Status: STEP 3
Revision von NSS No. 20
Beteiligte IAEO-Komitees: NSGC, EPReSC, NUSSC, RASSC, TRANSSC, WASSC
Nuclear Security Fundamentals
| STEP 12 | ||
| STEP 11 | Kommentare der SSCs und IAEO-Bewertung | IAEO-Zusammenfassung nach STEP 11 |
| STEP 8 | Kommentare der Mitgliedsstaaten und IAEO-Bewertung |
IAEO-Zusammenfassung nach STEP 8 |
| STEP 7 | Kommentare der SSCs und IAEO-Bewertung | IAEO-Zusammenfassung nach STEP 7 |
| STEP 4 | IAEO-Zusammenfassung nach STEP 4 | |
| STEP 3 | Kommentare der SSCs und IAEO-Bewertung | IAEO-Zusammenfassung nach STEP 3 |
Zurück zur Übersicht "In Entwicklung befindliche Safety Standards"
Background Information
Drawing on the results of the review process for NSS No 20, the following gaps should be addressed in the limited revision of the Nuclear Security Fundamentals:
- Revise unclear and inconsistent definitions;
- Ensure consistency of terminology within the publication and with the Nuclear Security Recommendations.
- Ensure consistency of concepts with the Recommendations publications, in cases where the inconsistencies are likely to lead to difficulties for States in implementing the guidance therein;
- Consider refining the objective of a nuclear security regime to improve its clarity;
- Consider enhancing or adding a limited amount of text to account for experience gained during the last decade, as well as developments in the following areas, in cases where the guidance provided in the existing text is not adequate to support lower-level, more detailed guidance:
- Information and computer security;
- Insider threats;
- Emerging threats;
- New and emerging technologies that could be used to strengthen nuclear security systems, while keeping the publication overarching and technology-neutral;
- Safety–security interface;
- Security aspects of nuclear material accounting and control;
- Sustainability and resilience of nuclear security regime including in unplanned situations for which continuity of operations is needed (e.g. pandemics and natural disasters).
Keeping in mind the importance of the stability of the Fundamentals for States, the revision should be limited and should primarily be focused on clarity and consistency of the text and the definitions. The revision should generally avoid any changes that alter the structure of the publication or its level of detail. Changes should be generally limited to the addition of and editing of individual sentences and paragraphs, and, for any proposed changes, it should be carefully considered whether or not the existing language in the publication is broad enough that further information could simply be added in lower-level publications without the need to edit the Fundamentals.