When exporting nuclear-related items, export control is required from two perspectives: the control of “Trigger List Items” as controlled by Nuclear Supplier Groups (NSG) and the control of the “Items Subject to the Agreement” as specified in bilateral Nuclear Cooperation Agreements. While Trigger List Items and Items Subject to the Agreement are largely similar, there are some items where they do not overlap. Furthermore, national law for controlling each item is different. The Trigger List Items are governed by the Foreign Trade Act, and the Items Subject to the Agreement (Internationally Controlled Items) are governed by the Nuclear Safety Act. As a result, the detailed procedures and requirements for controlling each item are quite distinct. For the Trigger List Items, export license must be obtained in accordance with the Foreign Trade Act. The details such as responsible authority, the items subject to license, license requirements and procedures, penalties are specified in the Public Notice on Import and Export of Strategic Goods. For the Items Subject to the Agreement, the process and obligations set forth in bilateral agreements and related administrative agreements are fulfilled in accordance with the Nuclear Safety Act. However, in contrast to the Trigger List Items, the details for complying with the agreements are not specified legally. Since most of the Items Subject to the Agreement are fall within the category of the Trigger List Items, the obligations in accordance with the agreements are reviewed and implemented during the export license assessment process. However, if the Items Subject to the Agreement are not are fall within the category of the Trigger List Items, there is a risk of control omission. For example, this applies to cases of exporting tritium and tritium removal facilities, which are not the Trigger List Items, to Canada and Romania. Moreover, since subjects to the agreement and compliance procedures are respectively different for 29 bilateral Nuclear Cooperation Agreements signed with different countries, it is difficult for enterprise to recognize the appropriate procedures and obligations under the agreement by their own. The bilateral Nuclear Cooperation Agreements establish legal obligations between state parties while NSG are non-legally binding arrangements. Therefore, it could be even more necessary to comply strictly with the agreements. Consequently, legal improvements are required for effective implementations of Nuclear Cooperation Agreements. While it may be challenging to institutionalize details of 29 Nuclear Cooperation Agreements, it is essential to legally specify key elements such as the list of items subject to agreements, responsible authority, requirements and procedures for implement the agreement obligations, and penalties. Furthermore, domestic awareness on compliance with Nuclear Cooperation Agreements is lower compared to the system of export license for Trigger List Items. The continuous outreach is also necessary, along with institutional improvements.

The Nuclear Export and Import Control System (NEPS) is currently in operation for nuclear export and import control. To ensure consistent and efficient control, various computational systems are either already in place or being developed. With numerous scattered systems, it becomes crucial to integrate the databases from each to maximize their utility. In order to effectively utilize these scattered computer systems, it is necessary to integrate the databases of each system and develop an associated search system that can be used for integrated databases, so we investigated and analyzed the AI language model that can be applied to the associated search system. Language Models (LM) are primarily divided into two categories: understanding and generative. Understanding Language Models aim to precisely comprehend and analyze the provided text’s meaning. They consider the text’s bidirectional context to understand its deeper implications and are used in tasks such as text classification, sentiment analysis, question answering, and named entity recognition. In contrast, Generative Language Models focus on generating new text based on the given context. They produce new textual content continuously and are beneficial for text generation, machine translation, sentence completion, and storytelling. Given that the primary purpose of our associated search system is to comprehend user sentences or queries accurately, understanding language models are deemed more suitable. Among the understanding language models, we examined BERT and its derivatives, RoBERTa and DeBERTa. BERT (Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers) uses a Bidirectional Transformer Encoder to understand the sentence context and engages in pre-training by predicting ‘MASKED’ segments. RoBERTa (A Robustly Optimized BERT Pre-training Approach) enhances BERT by optimizing its training methods and data processing. Although its core architecture is similar to BERT, it incorporates improvements such as eliminating the NSP (Next Sentence Prediction) task, introducing dynamic masking techniques, and refining training data volume, methodologies, and hyperparameters. DeBERTa (Decoding-enhanced BERT with disentangled attention) introduces a disentangled attention mechanism to the BERT architecture, calculating the relative importance score between word pairs to distribute attention more effectively and improve performance. In analyzing the three models, RoBERTa and DeBERTa demonstrated superior performance compared to BERT. However, considering factors like the acquisition and processing of training data, training time, and associated costs, these superior models may require additional efforts and resources. It’s therefore crucial to select a language model by evaluating the economic implications, objectives, training strategies, performance-assessing datasets, and hardware environments. Additionally, it was noted that by fine-tuning with methods from RoBERTa or DeBERTa based on pre-trained BERT models, the training speed could be significantly improved.

The Korea Institute of Nuclear Nonproliferation and Control (KINAC) conducts various outreach activities, such as publishing brochures and holding seminars and briefings, to make regulated parties aware of the importance and necessity of the export control regime. The outreach program aims to increase compliance rates by generating interest in the export control regime among recipients and to increase communication to support compliance. In order to explore the long-term development of outreach activities, we analyze how KINAC conducts outreach. KINAC conducts nuclear export control outreach to organizations that deal with trigger list items and related technologies. Educational institutions with nuclear energy-related departments, research institutes related to nuclear energy and materials, and industrial companies that handle equipment used in nuclear power plants or nuclear materials were selected for outreach. The outreach program provides information on the export control regime for trigger list items, the strategic technology control regime, and the Nuclear Cooperation Agreement. KINAC’s outreach programs can be categorized into education, exhibition, and publication. In the education program, we hold workshops and seminars for industrial companies, with customized content that considers the items handled by companies and the nature of technology transfer. We provide training for educational and research institutions focused on conducting research tasks and projects and transferring technology accordingly. As a result of the education program, there is a regret that the education for SMEs and educational institutions is not directly linked to the implementation of nuclear export control. The exhibition program operated a booth at nuclear-related exhibitions at least once a year. The booth distributed brochures or publications on the export control regime, conducted surveys to investigate awareness of the regime and conducted on-site consultations. The exhibition program effectively increased the understanding of the export control regime among the general public and potential regulated parties. However, it was only sometimes linked to the actual implementation of nuclear export control. The publication program produced promotional materials for use at education and exhibitions, as well as guidance materials on new and revised regulations. It used the agency’s online media to provide information on new and revised export control legislation and related issues. As a result of the publication program, various existing publications explaining the export control regime were consolidated into a single publication, increasing the efficiency and satisfaction of outreach.

Emerging technologies are innovative technologies currently under development or in the early stages of introduction. These technologies have the potential to impact a wide range of industries and sectors significantly and may, therefore, be subject to export controls. The list of emerging technologies subject to export controls varies from country to country and constantly changes as new technologies are developed. For example, the U.S., EU, and South Korea have responded to these changes by adding software and technologies related to artificial intelligence and machine learning to their export control lists. Nevertheless, export control of emerging technologies still presents challenges and limitations. The rapid pace of technological advancement makes it difficult for export control regulations to keep up. For export control purposes, international cooperation on information sharing and control methods is necessary for most countries to control similar items. Several new technologies in the nuclear field may be subject to export controls. These technologies include advanced reactors, nuclear fuel cycle technologies, and nuclear waste management technologies. Small modular reactors (SMRs) and fourth-generation reactors are being developed as advanced technologies, and new technologies are being developed to improve the nuclear fuel cycle. There is also active development of technologies for space applications utilizing nuclear reactors, such as the Nuclear Thermal Propulsion System and the Nuclear Electric Propulsion System. As these technologies may include new systems and items not in existing export control, they may pose a proliferation risk or may include software design know-how for advanced materials, it is necessary to consider whether and how they should be subject to export control to prevent nuclear proliferation. Overall, export controls are an essential issue in the emerging technology and nuclear energy sectors. Countries are moving toward strengthening regulations and international cooperation to overcome these challenges and ensure safe technology transfer, and South Korea should actively participate and lead this trend.

Strategic item export control aims to maintain international peace and safety and serves as a significant nuclear non-proliferation regime that directly impacts a nation’s security. Therefore, establishing an autonomous export control system at the state level is crucial, and one of the most efficient methods to achieve this is by enhancing an export company’s management system. Accordingly, many advanced countries, such as the United States, Europe, and Japan, have operated their own internal compliance programs (CP or ICP) to manage and screen the export of strategic items as a corporate social responsibility and risk mitigation measure. In Korea, which has a high dependence on trade, the need for CP was continuously confirmed, but the system was introduced in 2004, relatively late compared to other advanced countries. So far, the Korean government has made steady efforts to develop and establish the system and is actively encouraging businesses to obtain Compliance Program certification to autonomously manage strategic items. Major technologically advanced countries utilize technology transfer as a tool for economic sanctions, trade security, and strategic technology management, and they continue to strengthen their control regimes. In these countries, CP certification is considered a standard practice for export control among mid-sized and large enterprises. It serves as a vital risk management system that protects companies from unforeseen incidents. However, in Korea, the application of CP under the Foreign Trade Act is limited to dual-use items and does not extend to the nuclear export control system. Therefore, this paper analyzes international cases and CP requirements in countries like the United States, Japan, Europe, and Singapore. As a result of the review, the application of CP into Korea’s nuclear export control could be a coexistence means that can strengthen supply chain control as well as provide benefits not to impede technical research, international trade, and exchanges.

The Korea Institute of Nuclear Nonproliferation and Control (KINAC) conducts outreach to promote and educate regulated entities on the export control regime’s purpose, importance, and implementation. Outreach activities help to reduce regulatory blind spots and minimize domestic and international penalties for non-compliance. The need for outreach is growing as domestic and international policies are changing rapidly, and the scope of export regulations is expanding due to increased exports of nuclear power plants. In order to explore the long-term development direction of outreach activities, we will analyze the trends of nuclear export control and the outreach activities of related organizations. Here are some key trends in nuclear export controls. In recent years, countries worldwide have been reorganizing their supply chains for critical industries, focusing on their own and friendly countries, and strengthening their trade policies in security aspects such as export control and technology protection. Following the trend of international sanctions against Russia, the Korean government has implemented domestic export control measures similar to those of the international community, such as blocking the export of strategic goods to Russia. In addition, the number of strategic goods classifications and export licenses has been increasing as Korea promotes the export of new nuclear power plants. In line with carbon neutrality, it is expected to revitalize and diversify nuclear energy-related export businesses, such as joint research on fourth-generation nuclear power plants and SMRs. Finally, the scope of exports is expanding from ‘goods’ such as existing nuclear reactors to ‘technology’-oriented transfers. The means of technology transfer are diversifying with the development of information and communication technologies such as cloud services, email, video conferencing, and large-capacity removable storage devices. Next, look at the outreach activities of nuclear export control organizations. The Korean Security Agency of Trade and Industry (KOSTI) is an organization that implements export controls on dualuse items. It puts much effort into one-on-one consulting services with companies and has established and operated various online training programs. It also actively utilizes online promotional materials such as card news and videos. The export control agencies of major countries have a common trend of expanding outreach to research institutions, providing export control guides tailored to the characteristics of each field, holding annual seminars and conferences, and operating educational programs

In South Korea, the exporters of items related to nuclear power generation are diversified. Consequently, there is a risk of illegitimate export by companies failing to recognize the export control system because the awareness about this system for the strategic items among the subcontractors of nuclear power facilities is limited. To prevent illegitimate export of the strategic items, it is necessary to conduct outreach activities regarding the export control system for the related companies. Additionally, the exporters and export license examiners should consider whether an export target is on the Denial List, who may divert the strategic items to weapons of mass destruction. Therefore, the Korea Institute of Nuclear Nonproliferation and Control developed two systems for controlling illegitimate export of the Trigger List items. The first system, Nuclear Industry Information Collection and Analysis System, can gather information about the key nuclear industries in Korea and analyze the dealing of strategic items. The second system, Denied Persons Information Gathering System, can regularly gather information about the denied persons and provide the updated data to the exporters and regulatory examiners. These two systems can be used for outreach activities and export license examination to prevent illegitimate export of the strategic items.

The Nuclear Safety and Security Commission (NSSC) and the Korea Institute of Nuclear Nonproliferation and Control (KINAC) operate the Nuclear Export and Import Control System (NEPS), an online comprehensive export and import control management system to guide the domestic nuclear export and import control regime and efficiently process the application, processing, and issuance of various civil complaints required for compliance. This paper analyzes the results of NEPS functional improvements made in 2022. First, NSSC and KINAC launched a nuclear plant technology follow-up system. Since establishing the Nuclear Plant Technology Export License (Plant License) system in 2015, large-scale nuclear power plant projects with a large amount of technology transfer have been issued a Plant License, allowing them to transfer technology without a separate individual export license. The recipient of a Plant License is not required to obtain an additional export license but to follow up on the transferred technology, such as checking whether it is a strategic technology and reporting quarterly transfer details. A dedicated system has been established to facilitate the follow-up of plant license projects. That has improved work efficiency for both the regulated and the regulator. Second, we have improved the procedures for retrieving and supplementing civil petitions. We added a function allowing civil petitioners to directly retrieve a civil petition to cancel a previously filed civil petition or to revise it themselves. In addition, we improved the procedure for supplementing a civil petition by setting a supplementation deadline for a reviewer’s request to modify a civil petition and sending a reminder before the expiration of the supplementation deadline. That enhances the convenience of the complainant and the examiner. Finally, we have changed the numbering system for export and import control reviews. Previously, the application number was a 15-digit system with an 8-digit date and 7-digit serial number. We have simplified the number by changing the three unused digits in the serial number to a single symbol that separates the type of application. That made it possible to utilize the number for relevant searches in the future. Also, simplifying the number has improved the efficiency of applying, processing, and consulting for civil affairs. In the future, NSSC and KINAC will continue to upgrade NEPS and make various functional improvements, and there will be many changes in system operation through cloud transfer in a few years.

About 83% of the information systems of administrative and public agencies are operated by agencies, and most of them are vulnerable to security due to the small scale of operation, insufficient facilities, and lack of dedicated personnel. To address these issues, the Ministry of the Interior and Safety announced in June 2021 that, as part of the “Second Basic Plan for E-Government,” all information systems of administrative and public agencies will be converted to a cloud-based integrated management operating environment by 2025 to provide stable public services. Accordingly, relevant laws and guidelines should be researched and analyzed to prepare for the cloud conversion of the Nuclear Export and Import Control System (NEPS) operated by the Export and Import Control Office of the Korea Institute of Nuclear Nonproliferation and Control (KINAC). The Cloud Computing Act defines cloud computing, establishes a basic plan and implementation plan, provides support for promoting the adoption of cloud computing by state institutions, supports the construction of integrated information and communication facilities based on cloud computing technology, provides cost and technical support, and regulates cloud security certification, and applies the Personal Information Protection Act and the Act on Promotion of Information and Communication Network Utilization and Information Protection to protect personal information. The E-Government Act defines integrated standards and principles for information resources, support for the use of cloud computing services, classification standards for information resources, and integrated standards for calculating the size and capacity of information systems. The Notice on Standards for Using Cloud Computing Services and Securing Safety for Administrative Agencies and Public Institutions specifies the standards for using cloud computing services and measures to secure stability for administrative agencies, contracts for using cloud computing services, and ensuring continuity of cloud computing services. The Basic Guidelines on National Information Security stipulate the establishment and implementation of security measures, system security, user security, security management, information and communication network security separating internal network and internet network, and cloud computing security measures, and stipulate the NIS security review when introducing private cloud services. In order to convert NEPS to the cloud computing services, network, and software design plans, transfer plans, and cloud operation plans will be established in compliance with the relevant laws and guidelines. And future research will include researching the system status of major public and private cloud service providers and analyzing their advantages and disadvantages.

The Internal Compliance Program (ICP) is a framework for promoting compliance with laws and regulations and minimizing violations. It aims to prevent law breaches, by raising awareness of the compliance within the organization, which leads to enhance the credibility of the organization, and to prepare for audits. From the perspective of nuclear export control, ICP can be used to verify the company’s credibility by following NSG Guidelines and is expected to contribute to preventing the vertical and horizontal proliferation of nuclear weapons in the international community. However, ICP system is not globally established, and the NSG does not provide official guidelines for ICP. Therefore, this study aims to analyze the “Good Practices for Internal Compliance Programs for Nuclear and Nuclear-Related Exports” provided by the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory to find ways to apply and activate ICPs for domestic exporters. The form of ICP could vary depending on company’s size and internal environments, but it should be organized as follows. First, an internal department should be established so as to implement the ICP, and an executive who has export control knowledge should be assigned as the Chief Export Control Officer (CECO). The CECO, establish and revise ICP operating procedures and manual, organize contact point to communicate internally and externally. Second, measures should be established minimize risks in the export process, including business development transaction screening, supply chain, research and development, human resource, and intangible technology transfer risks. Third, internal control system should be established for export control compliance. The CECO should conduct regular assessments to ensure compliance and strengthen the organization’s internal export compliance processes. Fourth, an export-related training program should be periodically conducted for employees. In addition, as soon as the CECO becomes aware of, CECO should review the matter, take corrective action, and report to the relevant national authorities, when a violation of domestic export control laws or suspicious circumstances are captured. Nuclear export control plays an important role in ensuring nuclear nonproliferation. Republic of Korea has been implementing the ICP system for Dual-Use Items under the Foreign Trade Act, but not for Trigger List Items. Therefore, introduction of ICP for Trigger List Items is expected significantly contribute to nuclear nonproliferation. The subjects of ICP will be initially targeted to major nuclear enterprises, then gradually expanded to all nuclear enterprises. Further researches are needed to introduce on ICP for Trigger List Items.

In the late 80s, non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, including nuclear, chemical, and biological, became an internationally important issue, and in order to keep pace with the international situation, Korea amended the Foreign Trade Act in 1992 to legislate the export control of strategic goods. In addition, Korea joined the NSG, one of the international export control regimes, in 1995, and nuclear power operators are required to obtain export licenses in accordance with the NSG export control guidelines. In the nuclear export business, technical documents, equipment, materials, SW, etc. are exported to the importer, and the export items may include strategic items designated by the NSG, so operators must check whether they are strategic items and, if so, obtain an export license in accordance with foreign trade laws that reflect the NSG export control guidelines. In the case of processing and exporting goods or materials imported from another country, exporters must fulfill complex nuclear export control procedures, including obtaining the original supplier’s consent for re-transfer. In recent years, the international situation on export control has been more sensitive than ever, including the Russo-Ukrainian war, the U.S.-China semiconductor supremacy dispute, and U.S. lawsuits against domestic companies related to original technologies. In the worst-case scenario, a company may not be able to fulfill a contract due to export control issues. In order to facilitate the smooth export business of operators when exporting nuclear energy, ‘Nuclear Export Control Pre-Consulting’ is proposed to check compliance with export control requirements in advance and provide operators with customized export control implementation plans reflecting business characteristics. Through the pre-consultation, issues, requirements, and preparatory documents related to nuclear export control can be checked before the export business starts in earnest, i.e., when the decision to participate in the business is made, and the business can be supported to export smoothly by complying with the export control system. The most important aspect of pre-consultation is that domestic nuclear exporters need to know and apply for the program. To this end, the program will be actively promoted online and offline, and support will be provided for easy application through NEPS. In addition, procedures and outcomes will be continuously refined to ensure that the program is a means of ensuring full compliance with international nuclear non-proliferation norms for nuclear exports.

Under the Foreign Trade Act, an export license from the Nuclear Safety Commission is required to export items specified in Part 10 of Schedule 2 of the Public Notice of Exportation and Importation of Strategic Items (Trigger List Items). In the case of nuclear materials, deuterium, and heavy water, its cumulative amount determines whether it is trigger list item. An export license is required only if the cumulative amount exported to a single end-user country from January 1st to December 31st exceeds the regulation criteria. The reason for this cumulative control is to exclude small amounts of materials from the scope of control as they are considered less important in view of nuclear proliferation, but to prevent the possibility of acquiring large quantities of materials by importing small amounts several times. As a result, export control of nuclear material, deuterium, and heavy water requires different considerations than other Trigger List Items. First, materials exported by different companies must be consolidated to manage the cumulative amount. Second, it is necessary to continuously follow up the actual export status. If the material is not exported after it was classified as ‘non-Trigger List Items’, it should not be included in the cumulative amount. Third, there may be a difference between the accumulated quantities aggregated at the time of the classification and the time of the actual export. The classification should be changed if an export of the classified material is postponed or another export of same materials occurs before the export of the classified material. Fourth, the classification result of these materials should not be reused. Generally, the classification result could be reused within the expiration date (2 years) but in the case of substances. However, the reuse of classification result for materials should be limited as the classification results could be change depending on the cumulative amount. In addition, the sharing of classification results between different entities should also be restricted. The government approval procedures are required even for export of small amounts of nuclear materials which are less than the regulation criteria. The cumulative quantities of nuclear materials are systematically managed in the Nuclear Export & imPort control System (NEPS) through these procedures. NEPS is also linked to the custom clearance system of Korea Customs Service, which enables to track actual exports and the time of exports. However, cumulative quantities for the heavy water and deuterium are managed individually by classification reviewers. The annual export plans are received in advance from major entities which deal with the materials for nuclear uses, and the cumulative quantities for each application are managed manually. The systematic management has not been required as there were a few cases of exporting small quantities. However, systematic management may be required in the future as overseas expansion attempts from various companies in the nuclear field has been increasing. In addition, further study is needed on the criteria and system for calculating the cumulative amount. The time of aggregate the cumulative amount should be clarified by considering the difference between the time of classification and actual export. It is required to devise an efficient way to follow up the actual export.

When exporting nuclear power plants to a third country, the U.S. conditions import countries to join the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Additional Protocol. At the Korea-U.S. summit, Korea also agreed to maintain equal non-proliferation standards. This paper first analyzes how the U.S. applies the conditions for joining additional protocols to export control policies. The U.S. Atomic Energy Act is a general law in the field of nuclear power that governs both civilian and military use of nuclear power. Article 123 stipulates matters related to “cooperation with other countries.” According to Article 123, the United States must conclude a peaceful nuclear cooperation agreement with another country that stipulates nuclear non-proliferation obligations for nuclear cooperation to a “significant” extent. Article 123 of the Nuclear Energy Act presents nine conditions for signing the Nuclear Cooperation Agreement, and matters related to safeguards are stipulated in Nos. 1 and 2, and only IAEA’s Comprehensive Safeguards Agreement (CSA) is specified as requirements under the current law. As a result of analyzing the countries of the nuclear cooperation agreements currently signed by the United States, the United States is evaluating the AP in terms of the policy as an essential item. Among the nuclear agreements with the United States, three countries, Egypt, Brazil, and Argentina do not have AP in effect. Among them, Brazil and Argentina are recognized by the IAEA as replacing the ABACC with the AP, so only Egypt is not a member of the AP. The nuclear agreement between the U.S. and Egypt was signed in 1981 before the AP existed, and all recently signed agreements were identified as AP-effective countries. As a result of reviewing the U.S. export control laws, the U.S. did not legislate the AP as a condition for peaceful nuclear exports. Reflecting the NSG export control guidelines, AP was legislated as an export license requirement only in exporting sensitive nuclear technology (enrichment, reprocessing). However, it is confirmed that the U.S. policy applies AP entry into force as one of the main requirements for determining whether it is harmful to nuclear exports, along with the conclusion of the Nuclear Cooperation Agreement, the application of the Comprehensive Safeguards Agreement, and military alliance. The appropriate scope of application of the Additional Protocol in Korea and its application plan will be suggested through future research.

Korea Institute of Nuclear Non-proliferation and Control (KINAC) Safeguards division and Export control division operate regulation management system each other according to their work scope and characteristics. Korea Safeguards Information System (KSIS) of Safeguards division handles information for nuclear material accounting and control. Especially, accounting and declaration reports submitted to International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) are important information in this system. And Nuclear Import and Export Control System (NEPS) of Export control division deals with import and export information of nuclear materials and nuclear weapon trigger list items. Establishing and operating the integrated database as sharing information between KSIS and NEPS derive merits as follows. First, the full cycle of nuclear material transfer records can be managed by collecting information on the nuclear materials from import to export or disposal. In addition, regulatory body can verify inconsistency between transfer records and account records in date, location, element, mass etc. Especially, small quantity nuclear materials are major loop hole in nuclear material accountancy system. The accumulated material transfer data will give an evidence to catch loss nuclear material. Second, sharing the information on nuclear fuel cycle related research and development activities in both divisions can utilize the information to outreach on facility subject to nuclear technology transfer for Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) and additional protocol declaration for Safeguards Agreement with IAEA. Third, regulatory body is easily able to manage entire import and IAEA report procedure for items subject to the Nuclear Cooperation Agreement (NCA). In present, KINAC regulation on NCA is divided to Export control and Safeguards. Export control division conducts classification imported items subject to NCA and acquires prior consent or notifies to other country. And Safeguards division report inventory list for each NCA country to the ROK government once a year. Imported NCA inventory list will be generated automatically by merging database. Then, it can be easily verified without any additional process by both divisions.

With the rapid improvement of hardware and software-related IT technology, applying A.I. to the private and public sectors, such as the Food Poisoning Prevention Program in Nevada and Smart City based on big data in Boston, is steadily increasing. However, the cases of application to the regulation sector of government are still insufficient. The Korea Institute of Nonproliferation and Control (KINAC) is studying to apply A.I. technology to the regulation to improve the objectivity, consistency, and efficiency of classification and export licensing review. The KINAC developed the Nation Nuclear Technology Information Collection and Analysis System using A.I. techniques such as machine learning and deep learning techniques. KINAC and FNC Technology are developing the Export Risk Assessment System using A.I. modules and Bayesian Networks. The KINAC and Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute (KAERI) are developing an inventory history management system subject to the Nuclear Cooperation Agreements. The Nuclear Safety and Security Commission (NSSC) and KINAC operate the Nuclear Import and Export Control System (NEPS) for application and export license review according to relevant laws such as the Foreign Trade Act. Therefore, preparing an integration plan for the existing NEPS and the new systems is necessary. Since the NEPS has to be operated and accessible at all times, so the stability of the NEPS is the most important when integration and linking. So, it is suggested that the Collection and Analysis System and the Risk Assessment System, which require a lot of data traffic, are configured in a server separate from the NEPS, and the new DB and the NEPS DB are only linked. An inventory history management system is also suggested to be integrated and configured into the NEPS. Third, it is recommended that each system lists the information provided to or received from the NEPS in advance, and one-way communication should be performed basically. Two-way communication should be performed when necessary. Finally, against various cyber accidents and information leakage, it is proposed to review security vulnerabilities and apply essential security measures and guidelines. Through the integration and linkage of these systems, it is expected that the objectivity, consistency, and efficiency of classification and export licensing review of the KINAC are strengthened, and national transparency of development, production, and use of nuclear material is enhanced. It can be satisfied with the increasingly strengthened demands of the international community on duty for strategic item management.

The License on Technology Export of Nuclear Plant is a system that permits the export of strategic technologies for large-scale NPP projects collectively during the project period. So, an issuance of the export license could be omitted for each transfer of technology, but Post Strategic Items Confirmation must be performed before the transfer as a follow-up obligation. Sometimes, transfers of technology have been urgently required during the project. As Post Strategic Items Confirmation process takes up to 15 working days, it may be difficult to respond to urgent situations timely, which may cause setbacks on the project. Therefore, Urgent Technology Transfer System, which allows to transfer technology without prior Post Strategic Items Confirmation, was established to reduce a burden on licensee and improve the efficiency of regulation. This system applies only to the License on Technology Export of Nuclear Plant. In other words, the technology transferred through Urgent Technology Transfer System (hereinafter referred as Urgent Transfer Technology) does not pose any problem with regard to export control because it is already licensed. In addition, the Urgent Transfer Technology should be considered as a strategic technology until Post Strategic Items Confirmation, which means that the Urgent Transfer Technology is more strictly controlled than the generally transferred technology. Also, the Urgent Technology Transfer System does not apply to intangible technology transfers such as technical support through personnel dispatch. The system could be only used in specific conditions which are stipulated for each licensed project in advance in order to prevent indiscriminate abuse of the system by licensee. Licensees are required to report quarterly the stipulated condition corresponding to each Urgent Technology Transfer case, and it would be checked through post-site inspection whether the actual reason for the transfer meets the consulted condition. Moreover, the deadline of application on Post Strategic Items Confirmation after the Urgent Technology Transfer is stipulated for licensee so as not to omit the classification procedure. This Urgent Technology Transfer System does not apply to dual-use items. If the Urgent Transfer Technology is classified as a non-Trigger List Item through the Post Strategic Items Confirmation, it is outside the scope of the NSSC’s export license. In this case, the technology may be subject to an export license of the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy (MOTIE). However, if the technology is classified to be a dual-use item after Urgent Technology Transfer, it may result in unauthorized transfer because it has already been transferred. Licensee must apply to classification of MOTIE before Urgent Technology Transfer if the technology being transferred may be related with Dual-use Items. It is easy for licensee to overlook due to the low awareness about this system. Therefore, outreach activities are necessary to raise licensee’s awareness by explaining the Urgent Technology Transfer System and current issues in detail. Consultation with MOTIE may be needed for the improvement on issues.

The ROK conducts several export procedures, communications in connection with transfers; exchange of information on export plan, shipments, and receipt of nuclear materials, in accordance with bilateral Nuclear Cooperation Agreements (NCA) and Administrative Arrangements (AA) signed with US, Canada, and Australia. Also, the inventory amount of items subject to NCA has reported annually. This study reviewed the export procedures and management methods for spent nuclear fuel subject to NCA. The re-transfer procedures start with obtaining consent from the original exporting country. It is impossible to retransfer nuclear material without consent, whether long-term or individual case-bycase. If the material has multiple obligations, prior consent from all of those countries is required. Therefore, it is necessary to clarify the foreign obligated materials correctly. In general, nuclear fuel is subject to multiple obligations of all countries through which the materials have passed during the front-end fuel cycle. Then the new obligations are imposed on those irradiated materials or their by-products after ‘used-in’ or ‘produced through the use of ’ equipment subject to NCA. For example, fuel assemblies manufactured under CANDU fuel fabrication equipment subject to ROK-Canada NCA or burned in nuclear reactors where US equipment is installed have obligations based on Canada or US agreements. In order to impose obligation to irradiated materials, the principle of proportionality is applied as stipulated in each Agreement. According to the AA between US and ROK, nuclear materials used in the equipment transferred under the Agreement and produced through them are differently controlled. After the cycle in the reactor with US-made equipment, uranium in the irradiated fuel is considered a material used in the equipment. So it would be appropriate to apply obligation proportionality according to its origin, regardless the US-made equipment. Meanwhile, the obligation under US NCA is given to the entire amount of produced plutonium in the irradiated fuel. Although the contribution to the production of fuel is to be discussed case-by-case basis in the case of Canadian obligation, applying a similar method is proper. Since the fuel is burned in the form of bundles or assemblies, it is impossible to separate the spent fuel into uranium and plutonium physically. However, as discussed above, to clarify the rights and obligations pursuant to Agreement and ensure accuracy in inventory management, the obligation codes should be imposed on irradiated fuel as not a single item but separated individual substance of materials. Moreover, when an obligation swap occurs for the irradiated fuel, its movement and combustion history should be considered to prevent confusion in confirming multiple obligations and implementing export procedure.

In April 2015, the government of the Republic of Korea and the United States of America signed a new Nuclear Cooperation Agreement (NCA). Subsequently, in April 2016, the Nuclear Safety and Security Commission (NSSC) of the ROK and the Department of Energy (DOE) of the US signed the Administrative Agreement (AA) under the new Nuclear Cooperation Agreement. Accordingly, when Korea imports items subject to the Korea-US agreement, it is required to determine the inventory of imported agreement items and notify the United States of the inventory amount every year. In addition, when re-exporting an agreement item to a third country, prior consent of the original exporting country (USA) must be obtained. Nuclear companies that import items subject to the Korea-US Atomic Energy Cooperation Agreement must report their inventory to the government every year, but the standards and procedures for managing the inventory are not clearly stipulated in the national law. This makes it difficult for the government to verify the adequacy of the report submitted by nuclear companies, adding to the administrative burden on both the government and the companies. Accordingly, it is required for the government to establish and operate a system for history management system for import and export items subject to the agreement so that related information can be recorded and managed at each stage, such as first import of items to Korea, generation, disposal, and exports to third countries. This system provides history management functions such as initial import information record for items imported through import/export procedures according to administrative agreements, change of owned company due to domestic movement, deletion of inventory due to loss/disposal, deletion of inventory due to export or addition of inventory due to derived materials. Through this system, operators can easily manage agreement items, and the government can obtain reliable information on agreement items in close to real-time. In addition, when this system applies to exports of items subject to the agreement, the number of items subject to the agreement exported by Korea can be provided first so that the importing country can more quickly check the items subject to the agreement. It is expected to contribute to securing control of the items subject to the agreement and reducing concerns over nuclear proliferation.

The Nuclear Safety Act defines items defined in nuclear cooperation agreements with each country as internationally regulated materials and requires that import and export procedures be implemented according to each agreement. In particular, the US, Canada, and Australia, which are major nuclear power suppliers, describe detailed procedures related to imports and exports in administrative agreements attached to the agreement. This paper compares and analyzes the import and export procedures of agreed items in the three major countries and proposes procedures and precautions that nuclear companies should follow for smooth import and export. The import/export procedure, according to the annexed administrative agreement, is divided mainly into Direct-transfer, Indirect-transfer, and Re-transfer. Direct transfer refers to direct import and export between countries that have signed an agreement. The four-step process of prior notice, written confirmation, shipment notice, and receipt confirmation is commonly required for direct transfer. However, in the case of Canada, if the previously related information is the same, the shipping notification and receipt confirmation procedure may be omitted. Australia only defines items included in the notification without a separate form in the administrative agreement. Indirect transfer means transferring items originating from the other two countries that signed the agreement through a third country. All three countries stipulate that item transferred by indirect transfer are also subject to the agreement, and Canada stipulates separate advance notifications and shipping notifications for indirect transfer. Australia manages indirect transfers by including information from third countries in the exchange-related information between the two countries. The US does not have a specific procedure for indirect transfer, but it is presumed that it was omitted because it was difficult to confirm the time of shipment when the US exports through a third country. Re-transfer is a procedure to obtain consent from the original exporting country in advance when exporting items held in Korea to a third country. There are two types of consent based on re-transfer, the long-term consent method, and the individual case-by-case method. Long-term consent is a method of long-term consent for re-transfer to an agreed-upon country by agreeing in advance on a list of countries where re-transfer is possible. In the long term, the procedure will be reflected in domestic laws in detail and managed through an IT-based management system so that operators can smoothly implement such complex import and export procedures.