TOM GRANDMAISON: Hello and welcome to the WTW Construction Blueprints podcast. This is Tom Grandmaison. I am the WTW Construction Chief Client Officer and I'm also the podcast host today. And I'm delighted to be joined by two colleagues. First, Gary Rodrigues, who is our WTW Construction Industry Vertical Nuclear Lead out of Boston, as well as Joe Hurley, our West Region Lead for the Tech, Media and Telecom industry practice.
In this episode, we will explore nuclear energy and its fast evolution in today's marketplace. Welcome, Gary.
GARY RODRIGUES: Hey, Tom. Thanks for having me. It's a joy to be here today.
TOM GRANDMAISON: And welcome, Joe.
JOSEPH HURLEY: Yeah, thanks, Tom. Looking forward to jumping into this topic with you and Gary.
TOM GRANDMAISON: Great, thank you. So today we're going to talk about four different areas around nuclear energy. The first is basically raising awareness. Secondly, we'll get into some education. Thirdly, we'll talk about the insurance market. And lastly, we'll talk about some of the challenges that the industry faces.
So let's kick right into things, Gary. Let's talk about why is nuclear being discussed in today's marketplace today.
GARY RODRIGUES: Yeah, thanks, Tom. There are several good reasons why it's being discussed, I think, though the one that, to me, percolates to the top or rises to the top is the discussion that's been pretty intense over the past few years related to climate change. We have a lot of things going on across the world, across the globe that are beginning to demand more energy than we're capable of producing.
At the same time, we're facing issues tied to climate change, ocean level rise, and the things that we see and hear about every day-- catastrophic events like the continued hurricanes earlier this year that battered Florida and the Southeastern United States, for instance, the climate change discussion.
So when we take a look at the global level, nuclear power is a key component and has been for the past few years part of that climate change discussion. And the reason being is, of all of the energy sources that we have available-- including wind, and solar and other renewable energy sources-- nuclear has the lowest amount of carbon emissions.
So when we set goals globally to reduce our carbon footprint to net zero by 2050, nuclear power is a key ingredient in that mix of power that can get us down to the net zero that-- the discussion tied to decarbonization. That's that, to me, is probably the key driver or one of two key drivers, the second being energy demand.
As we've all noticed, it seems like it's happened over the past maybe six or eight months that all of our browsers and all of our search engines have become at least in part supported by artificial intelligence. Tremendous amounts of data and are being chewed up, if you will, and spit out through these search engines using artificial intelligence to get that information for us. And in doing so, it consumes a tremendous amount of energy. I've seen estimates as much as 400% more energy than a normal data center as a result of these AI-type powered searches that we do.
In addition, one search I've been told-- you do an AI search on our Edge browser, for instance-- what we use here at WTW-- would consume as much as a bottle of water in terms of the water needed for cooling. So you take a look at the energy demands and the cooling demands as of this next generation of data that is just exponentially growing. Our data needs will are estimated to grow over the next 10 years as much as they've grown up until this point in our history. So you think of that in terms of data growing exponentially, the power needs growing exponentially, the cooling and water needs growing exponentially, up against climate change initiatives aimed at bringing us down to net zero, nuclear power has become a huge discussion, if you will, as to being a key ingredient in our ability to accomplish or achieve all the goals tied to all of that.
And then, of course, maybe a little bit less important to the one and two that I just discussed is we have technological advancements that have come into play over the past 10 to 20 years while the nuclear industry has been somewhat-- or perceived to be-- dormant, where all the old traditional power reactors that we've had-- and there are about 95 of them in operation in the United States-- where all those old power reactors-- we've had new technological advancements. We had two power plants completed-- the Vogtle plants-- recently and come online.
And with the next generation-- the Gen IV, if you will-- this technological advancements that provide innovation, provide small modular reactors and microreactors that are more efficient, that use different types of fuels, have different types of cooling systems, have different type of safety mechanisms in the event of some type of an incident-- the technological advancements are an important part of why nuclear is getting a lot of attention.
And then there's a tremendous amount and I think it's great-- it's a bipartisan focus. There are a few issues in Washington, DC that are-- is bipartisan as the want for more nuclear power. So we have a tremendous amount of political support.
And recently, maybe a month or two ago when Climate Week happened in New York, we had major banks from all around the world commit to helping us grow nuclear power. So the political and financial support is there. And it's bringing awareness.
And then, lastly, we have to look at nuclear power and the discussion that we're having in the context of energy security and possibly even political-- I should say, governmental-type security. We have to take geopolitical security-- Russia and China are moving very, very quickly to build out nuclear power. And to some extent, we in the United States are lagging behind a little bit. So we're beginning to see the need and the geopolitical aspects of this. The energy security aspects of provide a tremendous amount of this thrust tied to this renewed attention.
TOM GRANDMAISON: Thanks, Gary. Talk a little bit about what's new in the nuclear energy space and what's coming in the years ahead.
GARY RODRIGUES: Great question, Tom. What's new is-- and I think if we look pretty much almost every day we're seeing in the news a-- or we're seeing in the blogosphere-- we're seeing new developments in regard to nuclear power. I think some of the greatest new developments are these advanced nuclear reactors and these small modular reactors that we're seeing and hearing a lot about.
It's true that some big tech companies-- and I'm sure Joe will speak to this in a little while-- big tech companies-- whether it's Amazon, or Microsoft, or Google or somebody else-- are making arrangements with some of the more traditional utility energy providers-- like Constellation Energy, and Talen power and others.
But on the sidelines, and it's a fast-growing area of growth for a whole new set of companies that have been started, and are well-capitalized and have advanced with the designs of small modular and microreactors-- each one of them a little bit different, each one of them positioning themselves a little bit differently than the others. but the advanced-- the new designs are being developed to improve safety and efficiency and cost, if you will. The small modular reactors-- they're smaller, they're more flexible, they can presumably be built once the first of a kind technology has demonstrated itself be built and hopefully modular fashion to bring down the costs.
The advanced nuclear reactors are focused on different types of cool-- alternative coolants like molten salt, and liquid metals and other gases, which can operate at higher temperatures and lower pressures, if you will, than a traditional power reactor. Then we also have new developments that are exciting, that are tied to new types of innovative fuels. We also have a discussion that's advancing faster than even I would have expected it in fusion energy, with companies like Commonwealth Fusion in Massachusetts making great advancements toward commercializing fusion power.
And then again, we also have the new developments that are very, very promising, that are tied to the political, and the financial and investment aspect of it all. And I think when you bring all of that together, all of those lead to this level of excitement of what's new in the industry. I mean, I've been around the industry now for about 45 years. I remember my grandfather's Oldsmobile. This is not my grandfather's Oldsmobile. This is new. This is a big shift in the way in which we're looking at nuclear power.
TOM GRANDMAISON: That is exciting, Gary. How about how nuclear fits within both the North American and the global clean energy strategies?
GARY RODRIGUES: All right. So nuclear has always been a clean energy. The-- by clean is-- the differentiation between clean and green really is one that comes down to the waste issue. But the clean discussion is centered around emissions and nuclear power has the lowest carbon emissions footprint of all of the energy sources that we have out there.
So if we were to take a look at a graphic, you'd see coal up at the top with a very high carbon footprint and you'd see other you'd see natural gas, and oil and others with fairly significant carbon footprint. You'd see wind and solar with small carbon emission footprints. And then you'd see nuclear power is really a blip on a radar screen in regards to the carbon emissions.
So it plays a very significant role in both North American and global clean energy strategies due to its ability to provide reliable-- nuclear power is one of these things-- if we talk about data centers, it's a power source that can be 24/7, 365-type power. It's very, very reliable. It's not reliant on the wind and sun like solar and wind are. So nuclear is a very big part of both North American and global clean energy strategies.
TOM GRANDMAISON: Let's shift to the education issue and just raising awareness for organizations that are considering nuclear energy-powered projects. Think of data centers powering the world's artificial intelligence efforts. Gary, can you talk a little bit about what technology companies, and developers, and contractors and lenders focused on this industry in particular should be concerned about with respect to nuclear?
GARY RODRIGUES: Yeah, Tom, another great question. I think one of the greatest challenges we have and-- is that we have a tendency, I think, to maybe overthink things. And if we take a look at nuclear, nuclear has always been on one of these subjects that's been hard for a lot of people to understand.
I made a presentation not too long ago and one of the first slides that I put up was that, to me, nuclear power-- and having been trained in the Navy and subsequent training and 45 years of experience-- of course, I have a tendency to think of it as not such of a big deal that maybe we overthink things-- but nuclear is a fancy way of boiling water. So in that fancy way of boiling water, we boil the water, we create steam, steam is taken out to spin a turbine generator, which generates electricity. You replace the reactor with a coal-fired plant or an oil-fired plant-- when you get out to the rest of the power plant, it's almost the same-- the mechanics are pretty much the same. But the nuclear stuff is very, very unique.
And within that nuclear context, I think some of the biggest challenges for new companies that want to get involved in constructing or technology companies that are considering nuclear for the future of powering data centers is learning the core of what nuclear is, which brings with it, I think-- and I've been involved in a lot of construction projects around the globe-- but nuclear has a very, very unique safety set of needs because of the possibility of a release of radiation or some type of a radioactive-involved incident where the safety aspects of training of workers, for instance, to avoid exposure to the radiation or the radioactive materials is very, very, very important.
I was involved not too long ago with decommissioning-- an audit of a decommissioning of two plants out in Southern California, looking at the waste handling practices, for instance. The decommissioning of a nuclear power plant is really a construction project in reverse. There's cranes, there's jackhammers, there's all kinds of trades involved. Instead of running wires, you're pulling wires. And most of the deconstruction of a nuclear power plant is traditional construction risk.
But there are those aspects of, OK, let's make sure we deal with the radiation and radioactive-related issues. So in terms of new nuclear, in terms of bringing small modular reactors and powering a data center in the construct of all of that, it's like, OK, how do we train the folks that are now beginning to use this as a power source into those unique attributes that are very uniquely nuclear. So that's one of the-- probably, in my mind, one of the biggest challenges.
And then there's the quality assurance aspect of it. We bring and embed in the design of bridges and tall buildings a tremendous amount of quality assurance. We do it when we make jet airplanes. We also do it when we construct nuclear power plants.
But in the context of the range of quality assurance is applied across most of these traditional construction builds, I think the quality assurance requirements that are set on nuclear power plants or maybe just a little bit higher standard. And so I think bringing in just that little bit extra focus on quality assurance, like we might apply on safety, might be a challenge to an organization that already thinks it's great with safety and great with quality assurance.
Those are a couple of the issues I think that are-- might bring challenges. And then I think there's just the phobia. We have these mental mindsets whereby a construction company that's good at-- for instance, maybe they're a concrete contractor and then they do concrete and reinforcement for tall buildings in Manhattan and they say, jeez, we're looking to expand. And this nuclear discussion, we hear it on the news every night, it's a fast-growing area, how do we get involved in it?
The phobia might be an obstacle in the way in which they're thinking when in reality a great concrete contractor could be equally great as a concrete contractor in the nuclear business. Getting beyond some of those phobias and mental mindsets, I think, will be very, very important.
Because as we grow-- if we truly step into what the potential is here for nuclear power over the course of the next decade-- all the plans, and the ambitious growth that's out there and our need to decarbonize-- we're going to need a lot of companies to step into this. And I think we have a lot of great construction companies that are capable of stepping into it, but they may not want to because they're unsure what that first step might be or they have that mental mindset that will hold them back. And if we can get them beyond that, I think, we overcome that challenge.
TOM GRANDMAISON: Joe, we really appreciate you being patient through this opening part of the podcast. I'd like to get your take on how technology companies and other project sponsors can be most proactive and effective going forward around the use of nuclear, say, in data centers and the like.
JOSEPH HURLEY: Yeah, thanks, Tom. It's interesting. I'll probably take that question through the lens of a risk manager and maybe three areas that come to mind. One, I think pushing to have a seat at the table. I think having been a risk manager in a prior life, oftentimes risk management perhaps is late to the party and maybe hearing about things after the fact. I think because this topic is so emerging and there's a variety of different players in the ecosystem, I think it's important that you as a risk manager-- you're connected early to really understand your respective company and the strategy related to nuclear power.
Two, I would say, in partnership with that, I think really digging in to understand all the risks and exposures for this new ecosystem, if you will. What are those risks? Who owns them? Contractually, who is liable? Where is liability being shifted amongst the various parties? What insurance policies have applicability? Are there new insurance products that perhaps would be developed out of this? So I think those are some questions and deep dives that I think risk managers should be focused on.
And then I think lastly-- and some of this is future-looking-- but really understand the insurer landscape. I think historically, particularly in the nuclear space, it's been dominated by a few insurers. Some of that is from a regulatory perspective. But I think there will be new entrants into the market and so understanding who those players are. And then in combo with that, I think partnering with your broker advisor and starting to have some of those conversations early with insurers in terms of really making sure they understand your respective company's strategy and things you're looking to achieve as it relates to data centers and the nuclear power technologies.
TOM GRANDMAISON: Great. And a follow-up to that, Joe, how are the conversations going here-- early days-- with technology company clients and prospective clients?
JOSEPH HURLEY: Yeah, no, it's a fair question, Tom. I think certainly early days. I think one of the things we're trying to do within our tech industry vertical and certainly partnering with subject matter experts, like Gary and some of our construction folks, is, one, I think, building awareness. So making sure our clients understand what is happening in this space. I think Gary alluded to some of the headline news with Amazon, and Microsoft and other large tech companies. So we're already starting to see some of this come to the fruition. And then helping them understand that some of the political and regulatory impacts, the potential timelines, et cetera.
And then I think, in partnership with that and I've had the pleasure of traveling with Gary and getting in front of some of our key tech clients, is really educating them on this process. Certainly, nuclear power has been around for years and it's not new, but I think some of the tech folks-- it's certainly new for them. And so, one, understanding how nuclear power could really play a vital role both from clean energy perspective but also just being able to accommodate the growth data center and AI-wise to really allow these companies to have that power dependency to run their business. So early days but I think just a little bit of really building on awareness and really, to the extent we can, educating some of our partners on this evolution.
TOM GRANDMAISON: Great thanks, Joe. Gary, shifting back to you for a second. Can you talk a little bit about the various power delivery methods or agreements that will be utilized to deliver the power?
GARY RODRIGUES: Great question. One that a lot of people are asking and it's-- I think it's important to remember that a lot of this stuff is happening quickly and there are a lot of things that are developing just as quickly in the background because there isn't a crystal ball that's big enough to know what the future holds. And, right now, we still don't have, if you will, a, let's say, an AI-powered data center by a small modular-- powered by a small modular reactor. So a lot of what we're talking about and a lot of the types of delivery mechanisms that we're looking at, we can presume or hypothetically say that it could be-- is it going to be a traditional EPC-type contract? Is it going to be an owner-developer focused insurance pro-- an owner-owned insurance program or a contractor-controlled insurance program? We don't know yet.
And I think what's unique about the nuclear aspect is I have a tendency to think of the companies that are out there in the new space-- NuScale, and Oklo, and Kairos and Terrestrial power-- and there's a whole bunch of them that are GE, Hitachi, Rolls-Royce, Westinghouse and others that are building these-- designing and building these new power sources. If we bolt them onto a data center to provide the power, who's ultimately going to own the nuclear aspect of the risk?
So I think in the early days, it's a big question. I think in the future, we will see the possibility of maybe a hybrid-like-- a traditional EPC contract where we've seen these things happen, where they've resulted in tremendous amounts of scheduled delays and cost overruns. And what company is going to take on the construction of a new power plant that has the potential, especially some of these first of a kind, technologies that haven't been built yet-- and what happens if we have a traditional contract and somebody has to be-- take the burden of all the cost overruns involved in it. That's-- it's an obstacle that everybody's trying to figure out the best way to move it aside so that the industry can accelerate.
So I think we may see hybrid contracts where you get to different stages of design-- if we take the cost overruns and we, just real quickly-- tied to the Vogtle plants-- seven years of schedule delays and roughly 100% in cost overruns, anticipated to be $17 billion, thereabouts, $35-- $34 billion project when completed. Some of that's tied to having to redesign. So we see contracts that are hybrid of an EPC potentially whereby you get into a stage of design where people feel comfortable and then they move forward and there's risk sharing that happens across the timeline of the project.
So the short answer is there's a lot of unknowns and we don't know for sure what these relationships will look like because we don't know what the construction contracts will look like. And we don't ultimately, when it gets into operations, who's going to bear responsibility for the nuclear part of it.
If we look at the nuclear provider for the small modular reactor as simply a manufacturer and they're going to build a modular reactor in a factory somewhere, ship it to a site and then a big tech company takes ownership of it, who will ultimately hold the license for that with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, or the federal government in the United States or wherever it is in the world for the operations, which means the ownership of it and that includes the nuclear liability part of it, which makes it a unique set of risks because you don't see that in a traditional, if you will, data center that's powered by wind, or solar or some other energy source that's just coming off of the grid? So there's still a lot to discover here.
But if I were to predict, I think we'll see hybrid or new consideration as to the type of contracts that are let. And we may even see hybrid ownership on some of these sites as they're built out in the future.
TOM GRANDMAISON: Joe, let's switch back to you and talk a little bit about the insurance market. You mentioned it very briefly in your earlier commentary. What is the state of the insurance market as it relates to nuclear power? What is it today and what do we think we need from the insurance industry as we move forward?
JOSEPH HURLEY: Yeah, thanks, Tom. I think today there's just a few key players, predominantly, that have insured a lot of companies in the utility space-- ANI and NEIL come to mind. I think because of this new ecosystem, I do think there are going to be other players, more commercial insurers, I should say, that will have the appetite-- at least early on we're hearing that there will be appetite expanding beyond the historical carriers in this space.
Again, Tom, I think somewhat early days. I don't know if Gary has a different view, but I think it's tough to say who those other players will be. But I think the appetite from insurers will open up here. And I think there may be other options and maybe even new products that come out of this that some of our tech clients will be able to take advantage of.
TOM GRANDMAISON: Agree. Gary, anything to add?
GARY RODRIGUES: Yeah, no, I think Joe's spot on. I mean, we had some discussions out at our construction risk symposium back in September where we were approached by a couple of very prominent insurance carriers that are excited about the-- what they're seeing. They're even seeing the same things that we're seeing every day that this-- the excitement tied to this next generation of nuclear power. And they're also seeing all of this excitement that's tied to the next generation of data center construction.
And I'm of the mindset, and I think Joe said this, that there will be an appetite there. I think that the insurances-- the operational insurances that the traditional industry has seen through industry mutuals, like NEIL and the nuclear liability protection afforded by ANI, that come out of the federal government's Price-Anderson Act-- I think you'll see the federal government begin to make adjustments to the Price-Anderson Act. They already have at some level with regard to small modular reactors. There'll be adjustments.
I think that we'll see more players step into it. And I also think part of our job, frankly, is to educate the insurance carriers, to let them know that what the construction-- we have a construction part of the life cycle, we have the operational aspect of the life cycle and then we may have-- and we do have today for some of our old power reactors-- a decommissioning part of the life cycle. We have to educate these insurance carriers to-- about these activities and where the risk lies.
And I think if we do a good job at that and we talk about the construction of a data center that may have a small modular reactor powering it-- let's focus on what's common in the construction risk in those programs and insurances that already exist, like builder's risk, and subcontractor default, and others. Let's bring the commonalities and-- as opposed to try to boil the ocean and focus on the uniqueness, which is almost right now something that nobody fully understands. I think if we do our job based on the-- on what I have seen and heard Joe alluded to is there's an appetite. And I think the industry will step in and be ready to be part of it all.
TOM GRANDMAISON: Agreed. And if I could just add one other anecdote, Gary and I have a meeting tomorrow with a major global insurance carrier, who to this point has been very quiet with respect to nuclear, and is very interested in learning more about it and is cautiously optimistic about doing something maybe in the property space, or the casualty space or both. So I agree. I do expect this will evolve over time as education takes further shape.
Let's switch to the last section around challenges and macro issues that we all face and the industry faces. Gary, can you talk about some of those challenges that the nuclear industry faces as we move forward here?
GARY RODRIGUES: Sure, Tom. I mean, one of the biggest challenges is tied both to the traditional power industry as well as what I call the new industry that's evolving and it's tied to cost overruns. We went a long time-- we went a very long time without a new nuclear power plant being built in the United States. And then Westinghouse stepped in to build and finish, Vogtle. And essentially the cost overruns and the challenges of finishing Vogtle changed the dynamics of Westinghouse. And, ultimately, Bechtel stepped in and finished Units 3 and 4 and $17 billion over budget.
And so that hangs out there like a Damocles sword. It's up there and everybody's thinking about, OK, who can afford that level of cost overrun? Who can afford seven years of schedule impact? And so cost overruns and schedule impacts are the subject of-- almost the first and most important subject that everybody's talking about.
In fact, I'm on a-- I'm part of a working group for the White House with the outgoing administration that was set up earlier this year. And this particular working group is focused on nuclear project, and program delivery and cost overruns. And I'm certain that between now and the end of the year, there'll be a report that's released that's tied to it all. And there are about 20 different companies that are involved in this, including Willis Towers Watson-- on this working group, talking about various ways to overcome cost overruns and schedule impacts that result in those types of delays.
Now, add to that is the fact that now finishing Vogtle was finishing a couple of AP1000, which were maybe new versions of some old Westinghouse pressurized water reactors. And now we take that to any number-- and there's literally dozens of small modular reactors and new nuclear companies that are stepping in this space-- every one of these reactors is the first of a kind. Technology-- FOAK is the terminology that everybody uses, First Of A Kind.
And you can't necessarily take the blueprint for what happened in-- at the Vogtle plants with the AP1000 projects and apply them necessarily to a 50-megawatt microreactor or a 300-megawatt small modular reactor. So there's a lot of uncertainty tied to this first of a kind technology, and the cost overruns and how we'll be able to deal with that.
There's a lot of optimism that the types of manufacturing, the supply chain-- ability to meet the supply chain needs for these small modular reactors would be quite a bit different than what we've seen with the bigger power reactors. So there's a lot of optimism that we'll be able to overcome some of those challenges. But I think the biggest challenges that we see are cost overruns, schedule impacts.
And then second to those would be the regulatory hurdles that we face. The-- historically the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and other regulatory agencies-- it takes a really-- there's an entire orchestra of regulatory action that takes place to permit and get a nuclear power plant built. You've got-- the EPA's involved, the Department of Energy, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Then you have state and local type regulatory authorities.
There's a lot of regulatory involvement. And it's burdensome, and it's challenging and finding ways in the White House committee-- working group that I'm part of is talking about how do we-- how do the regulators begin to innovate, and streamline, and help make things happen and be less burdensome, if you will. So I think cost overruns, schedule impacts, in part tied to supply chain issues, workforce availability, and the like and the regulatory aspects of it all are probably the three biggest challenges, at least in my mind.
TOM GRANDMAISON: Gary, a follow-up to that commentary, with respect to the change in the White House administration, what's your early day read on what we should expect from the new administration with respect to nuclear?
GARY RODRIGUES: Yeah, great question, Tom. I think I mentioned earlier that there's a tremendous amount of bipartisan support for nuclear power. It's on both sides of the aisle, both Congress and Senate. And I think even at the executive level of our government, the outgoing administration and the new administration are very pro-nuclear-- maybe for a little bit different reasons. I think the new administration is focused on energy independence, is focused on accelerating nuclear as part of that discussion.
And I think we will see-- with what I'm reading, the want to begin to streamline some of the agencies and regulatory bodies that are involved in decision-making and make things happen faster, it's quite possible that with the new administration and I expect it will. We may see some-- the pick up on-- what I think the outgoing administration has done quite well is they made tremendous investments in the Infrastructure Act and other federal mechanisms for funding. I think irrespective of administration will pick up on that and we'll see acceleration in the nuclear sector.
Now, it might be for-- it might not be necessarily tied to the fact that it's tied to moving the climate change needle toward decarbonization, maybe for different reasons, like energy independence in the United States, and nuclear becomes a big and an important part of that mix of energy that will lead to that energy independence.
TOM GRANDMAISON: Great. Joe and Gary, thank you so much for contributing to this episode and for sharing your perspective on such an important topic. Thank you to everyone who listened. Thank you for joining the WTW Construction Blueprints podcast. And we'll look forward to talking to you again on the next one.
SPEAKER: Thank you for joining this WTW podcast featuring the latest thinking and perspectives on people, capital, climate and risk in the construction industry. For more information, visit wtwco.com.
Willis Towers Watson offers insurance-related services through its appropriately licensed and authorized companies in each country in which Willis Towers Watson operates. For further authorization and regulatory details about our Willis Towers Watson legal entities operating in your country, please refer to our Willis Towers Watson website. It is a regulatory requirement for us to consider our local licensing requirements.
The information given in this podcast is believed to be accurate at the date of publication. This information may have subsequently changed or have been superseded and should not be relied upon to be accurate or suitable after this date. This podcast offers a general overview of its subject matter. It does not necessarily address every aspect of its subject or every product available in the market, and we disclaimer all liability to the fullest extent permitted by law.
It is not intended to be and should not be used to replace specific advice relating to individual situations. And we do not offer and this should not be seen as legal, accounting or tax advice. If you intend to take any action or make any decision on the basis of the content of this podcast, you should first seek specific advice from an appropriate professional.
Some of the information in this podcast may be compiled from third party sources we consider to be reliable. However, we do not guarantee and are not responsible for the accuracy of such. The views expressed are not necessarily those of Willis Towers Watson, copyright Willis Towers Watson 2023. All rights reserved.
