COMISIÓN DE LAS COMUNIDADES EUROPEAS 
COM(95) 
Brusela 60 final 
08.03.1995 
Evaluación del Centro Común de Investigación y de su 
programa de investigación multianual 
1 1992-1994 
A 
Dictamen del Consejo de Administración del Centro Común de Investigación 
sobre la Evaluación del Centro y su 
Programa Plurianual de Investigación 1992-1994 
Introducción 
En las decisiones del Consejo n° 92/273/CEE y 92/274/EURATOM de 29 de abril de 19921 
por las que se establece el Programa Plurianual de Investigación del CCI, su respectivo 
artículo 5 prevé lo siguiente: 
"1. Los trabajos de investigación realizados por el CCI serán evaluados por un grupo de 
expertos independientes organizado por la Comisión, previa consulta al Consejo de 
Administración. Al terminar los programas se realizará un informe al respecto. 
2. El informe de evaluación, junto con el dictamen del Consejo de Administración del 
Centro Común de Investigación, será presentado por la Comisión al Parlamaneto 
Europeo, al Consejo y al Comité Económico y Social." 
Al mismo tiempo, se ha tenido igualmente en cuenta el Programa Suplementario para la 
Explotación del Reactor de Alto Flujo, aplicándose un procedimiento de evaluación similar. 
A la luz de las recomendaciones realizadas por la Comisión de Evaluación presidida por Sir 
Hermann Bondi, encargado de evaluar el Programa 1988-1991 del CCI, el Consejo de 
Administración, previa consulta al Director General del CCI y de acuerdo con el Comisario 
responsable de la ciencia, la investigación y el desarrollo, decidió crear una serie de Grupos 
Visitantes integrados por científicos experimentados y gestores científicos independientes, con 
la misión de evaluar a fondo cada uno de los Institutos de que se compone el CCI. Se 
transmiten anejos al presente dictamen los informes que emanaron de estas evaluaciones, 
junto con un análisis general de Sir Hermann Bondi que sintetiza las conclusiones de dichos 
informes. En tales documentos figuran datos concluyentes sobre la situación actual del CCI 
y de sus institutos percibida por observadores externos. En cumplimiento de los objetivos que 
tiene encomendados el CCI, tales documentos constituyen una base relevante para la gestión 
y planificación estratégica de las futuras actividades científicas y técnicas del mismo. De 
igual importancia resultan las apreciaciones que se efectúan sobre la calidad de la 
investigación y la eficiencia de los distintos institutos del CCI, así como las propuestas que 
se vierten sobre los aspectos científicos y organizativos. 
El Consejo de Administración desea manifestar su reconocimiento a los eminentes científicos 
y gestores que de buen agrado han sacrificado gran parte de su tiempo a las visitas y a la 
elaboración de los informes y, en particular, a los presidentes de cada Grupo Visitante, y 
hace constar su especial agradecimiento a Sir Hermann Bondi por el análisis critico y síntesis 
que ha realizado. 
Diario Oficial de las Comunidades Europeas n° L 141 de 23 de mayo de 1992. 
¿-
Dictamen 
El Consejo de Administración ha estudiado detenidamente los informes y comparte las 
impresiones de Sir Hermann Bondi de que, desde la reorganización que tuvo lugar en el CCI 
en 1988, las mejoras no han dejado de producirse, sobre todo en lo que se refiere a la 
apertura del CCI al mundo exterior y a su funcionamiento interno. También es fuente de 
satisfacción el éxito de los Grupos Visitantes tanto en lo que atañe a las evaluaciones 
realizadas de los distintos institutos como por lo que facilitan a sus directores valiosa y cabal 
asesoría en asuntos científicos y organizativos. No obstante, ha de señalarse que en el futuro 
convendría que se pusiera más énfasis en evaluar los resultados de la investigación y sus 
consecuencias. 
El Consejo de Administración hace constar la necesidad expresa de definir los proyectos con 
más precisión y de mejorar los procedimientos de contratación, y confirma que se esforzará 
por buscar la mejora en este ámbito. No obstante, el Consejo detecta notables avances en el 
primer aspecto y menos en el segundo en los últimos años, y cree que los cuadros directivos 
del CCI son plenamente conscientes de ello, por lo que seguirá prestando su apoyo en esta 
dirección. 
El Consejo de Administración reconoce y reafirma los esfuerzos del Director General y de 
su equipo de hacer realidad las recomendaciones efectuadas en los anteriores informes de 
evaluación y se congratula de que estos esfuerzos estén dando sus frutos. El Consejo 
renovará sus esfuerzos por adaptar la organización para que encuentre un nuevo lugar más 
competitivo en la comunidad científica, a cuyo fin el Consejo cuenta con la aceptación 
general y el respaldo de la Comisión. 
En este sentido, resulta evidente que existen ciertas limitaciones debidas a la normativa 
interna de la Comisión en materia financiera y de personal que impiden poner en práctica 
algunas de las recomendaciones mencionadas y que son práctica habitual en el mercado libre. 
El Consejo de Administración reconoce la existencia de estos condicionantes, pero seguirá 
promoviendo y recomendando la simplificación y una mayor flexibilidad cuando ello sea 
posible, y se hace eco con satisfacción de que la mayoría de las recomendaciones más 
sencillas están siendo puestas en práctica y de que se están realizando serios esfuerzos por 
afrontar los problemas más relevantes que afectan a todo el CCI. La experiencia demostrará 
si son suficientes para mantener la competitividad del CCI, y el Consejo seguirá de cerca la 
evolución de los acontecimientos. 
A la vista de los resultados de esta primera experiencia, el Consejo de Administración se 
muestra favorable a proseguir en el futuro el régimen de visitas de los grupos encargados de 
la evaluación y asesoría, y a presionar para que se hagan realidad las recomendaciones que 
emitan próximamente. 
3 
Cambridge, 2nd September, 1994 
ANALYSIS OF THE REPORTS OF THE 
VISITING GROUPS TO THE 
JOINT RESEARCH CENTRE'S INSTITUTES 
(JRC MULTIANNUAL RESEARCH 
PROGRAMME 1992-1994) 
Professor Sir Hermann Bondi 

Analysis of the Reports of the Visiting Groups to the Joint Research 
Centre's Institutes (JRC Multiannual Research Programme 1992-1994) 
Executive Summary 
1. The strongest impression one receives from studying the Panel Report of 
1991, the nine Visiting Groups' reports of 1993-1994 and my report of June 
1994 (together with my letter to the Chairman of the JRC's Board of 
Governors) is on the continuous positive development and evolution of the 
external links of the JRC. Under the energetic leadership of the Director 
General, advice has been accepted and acted upon with impressive speed. 
This has been of great benefit to many individual scientists, to the JRC, to 
the Commission and to the general European industrial-academic 
atmosphere. 
2. It is most gratifying that the institution of Visiting Groups has been so 
successful. In each case, the JRC has established valuable new connections, 
received constructive advice and made knowledgeable friends. It is also 
remarkable how similar the Visiting Group reports are to each other. 
Scientific standards have received nearly universal praise, institutional 
support to the Commission is judged to be good and improving, but with 
further development still attainable. The stimulus of having to gain work in 
a competitive manner is regarded as very positive, but the necessary change 
of attitudes and indeed culture is, for some Institutes, quite considerable 
and needs sustained determination. The speedy growths in external links 
through students, visiting scientists, networking, etc. is universally 
applauded and further growth is recommended. 
3. Internal management of the Institutes is widely praised, but more progress is 
needed in some places through introducing tighter project definition and 
control. In particular, a significant strengthening of the management of 
tasks involving more than one Institute is seen as an urgent need. 
4. Almost every Visiting Group is deeply worried about staff recruitment 
procedures, and several would like to see some improvement in internal 
staff management, entirely in line with my views as expressed in 1991 and 
more recently. I cannot say too strongly that one cannot be optimistic about 
the future quality of the JRC, especially after the retirement bulge of the 
late nineties, unless there is a major revolution in recruitment methods, 
yielding a substantial speeding-up and a much greater involvement of local 
experts. As I have said previously, a posteriori judgment of choices made can 
meet requirements of excellence and of Member States' wishes far more 
effectively than the present cumbersome and wasteful procedures. 
5. Finally, I must express my concern about pressures for a reduction in nuclear-
relevant research. I fully appreciate the political strength of anti-nuclear 
views in several Member States. It must be realised that there are three 
powerful reasons for at least maintaining nuclear research: 
(i) even without a single new nuclear power station, Europe will have to 
deal with nuclear waste for a long time to come; 
(ii) concern about the safety of power stations in Eastern Europe will not 
go away; 
(iii) worries about nuclear weapon proliferation are growing all the time 
and Europe should continue to be able to play its part in the required 
scientific detective work. 
-2-
Report 
Introduction 
1. In 1991 I chaired a panel set up by the Board of Governors of the Joint 
Research Centre to evaluate the Centre and the work performed during the 
1988-1991 Multiannual Research Programme under the requirements of the 
Council Decisions taken in 1988 and establishing that Programme. In the 
ensuing report, issued on Í7th January 1992, the Panel proposed a change in 
the mechanism to be used for evaluating the JRC in order that the rather 
diverse activities of the various Institutes could be properly examined in 
somewhat greater detail by groups of independent, acknowledged experts 
working in the relevant fields, and to forge closer links with leading 
European scientific organisations active in related domains. 
Accordingly, during 1993 and 1994, nine expert Visiting Groups have 
evaluated the eight JRC Institutes, an extra Group examining the reactor 
HFR, and have drawn up reports of their findings for the Board of 
Governors. 
During the first half of 1994, the present author met the Board of Governors 
and visited each of the Institutes and JRC headquarters in Brussels to advise 
on the development of a strategy. This was in response to the Council 
Decision to open the JRC to competitive participation in Shared Cost Actions 
and to competition with external research organisations in providing 
scientific services to other Directorates General of the Commission. 
2. The present report sets out to present an overall snapshot of the JRC 
through the eyes of Visiting Groups and revealed in their reports, with 
comments based on the author's past and present perception of the JRC. 
The scope and terms of reference of the Groups is found in Annex I of this 
report which includes the requirements laid down in Council Decisions and 
the Resolution on the JRC 1992-1994 Multiannual Research Programme 
regarding the evaluation of the work carried out. At the same time, Groups 
were required to review progress in the implementation of 
recommendations of the above -mentioned Evaluation Panel, to judge the 
scientific quality, appropriateness, efficiency and impact of Institutes' 
activities and to examine an Institute's strategy for the future. 
General Points 
3. The period since 1991 has been one of opening out, to the general benefit 
of the value of the JRC to the scientific and industrial communities. The 
Visiting Groups have given the Institutes much better links with the outside 
world, the growth in numbers of postgraduates, postdoctorates and more 
senior visitors has been substantial and of great value in many ways, and the 
increase in external contracts is not only a necessity, but of great benefit to 
the scientific vitality of the Centre. All this is entirely in line with the 
recommendations of the 1991 Panel and most gratifying. This approbation 
seems to be shared by all Visiting Groups, not only for the advantages it 
brinas to the JRC but also for the valuable training it provides. Nevertheless, 
it is felt that the success of the action warrants the active pursuit of all means 
of opening the JRC. Networking with peer organisations is strongly 
y-
-3 
encouraged by all Groups, although the rather limited mobility of staff, 
both within the JRC and with the outside world requires serious attention. It 
has been suggested that promotion above a certain level should be 
dependent on service for a number of years in more than one country. 
Moreover, my own experience has been that in many cases, staff at about 45 
or 50 years of age become more mobile as their children reach university age 
or become independent. It could also be considered unreasonable to pay a 
foreign service allowance to staff remaining in one country for longer than 
ten to fifteen years. 
Particularly noted is the near absence of a modern career development 
strategy with an attendant training plan applicable to all staff. 
Another positive sign of the JRC having become a more open and valuable 
Commission tool, is the way in which activities in support of Commission 
sectorial policies have grown in recent years. In part, this trend can be 
ascribed to a response to the suggestion in the Panel Report to endeavour to 
develop "educated" correspondents in the customer services. The provision, 
in the Fourth Framework Programme of targeted money to user services 
which can be bid for on a competitive basis by the Centre should help to 
alleviate the present insufficient funding in that area in view of the 
magnitude of well founded requests and allow the JRC to show its mettle. 
4. The administrative shortcomings, inherited from the overall Commission 
system, are pointed out by everyone, especially those concerning 
recruitment, opaque accountancy, lack of valuation of capital investment 
and of intellectual property. 
Recruitment of staff is found to be slow due to the tortuous and inefficient 
system imposed on the Commission's scientific services as a whole. The Joint 
Research Centre is a showcase for the Commission and the maintenance of 
an irreproachable level of intellectual capacity and competence in its 
scientific staff is vital. Effective recruitment becomes an even more pressing 
point on taking into account the retirement bulge that will occur in the late 
1990s. 
Financial transparency and the demonstration of accountability have 
become essential pre-requisites of any publicly financed organisation in 
recent years and Visiting Groups do not seem to be entirely convinced on 
that score. In the case of the JRC, the matter is complex. Financial 
management must simultaneously meet the formal requirements of the 
Commission's budgetary system and permit efficient operation of a research 
organisation. Although improved as compared to some years ago, further 
efforts in that direction could not fail to bring rewards through greater 
perceived openness of the Centre in handling its affairs and thus the 
removal of one cause of suspicion to the media and public. 
Capital depreciation should be included more widely than at present as a 
routine item in all costing calculations. It could be envisaged to apply an 
amortisation period of 20 years to new buildings, some 15 years to large 
equipment with perhaps 5 to 10 years to lesser items with more rapid 
redundancy. The exclusion of accountancy for intellectual property serves to 
hide the true value of JRC scientists and leads to undervaluation of the 
Centre's potential. Both of these latter points carry the implicit criticism of 
unfairness to the private sector in competitions. 
On the scientific side, concern is rightly expressed over instances where 
Groups feel that scientific staff is used for routine tasks which could be 
better performed externally. New work should be rigorously assessed for 
suitability before being accepted and the establishment of "bureaus" 
avoided unless their establishment carries with it a substantial contribution 
from the Centre's laboratories. 
The various Reports seem to me to cohere well on these points. 
5. The evolution of the JRC towards a more competitive regime has been 
widely welcomed in the Groups' Reports. This is another step on a path 
adopted for the reorganisation of the Centre in 1988, following the 
recommendations of the Panel of Senior Industrialists led by Dr. Harry 
Beckers. In most countries, competition in research organisations is now 
considered to be a part of their natural development and the JRC has shown 
a potential in that direction by making a good start with contract research in 
a number of its Institutes. It is felt, however, that confidentiality of know-
how gained in performing contract research should be in general time-
limited, the norm could be some 3 to 5 years except where a longer time 
span might be of special importance such as in particular defence-related 
contracts (now within the JRC's remit), when special conditions might apply. 
6. Most Visiting Groups comment on the problem of inter-Institute or pan-JRC 
project management. With the forthcoming enlargement of the European 
Union, it seems probable that there will have to be a corresponding increase 
in the number of larger scale problems of concern to the Commission. 
Environmental research has already seen a considerable broadening of its 
horizons in the field of EU research activities, and in view of the 
multidisciplinary nature of that type of problem, projects may well tend to 
span the competence of more than one Institute. Examples of this already 
exist with the Centre for Earth Observation or R&D on Nuclear Safeguards, 
and such projects have an obvious subsidiarity value. The appointment of 
senior persons with overall responsibility for such projects is important both 
to ensure their smooth running but also as a clearly identified contact 
person with the outside world. 
7. In addition to the question of inter-Institute coordination, considerable 
interest is shown in aspects of internal management of Institutes. Members 
of Groups more concerned with the operation of research organisations 
subjected to competitive pressures feel uneasy about the lack, here and 
there, of established milestones or other targets by which group and 
individual performance can be accurately assessed. In the relatively few 
cases where adequate systems are operational, the Institute for Safety 
Technology for instance, the resulting clarity and transparency of 
presentation were much appreciated. Such a system should be considered to 
be normal in a centre so much under the public microscope and would 
simplify a posteriori control by management. 
8. To summarise, the tenor of the whole set of Visiting Group Reports, when 
compared to the recommendations of the Panel of Senior Industrialists and 
those of my own more recent Evaluation Panel, indicates that the Centre is 
well on the way to becoming a recognised centre of excellence in many of its 
areas of activity. In some areas, recognition is still lagging behind scientific 
competence and the doors to the world, must be prised further apart. 
However, I am extremely gratified to see that previous advice is being 
effectively followed and that the word "OPENNESS" has entered the JRC 
vocabulary. 
i 
5-
Particular Points from Individual Reports 
9. Institute for Reference Materials and Measurements - Geel 
The most important remarks here concern the staff which is dedicated and 
able, the management which is caring and provides a clear lead; however, 
more freedom to manage resources is recommended. Problems are 
identified regarding the potential duplication of ongoing work in national 
laboratories and the need for a more selective approach to try to reduce the 
excessive number of small items undertaken so that the Institute can 
concentrate on tasks falling within its field of excellence. Questions of 
demarcation between chemical analysis tasks undertaken at Geel and at 
Ispra also arise. Doubts are expressed on the operation of the BCR reference 
materials sector where management and financial problems are foreseen. 
10. Institute for Transuranium Elements - Karlsruhe 
The need to maintain the Institute's strong nuclear interest and to remain a 
centre of excellence was an important theme in the Report. There was 
particular fear that the recruitment system employed by the Commission 
might make the maintenance of an adequate staff of high competence 
difficult to achieve. Attention was drawn to ensuring that exploratory 
research would be directed towards potential developments of the 
Institute's core activities where possible. Tne high scientific level of Institute 
staff was praised and there were doubts about the use of valuable personnel 
on other sites to perform routine analysis. In contract research, the 
Institute's performance is good, although its intellectual property is 
somewhat undervalued, a point to be considered in setting up future 
contracts. Commercial secrecy should be limited in time, both in the interest 
of Member States and to ensure that the high quality of the work will 
enhance the Institute's reputation to the fullest extent. 
This Institute is the recognised centre of European actinide research. 
11. Institute for Advanced Materials (Materials) - Pert en and Ispra 
The Institute has acquired a firm international reputation in its field with 
good success in carrying out contract work and in network activities with 
peer research teams in European and worldwide contexts. As with Karlsruhe 
above, success in gaining research contracts has led to commercial secrecy 
problems. Central rulings on this point could easily lead to a rigid and 
stifling system, but the Marketing Adviser should be particularly concerned 
with giving advice on this question. I am pleased to see that the Visiting 
Group was able to endorse the Institute's long-term research plan based on 
the study of interfaces in material. This is likely to continue the valuable 
contribution made to EU industry by the Institute. 
12. Institute for Advanced Materials (The HFR Reactor) - Petten 
The Visiting Group gives the plant a clean bill of health and of safety, 
recognising its excellent operational reliability and availability. However, 
with the decline in nuclear R&D activities in most Member States, the nettle 
of financial viability needs grasping. The possible use of a significant part of 
the reactor for commercial purposes looks promising but implies that tariffs 
are based on the cost of operation and major efforts to reduce staff and 
operating costs need to be pursued with vigour. At the same time, it is clear 
-6-
that priorities would have to change with operating conditions geared more 
to possible long term industrial clients than to scientific experimentation. 
Such conditions would also place constraints on the Commission's freedom 
to close the plant. An early decision is now required. The Report 
demonstrates that the reactor has been exploited very successfully under its 
R&D regime and that the quality of those involved is undeniable. 
13. Institute for Systems Engineering and Informatics - Ispra 
The Report is generally encouraging and demonstrates the great progress 
achieved since the Panel review. However, the Institute is felt to be 
hampered by the rules under which it operates, these being over rigid and 
uncommercial. Most remarks apply equally to the rest of the JRC and some 
of the more important ones are to be found in section 4. above. Again, the 
importance of a clear and simple project management system is pointed out 
and the difficulties of inter-Institute projects and informatics management 
brought forward. A greater contact with industry is encouraged and the 
adoption of commercial principles in bidding for third party contracts is 
recommended. 
14. Environment Institute - Ispra 
The Report shows an institute producing a very high quality of scientific 
research and service covering a rather over-extended number of items. A 
rigorous selection of priorities could help with the problem. Once again, 
one finds a warning against using highly qualified staff for routine research 
and it is suggested that analytical services should be grouped together as a 
separated service unit. The importance of a staff embracing a wide range of 
disciplines in tackling environmental problems and the growing role of 
computer modelling and international networks is emphasised and the 
Institute is moving in those directions. 
15. Institute for Safety Engineering - Ispra 
It is gratifying to find that the project control and management of the 
Institute receive considerable praise, demonstrating the advantages of good 
practice and transparency for the JRC. While recognising the reduction in 
funding for research on nuclear safety, the Visiting Group was emphatic 
about the importance of the Commission maintaining a viable activity in an 
area where public concern was still high in many EU Member States, 
especially in relation to Central and Eastern Europe. Research into the safe 
handling of tritium and its waste is also essential if future public fears are to 
be avoided when the first large-scale fusion power station demonstration 
plant is undertaken. A further area I consider to be of public importance is 
the developing research on certain aspects of industrial, particularly 
chemical, plant safety. The Group pointed towards the development of 
cooperative actions with other research bodies studying different aspects of 
these problems to build a generic understanding of safety-relevant factors 
in chemical manufacture, and to pursue this action further, recomends 
hiring a few industrial chemists and chemical engineers. Work using the 
new reaction wall facility to study structural behaviour under dynamic 
loading is proceeding well and is very promising and the team at Ispra 
already constitutes an important node in a large international network on 
the subject. However, again there is a warning on not spreading efforts too 
thinly over too wide an area of activity. 
AJ 
7-
16. Institute for Remote Sensing Applications - Ispra 
Up to the present, about 50% of this Institute's activities has been concerned 
with providing tools and methods for use by Commission sectorial services 
responsible for policies concerning agriculture, anti-fraud, environment, 
fisheries, regional aid and overseas development. The Commission's 
Statistical Office is also an important client for the Institute's services. In 
parallel with the above activities, and to improve their capabilities, research 
is carried out on advanced methods of satellite data interpretation and its 
integration with geographical data. The Centre for Earth Observation deals 
with the management of the vast quantities of data emanating from 
terrestrial satellites. The Institute's "customers", express a high degree of 
satisfaction with the services rendered. With the development of Large 
Applications Projects, new networks are being established in which the 
Institute will play an important role. This relatively young and lively 
Institute has become an appreciated partner by organisations such as the 
European Space Agency, the IGBP and national space research centres. The 
Visiting Group was concerned with the development of a viable strateqy for 
the Institute in harmony with national and international centres ancf with 
the transparency of its system for management information. 
17. Institute for Prospective Technological Studies - Ispra 
The Institute, set up in 1988 to provide scientific and technological forecasts 
and advice in support of Commission services, is moving to a new site in 
Seville during the latter part of 1994. The Report points out that the 
Institute had not been able to meet the objectives originally foreseen for 
reasons of lack of designated funding, but had evolved a successful role as a 
scientific and technical advisory unit which should be further developed. 
Under the Fourth Framework Programme funding is available to pursue the 
missing "Observatory " function of the Institute. The Visiting Group praised 
the Institute's small staff and considered the output to be "most 
satisfactory". However, the problem of secrecy was again to the fore and 
even hindered the detailed assessment of the unit's output by the Visiting 
Group, which had to rely on interviews with clients! It is clear that although 
certain advice to policy-makers might have to be on a need-to-know basis, in 
general, the same time-restricted confidentiality system could be applied in 
contracts and agreements as suggested for the rest of the JRC's activities. 
Conclusion 
18. In general, I perceive a very satisfactory response to the recommendations 
made in the Panel report in 1991 and see steady progress since 1988 when 
the JRC structure was changed and the Institutes were established. During 
this time some of the rules of the game have changed, the introduction of 
competition for example, and these pressures are making visible inroads 
into the rigidity of Commission working methods and administrative 
attitudes: further improvement is to be expected as this evolution continues 
and is to be strongly encouraged. 
19. It appears from this first round that the Visiting Group peer review system is 
well suited to the task of evaluating the Centre on an Institute by Institute 
basis. Reports show a good degree of coherence in unerringly identifying 
areas for general improvement. An effort in the directions indicated can 
1. 
-8-
reap large rewards in efficiency and recognition. Concerning the latter 
point, I nave been interested to discover that many members of Groups 
approached the Joint Research Centre with very little idea of either its 
function or its capabilities except for a rather vague and invariably negative 
reputation in national circles. On closer acquaintance, this attitude usually 
changed to a strong interest in the Institute visited, which in a number of 
cases has been followed by a proposal for collaboration in a specialised 
research area. This demonstrates that although the JRC is a much more open 
organisation than formerly, there is still an enormous potential for progress 
in that sense.. Well directed efforts will certainly bring benefits to the 
Centre, the European Union and its Member States. 
20. Much has been achieved and the Board of Governors, Director General, 
Directors and the JRC personnel have brought about a clearly recognisable 
transformation of the Centre. With the Fourth Framework Programme, a 
new phase is beginning under which the Joint Research Centre is given the 
elements to complete this process to emerge as a modern and fully efficient 
research organisation recognised in scientific and political circles as being an 
effective and appropriate tool able to meet the needs of the Commission in 
an evolving European Union. 
n 
Annex I 
Visiting Group for the Evaluation of the Joint Research Centre 
Scope of Visiting Groups 
The chief scope of Visiting Groups is to perform evaluations, taking into account 
the objectives as set out for the 1992-1994 period (in Council documents, relevant 
papers for the Board of Governors, JRC Annual Workschedules, budget, etc.), to 
provide recommendations on the proper course to be followed by the Institute 
visited (or a unit of an Institute) in view of the stated objectives, and to apply in 
the evaluations, elements of the methodology proposed for research returns and 
effectiveness. 
The Visiting Group should: 
perform an evaluation of all activities of the Institute/Unit against its stated 
objectives, with particular emphasis on the impact the results of the work 
has had on the user of this research, and the degree of collaboration 
established with national research laboratories, as well as with industry; 
assess the scientific quality of the work and the appropriateness of the work 
and results for the Community; 
judge all aspects of the efficiency and impact of the work, taking into 
account the particular status of the JRC (its independence in the Community) 
in comparison with similar national laboratories; 
provide advice on the ongoing work on the basis of the evaluations and 
assessments performed; 
express recommendations for the future development of the Institute/Unit 
with regard to the overall strategic plans for development of the JRC in the 
medium-term and long-term. 
Terms of Reference 
1. To evaluate progress in performing work in accordance with the objectives 
set out in Council Resolution 92/C118/03 and Council Decisions 92/273/EEC, 
92/274/Euratom and 92/275/Euratom, documents addressed to the Board of 
Governors, the JRC's Annual Workschedules, budget etc., and to review 
progress in the implementation of the recommendations of the last 
Evaluation Panel. 
To ensure that the Institute/Unit has effective mechanisms to set its local 
scientific objectives, monitor progress towards those objectives and evaluate 
outputs. 
H 
2-
3. To review the various research activities to assess: 
a) the scientific quality and productivity of the Unit/Institute; 
b) whether full advantage is being taken of scientific opportunities in the 
light of funding and other constraints; 
c) the relevance of the work with respect to Community needs, including 
the relevance of work performed for external customers, when 
applicable. 
4. To assess the effectiveness of the scientific management leadership within 
the Institute/Unit. 
5. To advise on whether the Institute/Unit 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/Unit's external 
scientific links, including relationships with research organisations, the 
higher education sector, industry and government departments in the 
Member States, as well as outside the European Community. 
7. To examine the relationship of the Institute's/Unit's work in general, to the 
mission of the Joint Research Centre and to its forward strategic planning. 
8. To make recommendations and report to the Board of Governors of the 
Joint Research Centre. 
ir 
Teddington, 2nd September, 1994 
REPORT OF THE VISITING GROUP 
FOR THE EVALUATION OF THE 
JOINT RESEARCH CENTRE'S 
INSTITUTE FOR REFERENCE MATERIALS 
AND MEASUREMENTS 
K 
CONTENTS 
I. Introduction 
II. General Observations 
III. Scientific and Technical Activities 
111.1 Nuclear Physics and Measurements 
111.2 Reference Materials 
111.3 Exploratory Research 
IV. Management of Research 
IV. 1 Staff 
IV.2 Networking 
IV.3 Output 
V. Recommendations 
V.1 General Points 
V.2 Particular Points 
Annex I: Members of the Visiting Group 
Annex II: Terms of Reference of the Visiting Group 
IS 
If 
Report of the Visiting Group for the Evaluation of the Joint Research Centre's 
Institute for Reference Materials and Measurements (IRMM), Geel, Belgium 
Introduction 
At the invitation of the Board of Governors of the Joint Research Centre 
(JRC), members of the Visiting Group (see Annex I) spent 28-29 March 1994 
at the Institute for Reference Materials and Measurements (IRMM) 
(previously called the Central Bureau for Nuclear Measurements) at Geel 
reviewing the Institute's work and visiting its laboratories. 
The objectives for the Institute are to be found in Annex I, "Scientific and 
Technical Objectives", to Council Decision N° 92/273/EEC of 29th April 
1992 published in the Offical Journal N° L141 of 23rd May 1992. The 
relevant section is as follows: 
"The Central Bureau for Nuclear Measurements will continue its activities 
in both the nuclear and non-nuclear fields of reference materials and 
measurements, notably in the following areas: 
preparation, characterisation and certification of samples, 
long-lived or stable isotope mass spectrometry, 
nuclear data measurements and evaluation, 
radionuclide metrology, 
applied radiation techniques. 
Research also in the growing application of these specialised techniques to 
non-nuclear areas will capitalise on the existing experimental facilities 
including the particle accelerators. Activities in support of consumer 
protection policy will be continued ...". 
These general objectives are concurrent with the JRC's mission and are 
hiqhlignted in the scope of the Visiting Groups. As set out in the terms of 
reference (see Annex II), the Visiting Group should: 
• evaluate all activities of the Institute against its stated objectives, 
with particular emphasis on the impact the results of the work has 
had on the users of this research, and the degree of collaboration 
established with national research organisations, as well as with 
industry; 
• assess the scientific auality of the work and the appropriateness of 
the work and results Tor the Community; 
• judge all aspeas of the efficiency and impact of the work, taking into 
account the particular status of the JRC (its independence in the 
Community) in comparison with similar national bodies; 
• provide advice on the ongoing work on the basis of the evaluations 
and assessments performed; 
• express recommendations for the future development of the Institute 
with regard to the overall strategic plans for development of the JRC 
in the medium-term and long-term. 
2^ 
General Observations 
During the 1992-1994 programme in course, the name of the Institute was 
changed to the "Institute for Reference Materials and Measurements". 
Activities were carried out under the Specific Programme on Measurement 
and Testing of the Third Framework Programme for Community Activities 
in the fielcfof Research and Technological Development, support to other 
Commission services and a small amount of contract research for external 
third parties. 
Work under the Specific Programme included: 
neutron interaction data for standards, nuclear fission and fusion 
technology; 
radionuclide data and activities; 
. high accuracy in isotope ratio measurements by mass spectrometry; 
development for quality control analysis; 
reference materials for elemental analysis, isotope ratio 
measurements and reactor neutron dosimetry; 
aerosol and surface reference materials; 
samples and target preparation; 
materials management on behalf of the "Bureau communautaire de 
référence (BCR). 
Support to other Commission services was at present concentrated on: 
DG I (International Affairs - Nuclear Safeguards); 
DG III (Internal Market); 
DG VI (Agriculture); 
DG XIII (Technology Valorisation); 
DG XVII (ECSAM; Nuclear Safeguards); 
Consumer Policy Service: (protection and promotion of consumer 
interests). 
Contract research for third parties: 
This comprised a relatively minor activity at the present time. 
The Visiting Group felt that in the time available it was not possible to 
carry out a detailed audit but an overall appreciation was gained and valid 
judgments were possible. The objectives of IRMM were generally taken as 
given. A full assessment could not be made of whether the tasks or 
organisation were fully justified or the best possible arrangement. 
ÍA 
or 
ch 3-
lt was noted that the change of institution name represented a maj 
emphasis that had occurred after the Council Decision of 1992 whicn 
established the objectives of the Institute. The Group was uncertain about 
the validity of the name change but felt the new name to bè more 
appropriate to the present IRMM research profile. 
The management and staff provided a good level of information to brief 
the visiting Group, were open, cooperative and tolerant in responding to 
many questions and requests for more information. The Group would Tike 
to thank all those concerned. 
In all areas we found dedicated and able staff who displayed a high level 
of expertise. In some areas world class work was recognised and strong 
input to international cooperation and networking was evident. The 
culture was one of technical excellence but there was generally a 
willingness to respond positively to change including increasing 
competition. 
The management was caring and attentive, providing a clear technical 
and management lead whilst allowing staff to contribute. Some of the 
JRC procedures and requirements were unhelpful and contributed to 
delays in the timely deployment of resources. An example of the difficulty 
is the slow recruitment procedure and the relative lack of freedom to 
manage local resources against an agreed corporate plan. 
III. Scientific and Technical Activities 
111.1 Nuclear Physics and Measurements 
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. Connections through long-established networks with the 
few other institutes in the world engaged in these activities were 
appropriate and the teams were meeting the needs expressed by 
international committees managing the accumulation of data in relation 
to present and predicted needs. 
At the same time, considerable creativity was being shown in attempting 
to increase the application of methods and experimental equipment to 
fulfil other needs. The presence of young post-doctorate fellows was a 
considerable asset in that respect and the relationship with permanent 
staff was demonstrably symbiotic. 
The Group noted that the Linac GELINA, with its ultra-high resolution, was 
being overhauled and updated. At present, in terms of resolution, the 
machine is probably the best in the world. Moreover, in view of the 
excellence of the very considerable installations such as the Linac and the 
van de Graff accelerators, it is important that the investments they 
represent should be utilised to the maximum. This may mean applying a 
much greater effort towards their application to the advancement of 
European industry, as well as their use for purely basic scientific ends. This 
effort will require a much more intensive approach to possible partners or 
clients and a clearer understanding of commercial and sales 
considerations. However, this is unlikely to result in more than a 10% use 
for such purposes. 
2^ 
4-
Some four years after the completion of the refurbishement of the 
GELINA it would be wise to review its work and situation in scientific, 
economic and organisational terms. 
The quality of ongoing work is not in doubt but in the changing situation, 
attention must be paid to the potential added value of the intellectual 
property available. Amongst other things, the development of the use of 
Van de Graff for Rutherford scattering as an analytical tool seems 
particularly promising. 
The question of subsidiarity does not seem to be of great importance in 
this area, as such equipment is either unique or rare in member States, 
particularly if the accompanying expertise is taken into account. At the 
same time, the work in this field is seen to be important and regulated 
and monitored externally, although the bodies concerned do not handle 
the funds and are therefore not really "customers" in the classical.sense; 
this implies that a more critical internal progress review system may be 
needed in the future. 
An area where some members of the Visiting Group had some 
reservations was in data processing and informatics where it was felt that 
streamlining and the adoption of a more modern and distributed 
approach would be more appropriate. 
III.2 Reference Materials 
This item includes analytical science, mass spectrometry and sample 
preparation. 
Facilities in this area were also found to be excellent, particularly where 
the clean laboratory and mass spectrometry facilities were concerned 
which were of worla standard and the analytical laboratories which were 
very well equipped. 
Staff were extremely competent and include scientists of international 
repute. The part played by Geel in the redetermination of the Avogadro 
number has brought international recognition with implications for the 
traceability of chemical standards. Apart from the subject of this highly 
networked activity, there is spin-off into the improvement of isotope 
dilution techniques, an important technique for analytical purposes. 
Chemical metrology is important and more effort should be concentrated 
on the improvement of separation and extraction techniques, as well as 
the problems of reliable sampling and homogenisation. This work should 
also be networked with and support other standards' laboratories in 
Europe and, where appropriate, elsewhere. 
Actinide reference materials are the reference against which fissionable 
materials are measured for international safeguards. Geel provides an 
important part of these sources, both in Europe and elsewhere. 
The Institute has also initiated and coordinates the International 
Measurement Evaluation Programme (IMEP). A large worldwide network 
of laboratories participate in this action and their acceptance of IRMM's 
role as coordinator stands witness to its reputation as a centre of scientific 
excellence in that area. 
"ZJ 
5-
The Group was concerned about the economics of the reference materials 
action performed on behalf of the Community Reference Bureau (BCR). 
We understand that the staff involved would be paid from the Institute's 
budget but that sales will have to provide the funds needed to produce 
new reference materials and for the provision and re-certification of 
replacements for time-expired or exhausted stocks of existing materials. 
In moving into a competitive situation, a very careful analysis by business 
experts will be particularly important if the Union is to be provided with a 
permanent, reliable and cost effective service. To obtain such advice, 
detailed costing of staff, materials, operational procedures, storage and 
investments will certainly be needed. Consideration should be given to 
contracting out the provision of this service to a commercial organisation. 
Furthermore, quality assurance under an internationally recognised 
standard such as ISO 9000 will be essential as many of the organisations 
using the products are already accredited or are becoming so. 
The Group was concerned that Geel should concentrate on its core area of 
very high quality reference materials and measurements and not use 
expensive resources of staff and equipment for routine work. 
A clearer definition of work carried out at Ispra and that performed at 
Geel seemed to be needed as was greater selectivity in jobs accepted from 
other Commission services where cheaper alternatives could sometimes be 
found. 
Exploratory Research 
In examining on going exploratory and discretionary research at Geel, the 
Visiting Group noted that the two most important projects were linked to 
the Institutes activities in different ways. The "Radiation Physics" project 
may well widen the application of GELINA and can lead to more physicists 
wishing to use the facility. On the other hand, the investigation of protein 
and peptide components of metallothioneine is more concerned with 
work falling under Support to the Consumer Policy Service. Further 
development of such work on applied and basic biochemistry at IRMM has 
implications on the long-term forward planning of the Institute and 
should be a matter for very careful review. 
IV. Management of Research 
IV.1 Staff 
With the low rate of staff turnover it was felt to be extremely important 
to maintain a good flow of postdoctoral and other research fellows and 
visiting scientists in the Institute. 
The level of expertise was considered to be very high at senior staff level 
and their replacement will require careful planning at retirement time. A 
more flexible recruitment system able to operate more swiftly and a 
consistent staff training and career development policy would help to 
meet the changing situation in research and establish the desired staff 
profile in the years to come. (Some 5% of available time spent on staff 
development would be reasonable.) 
"2H 
6-
Members felt that it would also be useful to examine the use of short-term 
appointments or long-term attachments, of three to five years, with 
guaranteed return to their institute of origin to increase the throughput 
of scientists at IRMM and enhance knowledge transfer. 
IV.2 Networking 
Tasks are well defined in key areas but in those where qualitatively new 
venture have been initiated definitions are less clear and not yet 
integrated into strategic orientations. 
Further efforts applied to defining the Institute's tasks and its effective 
boundaries would considerably help with education and training and with 
maintaining morale and interest at all staff levels. 
The nature of the tasks performed at Geel has naturally led to the 
development of networks and such actions are considered to be an 
important means of information dissemination, scientific exchange and 
generally ensuring the Institute's place in the European Union andWorld 
at large. This is strongly encouraged. 
A better feeling amongst scientific managers for hourly staff costs and 
real availability would help with planning in a more competitive world. 
IV.3 Output 
This was seen to take diverse forms such as data, reference materials, 
certificates, as well as the more traditional ones of articles in learned 
journals, presentations at conferences etc. Taken overall, the quality and 
quantity are considered to be satisfactory and in many cases represent 
significant contributions to their respective fields of endeavour. A share 
of these has come from the young scientists. However, continuous 
performance monitoring can help to improve the value of the JRC as 
perceived by scientists and managers in Member States and efforts to 
increase output can only result in a wider and improved reputation. 
The temptation to demonstrate willingness by taking on work of an 
unsuitable or routine nature should be resisted. 
V. Recommendations 
With these recommendations, the Visiting Group would like to contribute 
to the further evaluation and development of the activities at IRMM. The 
points indicated should be taken into consideration at the various levels of 
decision making and management. The Visiting Group notes that some 
elements indicated in these recommendations are already being 
employed in some form and it also underlines that in the implementation 
of such recommendations account has to be taken of the specifics of the 
various research areas at IRMM. 
V.1 General Points 
There is a need for greater clarity about the mission of IRMM, having 
regard for the needs of the EU, the mission of other JRC Institutes, 
subsidiarity and the special capability at IRMM. 
2 V 
-7-
High level performance measures should also be set and monitored. 
There is a need for a robust scrutiny of project proposals to ensure they 
satisfy a priority EU need and that the IRMM is best placed in terms of cost 
and technical capability to deliver the work. Such scrutiny should take 
place during the preparatory phase of programme generations. Effective 
management and value for money depend critically on the existence of 
independent customers for IRMM work who also have responsibility for an 
input to the framework programme work commissioned from Member 
States. 
The spread of technologies and techniques at IRMM should be reviewed 
with a view to reducing the spread and increasing the depth in selected 
areas. In particular the roles of IRMM and Ispra in the field of chemical 
analysis should be reviewed and rationalised to achieve greater economy 
of scale. 
The level of laboratory facilities is high compared with staff numbers. This 
applied to both big facilities such as the linear accelerator and a vast array 
of smaller pieces of equipment. A more business-like approach is required 
which starts with knowledge of the true cost of ownership. By a 
combination of better focussing of work, down sizing, where appropriate, 
and business growth in selected areas it would be possible to increase the 
return on capital. It is recommended that a programme to assess true 
costs be initiated alongside an assessment of market opportunities and 
business development. 
As a more customer orientated programme develops more attention will 
need to be paid to project management with systems in place for project 
planning, cost control, milestone setting and monitoring. 
The proposed review of QA needs is welcome and consideration needs to 
be given to ISO 9000, ISO 25, TQM and benchmarking approaches. It is 
recommended that benchmarking be carried out for selected 
management and technical functions against other comparable 
organisations in national government ownership and privately owned. 
Benchmarking should provide information such as cost of work, cost of 
facilities, output per scientist, cost per scientist. 
Many of the facilities represent major European resources which should 
be made more widely available to Member States. Work of EU and 
Member States' interest should be facilitated free of charge against a 
budget held by DG XII and within current levels of funding. 
Some of the work carried out was in competition with that undertaken by 
Member States and in some instances there is a danger of heavily 
subsidised IRMM activities being in direct competition with more cost 
effective commercial work in Member States. Examples of this are the 
chemical method development and chemical reference materials work 
carried out in support of EU agricultural, environment and consumer 
safety policy. It is recommended that review of these activities be carried 
out to determine whether it is possible to deliver this work in a more cost 
effective way within Member State institutions and if appropriate to 
advise on the resolution of competitive and subsidiarity conflicts. 
7¿ 
-8 
V.2 Particular Points 
The move towards a competitive model for the Institute is 
applauded both as a means of increasing scientific vitality and 
awareness of staff, but also as a demonstration of the Institute's 
ability and usefulness. 
Effort must be applied to increasing, where possible, contract 
research and services to industry and other clients. 
The cost effectiveness of facilities should be established and those 
that need to be retained should be marketed in government and 
industry on an international basis. 
Mechanisms should be put in place to establish the full economic cost 
of work and comparisons of cost made with similar work in other 
organisations. 
Independent customers should be established who are responsible 
for defining the requirements and commissioning work in the most 
cost effective way. The customers should also be responsible for 
work commissioned from Member States within the Framework 
Programme. 
Where possible, two-way temporary staff exchanges should be set 
up as a means of cross-fertilisation. 
Rigorous selection should be applied to work carried out by the 
Institute and a clear forward plan adopted. Work division between 
Geel and other JRC Institutes should be established and recognised. 
The roles of IRMM and Ispra in chemical analysis should be reviewed. 
Chemical method development and associated reference materials 
development in support of agricultural, environmental and 
consumer safety policy should be reviewed to determine whether 
this work could be carried out more effectively within Member State 
institutions. 
Commercial advice should be sought in a number of areas and 
particularly for the management of reference materials where 
doubts about future profitability exist. Contracting out to a 
commercial organisation should be considered. 
International cooperations on chemical traceability should be 
continued but work should be extended to include sampling and 
homogenisation of analytical samples. 
More freedom to manage resources against an agreed corporate 
plan should be given to the Director. The rigidity of administration 
procedures should be reduced, especially where delays in 
recruitment are concerned. 
,¿f 
Annex I 
Visiting Group to the Joint Research Centre's Institute for 
Reference Materials and Measurements (IRMM) - Geel 
Members 
Dr. Maria Grazia DEL MONTE, 
Director, 
National Centre for Reference Materials, 
Via di Castel Romano 100-102, 
1-00129 Rome. Tel. + 39-6-505.52.61 
Fax. + 39-6-505.02.50 
Dr.RobertKAARLS, 
Director, 
Netherlands Measurement Institute, 
P.O. Box 654, 
NL-2628 VK Delft. 
(Schoemakerstraat 97, 
NL-2600 AR Delft.) Tel. + 31-15-69.15.07 
Fax. + 31-15-61.29.71 
Dr. Bernard KING (Chairman), 
Director, 
Analytical Quality, 
Laboratory of the Government Chemist, 
Queens Road, 
Teddington, 
UK-TW11 0LW Middlesex. Tel. + 44-81-943.76.00 
Fax. +44-81-943.75.93/943.27.67 
Prof. Thomas SCHOENFELD, 
Institute of Inorganic Chemistry, 
University of Vienna, 
Wáhringerstrasse 42, 
A-1090 Vienna. Tel. +43-1-403.05.44/310.23.85 
Fax. +43-1-403.05.44 
Secretary 
Mr. SamuelJ. LLOYD, 
Avenue Reine Elisabeth 8, 
B-1330Rixensart. Tel. + 32-2-295.40.48 (office) 
+ 32-2-654.09.44 (home) 
Fax. +32-2-295.01.46 
n 
z* 'J 
Annex II 
Visiting Group f pr the Evaluation of the Joint Research Centre's 
institute for Reference Materials and Measurements (IRMM) - Geel 
Scope of Visiting Groups 
The chief scope of Visiting Groups is to perform evaluations, taking into account 
the objectives as set out for the 1992-1994 period (in Council documents, relevant 
papers for the Board of Governors, JRC Annual Workschedules, budget, etc.), to 
provide recommendations on the proper course to be followed by the Institute 
visited in view of the stated objectives, and to apply in the evaluations, elements 
of the methodology proposed for research returns and effectiveness. 
The Visiting Group should: 
perform an evaluation of all activities of the Institute against its stated 
objectives, with particular emphasis on the impact the results of the work 
has had on the user of this research, and the deqree of collaboration 
established with national research laboratories, as well as with industry; 
assess the scientific quality of the work and the appropriateness of the work 
and results for the Community; 
judge all aspects of the efficiency and impact of the work, taking into 
account the particular status of the JRC (its independence in the Community) 
in comparison with similar national laboratories; 
provide advice on the ongoing work on the basis of the evaluations and 
assessments performed; 
express recommendations for the future development of the Institute with 
regard to the overall strategic plans for development of the JRC in the 
medium-term and long-term. 
Terms of Reference 
To evaluate progress in performing work in accordance with the objectives 
set out in Council Resolution 92/C118/03 and Council Decisions 92/273/EEC, 
92/274/Euratom and 92/275/Euratom, documents addressed to the Board of 
Governors, the JRC's Annual Workschedules, budget etc., and to review 
progress in the implementation of the recommendations of the last 
Evaluation Panel. 
2. To ensure that the Institute has effective mechanisms to set its local scientific 
objectives, monitor progress towards those objectives and evaluate outputs. 
3¿> 
-2 
3. To review the various research activities to assess: 
a) the scientific quality and productivity of the Institute; 
b) whether full advantage is being taken of scientific opportunities in the 
light of funding and other constraints; 
c) the relevance of the work with respect to Community needs, including 
the relevance of work performed for external customers, when 
applicable. 
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 relationships with research organisations, the higher 
education sector, industry and government departments in the Member 
States, as well as outside the European Community. 
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. 
8. To make recommendations and report to the Board of Governors of the 
Joint Research Centre. 
3-í 
Stockholm, 28th January 1994 
REPORT OF THE VISITING GROUP 
FOR THE EVALUATION OF THE 
JOINT RESEARCH CENTRE'S 
INSTITUTE FOR ADVANCED MATERIALS 
•)t 
33 
CONTENTS 
I. Introduction page 1 
II. General Observations pages 1-3 
III. Scientific and Technical Areas pages 3-5 
111.1 Materials in Extreme Environments page 3 
111.2 Reliability of Life Extension page 3 
111.3 Surface Modification Technology page 3 
111.4 Fusion Materials page 4 
111.5 Non-Destructive Testing page 4 
111.6 The Cyclotron page 4 
111.7 Materials Information page 4-5 
IV. Prenormative Research page 5 
V. Exploratory Research pages 5-6 
VI. Networking page 6 
VII. Publications page 6 
VIII. Future Scientific Trends page 6 
IX. Management page 7 
X. Recommendations page 7-8 
Annex I: Members of the Visiting Group 
Annex II: Terms of Reference of the Visiting Group 
>/' 
3f 
Report of the Visiting Group for the Evaluation of the Joint Research Centre's 
Institute for Advanced Materials. Petten (The Netherlands) and Ispra (Italy) 
Introduction 
At the invitation of the Board of Governors of the Joint Research Centre 
(JRC), members of the Visiting Group (see Annex I) spent the 14-17 
December 1993 at the Institute for Advanced Materials (IAM) at Petten and 
Ispra reviewing the Institute's work and visiting its laboratories. 
The objectives for the Institute are to be found in Annex I of Council 
Decision 92/273(EEC) and 92/274/Euratom of 29 April 1992. 
The main objectives are to contribute to enhancing European industrial 
competitiveness and the safety of components and structures, relevant 
mainly to the energy, transport, environment and manufacturing sectors, 
through advances in the understanding of the basic properties, the 
processability and engineering performance of materials. 
These general objectives are concurrent with the JRC's mission and are 
highlighted in the scope of the Visiting Groups. As set out in the terms of 
reference (see Annex II), the Visiting Group should: 
• evaluate all activities of the Institute against its stated objectives, with 
particular emphasis on the impact the results of the work has had on 
the users of this research, and the degree of collaboration established 
with national research organisations, as well as with industry; 
• assess the scientific Quality of the work and the appropriateness of 
the work and results for the Community; 
• judge all aspects of the efficiency and impact of the work, taking into 
account the particular status of the JRC (its independence in the 
Community) in comparison with similar national bodies; 
• provide advice on the ongoing work on the basis of the evaluations 
and assessments performed; 
• express recommendations for the future development of the Institute 
with regard to the overall strategic plans for development of the JRC 
in the medium-term and long-term. 
General Observations 
The Institute's functional structure is set out below. The High Flux Reactor 
(HFR) is not included in this Report, having already been visited by experts 
in research reactors and the subject of a recent report. The structure of the 
Institute is as follows: 
High Flux Reactor Petten 
Materials Processing and Engineering Petten 
Materials Characterisation Petten 
Non-Destructive Testing Petten (recently transferred 
from Ispra) 
3¿ 
-2 
Functional Materials Development Ispra 
and Cyclotron 
Materials Performance and Reliability Ispra 
The Visiting Group examined the Institute in detail and found the work and 
scientific output to be very good or excellent in most areas and of a truly 
international standard. The targeting of the work was good and staff 
showed a clear understanding of objectives. 
The Institute is well managed. However, the Visiting Group believes that 
the Director should be given more responsibility for running the Institute, 
particularly in the recruitment of staff, and that consideration should be 
given to exempting the Institute from some internal European Commission 
procedures. 
The Institute is undoubtedly expensive, with high overheads on its 
research. However, the Visiting Group is convinced of the need for a 
European institute of this type in the key strategic area of advanced 
materials. Given this need, the Visiting Group accepts that there are many 
various reasons for the high overheads, including the need to pay 
competitive salaries, the inherent expenses of running a high flux reactor 
and a cyclotron, and so on. The Visiting Group saw no evidence of waste. 
The Visiting Group believes that funding of the Institute should move 
towards a "core plus competitive" funding model. Contract work for third 
parties, mainly industry, has built up rapidly in the last few years and is at 
present running at about 8% of the total budget. The Visiting Group 
believes that the aim should be to increase this to 10% over the next few 
years. Such contract work is not only useful financially, but it also builds up 
real links with industries in the Member States. The Visiting Group 
welcomed the proposal at present under discussion at the political level to 
allow the JRC to participate in Framework Programme schemes, for 
example BRITE/EURAM. It is recommended that the aim of the Institute 
should be to obtain about 20% of its funding competitively from 
Framework Programme schemes over the next few years. Apart from the 
increased competitive funding element this would introduce, the Visiting 
Group believes that bidding for, and participation in, collaborative 
research through Framework Programme schemes would greatly 
strengthen the Institute's links with universities, research institutes and 
industries in the Member States and would be wholly beneficial. 
Orientation was greatly aided by the extensive use of colloquia, round 
table discussions and workshops, with strong industrial representation, 
when setting up programmes and activities, tnus creating a consensus in 
the materials science community. In the same way, seminars, conferences, 
expert meetings and publications in relevant international journals 
ensured that scientists were kept abreast of progress. 
The detailed internal annual review of all areas of work and project control 
were felt to be important factors in demonstrating and maintaining the 
level of excellence. 
The Institute is considered to hold the lead position in the special area of 
research on High Temperature Materials, particularly for its work on 
corrosion/mechanical properties interactions both for its expertise and for 
its equipment. This should be built on to further improve its image and to 
play key European roles by: 
n 
3-
exchanqes of staff; 
network establishment and participation in Framework Programme 
schemes; 
giving impartial advice on standards; 
encouragement of the introduction of advanced materials to improve 
competitiveness. 
III. Scientific and Technical Areas 
111.1 Materials in Extreme Environments 
In the study of behaviour of industrial materials in extreme service 
environments, the Institute at present occupies an internationally-
acknowledged leading position. 
The Visiting Group considers that the area is still an important one and that 
this work should continue to be emphasised. The Institute's well deserved 
reputation should be built on by placing more weight on aspects of stress 
analysis with the recruitment of an applied mechanics expert as soon as 
feasible. More emphasis could also be placed on computer modelling and 
integration with engineering design. Concerning the first aspect, this 
should preferably be handledby setting up networks with universities and 
research institutes. With regard to the second, this would profit from close 
interfacing with engineering design teams. 
The study of metallic, ceramic and composite materials for high 
temperature applications is of considerable importance to industry and 
networks and joint research programmes with universities, industrial 
research and government research organisations should be encouraged. 
111.2 Reliability of Life Extension 
The difficult and expensive experimental activities in this area show good 
results and some useful spinoffs to industry. However, the core area of this 
research should concentrate on developing more advanced procedures for 
assessing operational damage. Other aspects would profit from more 
intensive collaborations with external research bodies. 
111.3 Surface Modification Technology 
The Visiting Group was satisfied by the very rapid establishment of this area 
of activity at the Institute. After a short time useful results are already 
being obtained and the major equipment is functional. Work should now 
be focused on contributing to high temperature industrial applications of 
these techniques and this perspertive should be introduced as early as 
possible to these activities with emphasis on the production of data which 
will stimulate increased industrial use of the techniques. The Group did not 
feel that wear studies should be developed in the Institute as the subject 
was highly researched in many other places and was somewhat out of line 
with other Institute topics. A networking approach could help to avoid 
duplication of equipment and scientific effort. 
38 
-4 
111.4 Fusion Materials 
Although a small area of activity, very good and important work had been 
done up to the present on materials screening and selection in connection 
with the Community Fusion Programme. The priority given to this work 
must depend on the needs expressed by the programme managers as the 
Visiting Group itself felt unable to make a valid judgment on this highly 
specialised materials application. However, Members would warn the 
team against entering the field of tritium hermetic ceramic composite 
structures without adequate industrial, engineering and financial support 
as the subject was a vast one with strong dependence on proprietary know-
how which might not be easily available. 
An adequate data base on materials for fusion was in any case of high 
importance. 
111.5 Non-Destructive Testing 
This activity had been extremely useful in the past (PISC programme) and 
was at present being transferred from Ispra to Petten. The Visiting Group 
considered this to be an advantage as the previous nuclear orientation of 
the team could now be turned towards high temperature materials 
applications where a close collaboration with scientists working on the 
assessment of creep damage and remaining lifetime in high temperature 
plant could lead to great savings and an improvement in safety. This area 
should be vigorously pursued and work extended to include ceramics and 
composites in the future. To advance as rapidly as possible it was essential 
that the entire team and equipment be reunited at Petten without delay. 
The task was a very challenging and important one with very considerable 
industrial applications, both on bulk materials and coatings. 
Plant in the energy and process industries was ageing and would come to 
rely more and more on reliable Non-Destructive Evaluation to assure 
continued operation and the amount of work on the topic carried out in 
universities was limited emphasising the work at Petten. The Institute 
should, however, be encouraged to collaborate in this research with 
universities and other research bodies. 
III.6 The Cyclotron 
The main objective of this equipment was the study of damage in materials 
destined for fusion applications. Unfortunately, there were few other uses 
in the Institute's other activities and external users had been sought to 
enable the installation to remain economic. However, use by other 
research programmes did not appear to be forthcoming and alternative 
solutions should be examined. 
As the remaining work is of high quality and importance to fusion 
materials research, if the Cyclotron Becomes unavailable the possible use of 
other facilities should be examined. 
III.7 Materials Information 
The establishment of data for advanced materials is an essential part of 
their introduction into industrial use. Easy access to comprehensive data is 
vital for industry. 
3? 
Due to the developments during the last few years the HTM Databank is 
now in a very attractive form. To ensure that a much wider use of the 
databank is achieved, two actions should betaken: 
i) most of the information in the system (for example all data which is 
older than five years) should be declassified to research organisations 
in the EU and EFTA countries. The confidential data has, to a large 
extent, been generated in the COST framework and other European 
programmes with financial contributions from the national 
governments anyway; 
ii) the Institute should participate in European programmes like the 
European Collaborative Creep Committee where valuable use of the 
data can be found. 
Data banks are not in general commercially viable and often contain 
confidential and restricted data. The JRC, with its central and neutral 
Position, is in an ideal position to develop and supervise this type of data 
ase which is indeed closely connected to the Institute's research. 
A number of new data bases appear to be needed, not only to handle data 
like the HTM Data Bank, but also to be a source of constitutive equations. 
There is considerable need to be found for this type of database in thermal 
fatigue research. To save time and avoid duplication of studies, such a 
databank could preferably be set up as a network in the sense that 
participating institutes have their own data banks which they fill with data 
and this data is then exchanged between the partners to create a true 
European system. This approach has successfully been utilised for 
Thermodata Europe. 
IV. Prenormative Research 
The Institute should develop further prenormative research. Although not 
at the cutting-edge of science and technology, this type of research ensures 
that results can really be used in practice. Work should be concentrated in 
areas where there is a realistic prospect of application. In this respect, the 
proposed European Prenormative Research Associations (EPRA) and 
EPRA-M (for Materials) could prove to be a realistic means of assessing 
European requirements in this kind or research and providing a suitable 
forum. The Institute has demonstrated its possibilities in this area and this 
will hopefully lead to appropriate and usable standards. Such work can 
best be pursued as an international exercise and the Institute, by its nature, 
is highly suited to such activities. The Institute should be encouraged to 
have a coordinating role in the development of materials standards rn 
Europe, working closely with national standards laboratories. Work in this 
area has to be considered of high importance when comparing the 
situation in Europe with that in the U.S.A., or even increasing prenormative 
efforts in Japan. 
V. Exploratory Research 
The Visiting Group was impressed by and strongly supports the exploratory 
research programmes of the Institute. The Group considers exploratory 
research to be an important means of stimulating scientists to feed new 
Í^O 
ideas into mainline activities and to explore alternative approaches and 
new techniques suitable for application within the Institute. 
Such activities should be frequently reviewed and either transferred to 
mainline research or terminated. To emphasise its exploratory character, it 
is expected that many projects would be terminated at an early date to 
make room for more promising ideas, only the best being retainer/. 
VI. Networking 
The Visiting Group was pleased to see a positive attitude to networking in 
the Institute. In its main fields, the Institute could consider itself to be the 
natural leader (due to its competence) of networks, but it should be 
realised that at present, when research funding is limited, resources would 
have to be provided by the Commission. In that respect, access to compete 
in Framework Programme Shared Cost Actions might be handled on a 
collaborative level with other research units, thus forming the basis of a 
network. In addition, if the Institute was a full partner in BRITE/EURAM 
programmes it would greatly strengthen collaboration between the 
Institute and leading laboratories in the Member States. 
Members of the Group pointed out that exchanges should be two-way and 
that mobility must be expected from JRC staff as well as from their 
partners. This would be of great benefit for knowledge transfer and 
acquiring and passing-on new laboratory techniques. Visits should include 
established scientists which would further increase the Institute's visibility 
in the outside world. 
The possibility of PhD students dividing their time more equally between 
the JRC and their universities should be examined (six months in each per 
year). JRC staff could aid in the setting-up of materials laboratories 
elsewhere in Member States. 
VII. Publications 
The Group was pleased to see a good level of 43 articles published in 
appropriate international scientific journals during the year, and 
favourably impressed by the level of 52 papers contributed to international 
conferences of which 15 were invited. These figures demonstrate the 
interest shown in the Institute's work in the international arena. There 
were also some 22 articles in European journals and 28 papers to European 
conferences. 
VIII. Future Scientific Trends 
The Visiting Group strongly agreed with the Director's plan for the Institute 
that interfaces in materials should be the major theme. The structure and 
properties of interfaces are critical to the performance of a wide range of 
materials, particularly high temperature materials, and interfaces are not 
well understood. 
V/ 
7-
IX. Management 
The Institute was well managed, with scientific staff enthusiastic and 
spending a high proportion of their time on scientific and technical tasks. 
The systematic use of workshops in assessing new possibilities and the 
follow up audits of activities was shown to be effective. However, the 
Institute should not be overburdened with irrelevant committees and in 
that connection Members of the Group did not feel that the local Scientific 
Committee served any useful purpose. Scientific or managerial advice 
could be better obtained from academic and industrial scientists of 
requisite experience and from proven managerial experts. 
Ideas from staff members would seem to be adequately catered for by the 
possibilities opened by exploratory research activities. 
The ratio of support staff to scientists was felt to be rather high in 
comparison with universities and many industrial laboratories. 
The transfer of responsibility to local Directors was recognised and 
encouraged. In that respect, maximum transparency of overall budget and 
staff matters was essential. However, much was to be desired in the 
recruitment of staff which appeared too slow and rigid for a scientific 
institute. 
In view of the relatively high man/year costs, the Institute must concentrate 
on its core activities where its exceptional results were vital to a successful 
reaction from potential clients and scientific collaborators. 
X. Recommendations 
• The Director should be given more managerial responsibility, 
particularly in staff appointments. 
• The Institute should move towards a "core plus competitive" funding 
model. 
• The Institute should aim at obtaining 10% of its funding from 
external contract work from industry over the next few years. 
• The Institute should be allowed to participate fully in Framework 
Programme schemes such as BRITE/EURAM. It should obtain about 
20% of its funding competitively from such schemes over the next few 
years. 
• Work on advanced high temperature materials should continue as the 
main core activity. 
• An applied mechanics expert should be added to the team. 
• Transfer of non-destructive testing staff from Ispra to Petten should 
be completed without delay. 
• Surface modification work needs clearer alignment towards industrial 
needs. 
'il* 
-8-
Computer modelling should be increased where appropriate and 
maximum use made of networking with other organisations to meet 
these needs. 
A programme of exchanges of scientists with other organisations 
shouldbe set up. JRC staff should be included in exchanges. 
The prenormative area should be developed as a typical JRC activity. 
The JRC should be source of impartial advice and expertise on 
materials standards. 
Publication in the most respected scientific journals should be 
encouraged. 
An early decision should be taken on the future of the Cyclotron. 
Open access data bases should be set up where possible. 
The long-term research plan of interfaces in materials is a highly 
suitable path for the Institute to follow. 
f5 
Annex I 
Visiting Group to the Joint Research 
Institute for Advanced Materials (IAM-Mat) - Ispra and Petten 
Members 
Prof. Claude BATH1AS, Tel. +33-1-40.27.23.22 
Department of Metallurgy, + 33-1-40.27.26.33 
Conservatoire National Fax. +33-1-40.27.23.22 
des Arts et Métiers (CNAM), 
292 Rue St. Martin, 
F-75003 Paris. 
(Professor of Mechanical Engineering, Head of Institue for Technology and 
Advanced Materials at CNAM, Fellow of the American Society for Materials, 
Voting Member of the American Society for Testing and Materials) 
Prof. Colin J. HUMPHREYS, Tel. +44-223-33.44.57 
Head of Department and Goldsmiths' +44-223-33.44.58 
Professor of Materials* Science, Fax. +44-223-33.44.37 
Department of Materials' 
Science and Metallurgy, 
Pembroke Street, 
University of Cambridge, 
UK-Cambridge CB2 3QZ. 
(Member of Academia Europaea, Vice-President of the UK Materials Institute, 
Director of Rolls-Royce University Technology Centre) 
Prof. Rolf SANDSTRÔM (Chairman), 
Swedish Institute for Metals Research, 
Drottning Kristinas vàg 48, 
S-l 1428 Stockholm. Tel. +46-8-790.83.20 
Fax. +46-8-20.31.07 
(Professor of Applied Materials Technology at the Royal Institute of Technology, 
Vice-Dean of the School of Mechanical and Materials Engineering and Chairman 
of the Materials Centre at the same university) 
Secretary 
Mr. Samuel J. LLOYD, 
Avenue Reine Elisabeth 8, 
B-1330Rixensart. Tel. + 32-2-295.40.48 (office) 
+ 32-2-654.09.44 (home) 
Fax. +32-2-295.01.46 
¿/v 
y< 
Annex II 
Visiting Group for the Evaluation of the Joint Research Centre's 
Institute for Advanced Materials (1AM) - Petten and Ispra 
Scope of Visiting Groups 
The chief scope of Visiting Groups is to perform evaluations, taking into account 
the objectives as set out for the 1992-1994 period (in Council documents, relevant 
papers for the Board of Governors, JRC Annual Workschedules, budget, etc.), to 
provide recommendations on the proper course to be followed by the Institute 
visited in view of the stated objectives, and to apply in the evaluations, elements 
of the methodology proposed for research returns and effectiveness. 
The Visiting Group should: 
perform an evaluation of all activities of the Institute against its stated 
objectives, with particular emphasis on the impact the results of the work 
has had on the user of this research, and the degree of collaboration 
established with national research laboratories, as well as with industry; 
assess the scientific quality of the work and the appropriateness of the work 
and results for the Community; 
judge all aspects of the efficiency and impact of the work, taking into 
account the particular status of the JRC (its independence in the Community) 
in comparison with similar national laboratories; 
provide advice on the ongoing work on the basis of the evaluations and 
assessments performed; 
express recommendations for the future development of the Institute with 
regard to the overall strategic plans for development of the JRC in the 
medium-term and long-term. 
Terms of Reference 
To evaluate progress in performing work in accordance with the objectives 
set out in Council Resolution 92/C118/03 and Council Decisions 92/273/EEC, 
92/274/Euratom and 92/275/Euratom, documents addressed to the Board of 
Governors, the JRC's Annual Workschedules, budget etc., and to review 
progress in the implementation of the recommendations of the last 
Evaluation Panel. 
To ensure that the Institute has effective mechanisms to set its local scientific 
objectives, monitor progress towards those objectives and evaluate outputs. 
fé 
2-
3. To review the various research activities to assess: 
a) the scientific quality and productivity of the Institute; 
b) whether full advantage is being taken of scientific opportunities in the 
light of funding and other constraints; 
c) the relevance of the work with respect to Community needs, including 
the relevance of work performed for external customers, when 
applicable. 
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 relationships with research organisations, the higher 
education sector, industry and government departments in the Member 
States, as well as outside the European Community. 
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. 
8. To make recommendations and report to the Board of Governors of the 
Joint Research Centre. 
Harwell, 15.11.93 
REPORT OF 
VISITING GROUP FOR THE EVALUATION OF THE HIGH FLUX 
REACTOR AT THE JOINT RESEARCH CENTRE'S INSTITUTE 
FOR ADVANCED MATERIAL (PETTEN) 
SUMMARY 
The HFR (Petten) is being managed and operated in a competent and professional manner. 
The main research programmes using the HFR are likely to decline significantly. The JRC 
management should produce a future strategy for the HFR in collaboration with the 
sponsors/customers 
HI 
Vf 
CONTENTS 
I Introduction 
II Work in accordance with Objectives 
HI Efficiency 
IV . Overall Conclusions 
V Recommendations 
Appendix I Visiting Group Membership 
Appendix II Visiting Group Terms of Reference 
i o 
r/ 
VISITING GROUP FOR THE EVALUATION OF THE HIGH FLUX 
REACTOR AT THE JOINT RESEARCH CENTRE'S INSTITUTE 
FOR ADVANCED MATERIAL (PETTEN) 
INTRODUCTION 
At the invitation of the Board of Governors, JRC, the Visiting Group (for membership see 
Appendix 1) attended the Institute for Advanced Materials - High Flux Reactor for a number 
of days during June/July 1993. In total, some 15 man days were expended on the visit. 
In that time, a wide range of technical and scientific topics were covered and therefore it 
must be recognised that comments, conclusions and recommendations from the Visiting 
Group are made as general supporting, constructive advice rather than specific criticisms of 
the opérations. 
The specific scientific and technical objectives for the High Flux Reactor (HFR) are given 
in Annex 1 to the Council Decision No 92/275/Euratom of 29 April 1992. The principal 
objectives are: ..-..• 
1 The safe operation of the HFR in Petten. This comprises routine operation of the 
facility for more than 250 days/year, fuel cycle management and safety and quality 
management. 
2 Efficient utilisation of the reactor in a wide scope of topical sectors: irradiation testing 
of materials for fission reactors, as well as for future thermonuclear fusion reactors, 
neutron applications to solid state physics and materials sciences investigations, 
radioisotope production and related activities, neutron radiography as a non­
destructive testing method, and treatment of certain types of cancer with neutrons 
(BORON Neutron Capture Therapy) and related research. 
The more general objectives are concurrent with the Joint Research Centre's (JRC) 
mission and are highlighted in the scope for the Visiting Groups. The Visiting Group 
should: 
• perform an evaluation of all activities of the Unit against its stated objectives, with 
particular emphasis on the impact the results of the work has had on the users of this 
research, and the degree of collaboration established with national research 
laboratories, as well as with industry; 
• assess the scientific quality of the work and the appropriateness of the work and 
results for the Community; 
• judge all aspects of the efficiency and impact of the work, taking into account the 
particular status of the JRC (its independence in the Community) in comparison with 
similar national laboratories: 
- 3 
sz 
• provide advice on the ongoing work on the basis of the evaluations and assessments 
performed; 
• express recommendations for the future development of the Unit with regard to the 
overall strategic plans for development of the JRC in the medium-term and long-term. 
This report will be organised following the order set out in the Terms of Reference 
(see Appendix 2) with the Group's recommendations for each point summarised under 
'Conclusions'. 
H WORK IN ACCORDANCE WITH OBJECTIVES 
• The HFR is operated in a safe manner with due attention to safety and quality 
management. It is operated with a high degree of availability for about 265 days per 
year with very few unforeseen shutdowns. 
• The 'Work and Action Plan' for quality assurance is being implemented at an 
adequate pace with all essential elements completed and regular reviews of the 
ongoing activities which follow from the plan. 
• The fuel cycle, being dependent on the United States (US), is not currently closed due 
to the ongoing review of the US' fuel policy. 
Spent fuel elements are stored on the site which has adequate facilities for storage 
(these can also be increased in increments) for the short and medium term. 
The HFR uses High Enriched Uranium (HEU) fuel and has adequate suppliers for this 
type of fuel in the medium-term. The technical and economical implications of an 
eventual conversion to Low Enriched Uranium is being reviewed at present and so 
far it appears to be technically feasible. The decision to change from HEU to LEU 
remains a predominantly political one. 
Particular attention was paid to the condition of the plant and its situation vis-a-vis 
its operational safety. The HFR is found to conform to the requirements of the 
Netherlands Kernfysische Dienst (KFD), the safety authority concerned. At the same 
time, a programme of continuous upgrading is pursued to take advantage of 
technological progress and to conform to the latest evolutions in good practice. 
CONCLUSIONS 
• The HFR meets the first principal objective. 
• The HFR is a multi-purpose Oak Ridge Research-type (ORR-type) light water reactor 
having a potential use for a wide range of sectors. It has been utilised in all the areas 
mentioned in the second principal objective. 
• As far as the operational efforts are concerned, there has been an efficient utilisation 
to the satisfaction of the 'customers'. 
33 
The utilisation is dominated by 'customer-controlled' programmes with little overlap 
and collaboration with JRC programmes, but adequately supported by the HFR 
Division of the JRC. 
Therefore, the responsibility for the scientific quality and rate of progress for the 
programmes utilising the HFR lies mainly with the 'customers'. 
m EFFICIENCY 
The Visiting Group was able to interview representatives from user organisations. 
NETHERLANDS 
• Netherlands' users provided most of their own design and manufacturing services for 
their own experiments. They also assured day-to-day operation of the reactor under 
contract and were therefore naturally disposed to comment favourably on efficiency. 
• It was felt that the Netherlands had received a fair share of the available positions up 
to the present. However, there was now felt to be some over-capacity, particulary 
with beam-tube utilisation where the facilities were no longer of international standard 
and could be closed without serious loss of scientific impact, nevertheless, such work 
is actively pursued elsewhere in the Netherlands and future requirements should be 
carefully checked. 
GERMANY 
• German project leaders from both KFA Jülich and KFK Karlsruhe were present and 
irradiation programmes concerning light water reactors, high temperature gas-cooled 
reactors, fast reactors and thermonuclear fusion R&D were discussed. 
• All claimed that the service received from Petten staff was outstanding and the HFR 
highly suitable in its technical characteristics, in its reliability and in the large number 
of irradiation days per year. Petten engineers participated in project planning and 
final reporting. 
• Unfortunately, due to reductions in government sponsorship, work on fast reactors 
would be reduced to a small collaborative programme with Cadarache with perhaps 
two core and one peripheral position in use in the HFR. This continuation was partly 
due to the unique facility which allowed tests on fuel previously irradiated in Phénix. 
• A similar situation existed for HTR projects, where almost no work would be 
continued. There might still be occasional irradiations on steel and special coatings, 
but these would not be on a constant basis. 
-5 -
^ 
• Concerning light water reactor (LWR) fuel irradiations, the very flexible poolside 
facility and the ability to employ it for testing power reactor fuels already burned up 
in power plants would continue to provide some work. It was envisaged to use about 
three poolside facility positions in the future. 
• In the absence of a dedicated 14 MeV neutron source for fusion materials R&D, the 
HFR was still making valuable contributions in a variety of irradiation projects 
concerned with 'first wall' materials, breeder materials and in the future some 
component testing. Complementary work would also be performed in fast reactors. 
Both types of reactor were needed for irradiation tests by the Fusion Programme at 
the present time. 
• A dip in programme funding was expected in the near future, followed by a later 
extension to new materials and perhaps components. 
• Overall, a reduction in present German activities by at least fifty per cent was 
indicated. 
COMMUNITY 
• The Community Fusion Programme also planned to operate a modest programme of 
materials irradiations on a regular basis to measure creep and other mechanical 
properties in low activation structural materials. Irradiations on Tritium permeation 
through breeder blanket component materials were also performed. The size of these 
programmes was only limited by available funds. 
• The JRC s Institute for Transuranium Elements at Karlsruhe hope to begin some 
collaborative irradiations in a network with CEA and ECN beginning in 1995. 
OTHER COUNTRIES 
• Apart from Netherlands and Germany, little scientific work or scientists use the HFR. 
As a Community facility there is a need to encourage wider use of HFR for research 
and scientific training. 
RADIOISOTOPES 
• The primary use to which the reactor had been put was materials testing. However, 
isotope production for medical and industrial purposes has been a 'by-product' of 
HFR exploitation from the beginning. The Visiting Group received strong signals of 
increasing interest in these possibilities from representatives of European isotope 
manufacturers. 
They expected to use up to thirty per cent of the reactor capacity, and realised that 
in so doing, a commercial price would have to be paid for neutrons. This would 
íí 
imply an increase in the cost of the final product and such a change in policy could 
only be introduced to the market at a reasonable rate. 
However, with a decline in the materials irradiations' contribution to reactor costs, 
isotope production could no longer be considered as a by-product of materials testing 
and a normal tariff would have to be applied. 
On the other hand, although the reactor was suitable technically and production 
facilities were available, a more commercial attitude would have to be adopted by 
both management and staff if industrial-scale production was attempted. Importance 
should be given to ensuring maximum compatibility between materials testing 
schedules and isotope production, taking into account operating schedules of other 
European reactors producing medical isotopes. A considerably increased demand was 
foreseen in the future. 
BNCT 
Boron Neutron Capture Therapy (BNCT) was being developed at Petten and if 
successful, could provide facilities to treat patients, initially with gliomas and later 
perhaps with a number of other intractable tumours. This could provide an important 
task for the reactor until other more convenient special purpose facilities could be 
developed. 
CONCLUSIONS 
• The competence of the staff and the capability of performing difficult irradiation 
studies using sophisticated techniques is recognised by the clientele. 
The requirements for irradiations from the European nuclear power industry have 
dwindled and a reorientation of strategy is badly needed. 
An ability to respond more directly to commercial needs might be advantageous. 
- 7 
<c 
IV OVERALL CONCLUSIONS 
1 To date, the operation of the HFR has been carried out in a satisfactory manner with: 
• high technological standards; 
• good operational performance; 
• high degree of customer satisfaction; 
• excellent safety record. 
2 The JRC-HFR operation has been input-driven with no incentive to cut the cost of the 
operation. 
3 Utilisation to date has mainly focused on programmes originating in the sponsoring 
countries both of which signal declining needs for the forthcoming programme period. 
Only a small part of the utilisation has been on a Community basis. 
4 The Fourth Framework Programme proposal, as already discussed in the Council, 
does not indicate an increased Community need. 
5 The HFR is facing a rapidly changing situation: 
some German programmes have ceased, some are declining; 
the Fourth Framework Programme proposal foresees further reduction in the 
nuclear area (fission); 
the needs of the future fusion programme have not been clarified at this stage; 
the beam research at the HFR is no longer supported by the ECN and the 
possibility of a complete closing down of such research must be foreseen; 
the demand for radioisotopes is rising, however, the situation of NTD silicon 
is uncertain and there seems to be limited additional European industrial need; 
BNCT project is promising but is still at a speculative stage as a basis for a 
potential customer programme. 
All of the above means that the overall use will fall unless vigorous actions are taken 
to bring in new customers. 
The HFR operation has been demand-driven with management focus on operations, 
safety and technological improvements. 
There is a need for an output oriented strategy to ensure the continued efficient 
utilisation of the HFR and its facilities. 
10 The strategy should identify the future core-customer base and the optimal 
organisation structure. 
The core customer base could be: 
• the fusion programme - well-established European programme; 
• production of radioisotopes - catering to European industry on a commercial 
basis; 
8-
y } 
• a fission programme concerning the fuel cycle and nuclear safety - transition 
from national programmes to a Community-based programme. 
• BNCT - a European project with perspectives for a public service medical 
programme. 
11 The pursuit of these diverse needs and opportunities in a successful manner requires 
proactive planning and constructive interactions between the HFR management and 
the customers. 
12 The organisation must be adapted to customer requirements with clearly defined 
responsibilities for developing each of the core business areas. 
13 An output-oriented approach will require sustained attention to cost-effectiveness. 
14 If vigorous actions are taken now, a smooth transition from the present input-driven 
programme (1992-1995), to a new output-oriented programme for the next 
multiannual period could be achieved. 
9-
í? 
RECOMMENDATIONS 
1 As owner of the facility, the Commission should actively pursue the identification of 
future requirements for the HFR. 
2 JRC management should generate a draft strategy (result - and output - oriented) for 
the HFR in collaboration with the customers. 
3 Aim to achieve consensus from sponsors on the above strategy as a basis for a new 
multiannual programme. 
4 On the basis of the above, decide optimal organisation structure and modus operandi 
to implement strategy. 
5 Clearly identify responsibility for implementation of the strategy. 
6 The fuel cycle liabilities must be covered financially. 
7 The issue of responsibility for funding decommissioning must be resolved. 
8 In view of increasing commercial usage of the HFR reactor, there is a need to 
develop a more autonomous financial and management structure to become output-
oriented. 
9 A vigorous and lateral approach needs to be taken to review all aspects of the cost 
structure. 
The Visiting Group are indebted to Professor E Hondros, and the JRC Directorate at Petten, 
the ECN HFR staff who provided the detailed information and guided tours around HFR, and 
the customers who were willing to come to Petten to be interviewed by the Visiting Group. 
- 10 
¿7 
Appendix I 
VISITING GROUP MEMBERSHIP 
Mr John Baxter (Chairman) 
Director 
Engineering Project Management 
AEA Technology 
Mr Lucien Gilles 
Head of Testing Reactors Department 
Centre d'Etudes de Saclay 
Commissariat à l'Energie Atomique (CEA) 
Dr Roberto Ramón Gonzalez Amado 
Head of the Department of Engineering 
Escuela Técnica Superior de Ingenieros y Industriales 
Universidad Carlos HI 
Dr Jorgen Kjems 
Director, Research 
Riso National Laboratory 
Secretary 
Mr Samuel J Lloyd 
11 -
¿-•o 
Ci 
Appendix U 
TERMS OF REFERENCE 
1. To evaluate progress in performing work in accordance with the objectives set out in 
Council Resolution 92/C118/03 and Council Decisions 92/273/EEC, 92/274/Euratom 
and 92/275/Euratom, documents addressed to the Board of Governors, the JRC s 
Annual Work Schedules, budget etc, and to review progress in the implementation 
of the recommendations of the last Evaluation Panel. 
2. To ensure that the Institute/Unit 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 scientific quality and productivity of the Unit/Institute; 
b) whether full advantage is being taken of scientific opportunities in the light of 
funding and other constraints; 
c) the relevance of the work with respect to Community needs, including the 
relevance of work performed for external customers, when applicable. 
4. To assess the effectiveness of the scientific management leadership within the 
Institute/Unit. 
5. To advise on whether the Institute/Unit 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/Unit's external scientific 
links, including relationships with research organisations, the higher education sector, 
industry and government departments in the Member States, as well as outside the 
European Community. 
7. To examine the relationship of the Institute's/Unit's work in general, to the mission 
of the Joint Research Centre and to its forward strategic planning. 
8. To make recommendations and report to the Board of Governors of the Joint 
Research Centre. 
- 12 -
u 
62 
Roskilde, 14th June 1994 
REPORT OF THE VISITING GROUP 
FOR THE EVALUATION OF THE 
JOINT RESEARCH CENTRE'S 
INSTITUTE FOR 
TRANSURANIUM ELEMENTS 
¿'i 
¿Y 
CONTENTS 
I. Introduction 
II. Activities at ITE 
III. Specif ic Programmes 
111.1 Basic Safety Research in Nuclear Fuels 
111.2 Safety Aspects of Fuel Operation and Handling 
111.3 Actinide Determination and Recycling Activities 
IH.4 Chararterisation of Waste Forms and of High Burn-Up Fuel 
III.5 Actinide Research 
IV. Work for Commission Services 
V. Work for Third Parties 
VI. Exploratory Research 
VII. Collaboration 
VIII. Organisational Matters 
IX. Output 
X. Recommendations 
Annex I: Members of the Visiting Group 
Annex II: Terms of Reference of the Visiting Group 
Í-'V 
<} 
14 June 1994 
REPORT OF THE GROUP FOR THE EVALUATION 
OF THE JOINT RESEARCH CENTRE'S INSTITUTE FOR TRANSURANIUM 
ELEMENTS (ITE) IN KARLSRUHE 
INTRODUCTION 
A group of scientists experienced in various aspects of nuclear fuel and actinide 
research and development (R & D) 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. Members (see Annex I) visited the 
Institute on 21 and 22 February and assessed the Institute and its activities on 
the basis of the Terms of References set out in Annex II. 
The visit comprised a presentation of the Institute and its programmes by the 
Director and presentations by senior scientists on the following activities: 
nuclear fuel safety; 
spent fuel characterization; 
nuclear chemistry; 
basic actinide research. 
Discussions were held with staff responsible for organization, finance and 
management of the institute, future scientific perspectives were examined and 
a number of laboratories were visited. 
Finally, members of the Group were able to meet representatives from clients 
for whom third party contracts are being performed (e.g. Siemens and Alpha-
Medical (AKZO). 
ACTIVITIES AT ITE 
The Institute's programmes and projects during the 1990-1994 programme 
period are distributed as follows: 
• Specific Programmes 
Basic Safety Research on Nuclear Fuels 
Safety Aspects of Fuel Operation and Handling 
Actinide Determination and Recycling 
Characterization of Waste Forms and High Burn-up Fuel 
Actinide Research 
¿i 
Exploratory Research 
Acoustic Aerosol Scavenging with Ultra and Infrasound 
Study of Advanced Fuel Cycles 
Thermal Imaging of Irradiated Fuel Rod Sections 
Scientific - Technical Support to Community Policies 
Development and Testing Methods; Execution of Safeguards Analysis; 
Installation and Operation of On-Site Laboratories for Safeguards 
Analyses 
Work for Third Parties (major contracts) 
Post Irradiation Examination of LWR fuel rods 
Post Irradiation Examination PHEBUS 
- ' Interaction Fuel-Cladding 
Preparation, Irradiation and PIE of Minor Actinide Containing Fuels 
Fuel Analysis and Characterization 
Preparation of Radionuclides for Therapeutical Application 
SPECIFIC PROGRAMMES 
These areas comprise work performed under the Third Framework Programme 
and they are part of the following JRC-programmes: 
Reactor safety 
Radioactive waste management 
Actinides in nuclear fuel cycle safety 
The specific programmes of the Institute as a whole depend on its expertise 
and equipment in the field of transuranium elements, especially the actinides. 
Although the specific programmes cover quite a large scientific and technical 
area a common feature is the highly specialized hot cells sealed against escape 
of alpha particle contamination and shielded against high energy gamma 
radiation. These very expensive installations in combination with the 
experienced staff give the Institute a unique position in European and 
international nuclear research. This position is recognized worldwide and should 
be maintained even if the interest in nuclear energy at present is declining in 
Europe. This recommendation is based on the merit of a number of individual 
research programmes which will be described shortly in the following. 
1. Basic safety research in nuclear fuels covers a number of projects mainly 
concerned with fuels for light water reactors (LWR's). In parallel to experimental 
studies a fuel performance code TRANSURANUS is developed and validated. 
This work is important in the light of the many LWR's operating in Europe as 
it ensures continuity in European research on both basic and applied problems 
¿5 
with impact on safety and economy. The activities within this programme related 
to a number of projects carried out for third parties, especially the post 
irradiation examination (PIE) work. However, due to commercial restrictions the 
research activities cannot fully benefit from the results from such PIE work. This 
has a drawback and a solution should be sought when future contracts are 
negotiated. 
2. Safety aspects of fuel operation and handling deal with investigations of 
advanced fuels and with transport and dispersion of radioactive aerosol 
particles in nuclear facilities. Individual projects within this programme have 
important safety aspects for different parts of the fuel cycle. However, the 
overall objective of this programme could be defined more stringently. 
3. Actinide Determination and recycling activities are mainly concerned with 
the transmutation of long lived nuclear waste constituents (minor actinides) into 
shorter-lived fission products. This programme is an excellent example of the 
special expertise of the Institute being applied to a problem of high relevance 
to society in dealing with waste from past and present nuclear facilities. It is 
also within this area that the work for third parties has been economically most 
successful. 
4. Characterization of waste forms and of high burn-up fuel covers efforts 
to model the consequences of water intrusion into an underground fuel deposit. 
As is the case for programme III 3 this programme aims at reducing the risk of 
storing nuclear waste. It is a good example of the uniqueness of the Institute 
in combining specialized experimental work with high level theoretical work 
including computer modelling. 
5. Actinide research covers basic research of the physical and chemical 
properties of the actinide group of elements. Within this area the Institute has 
an internationally acknowledged expertise both theoretically and experimentally. 
These in-depth studies of actinides are important to extend our knowledge of 
this important group of materials but the research is also necessary to 
understand a number of technological problems related to the fuel cycle. This 
research on actinides should be continued but its uniqueness in the European 
framework could be more emphasized. One possibility is to promote the 
facilities and expertise as a European laboratory of excellence open for 
scientists from the member states in parallel to laboratories and installations 
participating in EU's Large Installation Programme (LIP). It is realized that such 
a status as a user-oriented facility will require extra resources, especially new 
staff. However, in all cases a consideration of the staff situation in this area is 
urgent in order to ensure continuity as senior staff is now near retirement. 
IV WORK FOR COMMISSION SERVICES 
The safeguarding of nuclear materials is an important task of the Commission 
(DG I and DG XVII) and of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). The 
> 
institute is able to contribute effectively to this important task. The Institute's 
chemical expertise is exploited in specialized chemical analyses of samples 
taken from nuclear installations by safeguards inspectors. An automated in-cell 
analytical machine has been developed at ITE to improve accuracy and 
convenience and has been widely adopted elsewhere. 
As a further development of this service, the Institute is providing analytical on-
site laboratories at Sellafield and Cap la Hague which will perform the bulk of 
these analysis. 
In the area of nuclear safeguarding in Europe the Group must point to the 
essential part now being played by the Institute, its success being attributed to 
its expertise in a number of disciplines. 
WORK FOR THIRD PARTIES 
The group applauded the Institute' success in winning contracts - some of them 
of very long duration. From 1990 up to the end of January 1994 orders have 
been placed for work worth about 18 MECU. In total 23 contracts have been 
received and it is noticed that two large contracts received in 1990 and 1991 
amount to 85% of the total contract volume. The remaining 21 contracts are all 
below 0.5 MECU with an average about 0.1 MECU. In the period 1992 - 1994 
(per 15/2) the Institute has received 18 contracts amounting to about 2 MECU. 
About 60% of this volume (9 contracts) falls within the area of nuclear 
chemistry. 
The discussion of the relationships behind the Institute and its clients included 
two interviews summarized in the following: 
A representative from Siemens (Dr. Manzel) was appreciative of the 
Institute's activities under contract on high burn-up fuels for LWR's. 
Siemens' hot cells had been closed some years previously and the 
transfer of work to ITE has proved to be very satisfactory. Client/contractor 
relations were excellent and at present it was expected that the 
association would continue in future. The Institute's staff, equipment and 
service provided were felt to be excellent in quality and administrative 
procedures relatively light. Scientific collaboration with the staff of the 
Institute worked well in certain areas, whereas other fields, for example 
fuel performance code activities were excluded for proprietary reasons. 
A representative of Alpha Medical (Dr. Geerlings) was also appreciative 
of the Institute's work on a contract concerning the separation of certain 
radioactive actinide isotopes in the production of a radiopharmaceutical 
agent for the treatment of certain cancers. The Institute's skills and 
installations were being used to develop suitable separation chemistry and 
Alpha Medical hoped to launch clinical trials in some months in 
collaboration with an institute in New York. 
7/ 
The group discussed in general the Institute's work for third parties and noted 
that the contracts received fitted well with the core programmes, thus in many 
cases a synergetic effect can be expected. The Group was also pleased to see 
the facilities of the Institute being applied on projects of commercial interest. It 
was realized that in such cases full openness of the work cannot be expected, 
but it was emphasized that results from third party work, whenever possible, 
should be made available for the Institute's own research possibly with certain 
restrictions on publication. 
VI EXPLORATORY RESEARCH 
The Visiting Group welcomes the 5 - 6% exploratory research carried out at the 
Institute. This was 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. 
However, attention is drawn to acoustic agglomeration techniques which have 
been subject for some years of repeated studies covering various possible 
methods or applications. When a technique or discovery is proven by an 
exploratory activity, it should either be exploited by commercial development or, 
if of a suitable nature, incorporated into the mainstream of the Institute's 
scientific activities. This wjll then release funds for new exploratory research 
which should not be pursued further than proof of the principle. 
The group discussed specifically the project "Evaluation of Potentialities of 
Alternative Fuel Cycles" and it was felt that this activity at present should be 
limited to theoretical work and should not include planning of irradiation 
experiments. The reason'for this recommendation by the group is the lack of 
European accord on the problems proposed to be investigated. 
VII COLLABORATION 
The group acknowledged the widespread international collaboration in 
practically all research areas of the Institute. The group was, however, surprised 
to learn about the very limited exchange of scientists taking place for longer 
periods between the Institute and its collaborators. 
VIII ORGANIZATIONAL MATTERS 
1. The group inquired about the Institute's organization vis a vis the 
administrative structure of the JRC. Of special interest to the Group was 
the technical and administrative responsibilities on the different levels at 
the Institute. The Director explained how the system worked which was 
more or less according to tradition as detailed written procedures had not 
been worked out. The group did not pursue this point but suggests it for 
•^ 
future consideration. 
2. In order to evaluate the activities of the Institute against its stated 
objectives the Group asked for a description of such objectives. Such a 
description was given verbally by the Director but written documentation 
was not available. It is, however, the general impression that overall 
objectives are adhered to in the various programmes. However, the lack 
of well-defined written objectives makes it impossible for the group in more 
detail to evaluate activities against objectives. 
3. The project/programme management system at the Institute appears to 
operate effectively and to make good use of the time available on the 
various installations. Also the general administration at the Institute 
appears to be satisfactory. In general, the Group noted that the 
organization of the Institute in units with almost a constant number of staff 
over the years may lead to a too rigid planning and some lack of freedom 
in the formulation of new projects. 
4. The staff situation was discussed and the Group expressed its concern at 
the age structure of the institute. Much of the Institute's experience and 
expertise is concentrated in staff in charge of units and laboratories who 
will be retiring in the relatively near future. Future planning would have to 
take into account the need to transfer knowledge and know-how to 
successors who wouid have to be chosen well in advance. Recruitment 
to the JRC presents many difficulties, both in the selection system used 
in the Commission (difficulties in the specification of requirements) and in 
the length of the process. A positive trend has been the increase in post 
doctoral fellows which has increased from 2 in 1991 to 17 in 1994, mainly 
sponsored by the Mobility Programme. This was considered highly 
satisfactory as young scientists now can qualify and hopefully present 
themselves as candidates for future positions at the Institute. 
IX OUTPUT 
The number of articles published in scientific journals increased from 35 in 1990 
to 40 in 1993, together with a similar trend in contributions to conferences which 
increased from 72 to 106 respectively. This is considered to be a good output 
of high scientific quality for such an institute considering that much of its product 
is issued in the form of data, analytical results, etc. 
X RECOMMENDATIONS 
1. The application of present and future knowledge and expertise existing at 
ITE to the problems of the safe management of nuclear energy, 
particularly in dealing with the sensitive area of nuclear waste is an 
important objective. This mission will remain of high significance in the 
7J 
foreseeable future for Union Member States, whatever the outcome of 
debates on the use of nuclear fission energy and must remain the focus 
of development at the Institute. In such development nuclear chemistry 
appears to be an important growth area contributing to a large number of 
research projects. 
2. In view of the continuing need for research and information on the actinide 
elements and their behaviour, together with the very restricted number of 
institutes where such work can be carried out, the Group strongly 
recommends that efforts be made to continue and develop the ITE core 
activities with emphasis on the basic understanding of actinide chemistry 
and physics. To accomplish this task effectively it is essential that the level 
of staff excellence is maintained. It is suggested that facilities and staff 
within this area are expanded in order to establish a "user facility" for 
European scientists similar to those within the "Large Installation 
Programme". 
3. Work in support of other DGs is clearly an essential role of the JRC and 
the Institute, as its specialists can provide important help in a number of 
areas. The Group welcomes the use made of the ITE by DG I (IAEA) and 
DG XVII (Euratom) for the analysis (both on-site and in the Institute) of 
samples taken by safeguards' inspectors from nuclear plant and facilities. 
The contribution by the Institute is very considerable and must continue. 
4. Making available services and facilities to the outside world under 
contracts is an important aspect of the Institute's activities and is to be 
strongly encouraged. At present this activity is on a satisfactory level but 
a certain increase should be planned for taking the following points into 
consideration: (i) The work for third parties should as far as possible 
support the Institute's own research and the results should be made open 
at least to the scientists at the Institute for their own use. (ii) In the 
promotion of work for third parties it must be assured that the staff 
distribution at the Institute is so flexible that successful units can get the 
necessary support, (in) The amount of contract work should not be allowed 
to increase to a level where core activities might be jeopardized. 
5. Attention should be focused on exploratory research to make certain that 
it really is "exploratory" in nature rather than repetitive and where possible, 
points to potential new developments in the Institute's core activities in 
science and technology. New work on alternate fuel cycles is not 
encouraged as it does not appear to fulfil the above requirements. 
6. The project/programme management system appears to operate efficiently 
and to make good use of the time available on the various installations. 
However, the manpower distribution into units of almost constant size over 
the years appears to be too rigid both in establishing new research 
priorities and in promoting work for third parties. 
h 
7. Serious consideration has to be given to ensuring that staff replacements 
will be of exceptional quality if the Institute is to maintain its position in the 
scientific world. The present system does not appear to be either 
adaptable enough nor rapid enough to meet that end and the exact 
specification of requirements for scientific posts must lie with the Institute 
rather than centrally. 
8. If resources can be found, the fruits of the work at the Institute could be 
best disseminated by further increasing the numbers of post graduate and 
post doctoral fellows in the Institute. At present levels of scientific A staff, 
some 15 Postgraduates and 25 Post Doctoral fellows might be foreseen. 
In this connection the exchange for longer periods of scientists is 
encouraged to establish more firm and vivid contacts between the Institute 
and the universities and national laboratories with which it collaborates. 
8 
7» 
Annex I 
Visiting Group to the Joint Research Centre's 
Institute for Transuranium Elements (ITE) - Karlsruhe 
Members 
Dr.GuyBAUDIN, 
Head of Department, 
Commissariat à l'Energie 
Atomique (CEA), 
31 rue de la Fédération, 
F-75752 Paris. Tel. + 33-1-69.08.91.56/69.08.91.60 
Fax. + 33-1-69.08.91.47 
Dr. Niels HANSEN (Chairman), 
Head of Department, 
Materials Department, 
Ris0 National Laboratory, 
Frederiksborgvej 399, 
P.O. Box 49, 
DK-4000 Roskilde. Tel. + 45-46-77.57.01 
Fax. + 45-42-35.11.73 
Prof. Qr. Georg KALVIUS, 
Head of Institute, 
PhysicsElô, 
Technische ÚniversitatMünchen, 
James-Franck Str., 
D-85747 Garching. Tel. + 49-89-32.09.25.01.02 
Fax. + 49-89-320.67.80 
Secretary 
Mr. Samuel J. LLOYD, 
Avenue Reine Elisabeth 8, 
B-1330Rixensart. Tel. +32-2-295.40.48 (office) 
+ 32-2-654.09.44 (home) 
Fax. +32-2-295.01.46 
H 
?? 
Annex II 
Visiting Group for the Evaluation of the Joint Research Centre's 
Institute for Transuranium Elements (ITE) - Karlsruhe 
Scope of Visiting Groups 
The chief scope of Visiting Groups is to perform evaluations, taking into account 
the objectives as set out for the 1992-1994 period (in Council documents, relevant 
papers for the Board of Governors, JRC Annual Workschedules, budget, etc.), to 
provide recommendations on the proper course to be followed by the Institute 
visited in view of the stated objectives, and to apply in the evaluations, elements 
of the methodology proposed for research returns and effectiveness. 
The Visiting Group should: 
perform an evaluation of all activities of the Institute against its stated 
objectives, with particular emphasis on the impact the results of the work 
has had on the user of this research, and the degree of collaboration 
established with national research laboratories, as well as with industry; 
assess the scientific quality of the work and the appropriateness of the work 
and results for the Community; 
judge all aspects of the efficiency and impact of the work, taking into 
account the particular status of the JRC (its independence in the Community) 
in comparison with similar national laboratories; 
provide advice on the ongoing work on the basis of the evaluations and 
assessments performed; 
express recommendations for the future development of the Institute with 
regard to the overall strategic plans for development of the JRC in the 
medium-term and long-term. 
Terms of Reference 
1. To evaluate progress in performing work in accordance with the objectives 
set out in Council Resolution 92/C118/03 and Council Decisions 92/273/EEC, 
92/274/Euratom and 92/275/Euratom, documents addressed to the Board of 
Governors, the JRC's Annual Workschedules, budget etc., and to review 
progress in the implementation of the recommendations of the last 
Evaluation Panel. 
2. To ensure that the Institute has effective mechanisms to set its local scientific 
objectives, monitor progress towards those objectives and evaluate outputs. 
n 
2-
3. To review the various research activities to assess: 
a) the scientific quality and productivity of the Institute; 
b) whether full advantage is being taken of scientific opportunities in the 
light of funding and other constraints; 
c) the relevance of the work with respect to Community needs, including 
the relevance of work performed for external customers, when 
applicable. 
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 relationships with research organisations, the higher 
education sector, industry and government departments in the Member 
States, as well as outside the European Community. 
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. 
8. To make recommendations and report to the Board of Governors of the 
Joint Research Centre. 
London, 2nd December 1993 
REPORT OF THE VISITING GROUP 
FOR THE EVALUATION OF THE 
JOINT RESEARCH CENTRE'S 
INSTITUTE FOR SYSTEMS ENGINEERING 
AND INFORMATICS 
s\ 
ti 
CONTENTS 
I. Introduction 
II. General Observations 
III. Scientific and Technical Activities 
111.1 Block 1 - Environment Hazards, Industrial Environment 
111.2 Block 2 - Renewable Energies 
III .3 Block 3-Nuclear Energy 
III.4 Block 4 - Information Technologies 
IV. Management of Research 
IV.1 Mission 
IV.2 Transfer 
IV.3 Quality 
IV.4 Areas of Concern 
V. Executive Summary 
VI. Recommendations 
VI.I Infrastructure 
VI.2 Management 
VI.3 Informatics 
VI.4 Competition 
Annex I: Members of the Visiting Group 
Annex II: Terms of Reference of the Visiting Group 
yL 
83 
Report of the Visiting Group for the Evaluation of the Joint Research Centre's 
Institute for Systems Engineering and Informatics, Ispra, Italy 
Introduction 
At the invitation of the Board of Governors of the Joint Research Centre 
(JRC), members of the Visiting Group (see Annex I) spent the week of 11-
15 October 1993 at the Institute for Systems Engineering and Informatics 
(ISEI) at Ispra reviewing the Institute's work and visiting its laboratories. 
The objectives for the Institute are to be found in the Technical Annex to 
the JRC Programme Proposal 1992-1994 (COM (91)281 final). These are: 
"to be the European centre of excellence in the field of 'complex systems' 
engineering, focussing on the evaluation and development of methods 
addressing the safety, standards and performance of systems which 
involve industrial, social and environmental issues on a pan-European 
scale. 
In particular, to take the broad 'systems approach* to the understanding 
of the human, societal and environmental implications of scientific, 
technological and industrial developments in order to provide technical 
advice for the balanced social and industrial development of European 
society. 
The Institute for Systems Engineering and Informatics will shortly be 
launching new initiatives in the areas of Environmental Accident 
Management, Safety at Work and later, Safety Critical Computer Systems 
and a contribution to the proposed Centre for Earth Observation. This 
work will build on the Institute s existing strengths in systems engineering 
and informatics". (These initiatives have since been implemented.) 
These general objectives are concurrent with the JRC's mission and are 
highlignted in the paper defining the scope of the Visiting Groups. As set 
out in the terms of reference (see Annex II), the Visiting Group should : 
• evaluate all activities of the Institute against its stated objectives, 
with particular emphasis on the impact the results of the work has 
had on the users of this research, and the degree of collaboration 
established with national research organisations, as well as with 
industry; 
• assess the scientific quality of the work and the appropriateness of 
the work and results for the Community; 
• judge all aspects of the efficiency and impact of the work, taking 
into account the particular status of the JRC (its independence in the 
Community) in comparison with similar national bodies; 
• provide advice on the ongoing work on the basis of the evaluations 
and assessments performed; 
• express recommendations for the future development of the 
Institute with regard to the overall strategic plans for development 
of the JRC in the medium-term and long-term. 
Z>H 
General Observations 
For the purposes of this report, scientific and technical activities of the 
Institute are organised into four blocks following the scheme adopted for 
their presentation. 
These are: 
1. Environment Hazards, Industrial Environment; 
2. Renewable Energies; 
3. Nuclear Energy; 
4. Information Technologies. 
The Visiting Group recognises the five-part purpose of the Institute: 
to serve the European Community by performing work for 
Framework Programme specific activities; 
to render support to other Directorates General; 
to serve the JRC by providing informatics services and advice to 
Institutes and Headquarters; 
to perform work under contract for third parties, making available 
expertise and facilities to European industry; 
to carry out exploratory research in order to maintain scientific 
vitality in the Institute's staff and to develop tools for the future. 
Members were impressed by the diligent dispatch of routine, albeit 
important, tasks by the Institute (for implementing the MARS project -
Major Accident Reporting System - for example) but also noted 
considerable creative work (e.g. development of new measurement 
techniques for European Solar Testing Installation (ESTI) etc., and in 
techniques for non-intrusive surveillance). 
Within the constraints of time, the Group applied three tests in reviewing 
each scientific and technical activity: 
• mission - is the mission appropriate? Is it adequately described? Is it 
sound? Is it followed? 
• transfer - how well do relevant facts, skills and ideas travel upstream, 
downstream and between parallel bodies both within and without 
the JRC ? What are the products ? 
• quality - is the work rigorous, fresh and relevant ? Is the value of 
results commensurate with resources consumed ? Are management 
methods appropriate ? 
5? s S' 
III. Scientific and Technical Activities 
111.1 Block 1 - Environment Hazards, Industrial Environment 
The'following activities are encompassed: 
• industrial hazards (plant safety and reliability, safety critical 
computer systems); 
• aircraft incident reporting system; 
• working environment; 
• accident prevention; 
• reliability modelling of structures; 
• industrial hazards (environmental planning); 
• support to DG XI - Directorate General for Environment, Nuclear 
Safety and Civil Protection - (directives on major hazards, 
biotechnology, environmental impact assessment, civil protection); 
• optical and holographic technologies applied to diagnostics and 
information processing; 
• Centre for Earth Observation (CEO). 
Comments 
• The extension of techniques developed for the safe operation of 
nuclear plants (where this has been the norm), to complex 
installations in other industrialised activities was welcomed. 
• Members of the group were pleased to note the efforts to take 
human, factors into account when considering industrial safety. 
Psychology-sociology disciplines were used rigorously in association 
with physical science and engineering. 
In projects such as the FORMENTOR project (EUREKA project No. 19) 
and STARS (Software Tools for the Analysis of Reliability and Safety), 
the practical implications for the safe and economic operation of 
process plant were appreciated. The close interest shown by industry 
was noted (installation of a system by British Petroleum). Attention 
to the modification of plants over time would show benefits over the 
whole life of complex installations. 
• Concerning the sub-project investigating stress among air traffic 
controllers, it was felt that such information might already be 
obtainable from Eurocontrol or the U.S. authorities, and that the 
study might only reinvent existing techniques. It was, however, 
sound to take this highly stressed working environment as a model 
for human stress in other working situations. 
• The work on safety in complex systems and the interaction of human 
beings with such systems was considered to be useful in stimulating 
work outside the Institute and in supporting EC policy in the field. 
The concepts could well be extended to non-lethal systems such as 
funds transfer, trading and telecommunication applications. 
• The studies on optical and holographic applications to non-intrusive 
surveillance of surfaces and solids were felt to be of high quality with 
valuable future applications still to be explored. 
ü 
Concerning the Centre for Earth Observation (CEO), the Group saw 
an important role for the JRC in converting the volume of currently 
unintelligible satellite data into user-friendly input for diverse 
applications. In analogy, thirsty people need help, if they are to 
drink from a fire hydrant. This role seems particularly appropriate to 
the JRC, which will be seen as neutral and unbiased by eventual users 
of the data. 
.2 Block 2 - Renewable Energies 
This block comprises: 
photovoltaic systems; 
transfer of solar technology; 
thin film photovoltaic devices in buildings; 
solar energy and saving; 
solar regional programmes. 
Comments 
The Visiting Group recognised the relevance of this work to 
developing the photovoltaic industry in Europe. It was impressed by 
the urgency created by close service contacts with numerous 
manufacturers, several with rapidly changing technologies. 
Response to requests for service and mastery of the techniques 
involved were impressive; 
knowledge of industrial costs and understanding state-of-the-art 
technology were essential to the success of these activities and for 
fruitful relations with industry; 
the expected accreditation of the ESTI laboratory to ISO 9000/CEN 
29000 standards and the formal status of Calibration and Type 
Approval certificates for this leading-edge activity were welcomed; 
the Systems Analysis and Monitoring of Projects (ESAS) activity was 
found to provide important support to a range of DG XVII (Energy) 
policy actions and demonstrations. However, Members of the 
Visiting Group were not satisfied that the whole economic envelope 
was being addressed in the work on energy saving. Full, whole life 
economic consequences should be included in decision support 
systems if they are to be respected in the commercial world; 
norms and standards which reflect leading-edge technology were 
clearly crucial to the efficient working of the European market in 
photovoltaic and energy saving products and processes. 
III.3 Block 3 - Nuclear Energy 
This block comprises: 
fission safety; 
safeguards and fissile materials management; 
nuclear safeguards support including collaboration with the 
IAEA; 
instrument and data evaluation for nuclear safeguards, seals 
and tags; 
1) 
• expert systems for energy auditing, reliability and risk evaluation; 
• support to the harmonisation of nuclear safety for thermonuclear 
fusion; 
• operational safety, accident analysis and environmental studies; 
• neural networks tor navigation of a teleoperated vehicle. 
Comments 
• Work on nuclear safeguards and safety of nuclear plants is a 
traditional JRC core function, operating in a highly disciplined 
environment. Research & Development is needed to meet new 
requirements and to improve established methods. The 
development of tamper-proof sealing bolts, upgrading of 
instruments and the introduction of advanced management 
techniques for fissile materials were noteworthy examples. 
• In the interests of non-proliferation of military nuclear materials and 
their possible conversion to civil applications, it was felt that the JRC 
should also be allowed to contribute to aspects of nuclear safeguards 
relating to decommissioned military material. 
• The further development of Probabilistic Safety Assessment (PSA) 
techniques in monitoring and controlling safety throughout the 
lifetime of nuclear plants was of clear importance. 
• The Group was concerned that current informal project 
management would prove inadequate where a number of JRC 
institutes located on several geographically separated sites are 
involved in connected programmes. The work on nuclear safeguards 
isa case in point. 
• Work on safety standards and engineering codes of practice for 
fusion engineers was clearly important in supporting the practical 
implementation of a thermonuclear fusion reactor. 
• The Community Fusion programme is fully integrated and tightly 
managed (led by DG XII), and the JRC's contribution of some twenty 
years standing is a small but important group of activities. The role 
of ISEI as a test and validation centre for robotic blanket handling 
devices, was felt to be appropriate to the Institute and should be 
preserved. The practical experience gained will no doubt influence 
design of fusion blanket elements in the ITER project. 
111.4 Block 4 - Information Technologies 
The Institute is required to provide informatics services to the JRC and to 
other Commission Directorates General, while its budget for exploratory 
research is minimal. 
The in-house service function is in transition from a monopolistic main­
frame-based computing centre to a distributed user-friendly network, 
with the Institute providing the communications backbone and some 
advice to the user Institutes. 
• The Group became aware that some difficulties are arising in the 
necessary balance between freedom of choice by user Institutes and 
network integrity. 
îl 
• Some'network disciplines had to be universally recognised, in the 
interests of inter-operability and network security; the latter 
appeared to receive inadequate attention at present. The Unit 
should be responsible for: 
network architecture at communication and data formatting 
levels; 
evaluation of new tools, so as to advise researchers throughout 
the JRC on value for money and best practice; 
Information Technology auditing and transfer of good practice 
throughout the JRC by training and other means. 
However, Institutes should be encouraged to acquire freely informatics 
and advanced computing tools to meet their specific needs, drawing on 
experience elsewhere in their scientific fields where appropriate. The role 
of ISEI should be to encourage best practice, and maintain essential 
network discipline. 
• The corporate informatics service has an important role to play in the 
long overdue reform of the infrastructure I and administrative 
services (ADIN) so as to rationalise management and financial 
systems, and to make better use of available manpower. 
• Several examples of excellence and innovation were observed, but 
more emphasis should be placed on fail-safe systems. 
• Use should be encouraged of informatics packages and advanced 
computing tools developed outside the Institute. 
IV. Management of Research 
IV.1 Mission 
• Objectives were found to be appropriate to the JRC and ISEI; 
however, they are rarely defined in the detail necessary for effective 
project control. (Exceptions are DG XVII and IAEA projects and DG 
XII fusion projects). Milestones are lacking and there appears to be 
little formal project management, except in some individual cases, 
often in response to external pressure. 
• A clear need is evident for a JRC-defined project management 
system for pan-JRC programmes such as nuclear safeguards. Those 
projects where more than one Institute is required to contribute 
might better carry "JRC status". While one Institute might well be 
assigned the leadership role, it should be exercised on behalf of the 
JRC, with authority to manage project resources within defined 
limits. 
IV.2 Transfer 
• Problems were perceived at working level in promoting best practice 
across Institute boundaries. However, transfer both inward and 
outward with the rest of the JRC and the outside world was 
improving. 
£3 
-7-
ln certain areas, the Institute remained introverted and more use 
should be made of external experience and tools, rather than solving 
problems from scratch. 
In areas such as FORMENTOR, the Fusion activities and ESTI, among 
others, great benefit was derived from contacts with industry, and 
several advanced techniques likely to be of value to industry existed 
in the Institute. 
Obviously, in the case of third party contract research, transfer was 
inherent. 
IV.3 Quality 
While much of the technical work is routine, such activities are 
performed dutifully and to a good standard and level of expertise. 
Several areas of excellence demonstrate creative scientific and 
engineering work, for example: 
ESTI; 
holographies and optical systems; 
robotics; 
failure analysis (in fusion and elsewhere). 
Much of ISEI does not employ rigorous project management, with 
clear milestones,time schedules and control . Experience elsewhere 
shows that pressure for results generates peer pressure which allows 
little latitude to freeloaders. 
IV.4 Areas of Concern 
The Visiting Group identified a number of areas where improvements 
would lead to the better management and operation of ISEI. In some 
cases, problems arise from elsewhere in the JRC, and not infrequently 
from the requirements of the European Commission itself. 
IV.4.1 ADIN: Administrative services at Ispra do not support management of the 
Institute effectively or economically. 
• Overheads are excessive by external criteria; over 25% of manpower 
on the Ispra site is employed in administrative and infrastructure I 
activities, including 22 managers and administrators in the Institute 
itself. 
• Financial and budget information is complex and confusing. 
• Overhead allocation and pricing rules are rigid and uncommercial. 
• Personnel management practices are inflexible and slow in 
recruitment, appointment, promotion, transfer and dismissal of 
staff. 
8-
IV.4.2 Coordination within the JRC gave grounds for concern, as Institutes have 
accepted encouragement to act with more self-reliance. Where 
coordination is imposed by external clients, cooperation seems to be 
effective: 
• In the safeguards project, management is only effective because the 
previous programme manager is still actively engaged. However, 
Fusion activities are well coordinated among the Institute for 
Advanced Materials (1AM) and the Institute for Safety Technology 
(1ST) as well as ISEI. 
• ISEI has problems at working level with the Institute for Remote 
Sensing Applications and the Environment Institute. 
• where lead Institutes are identified, project management is 
hampered by the strict separation of Institute funds and by virement 
rules. 
IV.4.3 Mechanisms for exerting scientific leadership were not impressive. There 
is a clear opportunity to foster improved transfer of scientific knowledge 
and the development of professional scientific and management skiffs. 
This could be encouraged by weekly seminars, on scientific subjects or 
organisation given by local staff or visitors. The Group was pleased to hear 
that seminars on project management had recently been held at ISEI. 
• The local Scientific Committee is a staff representation body 
inappropriate for scientific leadership. 
• There is patchy transfer of best practice, both into and out of the 
Institute. 
• An undue proportion of students and grantholders in some ISEI 
projects, hampers continuity. 
• Central library facilities at Ispra are inadequate with 
fragmentation among many locations; 
poor reference section; 
inadequate information service. 
IV.4.4 Ability to Compete: while ISEI clearly has scientific skills and knowledge of 
considerable commercial value, its ability to compete for research business 
is hampered. 
• Current CEC rules prevent JRC Institutes from receiving any EC funds 
other than those specifically allocated to the JRC in the Framework 
Programme. This effectively prevents ISEI from collaborating in 
many European scientific programmes. 
• Pricing rules are uncommercial: the value of intellectual property is 
largely ignored, and discounted exploratory work is precluded. 
• Rigid staff and virement rules impair ability to man and fund project 
teams for third party work. 
• There is an overwhelming concern for politics and procedures within 
the JRC. 
?/ 
9-
V. Executive Summary 
The Visiting Group was satisfied that the work undertaken by the Institute 
is appropriate to its functions, and generally of high quality. However 
objectives, while understood, were only rarely stated in a form that would 
allow effective project management - except where outside bodies had so 
stipulated. For those projects that required cooperation among Institutes, 
sometimes only informal means of coordination were apparent. It was 
felt that clear objectives and efficient project management would 
stimulate performance, generating peer pressure on individuals and 
improving value for money. 
The Institute is clearly hampered in its work by the procedures and 
requirements stipulated by the European Commission. ISEI is not well 
served by the administrative infrastructure, and financial information is 
too complex for easy comprehension. Constraints on staff appointments, 
virement of funds between budget lines, and pricing, undoubtedly impair 
effective bidding for competitive business - ana indeed operational 
control generally. The bar to receiving EC funds, other than those 
particularly allocated, prevents the Institute from participating in many 
Community projects to which it might well bring valuable skills. 
Paradoxically there is no such ban on receiving fees from third parties 
outside the European Community. 
The informatics work of the Institute is not currently supported by 
research funds. However, the Visiting Group believes that ISEI has a 
valuable role to play in maintaining essential discipline in the JRC's 
communications network, and in promoting best practice in advanced 
computing and informatics techniques throughout the JRC. Some 
research funds should be allocated to enable these tasks to be carried out 
at the state of the art. 
VI. Recommendations 
VI. 1 Infrastructure 
• Information and reports to management should be reformed to 
meet operational needs. Fixed and variable costs for each project 
should, in particular, be regularly reported. Virement rules should 
be relaxed. 
• The Director should have greater flexibility in selecting, appointing, 
promoting and removing scientific staff. 
VI.2 Management 
• Systematic project control should be applied throughout the 
Institute's work. Objectives should be stated in clear terms, and 
milestones set to mark progress, defining cost and time parameters. 
• For projects involving more than one Institute, the Director General 
of the JRC should nominate a Project Manager within one engaged 
Institute, and assign appropriate powers to adjust personnel 
assignments and funds. 
"i 
10 
• Training in project management skills should be regularly provided, 
and be extended to all scientific staff. 
• The Director should set in place mechanisms for stimulating scientific 
excellence, and disseminating best practice. 
• Connections with other scientists working in parallel fields should be 
further stimulated. 
• Involvement of industry in the Institute's work should be extended. 
Regular relationships - perhaps at the JRC level - with senior 
industrial scientists would help to form objectives, develop 
management skills and facilitate technology transfer. 
VI.3 Informatics 
• ISEI should be assigned authority for system architecture in JRC 
communication networks. 
• ISEI should be encouraged to advise other JRC Institutes on "best 
practice" in advanced computing and informatics. 
• The Director General of the JRC should require ISEI to audit from 
time to time, informatics and advanced computing applications 
throughout the JRC, against best practice standards. 
VI. 4 Competition 
• ISEI should be further encouraged to secure third party work. 
• The rules restraining the Institute - and indeed the JRC - from 
securing funds for participation in other CEC projects should be 
relaxed. 
• The Institute should be encouraged to adopt commercial principles 
in bidding for third party contracts and managing such work. 
'/3 
Annex I 
Visiting Group to the Joint Research Centre's 
Institute for Systems Engineering and Informatics (ISEI) - Ispra 
Members 
Mr. Peter BENTON (Chairman), 
Northgate House, 
130 Highgate Hill, 
UK-N6 6HD London. Tel. +44-81-341.11.22 
Fax. +44-81-341.11.33 
(Formerly Managing Director of Telecommunications, Deputy Chairman 
British Telecom and Director General of the British Institute of Management.) of 
Dr. Patrice BERNARD, 
Head of Department, 
Department for Waste 
Storageand Disposal, 
Centre d'Etudes de Cadarache 
Boîte postale 1, 
F-13008 St. Paul lez Duras (Cedex). Tel. +33-42-25.72.26 
+ 33-42-25.21.70 
Fax. +33-42-25.77.47 
Dr. Gunter G RI EG ER, Tel. +49-89-32.99.17.81 
Director, Fax. +49-89-32.99.25.79 
Max-Planck Institute 
for Plasma Physics (EPP), 
Boltzmannstrasse 2, 
D-8046 Garching bei Munchen. 
(Member of the IPP Board of Directors, Member of the EPP Scientific Board, Head 
of Experimental Division.) 
Dr. José Manuel TRIBOLET, 
Director, 
Institute for Systems Engineering 
and Computers (INESC), 
9 Rua Alves Redol, 
P-1017 Lisboa. Tel. +351-1-31.00.333 
+ 351-1-54.08.14 
Fax. +351-1-57.28.97 
(Founder of the Foundation for the Development of Education and Training in the 
Fields of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science (FUNDETEC), Founder of 
the Institute for Systems Engineering and Computers (INESC).) 
Secretary 
Mr. Samuel J. LLOYD, 
Avenue Reine Elisabeth 8, 
B-1330Rixensart. Tel. + 32-2-295.40.48 (office) 
+ 32-2-654.09.44 (home) 
Fax. +32-2-295.01.46 
4 
JfjT 
Annex II 
Visiting Group for the Evaluation of the Joint Research Centre's 
Institute for Systems Engineering and Informatics (ISEI) - Ispra 
Scope of Visiting Groups 
The chief scope of Visiting Groups is to perform evaluations, taking into account 
the objectives as set out for the 1992-1994 period (in Council documents, relevant 
papers for the Board of Governors, JRC Annual Workschedules, budget, etc.), to 
provide recommendations on the proper course to be followed by the Institute 
visited in view of the stated objectives, and to apply in the evaluations, elements 
of the methodology proposed ror research returns and effectiveness. 
The Visiting Group should: 
perform an evaluation of all activities of the Institute against its stated 
objectives, with particular emphasis on the impact the results of the work 
has had on the user of this research, and the degree of collaboration 
established with national research laboratories, as wellas with industry; 
assess the scientific quality of the work and the appropriateness of the work 
and results for the Community; 
judge all aspects of the efficiency and impact of the work, taking into 
account the particular status of the JRC (its independence in the Community) 
in comparison with similar national laboratories; 
provide advice on the ongoing work on the basis of the evaluations and 
assessments performed; 
express recommendations for the future development of the Institute with 
regard to the overall strategic plans for development of the JRC in the 
medium-term and long-term. 
Terms of Reference 
To evaluate progress in performing work in accordance with the objectives 
set out in Council Resolution 92/C118/03 and Council Decisions 92/273/EEC, 
92/274/Euratom and 92/275/Euratom, documents addressed to the Board of 
Governors, the JRC's Annual Workschedules, budget etc., and to review 
progress in the implementation of the recommendations of the last 
Evaluation Panel. 
2. To ensure that the Institute has effective mechanisms to set its local scientific 
objectives, monitor progress towards those objectives and evaluate outputs. 
cî6 
3. To review the various research activities to assess: 
a) the scientific quality and productivity of the Institute; 
b) whether full advantage is being taken of scientific opportunities in the 
light of funding and other constraints; 
c) the relevance of the work with respect to Community needs, including 
the relevance of work performed for external customers, when 
applicable. 
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 relationships with research organisations, the higher 
education sector, industry and government departments in the Member 
States, as well as outside the European Community. 
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. 
8. To make recommendations and report to the Board of Governors of the 
Joint Research Centre. 
1} 
Aveiro, 22nd August 1994 
REPORT OF THE VISITING GROUP 
FOR THE EVALUATION OF THE 
JOINT RESEARCH CENTRE'S 
ENVIRONMENT INSTITUTE 
¿y? 
îy 
CONTENTS 
I. Introduction 
II. General Observations 
III. Scientific and Technical Activities 
111.1 Air Quality 
111.2 Toxicology 
111.3 Chemicals 
IV. Management of Research 
IV.1 General 
IV.2 Staff Matters 
IV.3 The Future 
V. Recommendations 
Annex I: Members of the Visiting Group 
Annex II: Terms of Reference of the Visiting Group 
Í&-0 
yu^i 
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), members of the Visiting Group (see Annex I) spent 26-28 April 1994 
at the Environment Institute at Ispra reviewing the Institute's work and 
visiting its laboratories. 
The objectives for the Institute are set out in Annex I of Council Decision 
92/273/(EEC) of 29th April 1992 as follows: 
"The objective is to provide a contribution to the scientific knowledge, 
technical know-how and data needed by the Community, in particular to 
carry out its role with regard to the environment, as spelled out in Title VII 
of the Treaty, and with particular emphasis on prenormative work. 
Special emphasis will be placed on, in addition to the evaluation of the 
effects of pollution from industrial and other sources, the assessment of 
environmental degradation caused by the use of energy in the home, 
transport and industry. 
The JRC will contribute to the implementation of Community 
environment policy in three areas: 
participation in global change programmes; 
technologies and engineering for the environment; 
research on industrial hazards. 
In the global change area, emphasis will be placed on strong cooperation 
with laboratories and institutes in the Member States and at international 
level. The JRC contribution will concern mainly: 
modelling and air pollution transport; 
air chemistry linked notably to the fate of biogenic and 
anthropogenic emissions; 
biosphere-atmosphere interaction; 
related applications of remote sensing, which will focus on the 
interactions between land and ocean surface parameters and 
climate. It is furthermore aimed at the development of remote 
sensing methods applied to critical components of global change. 
Activities under the heading of technologies and engineering for the 
environment will concern mainly: 
environmental chemicals (migration and transformation in soil and 
their impact on ground water, harmonization of analytical methods 
for waste analysis, development of a mobile laboratory for in-field 
analysis of contaminants in soil and water, characterization of algal 
z 
blooms, biomonitoring of environmental chemicals/trace metal 
exposures and human diseases, risk evaluation of environmental 
chemicals); these activities will notably be aligned towards chemical 
waste problems..." 
"... In addition to research, development and support, the programme 
would provide education and training in each of the above areas and 
establish data collection, interpretation and distribution facilities where 
necessary. 
These activities could become the point of contact and common interface 
for national organizations, in particular public authorities and industries, 
and for support to other Commission services, including DGs V and XI." 
These general objectives are concurrent with the JRC's mission and are 
highlighted in the scope of the Visiting Groups. As set out in the terms of 
reference (see Annex II), the. Visiting Group should : 
• evaluate all activities of the Institute against its stated objectives, 
with particular emphasis on the impact the results of the work has 
had on the users of this research, and the degree of collaboration 
established with national research organisations, as well as with 
industry; 
• assess the scientific quality of the work and the appropriateness of 
the work and results for the Community; 
• judge all aspects of the efficiency and impact of the work, taking 
into account the particular status of the JRC (its independence in the 
Community) in comparison with similar national bodies; 
• provide advice on the ongoing work on the basis of the evaluations 
and assessments performed; 
• express recommendations for the future development of the 
Institute with regard to the overall strategic plans for development 
of the JRC in the medium-term and long-term. 
General Observations 
In the three days available to review the Institute and its work, the Group 
was impressed by the good quality of Institute management, by the 
efforts made by staff andmanagementto prepare clear presentations and 
documentation and to respond to questions that arose during the visit. In 
reviewing an institute with so great a spread of activities, some selection 
had to be made where personal visits to laboratories were concerned. All 
activities were reviewed but only some 60% were actually visited. 
For purposes of clarity activities were grouped into four categories: 
Specific Programme research activities; 
Scientific and technical activities in support of Commission policies; 
Exploratory research work; 
Contractual work for third parties. 
^6 
For each activity, the scope, results obtained to date and likely future 
developments were summarised in a document prepared for the visit. 
Members of the Group appreciated this form of presentation. Members 
were impressed by the overall quality of the science performed in the 
Institute and of the staff who presented the various items. However, it 
was felt that a critical process should be applied to the rather extensive 
field covered, to identify and benefit the higher priority projects and 
actions. 
A characteristic of the Institute is the relatively high proportion of 
chemists working there. It was recognised that in certain areas, 
recruitment was concentrated on obtaining other disciplines and the 
Director was strongly encouraged to continue with the estblishment of a 
more multidisciplinary staff in the future development of the Institute. It 
was agreed, however, that the present staff were competent and very 
productive. 
Another characteristic noted by the Group was the high degree of 
geographical dispersion of the Institute throughout the Ispra site. The 
historical reasons for this dispersion were understood and the 
management was encouraged to pursue, with vigour, its intention to 
regroup the Institute into a more manageable area. This would 
encourage maximum synergy between the various units in the Institute 
and thus a more systems-based approach with more extensive teamwork, 
valuable because environmental problems are so diverse and cover the 
vast range of human activities. 
Following enlargement of the Union, a very strong environmental 
research capability will be needed to respond to the growing awareness of 
the environmental impacts of human activities and the consequent 
evolution towards higher standards. 
III. Scientific and Technical Experimental Activities 
111.1 Air Quality 
The Visiting Group considered the European Reference Laboratory on Air 
Pollution (ERLAP) to be well-managed and after ten years of operation to 
be of proven value. 
Emissions were still an urgent matter and the work on bio-emissions could 
well be extented to include emission/absorption by soils. The burden of 
pesticides, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons etc. in rainwater was another 
area of relevance and work on the harmonization of parameters 
measured and measurement methodology was of concern to everyone. 
The Evaluation Monitoring European Pollution (EMEP) station operated 
by the Institute was competently operated and the Group was pleased to 
see that Ispra had an assured place in this international network. 
A close cooperation with universities was encouraged, particularly in 
highly specialised areas such as molecular biology and plant physiology in 
order to establish a sound basis for the explanation of the observed 
phenomenon on the "Biogenic Emissions in the Mediterranean Area", 
(BEMA) for example. There is a general lack of field research institutes in 
Europe and the work is important. 
MH 
The group was impressed by the degree of cooperation with Member 
States achieved in the provision of a suite of complementary mobile 
laboratories for on-site measurements and sampling and strongly 
encouraged common actions to provide joint facilities for large-scale 
experiments. For example, large-scale dispersion experiments were of 
vital interest in understanding and predicting the probable spread of 
contamination following industrial-scale accidents and the Institute's 
leadership in this international cooperative network was warmly 
applauded. Much effort had to be applied to all aspects of modelling in 
an area where even relatively short-term meteorological predictions were 
shown to be unreliable. 
Experimental work on the behaviour of sulphur-bearing aerosols in the 
atmosphere was under development with the commissioning of a new 
facility and the approach of combining modelling with experimental 
verification was sound. It appeared that in this instance, the good physics 
should be closely linked to a more extensive chemical support to fully 
exploit the experimental possibilities. The international networking 
undertaken on these large-scale problems was appreciated and should 
help to ensure that maximum benefit was obtained from the projet and 
its quality assured. 
It was felt that, in general, a closer cooperation between Units responsible 
for atmospheric chemistry and physics and for biospheric-atomospheric 
interactions would bring considerable benefits to both parties. 
Indoor air quality was still of concern as high concentrations of many 
products were found in domestic, public and industrial buildings. JRC 
contributions using the INDOORTRON were significant, particularly in the 
validation of measurement methods. Work in that area might be 
completed in about 3 to 4 years which could liberate the facility for use by 
universities and industry under contract. Round robin quality assessment 
campaigns would be of great value for the harmonization of measuring 
methods in Europe, and improvement of their quality. 
III.2 Toxicology 
III.2.1 European Centre for the Validation of Alternative Methods (ECVAM) 
Ths Centre was being set-up to meet a requirement in Directive 
86/609/EEC that the Commission and Member States should encourage 
research for the replacement , where possible, of animal tests by other 
appropriate procedures. ECVAM has its own scientific advisory committee 
which has defined the tasks as : "ECVAM will promote the scientific and 
regulatory acceptance of alternative methods which are of importance to 
the biosciences and which reduce, refine or replace the use of laboratory 
animals". 
A Head of Unit has been appointed, staff recruitment is under way, the 
proceedings of a series of recently held workshops on current problems 
are in press and ECVAM is at present involved in six validation studies with 
European laboratories and with Japan and the USA. 
The Visiting Group whilst appreciating the strong scientific guidance and 
coordination of efforts through the Scientific Advisory Committee, felt 
that every effort should be made to streamline administrative and 
recruitment procedures to bring the unit up to full strength as soon as 
possible. The Environment Institute was felt to be the most appropriate 
EU location for ECVAM. 
yÁ<>\ 
5-
111.2.2 Toxicology Laboratory 
The Group pointed out the importance of determining background values 
of trace metals and metal species in the general population in the 
European Union. Such values are of importance for the evaluation of risks 
arising from occupational exposures and those resulting from accidents to 
chemical plant, etc... In addition, total diet studies are needed to 
complement the above, especially in cases where vegetables are home­
grown whilst epidemiological and statistical investigations are also 
required if results are to be applicable in practice. 
A very important requirement lies in the standardization of all analytical 
steps: sampling, sample preparation; separation; trace analysis, all of 
which must follow agreed standard operating procedures. For parts of 
this work, clean-room conditions and regulations are required. After 
visiting the toxicological laboratories, the Group had the impression that a 
redefinition of goals as well as a reconstitution of the Unit is necessary. 
The present and continuing importance of chlorinated and polycyclic 
aromatic hydrocarbons shoula be taken into account at that time. A close 
connection with water and soil analysis would benefit both analytical 
services and users alike, and should be examined at an early date. 
111.3 Chemicals 
111.3.1 European Chemicals Bureau 
This activity is typical of actions to support EU legislation and operates in 
the area of the control of chemicals. Its mission is seen to be of 
importance for the establishment of viable regulations and directives and 
their implementation. 
111.3.2 Data Banks Euclid and Ecphin 
The data banks demonstrated to the Group appeared to be efficiently 
conceived with attention to user-friendly interfaces and giving customer 
satisfaction. However, the question arose as to whether, once a system 
was developed, it should be continued by valuable institute staff. Where 
possible, it should be passed to other private or public organizations and 
this needed periodic review on a case-by-case basis. 
HI 3.3 Food chemistry 
European Office of Wine, Spirits and Spirit Drinks (BEVAPS). 
Wine Laboratory 
This relatively small activity provides the Commission with analytical 
services for prevention of fraud and determination of origins of products. 
Analytical methods are evaluated in cooperation with national 
laboratories. The work appears to be competently performed. Chemical 
and microbiological laboratories for food analysis were also visited and 
found to be well eauipped and competently staffed. With EU 
enlargement, this could be a growth area. 
.6 
-6 
.3.4 Water and Waste 
This is a particularly important area and it is gratifying to see the JRC 
playing its part in a range of international projects where the Institute's 
contributions have been significant. Even so, the available resources do 
not appear to fully reflect the importance given to these subjects in the 
European Union. Water quality, recycling, treatment and similar 
processes are matters likely to be raised by upcoming directives. Water 
and waste management studies are urgently needed and waste water and 
solid waste should be included. 
.3.5 Analytical Laboratories 
To conclude this section, the Group encourages the Institutes' 
management to study the regrouping of its analytical services into a more 
compact form: if possible, as a single unit. This would help to make the 
most efficient use of specialized instruments and equipment and ensure 
maximum pooling of expertise and also help to prevent possible 
duplication. 
IV. Management of Research 
IV.1. General 
The environment Institute is larger than other Institutes at Ispra with a 
wide spread of research and service activities. With minor exceptions, it is 
well managed by keen and enthusiastic staff but suffers from the 
inevitable disadvantages of being widely dispersed over the Ispra site. 
However, it is understood that relocation is planned for the coming years. 
Evidence of networking and collaboration with other organizations in 
Europe and elsewhere was found in each of the units visited. This is clearly 
an important function of a Commission institute working in a field as 
universal as the environment and the visiting group wishes to emphasize 
the importance of trans-frontier cross-linking. 
As noted before in this report, the visiting group considers that in view of 
the importance given to environmental problems in the European Union, 
especially after enlargement, a much more even balance of disciplines will 
be needed in the Institute. Until that Can be achieved, the further 
development of interinstitute collaborative projects can be one method of 
improving the spread of competences. In that respect, networking with 
the outside world and maximising the number of post-doctoral fellows 
and visiting scientists in the Institute assume an even greater significance. 
The Group realizes that apart from specific programme research, the 
Environment Institute has to provide expertise and services to a wide 
range of Commission services responsible for developing and 
implementing policies in many sectors. These tasks are essentially those of 
the "Commission's own laboratory" but since some of this work will in 
future be of a competitive nature, it is important that the most 
appropriate tasks are selected relative to the policies concerned and to 
available competences and facilities. Interviews with representatives from 
customer DG's show a high degree of customer satisfaction and the Group 
appreciates the efforts being made by Institute scientists to meet these 
challenges. 
^ h 
-7 
Contract research is likely to remain a very small part of the Institute's 
activities but is both an important stimulation to research staff, 
encourages contact with the outside world and is a visible demonstration 
of competence. 
IV.2 Staff Matters 
To accelerate the adjustment of the balance of competences in the 
Institute, measures should be sought to encourage mobility. Movement 
between customer DGs and the Institute would form closer links between 
"contractor and client" and attention must be directed to obtaining the 
most appropriate young recruits. The predicted growth in the Institute 
and the age profile shown in the strategic plan for the coming years, 
present opportunities for disciplinary diversification. 
Concerning long-and short-term visitors to the Institute such as post­
doctoral researchers, visiting scientists etc, the Group welcomes the steady 
increase in numbers over the last three years and the future intentions. 
Maximum effectiveness of recruitment procedures is highly desirable and 
research- fellowships could provide a reliable means of selection. 
Flexibility is very important in trying to avoid early, narrow specialisation. 
IV.3 The Future 
The visiting group feels that the indicative breakdown of activity areas by 
percentage proposed by the Director and given below, represents a 
reasonable target to aim for over the coming years. 
60% Support to the Commission (essentially 2nd generation) 
20 % Large cooperative research projects (Global change, air, water, soil) 
10% Data organisation and communication (like CEO, ECPHIN, aerosols 
etc.) 
3% Free (ars-pro-arte) research 
7% Work for third parties 
Predictions regarding the size of the Institute are clearly dependent on 
available finance and overall JRC policy and therefore somewhat 
uncertain. However, the target of a complement of about 300 by the year 
2000 does not seem unreasonable in what can be considered to be an area 
still growing in importance. 
The above information is outlined in the Institute's strategy document 
which is a useful tool for the development of the Institute, but is likely to 
require some detailed revision following the present Report. 
V. Recommendations 
The 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. 
Specific research activities should preferably be performed in close 
collaboration with others with the aim of adding to the 
understanding of the mechanisms of large scale environmental 
phenomena. 
-8 
Where appropriate, computer modelling should supplement 
experimental activities and where possible, in Union-wide networks. 
Within the JRC and the Institute itself, a greater degree of synergy 
between units should be established. A multidisciplinary teamwork 
approach to large-scale problems is often the most effective one. 
Greater diversity of staff disciplines is strongly favoured. 
Analytical services should be reorganized to include the toxicology 
laboratory and radioactive assay should be confined to specific 
needs. Neutron activation analysis can often be substituted by more 
modern techniques of equal or superior sensitivity. 
Research on water and waste processing/recycling is likely to 
increase in importance. Attention should be directed to these 
aspects, particularly with regard to harmonization of methods. 
Work on indoor air pollution should continue for some years 
focussed on verification of standard operating procedures and 
sampling. 
Intermixing of staff with that of outside organizations is encouraged 
and networking should be yet more strongly developed. 
Data-bases should be examined for operation by outside agents, 
only retaining those for which there are strong reasons for operation 
by the Institute. 
The selection of tasks and setting of priorities within the institute is 
important. A more transparent project management system would 
help to ensure that these are maintained, and reassure the outside 
world of the Institute's efficiency. It should be possible to achieve 
this without creating a top-heavy management or diverting 
scientists from their tasks. 
^j 
Annex 
Visiting Group to the Joint Research Centred Environment 
Institute (EI) - Ispra 
Members 
Prof. Carlos A. BORREGO (Chairman), 
Department of Environment 
and Planning, 
University of Aveiro, 
P-3800Aveiro. Tel. +351-34-37.02.00 
Fax. + 351-34-29.290 
Prof. Dr. A. KETTRUP, 
Head of Institute, 
Institute of Ecological Chemistry, 
GSF Neuherberg, 
Ingoldstàdter Landstrasse 1, 
D-91465 Neuherberg. Tel. + 49-89-31.87.40.47 / 87.40.48 
Fax. + 49-89-31.87.33.71 
Dr. Thomas O'CONNOR, 
Experimental Physics Department, 
University College Galway, 
IRL-Galway. Tel. + 353-91-24.411 ext. 2495 
Fax. + 353-91-25.700 
Prof. Dr. Christos /EREEOS, 
Laboratory of Atmospheric Physics, 
Physics Department, 
Aristotelian University of Thessaloniki, 
GR-54006 Thessaloniki. Tel. +30-31-99.27.84/99.80.41 
Fax. +30-31-28.37.52/24.86.02 
Secretary 
Mr. Samuel J. LLOYD, 
Avenue Reine Elisabeth 8, 
B-1330Rixensart. Tel. +32-2-295.40.48 (office) 
+ 32-2-654.09.44 (home) 
Fax. +32-2-295.01.46 

AAA 
Annex II 
Visiting Group for the Evaluation of the Joint Research Centre's 
Environment Institute (El) - Ispra 
Scope of Visiting Groups 
The chief scope of Visiting Groups is to perform evaluations, taking into account 
the objectives as set out for the 1992-1994 period (in Council documents, relevant 
papers for the Board of Governors, JRC Annual Workschedules, budget, etc.), to 
provide recommendations on the proper course to be followed by the Institute 
visited in view of the stated objectives, and to apply in the evaluations, elements 
of the methodology proposed for research returns and effectiveness. 
The Visiting Group should: 
perform an evaluation of all activities of the Institute against its stated 
objectives, with particular emphasis on the impact the results of the work 
has had on the user of this research, and the degree of collaboration 
established with national research laboratories, as wellas with industry; 
assess the scientific quality of the work and the appropriateness of the work 
and results for the Community; 
judge all aspects of the efficiency and impact of the work, taking into 
account the particular status of the JRC (its independence in the Community) 
in comparison with similar national laboratories; 
provide advice on the ongoing work on the basis of the evaluations and 
assessments performed; 
express recommendations for the future development of the Institute with 
regard to the overall strategic plans for development of the JRC in the 
medium-term and long-term. 
Terms of Reference 
1. To evaluate progress in performing work in accordance with the objectives 
set out in Council Resolution 92/C118/03 and Council Decisions 92/273/EEC, 
92/274/Euratom and 92/275/Euratom, documents addressed to the Board of 
Governors, the JRC's Annual Workschedules, budget etc., and to review 
progress in the implementation of the recommendations of the last 
Evaluation Panel. 
To ensure that the Institute has effective mechanisms to set its local scientific 
objectives, monitor progress towards those objectives and evaluate outputs. 
/I '<¿ 
3. To review the various research activities to assess: 
a) the scientific quality and productivity of the Institute; 
b) whether full advantage is being taken of scientific opportunities in the 
light of funding and other constraints; 
c) the relevance of the work with respect to Community needs, including 
the relevance of work performed for external customers, when 
applicable. 
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 relationships with research organisations, the higher 
education sector, industry and government departments in the Member 
States, as well as outside the European Community. 
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. 
8. To make recommendations and report to the Board of Governors of the 
Joint Research Centre. 
//j 
Enschede, 10th December 1993 
REPORT OF THE VISITING GROUP 
FOR THE EVALUATION OF THE 
JOINT RESEARCH CENTRE'S 
INSTITUTE FOR 
SAFETY TECHNOLOGY 
A<H 
CONTENTS 
I. Introduction page 1 
II. General Observations page 1 
III. Scientific and Technical Areas pages 2-5 
11.1 Fission Reactor Safety page 2-3 
.2 Industrial Hazards page 3-4 
.3 Structural Mechanics page 4 
II.4 Tritium Technology page 4-5 
.5 Safeguards page 5 
IV. Management of Personnel page 5-6 
IV.1 Mission page 5-6 
IV.2 Relations page 6 
IV.3 Quality page 6 
V. Recommendations page 6 
Annex I: Members of the Visiting Group 
Annex II: Terms of Reference of the Visiting Group yUS 
yi lt-6 
A*ï 
Report of the Visiting Group for the Evaluation of the Joint Research Centre's 
Institute for Safety Technology, Ispra, Italy 
Introduction 
At the invitation of the Board of Governors of the Joint Research Centre 
(JRC), members of the Visiting Group (see Annex I) spent the 25th, 26th and 
27th October 1993 at the Institute for Safety Technology (1ST) at Ispra 
reviewing the Institute's work and visiting its laboratories. 
The objectives for the Institute are to be found in Annex I of Council 
Decision 92/273(EEC) and 92/274/Euratom of 29 April 1992. 
A. The main objectives concern : 
prenormative research on the reliability of structures; 
research on industrial hazards; 
- • nuclear fission safety including reactor safety, safeguards and 
fissile materials and radioactive waste management; 
tritium technology and fusion safety. 
These general objectives are concurrent with the JRC's mission and are 
highlighted in the scope of the Visiting Groups. As set out in the terms of 
reference (see Annex II), the Visiting Group should: 
• evaluate all activities of the Institute against its stated objectives, with 
particular emphasis on the impact the results of the work has had on 
the users of this research, and the degree of collaboration established 
with national research organisations, as well as with industry; 
• assess the scientific quality of the work and the appropriateness of 
the work and results for the Community; 
• judge all aspects of the efficiency and impact of the work, taking into 
account the particular status of the JRC (its independence in the 
Community) in comparison with similar national bodies; 
• provide advice on the ongoing work on the basis of the evaluations 
and assessments performed; 
• express recommendations for the future development of the Institute 
with regard to the overall strategic plans for development of the JRC 
in the medium-term and long-term. 
II. General Observations 
This report is arranged by Mission area following the internal organisation 
of the Institute as follows: 
Fission Reactor Safety (including waste management); 
Safeguards; 
Industrial Hazards; 
Structural Mechanics; 
Tritium Technology. 
M% 
The Visiting Group examined each of these areas in turn and was impressed 
by the leadership shown by the Institute's management team which had 
clearly succeeded in transferring its enthusiasm to its collaborators. This 
effect was seen to have permeated to everyone interviewed during visits to 
laboratories and demonstrations, and was particularly evident in younger 
staff and grantholders. This was manifested in an evident team spirit 
visible at all levels. In this connection, the presence of junior staff at 
meetings was much appreciated by members of the group. 
A large measure of this success could be attributable to the highly 
organised and efficient system of project control exercised at all levels. The 
detailed definition of objectives, setting of milestones, analysis of strong 
and weak points with subsequent follow-up and reporting, were important 
elements in securing a high level of motivation and consequent cost-
effectiveness. 
The re-orientation of scientists previously engaged in nuclear research and 
the redeployment of equipment to other significant fields of R&D, was 
considered to be clear evidence of successful management. 
III. Scientific and Technical Areas 
111.1 Fission Reactor Safety 
The Visiting Group considered that in view of uncertainties related to 
national decision-making on energy policy, it would be reasonable to 
maintain a certain nominal minimum of R&D on nuclear energy at a 
Community level. It was pointed out that regardless of future policy, the 
environmental implications of former and existing nuclear activities would 
remain into the far future, both in the E.C. and in Eastern European 
countries, with obvious implications to the Community as a whole. 
The Visiting Group therefore, recommends that, in view of the lack of a 
clear vision of the future, serious consideration be given to ensure that 
work be maintained at a viable level: in some areas resources may already 
have been reduced too far. 
Particular comments 
• The combination of modelling, code development with international 
partners, experimental verification followed by publication, was 
considered to be a valid prenormative approach to widespread 
coordination of high acceptability, likely to produce a maximum of 
useful products for a minimum overall outlay in times of universal 
financial stringency. The JRC is the best placed organisation to 
motivate such networks by practical example and the activities are 
felt to be of high importance. 
• Facilities such as FARO in Ispra and PHEBUS (in Cadarache) and the 
future STORM were of real importance in the area. Members were 
pleased to see that doubts expressed in the report issued by the 1991 
Evaluation Panel, chaired by Sir Hermann Bondi, about a long-term 
future for FARO had been dispelled by outside support for the 
projects being performed there. 
^MS 
The Group regretted that the PETRA facility could not be brought into 
operation, feeling that such a facility could be of great help in aiding 
common waste treatment problems. However, in view OT restricted 
funds and the present lack of national interest in research on 
reprocessing, the decision to proceed slowly was understood. In 
nuclear fission safety, the general lack of on-site projects 
necessitating the handling of radioactive substances was noted. 
No evidence was seen of work leading to inherently safe nuclear 
plants, a subject of world interest in which JRC expertise could 
contribute usefully. 
III.2 Industrial Hazards 
Comments 
Since experimental and theoretical work on dispersions of heavy qas 
clouds is carried on in many places worldwide, the members felt that 
there was no special place for the 1ST in that area. However, if the 
Institute endeavoured to include chemical reactions in dispersion 
models, so as to incorporate ignition of fires, explodable 
deflagrations and detonations in a sound way, this would represent a 
difficult and major step forward in science, and enable a valid 
judgement to be made of the environmental and safety aspects of 
certain measures taken by local, national or international authorities. 
In the chemical industry most accidents occur under dynamic 
conditions, such as those experienced during start-up and shut-down 
of large continuously operated plants and in batch or semi-batch 
processing of chemical reactions. On the basis of the IST's long 
experience in dynamic studies and multiphase fluid flow, the 
selection of safety in chemical plants and the environmental impact of 
accidents as a new research project was a wise and useful choice. 
The combination of the study and growing know-how in the 
experimental and theoretical evaluation of venting facilities, pressure 
relief, handling of severe accidents and dispersion of toxic chemicals 
in the environment is unique. The developing collaboration with 
industrial partners concerning pressure relief and venting is highly 
relevant and should be pursued vigorously. 
The experimental installation (FIRES) for studying dangerous 
reactions is fully up to an international standard and the 1ST is very 
well equipped for the collection of generic, fundamental know-how 
applicable to all chemical plants. 
Knowledge of chemical reactions and chemical reactors themselves is 
still at an initial stage in the institute. We strongly recommend hiring 
a few experienced chemical engineers or industrial chemists to build 
up that Knowledge as quickly as possible and to provide adequate 
sparring partners for industry. 
Industrial enterprises will only study reactions appropriate to their 
own processes and consequently there is a great lack of fundamental 
knowledge on chemical plant dynamics. Universities find it 
impossible to maintain groups with requisite experience on a 
permanent basis and the institute should fill this gap. 
A) 
-4 
• The 1ST should strengthen its contacts with other institutes in Europe 
also working in the area of batch reactors, to set up fruitful 
cooperations and thus establish its own niche in research in this field. 
This should be fundamental technological research of a generic 
nature which can help all industrial companies and simultaneously 
Crovide the European Commission with a sound technological 
ackground for developing directives. 
.3 Structural Mechanics 
The activity centres around experiment design and model development 
using numerical and visualisation techniques, followed by experimental 
verification using the recently commissioned European Laboratory for 
Structural Assessment (ELSA) and the Large Dynamic Testing Facility (LDTF): 
Comments 
• The Group noted with satisfaction the excellent progress made with 
the development of activities in the Unit and the enthusiasm and 
developing competence of the staff. First tests in ELSA have been very 
satisfactory. 
• A potential study of considerable interest exists in the investigation of 
the connections between pre-cast concrete elements together with 
the diaphragmatic behaviour of slabs and reinforced masonry under 
seismic conditions. 
• While recognising the importance of a common computer 
environment, the Visiting Group considers that the Unit should resist 
the temptation to disperse its activities in too many fields of 
application and concentrate its talent on fewer selected topics where 
an in-depth approach would bring greater rewards. 
.4 Tritium Technology 
In the use of tritium for civil purposes it must be emphasised that due to its 
nature, the behaviour of the element is very different from that 
experienced with fission products. This has important implications, at a 
European level, on protection and safety. It is therefore necessary to gain 
experience in the handling of large quantities of tritium before fixing the 
engineering design of future thermonuclear fusion reactors and further 
large-scale experiments incorporating tritium. 
Comments 
• The Group visited the European Tritium Handling Laboratory ETHEL, 
at present being commissioned, and was impressed by the progress 
made so far towards the practical implementation of a working 
laboratory. 
• Initial pilot experiments are progressing well and the experimental 
programme is sound. 
• Members were pleased to find a close collaboration with the 
installation at Karlsruhe and noted the complementarity between the 
work carried out in the two laboratories.. 
y i 
Excellent progress is being made overall on these very important 
activities 
III.5 Safeguards 
This JRC activity is not only an important link in the worldwide nuclear 
safeguards network and the implementation of non-proliferation policy, 
but provides the essential technical support required by the Commission in 
fulfilling its statutory obligations under Chapter VII of the EURATOM 
Treaty. 
Comments 
• The Visiting Group was pleased by the efficiency and care apparent in 
the performance of the work and its management. However, 
Members were concerned at the lack of a clear management structure 
to operate the programme which is spread over a number of JRC 
Institutes. They believed that although no adverse effects had 
appeared up to the present, attention should be paid to this point. 
• The long standing training programme for Safeguards inspectors 
carried out in the PERLA facility was particularly impressive and an 
important contribution to the effective safeguarding of nuclear 
materials in Europe. 
• The steady development of field instrumentation to improve 
accuracy, portability, means of standardisation and user-friendliness 
was considered to be of importance and to be performed to a high 
standard. 
In view of recent events demonstrating the need for an accurate and 
convenient means of assaying the quality of the contents of waste 
containers, the Visiting Group welcomed the response made by the 
JRC in developing rapid and highly sensitive equipment for waste 
container monitoring. The equipment appeared to be precise and 
largely automatic in use. 
• The Visiting Group was pleased to see that support was also provided 
to inspectors from the IAEA, Vienna and that the JRC took the lead in 
the European Safeguards Research and Development Association 
(ESARDA) and had worldwide connections in the matter of 
safeguarding nuclear materials. 
IV. Management of Personnel 
IV.1 Mission 
• Objectives were found to be generally clear and appropriate to the 
JRC and the project structure installed in the Institute defined 
activities in all mission areas and fixed mission targets and time scales. 
• The evolution of current Community research policy in the energy 
field is a cause for concern in avoiding thatlhe effort is not decreased 
below a critical mass due to reductions in resources. 
-6-
IV.2 Relations 
Information transfer, inward and outward, appeared to be good in all 
sectors covered by the Institute, largely due to the Institute's 
involvement with other organisations in Member States and outside 
by means of working parties, collaborations and initiating workshops, 
as well as a number of joint projects. 
It was noted that the volume of contract work undertaken for third 
parties had doubled in the last year and the Visiting Group would 
encourage further efforts in this respect. Such contracts were a 
valuable means of demonstrating the Institute's vitality and 
competence to industry and would help in securing IST's place in the 
scientific world. 
IV.3 Quality 
The Institute has been able to maintain a generally high standard in 
most areas of work, in spite of a steady conversion process of staff 
moving from mainly nuclear to other tasks. This was due to the 
quality and flexibility of a motivated staff. 
V. Recommendations 
The Institute should continue to follow and develop the lines being 
pursued at present paying attention to avoid too rapid a 
diversification beyond the areas of existing competences. 
Attention should be paid to the maintenance of a suitable level of 
resources in the nuclear safety area. Possible needs arising from 
Eastern European developments should not be neglected. 
The feasibility of the Institute's involvement in work on inherently 
safe nuclear reactors should be examined. 
The embryonic Industrial Hazards activities are worth pursuing 
vigorously and should be supplemented with an injection of 
experienced industrial chemical engineers or chemists. 
The structural mechanics team should be careful not to spoil an 
excellent start by too wide a dispersion of activities. This applies 
particularly to analytical modelling. 
The already close cooperation in tritium technology with other 
laboratories active in the world should be maintained to ensure that 
best use is made of this important Community facility. 
The Group feels that exploratory research could be a management 
tool for finding new and relevant activities to further enhance the 
future standing of the institute. Such programmes should not 
require prior approval but should be judged a posteriori as to 
whether management has spent this money diligently. 
The excellent system of project control employed by the Institute 
could well be extended to embrace pan-JRC projects such as nuclear 
safeguards which spans several institutes. 
SI il 
Annex 
Visiting Group to the Joint Research Centre's 
Institute for Safety Technology (1ST) - Ispra 
Members 
Prof. Dr. Franz M. BAUMGAERTNER, Tel. 
Director, Fax. 
Institute for Radiochemistry, 
Technical University of Munich, 
3 Walther Meissner, 
D-8046 Garching. 
(Areas of expertise: Tritium uptake in plants; aerosol 
chemistry; analysis at low-level transuranium elements.) + 49-89-32.09.22.02 
+49-89-32.61.115 
Prof. Dr. Theodossios P. TASSIOS, 
Agias Lavras 4, 
GR-15236 Palea Penteli (Athens). Tel. +30-1-362.48.40 (office) 
+ 30-1-804.97.51 (home) 
Fax. +30-1-362.54.82 
' (Areas of expertise: The behaviour of materials and structural engineering 
under seismic conditions and environmental influences.) 
Prof. Dr. Ir. Roel WESTERTERP (Chairman), 
Head of Department, 
Department of Industrial Processes, 
P.O. Box 217, 
University of Twente, 
NL-7500 AE Enschede. 
(Areas of expertise: 25 years in production, R&D, sales 
and general management in the chemical industry.) Tel. +31-53-89.28.77 
Fax. +31-53-31.40.24 
Secretary 
Mr. SamuelJ. LLOYD, 
Avenue Reine Elisabeth 8, 
B-1330Rixensart. Tel. +32-2-295.40.48 (office) 
+ 32-2-654.09.44 (home) 
Fax. +32-2-295.01.46 
lA 
^ 
Annex II 
Visiting Group for the Evaluation of the Joint Research Centre's 
Institute for Safety Technology (1ST) - Ispra 
Scope of Visiting Groups 
The chief scope of Visiting Groups is to perform evaluations, taking into account 
the objectives as set out for the 1992-1994 period (in Council documents, relevant 
papers for the Board of Governors, JRC Annual Workschedules, budget, etc.), to 
provide recommendations on the proper course to be followed by the Institute 
visited in view of the stated objectives, and to apply in the evaluations, elements 
of the methodology proposed for research returns and effectiveness. 
The Visiting Group should: 
perform an evaluation of all activities of the Institute against its stated 
objectives, with particular emphasis on the impact the results of the work 
has had on the user of this research, and the degree of collaboration 
established with national research laboratories, as wellas with industry; 
assess the scientific quality of the work and the appropriateness of the work 
and results for the Community; 
judge all aspects of the efficiency and impact of the work, taking into 
account the particular status of the JRC (its independence in the Community) 
in comparison with similar national laboratories; 
provide advice on the ongoing work on the basis of the evaluations and 
assessments performed; 
express recommendations for the future development of the Institute with 
regard to the overall strategic plans for development of the JRC in the 
medium-term and long-term. 
Terms of Reference 
To evaluate progress in performing work in accordance with the objectives 
set out in Council Resolution 92/C118/03 and Council Decisions 92/273/EEC, 
92/274/Euratom and 92/275/Euratom, documents addressed to the Board of 
Governors, the JRC's Annual Workschedules, budget etc., and to review 
progress in the implementation of the recommendations of the last 
Evaluation Panel. 
To ensure that the Institute has effective mechanisms to set its local scientific 
objectives, monitor progress towardsthose objectives and evaluate outputs. 
Al £ 
2-
3. To review the various research activities to assess: 
a) the scientific quality and productivity of the Institute; 
b) whether full advantage is being taken of scientific opportunities in the 
light of funding and other constraints; 
c) the relevance of the work with respect to Community needs, including 
the relevance of work performed for external customers, when 
applicable. 
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 relationships with research organisations, the higher 
education sector, industry and government departments in the Member 
States, as well as outside the European Community. 
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. 
8. To make recommendations and report to the Board of Governors of the 
Joint Research Centre. 
Ai :\ 
Bonn, 2nd September, 1994 
REPORT OF THE VISITING GROUP 
FOR THE EVALUATION OF THE 
JOINT RESEARCH CENTRE'S 
INSTITUTE FOR REMOTE 
SENSING APPLICATIONS 
lit 
CONTENTS 
Introduction 
II. General Observations 
II. Scientific and Technical Activities 
11.1 Agricultural Information Systems (AIS) 
11.2 Environmental Mapping and Modelling (EMAP) 
11.3 Monitoring Tropical Vegetation (MTV) 
11.4 Marine Environment (ME) 
11.5 Advanced Techniques (AT) 
11.6 Centre for Earth Observation (CEO) 
IV. Management Aspects 
IV. 1 Staff 
IV.2 Visitors 
IV.3 Finance 
IV.4 Management Information Tools 
Annex I: Members of the Visiting Group 
Annex II: Terms of Reference of the Visiting Group 
Annex III: Institute Objectives 
Annex IV: Programme of the Work for the Visiting Group 
3c 
S M 
Report of the Visiting Group for the Evaluation of the Joint Research Centre's 
Institute for Remote Sensing Applications (IRSA), Ispra, Italy 
Introduction 
At the invitation of the Board of Governors of the Joint Research Centre 
(JRC), members of the Visiting Group (see Annex I) spent 23-24 August 
1994 at the Institute for Remote Sensing Applications (IRSA) at Ispra 
reviewing the Institute's work. The composition of and Terms of 
Reference for the Visiting Group are given in Annexes I and II. The 
objectives for the Institute are listed in Annex III. The Visiting Group 
considers these objectives outdated and recommends a revision along the 
lines given in Chapter II (in italics). (Recommendations are highlighted in 
bold type in the Report). 
IRSA conducts research and pre-operational system development in the 
fields of: 
Agricultural Information Systems (AIS); 
Environmental Mapping and Modelling (EMAP); 
Monitoring Tropical Vegetation (MTV); 
Marine Environment (ME); 
Advanced Techniques (AT); 
as well as in the area of data pre-processing and dissemination through a 
project called "Centre for Earth Observation (CEO)" which was recently 
transferred to the Institute. 
I. General Observations 
The Visiting Group had the opportunity to listen to several presentations 
by IRSA 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 
professionalism and good success of the Institute in the few years since its 
creation in 1988. There seems to be a good level of motivation amongst 
the approximately 90 permanent and 50 non-permanent staff. 
1.1 Future Strategy 
The Institute's draft strategic plan of 18th March 1994 seems to reflect a 
general uncertainty about the proper way forward. The plan must be 
revised and restructured towards realistic and concrete long term goals. 
These goals must in priority represent the thematic orientation of the 
Institute's activities and be described in measurable goals such that 
implementation plans can be drawn up against these goals. The 
indiscernible mixture of strategic, tactical and operative aspects of the 
present draft plan should be eliminated. 
3¿ 
The Visiting Group took the opportunity to analyse the present objectives 
of the Institute and found them outdated. It recommends reformulations 
along the following lines which should on the one hand help to better 
focus the Institute s activities and (on the other) pay tribute to the 
important and further growing role of the Institute within the JRC: 
(i) to evaluate and demonstrate applications of remote sensing 
techniques in support of the sectorial policies of the European Union 
in areas such as agriculture, environment, aid to development, 
regional aid... 
(ii) to contribute towards the support of the European scientific and 
application communities in the utilisation of earth observation 
satellite data. 
Note: This objective is complementary to those of the European and 
national space agencies, international scientific programmes and 
those of other institutions; 
(Hi) to conduct research and support the development of methods and 
advanced techniques for the interpretation and application of 
satellite derived data. 
The strategic plan should further clarify the goals and policy in the 
following fields: 
roles and relationships with national, European and international 
organisations - where a clear understanding should be the baseline 
of the Institute's activities. The subsidiarity of the Institute's 
contribution is an important consideration in establishing an 
unambiguous position in this respect. At the same time, attention 
must be focused on fixing priorities and the development of a policy 
on work that should, respecting subsidiarity, be performed ¡n-nouse 
and what tasks can be better placed extra-muros. This should help 
towards clarifying IRSA's policy on third party activities and its 
competitive role vis-à-vis national research organisations and 
industry; 
data processing and dissemination - where the Institute should make 
additional contributions towards the promotion and furtherance of 
earth observation in the different communities; 
education and training - where the activities of the Institute should 
be strengthened by e.g. further enlarging the number of visiting 
scientists or cooperation with academia, young graduate trainee 
programmes and the like. 
There is an urqent need to further clarify the Institute's strategic and 
operational roles and share of activity in the EC's Fourth Framework 
Programme. The results of these ongoing efforts will have an important 
effect on the Institute's orientation and activities for the next four to six 
years and must be reflected in the updated strategic plan. 
133 
-3 
11.2 Quality 
The quality and the dedication of the acting Director and senior staff are 
recognised by the Visiting Group. It is recommended that a decision on 
the appointment of a Director to lead the Institute is taken in the shortest 
possible time. This should be coupled with a requirement to improve the 
application of generally accepted academic standards to the activities and 
the external presentation of the Institute. 
The Group felt that although the Institute enjoys considerable success, 
efforts should be made to improve its impact by greater attention to 
detail and verification of information in botn oral and written 
presentations. 
It should be also evaluated whether the setting up of additional advisory 
groups, representing the user communities, would be the appropriate 
step to enhance guidance and acceptance of the Institute's work. 
11.3 Methods for the Dissemination of the Institute's Activities' Results 
In general, the Institute develops and verifies methods for the 
interpretation of aerospace data for application in a number of fields by 
organisations responsible for policy implementation as mentioned above. 
The product in that case is passed to the organisation concerned and a 
follow-up service is provided. This service is particularly appreciated by 
the relevant Commission Directorates General and services. 
There is also a steady contribution of articles in journals, presentations to 
international meetings, however, the Group was concerned to find a 
number of papers listed as "submitted" which do not appear in 
subsequent publication lists. This practice is felt to be misleading and 
likely to engender misunderstandings in the academic world. 
Dissemination by direct transfer to students, post graduate and post 
doctorate research fellows is a growing feature at IRSA. Participation in 
large projects with other organisations by networking is an important and 
developing means of two-wayi information transfer. Át the same time, a 
more active approach to third party contract research, particularly in the 
Advanced Techniques area, should also help with information 
dissemination and the development of techniques in Europe. 
III. Scientific and Technical Activities 
Agricultural Information System (AIS) 
The main objectives of the Agricultural Information Systems Unit are to 
provide scientific and technical support to the services of the community 
in charge of the execution of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP). The 
central core of the activities of the AIS are the Monitoring Agriculture 
with Remote Sensing (MARS) project and the Register and Control of 
Agricultural Surfaces project, both taking the form of a technical and 
scientific support provided to the Directorate General VI (Agriculture). 
}H 
This unit has shown its deep understanding of the issues in agriculture 
information problems and a remarkable scientific maturity in its approach 
to the use of space remote sensing in this field. In undertaking and 
conducting the corresponding activities it followed the appropriate 
strategy: 
support to research in order to establish the methods; 
validation of the scientific methodology and clear statement of the 
limits and accuracy of the method imposed by the physics of the 
measurements; 
transfer of the scientific method and its adaptation as an operational 
method; 
validation of the operational method; 
industrial transfer in order to develop the operational tool and 
implement it; 
transfer of the operational tool under the responsibility of the user 
(DGVI). 
The AIS Unit is well managed and is characterised by a good scientific and 
technical guidance. It is effective in establishing innovative operational 
tools in agricultural information for the benefit of the Community Policies 
and requiring familiarity with modern techniques in data acquisition 
process and physical analysis of data. The Visiting Group noted with 
satisfaction the quality of cooperation reached with scientific and 
industrial teams of the Member States during the development of the 
project. 
In view of the importance of the agriculture information issue both from 
the political and economical sides, the Visiting Group encourages the unit: 
(a) to extend the method it developed for statistics in agriculture in the 
European Union to other regions (Central and Eastern Europe, North 
Africa ...); 
(b) to develop the methodologies for the control of agricultural 
surfaces; 
(c) to expand the programme towards the assessment of agricultural 
productivity and crop estimations for Europe and in the long term 
for other parts of the world. 
Environmental Mapping and Modelling (EMAP) 
The research in EMAP concerns the mapping of various components of the 
European landscape and the development of methods for using remotely 
sensed data together with other geocoded information for the 
management andprotection of the European environment. During 1993, 
the mapping and monitoring activities of the Unit were conductedTalong 
two main thematic lines: 
(i) forest grassland and natural vegetation; 
(ii) Mediterranean land degradation. 
ÏM' 
5-
Parallel activities in image understanding were pursued, aimed at 
continuing the development of methodologies for automatic 
classification, mapping and map generation from remote sensing data. 
The continued cooperation with Central and Eastern European countries 
(through the PHARE regional programme) should go on a par with the 
development of an interest for remote sensing data from a larger range 
of satellites (e.g. Russian). 
The Unit has the project of extending its work to "coastal ecosystem 
monitoring". It should be ensured how this will be coordinated with the 
Marine Environment Unit and integrated in the Land Ocean Interaction 
system in the Coastal Zone (LOICZ) and the European Land Ocean 
Interaction StudiEs (ELOISE) Programme. 
The Visiting Group noted with surprise the lack of clear goals and 
objectives from the Commission's environmental programmes and 
recommends the clarification of such goals and the interaction of the 
EMAP Unit with the Environmental Agency and DG XI. 
.3 Monitoring Tropical Vegetation (MTV) 
The objectives of the Monitoring Tropical Vegetation (MTV) Unit, closely 
connected to the objectives of the International Biosphere Geosphere 
Programme (IGBP), concern the study of vegetation at the surface of the 
continents using satellite based earth observations (development of 
methods for monitoring vegetation dynamics, derivation of physical 
characteristics of land surfaces and interface this information with climate 
models). The emphasis is put on the study of the tropical belt as 
containing the most actively changing world ecosystems, and the 
phenomena and processes are considered at global scales. 
The subject studies concern the land cover and land use characterisation 
(Mercator Project), the monitoring of forest and biomass burning 
(TREES/FIRE), surface-atmosphere interactions and biosphere modelling 
(TEAM project). 
The activities of this Unit are carried out under a good scientific guidance, 
a specific and successful effort to associate European scientists and to link 
the subject study to the objectives of the international scientific 
programmes on global change. 
The members of the Unit often participate in international research 
groups and maintain a regular dialogue with the main space agencies 
which provide space systems or instruments dedicated to vegetation 
monitoring. It is well worth noting that the MTV Unit, in the frame of its 
programme devoted to scientific research and methodological 
developments, had the opportunity to contribute directly to the DG I and 
DG VIII actions for the benefit of developing countries. 
The Visiting Group appreciates the quality of the products developed by 
the Unit and the efforts aimed at maintaining a high degree of external 
collaboration. It considers that one of the important achievements is the 
development of a comprehensive forest information system in support of 
the research community modelling the tropical deforestation dynamics. 
The Visiting Group encourages the Unit to work towards the setting up of 
an operational information system and entity to monitor in the long term 
the global vegetation dynamics. 
A% 
-6 
111.4 Marine Environment (ME) 
The scope of the Marine Environment Unit is to develop, demonstrate and 
validate methodologies for the use of data from space and airborne 
observations in both operational applications and scientific investigations 
related to the marine environment. 
The Unit is basically involved in the study of two main remotely sensed 
parameters: 
(i) the ocean colour as an expression of the substances in the near 
surface water layers and the biological activity in the euphotic zone; 
(¡i) the sea surface temperature as an indication of the heat energy 
budget at the air-sea interface as an element of the general 
hydrodynamic processes. 
Several publications in international journals with referees testify to the 
Unit's activity. 
The Unit has developed a unique finalised product and it should be 
recommended that methods and means be found to make it available, on 
a routine basis, to the océanographie community. 
Under a formal inter institute agreement the Unit is responsible for the 
development of hydrodynamic models with the aim of assimilating 
remote sensing data in process studies and of contributing to global 
models. Although this is a natural development of the remote sensing 
studies, one can not help wondering whether the Institute - even with the 
reinforcement from other Institutes of the JRC - has a staff of sufficient 
size or expertise to pursue successfully such an ambitious project. 
It is recommended that the Unit adopt as one of their long term thematic 
goals the development of an operational tool for regional planners for 
the application of coastal ocean management. 
111.5 Advanced Techniques (AT) 
The Advanced Techniques Unit is the biggest inside the IRSA, staff 40 
persons. The Unit is responsible for development of techniques and 
methods needed in scientific and application oriented use OT remote 
sensing. This includes e.g. the investigation of the principles of 
measurements in the different spectral lands, investigation of the 
feasibility of different techniques, development of data analysis methods 
and tools, and development of information extraction methods. 
The main elements of the activities are research on optical remote sensing 
systems, development of signal processing techniques, use of the 
European Microwave Signature Laboratory (EMSL), and use of the 
European Airborne Remote Sensing Capabilities (EARSEC). 
The AT Unit is well managed and the Visiting Group got the impression 
that the staff is very well qualified and motivated in their work. The 
Group was impressed with the high quality of the equipment and 
installations. Especially the European Microwave Signature Laboratory is 
an installation which permits remarkable contributions to the science and 
to the development of practical applications of remote sensing (signature 
research). 
All 
7-
The AT Unit has an Advisory Group to follow and make recommendations 
on the work of the Unit. The Visiting Group found this good practice. 
The Visiting Group draws the Institute's attention to the need to further 
promote the excellent capabilities of the Unit and to encourage the 
acquisition of third party financing and work for its facilities. 
III.6 Centre for Earth Observation (CEO) 
The Visiting Group was exposed to a concise presentation of the objectives 
of and plans for the Centre for Earth Observation (CEO). It was based on 
documents previously presented to the JRC's Board of Governors and 
discussed in the Steering Committee of the Pathfinder phase of the CEO, 
nominated by this Board. This presentation started with an overview of 
the situation in the field of space-based earth observations by the end of 
the century (provision of very important volumes of data, addressing the 
needs of a variety of end users in the scientific and applications fields), 
recalled the roles of the major actors in the field of data processing, 
distribution and use (EC, ESA, Member States and other European relevant 
organisations) and presented the CEO main objectives: 
provide user oriented services; 
be constructed on existing facilities and projects; 
be designed to be flexible; 
be designed to promote earth observations in Europe. 
The CEO schedule and workplan were also presented and in particular its 
Pathfinder Phase, covering the period 1993-1995. The Pathfinder Phase is 
composed of five main activities leading to the detailed definition and 
cost estimates of the CEO, in preparation of the decision on its design and 
implementation. 
The Visiting Group expressed its satisfaction to see the positive evolution 
of this extremely important project for the user of earth observation space 
data in the European Union. The CEO will play a major role in the 
promotion and dissemination of data and information, in stimulating 
applications and creating new products. 
The Visiting Group stressed the fact that the CEO should be a really 
decentralised system, designed for the end users, taking into account 
existing European and national facilities. The Pathfinder Phase should in 
particular aim at clarifying the objectives and roles of the CEO with 
respect to research and development of new applications in support, 
among others, of the policy of the EU. The Visiting Group is confident in 
the success of the endeavour undertaken under the responsibility of the 
IRSA, with the cooperation and advice of European scientists, engineers 
and managers. 
It is recommended that a more suitable name be found for this activity. 
A3 
-8 
IV. Management Aspects 
IV.1 Staff 
The Institute is favoured with a relatively young staff with an average age 
of 44. However, it is clear that in a rapidly evolving field such as remote 
sensing, there will be a need for a career planning particularly at the 
younger end of the age spectrum. At the same time, temporary 
attachment of staff to customer DGs can help to give a certain number of 
people a clear understanding of user need as well as bringing notions of 
remote sensing capabilities to the organisation concerned. 
Staff recruitment appears to leave much to be desired with a top heavy 
bureaucratic system bogged down with complicated procedures and long 
delays. Simplification should be made wherever possible. 
IV.2 Visitors 
The presence of a fairly high number of post doctoral and post-graduate 
research fellows is an important element in bringing scientific vitality to 
Institute permanent staff, as well as the future advantage of a corps of 
scientists throughout Europe with an intimate knowledge of the IRSA and 
advanced techniques of modern earth observation. Training young 
scientists is in itself an important activity in such an Institute. This activity 
should be expanded. 
IV.3 Finance 
The Visiting Group noted with satisfaction the generally good situation 
with respect to the future years' financing of the Institute's staff but 
noted with some concern the difficulties that the Institute is faced with in 
respect of maintaining an adequate budget for financing external 
activities. Under the system of competitive research via Shared Cost 
Actions and competitive bidding for contracts to provide support to DGs a 
number of difficulties will have to be overcome. Some income from these 
sources will be needed if the Institute is not to shrink. 
Furthermore, there is a perceived conflict between the subsidiarity 
requirement and the need, to compete for further work with national 
institutes and research organisations. Careful attention must be given to 
this matter if actual conflict is to be avoided. 
IV.4 Management Information Tools 
As a consequence of the above and of the need for a greater perceived 
transparency, a more formalised project management information system 
should be established for the whole Institute, compatible with other JRC 
Institutes. 
^3) 
Annex 
Visiting Group to the Joint Research Centre's 
Institute for Remote Sensing Applications (IRSA) - Ispra 
Members 
Professor Jacques NIHOUL, 
Geo Hydro Dynamics and 
Environmental Research (GHER) 
Bâtiment B5, 
Université de Liège, 
Sart Turnan, 
B-4000 Liège. Tel. +32-41-56.33.50 
Fax. +32-41-56.23.55 
Dr. Isaac REVAH, 
Director of International Relations, 
Centre National des 
Etudes Spatiales (CNES), 
2 Place Maurice Quentin, 
F-75039 Paris Cedex 1. Tel. + 33-1-44.76.75.85 / 44.76,76.28 
Fax. +33-1-44.76.78.49 
Prof. Heinz STOEWER (Chairman), 
Managing Director, 
Space Programmes, 
Deutsche Agentur fur Raumfahrt-
angelegenheiten (DARA) GmbH, 
Konigswinterer Strasse 522-524, 
D-53227 Bonn. Tel. +49-228-44.74.20/44.74.23 
Fax. +49-228-44.77.06 
Professor. Seppo URPO, 
Director, 
Metsâhovi Radio Research Station, 
Helsinki University of Technology, 
Otakaari 5A, 
SF-02150Espoo. Tel. +358-0-451.2235/264.831 
Fax. +358-0-460.224/264.541 
Tel. +31-53-87.42.16/87.44.44 
Fax. +31-53-87.44.00 Prof. Dr. Caesar VOUTE*, 
P.O. Box 1079, 
NL-7500 BB Enschede. 
•unable to attend meeting but provided written comments on documentation 
Secretary 
Mr. Samuel J. LLOYD, 
Avenue Reine Elisabeth 8, 
B-1330Rixensart. Tel. +32-2-295.40.48 (office) 
+ 32-2-654.09.44 (home) 
Fax. +32-2-295.01.46 
H° 
yiH'í 
Annex II 
Visiting Group for the Evaluation of the Joint Research Centre's 
Institute for Remote Sensing Applications (IRSA) - Ispra 
Scope of Visiting Groups 
The chief scope of Visiting Groups is to perform evaluations, taking into account 
the objectives as set out for the 1992-1994 period (in Council documents, relevant 
papers for the Board of Governors, JRC Annual Workschedules, budget, etc.), to 
provide recommendations on the proper course to be followed by the Institute 
visited in view of the stated objectives, and to apply in the evaluations, elements 
of the methodology proposed Tor research returns and effectiveness. 
The Visiting Group should: 
perform an evaluation of all activities of the Institute against its stated 
objectives, with particular emphasis on the impact the results of the work 
has had on the user of this research, and the degree of collaboration 
established with national research laboratories, as well as with industry; 
assess the scientific quality of the work and the appropriateness of the work 
and results for the Community; 
judge all aspects of the efficiency and impact of the work, taking into 
account the particular status of the JRC (its independence in the Community) 
in comparison with similar national laboratories; 
provide advice on the ongoing work on the basis of the evaluations and 
assessments performed; 
express recommendations for the future development of the Institute with 
regard to the overall strategic plans for development of the JRC in the 
medium-term and long-term. 
Terms of Reference 
1. To evaluate progress in performing work in accordance with the objectives 
set out in Council Resolution 92/C118/03 and Council Decisions 92/273/EEC, 
92/274/Euratom and 92/275/Euratom, documents addressed to the Board of 
Governors, the JRC's Annual Workschedules, budget etc., and to review 
progress in the implementation of the recommendations of the last 
Evaluation Panel. 
2. To ensure that the Institute has effective mechanisms to set its local scientific 
objectives, monitor progress towards those objectives and evaluate outputs. 
AAl 
-2-
3. To review the various research activities to assess: 
a) the scientific quality and productivity of the Institute; 
b) whether full advantage is being taken of scientific opportunities in the 
light of funding and other constraints; 
c) the relevance of the work with respect to Community needs, including 
the relevance of work performed for external customers, when 
applicable. 
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 relationships with research organisations, the higher 
education sector, industry and government departments in the Member 
States, as well as outside the European Community. 
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. 
8. To make recommendations and report to the Board of Governors of the 
Joint Research Centre. 
Ni 
Annex III 
INSTITUTE OBJECTIVES 
The Institute has four main objectives: 
1. To evaluate and demonstrate possible applications of remote 
sensing techniques in support of the sectorial policies of the 
European Community in areas such as: 
• agriculture; 
• environment; 
• aid to development; 
• regional aid. 
2. To prepare the scientific community for the utilisation of earth 
observation satellites such as: 
ERS-1; 
SPOT; 
Land sat; 
NOAAAVHRR; 
Polar Orbiting Platforms. 
This objective is complementary to that of the European Space 
Agency. 
3. To undertake research in order to develop methods for the 
interpretation of satellite derived data. 
4. To develop advanced techniques of earth observation for 
application in the mapping and monitoring of continental and 
marine ecosystems. 
MM 
Annex IV 
Visiting Group to the Joint Research Centre's 
Institute for Remote Sensing Applications (IRSA) - Ispra 
Outline Programme 23rd to 24th August 1994 
Tuesday 23rd August - Meeting room, building 44 
08.30 - 09.30 Private Session (Preparation) 
09.30 -10.00 General Presentation of the Institute 
10.00 -10.30 European Environment, EMAP 
10.30 -11.00 European Agriculture, AIS 
11.00 -11.30 Tropical Environment and Agriculture, MTV 
11.30 -12.00 Marine Environment, ME 
12.00-12.30 Advanced Techniques, AT 
Lido, Raneo 
12.30-14.30 Lunch 
Building 44. EMSL - Building 27 
14.30-17.30 Visits to Laboratories 
Meeting room, building 44 
17.30-18.00 Centre for Earth Observation, CEO 
18.00- Private Session (Review) 
// Gallione, Bodio Lomnago 
19.30- Dinner 
Wednesday, 24th August - Meeting room, building 44 
08.30 - 09.30 Private Session (Preparation) 
09.30 -11.30 General Discussion (including Organisation, 
Management, Finances) 
11.30 -12.30 Interview with the Director 
La Rocca diAngera 
12.30-14.30 Lunch 
14.30 -17.30 Private Session (Review) 
IV¿ 
London, 19th November 1993 
REPORT OF THE VISITING GROUP 
FOR THE EVALUATION OF THE 
JOINT RESEARCH CENTRE'S 
INSTITUTE FOR PROSPECTIVE 
TECHNOLOGICAL STUDIES 
Ni 
CONTENTS 
I. Introduction 
II. Work in Accordance with Objectives 
III. Efficiency 
IV. Overall Conclusions 
V. Recommendations 
Annex I: Members of the Visiting Group 
Annex II: Terms of Reference of the Visiting Group Nf 
Uo 
líl 
Report of the Visiting Group for the Evaluation of the Joint Research Centre's 
Institute for Prospective Technological Studies, Ispra, Italy 
Introduction 
At the invitation of the Board of Governors of the Joint Research Centre 
(JRC), the Visiting Group (see Annex I for Members) spent 8th and 9th 
September 1993 at the Institute for Prospective Technological Studies at 
Ispra. The Group met again in Brussels on 22nd October 1993 to examine its 
findings and meet with further clients from the Commission's services. 
The objectives for the Institute are to be found in the Technical Annex to the 
JRC Programme Proposal 1992-1994 (COM(91)281 final). The principal tasks 
are: 
1. The acquisition, treatment and analysis of information concerning the 
state and trends of science and technology. 
2. The execution of prospective studies in targeted scientific and 
technical (S & T) areas. 
To perform these tasks, the Institute has two main functions. The first of 
these is the observatory function in which the Institute endeavours to: 
• collect information on trends in technological innovation; 
• analyse, process and present the information in order to help 
determine research and technological development strategies; 
• develop and use specialised databases of the information collected by 
the Institute; 
• describe the state of science and technology in selected areas of 
interest to the Community. 
The second function is to execute prospective technological studies. This 
involves preparing S & T assessments, forecasts and scenarios, as an aid to 
the formulation of research and development strategies, including analyses 
of economic, social and environmental impacts. 
In pursuit of both functions, the Institute will make the best possible use of 
existing national bodies active in the same area, organising European 
networks of S & T observatories and prospective studies units. 
These general objectives are concurrent with the Joint Research Centre's 
mission and are highlighted in the scope for the Visiting Groups. The 
Visiting Group should: 
• perform an evaluation of all activities of the Institute against its stated 
objectives, with particular emphasis on the impact the results of the 
work has had on the users of this research, and the degree of 
collaboration established with national research organisations, as well 
as with industry; 
• assess the scientific quality of the work and the appropriateness of the 
work and results for the Community; 
I il 
-2 
• judge all aspects of the efficiency and impact of the work, taking into 
account the particular status of the JRC (its independence in the 
Community) in comparison with similar national bodies; 
• provide advice on the ongoing work on the basis of the evaluations 
and assessments performed; 
• express recommendations for the future development of the Institute 
with regard to the overall strategic plans for development of the JRC in 
the medium-term and long-term; 
This report will be organised following the order set out in the Terms of 
Reference (see Annex II) with the Group's recommendations for each point 
summarised under "Conclusions". 
II. Work in Accordance with Objectives 
• Owing to the structure of JRC funding under the Framework 
Programme, specific research programme funds could not be made 
available to the Institute's activities. As a consequence, the Institute 
has had to rely on customer demand for its resources and little money 
has been allocated for the development of the H ObservatoryH asa unit. 
However, some of the functions of an observatory are found 
associated with the supply of information for other projects and 
activities such as Global Change and the C02 issue, and Best Available 
Technology (BAT) fall into this category; 
• for the same reasons, work in the technological forecasting area is 
related to customer requirements and largely comprises state-of-the-
art extrapolations; 
• following demand, a different role has developed, that of Scientific 
and Technological Advisory Unit: the principal customers being the 
Secretariat General's Forward Studies Unit (CDP), DG III (Industry), 
DG XI (Environment, Nuclear Safety and Civil Protection), DG XVII 
(Energy) and DG XH's aeronautical programme; 
• 90% of the Institute's work is in support of the Commission. 
Conclusions 
• The Institute has not met the objectives originally foreseen for it; but, 
• it has evolved an important role of Scientific and Technological 
Advisory Unit which should be developed; 
• the observatory function has lagged behind for reasons linked with 
financing, but could now develop; 
• the role of the Institute needs to be further formalised so that its work 
can be fully integrated with policy formation. 
\*3 
3-
III. Efficiency 
The Visiting Group was able to examine the output in reports and other 
publications but was not allowed to remove these for detailed perusal for 
reasons of confidentiality. Output was also assessed from documentary 
evidence provided by clients and by interviewing representatives of 
Commission services which use the Institute. 
• At the time of the visit, 40 documents had been produced for the 
Commission and 2 for external third parties; 
• scientific and technical staff totalled 14, including 11 JRC officials (10 
university and one technical grade), 2 seconded experts and one 
visiting scientist, together with 8 grantholders, of which 3 are post 
doctorate, 3 are preparing PhDs and 2 are pursuing post graduate 
specialisation; 
• the Group was impressed by the commitment and enthusiasm of the 
staff. 
Conclusions 
• Considering the number of staff, funds available and the very positive 
reactions from the clientele where the science and technology advisory 
function is concerned, the output is considered to be most satisfactory; 
• unavailability of the output for expert evaluation, particularly in cases 
where this represented compilations of existing information in the 
public domain, was considered to be a barrier to making the Institute 
better known and obtaining maximum public benefit from the 
Institute's results; 
• quality was not evaluated in detail although this area of work had 
been assessed by ad hoc expert groups chosen for each project. 
IV. Overall Conclusions 
• The main activities of the Institute were fulfilling an important 
function as a Science and Technology Advisory Unit; 
• in general, the Institute was not yet filling its designated role of 
technological forecasting and the Observatory" function was only 
developing slowly; 
• the quality of output could not be assessed from documents shown to 
the Visiting Group as they were not made available for more study or 
peer review off-site; 
• customer reactions, both verbal and written, were appreciative of the 
Institute's contribution to their own work. The convenience of 
working with an in-house team acquainted with Commission culture 
and practice was considered to be a positive factor. For certain clients 
such as the Forward Studies Unit, the confidentiality assurance of 
working with a Commission group was also important, as was the 
impartiality of the advice given; 
1^ 
present core activities concerned scientific and technological aspects of 
energy, environment and transport, and their interactions; 
accountability within the JRC parent organisation was unclear to the 
Visiting Group; 
the Visiting Group noted that the Institute would be transferred to 
Seville in the near future and expressed concern about retaining 
efficient working relationships and the necessary day-to-day contacts 
with the Commission in Brussels. The S & T Advisory Unit should be 
located in Brussels; 
work undertaken up to the present was felt to be appropriate for 
meeting the Commission's needs. Work for outside clients was judged 
to fall within the Institute's competence, more effort should be applied 
to the development of these activities and building collaborative 
arrangements with third parties. There had been little work for 
industrial clients so far; 
there was a clear distinction between the work carried out by the 
Institute and that undertaken by other Commission bodies involved in 
the field such as the Forward Studies Unit, SAST, SPEAR and forward 
looking technology units in other Directorates General, however, in 
the case of FAST some redefinition of the interface should be made; 
it was noted that all important studies are submitted to review panels; 
in most cases, the value added by the work lies in integrating, collating 
and interpreting complex S & T information rather than adding 
knowledge. 
Recommendations 
• The JRC, in view of its flexibility and in-house competences, appears to 
be the most suitable organisation to house such an institute; 
• accountability within the JRC management as the parent organisation 
should be clarified to ensure maximum transparency of operations 
since the Institute is financed mainly from public funds and much of 
the Institute's output can be considered to fall within the public 
domain. This would help to create a healthy attitude inside the 
Institute and a better understanding of the Institute's purpose and 
achievements in the outside world; 
• the tasks of the Institute should consist of four basic activities which 
provide: 
Research and Development (R & D) in Focused and Specific Fields 
and Operation of an Information Infrastructure (Observatory): 
The R&D activity should be focused on a small number of fields 
in which the Commission has policy interests. These fields are 
likely to comprise activities bridging the interests of more than 
one policy sector, such as transport, energy, environment and 
informatics, where inter-relationships need to be better 
understood. The information infrastructure should establish 
well-focused data based on available technologies and "best 
practices" in well-selected technology fields. 
IV" 
-5 
Training 
The Institute should pay particular attention to training activities 
which are considered to be very important, both to train analysts 
and researchers, and to set up "natural" networks in the future; 
Commercial and Regional Services 
The Institute should also undertake regional tasks as they arise, 
and work under contract for third parties should be developed as 
a substantial and meaningful part of the activity; 
Scientific and Technological Advice 
Science and Technology (S & T) are important factors to be 
considered in many areas of policy. A focus for S & T advice 
should be provided by a small, but competent, Unit of the 
Institute. To be effective, this Unit should be located in Brussels. 
The role of the Unit should be to respond and interact with the 
policy formation process and to be aware of current policy issues 
and give advice as appropriate. A real and ongoing need has 
been identified for this support. 
To accomplish this task, the Brussels Unit of the Institute should 
draw on the best expertise available from a wide spectrum of 
interests including the other parts of the Institute. The Unit 
should be closely and flexibly linked with "think thanks" in the 
Commission. 
The Institute's S & T Advisory Unit should not only respond on 
request, but also advise on S & T matters where this can usefully 
inform Commission policy makers. A level of about 6 staff in 
Brussels is felt to be appropriate. 
it is considered essential to maintain a clear distinction between the 
Institute's work and the responsibilities of other Commission think 
tanks and forward studies groups. Nevertheless, strong links should be 
forged with these units; 
in view of its important advisory tasks, the whole Institute must employ 
staff of the hiqhest quality. Where practical, recruitments rather than 
transfers of other JRC staff should prevail when setting up the Institute 
in Seville. Some 50% of the scientific manpower could consist of non-
JRC staff; 
to achieve credibility in the scientific world and ensure accountability, 
the research findings should be published wherever possible; 
annual progress reports should include a section on the 
implementation of these recommendations and a further evaluation 
by a Visiting Group should be envisaged during 1997 to monitor 
progress. In the meantime, the detailed implementation plans for the 
whole Institute should be approved by the Board of Governors of the 
Joint Research Centre. 
\<¿ 
1^ ?-
Annex I 
Visiting Group to the Joint Research Centre's 
Institute for Prospective Technological Studies (IPTS) - Ispra 
Members 
Dr.PeterE.deJÁNOSI, 
Director, 
International Institute for 
Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA), 
A-2361 Laxenburg. Tel. +43-2236-715.220 
+ 43-2236-715.402 
Fax. +43-2236-731.47 
Sir John FAIRCLOUGH (Chairman), 
Chairman, 
Rothschilds Ventures Limited, 
New Court, 
St. Swithin's Lane, 
UK-EC4P 4DU London. Tel. +44-71-280.59.30 
Fax. +44-71-283.02.42 
Dr. Frieder MEYER-KRAHMER, 
Director, 
Fraunhofer Institut für Systemtechnik 
und Innovationsforschung, 
Breslauerstrasse 48, 
D-7500 Karlsruhe 1. Tel. +49-721-680.91.02 
+ 49-721-680.91.03 
Fax. +49-721-68.91.52 
Secretary 
Mr. Samuel J. LLOYD, 
Avenue Reine Elisabeth 8, 
B-1330Rixensart. Tel. + 32-2-295.40.48 (office) 
+ 32-2-654.09.44 (home) 
Fax. +32-2-295.01.46 
\s$ 
u 
Annex II 
Visiting Group for the Evaluation of the Joint Research Centre's 
Institute for Prospective Technological Studies (IPTS) - Ispra 
Scope of Visiting Groups 
The chief scope of Visiting Groups is to perform evaluations, taking into account 
the objectives as set out for the 1992-1994 period (in Council documents, relevant 
papers for the Board of Governors, JRC Annual Workschedules, budget, etc.), to 
provide recommendations on the proper course to be followed by the Institute 
visited in view of the stated objectives, and to apply in the evaluations, elements 
of the methodology proposed Tor research returns and effectiveness. 
The Visiting Group should: 
perform an evaluation of all activities of the Institute against its stated 
objectives, with particular emphasis on the impact the results of the work 
has had on the user of this research, and the degree of collaboration 
established with national research laboratories, as weflas with industry; 
assess the scientific quality of the work and the appropriateness of the work 
and results for the Community; 
judge all aspects of the efficiency and impact of the work, taking into 
account the particular status of the JRC (its independence in the Community) 
in comparison with similar national laboratories; 
provide advice on the ongoing work on the basis of the evaluations and 
assessments performed; 
express recommendations for the future development of the Institute with 
regard to the overall strategic plans for development of the JRC in the 
medium-term and long-term. 
Terms of Reference 
To evaluate progress in performing work in accordance with the objectives 
set out in Council Resolution 92/C118/03 and Council Decisions 92/273/EEC, 
92/274/Euratom and 92/275/Euratom, documents addressed to the Board of 
Governors, the JRC's Annual Workschedules, budget etc., and to review 
progress in the implementation of the recommendations of the last 
Evaluation Panel. 
To ensure that the Institute has effective mechanisms to set its local scientific 
objectives, monitor progress towards those objectives and evaluate outputs. 
Ate 
3. To review the various research activities to assess: 
a) the scientific quality and productivity of the Institute; 
b) whether full advantage is being taken of scientific opportunities in the 
light of funding and other constraints; 
c) the relevance of the work with respect to Community needs, including 
the relevance of work performed for external customers, when 
applicable. 
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 relationships with research organisations, the higher 
education sector, industry and government departments in the Member 
States, as well as outside the European Community. 
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. 
8. To make recommendations and report to the Board of Governors of the 
Joint Research Centre. 
Jfr 
ISSN 0257-9545 
COM(95) 60 final 
DOCUMENTOS 
ES 01 15 
N° de catálogo : CB-CO-95-072-ES-C 
ISBN 92-77-86182-7 
Oficina de Publicaciones Oficiales de las Comunidades Europeas 
L-2985 Luxemburgo