 good afternoon friends so let's have let's get started with our afternoon session so going to be a difficult session Shan is going to have a tough time in keeping you all of you alive so now we are going to talk about the the new power programs development of nuclear power programs particularly focused on newcomer countries or other places as well so Sean is an expert in in helping countries to develop nuclear power programs he comes from the nuclear infrastructure development section so make use of the time available and then ask as many questions as possible with him and then interact and get maximum out of this session all right thanks Ashok and I see presenting after lunch is not necessarily a challenge but an opportunity so here we go as Ashok mentioned I'm coming from the nuclear infrastructure development section and I know that name sounds a little bit broad when you think nuclear infrastructure I don't know what is it that you think of anyone I'm trying to keep you on your toes also I heard something people what yeah I think that's a perfect description of the work that our section does yeah we are really focused on nuclear power even though we're called nuclear infrastructure development section we don't look at things like the regulatory support for sources even if some countries might think that's part of their nuclear infrastructure so we're a relatively new section at the agency we were formed in 2007 and we were really formed at the demand of member states who are considering nuclear power some of the more vocal ones in the board were countries like the UAE and Egypt and this was at a time where there was this idea of the nuclear renaissance and it seemed like you know a lot of growth was projected in nuclear power it seemed like a lot of countries were considering adding and the agency was providing support to countries except it was spread among all these different departments it's like well we need help from legal that comes from the office of legal affairs we need help setting up the regulatory body that comes from the regulatory affairs section we need help with our citing and that comes from the citing and external events section and we need help with energy planning and that comes from the energy planning section so what member states really wanted was a single point of contact to say you guys get organized and you help us with a coordinated program of assistance so that's really where we see our role so here's the outline of my presentation I'm going to start just by talking a little bit about the status of nuclear power in the world and the projections for growth then we're going to talk about why some of the countries who are embarking and seriously considering embarking on nuclear power are doing so what are some of the reasons that they think it's important for their energy mix then sort of the bulk of my presentation is going to be this introduction to the IAEA approach which we call the milestones approach this is based on this sort of document which I'll talk a little bit more in detail milestones in the development of a national infrastructure for nuclear power it's sort of a two-dimensional document it looks across time and the development of the program and then it looks deep at a layered set of issues one of the important parts of this approach is the idea of evaluation because infrastructure encompasses a lot of different things it's really important for countries to have a way to look at their infrastructure graded across a set of benchmarks identify what the gaps are so that they can focus their efforts in those areas and be ready either to take a decision or to sign a contract or to move to a next phase of the program stemming from that once you understand how we help identify gaps in countries infrastructure I'll talk about some of the ways the IAEA provides assistance to help those countries fill those gaps and then some conclusions so this is a cool graph I didn't come from our section it came from a leaky section actually and this is the year of first nuclear power plant commissioning by country and the blue dots are in the past and the pink dots are in the future so each dot represents a different country so you can see looking kind of here to the mid-1950s that was when you had the very first commercial nuclear power plants in the Soviet Union the United States the UK and then a number of countries sort of continued that trend in the 50s 60s 70s even 80s you see there's almost about one new country every year for several decades then here kind of after Three Mile Island after Chernobyl you sort of see it tail out of it and you have you know this big gap of almost 15 years here between blue dots incidentally can do any of you know which some of these last joiners are like this last country to commission their first nuclear power plant was in 2011 as a hint I heard United Arab Emirates what I would say is that they're probably this first pink dot they actually haven't commissioned yet they were scheduled to commission unit one this year now it's they're talking about commissioning unit one next year so I think this is in 2017 but probably should be 2018 this other dot here is probably gonna be any other guesses the next pink one after UAE who else is constructing close to completion Belarus is correct China has several operating nuclear power plants already so China is one of these blue dots here they're not the last one I think they're this one here 1991 maybe was there first anyone know 2011 countries in the room I think somebody Turkey's another one of these pink ones all right I'll give Iran 2011 they started conducting the Bouchier plant decades before but it was commissioned for the first time in 2011 so that's their first nuclear power plant some of the other ones China Romania I think maybe Czech Republic I'm not sure some of these last ones in the in the 80s so I suppose I should get to the point of including this slide which is that even though we sort of saw this big tail off you see these pink dots there's a lot of countries who are still interested in nuclear power even after Fukushima so the IAA is working with all these countries and trying to help them prepare and be successful so here's kind of more detail about the newcomers I'll describe a little bit how we divide the milestones approach into different phases but I included several years so you can sort of see the trends this is current 2017 and we have phase three sort of split into two parts but we have five countries in phase three which are the closest to commissioning and operating their first NPP we mentioned these two here with the the plan already under construction are the UAE and Belarus several countries have ordered the first nuclear power plant but haven't poured the first safety concrete yet but it's coming soon there's four countries we estimate that have decided to introduce nuclear power and are really active in preparing the infrastructure developing the regulatory body doing a number of things which also described and then in phase one which is let's say a phase of consideration or maybe they have a decision maker in the country who said yes we're going but now they're you know doing all the let's say pre-feasibility studies and preparing for a national commitment that's going to be on the order of a hundred years we think there's about 19 countries there so in all about 28 newcomers and it's been relatively steady even despite kupushima anyone else can guess what these three countries are I heard one person guessed it when we were guessing about Iran Turkey is one yeah Turkey has a contract hmm South Africa has operating nuclear power plants they're an interesting case they've had the Kuburg nuclear power since early 80s but they are considering new build so actually they're following some of the guidance in the milestone approach and they had a review mission let's say in this box Turkey is one Bangladesh has contracted has the financing arrangement in place and plans for its first concrete later this year the other one which you can see we had two two we just added one to this group the last time the the interagency committee considered and that's Egypt because a lot of the contracts are final I think they haven't announced yet but it'll it'll happen soon this is sorry is this news to the Egyptians in the room maybe I need to fix my information I'm not sure so here's like the let's say the million dollar question or maybe even the multi-billion dollar question why nuclear power and I think to answer that question we need to sort of step back and say first why why energy why electricity and I really like this map it was taken in 2000 and that you can really see a stark difference between the developed areas of the world and the developing areas of the world and that's because energy and electricity are really essential for every aspect of development the UN established or adopted the sustainable development goals in 2015 to replace the Millennium Development goals and one of the big changes was that clean affordable energy for all was included as part of the SDGs because there was this growing recognition that when you're talking about raising living standards or improving healthcare or improving agriculture or developing your industry you need to have a secure stable source of electricity and a lot of countries are hungry for this so what we project is an increase in electricity use worldwide from between 65 to 100% in some projections just by 2030 and almost all this growth will occur in the developing world so what we hope is that the next time the satellites take these pictures we'll see a lot more of the world lit up oops I skipped over a slide so that sort of answers the question why why energy or why electricity but then the next question is well why nuclear relative to the other choices that are out there whether it's gas or coal or renewables wind solar hydro geothermal why nuclear and these are some of the reasons that countries are telling us there they want to pursue nuclear power countries are concerned about energy security they're looking for diversity in their energy mix they don't want to rely on one or maybe two types of imported fuel they want access to affordable and predictable energy services in some cases the prices of renew of fossil fuels can fluctuate a lot so when a country thinks it has energy security prices change all of a sudden it doesn't feel so secure reliability of electricity supply for countries that pursue a renewable heavy approach you can have problems because the sun isn't always shining and the wind isn't always blowing so you need electricity supply that can run sort of on a baseload basis in power industry and countries even developing countries I think have a keen sense of concern about the environment some because they have some fossil plants and a lot of air pollution and they're dealing with that and some countries are even concerned about climate change so they're looking for low-carbon energy supply options so these are some of the reasons countries are going for nuclear power and again it sort of harks back to what Aliki was talking about yesterday energy planning is really a key component of deciding on nuclear power and committing to a program so like I said this is sort of the basis for what we call the milestones approach to introducing nuclear power I'm gonna pass the book around just so you can kind of take a look and see how it's organized but this book is intended sort of as the they call it the well they started to call it it's our Bible but then we started to realize that wasn't a very inclusive term so now we're saying it's our holy book for infrastructure development and what we see is that almost all countries who are introducing nuclear power are considering it are following this approach and using the common language and lexicon that it establishes and we're seeing vendors and industry adopted as well it first came out in 2007 when our section was initiated it was put together by gathering a lot of experts and talking about well if you're if you want to coordinate and structure the introduction of nuclear power how would you do it so it's based on 40 years of experience and best practices and then was recently revised in 2015 because our sections done a lot of work with newcomer countries in the eight years between 2007 and 2015 we learned a lot of lessons in some ways we made things simpler so this Rev one is the newest version and I'll pass it around for people to take a look and what you'll see is that it sort of divides the process of introducing nuclear power into three different phases the first phase is a consideration phase the second phase is once there's a decision sort of at a point in time then the country prepares then the third phase I would say contracting isn't really a point in time but a process so I would say contracting and construction take place in phase three and then the country's ready to commission the first nuclear power plant now this is the chart this is sort of a simplified version just so that you can get a sense of the the time dimension this is how it looks in the detailed form in the guidance document and I think a couple important things to point out is the first we don't consider a country in phase one until nuclear power is specifically included as an option in the country's national energy strategy that's sort of our prerequisite to say you're really serious about considering nuclear power phase one is described as considerations before a decision to launch a nuclear power program is taken and milestone one has been rephrased a little bit in the revised guidance it used to be ready to make a knowledgeable decision now we we call it ready to make a knowledgeable commitment to a nuclear power program because a number of countries said oh we already took the decision back here here was just figuring out just how feasible it was and then now milestone one is about making the commitment so phase two like I mentioned is a serious phase for infrastructure development it's a lot of preparatory work your building institutions you're developing the key organizations that are going to implement and oversee the program and you're preparing to take a decision to enter into a big multi-billion dollar contract in most cases so the milestone at the end of phase two is that you're ready to invite bids or if you're working with a strategic partner or a sole supplier negotiate the contract for the first nuclear power plant and then phase three like I said is once you're ready to contract use you contract at the beginning of phase three you reach a final investment decision then you begin constructing and at milestone three you should be ready to commission and operate the first nuclear power plant safely and sustainably so these are sort of the the milestones that we use to measure where a country is at the end of each phase and here are the things that we're measuring 19 different infrastructure issues and when we say infrastructure some people hear that word and they think instantly to the hard physical things like the electrical grid or the readiness of the site itself but when we say infrastructure we're looking at in a comprehensive way and a lot of these issues are so-called soft issues you see things like nuclear safety nuclear security nuclear safeguards a regulatory framework there's a number of cross-cutting issues like human resource development stakeholder involvement which you heard just in relation to the back end this morning emergency planning and then a number of things that relate to policies whether it's national position your industrial involvement policy your policy for radioactive waste management but the idea is that based on international best practices and experience the idea was these are the 19 things that matter and if you really want to maximize your program's chances of succeeding you need to focus on all these issues you need to take them into account at each of the major inflection points so at the end of phase one here's where we're getting these buttons the end of phase one here's where you decide to implement and phase two is going to come mostly from funding from the government and it's going to cost on the order of hundreds of millions of dollars so it's a big this it's a big commitment it's a big investment to say we're going to spend all this money building a regulator and start starting to put emergency preparedness options in place prepare doing a lot of detailed site characterization thing things that are expensive that you know at the end of this phase you may not ever be ready or you might decide against nuclear power and the government won't get that money back so it's a it's a big commitment at milestone one and it's another big commitment at milestone two because that's when you're going to you know essentially be ready to enter into a multi-billion dollar contract and then at milestone three this is another sort of point of no return once you start irradiating material you can't just walk away from the plant there's there's things you need to do to ensure safety and at that point you're you know decommissioning becomes a lot harder once the plant has been active so I want to throw some numbers at you because countries come you know they look at these documents they look through they say oh this is so detailed this is so much work we really have to do all this work why do we have to do this is this binding we say no it's not binding it's not like your safeguards agreement that's a legally binding document with obligations it's not like the IAEA safety standards this is really just guidance but it comes from somewhere and sorry I need to update this number it should be 447 but can anyone guess what this number is I think I've heard it from several areas of the room but yes it's the number of currently operating nuclear power reactors and it is 447 my next number also has to be adjusted it should be 58 not 59 because one one plant went from this number to this number but what's 59 yeah power reactors under construction and sorry I put these slides together a couple weeks ago before I went on travel and on vacation and in that time Fuching 4 in China moved from under construction to commission so sorry it's like it's like three weeks old but now some other numbers maybe a little more challenging 33 and it's not a count of reactors I think there's more than 33 research reactors countries who are planning are considering we count about 28 but that's kind of soft this is a hard number that nobody can dispute I'm far I was shaking her head this is the number of countries and this is the number of countries that have ever operated a nuclear power plant and I think in one of Amparo's presentation there were 30 countries that are currently operating there's also three other countries who have operated in the past and are not operating now so one more number a big one that's not like the others 17,241 plus growing all the time yeah nailed it right here operational years of nuclear power reactors so it's a lot and the point of this slide is to show you that the milestones approach wasn't invented out of whole cloth they got together people from all these 33 countries you can see in the back the list of people who participated in the process of developing this guidance it's really a great information exchange identification of best practices and trying to capture as much guidance as possible to maximize countries chances for success if you talk to any of the operating countries they'll all have experiences they can share where they said oh we totally screwed this up or we did all these things right but there's this one thing we didn't do right and it set our whole program back five years and it was really costly so the idea is that if you take care of all these 19 issues in the phased approach you're gonna maximize your chances for success learn from the mistakes of others and hopefully be successful so self evaluation the next document I'm gonna pass around is this IAA nuclear energy series NGT 3.2 rev one the revision was just published at the very end of last year and it contains a methodology for assessing the status of your nuclear power infrastructure so for each of those 19 issues at the conditions are what the agency expects or what you know would be would maximize your chances of success at the end of phase one at milestone one are described there for each issue the self-evaluation is it's really essential it helps you assess the status as well as track the progress over time I mean introducing nuclear power is a process that takes 10 to 15 years maybe more so it really helps to know where you are at a given time track that over time identify the gaps and devote resources and effort to those areas so no matter how serious countries are we highly recommend that you familiarize yourself with this document and that you begin to conduct self-evaluation whether you want agency assistance or whether you want to review mission or not it's it's great for countries to know this and know what they should be doing the other thing that is that the self-evaluation can be used as the basis for an international peer review mission which we call in here it stands for integrated meaning it covers all 19 issues nuclear infrastructure review mission so here are some examples I'll pass it around you can you can take a look but you'll see like you just turn to a page here's an issue emergency planning here's sort of the the condition we expect summary of the condition examples of how the how you can demonstrate the condition and this let's see this is just an example but this is the issue of legal framework it has several conditions we only use one here as an example but the condition is that adherence to all relevant international legal instruments is planned okay planned this is to be done at the end of milestone one and this is a very common thing for many of the infrastructure issues in phase one the types of things that we're looking for our understanding understanding what needs to be done over the course of the program and having plans in place to do many of the things in phases two and phase three there are very few issues where we actually expect deliverables in phase one there are a few but for the most part I would say that phase one is about understanding and planning if you look at most of the conditions that's what they relate to now in this document the methodology for phase one is in orange once you get to phase two it's the blue color so same issue legal framework and the first condition this time is that the international legal instruments governing nuclear activities are adhered to so you can see it's a difference in phase two versus phase one whereas phase one we expect understanding and plans to adhere in this period of preparation in phase two that's when you actually should adhere so that by the end the time you're ready to contract you have a robust legal framework that's in place to govern all the activities so you can see the difference is phase two adhere to phase one plan now because it's the nuclear energy management school one of the 19 issues is the issue of management this is sort of a catch-all thing but I'll use this as another example and instead of showing it in the format I've spelled it out in bigger text so that you can see so from management in milestone one there's only one condition and that's part of the revision we used to have more we went to countries we realized it was too much to expect in phase one it was too complicated and we realized we could capture everything with one condition and that's that the need for appropriate leadership and management systems is recognized again it's not expected to have you know a lot of detailed structures in place in some cases the key organizations won't even exist at the end of phase one you might not have a regulatory body that's developed to oversee nuclear power you may not have yet identified an owner operator organization but really we're looking for evidence that the the importance of this is recognized and then the basis for evaluation these are the specific things we would look at a commitment to leadership and management systems to ensure success promote culture for safety security and safeguards and then plans to ensure that knowledge gained by the nuclear energy program implementing organization we could just say the government for short is transferred to the future regulatory body and owner operator if they don't exist now when we look to milestone two for management we have three different conditions the first is that the contract specifications and evaluation criteria are determined so you should have a bid invitation specification and you should have the criteria established that say how you're gonna evaluate the information you receive from different suppliers even if you have a sole supplier you should have this bid invitation specification with your requirements completed so again that's a tangible thing that should exist by the end of phase two another thing is that your owner operator should be identified established and they should by now have competence for procuring and managing the NPP contract and what we're looking for is that the team is competent to verify the project progress and the quality requirements as well as the procedures for knowledge management and then the final condition is that management systems have been established and these should be in the key organizations whether it's the you know the government the regulatory body and the owner operator so those management systems should ensure that all legal requirements are met safety security and safeguards and there should be a mechanism to monitor infrastructure development in other words what you don't want is to have the owner operator charging ahead ready to contract but you don't have a regulatory body that's competent to oversee that process or to issue a license so someone in government should be making sure that the regulatory body gets going if that's the case in your country any unhave an idea okay well you're the customer you have legal requirements it needs to cover things like how much fuel is going to be in the first load how many how much fuel are you going to keep on site what are you going to do with your spent fuel do they need to build spent fuel storage on your site does it meet your legal requirements does it meet your environmental requirements obligations there's even cases where countries have the the owner operator might be a foreign held company or a joint stock company that has largely people from the country of the supplier country but still there's a negotiation between that team and the supplier team and the supplier team needs to know what the buying team is asking for so you need a specifications document I think it's not so different and we have a guidance document specifically on this and an online tool which I have a link to also but really this is a lesson learned is that it's it's not such a different document and it's an important exercise to go through okay so we talked a little bit about countries apply the evaluation methodology they identify their gaps one of the most requested review services among the newcomer countries is this integrated nuclear infrastructure review mission and this is sort of an independent way to check where you are and countries like to do this typically like a year before they expect they're at one of the milestones because they have a good idea of where they are but it's nice to have people from the agency and the the teams for these mission are a hybrid of agency staff from different sections we usually have someone from the office of legal affairs the department of safeguards the department of safety and security department of fuel cycle to look at issues like fuel cycle policy and radioactive waste management the nuclear energy department and then a number of external experts from around the world and the idea is that we sort of check the evaluation and the team will make a number of recommendations and suggestions then the country will help tailor its action plan to make sure those gaps get filled so that it's ready to move to the next stage and it's also a good exercise because the you know introducing nuclear power requires a lot of different stakeholders throughout a country many different government stakeholders and going through a formal process like this is a good way to sort of align all the players get people together and on the same page we also have a tech doc which is called six years of lessons learned from in your missions and it shows which of the 19 issues in phase one and phase two most commonly get recommendations and suggestions what are those recommendations so even countries just looking at that can get an idea of well hmm maybe we should look carefully at ourselves and make sure that we're we're in good shape on this issue even if you're not at the point where you're ready to conduct a full self-evaluation or an admission so this is a list of all the missions that have been conducted the first one was in Jordan in 2009 the most recent one was in Ghana earlier this year and you can see there's been 22 different missions many of the newcomer countries so why do you think it's such a popular service and why do you think we've conducted so many and so many of the newcomer countries and he guesses if you're in the country why do you what do you think would be the value of this the report and the recommendations and suggestions that come out of it yeah I think it's right it really helps the country if you have skeptical public or skeptical stakeholders maybe within your own government and you say well we've done a self evaluation we're in good shape we're we're really happy with it we understand maybe that's not so convincing to some of your stakeholders it does really help to have an independent review and to be able to say look you know you're worried that we're not doing things safely while we're following the IAA guidance and here's sort of their findings related to all these different aspects the other thing is that this can actually help you in terms of attracting financing because you're going to require some balance of debt and equity financing and debt financing is challenging to get and the financiers are going to be looking for evidence that the risk to the program and construction risk is low so if you can say look we're following international best practices and the agency has very few recommendations that can help demonstrate that your program is less risky and that there's not a lot of showstoppers or things that haven't taken care of that could make that a bad investment so here's how the IAA sort of takes the results of self-assessment national action plans and then independent peer review missions with recommendations and suggestions and uses that to help define an integrated program of assistance so these are sort of things that we've talked about member state does self evaluation identifies its own gaps has a national action plan then maybe the country invites IAA review missions this can include the integrated review mission the in here but it can also include other more specific issues that go deeper on specific of the 19 issues the IRS mission looks really in-depth at issue seven which is the regulatory framework EPREV is the emergency preparedness and response review mission which looks in-depth at issue 14 seed mission can come multiple times throughout the program and it's looking at the site survey site study site characterization site citing process and then all those sort of inputs go into something that we call a country nuclear infrastructure profile show the example here on the next page and basically this provides a snapshot with some information of where the country is on all 19 issues it's really easy to fill this once we've conducted an in your mission because it essentially you just plug in the results of the in your mission but then the country will work over time you'll have some workshops you'll do some things internally you'll start to fill some of the gaps so each year we like to sort of do a check and you know we sort of keep this in between formal review missions to have a current snapshot the gaps that are identified through all these documents will be addressed through an integrated work plan this is a big spreadsheet which looks at sources of funding support whether through technical cooperation national projects regional projects interregional projects in some cases the country will share plans for bilateral assistance on certain areas and we put it into a big spreadsheet and say well this year we're going to do for this issue we're going to do an expert mission we're going to review the policy once you finish revising it or we'll send people for a fellowship to this country to learn more about it so we come up with a big package of assistance and then that's reviewed annually so that's how we try to do better now than we were doing in 2007 when we were uncoordinated so I talked about the CNIP I talked a little bit about the IWP just now let's talk then about some of the main forms of IAEA assistance to newcomers one key thing you've seen it probably in all the presentations so far the agency does a lot of collecting of good practices lessons learned into guidance documents so just these these documents I'm going to share are just for the issue of management it's only one of the 19 issues as I described sort of some of the different conditions in the evaluation methodology you see there's sort of different aspects to management that are captured one is the strength and readiness of the owner operator organization another is the management systems and the key organizations and then the last is the the whole project management so making sure all the parts of the program are moving in concert so for the owner operator we have a key document that was published in 2009 but it's in the process of being revised so revision one should be coming soon and it's focused on responsibilities and capabilities of that organization there's some other documents which are relevant preparation of a feasibility study as we'll talk in my next presentation that's a key activity in phase two and early phase three and then this one I mentioned before when we had the question from Sudan about invitation and evaluation of bids we have this good guidance document here and resources I also mentioned in the question about bids the IAEA nuclear contract and toolkit this used to be called bitty valve it helps the country ensure that it's well prepared for its bid invitation whether it's going for a tender process or for a sole supplier related to management systems key document here is the IAEA safety standard GSR part two leadership and management for safety this replaced the old GSR three and there's a bunch bigger focus on the issue of leadership now and then there's a number of other relevant documents management systems application of management systems development and implementation of a process-based management system you know the safety standards are sort of high level and then countries say well how do I do it in practice so some of these lower level documents try to explain that and use specific examples then there's a number of documents that compare the IAEA safety standards to other internationally accepted standards like the ISO series and the NQA one and then there's a couple of e-learning modules available on management systems last MVP project management there's a draft document which is already being distributed to member states if you ask the people who are working on it and then there's an additional relevant document this is a quite good one with very specific examples and then there's some e-learning modules that go along with those as well so this is going to be the same whether you're talking about support for nuclear power infrastructure development or many other areas in the agency the mechanisms for support include technical meetings for nuclear power infrastructure we hold two big ones each year the next one is coming sort of the last week of January it's called the topical issues in nuclear power infrastructure development we organize as part of the integrated work plans a number of workshops training courses fellowships usually using T resources from technical cooperation projects we also organize expert missions and advisory services generally to look at documents policies plans that you've developed and sort of one set of expert eyes on the review missions and peer reviews I've mentioned several of them there's the in-year IRS, EPRAG, SEED which are relevant for newcomers and then there's a number of training tools and networks as well training tools some of the key ones we offer training that we've done for several countries on modeling your human resource pipelines so we have a training tool for that it's called the nuclear power human resources tool another tool we have is called the competency framework this is where you can look at different organizations in different phases and it's pulled all the competences that are identified in IAEA safety standards in any series guidance documents for all the key organizations so you know what you should look for in those organizations in terms of your human resource strategy and in terms of the trainings that you should be going for in different phases and then there's this whole catalog of services sort of consolidated there's a link to it there so conclusions for this talk you saw from the beginning of the presentation that despite things that have happened the tail off in nuclear power the failure of the nuclear renaissance to really materialize in full there are a number of embarking countries that are moving ahead and we're going to have countries operating their nuclear first nuclear power plant for the first time in the coming years the IAEA milestones approach to introducing nuclear power helps guide countries through this process and the key products that sort of help support this approach are guidance documents training review missions and expert advice this evaluation methodology the document I circulated the second one provides a mechanism for evaluating the national nuclear infrastructure in different phases across all 19 issues it's useful as a tool for self-assessment by the country can also be used as the basis for an independent peer review and my section the nuclear infrastructure development section we try to coordinate all the efforts of the agency and we're trying to ensure that the agency support related to the introduction of nuclear power is relevant timely and of high quality so here you can see that we have this infrastructure bibliography this is useful because we have a couple of general documents and then you can click on each of the 19 infrastructure issues and see the key IAEA guidance documents for each of those issues because in countries it's you know you may often find that you're assigned to work on three or four of these issues specifically so it can help to identify what guidance documents are already out there the last thing I want to do is play this short video for you and this is I think sort of a sum up of my whole first presentation IAEA is here to help we have developed the milestones approach an internationally accepted method to implement sustainable nuclear power programs nearly every aspect of development requires access to modern energy sources many countries are now considering nuclear power as a sustainable energy option a nuclear power program is a major undertaking requiring careful planning preparation and investment in time institutions finances and human resources it involves 10 to 15 years of proprietary work and the commitment for around a hundred years the use of nuclear material requires strict attention to nuclear safety security and safeguards the IAEA milestones approach enables a sound development process for a nuclear power program it is a phased comprehensive method the completion of each phase is marked by a specific milestone of each phase 19 infrastructure issues need to be considered each issue is important requires careful consideration and specific actions three key organizations are involved in building a nuclear power program the government should create a mechanism for example a nuclear energy program implementing organization or NEPIO to coordinate the work of all organizations involved a competent independent regulator must be developed to ensure compliance with all nuclear safety standards the owner operator may be state owned or private and must be competent to safely operate the nuclear power plant and meet regulatory requirements in phase one the country will analyze all issues necessary to introduce nuclear power by milestone one the country will be ready to make a knowledgeable decision whether to introduce nuclear power in phase two the necessary infrastructure covering all 19 issues is developed by milestone two the country is ready to invite bids or negotiate a contract for their first nuclear power plant in phase three the licensing and construction activities are undertaken by milestone three the country is ready to condition and operate its first plant one of the most requested review services by new comers is the in the emission IAEA and international experts review the status of a country's nuclear power development however it is the country's responsibility to put the resources in place and move the program forward it is the sovereign decision of every country whether to launch a nuclear power program the IAEA does not influence that decision when a country decides to go that route the IAEA is here to help the milestones approach helps the country understand its commitments and obligations to ensure a safe secure and sustainable nuclear power program the milestones approach is documented in the IAEA nuclear energy series publication milestones in the development of a national infrastructure for nuclear power I wish I could say there was but there's really no shortcuts to this process and as I'll discuss in my next presentation I think where you have nuclear power succeed is in countries where you succeed in building what we call a national position in favor of nuclear power where you if you have a two-party system where both parties support it for the same reasons so that depending on who's in power it's not used as a wedge issue by one party against the other I say they're right at about 10 years I think they really got started in earnest in 2007 they were long on target to commission this year in 2017 by 2018 so 11 years I think for you a which documents specifically yeah so there was a meeting at the IAEA maybe this year a lot I think last year and the question was from member states you know what's do if you go for an SMR even some countries have asked well we want to go for a research reactor how much of this is valid for an SMR I think most of its valid or all of its valid and for a research reactor almost everything's valid as well except for the issue of electrical grid you would look instead at the end uses the research and development program what's the purpose of having the research reactor I mean most of the small modular reactors are basically just shrunk down light water reactors one thing that will probably be different maybe is that your emergency evacuation zone might be a bit smaller mm-hmm mm-hmm you think it's shorter or longer mm-hmm mm-hmm okay well I have to say if you're participating in the development of this document you're more informed on it than I am so I think people I think my section head is participating in this group so you know I think whatever comes out it will represent agency consensus yeah yeah mm-hmm I think the agency can't solve these kinds of political issues for countries but you know the issue one of the 19 is this issue of national position and we have a guidance document which I'll present in the next session on this and it's you know the theme that comes over and over is that you have to get all the important stakeholders and including if you have different political parties it helps to get broad political support for the program otherwise it's at a high risk of failing it's true and you may invest a lot in one administration and if the other administration doesn't support and they come into a power then it all goes for nothing yeah and I think this is exactly what we would advise countries to do is you need to consider whether it's going to work and be sustainable in your case and countries may say well we would really like to have it but honestly we don't have the political the broad political support that's needed to make this commitment and it's 10 to 15 years just to get the program off the ground and going and then it's another commitment for 100 years to manage the operations and to deal with the decommissioning and the waste yeah this is a really interesting area because we developed all this at the impetus of member states who are considering for the first time and it's been refined over years of experience but then we found that a number of countries and there are several South Africa is one Hungary is one I think Pakistan is one even the UK has come to our technical meeting and say you know we use some of the guidance in here because we've UK hasn't done new build since 1995 now they've signed a contract for a new plant they need to you know consider carefully stakeholder involvement there are human resource pipelines industrial involvement policy so even some of these and we call them now expanding countries countries that have nuclear power haven't had new build in a long time and are now sort of looking and seeing well you know do we have what it takes they're using these documents in South Africa even requested an in-year mission in 2013 to help look at the readiness of its institutions for new build I mean its regulator hadn't issued a construction license since before I was born so I think it's a fantastic question when you ask around people tend to have an opinion which I tend to disagree with the answer you hear a lot is and you hear this we hear it especially from other embarking countries that may be struggling a bit they say oh well the UAE they have infinite resources they throw cash they hire all the consultants they need they solve all the problems I think UAE has really been helped by its ability to bring very good people into its organizations but really what they do that I don't see in some of the other countries that are struggling a little bit is in 2007 they had a very very strong national position they had you know all the ministries all the stakeholders bought into the plan they released this white paper with their policy and strategy on nuclear power it said like these are the six key principles for our program here's our plan to build the regulatory body here's how we're gonna ensure safety here's how we're gonna get international oversight we're gonna have the highest standards of safety security and non-proliferation all these things and everybody was always committed to that policy and that strategy the whole time so they were very very focused and I think that's they were also very organized like I said it's a lot of coordination they didn't have let's say a nuclear group who is fighting against the Ministry of Energy who maybe didn't think it was such a good idea it was a government-wide policy that everybody was on board and everybody was supporting yeah do you have an example in mind like a physical risk a security risk well we went through a very robust process in 2013 14 and 15 to revise the milestones document and I think there's broad international consensus that if you cover those 19 issues you're all set some of the issues that you're mentioning I think are covered in the issues of national position this is the issue of political change funding and financing is a separate issue and then security is another issue as well physical protection so I think if you follow the methodology and you can ensure all those things you know on the timeframe that's set out you should be successful but it's possible that if you have those issues and you do a self-evaluation you'll say well we don't meet the conditions here phase one and it's you know that's a that's a warning or a red flag I would say one more question yeah mm-hmm that's a good question and I think the thing that indicates to me is that you'll help yourself going back later if you practice good knowledge management the first time around and not to keep harping on the UAE as an example but they're finishing there you know 10 to 15 years here and they're very focused right now on the issue of knowledge management because they're thinking that you know it could be another 15 years or so that we want to do new build again do we want to have to go back from this from the start and reinvent the wheel or can we sort of pick things up if we capture a lot of lessons learned if we interview a lot of people and document a lot of things maybe it can go faster so I would say for countries that have considered and they've done some studies maybe some have had site characterization done you know and now it's 20 years later you have to go back and look and you know you have to look at all 19 issues some of what was done before may still be usable some of it may have to be redone and I would say the better records you keep and the more if you practice good knowledge management it can make it easier for you later we're scheduled for a break but I think what I'd like to do instead is do a an exercise and then we break after if that's okay with everybody is everyone surviving and staying awake all right so you're gonna need to get into your six groups and it's one simple exercise and then we'll go around you all have the same exercise and then we'll share the results and we'll sort of judge each other's performance so I don't know how when you get into groups are you organizing throughout the room okay well we I can give you the thing first and then you can get organized and we'll probably give you 15 minutes so that we'll get back and we'll share your results at 20 minutes past three so here's the exercise imagine your government has recently adopted a white paper describing your country's decision to introduce nuclear power your energy minister is about to give a press conference and you are preparing for her media questions and answers how would you suggest you respond to the following question in a few sentences imagine a reporter asks they're given that several developed countries have decided in recent years Germany Korea plants are being closed in the United States in recent years to phase out nuclear power why is our government why do they think it's a good idea to go ahead with a nuclear power program now so get among yourselves talk you can invent whatever data and information you need but be prepared you know to give a pithy sound bite answer to this question if you're an energy minister and then we'll judge if we're the public or if we're the reporter how skeptical we are if we're persuaded okay