JANSI Annual Conference 2018 overview

The contents of these materials do not necessarily reflect
the opinions of the developers.
(honorifics omitted, titles may not be current)[Conference overview]large.

Date held: May 22 (Tue.), 2018 13:30 to 17:40

The deliberate delays and omissions seen in the TEPCO Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station accident

Venue: Iino Hall & Conference Center

have been harshly denounced. There is a tendency to influence decisions toward the conclusion that there are

Participants: approx. 390

no human errors, and even if such exist, they would not be so grave as to require action. Therefore, courageand decisiveness are necessary to invest the valuable resources currently at our disposal to prevent the future
occurrence of vague potential disasters. To prevent failures due to omission, the NRA is focusing on the 2
inhibiting factors of deficiencies in incentives and errors in prioritization. Without sufficient incentives, nothing
will lead to action even if the knowledge, understanding, and awareness required to prevent problems arepossessed. If leaders or the organizations are aware of existing potential threats but do not believe they require
focus in earnest, then this will lead to failures in prioritization. Continued consideration of the relationships
between the individual, the organization, and across organizations is vital to avoid failures due to omission. We
need JANSI and the industry to pursue such consideration.

[Opening statement]

Jacques Regaldo, World Association of Nuclear Operators (WANO) Chairman of the Board

Shojiro Matsuura, Japan Nuclear Safety Institute (JANSI) President and CEO

WANO strives to heighten safety through the performing of reciprocal support,

I hereby declare the commencement of the "JANSI Annual Conference 2018," the 5th such instance of thisadvancement of information exchange, and sharing of best practices. The soleconference. This conference strives for widespread knowledge of JANSI activities for not only our members,

objective of our organization is the pursuit of "excellence," which places nuclear safety

but all parties involved in nuclear energy. Addtionally this conference also strives for the exchanging ofas the predominant priority. It is with that mindset that we believe the independence of

opinions on the meaning and roles of voluntary regulatory organizations from diverse viewpoints to bothvoluntary regulatory organizations and the regulatory authorities of the nationalheighten and enhance JANSI activities.

government must be ensured. The results of the positioning process performed for peer

Last year, this conference was held for an entire day beginning in the morning. However, upon receiving input

reviews received by stations and utility operators, as well as stations themselves, arefrom the participants, we have decided to concentrate the contents from this instance onward into a half day

confidential information. Under no circumstances should this confidential information be communicated toconference. We thank you for attending and would appreciate any input you may have.

regulatory authorities, as the securing of the highest levels of reliability and transparency are invaluable, as is

The trial usage of reviews on inspection measures which use the US model as a basis is to commence in thethe maintaining of a "double safety barrier" comprising assessments performed by WANO with inspections andlatter half of this fiscal year. As continual measures by utility operators for voluntary safety improvement aremonitoring performed by regulatory authorities. The safety culture we strive for is a stringent one. While design

considered a major prerequisite of such review, we believe that the roles and responsibilities held by thequality and function alongside professionalism are necessary items, safety culture represents a valuable facet

voluntary regulatory organization JANSI will become ever more vital. We would like this conference to focus

for which voluntary regulatory organizations must systematically perform assessment. Towards this end, strict

on national government regulations and voluntary regulations for the exchange of opinions on the enrichment

self-assessment and the ability to learn from human error are required in addition to an attitude of openness

and normalization of voluntary safety improvement activities, so as to renew our awareness of theirand a questioning attitude. The same can be said for continual training. Once an accident occurs in the industry

importance.

of nuclear power, its effects will spread to all utility operators. We must remain humble and with strong
convictions, as these are musts for safety. Above all else, we must not forget that nuclear safety is to be given[Remarks by participants]

the utmost priority.

Toyoshi Fuketa, Nuclear Regulation Authority (NRA) Chairman
William D. Magwood, IV, Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development / Nuclear Energy Agency (OECD/NEA) Director-General

The importance of an attitude where there is mutual acceptance and approval of
attitudes and efforts between regulatory authorities and the regulated parties

The world watched as Japan underwent various changes in light of the experiences ofcannot be overstated. We expect the regulated parties to act as a collective of

the TEPCO Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station accident. The establishment ofprofessionals with a grasp of the field that bear a singular responsibility towards

JANSI was a sign that the Japanese nuclear power industry had not only regained its

safety. Towards this end, it is important that the utility operators accept

footing, but was making progress. Although their journey is still ongoing, they have

responsibility for their facilities when promoting the safety of such to society ataccomplished much on their way. Nations across the globe undertook efforts for1

improved safety after the accident, but the common feature among these was a tendency to focus on improving

so they could be used for communication with that general public. It was realized during the trial usage period

equipment and hardware. This meant there was little focus on the human side of safety. The human factor

that there were discrepancies in judgment of importance between utility operators and the regulatory side.

cannot be fully improved solely through the drafting of reports and holding of workshops. True improvement of

Ultimately, approx. 60% of those discrepancies were due to the human factor. How to improve upon this matterthe human factor requires the diligent accumulation of daily decisions and actions.

will be a challenge we face in the future. As for the sharing of information, open dialogues are necessary

That is why the success of JANSI holds the key to such improvement. When referring to the lessons learned

towards this end. It will require an attitude of striving toward raising safety from both sides in the dialogue.

from the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station accident, we can see that nuclear safety cannot be achieved

There are 2 nations which have adopted the ROP since its introduction in the US, ahead of Japan. These

unless there is excellence in human and organizational performance both, in addition to excellence for stations

nations are Spain and Mexico. Though there may be differences in the structure of regulations between these 2

and equipment.

nations, they both made the ROP suit conditions within their own nations by utilizing the experiences gained by

JANSI neither operates a station, nor will it become a secondary regulatory authority. What it does do, is

the US. What did these 2 nations undergo in the transition to these measures? Their experiences are sure toprovide a framework under which utility operators can work together to raise the excellence of safe

prove to be valuable sources of reference.

performance. In some ways, JANSI is the "conscience of the industry." The greatest role JANSI fulfills will not[Session] Enriching the foundations of voluntary regulations

be to merely perform review and guidance; it may be to lead utility operator attitudes toward reform.

<Short speech>[Keynote speech] The establishment of a Reactor Observation Process in the US

Chairman: Prof. Naoto Sekimura, Vice President of the University of Tokyo

Luis Reyes, Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) former Executive Director of Operations

Our commercial power stations have undergone much in the 7 years which haveAmong my experiences over the 30 plus years involved in regulations, I would like topassed since the TEPCO Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station accident, and I

reflect upon those relating to the introduction of the Reactor Observation Process

would like to cover the various issues that they face at present from 4 major(ROP) in the US. The impetus for the ROP was the Three Mile Island (TMI) incident inviewpoints.

1979. Although the INPO had been established and the framework of peer reviews

Firstly, there are issues accompanying the increased regulatory demands. While suchhad been organized, it was at the time of the TMI that the public began to hold doubts

demands are being issued through forms such as specific regulatory standards andabout nuclear power. Congress demanded reform in the structure of regulations. In an

restrictions on the number of service years, it goes without saying that additional

effort to boost manpower, the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) introduced

knowledge and re-assessment for safety are needed for such demands.
Secondly, there has been a sea-change in the attitude towards accidents which are either within design

the forerunner measure to the ROP in 1980. However, this proved to be a greatburden on utility operators. The most important point in the reform of the observation program wasstandards or exceeding design standards. The developments in attitudes toward leeway or external events for"transparency." There was an upsurge in the desire to understand the activities of regulatory authorities, as well

new design standards must be taken into consideration so that risk information and PRA in particular can beas the equipment and performance of the station. There were also criticisms leveled at the NRC that theireffectively utilized for such sea-changes.

observation activities were not very predictive. As there were only qualitative indices which led to differing

Thirdly, there is currently a demand for the additional installation of various machinery and equipment relating toobservation results, even for similar events, those criticisms gained steam from both the utility operators andsafety. The issue here is the format by which they will be categorized from the viewpoint of level of importance.

the general public. It was also around this time that Probabilistic Risk Assessments (PRA) began to see usage.

This is a highly important matter relating to the continual improvements and maintenance performed by utility

The aim of such PRA was to eliminate subjectivity for the achievement of greater accuracy. At the station, PRA

operators and the industry as a whole.

were utilized in the prioritization of station upkeep and equipment investment. There was not only a free market,

Fourthly, there is the matter of when such changes and reforms will be executed, and the amount that will be

but a demand for efficiency as well.

spent on such matters. The IAEA assessment is that the average cost of measures following the Fukushima

The NRC began improving its observation program based on PRA, conducting trial usage of ROP over a 6

Daiichi Nuclear Power Station accident at over 400 nuclear reactors worldwide was 20 billion JPY. However, themonth period spanning from May to Nov. of 1999 at facilities in 5 areas within the US. The transition to the fullamount being currently spent on reactors in Japan which have been reactivated exceeds this by an entire digit.

scale usage of ROP took place in Apr. 2000. From that time up to the present day, meetings on improvements

From viewpoints such as those of voluntary regulations, the foundations for appropriate and accurate response

have been periodically held on both the regulatory side and the utility operator side. These types of discussions

to these issues must be established into the future for the continual improvement of safety.

are vital for ROP. With the PRA being a long list of numbers, even engineers need time to comprehend them.
This is doubly true for the general public. Due to this, the activities in the ROP were color coded by importance2

Dominique Minière, Électricité de France (EDF) Group Senior Executive Vice President

Shuichi Kaneko, Nuclear Regulation Authority (NRA) Oversight Planning and Coordination Division Director

The presence of contractor companies is an extremely important factor in assuring

When we consider the image held by the general public on the work performed by "thenuclear safety at various stages. How will observation be performed during thenational government," "governments," and "government offices," it may not be amanufacturing of items such as equipment off site? The continued increase offavorable one. Concepts such as stubbornness, formality, and inflexibility may comedemands on the nuclear power industry has been accompanied by an increase of

to mind. As a nuclear regulatory organization, we believe that we must work to shedrisks as well. The first such risk is "falsification." This phenomenon is like a signal

this image, if only somewhat. Instead of putting off response to new knowledge, ourworldwide. Allow me to introduce the case of the Creusot Forge, which is one of ouraim must be to strive for swift efforts toward pressing matters. In the transition to newcompany's facilities. The "carbon anomaly event" was discovered in 2016 at

inspection regulations, we must strive to keep the roles of both the utility operatorsand regulatory organizations in mind to improve measures for observation. We would also like to enrich

Flamanville Nuclear Power Plant Unit 3. Although this problem was corrected at thestart of 2017, root cause investigations are still ongoing. The reporting of falsified data in at least 2 files also

communication with various relevant parties to the full extent possible, beginning with the regulated side, as thistook place in 2016, which raised doubts over the safety levels of two steam generator units. Our company

is an area which we as a regulatory organization have often received criticism for lacking. We are currently

decided to review approx. 3,800 files at the Creusot Forge factory, reaching back all the way to the early 1970s.

making every effort toward the diversification of opportunities for dialogue with not only the regulated side, but

Although 80% of the files have undergone analysis, this resulted in a voluminous amount of work over a 2 yearwith the general public and groups interested in nuclear power regulations. What must we do to promote these

period to resolve this problem. As a lesson learned from this problem, our company decided it would conduct

types of changes? I propose these 4 factors for promoting changes: (1) awareness and understanding of botheducation and training regarding the risks of "falsification" for the various EDF employees and contractor

foreign and domestic matters, (2) technical ability, (3) leadership, and (4) an organizational atmosphere withcompany employees involved in design and manufacturing. Additionally, we mandated that all suppliers musthigh sensitivity toward safety. Although our positions may differ between the regulatory organization and thecertify that there are no problems pertaining to falsification. Surprise inspections have also been performed byregulated side, we believe that the matters compiled here would prove useful in future measures.

EDF. We are also considering the performing of checks using big data in the future.
Tomoaki Kobayakawa, Tokyo Electric Power Company Holdings, Inc. President
Preston D. Swafford, CANDU Energy Inc. President and CEO
We at TEPCO drafted the "nuclear safety reform plan" in Apr. 2013. The failure to
I would like to use my experiences gained as a part of management at a US electricprepare for accident due to "the assumption that safety had already been established"

power company in the 2000s to explain how the nuclear power industry was fortified

was given in this plan as a root cause of the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station

through ROP. One of the many merits of the adoption of ROP was the thoroughaccident. The conclusion we reached was that the overconfidence and arrogance weelimination of subjectivity. In the past, the inability to provide effective response

had in our own safety prior to the accident must be eliminated and that a top down

measures via subjective discussions had existed. However, after the adoption ofreform starting from upper management were vital. This nuclear safety reform plan

ROP, there have been items such as PI (Performance Indicators) jointly used by all

promotes the specific advancement of 6 measures from the 3 viewpoints of "safety

electric power companies in addition to probabilistic evidence gained through items

awareness," "technical ability," and "dialogue ability." As an example of one of these measures, an action

such as PRA. This enabled a focus on issues for equipment and materials, as well asplan is being performed for the dissemination of safety culture throughout the entire organization via theareas pertaining to safety, instead of being distracted by superficial areas. Additionally, the ROP broughtenhancement of safety awareness held by management and the fostering of nuclear power leaders. We aretransparency to regulations, and has proved quite useful as a tool for communication with local residents.

also receiving various types of advice on nuclear safety via the enhancement of both internal and external

Speaking from my own experience, I can say that ROP asks you to "take a good look at the PI." If any

observation functions. In order to strive for this dissemination of safety culture, we have stipulated traits forunfavorable warning signs should be discovered, then immediate action must be taken. Unless these

the individuals, leaders, and organizations which realize a healthy nuclear safety culture (10 Traits), and areappropriate measures based on PI are taken, there is the risk of greater impact from such signs in the future. I

performing daily reflections by each individual alongside group debates towards this end. For thehope all participants not to underestimate the value of tools for early detection. The advancement of measures

improvement of technical ability, we have established a "nuclear human resource development center,"such as these is sure to ultimately lead to voluntary safety improvements by utility operators. I believe ouradopted the SAT (Systematic Approach to Training), and provided a training program for our employees. The

experiences will prove useful as reference for what JANSI is currently striving to achieve in Japan.

future issues facing the improvement of nuclear safety which we believe require tackling are measures toenhance the abilities of operators who, due to long term shutdown, have no operating experience with actual3equipment, highly precise management of items such as equipment due to factors such as design changes,

to fulfill their duty to improve safety based on the standards for their nation. The level of safety in Japan must be

and the human resource development and preparations of foundations necessary for technical development.

continually improved voluntarily upon this prerequisite. Efforts to improve safety must be kept in the awarenessof top management at utility operators. We shall make every effort to dutifully meet the expectations of the utility
operator. The constant exchange of information and opinions with the utility operator, so that the mutual

Shigeki Iwane, Kansai Electric Power Co., Inc. President and Director

benefits of such exchange can be utilized to raise the level of ensuring safety for electric power companies as aEver since the occurrence of the Mihama Nuclear Power Station Unit 3 accident inwhole, is both our duty and our responsibility.

2004, we at KEPCO have undertaken efforts to perform recurrence prevention
measures and rebuilding of safety culture which take the lessons learned into
consideration. After the occurrence of the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station
accident, we gained a sense of urgency that "there will be no future for nuclear
power in Japan unless voluntary and continual safety improvement activities arepromoted." It was with this sense of urgency that we drafted a road map in 2014,
and we have promoted measures in accordance with said map. We will adopt the"Risk Informed Decision Making (RIDM)" process into station management so as to strive for further
improvement of safety. Through the proper understanding of station conditions and usage of PRA for thequantification of risks for problems likely to occur, there will be results obtained which will be considered inperforming decision making toward the improvement of safety. The basis of voluntary safety improvement using
RIDM will focus around 3 key points: (1) performance observation and assessment (PI), (2) assessment of risks
including PRA, and (3) decision making and execution. The Corrective Action Program (CAP) andConfiguration Management (CM) will be vital as functions to support this process. The role we expect to be
fulfilled by JANSI is to confirm, from viewpoints such as the level of importance to safety, whether RIDM has
been appropriately adopted into voluntary safety improvement activities, so that they may aid us in the
improvement of safety. The knowledge gained from the Ohi Nuclear Power Station, which is a pilot plant for the
new inspection regulations, will be shared among utility operators. This will then be utilized to its full extent sothat it may lead to the efficient optimization of station management. In this way shall we strive for further
improvements in safety.

Shojiro Matsuura, Japan Nuclear Safety Institute (JANSI) President and CEO
As a voluntary regulatory organization, JANSI must realize the concepts of utility
operator commitment, awareness, and ideals through its activities with a "safety
focus," where safety is constantly placed as a central tenet. The nuclear powerindustry acts as members forming the communal body around JANSI. In order toimprove safety, JANSI must utilize peer reviews to oversee performance and how
businesses are operated in each field from a fellow viewpoint to confirm whether
there are any safety problems, while receiving the cooperation of the utility operators.
The results of these reviews will be compared against safety performance objective levels for the nuclear powerindustry worldwide (PO&C: Performance Objectives and Criteria) to clarify the points needing improvement,with the necessary items being shown as recommendations. A major prerequisite to these is for utility operators4

<Panel discussion> (honorifics omitted)

problematic areas before the regulatory authorities? Another matter of great importance is to maintain a criticalview. While I feel it is splendid that the Japanese culture shows proper respect for others, it would be

Chairman: Prof. Naoto Sekimura, Vice President of the University of Tokyo

problematic if that respect leads to an inability to indicate problematic areas when seeking and identifying

Panelists: Dominique Minière, Électricité de France (EDF) Group Senior Executive Vice President

problematic areas for nuclear power facilities. JANSI must be able to view matters critically, and this is an area

Preston D. Swafford, CANDU Energy Inc. President and CEO

where I believe they are also improving as well.

Shuichi Kaneko, Nuclear Regulation Authority (NRA) Oversight Planning and Coordination Division Director○President Kobayakawa: SEVP Minière indicated the importance of independence in the self-assessment

Tomoaki Kobayakawa, Tokyo Electric Power Company Holdings, Inc. President

function in particular, as well as the importance of internal and external peer reviews. What we feel is the most

Shigeki Iwane, Kansai Electric Power Co., Inc. President and Director

important in the 7 years since the accident is the knowledge that we are the agents in realizing safety. However,Shojiro Matsuura, Japan Nuclear Safety Institute (JANSI) President and CEO

we may not be able to realize every issue, and we may even make mistakes. That is why we believe it is very
important to accept vital indications based on expertise and fact. The ensuring of independence has been

○Chairman Sekimura: We would now like to proceed with the discussion. The first topic will be on how thoserequested of Dr. John Crofts, so that this internal party (who is our Nuclear Safety Oversight Office Director)

involved in overseas utility operators view the efforts being made by Japanese utility operators, based upon the

may become independent for proper performing of oversight, but what will ultimately prove to be of extreme

contents spoken by the Presidents of TEPCO and KEPCO. Furthermore, we would like to hear if you have any

importance is that the board of directors or the President receive such indications in earnest for proper handling.

recommendations on areas requiring improvement from the viewpoint of voluntary measures, or examples of

The specific indications on what must be changed are received for reflection into actual activities, and this is aJapanese efforts which are excellent.

common item which holds true for independence, self-assessment, and peer reviews.

○SEVP Minière: I believe the efforts are highly positive. This goes for the efforts by the utility operators, TEPCO
and KEPCO, as well as the efforts by JANSI. Possessing an internal entity that functions to perform○Chairman Sekimura: I believe the viewpoints presented here are invaluable ones. We would like, starting

self-assessment is important. Above all else, the utility operator bears the singular responsibility for nuclear

from President Swafford, to speak in more depth about how the reflection they touched upon should take placesafety. There are two points I would like to focus upon.

to encourage further specificity and diversity of viewpoints in enriching noticed matters and accumulated

The first point is the roles of regulatory authorities and voluntary regulatory organizations in nuclear safety.

information. If you could include your own examples, it would prove even more helpful.

Although WANO established a post-Fukushima committee, we have discussed here that our organization must

○President Swafford: While this may be similar to in-depth protection, I believe it is of unequivocal importanceremain independent and act efficiently. The self-assessments performed by utility operators do fulfill a vital role,that problems are firmly understood for site quality assurance and programs. When the JANSI team visits or an

but that role must be performed independently.

event occurs at the station, the members of the site must earnestly receive these external parties and any

The second point is the comparison and openness of self-assessment. Such assessments are performed at

remarks they may have for reflection into corrective actions. Instead of an attitude of introversion and isolation,

EDF once every 2 years, with WANO peer reviews also being received every 2 years. I believe it is importantthe attitude to be adopted should be open to indications from external parties. That is the ideal state to strive for,that a very strong culture in nations such as Japan or France must be utilized when conducting self-assessment.

and one which would be truly healthy.

After which, it will be important for such assessments to be conducted by teams comprising peers from many

○President Iwane: Regarding self-assessments, we at KEPCO have established a "safety validation

nations.

committee" in addition to the establishment of the company-wide and division-wide "safety promotion○President Swafford: I have watched the growth and development of JANSI over the past 4 years, and I

committee" for the purpose of Mihama Unit 3 accident recurrence prevention. This "safety validation committee"

believe efforts for voluntary regulations have come along with much support. The reflection of the lessons

has the contents of implementation viewed by experts who are an external third party, and said committee

learned from the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station accident was on target and consistent with theprogresses while receiving their input. We would like assessments to be performed from both a compliance andefforts undertaken in the US. What will JANSI need in its next phase? I believe it is the power to act. The

safety culture basis, via the safety validation committee, and the performance basis, via the reciprocal provision

support of utility operator CEOs and Presidents for the JANSI organization will prove invaluable towards thisand receipt of indications through the mutual piloting of the stations of the other party by maintenance andend, as will the dispatching of skilled human resources from the utility operator to JANSI. It is equally aselectrical experts in coordination with other PWR electric utilities and the nearby Chugoku Electric Power

important to show respect when JANSI team visits a site. This will lead to compliance with matters indicated byCompany. However, we believe that the further improvement of their precision will rest with clarification of thethe team. The dispatching of skilled human resources from the utility operator to JANSI will boast benefits suchworkings of Risk Informed Decision Making (RIDM) where levels of importance for matters including PI are

as the enhancement of both the organizations at the site and the parent company. Additionally, it is vital that theanalyzed, so that matters such as input, output, and the process for narrowing down levels of importance areutility operator discover and identify problematic areas earlier than the regulatory authority. That is what agiven a thorough look by third party experts. As for the relationship with JANSI, having CEOs support JANSI

voluntary regulatory organization must accomplish. After all, is it not important for JANSI to discover and identify

would be an absolute essential in ensuring that JANSI possesses effective power and can raise its level. What5

we believe is important for CEOs is to share the ideal state of JANSI, possess an awareness of gaps between

performing of assessment. Necessary matters will be performed, while matters less important to safety may bethis state and current conditions, and strive as utility operators to fill those gaps. Since I believe one of those

set aside and given lower priority. I felt it was very important that activities be promoted under such angaps is in human resources, relevant topics must be considered, such as how to dispatch skilled humanunderstanding.

resources alongside consideration of how dispatching to JANSI should be positioned within the career of said

○Chairman Sekimura: President Iwane, do you have any remarks on these matters from the viewpoint of

dispatched human resources and how to best utilize said human resources upon their return from JANSI.

CAP?

Additionally, as we at KEPCO will be undertaking CAP and RIDM, we would like JANSI Peer Reviews (PR) to○President Iwane: From the viewpoint of what significance "from the bottom up" is given by CAP as Director

be PRs which appropriately match such endeavors. We believe that ensuring a culture of criticality takes root at

Kaneko stated, I believe a culture of praise must be formed. The giving of due praise for improvement activities

JANSI is important, and towards that end our relationship of trust with JANSI will be important. Not only will theis vital. To ensure such a culture takes root, CAP must be organized and systemized so that awareness isrelationship of trust between top management be important, but so will thorough discussion by parties

gained of how much progress has been gained in improvements via CAP. Improvements upon such progress

executing duties at the station and JANSI. Additionally, we would like discussions conducted to cover how best

must be continued. It would be highly beneficial if this PDCA process is shared by all for further improvement offor the station to utilize JANSI outside of PRs for voluntary safety improvement.

safety. That is the format I feel this matter should take.

○Chairman Sekimura: First, I would like to hear the input from SEVP Minière regarding these remarks.

○Chairman Sekimura: Our next topic of discussion will be the viewpoints of priority and acceleration, which

Second, I would like Director Kaneko to give any remarks on the utility operator activities as seen from thewere touched upon by NRA Chairman Fuketa. The placing of priority in matters such as regulations, including

regulatory side. Furthermore, I would like to receive remarks on how future inspection measures will lead thepossessing an awareness of hazards and managing risks, is an issue. Furthermore, prioritization in terms of

upward spiral for both regulations and utility operators.

time, which NRA Chairman Fuketa described as swiftness, is also an issue. Another issue which exists is the○SEVP Minière: Self-assessment will require 2 important matters. The first is human resources, which will bemethod by which RIDM is performed based on risk information so that their results may be explained. Theof extreme importance. Skilled human resources must be dispatched to JANSI and WANO, and the returning

regulatory side in Japan had long struggled to include the term of swiftness. However, it is believed that thehuman resources should be given promotions and raises. Additionally, the matters proposed by inspection

concept of "without unnecessary delay" has been firmly included in the NRC, when taking them as an example.

organizations must be accepted and received in earnest. People have the tendency to deny or refuse

Therefore, we would like the swiftness mentioned by NRA Chairman Fuketa to be broken down and explained

weaknesses, which becomes particularly true in cases where understanding is not sufficient. Thus, the major

by Director Kaneko. After this explanation, we would next like explanations on examples in France, the US, andresponsibility of leaders will be to maintain an awareness of that matter and firmly accept the existence of such

Canada. We will then discuss what plans exist in Japan as a contrast, as well as which matters will require

weaknesses. In other words, they must accept the results of assessment, whatever they may be, so as todeliberation in the future.

ensure that measures against problems are definitively executed.

○Director Kaneko: There is a quote from NRA Chairman Fuketa that I would like to share. "Take heed, lest

○Director Kaneko: Within the remarks by President and CEO Matsuura, they spoke of the importance of

purple prose be used to effectively and specifically delay what must be done." I believe that the matter of

JANSI realizing various activities upon gaining the commitment of the electric power company. I agree

swiftness which Chairman Sekimura just spoke of was the main message which NRA Chairman Fuketa wishedwholeheartedly. While the remarks by JANSI may prove to be bitter pills to swallow, I felt that dedication toto convey in their opening remarks. While both the regulation and regulated sides are striving to progress, whatearnestly listening and firmly accepting such remarks would be a vital factor in promoting these voluntary

is important will be what significance is actually given, both specifically and in effect, to such forward progress. I

measures. Among the keywords in a differing point was the keyword of CAP. I believe this contains a concept

believe the priority assigned will likely be based on their significance or the scale of their impact. The intent ofsimilar to the "from the bottom up" concept held by the term "voluntary." I also believe a clearer awareness

NRA Chairman Fuketa was to ask for prioritization of matters which must be undertaken immediately andshould be considered of whether these voluntary "from the bottom up" activities or improvement activities,

matters which require swift results, within a framework which considers factors such as risk and safety for suchcalled CAP can firmly take root and safely attain fruition. In fact, no matter how we as a regulatory authority planmatters. This is also one of the major viewpoints which must be used by the regulatory organization, and what I

the new inspection program, if we do not confirm with utility operators and consider critically what kind ofbelieve to be a framework of their values.

awareness each individual inspector has and what they will consider as a problem and will look at, the program○Chairman Sekimura: I would now like to ask for remarks from SEVP Minière on whether there are examples

will fail to advance at all. Therefore, in this sense, I believe that CAP must effectively become a measure whichof realization of such concepts in France, as well as any relevant matters.

advances "from the bottom up." This will allow it to become an extremely significant measure toward the○SEVP Minière: There are 2 matters I would like to cover. The first matter is prioritization. The placing ofvoluntary ensuring of safety. This, in turn, will allow our regulatory measures and the utility operator activities topriority is clearly a matter which the management must first perform. That makes self-assessment very

achieve the upward spiral mentioned by Chairman Sekimura and lead to further improvement of safety. Indeed,

important. For an example of the measures taken in France, the organizations performing nuclear power

this would allow matters which we consider problematic to be received within the CAP for assessment and theinspection view stations from 15 fields, perform measurement on 7 levels, and use standards to assign colors
6such as orange, red, and yellow. In this way is prioritization performed. The second matter is risk information

trial run for a year and a half. However, our current intent is to get as close to the minimum level of acceptability

and risk management. I feel that the phrase risk management has some negative connotations. Referring to(at least 60 for a passing grade, in university grade terms). As it is said that there have been approx. 20 years of

this as safety improvement would have more positive connotations. As I am sure you are all aware, safety

improvements and advancements in the US from that point, we believe it is important to continually strive for

improvement has no end. It must undergo continual and constant improvement in facets such as design,

improvement while following those same types of improvements and advancements.

human factor, and safety culture.

○Chairman Sekimura: Thank you. Next, we would like to ask some questions of SEVP Minière. We have○President Swafford: On the matter of risk information usage, the basic foundation for risk information usage

received an explanation on how the EDF strove to resolve the issues with Creusot Forge. We would now like tois only considered and prepared after PRA for the entire station has come together, such as site PRA andhear what types of cooperation there were on the regulatory side in France regarding communication,

earthquake PRA. However, unless there is internal skill to begin with, the question of whether assessment anddeliberation, and resolution measures, as well as whether there were areas where it was difficult to gain

prioritization can be performed becomes a difficult one. Once these have begun to be used as tools, it can be

agreement. We received about 2 questions regarding this topic, which were asked for the purpose of allowing aseen that decision making leads to rather different results than before. For example, various measures havewider range of deliberations upon viewpoints for adoption of ROP from the US and issues with CAP. We would

been taken in where to invest capital, such as upgrades to BWRs post-Fukushima, but ultimately the decision

now like to hear the response from SEVP Minière.

was to introduce backup high pressure core injection systems. The merits of this choice were a nearly double○SEVP Minière: The issues in question were very important as a case of the transparency with nuclear safety

digit decrease in core damage frequency. The right choice can truly lead to a great impact. I believe theauthorities, which meant that it had to be definitively shown that such transparency existed. The efforts madedirection which should be taken in the usage of risk information should ultimately be one which results inwere after raising the objective of response which gave the top priority to nuclear safety, and said efforts wererewards for the electric power company. I also believe that this would gain further trust from the regulatory

performed under complete transparency. The purpose of this was to ensure complete transparency for not only

authority.

the regulatory authorities, but for the general public as well. We gave various types of explanations to the media.

○Chairman Sekimura: Thank you for your input. It was both extremely valuable and pointed out some homeThis was not a simple task by any means, but it was one for which we believed we needed to bear responsibility.

truth regarding skill. I would now like to ask President Kobayakawa for his input on these remarks.

Our belief was that, if a problem existed, then it was our duty to deal with such problems as quickly as possible.

○President Kobayakawa: I believe we received some very valuable input. As I believe it is important that theWe mobilized 100 EDF engineers to work full time in dealing with the issues in question, and said issues weremanagement ultimately perform rational decision making and commit to those decisions, I feel that the ability tocompletely resolved after 2 years of hard work. We also ensured the absence of issues aside from the issues increate a rational framework in which RIDM, and by extension PRA, can objectively identify important matters forquestion. For example, there was incorrect data for a certain steam generator. We performed proper checking

positioning of such matters based on this identification is invaluable. There is a perception that Japan still has aof said data to confirm whether said generator was operable. Deliberations were held with the regulatory

long way to go, and I believe that the role played by JANSI as a collective of professionals in this process will beauthorities until the end of 2016, with deliberations continuing to be performed in 2017 as well. Ultimately, it wasa major one.

in Mar. of 2018 that approval for recommencement of operation was received.

○Chairman Sekimura: We have received several questions regarding the topics we have discussed thus far.

○Chairman Sekimura: Thank you. Our final topic for debate will be the expectations for JANSI held byThere were several questions for Director Kaneko, which I would like to compile and ask of the Director. One

voluntary regulatory organizations. As we have already received remarks on how JANSI would like to advancequestion was regarding the issues being faced in the efforts to customize a new inspection measure with theregarding this viewpoint from President and CEO Matsuura, we would first like to receive remarks on theseadoption of ROP for Japan. Another was regarding the difficulty of deliberating upon all necessary matters in

expectations from President Kobayakawa and President Iwane. Then, we would like to hear if there are any

the 2 years remaining until full scale utilization, with this time frame including the trial run period. We would now

particular expectations of JANSI as a Japanese voluntary regulatory organization from President Swafford.

like to receive the answers to these questions from Director Kaneko.

○President Kobayakawa: As NRA Chairman Fuketa has stated, a voluminous amount of data will be required○Director Kaneko: Regarding the first question of customizing the ROP measure for Japan using the US as aon matters such as how risk information will be handled in the future. Naturally, it would be better to definitively

model, our basic attitude is that we will try to adopt a measure that is as similar as possible. Our honest stancestock up on data being performed by all parties over such data by a single party. A firm commitment to mattersat this time is that actual customization can take place at a later time. While there may be several areas where

for which immediate response can be performed, discovered through a collective organized effort, would also

efforts are necessary due to differences in measures owing to differences in the histories or structures of laws

aid in speedy resolution over a single utility operator struggling to find such matters. I believe these collective

between our nations, we will generally adopt similar items. Regarding the second question of a lack of time, Iefforts would serve an extremely vital role in being the driver of actions with such speed or ensuring new

believe they are absolutely correct. There were revisions to laws in the previous year, and we have a 3 year

technologies are definitively refined into ones with higher quality. That is the role we expect of JANSI.

execution period in which we must make preparations. I do not believe we can resolve every issue in that time○President Iwane: We have many expectations for JANSI. The first is to thoroughly look at cases of global

frame. I also do not believe that a perfect Japanese oversight system can be created simply by undergoing a

excellence, then look at Japanese CAP, so as to provide guidance to our efforts to make these CAP attain7

global excellence. The second is the provision of support to each company, such as through the issuance of

avoid being influenced by undue pressure. These were the words used by André-Claude Lacoste of France

guidelines on a common foundation. We expect JANSI to provide support such as that which takes current

during discussions on independence within the IAEA INSAG, and they are words I agree with. Regarding thisconditions into consideration and support for stations. This will help alleviate the very heavy workload facing

matter of undue pressure, I vowed to myself to remain steadfast regardless of any undue pressure we may

each company during their preparations for such common foundations, such as the current adoption of RIDM,

receive from electric power companies when I accepted the position of chairman of JANSI. Thankfully, no suchas the Japanese nuclear power industry itself is tackling numerous amounts of issues, among them issues suchpressure has been exerted upon us during my tenure, but this stance is one I intend to keep. Whether weas the adoption of new inspection measures. The third is to focus on such matters through measures such as

possess the ability to be independent truly depends upon the human resources comprising our organization.

focusing on such matters in JANSI peer reviews, so as to provide support which allows us to implement RIDM

The overwhelming amount of human resources comprising JANSI is members with experience at electric

more smoothly, which will ultimately allow RIDM to take root more firmly. As the expectations for JANSI growpower companies. Accordingly, it is important how many skilled members are assigned to JANSI from electric

ever stronger, we hope that they may consider human resources along with us regarding these matters.

power companies. This matter of what types of human resources would be assigned and from where was○Chairman Sekimura: Thank you. Next we would like to hear the remarks of President Swafford. Earlier, we

negotiated with each company individually shortly after the establishment of JANSI, but such dialogues did notreceived an explanation from WANO Board Chairman Regaldo who focused on the viewpoint of ango smoothly. As this is a matter where the big picture must be considered, I believe that the direct discussion of

independent safety organization. We believe that the current expectations for JANSI from utility operators inhuman resources between all electric power companies and JANSI for decisions which led to the formation of aJapan will not always be from this viewpoint, and may include different facets. Therefore, we would like the"human resource deliberation committee" that is held several times each year shows matters are definitely

remarks of President Swafford to cover how voluntary or independent safety organizations in Japan should

making advancements in a positive direction. Another matter is how human resources will be developed within

strive to be, based on their experiences in the US and Canada. Did any of the items such as expectations fromJANSI. The framework for human resource development within JANSI has been firmly established sinceutility operators which you just heard seem odd? Alternately, what are your thoughts on this matter based onaround the previous year, and such development will be promoted within said framework. I believe that human

your own personal experience?

resources firmly gaining abilities from various facets such as these for the improvement of effective ability via○President Swafford: I wholeheartedly agree with the remarks given. I believe an unwavering commitment to

the experiencing of peer reviews and investigations into excellence, alongside the gaining of abilities by JANSI

excellence should be made. At the INPO office in Atlanta, there is a poster with the word "excellence" written on

through the aforementioned human resource deliberation committee and facets such as the commitment ofit. But the last "e" is missing from that word, and that is for a good reason. It shows how excellence can nevervarious CEOs will allow JANSI to maintain its independence. As for matters such as CAP, guidelines on thisbe truly achieved, yet it is a goal which we must strive toward. I do not believe that dealing with regulations is amatter have been drafted by JANSI, and I would like definitive efforts on this matter to continue into the future.

role meant for organizations such as JANSI. Instead, I believe the role of the voluntary regulatory organization
is to pursue excellence and contrast matters against best practices. When looking at station performance from

○Chairman Sekimura: Thank you. If any of our panelists have any remarks after hearing this declaration ofaround 1981 or 1982 onward, it can be seen that it has improved every year. I believe this shows that there isintent by President and CEO Matsuura, please feel free to share them now.

mutual studying and learning, particularly from the mistakes of the other, and that this was not achieved by a

○President Iwane: I believe it is a very good thing that advancements are being made in a positive direction

single utility operator alone. Earlier, there were remarks touching upon the expectations for JANSI, and I believe

through the human resource deliberation committee. As I believe that human resources are a vital key to thethose expectations should be to improve their functions and abilities, gain insight from events and lessons

management of the organization, I feel that it is important that appropriate response be taken by each utility

learned around the world, and utilize those matters learned. Additionally, I believe the role or expectation ofoperator upon learning of the issues facing JANSI itself or the issues with human resources. Therefore, I would

JANSI is to seek proper response from utility operators on such matters to allow improvement of performance

like such matters to continue being covered at committees such as these. Regarding the guidelines, I would likeevery year. Those are the matters sought in the US, and I believe that JANSI will develop into an organization

JANSI to exhibit leadership in this matter while firmly establishing the distribution of roles. There remain many

which can achieve this.

realistic issues facing the industry in Japan. I hope that the utility operators and JANSI can conduct thoroughcommunication so as to possess a common awareness and strive toward mutual improvement on matters○Chairman Sekimura: Thank you. We would next like to hear the remarks of President and CEO Matsuura.

which we, the utility operators, must ensure are performed, alongside matters for which JANSI should provide

Based on your experiences, how do you believe that JANSI will continue to function as a voluntary regulatory

support.

organization with continual advancement into the future?
○President and CEO Matsuura: Regarding the independence of JANSI, this independence refers to whether○Chairman Sekimura (summation): Thank you. I would now like to head into a summation of our panel

the organization is firmly established and possesses the ability to do so on its own. Essentially, I believe this is a

discussion. I feel there has been very productive discussion on the future role of JANSI. I believe a singularmatter of the people who comprise such an organization. Additionally, the forces exerted upon it from external

direction has been shown regarding voluntary regulatory organizations, independent regulatory organizations,sources will determine that independence. In English, one of the definitions of independence is whether it canand the commitment by utility operators to activities. In addition to the enrichment and progression of various
8[Survey results] 73 answers collected

activities among utility operators, regulations in Japan have become extremely well fortified with theprogression of discussions on standard drafting, judgment, and inspection measures. To allow the guiding of aframework which possesses strengths such as the effective improvement of nuclear safety on an industry scale○The keynote speech and sessions (short speeches and panel discussions) were generally understood andwhile taking the structure of the reciprocal benefits which I just spoke of into consideration, I feel that JANSI will

well received.

have an ever greater role to fulfill. The utility operator must take the path travelled thus far into consideration○For the keynote speech, many answers stated that a good understanding was gained of the experiences ofwhen considering safety measures, not only for the hardware side, but the manner in which risk information is

ROP introduction in the US, and that the advice given based on these experiences would prove valuable ascreated and utilized, as well as the manner in which risk governance will be improved and RIDM will bereference for introduction in Japan.

promoted. The role which JANSI is expected to fulfill within these actions by the utility operator is to be an○For the short speech portion of the session, many answers stated that the contents from each presenter wereindependent organization with an objective, third party viewpoint. It was just a year ago that Dr. Richard A.

simple and focused, and facilitated understanding of the topics for discussion in the later panel discussions.

Meserve spoke of Strength in Depth at the meeting held by the Agency for Natural Resources and Energy, and○For the panel discussion, many answers stated that discussions were kept well organized thanks to thethis concept being announced in INSAG-27 means it is a fundamental concept which should lead to such a role

leadership exhibited by the Chairman. However, some answers stated that the contents of discussion werefor JANSI. I believe that all of the members which have participated in this conference here today havemerely retreading the contents of the short speeches.

confirmed that a relationship of further positive tension with the regulatory side should be established while all○While the conference length was shortened to half a day, there were no remarks nor requests received upon

relevant parties unify their efforts to promote the continued improvement of safety for nuclear power. With that, I

this matter.

would like to close this panel discussion.
END[Closing remarks]
Hiromi Yamazaki, Japan Nuclear Safety Institute (JANSI) Executive Vice President

I believe this conference was an excellent opportunity to re-establish our dedicationand gain a renewed awareness that the major prerequisite for the adoption of a
new inspection measure by the national government, which represents a major
turning point, is that the singular responsibility for ensuring the safety of the power
station lies with the utility operator itself, and that additionally, the responsibilities of
the utility operator do not stop at the boundaries of regulations, but it is of theutmost importance that voluntary and continual safety improvement activities must
continue to be enriched. I hope all in attendance can take the products of the endeavors here today back totheir own organizations for widespread utilization. We at JANSI will also continue to support the efforts being
made by the utility operator via reviews in the field and support activities. I would now like to take thisopportunity to explain about the next Annual Conference. At that time, we would like to take a look back upon
the activities performed thus far in a renewed dedication to the founding mission of JANSI, which is to ensurethat accidents such as the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station accident will never be repeated. The
next Annual Conference is scheduled to be held in March of next year. Finally, I would like to give my thanks
as the conference organizer to all of the participants for their time, from those who spoke at the podium tothose in attendance.

9