ML22123A189

From kanterella
Revision as of 02:07, 18 November 2024 by StriderTol (talk | contribs) (StriderTol Bot change)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
SP1-Waste-and-Water-Fukushima-Plenary-Transcript
ML22123A189
Person / Time
Issue date: 03/09/2022
From: Cool L
NRC/OIP/ICAB
To:
References
Download: ML22123A189 (34)


Text

1

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

+ + + + +

34TH REGULATORY INFORMATION CONFERENCE (RIC)

+ + + + +

SPECIAL PLENARY SESSION: WASTE AND WATER: THE

FUTURE OF DECOMMISSIONING EFFORTS AT

FUKUSHIMA-DAIICHI

NUCLEAR POWER STATION

+ + + + +

WEDNESDAY,

MARCH 9, 2022

+ + + + +

The Plenary Session met via Video-

Teleconference, at 9:01 a.m. EST, David Skeen, Deputy

Director, Office of International Programs,

presiding.

PRESENT:

DAVID SKEEN, Deputy Director, Office of

International Programs, Nuclear Regulatory

Commission

GUSTAVO CARUSO, Director and Coordinator, Fukushima

ALPS Treated Water Review, International

Atomic Energy Agency

NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 2

HAJIMU YAMANA, President, Nuclear Damage

Compensation and Decommissioning Facilitation

Corporation of Japan

NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 3

P R O C E E D I N G S

9:01 a.m.

MR. SKEEN: Thank you, everyone, good

morning, and welcome to this special plenary session

entitled Waste and Water, the Future of

Decommissioning Efforts at the Fukushima Daiichi

Nuclear Power Station.

My name is David Skeen and I am the Deputy

Director of the NRC's office of international

programs, and I have the distinct honor of chairing

today's session.

We are very fortunate to have with us

today senior executives from the Nuclear Damage

Compensation and Decommissioning Facilitation

Corporation of Japan, or NDF.

And the International Atomic Energy

Agency, or the IAEA, to discuss the ongoing

decommissioning and decontamination activities at the

Fukushima Daiichi site.

As some of you may know, about 10 years

ago I served as the Director of the NRC's Japan

Lessons Learned Division, following the 2011 Great

Tohuku earthquake and tsunami that resulted in the

accident at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power

NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 4

station.

I recall that even in the early days

after the accident, we realized that decontamination

activities at the site would be a very long-term

effort on the order of 30 to 40 years.

And dealing with a large volume of

contaminating water that would be generated at the

site over those many years would be one of the most

significant technological challenges for the

Government of Japan.

I'm looking forward today to hearing from

our panelists to get their views on the ongoing

decommissioning efforts including the NDF

unprecedented efforts that are currently underway at

the site, and the lessons being learned that could

have a significant impact on future decommissioning

efforts worldwide.

I am truly honored to introduce our two

distinguished speakers who will share with us their

respective agencies' unique role in the ongoing

Fukushima Daiichi decommissioning activities.

We will hear first this morning from

Professor Hajimu Yamana, the President of the Nuclear

Damage Compensation and Decommissioning Facilitation

NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 5

Corporation of Japan.

Dr. Yamana served as a professor at Kyoto

University specializing in actinide chemistry and

education for over 20 years, before being asked to

lead the NDF response to the Fukushima Daiichi

accident.

He has served as President of NDF since

2015 and has devoted his efforts to safely

decommissioning the facility ever since.

President Yamana will address the NDF

strategic planning relating to decontamination and

decommissioning at the Fukushima site, including the

technical challenges such as debris retrieval, spent

fuel removal, waste management, and the associated

regulatory considerations.

Our second speaker is my good friend and

colleague Gustavo Caruso, who will discuss the IAEA's

ongoing work with Japan regarding the planned release

of the treated water from the Fukushima site.

Gustavo has more than 40 years of

experience in nuclear radiation safety, regulatory

inspections of nuclear installations, licensing of

nuclear power-plants with the Nuclear Regulatory

Authority of Argentina before he joined the IAEA.

NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 6

In 2005 he was appointed the Head of the

Regulatory Activity Section within the Department of

Nuclear Safety and Security at the IAEA.

Following the Fukushima accident in 2011,

he was designated at the Special Coordinator for IAEA

action plan on nuclear safety in response to the

accident, and was the primary author of the report

that the IAEA issued.

In 2021 Director Caruso was selected to

manage the IAEA safety review of Japan's planned

discharge into the ocean of the contaminated water

that is currently being stored in 1500 storage tanks

at the Fukushima site.

So, following the presentations by both

President Yamana and Director Caruso, there will be

an opportunity for audience questions.Please submit

any questions you have using the Q&A tab.

Without further ado, I will now turn to

President Yamana to introduce his organization and

their activities related to decommissioning of the

Fukushima site. President Yamana, the virtual floor

is yours.

MR. YAMANA: Thank you, Mr. Skeen, and

hello, everyone. I am President Yamana from Japan,

NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 7

and I'm very glad to be with you today in this special

session.

Firstly, I'd like to express my sincere

gratitude to the NRC Staff for preparing for this

meeting and to Chairman Hanson for giving me this

precious opportunity.

Before starting my speech, please allow

me to express my deep concern and sorrow for what is

going on under war. It is as though my concerns at

nuclear facilities there are isolated by military

force from the operators on discretion and regulators

distractions.

So, this is totally against our firm

belief out of our experience from Fukushima Daiichi

accident that the most important lesson to be learned

should be operators proactive responsibility for safe

operation together with a completely independent

guidance from the regulatory authority.

So, at the 11th anniversary of the

nuclear accident at Fukushima Daiichi, let me express

sincere thanks from Japan to all countries who gave

support to Japan through various types of

international cooperation.

Today I will talk about the current

NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 8

status and plans for the decommissioning of the

Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power-plant as well as the

plans for the release of tritiated water into the

ocean.

Please note that I will refer to

Fukushima Daiichi as 1F for short. Can I have my

slide, the first cover page?

Firstly, I'd like to talk about the

organizational structure for 1F decommissioning.

For the decommissioning of nuclear plants that

require a long period of time, a prerequisite for

success is the establishment of a solid

organizational and management structure.

In the legal framework of Japan's nuclear

power business, Tokyo Electric Power Company, TEPCO,

is ultimately responsible for the decommissioning of

1F.

On the other hand, based on the law on

nuclear disaster response, the Government created the

Nuclear Emergency Response Headquarters and TEPCO's

decommissioning has to follow the line of this

administrative guidance, which is managed by METI as

a leading ministry.

NDF is a government-affiliated

NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 9

corporation specially created to supervise TEPCO to

fulfil its responsibility of compensation and

decommissioning. It is also responsible for

developing decommissioning strategies managing

decommissioning funds and overseeing TEPCO's project

management.

And nuclear regulatory authority, NRA, is

responsible for ensuring the safety of 1F

decommissioning from a complete independent

standpoint.

With regards to the release of tritiated

water into the ocean, there were several ministries

to address the possible comments of computational

impacts to the society. So, next page, please.

The major risk sources to DRAs are shown

on the lower left. The two major radiological risk

sources are the spent fuel stored in the storage pools

in the reactor building and the fuel debris

solidified inside of the pressure vessel and primary

containment vessel.

These must be retrieved from the damaged

reactor building within a certain period of time and

brought into a safe storage space until the time when

the final end state becomes ready.

NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 10

One complication is the inflow of

underground water into the reactor building and this

results in the continuous generation of contaminated

water. Similarly, there is a huge amount of low-

level radioactive solid waste that requires strategy

management for the future.

In the upper half of this page, I show

the timeline of the decommissioning defined by the

Government's mid and long-term roadmap. Now, 11

years after the accident, we are at the end of the

second phase of this table.

Until various measures for emergency

response and stabilization were taken to achieve the

safe and stable status today.

In the second phase, we have completed

about half of the spent fuel retrieval and are

prepared to study and start fuel debris for Unit 2 as

the first implementing unit.

We will start the third phase from around

the end of this year to complete recovery of spent

fuel and prepare for the full-scale recovery of fuel

debris within the first decade.

The photo in the lower right shows a

large remote arm that will be used for the inside

NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 11

investigation of the reactor vessel and for the

small-scale trial sampling of the fuel debris at Unit

2.

It is going to start from this autumn.

Please go ahead. Now, recently, attention is given

to the issue of disposal of the treated water and I

have to focus on this subject in my talk.

Treated water is purified cooling water

that was contaminated from contact with the damaged

core. Let me introduce the water management system

being used at the 1F site.

Water is continually injected into the

pressure vessel to cool the damaged core and the water

flows out to the turbine building.

In order to reduce contaminants, this

water is treated by the Cs removal system and reverse

osmosis system to feed it back to the reactor.

However, a significant amount of

groundwater continuously flows into the building,

increasing the volume of water in this circulation

loop.

The excess water is taken out and treated

by Advanced Liquid Processing System, ALPS, to remove

almost all radionuclides to satisfy that it meets the

NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 12

safety criteria for discharge to the environment.

By operating the ALPS system at its

optimal performance of decontamination, the only

remaining radionuclide in the treated water is

tritium. This is called ALPS treated water.

Due to the continuous in-flow of the

groundwater in the past, the amount of the treated

water stored in thousands of tanks has now reached to

about 1.4 million cubic meters, occupying massive

portions of the site.

It is estimated that the run-out of the

space to build additional tanks within less than two

years.

Through a dedicated study by the

Government, it was concluded that it is appropriate

to release the ALPS-treated water into the ocean as

long as the environmental safety is secured.

This is a standard practice for all other

nuclear facilities in the world, releasing tritium to

rivers or oceans. This conclusion is widely

supported by concerned experts who emphasize the

importance of sustainable long-term project of

decommissioning.

Next slide, please. This slide shows a

NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 13

plan for the ocean discharge of ALPS-treated water.

In the upper left, you can see the current storage

status of the ALPS-treated water.

1.3 million cubic meters are stored in

about 1500 tanks because the tritium inventory is

about 780 terra becquerels.

The average concentration is 60,000

becquerels per liter. It is anticipated that about

5000 cubic meters of treated water will be added every

year.

The plan to release ALPS-treated water

into the ocean is based on keeping the amount of

tritium released per year below 22 tera becquerels,

which was the upper limit license condition for pre-

accident power generation operation.

The upper limit of tritium concentration

will be 1500 becquerels per liter because this has

been already approved and used for the release of

tritium-containing groundwater to the ocean.

It was just about one-fortieth of the

legally permitted criteria for tritium discharge. To

ensure this low concentration, the ALPS-treated water

will be diluted with seawater nearly 100 times before

the discharge.

NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 14

To respond to the public concern, an

undersea tunnel will be built and the water will be

discharged at one km offshore and depth of about ten

meters. I should acknowledge that there has been a

big debate and social confusion about this decision.

However, we believe this decision is

justified and unavoidable because we must keep

focusing on risk reductions such as the removal of

the core debris and moving forward on

decommissioning.

It is natural that there are some key

points to be confirmed for this operation. There,

the confirmation of the sufficient removal of other

radionuclides than tritium, the sufficient dilution

of the treated water, precisely analyze concentration

of tritium, and so on.

To address these concerns, open and

transparent monitoring of all systems and discharge

is required and continuous ocean monitoring will be

essential too.

In order to confirm the correct

implementation, safety regulation by the NRA as well

as supervision of the project by the NDF, disclosure

of accurate information and careful explanation of

NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 15

information of importance.

And as will be given by Mr. Caruso later,

the independence supervision and evaluation by IAEA

is indispensable.

Finally, I have to touch on the fisherman

and public are very concerned about the environmental

impacts and the potential of reputational damages.

We fully understand these concerns and

the Japanese Government is now planning to address

these social impacts with various administrative

measures. Go ahead, please.

To conclude my talk, I'd like to remind

you that the decommissioning of 1F has been

progressing steadily and we are making steps for the

mid to long-term work such as the fuel debris

retrieval.

For the ocean release of ALPS-treated

water, scientific safety should be the fundamental

basis of the stakeholder involved discussion and

understanding.

I appreciate your further discussion and

understanding of their approach and we would be happy

to provide the necessary information to you. Thank

you very much.

NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 16

MR. SKEEN: Thank you, President Yamana,

for providing the RIC audience here such a

comprehensive update on the NDF activities.

I'm certainly also glad to see the NDF

has been able to continue this important mission

despite the additional challenges of COVID-19 over

the last few years.

I know that's also weighing on folks'

mind as well as you do your work.

As a reminder to the audience, please

enter any questions you may have for President Yamana

into the question and answer chat box so that we can

address those following Director Caruso's

presentation.

So, now we will turn to Director Caruso

to discuss the IAEA's work with Japan that is related

to the release of the treated water from the Fukushima

site. Gustavo, the virtual floor is yours.

MR. CARUSO: Thank you very much. Thank

you, Chairman Hanson, to invite the IAEA and myself

to make this presentation in this online format.

This month is 11 months from the

accident, that's why I wanted to inform you the Agency

organized an important conference last year, where

NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 17

Dr. Yamana and Chairman Hanson had a prominent role

there.

And then the conference educates the

Fukushima building on the lessons learned for nuclear

safety was a very successful one and we are working

with the proceedings at this moment which will be

really soon for the public consumption.

But to my first slide, please?

Just the presentation we have some

outline, background, the focus on of the IAEA review

and scope and the standards that we will use, the

taskforce that was stated, components of our review

and different aspects regarding the recent progress

and looking ahead.

Next, please. In April 2021, the IAEA

and the Government of Japan make an agreement of this

based on the governmental announcement from Japan

about the basic policy for handling the ALPS waters

at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power station.

And in this agreement, we discussed how

to make the review of the implementation plan

activities all related to discharge of the water that

Dr. Yamana had just explained before at the Fukushima

Daiichi power-plants against international safety

NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 18

standards.

And this is basically consistent with and

totally in line with our standard line functions to

provide the application of this international

standards at the request of the parties of the member

state.

I wanted to clarify that it's not an

inspection, we are not replacing any regulatory job,

we are just going to fulfil international work just

to compare and comply, and see the compliance with

all the international standards that approve all the

member states in this particular case of the

discharge.

This review will be focused on the low-

range review of the before the water will be

discharged during the discharge of the water, as some

indicates, and after the complete discharged water to

the sea.

Therefore our main activity was how to

ensure safety and transparency, mainly the key

concept of the review in order to contribute to the

confidence building. Next, please.

Then, the mission scope will focus

basically on the Government of Japan, however, they

NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 19

are different players in this case. In one side,

it's METI/TEPCO, basically the responsible

organization to prepare the application and to see

how the technical comply with the safety standards.

The other side is the regulatory body

that we will also be part of our review in assessing

and reviewing the standards and inspecting the

application and issuing the organizations in

compliance with our standards as well.

Therefore, with these two, we complete

the picture and also the focus that basically, as I

said, near term, mid term, and long term, that's why

we have to prepare all our skills concerning this

long range of this particular review.

We will use the standards, of course, as

a benchmark and the conclusions of course will be

based on the compliance or the comments from using

the standards as a reference point. Next please.

Then here you can see a number of

standards, these are the key ones, in particular

starting from the basis of the standard we have G

Part 3. These are the standards for radiation and

safety radiation sources.

And this is the requirement but

NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 20

initially, we are considering the safety

fundamentals, safety principles that is the governing

overarching requirements for all activities and

safety standards below that.

And also the number of guides, the number

of guides that are related to the environmental and

source monitoring, the radiation protection of the

environment of the public radiation protection,

radiation protection control of the radiation

charges, and prospective damage to the environment.

This is key.

Next please.

To do this work, the Director General, he

directed the establishment of the taskforce as a

pragmatic tool to implement all the work that we have

to do, including 11 international recognized experts

in different fields in these particular topics

related to ensure that we have the international

expertise needed to do this work.

They were appointed by the DG and in

addition to that, we have a number of staff of the

IAEA that has the background in this topic to join us

as we complete what we call the taskforce on this

project.

NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 21

Next, please. The taskforce basically

will serve the Secretariat as the leading component

and they will be chaired by the IAEA.

Personally, I am the Chair of the

taskforce and the objective of the Secretariat is

providing planning, coordination, and implementing

all the review admissions.

We will provide the necessary expertise

to use the necessary reports, compiling information,

drafting the text, and of course, being the liaison

with any other necessary senior official in the

Government of Japan and member state or any other

relevant stake-holders.

The international expressed, of course,

they have an advisory role, an important role, to the

Secretariat to perform the function to basically

review the information, highlight the relevant key

aspect, attend the missions and participate with us

in the missions, attend the taskforce expert meetings

and of course, participate in different activities

planned by the IAEA.

Next, please. In summary, this review

will consider three important components.

The first is the safety assessment where

NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 22

we include all the technical radiation aspects that

are considered for the plan and supporting these

activities, in particular, considerations such as how

to make the radiological characterization of water,

the safety-related aspect of the engineering of the

implementation of the system to discharge the water,

the occupation of radiation protection processes,

basically the doses to the workers, and the

radiological environmental impact assessment.

The regulatory activities, the other

important components, is the review, what are the

regulatory actions are considered to do, the

processes that the Japanese regulator are planning to

do in this project, with set objectives what are the

most important requirements from the Japanese

regulators in place?

Which regulatory assessment, the

affirming of the inspections and oversight program

plan by the NRA in Japan. And last but not least is

the independent summary analysis, what we normally

call collaboration.

In our project the IAEA will make the

collaboration of all sampling water, in particular

two things, one is the source of water, how to

NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 23

characterize independently for the IAEA for our

laboratories, what is the isotopic composition of the

tanks, and how to characterize the environmental

samples that are composed by sediments, by water, by

seaweed, and fish.

These are made in the IAEA by three

laboratories, we have three laboratories, one at the

IAEA we call isotopic hydrology, laboratory with

another one is outside Vienna and this laboratory is

terrestrial monitoring.

And in Monaco, in Monaco we have a

laboratory for an environmental monitoring. The

three laboratories together will make an independent

analysis but not only that, we are going to involve

third-party laboratories from other countries to

again, corroborate our independent mission. Next

please.

The outputs, what are the outputs of our

program? In this particular we have many components

which will be drawn through the years, several years,

and in multiple ways.

For example, they create an important

website with public domain, we are producing reports

in different topics in particular from missions. We

NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 24

are giving briefings to the Board, to members states

on particular requests and making presentations, like

for example this one at RIC.

The reports will be issued periodically

will update all of the work that we are doing with

different components of the mentioned work, and prior

to the beginning of the discharge.

We plan to make a summary reports with

our statements about the compliance of the evaluation

of the international standard with all processes and

activities that Japan is doing.

The Secretariat of course will provide a

timely debriefing necessary to get a clear

understanding of what the work is that was done and

what are our conclusions. This is before the water

discharge.

After that we will have another program,

how to continue for a number of decades about this

monitoring aspect and inform the regulatory

stakeholders. Next please.

What we need until now is basically, just

to summarize, the Government of Japan and TEPCO

providing information on the ongoing review, for

example, in November of 2021 the environmental impact

NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 25

assessment, in January the implementation plan, the

entire project implementation plan, and February, we

received the self-evaluation of how Japan believes

they are in compliance with what are the ongoing work

in order to achieve the role of compliance with

international standards.

We have several meetings with the

taskforce since last year in September to review

different steps of this process and in February of

2022 we have very important mission that basically

was divided into three parts.

One, we went there with the three

laboratories' representatives to Japan to discuss how

we are going to make the corroboration plan. Second,

we made the first mission to TEPCO METI the in order

to review one of the components, as we mentioned, the

safety assessment including the radiation aspects.

And the last was the preparatory meeting

of the regulatory mission that is going to take place

in March. Next please.

Then we made a first mission, as I said,

to TEPCO.

It's the first in the process, there will

be more than one, but these are the initial missions

NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 26

to get the awareness of the situation, visit the

place, discussing the technical people, asking

questions towards a comprehensive understanding of

all the topics included to be part of the compliance

of the standards.

This mission will take several experts

like 15 members from the taskforce and engineers,

outside members, inside members, and we cover, as I

said, a wide range of topics.

Next, please. Then we'll mainly focus

on eight technical areas, we discussed the

overarching departments that needs to be fulfilled.

What are the main elements for the characterization

of the source term, discussing about radionuclides

that intervene in this process in different storage

tanks.

We discussed different safety-related

aspects regarding the process on the reliability of

the process, how the engineering is going to take

place at the site in order to review what are the

different situations including any contingency plans

for if something was wrong or going wrong.

What are the back up situations, what are

the safety systems that will cope if there is

NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 27

something wrong? The other topic was the

environmental impact assessment.

We discussed all topics since what is the

impact in the environment. Those limit constraints,

source and environmental monitoring programs because

another thing in addition to our corroboration, we

are going to review how they are making themselves

the monitoring program for the source term and the

environmental standards.

And how Japan is getting a close on

giving information to the interested parties or

stakeholders for all this work, and of course, an

additional last but not least, we discussed the

occupation radiation protection.

It means that the IAEA will also

corroborate the doses to the Staff involved in this

activity. As I said, we are working at this moment

with different elements collected in Japan and we are

going to produce a report in a couple of months to

identify similar topics that we discussed and how

to continue because, as I said, before the water

release an ongoing dialog that we are doing in Japan.

Japan is working different materials and

documents, evaluations that we discussed to be done,

NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 28

and then as I said, this report will consider all

these things and will be released at the end of April,

optimistically, realistically, probably the first

week of May.

Next please. In the future, where do we

go? As I said this month, another mission we are

going to have is the first regulatory review about

how NRA is making the regulated safety case of the

ALPS-treated water discharge.

And then we have the same case of

TEPCO/METI will also make a report in a couple of

months after the mission, end of May, and then we

have plans for the second part of the year to have

the other missions, the continuation from the second

mission to the TEPCO/METI and the regulatory

authority, including inspection programs and further

developments that appear that we need to discuss

related to the prior work.

2023 is the plan year where the water

will be discharged.

It will be a very dynamic time in 2023,

in particular because we need to issue a final report

of our views before the water view is discharged with

the three volumes of the self-assessment, the

NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 29

regulatory review, and the corroboration assessment,

including a summary that is easily understandable

summary for all people in the nuclear program.

And of course, we will continue

implementing the process for independent sampling and

we have to prepare in 2023 our program for during the

process. During the process means that after the

water started to be charged at the sea.

Then in 2024, long-term monitoring will

continue under the current consideration of all

discussed with the relevant stakeholders. This is

what I have to tell you, I hope that it was clear.

Thank you again for giving this

opportunity for giving the presentation, thank you.

MR. SKEEN: Thank you very much, Gustavo,

I really appreciate the comprehensive presentation

that you provided.

I know that at least here at the NRC we

will be following the work of your taskforce as you

go forward and we certainly look forward to

continuing engaging with the IAEA and the NDF on this

topic.

So, we've got about five minutes for

questions and I've got several questions coming in.

NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 30

I think the biggest ones that we're getting right now

have to do with the stakeholders. So, I think we'll

go to Dr. Yamana first.

Can you talk about some of the approaches

you've had in consulting with the public and the

stakeholders in Japan in any of the challenges you

might have faced with your engagement with the

public?

What were the lessons learned from those

engagements?

You're on mute, Dr. Yamana.

MR. YAMANA: Sorry, yes, thank you.

Actually, there has been significant distrust for

TEPCO and discontent from the accessibility of the

decision-making process in the Government, this is

people's opinion.

So, the public engagement has been

absolutely important and this has been very important

in the case of Fukushima Daiichi.

So, for communication with the

stakeholders, the Japanese Government has

periodically had formal opportunity to discuss about

the progress and plan of the decommissioning,

including the water issue with the leaders of the

NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 31

municipalities and some representatives of the

relevant field in the Southern area.

On the other hand, the NRA has had the

frequent meeting to discuss about the safety of the

continuing work with TEPCO in which NRA Commissioners

and some opinion leaders debate the safety issues.

This meeting is open to internet streaming.

So, there have been some other

opportunities to have direct dialog with the public

like the International Forum, which is held by my

organization.

But I have to say, the chance of the

dialog with the public was not so sufficient in the

past. So, I myself think we need to expand this

opportunity to talk directly to the public, I mean

the stakeholders should be expanded more. That is

my view.

MR. SKEEN: Thank you very much for that

answer, I appreciate it.

I know certainly the more open and

transparent you can be in the plan as the process

moves forward, sometimes it's difficult to go through

but it is important to keep the public informed as

the activities proceed.

NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 32

But I know, certainly Gustavo and the

IAEA will make all their information public. So,

having them monitoring and providing that to the

public is also very helpful.

Gustavo, real quick, from your

presentation, folks seem to say the review process on

the proposed release, you wrote out a pretty good

plan as to where we are and where we're going to be

in the next couple of years.

But long-term, how do you see the IAEA

monitoring process? Just give us some of those

perspectives on the projects going forward.

MR. CARUSO: Thank you for the question.

I think as I said, we have very different milestones.

Our first milestone is to produce and show to what

extent Japan is fully in line with the standards.

This will be done next year, let's say

before the water will be discharged.

And then everybody has the opportunity to

see our evaluation totally independent evaluation

done, some discussions probably Japan would use this

with their stakeholders for this particular result.

After that, as I said, in 2023 we need to

prepare our own program, how we're going to first the

NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 33

transition moment, what I call is the moment that

they all work preparations and imminently opening of

the valves will happen and the Agency will be present

for a time.

And then after that, of course we will

continue to be present as part of our review and

witnessing of all the activities in line with the

standards.

And after that, as I said, 2023, we have

to prepare the steady-state program, how we are going

to monitor and first of all corroborate what is in

the sea, what is in the tanks, in the open manner

with our laboratories, and then how we are going to

take into account the taskforce discussions, what's

going on.

If, of course, our discussion is

basically meant for any particular and small

deviation we are prepared to discuss, first, among us

and then with the Japanese colleagues in order to be

sure we are on the same page.

Therefore, we are fully prepared through

design programs, as you know this house, the IAEA,

has enough experience on this particular project and

we are prepared to design a program to support and to

NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 34

demonstrate basically science-based approach,

transparency, and this will contribute altogether to

building confidence that we have.

MR. SKEEN: Thank you, Gustavo, I

appreciate the response on that. Unfortunately,

we've reached the end of our time today and we have

to conclude this special plenary session.

But I want to thank our two distinguished

panelists, President Yamana and Director Caruso, for

taking the time out of their very busy schedules to

participate in this session with us today.

I also greatly appreciate all of the

audience for joining us virtually. I'm sure having

the audience hear these types of conversations is

very helpful and educational for them.

So, if there are no other questions or

thoughts, thank you everyone for participating today

and I thank the RIC audience. This closes out our

session, thank you.

(Whereupon, the above-entitled matter

went off the record at 9:46 a.m.)

NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS