IAEA conventions on nuclear safety provide for co-operation in wake of nuclear accident.

IAEA conventions on nuclear safety provide for co-operation in wake of nuclear accident

Two international Conventions formulatedthrough the efforts of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to strengthen international cooperation on nuclear safety and environmental protection have been signed by 51 countries.

One instrument, committing partiesto provide early notification of and information about nuclear accidents with possible transboundary effects, will enter into force by 27 October 1986. The other binds signatories to endeavour to provide assistance in the event of a nuclear accident or radiological emergency.

The two instruments were openedfor signature on 26 September, after being adopted by consensus at the first special session of the IAFA General Conference (Vienna, 24-26 September). The session culminated a series of meetings on nuclear safety issues organized by the IAEA in response to the Chernobyl nuclear power station accident in the Ukrainian SSR in April 1986. Some 640 delegates from 94 countries and 27 national and international organizations participated.

The five nuclear-weapon States--China,France, Soviet Union, United Kingdom and United States--indicated during discussion of the drafts that they would nofify other States in the event of accidents involving military use of nuclear energy, as well as accidents at civilian nuclear facilities.

The new Conventions "filled gapsin the international legal framework for response to emergency situations", according to IAEA Director-General Hans Blix.

The drafts were forwarded to thespecial session by the IAEA Board of Governors, which met at the Agency's Vienna headquarters on 22 and 23 September. The texts were prepared at a four-week meeting of 283 technical experts from 62 countries and 10 international organizations (Vienna, 21 July-15 August).

Achieving agreement on the instrumentswith such speed and cooperation was "remarkable", the Chairman of the expert meeting, Lodewijk H.J.B. van Gorkom of the Netherlands, told the press on 15 August. From the beginning of the meeting, he observed, there had been "the political will of all the countries participating, from East and West, North and South, to arrive at a consensus on the drafts of the two conventions. There has been virtually no basic conflict, no deep-seated problems."

Reaching consensus in only fourweeks was very unusual, according to Mr. van Gorkom, who cited another recent Agency convention that had taken two years to draft. There was great readiness on all sides to make concessions, even on very critical points, he said. One such example was to what extent the instruments should cover a nuclear accident involving nuclear weapons. But even on that point, compromise was reached, he said.

The special session also had beforeit a report prepared by the 13-member International Nuclear Safety Advisory Group on the results of a week-long review of data on the Chernobyl accident, undertaken from 25 to 29 August at IAEA headquarters in Vienna. Nearly 600 experts from 62 countries and 21 national and international organizations participated in that meeting, which was aimed at preventing future nuclear accidents, improving international co-operation in nuclear safety, and exchanging experience related to physical and chemical phenomena involved in nuclear energy use, in order to reduce the risks and maximize its benefits.

Participants discussed a 380-pagetechnical report that described Chernobyl's REMK-1000 reactor, and analyzed the accident and its consequences.

Introduing the report, ProfessorValery Alekseevich Legasov, leader of the 28-member delegation from the USSR, said the accident was a "disaster for our citizens" that had led to considerable material and moral loss. "It has disturbed the current economic and scientific activity of many enterprises and organizations. It has made it necessary to work in an environment with a very complicated radiation picture. And in the world community, this accident has led to an intensification of discussion in relation to our preparedness for a further utilization of nuclear energy."

But despite the severity of the accident,he said: "We cannot stop the futher use of nuclear energy in helping to solve the problems of developing manking". The Soviet Union, in its plans for developing its energy resources, attached priority importance to constructing nuclear power plants, he said.

Director-General Blix told the assemblagethat restoring confidence in nuclear power, which provides 15 percent of the world's electricity, would require "prolonged safe operation of nuclear power plants worldwide and ... require that such future accidents and incidents as there may be will have only minimal consequences on health and environment".

A 13-point list of technical proposalsfor improving nuclear safety emerged from the Chernobyl review. It includes suggestions for IAEA action, such as developing guidelines on protective clothing, setting up a data base for validation studies, and promoting exchange of information on computer codes for assessing the consequences of nuclear accidents.

According to the Group's Chairman,Rudolf Romersh, Head of the Swiss Organization for the Storage of Radioactive Waste, the list "expresses the readiness of the international community of experts to take part in the efforts to be guided by IAEA in the aftermath of the Chernobyl accident ... [and] the wish to do everything to restore confidence in a technology to produce energy which our world needs."

Mr. Blix said a great deal had beenlearned at the meeting about the management and containment of a severe nuclear accident, and about medical and decontamination measures. "My impression is that the actions taken by the Soviet authorities have received the respect and support of the expert community", he said.

The Director-General felt sure therecommendations would lead to expansion of the Agency's work programme to include improved operator-training and design features in order to minimize operator errors.

Noting that delegates had not beenasked to address the "political question" of whether or not the risks connected with nuclear power were unacceptably high, Mr. Blix said that that question could not be answered in isolation. "You must also ask what risks you would incur in terms of human health and environment if nuclear-generated electricity were produced by coal or oil, which are the most realistic alternatives, and if, as I think we must assume, we will not reduce our consumption of electricity."