VZCZCXYZ0000
PP RUEHWEB

DE RUEHC #0269 1571116
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
P 042219Z JUN 08
FM SECSTATE WASHDC
TO RUEHAM/AMEMBASSY AMMAN PRIORITY 7262-7268
INFO RUEHAD/AMEMBASSY ABU DHABI 1212-1218
RUEHUJA/AMEMBASSY ABUJA 5323-5329
RUEHAR/AMEMBASSY ACCRA 1712-1718
RUEHAS/AMEMBASSY ALGIERS 1270-1276
RUEHAK/AMEMBASSY ANKARA 4596-4602
RUEHTA/AMEMBASSY ASTANA 9941-9947
RUEHTH/AMEMBASSY ATHENS 3244-3250
RUEHBK/AMEMBASSY BANGKOK 3171-3177
RUEHBJ/AMEMBASSY BEIJING 0835-0841
RUEHRL/AMEMBASSY BERLIN 4902-4908
RUEHSW/AMEMBASSY BERN 4249-4255
RUEHBR/AMEMBASSY BRASILIA 8624-8630
RUEHBS/AMEMBASSY BRUSSELS 0511-0517
RUEHBM/AMEMBASSY BUCHAREST 9214-9220
RUEHUP/AMEMBASSY BUDAPEST 4077-4083
RUEHBU/AMEMBASSY BUENOS AIRES 4083-4089
RUEHEG/AMEMBASSY CAIRO 6363-6369
RUEHBY/AMEMBASSY CANBERRA 1436-1442
RUEHDK/AMEMBASSY DAKAR 0411-0417
RUEHDR/AMEMBASSY DAR ES SALAAM 4514-4520
RUEHKA/AMEMBASSY DHAKA 8755-8761
RUEHDO/AMEMBASSY DOHA 9394-9400
RUEHHE/AMEMBASSY HELSINKI 0297-0303
RUEHHI/AMEMBASSY HANOI 6860-6866
RUEHJA/AMEMBASSY JAKARTA 0121-0127
RUEHKL/AMEMBASSY KUALA LUMPUR 9006-9012
RUEHKU/AMEMBASSY KUWAIT 3898-3904
RUEHKV/AMEMBASSY KYIV 6629-6635
RUEHLJ/AMEMBASSY LJUBLJANA 5253-5259
RUEHLO/AMEMBASSY LONDON 7837-7843
RUEHMD/AMEMBASSY MADRID 8916-8922
RUEHMK/AMEMBASSY MANAMA 4745-4751
RUEHML/AMEMBASSY MANILA 6606-6612
RUEHME/AMEMBASSY MEXICO 2951-2957
RUEHMN/AMEMBASSY MONTEVIDEO 1178-1184
RUEHMO/AMEMBASSY MOSCOW 1555-1561
RUEHMS/AMEMBASSY MUSCAT 0839-0845
RUEHOT/AMEMBASSY OTTAWA 1057-1063
RUEHFR/AMEMBASSY PARIS 9256-9262
RUEHPG/AMEMBASSY PRAGUE 8310-8316
RUEHSA/AMEMBASSY PRETORIA 9160-9166
RUEHRB/AMEMBASSY RABAT 4867-4873
RUEHRA/AMEMBASSY RIGA 0170-0176
RUEHRH/AMEMBASSY RIYADH 7639-7645
RUEHRO/AMEMBASSY ROME 6615-6621
RUEHYN/AMEMBASSY SANAA 7107-7113
RUEHUL/AMEMBASSY SEOUL 7669-7675
RUEHSF/AMEMBASSY SOFIA 1226-1232
RUEHSM/AMEMBASSY STOCKHOLM 5378-5384
RUEHTL/AMEMBASSY TALLINN 6043-6049
RUEHSI/AMEMBASSY TBILISI 7786-7792
RUEHKO/AMEMBASSY TOKYO 4597-4603
RUEHTU/AMEMBASSY TUNIS 0259-0265
RUEHTC/AMEMBASSY THE HAGUE 2305-2311
RUEHVL/AMEMBASSY VILNIUS 0007-0013
RUEHWR/AMEMBASSY WARSAW 1229-1235
RUEHYD/AMEMBASSY YAOUNDE 6244-6250
RUEHYE/AMEMBASSY YEREVAN 5643-5649
RUEHVB/AMEMBASSY ZAGREB 0910-0916
RUEHBS/USEU BRUSSELS
RUEHVI/AMEMBASSY VIENNA 5175-5181

UNCLAS STATE 060269 
 
SENSITIVE, SIPDIS 
 
C O R R E C T E D C O P Y  (ADDED CAPTION SENSITIVE) 
 
UNVIE FOR IAEA: CWELLING; PARIS FOR USOECD: MCLAPPER 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: ENRG TRGY KNNP IAEA
SUBJECT: REPORT OF THE SECOND GNEP STEERING GROUP MEETING 
 
A) UNVIE Vienna 000647 (Report of the September 2007 GNEP Ministerial) 
B) STATE 168362 (Report of the December 2007 Steering Group meeting) 
C) UNVIE VIENNA 00183 (Completion of First Global Nuclear Energy 
Partnership (GNEP) Infrastructure Development Working Group Meeting) 
D): State 7716 (Report of the First GNEP Reliable Nuclear Fuel 
Services Working Group Meeting) 
¶1. (U) SUMMARY.  The Second Steering Group Meeting of the Global 
Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP) was held in Jordan on May 14-15, 
2008, hosted by the Jordan Atomic Energy Commission and chaired by 
the United States.  The meeting was attended by approximately 105 
representatives of 28 countries (19 Partners and 9 candidate 
Partners) and three observer organizations, including the 
International Atomic Energy Agency (see list para 11).  GNEP Partners 
agreed ad referendum to a list of 25 new countries to invite to join 
GNEP (see para 7), received reports from and agreed on next steps for 
the two working groups on infrastructure development and reliable 
fuel services and agreed to support a Japanese proposal that the 
Steering Group develop a joint statement to be issued by the 
Executive Committee at the next ministerial meeting.  The Steering 
Group also discussed the draft terms of reference for a working group 
on grid appropriate reactors and the possible establishment of a 
nonproliferation working group, and discussed mechanisms for engaging 
with outside groups including industry and academia.  Based on the 
progress being made by the working groups, the strengthened 
interactions at the Steering Group meeting, increased engagement by 
several participants and the new concepts discussed during the 
meeting, GNEP appears to have taken an important step in firmly 
establishing itself as a viable, dynamic and relevant global 
partnership.  END SUMMARY 
 
¶2. (U) Opening Remarks.  Jordan's Prime Minister Nader Dahabi opened 
the meeting and expressed strong support for GNEP.  GNEP Steering 
Group Chairman Ed McGinnis and Jordan Atomic Energy Commission 
Chairman Khaled Toukan also provided opening remarks.  Ambassadors to 
Jordan from Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada, China, Egypt, France, Japan, 
South Korea, Romania, Russian Federation, South Africa, United 
Kingdom and United States attended the opening remarks.  Several news 
agencies and print and television media also attended the opening 
statements and the Jordan Times newspaper and local television 
reported on Prime Minister Dahabi's remarks.  News coverage following 
the meeting was positive. 
 
¶3. (U) New Partners.  The first session began with introductions, 
statements by the Steering Group vice chairs and a statement by the 
United Kingdom, which was welcomed as a new partner, having joined 
GNEP since the last Steering Group meeting.  The UK stated regarding 
its GNEP membership: "We believe that by sharing good practice there 
are real potentials for streamlining the methods for introducing 
nuclear power in a safe, secure and economic way, and seeking the 
best solutions for the management of nuclear waste." Then the U.S. 
Chair presented a summary of GNEP activities to date and the meeting 
objectives.  The December 2007 Steering Group meeting minutes were 
formally adopted. 
 
¶4. (SBU) The Infrastructure Development Working Group (IDWG).  The 
IDWG presented the results of its first meeting (REF C) and its 
planned next steps.  It identified the principal infrastructure 
development needs as human resource development, regulatory 
structures, financial mechanisms and business planning.  Feasibility 
studies were recognized as a specific type of partnership resource 
that can be provided both bilaterally and multilaterally.  The United 
States reported on its initial efforts in conducting a feasibility 
study for nuclear power in Jordan and indicated readiness to consider 
conducting one or two more feasibility studies this year.  The IDWG 
recommended involving industry as part of its activities.  This was 
also recognized as an issue for the Reliable Nuclear Fuel Services 
Working Group.  As a result, the Steering Group asked a drafting 
committee of partners to develop a guidance document on how GNEP 
should approach including outside groups, including academia as well 
as industry, in its activities.  The draft that was presented to the 
Steering Group the next day was recognized as a very good basis for 
external engagement and it will be distributed to the Steering Group 
for approval with a view to presenting it to the GNEP Executive 
Committee for approval at the next Executive Committee meeting.  The 
representative from the Generation IV International Forum offered the 
Steering Group assistance on the legal aspects of involving industry, 
such as intellectual property considerations.  The IDWG presented its 
idea for an online resource library that would list resources such as 
education and training programs, assessment tools, conference and 
event information, model legislation, best practice references, etc. 
The IDWG was recognized as having identified important, specific 
activities that effectively tap the unique capabilities offered by 
the partnership.  Partner and observer countries took an active role 
in the discussion of the IDWG's next steps and reiterated the great 
need for IDWG efforts.  Countries expressed the importance of human 
resource development, government institution building/strengthening, 
and sharing experiences.  The IAEA representative indicated a need 
for support in the area of assessments and that multilateral 
assessments could be beneficial to bring a wider range of viewpoints 
and experience to the assessment.  He also stated the value of GNEP 
in bringing infrastructure development issues to the ministerial 
level. 
 
¶5. (SBU) The Reliable Nuclear Fuel Services Working Group (RNFSWG). 
The RNFSWG presented a summary report of its first meeting and 
initial activities.  (REF D) During the first meeting, the RNFSWG 
discussed front-end fuel cycle issues and concluded that the markets 
have performed reliably and that steps to improve reliability should 
emphasize market neutrality.  Working group members agree that the 
lead time for installing new front-end fuel cycle production capacity 
would likely be shorter than the time required to build new nuclear 
power plants, and thus fuel would be available to meet growing 
demand.  In addition, the RNFSWG agreed on a survey for GNEP partners 
to collect information from Partners on existing laws, regulations 
and policies for fuel cycle elements and features.  Above all, each 
country would provide its views on how "reliable fuels services" 
should be defined.  The survey was designed to follow the key GNEP 
principle of inclusiveness by seeking input from countries with all 
stages of involvement in the nuclear fuel cycle (full fuel cycle, 
uranium suppliers, and nuclear power plants but no fuel cycle 
facilities), as well as from countries contemplating nuclear power. 
Results of the survey will be analyzed to identify common practices 
and gaps needed to be addressed for moving towards comprehensive 
reliable fuel service arrangements as well as to develop a common 
view on reliable fuel services and next steps for the working group. 
One partner expressed interest in expanding the survey beyond GNEP 
partners to collect more data.  The Steering Group decided that 
expanding the survey would not be consistent with GNEP operating 
procedures and recommended the RNFSWG consider relevant information 
from other sources, including the IAEA's efforts under INPRO to 
identify Common User Considerations, in developing its analysis. 
However, the Steering Group recognized this initial step as very 
important to lay the foundation for addressing what is a challenging 
area.  The Steering Group also encouraged the RNFSWG to look at 
regional fuel center approaches.  Like the IDWG, the RNFSWG has 
considered operating procedures for industry participation.  The 
RNFSWG initially agreed to hold its next meeting during the margins 
of the IAEA General Conference in late September 2008.  The Steering 
Group responded by recommending that the RNFSWG hold the meeting a 
few weeks earlier to allow sufficient time to prepare a status report 
in advance of the next Steering Group meeting. 
 
¶6. (SBU) Grid Appropriate Reactors Working Group (GARWG).  The United 
States proposed the creation of the GARWG with specific Terms of 
Reference to define its objectives, scope, activities and next steps. 
 A number of partners expressed support for establishment of the 
working group, but others asked that the Terms of Reference be 
revised to incorporate comments offered by the International Atomic 
Energy Agency (IAEA) to prevent duplication of efforts.  It was 
agreed that, once revised, the Steering Group Chair will distribute 
the new Terms of Reference to the Steering Group members for final 
consideration as a working group to be established by the Executive 
Committee at the next GNEP ministerial-level meeting. 
 
¶7. (SBU) New Invitees.  The Steering Group agreed by consensus to 
invite 23 countries and one international organization, the Gulf 
Cooperation Council, to join GNEP this year.  The countries are: 
Algeria, Armenia, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Cameroon, Croatia, Estonia, 
Georgia, Greece, Indonesia, Kuwait, Latvia, Malaysia, Nigeria, 
Philippines, Saudi Arabia, Tanzania, Thailand, Tunisia, United Arab 
Emirates (UAE), Uruguay, Vietnam and Yemen.  Invitations will be sent 
to the countries to attend the next GNEP ministerial meeting in 
October.  It was agreed that two of those countries would be invited 
as observers until they have comprehensive safeguards agreements in 
force with the IAEA (Saudi Arabia and Bahrain).  Partners agreed ad 
referendum to invite two additional countries proposed during the 
Steering Group meeting (Qatar and Oman), upon approval of two partner 
countries that requested additional time to have their governments 
review the proposal.  By the end of May, the two countries requesting 
extra time expressed approval for inviting Qatar and Oman to join 
GNEP.  Qatar will be invited only as an observer until it has a 
comprehensive safeguards agreement in force.  China again blocked 
consensus on inviting the Nuclear Energy Agency as an observer 
organization.  [Comment: It was understood that China's position was 
political, based on Taiwan's role either in the NEA or in its parent 
organization the OECD.] 
 
¶8. (SBU) Next GNEP Ministerial Meeting.  France announced it would 
host the next GNEP Executive Committee Meeting in Paris on October 1, 
¶2008.  There were no objections from any Steering Group members. 
France will look into whether the facility would also be available 
the day before (September 30) to hold a brief Steering Group meeting. 
 As the chair of the next Executive Committee Meeting, France will 
send invitation letters to the GNEP partners, candidate partners and 
observers on behalf of the GNEP partners. 
 
¶9. (SBU) GNEP Ministerial Statement.  Japan proposed a joint 
statement, "Global Nuclear Energy Partnership Joint Statement on the 
Peaceful Uses of Nuclear Energy as a Measure against Global Warming," 
that could be made by the GNEP Executive Committee after its October 
1 meeting.  There was consensus to issue a statement though it was 
agreed to expand the statement to reflect the progress made by GNEP 
since the last Executive Committee Meeting in September 2007 and the 
partnership's next steps.  It was also agreed that the Steering Group 
chair would harmonize comments and distribute the joint statement to 
the Steering Group for final consideration. 
 
¶10. (SBU) Nonproliferation Working Group.  Canada proposed 
establishing a nonproliferation working group (NPWG) to address the 
objective of reducing proliferation risk in the expansion of nuclear 
energy.  Australia seconded this proposal, but France and Russia 
argued that nonproliferation issues could be addressed in the context 
of the three existing and proposed working groups.  [Note: Australia, 
which had initially proposed the NPWG, did not otherwise participate 
in the meeting pending a decision by the Rudd government on whether 
to continue its participation in GNEP, and indicated that the 
establishment of a NPWG could be an important factor in that 
decision. 
 
¶11. (SBU) Participants. The following countries participated as GNEP 
Partners: Australia, Bulgaria, Canada, China, France, Ghana, Hungary, 
Italy, Japan, Jordan, Republic of Korea, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, 
Russian Federation, Slovenia, Ukraine, and the United States.  The 
following countries participated as Observers and Candidate Partners: 
Argentina, Belgium, Egypt, Germany, Mexico, Netherlands, Slovak 
Republic, Spain and South Africa.  The following intergovernmental 
organizations participated as Observers: Euratom, the Generation IV 
International Forum (GIF) and the IAEA. 
RICE