Senior IAEA official Graham Andrew said that the overall situation remained “very serious” and that the U.N. atomic watchdog was concerned it had not received some information from Japan about the Fukushima nuclear plant.
“We have not received validated information for some time related to the containment integrity of unit 1. So we are concerned that we do not know its exact status,” he said.
The IAEA also lacks data on the temperatures of the spent fuel pools of reactors 1, 3 and 4, he said, though Japan was supplying other updates.
Now here’s a quote from the IAEA website about their own role in the whole situation. Once again, pay attention to the bold.
IAEA Director General’s Statement to the Board of Governors, 21 March 2011 (about halfway down the page) http://www.iaea.org/newscenter/statements/2011/amsp2011n007.html
Since the accident, I have tried to address some widespread misconceptions in the media about the IAEA’s role in nuclear safety. These misunderstandings fuelled some criticism of the Agency’s response, which was not always justified.
I explained that we are not a “nuclear safety watchdog” and that responsibility for nuclear safety lies with our Member States. The IAEA acts as a hub for international cooperation, helping to establish safety standards and providing expert advice on best practice. But, in contrast to the Agency’s role in nuclear non-proliferation, nuclear safety measures are applied voluntarily by each individual country and our role is supportive.
Can’t get more clear than that. I’m not saying that the Reuters article doesn’t say valid things, but it’s small things like that that make me question how much trust I can put into any news organization.