Summary of JANSI Annual Conference 2017
[Brief Overview of Conference]
Date: 9:30 - 17:50, Thursday, April 27, 2017
Place: Iino Hall
Number of participants: Approximately 310[Opening remarks]
Shojiro Matsuura, President and CEO, Japan Nuclear Safety Institute (JANSI)○ The JANSI Annual Conference 2017 is hereby convened, as the fourth JANSI Annual Conference. This conference is held

for the purposes of informing not only JANSI members but also the wider nuclear power communities about JANSI’s
activities, as well as to exchange opinions from a variety of perspectives about the purpose and role of self-regulatory
bodies, with the aim of enhancing JANSI’s activities.
○ This year, our focus is on “improving the safety of nuclear power plants”, and we have decided to hold opinion
exchanges on the topic of voluntary measures to improve safety from the perspectives of both society and technology.
○ I hope we are able to use the keynote speech and panel discussions to deepen the debate on measures aimed at
improving the future safety of the nuclear power industry and other topics.

[Keynote speech] Building a voluntary system involving all stakeholders for continuous
improvements in nuclear safety
Satoshi Kusakabe, Commissioner, Agency for Natural Resources and Energy, Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry○ Six years have now passed since the TEPCO Fukushima Daiichi nuclear accident, andduring this time Japan has carried out a thorough review of nuclear power policy in a waythat gives top priority to safety. We have worked particularly hard on the following threeareas: the reconstruction effort in Fukushima; strengthening nuclear regulations; andenhancing nuclear disaster prevention. At the same time, it cannot be denied that Japanesepeople continue to express concerns about nuclear power. We must continue to makeongoing efforts in the pursuit of greater safety and meet these concerns by restoring the faithof the general public in nuclear power.
○ I believe that, rather than handling safety regulations in a passive way, the involved parties,
including the power companies, need to build a system that allows us to make deliberate and continual improvements
to safety, and I believe there are several steps we need to follow in order to achieve this. First, we have to work on thebasis that the power companies themselves are dealing with the regulations sincerely. Second, rather than adopting apassive stance, it is necessary for the power companies to make suggestions to one another and self-regulate in a way thathelps them to improve safety together. Third, the nuclear industry as a whole, including manufacturers and research
institutions, needs to come together to pursue safety and reflect the latest insights in safety measures. Doing this will help
the industry to start a dialog with the regulatory authorities, and lead to further improvements in safety.
○ This system would allow all parties involved in nuclear power to pursue safety improvements from their respective
positions through these three steps, to make suggestions to one another, and to aim for greater levels of safety – I havecalled it the “Voluntary system for making ongoing safety improvements in nuclear power”. Building this kind ofsystem is the key to gaining the understanding of local authorities and local residents; more than this, it is a major
element in allowing Japan, after our experiences of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear accident, to make a genuine
contribution to international society.

The text herein is not based on the consent
of the speakers.

○ As we set about building this system, I have three requests to make of everyone involved in self-regulation activities.
Firstly, I would like to point out to JANSI that the result of self-regulation activities is an ongoing track record of safe
nuclear operation, and this is not something that can be achieved overnight. In order to firmly establish self-regulation
and achieve results that are clearly obvious to the industry, JANSI will be expected to continue implementing
measures persistently and adopt the position of leading the voluntary safety improvement initiatives implemented by
the industry. Last year, I got the opportunity to ask CEO Peter Prozesky of WANO (World Association of Nuclear
Operators) about the significance of self-regulation activities. According to Mr. Prozesky, self-regulation activities are
an attempt to pursue never-ending improvements in safety through which you constantly have a questioning attitude.
This behavior is based on firmly-rooted beliefs, and only when these beliefs are strong is it possible to achieve safetythat exceeds regulatory standards. It would be no exaggeration to say that initiatives implemented by self-regulatoryorganizations make the final difference in terms of nuclear safety.
○ Secondly, I would like to point out to the power companies that the main players in improving safety through selfregulation activities are the power companies themselves. I would like to see them trying to think hard about andunderstand the meaning of self-regulation, taking the assessments of JANSI seriously, and continuously striving to
improve quality.
○ Third, I would point out to local governments and members of the mass media that in order to continually achievesafety improvements through voluntary self-regulation activities it is important to constantly adopt a questioning
attitude. I would like you to maintain a constant interest in whether or not the industry is continuing to implement
tireless measures aimed at improving safety, and to continue asking questions.
○ From our position of jurisdiction over nuclear power policy, the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry willcontinue to call for operators to address self-regulation activities seriously, and we will provide the support needed forthese activities to function effectively. The important thing now for the nuclear power industry is for the relevant
parties to move into action with enthusiasm as we share recognition of the challenges we face and set about trying to
improve safety voluntarily.

[Session 1: Voluntary Safety Improvement Efforts in Nuclear Power Generation]<Short speech>
Moderator: Akira Yamaguchi, Professor, The University of Tokyo○ I realize this may be a little inappropriate, but the title I have come up with is “Protection
Can Become Nonsensical”. One example would be internet passwords. The more complex
the password, the safer it becomes, but there are cases when you end up forgetting the
password and can no longer log in. If you increase the strength of the brakes on a car to
make a car that will never crash, the braking performance improves but this then becomes adanger for cars driving behind. The risk of being crashed into from behind then arises.
○ If we take the example of cooling performance, which is extremely important for nuclear
power plants, as the multiplicity and redundancy of alternative cooling increases, the piping
system and injection line grow larger and the risk of leaks rises, as well as issues such as theincreased human error risk from maintenance management.
○ The higher you try to set the bar for safety, the more areas of uncertainty emerge. Thinking about these areas, I believe
the approach to strengthening safety measures then moves away from strengthening design measures and towards
appropriate risk management. When this happens, risk management plays an extremely important role.
○ When PRA (Probabilistic Risk Assessment) is used to make decisions in the United States, there is a guide forassessing the technical adequacy of the PRA. The guide suggests that achieving voluntary safety improvements does
not mean waiting until the PRA is fully completed. That would simply be an excuse to do nothing. It is important to
use the current best insights to improve safety, to recognize the weaknesses in terms of PRA, and to remember theneed to work hard to overcome these issues.

Satoru Katsuno, President and Director, Chubu Electric Power

we are “Prudent” in never being satisfied with the status quo, and “Proactive” in considering
implement measures with foresight. We also need to be “Rigorous” in our scientific approachand seek to be “Resilient” so that we are able to recover, no matter what happens. And our
methods need to have a “Conscience” not be “Complacent”.
○ A self-regulatory organization that leads these activities needs to show “Professionalism” inrespect to nuclear safety, promote mutual “Reliability & Respect” in regard to operators andregulations, and achieve the “Commitment” of CEOs and “Complementary” relations with theregulations.
○ The main challenges facing JANSI as a voluntary regulatory body include: improving thequality of “Peer Review”; developing “Restart Reviews” (support for restart); and introducing comprehensive
evaluations of power plants. We need to keep these key words firmly in mind at all times and combine these efforts inorder to produce effective results.
ways that we can○ The “Proposals for Voluntary and Continuous Improvement of Nuclear Safety” submitted by
the Japanese government in 2014 contained the following framework: (1) Risk management;(2) Comprehensive risk assessments; (3) Reducing residual risk; (4) Improving resilience;and (5) Reconstructing safety improvement research.
○ In terms of the risk management system, it is necessary to work from the assumption that“risk is never zero”. Regarding the measures we have implemented at Chubu Electric Power,
we have enacted the “Chubu Electric Power Group Nuclear Safety Charter" and established asystem whereby the Nuclear Power Division and the Communications Promotion Group reporton the status of activities to the “Nuclear Power Safety Committee”, which is composed of executives chaired by the
President and the head of the Auditing Division, and receive its instructions. Each of these three organizations needs tocommunicate externally, and the Nuclear Power Safety Committee gives information to an advisory board composedof external experts, from which we receive opinions.
○ As part of the new inspection system that we plan to introduce, we will incorporate “risk informed” approaches inorder to utilize risk information to clarify the impact on safety, and “performance based” approaches to reflect our
results in ensuring safety, and we have clearly set out our unambiguous responsibility as an operator for carrying out
inspections.
○ As an operator, we will seek to improve our voluntary security activities, identify issues by ourselves, and further
develop our programs of corrective actions for resolving these issues; at Chubu Electric, we will oversee the situation
as needed to monitor the functioning of equipment and any deterioration in quality, and work to improve thecapabilities of our diagnostic technologies. Furthermore, we will increase our utilization of peer reviews by JANSI and
WANO, and work actively to promote the voluntary security activities of the industry as a whole.

Yutaka Kanai, Executive President, Hokuriku Electric Power Company○ In serious reflection upon the criticality accident cover-up discovered in 2007, Hokuriku
Electric Power Company regards improvements to our technological capabilities to be an
extremely important challenge, and we have gradually increased our staff. Our Nuclear Power
Division as a whole currently has a staff of around 550.
○ As part of these efforts, recently we have come up with various ideas to improve the trainingof our operators. These include training in dark and smoky conditions, as well as training at
thermal power plants in order to experience a “living plant” in consideration of the long-term
shutdown of our two reactors at Shika Nuclear Power Plant. Furthermore, we are carrying out
regular joint training using an operation training simulator in cooperation with Chubu ElectricPower Company and Tokyo Electric Power Company, which possess ABWRs (Advanced Boiling Water Reactors). In
addition to this training, we are considering switching our shift system from a five-team two-shift system to a six-team
two-shift system.
○ As the operations shutdown becomes long-term, there are concerns about a lack of “tension” arising in simulation
training because of “familiarity”. For this reason, we have come up with training methods that increase the sense oftension by introducing team assessments through the appointment of executive officers and operators from other shift
teams as “inspectors”.
○The training and education of managers, in addition to plant staff, is also extremely important. As part of these efforts,
every morning we hold general managers’ meetings, from the plant manager down.
○ In terms of raising safety awareness, as a general rule, as president I visit our plants every month to hold “Frank
Dialogs” with the workplace employees. Since 2007, I have held 97 such meetings in total (as of April 27).
Shojiro Matsuura, President and CEO, Japan Nuclear Safety Institute (JANSI)○ The important factors in deciding the success of voluntary self-regulation can be expressed by taking the following
letters from the alphabet - “P, R, and C”. In order to promote better voluntary safety improvements, it is essential that

Koji Okamoto, Professor, The University of Tokyo○ What lessons can be learned from the TEPCO Fukushima Daiichi nuclear accident?
I believe the following three main pillars will lead to voluntary safety improvements: “think
about overall risk”; “expect the unexpected”; and “gaining trust is a difficult path”.
○ The only way to improve voluntary safety by dealing with the unexpected is to implement“ongoing improvements”. One of the targets for these activities is promoting improvements inthe direction of reducing overall risk. To have an improvement target by promoting ongoingcorrective measures on a risk basis, it is essential to promote improvements in a direction thatis based on future risks, rather than confirming the present situation.
○ One of the tools we have for dealing with risk is PRA (Probability Risk Assessment), but we must not rely solely on
this tool. Workplace feedback is needed in order to be able to use PRA as a tool.
○ If we take the example of a chef, a beginner (a power company new to risk in this example) would use a new knife(PRA) to cook (promote plant safety) and gradually grow from being a beginner to becoming a professional chef,
while learning from his or her mistakes and sharpening the knife until it can be used with outstanding skill. The result
is delicious food. I believe that the same applies to power plant safety.
○ In order to improve their voluntary safety, operators need to build systems that allow them to use the tool of riskskillfully. It is also important that they show the general public that risk has been reduced as a result of carrying out
assessments of troubles.
Yuko Sakita, Journalist and Environmental Counselor○ Until the TEPCO Fukushima Daiichi nuclear accident occurred in 2011, I think it would behonest to say that we simply left energy to the energy operators.
○ The “myth of safety” has been destroyed as a result of the accident, so how do we go about
restoring trust with the general public and society so that we are able to use nuclear power?
To turn our safety efforts into peace of mind, I have the following three proposals, which are
aimed at fostering trust between JANSI and the general public and society – “disclosure of
information”; “dialog”; and “participation and collaboration”.
○ In order to achieve “disclosure of information”, I feel it is essential for the general public
and society to have clarity about the accountability and processes for confirming whether or not JANSI’s tough checks
are functioning.
It is also important that we have a “dialog” so that the flow of information is not simply one-way. In order to achievethis, we need to offer regular opportunities for public hearings and public relations. Surely it would be a good idea tohave full opportunities for award ceremonies, announcements of leading case studies, frank opinion exchanges, and Q&A
between the participants and mass media, especially in the consuming regions.
○ Regarding “participation and collaboration”, I think it is important for JANSI and local communities to come together
and create opportunities for fostering a safety culture. Sharing the results of nuclear facility assessments with local
people in the respective regions and holding opinion exchanges would form a platform for building trust. I would be very

happy to see diverse representatives from local communities taking part, talking together, and creating greater
opportunities to “co-create” safety and peace of mind.

(In response to a question from the audience about how to attract reporting in the mass media, given theimportance of its role in communicating efforts to improve safety to the general public)○ President Matsuura I think the surest way to gaining the trust of society in relation to the question of how much

<Panel Discussion>

safety has actually improved is to build up a track record, for example in regard to the restart of operations, by having

Moderator: Akira Yamaguchi,

Professor, The University of Tokyo

operators achieve trouble-free safety during restart and then operate safely for a certain period of time without any

Panelists:

Satoru Katsuno,

President and Director, Chubu Electric Power

problems. Operators need to show these results to the general public by themselves; we believe that communicating

Yutaka Kanai,

Executive President, Hokuriku Electric Power Company

directly with the general public goes beyond the scope of JANSI’s current responsibilities.

Shojiro Matsuura,

President and CEO, Japan Nuclear Safety Institute (JANSI)

Koji Okamoto,

Professor, The University of Tokyo

Yuko Sakita,

Journalist and Environmental Counselor○ Ms. Sakita The general public has become extremely sensitive to the question of whether or not information will befully disclosed and whether or not there is a willingness to do so. There may be things that cannot be disclosed whencarrying out assessments, such as detailed data. This is unavoidable, but I think there are processes that can bedisclosed to a certain extent, such as the systems used for overall assessment. I would like you to consider how you
can keep confidential information confidential, but at the same time show flexibility in disclosing what you can.

○ Moderator, Professor Yamaguchi: I think the main points from the short speeches can be summarized as follows:
firstly, there is the question of the base for carrying out safety improvements, including things such as insights andtechnology, maintaining personnel, and a safety culture; secondly there is the question of governance, systems and(How does JANSI work to achieve voluntary safety improvements?)○ Professor Okamoto The goal I think we need to aim for is for all stakeholders to work together to achieve overall

frameworks for operating self-regulated systems; this includes the role of JANSI; and thirdly, there is the question ofsafety improvements. For this reason, I think it is extremely important to show that both operators and regulations are

how we communicate with society.

making progress in this direction, in ways that include the general public and the mass media. JANSI has several toolsthat allow it to achieve this, including peer reviews and the full-scale introduction of an overall assessment system for(In response to a question from the audience about the efforts being made to achieve the peace of mind

power plants. I would like to see JANSI showing, from a neutral and fair position as a provider of technical support

demanded by society)engineering, whether or not each plant has improved or stagnated every year in relative values, not in comparison with○ President Katsuno I think that safety will lead to peace of mind if we are able to give a full explanation to local
communities and society at large about the fact that we are working tirelessly to improve safety in a variety of ways asneighboring plants but in comparison with its own figures for the previous year.
○ President Katsuno We need to recognize that, while on the one hand JANSI is a self-regulatory organization

part of our everyday work, and by providing local people with a full level of real-time information when various risk

affiliated to the body of operators, it is also independent as an organization from the individual operators, and it isevents arise.

essential for plant personnel to recognize this too. Assuming this to be the case, I think it is important for us as CEOs

○ President Kanai In terms of the relationship with the local community, I think it is extremely important for local

to continue expressing our expectations to JANSI, to commit to its achievements, and to communicate these internally.

people to be able to meet the people who work at the power plant, and to be able to fully trust them after seeing the

In terms of Japanese culture, the way we relate to self-regulatory organizations is noticeable in that we do not like tofull extent of the efforts they are making. At Hokuriku Electric Power Company’s power plants, we encourage ourbe given suggestions by outsiders; this is something that we need to improve internally, and an area in which I think

staff to go out into local communities as much as possible and explain their work to people in their own words.

we are making progress.
○ President Kanai From our perspective, JANSI is an invaluable institution for the purposes of voluntary safety(In response to a question from the audience about the need to share concerns with society, show these

improvements, and an extremely important organization. So, what do we need to commit to as CEOs? Firstly, we need

concerns, and work with local communities to overcome them)to provide support as the entire power industry, or in other words fully provide the necessary manpower and funding.

○ Ms. Sakita I believe that showing society fully that the risk is never going to be zero but that we are working hard to
reduce risk as much as possible is an important part of turning our safety efforts into trust. Surely if JANSI and theoperators fully communicate the systems they have for allowing JANSI to carry out thorough checks of the operators’

Secondly, surely it is extremely important that we establish a relationship of independence between the powercompanies and JANSI, and that JANSI then gives invaluable advice to each power company. I think our role is tobuild and protect a robust framework for this to happen.

work it will help to build up trust.

<<Summary by the moderator>>(In response to a question from the audience about whether Japan is the only country that fails to make gooduse of risk information acquired in real time)○ I feel that we have achieved a high level of initiatives in voluntary safety improvements.
However, as Professor Okamoto pointed out, we also need to reduce the overall risk; “efficiency” has been a key word

○ Professor Okamoto PRA, including living PRA, is a tool for measuring risk. Living PRA is a very important tool in thisin the discussions. In terms of voluntary safety improvement initiatives, moving forward I think we have entered asense, and an extremely important way of knowing what is currently happening at a power plant. In the case of thephase of aiming to develop overall safety improvements a little more, and trying to build an independent system toUnited States, when an event occurs the operator will use living PRA to check how big the problems is, and the NRC

achieve this successfully.

has its own independent living PRA tools to carry out assessments and allow the two parties to hold discussions. It is○ President Matsuura I think the phrase “trust and respect” is very appropriate here. This applies to the relationships

not that we do not use these tools at all in Japan. For example, PRA tools during shutdown (periodic inspections) arebetween JANSI, the operators, and the regulatory bodies; trust and respect is something that we need to communicate

used to control risks because the situation changes on a daily basis during periodic inspections, and if we expand these

actively as a key phrase, and to work hard to achieve, especially in terms of our relationships with the general public.

tools we will be able to make good use of them.

○ In relation to technology and society, we need to recognize that the way we communicate with society is not goodenough in some ways. In terms of how we overcome this challenge, we need to remember the word “openness”, andseek to keep a variety of communication channels open at all times so that we are able to communicate freely withvarious stakeholders. In order to achieve this, I think it is important that we are honest. Moving forward, we are facedwith the extremely important challenge of how we develop proactive relationships with the mass media, and how wethink about communicating industry initiatives to society, and we need to come up with more ingenious solutions.
○ In terms of the future outlook, we need to aim for a situation in which we firmly establish the voluntary safety
improvement measures we have implemented thus far, set up independent systems, inform the general public in orderto gain their trust, and in doing so create mutual respect and trust. I would like to see operators making even greater
efforts to carry out voluntary safety improvements, and for JANSI to monitor these efforts thoroughly and show
leadership in the field of self-regulation.

[Session 2: JANSI’s activity results report for FY2016]
Director, Planning & Administration, JANSI

Yoichi Hiraoka

Director, Safety Systems, JANSI

Masuhiro Nakano

Director, Evaluation & Assistance, JANSI

Takeyoshi Yaegashi(1) JANSI’s main activities and comprehensive evaluation of power plants- Explanation of the main challenges facing JANSI for the foreseeable future (improving the quality of peer reviews,
full-scale introduction of the comprehensive evaluation of power plants, and developing support for the restart of[Session 3: Safety Improvement Efforts at Nuclear Power Stations]<Short speech>
Masahiko Sato, Deputy General Manager of Ikata Nuclear Power Station, Shikoku Electric Power Company○ The Unit 3 at Ikata Nuclear Power Station restarted power generation in August last year for the
first time in approximately five years and four months. It has since continued to operatesmoothly without any trouble. In preparation for the restart, the power station prepared a system
for handling a major accident. For this system to be utilized effectively, education and training
are essential.
○ In addition to giving personnel competence and maintaining and improving them, we haveformulated a training program to secure sufficient personnel. In terms of training design, we
have made independent efforts to set out how we will operate the installed equipment to meetthe requirements for types of training, operational procedures, and training frequency, in
accordance with the JANSI guidelines, and we have given careful consideration to provide systematic training. We
have also developed an operational manual for each skillset. Specifically, we have set out clear guidelines for eachrole, including cooling and water injection for the nuclear reactor, securing a power source, and securing water
resources through the operation of pump trucks.
○ We have also incorporated a large amount of training without showing scenarios beforehand, and we are following a
medium to long-term management plan. Moving forward, in addition to actively seeking to address matters that we
identify with a view to further strengthening our effectiveness, the challenge we face is to promote effective training inline with each employee’s level of ability.
○ We are also working to incorporate comprehensive training. This is a major undertaking that requires time and work,
but we want to incorporate it into our training and improve our ability to make a systematic response. Furthermore, weplan to utilize disaster simulation exercises and actively seek to respond to the risk of a major accident.

power plants)- From the main topics, a detailed explanation was given of the system for comprehensive evaluations of power
plants(2) Programs for improving safety systems and support for restart- Summary given about safety improvement measures evaluation, as well as proposals, recommendations and support- Results and evaluation of support for restart, and explanation of future improvements(3) Nuclear power facilities evaluation program and support program- Summary of peer review aims and systems, and explanation of excellence guidelines, etc.
- Introduction of a variety of support programs for power plants○ Poster session- Voluntary safety improvement initiatives by nuclear power operators promoted at JANSI- JANSI peer review- Operation of power plant comprehensive evaluation system- Developing and implementing a leadership training program- Promoting activities to foster a safety culture- New initiatives for analyzing operational information (event analysis)- Ensuring safety of nuclear power at restart (restart support)- Technical support in each specialist technical fieldYasuhiko Yoshida, General Manager of Ohi Power Station, the Kansai Electric Power Company○ Since my appointment as General Manager of the power station, I have set out two goals. Firstly,

I want our power station to become one that makes the local people glad that a power station
was built there. Secondly, I want to become a power station that makes its employees glad thatthey are working there. I believe this will be the source for establishing a mindset in each andevery employee that they are responsible for the power station’s safety and quality.
○ Gaining the understanding of the general public is essential for a nuclear power company. In
order to achieve this, we first need to obtain the understanding of local people, and the key toachieving this is to gain the recognition of the people working at the power station, 70% ofwhom are local people, that we are working as hard as possible to improve safety. Currently, we
utilize digital signage for the purposes of actively communicating and sharing information with employees at ourcontractors, and we hold regular information-sharing meetings. In addition to work safety measures, we are doing
everything we can to improve the work environment of the power station, including improvements to the staff canteen,etc.
○ A challenge we face moving forward is maintaining our technical skills. A long time has passed since operations wereshut down at the power plant. For example, as part of our efforts to maintain and improve the technical skills of ouroperators, in addition to simulation training for severe accidents, we also provide actual experience at neighboring
thermal and nuclear power plants.
○ Furthermore, what concerns the operators themselves is their lack of experience in start-up and shut-down operations,which they must put into practice. There are as many as 700 operations involved in start-up, and operators need tohave 100% understanding. For this reason, we carry out follow-up education and training for 100% of operations. In
addition, we have made operational guidelines for the start-up check-sheets for the 40 most important operations,
including warnings and knowhow based on previous trouble, and we have sought to pass on technical skills andrelieve operators’ concerns.

Ichiro Ihara, General Manager, Nuclear Power Division, Chubu Electric Power Company○ Hamaoka Nuclear Power Station has approximately 750 employees. Just under one-third of thetechnical staff that have joined the power station since the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear accident
in 2011, or 210 employees, have no experience whatsoever of plant operation. The biggest
challenge we face as we work towards restart is to improve the technical skills of these staff
members at the same time as maintaining the technical skills of our veteran operators andmaintenance staff.
○ In relation to the maintenance of operators’ technical skills, Chubu Electric is cooperating with
Hokuriku Electric and TEPCO, which also possess ABWRs. We have visited each other’s sites
to carry out simulator training, evaluate one another, and select improvement examples, and wehave held skills contests for our junior employees.
○ Furthermore, through the Japan-United States CNO (Chief Nuclear Officer) Leadership Meeting led by JANSI, wesent young employees, including fuel staff, repair staff, and operators, to Diablo Canyon Power Plant in the UnitedStates. In addition to exchanging information related to PRA (Probability Risk Assessment), etc., they built up theirknowledge and skills by shadowing staff as they toured the facilities.
○ In order to acquire capabilities, technical skills, and knowledge, the most important thing is to maintain motivation.
We hold regular meetings to communicate to the junior employees what the purpose of their work is and how
important their role is. We cannot yet see when restart will be, but we plan to give our all, alongside the third of ouryoung staff who have yet to experience operation, as we try to realize restart.

Takeyoshi Yaegashi, Director and Evaluation & Assistance Vice President, JANSI○ In addition to peer reviews, JANSI supports power plants in a variety of different ways. All of our measures can becharacterized by the fact that we are seeking to meet the regulatory standards and achieve “excellence”, which is thehighest safety standard.
○ In order to address performance improvements, which is a challenge faced by all nuclear power stations, thecompanies met up at Chubu Electric’s Hamaoka Nuclear Power Station, which is implementing state-of-the-art
activities, and we promoted the “Benchmark Visit” program as a way of sharing initiatives. I look forward to seeing anenvironment of friendly rivalry, whereby the respective companies following the example set by Hamaoka and at thesame time develop their own original improvements.
○ Another pillar of our activities is assistance visits for disaster prevention training. Teams composed of operators,
experts and JANSI employees visit power plants, work alongside the administrative staff from the stage of formulating
training plans, and give advice. The aim is to ensure that a thorough PDCA cycle is implemented.

Yojiro Ikawa Editorial writer at Yomiuri Shimbun, Tokyo Headquarters○ Looking at the initiatives implemented by the regulatory authorities since the great earthquake
and tsunami disaster, there are some areas where it is unclear whether safety has actually
improved. Surely the lessons of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear accident have essentiallyalready been reflected in the stress test stage. The important thing is to implement measures inrespect to tsunamis, power sources, and cooling water, and these have been sufficiently
checked in the stress tests.
○ I believed that the new regulatory standards were the logical extension of these efforts, andI did not expect to see the current serious situation in which almost all nuclear power generation
has been suspended. Risks can never be zero. The question is how far you are prepared to accept them. The important
thing is to hold coolheaded discussions based on the data.
○ Looking back at the serious events relating to nuclear power, the majority are the result of equipment failures, and thedesign and manufacturing errors that brought these failures about. In most cases, something appears normal but ithides a fault, and when this happens a situation develops and we end up losing trust. Nuclear power plants have a large
amount of hardware that is subject to verification testing. Why don’t you allow young technicians to make full use ofthis and build up specialist knowledge? Can you really trust the equipment and facilities in front of you? Are the
manufacturer’s specifications, design and manufacturing good enough? You need to foster technicians who

continually ask these questions. The current period of long-term shutdown is the perfect time to strengthen the
educational platform. If all you do is carefully look at how to handle the regulations, human resources will not develop,
and your nuclear power technology will become obsolete.
Katsumi Kuruba, Professor, Fukui University of Technology○ Forty years ago in 1977, Fukui Prefecture established the Nuclear Safety Division. It hired
specialist technical staff, and consistently upheld the position of checking everything that
could be checked independently by the prefectural government. It has thoroughly collected
and accumulated technical data, and fully disclosed this to the central government, operators,
and local residents in order to reach consensus. Fukui has developed a unique system formonitoring environmental radiation and monitoring operations, and it has the following
catchphrase – “Residents of Fukui Prefecture, Keeping an Eye on the Power Station”,○ When preparations were being made to restart the Units 3 and 4 at Kansai Electric’s Ohi
Power Station in 2012, the new regulations were not yet in place. The question arose as to how to allocate power
supply vehicles and fire pumps. Rather than waiting for instructions from central government, discussions were heldwith the prefectural government and the operator and the approach was taken of implementing the best possible
measures that could be taken at that time. I believe this approach later had an impact on the new regulations.
○ Currently, I am affiliated to Fukui University of Technology and I am working to foster nuclear power personnel withan international perspective and who are active in the local community. In February this year, we made use of a grantsupporting projects that foster human resources in the field of nuclear power regulations, and held some extremely
stimulating onsite training with students at the Fukushima Daiichi and Fukushima Daini power stations.
○ Before the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear accident, we taught students to “prevent accidents from happening”. However,since the accident this has changed to an approach of “safety needs to be ensured even if an accident occurs”. We needto continue fostering human resources so that even if a situation like Fukushima Daiichi happens again, they are able tominimize the damage for the people living nearby.
Mariko Ichikawa, consumer life consultant○ In 2006, the citizens group “Roundtable for Food Communication” was launched and began
activities on the topic of food safety. After the Fukushima Daiichi accident, it sought to study
radiation and in its own way sought to reduce the damage caused by harmful rumors. The
Consumer Affairs Agency has held risk communication sessions dozens of time per year.
However, little progress has been made in the understanding of the general public. The reality isthat misunderstanding is particularly entrenched in large cities and consuming regions.
○ It is often said that safety is scientific and objective, but that peace of mind is a psychologicaland subjective judgment, but I think this is slightly off the mark. Safety means low risk, but
because subjective judgement comes into play we are faced with the difficulty of not being able to make across-theboard judgements. Peace of mind refers to the feeling that there is nothing to worry about by letting the experts checkand decide whether a situation is safe or not.
○ In the field of food safety, there are many people who still feel concerned even if you tell them that there are standards
showing that food is considered to be sufficiently safe in scientific terms. Typical examples are pesticide residues andfood additives. People are easily affected by worrying information. This applies even more to women who are raisingchildren. There are even self-proclaimed experts who give incorrect information to the media and stir up concerns
among consumers.
○ Accepting people’s concerns, including about nuclear safety, and continuing to show them an attitude of aiming forhigher safety standards will foster trust. Never covering up accidents and trouble, never lying, and dealing with people
in an honest way will help to back that trust up.

[Panel discussion]Moderator:
Panelists:

Hiromi Yamazaki, Executive Vice President, JANSI
Masahiko Sato Deputy General Manager, Ikata Nuclear Power
Station, Shikoku Electric Power Company
Yasuhiko Yoshida, General Manager of Ohi Nuclear Power
Station, Kansai Electric Power Company
Ichiro Ihara, General Manager, Nuclear Power Division, Chubu
Electric Power Company (former General Manager, Hamaoka
Nuclear Power Station)
Yojiro Ikawa, Editorial writer at Yomiuri Shimbun, Tokyo
Headquarters
Katsumi Kuruba, Professor, Fukui University of Technology
Mariko Ichikawa, Consumer life consultant
Takeyoshi Yaegashi, Director and Evaluation & Assistance Vice
President, JANSI

Moderator: Mr. Yamazaki○ Moderator: Mr. Yamazaki I would like us to focus on the following two main discussions from among those picked
up on during the short speeches: (1) Maintaining and improving technical skills at power plants, and the question of
motivation; and (2) The perspective of the general public.
[1. Maintaining and improving technical skills at power plants, and the question of motivation]○ Mr. Yoshida The fact is that providing education as part of severe accident training has resulted in a greateradministrative workload. In effect, we are saying to the plant staff that for us to succeed they need to achieve their
mission no matter what. If you are unsure if something can be achieved, you need to make improvements somehow. We
build up small improvements through training and increase its effectiveness. We tell the plant staff that they are training
so that the power plant can be protected no matter what happens; currently, we are carrying out 1,000 training sessions
per year.
○ Mr. Ihara
I agree with what Mr. Ikawa said about the need for technicians to make greater efforts to pursue andacquire technological skills. New employees spend their first year learning the plant in a two-shift watch, and then split
into different specialisms, such as power generation, or maintenance. When the plant is shut down, it is difficult for themto see their goals. The situation is such that we have come up with a variety of systems for them to acquire technicalskills. Under these circumstances, when they come up against technical issues in their respective workplaces, we let themthink about ways of making improvements or finding better methods. We have people in the industry at JANSI who arecapable of teaching them, so we send young people to JANSI to hold debates and increase their technical skills by
overcoming the challenges they face.
○ Mr. Ikawa Having listened to the explanation given by the power stations, I think we would be wrong to think thatjust because we are carrying out severe accident (SA) training everything is OK. I think it is a very good idea to throwout the old “myth of safety” and to work on the assumption of previously unthinkable scenarios or difficulties, such as
total loss of power. We may be able to avoid SA or situations like Fukushima, but unless we foster a mindset of
thinking about and identifying day-to-day problems with defects or components, and system problems such as design
problems, if we ever had an incident at an earlier stage it is unlikely that we would ever be allowed to restart
operations. If we are not careful, we could be looking at the end of the nuclear power in Japan.
○ Mr. Sato It is not that we are only training for severe accidents; the most important part of our work involves carryingout checks during normal operation to prevent accidents from happening in the first place; in other words, preventing
small problems from arising. The basic approach is to increase everyday safety by using the knowhow we haveaccumulated during regular patrols and our ability to detect abnormalities. Until now, we have spent time teaching
this; an extremely important question we are now faced with is how we replace the training time lost as a result of
training for severe accidents so that we can maintain the previous level of training. The reality is that we have added
staff in order to create the time to allow us to do this.

○ Moderator: Surely the power company as a whole is important and not just the power plant itself. I am surethat gaining the understanding of the local community can be a major motivating factor. What is the current
situation in this regard?
○ Mr. Ihara To give you an example, for many years we have been visiting people’s homes in Omaezaki City, where
Hamaoka Nuclear Power Station is located, and four neighboring cities, to give one-to-one explanations about thepower plant. When young technician from the power plant accompany their senior colleagues on trips to local homes to
speak to people, people respond with understanding and encouragement. There are cases when employees’ motivation
has increased, despite the current tough environment, as a result of employees being able to confirm their position andfind job satisfaction through their relationship with local people.
○ Moderator: Universities have students majoring in nuclear power. How have the feelings of these studentschanged in respect to the idea of working at a nuclear power station?
○ Professor Kuruba: Currently, if you ask our students whether they want to work in the field of nuclear power manyof them say they do; at our university I would say this applies to almost all students. My own current opinion is thatthe younger generation does not necessarily want to abandon nuclear power; rather, I think they are slightly concerned
about the situation and this feeling is leading them to make different choices. The extent to which nuclear power
recovers depends on the steady operation in the workplace of power plants in each region, and I think both us and thestudents are looking forward to a time when we have a better reputation, not just locally, but across the country as
whole. The impression I get is that motivation levels have not fallen at all.
[2. The perspective of the general public – what do we need to do for the general public to accept restart?]○ Professor Kuruba: There are cases, such as at Takahama Nuclear Power Plant, when there were great difficulties withthe local community, but after many years of working hard to gain the understanding of local residents and thelegislative bodies in respect to restart, the local community has finally agreed and restart has been achieved. The
judiciary’s judgment led to a sudden freezing of the situation, and this was a big shock for local communities. It goes
without saying that before anything else we need to give a full explanation to the local community about why we areusing nuclear power and why we should restart, and this is something that the electric power companies and thenuclear industry as whole need to explain to the nation. When we try to guess the governor’s response to this question
after all this time, I think it will come down to the fact that the central government has not set out a clear policy. The
central government has not given a firm policy or details to the Japanese people, and it cannot make up its mind. This
has led to various concerns among the people. Without a clear direction, there is tendency to choose the safest path.
This is why I think we have not made progress in terms of the understanding of nuclear power. On all the questions,
including the question of repositories for high level waste, the issue of spent fuels, and the question of the Monju plant,
the government has failed to set out a clear policy and details to the nation and to make the effort to gain people’s
understanding, and things have been left unresolved. Given this situation, we cannot expect to get any answers.
○ Mr. Ikawa I think it would be better to think about this from a slightly different perspective. In order to achieve
restart, we need to see the politicians doing better. However, at the moment we cannot expect much. Working on theassumption that nothing will change for the time being, I think the nuclear power industry needs to start thinking very
seriously about how to maintain motivation and technology. Apparently, there is an insect called the tardigrade thatcan survive even if you freeze it for two or three years or send it into space. If nuclear power is considered to benecessary for Japan from a long-term perspective because of the energy supply-demand balance, the question ofwhether our nuclear power plants can become like the tardigrade becomes important. Rather than rushing to restart, I
think a bigger priority is to involve technicians and related manufacturers in serious discussions on how nuclear
technology can be maintained, and to think about how we can build up a firm defensive platform.
○ Professor Kuruba Technology changes all the time, so if we take a tardigrade approach we will not produce humanresources. We will end up with nothing. The question would become how we go about resuscitating and re-hatching
the industry, and I think that would be really tough. Unless nuclear power keeps moving, people will not develop andthe industry cannot be maintained. In other words, the technology could not be improved or maintained, so I don’t
think it would be a good idea to give up so easily. If we are realistic, the situation is not particularly optimistic, but if weare able to restart one, two or three power stations, I think we have a future.
○ Mr. Ihara In relation to this question, I think the situation regarding BWR is particularly challenging. In the case of
BWR, it is not enough simply to have somebody capable of operating, somebody capable of carrying out maintenance,
and then become a tardigrade. Nuclear power technology is more broad-ranging than that. Even if we look at thequestion of nuclear fuels, there is a long supply chain, and it covers a very broad-ranging area. If this chain is broken
over the next few years, even in a single location, the whole chain will no longer be linked together. I think if wechoose the tardigrade route, we will lose everything. There is a risk that nuclear technology will be lost from Japan, so
surely we need to keep it moving.
○ Moderator: Ms. Ichikawa, in your speech you mentioned the need to accept people’s concerns and resolutely
continue to give people full explanations. Could you please give your opinions on what messages can be given by
the power companies, or The Federation of Electric Power Companies as a whole, or how we should
communicate those messages?
○ Ms. Ichikawa From the perspective of the general consumer, the only source of information about nuclear power
plants is the media. I am sure that the power companies are extremely concerned about what information will bereported, but simply telling media representatives to report information correctly is not going to work. However, I
think we are currently in the process of rebuilding the trust lost after the March 11 accident. Building up trust is a very
hard thing to do, and it takes time and work. However, the nature of trust is such that it can fall down in an instantbecause of an unexpected occurrence. Operators may see consumers as fickle and difficult to deal with, but actually
they want to give their trust. This is why the companies that gain trust are those that meet these expectations, and thisis the meaning of a brand.
○ Moderator: When restarting power stations, it is extremely important that we listen to the concerns of the local
community. What is your day-to-day approach to holding dialog with local communities, listening to theirconcerns, and building up relationships?
○ Mr. Yoshida As I mentioned just now, we have been pursuing a variety of initiatives with the goals of making local
people glad that a power station was built there, and making the employees glad that they are working at Ohi Nuclear
Power Station. The first priority in trying to make local people glad that they work at Ohi is to create a workplace atwhich the rules are properly followed, safety discipline is established, and they can work there with peace of mind.
The second most important thing is that they understand that we are managing the plant transparently, without covering
things up, and managing it in such a way that information is fully disclosed. Third, the people who work there need tounderstand that the power plant is being run in a sincere and fair way, and that local people learn this in turn. I thinkthese things are important.

<<Moderator’s summary>>○ The panel discussion has shown us that the site superintendents of each power station are working passionately, notonly to meet the new regulations, but also to maintain and improve workers’ skills, and of course to carry out daily
training on how to respond to a serious accident, as well as a variety of initiatives aimed at maintaining motivation. It
is also clear that they are working very hard to come up with ways of responding to local communities, and this is very
reassuring.
○ Gaining the trust of local communities is not something that can be done overnight, but I think it is important that weshow people an attitude of working hard every day.

[Closing remarks]
Hiromi Yamazaki, Executive Vice President, JANSI○ At this year’s conference, we chose the themes of safety improvements and improvements to voluntary safety activities,
which are major recent topics and major topics for the nuclear power industry. In the panel discussions, we debatedthe challenges faced in making ongoing and independent efforts to promote voluntary safety improvements in waysthat are acceptable for society, and we received some extremely stimulating suggestions about the role of operators
and JANSI. It would be befitting if all of today’s visitors took home the results of our discussions and made wideranging use of them, and this I something that would make our conference extremely meaningful. JANSI and I willoffer our full support to operators’ initiatives, including attempts to improve the technical skills of station personnel,
through workplace reviews (assessments) and support activities provided in line with the results.

[Questionnaire results] 93 responses were collected○ The sessions and panel discussions were mostly understood, and people were happy for the most part. However,
several people responded that it would be better to reduce the number of panelists and develop discussions in greater
depth.
○ Numerous responses stated that Session 3 contained several specific examples from the power plants that will be
useful in the future; that the session gave the opportunity to hear about each company’s positive initiatives and ideas;
and that this will help to improve motivation.
○ In response to the collection of questionnaires handed out to the audience during the sessions, which was carried out
for the first time this year, we were told that these questions will be used and that useful comments were received.
○ In terms of operation of the conference, several people commented that the break times were too long. The opinion
was given that if a session finished early, it would be better to shorten the break time and start the next session earlier
in order to avoid overrunning the finishing time.