DG XIII to the innovating Institute, the 
incentive for commercial exploitation would be joined to the necessary 
technical competence. 
IV.3 Quality 
Useful routine skills exist at the Institute, some others are available 
from outside and, in general, they are tested by competition. 
Exceptional competences exist as well, notably in groups dealing with 
safeguards measurements and control techniques, reactor safety, 
heavy robotics, decision models for integrated environmental 
assessment and structural mechanics, particularly around the ELSA 
facility. 
The Visiting Group noted that the internal Scientific Committee is now 
working well, and is active in promoting idea exchange, both intra and 
inter-Institute. In particular, the Scientific Committee seems effective in 
peer review of exploratory research projects. Project management 
skills have been systematically improved. 
Programme User Advisory Boards are in the process of being created. 
These are welcomed, as they will provide an ongoing external peer 
review that, together with the internal action of the Scientific 
Committee, should promote relevance in project missions, quality of 
work and improved transfer. 
IV.4 Competition 
Competition has clearly improved mission, transfer and quality, as 
indicated above. It also improves the morale and skills of the staff as 
they are seen to work at the cutting edge of science and technology. 
The Visiting Group was impressed by the variety of external research-
and industrial bodies, from 15 Member and Associated States, that 
had been brought into contact with the Institute in the process of 
bidding for and operating Shared Cost Action projects. 
However, extended competition is tending to move ISIS downstream 
towards practical applications, and away from basic research. 
Exploratory research therefore needs to be systematically stimulated, 
in order to refresh the Institute's intellectual competencies. 
In consideration of the above, the Visiting Group considers that a 
balance between competitive and non-competitive activities should be 
maintained. In the opinion of the Group the competitive activities of 
the Institute could usefully grow to reach, asymptotically, 35% of the 
total. 
Finally, the Group recognised that a potential conflict exists between 
the JRC's independence and its competitiveness. The independence 
of the JRC is a necessary requirement for its institutional activities, 
whereas competitive work may demand that specific interests be 
served. Careful management is required to minimise this conflict. 
ft-44-
V. Executive Summary 
The present evaluation of the Institute for Systems, Informatics and 
Safety (ISIS) of the Joint Research Centre follows the evaluation of the 
JRC Institutes performed by Visiting Groups in 1993 and 1994. ISIS 
was created at the beginning of 1996, basically merging two Institutes, 
the Institute for Systems Engineering and Informatics (ISEI) and the 
Institute for Safety Technology (1ST). 
This report has been requested by the Board of Governors of the JRC. 
Together with the 1993 reports for ISEI and 1ST, it covers a 5 year 
period and contributes to the periodical evaluation of the Community 
RTD activities. 
ISIS executes work within the 4th Framework Programme as 
Institutional Research in the chapters: Measurement and Testing, 
Environment and Climate, Nuclear Safety and Safeguards; Controlled 
Thermonuclear Fusion. As Institutional Support in the chapters: 
Information Technologies, Environment and Climate, Agriculture and 
Fisheries, and Nuclear Safety and Safeguards. 
ISIS also performs competitive work. It has won several contracts 
under Competitive Support and under Shared Cost Actions within the 
Framework Programme and executed work for third parties, outside 
the Framework Programme. 
The Visiting Group reviewed the work performed at the Institute, which 
is structured in eight scientific/technical areas. The Group also 
considered the governance issues related to the scientific/technical 
work. 
The activities were judged against three tests: Mission, Transfer, and 
Quality; the effect of Competition has been separately noted. 
The mission of the Institute and of individual projects seems to be 
appropriate. Transfer, both laterally with other scientific bodies and 
downstream to industry has markedly improved since the previous 
Visiting Group reports of 1993. Quality is generally satisfactory and in 
some areas excellent. 
The effect of competition seems-to have been wholly beneficial, in 
sharpening mission, in testing quality and in promoting transfer. 
Improvement in staff morale is quite apparent. 
The recommendations of the Visiting Group are presented in the 
following chapter VI. 
VI. Recommendations 
VI.1 S&T Activities 
0 Software Technologies and Automation 
For a number of applications concerning Multimedia Networks, 
Dependable Software and Sensor Based Robotics - technologies for 
which research is widespread in many laboratories nowadays - it is 
recommended that the results, or elements of them, be tested soon 
against a competitive approach. 
{V4S 
0 Advanced Techniques for Information Analysis 
The results obtained on 3-D holographic images, under High 
Performance Computing and Image Processing, should be evaluated 
by an industrial panel and be given the possibility of being confronted 
with the industrial market. 
0 Structural Mechanics Unit 
The "auto diagnostic" optical fibres instrument and the 
optomechanical sensor show promise, and should be 
further tested in the unit. 
The recent extension of research towards masonry 
structures is welcome. Masonry is a challenging material, 
difficult to model. So, although several research centres 
are concerned with the subject, ISIS, with its exceptional 
facilities, can make a valuable contribution. It should now 
develop an analytical package for the multiple social and 
engineering needs. 
Collaboration with Japan in the field of seismic research 
and design should be encouraged. Although Japanese 
solutions are often specific to their culture, their wealth of 
experience and experimental data in the field are likely to 
be valuable in the European context. 
Work on repair and strengthening structures by innovative 
means is still at an early stage at ISIS. Considerable 
additional effort is needed to achieve critical mass in this 
field. 
VI.2 Infrastructure 
Considering that a substantial part of the budget of the Institute is 
devoted to pay for the JRC Administration and Infrastructure (ADIN) 
and ISIS is substantially dependent on ADIN for its financial and 
management control systems, an external evaluation of this unit would 
be appropriate in parallel to the Visiting Groups for the JRC Institutes. 
VI.3 Management 
The staff recruitment system has been recently made more 
flexible at the JRC with the introduction of non-renewable 3 year 
contracts which adds to the one year contracts for auxiliaries and 
to the renewable 5 year contracts for temporary agents. The 
Visiting Group is however concerned that rigidities still exist that 
can prevent the selection of appropriate staff, and impede 
initiation of projects won in competitive tender. It recommends 
that: 
Temporary Agent staff, recruited under the new scheme of 
non-renewable 3 year contracts, should be permitted to 
apply for admission to the Reserve List of qualified 
candidates, and therefore allowed the opportunity to 
progress from an initial 3 year contract to more extended 
employment. 
Similarly, Reserve List candidates should be free to apply 
for the aforementioned Temporary Agent status, under 3 
year contract. 
The Director should be enabled to carry a small reserve of 
staff - 1 to 3 persons - speculatively, so that competitive 
A-46-
projects can be manned promptly on award of contract. It 
was noted that delays of up to 6 months had occurred in 
starting work, due to the requirement that recruitment 
procedures may only begin after a contract has been 
awarded. The cost of this reserve would be classed as an 
overhead and discharged as a project cost. 
Responsibility for administering patents, which is now with DG 
XIII, should be moved to the level of the Institute. Revenues from 
licences net of patent costs, should go to the initiating Institute as 
additional funding at the Director's discretion. 
The Visiting Group encourages the establishment of Programme 
User Advisory Boards, which have been proposed for the 
Institute. 
The Visiting Group suggests that the possibility of establishing a 
commercial incubator facility at Ispra should be explored. 
Surplus accommodation is available, and the additional cost to 
ADIN might well be minor. Users could be JRC staff, external 
individuals with proposals for commercialising Ispra technology, 
and pilot teams from industrial companies. 
An active programme of exploratory research should continue to 
be encouraged: whereas the sharply increased competitive work 
has brought clear benefits in mission, quality and transfer, it is 
clearly desirable that the springs of creative science at ISIS be 
continually refreshed. 
ISIS should continue to develop and calibrate analytical tools, 
modelling techniques and system integration methods, as the 
essential infrastructure of its wider programmes. 
Technology transfer between ISIS and European Commission 
clients should be improved, by encouraging movement of some 
senior ISIS staff to established posts in the relevant Directorates 
General in Brussels. 
The benefits for ISIS of extended competition are quite evident. 
A number of observations and recommendations in this report 
are designed to promote further this encouraging progress. 
(\ -47-
Aveiro, 21 November, 1996 
REPORT OF THE VISITING GROUP 
FOR THE EVALUATION OF THE 
JOINT RESEARCH CENTRE'S 
ENVIRONMENT INSTITUTE 
ft-48-
CONTENTS 
I. Introduction 50 
II. General Observations 51 
III. Scientific and Technical Activities 54 
III. 1 Atmospheric Processes 54 
111.2 Environmental Monitoring 54 
111.3 Soil, Water, Waste 55 
111.4 European Chemicals Bureau 55 
111.5 Life Sciences 55 
111.6 European Centre for the Validation of Alternative 
Methods (ECVAM) 56 
111.7 Indoor Pollution 56 
111.8 European Technical Office for MEdicinal Products 
(ETOMEP) 57 
111.9 Food and Drug Analysis; Consumer Protection 57 
IV. Implementation of Research 58 
IV.1 Mission 58 
IV.2 Transfer 58 
IV.3 Quality 59 
IV.4 Competitive activities 59 
IV.5 Management issues in general 59 
V. Executive Summary 60 
VI. Recommendations 60 
VI.1 S&T Activities 60 
VI.2 Infrastructure 61 
VI.3 Managerial 61 
Annex I: Members of the Visiting Group 
Annex II: Terms of Reference of the Visiting Group 
ft-49-
Report of the Visiting Group for the Evaluation of the 
Joint Research Centre's Environment Institute (El) 
(Ispra, Italy) 
Introduction 
At the invitation of the Board of Governors of the Joint Research 
Centre (JRC), a Visiting Group of independent experts (see Annex I) 
spent the 11 and 12 September, 1996 at the Environment Institute at 
Ispra in Italy, reviewing its work, meeting the staff and visiting the 
laboratories and other installations. A further visit was conducted on 
17 and 18 October, 1996 to augment the impressions gained from the 
first visit in view of the multitude of activities performed at the 
Environment Institute and to finalise the report. One invited member 
could not be present at the visits due to other obligations, but has 
contributed to the present report. 
The present exercise follows that performed by Visiting Groups in 1994 
and the implementation of recommendations made at that time will be 
an important factor to be considered. 
Since that time, certain changes have occurred and the JRC has 
become independent from Directorate General XII and is now an 
autonomous Directorate General of the Commission (Commission 
Decision of 10 April 1996 on the Reorganisation of the JRC). 
Furthermore, the Council has further clarified the JRC's role by clearly 
distinguishing between institutional and competitive activities (Council 
Conclusions of 26 April 1994 on the Role of the JRC) and in Council 
Decisions of 15 December 1994, adopting the present "specific 
programme for research and technological development, including 
demonstration, to be carried out for the European Community " by 
the JRC under the Community Framework Programme. This requires 
that an evaluation is carried out by external experts on work performed 
during the preceding five years. 
The above changes, together with efforts intended to increase 
efficiency and reduce costs, have led to some internal reorganisation 
of the JRC structure. This in its turn has resulted in a reduction of the 
number of Institutes from eight to seven and in consequence, a 
redistribution of certain tasks and projects. 
The general scientific and technological objectives and content for the 
Joint Research Centre's specific programme are set out in Annex I of 
the Council Decisions of 15 December 1994. Institutional research 
activities are included in this annex which also includes institutional 
scientific and technical support. Together, these two areas comprise 
the JRC Direct Action and specific rules for its implementation are 
given in Annex III of the Decisions. 
The scientific and technological objectives and contents of the 
competitive support activities are to be found in Annex IV and the 
specific rules for their implementation in Annex VI. The Visiting Group 
was informed that this action is managed by the Commission 
Secretariat General, together with the interested Commission 
Directorates General. 
As stated in the Environment Institute's Annual Report for 1995, "the 
aims of the El are to assess levels and fates of chemicals in the 
environment, the exposure of man and the environment to them, and 
their etfects on both, as well as consumer protection.". Together, 
ft-50-
these objectives encompass an amazing wealth of research and 
support activities at the El. This prolificacy is a result of the Institute's 
mission: to be directly involved in research, in the strict sense of the 
word, and to provide support to several Directorates General of the 
European Commission. 
The Visiting Group has applied the Terms of Reference given in Annex 
II of this report on the understanding that although the present 
evaluation will contribute to the general evaluation of the Framework 
Programme being performed at present, which requires assessments 
to be made covering the past five years, it is nevertheless based on a 
somewhat different premise. The JRC by its nature and by its 
assigned tasks is evaluated Institute by Institute rather than by a 
programme oriented approach. 
The presently applied system of visits by teams of independent 
experts covering the whole spectrum of activities of each individual 
Institute has been proven and widely accepted as the best practical 
method of assessing the JRC and indeed is that favoured for many 
other research organisations worldwide. 
A Visiting Group evaluated the El in April 1994, as reported in 
"Evaluation of the Joint Research Centre and its Multiannual Research 
Programme 1992-1994", Commission document COM(95)60 final, 8 
March 1995". The Chairman of the present Visiting Group (and one 
member) took part in this exercise. Together, this aforesaid report and 
the present report will thus review the entire period in question and 
emphasise the progress and developments made over that period. 
II. General Observations 
The Environment Institute has its roots in the days, many years ago, 
when the Joint Research Centre activities were mainly centred on 
nuclear research and development, and when competences in 
chemistry and radiochemistry were needed and developed. The El 
was formally created in 1988 when a large reorganisation of the JRC 
took place and the Institute grew from a former chemistry division. 
Targeted environmental research, however, was initiated within the 
JRC in the 1970's, as was work in support of other services of the 
Commission. 
At present, the El which is headed by Professor Jean-Marie Martin and 
who took up his post as Director of the Institute on 1 September 1995, 
is organised into nine scientific-technical Units and a Unit for 
administration and technical services. The Deputy Director also heads 
one of the scientific Units. 
The nine scientific-technical Units may be grouped into three major 
thematic working areas: 
• Levels and Fates of Chemicals 
Atmospheric Processes Unit 
Environmental Monitoring Unit 
Soil, Water, Waste Unit 
• Exposure to Chemicals and their Effects 
European Chemicals Bureau (ECB) Unit 
Life Sciences Unit 
European Centre for the Validation of Alternative Methods 
(ECVAM) Unit 
Indoor Pollution Unit 
A -51 
• Consumer Protection 
European Technical Office for MEdicinal Products 
(ETOMEP) Unit 
Food and Drug Analysis; Consumer protection Unit 
The above activities are performed and financed within the scientific 
and technical objectives, falling under Environment and Climate and 
Agriculture and Fisheries, specified in the Council Decision of 15 
December 1994 and its annexes on the JRC specific programme 
(1995-1998) for the European Community, which contribute to the 
implementation of the 4th Framework Programme of Community RTD 
activities. This encompasses institutional research and institutional 
support, notably to the European Union's environmental policy (to the 
Commission Directorate General for Environment, Nuclear Safety and 
Civil Protection - DG XI), to the industrial policy (to the Directorate 
General for Industry - DG III), to the agricultural policy (to the 
Directorate General for Agriculture - DG VI) and to the consumer 
protection policy (to the Directorate General for Consumer Protection -
DG XXIV). 
Further work and finance is-provided through participation in shared 
cost actions under specific programmes of the 4th Framework 
Programme, competitive support under the same and through work for 
outside third parties. 
A particular characteristic of the El is the high proportion of its 
activities which are devoted to scientific and technical support to the 
Union's policies, some 70% of the total of its institutional activities 
(60% of the staff, 80% of the financial resources), which is mainly 
organised through 'bureaux' or 'offices' set up through a Commission 
Communication to the Council and the European Parliament on a long-
term basis, specifying the objectives and modes of operation of the 
work. The Visiting Group, in this connection, notes that the previous 
Visiting Group for the 1992-1994 evaluation suggested "that a primary 
task of the Institute should be to provide the scientific support needed 
to underpin the preparation and implementation of EU policy in the 
field of protection of the environment". A recommendation which has 
clearly been implemented. 
In comparison with the. 1992-1994 period, the JRC in general, and thus 
the El in particular, are now permitted to compete in a wider spectrum 
of activities, mainly through the shared cost action programmes of the 
Framework Programme and the action on competitive support, as well 
as other Community programmes. 
The Visiting Group notes that the El has made good use of these 
opportunities, which were opened up to the JRC in 1995. The Visiting 
Group was informed that the El is engaged in 22 shared cost action 
projects won in competition, with a success rate of 33% of the 
proposals submitted. In this way the El is working with 120 outside 
partners. 
The El budget has grown from some 40 MECU in 1992 to 48 MECU in 
1995, of which 2 MECU is derived from work for third parties. The 
1996 budget is 51 MECU, of which 6 MECU stems from competitive 
activities (shared cost actions 35%, competitive support 46%, work for 
third, parties 19%). 
The statutory staff numbers 219, of which 88 are scientists. Scientific 
fellows (grantholders), scientific visitors and seconded national experts 
and 63 (unpaid) trainees bring the total human resources to more than 
350. The non-permanent staff thus amounts to around one third of the 
total. The statutory staff has grown from 196 in 1992 when the total 
ft-52-
human resources numbered 275. The El has thus always followed a 
policy of having a substantial proportion of other human resources in 
addition to the statutory staff. 
Presentations of activities were made to the Visiting Group and they 
had extensive discussion with the Director and the Unit Heads and 
visited the laboratories of each unit of the El. Here the Visiting Group 
also met with several other staff members of the Institute. All the 
discussions were held in an open and most cooperative atmosphere 
and the Director and his staff did their utmost to present 
documentation and information to address the questions of the Visiting 
Group members, who express their-thanks to everybody concerned. 
The Visiting Group furthermore acknowledges the testimonials it 
received from the customers of the El and notably from the 
Commission Directorate General for Environment, Nuclear Safety and 
Civil Protection (DG XI). 
Throughout the visit, the Group gained an impression of a very 
competent and highly motivated staff at the El. During the visits to the 
laboratories the Visiting Group noted - as had the 1994 Visiting Group -
the high degree of geographic dispersion of the El throughout the 
Ispra site. There are historical reasons for this and while some 
regroupings have taken place, further efforts in this direction are 
recommended. Synergy and collaboration between the many Units of 
the Institute depends on many factors, but appears to be hampered by 
the present arrangements. The Visiting Group also noted that recently 
new buildings have been built for the El, as part of an overall plan for 
the Ispra site which is now in progress. One new facility was not 
presently being used to its full capacity but in general the building and 
movement plans show promise for the scientific life of the El. 
The criteria used for the analysis of the El activities were the standard 
terms of reference for all the Visiting Groups. The El Visiting Group 
furthermore found it helpful to focus on four main points: 
• Mission: Is it proper to the Institute and to the JRC? Is it useful? 
Is it well understood? 
• Transfer: Are parallel and upstream ideas accepted and 
implemented? Is transfer out into the external world performed in 
an efficient way? 
• Quality: Is the work rigorous, fresh and creative? Are the results 
of the work made available by publication? 
• Competition: Has a good degree of success been achieved in 
competition, particularly in Shared Cost Actions? Has the 
competitive work been usefully integrated with institutional work? 
ft-53-
III. Scientific and Technical Activities 
111.1 Atmospheric Processes 
(Statutory staff - 27; Non-permanent - 12; Trainees - 7 ) 
This Unit is devoted to studies on the formation and impact of aerosols 
and photo-oxidants over Europe within the framework of the 
atmospheric global change issue. The research on complex physico-
chemical studies for the proper understanding of these is rightly 
characterised as a key element in the development of environmental 
policies, both in the European Union and worldwide. In this respect, 
the Unit has a clear mission which also emphasises its role of 
coordination of European projects. These include the Biogenic 
Emissions from the Mediterranean Area (BEMA) project and the 
Aerosols and Climate Project, (with up to 17 partners across the EU 
countries), complemented with photochemistry and chemical kinetics 
activities, with laboratory work and field modelling. 
The work contributes to the International Geosphere-Biosphere 
Programme (IGBP) for which the unit runs the European Project Office 
of the International Global Atmospheric Chemistry (IGAC) project, and 
also to other international or European (EUREKA) programmes. The 
results are amply documented in peer refereed journals and through 
participation in, or initiatives on, seminars and congresses. 
It is clearly an area of work where the new opportunity for the JRC to 
participate in Community shared cost action programmes has been 
beneficial. 8 projects have already been accepted, thus strengthening 
the collaboration with national research, as also witnessed by scientific 
fellows joining the work at the cost of their respective institutions. 
The Visiting Group welcomed this collaboration with national research 
which could be further extended to encompass teams in other Member 
States and associated countries, in addition to those already involved. 
111.2 Environmental Monitoring 
(Statutory staff - 36; Non-permanent - 8; Trainees -12) 
In addition to the longstanding and highly recognised activity of the 
European Reference Laboratory for Air Pollution (ERLAP) in support to 
DG XI, the Visiting Group was also informed of the Radioactivity 
Environmental Monitoring (REM) project and the European Tracer 
Experiment (ETEX). This also supports DG XI, where follow up work 
is in progress after the large scale experiment which took place in the 
Autumn of 1994. Results are available, but the focus is now on work 
to reach a consensus on the models to be used for real-time 
forecasts. 
All the work is clearly characterised by the ability of El and the Unit to 
foster true collaboration through well defined networks and to obtain 
results for the benefit of the customer, DG XI (with whom a 
constructive dialogue is maintained). Here, as in other Units, the 
collaboration is also based on the fine scientific quality of the El and 
the excellent instrumentation and facilities available in the Institute. 
The Visiting Group noted not only the DG XI satisfaction with the work, 
but also their wish to see developments including further work on air 
quality and auto oil. The Visiting Group sees a clear need and scope 
for increased urban air quality studies in the future. 
ft -54-
111.3 Soil, Water, Waste 
(Statutory staff - 44; Non-permanent - 13; Trainees -13) 
The diverse work of this Unit ranges from support to DG XI (waste 
catalogue, classification of surface water) through institutional research 
(water, soil) to work for third parties on water management and 
recovery. The Visiting Group also inspected the Advanced Mobile 
Analytical Laboratories developed under a EUREKA project with 
industry and national laboratories. This is a good example of product 
and service development with industrial partners. Another promising 
activity is the project on Analytical Quality Control (AQUACON) which 
aims at the identification, quantification and reduction of sampling and 
measurement errors for selected environmental matrices and 
analyses. The work is based on extensive European collaboration 
coordinated by the El including inter-laboratory exercises for rainwater 
analysis (186 laboratories from 22 countries) and should Jind further 
applications in the future. The Unit in general has a wide "range of 
competences readily available to customer requests. Third party work, 
e.g. on the Venice lagoon, is an example of this, as is a series of 
projects on lake restoration and measurement and provision of tools 
for rational water management. It is recommended that even more 
focus be placed on the water related research in the future, in view of 
the El involvement in the Task Force on Environment and Water, set 
up by the Commission and which, in the view of the Visiting Group, is 
responding positively to an overall EU concern. At the same time the 
Visiting Group recommend that adequate competences also be 
maintained in the other areas of the Unit - Waste and Soil - to cope 
with possible future demands by policy customers. 
111.4 European Chemicals Bureau (ECB) 
(Statutory staff - 18; Non-permanent - 5; Trainees - 1) 
Here, the Visiting Group found a one-to-one connection between an 
organisational unit and a specified activity, set up by a Commission 
Communication to the Council and the European Parliament in support 
of DG XI. The mission is clear and, as the previous Visiting Group 
found, there was continuing and good justification for the work being 
performed in a scientific environment. 
The work responding to requirements of Community legislation is 
concerned with the classification and labelling of dangerous chemical 
substances, evaluation of existing substances, notification of new 
substances, carrying out risk assessments and a databank on 
import/export, all in close collaboration and contact with Member 
States' representatives and DG XI. Furthermore, there is work 
underway on the scientifically complex area of developing proper 
methods for testing, where 80 are already included in a Community 
directive and 40 are under development or revision. 
DG XI see a clear need to continue this highly esteemed and 
necessary activity, and would like to see the remit widened to include 
pesticides and biocides. However, this is not possible within the 
present resource level. 
111.5 Life Sciences (Statutory staff - 11; Non-permanent - 6; Trainees - 6) 
This Unit encompasses institutional research supported by excellent 
laboratories on the exposure of trace metals in human tissues and 
fluids and on their toxicological significance to human beings. This 
work is in support of the Commission Directorate General for 
Employment, Industrial Relations and Social Affairs (DG V), and third 
parties (national authorities). The Unit has also won shared cost 
action projects in collaboration with national partners, as well as 
contributing to a EUREKA project. 
(V55-
The Visiting Group was pleased to note the positive developments 
since the last Visiting Group, the consolidation of the work and the 
willingness to share the laboratory facilities with other Units in the El. 
The value of exploratory research was emphasised and this may open 
up new areas for the Unit. The high specialisation on trace metals is 
of undoubted value, but there may, in the opinion of the Visiting Group, 
be a basis for further work for customers in the life sciences area, 
possibly by further strengthening the interaction with other Units of the 
El. 
111.6 European Centre for the Validation of Alternative Methods (ECVAM) 
(Statutory Staff - 10; Non-permanent - 10; Trainees - 9) 
This Unit is entirely dedicated to a single objective as defined by the 
Commission in a Communication to the Council and the European 
Parliament and work is conducted under a Memorandum of 
Understanding between DG XI and the JRC, and a further agreement 
DG XI/JRC from 1995. The validation of methods and strategies to 
reduce or replace live animals in laboratory studies is required in 
present and perhaps future Community legislation and highly feasible 
in view of the importance of the issue. The Visiting Group noted that 
the work is guided by a scientific committee which represents all 
vested interests. This stimulates indispensable collaboration with 
national and industrial bodies, combined with the experimental studies 
conducted in the ECVAM laboratories. The Unit has excellent facilities 
in a new building constructed for ECVAM, but not yet exploited fully. In 
the view of the Visiting Group this could also serve as a temporary 
working place for national teams or other needs of the El. 
The Visiting Group was concerned to learn, also from DG XI, that work 
has not progressed fully as foreseen. Information exchange and, in 
particular, the initiation of a broad dialogue with all interested parties 
has been fully developed, as witnessed by the many successful 
workshops organised. On the contrary, the requested database on 
alternative methods and services has not been initiated. Above all, the 
work of ECVAM to coordinate the validation of methods for alternative 
tests has not yet led to definitive results. Although the complexity 
should not be underestimated, as well as the fact that ECVAM is still 
building up with qualified staff, the priorities of the Unit with regard to 
work areas is questioned by both.the customer DG and the Visiting 
Group. However, the Visiting Group is confident that the El Director, 
being fully aware of the situation, will take actions to meet the 
customer requirements and to state priorities. 
111.7 Indoor Pollution 
(Statutory Staff - 10; Non-permanent - 1; Trainees - 2) 
This is an important issue, on which the El has been engaged for 
many years, coordinating a European wide collaborative action "Indoor 
Air Quality and its Impact on Man" which is a collaboration between 
scientists from 15 European countries, for which the Unit provides the 
secretariat. The main experimental facility, the INDOORTRON 
chamber, appears to be in good use and serves primarily for the 
experimental validation of volatile organic compound emission 
measurements. This institutional research is supplemented by a 
shared cost action on measurement methods. Results of the research 
have been of interest to DG III (Industry), but overall the Visiting Group 
regrets, as does the El itself, that the work has not yet found a larger 
spectrum of users. Direct measurements in buildings have been made 
and the Visiting Group believes there is further room for work for third 
parties and Commission services, as was recommended by the 
previous Visiting Group. 
A -56-
On more scientific grounds, the Visiting Group recommends the work 
of the Unit be oriented more towards the effect of indoor pollution on 
man, perhaps in strong collaboration with other Units of the El, thus 
linking with toxicology. This may lead to the further attractiveness of 
the work, whose future should be re-assessed in the light of its many 
potential applications. 
.8 European Technical Office for MEdicinal Products (ETOMEP) 
(Statutory staff - 14; Non-permanent -11; Trainees - 1) 
This Unit, where some 55% of the work is devoted to the support of 
the European Medicine Evaluation Agency (EMEA) in London in 
informatics and telematics, is oriented to the pharmaceutical regulatory 
sector. This includes information systems such as the European 
Community Pharmaceutical Information Network (ECPHIN), and a 
series of telematics projects financed as institutional support and in 
addition through work won as competitive support and shared cost 
action programmes. Some 15% of the Unit's activities are concerned 
with environmental systems as third party work for regional authorities. 
The Unit has a role - for 30% of its work - in providing information 
technology support to the entire El, both for scientific and 
administrative applications. Overall the Unit obtains half of its financial 
resources from institutional activities and the other half is won through 
competitive schemes, where this Unit has been particularly successful. 
The Visiting Group was informed about databases and information 
systems such as ECPHIN and ECDIN (European Chemicals Data 
Information Network) developed and maintained by the Unit. The 
Visiting Group was pleased to learn of the utilisation of these systems 
by outside users. It agrees with the El Director that this development, 
for the time being, should be maintained in the El and not yet 
transferred to outside operators, as suggested by the previous Visiting 
Group. Overall, however, information technology activities of the Unit 
should have a clearer orientation towards the main environmental 
objectives of the El. 
.9 Food and Drug Analysis 
(Statutory staff - 24; Non-permanent - 5; Trainees -11) 
This Unit's main objectives are to provide scientific and technical 
support to various Directorates General of the Commission and to 
provide chemical analyses to other units of the El, or Institutes within 
the JRC. It has a very long tradition of support work to the 
Commission services, going back to the early 1970's. One main 
activity is centred around the European Office for Wine, Alcohols and 
Spirit Drinks (BEVABS) organised at the request of the Commission in 
1993 upon the initiative of DG VI (Agriculture). The purpose of the Unit 
is to combat fraud in wine production, notably the adulteration of wine 
by the addition of sugar and the watering of wine. The method applied 
is nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) and the unit has established an 
EU wine data bank, using the results of NMR measurements and 
information on the origin of the wine from eight Member States, in 
collaboration with their national authorities and laboratories. 
fV57-
On the basis of its vested competences and excellent laboratory 
facilities the Unit furthermore, in response to requests from DG III 
(Industry), provides technical and advisory services related to 
chemicals in foodstuffs and food packaging materials. This work 
includes participation in collaborative trials for working groups of the 
CEN (European Committee for Standardisation). The varied work 
programme of this Unit includes analyses of contamination of animal 
feeds, of milk and milk products for DG VI (Agriculture and Fisheries) 
and cosmetics and water for human consumption for DG XXIV 
(Consumer Policy Service). These various work areas provide 
technical support to existing Community legislation or scientific-
technical background for possible new legislation, The Unit therefore 
acts as the Commission's own laboratory and contributes to the 
arbitration when different measurement methods and results are to be 
compared and harmonised throughout the EU Member States. 
Most of the work is classified as institutional support. However, the 
Unit has also won shared cost action projects with national partners in 
the field of food analysis and in addition some of the work for 
Directorates General III, VI and XXI (Customs and Indirect Taxation) is 
conducted under contracts won as competitive support. The 
confidence in the work of the Unit, as witnessed by the many requests 
to it over so many years from a variety of Commission services 
coupled with the growing importance of the subject area, could, in the 
opinion of the Visiting Group, lead the Commission to define a more 
targeted 'Office for Food and Drugs' within the El, provided there is a 
clear scope and vested user need and that adequate resources are 
made available. 
IV. Implementation of Research 
IV. 1 Mission 
The published mission of the El is in line with the overall mission of the 
JRC as described in documents made available to the Visiting Group 
and is amply reflected in the mission of its constituent scientific units. 
The objectives of the institutional research and institutional support are 
described in Annex I: Scientific and Technological Objectives and 
Content of the Council Decision of 15 December 1994 on the JRC 
Specific Programme 1995-1998. This does not make any particular 
reference to either the El or to the other JRC Institutes. The Visiting 
Group, however, on the basis of the workprogramme sheets for 1995 
and an overview of the work distribution between the Institutes, judges 
that the El institutional work is fully in line with the objectives as 
detailed in the programme decision, in particular for the Environment 
and Climate theme. 
IV.2 Transfer 
Since a large proportion of the work of the El is devoted to institutional 
or partly competitive support to other services of the Commission, a 
major part of the transfer of its research results takes place within the 
frameworks established for its interaction with the customers. The 
Visiting Group, however, would encourage external publications 
whenever possible of scientific research results and studies of 
common interest in peer reviewed journals. In ongoing dialogue of 
new ideas and requests with the Commission customers the El 
appears to be very receptive. This interaction and dialogue, however, 
is not solely restricted to the formal users, but is extended through the 
relevant national environments, as witnessed by the many network 
arrangements set up and the initiative of the Environment Institute to 
arrange seminars and symposia. The record of publications, as 
R -58-
illustrated by the El Annual Report 1995 and the statistics was made 
available to the Visiting Group. 
IV.3 Quality 
The above mentioned statistics on publications as illustrated in the El 
Annual Report demonstrates a clear drive to publish the Institute's 
research results across most aspects of its activities, in peer refereed 
journals, which gives the Visiting Group confidence in the quality of the 
work performed. Throughout its visits the Group also recognised the 
European added value of most of the ongoing work, but would 
recommend maximum efforts to include all Member States and 
associated countries in the research programmes. 
IV.4 Competitive Activities 
The Visiting Group found that the El has responded in a dynamic way 
to the new challenges set out for the JRC, with participation in a wider 
spectrum of competitive activities than was possible in the past and 
was encouraged that so far the El has achieved good success in 
competition. In particular, the participation in shared cost action 
programmes was considered to have brought value, because these 
open up a new dimension to the collaboration with national 
organisations. The El also participates in competitive support, but the 
borderline between this type of action and institutional support is not 
distinct. The Visiting Group was also informed of some administrative 
problems in relation to the new competitive support action introduced 
in the 4th Framework Programme. 
Finally the El continues to participate in work for third parties, which 
accounted for some 4% of its income in 1995. Present projections 
indicate at least a 15% income from the competitive activities, heading 
towards the targeted ratio of 80/20 between- institutional and 
competitive activities. This is seen as a good opportunity for the El at 
this level. 
IV.5 Management Issues in General 
The Visiting Group reviewed with the Director the methods of internal 
management of the Institute and was pleased to find that improved 
procedures appear to have been set up, not only to ensure proper 
management control of the work progress, but also to create a 
stimulating atmosphere for the generation of new ideas. In this 
respect the Visiting Group was also pleased to learn of the outcome of 
a recently held 3-day internal seminar on the future strategy for the El 
and of the clear intention of the Institute to become, in its specialist 
areas, the leading Institute in Europe in its field. 
The Visiting Group felt, as emphasised above, that a greater degree of 
cooperation between the Units would strengthen the Institute and was 
pleased to learn of the plans to set up inter-Unit projects, with two or 
more units participating in each project. In the view of the Visiting 
Group exploratory research may be a further vehicle for fostering this 
necessary and welcome trend. 
ft-59 
The Visiting Group recognised the highly competent and motivated 
staff of the Institute. It examined in detail the age structure. For the 
scientists there is a clear peak in the 31-40 year age bracket and 
another in the 61-65 age bracket. Thus, several of the staff are 
approaching the statutory retirement age. In the immediate future the 
challenge for management will be to preserve and maintain the 
accumulated competences in order to equip the Institute for the 
medium and long term future. 
V. Executive Summary 
The Visiting Group concludes that the work undertaken by the El is of 
high quality and meets the objectives set out in the Council Decisions 
on the JRC specific research programmes 1995-1998, and the 
intentions in the Council Conclusions of April, 1994 on the Role of the 
JRC, including competitive activities. The Visiting Group judged that 
the recommendations from the previous Visiting Group covering the 
1992-1994 period, have largely been implemented, as far as possible. 
For an Institute with a large proportion of its work devoted to scientific-
technical support to the Union's policies the customer/user 
requirement that objectives be met is very important. 
With one exception, the Visiting Group is convinced this is fulfilled and 
the Group welcomes the fine performance of the El in the competitive 
arena. 
Future prospects are good, provided the El smoothly transfers 
knowledge and expertise across the generation shift for an important 
proportion of its staff, including some in senior managerial positions. 
VI. Recommendations 
VI.1 S&T Activities 
Maintain the primary task of providing the scientific support 
necessary to underpin the EU policies for environmental and 
consumer protection; 
Further extend outside scientific collaboration to encompass all 
EU Member States and associated countries; 
Increase the multi-disciplinary approach, notably with regard to 
improved interaction with life sciences in further activities of the 
El (as an example, on indoor pollution); 
Pay particular attention to the promising developments in the 
area of food and drugs, where the El may gain an even more 
prominent role; 
Similarly in the area of water research and the management of 
water resources, where the El has, as yet untapped, further 
potential. 
ft -60-
VI.2 Infrastructure 
Continue plans to concentrate and better distribute the Institute 
premises and laboratory facilities, as this will contribute to 
improved interaction between the Units of the Institutes; 
Foster further collaboration between the Units of the El, including 
the institution of inter-Unit projects. 
VI.3 Managerial 
Provide early plans for the necessary succession planning in 
relation to the forthcoming retirements to ensure that developed 
competences are safeguarded for the future of the El; 
Related to the above, recruit new staff into the work at the 
necessary time to develop and extend flexibility to respond to 
customer needs; 
Maintain the recorded level of customer satisfaction, check 
customer opinions at regular intervals and implement the steps 
necessary to restore adherence to objectives agreed with the 
user, in cases of variance; 
Strive for a proper balance between institutional (i.e. EU funded) 
activities and competitive activities in the context of the overall 
JRC policy. Competitive activities may increase in proportion 
towards the 20% goal for the present programme period. 
Encourage whenever possible that the outputs of the El's 
research and services should be published in peer reviewed 
journals to extend the already promising position. 
fV61 
Metsâhovintie, 11 October, 1996 
REPORT OF THE VISITING GROUP 
FOR THE EVALUATION OF THE 
JOINT RESEARCH CENTRE'S 
SPACE APPLICATIONS INSTITUTE 
A-62-
CONTENTS 
I. Introduction 64 
II. General Observations 65 
III. Scientific and Technical Activities 65 
111.1 Agricultural Information Systems (AIS) 65 
111.2 Environmental MAPping and Modelling (EMAP) 66 
111.3 Marine Environment (ME) 66 
111.4 Monitoring Tropical Vegetation (MTV) 67 
111.5 Advanced Techniques (AT) 67 
111.6 Centre for Earth Observation (CEO) 68 
IV. Implementation of Research 69 
IV.1 Mission 69 
IV.2 Transfer 69 
IV.3 Quality 69 
IV.4 Staff Management 69 
V. Executive Summary 70 
VI. Recommendations 70 
VI.1 Scientific and Technical Activities 70 
VI.2 Infrastructure 71 
VI.3 Management 71 
Annex I: Members of the Visiting Group 
Annex IhTerms of Reference of the Visiting Group 
Pi -63-
Report of the Visiting Group for the Evaluation of the 
Joint Research Centre's Space Applications Institute (Ispra, Italy) 
INTRODUCTION 
At the invitation of the Board of Governors of the Joint Research 
Centre (JRC), a Visiting Group of independent experts (see Annex I) 
spent the 9th and 10th September 1996 at the Space Applications 
Institute (SAI) at Ispra, reviewing its work, meeting the staff and visiting 
the laboratories and other installations. 
The present exercise follows that performed by Visiting Groups in 1993 
and 1994 when the name of the Institute was the Institute for Remote 
Sensing Applications (IRSA) and the implementation of 
recommendations made at that time will be an important factor to be 
considered. 
Since that time certain changes have occurred and the JRC has 
become independent from DG XII and is now an autonomous 
Directorate General of the Commission (Commission Decision of 10 
April 1996 on the Reorganisation of the JRC). Furthermore, the 
Council has further clarified the JRC's role by clearly distinguishing 
between institutional and competitive activities (Council Conclusions of 
26 April 1994 on the Role of the JRC) and in Council Decisions of 15 
December 1994, adopting the present "specific programme for 
research and technological development, including demonstration, to 
be carried out for the European Community " by the JRC under the 
Community Framework Programme. This requires that an evaluation is 
carried out by external experts on work performed during the 
preceding five years. 
The above changes, together with efforts intended to increase 
efficiency and reduce costs, have led to some internal reorganisation 
of the JRC structure. This in its turn has resulted in a reduction of the 
number of Institutes from eight to seven and in consequence, a 
redistribution of certain tasks and projects. 
The general scientific and technological objectives and content for the 
Joint Research Centre's specific programme are set out in Annex I of 
the Council Decisions of 15 December 1994. Institutional research 
activities are included in this annex which also includes institutional 
scientific and technical support. Together, these two areas comprise 
the JRC Direct Action and specific rules for its implementation are 
given in Annex III of the Decisions. The scientific and technological 
objectives and contents of the competitive support activities are to be 
found in Annex IV and the specific rules for their implementation in 
Annex VI. These activities are managed by the Commission 
Secretariat General and the relevant Directorates General. 
The particular objective of the Space Applications Institute is the 
generation of relevant, timely and accurate information from remote 
sensing and space systems. 
This involves: 
work supporting the sectorial policies of the European Union 
concerning agriculture, forestry, environment, aid to development 
and regional aid. 
work to promote, disseminate and support remote sensing 
applications and services in the Earth Observation industry, value 
ft-64-
added companies, research institutions and government 
organisations. 
The Visiting Group has applied the Terms of Reference given in Annex 
II of this report on the understanding that although the present 
evaluation will contribute to the general evaluation of the Framework 
Programme being performed at present (which requires assessments 
to be made covering the past five years) it is nevertheless based on a 
somewhat different premise. The JRC by its nature and by its 
assigned tasks is evaluated Institute by Institute rather than with a 
programme oriented approach. 
The present system of visits by teams of independent experts covering 
the whole spectrum of activities of each individual institute has been 
widely accepted as the best practical method of assessing the JRC, 
and indeed is that favoured for many other research organisations 
worldwide. 
The present evaluation will therefore cover the period from Summer 
1994, when the iast visits took place, up to the present time, and 
together the two reports will review the whole period in question. 
II. GENERAL OBSERVATIONS 
The observations of the Visiting Group are based on the presentations 
of the Units of SAI by the Unit Heads, on the discussions with the 
Director of the Institute, on visits to some laboratories, and on printed 
material delivered before and during the visit. The presentations and 
subsequent discussions gave information to the Visiting Group about 
the objectives and main results of the Units. The discussions with the 
Unit Heads clearly brought out the most important results and the 
direction of future activities. The presentations reflected the often high 
scientific and technical quality of the Units and professional approach 
towards development and use of applications of remote sensing. The 
discussions showed a sharpened awareness of the mission of the 
Institute on the part of the management. 
The Visiting Group also reviewed with the Director and Unit Heads the 
recommendations of the previous Visiting Group and actions taken to 
follow the recommendations. The Visiting Group noted with 
satisfaction that the previous recommendations have been taken into 
account, were implemented or were not relevant any more. 
SAI plays, and should continue to play, an important role in the 
development of European Earth Observation, and its activities have 
become crucial to the exploitation of the investments made by 
Member States, particularly in the European Space Agency. To this 
end it must continually disseminate the results of its work, even to 
potential competitors, and be ready and eager to transfer activities to 
operational entities, particularly in the private sector. This implies a 
willingness in due course to close down activities which have proved 
either to lack promise or have found new sponsors, thereby making 
resources available for new activities - always, of course, within the 
agreed mandate of the SAI. 
III. SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL OBJECTIVES 
111.1 Agricultural Information Systems (AIS) 
The presentation and discussions confirmed the impression of the 
previous visiting group, that this Unit has a high level of professional 
competence and an excellent understanding of the SAI mission in this 
important field. Visible progress has been made in the past two years, 
A-65-
not only in techniques (for example, the introduction of radar into the 
methodologies), but also in the transfer to operational entities and the 
extension of the SAI work to Eastern Europe and North Africa. The 
progress made is perhaps best illustrated by the setting up of a so-
called "super control" to monitor quality in the service industry now 
working in this area. 
The Unit is well qualified to work in the future in the important field of 
major hazards and risks, but it is not a simple extension of present 
work. Accordingly, it is essential to recognise, firstly, that new links 
must be forged with other entities already working in this field, and 
secondly, that the activity will almost certainly require the addition of 
some new expertise. 
Environmental MAPping and Modelling (EMAP) 
The research and development in EMAP are concentrated on the 
applications of remote sensing methods for environmental purposes. 
Typical projects are mapping and monitoring of European forests, 
natural grasslands, Mediterranean land degradation and urban land 
use. The Unit uses advanced methods such as fuzzy logic, fractal 
techniques and neural networks. 
The main projects of the Unit are Forest Ecosystem (FIRS) and 
Mediterranean Environments. The Visiting Group noted clear progress 
in these important projects. 
EMAP has not been able to attract DG VI (Agriculture) for competitive 
projects as much as the Unit had anticipated. The Visiting Group 
notes that it is a responsibility of the Unit to develop applications in 
prospect to some minimum level where benefits can be foreseen or 
are likely to be achieved. After that projects can be "sold" to 
customers for competitive actions. 
The Visiting Group also noted that EMAP is lacking a clear strategy 
and commonly accepted goals for the future. The mission of the Unit 
should be clarified with the personnel of the Unit and the Director of 
the SAI. 
Marine Environment (ME) 
The objectives of this Unit are to develop and validate methodologies 
for the use of space observations in both operational applications and 
scientific investigations related to the marine environment. Basically 
remote sensing of ocean colour and sea surface temperature have 
been studied and applied, e.g. in coastal areas. In order to validate 
the derived parameter distributions the Unit has carried out an 
experimental activity successfully. More recently, the goals were 
extended in the direction to promote an integrated approach 
combining the use of remote sensing data, in-situ measurements and 
numeric modelling. 
The processing of satellite data in order to generate distributions of 
ocean colour and sea surface temperature has been improved 
substantially towards operational use for e.g. coastal management and 
the field of fisheries. The Unit was also successful in getting support 
in the area of competitive activities. 
The Visiting Group acknowledges the research concept of an 
integrated approach by combining remote sensing data, in-situ 
measurements and modelling in principle, but it strongly recommends 
not putting manpower into the development or use of 3-D models, but 
rather to cooperate closely with correspondingly experienced groups, 
and to define carefully the interface for fruitful work between them and 
the Institute. The efforts of SAI/ME should be mainly concentrated on 
A-66-
the remote sensing part including calibration/validation and the 
understanding of processes .in coastal areas in order to be a 
competent partner in the cooperation. 
111.4 Monitoring Tropical Vegetation (MTV) 
The objectives of the MTV Unit are the characterisation of vegetation 
canopies and eco-systems in tropical regions. Data sets of different 
satellite sensors have been used to derive large-scale information in 
order to support the study of global change issues. These activities 
include the human impact upon land resources like deforestation and 
biomass burning. 
The presentation of the Unit was clear and gave a very good insight 
into the work of the last years. Major results, like the first global 
tropical rainforest map as derived from AVHRR (Advanced Very High 
Resolution Radiometer) data, and the large scale ERS-1 (European 
Remote Sensing satellite number 1) radar mosaic of Central Africa, 
were impressive. The monitoring of biomass burning within the FIRE 
(Fire In global Resource and Environmental monitoring) project yielded 
the first global fire distribution map, which should be very useful for 
investigations of tropical atmospheric chemistry. 
The laboratory visit included the interesting presentation of the TREES 
(TRopical Ecosystem Environment observations by Satellites) CD-ROM 
containing a wide range of TREES products. 
It has been recognised by the Visiting Group that there is some 
overlap with other Units, in particular with respect to remote sensing of 
forests. As a consequence, it seems to be necessary to reinforce the 
cooperation between the relevant Units. 
The MTV Unit has been very successful in acquiring funds in the 
competitive activities area. 
The Visiting Group encourages the Unit, that the main activities will be 
pursued in the same direction in the years to come. Attempts to 
interface remote sensing measurements and biosphere modelling are 
supported, but the latter activity should be kept small. 
111.5 Advanced Techniques (AT) 
The Advanced Techniques Unit is investigating both theoretical and 
applications-oriented principles of remote sensing measurements in 
different spectral bands. The Unit is also developing advanced data 
analysis tools and information extraction methods. 
The presentations of the Unit and a visit to the laboratories were well 
organised and very informative. 
The major measurement facilities operated by the AT are the 
European Microwave Signature Laboratory (EMSL) and the European 
GOniometer (EGO). These quite new facilities have already produced 
significant results e.g. data base of signatures of remotely sensed 
targets. 
New projects such as detection and identification of anti-personnel 
land mines and ROad Condition and COntrol (RoCoCo) are well suited 
to the role of AT and will without doubt proceed towards useful 
applications. However, the Visiting Group notes that, if accepted, the 
proposed anti-personnel mine project, due to its public nature, may 
require different management efforts compared with those normally 
used at the Unit. 
A-G7-
The Visiting Group noted that the management of the Unit is satisfied 
with the functioning of the EMSL Advisory Committee. The Visiting 
Group proposes similar advisory committees also for other Units of the 
SAI, if applicable to the benefit of Units. 
The Visiting Group encourages more extended use of facilities of AT 
for third party contractual work (now 7% in the case of EMSL). 
111.6 Centre for Earth Observation (CEO) 
The Visiting Group received a very competent description of the status 
of the Centre for Earth Observation, and noted with satisfaction that 
the Pathfinder Phase had been successfully concluded at the end of 
1995. The Design and Implementation Phase has now started, and 
the Group was satisfied that the CEO management was being 
responsive to the directions being given by the Steering Committee 
and sensitive to feedback from cooperating entities. 
The project thus appears to be developing satisfactorily. 
In reviewing the CEO work area, the group would wish to make just 
two observations: 
The amount of data already being handled is impressive, but the 
avalanche has yet to come. Problems with such large quantities 
of data - not to speak of the difficulty of controlling the content of 
the databases - will multiply in the coming years. Planning the 
future of the CEO function after 1998 already needs high-level 
attention. 
New fields of activity, telecommunications and navigation have 
been added to the work schedule of the unit responsible for the 
CEO. It is important, both in the CEO and in other SAI units, that 
these understandable extensions should initially be restricted to 
areas wholly connected with satellite remote sensing. 
The Visiting Group supports the proposed new activity in atmospheric 
research, in principle. On the other hand, it is not clear if the CEO Unit 
has enough specialist experience in this research area to develop the 
UV radiation project. Therefore, it is recommended that it be carefully 
examined if SAI/CEO has to recruit one or two experts from 
experienced European laboratories in order for the Institute to be in a 
position to undertake recognised work in this field. 
A-68-
IV. IMPLEMENTATION OF RESEARCH 
IV.1 Mission 
The mission of the SAI, its place within the JRC and relevance of its 
work to the Framework Programme, all appear to the Visiting Group to 
be adequately defined and documented. The objectives and the 
methods to be followed in the SAI have been promulgated and seem 
to be widely understood and respected by staff. 
IV.2 Transfer 
There was a good appreciation of the need for ideas, information and 
results to be continuously diffused, not only within the SAI, but also 
between sister Institutes within the JRC and in the outside world. But 
continued vigilance is necessary on the part of the Director and senior 
staff to ensure that this openness continues to be encouraged by the 
Institute. 
The Visiting Group took note that the number of publications produced 
by the Institute is quite high. On the other hand, it is recommended 
that the Institute should make more frequent use of the respected 
refereed journals as publishing channels. Publishing in refereed 
scientific journals represents a good continuous evaluation process of 
the work and results of the Institute. 
IV.3 Quality 
The Visiting Group had specific evidence of a striving for quality and 
excellence, but here again this report can be little more than a 
snapshot and continued effort is required in this area. 
It is somewhat difficult for the group to offer a thorough opinion as to 
whether results are commensurate with the resources deployed, but 
there was certainly an air of targeted activity, and a realisation that 
quality needs to be maintained. 
It is suggested that the multi-annual work schedules for the various 
research areas should attempt to include more specific milestones 
whereby progress could be more effectively measured - by the 
Director as well as by governing bodies or visiting groups. 
IV.4 Staff Management 
A new Director for SAI was appointed about a year ago. The new 
Director with his Deputy, the Scientific Assistant and Administrative 
Assistant, has built a management group which makes a very 
competent impression and gives the feeling of a well directed and 
motivated Institute. 
Recent administrative decisions appear to have gone a long way 
towards solving the recruitment problems to which the previous visiting 
group drew attention in its report. This is very gratifying, because the 
dynamic nature of SAI's workload requires a continued measure of 
flexibility if appropriately qualified key staff are to be recruited in time. 
Some of SAI's future projects will involve complicated partnership 
arrangements and may have a high political profile. Consideration 
should be given to recruiting, training or acquiring in some other way, 
the services of experienced project managers capable of undertaking 
such activities, as well as recruitment of the more conventional 
disciplines of the Institute. 
ft-69-
The Visiting Group has also discussed the role of the Units and the 
interaction with the Director. Even though the Units have the scientific 
responsibility for the performance of established research 
programmes, future proposals have to be developed in close 
cooperation with the Director. The responsibility of the Director 
includes the preparation of an integrated scientific programme and the 
proposal of new research areas. 
V. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
At the invitation of the Board of Governors of the Joint Research 
Centre (JRC), a Visiting Group of independent experts (see Annex I) 
spent the 9th and 10th September 1996 at the Space Applications 
Institute (SAI) at Ispra, reviewing its work, meeting the staff and visiting 
the laboratories and other installations. The present exercise follows 
that performed by a Visiting Group in 1994. The name of the Institute 
was at that time the Institute for Remote Sensing Applications (IRSA). 
The Visiting Group reviewed the present situation, development since 
previous Visiting Groups, and took note of actions taken to fulfil the 
recommendations from 1994. 
The Visiting Group noted with satisfaction that in general terms the 
management of the Institute is running well and high quality scientific 
and technical results have been achieved in all six Units of SAI. 
Nevertheless, the.Visiting Group noted that some further improvement 
could be made in certain aspects of management and strategy, and in 
scientific and technical work done in some of the Units of SAI. The 
recommendations of the Visiting Group are presented in Chapter VI of 
this report and those which are related to only one of the Units are 
also repeated in Chapter III in connection with the Unit concerned. 
VI. RECOMMENDATIONS 
VI.1 Scientific and Technical Activities 
The Visiting Group has noted that in different SAI Units there is a 
growing requirement for radiative transfer (RT) modelling. In order to 
avoid unnecessary duplication in this field it is recommended that only 
one small group of RT experts for the Institute as a whole be 
established and to have just one, or a very restricted number of RT 
specialists per Unit, for applying the specialised RT models. 
Several Units of SAI are involved in remote sensing of forests. Whilst 
accepting that different problems exist in the various projects, it 
nevertheless seems to be necessary to establish a regular cooperation 
between the relevant Units, in order to further the study of the basic 
procedures in remote sensing of forests. 
The Visiting Group acknowledges the research concept of an 
integrated approach by combining remote sensing data, in-situ 
measurements and modelling in principle, but it strongly recommends 
not putting manpower into the development or use of 3-D models, but 
rather to cooperate closely with correspondingly experienced groups, 
and to define carefully the interface for fruitful work between them and 
the Institute. The efforts of SAI/ME should be mainly concentrated on 
the remote sensing part including calibration/validation and the 
understanding of processes in coastal areas in order to be a 
competent partner in the cooperation. 
A-70-
The Visiting Group supports the proposed new activity in atmospheric 
research, in principle. On the other hand, it is not clear if the CEO Unit 
has enough specialist experience in this research area to develop the 
UV radiation project. Therefore, it is recommended that it be carefully 
examined if SAI/CEO has to recruit one or two experts from 
experienced European laboratories in order for the Institute to be in a 
position to undertake recognised work in this field. 
VI.2 Infrastructure 
The Institute and its Director can benefit from advice and criticism from 
outside the normal hierarchical chain. This could be provided either by 
an SAI advisory group (to be established, meeting about once per 
year) or by ensuring that a visiting group is regularly convened every 
two years, approximately. Given the workload already created by 
existing committees and the like, the second method would probably 
be preferable. However, in this case the visiting group should consist 
of 4 or 5 members, rather than the present 3, in order to provide a 
better coverage of the disciplines. 
VI.3 Management 
Many of the problems which SAI is tackling are inter-disciplinary and it 
is obviously important for the Institute to have good and continuous 
collaboration with the other JRC Institutes and to take the maximum 
advantage of their existing capabilities. There is ample evidence of 
good relations at a working level between Institutes and the regular 
meeting of Institute Directors provides a basis for cooperation at 
senior level. Given the increasing breadth of SAI activities, however, 
this is a subject which requires regular attention. 
Because of the increasing relevance of its work to industry it is 
recommended that appropriately qualified representatives from industry 
should be included in SAI's committees, working groups, etc., along 
with those from academia and elsewhere. The group would not, 
however, suggest creating a separate industrial consultative body. 
Industry's intellectual contribution will be most effective if it is injected 
into the system at varying points, rather than being in a single - ghetto­
like - body. 
A-71-
Cambridge, 21 October 1996 
REPORT OF THE VISITING GROUP 
FOR THE EVALUATION OF THE 
JOINT RESEARCH CENTRE'S 
INSTITUTE FOR PROSPECTIVE 
TECHNOLOGICAL STUDIES 
ft-72-
CONTENTS 
I. Introduction 74 
N. General Observations 75 
III. Scientific and Technical Activities 76 
111.1 Block 1 - European Science and Technology 
Observatory (ESTO) 76 
111.2 Block 2 - Technology - Employment -
Competitiveness (TEC) 77 
111.3 Block 3 - Institutional Support Agreements 
and Projects 77 
111.4 Block 4 - Customer Review 78 
111.4.1 - Project Management 78 
111.4.2 - Quality 78 
111.4.3 - Value ......:... 78 
Hl.4.4 - Future Issues 79 
IV. Implementation of Research 79 
IV.1 Mission 79 
IV.2 Transfer 79 
IV.3 Quality 80 
IV.4 Areas of concern 80 
V. Executive Summary 81 
VI. Recommendations 82 
VI.1 S&T Activities 82 
VI.2 Infrastructure 82 
VI.3 Management 82 
Annex I: Members of the Visiting Group 
Annex IhTerms of Reference of the Visiting Group 
A-73-
REPORT OF THE VISITING GROUP FOR THE EVALUATION 
OF THE JOINT RESEARCH CENTRES 
INSTITUTE FOR PROSPECTIVE TECHNOLOGICAL STUDIES (IPTS) 
AT SEVILLE IN SPAIN 
I. Introduction 
At the invitation of the Board of Governors of the Joint Research 
Centre (JRC), a Visiting Group of independent experts (see Annex I) 
spent the 12 and 13 September 1996 at the Institute for Prospective 
Technological Studies at Seville, Spain reviewing its work, meeting the 
staff and visiting the facilities. 
The present exercise follows that performed by Visiting Groups in 1993 
and the implementation of recommendations made at that time was an 
important factor to be considered. 
Since that time, certain changes have occurred and the JRC has 
become independent from DG XII and is now an autonomous 
Directorate General of the Commission (Commission Decision of 10 
April 1996 on the Reorganisation of the JRC). Furthermore, the 
Council has further clarified the JRC's role by clearly distinguishing 
between institutional and competitive activities (Council Conclusions of 
26 April 1994 on the Role of the JRC) and in Council Decisions of 15 
December 1994, adopting the present "specific programme for 
research and technological development, including demonstration, to 
be carried out for the European Community ." by the JRC under the 
Community Framework Programme. This requires that an evaluation is 
carried out by external experts on work performed during the 
preceding five years. 
The above changes, together with efforts intended to increase 
efficiency and reduce costs, have led to some internal reorganisation 
of the JRC structure. This in its turn has resulted in a reduction of the 
number of Institutes from eight to seven and in consequence, a 
redistribution of certain tasks and projects. 
The general scientific and technological objectives and content for the 
Joint Research Centres specific programme are set out in Annex I of 
the Council Decisions of 15 December 1994. Institutional research 
activities are included in this annex which also includes Institutional 
scientific and technical support. Together, these two areas comprise 
the JRC Direct Action and specific rules for its implementation are 
given in Annex III of the Decisions. The scientific and technological 
objectives and contents of the competitive support activities are to be 
found in Annex IV and the specific rules for their implementation in 
Annex VI. 
The mission of the Institute for Prospective Technological Studies as 
defined by the Commissioner for Science, Research and Development, 
Mrs. Edith Cresson, "is to collect information about technological 
development and its application in Europe and the world, to analyse it 
and to transmit it in processed form to the European decision makers". 
Its particular objectives are defined as follows: 
ft-74-
to perform technology watch (TW), particularly in the areas of 
energy, environment, transport, information technology and 
biotechnology; 
to carry out studies on matters relating to technology, 
employment, competitiveness (TEC); 
to undertake work on request (WOR). 
The Visiting Group has applied the Terms of Reference given in Annex 
II of this report on the understanding that although the present 
evaluation will contribute to the general evaluation of the Framework 
Programme being performed at present, which requires assessments 
to be made covering the past five years, it is nevertheless based on a 
somewhat different premise. The JRC by its nature and by its 
assigned tasks is evaluated Institute by Institute rather than by a 
programme oriented approach. 
The presently applied system of visits by teams of independent 
experts covering the whole spectrum of activities of each individual 
Institute has been proven and widely accepted as the best practical 
method of assessing the JRC and indeed is that favoured for many 
other research organisations worldwide. 
The present evaluation will therefore cover the period from Autumn 
1993, when the last visits took place, up to the present time, and 
together the two reports will review the whole period in question. 
II. General Observations 
In evaluating the Institute, the Visiting Group was particularly interested 
to explore changes that had taken place since the last visit in 1993, 
when the IPTS had been situated in Ispra. Recommendations made at 
the time were examined in the light of a follow-up action carried out 
mid-1995, at which time five out of the nine recommendations had 
been accepted and implemented. 
Regarding the other four, the early strengthening of the Brussels unit 
to the recommended 6 staff was not possible during the initial period 
and considered to be undesirable before a reputation had been gained 
with customer services there. Recently, however, the Brussels 
contingent has been enlarged with an additional person and successful 
contacts are developing. 
The recommendation to recruit staff from outside Ispra has occurred in 
practice because of the nature of the experience required. New staff 
have largely been selected from outside the JRC. 
The recommendation that 50% of the scientific manpower should be 
non-JRC staff has also occurred naturally and there is at present an 
almost equal ratio. 
Finally, the recommendation that annual reports should contain a 
special section on recommendations with a further evaluation in 1997 
has been pre-empted by strong follow-up campaigns launched by the 
JRC Board of Governors and by the present evaluation. 
In the 3rd Framework Programme the Institute had no budget from 
programme activities and relied entirely on contracts with other 
Commission services and work for third parties for its income. This 
situation has changed with the 4th Framework Programme Decision. 
IV75-
Since 1993, the Institute has been rehoused in the World Trade Centre 
in Seville, where an existing technical infrastructure is ensuring good 
communications with Brussels, the rest of the JRC and with members 
of its various networks, while its position nearby but not inside the 
science park provides excellent opportunities for contacts, without 
danger to the Institute's European Union image. 
Since the International Exhibition of 1992, Seville has enjoyed 
improved rail and air communications with most European capitals. 
III. Scientific and Technical Areas 
European Science and Technology Observatory (ESTO) 
Since the debut of ESTO in October 1995, under the 4th Framework 
Programme, this activity, in many ways the core of the Institute's 
activities, has made Vapid progress. The concept has been defined, 
founded on a network of European nationally-based institutions. At the 
time of the visit, the final agreements with core members had not yet 
been signed, but preparatory work was already well advanced and 
some activities were operational. The Visiting Group feel confident 
that preliminary milestones are largely being met. 
We consider ESTO to be the Institute's salient activity and as such, the 
data base should have the widest possible accessibility. Similarly, the 
ESTO network should have an open membership within the European 
Union, whilst recognising the special position and responsibilities of the 
core members in its management. 
To ensure its credibility, strong quality control measures are essential 
and this feature will enhance the Institute's reputation and help to 
create added value in all its operations. 
With the achievement of a reputation for quality, it is foreseen that 
ESTO outputs could increasingly form the trigger for in-depth studies 
both in IPTS and elsewhere in other network members. We see ESTO 
as an enabling facility for an expanding field of European programmes. 
Finally, ESTO should be exploited to bring up-to-date information on 
best practice in prospective technological studies to the Institute. 
Since December 1995 IPTS has been publishing "The IPTS Report" at 
the request of Commissioner Cresson. The report, issued in 10 
numbers per year, is addressed to decision makers involved in 
"managing change" and selectively presents condensed articles on 
technoeconomic issues which need wider debate. Topic preparation 
is carried out collaboratively by the Institute with a small group of 
ESTO core members interactively using the Internet for speedy 
communication. At the time of the visit, 8 issues were available and 
circulation had reached some 4,000 copies and was still growing. 
The Visiting Group applauds these first efforts and expects to see 
ESTO develop into a service with significant European added value as 
experience is gained. 
f\-76-
Technology - Employment - Competitiveness (TEC) 
Work on TEC began in September 1995 and is largely programme 
oriented. In the first year some 18 man months have been devoted to 
three major topics: 
the Competitiveness Programme; 
the Employment and Technology Programme; 
the Regional Aspects and Resources Programme. 
The first two topics are the subject of considerable activity with 
scientists and organisations throughout the world. The OECD is 
particularly active. The IPTS is still a newcomer. It is important that 
IPTS identifies projects of special competitive advantage to the 
Community as early as possible. The present concentration on 
"economic webs" and competitiveness seems to be a reasonable but 
ambitious approach. To ensure a high quality in this area, extensive 
contacts with the OECD regarding their work on national innovation 
systems could be rewarding. In addition, a clear focus on the 
European policy dimension could bring greater pertinence to the issue. 
In the Employment and Technology Programme we agree with IPTS 
that although various aspects have already been examined by others, 
conclusions do not exist in an explicit form. However, thinking through 
the combination of competitiveness and employment to its conclusion 
requires great experience and this should be recognised. The 
proposed plan to focus on a European model that promotes and 
reinforces competitiveness and employment is supported by the Group 
and should be developed with other Institutes. 
The Regional Aspects and Resources Programme reasonably focuses 
on the Mediterranean region. Should this work increase significantly, a 
special programme outside the TEC should be considered. 
The TEC has a broad field of interest and greater emphasis needs to 
be placed on project selection and project management to generate 
significant added value. Research elsewhere has created a huge 
literature bank and the application of advanced literature survey 
methods could bring considerable returns to the IPTS and save time 
and resources. 
Lastly, TEC is a client oriented area, especially in the third topic. It 
would be very advantageous to train staff in interpersonal 
communication skills. IPTS needs to recognise that its customers will 
also need help to exploit IPTS findings. 
Institutional Support Agreements and Projects 
Included under these agreements* is work undertaken for the following 
Commission units and Directorates General: 
Forward Studies Unit 
DG III, Industry 
DG XI, Environment, Nuclear Safety and Civil Protection 
DG XII, Science, Research and Development 
DG XIII, Telecommunications, Information Market and 
Exploitation of Research. 
Formal agreements which are signed between the JRC and the Directors 
General of the services concerned. 
fV-77-
In addition, projects are being or have been undertaken for other 
Institutions as follows: 
European Parliament (including STOA) 
Council of Europe. 
Projects cover topics such as: 
Environment 
Pharmaceutical industry 
Transport 
etc. 
The Visiting Group considered that in these cases, the IPTS will need 
to identify the particular aspect of value to these organisations. After 
debating the subject, the Group concluded that IPTS activities, to be of 
greatest value, should be situated near but upstream of the decision­
making process. As a young organisation,, to obtain maximum 
effectiveness, IPTS will have to pay particular attention to the 
interactions it will have with its customers. The Visiting Group felt that 
with its growing experience, considerable progress was being made in 
the area. 
111.4 Customer Review 
The Visiting Group contacted a number of customers in the above 
organisations to gain their views. These are summarised here. 
111.4.1 - Project Management 
IPTS projects generally adhere to the brief but customers feel the 
need to have a much stronger interactive process in their projects. 
This is considered helpful for better management but most importantly 
to facilitate transfer of results. The Seville location does not help this. 
IPTS might consider lending or exchanging staff with customers to 
facilitate this interaction. There is a need to recruit staff who can work 
directly with customers in the policy making process. 
IPTS controls timescales well except in the area of staff management. 
A project defined in November 1995 was delayed for more than 6 
months by lengthy procedures in staff recruitment. 
111.4.2 - Quality 
Although customers thought it a little early for full evaluation of quality 
they were positive so far. In comparison with consultants, "quality 
management" is reasonable. 
111.4.3 - Value 
There does seem definite evidence that IPTS advice has been used to 
formulate policy. But IPTS need to follow up projects more strongly on 
this aspect. This will further improve their projects as experience 
builds up. 
IPTS is seen as particularly valuable as it could work in sensitive 
areas, gain access to privileged information and interpret it for the 
European perspective. IPTS is expected to digest research results 
and interpret them into the policy dimension, which will include 
communication. 
A -78-
One very positive feature of IPTS is that customers know that they will 
take an in depth look at global scale in each project area, consultants 
generally don't have the brief or time to do this. 
For IPTS work to have the highest value, the closer it can work with its 
customers the better. 
111.4.4 - Future issues 
(1) IPTS and the JRC need to build stronger working links. The JRC 
can use IPTS for JRC planning, strategy and prospective or 
foresight activities. IPTS could exploit JRC resources and 
scientific knowledge more effectively. 
(2) IPTS should play a greater role in animating European foresight 
as this topic will become a priority and some organisation has to 
be in charge. More generally IPTS should become a pro-active 
organisation, a full part of the policy making process. 
(3) IPTS must further strengthen links with the national policy 
institutes, who are doing the same sort of job and encourage 
company/academic/ government collaboration. 
(4) IPTS should be assessing Europe's capability to meet the 
international challenge. The US/Japan have their own groups to 
do this, IPTS should do this for the EU. 
IV. Implementation of Research 
IV.1 Mission 
As mentioned in the introduction, the mission of the Institute defined by 
the Commissioner, Mrs. E. Cresson "is to collect information about 
technological developments and its application in Europe and the 
world, to analyse it and to transmit it in processed form to the 
European decision makers". 
The Visiting Group considers that the Institute is starting to establish a 
sound reputation with its customers and set up an infrastructure to 
meet their future demands. The IPTS' capability includes both modern 
information systems and a skilled staff able to exploit them efficiently. 
The IPTS mission was well understood by staff encountered by 
members of the Visiting Group and its terms are being met in most 
respects. 
IV.2 Transfer 
Considerable efforts have been committed to establishing and 
maintaining efficient dialogue with major customers. The European 
Science and Technological Observatory (ESTO) network provides an 
alternative means of customer contact and also adds an extension to 
the Institute's own resources. 
The scientific, technical and intellectual assets of other JRC Institutes, 
however, seem to be largely untapped and could provide the IPTS with 
specialist advice and studies on a larger scale than at present. This 
possibility should be examined. 
The openness and availability of IPTS' output is considered to be a 
positive and very welcome advance on the situation encountered 
during the last evaluation. Information of all kinds was made available 
A -79-
to the Visiting Group and the concern and flexible means employed to 
inform and engage the customer was felt to be a rjiost satisfactory 
evolution. However, on examining some of the printed output it was 
felt that a more uniform house-style would help to enhance the 
Institute's image and should be implemented for all reports. 
IV.3 Quality 
The perceived quality of output is consistent with a relatively youthful 
organisation and in general of good calibre. In future, however, formal 
quality control procedures must be adopted if the Institute's work is to 
be universally acknowledged; this being present practice in 
comparable institutes elsewhere. 
The management has set high standards for its statf, but recruitment 
of experienced "permanent" staff of the required level of excellence is 
still being hampered by lengthy EU procedures. Furthermore, staff 
additions are required, particularly at the more senior levels, if the 
necessarily high customer expectations are to be fully satisfied. 
On the other hand, the flow of short-term staff now appears to be 
highly satisfactory both in quality and in numbers consistent with the 
recommendations of the previous Visiting Group. Intelligent use of this 
resource enhances the Institute's vitality, flexibility and enthusiasm. 
Besides introducing the latest skills the benefits greatly outweigh the 
extra supervisory effort required by "permanent" staff. 
IV.4 Areas of concern 
The Visiting Group is particularly concerned that IPTS may be 
pressured to attack an unreasonably wide range of issues, thereby 
diluting its effectiveness. Consideration should therefore be given to 
identifying those future and new European priority areas. Rather than 
limiting its vision to traditional themes, much under study in Member 
States and elsewhere. Policies relating to food, demographics, 
socio/economic stability, regional influences are likely to emerge and 
should provide sufficient new challenges. 
A transparent and formal project management system has not yet 
been fully developed in the Institute, in part due to other priorities 
during its early years. A suitable system should now be installed with 
some urgency. For example, for each project, a clear and unequivocal 
definition of operational goals is needed and the project leader must 
have clearly defined responsibilities. Project resources, both internal 
and external, required to meet customer requirements should be 
predetermined and realistic milestones set. These will enable 
management to assess continuously performance and take action 
where required, stimulate a methodical approach and enhance 
customer confidence. 
In line with the above, sensitive qualitative indicators should be 
identified appropriate to the types of work carried on by the IPTS, 
serving to monitor the use and value customers obtain from the 
Institute. Emphasis must be placed on tangible action (new 
Community programmes, changes in policy direction, improved 
legislation, etc..) following input from Institute actions rather than 
numerical evidence obtained from citation rates, numbers of 
publications, etc., indicators impressive in themselves for 
demonstrating output but failing to demonstrate success. It is 
essential in that respect that project leaders can and do track the 
practical use made of their project results. 
ft-80-
V. Executive Summary 
Overall considerable progress has been made since the last visit. In 
particular IPTS now nas a much clearer brief, formal budgets, a 
defined set of customers, a skilled and enthusiastic staff and has 
delivered valuable results. This is very encouraging. After the 
management changes which have taken place a period of continuity is 
now necessary to allow the full potential of IPTS to be realised. 
For an organisation of its age project management and quality are 
typical, but more needs to be done. 
A clearer view of the ways IPTS needs to work with its customers is 
now emerging. Customers are seeking greater interaction with and 
participation of experienced IPTS staff in the policy formulation 
process. We consider this a most healthy development but it will 
need more experienced staff to work with the researchers and much 
closer working relationships with customers most of whom are based 
in Brussels. This is still in their eyes, a long way from SevHIe. Use of 
advanced communication technology and the Internet and World Wide 
Web need to be extended to key customers. 
The formation of the ESTO network brings a number of benefits. Apart 
from its main function as a science and technology observatory and 
reporting network, it starts to bring together many of the leading 
science policy institutes in a formal long range project rather than the 
short projects which had previously been a feature of the Institute's 
work. ESTO should also provide much more flexibility to IPTS in 
meeting short term requests from its own customers. It provides an 
alternative channel to policy makers through national institutes. 
Specifically IPTS, where relevant, needs to make more use of the 
scientific specialists in the other parts of the JRC. This might be 
facilitated by strengthening the contacts with the rest of the JRC and 
the expertise in the various Institutes: the JRC itself being able to use 
the IPTS to help set strategy as well as an indicator of scientific and 
technological trends. 
As a source- of scientific knowledge and a member of scientific 
networks, the other JRC Institutes need to be part of the ESTO 
network too. 
The portfolio of projects at IPTS needs to be carefully managed. 
There may be pressure to try to cover too much. 
ft -81 
VI. Recommendations 
VI.1 S&T Activities 
1. Activate ESTO network but make the project as open as possible 
and widen project teams to include academics, policy makers 
and industrialists. 
2. Where relevant, make more use of JRC specialists. 
3. In all projects relationships should be formed with the best 
research groups so that IPTS does not 'reinvent the wheel'. 
4. Help with the animation of discussions on European foresight 
actions (see Section lll.4.4(2)). 
5. Form working relationships with the ETAN programme. 
VI.2 Infrastructure 
1. Continue to develop IT and communication systems to be of 
highest quality but focus on their effective utilisation by 
customers. Training will be needed. 
VI.3 Management 
1. Introduce formal Project Management and Quality procedures. 
2. Build up more experienced Brussels team, investigate staff 
exchanges with customers. 
3. Change project organisation to increase customer interaction and 
measure performance on outcomes. Develop indicators of 
project value to aid management and staff assessment. 
4. Identify major European issues and take a leading, proactive 
stance. 
ft-82-
ANNEX II 
•V 
JOINT RESEARCH CENTRE 
JRC 
CONDENSED LIST OF RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE 
REPORTS OF THE VISITING GROUPS TO THE 
JRC INSTITUTES 1996 
•V 
A-S3 
EVALUATION OF THE 
INSTITUTE FOR REFERENCE MATERIALS AND MEASUREMENTS (IRMM) 
RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE REPORT OF DR. DEL MONTE 
CHAIRWOMAN OF THE VISITING GROUP 
0Q No. 
8 
10 
11 Recommendations 
Maintain suitable level of resources in core activity 
Avoid advantages to nuclear enterprises in certain countries 
More effort on chemical metrology 
Restructure IRMM to become EU centre of excellence in biological and environmental RMs 
Broader market for Institute 
Use "head hunting" agencies to target specific scientists and then employ them on competitive terms 
Attract staff on worldwide basis with more flexibility for Director, progress review oriented to Institute 
needs 
Business like approach needed under new JRC role 
Overhaul Institute accounting (using consultants), delegate operational decisions to Unit heads 
Include equipment depreciation in accounting procedures; define project objectives and milestones 
Provide marketing courses for selected staff from each Unit 
EVALUATION OF THE 
INSTITUTE FOR TRANSURANIUM ELEMENTS (ITE) 
RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE REPORT OF DR. HANSEN 
CHAIRMAN OF THE VISITING GROUP 
No. Recommendations 
Maintain excellence of staff - transfer knowledge at retirement by early use of pensioners 
Maintain reputation in actinide research - facilitate access to laboratory 
Strengthen safety research - develop / improve analytical methods for safeguards 
Set up interdisciplinary teams for projects - extend project management - promote cpst accounting 
transparency 
Establish early planning of activities for 3 year contracts; 3 year contracts may not be appropriate in 
highly specialised areas; continue hosting young scientific fellows 
Apply adequate resources to maintain present nuclear authorizations 
Employ stepwise approach to certification and accreditation 
EVALUATION OF THE 
INSTITUTE FOR ADVANCED MATERIALS (1AM) 
RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE REPORT OF PROF. BATHIAS 
CHAIRMAN OF THE VISITING GROUP 
2? No. Recommendations 
1 Site work near, upstream of Industrial Research 
2 Work in coatings area to be generic or precompetitive 
3 Open access databases encouraged but maximum outsourcing of routine tasks 
4 Avoid duplication of activities or important equipment between Units 
5 Characterisation is an important core competence for the Institute 
6 Encourage shared cost actions 
7 More inter-Institute collaboration in JRC 
8 Complete project management and total quality management introduction 
9 Examine recruitment procedures for scientific staff 
10 Enhance educational role, enhance number of doctoral and post-doctoral fellowships 
11 Increase mobility with short term attachments 
12 New mechanisms to start industrial third party work more quickly 
13 Contact European experts when establishing new activity fields 
EVALUATION OF THE 
INSTITUTE FOR SYSTEMS, INFORMATICS AND SAFETY (ISIS) 
RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE REPORT OF MR. BENTON 
CHAIRMAN OF THE VISITING GROUP 
No. Recommendations 
1 Test results against competitive approach where technology is widespread in many laboratories 
2 Evaluate 3-D holographic image processing by industrial panel and confront industrial market 
3 Opto-instrumentation for ELSA application should be further tested 
4 Develop analytical package for masonry structures 
5 Encourage collaboration with Japan in seismic research 
6 Critical mass not yet achieved in repair and strengthening structures 
7 Suggest external evaluation of ADIN 
8 3 year staff should be allowed to apply for admission to Reserve Lrst 
9 Reserve List laureates should be free to apply for 3 year contracts 
10 Director should carry reserve of 1 to 3 persons 
11 Patent administration should be moved to Institutes - with revenues to initiating Institutes 
12 Encourage Programme User Advisory Boards 
13 Explore establishment of commercial incubator facility 
14 Encourage exploratory research 
15 Develop and calibrate analytical tools, modelling techniques, system integration methods 
16 Encourage mobility of some senior ISIS staff to relevant Directorates General tô improve technology 
transfer 
17 Extended competition is encouraged J 
EVALUATION OF THE 
ENVIRONMENT INSTITUTE (El) 
RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE REPORT OF PROF. BORREGO 
CHAIRMAN OF THE VISITING GROUP 
CO No. Recommendations 
1 Maintain scientific support to environmental and consumer protection policies 
2 Extend collaboration to all EU Member States and Associated countries 
3 Increase multi-disciplinary approach - particularly including Life Sciences 
4 Follow developments in food and drugs area for possible future actions 
5 Follow developments in water research and resource management as potential development area 
6 Continue concentration of laboratories and facilities 
7 Foster internal collaboration with inter-Unit projects 
8 Plan early for coming retirements to safeguard competences 
9 Seek means of inserting new staff at the necessary time 
10 Maintain user satisfaction, regularly check opinions, follow-up discrepancies 
11 Be prepared to increase competitive activities to 20% 
12 Encourage documentation of output, preferably in peer reviewed journals 
EVALUATION OF THE 
SPACE APPLICATIONS INSTITUTE (SAI) 
RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE REPORT OF PROF. URPO 
CHAIRMAN OF THE VISITING GROUP 
No. Recommendations 
1 Avoid unnecessary duplication of radiation transfer modelling (one small group for the Institute) 
2 Establish regular cooperation between units concerned with remote sensing of forests 
3 Don't develop 3-D models, cooperate with experienced groups concentrate on remote sensing part 
4 Explore recruitment of experienced staff in UV radiation for atmospheric research 
5 Appoint advisory group or convene Visiting Group every two years 
__________ , ' - j 
6 Maximise collaboration with other JRC institutes * 
7 Include industry representatives in working groups and Committees 
EVALUATION OF THE 
INSTITUTE FOR PROSPECTIVE TECHNOLOGICAL STUDIES (IPTS) 
RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE REPORT OF DR. WHELAN * 
CHAIRMAN OF THE VISITING GROUP 
No. Recommendations 
1 Widen project teams via ESTO with policy makers, academics, industrialists 
2 Make more use of JRC specialists 
3 Form projects' relationships with best research groups 
4 Help to animate discussions on European foresight actions 
5 Form working relationships with ETAN programme 
6 Continue developing IT and communication utilisation 
7 introduce formal Project Management and Quality procedures 
8 Build more experienced Brussels team, exchanges with customers 
9 Increase customer interaction and measure project outcome - develop value indicators 
10 "!'ake leading proactive stance in identified major European issues 
ANNEX III 
•\S' 
JOINT RESEARCH CENTRE 
JRC 
COMPOSITION OF THE VISITING GROUPS TO THE 
JRC INSTITUTES 1996 
V 
A-^o 
Visiting Group to the Joint Research Centre's 
Institute for Reference Materials and Measurements (IRMM) - Geel 
Members 
Dr. Maria Grazia DEL MONTE (Chairwoman) Tel: + 39.6.592.40.8S (SOS.52.61) 
Director Fax: + 39.6.S92.40.8S (S05.02.S0) 
National Centre for Reference Materials 
Via di Castel Romano 100-102 
1-00129 Rome 
Mr.PeterJ.JENKS Tel: +49-281 9887-212 
Product Manager Fax: +49-281-9887-199 
Biological, Elemental and 
Pharmaceutical Reference Materials 
PROMOCHEM GmbH 
D-46469 Wesel 
Mr. Robert KAARLS Tel: +31-1S-269.1S00 
Director Fax: +31-15-261.2971 
Nederlands Meetinstituut (NMi) 
P.O. Box 654 
NL-2600 AR Delft 
Secretary 
Mr. Hans J0rgen Helms Tel: + 32-2-29.58527 
Joint Research Centre Fax: +32-2-29:50146 
European Commission 
Square de Meeûs 8 (SDME 10/20) 
B-1050 Brussels 
fY<u 
Visiting Group to the Joint Research Centre's 
Institute for Transuranium Elements (ITE) - Karlsruhe 
Members 
Dr. Niels HANSEN, Dr. Techn. (Chairman) Tel: + 45.46.77.5701 
Head Fax: +45.46.35.1173 
Materials Department E-mail: materials@risoe.dk 
Building 228 
Ris0 National Laboratory 
Frederiksborgvej 399, P.O. Box 49 
DK-4000 Roskilde 
Mr. Richard HOOPER Tel:+43-1.2060.21808 
Director Fax: +43-1.2060.29145 
IAEA 
Wagramerstrasse 5 
P.O. Box 100 
A-1400 
Vienna 
Dr. Klaus JANBERG Tel: +49.201-109.1401 
Geschàftsfùhrer Fax: + 49.201-109.1137 
GNS 
Gesellschaft fur Nuklear-Service GmbH 
Hollestr. 7A 
D-45127 Essen 
Mr. Jean van VLIET Te/; + 32-14 33 02 11 
Manager Fax: +32-1431 7046 
MOX plant 
Belgonucléaire 
Europalaan 20 
B-2480 Dessel 
Secretary 
Mr. Hans J0rgen Helms Tel: + 32-2-29.58527 
Joint Research Centre Fax: +32-2-29.50146 
European Commission 
Square de Meeûs 8 (SDME 10/20) 
B-1050, Brussels 
rV^ 
Visiting Group to the Joint Research Centre's 
Institute for Advanced Materials (1AM) - Petten and Ispra 
Members 
Prof. Claude BATHIAS (Chairman) Tel: + 33.1.40.27.23.22 
Conservatoire National des Arts Tel: + 33.1.40.27.26.33 
et Métiers (CNAM) Fax: + 33.1.40.27.23.22 
2 Rue Conté 
F-75003 
Paris 
Prof. Pier Giulio AVANZINI Tel: + 39.10- 6475 802 
Direzione Area della Ricerca Fax: + 39.10- 6475 800 
Consigiio Nazionale Ricerche 
via De Marini 6 - Torre di Francia 
1-16149 
Genoa 
Mr. Staffan SÔDERBERG Tel: + 46-8-726.6698 (switchboard) 
Director Tel: +46-8-726.6300 (direct) 
AB Sandvik Coromant Fax: + 46-8-726.9092 
S-126 80 
Stockholm 
Prof. Dr. T. VARGA Tel: +43-1-588.013.429 
Leiter der Techn. Versuchs- Fax: +43-1-587.81.96 
und Forschungsanstalt 
TVFA - TU Wien 
Karlsplatz 13 
A-1040 
Wien 
Secretary 
Mr. Samuel Lloyd Tel: + 44-1858-575.937 
Oak House Fax: + 44-1858-575.085 
Walcote Road 
South Kilworth 
Leicestershire LE 17 6EE 
U.K. 
ft-^3 
Visiting Group to the Joint Research Centre's 
Institute for Systems, Informatics and Safety (ISIS) - Ispra 
Members 
Mr. Peter BENTON (Chairman) 
Director General 
British Institute of Management 
Northgate House 
130 Highgate Hill 
UK-N6 6HD 
London Tel: +44.181.341.1122 
Fax: +44.181.341.11.33 
Prof. Jane GRIMSON 
Dean of Engineering and 
Systems Sciences 
Department of Computer Science 
Trinity College 
Dublin 
Ireland Tel: +353.1.60 81 707 
Fax: +353.1.67 72 204 
Mr. Theodossios P. TASSIOS 
Agias Lavras4 
GR-15236PaleaPenteli 
Athens Tel: +30.1.77.21.237 (office) 
Tel: + 30.1.369.1111 (Ecole Poly, 
d'Athens) 
Tel: +30.1.804.97.51 (home) 
Fax: +30.1.77.21.275 (office) 
Prof. Dr. Dennis TSICHR1TZ1S 
Chairman of the Executive Board 
GMD-Forschungszentrum 
lnformationstechnik GmbH 
SchloB Birlinghoven 
D-53754 
Sankt Augustin Tel: + 49-02241114-2245 (2294) 
Fax: + 49-02241114-2110 
Dr. F. YNDURAIN 
Director General 
CIEMAT 
Av. Complutense 22 
E-28023, Madrid Tel: +34-1-3466060 
Fax: +34-1-3466082 
Secretary 
Prof. Ing. Carlo Rinaldini 
ViaI)eiBoderi,36 
r-2J200Varese 
Italy Tel: +39-332-239367 
Tel: +39-335-6241169 
Fax: +39-332-239367 
ft-^4-
Visiting Group to the Joint Research Centre's 
Environment Institute (El) - Ispra 
Members 
Prof. Carlos A. BORREGO (Chairman) Tel: + 351.343.800.800 
Department of Environment and Planning Fax: +351.343.828.76 
University of Aveiro 
P-3800 Aveiro 
Prof. A.R. HARDY Tel: + 44-1904-462384 
Research Director Fax: +44-904-462256 
Central Science Laboratory 
Sand Hutton 
York Y04 1LZ 
UK 
Prof. Dr. A. KETTRUP* Tel: + 49-89-3187.404718 
Director Fax: +49-89-3187.3371 
GSF Neuherberg 
Institute of Ecological Chemistry 
Ingolstàdter Landstrafle 1 
D-8042 Neuherberg 
* unable to attend meetings but provided written comments on documentation 
Secretary 
Hans Jprgen Helms Tel: + 32-2-29.58527 
Joint Research Centre Fax: +32-2-29.50146 
European Commission 
Square de Meeûs 8 (SDME 10/20) 
B-1050 
Brussels 
P\'^ 
Visiting Group to the Joint Research Centre's 
Space Applications Institute (SAI) - Ispra 
Members 
Prof. Seppo URPO (Chairman) Tel: + 358.9.264.417 
Director Fax: +358.9.264.531 
Metsâhovi Radio Research Station 
Metsâhovintie 
FIN-02540 Kylmâlâ 
Prof. Dr. Herbert FISCHER Tel: + 49.07247182-3643 
Head Fax: +49.07247182-4742 
Institut fur Météorologie und Klimaforschung 
Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe 
Postfach 3640 
D-76021 
Karlsruhe 
Mr. Roy GIBSON Tel: + 33-67.67.81.81 
Résidence Les Hespérides Fax: + 33-67.22.34.02 
51, Allée Jean de Bains 
F-34000 
Montpellier 
Secretary 
Prof. Ing. Carlo Rinaldini Tel: + 39-332-239367 
ViaDeiBoderi,36 Tel: +39-335-6241169 
1-21100 Varese Fax: +39-332-239367 
Italy 
A-^ 
Visiting Group to the Joint Research Centre's 
Institute for Prospective Technological Studies (IPTS) - Seville 
Members 
Dr. Robert C. WHELAN (Chairman) 
36 Green End 
Comberton 
Cambridge CD3 7DY 
UK Tel: +44.1.223.263.137 
Fax: +44.1.223.263.940 
Dr. Josef FRÔHLICH 
Head 
Austrian Research Centre Seibersdorf 
Division of Systems Research 
Technology-Economy-Environment 
A-2444 Seibersdorf 
Austria Tel: +43(0)2254-780-3880 
Fax; +43(0)2254-780-3888 
E-Mail: 
froehlichj@zdfzs.arcs.ac.at 
Prof. Dr. Herbert PASCHEN 
Leiter des Instituts fur Angewandte 
Systemanalyse 
und Technikfolgenabschatzung (ITAS) 
Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe 
Postfach 36 40 
76021 Karlsruhe Tel: +49.7247182-2500 
Fax: +49.7247182-4806 
Prof. Walter ZEGVELD 
Chairman 
Rathenau Institute 
P.O. Box 85525 
NL-2506CA The Hague 
The Netherlands Tel: +31.70.342.15.42 
Fax: +31.70.363.34.88 
Fax: +31.70.393.0173 (home no.) 
Secretary 
Mr. Samuel Lloyd 
Oak House 
Walcote Road 
South Kilworth 
Leicestershire LE 17 6EE 
U.K. 7e/: +44-1858-575.937 
Fax: +44-1858-575.085 
«vn 
ANNEX IV 
"V 
JOINT RESEARCH CENTRE 
JRC 
TERMS OF REFERENCE OF THE 
VISITING GROUPS TO THE 
JRC INSTITUTES 1996 
V 
(V^sr 
TERMS OF REFERENCE 
FOR THE VISITING GROUPS FOR THE EVALUATION OF THE 
JOINT RESEARCH CENTRE'S INSTITUTES 
1. To evaluate progress in performing work in accordance with the objectives set out in 
Council Decisions 94/918/EC and 94/919/Euratom, documents addressed to the Board of 
Governors, the JRC's Annual Workschedules, budget etc., taking into account the results 
of the last JRC evaluation performed in 1993-94. 
2. To ensure that the Institute has effective mechanisms to set its local scientific objectives, 
monitor progress towards those objectives and evaluate outputs. 
3. To review the various research activities to assess: 
a) the relevance of the work with respect to Community needs, including the 
relevance of work performed for external customers, when applicable. In 
particular whether the objectives initially set for the Institute are still valid against 
evolving S&T, industrial and socio-economic conditions; 
b) the scientific quality and productivity of the Institute; 
c) whether full advantage is being taken of scientific opportunities in the light of 
funding and other constraints. 
4. To assess the effectiveness of the scientific management leadership within the Institute. 
5. To advise on whether the Institute has been making efficient, effective and economical 
use of resources in carrying out its programmes and management functions. Resources 
include manpower, money, services, facilities, data and equipment. 
6. To review the extent and effectiveness of the Institute's external scientific links, including 
cooperation with research organisations, the higher education sector, industry and 
government departments in the Member States. 
7. To examine the relationship of the Institute's work in general, to the mission of the Joint 
Research Centre and to its forward strategic planning as well as to the overall objectives 
of the Framework Programme. Therefore assessing: 
the contribution towards the improvement of the competitiveness of European 
industry and the economic impact (both direct and indirect) that has already been, 
plus that which is expected to be achieved; 
the contributions to strengthening the scientific and technological bases; 
the contributions to relevant Community policies such as environment, industry, 
agriculture, transport, employment, cohesion, etc. 
To assess the European added value of the Institute's activities on the basis of the 
subsidiarity principle. 
8. To make recommendations and report to the Board of Governors of the Joint Research 
Centre. 
IVll 

ISSN 0254-1475 
COM(97) 164 final 
DOCUMENTS 
EN 15 01 
Catalogue number : CB-CO-97-152-EN-C 
ISBN 92-78-18374-1 
Office for Official Publications of the European Communities 
L-2985 Luxembourg