Fact Sheet: Update on Joint Statement on Strengthening Nuclear Security Implementation (INFCIRC 869)

THE WHITE HOUSE 

Office of the Press Secretary

________________________________________________________________

For Immediate Release                        

FACT SHEET

Update on INFCIRC 869

On October 9, 2014, the Permanent Mission of the Kingdom of the Netherlands, on behalf of its Government and 34 other countries (full list below), conveyed to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Secretariat the “Joint Statement on Strengthening Nuclear Security Implementation” from the 2014 Nuclear Security Summit and requested that it be circulated to all IAEA Member States.  The subscribing states pledged to take specific steps, including implementing key IAEA nuclear security guidance, accepting voluntary peer reviews, and committing that those responsible for nuclear security are demonstrably competent.  The Dutch note verbale  encouraged all States to meet the intent of these essential elements of a nuclear security regime and to commit to the effective and sustainable implementation of the principles therein.  The IAEA has circulated the 2014 Joint Statement as INFCIRC/869, to which all IAEA Member States could ascribe.

On November 13, 2015, Jordan pledged its commitment to the Joint Statement on Strengthening Nuclear Security Implementation, as contained in INFCIRC/869.  Jordan is the 36th IAEA member state to subscribe to the statement, and the first to do so outside the Summit process.

The United States continues to encourage all IAEA member states to indicate their commitment to implement the provisions of INFCIRC/869, noting that such public commitments provide public assurances that nuclear materials are effectively secured and underscore support for the IAEA and its nuclear security efforts.

Full List of Subscribers

Algeria, Armenia, Australia, Belgium, Canada, Chile, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Hungary, Israel, Italy, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Lithuania, Mexico, Morocco, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Philippines, Poland, the Republic of Korea, Romania, Spain, Sweden, Turkey, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, the United Kingdom, the United States of America, and Vietnam.

###

Joint Statement on Cyber Security

2016: Gift Basket on cyber security of industrial control and plant systems at nuclear facilities 

Subscribed by: Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Belgium, Canada, Chile, China, Denmark, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Hungary, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Republic of Korea, the Netherlands, Norway, the Philippines, Poland, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, Ukraine, the United Arab Emirates, the United Kingdom, the United States of America and the United Nations.

Introduction

The States listed above commit to ensure adequate cyber security at industrial control and plant systems at nuclear facilities.  These control systems are often used within safeguards, security, and safety systems.  Increased attention in this area will assist States, nuclear operators and the supply chain to continue to strengthen the resilience of these systems, protecting them from potential malicious attack or accidental damage.

To date, work has mainly focused on mitigating the vulnerabilities of enterprise systems used to manage information and data within nuclear facilities and supply chains.  This work needs to extend to industrial control systems.

Nuclear facilities benefit from robust safety mechanisms which have been strengthened and developed over several decades.  In addition to physical, logical, and human based controls, there has been an increase in the use of information technology to form part of the safety and security aspects of plant control systems, as well as nuclear material accountancy and control.  More information on the use of information technology and the associated threats and vulnerabilities in this context is needed to inform continuous security improvements.

The Initiative

The States listed above agree, as resources permit, to participate in two international workshops on this topic in 2016.  These workshops will enable States and their nuclear sectors to share good practice in managing risks to industrial control systems in nuclear sites, as well as examine the impact of using information technology in managing safety and security aspects of plant control systems.

These workshops will focus on areas including:

  • Threats and vulnerabilities, through considering case studies of recent incidents;
  • Potential or known incidents which can impact on control systems, through an interactive approach;
  • Technical and management challenges of managing risksto legacy systems;
  • Technical and management challenges of assuring new build nuclear and supply chains
  • Incident response and recovery.
  • Managing public/media expectation in light of an incident.

Outcomes and Next Steps

The States listed above propose to present the findings of this work at the Ministerial segment of the IAEA International Conference on Nuclear Security, in Vienna in December 2016 to contribute to IAEA efforts to increase cyber security at nuclear facilities, building on the IAEA International Conference on Computer Security in a Nuclear World held in June 2015. 

Joint Statement on Maritime Supply Chain Security

2016 Nuclear Security Summit

Maritime Supply Chain Security Joint Statement 

Over the past decade, many countries have deployed radiation detection systems at their seaports as a key component of their national approach to combating nuclear and radiological smuggling.  These systems have detected numerous nuclear and other radioactive materials out of regulatory control (MORC) - some that pose security risks and others that just pose risks to public health and safety, or are of regulatory concern(e.g. contaminated goods and orphan sources).  Due to the complexity of the maritime system and the many stakeholders involved, it is clear that national, regional and international coordination in both the public and private sector is needed to secure this vector and enable the permanent removal of these materials from the maritime supply chain. 

With this in mind, 15 countries, nine international organizations, three terminal operators, and several academic representatives participated in a workshop from 16-18 November 2015, co-sponsored by the United States and the United Kingdom, focused on promoting radiation detection in the maritime supply chain and developing enhanced measures to permanently remove materials found out of regulatory control.  This workshop was in fulfillment of a commitment made at the 2014 Nuclear Security Summit in a joint statement on maritime supply chain security.  Workshop participants acknowledged that detection systems are an important tool in a nation’s approach to locating and securing MORC and identified a set of best practices and recommendations. 

Australia, Belgium, Canada, Germany, Georgia, Israel, Lithuania, Kazakhstan, Mexico, the Netherlands, Spain, the United Arab Emirates, the United Kingdom and the United States endorse the following best practices and recommendations identified at the November 2015 workshop.

Best Practices

Nations with detection programs have agreed to continue to share technical advice, lessons learned and best practices with one another and with those nations seeking to implement and sustain detection systems.  Specific examples of best practices include:

  1. Plan for long-term sustainability of systems early in the process of developing and deploying radiation detection programs; 
  2. Establish a comprehensive "end-to-end" regulatory framework that provides the necessary framework and authorities to all stakeholders involved in the detection, notification and response to materials found out of regulatory control;
  3. Implement and institutionalize regular training and adaptive exercises that address evolving threats, operational challenges and security strategies of detection systems to verify that roles and responsibilities are clearly understood and that all relevant stakeholders maintain a state of readiness;
  4. Take appropriate national-level measures at the material’s origin, in accordance with the IAEA Code of Conduct on Radioactive Sources, to ensure that radiological materials are controlled at the point of origin and prevented from entering the maritime supply chain.
  5. Take appropriate measures to ensure that detected nuclear other radioactive materials are placed back under control in either the country responsible for the detection eventor the country of material origin, as appropriate; and
  6. Report incidents involving MORC to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Incident and Trafficking Database (ITDB) in a timely manner and seek other formal and informal mechanisms to share information on detections, trends, and challenges in addressing MORC with regional and international partners.

Recommendations:

  1. Seek opportunities and mechanisms to enhance communication between public and private stakeholders regarding the responsibilities and obligations associated with the removal of MORC from the maritime supply chain and to ensure feedback mechanisms for all parties in the ultimate resolution of MORC cases, as appropriate;Develop technical and operational solutions to reduce alarms from innocent, naturally occurring radioactive material (“NORM”) to protect commerce and to focus resources on detecting materials of concern;
  2. Request that the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) continue to study technical and operational issues related to detection operations through cooperative research projects and other mechanisms as appropriate;
  3. Request that INTERPOL continue and enhance current efforts to ensure that threat information flows from law enforcement to front line officers (i.e. Customs and Border Protection) involved in detection operations;
  4. Request that the World Customs Organization (WCO) expand its efforts to deploy a common communication platform between customs organisations, which could be leveraged to facilitate timely information sharing in member states on detections, trends and challenges in addressing MORC; and
  5. Investigate whether the WCO or other appropriate organisations could expand their efforts to facilitate information sharing that goes beyond customs organisations to regulators or other applicable organisations in order to allow all those organisations involved in the detection and removal of MORC to share timely information, ensure that material is permanently removed from the supply chain and correctly disposed of. 

The United States and the United Kingdom will document and share these and other best practices and recommendations with the international community. 

Joint Statement on Promoting Full and Universal Implementation of UNSCR 1540 (2004)

Joint Statement on

Promoting Full and Universal Implementation of

United Nations Security Council Resolution 1540 (2004)

2016 Nuclear Security Summit in Washington D.C.

Recognizing that United Nations Security Council Resolution (UNSCR) 1540 (2004) and the United Nations Security Council Committee established pursuant to UNSCR 1540 (hereinafter “1540 Committee”) are key parts of the international legal architecture for States to prevent and combat nuclear terrorism.

Noting that the full implementation of UNSCR 1540 is a long-term endeavour that requires both political and technical action at national, sub-regional, regional and international levels.

Recalling the 2010 Washington Nuclear Security Summit Communiqué and Work Plan, the 2012 Seoul Nuclear Security Summit Communiqué, the 2014 Hague Nuclear Security Summit Communiqué, and the follow-up Resolutions of UNSCR 1540, particularly UNSCR 1977 (2011), which underscored the important role of UNSCR 1540 in strengthening global nuclear security and reducing the threat of nuclear terrorism.

Noting that the 1540 Committee will be completing  its second Comprehensive Review in 2016 on the status of the implementation of UNSCR 1540, as set forth by UNSCR 1977 (2011). This Review provides an opportunity for the 1540 Committee to take stock of national and international progress in implementing UNSCR 1540 since the previous Comprehensive Review in 2009, and to put forward key findings and recommendations that will contribute to more effective implementation of UNSCR 1540.

Welcoming the contributions of States for updating and submitting reports on national implementation of UNSCR 1540 with the view of the 2016 Comprehensive Review on the implementation of UNSCR 1540.

Reaffirming our commitment to the Joint Statement on Promoting Full and Universal Implementation of UNSCR 1540 delivered at the 2014 Hague Nuclear Security Summit.

Noting that since the 2014 Hague Nuclear Security Summit, co-signatories have advanced national efforts to further the implementation of UNSCR 1540 by providing support for the 1540 Committee’s main areas of work, including, inter alia: monitoring implementation of the Resolution; providing capacity building assistance at the technical level to requesting States in implementing their UNSCR 1540 obligations; preparing and submitting UNSCR 1540 National Implementation Action Plans; organizing or supporting regional and sub-regional training seminars, exercises and initiatives; convening workshops to help facilitate the implementation of UNSCR 1540 into national legislation; conducting outreach to stakeholders in industry, civil society and academia; and strengthening cooperation with regional organizations such as the African Union, ASEAN, the Caribbean Community, and the European Union.

*  *  *

We, the Governments of Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Belgium, Canada, Chile, China, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Israel, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Mexico, Morocco, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, the Philippines, Poland, the Republic of Korea, Romania, Singapore, Spain, Sweden, Turkey, Ukraine, the United Arab Emirates, the United Kingdom, the United States, with the support of the United Nations, the European Union and INTERPOL, reaffirm our commitment to the full and universal implementation of UNSCR 1540, including the implementation of obligations to enhance the security of nuclear materials worldwide in line with the objectives of the 2016 Washington Nuclear Security Summit Communiqué and institutional Action Plans. We reiterate our support for the activities of the 1540 Committee and the Group of Experts. We also reaffirm our commitment to fully implement UNSCR 1540 in our respective States, in areas where we have not already done so, and further undertake to:

1.       Work with and provide information to the 1540 Committee and its Group of Experts for the 2016 Comprehensive Review on the status of the implementation of UNSCR 1540;

2.       Consider providing additional support and assistance in fulfilling the Action Plan in support of the United Nations, particularly actions aimed at facilitating national and regional implementation of UNSCR 1540 and its nuclear security obligations, with a view to helping requesting States to fully implement UNSCR 1540 by 2021, as referenced in the UNSC Presidential Statement of 7 May 2014;

3.       Encourage states to submit reports on national implementation of UNSCR 1540 on a regular basis, and focussing outreach on states yet to submit a first report to the 1540 Committee;

4.       Advocate for international, regional, and sub-regional organizations that have not yet done so to designate a Point of Contact (PoC) or coordinator on the implementation of UNSCR 1540 in order to facilitate regional approaches to assisting States in implementing their UNSCR 1540 obligations and enhance coordination for their UNSCR 1540 implementation efforts;

5.       Consider providing funding, where feasible, to organizations requesting for supporting their PoCs or coordinators for the implementation UNSCR 1540;

6.       Enhance coordination through outreach events with a wide range of domestic stakeholders such as industry, parliamentarians, civil society and academia, and develop appropriate ways to inform these stakeholders of their obligations pursuant to domestic laws relating to the implementation of UNSCR 1540;

7.       Consider organizing joint exercises at the national, regional or international levels that demonstrate ways of reinforcing national and regional capacities and international cooperation for better implementation of UNSCR 1540, and encourage the participation of relevant international organizations and initiatives;

8.       Advocate for the 1540 Committee to continue to strengthen cooperation with other relevant international organizations and initiatives, such as the International Atomic Energy Agency, other United Nations entities, the International Criminal Police Organization (INTERPOL), the Global Initiative to Combat Nuclear Terrorism (GICNT), and the Global Partnership Against the Spread of Weapons and Material of Mass Destruction (Global Partnership), as well as regional and sub-regional organizations in promoting the implementation of the 2016 Nuclear Security Summit institutional Action Plans;

9.       Advocate for the 1540 Committee and its Group of Experts to enhance their cooperation with other relevant entities in the United Nations system, such as the UN Office for Disarmament Affairs (UNODA)- and the UN Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), including through strengthening the legal framework to prohibit illicit activities, export controls, border security, and other measures that support obligations under UNSCR 1540, and the Counter-Terrorism Executive Directorate through joint country visits to monitor the implementation of UNSCR 1540;

10.    Consider further enhancing the cooperation between the International Atomic Energy Agency and the UNSCR 1540 Committee and its Group of Experts on strengthening nuclear security, through opportunities such as: enhancing complementarity and reducing duplication, including by using Integrated Nuclear Security Support Plans (INSSP) to inform voluntary 1540 National Implementation Action Plans; coordinating with the IAEA’s International Nuclear Security Education Network (INSEN) on outreach to academia relevant to implementing UNSCR 1540 and the IAEA’s Nuclear Security Support Center (NSSC) Network on outreach to nuclear security training centers; exploring establishing a liaison between the 1540 Committee and the IAEA’s Division of Nuclear Security;

11.    Advocate for the 1540 Committee and its Group of Experts to continue collaborative efforts and interactions with INTERPOL regarding assistance requests and training opportunities;

12.    Advocate for the 1540 Committee and its Group of Experts to continue to participate in GICNT exercises, workshops and events that focus on building and enhancing nuclear forensics, detection and response capabilities;

13.    Advocate for the 1540 Committee and its Group of Experts to assist UN Member States to develop strong UNSCR 1540 assistance requests that are sufficiently detailed to support responses from potential assistance providers, including through the Global Partnership. In this context, consideration should be given to strengthening the 1540 Committee’s “match-making” mechanism and coordination with assistance providers, including at the regional level, through the Comprehensive Review of UNSCR 1540;

14.    Advocate for the 1540 Committee and its Group of Experts to assist UN Member States to address new and emerging WMD threats relevant to the obligations and recommendations of the resolution; and

15.    Advocate for increased contributions, where feasible, to the UN Trust Fund for Global and Regional Disarmament Activities dedicated to supporting UNSCR 1540 implementation and the work of the 1540 Committee.

Joint Statement on Sustaining Action to Strengthen Global Nuclear Security Architecture

JOINT STATEMENT ON SUSTAINING ACTION TO

STRENGTHEN GLOBAL NUCLEAR SECURITY

The Nuclear Security Summit process has led to significant achievements in nuclear security at national, regional, and global levels; but the work of building a strengthened, sustained, and comprehensive global nuclear security architecture – consisting of legal instruments, international organizations and initiatives, internationally accepted guidance, and best practices – requires continuous attention.

We need sustained action and ambition on nuclear security after the 2016 Nuclear Security Summit to address continuing and evolving nuclear security challenges, with the objectives of advancing implementation of nuclear security commitments and building a strengthened, sustainable and comprehensive global nuclear security architecture.

The Governments of Argentina, Armenia, ­­­­­Australia, Belgium, Canada, Chile, China, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Hungary, India, Israel, Italy, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Lithuania, Mexico, Morocco, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Nigeria, Norway, Republic of Korea, Romania, Poland, Singapore, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Thailand, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, United States, Vietnam, and the following international organizations: INTERPOL and United Nations, aiming to facilitate cooperation and sustain activity on nuclear security after the 2016 Nuclear Security Summit, commit to:

  • Establish a Nuclear Security Contact Group; and
  • Designate an appropriately authorized and informed senior official or officials to participate in the Contact Group.

The Contact Group is tasked with:

  • Convening annually on the margins of the General Conference of the International Atomic Energy Agency, and, as may be useful, in connection with other related meetings;
  • Discussing a broad range of nuclear security-related issues, including identifying emerging trends that may require more focused attention;
  • Promoting and assessing implementation of nuclear security commitments, including those made during the Nuclear Security Summit process, reflected in the four Nuclear Security Summit Communiqués, the 2010 Washington Work Plan, the 2016 Action Plans, national commitments and associated joint statements, and gift baskets;
  • Developing and maintaining linkages to nongovernmental experts and nuclear industry; and,
  • Determining any additional steps that may be appropriate to support these goals.

The Contact Group may also consider and make recommendations to their respective leaders on convening any future Nuclear Security Summits.

We welcome the participation of all countries that subscribe to the goals set out in this Joint Statement and wish to contribute to the work of the Contact Group.

National Progress Report: Belgium

Since the 2014 Nuclear Security Summit, Belgium has strengthened nuclear security implementation and built up the global nuclear security architecture by[1]

STRENGTHENING NUCLEAR & OTHER RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL SECURITY

A.- NATIONAL NUCLEAR MATERIAL SECURITY REGIME

a)   LEGAL & REGULATORY FRAMEWORK- LICENSING

Belgium strengthened and updated its legal and regulatory framework regarding physical protection a few years ago. This enhanced legal and regulatory framework necessitates the restructuring of the physical protection systems of the nuclear facilities. This restructuring process will be finalized in the coming months. It is being monitored by the Federal Agency for Nuclear Control (FANC), which is an independent public agency responsible for nuclear safety and security, radiation safety and for many aspects related to nuclear safeguards.

b) IPPAS (International Physical Protection Advisory Service)

An IPPAS mission took place in Belgium in November 2014. According to its findings, the national physical protection regime is a robust one, but there is room for some improvements. The Belgian authorities responsible for nuclear security are currently working towards the implementation of the IPPAS report.

c)  CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURES

 In the framework of the protection of critical infrastructures, the Belgian authorities are continuously improving the security of the Belgian nuclear power plants, including the parts dedicated to the transmission of electricity.

d) THREAT- TRUSTWORTHINESS

DESIGN BASIS THREAT (DBT)

Belgium's Coordination Unit for Threat Analysis (CUTA) and the FANC have pooled their activities to establish the Design Basis Threat for the nuclear sector nationwide. In particular, thanks to a fruitful collaboration with the stakeholders, the specific reference threat for each nuclear operator has been established. The Belgian authorities are currently revising the DBT in function of the changing threat environment.

INSIDER THREAT & TRUSTWORTHINESS

The Belgian authorities are currently assessing how to strengthen the legal and regulatory framework regarding vetting and trustworthiness, and how to extend its scope. Moreover, the nuclear operators have implemented specific programmes aiming at increasing the vigilance with regards to trustworthiness.  This vigilance towards the insider threat relates not only to the nuclear security areas, but also to the non-nuclear areas of the nuclear installations.

Regarding the security of radioactive materials, the insider threat issue is already taken into account in a concrete manner, as illustrated (see point B)) by the practical aspects of the recent training organised jointly with the IAEA.

e) RESPONSE

The restructuring process of the national physical protection regime calls for strengthened and improved response capabilities in case of a nuclear security incident. At the Seoul Nuclear Security Summit in 2012,  Belgium stated its determination to accomplish this task which requires the cooperation and efforts of all involved parties. One of the main achievements in this regard is the recent decision by the Government to establish a new General Directorate “Surveillance and Protection”, within the Federal Police. This Directorate will be tasked with the protection of the critical infrastructures and the nuclear facilities. In the interim period, the military forces ensure this protection. 

As a follow-up to the IPPAS mission, reflection is currently underway to extend the powers and competencies of private security guards, notably with a view to improve their equipment for self-protection, to improve the synergies with the intervention forces and to better take into account the specificities of sensitive activities.

B.- NATIONAL RADIOLOGICAL MATERIAL SECURITY REGIME

Belgium underscores the need to protect all radioactive materials which are not nuclear materials by taking into account their potential danger and their attractiveness for criminals or terrorists. In this perspective, the relevant Belgian authorities are updating the legal and regulatory framework, in order to strengthen both safety and security of radioactive materials, notably by duly taking into account the nexus between them.

Two achievements are worth mentioning in this regard. First, the FANC has organized a workshop aimed at raising awareness of the threat posed by these materials and of their potential attractiveness for criminals and terrorists. Second, Belgium and the IAEA have jointly organized a national training course related to the protection of radioactive materials, which took place from 15 to 19 February 2016. This training course for the main operators and carriers has effectively reinforced the good cooperation with these stakeholders.

C.- CYBER SECURITY

For several years, international as well as national efforts focused on  strengthening the physical protection systems of nuclear facilities. However, given the numerous cyber-attacks against governments and industries, cybersecurity is now a top priority both at the international and the national level. This is why the relevant Belgian authorities have initiated a process aimed at identifying the principal features of potential cyber-attacks against the nuclear sector. This has allowed the identification of the specific threats and risks against our nuclear facilities.

The Cyber Security Centre for Belgium, under the authority of the Prime Minister, was established in 2015.

As far as the regulatory framework is concerned, it should be mentioned that in line with the existing regulations (in particular the Royal Decree of 17 October 2011 regarding the categorisation and the protection of nuclear-related documents), the nuclear operators must protect all sensitive information, whatever medium is being used. As a consequence, they have to protect any piece of information in digitalised form on networks or other electronic systems.

Belgium voluntarily extended the scope of the “stress-tests”, set up after the Fukushima accident, to include man-made events, such as cyber-attacks.  These stress-tests provided valuable insights, but they gave only a kind of snapshot. Given the rapidly and constantly evolving situation, a continuous monitoring is indispensable and this mind-set is fostered in all nuclear facilities of the country.

The FANC pays heed to the global recommendations of the IAEA in the field of cybersecurity. The FANC is also committed to the exchange of information with foreign authorities in order to share good cybersecurity practices.

Finally, the Cybersecurity Centre and the FANC are examining what kind of initiatives Belgium should take in order to optimize its cybersecurity and to reinforce the international cooperation in this field.

II.-  …MINIMIZING NUCLEAR & OTHER RADIOACTIVE MATERIALS

Belgium subscribes to the objective to eliminate in time, when economically and technically feasible, the use of highly enriched uranium for civilian purposes.

Belgium actively works towards the timely conversion, subject to regulatory approval, of the research reactor BR2 of the Nuclear Research Centre (SCK•CEN) to low enriched uranium, as soon as an appropriate high density fuel has been qualified for this purpose. The SCK•CEN is participating in numerous irradiation experiments for the qualification of the high density LEU fuel, not only for its own reactor, but also for foreign research reactors. As such, the SCK•CEN takes the lead in a broad international cooperation.

Belgium also works towards the timely conversion, subject to regulatory approval, of the processing facility of the National Institute for Radioelements (IRE) for medical radio-isotopes to low enriched uranium. This conversion program is very advanced and runs on schedule. IRE is regularly communicating with the appropriate US authorities on the progress of this project.

Belgium plans to continue its collaboration with interested European countries and the United States to eliminate additional stocks of excess special nuclear materials, consistent with their commitment to prevent nuclear terrorism.

III.- …COUNTERING NUCLEAR SMUGGLING

Belgium participates in the Megaports Initiative aimed at enhancing the detection capabilities for special nuclear and other radioactive materials in containerized cargo transiting the global maritime shipping network.

IV .-  …SUPPORTING MULTILATERAL INSTRUMENTS

Belgium deposited its instrument of ratification of the 2005 Amendment to the Convention on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Material (CPPNM) on 22 January 2013. Although the 2005 Amendment has yet to enter into force, the Belgian national legislation, regulations and policies have already been adapted to fully comply with the amended CPPNM.

Belgium ratified the International Convention for the Suppression of Acts of Nuclear Terrorism (ICSANT) on 2 October 2009. Through the implementation law of 23 May 2013, intrusion or attempted intrusion into the security areas of the Belgian nuclear sites constitutes a criminal offence.

V.- COLLABORATING WITH INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS

A.- CONTRIBUTION TO THE IAEA’S NUCLEAR SECURITY-RELATED ACTIVITIES

Belgium actively supports the IAEA’s nuclear security initiatives, and Belgian experts contribute to many of these activities. For instance, Belgium actively participates in the process of developing documents in the IAEA's Nuclear Security Series, notably in the Nuclear Security Guidance Committee; Belgian experts have participated in IPPAS missions in other States; Belgium also shares information on the illicit trafficking of nuclear and radiological materials by participating in the IAEA Incident and Trafficking Database.

In addition, since the 2010 Washington NSS, Belgium has contributed 300.000 USD annually to the IAEA Nuclear Security Fund. The same contribution is scheduled for 2016. This will bring the total amount of Belgian voluntary contributions to this Fund since 2010 to more than two million USD.

B.- SUPPORT FOR OTHER NUCLEAR SECURITY-RELATED INTERNATIONAL INITIATIVES

The Belgian Nuclear Research Centre SCKŸCEN and the national Institute for Radioelements (IRE) have collaborated with the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organisation (CTBTO), US and European organisations to examine how medical isotope production facilities influence Treaty related noble gas analysis and to help develop an understanding of the global radioxenon inventory.

The SCK-CEN, together with the FANC and the Royal Meteorological Institute (KMI/IRM), has become a national data centre within the International Monitoring System (IMS) of the CTBTO.

Belgium is a partner country in the Global Partnership against the Spread of Weapons and Materials of Mass Destruction and also participates in the Global Initiative to Combat Nuclear Terrorism.

Belgium is committed to the full implementation of Security Council Resolution 1540 and has fulfilled its national reporting obligations in this regard.

Belgium recognizes the important role ENSRA (European Nuclear Security Regulators’ Association) plays as a forum for exchange on nuclear security regulatory matters, aiming notably at achieving or promoting, as far as practicable, a common approach of nuclear security practices. The FANC is one of the founders of this forum, and intensively participates in its activities.

VI.- PARTNERING WITH EXTERNAL STAKEHOLDERS

The policy of the Belgian nuclear security authorities is to consult and to collaborate to the greatest possible extent with the stakeholders. Outreach efforts were undertaken during the process of reinforcing the physical protection regulatory framework. Such outreach is also taking place during the current process of enhancing the security of radioactive materials. The national training course on the physical protection of radioactive materials, jointly organized by Belgium and the IAEA in February 2016, illustrated the close cooperation with the stakeholders.

ANNEX: LIST OF THE JOINT STATEMENTS/GIFT BASKETS BELGIUM JOINED

1.   Multilateral Cooperation on High-Density Low-Enriched Uranium Fuel Development for High-Performance Research Reactors

2.   Strengthening the Security of High Activity Sealed Radioactive Sources (HASS)

3.   Sustaining Action to Strengthen Global Nuclear Security

4.   Mitigating Insider Threats

5.   Sustainability in Reporting and Information Sharing

6.   Increasing Cyber Security of Industrial Control and Plant Systems at Nuclear Facilities

7.   Promoting Full and Universal Implementation of United Nations Security Council resolution 1540 (2004)

[1] As one of the subscribing states to IAEA Information Circular (INFCIRC) 869, some of the accomplishments mentioned in this report are directly associated with the additional commitments described in this Information Circular.