Toward Post-Fukushima No. 12

12. Nuclear Regulation in Japan after Fukushima
Gail H. Marcus
Consultant, USAFirst, I want to express my condolences to the(MITI). The second was as a visiting researcher atJapanese people on the horrific events of thethe Tokyo Institute of Technology, where I did aearthquake and tsunami of March 11, as well ascomparative study of nuclear regulation in Japanmy admiration of the bravery of the workers whoand the United States.

have been, and still are, fighting to control theensuing effects of those events on the Fukushima
Dai-ichi nuclear power plants.

I believe Japan needs to consider the following as
it addresses the reform of the regulatory system:

Among the many things being examined in theaftermath of the Fukushima accident is the1. Independence is critical, but
independence has several dimensions.

organization of the nuclear regulatory structure in

Independence is important for many government

Japan In particular, experts both within andfunctions, but it is particularly critical where theoutside Japan have called for the consolidation of

public health and safety is concerned. The

all regulatory activities in Japan under a singleregulatory organization must be structured to beindependent authority. I have long believed thatindependent of pressures to make decisions based

this would be a good idea, and I would like to use

on economic or other factors.

this opportunity to discuss this proposal.
The discussion of independence usually focuses
My own understanding of regulatory issues

on independence from the regulated industry. This

comes from about 15 years working at the US

is important, but at the same time, a regulator

Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), including

must also be independent of other government

almost 5 years working for a Commissioner, andagencies and from the political process. That is,from 3 years as Deputy Director-General of thesafety decisions must not be unduly influenced byOECD Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA). I also havespecial interests of any kind.

an appreciation of the situation in Japan based on
two assignments in Tokyo. The first was as aliaison

Regulatory

When I joined the NRC, I had a boss who

Commission (NRC) to its counterpart regulatory

thought that talking to people from industry wasorganization within the Agency for Natural

talking to the “enemy.” Fortunately, most people atResources and Energy (ANRE) of what was then

NRC did not think so. In fact, the prevailingthe Ministry of International Trade and Industry

philosophy was that it was important to gain an

1

fromtheUS

Nuclear

2. Independence does not mean isolation.

Copyright © JAPAN NUS CO., LTD. All Rights Reserved

Toward Post-Fukushima No. 12

understanding of the facts and opinions of allinterestedparties,

includinglicensees.

achieve.

This

perspective was captured in NRC's Principles ofGood Regulation, which I further discussed in an
earlier essay for JANUS.

5. There are several ways to implement an
independent regulatory organization.
Most countries with nuclear power plants
started out with regulatory organizations that, like

3. A counterpart to independence is the needfor transparency.
The other side of the coin is that the regulatory

Japan today, were part of the agencies that had
developed

nucleararrangements

power.

raisedOvertime,

thesequestions

about

theprocess must be open and transparent. This iscredibility of the safety oversight, and many

particularly important in helping the publiccountriesunderstand that decisions are arrived at on aorganizations, although in different ways, tological, objective basis and are not influenced byseparate them from other government functions as

special interests. Transparency can take several

well as from a chain of command that could allow

forms, including soliciting public input throughinappropriate political influence.

have

restructured

theirregulatory

formal processes, holding meetings open to thepublic,

providing

toTherefore, as Japan looks at reforming its

otherregulatory structure, they will have to evaluate astakeholders, and providing reports that document

variety of structures in place around the world andthetheto choose a structure that that will work within thethe issues raised from public

context of the organization and operation of thecommunications
technical

thewithbases

disposition of all

publicaccesslicensees
foranddecisionsandcomments.

Japanese government.

4. Regulation across an area should beconsistent and coordinated.

6. Japan will need to address some special
government characteristics.

One special problem in Japan is that there are

There are two characteristics of the Japanesecurrently

3organizations

thecivil service that will bear special attention. The

regulation of nuclear activities － the Nuclear

first is that most government positions are held bySafety Commission in the Prime Minister’s officegeneralists rather than specialists in a field, andfor basic nuclear safety policy; the Nuclear

the second is the system of amakudari, whereby

Industrial Safety Agency (NISA) in the Ministry of

there is an institutionalized outplacement ofEconomics,

Tradeandisindividuals from government to industry at the end

responsibleforinspection,andof their government careers. Both of theseenforcement for nuclear power plants; and thecharacteristics present difficult challenges, as theNuclear Safety Division of the Ministry ofpractices cross the whole government system andEducation,cannot be reformed completely in the short term.

Sports,involved

Industry

Culture,in(METI)

oversight

ScienceandTechnology (MEXT) for experimental and research
reactors. Although these three agencies do work

However, consideration must be given to thewith each other, the fact that the regulatory

effect of these characteristics on the government’sactivities are in separate organizations makes

independence

coordination and consistency more difficult toregulation, and ways must be found to limit or2andtransparency

innuclear

Copyright © JAPAN NUS CO., LTD. All Rights Reserved

Toward Post-Fukushima No. 12

overcome the concerns they raise for nuclear
regulation.

I do want to end with one caution － theregulatory structure is only one element of a large
and complex system associated with nuclear safety.

7. Institutional reform is only one step.

Reforming the organization will not by itself

Reorganizing the nuclear regulatory structure

guarantee absolute safety, or even absolute publicand making fundamental changes in the way aconfidence. I should note that the US NRC, despite

government agency operates are big steps. Someallwould question why they are necessary. After all, itindependence, is still periodically criticized foris hard to say how, if at all, the regulatory

being too close to industry. I can, of course, argue

structure or operations affected the course of thethat many of those criticisms are unfounded, butaccident and its aftermath. However, whether orthat is not the point.

thebarriersandprecautions

toassure

not these factors would have affected events at
Fukushima, a number of allegations and concerns

The point is that regulatory reform must be part

have been raised that suggest that there areof a larger and ongoing process of change. It is one

underlying problems in the way the system has

step of many, and like the other steps, will require

worked in the past. Furthermore, these factors

continued attention to ensure that the spirit of thehave definitely affected public confidence in thereform is sustained. This is a large task and a very

willingness and ability of the government to makeimportant one. It could have a profound effect on

the tough decisions a regulator needs to make.

the future economic and social wellbeing of Japan,

That alone makes the effort to reform the system

and I wish Japan every success as they embark on

necessary and important.

this path. Gambatte kudasai!
I will continue to address this issue in my blog
at: http://www.nukepowertalk.blogspot.com/
August 2011

3

Copyright © JAPAN NUS CO., LTD. All Rights Reserved