Japanese Trends and major countries
status of Nuclear Backend measures
and Fuel cycle policy
Sep 2023

JAPC Fellow in charge of D&D
President of IRID
Toyoaki Yamauchi

Contents

1. What are backend measures?
2. History and Current Status of Nuclear
Development and Utilization in Japan
3. Status of backend measures in majorcountries
4. Issues such as backend measures in Japan1

1. What are Backend measures?
Include Fuel Cycle Policy2What are Backend measures?
Backend measures are the safe disposal of waste(including unnecessary facilities) generated by the use of
nuclear power.
- Processing and disposal of high-level radioactive waste- Processing and disposal of low-level radioactive waste- Decommissioning of nuclear facilities (including
accident reactors)
According to the Fuel cycle policy, high-level radioactive
waste includes spent fuel or vitrified waste.

Nuclear Power Utilization and Fuel Cycle Policy
In the current use of nuclear energy, nuclear fission energy of U235
and Pu239/241 is used for power generation. The consumption of
nuclear fuel material is about 1% even after about one year ofoperation. Unburned U235, Pu239/241, raw material U238, andfission products remain in the spent fuel.
Reprocessing is the act of processing spent fuel and separating andextracting fuel substances. Considering long-term energy policies
and security/nuclear non-proliferation policies, each country

selects a comprehensive fuel cycle policy, including environmental
impact and economic efficiency.

(Ref)Nuclear Fuel Cycle include Fast Reactor Cycle

Ref: Nuclear power and energy drawing collection

2. History and Current Status of Nuclear
Development and Utilization in Japan

6

Objectives and Scenarios for Introduction of
Nuclear Power in Japan

Based on the recognition that ``the war between Japan andthe US started with oil and ended with oil'' (from Emperor
Hirohito's monologue), nuclear power was used twice as aquasi-domestic energy to solve the permanent resource
problem. Introduced under political initiative to prevent wars of
aggression. Scenario developed in
the following step-by-step flow.
① Reactor introduced overseas② Domestic power reactor③ Domestic breeder reactor/nuclear fuel cycle establishment(From the 1956 Nuclear Energy Development Long-Term
Basic Plan for Use)
Tokai NPP at the start of operation
Ref: JAPC

Energy/nuclear policy is an important national policy directly
linked to security.

7(1) History of Introduction Nuclear Power
Generation(1/2)

1956 AEC and JAERI (now JAEA) established1957 Government investigation team reports
on UK GCR.
Research reactor JRR-1 first criticality
JAPC Established after cabinet approval
The GCR was selected as the first NPP at Tokai
1963 Power test reactor (JPDR) first power generation
1965 U.S. BWR decided as second NPP at Tsuruga
There is a commitment to supply enriched uranium from the US.

First Critical at MCR
on Tokai NPP
Ref: JAPC

1966 KEPCO decided to build a PWR at Mihama and TEPCO decided
to build a BWR at Fukushima
Tokai NPP operation started.
1970 Tsuruga 1 operation started, Mihama 1 operation started.
1971 Fukushima Daiichi Unit 1 started
Ref: AEC archive and Atomic energy Year book8

(1) History of Introduction Nuclear Power
Generation(2/2)
Since then, LWRs have become mainstream, and nuclear power generation has
contributed to the mitigation of the oil crisis and rapid economic growth.
Introduced to all 9 electric power companies with the start of operation of Shiga1 in 1993. Before the Great East Japan Earthquake, the domestic production rate
was around 90%, and it became the main power source responsible for 25-30%
of electric power consumption (① and ② of the introduction scenario wereachieved).

2011 Great East Japan Earthquake, Fukushima accident,
all NPPs shut down2012 Establishment of the Nuclear Regulation Authority
2013 Cabinet Decision on Electricity System Reform
2020 carbon neutral declaration (46% reduction from 2013 in 2030)
2022: Ukraine crisis, first warning of tight power supply
Determined the policy to utilize nuclear at the GX Committee
2023 Enactment of GX-related revision bill. As of summer 2023, 11commercial reactors have restarted
Ref: AEC archive and Atomic energy Year book9

Current Status of NPPs in Japan
As of End of Aug 2023

StatusCommercial operation

Number

NPPs

11

Sendai-1&2, Ikata-3, Takahama-3&4,
Ohi-3&4,Genkai-3&4,Mihama-3、Takahama-1

Preparation for restart

6

Under NRA Review

10Takahama-2, Kashiwazaki-6&7,Tokai-2、Onagawa-2,Shimane-2
Hamaoka-3&4,Shika-2, Ohma,
Tsuruga-2, Shimane-3,Tomari-1,2&3,
Tohoku Higashidori-1
Kashiwazaki-1,2,3,4&5, Onagawa-3, Shika1,Hamaoka-5,TEPCO Higashidori-1(including periodical inspection)(Application for the reactor
establishment license amendment was
submitted.)

Under consideration

9

Under
Decommissioning

18+2

Dealing with the accident
for Decommissioning

6

Fukushima Daini-1,2,3&4、Ohi-1&2,Tokai、Ikata-1&2,Onagawa-1,Genkai-1&2、Hamaoka-1&2, Mihama-1&2, Shimane-1,
Tsuruga-1,Fugen,Monju

Fukushima Daiichi-1,2,3,4,5&6

Above table Includes NPPs under construction, such as Shimane-3, Ohma, TEPCO Higashidori-1
and R&D stage Plants, such as Fugen and Monju.

103(2) History of the development and introductionof the reprocessing facilities

1956 Established NFC (now JAEA)
1966 Decision to privatize nuclear fuel materials
1971 Tokai reprocessing construction approval
1977 US announces freeze on reprocessing
1977-80 International NFCE
1980 Established NFS (currently JNFL Ltd.)
1981 Tokai Reprocessing Plant started operation
1985 Aomori Prefecture agreed cycle facilities siting Bird view of Rokkasho Facilities
Ref: JNFL
1992 Rokkasho reprocessing project designation2005 The Reprocessing Fund Management Law
2014 Tokai reprocessing plant decommissioning decision2016 Enactment of the Reprocessing Contribution Act, NURO established2018 AEC decided not to increase the amount of Pu held at present.
2020～ Rokkasho reprocessing plant is preparing for operation
11
Ref: AEC archive and Atomic energy Year book(3) History of High-Level radioactive Waste disposal
1964 AEC announces deep sea or rock layer disposal policy
1972 London Convention (prohibition of ocean dumping) adopted
1976 AEC announced a policy that the government would be
responsible for disposal.
1980 Ratified and signed the London Convention
1993 SHP established1999 Disposition meeting report
1999 Second Report on Geological Disposal
2000 Law for Final Disposal of HLW, NUMO established Concept of HLW disposal
Ref: METI
2002 NUMO started public offering for literature research2007 one local expressed its intention to apply, but it was abandoned
due to pros and cons. the Nuclear Reactor Regulation Act revised
2015 Cabinet decision revised the basic policy
2020 literature survey is underway at two locations
Ref: AEC archive and Atomic energy Year book12

(4) History of Low-Level radioactive Waste disposal
1964 AEC announces policy for ocean dumping
1972 Adoption of the London Convention (international rules)
1976 AEC announced a land disposal/ocean dumping combined policyon the responsibility of the generator.
1980 Ratified and signed the London ConventionIn
1983 completely freeze ocean dumping.
1985 NFI Established (now JNFL), Aomori Prefecture agreed to arequest for location cooperation
1990 Rokkasho disposal business license
1992 Rokkasho disposal operation started
1995 JPDR L3 disposal business permit
1996 JPDR L3 underground facility cover completed Rokkasho disposal center
Ref: JNFL HP
2008 AEC law revision(Implementing body of RI disposal)From2015 Tokai L3 burial project under review
Ref: AEC archive and Atomic energy Year book

13

Current status of Low-Level radioactive waste disposal sites
As of August 2023

〇 Rokkasho disposal center is in operation for L2 waste
during commercial reactor operation (Units 1 and 2 aredisposed, Unit 3 is under construction)〇 JPDR L3 waste disposal facility during the 30-year
management period from 1996 (until the mid-2020s)〇 Tokai Power Station L3 underground facility undersafety review since 2015
〇 There are no disposal sites for L1 waste, L2
dismantling waste, L3 waste disposal facilities, cycle
waste, and RI/laboratory waste.
14

Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal Methodology
in Japan
L1: Relatively highradioactive waste

L2: Relatively low
radioactive waste

L3: Very low level waste

Intermediate depth
disposal with artificial
structure

Sub surface disposal
with artificial structurenear surface trenchdisposal

L3 waste
L1 waste

Under consideration ofSite location

L2 waste(300～400years monitoring)(50years monitoring)

Current JNFL facility isfor only operating
waste of Commercial
NPPs

JAPC Tokai L3 facility
is under licensing
review
15

(5) History of Decommissioning
1990 Started provision for dismantling commercial
reactors
1986-96 Dismantling of JPDR
2001 Start of decommissioning of Tokai NPP
2008 Start of decommissioning of Fugen NPP
2009 Start of decommissioning of Hamaoka-1/2 NPP
2015～ Due to changes in regulatory standards
after the earthquake,15 reactors was shutdown(30-40 years process for each plant)
2018 Commenced decommissioning of Tokai
Before and After of JPDR dismantling
Reprocessing Plant
Ref: JAEA HP
2022 Preparing to establish a new decommissioning organization fordomestic comprehensive management
Ref: AEC archive and Atomic energy Year book16

(6) History of Fukushima-Daiichi decommissioning
2011 Great East Japan Earthquake
Fukushima Daiichi accident(1F1-3 core damaged)
Established Nuclear Damage Compensation
Organization2012 Established NRA
2013 Established IRID
Remake from NDC to NDF
2014 Established 1F Decommissioning Company
in TEPCO
2017-2022 Investigation in PCV of 1F 1-3
2023 Release start of treated water into the sea
Currently working for decommissioning
Just after Hydrogen explosion(Preparation for fuel debris retrieval, etc.)
on 1F1&1F3
Ref: News footage

17Roles of Organizations in Decommissioning ofFukushima-Daiichi

Development of the TechnicalStrategic Plan
Management of reserve funds fordecommissioning©International Research Institute for Nuclear Decommissioning
Reference: The Agency of Natural Resources Energy, Ministry of Economy, Tradeand Industry of Japan website

Reprocessing & backend countermeasures organization androles (Excluding Fukushima Daiichi )Reprocessing

HLW Disposal

LLW Disposal

Decommissioning

Implementation
Responsibility

NURO(Can be entrusted)

NUMO

Nuclear/RI
licensee

Nuclear/RI
licensee

Responsibility
on Regulation

Reprocessing
licensee(JNFL、JAEA)

Waste disposal Waste disposal
licensee I
licensee Ⅱ(unapplied)(JNFL、JAEA)

Cost Payer

Spent Fuel
Generator(Utilities,
JAEA)

HLW
LLW
Nuclear/RI
Generator(Utili Generator(Nucl licensee
ear/RI licensee)
ties、JAEA)

FundManagement

NURO

RWMC

Nuclear/RI
licensee

RWMC

Nuclearlicensee、JAEA

SitingResponsibility-

Nuclear /RI
licenseeUtilities⇒ D&D
licensed Corp.
Nuclear/RI
licensee-

出典: 関係法律及び各組織HP情報より作成

19

(Ref) List of Reprocessing/Backend Related Law
Reprocessing and decommissioning“Law Concerning Implementation of Reprocessing of Spent Fuel andPromotion of Decommissioning”

High-level radioactive waste disposal“Law Concerning Final Disposal of Specified Radioactive Waste”

Safety Regulations for Nuclear and RI Facilities“Law Concerning Regulation of Nuclear Source Materials, Nuclear Fuel
Materials and Nuclear Reactors”"Law Concerning Regulation of Radioisotopes, etc."

Support for decommissioning related to the accident reactor“Nuclear Damage Compensation and Decommissioning Facilitation
Corporation Act”
20

3. Status of Backend measuresin major countries

21Characteristics of Fuel cycle Policy andBackend measures〇 Fuel Cycle policy is not only a long-term energy strategy, butalso an issue related to national security, so a long-term andconsistent policy is necessary.
〇 Back-end measures are issues related to public safety (do notleave existing radioactive materials unattended) and debts(ultimately electricity bills or taxes), and are a long-term projectthat will take more than 100 years. Fundamentally a cost center,
unlike the private sector where short-term profits areprioritized, an overall optimal strategy is important.

(1) Outline of Fuel cycle Policy〇 In order to establish a nuclear fuel cycle at the beginning of
nuclear power development, each country aims at reprocessing.
Note) The once-through direct disposal of spent fuel is a concept that emerged after
the reprocessing freeze policy of the United States.

〇 After that, each country will decide its reprocessing policy
based on the international situation related to security, such as
the nuclear non-proliferation treaty and the possession of
nuclear weapons.
〇 Reprocessing, which is chemical separation, is relatively easy
at the laboratory level compared to enrichment, which isisotope separation. However, with large, complex commercial
plants with high radiation levels, there are problems with stable
operation and economic efficiency such as material corrosion
and troubles, so many countries are withdrawing from the plant
based on a comprehensive judgment.
23

Fuel cycle Policy on Major countries
Country

PolicynuclearComments

US

once through Possession Since the Carter administration, commercial reprocessing has
been frozen due to nuclear non-proliferation policy. However,R&D will continue
RussiaReprocessing Possession The goal is to establish the FBR cycle. An FBR is in operation, but
the future is unclear.
China
Reprocessing Possession It is now being developed independently. Currently in the pilot
plant stage and planning for full scale.
Both
UK
Possession It was a both policy, but all reprocessing facilities was shutdown.
Actually, reprocessing is not possible.
FranceReprocessing Possession Accepting from overseas, continuing the reprocessing policy.
Aiming for the fast reactor cycle, but stagnating.
Japan
Reprocessing Non
The only non-nuclear weapon to accept reprocessing under strict
inspections.
India
Reprocessing Possession Although it has not signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, it
is developing cycle.
Germany , once through Non
Reprocessing development (up to small-scale plant) was
underway, but development was discontinued
Belgium
Reprocessing not adopted due to nuclear non-proliferation policy
Canadaonce through Non
etc
Ref: Made by AESJ Reprocessing & Recycle Department HP

24

Reprocessing Facility on Major Countries
Capacity*
per year

Operaton
periodCountry Operator

Place

Facility name

FranceOrano R La hague

La hague

La hague Faciity

1700tHM

1966-

UK

Sellafield Ltd

Cumbria
Sellafield

THORP &

1000

1964-2022

PA MayakOzerksMayak reprocessing facility
RT-1 plant

400tHM

1977-

Mining & Chemical
Complex(MCC)

Zheleznogorks

Pilot Demonstration
Center(PDC)

4.4tHM

2016(Part)

226tHM

Planned2024

RT-2 plant

800tHM

Planned 2035

Russia

Japan

China
India

Magnox reprocessing facility

JAEA

Tokai-mura

Tokai Reprocessing Facility

120tHM

1981-2018

JNFL

Rokkasho-mura

Rokkasho Fuel Cycle
Facilities

800

Planned 2024

Lanzhou fuelcomplex facility

Lanzhou city

Lanzhou pilot
reprocessing plant

0.1tHM

2006Constraction startBARC

TARAPURPREFRE-1&2

100tHM

1977

IGCAR

KALPKKAM

KAPP

100tHM

1998*) tU/y by metallic U weight。 HM is metallic weight of U & Pu in MOX
Ref: Nuclear power and energy drawing collection25

(2) Outline of HLW Disposal〇 Depending on the reprocessing policy, disposal
targets are spent fuel or vitrified waste.
〇 Taking into account the half-life of radioactivity thatexceeds hundreds of years, each country disposes bygeological disposal and generally by publicorganizations.
〇 Site location requires not only technical feasibility
but also a local consent process (with the exceptionof some countries). Currently, disposal sites havebeen tentatively decided in Sweden, Finland, andFrance.
26

HLW disposal system and current situation in eachcountry(1/2)
Country Implementing bodyFund system

Current situation

Finland

Poshiva(Utilities
invested)
Sweden SKB(Utilities
invested)National Waste
Management Fund(VYR)

Site selected in Olkiluoto. Construction Permit
2015. 2021 operating license application.

Nuclear Waste Fund
(Include D&D and
ILW/LLW)

France

ANDRA(Public Sector)
Switzerl NAGRA(Government& Utility invested)
andGerman BGE(Public Sector)yProvisions (FutureFunds)
D&D/Waste
Management Fund

Site selected in Forsmark. 2022
Government license for business, underreview for safety.
Unofficially appointed in the Bures area.
2023 Cigeo Facility Permit Application.
NAGRA proposed Northern Lageren as aSite candidate.
Publish site requirements map and selectsite

CanadaTrust FundSpain

NWMO(Private
sector Invested )ENRESA(Public Sector)

Waste Management
Fund(Government Pay
for withdrawal nuclear )External Fund for
ENRESA

21 regions participating, in the site
selection process.
Currently in interim storage with plansfor geological disposal after 50-100 years

Ref: Made from "Disposal of high-level radioactive waste in foreign countries (2023 edition)" by RWMC

27

HLW disposal system and current situation in eachcountry(2/2)
Country Implementing bodyFund system

UK

NWS(former RWM)
under NDA

During the site selection process.
NDA Badget、
Provisions(Oper Established WG with 3Local Gov. andating Plants)
Decided 4 Research area

US

DOE(Government)

NWF

China

CNNN(Public Sector)

Spent FuelSelect 6 regions as primary selection.
Treatment Fund Researching at underground Lab.

South
Korea
Japan

KORAD(Public Sector) Radioactive
Waste FundNUMO(Licensed
Contribution
Corp.)(To NUMO)

RussiaNORAO(State-run)Special Deposit
Fund

Current situation

Yucca Mountain disposal plan on holdPublication of basic plan for disposal
Publish a map of scientificcharacteristics. Literature survey
underway at 2 locations
Underground Lab. under construction

Ref: Made from "Disposal of high-level radioactive waste in foreign countries (2023 edition)" by RWMC

28

(3) Outline of Low-Intermediate level waste Disposal
Note) Internationally, there are many expressions of low-intermediatelevel, so it is written as low-intermediate〇 Generated from each nuclear facility and RI facility(including hospital)〇 Disposal concepts are classified according to theradioactivity level and half-life according to the standardsof each country, and disposal is carried out by
government sector or private organizations.

〇 There are differences in the current state of disposal site
development depending on conditions such as thenational land and political system of each country.
29ILW/LLW disposal system in major country
Country
US(Private)

Implementing Body
Private Companies(US ecology、ES、WCS)FranceUK
Japan
Germany
Spain
CanadaFinlandSwedenSwizerland
South
Korea
China

Siting Body
Disposal Concept
ObjectState
Depend on
Class A～C、GTCC
Compact
Government、
DOE(GTCC)
ANDRA(Public Sector)
ANDRA
Long-life ILW,
No restriction
Short-life ILW/LLW,VLLW
Intermediate、Low
NWS(Former LLWR & RWM) NDA
No restriction
under NDA
Originator
LLW(L1/L2/L3)
Each facility
JNFL(Utilities)、JAEA
BGE(Public Sector)
BGE
Non-heated
No restriction
ENRESA(Public Sector)
ENRESA
ILW,LLW,VLLW
No restriction
Same as left
Utility(OPG)、AECLILW(Long-life,Short-life) 、Not decided
LLW(V Short-life,VLLW)
Utilites
Utilities
ILW,LLW,VLLW
Each NPPSKB(Utilities invested)
SKB、Utilities Short-life ILW、Short-life Each NPP
LLW、Short-life VLLWNAGRA((Gov.&Utility invested) NAGRA
Not decided
α、ILW
KORAD(Public Sector)
KORAD
Low/Intermediate level
Subsidiary (GNPE、PEEEC)

CNNN

ILW、LLW、VLLW、Short- Each region
life

Ref: Made from "Facilities and Sites Related to Radioactive Waste in Other Countries (2023 edition)" by RWMC

30

ILW/LLW disposal Facilities in major country
Country
US

FranceUK
Germany
Japan
Spain

FinlandSwedenSwitzerland
South Korea
China

Facility
Richland
Barnwell
Clive
WCS
La Manche
Aube
CIRES
Drigg
Dounreay
Morsleben
Konrad(Planned)
Rokkasyo
Tokai(JAPC Planned)
El Cabril
El Cabril
Olkiluoto
LovisaSFR
Forsmark
Northern Lageren(Proposed)
Wolseong
VeyronSeapayFeifengshan

Operator
US ecology
ES
ES
WCS
ANDRA
ANDRA
ANDRA
LLWR
DSRL
BGE
BGE
JNFL
JAPC, JAEAENRESAENRESA
TVO(Utility)
FPH(Utility)
SKB
FKA(Utility)
NAGRA
KORAD
GNPEP
EEEC
EEEC

ObjectClass A～C
Class A～C
Class AClass A～C
Short-life ILW
Short-life ILW
VLLW
LLW
LLW
Non-Heated
Non-Heated
LLW(L2)
VLLW(L3)
ILW
VLLW
ILW
ILW
ILW
VLLW
ILW (& HLW)
ILW
ILW
ILW
ILW

Capacity(m3) No of NPPs
1,700,000
135
880,000
8,820,000
4,350,000
527,000
70
1,000,000
650,000
2,100,000
45
175,000
37,00037
303,000
122,000
60
28,000100,000
10
120,000
5
8,400
5,400
63,000917,00072,0005
20,00024
240,000
51
200,000
180,000

Ref: Made from "Facilities and Sites Related to Radioactive Waste in Other Countries (2023 edition)" by RWMC

31

(4) Outline of Decommissioning〇 Except for special cases, decommissioning will
eventually be required for nuclear facilities that havefinished their role.
〇 There are 188 nuclear power plants in the world thathave already been decommissioned*, but the US andother have completed decommissioning of less than 20
reactors. There are 431* nuclear power plants inoperation in the world, which will be phased out.
* : World Nuclear Power Development Trends 2023 Edition (JAIF)〇 The implementation system of decommissioning differsfrom country to country, and there are differences in thetime and effort required for dismantling and the amountof waste generated depending on the type of reactor(GCR, LWR, FBR, HTTR, etc.).
32

Decommissioning system on major countries
Country

Implementing body Methodof Fund systemdecommissioning
US
External
fundedtrust
D&D company(ES、 Standard is within 60
years, Mainly Immediate system
Northstar、CDI)
dismantling method
UK
Magnox Ltd under GCR is deferred method, NDA budget(GCR)
NDA(Public Sector) but a part of GCR will be and External funded trust
precedingsystem(operating plants)
DP2D in EDF
Internal reserve system
Franceimmediate dismantling
methodJapan
Each Utility
immediate dismantling
Internal allowancemethod⇒ to change to acontribution system
Internal allowance
Germany
Each Utility (only immediate dismantling
dismantling)methodSpain
ENRESA(Public
immediate dismantling
External
reservefrom
Sector)methodelectric charge for ENRESA
Fund system
Sweden & Each Utilities
immediate dismantling
methodFinlandRef: AESJ Vol.61, 2019 “Decommissioning System in major Countries and Japan”

33Summary about backend organization
on each countries
country

SummaryUK

Concentrated backend work on NDA. Since the land is small and it is difficult tolocate many disposal site, they are working on 3R* for waste in cooperation withregulations and local communities.
The large and complex GCR is scheduled for delayed dismantling.

France

It looks like a disjointed system, but France is a centralized state, and under
government policy, related organizations are working together to work on thebackend. Each organization separates backend departments within the organization.

US

SF is managed at the responsibility of Federal Government. Decommissioning
companies and LLW disposal sites have been successful as private businesses andare proceeding most rationally.

Germany Roles were divided between the government and the utilities in terms ofwithdrawal from nuclear power. The dismantling of the facilities is progressing, but
it is unclear whether the waste disposal will go well.
Spain

Spain stablished ENRESA as a backend player for the withdrawal from nuclear. We
are making good progress by dismantling each nuclear facility one by one andoptimizing domestic LLW disposal.
*: 3R of waste refers to the principle of Reuse, Reduce and Recycle.

34

(Ref) Status of decommissioning of the accident reactor
US TMI-2
・The core was partially damaged due to insufficient cooling, but the fuel debris
remained in the reactor vessel.
・Cleanup activities by DOE, NRC, GPU (power), and EPRI have removed almost
all fuel debris and stored it at the Idaho Lab.
・ After the shutdown of TMI-1, it was sold to EnergySolutions and is expected tobe dismantled in the future.

Ukraine (Former Soviet Union) Chernobyl
・ A nuclear runaway and a steam explosion caused a massive explosion of the
facility, releasing a large amount of radioactive material.
・ Restrictions on habitation within 30km surroundings due to global scalepollution.
・ It cannot be dismantled. And is disposed of in situ in a sarcophagus. Then ashelter was built
・ There are concerns about the occupation by the Russian military and thelong-term deterioration of the sarcophagus.
35Organizational Structure for Backend on UK(Brown is Public Organization)

Nuclear Decommissioning Authority

Sellafield
Ltd

MagnoxLtd

・D&D for GCR・Reprocessing
・D&D for Reprocessing ・D&D for AGR(in future)facility and research
・D&D for research
reactorfacilities include FBR
Magnox and DSRL
have been integrated

・Nuclear Backend Overall strategy
・Affiliated organization management
・Budget management
・Stakeholder Management(Local
People, Regulator)

Nuclear Waste
Services
・LLW/HLW disposal
RWM and LLWR
have been
integrated

Note) D&D means from dismantling of facilities
to transportation of waste.

Nuclear
Transport
Solutions・Nuclear Transport
INS and DRS havebeen integrated

Springfields
Fuels & UNS
・D&D for Legacy factory
The site owner is an NDA, but fuel processing,
etc. is carried out under a lease agreementwith private company.

Organizational Structure for Backend on France<Public Sector>
Nuclear/Alternative
Energy Agency(Nuclear application
development
organization including
munitions)Radioactive Waste
Management
Institution<Private Sector>
Electric Power
Company

Fuel Cycle
Company(Private company with

(Private company withover 80% government
shareholder)

CEA

ANDRA

・D&D for researchfaciity

・HLW disposal
・LLW disposal

EDF(DP2D)
Cyclife・D&D for
GCR,LWR,FBR
・Waste Interim Storage(ICEDA)
・LLW Treatment(bySubsidary Company
Cyclife)over 90% government
shareholder)

Orano・Reprocessing
・D&D for Reprocessing
facility
・Waste Treatment＆Technical Service

Organizational Structure for Backend on US
There are no private reprocessing facility<Private Sector><Government>
Administration for Energy

LLW disposal Company

Decommissioning
Company(Munitions, R&D, Waste disposal
etc)(Local Government is
responsible for siting
and final management)(Transfer Ownership orLicense from ElectricCompany)

Department of Energy

・EnergySolutions

・EnergySolutions(There are many Institutes suchas Hanford, SavannaRiver,
Sandia, Idaho, OakRidge,
LosAramos etc under DOE)

・WCS・US Ecology

・Northstar
・CDI(Holtec)

・D&D for munitions & researchfacility
・HLW disposal include GTCC*
・LLW disposal*: Exceeding Class C LLW

・LLW disposal

・D&D for Commercial
reactor
・LLW Treatment
・LLW Transportation

Organizational Structure for Backend on Germany
Nuclear power withdrawal policy, andreprocessing pilot facility is now on decommissioning.

<Public Sector>
Radioactive Waste
Management Institute

BGE
・HLW disposal
・LLW disposal
・Waste Storage

R&D Institute<Private Sector>
Electric Power Company(Division of roles with the government inwithdrawal from nuclear power)

WAK(Karlsruhe)etc
・D&D for researchfacility

Each Utilities(RWE,E.ON,EnBW,Vattenfall)・Until dismantling facility
and transportation ofwaste to interim storageOrganizational Structure for Backend on Spain
Nuclear power withdrawal policy, andNo reprocessing facility<Public Sector>
Implement total backend work through transporting Nuclear Facility
from Utilities and research institute, etc.

ENRESA・Overall Strategy
・Fund management(collect from electricity bills)
・HLW disposal
・LLW disposal
・D&D from NPPs and research facility
・SF/Radioactive Waste Storage

4. Issues such as backend measures
in Japan

41

Organizational Structure for Backend on Japan
Reprocessing

NURO
・Obligation to
reprocess& FundManagement

JNFL
・Reprocessing
・D&D of
Reprocessing(Future)

HLW disposal

LLW disposal

NUMO

JAEA

・HLW disposal

RWMC
・HLW FundManagement

・RI/Research waste
disposal

JNFL
・L2 waste disposal
from Utilities

Each Owner
・Discharger liability

Spent Fuel storage & Pu use
Each Utility

D&D
New Licensed
Corporation(Append to NURO)
・OverallManagement& FundManagement

Utilities
・D&D work(By owner)

1F D&DJAEA

NDF・Support 1F
D&D and FundManagement

TEPCO(Decom-C)
・1F D&D workIssues on Japanese Backend〇 Because the organizational structure is subdivided by field
and by each operator, issues such as disposal site
location, spent fuel storage, Pu utilization, etc. are handled

only by individual companies or industry groups. Overall
optimization is required, including nuclear material/waste

related facilities and transportation infrastructure.
〇 Electricity liberalization (abolition of comprehensive cost,

introduction of competitive market) was implemented
without sufficient consideration of back-end support.

New Challenge
Abstract of New D&D Licensed Corporation
National
Government Appropriate Involvement, Oversight（Approval of establishment, restrictions
on dissolution, supervision orders, etc.）

Partially excerpted and modified from “The outline of
the interim report (draft) ”, on 3rd Meeting of Working
Group on Facilitation of Decommissioning, (Oct.5 2022)

Licensedcorporation*Excluding accident reactor(1) Comprehensive management of
decommissioning in Japan(2) Responding to common issues to operators（R&D,
procurement of equipment, promotion of understanding of the region,etc.）(3) Securement, management and payment of funds
Payment ofcontributions

Nuclear PowerOperator￥￥

Nuclear PowerOperator⚫ Based on the Nuclear Reactor Regulation Law, the basic principle isthat the nuclear power operator is responsible for decommissioning
individual reactors.
⚫ The nuclear power operator is responsible for paying the annual
amount notified by the licensed corporation as a contribution.

￥⚫ After taking into consideration
the costs required for the entire
operations of (1) to (3), thelicensed corporation decides andnotifies the amount ofcontribution for each nuclear
operator every fiscal year.
⚫ Contributions are set at a levelthat takes into account theuncertainty of the future, andalso in consideration of thebusiness situation of eachnuclear power operator.

Nuclear PowerOperator
Alignment

JAEA

Local Gov.
etc.

Source : ANRE in METI

44

Summary〇 Energy prices (economic efficiency) change with the times and theenvironment, but technology that has been parted cannot be easily
returned. We should formulate and share strategies for resolving
back-end issues and how Japan's nuclear power, which lacks energy
resources.
〇 Regardless of whether nuclear power will be used in the future, risks
and liabilities will not disappear unless all stakeholders, including
regulatory bodies and local governments, recognize that back-end
measures are a “100-year plan”. In order to maintain humanresources and supply chains, it is necessary to make the businessattractive to young people.