Interpretation aid to Section 28 Paragraph 3 Sentence 1 GenTSV?

At the Updating the project manager certificate The following regulation applies: "The knowledge imparted during the training pursuant to paragraph 2, sentence 1, number 3 must be updated at least every five years by re-attending a recognized training event." (Section 28, paragraph 3, sentence 1 of the GenTSV). According to Section 28, paragraph 3, sentence 4 of the GenTSV, proof of updating must be provided to the responsible authority. There are increasing signs that if the five-year deadline is missed, state authorities will require project managers/BBS to re-attend a basic course, and that the facilities will be shut down until the project manager certificate is updated.

The AGCT had dealt with the Question of interpretation of Section 28, Paragraph 5, Sentence 1 of the GenTSV, the district government initially approached the Higher Regional Labor Court (LAG) with the question of whether the Federal/State Working Group had provided any interpretation guidance. The LAG then referred the matter to the state authorities. The Düsseldorf District Government, as the responsible state authority, responded by stating that those inquiring should contact the Düsseldorf District Government directly.

Since the question remains unanswered, at least for participants from North Rhine-Westphalia, here is an attempt at an interpretation based on the available legislative materials: The Federal Council's printed matter (BR-Drs. 137/19 p. 24) does not provide any information on this. It contained another provision, according to which the competent authority could order the project manager/BBS to participate in a further training event if their knowledge was no longer sufficient. The committees in the Federal Council deviated from this with a recommendation dated May 27, 2019, which proposed the currently valid version. The justification stated that Section 28 (3) of the GenTSV should be amended – away from the individual case regulation – to make appropriate further training measures mandatory for all project managers at appropriate intervals. Analogous to the regulation in radiation protection, the option of demonstrating the updating of the required expertise by other suitable means than attending a recognized further training event is still provided. In the decision printed matter of 07.06.2019 it is then additionally stated, “As stated above, Section 28 III GenTSV is introduced as a newly introduced regulation in accordance with the Radiation Protection Ordinance to repeat the training events introduced." The regulation previously proposed in the legislative process for repeating the continuing education course at the discretion of the authority in the event that a project manager no longer possesses sufficient expertise was not deemed sufficient. The regulation states verbatim: "Continuing education should not be a punishment, but should be considered a positive. Furthermore, it should be a matter of course to keep one's own technical and legal knowledge up to date, as has long been common practice in other legal areas, such as radiation protection. Section 48 of the Radiation Protection Ordinance stipulates that the required expertise in radiation protection must be updated every five years. This regulation could serve as a model here. Section 28 (3) of the GenTSV should therefore be amended to make appropriate continuing education measures mandatory for all project managers at appropriate intervals. Analogous to the regulation in radiation protection, the option of demonstrating the updating of the required expertise by other suitable means than attending a recognized continuing education course is still provided." The wording makes it clear that it is always a question of updating and not of completely re-acquiring specialist knowledge. This is due, on the one hand, to the reference to Section 28 Paragraph 3 GenTSV and the term "to repeat the continuing education events", which is used precisely in this context. For repetition in this sense, one-day courses are provided for in accordance with Section 28 Paragraph 3 GenTSV (updating), whereas for the first-time acquisition, i.e. a completely new acquisition (Section 28 Paragraph 5 GenTSV), two day courses are required. It is questionable whether the Radiation Protection Ordinance (StrlSchV) can also be used as justification. In contrast to GenTSV, this contains a regulation on what applies in the event of a failure to update. Section 50 Paragraph 1 StrlSchV stipulates that the competent body can revoke recognition of the required specialist knowledge or impose conditions on its continued validity if proof of continuing education measures is not submitted or is not submitted in full. Consequently, once acquired, specialist knowledge remains valid and must be actively revoked by the authority. This is a discretionary decision that takes into account criteria such as the time window for exceeding the qualification, many years of service, etc. Accordingly, the impact under radiation protection law is limited to a consequence for the continuing education certificate. There is no direct legal consequence related to the operation of a radiation protection laboratory. This only arises when the corresponding specialist knowledge has actually been revoked. The term "continuing education measure" refers to continuing education measures pursuant to Section 48 of the Radiation Protection Ordinance (StrSchV). In radiation protection law, these are distinguished from the (initial) acquisition of the required specialist knowledge pursuant to Section 47 of the Radiation Protection Ordinance (StrSchV) and the updating of further training (Section 48 of the Radiation Protection Ordinance). In this context, Section 50 (1) of the Radiation Protection Ordinance (StrSchV) means that once acquired, specialist knowledge pursuant to Section 47 of the Radiation Protection Ordinance can be revoked if someone does not participate in a continuing education measure pursuant to Section 48 of the Radiation Protection Ordinance (StrSchV). Accordingly, in a first step it can be stated that genetic engineering law also applies that a once with a basic course (two-day courses) The acquired project manager certificate remains valid and does not lapse or expire . When interpreting Section 28, Paragraph 3, Sentence 1 of the GenTG, this must be taken into account in such a way that only a daily rate can be required for updating. Furthermore, it can be deduced from this that an impact on the investment requirements can only be assumed if the expertise of a holder of an old project manager certificate has been subsequently revoked under the GenTG.