18 June 2012

Yoshinori Moriyama

Deputy Director-General for Nuclear Accident Measures

NISA, Japan

Nuclear and Industrial Safety

Agency Ministry of Economy, Trade and

Industry

International Experts’ Meeting on

Enhancing Transparency and

Communication Effectiveness in

the event of a Nuclear or

Radiological Emergency

Lessons Learned from the Accident at

TEPCO 's Fukushima Dai-ichi Nuclear

Power Station and Measures for

Improvements Concerning Public Relations

1. NISA’s Experiences from the Response to

the Accident

2. How did the People and Media Judge

NISA's Public Relations?

3. NISA’s Future Efforts and Approaches

Based on Experiences

4. Conclusions

Contents

1-1. NISA's Experiences from the Response to the Accident

Extremely difficult situation for public relations

The Fukushima Nuclear Accident is a complex disaster.

(1) The operator's and the government's insufficient

preparedness for a complex disaster

(2) Need to cope with an earthquake, a tsunami and a

nuclear accident at the same time.

(3) Prolonged unavailability of infrastructure over a large

region (electricity, telecommunications and traffic)

Exceptionally difficult situations to gather

information and to communicate

(4) Resource allocation problems

1-2 Public relations by NISA(1)

Immediately after the accident (March 11)

- The first briefing after 30 minutes of the earthquake

occurrence

- 15 briefings within 24 hours

Need to quickly understand plant status and draw up

prospects for the future.

Unavailability of information about plant status due to SBO.

Unavailability of normal communication network.

NISA’s first and biggest difficulties were inabilities to

gather information and make necessary contacts.

NISA’s core public relations = press briefings for journalists Public relations changed according to the progress of the accident

1-3 Public relations by NISA(2)

One week from the second day (March 12 and later)

Press briefings were held 2 or 3 times a day.

NISA's

spokesperson

and a decision

maker in

different

places was a

big problem.

(1) Occurrence of hydrogen explosions.

Suspicions about the capability to cool the

spent fuel pools.

- Raised concerns

- Strong interest in the prospects for

the settlement of the accident

(2) Need for accurately understanding the

radioactive contamination among the

residents evacuated.

(3) Not working sufficiently to effect sharing

information between decision makers and

the secretariat of the Nuclear Emergency

Response Headquarters.

1-4 Public relations by NISA (3)

Institutional design without consideration of a complex disaster

Why couldn’t the decision maker and the persons in charge of

public relations share information adequately?

1-5 Improvement of response to media (after April 25)

Information provision and the explanation were

comprehensively implemented

for various topics.

(1) Joint press conferences at the head office of TEPCO,

held by the government and TEPCO

- Heavy attendance of major newspapers, TV

stations, freelance journalists and Internet media.

- Conferences lasted several hours.

- Information provision and Q&A there and then.

(2) Briefings by NISA were also held at NISA in the same

way as the joint press conferences with the same

briefer.

1-6 Improvement of response to media (after April 25)

Need to respond to inquiries from the general public

and residents in affected areas

(1) NISA's response to inquiries from the general

public by telephone, around the clock.

(2) NISA’s briefings for local residents

(3) Setting up of a "One-stop consultation contact"

at Local Nuclear Emergency Headquarters.

1-7 Provision of information to international community

Highly appreciate

for IAEA initiatives!

However, NISA was unable to provide

information sufficiently due to

limitations of gathering information at

the initial stage of the accident.

(1) Notified the international

community immediately on the

basis of the Convention on Early

Notification of a Nuclear Accident.

(2) More than 90 briefings for

diplomatic corps in Tokyo

(until December 2011)

(3) 70 press conferences

for foreign media

(until December 2011)

- Staffs from the

secretariat of the IAEA

were dispatched to the

ERC of NISA to

collaborate with us, and

very quickly to help us

provide information.

- The IAEA fact-finding

team led by Dr. Mike

Weightman was also

highly evaluated as

objective information

source.

2 How did People and Media Judge NISA's Public Relations?

Implementation of questionnaire survey

for NISA’s public relations activity

(1) There was doubt that NISA was proactive enough to

disclose information to the public..

(2) NISA was unable to sufficiently respond to the needs

of information receivers.

(3) There was some inadequacy in the organization and

methods of NISA’s briefings.

(4) There were criticisms saying that information

dissemination from NISA was slow compared to that

of real time news media such as TV or the internet.

(5) It was pointed out that information provision in

English tended to be slow.

As a result...

It is necessary to thoroughly reinforce communication

mechanism in case of emergencies. Improvement of the

structure for obtaining information is also needed.

(1) Enhancement of the use of satellite communication, etc. that is

not affected by disasters.

(2) Introduction of video conferencing systems among operators,

the Prime Minister's Office and the regulatory authority.

(3) Dispatch of highly skilled staff from the regulatory authority to

respond to an accident in the operator's emergency operation

center.

Public relations is a keystone

for crisis management in the emergency.

It is important to reconsider and to improve

the crisis management framework.

3-1 How to improve the approaches of NISA’s public relations?

3-2 How to improve the approaches of NISA’s public relations?

It is necessary that the persons in charge of the press

response and the persons responsible for decision making

are in the same place as much as possible.

(1) Consolidation of activities responding

to the media in the case of a major

accident at the prime minister's office.

(2) Holding briefings by the nuclear

regulatory body, following a press

conference at the ministerial level.

Joint Press Conference in

the Government-TEPCO Integrated

Response Office is a good practice.

3-3 How to improve the approaches of NISA’s public relations?

* Nuclear Power Plant

* PAZ 5km

UPZ 30km

EPZ 8-10km

Need to improve the ways to communicate with

local municipalities and residents

As for the local response in the case of an

emergency, a PAZ (5 km) and UPZ (30km) will

replace the EPZ (8 to 10 km) that had been in

use before.

(1) Expansion of the applicable regions, increase

of numbers of the local authorities, and draft

new emergency preparedness plans.

(2) Improvement of communication with local

authorities and residents during normal times.

(3) Further efforts to make people understand the

emergency preparedness measures also

during normal times. EPZ: Emergency Planning Zone

PAZ: Precautionary Action Zone

UPZ: Urgent Protective Action Planning Zone

3-4 How to improve the approaches of NISA’s public relations?

NISA's organization for public relations activity was weak.

- Improvements of the organization and enhancement of

the human resources

- Upgrade of response capability of spokespersons

- Retaining spokespersons for international public

relations

- Enhancement of support systems for spokespersons in

emergencies

- Retaining a dedicated team for analysis and evaluation

of the accident. This team will provide information

appropriately to the emergency response team and the

public relations team.

3-5 How to improve the approaches of NISA’s public relations?

(3) New media tools

- The role of new media based on the

internet is growing. (Twitter, Facebook

and the like.)

- Response to these media and their use

are challenges.

(1) In order to provide the information in a timely

and appropriate manner, prior preparation of

materials is needed, for easily understandable

explanations.

(2) It is necessary to improve communication

with local authorities and residents even at

normal times.

4 Conclusions

(1) A recurrence of accidents like this time must be

prevented by all means. However, in case such an

accident unfortunately happens, public communication is

a key to prevent confusion and ensure the safety of

people, as well as to recover the confidence in nuclear

safety.

(2) Most of the people never imagine nuclear disasters and

the consequences. Therefore, NISA should prepare

materials for easily understandable explanations which

can be used in the emergency.

Public relations is a keystone

for crisis management

in the emergency.

Thank you for your attention