VZCZCXYZ0004
PP RUEHWEB

DE RUEHUNV #0096/01 0651541
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
P 061541Z MAR 09
FM USMISSION UNVIE VIENNA
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 9106
INFO RUEHII/VIENNA IAEA POSTS COLLECTIVE PRIORITY

UNCLAS UNVIE VIENNA 000096 
 
STATE FOR IO/T, ISN/MNSA, ISN/RA 
NA-243-GOOREVICH/OEHLBERT, BRUNNS; NA-241 O'CONNOR, 
SIEMON; NA-21- CUMMINS, ILIOPULOS; 
NE- MCGINNIS, PERKO, CLAPPER 
NRC FOR OIP - DUNN, LEE, HENDERSON, SCHWARTZMAN 
ROME FOR USFAO 
 
SENSITIVE 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: AORC KNNP IAEA ENRG TRGY
 
SUBJECT:  IAEA: MARCH BOARD WRAP-UP 
 
REF:  (A) STATE 18988  (B) UNVIE VIENNA 0067 
 
------- 
SUMMARY 
------- 
 
¶1. (SBU) USDEL was broadly successful in using the March 2-5, 2009 
IAEA Board of Governors meeting as a platform to enunciate the new 
Administration's support for the IAEA and renewed commitment to 
multilateral cooperation.  U.S. interventions conveyed the 
overarching objective of building a robust IAEA that can effectively 
fulfill its nuclear safeguards, safety and security mandate and 
promote peaceful uses of nuclear technology.  Other delegations and 
officials in the IAEA Secretariat both explicitly and privately 
appreciated the positive tone and content of U.S. statements, 
particularly our broad points on Administration policy at the start 
of our intervention on the Safety Review and our "clever" (per a 
Jordanian counterpart) reliance on a P5+1 statement on Iran.  As 
reported in this message and septels, USDEL made progress on the 
objectives: 
 
-- Ensuring that the election of the next Director General is 
conducted in a timely manner with minimal disruption while securing 
Board support for DG term limits; 
 
--Urging cooperation by Iran with the IAEA investigation, i.e. 
Iran's blockage of the investigation while ramping up its enrichment 
capacity is not an acceptable status quo, and such cooperation would 
take forward momentum on diplomatic engagement and direct dialogue; 
 
 
-- Signaling continued support for IAEA verification in Syria with 
an appropriate technical focus on the need for Syrian cooperation 
and access to debris and locations; 
 
-- Achieving preliminary Board discussion of the International 
Nuclear Fuel Bank (INFB) and the Russian fuel assurance proposal 
with a view toward approval by the June Board. 
 
Iran, Syria, DPRK, DG Election/term Limits, and Reliable Access to 
Nuclear Fuel (AOB) are reported septels.  The Board also approved by 
consensus an India Additional Protocol (AP), making a penultimate 
step towards implementation of the U.S.-India nuclear deal, along 
with APs for UAE and Djibouti. End Summary. 
 
---------------------------- 
DIRECTOR GENERAL'S STATEMENT 
---------------------------- 
 
¶2. (U) Director General ElBaradei opened the March 2009 Board 
meeting by noting that great improvements to safety and security are 
being realized, and developments are being made in the use of 
nuclear applications for a wide range of needs including medical 
imaging, cancer therapy, food security, and in assisting member 
states in creating new mechanisms to meet the Millennium Development 
Goals.  He noted an increase in strategic partnerships with the FAO, 
WHO, OECD and other UN agencies and NGOs that will allow the IAEA to 
expand its core objectives.  DG ElBaradei also noted that 2008 was 
the first year since 1955 that not a single new power reactor came 
on line, yet was an extremely active year for design and 
construction start ups, including a record 26 license applications 
in the United States alone, indicating an acceleration in the 
acceptance and use of nuclear power throughout the world in the 
years to come. 
 
¶3. (U) The DG noted there was also a marked increase in Technical 
Cooperation projects related to nuclear power in 2008, as well as 
requests for assistance from many "newcomer" member states 
interested in exploring ways that nuclear technology can provide new 
avenues for both energy and development. 
 
¶4. (U) Finally, DG ElBaradei also observed that the Agency's budget 
will be a priority in the months to come.  Because of an increase in 
threats to nuclear security, increasing demand for nuclear energy, 
and an ever increasing demand from member states for assistance in 
development, the budget must be addressed and a stable and assured 
increase will need to be agreed on and acted upon quickly, he said. 
 
------------------------------ 
AMBASSADOR'S OPENING STATEMENT 
------------------------------ 
 
¶5.  (U) Ambassador used the first U.S. intervention in this first 
Board of Governors meeting of the Obama Administration to good 
effect, prefacing our remarks on the Agency's Nuclear Safety Review 
document with broader points about the Administration's support for 
the Agency.  Several representatives of other delegations, including 
from Middle Eastern countries, commented privately to USDEL members 
afterwards that they welcomed the tone of our message.  Full text of 
Ambassador's statement follows. 
 
¶6.  (U) Begin official text: 
 
Madam Chairwoman, 
This is the first meeting of the IAEA Board since the inauguration 
of President Obama.  This is a moment of complex challenge for the 
IAEA, but also a moment of unparalleled opportunity with a renewed 
American commitment to the United Nations and multilateral 
diplomacy.  My delegation notes with appreciation the positive 
interest of Member States in the U.S. Presidential election and in 
the ongoing adjustment and review of U.S. policies, including many 
that affect the work of the Agency.  I hope, Madame Chairwoman, you 
will permit me to start my intervention with five points on behalf 
of the new U.S. Administration. 
 
First, President Obama and his new Administration strongly support 
the International Atomic Energy Agency in all aspects of its 
mission.   We seek to strengthen the IAEA and to ensure that the 
Agency gets the authority, information, people, and technology it 
needs to do its job.  Our top priority is the verification role of 
the Agency, which is essential to creating the confidence that 
enables countries worldwide to benefit from peaceful use of nuclear 
technology.  This essential verification role will grow as more and 
more countries invest in nuclear power to provide clean energy for 
growth and development.  Instruments like the Additional Protocol 
will become increasingly important not just for verification but to 
build confidence among nations. 
Second, we support the important role the IAEA plays in global 
efforts to help countries adopt the highest standards for nuclear 
security and protection of nuclear materials.  President Obama has 
identified preventing terrorists from acquiring nuclear and 
radiological weapons as his number one security priority.  The 
National Nuclear Security Administration of the U.S. Department of 
Energy is already pursuing a major Global Threat Reduction 
Initiative to reduce and protect vulnerable nuclear and radiological 
material located at civilian sites worldwide.  We will continue to 
look to the IAEA for support in global efforts to secure nuclear 
materials; to phase out the use of highly enriched uranium in the 
civil nuclear sector; to strengthen international intelligence and 
police cooperation to prevent WMD terrorism; and to help build the 
capacity of governments around the world to prevent the theft or 
diversion of nuclear materials. 
Third, President Obama has expressed strong support for the creation 
of an IAEA-administered nuclear fuel bank.  While in the U.S. 
Senate, both he and Secretary Clinton supported legislation 
providing $50 million to the IAEA in response to the challenge grant 
from the Nuclear Threat Initiative.  The Administration wants to 
work with the IAEA and Member States to put into place a fuel bank 
that would allow countries to benefit from the peaceful uses of 
nuclear energy without increasing the risks of nuclear 
proliferation.  We welcome the initiatives by the Russian Federation 
and the Nuclear Threat Initiative, as well as by many others. 
Fourth, we believe that preserving the Agency's credibility in 
implementing NPT safeguards depends on our success in dealing with 
the immediate challenges - specifically those posed by North Korea, 
Iran, and Syria.  The new Administration intends to strengthen 
diplomatic efforts to address each of these challenges.  One 
principle will remain constant and is shared by us all: The need for 
countries to abide by their international obligations, including 
cooperation with the IAEA.  We must strengthen and revalidate this 
important Agency rather than allowing those who violate their 
obligations to discredit it. 
Fifth, the new Administration recognizes that the IAEA's essential 
role in non-proliferation is part of a broader international effort 
that includes diplomacy and disarmament.    While the IAEA must 
pursue its essential verification role, there is also a role for 
diplomacy in ensuring the viability of the NPT.  Hence, the 
Administration's readiness for direct engagement with Tehran as part 
of the international effort to convince Iran's leadership to meet 
its responsibilities.  Hence, the Administration using dialogue with 
Syria to encourage its leaders to cooperate with the IAEA.  Hence, 
the Administration's commitment to the Six-Party process to pursue 
the denuclearization of the North Korea. 
The new Administration also recognizes that NPT obligations 
encompass disarmament as well as nonproliferation.  President Obama 
supports the goal of working toward a world without nuclear weapons. 
 His Administration intends to renew America's commitment to 
disarmament, including dramatic reductions in U.S. and Russian 
stockpiles of nuclear weapons and material and a verifiable global 
ban on the production of new nuclear weapons material. 
President Obama believes that the best way to reduce global threats 
and seize global opportunities is to design and implement global 
solutions.  The new administration looks forward to a close working 
relationship with the IAEA, its Secretariat, and its Member States 
to advance our common objective of promoting the safe, secure, and 
peaceful use of nuclear technology. 
Thank you, Madame Chairwoman. 
End text. 
--------------------- 
NUCLEAR SAFETY REVIEW 
--------------------- 
 
¶7.  (U) In his introduction to the Nuclear Safety Review Department, 
Deputy Director General Taniguchi noted that current safety 
practices are adequate.  However, looking to the future and 
recognizing an increased interest in nuclear energy by member 
states, he flagged the need for continuous improvement in nuclear 
safety and security and the role the IAEA and its Member States play 
in these areas through standards and infrastructure development, 
self-assessment and peer reviews, and knowledge and information 
sharing.  He listed as challenges ahead including the need for 
global adherence to international legal instruments; dwindling 
numbers of technically competent personnel for regulators, operators 
and vendors; the need for integration and harmonization of safety 
approaches; and, transparency to bolster public confidence. 
 
¶8.  (U) DDG Taniguchi was followed by Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA) 
Director General Echavarri, who noted his agency's collaboration 
with IAEA in several of these areas.  Of particular note was the 
2008 publication of the first NEA Nuclear Energy Outlook, with high 
and low projections for growth in nuclear power that ranges from 150 
to 600 new nuclear power plants by 2050.  He also sounded a theme 
picked up subsequently by many of the Member States in their 
statements, that the supply of medical radioisotopes is extremely 
fragile and that the world's supply comes from 5 aging research 
reactors through a complex distribution chain.  He estimated it will 
take 5-10 years for additional capacity to become available, and 
urged governments to invest in this technology, as private 
investment would not be adequate to meet the need.  The importance 
of the safety program, noted by several countries as a fundamental 
mandate of the IAEA, was underscored by the 26 countries which made 
statements on the subject. 
 
¶9.  (U) There were several common themes in the statements made by 
the three groups -- Argentina speaking for the G-77 and China, 
Nigeria speaking for the African states, and the Czech Republic 
speaking for the European Union.  First was to emphasize the key 
role of the IAEA in ensuring access to the benefits of nuclear 
technology and the need for "vigilance and concrete actions" in 
support of nuclear safety with an emphasis on safety being the 
responsibility of the nation and the operator.  Second was a noted 
increase in reported incidents as captured in the Nuclear Safety 
Review's appendix, an increase of over 60 incidents from 2007 (114 
to over 180), where over half the events were attributable to 
medical misadministrations.  Third, the group statements noted the 
need to share knowledge and to enhance emergency preparedness. 
Fourth, and repeated by many Member States in their interventions, 
the need for the issue of nuclear liability to be included in the 
Nuclear Safety Review was questioned (which DDG Taniguchi noted was 
in the report because GSR-1 includes the requirement for an 
appropriate liability mechanism.) Many believed the Response 
Assistance Network (RANET) program should be given greater 
prominence through member states registering their assets for use in 
an emergency.  Fifth, the issue of denial of shipments and/or delay 
of access to radioactive and nuclear materials for uses in medical, 
agricultural and industrial fields was raised, with the associated 
concerns related to transport of radioactive materials.  Sixth, all 
the groups emphasized the need for global adherence to the 
international legal instruments which provide the framework for 
safety cooperation and assistance activities (including the 
non-legally binding Codes of Conduct on sources and research 
reactors).  Last, all groups highlighted that although safety and 
security are important they should not be used to hamper the 
beneficial uses of nuclear and radiological material. 
 
¶10.  (U) Themes which arose from the 26 Member State interventions 
included addressing challenges ranging from the need for regulatory 
independence, provision of technically skilled and adequately funded 
staff, the demands of new construction and licensing as well as 
vendor inspections, the need for a balanced safety-security 
interface (which DDG Taniguchi noted the IAEA "will work to enhance, 
and integrate to the degree it is necessary"), addressing safety 
needs concerning mining, including the IAEA's Uranium Production 
Appraisal Team (UPSAT) missions, and effective communication with 
the public to ensure support for nuclear energy.  The IAEA was 
commended for the opening of the International Seismic Center.  In 
addition, Member States mentioned the work of regional groups such 
as the Ibero-American Forum and the Small Nuclear Programs Network, 
the Asia Nuclear Safety Network and the need to continue to 
interface with other international organizations such as the World 
Health Organization, ICAO and IMO 
 
¶11.  (U) Among other items of note, Argentina cautioned the Board on 
the review of the Basic Safety Standards (BSS), stating that changes 
could affect existing regulations and legislation, and cited the 
case of regulation of radon, which Argentina believes needs further 
"painstaking and substantive study" before being included in a 
revised BSS.  Finland reminded countries considering nuclear energy 
that nuclear programs and the construction of nuclear facilities are 
very complex.  Finland also noted that all aspects of a nuclear 
program require an integrated strategy from the outset, citing that 
in their own case there were over 1900 subcontractors at the 
Olkiluoto nuclear power plant, adding a new and difficult dimension 
to regulatory oversight.  Canada took exception to the inclusion of 
a minor unplanned shutdown without offsite radiological exposure at 
Pickering in the Nuclear Safety Review addendum, and requested that 
IAEA clarify its criteria for listing those events.  Canada also 
suggested that the Nuclear Safety Review not be comprehensive in its 
topical coverage each year, but rather take a biennial approach so 
that topics can be covered in more depth in alternate years.  The UK 
requested that Integrated Regulatory Review Service (IRRS) missions 
be given more prominence in the Nuclear Safety Report, and New 
Zealand noted the need for regular budgeting for the Office of 
Nuclear Security.  There were many statements highlighting the need 
for the IAEA to assist Member States with medical isotopes and 
equipment for medical isotope production, due to the shortages felt 
around the world this past year, and on the need for better safety 
regulation for medical facilities.  Many Member States highlighted 
the importance of IAEA's RANET system.  The Czech Republic speaking 
for the European Union also agreed with the report that the IAEA's 
Incident and Emergency Center (IEC) should be strengthened.  In all, 
comments about the importance of the security came in 23 of the 26 
Member State interventions.  Argentina speaking for the G-77 and 
China, Nigeria speaking for the African states, and the Czech 
Republic speaking for the European Union all stressed the need for 
security of radiological sources for medical and uranium mining 
purposes.  Argentina also called for a "Code of Conduct" needed for 
research reactors and not just power facilities.  New Zealand 
announced a pledge of 35,000 NZD (approx. 17,500 USD) to the Nuclear 
Security Fund. 
 
¶12.  (SBU) Comment: There was more discussion this year about 
security issues and activities than there has been in the past. 
Although the report is called the Nuclear Safety Review it does 
include some security activities and there is obviously a desire on 
the part of Member States to discuss security as it relates to 
safety.  Mission recommends that the U.S. encourage the IAEA to 
include more discussion of security activities and documents in this 
report next year.  This would not replace or take away from the 
Annual Security Report, which is given to the Board in September. 
Rather, it would be another avenue for IAEA to highlight the 
important work it is doing in the security area and stress the need 
for Member States to focus on security. Given the Member States 
comments and the increased awareness of the need for security of 
radiological sources, the U.S. should also encourage the Agency to 
increase activities to support Member States in radiological 
security. 
 
¶13.  (SBU) Comment and Recommendation - RANET: Moreover, many Member 
States are supporting the IAEA's RANET system.  Through RANET, 
Member States can register emergency response capabilities with 
IAEA.  If there is a major accident in a country without sufficient 
response capabilities, IAEA would use RANET to pull together the 
personnel, equipment, etc., needed to respond to the event.  The 
U.S. supports this system, but the Mission recommends that the U.S. 
promote it system and encourage other countries to register 
capabilities.  If there are sufficient resources registered in 
RANET, there is no need for IAEA to develop a large Incident and 
Emergency Center.  This is consistent with U.S. policies (a) that 
the IAEA be a coordinator not a responder and (b) to encourage 
countries that may not have reported incidents in the past to report 
them in future and receive "neutral" assistance from IAEA in 
responding.  It is appropriate for the U.S. to signal strong support 
for RANET now given the increased support for the service from other 
Member States. 
 
------------------------- 
NUCLEAR TECHNOLOGY REVIEW 
------------------------- 
 
¶14.  (U) The Board took note of the Director General's report on 
"Strengthening the Agency's activities related to nuclear science, 
technology and applications: Nuclear Technology Review 2009" 
GOV/2009/3.  The discussion included statements from 30 countries, 
including two observers.  According to the statements, the biggest 
issue for all member states is transfer of knowledge and human 
resources capacity development, which was mentioned by nearly every 
delegation.  Not surprisingly, the second most important issue was 
the production and supply availability of radioisotopes for medical 
and research purposes.  Climate change, facility modernization and 
the consequences of the financial crisis rounded out concerns from 
WEOG countries, while food production and security, medical research 
and water management topped the priorities of the G-77 countries. 
G-77 statements almost unanimously included mention of a nation's 
right to sovereignty over its energy portfolio, including nuclear 
power.  The IAEA Program of Action on Cancer Therapy (PACT) and the 
FAO/IAEA Joint Division were also mentioned as models the Agency 
should following its future work. 
 
¶15. (U) More than 30 Member States presented positions on the 
Agency's activities in nuclear S&T and non-power applications.  They 
also contributed comments about the draft document entitled "Nuclear 
Technology Review (NTR) 2009," which is due to be published at the 
53rd session of the General Conference in September 2009.  In his 
introductory remarks Yuri Sokolov, Deputy Director General for 
Nuclear Energy, encouraged the spread of best practices in uranium 
mining among Members, human resource development, an integrated 
nuclear review process, and a timely publication of the Common User 
Consideration report.  He also encouraged Member States to increase 
their financial contributions to enable the Agency to carry out 
requested activities.  Sokolov's colleague Werner Burkart, DDG for 
Nuclear Sciences and Applications, expressed the IAEA's continued 
commitment to fusion research, capacity building, nuclear techniques 
to support crop expansion, improving human health and environment. 
He announced that a Practical Arrangement with the World Health 
Organization (WHO) is soon to be signed to create a Joint Program on 
Cancer Control. 
 
¶16. (U) In addressing nuclear S&T, most Members requested the 
Agency's continued support in technology transfer, infrastructure 
development, capacity building (i.e. training for nuclear skills 
workers worldwide), and promotion of public awareness of the 
viability and usefulness of nuclear technology.  Some members 
encouraged better coordination to avoid duplications between the 
Generation IV International Forum (GIF) and the Agency's 
International Project on Innovative Nuclear Reactors and Fuel Cycles 
(INPRO.)  While some members expressed satisfaction with the growing 
reliance on evolutionary reactor designs, others (South Africa and 
South America) called for increased regional cooperation and 
networking in research reactor development.  Many members urged the 
Agency to pay more attention to the developing countries.  For 
example, China called on the IAEA to provide more assistance in Asia 
because of its regional energy demands.  China also encouraged 
Member States to participate in the IAEA-China International 
Ministerial Conference on Nuclear Energy in the 21st Century to be 
held in Beijing, April 20-22, 2009.  India mentioned that nuclear 
power currently provides about 3 percent of its electricity and that 
the national target is to meet 25 percent of electricity demand from 
nuclear by 2050.  India called for Small-Medium Reactors and Thorium 
Breeder Reactors to be included in the NTR in order for information 
about these technologies to reach a wider audience.  Japan 
reiterated its position on the 3S (security, safety, and safeguards) 
as a necessary components to develop nuclear power. 
 
¶17. (U)In addressing non-power applications, most members stressed 
the importance of the Agency's activities related to the protection 
of marine and terrestrial environments, human health, food and 
agriculture, improving livestock productivity, diagnostic and 
therapeutic applications of nuclear medicine and the use of nuclear 
technology in sea water desalination and water resource management. 
Many members expressed concerns about the disruptions in the 
supplies of the radioisotope molybdenum-99 for diagnostic imaging 
and delayed shipments of this material in the past year.  Members 
requested the Agency's assistance to resolve this issue.  The EU 
also stressed the importance of strengthening agricultural 
development by using nuclear technologies.  However, the EU stressed 
that closing or constraining research reactors in order to reduce 
proliferation threats was misguided.  (Comment: The breadth of 
issues raised under this agenda item made clear that balancing the 
needs of nuclear "have" and "have not" countries and determining 
E 
nuclear applications focus remains a challenge to the Agency.  End 
Comment.) 
 
------------------------------------------- 
SAFEGUARD AGREEMENTS & ADDITIONAL PROTOCALS 
------------------------------------------- 
 
¶18.  (U) The Board approved by consensus a comprehensive safeguards 
agreement (CSA) with a small quantities protocol (SQP) for Djibouti, 
and Additional Protocols (AP) for Djibouti, the United Arab 
Emirates, and India.  Introducing the item, the Chair noted that the 
Board had in 1997 asked the Director General to conclude APs with 
three categories of states - Non-Nuclear Weapon States, for which 
the DG was asked to use the Model Protocol as the standard; Nuclear 
Weapon States as appropriate to contribute to nonproliferation and 
efficiency aims of the Model Protocol while staying consistent with 
NPT Article I obligations; and others prepared to accept measures 
provided for in the Model Protocol in pursuance of safeguards 
effectiveness and efficiency. 
 
¶19.  (U) Twelve countries spoke on this agenda item.  Cuba on behalf 
of the NAM took note of the CSA and APs and used this opportunity to 
raise concern on behalf of the NAM regarding the confidentiality of 
safeguards information, leaks to the media, and the objective 
technical nature of the reports; this previewed further discussion 
under the Iran and Syria agenda items with respect to the release of 
those reports (septels).  DG ElBaradei responded off the cuff by 
acknowledging the concern that leaks could lead to deliberate 
misinformation and "media hype."  The DG underscored the necessity 
for confidentiality to ensure the integrity of safeguards 
investigations, but noted the challenge the IAEA faces in light of 
the fact it has staff from over 100 countries and that "very 
sophisticated" technologies target Agency information.  Further 
addressing media reports, the DG said that "if it is not in our 
reports, ignore it."  He said the Agency's reports try to 
distinguish between legal obligations and "transparency" measures. 
(Comment:  Apparently implying media misrepresentations on this 
front.  End comment) The DG closed his comments by making an "appeal 
to all to leave us in peace, keep your distance, let us do our 
work." 
 
¶20. (U) The U.S. statement noted the entry into force of the U.S. AP 
in January and welcomed the agreements by Djibouti, India and UAE. 
Switzerland, later supported by Ireland, complained that there was 
not sufficient time to review the India AP, but did not block 
consensus.  Both member states stressed this is not the first time 
the Board was given short notice for important proposals and asked 
that the DG avoid this practice in the future.  (Note: ElBaradei 
later responded that the Secretariat sought to provide documents to 
the Board as soon as they were ready and the Board could decide the 
timing of its decisions on those documents.  End note.) 
Afghanistan, Iraq and Ghana specifically supported India; U.S., 
France and South Africa welcomed the CSA and all of the APs.  South 
Africa underscored the importance of countries with advanced nuclear 
programs taking extra measures to provide assurance of the peaceful 
nature. 
 
¶21.  (U) Dr. Anil Kakodkar, Chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission 
of India, spoke for his government (full text in para 23).  He 
emphasized India's intent to cooperate with the IAEA on civilian 
nuclear issues, that expanding nuclear power is indispensible to 
meet energy needs, and drew attention to India's quick work on the 
AP text, which was made possible through the support of the 
Secretariat negotiating team and the BOG.  He underscored India's 
particular circumstances and its intention to "further strengthen" 
the global nonproliferation system.  He characterized the AP as a 
significant milestone in the India-IAEA relationship. 
 
¶22. (U) Dr Kakodkar also noted the importance of energy security for 
India's population, which accounts for one sixth of humanity.  He 
underlined India's robust self reliant program, mastery of the full 
fuel cycle, and cited the goal of a 15 fold increase in nuclear 
power over the next two decades.  He described India's 
"indispensable" role in the global nuclear renaissance and committed 
that India's national export control system will remain on par with 
the best international standards, and reaffirmed India's disarmament 
policy.  He characterized the AP as the culmination of the civil 
nuclear agreement and generally put a positive, forward looking spin 
on the Board decision. 
 
¶23.  Begin Indian Text: 
Madame Chair, 
The Indian delegation would like to convey its pleasure on seeing 
Algeria as Chair of the Board of Governors and compliment you on the 
excellent manner in which you are conducting its proceedings.  We 
have requested the floor to speak on item 5(a) of the Board's 
Agenda, which is consideration of the Protocol additional to the 
Agreement between India and the IAEA on the application of 
safeguards to civilian nuclear facilities.  As you are aware, on 2nd 
February this year, India and the IAEA signed the Safeguards 
Agreement. At the time of the Board's approval of India's Safeguard 
Agreement, in August 2008, we had indicated that India and the 
Agency had already undertaken discussions on an Additional Protocol 
to the Safeguards Agreement.  Following the successful conclusion of 
discussions with Secretariat of the Agency, we are pleased that we 
were able to finalize the text of the Additional Protocol, which is 
now before the Board for its approval. 
 
This Protocol is to be seen in the light of India's exercise of its 
sovereign right to cooperate with the Agency in the further 
development of the peaceful uses of nuclear energy. Its expeditious 
finalization is demonstration of India's determination to engage 
actively with the IAEA in implementing the Civil Nuclear Initiative 
and in taking forward the expansion of the peaceful uses of nuclear 
energy for its national development. 
 
The text of the Additional Protocol to India's Safeguards Agreement 
was drawn up in negotiations conducted in accordance with the 
request made by the Board of Governors to the Director General in 
approving the text of the Model Additional Protocol that the 
Director General negotiate protocols "....with other states that are 
prepared to accept measures provided for in the Model Protocol in 
pursuance of safeguards effectiveness and efficiency objectives". 
Therefore, this Additional Protocol draws on elements of the Model 
Additional Protocol keeping in mind India's particular circumstances 
and to further enhance global nuclear non-proliferation objectives 
by strengthening the effectiveness and improving the efficiency of 
the Agency's safeguards system. 
 
The cover note by the Secretariat provides further information on 
specific aspects of the Additional Protocol.  We have noted that as 
regards the last sentence of Article 1(a) the Secretariat has 
clarified that the sentence refers to the Articles on 'Designation 
of Agency inspectors' and 'Visas'.  We have further noted the 
Secretariat's confirmation that the provisions on "Cooperation, 
interpretation and application of the Safeguards Agreement and 
settlement of disputes" as contained in the Safeguards Agreement, 
would apply to the Additional Protocol. 
 
Madam Chair, 
For a country that accounts for one-sixth of humanity, energy 
security is a national priority and is essential to maintain optimal 
levels of economic growth and ensure sustainable development.  If we 
are to achieve our goal of abolishing mass poverty by 2020, we need 
to maintain a growth rate of 8-10 percent.  As an environmentally 
clean and sustainable energy source, nuclear power is thus 
indispensable to meet India's energy needs.  At the same time, we 
see nuclear energy as capable of addressing common global concerns 
to address the problems of climate change. 
 
India's nuclear programme which is based on robust and self-reliant 
R&D, has mastered all aspects of the nuclear fuel cycle.  We have 
built vibrant programmes in Pressurized Heavy Water Reactors, Fast 
Reactors, Thorium Reactors and related fuel cycle technologies as 
part of our three stage nuclear programme.  Based on the progress we 
have achieved so far we are confident of meeting important 
milestones, including the launch of the 500 MWe Fast Breeder Reactor 
for commercial operations in 2011. 
 
India is in the process of a major expansion of its nuclear power 
sector.  We have set a national goal of a fifteen-fold expansion of 
nuclear power in the next two decades.  We see international 
cooperation in the peaceful uses of nuclear energy as a valuable 
additionality to our national efforts.  In cooperation with various 
countries, we are making considerable progress in operationalizing 
the Civil Nuclear Initiative through the conclusion of various 
cooperation agreements. 
 
As the global nuclear renaissance unfolds, we believe that India's 
integration into and cooperation with the international nuclear 
community will be indispensable to realizing our shared vision of 
using nuclear power as a clean and secure energy source and as a 
pathway for India's own contribution for the growth of global 
nuclear power.  We also stress that partnership between India and 
the international community is of critical importance in promoting 
energy security, sustainable development and effective 
non-proliferation.  India is committed that its national export 
controls will remain at par with the best international standards. 
Our commitment to global non-discriminatory nuclear disarmament 
remains firm and I take this opportunity to reiterate it today. 
 
Madam Chair, 
 
The finalization of the Additional Protocol is a significant mile 
stone in the longstanding cooperation between India and the Agency 
and brings to a culmination the steps envisaged in the Civil Nuclear 
Initiative.  The willingness of India, a country that has 
voluntarily accepted safeguards on its civilian nuclear facilities 
and is now prepared to accept an Additional Protocol, is of 
considerable significance for the IAEA's Safeguards system. 
 
I would like to take this opportunity to convey our deep 
appreciation to members of the Board of Governors for their support. 
We would also like to convey our appreciation to the negotiating 
team of the Secretariat of the Agency for their dedicated efforts in 
ensuring the early finalization of the text of the Additional 
Protocol.  We look forward to cooperating with the Agency to 
facilitate the implementation of the Safeguards Agreement and this 
Protocol in accordance with their provisions as a whole. 
 
Before closing, I would like to compliment the Director General Dr 
Mohammed ElBaradei for his outstanding leadership of the Agency and 
for his steadfast commitment for expanding the Agency's cooperative 
relations with India. 
 
Thank you Madam Chair. 
 
End of Indian Text. 
 
----------------- 
Personnel Matters 
----------------- 
 
¶24. (U) Consistent with the UN salary scale adopted at the 63rd 
UNGA, the Board approved by consensus a revision to the salary scale 
for professional staff and higher (including the Director General) 
at the IAEA.  The IAEA had provisionally implemented the salary 
scale with an increase of 2.33 percent since January 1 which will be 
applied on a no loss/no gain basis. 
 
SCHULTE