[Translated from Japanese] [March 13, 2006]
To: Mr. Toshihiro Nikai
Minister of Economy, Trade and Industry
As stated in the enclosed 9 March letter from Dr. Edwin Lyman (Union of Concerned Scientists) and Professor Frank von Hippel (Princeton University) to Aomori Governor Shingo Mimura, there are points that cannot be supported by facts in the explanation given by the Japanese Government to the six US Democratic members of Congress including Edward Markey, and to Aomori Prefecture. This concerns the international implications for nuclear proliferation of the Rokkasho reprocessing plant. I therefore request that you take the following action before beginning active tests at the plant:
- Provide a detailed technical account of why METI believes that MOX is far less useable for making nuclear weapons than pure plutonium oxide.
- Show in graph form the year-by-year accumulated plutonium inventory at the Rokasho reprocessing in order to explain how the plutonium that is to be accumulated.if and when its separation begins will be consumed based on the power companies’ utilization plans.
- Explain how Japan justifies the logical inconsistency of commencing reprocessing at Rokkasho using the PUREX method which has nuclear proliferatoion risks, while supporting GNEP which is critical of the PUREX method. The Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP) initiative maintains that since the PUREX (plutonium-uranium extraction) reprocessing method (the method used at the Rokkasho reprocessing plant) is accompanied by high nuclear proliferation risks, it aims to develop new methods including UREX plus (uranium extraction +) .
Jungmin KANG, Ph.D.
Independent Nuclear Policy Analyst (August 2002 -Present). Advisor on nuclear energy policy, PresidentialCommission on Sustainable Development, Republic of Korea. Visiting Research Fellow at Princeton University (1999-2000). Associate of Nautilus Institute.
130-dong, 504-ho
Seoul National University
Shilim-dong, Kwanak-go
Seoul 151-742
Republic of Korea