The international ITER Council (IC) met March 10-11 in Cadarache, France, "to share information on domestic developments and to consider technical progress as reported by the Director (Dr. Robert Aymar) and the results of a Special Working Group (FPN98-23) on the strategic rationale for ITER and to start planning for future actions."

Aymar reportedly told the IC that three designs, varying in aspect ratio, were under consideration for a reduced cost ITER. The ITER Joint Central Team has been developing reduced cost options "aimed at a target of approximately 50% of the direct capital cost of the present design, with reduced technical objectives" (FPN98-23). European participants at the IC meeting reportedly urged even lower cost targets. The IC and the Director agreed to make "available to the Parties by the end of 1999 a report for review by the TAC (ITER Technical Advisory Committee, chaired by Prof. M. Fujiwara) and subsequent consideration and action by ITER Council on (1) key elements of a specific design ... and (2) a restricted number of design variants consistent with the same guidelines." The IC asked the Director to make a progress report to a meeting of the Program Directors of the Parties scheduled for July 1999.

The IC endorsed a report by the Special Working Group on the strategic rationale for ITER. The Group was co-chaired by Hiroshi Kishimoto and Klaus Pinkau. U.S. members of the group were Charles Baker, David Baldwin, Robert Goldston, Gerald Navratil and John Sheffield. The report concluded that the "international program is technically ready to proceed with the construction of an experimental facility which in an integrated manner addresses scientific and technological issues before DEMO." The group said, "Many of these issues can be addressed only in near-power-plant conditions." The group endorsed "a device in which it is expected to achieve energy gain of at least 10 and explore steady-state operation, at a direct capital cost of approximately 50% of ITER as described in the Final Design Report." With respect to a proposal, endorsed by many scientists in the U.S. (FPN98-12), that plans to construct ITER should be replaced by several specialized lower cost facilities (so-called "multiple machine strategy"), the group said, "The SWG concludes that this would delay by 10 years or more the key fusion demonstration and integration step, and would increase the total cost of fusion development substantially. It is the unanimous opinion of the SWG that the world program is scientifically and technically ready to take the important ITER step." The IC reconstituted the SWG and charged them "to develop proposals and all necessary supporting information for the complete realisation of ITER including key elements of a draft agreement for construction and operation and associated draft implementing arrangements." The IC asked that "a report by submitted by the end of 1999 for consideration by the ITER Council at its first meeting in 2000 (scheduled for January), with an interim report to the Project Director's meeting in July.

The IC also accepted "proposals from the U.S. for its continued involvement in ITER activities, principally in Physics Experts Groups and limited testing of the Central Solenoid Model Coil after July 1999," when the U.S. formal agreement to participate in ITER is schedule to expire (FPN98-28). U.S. fusion head Anne Davies told the Council "We would like to remain involved in the ITER Physics Expert Group, as in the past." She said that "Our experts will participate in the various meetings, and share technical information from the U.S. physics program." She said "Having finished the manufacture of the Model Coil, we will participate in its installation and testing through the end of September 1999, and we will finish the manufacture of the Diverter Cassette and complete our presently planned involvement in the testing, also by the end of September 1999."