A global coalition of firms that markets atomic-energy facilities on Thursday unveiled common procedures aimed in part at maximizing the physical protection of newly constructed sites and preventing the spread of weapon-sensitive material and systems. (See GSN, Sept. 8.)
Negotiated over nearly three years in a process arbitrated by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, the nonbinding protocol represents a pledge by signatory exporters to maintain specific security and nonproliferation practices in designing and building nuclear plants, and to demand that potential buyers abide by related guidelines.
Some of the firms have already reported invoking the “Nuclear Power Plant Exporters’ Principles of Conduct” in evaluating prospective atomic-plant sales, Carnegie Endowment expert Ariel Levite said.
“[The companies] pointed out … the issues that still needed to be taken care of as highlighted here for them to actually be able to sign a contract with them,” said Levite, emphasizing that the codes are not intended to cut any nation out of the atomic marketplace.
“Emphatically, this is not a denial regime. This is not designed to exclude anyone,” the former Israeli nuclear official said.
In addition to addressing “Physical Security” and “Nonproliferation and Safeguards” principles, the document includes sections on accident prevention and response, environmental protection and waste disposal, damage compensation and corporate ethics.
“The thought behind this initiative was that the vendors of nuclear power plants have a strong interest to welcome high standards on their own practices and in all the places where they seek to build plants, because … if there’s an accident or lapse anywhere, the industry will be hurt everywhere,” Jessica Mathews, the organization’s president, said in announcing the document.
The participating companies worried that they might be put at a competitive disadvantage if they accepted such standards while other firms did not, acknowledged George Perkovich, who heads the Carnegie Endowment’s Nuclear Policy Program. However, the concept of a common set of practices “was quickly validated,” he added.
The 10 entities that have agreed to the guidelines represent the nuclear power plant export industry “pretty much in entirety,” Perkovich said. The firms include the French firm Areva, GE-Hitachi Nuclear Energy and Atomstroiexport, the Russian state-run firm responsible for constructing Iran’s new Bushehr nuclear plant (see related GSN story).
China National Nuclear took part in the negotiations, “but they are still in the process within China of getting the necessary approvals to formally adopt,” the specialist said. “We hope that will happen.”
Carnegie convened the first meeting of the companies in October 2008, and negotiating teams carried out five additional sessions.
“We had the sixth meeting in Seoul in October 2010, thought we were finished, and then we were going to launch it on March 23, and then the earthquake and tsunami happened in Japan on March 11,” severely damaging the country’s Fukushima nuclear power plant, Perkovich said (see GSN, Sept. 15). In response, the exporters delayed the document’s release and “scrubbed the principles to update them,” he said.
The code “reinforces” the importance of various safety practices, said Richard Meserve, president of the Carnegie Institution for Science. “This should be seen as a living document that will change as events like Fukushima unfold and we learn more about what to do,” he said.
The principles call on nuclear power plant exporters to build security protective features into their facilities, but no specific requirements are identified. The firms should guarantee such measures are “compatible” with safety and crisis management needs outlined by the International Atomic Energy Agency, according to the code.