International Framework for

Nuclear Energy Cooperation:

Recent Developments for Assistance

to Newcomer Countries

Dr. Alex R. BurkartCo-Chair

Infrastructure Development Working Group

IAEA TM/WG on Topical Issues on Infrastructure Development:

Managing the Development of a National Infrastructure for

Nuclear Power Plants

Vienna, 24-27 January 2012

Historical Perspective:

Aims & Objectives

• The Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP) was launched in February

2006 as a comprehensive vision and approach to the safe and secure

development of nuclear energy.

• Conceived in order to meet the growing global demand for clean, safe,

secure and environmentally sustainable sources of energy.

• In June , 2010, Partners agree to rename GNEP as the International

Framework for Nuclear Energy Cooperation (IFNEC).

IFNEC Statement of Mission

“The International Framework for Nuclear Energy

Cooperation provides a forum for cooperation among

participating states to explore mutually beneficial

approaches to ensure the use of nuclear energy for

peaceful purposes proceeds in a manner that is efficient

and meets the highest standards of safety, security and

non-proliferation. Participating states would not give up any

rights and voluntarily engage to share the effort and gain

the benefits of economical, peaceful nuclear energy.”

Current Membership

Participants

1. Argentina2. Armenia3. Australia 4. Bulgaria 5. Canada6. China7. Estonia8. France9. Germany10. Ghana11. Hungary12. Italy13. Japan14. Jordan 15. Kazakhstan16. Kenya17. Korea, Republic of 18. Kuwait19. Lithuania

20. Morocco21. Netherlands 22. Oman23. Poland24. Romania 25. Russia26. Senegal27. Slovenia 28. Ukraine 29. United Arab Emirates30. United Kingdom31. United States

Observer Organizations

1. International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)

2. Generation IV International Forum (GIF)

3. Euratom

Observer Countries

1. Algeria2. Bahrain3. Bangladesh4. Belgium 5. Brazil 6. Chile7. Czech Republic8. Egypt 9. Finland 10. Georgia11. Greece12. Indonesia13. Latvia14. Malaysia15. Mexico16. Mongolia17. Nigeria18. Philippines19. Qatar

20. Singapore21. Slovakia22. South Africa23. Spain24. Sweden25. Switzerland26. Tanzania27. Tunisia28. Turkey29. Uganda30. Vietnam

Current Membership

Participants

Observer Countries

IFNEC Structure

STEERING GROUPUnited States Chair

China, France & Japan Vice-Chairs

EXECUTIVE COMMITTEEMinisterial Level Officials or Designees

Infrastructure Development

Working Group (IDWG)

U.S. and UK Co-chair

Lead Activities Lead Activities

Human Resource

Development

Radioactive Waste

Management

Interaction With Specialist Organizations

Small Modular Reactors

Subgroup on Resource

Requirements and Fuel Supply

Subgroup on Approaches for Selection of Back-end Fuel Cycle

OptionsFuel Services Framework

Infrastructure

Participant Country Support

Online Resource Library

Reliable Nuclear Fuel Services

Working Group (RNFSWG)

France and Japan Co-chair

• RNFSWG Explores:

� Resource requirements and fuel supply

� Approaches for selecting back end fuel cycle options; and

� Opportunities and challenges associated with Comprehensive Fuel Services

(CFS), including engagement with industry.

• Industry/Stakeholder Engagement

� Industry is encouraged to participate in RNFSWG meetings where its

input is crucial to the Working Group’s efforts to explore the challenges

and opportunities associated with CFS.

• CFS/Joint Convention

� IFNEC will seek introduction of CFS concept within the Joint Convention

on the Safety of Spent Fuel and Safety of Radioactive Waste.

• Next Meeting

� Tentatively planned for April 2012, location TBD.

Reliable Nuclear Fuel Services

Working Group

Key Considerations for

IDWG Activities

• Established to facilitate the development of the infrastructure needed for

worldwide nuclear energy expansion in a safe, secure and peaceful

manner.

• The IAEA document - “Milestones in the Development of a National

Infrastructure for Nuclear Power” established 19 infrastructure elements

which we use as a basis for looking at the Group's activities.

• Consensus messages

� All members are experiencing infrastructure development challenges.

� Human Resource development is a central issue.

� Providing a forum for exchange of experience, lessons learned, and resource

information is beneficial to members.

Infrastructure Development

Working Group

• Focuses on seven key areas:

�Human Resource Development

�Radioactive Waste Management

�Small Modular Reactors

�Support for Participant Countries, including Assessments

and Financing Approaches

� Interaction with Specialist Organizations

�Online Resource Library

� Infrastructure Needs for an International Nuclear Fuel

Services Framework

10

• IDWG meetings

� April 2011 in Paris

� October/November 2011 in Vienna

IDWG Meetings and Workshops:Defining Activities, Summarizing Results,

Sharing Information � Peer-to-peer

engagement

� Lessons-learned

exchanges and

workshops

� Interaction with

industry,

educational

community and

specialist

organizations

� Fast-track

activities to

complement a

strong base of

IAEA and bilateral

efforts

Human Resource Development

Modeling Tool

• Recent model development has focused on regulatory agency workforce

and safeguards capabilities

� Opportunities for specialized

training such as safeguards are

now represented in the model

� Workforce for a nuclear regulatory

body based on the US NRC is now

included in the model

Proposed Activities under PUI

Turned over to the IAEAon September 20, 2011 foruse with all Member States

• Near-Term Developments to Support Transfer Include� Writing a “users manual” and technical documentation� Developing training course materials� Refining the software (if necessary)

• Trial Review with the IAEA - Oct 2011� Final review of tool documentation and training course materials

• Pilot the Tool with Selected Member States� First IAEA Training Session - Jan 2012

• Approximately $500,000 expended by the U.S. on development.� Awaiting more funding from the Peaceful Uses Initiative.

“This tool can be an excellent way for

Member States to plan for human resource

development and is a good example of the

potential for cooperation among the IAEA,

the USA and IFNEC”

Alexander Bychkov, DDG, IAEA

Nuclear Power Institute (NPI):

Human Resource Development

• August 2011, Rosatom (Russia) visited NPI/TAMU

� Projected Outcome: Build on existing Russian student programs and possible faculty and student exchange

• October 2011, IAEA International Experts visited NPI/TAMU.

� France, Argentina, UK and Japan

� Focus: Educational Programs and implementation of programs in technical universities.

• January 2012, UK nucleargraduates visited NPI/TAMU

� 31 students and team leaders

� Focus: Training

• February 2012, IAEA International Experts to visit NPI/TAMU

� Bangladesh, Indonesia, Jordan, Malaysia, Thailand, United Arab Emerites, Vietnam

� Focus: Development of Human Resources and building a national infrastructure for nuclear power.

• February 2012, Malaysian Delegation to visit NPI/TAMU

� UNITEN and UKM (universities) and Tenaga (utility)

� Projected Outcome: Program Development, University Faculty and Student Exchanges, Teacher Exchanges

• Spring 2012, Vietnam Delegation visit to NPI/TAMU

� Projected Outcome: Program Development, University Faculty and Student Exchanges, Teacher Exchanges

Initial IDWG

Activities

Negotiations

Outcomes

Future

Exchange Program Highlights:

NPI and the Czech Republic

Economic Study for SMRs

• Preliminary Findings of Independent Ongoing Study of Economics of SMRs

� Construction learning can bring down overnight cost.

� Predictable and streamlined regulatory and construction schedules that includes strong

stakeholder involvement and support can reduce the cost of capital, which in turn can reduce

levelized cost.

� Building multiple units at a site will bring down average cost per unit.

• In some cases SMRs can be competitive with large plants

• In some cases SMRs can be competitive with natural gas

� Transferring significant capital costs from the site to the factory can be one of the principal

factors to reduce contingency costs.

� Standardized, certified designs can reduce duration risk, which is also a key factor reducing the

cost of capital.

• “Economies of Small and Modular” can be Competitive with “Economies

of Scale”

• Waste Management Issues are of Interest

16

IFNEC Resource Library

• An integrated on-line source of

existing infrastructure development

references, programs, tools, and

pooled Participants’ resources

�Education and training sources

�Assessment tools

�Conference and event information

�Best practice references

�Operational data

�Services information

�Vendor information

�Past meeting presentations

• Now the unified source for all non-public IFNEC data, including IDWG, RNFSWG, and Steering Group presentations

• Resource Library calendar is regularly updated to reflect ongoing civilian nuclear energy-related events

17

Radioactive Waste Management

• Radioactive Waste Management Subgroup (chaired by the UK)

reinforces the importance of radioactive waste management

• Working from a consolidated topic list

� Research and Development

� Funding and institutional arrangements

� Interactions with stakeholders

� Safe and secure storage and transport of used fuel and radioactive waste

prior to disposition

� Opportunities and constraints for regional and/or shared disposal

facilities

� Opportunities for changing how human resources are developed

� Will be addressing waste issues for Small Modular Reactors

Workshop on Emergency

Preparedness and Response

• Ensuring Effective Emergency Preparedness and Response as an Aspect of

Infrastructure Development

• International Framework for Preparedness and Response to Nuclear and

Radiological Emergencies

• IAEA Guidance, Tools and Programmes in the Area of Emergency Preparedness

and Response

• Case Study on Experience in Developing an Emergency Preparedness and

Response Capability While Establishing a National Nuclear Power Program

• IAEA Guidance on Emergency Preparedness and Response: Considerations for

States Embarking on a Nuclear Power Programme

• Making the Best Use of IAEA and Member State Assistance Programmes

Assistance Programs

18

• Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute

• Korea Hydro & Nuclear Power Company

• Kozloduy NPP Plc.

• Lightbridge Corporation

• Lithuanian Electricity Organization

• National Skills Academy for Nuclear (UK)

• Nuclear Assurance Corporation

• Nuclear Energy Institute

• NuScale Power

• Oak Ridge National Laboratory

• PNTL

• SKB

• Société Générale

• Sogin

• Towers Perrin

• Toshiba Corporation

• UK National Nuclear Laboratory

• Urenco

• U.S. Export-Import Bank

• U.S. Civilian Research and Development Foundation

• Ux Consulting Company

• Westinghouse

• WM Mining

• AdSTM Inc

• Advance Uranium Asset Management

• Ansaldo

• Areva

• Argonne National Laboratory

• Atomstroyexport

• Babcock & Wilcox

• Barclay’s Capital

• Cameco Corporation

• Curtiss-Wright Flow Control Company

• Deutsche Bank

• EDF

• Emirates Nuclear Energy Corporation

• Enel (Italy)

• Energopomiar (Poland)

• Eni (Italy)

• Fitch Ratings

• GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy

• International Nuclear Services

• Hyperion Power

• JAIF International Cooperation Center

Industry Engagement

• Czech TechnicaI University

• CIRTEN

• Igor Kurchatov Vocational School

• Kuwait University

• North Carolina State University

• Politechnico di Milano

• Sapienza University of Rome

• Texas A&M University

• University of California-Berkeley

• University of Manchester

• University of Sofia

• University of Tartu (Estonia)

Educational Community andInternational Organization

Engagement

• ARIUS

• EDRAM

• European Nuclear Education Network (ENEN)

• Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD)

• World Association of Nuclear Operators (WANO)

• World Institute for Nuclear Security (WINS)

• World Nuclear Association (WNA)

Joint Workshop: Backend Management

Summary Points

• General, relating to infrastructure support for CTG� Timeframes for radioactive waste management & decommissioning are longer than operational

reactor life

� Setting a full (reactor, sf /rwm, decommissioning) lifecycle strategy, complete with decision-making points, is key

� Ethical, socio-political aspects of storage & disposal (& transportation) important

o Much joint work being done and useful to transfer experiences but no universal formula for successful progress e.g. on siting

� Technical aspects are generally well understood and issues are manageable

o Again much joint research being undertaken

• Specific to multinational approaches for storage / disposal

� These may appear attractive but

� Similar issues to the above general points

� Political/ public support lacking & difficult to tackle

• a main barrier to progress?

� But this should not prevent constructive discussion, particularly if no host country is identified at

the beginning of the process

Joint Workshop: Backend Management

Recommendations Going Forward

• The WGs should continue to work together & share experiences, technologies in

storage, transportation and disposal in approach to infrastructure support for CTG

• Continue discussion on Regional Co-operation (recognizing sensitivities) within

the IFNEC context

� In line with Joint Convention / IAEA Principles etc.

� Recognising positive and negative impacts on infrastructure (including financing rwm, regulatory and legal frameworks)

� Recognising countries could consider dual track approach – national / international

o but not one at the expense of the other, i.e. “wait and see” not acceptable

� Could/ should/ would a country or a group of countries “volunteer”?

� Recognise “issues” such as liabilities, economics, financing etc

o IDWG to draft papers

� Recognise aspirations of new countries and manage expectations in policy / strategy development for either single/ dual-track

approach

o Assistance in establishing infrastructures, especially legal and regulatory framework

o Partnership building between regulators, and also partnerships between site operators or organizations

• Continue engaging with industry (i.e. the implementers/ service providers)

� Role of Industry in a public/private partnership needs further exploration

� RNFSWG to redesign and re-circulate industry survey

EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE AT WARSAW UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY, SEPTEMBER 29, 2011

IFNEC EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE

WARSAW, POLAND

September 29, 2011

•UAE joined as a Participant and Philippines and Qatar joined as Observers.

•Kenya joined as a full Participant several days after the meeting.

• Addressed key role of private sector and public-private partnership

� Bill Gates featured as keynote speaker via video

o Private sector innovation

o Need predictability in the market, including

regulatory, in order to attract investors

o Need greater government R&D investments

EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING AT WARSAW UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY, SEPTEMBER 29, 2011

Key Role Of Private Sector

• Investment Banking Sector

� Briefing on approaches and status of private financing of

nuclear projects provided by Barclays Capital

Managing Director James Asselstine.

• Country Perspectives

� China and France provided briefings on their approach to financing.

• Agreed Upon Actions

� World Bank: Agreed to encourage the World Bank via the IFNEC Warsaw Joint

Statement to undertake a study of the economics and financing of nuclear power .

� Finance Workshop: Agreed to hold an expert-based stakeholders workshop on

financing to discuss the challenges and opportunities in the area of financing and

what IFNEC can do to support.

Addressed Financing:

Barriers and Opportunities

� Fukushima. Highlights continued importance of safety.

� Safety Conventions and Liability. Calls on all IFNEC countries to join four main safety conventions

as well as the establishment of a global nuclear liability regime.

� Comprehensive Fuel Services (CFS). Highlights Comprehensive Nuclear Fuel Services (CFS),

encourages continued engagement with industry and other stakeholders, and directs that a

discussion paper on the benefits and issues regarding CFS be developed.

� Financing. Recognizes financing as a major barrier to access nuclear energy and the importance of

multilateral development banks. Calls on the World Bank to conduct an economic and financial

assessment of nuclear power and offers to work with the World Bank.

� Stakeholder Engagement. Emphasizes need for IFNEC to engage with the various stakeholders of

the nuclear energy sector.

� Infrastructure Development. Emphasizes the need to continue sharing lessons-learned, assist

with human resource development, address radioactive waste management; and directs the

Infrastructure Development Working Group to continue engagement with industry and other

stakeholders.

IFNEC 2011 Joint Statement

• Expert-based stakeholders-wide workshop on financing in London, May

9-10, 2012.

• Scenario-based exercise will collectively explore the current barriers and

opportunities regarding financing nuclear energy projects.

• Key stakeholders involved in financing of nuclear power projects (e.g.,

vendors, utilities, energy agencies, export credit agencies, investment

banks, and multilateral development banks) will be invited to identify

potential solutions to nuclear financing issues.

• Participants and Observers will develop a set of practical steps that the 61

countries of IFNEC could employ to address the financing of a safe and

secure nuclear energy program.

IFNEC Nuclear Financing Workshop

The Comprehensive Nuclear

Fuel Services (CFS) Concept

• A CFS approach is one that provides reliable and commercially-based services on a global basis based on a range of options for fuel supply, used fuel management and ultimate disposal services.

• Under the CFS concept, suppliers would offer a set of options for fuel supply, used fuel management, and ultimate disposal services.

• CFS is intended to be a flexible and tailored approach that recognizes and accommodates the unique requirements of the specific users and service providers.

• A CFS approach could provide a competitive economic advantage over indigenous development of enrichment and reprocessing and would remove some of the burdens associated with the interim storage and the final disposal of used fuel or/and high level radioactive wastes.

• Tentatively set for October 10 in Marrakesh

• Greater attention on the needs of the developing world and

access to the global market (e.g., financing, HR,

infrastructure, expert-based information sharing) expected.

• Will receive specific proposals from Steering Group and

Working Groups as to what IFNEC can do to:

� Address financing as a barrier;

� Realize CFS; and

� Further engage in infrastructure development areas.

Morocco To Host and Chair 2012

Executive Committee Meeting