Let's start off with, good morning everyone. We're actually in Australia. I'm in Sydney, Nixon, Canberra. So it's a very early start for us. So if we stumble a little, excuse that. And I'm sure that'll be no problem. But let's get straight into it. Because as you know, some of the installations that we've been looking at today have taken some time and ours is no exception. So I'm going to quickly introduce the architecture and then we're going to jump into getting the installer kicked off and start to see the good stuff. So to put open, I come to the OKD space from OpenShift. I work for Red Hat. So I will probably just mix the terms up. But yeah, to put OKD on OpenStack, we have to look at some key integration points. But in the middle of all of that is the use of the OpenStack APIs. We don't ever want to interact with our underlying infrastructure without going through those APIs so that we can ensure a good sense of control over the environment. So when we do this installation, we're going to utilize some different aspects, which we'll dive into a bit later once we have it running and questions come up and such. But we're going to utilize different components of the open stack environment, things such as glance for image storage. We're going to use some cinder block and disk storage or presentation. And we're going to also use object storage, a bit of everything. And of course, during the talk, Nick will break in with his insights and please add anything based on the experiences we've all had. So we're going to try to implement essentially what's sitting here to demonstrate how OpenShift or OKD can actually sit on top of OpenStack. In this example, you can see I'm setting up an OpenStack via an overcloud. So we're going to be using Red Hat OpenStack platform. But it will work the same with most OpenStacks. So as you would have known and heard a bit today, there are many different ways or multiple different ways to install OKD. There's the full automation, which is the installer provision infrastructure model. This is a guided install. It's easy, but very prescriptive. And we're going to use that today so that we can just dig right into the way OpenStack handles OpenShift. There is, of course, a UPI model. And that's fully supported as well on top of OpenStack. So this is where we use pre-existing infrastructure. It's flexible and can be more complicated. But we do supply plenty of helper scripts to communities writing them. There's lots of really cool stuff going on. We don't require OpenStack admin privileges for either of these installs. So to really reinforce that today, I did not install this OpenStack cloud. I'm using an internal cloud. I do not have admin privileges on the cloud. I just wanted to see what it was like as an actual installer. So let's go straight to the install, because, again, it's going to take a bit of time, and we'll see how far we get. I have two environments. I've got one I prepared already. And hopefully, we can use that to show a simple demo of something. But we're going to install on this current environment called Meculin. So let's go ahead and do that. All right. So as mentioned, hopefully, this is large enough. We have a running OpenStack cloud, right? So nothing too exciting. It's got Cinder for volume. It's got a basic setup where we have an external network presenting our external connectivity. I've gone ahead and created a simple tenant network, because what I want to do is show that we can actually plumb into that network with some of our OpenStack nodes, or OpenShift nodes. What else have we got sitting in here? Got some object storage. So we're looking at a bit of, in this case, we are backed by a Ceph install. And so this is going through Rattos Gateway or RGW just to access that. What else? A couple of floating IPs that need to be pre-allocated and set up in DNS. But to really understand how that works, let me switch back to the installation window. And how we talk to the cloud for the installer is to the usual clouds.yaml file. And in this case, I've got two clouds indicated here. I'm going to be using the one I've called OpenStack with my demo user. And what we'll see in a minute is when we run the OpenShift installer, it's actually just going to communicate with the cloud directly and prompt me for various aspects of what is needed in that cloud. That's how we can then create our install config file. Now, while it's an IPI and it will generate most of that on its own, we will add some extra pieces to it. So let's get right to building the install. So we're going to do a create install-config. I'm going to do this off, as I mentioned, a specific cloud. The first thing it asks me for is a public key. Again, this will seed inside of the ignition file to allow us to SSH to the Coros or Fedora Coros nodes. Additionally, you've seen that. So now it's actually reading the cloud.yaml file. And it's asking me which cloud I want to install on. And I'm going to choose OpenStack. It asks me what my external network is. You can see that right now, seeing the same stuff I just showed you in the other install, that we've got a custom tenant network and an external. So this will be my external network. I need to have two IPs set up previous to the installation. One is for the API VIP, which we'll see how it sits in front of the tenant network so I can get created. This one, I've preset it up in DNS in Route 53 just to make it easy. The other IP that's required is for the Ingress Router. Same situation. It's the wildcard domain for apps. It's also been set up in Route 53. So we'll select that. Got to choose a flavor. These are being presented to me as a tenant in the cloud. So this one looks good. The usual stuff here. I've got a base domain prepped. Call it that. And then the Pulse Secret is the same thing that we saw before. It's the fake one. And that'll generate my cloud config. But I actually have to make some alterations to that. And what I want to do is actually I have it here. I have one ready. And then the one we just created. So a couple of things that we're going to do to make this IPI install a little bit more customized is, as you'll see on the left in the red, I have reduced the number of replicas down to one. In theory, I'm hoping to speed up the installation time in practice. I may not be. Additionally, I'm able to add that additional network IP. This block actually belongs to the worker nodes, not to the controllers. So that network you saw on there, I'll be able to go ahead and attach automatically with the installer. Additionally, for the control plane nodes, I'm going to add a root volume and a block volume out of Cinder. This is the volume pool provided by OpenStack that I can actually carve volumes out of. Again, and I'm doing this mostly to just demonstrate the features. We might use that because we need to back at CD with something fast. We might prefer to install this way just to have the options. And then what else? I've added an external DNS. So when the OpenShift installer creates the subnet, it can seed it with a name server. It doesn't have to. Many clouds may offer that directly. But it's a convenient way.  I was just going to say with the volumes, having centralized storage like that allows you to do via migration much more easily and everything between computes on OpenStack. So additionally, I'm specifying the cluster OS image. Those who have done bare metal installs are probably familiar with this. I'm doing this because while the IPI installer does, as you saw the guys do in the previous install, it does pull down a QCAL. The problem is because I'm backed by Cef, I want to use a raw image. So I'm able to create my own, place it in there and still access it from the IPI installer. So again, interest of time, I'm going to create that, or add that config file into my directory so that now I'm actually installing off of that one. All right, so again, the pieces I just spoke about, as the guys mentioned, we're using OVN, who were needies on there. You might have seen that in the previous. That's done in OKD, but in OpenShift, it's tech preview at the moment. So anyway, let's get the install going. We're going to watch the environment as we do this. So I've set up a watch that's going to show various components as the instances are built, images are used, that type of thing. Let's get this going. We're going to do the same, create cluster, off our directory. And for these guys, I like debug. Okay. So this should go ahead and get that install going. Right, so it's loading off of clouds.yaml. And very quickly, we will be able to, as the install grows, we will be able to see the infrastructure begin to appear in OpenSack. Yeah, I was going to say one of the reasons you might want to attach multiple networks is if you want to implement something like multis later and attach pods to multiple networks to give pods access, direct access to the outside world. Hmm. Yeah, next playing with some really exciting stuff where we can start putting OpenShift into telco environments. So it's really cool. As you can see, the build has begun. So the installation has started. And the one point we notice is the ignition file has been created in an IPI install. This is stored automatically in glance in UPI. You can store it wherever you want. But for an IPI, we get it for free in glance. Additionally, the volumes have started to be built for the control plane and bootstrap nodes. Now, as you know, we didn't actually specify anything for the bootstrap, but because it's part of that initial cluster to do the bootstrapping, it defaults to using the same as the control plane installation. What else can we say about this? The ports, the master ports are being created and allocated against that internal tenant network that you're seeing. Yeah, the actual DHCP control of that machine that worked at 10.0016 is actually handled by the OpenStack router as well. Right. Let's see what else. So the floating IPs have now been matched to the internal network. I believe they're all trunks that are created for each of the instances as well. In a telco world where you may want to have a jumbo MTU or something on the system, you would set that all up through your OpenStack neutron setting the default MTU to a certain size that when it creates networks. And the router will, sorry, the DHCP server, the OpenStack DHCP server will tell the OK DVMs as well what the MTU is and they'll set it accordingly. So they'll come up with a jumbo frame as well for the MTU on the node network. All right, now what you'll notice is done here in an OpenShift on Stack install, a couple of other things have appeared, excuse me, is we have another floating IP that's appeared. This is actually chosen at random, it's not preset and it's attached to the Bootstrap node to allow us to jump on there and I guess troubleshoot, look around and see what's going on. And that same, what's it called SSH key was added to that node. And so in theory, once that thing comes up, we can connect to it. So let's go ahead and take a look at the Bootstrap. Terrific, so the Bootstrap is actually on its way up and hopefully we can get on to it. You might want to show the console of the controller that's continually trying to get the ignition file from the Bootstrap and when it's ready, it'll get it and boot itself, yeah. All right, so I can probably get this out of the way. We can see what OpenStack has done and we can see what's being built up and as Nick said, the controllers, there we go. So this is this two phase installation. The first phase is completed on the Bootstrap so soon it will be able to give this controller its access. So now we should have cry control and all that on there. Now it's just a case of waiting for the installation to begin. And we can as well, I'll just jump off again and I've set this up. So hopefully we should start to get some life out of things a bit too early, I think. Yeah. So probably the more exciting thing to watch here is the journal. And it's downloading the images live, so depending on your internet speed, it could take a bit of time.  All right, you can see it's all beginning to start up. Perfect. Eventually that cluster, I mean, this is the same install process. Hopefully you've been watching all day but you've been seeing all day to actually get us there. That was Nick was pointing out. The images have just been grabbed by the controllers and now we should be able to start to see the cluster form. And that was our first piece. Now with the installation, if you notice, there's no floating IP placed on any of the control plane nodes. And ideally, right, you're not gonna jump on to them. But we can actually just jump over to them if we want by just using a don't command for Linux for SSH. And then we can watch what the cluster that the masters are doing. They're given the same key. And so the same process is gonna be happening. Sorry? You can do it the lazy way like me and assign another floating IP address to them by the horizon, could we? Yeah. You can see we don't have any of the tools. So we haven't gone through the phase, the first phase yet. But you'll see it's happening there. There we go. In a minute, it'll kick us off. And what you're seeing is the same installation process across, you've seen across all the other platforms except we're sitting here inside of OpenStack. What else can we add is it's not the most thrilling. I have more slides. There we go. So we're switching over to the second phase in a minute. We'll get kicked off and then the cluster will go ahead and build up. And once that's come on, I wanna jump back on the machine and have a look at some of the networking aspects that are being set up on there. There we go. As you can see, the installer has also set up all our security groups for the cluster. And again, they're all unique to this one cluster. So as a tenant in OpenStack, I could run multiple clusters in the same space. Just have to have your quota set up. Things have to work. If I didn't have Swift, it would place the registry back into block storage and to Cinder. But we're gonna talk about that in a minute. I just really did wanna get the installer running for the hope of actually hitting that final line. So if we now go back to the masters. And one thing to note is the reason you can have multiple clusters as a tenant is that it tags every resource that is deployed for the specific cluster, I tags it with the cluster ID. So if you were to go in OpenStack and do a show on a network that it created, you'll see that it's tagged with the unique cluster ID. So when it comes to tearing it down, it doesn't go and tear down every resource you've got deployed in OpenStack. BlueDreams is hurting my machine. So here's what Nick's, hopefully I'm still with you guys. Yeah. Here's what Nick's talking about. We got the tag, we got the unique network set up there. But if you click on the actual name, August. Yeah. Of the network. It doesn't show you the tags on the GUI. If you were to do a show, OpenStack show network on the CLI and OpenStack, you'll see actually a tags property as well. On this guy? Yeah, if you do a show on the, yep, on that guy. You'll see the tags down these, yep, down there. Where it marks them specific to this cluster ID. And it does it to the VMs and everything as well. If we hop over to back onto our control plan before we actually, before the master disappears or the bootstrap disappears. Again, before I ran that, cry control, you can see some of the functions and stuff we have. So core DNS is running. And this is handling all the internal name server stuff for the cloud, for the cluster. Where we are getting, like you can see the settings that were created when we did the installer. And I was able to set the forwarder to set that. And then we can see how our internal network has got a set of VIPs created. And these are going to be balanced across the entire cluster. So this is all handled internally with the IPI install. Obviously with the UPI, you can do different things you need to. But as a great way to get OKD running very fast on OpenStack, not having to fiddle around with too much external networking and DNS and such. This is quite convenient. And this is managed, and again, all by KepaLiveD. So it sets up the VRRP communication. And then, and again, Nick's the networking expert here. So he'll correct me when I say the wrong things. But we set up various different VIPs inside. This is for the API. We set up a DNS VIP so that all the internal nodes can resolve against it. As well as the Ingress, which we'll go and set up in a minute. Now, if your OpenStack isn't within a private network, so, and these IP addresses clash with that private network, you can renumber them through the install config file. Do, but also, because we're going to lose the bitstrap soon, HA proxy is running there as well. Again, this is all set up by the IPI installer.  And then shortly, what Nick was talking about there is in that install config, you can actually be very specific. And I know you've run into issues where, that does happen, right? Where the site is being used elsewhere. Especially if you're installing it on OpenStack that's inside a enterprise network, that's typically will be using 10 addresses itself. You might want to change it to 172.16 or some other private addressings. Now, one other piece of set up that we need to do manually that hasn't, that will be, I think it's being added to the next release of the various pieces is to attach, we still have that extra floating IP. And we want to go ahead and attach that to the Ingress port so that the app URL and then all the apps can resolve. So at the moment, we do that manually with just an OpenStack command. So this is a floating IP. I'm gonna set the port to use the floating IP we designated and set up in DNS. So right, if we look at anything.app.mycluster and name we're gonna actually get that resolution against that IP. So now is where we get to sort of the kind of the boring part of the install. Everything is rolling. But what's gonna happen in a minute, as everyone knows, is we're gonna have that bootstrap. Oh, there it goes actually, so that's a nice timing. So the bootstrap is currently being removed. And that means the cluster is actually self-sufficient. Great sign. So we've got our three masters up and ready. And we are now moving into that second part of actually getting the cluster and the operators to go. Actually moving along quite nicely. And then finally, everyone's favorite. We can see that the various operators are starting to come up. So what I thought we might do while this is running is quickly look at some of, as well he was saying the last one was the stuff about the slides. I've got a couple of slides. So let's briefly talk about those things. Before we go, the timing here is actually accelerating and I love it. What we have going on here is the bootstrap's been removed. We have our control plane now established. You'll notice that the image for ignition has been removed as well. That's wonderful because obviously there's sensitive stuff in there and we don't wanna have that sitting around. So the installer removes that. Obviously if you're using another method you need to do that yourself or expire it or protect it or whatever you need to do. But the installer is looking after that. We are still, as you remember, we asked, I think I have got one worker coming up and we're gonna connect it to this extra network. But we haven't seen that actually happen yet until the workers come up. So let's quickly, I wanna quickly go back to these slides because I think that it helps to visualize a bit of what's going on while it's happening in the background. So essentially this is the IPI deployment flow on OpenStack. It's similar obviously to other cloud providers but I found it helpful just to outline it, right? We run the installer and then this Bootstrap node grabs our Fedora Core OS or our Red Hat Core OS image at a glance, it grabs ignition from glance and then sets up the Bootstrap cluster and then that cluster can pull the containers and then maintain itself as normal. These are all running through Nova and they can be backed by Cinder, whatever, we'll talk more. Once that Bootstrap cluster is established and we wait the KIPA LiveD back over to the three masternodes and the cluster is established and then we are able to go ahead and add workers through a machine set which is what the installer will actually build for you. So let's dive quickly into the integrations as the installer goes in the background. We visited this already, you should be familiar with what's happening there. So where are the integration points for OpenStack when you're putting OKD on there? One is the image service. So this is glance where we will store a Core OS image for the base install and the ignition payload. We can't add it directly to cloud init because cloud init, it's too big. So what we actually do is offer the instance and just a URL to go retrieve it. It does mean that the Core OS image and that tenant will need access to glance. The next thing to talk about is networking. So to try to summarize what we saw happening there and please, Nick, add when you have more here, we stick OpenStack floating IPs in front of these internal VIPs and they're all managed by KIPA LiveD to balance across the cluster. There's an API VIP on the Bootstrap until the cluster is up, shouldn't be unfamiliar, which is then weighted back to the masters. Those VIPs, as we talked about, have to be established in DNS prior to installation. The masters will then run everything that's needed for the cluster, your DHCP, an HA proxy, Core DNS, the plugin for Core DNS, the MDNS publisher, and KIPA LiveD. The Ingress VIP is then set to the workers and not fronted by a floating IP, which in our case, we have to manually assign. The machine network is the neutron tenant network that was built. This is what Nick was talking about, how you can actually change it to a different SIDR if you need to or a different network ID if you need to, but that is managed by the installer and an IPI. You can customize that somewhat by what Nick said. Let's see. There's a tenant on OpenStack. You can use the same IP addressing across multiple clusters on OpenStack, and what distinguishes them is the NAT address or the floating IP address that you assign to them. So each cluster that you deploy in OpenStack as a tenant would need its unique floating IPs and DNS names registered. But in terms of the internal IP addressing, they could be the same. Are we seeing a lot of people doing like one cluster per cloud or when is that, what are you seeing out there? In enterprises, I mean, you know, in enterprises, I see more multiple clusters, you know, a dev cluster, a pre-prod cluster, a production cluster, say on OpenStack, or you may even go down to specific development teams. So, you know, a development team may want their own cluster and you can easily, as their own tenant on OpenStack, you can easily spin up their own cluster on that. Another aspect of networking which we didn't talk about here is this is running the OKD SDN on top of the OpenStack SDN. So we've got, in a way, we've got double encapsulation with VXLAN, but with OpenStack, you've got the option of deploying Kurya, which allows Kubernetes to interact directly with the OpenStack SDN itself. So it removes the OKD encapsulation layer and it creates the infrastructure networks that it requires for OKD, it creates it natively on OpenStack itself. And in that kind of deployment, if you were to enable Kurya, there will be many, many more networks that you'll see created on OpenStack and not just the main node network, which then it encapsulates, then it uses its own SDN to encapsulate all the infrastructure networks across. So at the moment, that's been abstracted to us and all the OKD infrastructure networks are being encapsulated across this orange network that you're seeing here on OpenStack. But if you were to integrate the OKD and OpenStack SDNs through Kurya, you'll see multiple networks being created here, one for each infrastructure network and one for each namespace or project in OKD as well. Yeah. Yeah, I didn't play with Kurya on this one and some of that was because the version of OpenStack I'm using doesn't actually have, it uses OVS and can be a bit heavy and my resources are limited. I wasn't able to do it. So this is quite good. The worker node has actually come up so we're progressing quite well with the installation. As you can see through my watch command, we've connected to both networks. So we're my BYON OKD network as well as the OpenShift network that was created by the installer. Additionally, we now have containers created. Not those containers, different kind of containers. These are object storage and this is going to be the backing for the internal registry. Now, it bothered me a lot that there were multiple names here so I asked the developers and it's a bug. So there's only meant to be one and they're working through that. Not sure how that happened but these containers will be created. If we had been using Cinder for our registry we would see another volume attached to one of the workers. Obviously that's not a best practice for HA whereas for an object store it's not pinned to an instance. So far the installation is quite good at the moment. All the components are coming up and as you saw in here we've actually attached into that network. So let's see the status of the install. All right, the workers up. I might even be able to do a scale on here. And one thing that I can see that is all set up for you if we... Yep, the installation seems to be moving along pretty nicely. This should complete shortly so let's quickly jump back to the slides to finish what we were talking about. Someone I work with at Red Hat, Robert Heinzman, a colleague of mine did this incredible drawing to try to capture what's going on with all the different components of the installation. And so I wanted to reproduce it here. It's all his but it really helped me to understand how it holds together. You can see where we have our floating IPs sitting in front of our tenant-based VIPS where the balance is with Keep Alive D and how the whole thing is held together. Again, so just to talk through these integration points we have got, in one case I showed an example of where we set a root volume. I set it to 30 in the actual demo but we saw those connected. And as I mentioned it can be the registry back end but that's not the preferred method. The IPI, the installer will actually test to see if it has access to object storage. If it doesn't or gets some kind of no access errors or whatever, it will go ahead and set it up in Cinder. Something that's coming soon and something that's near and dear to Nick I think these days is the addition of more storage support for OKD and OpenShift. Right now we are a little bit limited in that there's no RWX support by using Cinder for volumes. Of course you can use an NFS server, you can set up a storage class but Manila is being brought in and that is what brought a lot of the BYON functionality. Nick, if you want to add anything about Manila or just, yeah. Well I mean what Manila will give OpenShift is the ability to basically utilize NFS on, you know, typically a CIF storage cluster that's deployed with OpenStack. And the way OpenStack does it, or I should say CIF does it for to present an NFS front end to OpenStack resources is it uses the Ganesha project which does NFS to CIF FS gateway for you. And Manila's responsibility is to establish and secure the file shares. So what that would allow you to do is to create persistent volumes that can be shared across multiple, or pods running on multiple workers because they'll all be able to use the standard NFS mountings to communicate. And I think the Manila support is certainly improving but, you know, any work that people are interested in doing to assist with this, it's a large piece of work and takes a good deal of testing and environments to back it up. Some other interest, I mean obvious stuff here is NOVA for all our compute. It can be ephemeral, it can be block. The usual requirements here that we need fast disk, this isn't a public cloud so you need to be working with an OpenStack admin to understand what kind of storage is being supported underneath that. Also, there's improved support for availability zone so you can actually start to place the workers where you want them inside the cloud. That's evolving as well around between the Cinder support and NOVA to get that right. I know Nick, you've had some battles with that. Yeah, there's, I mean, and one thing to note is the deployer will request affinity or anti-affinity for the masters and things like that so it will ask OpenStack to try and place them on different compute nodes. So it avoids trying to put, you know, two masters or three masters on the same compute node because obviously then you're not really running HA for your three masters are running on the same physical machine that may die. But if you're only running with a small OpenStack cluster with only two or three compute nodes then you may see multiple masters on the same compute but it will try, you know, to spread them across different physical machines. And then, yeah, and in theory then you should be able to get away with something like a live migration, some of the built-in capabilities in the form. I don't know that's 100% perfect though. I'm sure that has its ups and downs. Yeah, I mean, I've played with it quite a bit. If you do have central storage like Cep, RBD and you do birth, you do create it using volumes or ephemeral backed by Cep on OpenStack. And that's where you start needing to see your OpenStack administrators on how they've deployed things and what's available. But live migration certainly does work even on masters. I've done it many times. As long as your storage backend systems can handle it, you can move a master from one physical compute to another. Yeah, and I suppose that's the nice thing about being able to get things like OKD straight onto an OpenStack platform is you get all that on-premise benefit of infrastructure as a service. Well, exactly. OpenStack is a private cloud. Yes, indeed. So our install is still progressing. The final piece as far as the integration point is the object storage or Swift. It's the preferred registry backend for HA and the default choice of the IPI installer. And we saw that. One thing I'd like to do is actually show a scaling demo. So what I've done is when the IPI installer runs, it creates just a machine set for the workers to make scaling simple. I'd like to demonstrate that it works and see how it works across OpenShift and OpenStack. If the cluster hasn't finished, I've got another one that I pre-built to just show the demo while we do it. So let's see where we are. We're not quite there with the final installation. So we're going to go ahead and bring up this second one. Hopefully we'll be successful there. Okay, so this is a different OKD install, but on a different OpenStack. Make sure we're all logged in. And guys, if it takes a little bit longer, don't worry, we'll just hear the last talk so you can go a little bit longer. Yeah, no problem. So yeah, we can keep an eye on that. But as always... So here we have another OpenStack environment, and this one has got an OKD install with a number of workers. In this case, we have two workers and our three control plane nodes. You can see I built this previously. The actual control plane was built days ago, and then I've scaled a few times. And this is an IPI install. It creates a default machine set for the workers, as you'd expect, which means that because it's using the OpenStack cloud provider, we can actually easily scale out. So why don't we add a couple of workers, and now we can simply get back. And hopefully the two platforms are speaking to each other. In the meantime, I'm looking at the console and your other stack has completed deploying. Oh, excellent. We can do even more machine builds. So what we have happening here, right, is you can easily see that once we scaled out the machine set, OpenShift has related that information back down to OpenStack, or OKD back down to OpenStack, and we got a matching of naming so that you can really see how integrated the two platforms are. And I know it's not surprising for those on AWS and such. It's like how it works every day. But in an OpenStack space, it's really helpful that we can see the same type of integration that's happening in all the other platforms, so simply done. And what I'll show you, as Nick said, because we finished the other install, this is what comes right out of the box. So literally we now have the machine's provisioning. There may not be nodes yet because they're still building up. We can see that the extra, the new workers are being added to the topology. And just being automatically plumbed into the right networks. If we do this on the other machine, on the other one, we'll actually get the extra networks. We can see that we have the ability to create the autoscaler, so the custom stuff where if we want to go ahead and hit it with load it will automatically autoscale. And that constant communication and interaction and integration between OKD and OpenStack means that the two pieces work almost seamlessly, right? You're able to just scale out without much effort. So Nick's told us so anyway. The big positive of this is it's running on-premise, where I can say it would normally be running. It's not in the cloud. It's not across, you know, depending on the type of workloads you're dealing with and security requirements, government regulations and things like that. Yeah. I mean, it's awesome, right? It's an open source, on-premise, running an open source container platform, perfectly integrated and, you know, almost... Yeah, it's wonderful. So Nick, you're saying the other one finished? Yep. We'll put those away. That's cool. But yeah, look at that. So I know Diane loves this. So here we go. We've had a successful installation on our cloud of the live demo. So we're going to go and see if we really did. The proof of life moment. Here it comes, yeah. So obviously relying on the DNS I set up previously. Here it comes. Voila. Can we see that dashboard? Hey, that's great. Yeah, that is great. The demo gods love it. And good. This is terrific. A couple of things I want to point out that have been done here. A storage class was created. And I haven't mentioned much about it, but the Cinder storage class is created by default out of the IPI installer. Again, you can modify that. You can change that. You can do what you want. But you get that one. That one's built in. And so you're getting that immediate integration with OpenStack where you can use it to use it for persistent volumes and other pieces. If we had, let's see what else I did go on about was our... You had to, you know, if you didn't integrate with Manila, the other department that had Manila, you would see an additional... That's where you would set up your... Well, the Manila operator would automatically create an additional storage class for you. Yeah, that's... Oh, right. Okay. So again, that installer is handling all that for you. Here's our autoscaler. Might as well scale this while we're here. That install definitely was... Now we can... You know, we've got the autoscale ready. There we go. Ready to go. You can see it appear there shortly. And overall, I mean, that's... I probably couldn't have asked for more with that installation and that timing to actually have been able to go through all that. I don't know if I had any more slides to... No, see, I prepared this slide. This is my just-in-case slide. Success. But it's a different one, obviously.  Jeff, that was the just-in-case one. That was the just-in-case, yeah. Say, you know, look, I really can do this. It does actually work, but I don't need to do that because it really does actually work. And, you know, working within Red Hat with a lot of the upstream guys and gals to put this... to see how this comes together, it's just getting better and better with each new cut and the add features to it like you wouldn't believe. But the integrations have become so clean.  There's a bunch of helper scripts to make it work. I know Nick loves to bash about on it and find all the various issues. But it's, you know, it works right out of the box. You know, these two technologies just work so nicely together. So here we go. I've added those two workers. Remember, we had an extra network, so that's not been forgotten. They've been plumbed into that network. I haven't had to do any kind of complicated setup on the hosts. I'm not pixie-booting.  It feels like I'm on public cloud. The integration between the two is becoming so clean that I feel confident with my OpenStack cloud running OKD, OpenShift, whatever. Because it's just built so nicely. I mean, I'm just clicking buttons here. And of course, you can do all this with the CLI. But that wouldn't be as fun to watch. Or maybe it would be. Maybe. Yeah. So what else can we add, Nick? I mean, this is there. The install is coming up. Now, this is just OKD. There's nothing to show off about how these nodes are added to the cluster. But as you can see with this screen here, it's all managed through those OpenStack APIs, meaning our OpenStack admins are aware of what's going on. They're able to control quotas, access to resources, ensure that tenants have what they need, and then the tenant running OKD is able to do what they need to do. They're able to scale access externally, run multiple clusters. It pretty much gives you a public cloud-like experience but on something so much cooler than public cloud with OpenStack. Nick, I don't know if you want to say much more. I can mention what I've been playing with. If you had an OpenStack that had bare metal as a service as well, through the UPI, you can actually achieve a scenario where you've got OpenStack deploying bare metal workers for you as well, dynamically and connected straight into the OKD cluster without even, you know, just as we've scaled up now for virtualized workers, you can have bare metal machines deployed for you and attached directly into the OKD cluster. Pretty cool. I love how you say that the private cloud is the coolest there and I have to agree for lots of different reasons but I think it is one of the neatest things to see us to be able to do a full stack there with all OpenSource stuff. It's really pretty awesome. So I'm really grateful you guys got up so early so you're the only ones with light in the room so far today. We had people up at midnight to see you and Saudi Arabia. So I'm really very grateful to have you guys on and look forward to collaborating a lot more with the OpenStack community and bringing this to the forefront. I think you guys, there's an open infra summit I think in October that we're going to try and do an OpenStack Commons with an OpenShift Commons with an OpenStack theme. It was the event that was supposed to be in Berlin so I'm negotiating how to co-locate virtually with the OpenStack foundation but hopefully we'll get you guys back on stage hopefully before October but to continue on the live stream having a lot of OpenStack content as I think there's a good number of our end users who are deploying OKD, OpenShift on OpenStack these days and we'd love to hear from you all as much as possible. So kudos to you guys for getting up. Is there any last words or a slide or anything that you wanted to end on? Just in case we want to get a hold of you and... Fair point. I didn't actually prepare that. The more we hear from people the better so I'm easy. I'm August at redhat.com and I don't know if you shared a Twitter handle at SilentOg on Twitter but yeah just reach out, ask questions there's a bunch of stuff that we've produced Nick works on blogs I've got some blogs on OpenShift we want to share the Shift and OKD on Stack Experience because it is growing and as you can see in 36 minutes we've got a container enabled cloud that's pretty awesome and I guess to end on the more we talk the better and I just can't wait to hear more I'm so excited to have been given the opportunity to actually do this, I was terrified but I was super excited so I'm thrilled. We love to scare people. The fact that it's all 100% open source really excites me there's no proprietary cloud there there's nothing and if you go for the commercial version as well there's hundreds and hundreds of companies already using this stuff out there and as I say it's open source turtles all the way down so it's really pretty cool


My name is Allison Nalloway. I'm an epidemiologist and vaccine researcher here at the Kaiser Permanente Center for Health Research. It seems like I've always been interested in science. I can remember as a child sitting down and reading through my mom's textbooks just because I was really curious about how the body worked. That curiosity kind of stayed with me as I grew up. I was recently back at my parents' house and I found this old paper I had written in high school about the bubonic plague and had like 75 citations on it, which was kind of ridiculous. But I was so fascinated by the subject. I just wanted to read everything I possibly could on it. And I think that's really what it takes to be a good researcher. You just have to dive in and keep asking questions. As I was finishing college, I wasn't quite sure what area of science I wanted to work in. I was studying biology and anthropology and I was working on a lab at that time. And I just couldn't see a life of fruit flies and rats and microscopes in my future. And it was actually a suggestion from one of my professors that led me to a career in epidemiology. I'd gone to a party at her house and she was sitting on the floor in a pillow and she kind of leaned over to me and just said, you should go into epidemiology. For me, it was kind of the proverbial light bulb moment. I knew that epidemiology was the right fit. It's the study of disease and human populations and it has a huge impact on public health. I think there's a public perception out there that vaccines aren't safe. And while there are some side effects to vaccines, generally they're pretty rare. And I think it's really concerned about vaccine safety that have led to kind of a recent increase in people either declining vaccines for themselves or declining vaccines from their children. And that's why we're seeing a resurgence of diseases that vaccines can prevent, like measles, mumps and whooping cough. I'm really proud of the work that we do here at the center because we generate scientific evidence that can help reassure the public that vaccines are safe and effective. I love sports. I love watching them, playing them and now coaching them. So I grew up in the Midwest and I played basketball and softball and track and flag football. Now I've kind of slowed down a little bit and I'm in the golf and tennis and swimming. And I love cheering for my favorite sports teams, the Iowa Hawkeyes, the Chicago Cubs and the Portland Trail Blazers.  It's such a pleasure to see kids get to play and it's such a pleasure to see kids get really excited about sports and learn some new skills.


e ia ea the ia ea's report on the accident Was issued. I think we had done sort of a sort of at least a survey on it with respect to Comparability or whether you know I think that where there's a match in terms of actions the staff or at least the commission had looked at It has there's is there anything more you would want to say on that in terms of where we are I don't know if in terms of any further look the respect to that or insights we've had from that report So we have completed our evaluation of the report and we did not identify any Any gaps or any areas where we felt additional regulatory action was warranted based on insights from the report I think as you know, we had representatives from the nrc participating on the working groups that developed the report itself So I think yeah, I think we were pretty well informed on what the report was going to say and we had Things pretty well capped when the report ultimately came out. Okay, and great. Well, I got you there With respect to the this is the question. I think commissioner barron touched upon about this Trying to create a framework for ongoing evaluation of Hazards and natural hazards Versus a periodic What do we know about in terms of other regulatory bodies where they do is My guess may be that they have gone given their other framework for licensing and oversight to this periodic A periodic review or whatever, but So I don't know if where we are in the process We've we've had a chance to gain insights with from what the international community does But I think it's a very fair point that You know other regulatory bodies have extensive experience in doing psr's for example And we can gain from we can gain insights from that as we move forward and develop our process So that's that's a very fair point. I think okay It's an interesting kind so because on the one hand what I've also heard in in terms of one of the What some of them like about our process is the notion of the back fit The back fit experience of and use of the back fit rule Which they may not necessarily be able to apply during the 10 year For example the 10 year period or the five year period And I guess the one thing I would point out as we develop the process for evaluation of other hazards One of the things we're thinking is you know not making it. It's not we're thinking it might not be a ongoing review A standalone ongoing review, but an ongoing review plus a periodic look at what is what we've compiled over the last X number of years so we can see if cumulatively things have changed so it's it's more than just a Continuum it's a you know points in the process That's correct points in the process. Okay. Well, I think that's going to be interesting. I know that's a A good issue to work on one of the things I think tony pertrandula mentioned And I think in the some of the staff presentation as well as this notion of an effect knowledge transfer and knowledge management particularly as you get to a point where We've been in the let's say the last four or five years We've been particularly in an implementation of additional requirements or evaluations or the like Those are now Coming behind us partly because the requirements are there they need to be implemented. They will be implemented What do you see as a And reflecting on what I think I heard tony say What do you see as particular challenges in that transfer? And how do you intend to manage that? So one of the things That we see is potentially challenges The group of folks that have involved on industry side have been what their fukushima leads if you only have a group of people to do the fukushima work Allowing the regular plant folks to keep their focus on safety as they're transitioning back to the line And we're starting to get into inspections those folks now have to pick up Where the fukushima guys left off if you will and so we're concerned that the knowledge there is not necessarily transferring Perhaps as quickly as we would like so we've already been in communications with Industry and we're talking about having a workshop later this year where we can kind of influx them if you will with Understanding of what we know because we've been in the trenches for quite a few years We're doing the similar thing with the ti after so many of ti We're going to step back and take a look and say okay. Is there any lessons learned here? We're doing the same thing with the sc's we're about Four or five sc's in now and we want to have a workshop and kind of work through What are some of the things that we're seeing on either side? We've been doing a lot of the work again as I mentioned before with regions We've been bringing them all along throughout this process In fact, they've helped us a lot of times with the audit process So they're already very very familiar with What fukushima is what beyond design basis things aren't how we're going to inspect to those so We feel pretty comfortable from that perspective, but again, there are some challenges with perhaps pockets as we move forward I mean one of the things is is looking you know looking back It's a three mile an accident is as if we sit here today and a few hours around at the time but Is there something In reflecting on this says do I wish I knew something better about what we did? Or what what we're trying to get out about tmi today Is there anything like that because you almost have it seems to me it may be worthwhile asking the question ourselves What what are we still asking ourselves about in terms of tmi or understanding what we did at that time? And does that help inform how we might sort of Capture that knowledge or capture. I mean certainly you saw from from mike's Presentation that throughout this process. We've continually adjusted ourselves. We were in a continuing learning mode So as we learn new information we say Perhaps what we originally thought might have been something of value is not as much We adjust ourselves and I think what tony said and what commissioner usiner said about Using this equipment in other capacities helps us to better understand and Integrated if you will and be ready for If that time ever happened it would be tragic, but if it ever happened right we'd be ready for it Last question. I'll ask for you. Yeah sure Also note that we have in fact Reaching back over the years captured sort of the higher level learnings if you will you know preparing for the unknown Keeping a questioning attitude those kinds of things and those are captured actually in documents that we've written Published they they are already a part of our new reg knowledge capture Series if you will we've done seminars for the staff And when I look internationally, there have been similar sorts of activities. Those are a part of the very Practical detail things that we've done like writing s. E's like doing handoffs along the way The kinds of things that jack and troi talked about so it's all of that stuff I think that we have to continue to do as we go forward Okay, my colleagues are indulged by what I was going to ask troi is if you could just give maybe some Better detail in terms of what the temporary instruction Focuses on what is the what are we asking our inspectors to go look at or how to accomplish that? I think that would help those in the audience of me as well Sure. So the the first thing is the safety evaluation that the staff prepares informs the inspection team as to what activities need to be like that and And in practice they go out they they discuss the strategies with the licensees teams They do field walkdowns. They'll watch simulations to make sure things can be hooked up. They do inventories They have all the right equipment. They'll go out to the safer centers But the on-site storage centers In some cases they observe testing and maintenance of the equipment They they compare the procedures back to the operators use they could take the procedures back to the technicians Understanding of how the equipment operates and how it'll be deployed at a high level. They also look at emergency preparedness communication links I think that'll leave anything out most of my team leader at least in region four of the Our team leaders went out with the audit teams on a few occasions to understand how the process was evolving We're using the same core team To do all the inspections in region four plus the resident inspector from each site and and our team leaders before they start in region four They go out and participate in the team inspections at the other site So john metay check who's one of my team leaders was that cook Recently doing the inspection up there and my other team leader ryan alexander will be it I think which site somewhere in region two and a couple of weeks doing the same kind of thing Okay, thanks very much commissioner. So many Well, thank you for your presentations and uh, I my colleagues have asked some good questions But i'll just make some comments and ask some questions in no particular order But I guess I think I will start mike with your uh context and kind of seen setter a brief overview of how we got to where we are Today, it's hard not to step back and reflect on that a little bit I think you mentioned over 250 public meetings if I if I jotted down the number correctly I hesitate to tell this story because people who have smartphones Some in the audience are going to pull out their smartphones and do this as soon as I say it But someone pointed out to me just yesterday That if you go to google Search I have the google app on my phone But if you go to google search and click on an image search if you type in the search chain public meeting japan So that's it. There's no nuclear. There's no fukushima An interesting thing comes up. It is almost entirely at least the first couple of pages are pictures of nrc Commission public meetings. It's I don't that might be maybe a commentary on other public meetings in japan, but um It's interesting to me that that nrc the frames is the very first picture Commissioner austin dwarf you and I are in and it's a picture of this side of the table at a commission meeting So not that I go googling for things that image searches that yield images of me There's people like dave skein and others in there, but I think that's now that may have to do someone's going to email me later today about like google search algorithms And the fact that it was me who searched and somehow that google has a big portfolio on me and knows that I want to Have the return be a picture of me, which I actually don't want um And that may all be true, but I think uh, it has been quite an evolution in development we To this day Some have a very singular focus on the near-term task force But the truth is we've had at this point many hundreds of nrc analysts and experts that have contributed To the nrc's regulatory response to the events in fukushima over the course of the last number of years Every stage in this process has posed a unique set of challenges I think for the nrc different challenges some the same for the industry, but i'm more focused on What's the the long pole in the tent for us? I see this moment in time as reflected in all of your presentations is that Really important inflection point where for years we have been in issue identification Exploration analysis coming up with whether or not there was a regulatory response what that should be And yes, the commission has shaped some of those. I think In some instances I voted for to adopt your recommendation Others of my colleagues have not and we ended up doing something different at times I've been part of a majority that indicated that although the staff considered many things the appropriate regulatory response was something different I think that's actually indicative not of Of a weakness in this process, but a strength in it If the commission were merely here to pass through everything the staff developed that would be a very different nrc Than it is. I had the preponderance of things have been adopted and many things didn't require the commission's endorsement at all they are fall under the delegated set of of Staff actions Where things are going to fundamentally change the regulatory framework the commission of course has been involved in those and I I think that a lot of good work has been done. It's interesting. We've had turnover on our side When jack came in I thought boy, we are asking this individual to come in This is a difficult awkward time for handoff It had more to do with an important opportunity for your predecessor, but I want to credit you and many other individual contributors at nrc and jack you you did step in at an important time But the challenge or one of the key challenges I see now is We've done all this identification and analysis decisions have been made And as a body of decision making it reflects What we thought needed to be changed in areas where we thought we were well served by what we had And I would remind people that the near-term task force in general felt that we were well served in terms of what we had I don't think that they were calling for a fundamental c change in nrc's regulatory philosophy So we've had the intervening years many I think at this point probably hundreds of thousands of hours of nrc staff analysis And we've had a chance to shape that But the truth for anyone who knows how nrc regulates is that Now as we move into compliance oversight and inspection of this body of decisions and then the manifestation of those decisions It's going to come down to individual nrc inspectors men and women in the field at these plans A lot of the guidance and interpretation falls on their shoulders And so I appreciate the acknowledgement for all of the gentlemen sitting on the other side of the table That you and other supervisors who report to you Will play a very outsize role in making sure that there is coherence Between you've been here at headquarters except for troy. Appreciate you're coming here today You've been here to observe the development of the evolution of where we are very much up close But we can't leave those people to kind of figure it out on the ground And so I hear I appreciate that the previous panel identified this as a challenge I hear from you that we're well along and are thinking about it But I think that will require a very active management and supervision And so I think that's what the knowledge management comes down to is this maybe not a capturing of knowledge but making sure that there's a transfer of knowledge and I appreciate and again i'm comforted that you're on top of that I would turn to mo on flooding because people haven't asked you a whole lot about it So I was at a u.s. Nuclear power plant Doesn't matter which one a few months ago And they were giving a status on their compliance with fukushima actions is a lot of them do when I visit And there was a discussion about their flooding assessment and they said were Still getting input on the xyz dam and I said well What state is it and I don't happen to know and more relevant more relevant I said and and how far away from that how far far away from this plan is that dam and it was over 900 Miles away now. I don't know if you're a hydrologist. I'm not a hydrologist, but I think as a lay person Do you share my difficulty in wrapping my mind around? How a dam failure 900 miles away? You know impinges. I don't I I can create hypotheticals. I'm like any other creative person My mind can try to figure I realize a lot of these are river systems And so we have to look at it that way But then I tried to think about it and say If that's the level of conservatism, perhaps it just reflects uncertainty and conservatism It does affect how one would approach a periodic Review of hazards because the one way to handle the need to constantly relook at something is to look at it Less frequently but with an abundance of conservatism because then The need to reanalyze it would need to be something that fell out entirely outside of that bubble And I guess I'll let you speak to the 900 mile away dam But I would I do want to say this is the other so I see two key challenges One is the knowledge transfer the other one is The fact that as we move forward We really need to understand as we've learned all along that every action we've taken Then has an effect on whether or not regulatory action is probably needed on other actions and I don't want to draw I think in anything we look at in the mitigation of severe accidents If you implement some measures other measures are then less recommended than they otherwise would be and I see the whole of the last five-year journey as Reflecting that that idea is that tier one made tier two and tier three I know that our most persistent critics might say Well, you know time went by and nrc thinks that the public's forgotten about this And that's why tier two and tier three are getting short shrift. I don't share that view at all And I think it does require, you know some some study of all that we've done That the fact that items in tiers two and tier three Are less recommended on the basis of the tier one actions I think we knew that all along and so this isn't something that happened accidentally five years later Okay, mo I've got one minute. What about why does that dam 900 miles away make a difference? So i'm not a hydrologist I would say it's it's just the amount of water behind that dam the fact that it is 900 miles away It still has an impact on the site. I do share the view that It does lend itself to a certain perception of of a level of conservatism that we are looking And we're implementing and calculating these hazards and that goes without saying for for flooding Just the probabilistic risk assessment framework is not at hand yet And it's several years away if not, you know And I can't remember whether this site needed input from the core of engineers. I know some sites Need that can I just ask you quickly? Do we have do those sites get good Transparency into that data? I had heard a couple of years ago that the core didn't want certain information underlying the inputs about Flooding hazards to be shared with licensees or frankly anyone outside the government It does raise i'm the only non-lawyer on this commission or someone without a law degree But it raises issues of if I can convict you on evidence that I don't allow you to see There's a kind of a what I would call as a non-lawyer a due process issue there. Have we resolved that? So commissioner andy cambell is at the podium. He's been in the teeth of this This issue and so if he can talk to your question, uh, excuse me this commissioner savanna key I'm andy cambell. I'm the deputy director of the division of site safety and environmental analysis And I've led all the visits except for the initial ones to the army core sites We interact with them weekly we set up a process that allowed the licensees to ask Any question they wanted through an early meeting before they got their hydrographs from the results And through interactions if they had additional questions, we've provided opportunities for them to submit those to the army core It is important to recognize that it is not only the army core But all the organizations that are responsible for dams protect certain information that in the wrong hands could be detrimental to Property and life and that includes dams in canada by the way. So we work through a process of Working with the army core making sure the licensees have an opportunity To get any and all the information that they want to be able to take the hydrographs and the other associated information And do the flooding analysis for their sites It's an ongoing process. We're working currently on the last site, which is on the columbia river That involved, uh, treating negotiations with the army core in canada because that's all under the columbia re us canada treaty on the columbia river And yes a large dam 900 miles away can cause a lot of damage And that's the kind of information that is protected now the screening process that we use Eliminated Thousands now i'll say tens of thousands of dams That are in the national inventory of dams from further consideration on all the watersheds that we've looked at In the end there are only a handful of dams that are of concern and they are the very big ones Or they're very close. So that's the kind of thing you have to keep in mind when you're discussing and i'm Careful not to talk about any particular dam or river system Or what the flooding could be but those are the kinds of considerations I will point out that the Review that we've done is consistent with what the army core does what bureau of rec does what firk does We've had a lot of cooperation with those agencies in this process and the licensees have been Able to see all that information It's just the transfer of information of a particular nature to licensees is Or to anybody outside that sphere is controlled Okay, thank you. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I'm over my time. Thank you commissioner commissar osmond Thank you chairman. Thank you all for being here And for your work and the work of your teams I'll also Echo commissioners finneke's thanks to tory for representing the regions here and it's very good to see tory Not surprisingly i'm going to follow my colleague commissioners finneke and doing some reflection here for I think some important reasons that this is we're the two that were here when this started off and At least i'm i'll be here another few weeks But this is my last chance publicly to thank the staff for All their work and all the fukushima issues whether it be at headquarters or in the regions But also to provide just some individual commissioners perspectives on this because I think it is important to take stock of Where we are today in 2016 And i'll make a couple of comments some of which are going to add my voice to that of christine finneke's here um I remember very clearly When in the week after fukushima when the commission voted to not shut down nuclear power plants united states because we believe they were safe I think that gets that whole historical fact gets missed in many discussions today Well, the commissioners finneke I was here when the commission unanimously endorsed Having a near-term task force effort to look at areas that we ought to look at but not to say Yes, go out there and immediately implement everything that this task force does And I think that has been mischaracterized in a number of congressional hearings The commission did not go forth and say go tell us what to change in our regulations It says go look at those areas and recommend what areas of our regulatory process In substantive regulations should we explore based on what we know in 2011 in fukushima That has been mischaracterized so many times. I felt it was important to Try to clarify today. These are areas to look at then we'll decide what regulatory actions if any are appropriate That's probably the most single Significant Inaccuracy I've seen in the press the last five years In july of 2011. I remember bill bordcher was sitting exactly in your spot and I said bill What were the key lessons learned and chair and burns hit on this briefly in his questions Today, what were the key lessons learned from our experience as a regulator based on three-mile island? And I remember very clearly mr. bordcher saying A lot of things were ordered by the nrc A lot of those activities added safety value A lot of them did not Is that a lot of them did not that kind of resonated with commissioners finicky and I and led in the fall 2011 when second 11 Zero one three seven came out when marty virgilio had your job that we led to this tier one tier two and tier three And I completely agree with commissioners finicky that we knew at that time that all things are not created equal here There are some that were really of safety significance some that we needed to look at that but would not rise to that same Urgent safety issue and that's exactly how it's played out Yet there are those critics of the nrc who would suggest that we didn't do all the stuff that Was listed line item 35 separate areas in the if I remember right in the near-term task force report Well, there was a reason for that I'm not going to ask this question mike, but I think you can just nod your head I'm not trying to ask a leading question. I do have a law degree. I'm not a practice, you know experience attorney, but In a leading question format, I think that there's been if you look at the amount of I'm going to use this as a visual This amount of work effort done by the near-term task force report And I'll magnify that by probably a factor of at least 100 or the number of hours and effort expended by the nrc staff and to look at all of this But to more fully explore various areas. Is that a fair characterization? Okay, and so that plays into this not being a static Approach it's a dynamic approach And I think that dynamic approach has served this agency extraordinarily well It's evolved with time as lot knowledge has been learned and as new things looked at and as risk assessments have changed And the fact that we've made some decisions in 2013 and 14 and 15 that were Backing off maybe some things we thought might originally Be appropriate Is not a bad news story I'd say it's a good news story and it confirms that we've used solid science and engineering practices analytical methods to assess the risk and use that to inform our decision-making Again that piece has also been mischaracterized a number of times in the press The communications piece and I appreciate that You talked about the 250 meetings And I look at my service in the department of energy department of defense and kinshore spenikis talk about the google hits on public meetings and In talking to my colleagues international community of the last five years and two months since fukushima It's been my personal view that we could not have been more transparent There's no other country that has been as transparent as united states in discussing these issues and engaging stakeholders At the end of the day that why I expect our professional staff are technical The technically competent staff to take all that into account and to be able to render decisions And I think you have In preparation for a recent speech. I looked at the number of votes I've cast on seki papers on fukushima along with commissioner spenikis 25 In the all of our votes on websites I think the record of public meetings is very open and transparent So for the american public, uh, even though there may be times when people will disagree with decisions we've taken And that's a fair comment and i'm not asking for everybody to agree with us But at least I think it's a fair statement to say that there's been transparency as to how we've arrived at those decisions Whether somebody agrees or not you can at least see how individual commissioners came out On different seki papers. I think that's a real strength In the last I'd say six or eight maybe 10 or 15 congressional testimonies that I've Had an opening statement for I've um been proud to say that I think we're in a good place on fukushima issues and that we have relied upon solid principles of science and engineering I feel that way today And I have confidence that years from now You and you look back upon your legacy at the nrc You'll be able to say that's the case and I also acknowledge a lot of work left to be done as my johnson said Earlier people have commented. I'm gonna do a little sidebar here But I think it's important in the concept of periodic safety reviews and I've recently discussed these on international trip with other international regulators just last week over in spain I'm not a critic of the periodic safety review process But I think when people ask ostendorfer, why don't you do that in the united states? I'd say Well, here's why And it's been Look at our baseline inspection program. Look at the resident inspectors reported to re-pruitt and mark de pa and chris kennedy down in region four Sell them as that rigorous baseline inspection program from my experience fully replicated elsewhere It's not a criticism. It's just I think an accurate observation Look at our component design basis inspection programs where every three years every plant has a Detail focus area and engineering performance specifications That looks in an ongoing fashion with a deep dive at a particular aspect of plant safety Our reactor oversight process I could go on and on down the path. I won't do that but I'd say that For other countries periodic safety reviews work well for them. I respect that I think our systems work well for us and it's not a When it's be when one looks at what we do in the united states you have to look at the details And do a deep dive on what we do for our inspection program. Otherwise, there's not an I don't think you'll have an accurate comparison Mike I'd encourage you now. This is not something you need you need commission direction for And that need not Capture this in the srm, but I think it's important at some point in time You and Vic McCree can do this. I think it's important to consider capturing A lessons learned from Fukushima regulatory lessons learned not the details but more the process the You know high-level senior leadership engagement that you're Uniquely equipped to lead as in your position as having led the Fukushima steering committee for so many years and so forth the other piece that The second sidebar offer is I don't think there's been A full articulation by industry or the nrc where I'll use a phrase nuclear enterprise Of the importance of operator training in all of this We we don't talk about enough. I don't think industry talks about enough either And I know that a few years ago. I know commissioners finnaker will recall at one of these meetings There was a question about well, we don't know that operators would carry out these steps Remember that where there's a debate maybe three years ago on this topic and I think that was Any questions a fine question, but I think it it It did not Get fully answered from the standpoint that I have complete confidence as a former nuclear plant operator on submarines for many years that The operators in u.s. Industry are highly qualified or proficient. They're ongoing training Every x number of weeks is a very strong Aspect of their preparation to deal with any cash, and I think that's one piece that Has not received the visibility that's appropriate Okay, I'm gonna stop there, but I appreciate you're listening to One commissioner's perspectives. I thank you for all that you and your teams have done. Thank you chairman Thank you commissioner Before we close any other comments from my colleagues Well, thanks. I'm pleased we've had this opportunity to discuss the progress to date on the fukushima daichi lessons learned Activities as well as the plans for the actions that remain Before us to be completed to hear their perspectives of both the staff as well as Other external stakeholders on these issues Again, we appreciate the informative presentations today and with that we'll stand adjourned


Pick any four players in NBA history for your Dream Dunk Contest. LA Prime, Jordan, Indiana's precious Paul George, Vince, Carter, Shade and Sharp. Dream Dunk Contest, Dominique Wilkins, Michael Jordan, Zach Levine and Aaron Gordon just for that rematch. Vince Carter, Dominique Wilkins, Zach Levine got a deal, an over topping. Vince Carter, Aaron Gordon, Zion and Mike Jordan. Vince Carter, Zach Levine, MJ, I want to see y'all in there. Michael Jordan, Zach Levine, Vince Carter and Aaron Gordon. Vince Carter, Zach Levine, Aaron Gordon and Dominique Wilkins. Michael Jordan, LeBron, John Morant. See, Zach a power dunker though, that's kind of hard. Nate Robinson, I do Nate Robinson again. Michael, Zach, Dominique, Mike, A.G., Aaron Gordon. Derek Jones Jr., Mack, my teammate, Vince Carter, Aaron Gordon.


Hi and welcome to this presentation on the NCC 2022 Commercial Building Energy Efficiency Provisions. I'm Claire Wright, your host. Before we begin, I'd like to take a moment to acknowledge the traditional owners of the land on which we produce this presentation, the Ngunnawal Peoples, as well as the traditional owners of the land from which you are viewing this presentation. I'd like to pay my respects to their elders past and present and recognise their culture as the longest living culture in the world. Today's presenter is Mike Dodd. Mike is one of our energy efficiency team members here at the Australian Building Codes Board. His work involves project managing some of the energy efficiency changes in the code. Before we hand over to Mike, I'd like to cover off the learning outcomes for this presentation. After the session, the aim is that you'll have a better understanding of the NCC and learn the following. First, be able to describe the changes to the National Construction Code as they relate to commercial energy efficiency. Second, interpret and understand some of these provisions. And lastly, identify when these changes will be adopted. Now I'll hand you over to Mike, who will take you through the content. Today I will provide a summary of the recently released energy efficiency provisions included in the 2022 update of the NCC. These changes apply to Class 3 and Class 5 to 9 buildings. The intent is to provide information on the provisions that will assist you in understanding the changes. Here is what we will cover today. Following an overview of the changes and their intent, we will look at the mandatory performance requirements. We will then look in detail at the key changes for commercial buildings. There are also new provisions related to electric vehicles or EVs and renewable energy equipment like solar, photovoltaic panels and batteries. I will conclude by providing the information on when the changes will be adopted and where further guidance can be found. Okay, to begin with I will cover the key changes that we think you need to be aware of. There are five key things to highlight in relation to the energy efficiency changes for commercial buildings. I will go through each of these in more detail as we progress through the presentation. Firstly, there is an update to the non-regulatory objectives and functional statements of Section J. These help clarify the high level intent. Second, there is an extensive change to the clause numbering system. Third, there are changes to the neighbours and green star compliance pathways. Fourth, there are small but important changes to the deemed to satisfy provisions for floor insulation. Lastly, there are several new deemed to satisfy provisions for electric vehicles and renewable energy readiness. Okay, so what is the intent of the new requirement? Let's move on to the next slide. There are four objectives which are to reduce energy consumption and energy peak demand, to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, to improve occupant health and amenity and to make the retrofit of renewable energy and electric vehicle charging equipment easy. They also help deliver on the commitment by all Australian governments to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, including the Australian government's enhanced 43% emissions reduction target for 2030 and commitment to net zero by 2050, which was announced in October 2021. There are two mandatory energy efficiency performance requirements that relate to commercial buildings, including the common areas of Class 2 buildings. One is existing and one is new. I'll go through each in turn now. In 2019, JP1 was the only performance requirement in Section J. In 2022, J1P1 is the updated clause number for what was JP1. This performance requirement relates to energy use of all commercial buildings and the common areas of apartment buildings. The only change to this performance requirement from 2019 is that it now explicitly excludes the sole occupancy units for Class 2 apartment buildings and Class 4 parts of a building. These now have their own dedicated performance requirements. The extract on the screen shows the update. Only the highlighted words and the clause number has changed. You can see that most of this item is unchanged and it is business as usual in relation to meeting this performance requirement. The new performance requirement that relates to commercial buildings, including the common areas of Class 2 buildings, is J1P4. It states, a building must have features that facilitate the future installation of on-site renewable energy generation and storage and electric vehicle charging equipment. To meet this performance requirement, there are several DTS readiness provisions that I will cover in more detail later. The focus of this presentation is Class 3 and Class 5 to 9 buildings, but it is also worth noting that there are two other new performance requirements in NCC 2022, J1P2 and J1P3. These are dedicated provisions for sole occupancy units in Class 2 apartment buildings and Class 4 parts of buildings. These are not covered in this presentation, but if you would like to know more about this topic, please see the Apartment Building Energy Efficiency webinar available on our YouTube channel. Briefly, one thing that is unchanged are the compliance pathways for commercial buildings. Just as in 2019, you can demonstrate that a project satisfies the performance requirements by using a performance solution, a deemed to satisfy solution, or a combination of both. The existing whole of building prescribed calculation verification methods, J1V1, J1V2 and J1V3 verification using a reference building also remain available as compliance options. The J1V4 building sealing calculation method to comply with part of the J1P1 performance requirement is also retained. The process for each compliance pathway is also largely as it was in 2019, except that the J1V1 Neighbours Commitment Agreement verification method has been expanded to cover a range of building types beyond office buildings. And the J1V2 Green Star method has been simplified, but I'll cover these in more detail later on. I'll go through the key changes to Section J in more detail now. These are relevant to the common areas of Class 2 buildings, Class 3 buildings and Class 5-9 buildings. The first key change that you will see is that the objectives and functional statements have been returned to Volume 1 from the Guide. The objectives and functional statements are still non-regulatory, but help with clarifying the intent of the provisions. Previously, the Guide identified that for energy efficiency, the objective was to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The objective has now been expanded to align with the Government's trajectory for low energy buildings policy. The trajectory notes that the benefits of energy efficiency include lower bills, improved health and comfort for occupants, improved resilience, lower peak electricity demand and reduced greenhouse gas emissions. And these things are now also the objectives of Section J in the NCC. The next key change is the updates to the clause numbering that has occurred throughout the entire NCC. It is referred to as SPTC, which reflects the new system's referencing syntax. Section Part Type Clause. Some examples are shown on the screen. Importantly, SPTC retains as much of the previous NCC's referencing system as possible. To assist practitioners transition to the new referencing system, NCC 2022 includes NCC 2019 numbering alongside the new numbering. Moving on, another set of changes to note are that the J1V1 neighbour's pathway has been expanded from only Class 5 office buildings. It now includes a neighbour's star rating equivalent for Class 2 common areas, Class 3 hotels and Class 6 shopping centres with a gross, lettable area greater than 15,000 square metres. In the verification method J1V2 for GreenStar, the modelling requirements have also been simplified. Buildings following this pathway no longer require a model consistent with both the J1V3 modelling parameters and the GreenStar modelling parameters. So, if you are following the GreenStar verification method, use the GreenStar calculation method only. While the modelling requirements were often identical, there were occasionally small variations that led to modelling efforts being duplicated. For example, GreenStar specifies the plant configuration for the reference building, but J1V3 requires use of the proposed plant in the reference building. This difference previously meant two models would have been required, but this is now no longer the case. The next item to note is an amendment to clause J4D7, which relates to the thermal performance of a concrete floor slab. In most instances, a slab on ground that does not have an in-slab heating or cooling system is considered to achieve a total R value of R2.0. This means that it should automatically meet the deemed to satisfy total R value requirement, which is also set to R2.0. As well as reducing the amount of calculations needed, this should mean fewer buildings need to install under slab insulation to meet the deemed to satisfy provision. This change especially affects buildings with a high floor perimeter to floor area ratio, which tend to be smaller buildings. However, the exception is in Climate Zone 7 and in Climate Zone 8 for overnight operating Class 3 and 9 buildings. Climate Zone 7 and 8 cover alpine regions and other cold winter areas like Canberra, Armadale and much of Tasmania. In these areas you will still need to calculate the total R value for the slab on ground and may still need to add under slab insulation. Before I move on to the requirements for renewable energy and electric vehicle readiness, I would like to highlight that there have been extensive changes to the requirements for Class 2 building sole occupancy units that sit in Section J. These changes are covered in a separate presentation titled Apartment Energy Efficiency. Next up I'm going to discuss the new suite of provisions designed to make it easy to retrofit solar panels, electric vehicle charging and battery storage equipment into all commercial and apartment buildings. These provisions will allow you to show compliance with the J1P4 performance requirement. Performance requirement J1P4, Renewable Energy and Electric Vehicle Charging, requires commercial buildings and apartment buildings to prepare for renewable energy and EV charging equipment. Commercial buildings need to plan for a percentage of car park spaces that can be easily converted to support EV charging, installation of charge control devices for EVs, the provision of dedicated distribution boards adjacent to car park spaces, space to be left on electrical switchboards for circuit breakers for batteries and solar panels, ensuring that 20% of the roof area space remains clear for future installation of solar panels, ensuring warehouse roofs are structurally designed to support the addition of solar panels in the future. The Dean to Satisfy provision is Clause J9D4 in Volume 1. Note it is about EV readiness, not EV charges. It is about laying the groundwork for easy EV charger installation later. What is looking to facilitate is type 2 EV charges, ones that can operate on a 32 amp circuit and readiness for AC charging, not DC charging. To make a building EV ready there are three requirements related to physical infrastructure, electrical capacity and control equipment. The proportion of car park spaces that need to be ready to support future installation of EV charging depends on the classification of the building and is shown on this slide. For Class 2 apartment buildings 100% or all of the spaces need to be EV ready. For Class 5 and 6 buildings like office and retail buildings at least 10% of the spaces are to be EV ready. For Class 3 and Class 7B, 8 and 9 buildings at least 20% of the spaces are to be EV ready. Except for Class 2 apartments the percentages are set at a level you'd expect the building to be able to deal with business as usual without upgrading their electrical headroom. Class 7A buildings which are standalone car parks are not included. They typically have very small switchboard and a very large number of car park spaces, including them would massively drive up build costs and not be economically feasible. For the first key requirement physical infrastructure we are mainly talking about distribution boards dedicated to EV charging. Clause J94 requires distribution boards to be placed in car parks based on the number of EV ready car park spaces per story. This is the table that shows how many distribution boards will be required. Basically it's one per 24 EV car park spaces. In the previous slide we showed the proportion of car park spaces that need to be ready to support the future installation of EV charging. In bringing the two tables together for Class 2 buildings all the car park spaces need to be EV ready. For Class 3 to 9 buildings except 7A car parks you need to multiply the total number of car park spaces by the 10 to 20 percent requirement from the previous slide to work out how many car park spaces are required to be EV ready per story. For example if there are 100 car park spaces on a single story of a Class 5 building 10 percent or 10 spaces need to be EV ready. From table J94 this means that one electrical distribution board is needed to allow for future EV charging needs. The second key requirement relates to electrical capacity requirements in the distribution boards. This is dealt with in Clause J94 2. What this is saying is that you need to size your EV circuits to be able to deliver 12 kilowatt hours of electricity through a charger in an 8 hour period except for Class 3 buildings which require 48 kilowatt hours through a charger over 8 hours. For Class 2 and Class 3 buildings that 8 hour period is overnight. For Class 5 to 9 buildings it is during the day 9 a.m to 5 p.m. In all situations it does not prevent charging at other times but requires the capacity to be provided at the times we would most expect charging to occur. The third key requirement relates to a charge control system with the ability to manage and control charging in response to total building demand. At the very basic level this could be achieved with timers in the distribution board and metering and breakers upstream. This leaves room for a smart system to be deployed over the top at a later date. The concept of load management is central to the measures. It keeps the cost down by reducing or avoiding the need to upgrade the network connection. We'll now look at the new provision intended to allow for easy addition of solar photovoltaic or PV panels and batteries to Class 2 to 9 buildings. This is J95 facilities for solar photovoltaic and battery systems. There are two clauses in this provision. Clause 1 relates to the building's main switchboard and the second relates to the roof. To facilitate the future installation of solar PV on a building the provision provides for at least one labeled circuit breaker slot on the main switchboard. The clause also requires the main switchboard to be sized to accommodate supply from a PV system that covers 20% of the roof space. There's also a requirement to leave at least one circuit breaker slot for a battery storage system. This clause is the extent of the provisions for battery storage readiness. Clause 2 of J95 sets out the provision to leave 20% of the roof clear for ease of retrofit except for buildings that are heavily shaded already have solar or where most of the roof is used for other purposes like a roof garden or car parking or where the roof is very small. There is also a provision for warehouse roofs to ensure that they have the structural adequacy to support solar panels being installed in the future. Those provisions are set out in Section B of Volume 1. We are specifically targeting warehouses as this is the sector where roof structural issues are most likely to arise preventing a solar retrofit. Most roofs in other building classifications will have adequate structural capacity to accommodate a solar retrofit business as usual. If you want to know more about what I have covered in this presentation there are a few places you can visit. The ABCB Resource Library has lots of content to help you understand the NCC be that existing content or the changes in this presentation you can find the resource library on the ABCB website. Our resources include in-depth handbooks, helpful articles and calculators to provide further guidance when working with the NCC. Our YouTube channel has many helpful videos to watch at your own pace. Given that the vast majority of Section J remains unchanged from NCC 2019 we recommend you watch the Section J transformed video on the channel if you would like to know more. Or if you are after a more fundamental understanding of a topic the NCC Tudor series of videos is a great introduction to key components on the NCC. Thanks for that Mike. We hope everyone found that informative. That brings our presentation on the changes to commercial energy efficiency in NCC 2022 to a close. Again if you want more information visit abcb.gov.au. Thanks for watching.