ContentsChapter 1

Overview

Hitoshi Yoshioka

1. Why do an International Assessment of the Interim Report?······························ 1
1-1．Events Leading Up to the Formulation of theDraft Nuclear Energy Policy Outline ·························································· 1
1-2．Interim Report Concerning the Nuclear Fuel Cycle Policy ························ 1
1-3．Purpose of the Review ················································································ 22. Organization and Activities of the ICRC ································································ 32-1. Background behind the establishment of the ICRC····································· 32-2. ICRC Members······························································································ 33. Characteristics of and Problems with the Interim Report ···································· 43-1. Conducting a “Comprehensive Evaluation” of the “Basic Scenarios”········· 43-2. The Conclusion to Adhere to the Current Policy ······································· 53-3. Problems with the Methodology of the Overall Assessment······················· 53-4. Problems with each of the Individual Assessment Items ···························· 73-5. A Summarization of the Problems ······························································· 94. Results of the Reviews by Overseas Panelists ························································ 94-1. Overall characteristics ··················································································· 94-2. Particular features of each individual report·············································· 104-2-1. Fred Barker (UK) ········································································ 104-2-2. Mycle Schneider (France) ·····························································114-2-3. Christian Küppers (Germany) ·······················································114-2-4. Frank von Hippel (USA) ····························································· 135. Assessment of the Cost of a Change of Policy ···················································· 135-1. Why treat the cost of a change of policy as a separate issue? ·············· 135-2. The Interim Report’s evaluation methodology in regard to thecost of a change of policy ······································································· 145-3. Errors in the long-term nuclear power plant shut down scenario ············ 145-4. The real problem associated with a change of policy ······························ 155-5. The uncounted costs of not changing policy············································· 16
6. Conclusion ················································································································· 16

Chapter 2ICRC ReviewFred Barker

1. Introduction ··············································································································· 18
2. Deficiencies in the Planning Council’s Assessment Method ········································· 18
3. Key Issues in Judgements of Scenario Performance ····················································· 19
4. Methods for Improved Assessment ·············································································· 23
5. Stakeholder Participation in Assessment ······································································ 25
6. Conclusion ················································································································· 26

Chapter 3ICRC Review

Mycle Schneider

1. Introduction ··············································································································· 27
2. JAEC Methodology ···································································································· 27
3. Definition of the Scenarios ························································································· 28
4. Evaluation of the Scenarios························································································· 29
5. Conclusion ················································································································· 39

Chapter 4ICRC ReviewChristian Küppers

1. Introduction·················································································································· 42
2. Radiological Impact of Reprocessing, Interim Storage and Final Disposal of Spent Fuel · 43
3. Safety of Reprocessing, Interim Storage and Final Disposal of Spent Fuel ······················ 46
4. Proliferation Risks Related to Separated Plutonium and Spent Fuel ································ 47
5. Overseas trends ············································································································ 49
6. Conclusion ··················································································································· 49

Chapter 5ICRC Review

Frank von Hippel

1. Introduction ··············································································································· 50
2. Domestic considerations: economics, safety and other considerations··························· 50
3. International considerations: the added danger of plutonium diversion bywould-benuclear terrorists and damage to the effort to contain the proliferation of national nuclear
fuel-cycle facilities ····································································································· 52
4. Conclusion ················································································································· 56

Appendix 1:New Nuclear Policy-Planning Council 13th Meeting Reference Paper 1.
Interim Report Concerning the Nuclear Fuel Cycle Policy, 12 November 2004 ············ 1

Appendix 2: Letter to the JAEC Chairman ················································································· 8Appendix 3: Reply from the JAEC Chairman ··············································································· 9