Pacific Islands Forum expert panelist criticizes IAEA's report on release of Fukushima nuclear wastewater

SUVA, July 11 (Xinhua) -- A Pacific Islands Forum (PIF) expert panelist has criticized the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) for ignoring its own principle of justification in its report on Japan's planned dump of nuclear wastewater into the Pacific Ocean, local media reported.

The IAEA final report released last week claimed that the plan "is in conformity with the agreed international standards."

However, the report was criticized by Arjun Makhijani, president of the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research, the Fiji Times reported on Tuesday.

The IAEA report noted that justification is a fundamental principle for the international standards of radiation protection.

"The IAEA has abandoned its responsibility to review the justification of actions, even though it is part of the fundamental safety principles," Makhijani said.

Makhijani, a nuclear engineer who has half a century of expertise, said that he has raised his concerns with the IAEA as part of the PIF expert panel.

The IAEA said in the report that the controlled, gradual release as planned by the Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) would have a "negligible radiological impact on people and the environment."

"The IAEA is refusing to acknowledge its responsibility, and basically abandoning the countries of the Pacific region to whatever mercies the government of Japan might offer them," he said.

The TEPCO has yet to confirm a start date for dumping the wastewater as Japan aims to start to do so around this summer.

The IAEA is set to meet with Pacific leaders next week, The Fiji Times said.

The PIF independent scientific experts and the IAEA held the second technical dialogue on Fukushima wastewater last month.

During the meeting, the PIF experts said that the lack of TEPCO research into Fukushima nuclear wastewater discharge on marine species, which are more common to the Pacific Forum nations, left them unable to provide an informed decision to PIF members on a priority gap around the ecosystem and food security impacts.