It’s expected to take 10 years for the U.S. nuclear industry to discover “substantive results” from the meltdowns at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear facility, according to Electric Power Research Institute vice president Neil Wilmshurst. The industry is running tests on the Japanese nuclear plants and helping the facility’s owner, TEPCO, filter the radioactivity out of the water, Wilmshurst told Nuclear Regulatory Commission members Oct. 11. The commission entertained both industry stakeholders and environmentalists to review what steps it should undertake for the domestic nuclear power industry in the wake of the meltdowns in Japan last March. Industry representatives repeated calls for the commission to refrain from strict orders--allowing nuclear plant owners flexibility in their response to emergency situations. “Flexibility is not going to work,” Ed Lyman, Union of Concerned Scientists, senior staff scientist, riposted. Environmentalists called on the commission to issue clear requirements for seismic and flooding hazards, as well as to delineate evacuation zones with funded emergency response in areas like New York City (near the Indian Point nuclear reactor). In California, the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station general area of impact contains about 7.4 million people, according to Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA). Although regulators have had seven months since the Fukushima Daiichi disaster to contemplate what should be done domestically, NRC staff is not advocating a quick response. By the end of 2011, staff said that a memo should go out to nuclear plant owners--like Southern California Edison and Pacific Gas & Electric, whose facilities are near earthquake faults--to request them to evaluate their sites and take a look at vulnerabilities. “And see, what actions, if any, are needed to upgrade the sites,” Eric Leeds, NRC director, office of nuclear reactor regulation, said. Since the commission initiated its Japan Task Force to digest “lessons learned” from Fukushima Daiichi, regulators are increasingly focusing on the potential use of “walk downs” to identify potential sources of failure in nuclear plants in the case of emergencies, like earthquakes. It was clear in the NRC meeting this week that there is no firm prescription of a walk down. It’s a term of art that the commission staff “envisions,” but lacks a solid definition.