【号外】 発行 2017 年 10 月 「生業を返せ、地域を返せ！」 みんなして 福T島原OKYO発事故被害弁護団 TENov/DecL：03-3379 -20176770
No. 181 NUKECitizens' Nuclear InformationINFO Center Akebonobashi Co-op 2F-B, 8-5 Sumiyoshi-cho, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo国と 162-0065,東電 のJAP責AN任をPhone:認め +81る 3判 3357決 3800を勝 ち Fax:取 +81りま 3 3357した 3801！ URL: http://cnic.jp/english/ e-mail : [email protected]
Outside the Fukushima District Court, plaintiffs hold signs proclaiming their victory
Court recognizes liability of the government and TEPCO（旗だしは、藤原弁護士、関根弁護士、鈴木弁護士が in the Nariwai (livelihoods)つとめました。） Trial The ２０１７年１０月１０日、約４年半の verdict in the "Give us back our審理 wasを経て、 liable「生業を返せ、地域を返せ！」福島 for failure to exercise its regulatory livelihoods, give us back our communities" trial, powers to have TEPCO take countermeasures which原発訴訟 residents（第１陣） of Fukushimaは、判決を迎えました。福島地方裁判所が言い渡した判決は、国 who had become against such an accident. The court alsoと evacuees東電の due法的責任 to the を明確に認めFukushima Daiichi、茨城県の一部地域 Nuclear recognizedの原告にも賠償を認めるなど that TEPCO, the operator of中間指針 FDNPS, Power等に基づく賠償対象地域よりも広い地域を賠償の対象とし、 Station (FDNPS) accident had initiated at was also liable 「自主的避難等対象区域」等for having neglected to take the Fukushima District Court, was handed down due care in establishing appropriate tsunami の原告について賠償金の 上積みを認める内容で、第１陣原告３８２４名のうち、２９０ on October 10. The verdict fully recognized countermeasures at the nuclear power plant. both７名の請求が認められました the government's and Tokyo Electric（詳しくは同封した声明文をご覧ください。） Power The 3,824 plaintiffs in the lawsuit。 included Company裁判長による主文の言い渡し後、法廷を飛び (TEPCO)'s liability for the accident; both出した３人の弁護士が「勝訴」、「国と東電 residents in the Fukushima Prefecture the government for failing to exercise its compulsory evacuation zones as well as 断罪」、「被害救済広げる」と書かれた３枚の旗を大きくかかげると、裁判所の門前で待 responsibility with regard to safety regulations residents in areas of high dose rates comparable at ち構えていた約１０００名の原告FDNPS and TEPCO, as the operatorや of全国 the各地 withから those駆けつ zonesけてく andださ residentsった支援者 inから大き Miyagi, nuclearな歓声が power上がりました。東京・東電本社前 plant, for failure to fulfill its dutyと 沖縄でも同時に旗だしを行い、Ibaraki or Tochigi Prefectures,また、福岡で adjacent to in taking safety measures. も原発なくそう！九州玄海訴訟 と福島原発事故被害救済九州訴訟のみなさんによる 集会 The verdict stated that while the government Contents が持たれ、各地の 原告や支援者と喜びを分かち合いました。 判決日の様子は全国ニュー should have completed estimates for projections Livelihood Trial Victory 1 - 2 of inundation due to a large tsunami by 2002, スや全国紙でも大きく扱われ、関心の高さがうかがわれました。 Kashiwazaki-Kariwa Restart? 2-4 in accordance with the recommendations 判決期日までに裁判所に提出した「公正な判決を求める署名」の数は 「２３４，５６７ 4 - 6 of the government’s Earthquake Research Radiation Exposure Data Headquarters,筆」であり、全国で it did not doこれほど多く so. Since useの国民が注目していることに後押しされた勝訴判決で of these Book Review:Rethinking Nuclear 7 estimatesあったことは言うまでもありません。 would have enabled the prediction Energy of an accident leading to a total loss of power Radiation Exposure Data 2016 8- 9 due to the onslaught of a tsunami that exceeded News Watch 10 - 11 the height of the FDNPS site, the government Who's Who: Naomi Katagiri 12 2 November/December 2017 Nuke Info Tokyo No. 181 those areas. The plaintiffs claimed damages government instructions) was also recognized from the government and TEPCO for having with the stipulation of additional payments to been deprived of a peaceful daily life due to be made over and above the compensations evacuation, demanding that the air dose rate in already paid out. In total, the court ordered the their former homes be returned to the condition government to make payments of 250 million yen existing before the nuclear accident (roughly and TEPCO to pay out 500 million yen. 0.04 milliSieverts). Plaintiffs whose return home The plaintiffs’ association and the lawyer's was considered to be “difficult” also claimed group have appealed to the Sendai High Court “compensation for loss of hometown.” for insufficiencies in the scope and amounts Regarding the demand for “restoration of of the compensations in addition to the ruling the status quo ante” the verdict stated that this dismissing the “restoration of the status quo ante.” “was understandable from a sympathetic point The government and TEPCO have also lodged an of view,” but dismissed the demand by stating appeal, saying that “the verdict is unacceptable,” that, “since the plaintiffs did not specify the and thus the struggle of the evacuated residents content of the actions demanded, the claim is not with regard to the government and TEPCO’s applicable to a civil case.” The “compensation liability is set to continue for some time to come. for loss of hometown” was also not recognized. This is the second verdict to recognize the On the other hand, the court recognized a breach liability of both the government and TEPCO of the right of subsistence for 2,907 plaintiffs for the nuclear accident, following the March and certified the applicable region as larger than 2017 verdict In the Maebashi District Court. In the government’s policy on the geographical September 2017, the Chiba District Court, while scope for compensation. Damages for so-called recognizing the possibility of prediction by the “voluntary evacuation” (people who evacuated government, did not recognize the failure of the on a voluntary basis, not in accordance with government to exercise its regulatory powers.
September 1985, and Unit 7, in July 1997. The The effect of this became more notable the more combined capacity of its seven units is 8,200 the discussions of the subcommittees proceeded. MW, making it the world’s largest single nuclear At the time, the Nuclear and Industrial Safety generating station. Units 6 and 7, in particular, are Agency and the NRA were Japan’s regulatory “advanced boiling water reactors (ABWR)” with institutions for nuclear energy, but while they capacities of 1,356 MW each and recirculation were rather lenient toward TEPCO in their pumps contained within them. reviews, both subcommittees questioned TEPCO Japan’s largest electric power company TEPCO severely, occasionally even getting the national has owned and operated a total of 17 nuclear government to amend its decisions. It was also the reactors in Japan (six at Fukushima Daiichi, prefectural government’s policy to have the views four at Fukushima Daini and seven at KK). The of Niigata’s citizens and residents reflected by the electricity generated by these is all transmitted Technical Committee and its two subcommittees. to the Greater Tokyo Area. None is supplied to On March 11, 2011, right when the either of the prefectures where it is produced. Subcommittee into Earthquake and Ground In August 2002, however, it was revealed that Condition was convening, wouldn’t you know it, TEPCO had altered data from its own inspections, the venue underwent prolonged, major shaking. concealing problems in 29 cases. It continued That was the M9.0 Tohoku earthquake and asserting that safety was its “top priority,” but tsunami off Japan’s Pacific coast. that was clearly a lie. In September 2002, Niigata Prefecture, Kashiwazaki City and Kariwa Village (3) Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Accident all rescinded their agreement for “pluthermal” Verification Work plans at the plant. The following year, in April Niigata’s Technical Committee has turned its 2003, operation of all 17 of TEPCO’s nuclear discussion for the time being to Fukushima reactors was halted. nuclear accident verification work. It has Viewing TEPCO’s concealment of problems as augmented its membership and continues these a serious issue, Niigata Prefecture established the discussions even now. For safe management of “Technical Committee on Nuclear Power Safety KK, it decided that what needed highest priority Management in Niigata Prefecture” (hereinafter, was clarifying the causes and results of the the “Technical Committee”) in February 2003 Fukushima nuclear accident. The four committees with the aim of increasing the prefecture’s investigating the accident, from the Diet, the technical ability when checking KK for safety national government, TEPCO and private citizens, and hazards. Nevertheless, they were unable to submitted their own respective reports, wrapping prevent the disaster resulting from the Chuetsu up their investigations, but Niigata Prefecture offshore earthquake in July 2007. During that was not satisfied with that, and has been trying earthquake, Units 2, 3, 4 and 7 were running, and to clarify all aspects of the Fukushima nuclear they shut down automatically. The other units, accident. 1, 5 and 6, were out of operation for regular The two subcommittees are taking a temporary inspections. break from their discussions because the Technical Committee has put forward six topics and divided (2) Two Subcommittees its members into groups of a few people that are Niigata Prefecture added six new members to the continuing to discuss these. The six topics are Technical Committee in March 2008 to enhance (1) the effects of seismic motion on important it, giving it 14 members in all. In addition, it equipment, (2) critical decisions made, such as to organized two subcommittees under the Technical inject seawater, (3) TEPCO’s earthquake-response Committee. They were the “Subcommittee management, (4) the state of information sharing into Equipment Integrity, Earthquake on issues such as the meltdowns, (5) work under Resistance Safety” (with eight members) high radiation conditions, and (6) severe accident and the “Subcommittee into Earthquake and countermeasures. Six and a half years after the Ground Condition” (with six members). Each earthquake, these discussions are finally shedding subcommittee has several members that take a light on the course of events that delayed public cautious approach to nuclear power, or are even admission of the meltdowns. The discussion of downright critical of it—a stance worthy of topic (1) has come to a climax. Facts are being special mention. Indeed, this situation is without brought to light about damage that the enormous parallel. tsunami fails to explain. 4 November/December 2017 Nuke Info Tokyo No. 181
(4) Newly Elected Governor Yoneyama’s members), whose duty it will be to clarify the Policies causes of the accident. He has also established Ryuichi Yoneyama became Niigata’s newest two new verification committees. They are governor in October 2016, replacing Gov. the “Committee to Consider the Effects from Izumida, who had served three consecutive terms. Nuclear Accidents on Health and Livelihood of Gov. Yoneyama is continuing his predecessor’s a Nuclear Power Plant Accident” (five members policies. He says, “While verification of the in the subcommittee on health and four in the Fukushima accident is still incomplete, we subcommittee on livelihood) and the “Committee will not even begin to discuss restarting the to Consider Evacuation Methods in Nuclear Kashiwazaki-Kariwa Nuclear Power Station.” Disasters” (nine members). To oversee all three Furthermore, he says verification work for the of the verification committees, a “Verification Fukushima nuclear accident will take another Supervisory Committee” is to be formed. three to four years to complete. What this means While the committee system which has been set is that even if the NRA gives the go-ahead up is to be highly commended, it reflects only the for restarting the plant, Niigata Prefecture, as view of experts. One wonders what kind of input the locality of the nuclear power plant, will Niigata’s citizens and residents will be given and conduct its own deliberations independently how their proactive views and arguments can of the national government and draw its own also be incorporated. I think that is an important conclusions. question for the future. In addition, Gov. Yoneyama has conferred the status of “Verification Committee” upon the
Reference Material: Radiation Exposure Data for Nuclear Industry Workers (Fiscal Year 2016)
The Secretariat of the Nuclear Regulation Authority released the FY 2016 Report on radiation management in nuclear facilities on 4 October 2017 (www.nsr.go.jp/data/000203487.pdf). The data on the following 2 pages was compiled from the section on "Management of radioactive waste and exposure of workers at nuclear reactor facilities for power generation, research and development facilities, fabrication facilities, reprocessing facilities, waste disposal facilities and waste management facilities." In the 17 nuclear plants other than Fukushima Daiichi, a total of approximately 46,900 workers received a collective dose of 7.60 Person Sv, an average of 0.2 mSv per person. Compared to this, 15,800 workers at Fukushima Daiichi received a collective dose of 45.90 person Sv, an average of 2.9 mSv per person, a much higher exposure to radiation. The Sendai nuclear plant, which was restarted in 2015, had regular inspection shut-downs at Unit 1 from October to December 2016 and at Unit 2 from December 2016 to February 2017. In 2015 there were no exposure doses of over 5 mSv, but probably because of the inspections, exposure doses were higher in 2016.
Table 1: Radiation exposure of workers at nuclear reactor facilites for power generation Effective dose level (persons) Average Maximum Total effective effective <5 5-10 10-15 15-20 20-25 25-30 30-35 35-40 40-45 45-50 total (Person Plant Attribution dose dose Sv) mSv mSv mSv mSv mSv mSv mSv mSv mSv mSv mSv (mSv) (mSv) Power Company 517 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 517 0.00 0.0 0.1 Tomari Subcontractor 1,928 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,928 0.03 0.0 0.8 Total 2,445 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,445 0.03 0.0 0.8 Power Company 506 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 506 0.01 0.0 0.3 Onagawa Subcontractor 2,215 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,216 0.30 0.1 5.5 Total 2,721 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,722 0.31 0.1 5.5 Power Company 276 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 276 0.00 0.0 0.2 Higashi Dori Subcontractor 925 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 925 0.04 0.1 2.6 Total 1,201 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,201 0.04 0.0 2.6 Power Company 1,566 90 22 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,678 2.13 1.3 14.8 Fukushima 1 Subcontractor 11,409 1,393 770 369 112 57 21 26 0 0 14,157 43.78 3.1 38.8 Total 12,975 1,483 792 369 112 57 21 26 0 0 15,835 45.90 2.9 38.8 Power Company 545 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 545 0.02 0.0 0.7 Fukushima 2 Subcontractor 1,527 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,531 0.14 0.1 6.6 Total 2,072 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,076 0.16 0.1 6.6 Power Company 1,209 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,209 0.03 0.0 1.5 Kashiwazaki Subcontractor 5,008 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5,013 0.82 0.2 8.2 Kariwa Total 6,217 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6,222 0.85 0.1 8.2 Power Company 791 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 791 0.03 0.0 1.4 Hamaoka Subcontractor 3,827 18 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 3,850 0.85 0.2 15.5 Total 4,618 18 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 4,641 0.88 0.2 15.5 Power Company 415 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 415 0.00 0.0 0.2 Shiga Subcontractor 2,308 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,308 0.08 0.0 1.9 Total 2,723 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,723 0.08 0.0 1.9 Power Company 390 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 390 0.01 0.0 1.1 Mihama Subcontractor 1,710 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,713 0.25 0.1 8.5 Total 2,100 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,103 0.26 0.1 8.5 Power Company 509 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 509 0.01 0.0 0.8 Takahama Subcontractor 3,067 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3,074 0.66 0.2 6.8 Total 3,576 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3,583 0.67 0.2 6.8 Power Company 489 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 489 0.03 0.1 1.0 Ohi Subcontractor 2,356 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,358 0.46 0.2 5.8 Total 2,845 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,847 0.50 0.2 5.8 Power Company 482 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 482 0.01 0.0 0.7 Shimane Subcontractor 2,753 33 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,788 1.15 0.4 11.4 Total 3,235 33 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3,270 1.15 0.4 11.4 Power Company 453 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 453 0.02 0.1 1.2 Ikata Subcontractor 1,605 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,612 0.45 0.3 8.0 Total 2,058 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,065 0.47 0.2 8.0 Power Company 619 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 619 0.00 0.0 0.6 Genkai Subcontractor 2,830 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,831 0.35 0.1 5.5 Total 3,449 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3,450 0.36 0.1 5.5 Power Company 456 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 456 0.03 0.1 3.5 Sendai Subcontractor 2,844 25 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,873 1.47 0.5 11.8 Total 3,300 25 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3,329 1.50 0.5 11.8 Power Company 270 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 270 0.00 0.0 0.0 Tokai Subcontractor 666 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 666 0.01 0.0 3.1 Total 936 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 936 0.01 0.0 3.1 Power Company 284 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 284 0.02 0.1 1.7 Tokai 2 Subcontractor 1,265 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,265 0.22 0.2 4.6 Total 1,549 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,549 0.25 0.2 4.6 Power Company 319 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 319 0.01 0.0 0.4 Tsuruga Subcontractor 1,405 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,405 0.07 0.1 1.6 Total 1,724 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,724 0.08 0.0 1.6 Power Company 10,096 90 22 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10,208 2.36 0.2 14.8 Commercial Subcontractor 49,648 1,499 780 370 112 57 21 26 0 0 52,513 51.13 1.0 38.8 Plant Total Total 59,744 1,589 802 370 112 57 21 26 0 0 62,721 53.50 0.9 38.8 6 November/December 2017 Nuke Info Tokyo No. 181
Table 2: Radiation exposure of workers at Monju and Fugen Plant Attribution Effective dose level (persons) Total (Person Sv) Average effective Maximum Total (persons) dose (mSv) effective dose <5 mSv 5-10 mSv >10mSv (mSv) Monju Power Co 390 0 0 390 0.00 0.0 0.0 Subcontractor 988 0 0 988 0.00 0.0 0.0 Total 1,378 0 0 1,378 0.00 0.0 0.0 Fugen Power Co 105 0 0 105 0.02 0.2 3.7 Subcontractor 352 0 0 352 0.09 0.3 4.6 Total 457 0 0 457 0.11 0.2 4.6
Table 3: Radiation exposure of workers at nuclear fuel fabrication facilities Plant Attribution Effective dose level (persons) Total (Person Sv) Average effective Maximum Total (persons) dose (mSv) effective dose <5 mSv 5-10 mSv > 10mSv (mSv) Global Nuclear Power Co 235 0 0 235 0.01 0.1 1.5 Fuel Japan GNF-J Subcontractor 159 0 0 159 0.00 0.0 0.0 Total 394 0 0 394 0.01 0.1 1.5 Mitsubishi Power Co 275 0 0 275 0.00 0.0 0.6 Nuclear Fuel (MNF) Subcontractor 59 0 0 59 0.00 0.0 0.0 Total 334 0 0 334 0.00 0.0 0.6 Nuclear Fuel Power Co 176 0 0 176 0.02 0.1 1.2 Industries (Tokai) Subcontractor 39 0 0 39 0.00 0.0 0.0 Total 215 0 0 215 0.02 0.1 1.2 Nuclear Fuel Power Co 130 0 0 130 0.01 0.1 0.6 Industries (Kumatori) Subcontractor 79 0 0 79 0.00 0.0 0.1 Total 209 0 0 209 0.01 0.0 0.6
Table 4: Radiation exposure at Japan Nuclear Fuel Rokkasho Nuclear Fuel Cycle Facilities Plant Attribution Effective dose level (persons) Total (Person Sv) Average effective Maximum Total (persons) dose (mSv) effective dose (mSv) 5-10 mSv > 10mSv (mSv) Reprocessing Power Co 1,221 0 0 1,221 0.00 0.0 0.3 Plant Subcontractor 4,552 0 0 4,552 0.04 0.0 2.0 Total 5,773 0 0 5,773 0.04 0.0 2.0 Uranium Power Co 211 0 0 211 0.00 0.0 0.4 Enrichment Plant Subcontractor 395 0 0 395 0.00 0.0 0.1 Total 606 0 0 606 0.00 0.0 0.4 Low-level Power Co 91 0 0 91 0.00 0.0 0.0 Radioactive Waste Disposal Subcontractor 248 0 0 248 0.00 0.0 0.0 Center Total 339 0 0 339 0.00 0.0 0.0 High-level Power Co 181 0 0 181 0.00 0.0 0.0 Radioactive Waste Disposal Subcontractor 998 0 0 998 0.00 0.0 0.0 Management Total 1,179 0 0 1,179 0.00 0.0 0.0 Facility
Table 5: Radiation exposure of workers at Research and Development Facilities Plant Attribution Effective dose level (persons) Total (Person Sv) Average effective Maximum Total (persons) dose (mSv) effective dose <5 mSv 5-10 mSv >10mSv (mSv) Ningyo Toge Power Co 69 0 0 69 0.00 0.0 0.0 Uranium Subcontractor 131 0 0 131 0.00 0.0 0.0 Enrichment Prototype Plant Total 200 0 0 200 0.00 0.0 0.0 Reprocessing Power Co 366 0 0 366 0.02 0.1 3.5 Facilities (Tokai) Subcontractor 801 0 0 801 0.07 0.1 4.1 Total 1,167 0 0 1,167 0.09 0.1 4.1 Oarai Waste Power Co 33 0 0 33 0.00 0.0 0.0 Management Facility Subcontractor 158 0 0 158 0.01 0.0 0.5 Total 191 0 0 191 0.01 0.0 0.5 November/December 2017 Nuke Info Tokyo No. 181 7
Book Review Rethinking nuclear energy ~Autopsy of an illusion by Hiroaki Koide Published by AnimaViva multilingue, 2015
This book is an English translation of Genpatsu Zero which was published in 2014. Although it has taken some time for the translation to be published and released in Japan, much of the information and, of course, Koide's opinions are still very relevant. Hiroaki Koide was Assistant Professor at Kyoto University Research Reactor Institute and is a well- known critic of nuclear power. Especially since the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Disaster, he has participated in many speaking tours and his stance of always questioning 'official' information and his expertise in being able to provide alternative 'facts,' Koide also claims that decontamination is 'a waste of interpretations and solutions has been a great source national budget' and this money would be better spent of support for the anti-nuclear movement as well as on settling the displaced in a new location rather than the general public. This book is a collection of Koide's trying to make them come back to areas that cannot speeches and articles, including data, maps and be called safe, simply to make it look as though diagrams and thus, while it lacks a coherent storyline, everything is 'back to normal.' it is easy to understand and includes a question and Related to this is the issue of rad-waste disposal. answer section on how to protect ourselves from Koide says that waste from F1 should not be radioactivity and other practical information which distributed to various local governments around the can be readily used by everybody. country but should be disposed of in the location One of the most disturbing aspects of Koide's book where it was generated, which is F1. As the level of is that there has been little progress made to date on radiation which workers are exposed to is already many of the issues that he raised in 2014. Many of very high at F1, Koide suggests Fukushima Dai- the policies and practices that he warned about three ni or the TEPCO-owned Kashiwazaki-Kariwa plant years ago continue without pause or question. For grounds. As this will not be adequate to dispose of example, Koide levels strong criticism as well as all the nuclear waste in Japan, a further site must be alternative solutions, for issues such as the storage found and Koide suggests that the places that use the of contaminated water at Fukushima Daiichi (F1), most energy such as Tokyo and Osaka must also be the entire decontamination project, decommissioning considered as candidate sites. of F1 and disposal of nuclear waste. Taking the Although some of Koide's proposals are on the decommissioning issue, he points out that the first radical side, his sense of justice comes out strongly step in decommissioning a reactor is to remove the in this book. As a student of nuclear science, he fuel, but as the fuel in reactors 1 and 3 is melted, he realized the unacceptable dangers of nuclear energy claims it will be impossible to remove all of it as it and he cannot forgive the government nor TEPCO for will be scattered around, not in one 'compact lump.' pursuing this policy, especially after the Fukushima Koide also repeatedly emphasizes the severe exposure Daiichi disaster has caused so many people so much to radiation of the workers who will be performing misery, and especially because they are refusing to these operations and to reduce this exposure as far as take responsibility for this disaster. But at some level possible, he believes that the most realistic solution it seems he cannot forgive himself either, for failing to is not to decommission F1 but to enclose it in a get his message heard and prevent this disaster. This sarcophagus, as was done with Chernobyl. Even at sentiment is perhaps felt strongly by many in the anti- present we see little progress made with recovering nuclear movement, and leaves us with the question the melted fuel and even robots are having a hard of how to convey our message to power-holders in an time getting close enough to monitor where it is, effective way that facilitates concrete change. let alone remove it. Yet, although the schedule has been adjusted and readjusted, TEPCO maintains it
*Of 42 operable reactors, only 5 are actually in operation as of Oct. 2017 © CNIC Commercial and Research Nuclear Facilities in Japan Type of Facility Status (as of Jan. 2017) Research reactor Rokkasho Village, Aomori Prefecture B Uranium fuel manufacturing plant for BWR Operable Under Permanently construction shut down Mox MOX Fuel Fabrication Plant (JNFL) P Uranium fuel manufacturing plant for PWR GNF-Japan Global Nuclear Fuel - Japan Reprocessing Plant (JNFL) Mox MOX fuel manufacturing plant JAEA Japan Atomic Energy Agency Uranium Enrichment Plant (JNFL) Uranium reconversion Others JNFL Japan Nuclear Fuel Ltd. Low-level Radioactive Waste Uranium enrichment plant Mine NFI Nuclear Fuel Industries, Ltd. Disposal Center (JNFL) Reprocessing plant RFS Recyclable-Fuel Storage Campany High-level Radioactive Waste Storage Center (JNFL) Tono, Gifu Prefecture Horonobe, Hokkaido Uranium Mine (JAEA) Underground Research Center (JAEA) Tokai Village, Ibaraki Prefecture Geoscience Center (JAEA) Mitsubishi Nuclear Fuel Mizunami Underground Mutsu City, Research Center (JAEA) Aomori Prefecture P Mitsubishi Nuclear Fuel Higashi-Osaka City, JCO Tokai Plant Osaka Prefecture Interim Spent Fuel Storage Facility (RFS) B NFI Tokai Plant UTR (Kinki University) ox Plutonium Fuel Production M Facility (JAEA) Kumatori Town, Osaka Prefecture Reprocessing Plant (JAEA) KUR (Kyoto University Research Reactor Institute) Vitrification Facility (JAEA) KUCA (Kyoto University Research Reactor Institute) Chemical Processing Facility (JAEA) P NFI Kumatori Plant Reactor Fuel Examination Facility (JAEA) Waste Safety Testing Facility (JAEA) Ningyo-toge, Okayama Prefecture
Uranium Mine (JAEA) JRR-3 TCA TRACY NSRR Prototype Uranium Enrichment Plant (JAEA) JRR-4 FCA STACY
Yokosuka City Oarai Town, Yayoi (Tokyo University) Kanagawa Prefecture Ibaraki Prefecture JRR (Japan Research Reactor), JAEA B GNF-Japan HTTR (JAEA) NSRR (Nuclear Safety Research Reactor), JAEA TCA (Tank-type Critical Assembly), JAEA Kawasaki City JMTR (JAEA) FCA (Fast Critical Assembly) , JAEA Kanagawa Prefecture TRACY (Transient Experiment Critical Facility), JAEA Joyo Experimental STACY (Static Experiment Critical Facility), JAEA NCA (Toshiba) Fast Reactor (JAEA) © CNIC November/December 2017 Nuke Info Tokyo No. 181 9
Nuclear Power Plants in East Asia (as of Jan. 2017) Based on Japan Atomic Industrial Forum, Inc. Report (ISSN 0915-0692) China Type of Reactor
1 No. 1 1 A1 1 1 Xudabao 1 2 PWR AP,EPR, BWR ABWR CANDU Others PWR PWR APR Status Hongyanhe 1 1 1 Operable
1 2 3 4 5 6 1 1 1 Under Construction CPR1000 Pyongyang 1 1 1 Planned Shidaowan 1 1 HTGR CAP1400 1 Permanently shut down
Haiyang 1 2 3 4 AP1000 Seoul Tianwan Beijing South Korea Hanul (Ulchin) 1 2 3 4 5 6 VVER1000 CPR1000 1 2 3 4 5 6 CPI CPI OPR1000 1 2 Fangjiashan CP1000 Shin-Hanul 1 2 3 4 (Shin-Ulchin) APR1400
Wolsong 1 2 3 4 Qinshan Ⅰ-1 Ⅱ-1 Ⅱ-2 Ⅱ-3 Ⅱ-4 Ⅲ-1 Ⅲ-2 CNP300 CNP600 Shanghai Shin-Wolsong 1 2 OPR1000
Sanmen 1 2 3 4 AP1000 Kori 1 2 3 4 WH60 WH F Xianning Dafan 1 2 AP1000 Shin-Kori
1 2 A3 A4 A5 A6 Pengze 1 2 AP1000 OPR1000 APR1400 Hanbit (Yonggwang)
Taohuajiang 1 2 AP1000 1 2 3 4 5 6 WH F WH F OPR1000
Ningde 1 2 3 4 5 6 CPR1000 Taipei Taiwan
Chinshan 1 2 Fuqing 1 2 3 4 5 6 CP1000 Kuosheng 1 2
Hong Kong Lungmen A1 A2
Maanshan China 1 2 WE 3loop Putian 1 2
Zhangzhou 1 2
Lufeng 1 2 AR1000
Lingao 1 2 Ⅱ-1 Ⅱ-2 PWR CPR1000
Guangdong Dayabay 1 2 PWR
Yaogu (Taishan) 1 2 EPR
Yangjiang 1 2 3 4 5 6 CPR1000 ACPR1000
Changjiang 1 2 CNP600
Fangchenggang 1 2 3 4 CPR1000 10 November/December 2017 Nuke Info Tokyo No. 181
NEWS WATCH
Data Falsifications by Kobe Steel Uncovered up to fiscal 2018 by the dismantling of turbines, main Kobe Steel admitted on October 8 to rewriting condensers, etc. Upon receiving approval from the inspection certificates for some of its products and NRA for its radioactive concentration measurement other misconduct. Since then, one scandal after and evaluation methods, it will use those methods to another has come to light, affecting many more of its conduct actual measurements of the target materials. If products. In fact, the company appears to have been it can get the NRA to confirm its results, it will be able falsifying data or cheating in other ways for decades. to dispose of the materials or reuse them as “wastes Deliveries to nuclear power facilities have also been cleared from radiation regulations.” affected by these scandals. One case, revealed on However, because society lacks an advanced October 13, involved replacement pipes that were understanding of the clearance system, Chuden scheduled to be used in a heat exchanger of a residual will temporarily store it on-site in an area for items heat removal system at Fukushima Daini Unit 3 awaiting shipment. Some of the clearance wastes from (BWR, 1,100 MW). Another came to light on the 25th the Tokai NPP have been machined into chair legs regarding centrifuge parts that had not yet been used at for a nuclear power PR center and are being used to the Rokkasho uranium enrichment plant. Components promote society’s understanding, but this is not having produced by Kobe Steel include items like radiating much of an effect. fins on fuel transport casks and welding materials used in feed water heaters, the upper lids of PWR pressure Decommissioning Ohi NPP Units 1 and 2? vessels, moisture separation superheaters, light water Japan’s Nikkei daily newspaper carried a front- reactor fuel cladding tubes, nuclear reactor pressure page article on October 17 titled “Ohi NPP to vessels, and so on. As of November 15, however, no Decommission Two Units.” It said that Kansai improprieties involving these items had been reported. Electric Power Co. (KEPCO) was close to making a Japan’s Nuclear Regulation Authority (NRA) has final decision to decommission Units 1 and 2 at the called for the electric power companies to ensure plant (both PWR, 1175 MW). KEPCO immediately that the components in question are not being used. denied that on its website, saying, “It is not true that The electric power companies are requesting similar we have established a policy for decommissioning confirmation from the plant makers. Leaving this up the reactors.” In response to another article stating to such voluntary measures, however, is no way to that KEPCO is carrying out coordination with pursue the truth. Related businesses should be asked local municipalities and other parties in Fukui,” the to conduct a thorough investigation and report the municipalities denied any coordination. KEPCO results. has been insisting obstinately on proceeding with preparations for restart, but other papers have all Application Filed for Using Clearance System for backed Nikkei’s assertion in their own subsequent Demolition Waste at Hamaoka Units 1 and 2 articles. Chubu Electric Power Co. (Chuden) announced KEPCO’s petitions to extend the operating period on October 17 that it had filed an application with of Unit 3 at the Mihama NPP and Units 1 and 2 at the NRA to confirm whether or not its radioactive the Takahama NPP (all PWR, 826 MW) to 60 years concentration measurement and evaluation methods, have recently been approved. It has been explained necessary for applying the clearance system in that although Mihama Units 1 (PWR, 340 MW) and disposing of demolition wastes generated in the 2 (PWR, 500 MW) are to be decommissioned, the course of decommissioning work at Units 1 (BWR, other three units will continue operating because their 540 MW) and 2 (BWR, 840 MW) at the Hamaoka power capacities are large. The capacities of Ohi Units Nuclear Power Station, would be adequate or not for 1 and 2, however, are much larger. applying that system. For decommissioned nuclear The papers predicting their decommissioning despite power plants (NPPs), the clearance system has been that, explain that in Japan only Ohi Units 1 and 2 have used previously at Japan Atomic Power Co.’s Tokai adopted an ice-condenser mechanism for preventing NPP (GCR, 166 MW), so this would be the second high pressure in the containment vessel, using ice instance. to cool and condense steam into water, and this is According to Chuden, there are about 77,000 tons of becoming a hindrance to their passing the safety waste scheduled to be treated under this system. This inspection. Because of this mechanism, they explain, time, the target is about 6,900 tons of metals generated the required withstandable pressures could be lower, November/December 2017 Nuke Info Tokyo No. 181 11 but they do not meet the new regulatory requirements. equipment supply and other commercial contracts as In any event, though, KEPCO’s real intent is appropriate. probably for decommissioning. Even if they decommission Ohi Units 1 and 2 with their large NUMO pays students to attend public meeting capacities, no supply problems would be expected On 6 November, a public meeting to exchange since demand is decreasing, as the above-mentioned opinions on the government's Geoscientific Nikkei article explains. While their revenue from Characteristics Map (showing areas 'suitable' for electricity generation would increase if they operated disposal of high-level nuclear waste-see NIT No. 180) these units, the enormous amount of money they was held in Saitama Prefecture (bordering Tokyo). would have to spend to have them meet the new It was organised by the Nuclear Waste Management regulatory requirements would make them extremely Organisation of Japan (NUMO). A CNIC staff unprofitable. member also attended. The exchange of opinions KEPCO is attempting to move toward was held in the second half of the event with 24 decommissioning the Ohi units with a variety of members of the public participating (including 12 justifications being offered. university students) and about 50 observers. During the discussion, two university students (aged 20 and Toshiba to Own All Westinghouse Stock 21) mentioned that they had received 10,000 yen for Toshiba announced on October 3 that it would buy attending the meeting. The older student said that he back the 10 percent of Westinghouse stock owned was from Kanagawa Prefecture and would not have by Kazatomprom, Kazakhstan’s state-run nuclear attended such an event on a weekday if he had not power company. The purchase price is said to be been paid. The NUMO representative, who was in the about US$522 million. Kazatomprom possessed a put same discussion group as the students, said that if this option, giving it the right to request Toshiba to buy was true, it was a serious issue. Following the public back its stake in Westinghouse starting from October 1. meeting, on 14 November, investigations by Kyodo On October 2, it notified Toshiba that it was exercising News revealed the facts. that option. The logistics and management of the public meeting The stock buyback is scheduled for January 1. had been outsourced to an advertising company called After this buyback, Toshiba will have full ownership "Chiikiryoku Kasseika Kenkyuushitsu (Revitalizing of Westinghouse, but under bankruptcy law, Community Strength Research Center Ltd.)" and Westinghouse is no longer considered a consolidated PR activities directed at students had been further subsidiary of Toshiba. This does not change Toshiba’s outsourced to a company called "Oceanize Ltd." earnings outlook, because the buyback had already Oceanize promised to pay students 10,000 yen and been assumed and its impact on the consolidated recruited 12 students to attend the Saitama meeting. results for the fiscal year ending March 2018 had been In Tokyo, Aichi, Osaka and Hyogo Prefectures 27 taken into account. students were recruited through university clubs by Toshiba’s future challenge will be to find a buyer for offering a payment of about 5,000 yen per student. all of the stock, but there are no prospects. It seems they also did the same in Tochigi, Gunma, Shizuoka, Wakayama and Nara Prefectures. MOU between Toshiba Subsidiary and Ukraine’s NUMO held a press conference on the evening of ‘Energoatom’ 14 November, where they apologized, explaining that Toshiba Corp.’s Energy Systems & Solutions Co. the contracted companies were supposed to recruit and its Nuclear Energy Systems & Services Division students, but not by paying them. That decision split off, forming a new company, Toshiba Energy was made independently by the executive in charge Systems & Solutions Corp., on October 1, 2017. On at Oceanize and was due to a mistake in internal October 25, the new company signed a memorandum management at the outsourced company. of understanding (MOU) with Ukraine’s state run On 17 November, it was further revealed that Energoatom, which operates 15 commercial reactors multiple students who had attended seminars last in the Ukraine, aiming to modernize that country’s summer also received cash payments of a few turbine system equipment. thousand yen. It seems that mobilizing university Modernizing the equipment will increase the power students by paying them had become normal practice. capacity while improving safety and efficiency. It is Recognizing this, the Minister for Economic Trade also considering expanding this cooperation to include and Industry, Mr. Seko, said at a press conference on long-term provision of services for the installed 17 November that he has given instructions that the equipment and introduction of the latest technical and facts be investigated. financial solutions. NUMO's self-stated basic policy of "We aim to To systemize the cooperation based on the MOU, the become the [sic] socially trustworthy organization" companies have agreed to set up a steering committee has taken a serious blow. This revelation of non- with representatives from both companies serving as transparent management is likely to cause a severe co-chairs. They are trying to coordinate on all issues setback to the selection of a nuclear waste disposal involved in this cooperation, including entering into site. 12 November/December 2017 Nuke Info Tokyo No. 181
Who's Who Naomi Katagiri Striving for a better future for Niigata Prefecture Naomi Katagiri is the chairman of New Future Niigata, which was launched in March 2017. The 67-year-old leader is the vice president of Ishikawa Co., a major house- building company based in Niigata City, and is a first- class registered architect. She played a major role in the victory of Ryuichi Yoneyama in the Niigata gubernatorial election in October 2016. This group was organized for the purpose of supporting the new governor, and providing opportunities for both the governor and citizens to actively exchange views not only on reactivation of the nuclear power plant in Niigata but also on various other issues pledged by the governor in his election campaign. The citizens aim to create a new type of prefectural government by having occasional face-to-face talks with the governor, and encouraging him on to further action at other times. This writer is from Niigata and is also a member of the group. the better future of their children, who should grow up In Ms. Katagiri's address to the group’s inauguration enjoying good health. In August 1996, the nation’s first ceremony, she said “Our group’s policy is not ‘Niigata local referendum on a nuclear plant construction project First,’ which means to give top priority to benefits for was held. The result was that this plan was rejected by Niigata residents. I believe that the future of Niigata, the residents. They jointly stood up against the government’s whole nation of Japan, and eventually the whole world, project to construct a nuclear plant, and raised questions will change for the better if our group’s movement and about the nation-building policy the government has been activities continue to expand.” As is well-known, Governor promoting since the Meiji Era. Yoneyama defeated his rival candidate, backed by the Born in Niitsu, Niigata Prefecture, Ms. Katagiri graduated ruling Liberal Democratic Party, by a large margin in from the commercial course at her high school. While the gubernatorial election, although the rival had been working for a construction company, she felt the need considered the favorite to win the election. Behind to study architecture, and became a first-class certified Gov. Yoneyama’s victory, there were the local citizens’ architect. She did this after she married a newspaper movement against the nuclear power plant and the strong reporter and while raising three children. Her hobby is determination among the residents, including Ms. Katagiri, embroidery, and her skills are as good as a professional. to prevent the restart of the plant’s operations. She entered the law school of Niigata University at the Ms. Katagiri has been opposed to nuclear plants for age of 51, and graduated at the age of 55. This academic many years. It was in 1969 when Tohoku Electric Power career is quite unusual for a Japanese woman. She has Co.’s plan to construct a nuclear plant in Maki Town in talked about her unique career in a radio program, ‘Morning Niigata Prefecture was revealed. The plant was scheduled Essay,’ broadcast by NHK Niigata. Her career is also to become operational in 1986. I have a leaflet written by described in her book “Zenzengo” (Niigata dialect meaning Ms. Katagiri against the first official hearing on this project “history repeats itself”) published in 2013. held in August 1981. The leaflet, however, was issued by a She was invited to the 10 year anniversary symposium local mother’s group against the Maki nuclear plant project. “The Chuetsu Offshore Earthquake and the Kashiwazaki- The writing in the leaflet still match the current situation. Kariwa Scientists Association” held in Tokyo on October The group criticized the hearing for the following reasons. 9, 2017, and made a speech to the effect that Niigata (1) It was held on the assumption that the nuclear plant residents should oppose the restart of the Kashiwazaki- would be constructed, (2) the nuclear plant would produce, kariwa Nuclear Power Station, as well as electing more in addition to electric power, plutonium that can be used women lawmakers in the upcoming general elections. Her for production of nuclear bombs, (3) nuclear power is not passionate speech for the better future of the prefecture an alternative energy for fossil fuels, and (4) nuclear power made a strong impression on the audience. plants are vulnerable to earthquakes that happen frequently in this country. Based on these reasons, the group called