VZCZCXYZ0010
PP RUEHWEB

DE RUEHKO #3169/01 3220145
ZNY CCCCC ZZH
P 170145Z NOV 08
FM AMEMBASSY TOKYO
TO RHMCSUU/DEPT OF ENERGY WASHINGTON DC PRIORITY
RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 8869
INFO RUCPDOC/DEPT OF COMMERCE WASHINGTON DC PRIORITY

C O N F I D E N T I A L TOKYO 003169 
 
SENSITIVE 
SIPDIS 
 
DEPARTMENT FOR EAP/J, ISN/NESS JAN FLADEBOE, DOE FOR GC-52 
BEN MCRAE, NE-6 CRAIG WELLING 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 11/18/2018 
TAGS: PARM ENRG TRGY NRR MNUC PUNE JA
SUBJECT: JAPAN TO CONTINUE DELIBERATING CONVENTION ON 
SUPPLEMENTARY COMPENSATION 
 
REF: STATE 054213 
 
Classified By: Ambassador J. Thomas Schieffer for reasons 1.4 (b) and ( 
d). 
 
¶1.  (SBU) Summary: Japan sees no need to join the Convention 
on Supplementary Compensation for Nuclear Damage (CSC) 
immediately, but has concluded the CSC is the "realistic 
future choice."  The GOJ, therefore, will continue its 
internal deliberations.  Despite comments from a MEXT 
official that U.S. firms are not pushing their Japanese 
counterparts on the issue, and that such efforts are needed 
for progress, Tokyo-based representatives of one U.S. firm 
note they have in fact been advocating for the CSC.  End 
summary. 
 
MEXT COMMENTS REGARDING CSC 
--------------------------- 
 
¶2.  (C)  Econoff met with Ministry of Education, Culture, 
Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT) official Taro Hokugo 
November 5.  Hokugo, the deputy director of the Atomic Energy 
Division's Research and Development Bureau, provided a short 
update on CSC-related deliberations within the Japanese 
government.  He also provided a draft document entitled 
"Recent Development on the Revision of Nuclear Liability 
System", which post is sending by e-mail to State ISN/NESS 
and DOE's Office of Nuclear Energy. 
 
¶3.  (C)  Hokugo noted MEXT's Nuclear Liability System Review 
Committee had examined various nuclear liability treaties, 
including the CSC, the Vienna Convention on Civil Liability 
for Nuclear Damage, and the Convention on Third Party 
Liability in the Field of Nuclear Energy (Paris Convention). 
After review, MEXT decided the Vienna Convention would be 
insufficient and the Paris Convention would be too difficult 
to join.  The Committee concluded the CSC was Japan's 
"realistic future choice" and the Committee will establish a 
working group to continue discussions on CSC issues. 
 
¶4.  (C)  Hokugo said MEXT sees no need to act quickly on the 
issue of CSC because there is little interest on the part of 
Japanese firms Toshiba and Hitachi.  These firms, he claimed, 
are not receiving any pressure from their American 
counterparts regarding the CSC.  Hokugo suggested if the U.S. 
wants Japan to join the convention, American firms need to 
put pressure on their Japanese counterparts, which they would 
then transfer to MEXT. 
 
¶5.  (C)  According to the document provided by Hokugo, the 
Committee's report is out for public comment and a final 
version will be released in December.  Post will forward a 
copy of the full report (in Japanese) for those interested in 
having a copy for the record.  To move the issue forward with 
MEXT, Post has plans for a more in-depth meeting with 
officials responsible for nuclear liability policy. 
 
INDUSTRY COMMENTS 
----------------- 
 
¶6.  (SBU)  DOE Nuclear Energy Attache and Econoff also met 
with Tokyo-based representatives of GE Japan November 10 to 
discuss the firm's interactions with Japanese industry 
regarding the CSC. 
 
¶7.  (SBU)  In contrast to MEXT comments about the need for 
U.S. companies to put pressure on their Japanese 
counterparts, the GE officials said their company had in fact 
urged Japanese companies at the staff level to support 
ratification of the CSC.  After discussions, GE reps agreed 
that perhaps higher-level advocacy was called for and noted 
they have been deliberating whether to deliver comments at 
the senior level. 
 
¶8.  (SBU) In discussing the challenges GE faces, reps 
commented that Japanese industry does not share GE's 
awareness of the vulnerabilities caused by liability. 
Furthermore, Japanese firms are hesitant to support CSC 
because of cost concerns.  For its part, reps noted, U.S. 
industry has been reluctant in some quarters to describe the 
need for CSC too starkly for fear it would discourage the 
Japanese from pursuing joint business efforts. 
 
¶9.  (SBU) Emboffs and GE reps further discussed Japanese 
power companies' apparent opposition to the CSC.  The GE reps 
noted this was somewhat confusing, given that it seemed plant 
suppliers would be liable for CSC-related costs, and not the 
 
utilities companies.  Econoff inquired if the utilities had 
any business plans, perhaps involving partnering with 
suppliers for overseas ventures, that could affect their 
outlook and reps agreed this issue needs further 
investigation. 
SCHIEFFER