Case studies: Experience in Japan [Factors affecting public and political acceptance for the implementation of geological disposal]

One-third of the total electricity produced in Japan comes from 53 nuclear power reactors. The basic Energy Plan states that nuclear fuel cycle will be promoted as national policy that includes reprocessing spent fuel. At the present, spent fuels are stored at each reactor site and an interim storage facility in Rokkasho, where they await reprocessing. Some spent nuclear fuel has been reprocessed in Japan, and the vitrified waste is currently being stored. Some of the HLW from fuel reprocessed in France has been being shipped back and is stored at Rokkasho. Other high-level waste is waiting in the U.K. for its return to Japan. An administrative framework for the utilization of nuclear energy in Japan was established in 1956. By 1962, two realistic alternatives for final disposal of radioactive waste were proposed: dumping the waste into the deep ocean and disposing of the waste in deep underground repositories. By the mid-1970s to 1980s, geological disposal gradually came to be recognized as the most probable option for the management of HLW. In 1976, Japan's Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) published comprehensive guidelines including some key elements relating to geological disposal. In 1980, the Special Committee of the AEC indicated a stepwise procedure (revised in 1985) for geological disposal. In 1987, the AEC, in its long-term programme report on research, development and utilization of nuclear energy (LTP), recommended the establishment of an implementing organization, a clear allocation of responsibilities among the related organizations and a site selection process with a sufficient degree of public support and understanding. Legislative framework, history, technical factor, structural factor, and process factor are discussed. Concerning the behavioural factor it is reported that it is unlikely that a community will consider hosting a repository unless local decision-makers and the public have sufficient information and expertise to make an appropriate judgment. NUMO (the implementing organization) believes that it is therefore essential to set up a framework by which critical information can be accessed by the interested public. Such information includes the overall and detailed schedules for siting, safety principles and plans for the promotion of the local economy and infrastructure, both by the government and the implementing organization. Accordingly, NUMO has established a rule of conduct for information disclosure