 This next session will tie together a little bit of what I said earlier and what captain's just talked about Because what I want to talk about is review services And I've lost the clicker already Do you want to see it? No Thank you So yeah, we're gonna we're hopefully tied together some of the stuff about principles of safety and the fact that we have safety standards and And the natural question is okay. So how do you know people are applying them? so The IEA has a number of safety review services that we offer And they they form part of an overall support framework and it's it's the way in which we offer help to member states to For them to to really engage their own adherence to safety standards And it's helpful to us as well because when we go and do a review We will we will gain useful comments And feedback on the safety standards that the captain just talked about And we can we can gather that information as real sort of first-hand experience and use that when we next Revise the safety standard We also find that we we we learned some really good things in these safety reviews That might be information that we can share with other member states and I'll come back to that in a second as well So we've got this list which is probably the main safety review standards I'll talk about most of them in a bit more detail They aren't complete because there are lots of these the main thing I wanted to point out is that like the like the safety standards themselves Review missions are voluntary They are performed at the request of member states. So there is no obligation to ask for a review mission But we obviously we encourage it. We like doing it We find it helpful for for the standards And there's nothing more satisfying than helping somebody to improve their new safety, frankly So it's very enjoyable Yeah Um I I understand your point. Um, I I think it is in this context And in the emission, you know, it is really reviewing whether a state has put in place the infrastructure required for a for a you know, a safe nuclear power program So it's it's not reviewing actual safety on the ground. I absolutely agree with you But you know, if if you're going to embark on a nuclear power program and you go Through the um in the process It's really helpful to have that have a review done along the way Because what you don't want is to get to the end and say right. We're ready to build a plant now and everyone says Are you sure? You know, it's really useful to have that that check along the way um, I mean for instance, I'm I'm going to the united arab emirates in uh in september and we're going to do a Pre-operational ozart. So an ozart mission designed for the end of construction and during commissioning and If you like that really is the almost the final Cross-check of whether the country was effective in their infrastructure reviews all the way through um, so, you know, it's it's these things all hand together, but Interesting question. Thanks. Uh, this is the just a quick diagram of the support services. So, um We offer these peer reviews, which is what I'll talk about mainly But obviously there are also security guidelines. We can offer help on education and training There are other advisory services the safety standards, of course international legal instruments kathryn talked about some of the Conventions and there's also knowledge networks, which you can gain easy access to if you look on the on the ia website and there's a number of international or regional Uh, knowledge networks Um, you know just pick one up the asian nuclear safety network Where, you know, some of the asian countries have got together to help themselves to Gather their knowledge of nuclear safety, you know in the asian region okay Now i'm a i'm an operations guy i'm a station, you know power station guy So i'm going to approach this very much from the nuclear power operational nuclear power plant perspective However, the the principles that we use in ozart operational safety review team are very similar to the way in which we approach safety reviews in other areas as well Whether they be regulatory um Or research reactors or fuel cycle facilities. So the principles are very similar So by going through this in a bit more detail, you will get an overview about how it's done in many other safety review services So what does it do? So an ozart provides advice assistance to member states in enhancing their operational safety It's not just operating nuclear power plants, but it is For those plants reaching the end of construction. I'm just about to go in well Probably in the middle of commissioning as well And we call that a pre operational safety review And that's why we're doing it at baraka in a month's time Although it says there it could be focused to review only a few specific areas We strongly recommend that when a member state asks for an ozart that they ask for the full ozart service because frankly A lot of things all tie together and if you think back to what I was talking about earlier in terms of leadership management Um, you know and all that stuff about whether whether management is taking an overall view of safety across the whole plant Um, if you missed out emergency preparedness and chemistry and technical support, I know we looked at operations and maintenance You wouldn't get a really good picture of whether the plant as a whole was uh Was really effective in applying the whole of the uh, of the operating safety standards So we do we do strongly recommend Taking the whole mission Um, if necessary if a member state wanted to just focus on one small area They could ask for something different which would be an expert mission And we we'd bring along a different team just to look at that specific technical area But for an overall review in operational safety, we recommend ozart When we do a mission we we also recommend that you ask us to come back it in It says 12 to 18 months there, but actually Um, I will change this slide because we actually prefer 18 to 24 months Because some things take longer to address than 12 months You know if we find an issue and give you advice on how to fix it It can be quite challenging to fix that and see the results within 12 months So we usually recommend 18 to 24 months I've just come back from a review mission in a follow-up mission in japan And that was two years after the original mission and that was that felt about right The review is is almost an ozart is almost three weeks So, uh, oh Oh, I see Yeah, I I will when I change this I will I will be 18 to 24 months Well, you know, it's it's a very interesting point, uh, things vary, you know Some some things you go to a plant and you'll see Something simple like you know guys you you don't really have good control over access to your radiation controlled area And that that's pretty easy to fix you could probably fix that in a couple of weeks um, but if if you go there and you say, you know, actually, uh You don't have a very good configuration management control system so You think that that includes uh, design Understanding the design basis having all documented having in place a modification control system Um, you know, those things take a bit longer to fix So, you know, you you need to give people time to to make the changes There might be you might need to get them agreed with a regulator Put them in place and then have enough run time To sort of show results as well because when we come back, we like you to tell us well, we did this Uh, this was the change. This is what we did. This is the plan. We've done it. It's in place now It's all documented and this is why we think it's worked because for the last few months We've seen the improvement, you know, we might have seen the number of non-conformances come down over a period of time so Um, you're right. Some things take less some things take more On average, we would recommend 18 to 24 months. It's just born out of experience So what does it look like pretty simple? First thing is we come along And tell you what it's all about. So if you want to know his art mission We don't say okay, we can come on monday. It doesn't quite work like that Because we've we've got probably a team of 14 15 people and we draw them from all around the world In each in each area. So the first thing we do is we come and tell you what it's all about Because there's a lot of work required at the plant And actually we do that usually about 12 months before before the mission Um, and two people will come along. It's usually the you know, when we get the request I will nominate a team leader and a deputy team leader and they will come and they will meet the team on the plant Um, it's a sort of a two-way communication thing and we'll tell you what it's all about How to how it works what to expect and how to prepare for it Next the actual mission itself happens. Um Again led by the IEA team leader and uh deputy team leader I like to have another person from the IEA there as well because you never know what's going to happen Someone gets ill Somebody has a family crisis and has to go home. So I actually like to send three people from the IAEA Um, but nevertheless we have an IEA leadership team and then we'll have 12 maybe actually more external experts now And it says two and a half weeks there. It's it is about two and a half weeks. We arrive on a monday We get in Onboarded into the plant. So we need to know your your rules on your plant Uh, it was a bit more training to do for for the for the site people and for The team itself and then it's eight or nine days worth of intensive review And that intensive review includes making sure that we communicate very closely with the site team so that we don't surprise you at the end of the mission And then we'll write a report a draft report. In fact, we call it technical notes And we'll have an exit meeting where we'll present the results Um to you so we we we don't leave the site until we give you the report in your hand Very important to us that we leave you with that clear information When we when we immediately leave the plant we we leave the draft what we call the technical notes with the with the plant itself Yeah, with the yeah We actually hand it to the plant manager whoever the plant manager is yeah, so you do to the other plant Now we uh, we try to be fully transparent. So we always Invite the regulator to the exit meeting and we also Meet with the regulator a couple of times during the mission itself just so that they can get a flavor of how it's going what we're finding Just so that we we don't want to surprise the regulator either But anyway, we'll leave we'll leave the report with the the plant at the end of the the two and a half three week mission Sorry, I missed you And I'll deal with your first question first and then I'll I'll ask you to clarify your second question So the the external experts are there to review The different review areas. So there are about Trend depending on on what the the member say asks for there are 10 or 12 review areas And we bring a different external expert to review each review area now those those reviewers will be Pretty experienced in that review area. So for instance I'm I'm doing when I go to Baraka in three weeks time. I'm taking two operations reviewers one from the uk and one from russia We're getting the leadership and management expert from spain we're getting the maintenance reviewer I think from hungary. So the essence of it is we get an international perspective That's that's important to us because we don't want there to be too much of one country's bias in the report We want it to be an international report with international experience It also promotes More widely the safety standards in a wider range of countries as well So what was your second question? Yeah Yeah To tell the truth. No, I mean, you know politics being what it is. There are there are sometimes member states that Would rather not have experts from certain countries, you know Different countries are friends or not friends with different countries. So you might get one country saying we were happy with an international team, but To be honest, it would be more difficult for us if you invited someone from that country So we say we understand we're not we don't get in the way of that. We will find an expert that everybody is happy with The fact that they're not iea experts is is fine. It's what we want because We we can't Hold within I mean within my team looking after ozards. I've got I've actually only got three people So I cannot send enough experts from the iea from my team to do all this So we we bring people from who are actually used to applying the iea standards in in their own country To do the mission now, obviously what we also do is we provide them up front with some training About how we expect them to do the review because we want to be clear that when they come They're reviewing that that plant against the safety standards Not against what they're used to in their own country and not even against what the regulations are in that other country You know we're all the only the only thing we're knowledgeable about is the iea safety standards. It's impossible for us to hold Knowledge of the regulations in every single country. It's just not positive Does that answer your question? Good question And then as I say we we do a follow-up mission about 18 months to two years after And again, I take two people we take two people from the iea and usually Two or three of the original team Because you know, we're not reviewing the whole thing again We're just reviewing the issues that we found so we we can get away with a smaller team I was in japan recently and we had two iea and two external experts Uh, it's for the plant to address the issues that were found and left with them I think that's fine Well, they they have discretion about when they ask us to come back I mean we we ask them if they to to put it in in the 18 months to two year period But you know, again nuclear power stations being what they are they may say well, you know We've got a major outage in that period and we've got a lot of work to do Could we either bring it forward or could we bring it back and we're very flexible about that? You know, we we understand that we have to accommodate their own work schedules You know, we we don't want to get in the way of that. So if if they say Could we make it 26 months? We say that's fine. No problem, you know No, no, no, we don't we don't we don't get that Not in my experience. I've only been with the 83 years But you know, some of my team have been there quite a bit longer And I've asked a similar question and we we don't tend to get Regulatory interference or recommendations. They're they're usually Very interested in the results because of course they want to know how does what we find Compare with what they find as a regulator. So they're very interested in that But they don't they don't tend to get in the way of the timing of things So these are the areas that we we always we always want to review Um, so We call these the standard areas because really these ought to be addressed by every nuclear power plant So leadership training operations maintenance tech support operating experience radiation protection chemistry Immersive preparedness accident management and then human technology and organizational interactions Which together with the leadership and management is where we start to address those cultural issues that I was talking about this morning So this is a fairly new and you fairly new module And then we also offer some other optional areas depending on the on the the plant itself So for a for a plant at the beginning of its life, which is just about to be commissioned We will come into a pre-OSR which adds to this the commissioning module If a plant has been running a long time and is considering extending its operating license To extend the license we will Look at long-term operation. So that's how are they preparing For a long-term operation. Do they have all the all the things in place for that? If they are planning to shut down or within the next four to five years, we will we can also come and and ask Um questions about well, okay, so how are you preparing for decommission? What preparations are you in place? You know, you don't just turn the plant off take the fuel out and leave it There is still a residual hazard there that has to be addressed and We can do a specific module on safety culture which is in more detail Or we can also and we've done this one recently actually for the first time in a few years We can look at how they're using probabilistic safety assessment To help them with their decision-making on the plant Probabilistic safety assessment is often is often used in the design phase But it can also be used in the operational phase to help them to make decisions Especially when you're in an outage situation or when you're planning for an outage when you're you're taking pieces of equipment out of service to maintain it But you still need that equipment potentially to keep the plant cool and keep it safe So okay, the hazard goes down when you shut the plant down But you're potentially Infringing on the safety because you're taking plant out of service to fix it or to maintain it So the probabilistic safety assessment can be very helpful there How many have we done? Well, we are in the middle of one in the u.s. Right now and that is 195th in the series So we do them all over the world. So everywhere. There's a nuclear power plant Well, we haven't done a nose on every single nuclear power plant, but we've probably covered all the countries And most of the plants by now So 195 How does it work? Okay, so we we really look at two two different types of things we look at What we call the program-based things And that really Is about do you have the right systems in place the right documentation the right processors And we can look at that compare that with the standards we can go and talk with people see how they actually do it And we'll gather the facts together Of what about what we see Other things we'll go out and look in the field. So we've got the main control room and actually observe people doing Manipulations on the plant control boards. So how do they how do they manage reactivity? Um, how do they manage a shutdown? How do they plan activities like maintenance? Um, how will they do chemistry monitoring? And through those field observations will also collect facts and What we usually find is if there are gaps it in the processors You'll find gaps out in the field as well it's it's almost self-evident commissioning is an interesting an interesting module because although we review commissioning during a Pre-operational OSART We don't actually have commissioning as a as an area of single expertise because commissioning actually touches all sorts of different things It obviously touches operations and management But it also touches how maintenance has has interacted with the construction teams To to transfer the knowledge of the systems and what their requirements are We what most plants do is that they will put Permanent station staff onto commissioning teams to understand how the plant works Get to understand its characteristics and they and they will use that information when they're writing the maintenance strategies for the plant as well Um, it's the same with chemistry. It's the same with radiation protection Many tests Oh, absolutely. Yeah, yeah Yeah, well if there was a commissioning test in progress we would go and we would observe it And our our interest actually is not just in the test itself But it's in how the commissioning team which is usually separate to the operation to the to the main plant team Our interest is also in how the commissioning team Interfaces with them with the permanent station staff So are they are they using this opportunity to get people to understand what happens when they start this plans up for the first time Or, uh, you know, they're how how the plant behaves when it's running for the very first time So I would expect the engineering people to be there saying, okay What what what are the vibration characteristics? Will it meet its performance criteria? Does it develop enough pressure? Did that diesel start in the time scale that we that we needed to start in so they will be gathering a lot of that information as well So, you know, it's not for us to judge the adequacy necessarily of the commissioning test That's for the commissioning team to do But we want to know that it was well planned well organized Well executed and you're using the opportunity to help to train the permanent staff of the plant No, no, no, no, no it's because because the IEA has no authority to judge whether commissioning test is satisfactory or not That that is for the plant to judge and you know, if they have to convince the regulator That that is a you know that because you might be commissioning a safety system or a non-safety system If it's on a safety system They would have to be able to provide evidence to the regulator that that safety system met its safety mission But if it's commissioning test on a A condensate pump, well, it's not safe to relate it. You know the regulator is not really interested in that So we gather all these facts together and the experts and the team leaders will then formulate an issue So we're trying there to to understand what we've seen. What does it mean? What is its safety impact? Okay, can we now write something that try that really describes this issue and make some suggestion or recommendation to the plant on how to fix on what needs fixing not how to fix it but what needs fixing In the meantime, of course, uh, we're working with the plant people and we are always asking for them To make sure that we understand what we're seeing correctly because we it's very important that we don't go off on a tangent and Make a conclusion which is inaccurate because we just didn't understand how the process works So we try to make sure we get good feedback from the counterparts and the whole team as well Because you might have somebody who's an expert reviewer in maintenance But that person might well have had a lot of experience also in commissioning Or technical support. So we use the strength of the team in in in all these missions Yeah Yeah, that happens a lot. Yeah. So the the mission is always conducted in English But if the if the language of the member state isn't English, we we arrange for interpreters to to go there with them So either the member state will provide the interpreters or if necessary we we can find interpreters as well So, uh, you know, obviously when I I was at russia in a russian plant two years ago And the whole mission was done in english But all of the all of the interactions with the site people were done with interpreters It's accurate To tell the truth you you have to take it on trust You know if if we get into the situation Well, you know if we have to take it on trust because if you start to say To an how do you say to somebody through an interpreter? Uh, I don't believe you I don't know Yes, no, you're you're quite right and and It's something that we are very aware of it. It is a good question because I've I've struggled with this as well Sometimes you can ask a question through an interpreter and you ask a very simple question and the answer takes five minutes And you think well, that was uh, that was an easy question Or the other way around is also very interesting where you know, you have a you have a A question about a complex issue and then they say, uh, no, it's okay Well, I'm not sure if you really understood the you know, the significance of the question I was asking So it does happen from time to time and and you just have to say to the interpreter look Um, that was a very short answer But I would appreciate more and more detail about this or this or this So you have to just recognize it and and keep probing asking more questions until You are sufficiently convinced, but there is a degree of trust there. But you know, um, what what I would say to you is that, you know In my experience People on nuclear power plants are very passionate about safety. They want their plant to be safe Because you know, they live they live near the plant their their kids live near the plant And they they genuinely want their plant to be safe. So, you know, there was a very real um, uh, you know, self-interest in in in finding out what somebody else can help you with If you think somebody else can help you do your work better or more safely Wow, that for me, that's like free free information for nothing. You know, so it's That that's how I I find most of the missions got all the mission Um, this might come to back to some of the questions that you've asked We think Ozart is is objective because The only standards that we use are the safety objective the safety standard the ia safety standard So everything's judged against the same thing And we don't we don't judge, uh, a plans on the the standards of the experts from their own countries And we don't use even the country's regulations. We just use the safety standards We bring along very well qualified reviewers with diverse international experience So we we'll train them first in how to do a mission And we might even take them as an observer on a mission before they do a real mission And then we allow them to be a reviewer and we we we We try to keep hold of the good ones and ask them to come back and do reviews again We have a standard scope what we can customize it The the reviewer self is very transparent because we we make sure that we always tell people what we see and what Ask them to tell us if it's accurate or not And I as a team leader will have a daily meeting with the plant manager to say look at this is what we're finding We think it means this but we're still gathering data But you know if you if you don't think we've got on this correct, please tell us and we'll go back and look at it again So we're very transparent about how we do this But we're very keen not to surprise the plant at the end And it's also De-restricted so our our policy is that when the final report is published It's it's restricted for 90 days for a for a plant or a member state to consider How they would respond if they had questions on this report from the general public or from people who don't like nuclear power But our our strong preference is that we that they allow us to de-restrict the report 90 days after this issue And my industry and I've never had anybody come back to us and say no, we want this report to remain restricted In the three years. I've been doing it and I'm only aware of one of one OSR reports ever being requested to be Kept restricted and that's in 195 missions so Most member states these days They recognize that if they're going to get public support for nuclear power, they have to be open and transparent Yes, yeah Now what we and what we do is Can you remember I mentioned on one of the slides that we have a preparatory meeting a year in advance? And we we're very clear then, you know, we say look Our policy is that the report will be de-restricted after 90 days You as a member state you have the right to to ask us not to de-restrict it if you so wish But you know that is our policy and Unless you tell us so they've got a right to us that they want this to remain restricted It will be de-restricted, but but we are very clear a year in advance about about what this means Again, we don't want to surprise them Some well that varies another another great question some some countries Will publish the report on their web on their own internal websites Or the regulator might publish it on on On their website so either the utility website or the regulator Some countries will just provide it on request and some countries say Well Go and ask the IEA for a copy now We won't we won't release it even though it's de-restricted We we don't release it unless we talk with a member state So we'll say we've had a request from this organization. It's de-restricted So we do intend to provide this organization with a copy or this person with a copy But we want you to be aware because again, we don't want to surprise the member state so That's how it works, but not everybody treats it the same No, no, no, we don't take no we don't take any documents away from the site at all The only thing we come away with is the the knowledge in our head and the the draft report itself Yeah, we don't we don't take any information away All right, and it's very important to us that our experts understand that they all sign a confidentiality agreement before they come on the mission Which acknowledges that they they are not allowed to take any material away from the plant at all during the mission Or at the end and they're also not allowed to discuss The the mission even after the only the only people who are allowed to discuss the mission are the iaa and the member state So the the experts sign that confidentiality agreement What we what we do is we we ask the plant to provide us with what's called an advanced information pack because In two and a half weeks or three weeks sounds like a long time, but it's not really So we ask we ask the plant to provide us with advanced information on the plant structures the management processes What's gone wrong in the last three years so events that they've had in the last three years It's well, it's actually the advanced information pack is sent to us electronically We put it onto a secure website And we only give the password to the secure website to the people who are coming on the mission And once the mission is over we take that password away So, you know, you can't go back five years afterwards and and gain a you know get hold of the information So it's only there for a About a month or so in advance of the mission so that the team can review the information And then once the mission is over It's it's no longer available But you have mentioned that you have Well, we don't send them the information, but we give them access to it now You know, so they can they can log on to the website and and and look at it And you know, if they want they could download it and print it and give it to somebody who wasn't very friendly to nuclear power That's not the sort of people we're looking for on our missions But you know, they could do that if they wanted in the same way that you know They could go to the plant and be given a document to read and they could photocopy it and take it away But that's not the sort of people that we we look for on the missions And if someone if someone were to do that then we would we would take them off the mission Yeah, we would we would deal with it Well, what to be honest once it's on your once it's on a screen because you know, you have to read it electronically Once it's on that screen you can screen capture it anyway So, you know It's there's there's no real safety benefit in not allowing the people to to read it or download it But we you know before that they have to sound the confidentiality There is a there is a degree of trust in all of this Uh, we now as well as looking at stations. We can also look at corporate organizations So we look at corporate manage the things we look at in corporate organizations is corporate management independent nuclear oversight human resources communications, particularly with the public and particularly in emergency situations and then corporate support for technical functions like operating experience chemistry fuel management, etc because the corporate organization in in in many organizations has a significant impact on how the plants maintain their safety It depends on the organization itself But you know if you go to some of the bigger organizations say edf in france big fleet big centralized engineering function So they do a lot of the design basis stuff within that central function So it's right that we have a way to look at them Another another plant, you know the organization might only have one plant So all of that is done on the plant or in an associated head office So, you know that we have to be able to cater for all these different situations But the processes is out of the same I've mentioned that That's exactly the same So just very briefly to The top up or to finish off on Ozark. It's been going a long time. It started in 1982. So a long time now We use the safety standards. It's Recognized in our general conference and even in the convention on nuclear safety review meetings They are publicly available So they help us or they help the industry to communicate openly And uh, it's also very well. It's well appreciated by regulators because although organizations like Wano will come and do very similar peer reviews Wano reports are kept highly confidential. They are only available to the organization that asked for the The Wano review so the regulator officially never gets to see The Wano reports mean they do to a degree but officially never So the fact that the Ozark report is is available to them is very helpful to the regulator You can look on the website I've got a slight concern that the website might have changed and now look a bit different But if you go into if you just search, you know, do google and say i a e a Ozark You'll find this information And certainly all of the all the links All the links will will be working we use guidelines to help people to do the Um mission and again, we we make all these guidelines available to the plant in advance So the plant actually knows all the questions. We'll go and ask them. They know all the questions Um, we capture all the results in a database called osmere, which is Ozark mission report database Uh, so if you have a nuclear power plant You will have access to this and you ask for it. You will have access to this Ozark mission database Um, yeah, again, I need to get a new screenshot because we've just refreshed it and made it look a bit more modern But essentially we've captured all of the recommendations and suggestions that we've made on every single Ozark mission in all of the different areas And we've also captured all the good things that we see because we don't we don't just capture the things that people ought to fix We try and capture something that we think is really really good Better than anything we've seen elsewhere that we think will be helpful to somebody else So for instance when I went to this russian plant, they had a they had a way of of um Finding out The age or sorry the irradiation Of a leaking fuel assembly in the reactor when the reactor was still at power And they could split it down into when that Fuel assembly was loaded because usually they state the fuel assembly is staying for maybe three fuel cycles So it would either be fairly new or it's been in through one cycle or it's been in through two cycles And when you want to find that leaking fuel assembly during an outage It's very helpful to find it as quickly as possible So by knowing if it's in the first batch the second batch or the third batch Very helpful and we've never seen that anywhere else the way that they did it So we made that available as a good practice for anybody else who runs that sort of reactor to be able to use Yeah Three thousand Yeah, yeah How many are it's already implemented for actually um, well we um, I would like to say three thousand um And the truth is it won't it won't be all them because sometimes A recommendation might not be implement implemented because The plant does something different. They might modify the plant to to take away a vulnerability Or we they might do something else which changes the whole thing I mean say say they had an organizational issue which we gave them a recommendation on and They they subsequently went through a completely different a whole reorganization of the company Which changed the way the plants operate. So the the recommendation might no longer be valid So we would we would withdraw that recommendation because something else has happened in the meantime But most I would say the vast majority of the recommendations and suggestions are Are resolved Now not they're not all resolved within two years But what when we go back for the follow-up mission? We review all the recommendations and suggestions and we we give them one of three statuses We either say they're resolved in which case you fix the problem Or you've made satisfactory progress in the time that you've had because some things do take longer than two years And if if you've convinced us that you know or the convinced the experts That what you're doing is the right thing and it has a high probability of success we will say satisfactory progress and It's for you to finish Occasionally we think you know, you've just not understood this issue Or you've not done something that's effective and we have to say insufficient progress and that does happen But usually our usual finding is after two years Somewhere between 50 and 60 percent of the issues are resolved Somewhere between 40 and maybe 50 percent are satisfactory progress And occasionally you'll get one or two that are insufficient progress But our average Since we began Ozard is over 90 percent are either resolved or Satisfactory progress and in the last five years or so it's actually the average is 95 percent So people have got better and better of this which is pretty much what you expect So that was Ozard now a lot of the same review principles apply to other remissions So I won't go into these other ones in as much detail The same principles of how you do the review how you write the reports how you present the report It's all very very similar Yeah And no no actually Ozard is is nuclear power plants Only nuclear power plants, but I will cover other things when I when I talk about other things because there are there are other missions Yeah, yeah, we'll we'll cover that in just a few moments. Yeah. Yeah now So this one this is probably the other the other review service that gets the most requests it's it's a review of regulatory aspects in a country so it's Integrated regulatory review service. It's pretty much what you expect from the title It looks at the national regulatory infrastructure and compares that with what we recommend in the safety standards It helps us and the regulator in that country to learn about the different approaches of the organization And the different practices of different national regulators because again We bring expert regulators from all the different countries or many different countries It also as we as I said earlier it helps us to get feedback on the application of the safety standards and whether it's actually helping countries to Provide a safe level of regulation And again, we have follow-up missions and again the the the recommendation is around two years We often find it's a bit longer than two years in regulatory space, but that's just the way it goes So what is what does irrs look at? so It looks at responsibilities and functions of the government The global regime for say for regulation Looks at the actual regulatory body in in the country what these responsibilities are how it works as an organization And then we look at the more the more technical things from a regulation Perspective so how do they authorize activities to happen? How do they review? Plants and how do they review safety cases? What do they ins? How do they inspect the nuclear plant? How do they enforce actions when they when they're not happy? um and you know How do their regulations and guides stack up against the the the safety standards? And of course usually they all they also require to regulate emergency preparedness and response Um, so we look at that as well and we look at interfaces with security So those those are the technical things that that we that the irrs looks at from a regulatory perspective But the the techniques for doing it are all much the same In in the fact that we will look at documentation and processors We'll go and we will go and talk with regulators in the regulatory office potentially also at the plants as well Again, there are guidelines. Um, so there are there are no secrets to how we do this These guidelines are all publicly available It was revised only four years ago, but it's actually being revised again. So as a new version do out soon Uh, so this helps regulators in the country to prepare for the mission So it's proven very effective. Um gets very good feedback from regulators Where we go, uh We recommend that regulators invite it regularly Um, and we have been round. We're on a second round now with a couple of countries I think the uk has has invited a second round of irs It's a fairly mature process now. It's not been running as long as those are but I think it's been running about 15 years Um lessons learned from the past missions are used for further development of the process And also fed back into the regulatory safety standards um, and obviously we we encourage um Regulators to participate because they they learn well first of all they bring their experience But also they learn a lot about how regulation is done in other countries Which helps them to benchmark on on their own regulatory practices Okay, someone asked earlier about nuclear infrastructure. So um Just a few words on that And again, I'll I'll I'll be covering these things in in probably less than less detail But this is really um a review service that Helps countries that are considering embarking on a nuclear power power program. So this really starts Before a country has even made a decision to do to make a nuclear power program So what what does that country need to to form an inform to get an informed view about whether it should do it or not because It all it can sound very glamorous. Oh, we've got a modern nuclear power program But the responsibilities and the long-term nature of a nuclear power program It's very easy to underestimate those Once you take into account, you know, the legislative and regulatory requirements that you need The fact that you you probably need to want to put in place an educational system Which brings people up through a technical route. So how do you train the technicians the engineers the regulators? the suppliers In your country to be able to support a nuclear program How do you choose a site? How would you assess a site? There's an awful lot that needs to take place before you even get near a decision to to implement a nuclear program So this really is is designed to provide a structured framework of guidance to help a country make a good decision And you know, some countries have considered it and said Yeah, okay Not yet. We'll do it later And there are certainly countries recently who who who are close to making that decision that have decided Just to make it a bit later on and that's that's a good decision in its own right Other countries have gone through this process and started. Yeah, we are ready. We are prepared It's a someone that we absolutely want to do and the UAE is a great example and they're close to commissioning their first unit Um, so we'll help to evaluate the national infrastructure It'll obviously identify gaps. They might be technical gaps in the in the The industrialized nature of the country or in the education available in the country There might be anything, you know, it might be in a in a highly seismically active zone So that might be a perspective that you want to build in um And it will obviously make recommendations and suggestions about how to make progress Because it's one thing to make a decision It's another to start letting contracts which which is a major financial commitment, you know a nuclear plant these days is, you know probably going to be You know Between five and ten billion dollars us So it's a major a major financial commitment And then you know actually being ready to construct and commission the first unit So it's in three stages We have some guidance on this and this is slightly different to some of the other Missions I I'll review missions. I'll talk about because this one is actually run out of our nuclear energy department, not our nuclear safety department But here we have the milestones in development of a nuclear A national infrastructure for nuclear power And we've got evaluation of the status of the national nuclear infrastructure And again, as usual, we've got guidance on how to prepare for and how we conduct these in-ear missions So all the information is is freely available Ah There are 19 Topics that are addressed in the in the mission and again as you'd expect it starts from the national position Uh, you know, how how is the how is the the country set up? For the decision to go on a nuclear power program And of course, then it starts going through the legislation the safeguards the regulations And then gets into other things like developing human resources So your your education and training perspectives Down into other things like the site Stakeholders very important. If you haven't got a nuclear program, it's all new for people People will when you're safe to people, what do you think about nuclear? What's the first way that comes into your head? It's usually Fukushima or Chernobyl So you have to have stakeholders involved Um, environmental protection The fuel cycle what what will you do with the waste that comes from the nuclear program? And how you know all the other things down into the details of you know, how will you procure the equipment? Some countries might not be willing to sell you stuff. They may they may think it's their own intellectual property So when you procure it internal to the country all sorts of things to think about Okay, other review services I mentioned earlier that we look at long-term operation in in in Ozart and we do But we actually also have a more in-depth review of long-term operation as well, which we call salto or safe long-term operation And uh, although Ozart will give you a very good overview of your preparations for long-term operation A salto mission We'll actually concentrate on that one area and allow you to really look at whether you have The the right management process in place and it will then dive down into The specific issues of the civil structures on the plant the electrical and instrumentation type issues and the mechanical plant issues And it will look at all of the aging management programs you've got in place How you assess degradation of these uh components and structures And it will also go back into the the human side And about how you address the knowledge management part of long-term operation Because as I said earlier usually on a nuclear plant lasts for 40 years And you get people like me who joined it as young people and you you you go through the entire program And just at the time the plant's going into long-term operation people like me are thinking You know, it's about time I retired So how do you hand the knowledge of people like me onto the next generation of people who you want to keep your plant safe? Very important absolutely crucial Um, of course, yeah, we'll identify issues and give you some idea of what we think we need to fix Uh, and again a good exchange of experience if you if you're doing something really well on that plant We will ask you if we can take that and share it with the industry And we're just creating another database that will help us to do that but also, um You know the the experts who come and help you with the assessment They will also take back that information to their own plans and that will help them to do that that work better as well So we look at the organization the licensing basis We look at what you need to do up front. In other words, have you got good maintenance programs already? Have you got surveillance programs already? Have you got your equipment qualification program in place? And then we look at the programs in the three main areas and then we look at the human resources and knowledge management issues Then we look at we start to look at other nuclear facilities. So Ozark dealt with operational commissioning operating Sorry commissioning nuclear power plants, but we also look at fuel cycle facilities And I I apologize for the abbreviations. It's uh, it's it makes me cringe, but we had to give them all a different name So this is the safety evaluation of fuel cycle facilities so and they themselves can be very varied because they could be fuel cycle facilities in the Construction and fabrication of new fuel or it could be how you deal with spent fuel wants it to take an out of the reactor Um, or it could be the with the waste that arises from plutonium reprocessing So they look at conversion and enrichment Fuel fabrication spend fuel storage reprocessing and fuel cycle research and development Now for some places that will all occur on one site. There's a site in the uk that does pretty much all of that apart from fuel fabrication They do pretty much all the rest um But in some countries all these are done on different sites So how we do it depends on the site itself And again, uh, there's a well understood structured way of things that we look at So again, it starts with management training how you operate the facility And then it goes down into the particular technical hazards that you find on that So strange though, it may seem you don't often have a criticality issue on a nuclear power plant until the fuel is in the reactor It's it would be quite unusual for you to run up against a criticality issue Um, but criticality can occur of course as we as we started off with at the beginning of this morning On other facilities where you've got uranium or plutonium Being moved around or it's in fluid form and the fluid, you know, the assembly of that can be can be absolutely Crucial to whether you've got a critical assembly Um, and of course in in with that is uh fire safety as well because you don't be spreading water around when you've got Uh solutions of critical material so I won't I won't dwell on this I'm sorry, I'm not sure if I understand the major real question Yeah, so we find a problem with modification When you when you say they you mean the the plant itself Yeah, okay, so if the facility disagrees with the conclusion That that that point is is Discussed and agreed on before the end of the mission So, you know, if they say we think our modification process is fine and we say well Yes, but this is what the safety standards require and you don't comply with the safety standards You know, there either is a gap or there isn't a gap So we have we have to have that discussion during the mission itself It's pretty rare that we we disagree on the facts because the whole the whole the mission is based on observed facts So if we just to pick a A slightly different example say say that you know, there should be a process for training The operations personnel and we go to a plant and we say okay, so um, how do you train your operations personnel and they say well Uh, we uh, we we just train them on the job I'm gonna say well the safety standard requires formal Classroom training and technical training. What do you do in that area? And if they say well, we don't do that because we rely on university training Say, okay. Well, that's that's different to what the safety standard says so Yeah, you either accept the fact that there's a difference or not and we I've never personally come across a fact, you know a situation where We've said this is what the safety standard says and there's a gap and the plants say no, there isn't a gap Uh, okay Well, it's only for We we're I mean certainly in terms of proliferation we would not we wouldn't get anywhere near that and Yeah, because the the The only people who would look at that would be our safeguards people in the agency so And you know, that's that's a that's a fairly closely guarded activity So I I don't know anything about it and I'm not even allowed on the floor Um of the building where that all happens So in in terms of proliferation that that would be dealt with from a completely different set of of security and safeguard standards The there's not much that we do in Italy. I'm trying to get to To your concern of this modifications thing Um We we don't look at the safety of individual modifications. We look at whether the plant has a process That will deliver safe modifications, but we don't say I want to look at your modification on The safety system X And and tell you whether we think that is safe or not. We you can't do that in two weeks You just can't do it. So we're looking at whether they are doing things in the right way Yeah, they are responsible for safety and they They're accountable to the regulator for making sure that they comply with the with the member states regulations So we we don't go in and say You know This modification is unsafe If we're walking around the plant and we see somebody working at height Without proper protection for working at height. We would say to the person with us We think that's unsafe. We think you should stop there So we wouldn't we wouldn't Allow things to just go on that we would think we thought were unsafe But we have no authority on the plant itself, you know, we would say my first question would be do you think that is safe? I'm hoping that they would reach the same conclusion. I would Moving on. Um, we also are able to do some help in the area of design assessment Um, again, this is this is when you think about design as a whole. It's a very very wide range of things So, um A lot a lot of different activities. So there's your design safety. So design evaluation for licensing purposes Safety analysis either deterministic or probabilistic through this through the plant life So if if people want us to review whether their probabilistic safety assessment is is accurate or complete We could go and help them to do that We could look at their severe accident management program Um, obviously much more interesting that nowadays Or we could look at specific topics say in their 10 yearly periodic safety review, which Quite a few member states do although not all site and external events design tends to be Mainly up In advance of constructing a plant. So this is all about How you select a site for a nuclear power plant and how you assess it against Um, its requirements in terms of you know seismic vulnerability Is it an area subject to floods? Is it in a tornado region? Does it have sandstorms? Does it have a you know, a very high tidal range is it is on a river whose course may shift All all that sort of thing associated with the site Um and external events like floods or earthquakes Um, it would obviously provide again an independent review about whether the The site assessment has complied with the IEA safety standards Obviously, it's multidisciplinary because you know Seismic factors are very different to uh, geo Geographical factors like extremes of weather or vulnerability to tornadoes, etc Um I don't get we've done a lot of these but they tended to have been more focused on on specific areas Anyway, we are able to offer this service Uh, someone mentioned I think was you mentioned. Okay. Is it is it just operational power plants? No, it's operation and operational and commissioning power plants It's also fuel cycle facilities and also research reactors as well. So this This tends to follow the same again the same principles as those are But uh, you know a research reactor operates quite differently to an operating power plant So, uh Obviously, we look at we look at the things that are applicable to research reactors I'm not a research reactor man myself So I'm not as knowledge above like this, but the same sorts of things safety analysis operating limits regulatory supervision aging management radiation protection And I think criticality will come into this Again same sort of principle main mission followed 18 to 12 to 18 months later by a follow-up mission And if If a plant is ready to be constructed again, we could we can also offer a service. Okay. Are you ready to actually start construction now? so fairly Fairly specialized review service. But again, there are guidelines Which if if nothing else actors a really good source of information for self-assessments And then there's some other stuff as well. Again, I'm already out of time, but I just I'll just mention them We can look at emergency preparedness Which I think Catherine mentioned earlier education and training occupational radiation protection advisory stuff And and then this these are the things recognize the fact that the iaa doesn't just deal in nuclear power It also deals with other applications of radiation for instance in medical use industrial use In crops insect control, you know, and wherever you've got, you know, the use of radiation in those areas radiation protection for people involved in that work is also important and again transport safety and Catherine mentioned how far back transport safety goes in the iaa's history. So again, we can offer that So the tagline there, you know, we cover an awful lot more just the nuclear powers related issues So just a very quick summary We we aim to improve nuclear safety by helping member states To enhance their own capacity to evaluate safety within their own boundaries And do and do good comprehensive self-assessments We support regulators and operators In developing and applying nuclear safety skills because when people come on our missions They do pick up useful skills that they can then apply when they go back to their own their own plants It's it's what we really it's it's what one of our important things for us that we broaden the knowledge across the whole industry And by implementing recommendations from the missions, then the plants are making direct improvements in their own nuclear safety or radiation safety Thank you