ITER ITA NEWSLETTER
NO. 1, FEBRUARY 2003

INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, VIENNA, AUSTRIAISSN 1683–0555

EIGHTH ITER NEGOTIATONS MEETING (N-8)
by Dr. V. Korzhavin, Deputy Head, Department of Atomic Science and Technology, Minatom, Moscow
A very important milestone was reached at the Eighth ITER Negotiations Meeting, held on 18–19 February
2003, when delegations from the People’s Republic of China and the United States of America joined thosefrom Canada, the European Union, Japan and the Russian Federation in their efforts to reach agreement on
the implementation of the ITER project. St. Petersburg, Russia, celebrating its 300th anniversary this year,
was the site of the Meeting. Members from the ITER International Team and an IAEA Representative also participated in the meeting. Mr. Igor Borovkov, First Deputy Minister of the Russian Federation on Atomic Energy,
welcomed all the delegates, noting the significance of the addition of China and the USA in the Negotiations.
The delegations accepted Dr. Vladimir Kuchinov as Moderator, and Dr. Vladimir Vlasenkov as Secretary,
assisted by Ms. Christa Basaldella.
In their opening statements, the Heads of Delegation of both China and the USA declared their countries’commitment to developing fusion energy as a potential source of safe, secure and environmentally friendly
energy. Delegations fully endorsed and welcomed the entry of China and the USA to the Negotiations, noting
the significant domestic fusion programmes of both.
The Head of the Chinese Delegation indicated that China, as the largest developing country in the world, hasa great need to pursue alternative energy sources. China believes that ITER can potentially lead to new formsof energy and contribute to the peaceful and sustainable development of the world in the long term. China
expressed its strong wish to be a valuable member of the ITER family, to make joint efforts with the other partners for the successful exploitation of fusion energy.
The US Head of Delegation noted that President Bush had announced on January 30, 2003, that the USA
would join ITER. In his statement, the President said: “The results of ITER will advance the effort to produce

Participants in the Meetingclean, safe, renewable, and commercially available fusion energy
by the middle of this century.” The
USA remarked on the extensive
reviews undertaken by their scientific and technical communities inarriving at the conclusion to join
the ITER Negotiations.
To express the support of thecommunity for the Canadian hostsite, the Canadian Delegation
included John Mutton, the Mayorof the Municipality of Clarington,
and Roger Anderson, Chair of theRegion of Durham. Mayor Muttonemphasized the excellent technical and sociocultural characteristics of the Canadian site and theenthusiasm of the local community for hosting ITER.
The EU Delegation informed themeeting that France has confirmed, at the level of Prime
Minister Raffarin, its offer of hosting ITER in Cadarache as theEuropean site, taking advantage
of its well-known scientific, technical and socio-economic environment. The local authorities haveexpressed, in partnership with theGroup of participants at a reception at the Grand Duke Vladimir’s Palace government, their strong commitment, with respect to financial,educational, cultural and all other aspects, to provide the best working and living conditions for ITER staff. The
EU Delegation also informed the meeting that the Spanish Secretary of State for Science and Technology, Mr.
Morenès, headed an official delegation to meet with Commissioner Busquin to personally re-iterate the firm
commitment of all levels of the Spanish government and society to the success of ITER in Vandellos. An
announcement was also made of the important step of starting the official licensing procedure for ITER in
Spain, two months in advance of the previously presented schedule.
The Head of the Japanese Delegation reported that Prime Minister Koizumi, while visiting Russia on 10 and
11 January, referred to the importance of ITER, both in the Summit meeting with President Putin and in his
speech at the Kurchatov Institute (for details please see ITA Newsletter No. 1, January 2003). Mr. Kimura,
Governor of the Aomori Prefecture, attending the meeting, promised to establish an international school andstressed the recent and future improvement of public transportation, including an extension of a bullet train
line and planned direct flights from Narita Airport Tokyo to Aomori.
The RF Delegation confirmed that the ITER activities are conducted according to the Federal Programme
which runs through 2005 and includes the start of industry involvement in ITER. Therefore, it is important tobring the Negotiations to a timely conclusion.
The following presentations summarizing the status of the Negotiations were made by the “old” participants:
•
•
•
•

2

Structure of the Negotiations
JASS Process
Agreement
Procurement Allocation•••

Management Structure of the Organization
Work Plan and Milestones
ITER Transitional Arrangements.

Dr. Muraviev, Moderator of the Seventh Meeting of the Negotiations Standing Sub-Group (NSSG-7), held in
St. Petersburg on 26-28 January 2003, introduced the progress report of the NSSG. The delegations commended the NSSG for the significant progress made in drafting the ITER Agreement and charged the Groupto elaborate further the Agreement and Related Instruments.
The delegations took note of the progress of discussions on procurement allocations and encouraged the participants to continue their interactions in this area, taking account of the new participants’ expressions of interest in contributing. The delegations also noted the actions on ITER decommissioning issues, management
structure and intellectual property rights, and asked the NSSG to present a report on progress at N-9.
The Negotiators approved the Report on the Joint Assessment of Specific Sites. It was completed within theframework of the Negotiations, following detailed reviews and visits to all four potential locations: Clarington
in Canada; Cadarache in France; Vandellos in Spain; and Rokkasho-mura in Japan. The report confirms that
all four sites meet the criteria established for the location of the ITER project, although there are different
strengths and weaknesses for each site. For the Summary of the report, please see the next issue of thisNewsletter. The complete report can be found on the ITER Website (www.iter.org/jass).
The delegations noted the report on the start of the ITER Transitional Arrangements (ITA), including the firstmeeting of the ITER Preparatory Committee. The delegations also noted that China has stated its willingness
to participate in the ITA and that the USA is considering participation.

Support staff of the Meeting

FIRST MEETING OF THE ITER PREPARATORY COMMITTEE
by Dr. V. Vlasenkov, RF Contact Person
ITER Transitional Arrangements (ITA) have been established by Participants in the ITER Negotiations with theobjective of preparing for an efficient start of the ITER Joint Implementation, if and when so decided, and of
maintaining the integrity of the ITER Project.
In accordance with the Terms of Reference for the ITA, the ITER Preparatory Committee, composed of two
members from each ITA Participant, has the responsibility for the overall direction of the arrangements andexercises supervision of their implementation.
The Committee held its first meeting on 17 February 2003 in St. Petersburg, Russian Federation. Delegations
from Canada, the European Union, Japan and the Russian Federation participated in the meeting.
Representatives of the new Participants in the ITER Negotiations, China and the USA, were also present at
the meeting, as observers pending decision by their respective authorities on joining the ITA.

3

The Committee accepted its Rules of Procedure, under which, inter alia, the Chair of a meeting will be nominated by the Participant that is hosting the meeting, from among the members of that Participant’s delegation. Subsequently, the delegations accepted Dr. Yu. Sokolov as Chair of the meeting.
The delegations took note that, with the completion of an exchange of letters between the IAEA andParticipants, the ITA have entered into force as of 1 January 2003 in accordance with the Terms of Reference.
The delegations confirmed designations within the structure of ITA as follows:
Members of the Committee:
Canada: Mr. J. Campbell, Dr. M. Stewart
European Union: Dr. U. Finzi, Dr. J.-P. Rager
Japan: Mr. T. Sugawa, Dr. S. Matsuda
Russian Federation: Acad. E. Velikhov, Dr. Yu. Sokolov
Contact Persons:
Canada: Ms. K. Moshonas
European Union: Mr. M. Drew
Japan: Dr. T. Tsunematsu
Russian Federation: Dr. V. Vlasenkov
International Team: Dr. P. Barabaschi
Dr. R. Aymar, as the Interim Project Leader of the ITA International Team (till 30 June 2003), and Dr. Y.
Shimomura as the Co-Leader (till 30 June) and Leader from 1 July 2003.
Participant Team Leaders:
Canada: Dr. M. Stewart
European Union: Dr. R. Andreani
Japan: Dr. M. Mori (Dr. E. Tada, Acting PT Leader)
Russian Federation: Dr. O. Filatov
The Committee confirmed that the main objectives of the technical activities in the ITA phase are:•••

Maintaining the documented design basis for ITER, completed to a level where all interfaces and configuration are maintained at an acceptable level of continuity;
Establishing the technical specifications for all the procurement contracts during the first 2-3 years ofconstruction;
Establishing a resource loaded schedule for construction and agreed procurement scheme, procedures and arrangements, introducing project management systems and tools.

The Committee noted that the secondment process of the International Team (IT) staff is under way.
It was agreed to establish a system of task agreements, similar to the process used during the EDA, between
the IT and the Participant Teams (PT) in order to specify and co-ordinate tasks of the joint work programme.
The work programme proposed by the IT was endorsed in general, including the preliminary list of task allocations. The IT and PTs were asked to jointly develop it further, giving priority status to non-site-specific items
and to feasibility issues. The Committee also asked the IT Leader to organize regular IT/PT meetings toensure the co-ordination and progress of the work programme.
The Committee welcomed China’s expression of willingness to participate in the ITA, noting that such participation also constitutes the most effective way for new Participants to familiarize themselves with the project
and with their contribution priority areas.

4

THIRD MEETING OF THE ITPA CO-ORDINATING COMMITTEE
by Dr. D.J. Campbell, EFDA CSU, Garching, and Dr. M. Shimada, ITER JWS, Naka
The Third Meeting of the International Tokamak Physics Activity (ITPA) Co-ordinating Committee (CC) was
held on 24-25 October 2002 at the Max-Planck-Institut für Plasmaphysik, Garching. Dr. D. Campbell, Chair of
the CC, expressed his pleasure at the significant enhancement of the physics basis for burning plasma experiments, which had been achieved via the ITPA collaboration. He was pleased to report that the recent initiative to assess the ITER diagnostics requirements through the ITPA Topical Groups had been very successful
and he called for continued support of this activity. In addition, he recommended that the opportunity for collaboration with the International Energy Agency (IEA) should be vigorously pursued to promote co-ordinatedresearch on the High Priority Research Areas.
Dr. R. Aymar, ITER International Team Leader, summarized the status of ITER. Dr. Aymar commented that heis very pleased with recent progress made through the ITPA activities in the areas of transport, pedestal, and
ELM and disruption mitigation, which had increased confidence in the achievement of ITER’s goals, and heencouraged continued efforts to improve understanding of the underlying physics processes, which would further increase confidence in ITER’s performance margins.
The Topical Group (TG) Chairs and Co-chairs reported on the most significant recent developments in theirareas of responsibility as follows:

Diagnostics (A.J H Donné, A. Costley)
Interactions with other TGs on measurement requirements and their justification have been enhanced. This has led to recommendations for higher resolution in the measurement of several key parameters (Te, ne, Ti, vrot, q, etc.). Because of thepromising developments in the “advanced tokamak” operating modes, it will be necessary to determine the minimum
requirements for supporting this operation (to avoid over-specification of the measurement requirements) and to assess
the performance of possible measurement techniques. In the last TG meeting, stronger EU and US participation would
have been desirable. Additional resources are necessary to support the development of BPX-relevant diagnostics onpresent-day devices.
MHD, Disruptions and Control (O. Gruber, Y. Gribov)
Sawtooth control has been shown to influence the onset of neoclassical tearing modes (NTMs). Benign ELMs (type II
ELMs) are observed at q > 3.5 and in plasma equilibria close to double null in AUG and JT-60U at higher densities. Active
control of ELM frequency and amplitude was demonstrated by pellet injection in AUG. Strong noble gas puffing was effective for mitigation of forces and heat loads in disruptions while suppressing runaway electron generation (DIII-D, AUG).
The DINA code (disruption simulation code) has been tested against many experiments, including DIII-D, JT-60U, TCV
and AUG. A broad heat deposition is observed during the disruption thermal quench in AUG and DIII-D.
Steady State Operation and Energetic Particles (C. Gormezano, K. Miyamoto, S. Ide)
Electron cyclotron current drive (ECCD) stabilization of the m=2/n=1 NTM at r/a = 0.66 was achieved in DIII-D. A very
good database on off-axis ECCD efficiency has been established showing that the measured efficiencies are in reasonable agreement with modelling predictions. Lower hybrid current drive has sustained discharges for up to 4 minutes in ToreSupra. Real time control of the normalized parameter ρ/LTe has been demonstrated in JET, sustaining a neutron yield of
1016/s for 7.5 s. Good alignment of bootstrap current and pressure profiles, as well as qmin, are key features of candidate
steady state scenarios for burning plasma experiments. Shallow shear at q0 = 1 (AUG, DIII-D) and shallow shear at qminaround 2 (DIII-D, JET, JT-60U) appear to be the best candidates for steady state scenarios.
Transport and Internal Transport Barrier (ITB) (E. Doyle, V. Mukhovatov)
Quasi-steady-state operation (7.5 s) with real time ITB and q-profile control was demonstrated on JET. ITB plasmas having Te ~ Ti using dominant electron heating were achieved in JT-60U. Full non-inductive operation (i.e. with a non-inductive current fraction of >90%) was achieved with ITBs on JT-60U, JET and DIII-D. Off-axis ECCD resulted in ITB formation in DIII-D advanced tokamak plasmas. High-Z impurity accumulation in plasmas with ITBs has been mitigated by central heating. Theory-based modelling studies highlight the need for a predictive model of the H-mode edge pedestal. Three
conference papers have been presented, at the US TTF Meeting, EPS 2002, and the 19th IAEA FEC.

Confinement Database and Modelling (W. Houlberg, A. Polevoi)
The following High Priority Research Topics have been recommended for international collaboration: 1) confinement studies with pellet injection (including pellet-induced ELMs); 2) further studies on the isotope dependence of confinement; 3)investigation of the confinement scaling with β- the database should be extended over a broader range of ρ* and ν*; and4) extended measurements of pedestal data, including scaling experiments and a database of core plus pedestal analy-

5sis. Although ion transport is reasonably well described by physics models, electron transport needs further work.
Validation of predictive transport codes is in progress. Three papers were published at the 19th IAEA FEC.
Pedestal and Edge (Y. Kamada, T. Osborne)
The origin of type I and type II ELMs in many tokamaks appears to be explainable in terms of the stability of edge peeling/ballooning modes. DIII-D data shows that the conducted ELM power decreases toward higher density or collisionality,
but that the convected ELM power is almost constant, which is in contrast to JET results. Establishment of a scaling forthe pedestal width is an urgent issue. Several pedestal scalings have been proposed, projecting to 2-4 keV in ITER. An
assessment of the diagnostics requirements for the pedestal region in ITER has been made, resulting in a recommendation for higher spatial resolution (a/400) at the plasma edge (> 0.8a).
Divertor and SOL (N. Asakura, B. Lipschultz)
The rise time of the ELM divertor heat flux pulse has been observed to be of the order of the ion transport time parallelto the magnetic field, implying that the acceptable type I ELM heat load is a factor of two higher than the previous estimate. Only 50-80% of the ELM energy lost from the core appears at the divertor targets in JET and AUG, which necessitates further studies on power accountability. There are similar uncertainties in relation to the disruption heat loads. In
dimensionless scaling experiments, appropriately normalized SOL profiles and derived radial transport coefficients havebeen found to be similar in DIII-D and C-Mod. Further studies on tritium retention should be encouraged. Three papers
were given at PSI-2002 and one at the 19th IAEA FEC.

Reporting on the activities of the Database Oversight Group, W. Houlberg outlined the status of the ITPA
Profile Database (IPDB). This database is structured with common formats and tools to facilitate collaborative
projects between TGs. Modern architecture and data organization are employed. It was proposed that a
Governing Committee should be established to ensure that a wide variety of needs are met, and that responsibilities are distributed to reduce bottlenecks. This, together with detailed elements of the proposal, wasapproved by the Co-ordinating Committee.

EU, JA, the RF and the US briefly reported on the status and plans for their R&D programmes.
EU (D. Campbell). The EFDA Technology budget includes increases for Design and R&D in ITER H&CD and diagnostics.
A new EU task force has been established to address PWI issues for ITER, with a focus on erosion, redeposition and tritium retention. The EU fusion programme is addressing a wide range of issues associated with the ITPA High Priority
Research Areas.
JA (M. Wakatani and H. Ninomiya). JT-60 terminated its 2002 experiments in July. In 2003, experiments are proposed on
performance improvement and physics studies in advanced tokamak plasmas with the aim of contributing to the ITPA
research priorities. JAERI expects at least 8 weeks of operation in 2003, but the available experimental time depends on
the budget. JFT-2M will be shut down in 2003, but its operation will be resumed in 2004.
RF (N. Ivanov). The T-15M Tokamak, a device with copper coils and a non-circular cross-section, is being designed. Theory
and modelling work are contributing to ITER analysis in many areas, including ripple losses, resistive wall mode feedback
stabilization, neoclassical tearing mode control, disruption simulations with the DINA code, plasma transport and ideal
stability analysis using the ASTRA code, and FW heating and current drive using the ICRF antenna.
US (E. Oktay). The US community is embarked on the process of development of an agreed strategy for the study of burning plasmas, most notably through the Snowmass Meeting in July 2002, and a FESAC Burning Plasma Strategy Panel.
A principal recommendation emerging from this process is that the USA should join ITER as a full partner. The National
Research Council has established a study committee to assess a programme of burning plasma experiments, and a
progress report is expected in December 2002. FESAC and NRC recommendations are critical to the US decision regarding the possible participation of the US in ITER Negotiations.

M. Shimada discussed the objectives and scope of the proposed “Tokamak Physics Basis”, together with apossible schedule for its completion. The “ITER Physics Basis”, which is a valuable knowledge resource andhas provided a useful methodology for projection to burning plasma experiments, including ITER, is now five
years old and some sections should be updated to reflect the progress made in that period. It was noted thata positive decision on ITER site selection and construction could have a positive impact on the motivation forsuch a revision and it was agreed that M. Shimada and D. Campbell should work out a well-defined scope forthe document and distribute it for discussion among the CC and TGs.

6

ITPA High Priority Research Areas 2002-2003
Diagnostics

•
•
•
•
•

MHD, Disruption
and Control

•
•
•
•
•

Steady State
Operation andEnergetic Particles

•
•
•
•
•
•

ITB and Transport

•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Confinement
Database andModelling•••

Pedestal and Edge •••Divertor and SOL

•
•
•
•

Review requirements for measurements of neutron/α-particle source profile and assessment of possible methods of measurement.
Determination of MINIMUM requirements necessary to support advanced tokamak operation and control, and assessment of the possible measurement techniques.
Assess impact of RIEMF on magnetic measurements and perform improved measurements on prototype coils.
Determination of lifetime of plasma facing mirrors used in optical systems.
Development of methods of measuring the energy and density distribution of confinedand escaping α-particles.
MHD stability analysis of H-mode edge transport barrier under type I and tolerable ELM
conditions.
NTMs: island onset threshold, stabilization of (3,2) and (2,1) NTM islands at high β and β
recovery, possible operation with benign NTMs (FIR, seed island control); identify requirements for reactor plasmas.
RWMs: analysis, experimental verification of control, role of plasma rotation and error
fields, control system requirements for diagnostics.
Construction of new disruption DB including conventional and advanced scenarios andheat loads on wall/targets.
Development of disruption mitigation techniques, particularly noble gas injection.
Multi-machine assessment of candidate steady state and hybrid scenarios.
Install steady state scenario development database.
Explore and develop plasmas with very high bootstrap content.
H&CD code benchmarking on ICRH, NBCD, LHCD and ECCD.
Start assessment of reversed shear operational space: modelling codes for EP collectivemodes, experiments including mainly quantitative measurements.
Assess proposed q-profiles for steady state and hybrid scenarios.
Improve experimental characterization and understanding of critical issues for reactor relevant regimes with ITBs, including:Continue to optimize and improve ITER-hybrid and AT operation demonstration discharges,
Obtain Te ~ Ti at higher performance,
Impurity accumulation (low- and high-Z),
Compatibility with edge conditions (ELMs, density,).
Develop, manage and analyse the new international experimental ITB database in orderto test predictive theory-based models and ITB formation conditions.
Study experimental plasma results that challenge whether ion transport is fully understood, such as flat core profiles, etc.
Test simulation predictions via comparisons with measurements of turbulence characteristics, code-to-code comparisons and comparisons to transport scalings.
Assemble and manage multi-machine databases, analysis tools, and physics models.
Evaluate global and local models for plasma confinement by testing against the databases.
Use the models to predict the performance of Burning Plasma Experiments, including an
estimate of the uncertainty of the predictions.
Improve predictive capability of pedestal structure through profile modelling.
Construct physics-based and empirical scaling of pedestal parameters.
Improve predictive capability for ELM size and frequency and assess accessibility toregimes with small or no ELMs.
Understand the effect of ELMs/disruptions on divertor and first wall structures.
Tritium retention and the processes that determine it.
Improve predictive capability of pedestal structure through profile modelling.
Better prescription of SOL perpendicular transport coefficients and boundary conditions
for input to BPX modelling.

Definition of High Priority Research Areas: a small number of R&D issues which provide a focus for the Topical Group’s
activities in a timeframe of 1-2 years and which should be determined on the basis of their likely importance, both inincreasing understanding of fusion plasmas and in providing increased confidence in achieving significant fusion gain inproposed long-pulse burning plasma facilities, as well as of probability of thier achieving significant progress within thistimeframe.

7

Discussion on issues relevant to the Structure of the ITPA included the following topics:
Structure and Activities of the Topical Physics Groups. Dr. D. Campbell expressed the Committee’s appreciation for the contribution of Prof. Kenro Miyamoto during his time as Co-Chair of the Steady State Operationand Energetic Particles Topical Group and welcomed Dr. S. Ide, JAERI, as the new Co-Chair of the TG. To
reinforce this TG’s work in the key Energetic Particles area, it was decided to ensure that each participant isrepresented by at least two experts active in this area (if necessary, by new nominations) to allow the formation of an Energetic Particles working group within the TG.
It was suggested that a joint session to discuss plasma control issues should be held during the Diagnostics
TG meeting on 14-18 July 2003, in St. Petersburg or in Moscow. The focus of the meeting would be physicsrelated requirements on control. The role of rotation in influencing plasma performance has been highlighted
increasingly as it influences transport and stability. However, the physics understanding of rotation is limited:
the present theory does not explain cases in which significant plasma rotation is observed with no momentum input (e.g. with ICRF in C-Mod). The need for continued code benchmarking of ECCD stabilization of
NTMs was highlighted in the discussion.
Participation of the Stellarator Community in the ITPA. An ‘informal’ proposal for participants from the stellarator community, one for each TG, had been received. This list was approved by the CC. The CC confirmedthat it is not the intention to modify the scope of the ITPA through the participation of the stellarator community. It is expected, rather, that the participation of the stellarator community will be beneficial for developing
an improved understanding of the physics relevant to a tokamak BPX and that the stellarator community will
gain from the extensive physics basis which has been assembled for a tokamak BPX.
Progress on the ITPA Website (http://itpa.ipp.mpg.de/). H. Zohm reported that uploading of files will bepossible in the near future. TG members are encouraged to use this site as much as possible to enhancecommunication among the members. Suggestions for improvement are welcome and should be mailed toH. Zohm (zohm@ipp.mpg.de).
Proposals for High Priority Research Areas 2002-2003 were made on behalf of each TG and reviewed by the
CC. The final list of agreed areas is shown in the table on page 7.
The CC members expressed satisfaction with the progress achieved in the ITPA over the last 12 months. It
was agreed that the Contact Persons will discuss the possibility of extending the ITPA framework for up to two
years with their respective administrations.
Participants in the Meeting
EU: D. Campbell, F. Romanelli, H. Zohm, A.J. Donné, C. Gomezano, O. Gruber
JA: H. Ninomiya, S. Takamura, M. Wakatani †, N. Askura, Y. Kamada
RF: N. Ivanov, S. Konovalov, S. Mirnov
US: E. Oktay, N. Sauthoff, R. Stambaugh, E. Doyle, W. Houlberg
IT: R. Aymar, M. Shimada, A. Costley, Y. Gribov, V. Mukhovatov, A. Polevoi† The members of the ITPA Co-ordinating Committee and the ITPA Topical Physics Groups wish to express their sadness
at the sudden death of Prof. M. Wakatani of the University of Kyoto. Prof. Wakatani’s significant contributions to the workof the ITER Physics Expert Groups and to that of the ITPA are greatly appreciated by all of his colleagues.

Printed by the IAEA in Austria
April 2003

03-00568

Items to be considered for inclusion in the ITER CTA Newsletter should be submitted to B. Kuvshinnikov, ITER Office, IAEA,
Wagramer Strasse 5, P.O. Box 100, A-1400 Vienna, Austria, or Facsimile: +43 1 2633832, or e-mail: c.basaldella@iaea.org(phone +43 1 260026392).