VZCZCXYZ0001
PP RUEHWEB

DE RUEHUNV #0431/01 2641337
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
P 211337Z SEP 09
FM USMISSION UNVIE VIENNA
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 0062
INFO RUEHBJ/AMEMBASSY BEIJING 0939
RUEHRL/AMEMBASSY BERLIN 0916
RUEHBR/AMEMBASSY BRASILIA 0304
RUEHBS/AMEMBASSY BRUSSELS 0318
RUEHBY/AMEMBASSY CANBERRA 0756
RUEHMD/AMEMBASSY MADRID 0271
RUEHMO/AMEMBASSY MOSCOW 1015
RUEHNE/AMEMBASSY NEW DELHI 0353
RUEHFR/AMEMBASSY PARIS 1144
RUEHSM/AMEMBASSY STOCKHOLM 0318
RUEHKO/AMEMBASSY TOKYO 0802
RHEBAAA/DOE WASHDC
RUEANFA/NRC WASHDC

UNCLAS UNVIE VIENNA 000431 
 
SIPDIS 
 
FOR ISN/NESS AND IO/GS 
DOE FOR NA-21 
NRC FOR THARRIS 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: KNNP TRGY ENRG KSTC IAEA PARM AORC
SUBJECT: IAEA - REPORT ON IAEA CONSULTANTS MEETING ON IAEA MEETING 
ON RECOMMENDATIONS FOR SECURITY OF RADIOACTIVE MATERIALS AND 
ASSOCIATED FACILITIES 
 
REF:   STATE 96396 
 
¶1. SUMMARY:  A September 7-11 meeting of consultants from Member 
States concluded discussion and drafting of the IAEA document 
"Recommendations on the Security of Radioactive Material and 
Associated Facilities (RM)".  Key points of discussion centered on 
scope of the document, boundary with the other Recommendations 
documents, document structure, and consistency of terms.  The RM 
document will be opened to wider scrutiny by Member States through 
the Technical Meeting and 120-day review process.  The Technical 
Meeting is scheduled for the week of February 1, 2010. END SUMMARY. 
 
 
¶2. CONSULTANTS' MEETING: Twenty consultants from Australia, Belgium, 
Brazil, China, France, Germany, India, Japan, Russia, Spain, Sweden 
and the U.S met 7-11 September 2009 in Vienna to conclude drafting 
of the Recommendations on the Security of Radioactive Material and 
Associated Facilities (RM document).  The UK chaired this fifth and 
final consultants' meeting to develop this draft.   The U.S. 
delegation included three representatives, from State, U.S. Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission, and the National Nuclear Security 
Administration.  This RM document is one of three Recommendations 
documents that fall within the Nuclear Security Fundamentals in the 
Nuclear Security Series.  Following paragraphs are keyed to the main 
issues treated in the consultants' meeting. 
 
¶3.  Boundary between Recommendations documents -- One of the main 
issues discussed during the meeting was the scope boundary between 
the RM document and the Recommendations for Security of Nuclear 
Materials and Facilities (INFCIRC/225/Rev.5, or NM document). 
During the fourth consultancy meeting in June, the Reference Group 
proposed to change the scope of the RM-document.  Until that time, 
the scope of the RM-document had included all radioactive material 
outside the scope of INFCIRC/225 (i.e., other radioactive material 
and nuclear material (NM) below the Category III level).  The new 
proposal was for the scope to be broadened to include also the 
protection of Category I to III nuclear material in one particular 
scenario: against malicious acts involving theft of NM and 
subsequent dispersal resulting in radiological consequences. The 
scenario involving sabotage of NM (also resulting in radiological 
consequences) would remain in the scope of the NM-document. 
 
¶4.  The Belgian and Japanese delegations had sent letters prior to 
the meeting objecting to this proposed change in scope, and 
consultants at the fourth CM had expressed concern with this 
proposal at the time.  After due consideration during this September 
meeting, the participants agreed that the scope of the RM-document 
should revert to the scope developed before the fourth consultants 
meeting.  However, in the interest of addressing the wishes of the 
Reference Group and not to leave this scenario as a gap, the 
participants included a clause in the scope section of the 
RM-document that indicates that "while the document is not intended 
for Categories I to III nuclear material, States could apply the 
security measures contained within to the prevention of scenarios 
involving theft of nuclear material and subsequent dispersal leading 
to radiological consequences". 
 
¶5.  Nonetheless, the participants requested that the Reference Group 
and NM-document consultants reconsider inclusion of the theft and 
dispersal scenario into the NM-document.  Many States consider 
INFCIRC/225 to be the official and sole guide on the physical 
protection of their nuclear materials and facilities; many translate 
INFCIRC/225 and adopt it directly into national law.  The 
participants, as experts on radioactive material protection, did not 
see the benefit of including some of the protections for NM Category 
I-III materials in another document - particularly one addressed to 
the regulators and users of radioactive materials and devices. 
 
¶6.  Structure of Document -- During the meeting, the IAEA Scientific 
Secretary pressed hard for the RM-document to be restructured to 
parallel the higher-level Fundamentals document.  Each of the 12 
Essential Elements contained in the Fundamentals would be a 
subchapter heading in Chapter 4 of the RM-document.  The Secretariat 
is also pressing for this in the two parallel Recommendations 
 
 
documents on Nuclear Materils and on Detection and Response. 
 
¶7.  Meeting participants resisted this change.  While the Scientific 
Secretary used existing text in the reorganization, it lost much of 
the meaning and conceptual flow from the original structure. 
Participants agreed that it would require a lot of thought and time 
to rework it.  In addition, the Reference Group guidance said the 
Recommendations documents should "refer to and be consistent with" 
the Fundamentals document, not that they should follow its 
structure.  In order to meet the intent of the Reference Group, 
meeting participants added a reference to the Fundamental elements 
in the RM-document and reviewed it to be sure it was consistent with 
the Fundamentals. 
 
¶8.  Other topics -- Once these issues were resolved, the remainder 
of the meeting focused on detailed editing of the document, and 
discussions went well.  Participants paid special attention to 
ensuring a consistent use of terms throughout the document.  Terms 
included regulatory body, competent authority, management, security 
level, and nuclear security event. 
 
¶9.  Next Steps -- The next meeting on the RM Recommendations 
document will be a Technical Meeting with broader Member State 
participation, scheduled for the week of 1 February, 2010.  Before 
this time, the two other Recommendations documents are scheduled to 
be finalized and the Reference Group will hold another meeting.  The 
Secretariat indicated that it may be making some changes to the 
RM-document before the February meeting depending on the outcome of 
these activities and to harmonize the RM-document with the others. 
 
¶10.  This report was prepared and cleared by the USDEL to the 
consultancy meeting. 
 
 
DAVIES 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
UNCLASSIFIED                 4 
 
 
 UNCLASSIFIED 
 
           UNCLASSIFIED