"japan’s current nuclear energy policy" - hirobumi kayama

Japan’s current Nuclear Energy Policy

Hirobumi Kayama

Agency for Natural Resources and Energy, METI

March, 2015

1. Nuclear Energy Policy in the New Strategic Energy Plan of Japan

2. Efforts and Challenges of Japanese Nuclear Energy Policy

2-1. Efforts toward Decommissioning and Contaminated Water Management

of TEPCO’s Fukushima Daiichi NPS

2-2. Existing Light Water Reactors

2-3. Reconstruction of Safety Culture

2-4. Promotion of Strategic Development of Technologies and Human

Resources

2-5. Nuclear Fuel Cycle and Fast Reactor R&D

2-6. Establishment of Appropriate Business Environment under the More

Competitive Market

Table of contents

2. Basic policy regarding measures concerning energy supply and demand

1. Issues related to the energy supply-demand structure in Japan

① Concerns over the safety of nuclear power generation and deteriorated public confidence in the

government and operators

② Outflow of national wealth and increase in dependency on the Middle East, price of electricity and

greenhouse gas emission in Japan due to higher dependency on fossil fuels

③ North America's move toward independency of its energy supply by the shale-gas revolution and

widening gap of regional energy prices in the world

・We will do our utmost to achieve the reconstruction and recovery of Fukushima while reflecting on the

pains felt by the people affected by the accident at TEPCO’s Fukushima nuclear accident. Needless to

say, that is the starting point for rebuilding Japan’s energy policy.

Introduction

① To pursue "Energy Security", "Economic Efficiency" and "Environment" on the premise of "Safety" as

the basic viewpoint, in consideration of "global viewpoint" and "economic growth“

② "Multilayered" supply structure where the strength of each energy source is to be maximized by

appropriately offsetting each other's weakness

③ More "flexible and efficient" energy supply-demand structure where various options are to be prepared

by various suppliers 2

＜Description in the Strategic Energy Plan of Japan＞


Decided by the Cabinet in April, 2014

Nuclear power is an important base-load power source as a low carbon and quasi-domestic energy source, contributing to stability of energy supply-demand structure, on the major premise of ensuring of its safety, because of the perspectives;

i. superiority in stability of energy supply and efficiency,

ii. low and stable operational cost and

iii. free from GHG emissions during operation.


3


Ref.) Constitution of Electric Power Supply Corresponding to Demand

Dependency on nuclear power generation will be lowered to the extent possible by energy saving and introducing renewable energy as well as improving the efficiency of thermal power generation, etc. Under this policy, GOJ will carefully examine a volume of electricity to be secured by nuclear power generation, taking Japan’s energy constraints into consideration, from the viewpoint of stable energy supply, cost reduction, global warming and maintaining nuclear technologies and human resources.


4


○In light of the evaluation of characteristic of each energy source, GOJ will show the energy mix quickly after assessing the prospects for the restart of nuclear power plants, status of introduction of renewable energy and international discussions on global warming including those for the Conferences of the Parties (COP)

○GOJ has started discussion on the energy mix in the Advisory Committee for Natural Resources and Energy and established a new experts’ Working Group to examine cost of each power source.

December 25, 2014

Secretariat of the Team for Countermeasures for Decommissioning and Contaminated Water Treatment

On December 22, 2014, all fuel

removal from Unit 4 was completed. Fuel removal from Unit 4 SFP

commenced on November 18, 2013.

Removal of spent fuel assemblies was

completed on November 5, 2014, and

removal of non-irradiated fuel assemblies

was completed on December 22, 2014.

Main works and steps for decommissioning

Fuel removal from Unit 4 SFP has been completed. Preparatory works to remove fuel from Unit

1-3 SFP and fuel debris* removal are ongoing.

Fuel Removal

from SFP

Fuel Debris

(Corium) Removal

Dismantling

Facilities

Storage and

handling Fuel removal

Installing

FHM*

Rubble removal

& dose reduction

Storage and handling

Fuel debris removal

Stop leakage Dose reduction

& Leakage

identification

Dismantling

Design &

Manufacturing

of devices/

equipment

Scenario

development

& technology

consideration

Unit 4 Unit 3 Unit 1&2

FHM*: Fuel-Handling Machine Unit 1-3

Unit 1: FY2017 Fuel removal will start (under consideration)

Unit 2: After FY2017 Fuel removal will start (under consideration)

Unit 3: FY2015 Fuel removal will start (planned)

Unit 4: 2014 Fuel removal was completed

After FY2017

Water stoppage of PCV lower

part (under consideration)

*Fuel assemblies melted through in the accident.

Fuel removal from SFP

移送済み燃料（体）

1533/1533 Fuel removal has been completed on

December 22nd, 2014

(Fuel-removal operation)

5

2-1. Efforts toward Decommissioning and Contaminated Water Management of TEPCO’s

Fukushima Daiichi NPS

December 25, 2014

Secretariat of the Team for Countermeasures for Decommissioning and Contaminated Water Treatment

Freezing plant

Three principles behind contaminated water countermeasures

1. Eliminate contamination sources

2. Isolate water from contamination

(1) Multi-nuclide removal equipment

(3) Pump up ground water for bypassing

(4) Pump up ground water near buildings

(5) Land-side frozen walls

(6) Waterproof pavement

(7) Soil improvement by sodium silicate

(8) Sea-side impermeable walls

(9) Increase tanks (welded-joint tanks)

(2) Remove contaminated water in the trench*

＊Underground tunnel containing pipes.

3. Prevent leakage of contaminated water Multi-nuclide removal equipment (ALPS） • This equipment removes radionuclides

from the contaminated water in tanks, and reduces risks.

• It aims to reduce the levels of 62 nuclides in contaminated water to the legal release limit or lower (tritium cannot be removed.)

• Furthermore, additional multi-nuclide removal equipment is installed by TEPCO (operation started September 2014) as well as a subsidy project of the Japanese Government (operation started October 2014.)

Land-side impermeable walls with frozen soil • The walls surround the buildings with frozen

soil and reduce groundwater inflow into the

same. • On-site tests have been conducted since last August.

Construction work started in June and the freezing

operation will start within FY2014.

• The walls aim to prevent the flow of

contaminated groundwater into the sea. •Installation of steel sheet piles is almost (98%)

complete. The closure time is being coordinated. (Length: approx. 1,500m)

Impermeable walls with frozen soil

Sea-side impermeable walls

6

2-1. Efforts toward Decommissioning and Contaminated Water Management of TEPCO’s

Fukushima Daiichi NPS


1. On the premise that safety comes before everything else and that every possible effort is made to resolve the people’s concerns, judgment as to whether nuclear power plants meet the new regulatory requirements will be left to the Nuclear Regulation Authority (NRA)

2. In case that the NRA confirms the conformity of nuclear power plants with the new regulatory requirements ,which are of the most stringent level in the world, GOJ will follow NRA’s judgment and will proceed with the restart of the nuclear power plants.

3. Examining an appropriate business environment, where nuclear power operators can realize smooth decommissioning, prompt safety measures, stable supply of electricity, etc. under the liberalized electricity markets.


7

8

Nuclear Power Plants in Japan (As of March, 2015)


**Based on “the Basic Act on Disaster Control Measures” and “the Act on

Special Measures concerning Nuclear Emergency Preparedness”

Preparation and enhancement of the disaster prevention and evacuation plan

*Not required by the nuclear reactor law

Safety Reviews and Inspections process of NRA

Local acceptance process * No legal requirements

Local acceptance process

Disaster prevention and evacuation plan

*Not a legal

prerequisites for restart

Date Reactor Applicant

Sep. 10th 2014

Sendai NPS, Unit 1 and 2

Kyusyu Electric Power

Feb. 12th 2015

Takahama NPS, Unit 3 and 4

Kansai Electric Power

Permitted reactors

Review of basic design and

concept (for permission of reactor

installment license change)

Review of detailed

design (for approval of

construction works plan)

Assessment of Operation

management systems, etc.

(for approval of operational safety programs

Outline of processes for restart of NPPs


10

2. Disaster prevention and evacuation plan • A regional disaster prevention plan (including evacuation plan) against nuclear disaster should be

formulated by local authorities based on the Basic Act on Disaster Control Measures.

• Although formulation of regional disaster prevention plan is not a legal requirement for restart, the plan is important to ensure safety of local residents. The government supports local authorities to make a sufficient plan.

• Kyushu Electric Power submitted its application to make changes to the reactor installment license of Sendai NPS Unit 1 and 2 in July 2013.

• NRA compiled a draft evaluation report in 16th July 2014 which admits that Sendai NPPs satisfies new regulatory requirements.

• After the public comment process (until 15th August) and reviewing of the submitted opinions, NRA granted a permission(changes to the reactor installment license) in 10th September for the basic design and safety features of Sendai NPPs.

• Sendai NPPs can be restarted after i) acquiring approval of the detailed design and construction of the nuclear reactors and ii) completing pre-service inspection of operational safety programs.

1. NRA’s Safety Review Sendai NPP

18,600 page document was reviewed & 62 review meetings were held for 110 hours

3. Local Consent of the restart of Sendai NPPs • Both the governor of Kagoshima prefecture and Mayor of Satsumasendai City, hosting Sendai NPPs,

approved the restart of the NPPs, which means the local consent process was completed for those two reactors.

(Ref) Efforts towards restart of Sendai NPPs

1. Nuclear industry as well as GOJ must shed the so-called “safety myth”, and

pursue the world’s highest level of safety for operations through continuous and

voluntary safety improvement.

2. The industrial circles, including nuclear operators, need to set up business

schemes to persistently pursue safety and make efforts to foster safety culture

that places top priority on the safety of nuclear facilities.

3. Each nuclear power operator, with a firm resolve that it will never let another

nuclear accident to happen, should establish an appropriate risk management

system and implement objective and quantitative risk assessments such as

probabilistic risk assessment (PRA).

11


2-3. Reconstruction of safety culture

A METI’s Advisory Committee published the proposals on what the industry’s initiative to voluntarily improve safety should look like were on 30th of May 2014.

12

Proposals for Voluntary and Continuous Improvement of Nuclear Safety (May 30, 2014)

（１）Implementation of risk management under an appropriate risk governance framework

（２）Activities required to be implemented based on lessons learned from the accident at TEPCO’s Fukushima Daiichi NPS as the starting point

①Implementation of exhaustive and comprehensive risk assessments including low-frequency events

②Reduction of residual risk through strengthening “defense in depth”

③Identifying the accident sequences and cliff edges at each plant, focusing on external events such as earthquakes and tsunamis, which are particular to Japan’s geographical conditions, and improving resilience including response to, and recovery from unexpected incidents that are not properly addressed by the existing ordinary system

④Reorganization of research for improving the safety of light-water reactors that are commercially operated in Japan and reinforcement of research coordination among organizations at home and abroad

（３）Attitudes especially required to steadily proceed with these activities and have them take root

①Creation of an organizational culture with a critical mind and power of imagination concerning residual risks

②Swiftly introducing state-of-the-art information and opinions from both home and abroad, and making Japan’s efforts known overseas

③Involvement of external stakeholders

④ Improving human and intelligence bases across industr

⑤ Sharing roadmaps to be constructed by each industrial actor based on the WG’s proposals and pursuing for the overall optimization through constantly monitoring actions based on the roadmaps and continuously revising the roadmaps

2-3. Reconstruction of safety culture :

Proposals for Voluntary and Continuous Improvement of Nuclear Safety

Outline of NRRC

- Established within the Central Research Institute of Electric Power Industry (CRIEPI) on October 1,2014 (Number of staff： About 110)

- Utilizing PRA, this center is to perform R&D of safety-enhancing technologies which is beyond merely fulfilling regulatory requirements and to examine and propose effective problem-solving measures at individual plant, etc.

- The authorities of nuclear safety with strong leadership experience were invited to serve as the NRRC’s executives.

Head: Dr. George Apostolakis

Executive Advisor: Dr. Richard A. Meserve

Chairman of Technical Advisory Committee: Mr. John W. Stetkar

13

2-3. Reconstruction of safety culture :

Establishment of the Nuclear Risk Research Center (NRRC)

Ref.) Role of NRRC

14

To support utilities, NRRC will - Develop modern PRA methodologies and infrastructure - Investigate mechanism, frequency and consequences of external natural hazards - Continuously be aware of and identify new risks

Production cycle of NRRC R&D outcomes

Issues to be solved to continuously improve

safety

Utilize NRRC’s R&D outputs to risk-informed decision

making

Utility’s Risk Management process

Continuous safety improvement

Outcomes 1

Gap Analysis

Identify what should be done by NRRC until when

Develop research plan/roadmap NRRC

resources

Do R&D

Produce R&D outputs

Confirm utilities’ efforts

Outcomes

2 Center of excellence

methodology model data

knowledge Skilled researchers

Trust from stakeholders

Outcomes 3

NRRC Utilities Stakeholders

Institutions - International - domestic

state-of-practice state-of-the-art

Information

release

Presentation Material of Dr. Apostlakis

Working Group on Voluntary Improvement of Safety,

Technology and Human Resource (The 5th Meeting)


Resources

1. Maintaining and developing high-level nuclear technologies and human resources is imperative for smoothly decommissioning aged nuclear power plants, which are expected to increase in the future, as well as TEPCO’s Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plants.

2. Because enhancing the nuclear safety in surrounding countries ensures the safety of Japan, maintaining and developing high-level nuclear technologies and human resources which enable Japan contribute to their safety enhancement is essential.

3. GOJ promotes the development of technologies that contribute to safety improvement of LWRs including countermeasures against severe accidents and enhance their reliability and efficiency in order to reduce risks in case of an accident.

4. Under international cooperation, GOJ also facilitates R&D of nuclear technologies that serves the safety improvement of nuclear use, such as high-temperature gas-cooled reactors which are expected to be utilized in various industries including hydrogen production and which has an inherent safety.

15


16


Resources: Basic Policy for Formulation of Light Water Reactor Safety

Technology and Human Resource Roadmap

A METI’s Advisory Committee has conducted an active discussions for formulating the “Light Water Reactor Safety Technology and Human Resource Roadmap” in April or May 2015.

○ “Light Water Reactor Safety Technology and Human Resource Roadmap” should be formulated in full consideration of the lessons learnt from the experiences of the accident at TEPCO’s Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station, so that the public can feel confident of safety of light water reactors.

○ In order to define items of technology development and to maintain and develop human resources to

support these items, firstly we need to present challenges in realizing enhancement of the public confidence in the safety of the light water reactors and safe and continuous use of the reactors; then we need to reconstruct the roadmap by reviewing the priority of the existing technology development and schedule, with considering whether they can contribute to resolve the challenges.

○ Also, “Light Water Reactor Safety Technology and Human Resource Roadmap” should be able to

realize the optimal approach, by clarifying roles among the parties concerned such as academic societies, the government, operators, manufacturers, and research institutes; and by eliminating overlapping of roles in Japan as a whole. Furthermore, in order to obtain the highest level of outcomes with eliminating overlapping of the roles in research and development, elements of necessary international collaborative researches should be actively incorporated into the roadmap, in full consideration of the trend of the global research and development and human resource development.

＜Description in the Basic Policy for Formulation of the Roadmap＞

1. GOJ will make efforts to reduce the volume and harmfulness of radioactive waste and create a nuclear fuel cycle that contributes to effective utilization of resources while adequately taking the past history into consideration and continuing to seek the understanding of relevant municipalities and the international community and will promote reprocessing and plutonium use in LWRs.

2. Specifically, GOJ will promote plutonium use in LWRs, and proceed with such measures as completion of the Rokkasho reprocessing plant, construction of a MOX fuel processing plant, and completion of the Mutsu interim storage facility on the underlying premise of ensuring safety. GOJ remains committed to the policy of not possessing reserves of plutonium without specified purposes. Also GOJ will promote R&D of fast reactors, etc., through international cooperation with the U.S. and France etc.

3. GOJ will position Monju as an international research center for technological development, such as reducing the amount and toxic level of radioactive waste and technologies related to nuclear nonproliferation. GOJ will take necessary measures for issues to be overcome , such as the re-establishment of systems to implement the above mentioned actions on its own responsibility.


17

2-5. Nuclear Fuel Cycle and Fast Reactor R&D

Electric utilities have aimed to utilize MOX fuel in 16 to 18 NPPs until 2015.

Considering when the NPPs restart and starting operation of Rokkasho reprocessing plant

(RRP), electric utilities are supposed to show new “Plutonium Utilization Plans” before they

start reprocessing to recover plutonium in RRP.

The Kansai Electric Power Co.Takahama-3 （Fukui pref.）[Applied]

The Chugoku Electronic Power Co.Shimane-2（Shimane pref.）[Applied]

Kyushu Electric Power Co.Genkai-3 （Saga pref.）[Applied]

Shikoku Electric Power Co.Ikata-3 （Ehime pref.）[Applied]

Chubu Electric Power Co.Hamaoka-4（Shizuoka pref.）[Applied]

The Japan Atomic Power Co. Tokai Daini（Ibaraki pref.）[Applied]

Hokuriku Electric Power Co.Shika-1 （Ishikawa pref.）

Hokkaido Electric Power Co.Tomari-3 （Hokkaido） J-POWER

Ohma （Aomori pref.）（under construction）

※Operation started in December 2009 ※Operation started in March 2010

Tohoku Electric Power Co.Onagawa-3 （Miyagi pref.）

TEPCO started to use MOX fuel in Fukushima-Daiichi-3 in Oct.2010, but stopped with the Tohoku Earthquake in 2011.In March 2011, TEPCO announced their decision to decommission Fukushima-Daiichi 1-4.

Got the approval of local governments

Before getting approval of local governments

Already loaded※1

※Operation started in January 2011

The Kansai Electric Power Co.Takahama-4（Fukui pref.）[Applied]

The Kansai Electric Power Co. Ohi（1～2 reactors）（Fukui pref.）

The Japan Atomic Power Co.- Tsuruga (1 reactor)（Fukui pref.）

※1 Using MOX fuel treated in France.

※Tokyo Electric Power co.(TEPCO) have planed to operate in 3～4 reactors which are not specified site.[Applied]: Electric utilities have applied for a conformity assessment with the new regulations to NRA.

（Ref）Plutonium utilization in Japan

18


Competitive Market

【Exploring an appropriate business environment under the more competitive environment】

Nuclear operators are also required to

1) maintain high-level nuclear technologies and human resources,

2) smoothly go through decommissioning work, which will increase in the future

3) quickly take the best safety measures in response to regulations reinforced after the TEPCO’s Fukushima nuclear accident and

4) contribute to global warming countermeasures and stable electricity supply utilizing base-load power sources.

Therefore, GOJ will explore an appropriate business environment in which nuclear power operators can meet the above challenges even under the more competitive environment promoted by the electricity system reform, learning lessons from the overseas examples.


19

Bills

1st Reform: passed in Extraordinary Diet in 2013

1) Establishment of the Organization for Cross-

regional Coordination of Transmission Operators

(OCCTO)

2) Action programs for 2nd and 3rd Reforms etc.

2nd Reform: Passed in Ordinary Diet in 2014

1) Full retail competition

2) Revision of applicable and regulations associated with the abolishment of General Electricity Utility system

3rd Reform: Ordinary Diet in 2015

1) Legal unbundling of transmission/distribution sectors

2) Code of Conduct


Competitive Market : Roadmap for Electricity Market Reform in Japan

小売全面自由化

（参入自由化）

Nov. 13,

2013

1st refo

rm

Cab

inet D

ecisio

n o

n th

e P

olicy

on

Electricity Syste

m R

eform

Apr. 2, 2013

Cabinet Decision

Abolishment

of retail tariff

Legal unbundling of

transmission

/distribution sector

（※At around 2015:Transition to new regulatory organizations）

【1st Step】

2015

【2nd Step】

2016

【3rd Step】

2018-2020

2nd refo

rm

3rd refo

rm

The

1st B

ill

(1st bill)

2013

Establishment of the

Organization for Cross-

regional Coordination of

Transmission Operators (OCCTO)

Full retail

competition Period of transitional arrangement for retail tariff

(2nd bill)

2014

(3rd bill)

2015

The

2n

d Bill

Jun. 11,

2014

Construction

Operating Decommis

sion

Operating

start

Early Close Construction

start

Shut down

Close

（original assumption）

＋

－

Nuclear power business requires long and stable payback . The experiences of other countries which have already liberalized their market indicate that it is challenging to pursue "liberalization of electricity market" and "promotion of nuclear power business" at the same time.

• “Nuclear Power in Competitive Electricity Markets (2000)”

by OECD NEA, states

In competitive market , it’s hard to predict long-term

electrical power cost, so that Nuclear power generation,

with long lead time and significant investment cost ,may

have significant investment risk compared with other kind

of power generation.

In Liberalized market, it is unclear to predict future price or

payback of investment. Private investors prefer more

flexible and short-term payback investment.

• In the UK, the electricity market was gradually liberalized

after 1990 and achieved full liberalization in 1999. With

this background as well as with increasing development of

oil and LNG in the North Sea, there were no new

construction of NPPs for 20 years after 1995.

• In the U.S., liberalization of electricity market has been

progressed in each state after 1990. With the decreasing

price of LNG, new construction of NPPs has been

stagnated for a while. Currently there are 4 projects for

new establishment of NPPs .

(2) Influence of liberalized electricity market for Nuclear power generation

(1) Image of the schedule for payback and risk of NPP

21

Additional investment

Early decommission

(Ref.) Nuclear power under the liberalized market

Price set to collect all cost of NPPs including decommission and

disposal of spent fuel. This price will be determined through the

negotiation between utilities and the government.

Price set by averaging forward price in the market

Strike Price

Reference Price

(Summary of FiT CfD in the UK) • The difference between the “Reference Price” (introduced by the market price), and the “Strike Price”

(decided by the utilities and the Government to collect all cost of NPPs including decommission and disposal of spent fuel) will be paid either by the utilities or by the Government, to level the profit and loss of NPPs and to improve the predictability of payout.

In October 2013, EDF Group and the UK Government had reached in principle an agreement on the key commercial terms for an investment contract (Feed in Tariff Contract for Difference (FiT CfD)) of the planned Hinkley Point C new nuclear power plants. (The Terms: 1630kW X 2units, Strike Price: ￡92.5/MWh (￠ 15.7/KWh) for 35years).

And also the UK Infrastructure Guarantee Scheme (IUK) is applicable to new nuclear power plants. In October 2014, the European Commission (EC) concluded such measures (FiT CfD and IUK) for

Hinkley Point nuclear power plants are compatible with EU state-aid rules, if the conditions are partly modified.

Pay the

Difference

to Utilities

Utilities Pay

the Difference

＜Image of CfD＞

Reference Price

Strike Price

(Ref.) Measures taken in UK

22

"japan’s current nuclear energy policy" - hirobumi kayama

Documents

energy security

energy constraints

renewable energy

quasidomestic energy

gap of regional energy

nuclear technologies

basic policy

nuclear fuel cycle