IRID International Expert Group

September 2013 IEG Meeting Summary

IEG Mission
The mission of the International Expert Group (the “IEG”) is tocontribute to the safe and efficient implementation of thedecommissioning of the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station(the “Decommissioning”) and R&D activity for theDecommissioning, by providing advice to The International
Research Institute for Nuclear Decommissioning (the ”IRID”).
The IEG shall provide such advice to IRID from an objective
perspective based on the collective view of the IEG reflecting thediffering international expertise and experience of each member ofthe IEG.

The IEG will provide IRID with recommendations on the specific issues
faced at the Fukushima Daiichi NPS and the specific issues of Research& Development for decommissioning
IRID International Expert Group2

Summary Comments• A good visit and good meeting• Organization changes (formation of IRID, METI increasedinvolvement) provide a potential foundation for improved
effectiveness• Key challenges remain to be:– Stakeholder engagement and education– Prioritization of activities– Definition of Interim and End States (to guide activities)– Organizational alignment and effectiveness

There are technical challenges to execute the Fukushimadecommissioning ‐ right now the organizational and stakeholder
challenges are more significant and more important
IRID International Expert Group3

Summary Comments• Developing and maintaining public confidence is vital– Commitments must be met• Commitments must be within the capability of delivering organization• Top down goals must be validated by bottom up planning• The amount of work must be reasonable (this will require some hard choices toprioritise)– TEPCO, IRID and METI must be partners supporting each other• There is a hierarchy to defining priorities and work:
policy ‐> supporting strategies ‐> implementation plans• Policy and regulation needs to respond to realities of the situation• 1F is no longer a nuclear power plant site, it is a nuclear
decommissioning site

IRID International Expert Group4

Formation of IRID
• Observations:– Goals and vision for IRID are good
– There is a need for clarity in organizational roles, responsibility, andaccountability between TEPCO, IRID, and METI• They need to be understood by everyone– Achieving the new way of working will require significant investment of timeand focus• IEG recommendations will include suggestions on how to develop
and ensure clear division of responsibility between TEPCO, IRID,and METI
– For example: regular assessments to determine if adjustments are needed

IRID International Expert Group5

Fuel Debris Removal R&D Solicitation• Observations:– Objectives to engage international organizations, and to engage with themearly are good
– Plan to consider options other than flooded PCV is good
– Planned approach could create risk that the number of responses will be low
and not from organizations with the right experience and capabilities• Concerns about ownership of Intellectual Property• Concerns about whether this process will create a real opportunity for market• Concerns about Japan’s history as a closed market• Concerns about time scale for process• IEG recommendations will focus on communication with potential
responders to ensure they understand long term plan and will
engage with IRID
– For example, engagement with selected companies in advance to discuss theirconcerns and reinforce the reasons they should participate
IRID International Expert Group6

Contaminated Water• Observations:– IEG does not see immediate threat to people or environment• Emergency actions are not required• Situation highlights need for improved communications– Three objectives:• Reduce risk of contamination to ocean• Lower water levels in Reactor and Turbine Buildings• Reduce amount of water to be treated and stored• Priorities/Recommendations:• Trench remediation• Subdrain functionality• Groundwater bypass• Options for reduction of cooling water flow

IRID International Expert Group7

Additional Comments• Ice Dam
– We understand the objectives of the ice dam– It is important to evaluate in detail the feasibility and impact• Need to understand impact on groundwater flow, building stability, and soilconditions• Physical trials and testing are essential– Implementation schedule should be decided based on site conditions after
restoring subdrains and implementing groundwater plus results of physicaltrials and testing• Shield Wall
– We understand the objectives of the shield wall
– It is important to evaluate further:• Potential for unintended consequences on ground water flow
• Potential for concentrating contamination in one location• How to handle and manage a large volume of contaminated soil and water

IRID International Expert Group8Tank Farm
• Observations:– Existing situation is not ideal• Leaks likely• Low margins– Objective is to remove risk of contamination from tanks• Priorities/Recommendations:– Ensure adequate storage capacity– Accelerate additional ALPS capacity– Mitigate risks of leaks – pursue spare tanks– Replace bolted tanks– Replace horizontal tanks• Note:– Replacing tanks does not reduce risk of piping leaks– Discharge of treated water creates immediate capacity• IEG sees no safety or environmental reasons preventing discharge

IRID International Expert Group9Roadmap• Observations:– Building public confidence is critical• The Roadmap should be relative stable, defining key policy items and the importantInterim and End States• Roadmap dates should be realistic and achievable– The Roadmap plays a role in establishing public confidence and guiding theprogram• IEG Recommendations will focus on actions to increase stakeholder
confidence in the Roadmap and improve it’s use as a guidance
document– For example, top down date goals should be validated from a bottom‐up
approach

IRID International Expert Group10Spent Fuel Removal• Observations:– Good progress preparing Unit 4 for spent fuel removal– Overall plan appears optimistic• Seems to assume “normal” operation type experience• Issues with damaged fuel and racks will occur more than anticipated– Removal of fuel from Unit 4 and moving fuel from Common Pool to casks must
be coordinated to ensure sufficient space in the Common Pool

• IEG Recommendations will focus on increasing the robustness andconfidence of the overall plan for spent fuel removal– For example, this is a high risk activity ‐ IEG would like to engage with TEPCO toreview the plans in detail, including failure analyses

IRID International Expert Group11

Site Visit• Observations:– Progress can be seen, for example:• Unit 4 spent fuel removal structures and equipment• Removal of rubble from Unit 3 reactor Building• Site access– Radiation protection practices seem overly conservative• Increase worker risks (increased risk of industrial incidents)• Decrease worker productivity• Sends unintended messages to broad community– Efforts still needed to get out of emergency mode

• IEG recommendations will focus on practices to improve worker
efficiency as well as reduce overall worker risk (radiological andindustrial) and worker burden

IRID International Expert Group12

Priority Work Programmes
Operator
1. Trenches
2. Sub Drains
3. Groundwater Bypass
4. Tank Farm management
5. ALPS capacity
6. Cooling water reduction and installation of local water treatment
7. Unit 4 Spent Fuel removal
8. Unit 3 Spent Fuel removal
Strategy and Policy
1. National waste policy
2. Regulatory environment suitable for realities of decommissioning
3. Stakeholder engagement and building public confidence
IRID International Expert Group13

IEG Operations• Observations:– IEG is coming together as a team – complementary skills and experience arebeneficial– IRID and TEPCO support is helpful– Embassy engagement is helpful• IEG recommendations will focus on improving the effectiveness ofIEG meetings

IRID International Expert Group14

Key IEG Recommendations (to IRID, METI & TEPCO)• Review the priorities for Contaminated Water countermeasures andadjust work plan
– Align actions with goals and priorities– Reduce risk of unexpected consequences• Improve expectation management– Improve engagement with stakeholders to improve understanding of risks– Ensure internal work schedules have margin compared to external schedules• Improve clarity of organizational roles and responsibilities among TEPCO,METI, IRID and other key organizations– Ensure Division of Responsibilities of all parties is communicated and understood– Ensure priorities are shared, understood, and communicated• Progress on defining Interim and End States is critical– Provide direction for ongoing activities– Requires addressing national policy questions• Perform readiness review of plans and bases for performing Unit 4 spentfuel removal– Include outside participation for independence (including IEG)

IRID International Expert Group15

Looking Ahead – Next IEG Meeting• At next meeting, IEG desires to engage on:– Roadmap, in particular Interim and End States to be included in next revision– Development of IRID
– Design processes– Fault scenarios for fuel removal– Fuel debris removal

IRID International Expert Group16