Nuclear 2013

1. Nuclear 2013 The 6th Annual International Conference on Sustainable Development through Nuclear Research and EducationMay 22-24, 2013, Piteşti, România NEWALNCER: Identifying and implementing solutions for an enlarged involvement in Euratom programmesDaniela DiaconuInstitute for Nuclear Research, Romania

2. Content Project objectives Structure Activities Main Achievements Conclusions

3. NEWLANCER objectives to identify and implement effective and efficient solutions leading to enlarged NMS involvement in future Euratom FPs by: • strengthening and catalyzing national R&D potential in NMS • increasing cohesion between NMS institutions • improving their cooperation with OMS research centres Coordinated Actions November 1, 2011 – October 30, 2013 FP7 Euratom 2011 Consortium: 16 partners (6 NMS + 3 OMS) Coordinator: Institute for Nuclear Research – Romania (INR) 11 research institutes 3 universities 2 consulting organisations

4. Project Structure WP 1 – Analysis of skills and current participation of NMS in Euratom Projects WP 3 – Good Practices and Recommendations insights SWOT insights requirements WP 2 – Networking activities for advanced cohesion in NMS and OMS nuclear research best practices information products products links WP 4 – Dissemination WP 5 – CA Management How? Why?

5. Review on current participation? Quantitative analysis – Input data on Euratom FP6 and 7 from EC • Qualitative analysis • Why low participation? • Where are the main barriers : inside or outside organization? • It is about a lack of interest, resources, competence, strategies, coherence between strategies and polices? • It a real wish to increase participation? • Is the entire potential used? • What the margins are? • Questionnaire - Profiles of NEWLANCER participants • Size; Budget • Strategy & expectations • Existing competence • Off-Optimum (margins) • Review of National Nuclear Programmes and National R&D Strategies

6. Correlations FP6 - NMS received 5% EC grant FP7 - NMS received 5%EC grant (2010) Increase trend: Hu, Pl, Ro, Si, Lt Received EC grant is proportional with: - number of full experts - organisation budget

7. What motivated participation? OMS NMS • High involvement in European networks and SNETP platform • High national coordination of participants in Euratom programs • Bilateral partnerships established with some key European research organizations • Nuclear programs strongly supported by national authorities • Scientific excellence • Personal contacts, determination and persistence • Access to experimental results • Access to key experts • Financial contributions (from both EU and national sources) • Visibility • Enlargement of small domestic research groups, • Access to large infrastructures

8. What prevented participation? common reasons for O&N MS: • limited resources, • national strategies, • large efforts needed to prepare a proposal and finding the right set of partners. specific reasons of NMS: conditions of NMS organisations • small size of research groups • insufficient incentives for domestic networking, • insufficient resources for international networking • specific national competences not connected to the OMS interests. Major concern: lack of resources may be much more detrimental for the future of the research in the NMS.

9. National Nuclear Strategies & Nuclear R&D programmes • Are there clear defined National Nuclear Strategies and Nuclear R&D programs? • Is the nuclear research program correlated with the national energy strategy? • Are there common objectives in these strategies to stimulate NMSs’ cohesion? • It is possible to harmonize these strategies with the EU ones? • Can some joint actions for more successful participation in R&D EURATOM programs be identified? • In NMS : available, but developed as • independent document (Hu, Ro) • parts of other general country documents for energy policies, electrical systems, educational programs (Bu, Si, Lt, Po) • In OMS: more coherent • representative for the nuclear activities, • intentions and perspectives for further development in the relevant countries (Fr, It) thanks to their close links to the European strategy which is defined by the SNETP.

10. PN II 2007-2013 vs PC 7 • Programe PN II • Resurse umane – cresterea numarului de cercetatori; imbunatatirea performantelor; atractivitate in cariera • Capacitati – acces la aparatura performanta • Idei – cercetarea fundamentala; cercetari de frontiera, interdisciplinaritate, cercetari complexe • Parteneriate in domenii prioritare – cresterea colaborarii intre entitati de CDI, agenti economici etc. pentru gasirea solutiilor la probleme identificate • Inovare – proiecte de cercetare pre-competitiva si dezvoltarii infrastructurii de inovare • Sustinerea performantei institutionale – mecanisme de finantare institutionala prin competitie pentru implementarea de strategii proprii de dezvoltare

11. What shall be done? SWOT analysis Objectives: • support strategic decision making • point out the internal factors that could be helpful in improving the capabilities of organizations to achieve its goals. Four basic strategies for achieving the goals: • improve the Strengths helping to achieve the goals, • overcome or minimize the Weaknesses counteracting the goals, • take advantage of Opportunities helping to achieve the goals, • adapt to unavoidable Threats and minimize their counteraction to the goals (most conservative).

12. SWOT- regional perspective common issues in all participating NMS and in all fields Strength - potential of human resources, although they find that the number of good experts is not sufficient and is even decreasing due to retirement and insufficient interest of young and talented students for nuclear field. - existing funding Some countries have current investments in nuclear research and technology, and also some kind of stable funding provided by special funds, but the risk of sustaining these opportunities in future is great. Important factor - Investment in the nuclear technologyfield Weakness/threat - lack of systematic planning on institutional and national level - deficient management in research institutions - Topics of Euratom calls not always consistent with the interests and needs of NMS, NMS with small nuclear program could manage to participate if they were able to participate in smaller projects.

13. SWOT Romania 6 National Expert Groups • Participation in Euratom Program is an opportunity for advanced knowledge, access to information and practice exchange, getting additional funds, access to advanced technology and European research infrastructure, education and training for young scientists, harmonization of national policies and curricula with European ones. • Critical success factors for a larger participation well defined national strategy in the field of nuclear technology, promotion and support to participation in EURATOM projects, clear short-term and long-term priorities in the organizations, sufficient number of young and experienced researchers in the field, experts’ exchange and common use of European experimental infrastructures. • Proposedstrategies leading to successful participation in Euratom projects: exploit the Strengths, and partly reduce the Weak points. • a better use of existing personnel experience when applying for Euratom projects. • measures for implementation better strategic planning on national level • reduce deficiencies in management of research institutions

14. Networking Activities Create connections, built links in order to: 19 National Expert Groups 2 National Workshops • Consolidate national cohesion among institutions • Enhance regional and European collaboration • Improve communication with European structures 5 Regional Expert Groups 4 Regional Seminars& Technical Visits Collaboration with TPs Working groups • Scope • Materials for Fast Nuclear Reactors and ADS • Generation III and IV systems • Nuclear Safety • Radioactive Waste Disposal • Education and Training • Radioprotection

15. NEWLANCER network Regional Expert Group Nuclear Safety Regional Expert Group Nuclear Safety European structures: SNETP, NUGENIA European structures: SNETP, NUGENIA NExG Bulgaria NExG Bulgaria Specific field: Nuclear safety Specific field: Nuclear safety NExG Hungary NExG Hungary NExG Romania NExG Romania NExG Slovenia NExG Slovenia NRA Bulgaria NRA Bulgaria HAEA, NSD Hungary HAEA, NSD Hungary CNCAN, Ministry of Economy Romania CNCAN, Ministry of Economy Romania URSJV Slovenia URSJV Slovenia National authorities: National authorities:

16. Increasing regional collaboration • regional seminars (Budapest, Sofia, Ljubljana) • discuss the regional capabilities vs. opportunities of the market; • expert group presentations on the state-of-the-art, research works and programmes, directions, needsin each thematic fields • produce working plans for cooperation • thematic visits • explore NMS current capabilities, both as researchinfrastructure and as human resources; • Result: INR participation in MACXIMA project • Targets: • - identify common aspects and/or complementarities, • - discuss how to better exploit this potential in future common projects • establish ways for a durable cooperation

17. Regional collaboration on RWM • Main priority: to solve the problem of LIL-SL waste disposal (Ro, Lt, Si, Po) • Complementarities: • Lt – competences in numerical modeling • Ro – experiments on radionuclide migration • Po – conditioning matrices • Si – public approach • Main concern: elaboration of the strategy for SF/HLW and its associated program (Ro, Lt, Bu, Po) • Common problems: • RAW inventory (Ro, Lt, ) • advanced solutions for treatment and conditioning (Ro, Po, Lt) • i-graphite (Lt, Ro, Si?) • Common wish: regional geological repository

18. Strengthening communication at European level • SNETP General Assembly, Warsaw, November 29-30, 2011 The NEWLANCER project: towards a better integration of NMS potential in the SNETP Strategic Research Agenda • NEWLANCER representatives in 3 NUGENIA Working Groups • Participation of Dr. A. Dietrich in 1st Regional Meeting, April 1-4, Budapest • information on Radioprotection program, MELODI and DoReMi • Invitation to collaborate with OPPERA • Participation of Nagy Zoltan in 1st Regional Meeting, April 1-4, 2012 importance to be part of the IGDTP • Participation of Jacques Delay in the Regional Meeting on RWM, Ljubljana, April 15-17, 2013 • Participation of NEWLANCER representatives in IGDTP Working Group meeting

19. Increasing visibility Catalogue of NMS competences & database Website – www.newlancer.net Presentations Leaflets

20. Pilot exercise on project proposal Goal: transfer of practical experience of NEWLANCER consortium (existing or acquired during the project) to non-experienced organizations and to guide them in the process of project proposal, following all necessary steps towards the proposal submission. Participants: - some of NEWLANCER partners - organizations not yet involved in Euratom program but having appropriate potential for participation in Euratom programme - identified based on the outcomes of the national seminars (WP2.1) and on the result of the capabilities mapping (WP1.2). This pilot exercise intended only to facilitate their access in future Euratom calls, and not necessary to submit a proposal.

21. New projects • 3 project proposals based on NEWLANCER initiatives: • SARRAH, EAGLE and ASAPMSA_E addressing: • SARRAH - Widening involvement in the 'Fission, Safety and Radiation Protection' Programme (Topic 6.0.1) – ARCADIA • - new countries – Estonia, Greece, Portugal • - new organisations: NCBJ, CLOR, CITON, UPIT • EAGLE - Education / training / information towards the public (Topic 6.0.2) • ASAPMSA_E - Consequences of combination of extreme external events on the safety of Nuclear Power Plants (Topic 2.1.2)

22. Conclusions • Since their accession to EU, the NMS participation in Euratom research remained at 5% from total EC grants both in FP6 and FP7, despite the facilitating measures taken by EC to encourage their contribution in the fission research. • Organizations from NMS seem to struggle both with the national and EURATOM research programs. It seems that strategic research management and funding of these organisations only marginally affect the success in EURATOM projects. It is possible that the current success depends mainly on the excellence and connections of individuals rather than from systematic approach of the organisations and/or nations. • SWOT analyses in each participating country revealed possible strategic directions leading to a wider participation in future programmes and identified research potential that could be further exploited. • A multi-level network linking national and regional experts in the Euratom fields, connecting them to OMS research centers with large participation as well as to the European Technological platforms and other related associations or networks (EERA, NUGENIA, Euratom NCP) was built. • This complex network ensured access to information and favored creation of specialists teams able to plan new projects. • As a result of the lessons learnt in the analysis of previous participation and of the networking activities, one new FP7 project, MAXSIMA was proposed in Euratom 2012 call and it is running, and other 3 project proposals were submitted in the Euratom 2013 call (SARRAH, EAGLE, and ASAMPSA_E ) as result of a pilot exercise.

23. Thank you! www.newlancer.net