hankyoreh

IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi shakes hands with those attending an event regarding the disposal of irradiated water from the Fukushima nuclear power plant held in Japan’s Fukushima Prefecture on July 5. (Yonhap)

The Hankyoreh’s examination of the document shows that the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) published its final report on the discharge of radioactive water from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant into the ocean after only completing one round of sample analysis of the contaminated water, despite previously promising to carry out three rounds of safety reviews for the release.

Moreover, the IAEA released its final report even though the results of its environmental sample analysis, conducted in order to corroborate environmental monitoring results, had yet to come out. Critics say the IAEA undermined the credibility of its own report by coming to the conclusion that dumping the irradiated water into the ocean is fine even before analyses of its core samples were completed.

In its final report made public on Tuesday, regarding its plan to conduct three rounds of sample analysis of the irradiated water, the IAEA revealed that “a report including the analysis of these samples” — the second and third samples collected in October 2022 — “is expected to be published later in 2023.”

Sample analysis is part and parcel of “independent sampling, data corroboration, and analysis,” one of three components of a safety review. In other words, the IAEA released its final report even though analyses of its second and third samples of the radioactive water have yet to be completed.

Previously, in its third interim report published in December 2022, the IAEA had revealed that it would collect and analyze a total of three samples of the Fukushima water in accordance with its safety review process. As per this plan, an IAEA task force collected samples of the radioactive water through the Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO), once in March 2022 and twice in October 2022.

Through its sixth interim report published in May this year, the IAEA revealed that, according to analyses of the first radioactive water sample collected in March 2022 conducted at four different laboratories around the world including an IAEA-affiliated lab and the Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety (KINS), radionuclides other than tritium were not detected beyond the safety limit. As this first sample was collected from the K4-B tank group, which TEPCO deemed ready for discharge, after it had been homogenized for 14 days with circulation and agitation equipment, observers had commented that this result was as expected.

But results of analyses of the second and third radioactive water samples collected in October have yet to come out. The two samples were collected from the G4S-B10 and G4S-C8 tanks, standard storage tanks for water processed by the Advanced Liquid Processing System (ALPS), without undergoing circulation and agitation for sample homogenization. The results of their analyses were scheduled to be submitted to the IAEA earlier this year.

The IAEA’s final report was released when analysis results of not just radioactive water samples, but environmental samples have yet to come out. The IAEA had collected environmental samples such as seawater, marine sediment, fish, and seaweed last November, saying it would “corroborate the data from TEPCO and the Government of Japan associated with the ALPS treated water discharge.”

But IAEA’s Tuesday report only mentioned that “the results from the first ILC for environmental samples [. . .] will be available later in 2023.” In a sense, the IAEA reached the conclusion that dumping the irradiated water would have “a negligible radiological impact on people and the environment” when the accuracy and credibility of data submitted by Japan haven’t been fully corroborated.

Even more, the results of interlaboratory comparisons (ILC) conducted by the IAEA to determine occupational radiation exposure haven’t come out yet either. “Occupational radiation protection” is one of eight technical subjects of IAEA safety reviews. The IAEA announced that results of occupational radiation exposure ILCs would be provided later this year as well.

Experts criticized the IAEA for concluding that Japan’s plan to release irradiated water into the sea is “consistent with international safety standards” even before completing its analyses of core samples. Han Byeong-seop, the director of the Institute for Nuclear Safety, especially took issue with the fact that the contaminated water underwent only one round of sample analysis.

“Conducting three rounds of sample analysis in order to reach reliable results is a universal principle in chemical analysis, which is probably why the IAEA said it would carry out three rounds [of sample analysis],” Han said, adding, “But by releasing a report with only one round of analysis completed, [the IAEA] has proved for itself that the results of its analysis are insignificant.”

Another safety regulations expert who previously worked for KINS remarked, “I suspect that the IAEA caved to Japan’s wish to have the report as soon as possible by cutting short its service period and announcing results that haven’t even been reached yet,” stressing that “this is a matter of credibility.”

By Kim Jeong-su, senior staff writer

Please direct questions or comments to [english@hani.co.kr]