• (Saturday) It seems the Diet’s Fukushima Investigation Panel (NAIIC) believes that Tepco never wanted to abandon F. Daiichi. “Workers at the plant were battling to contain the crisis,” said NAIIC Chairman Kiyoshi Kurokawa, “Not only (Tepco president) Shimizu’s accounts, but also our past investigations showed that the electric utility was not considering full withdrawal.” This followed Shimizu’s testimony where he said Tepco “at no stage considered a complete pullout.”  However, submitted evidence on June 8 included transcripts of some telephone communications between Tepco-Tokyo and un-named persons at F. Daiichi. On March 14, someone with Tepco asked, “Around what time will evacuation of all workers from the site be ready? All workers will evacuate to the visitor hall of the Fukushima No.2 (Daini) nuclear power plant, is that correct?” During his testimony, Tepco’s president Shimizu explained they were talking about the evacuation of non-essential personnel alone – Tepco never intended to abandon F. Daiichi. When asked if he felt the government misunderstood what he was saying, Shimizu responded, “I am afraid so.” (Asahi Shimbun)
  • (Saturday) The NAIIC generally feels government interference during the Fukushima crisis only made matters worse. Panel member Shuya Nomura said Naoto Kan’s aides made numerous calls to the Fukushima Daiichi plant which did not follow the official line of communication mandated under the country’s nuclear disaster management law, adding, “They asked questions that were often inappropriate and very basic, unnecessarily causing more work in addition to the operation at the site.” Among other criticisms, the panel said the government should have released more information about the spread of radiation and other related data so the public could have made more-informed evacuation decisions. The with-held information has created great distrust for their leaders. (Japan Today) “I didn’t know a hydrogen explosion had occurred (at the nuclear plant) and was wondering why we had to evacuate. In any case, information was slow,” said a resident of Minamisoma. “If the government had mentioned the nuclear plant when it issued the evacuation instructions, I could have locked up my house and brought out my valuables. I’m disappointed that my house was robbed (while I was evacuated).” A significant majority found out about the accident on TV, and not from their elected officials. (Mainichi Shimbun)
  • (Saturday) Protestors disrupted the meeting with their extreme anger. Some members of the public demanded that the panel allow them in as the committee members. A few even tussled with Fukui Prefecture’s staff. Because of this, the meeting was suspended and resumed at a more secure location. This infuriated many people. Shouts of “This commission should be for the people,” and “Pushing it through is an act of violence,” rang out. (Japan Times)
  • (Sunday) NAIIC has run an extensive survey of evacuees from the six towns nearest F. Daiichi. The survey covered more than 10,000 of the ~55,000 people who evacuated their homes. NAIIC found that 70% of the refugees moved at least 4 times before being finally settled. About a third of the survey’s residents moved as many as six times! “The government’s evacuation instructions were haphazard and invited confusion,” said Chairman Kurokawa. But, the most disturbing situation was Tokyo’s confused notion of where to send evacuees. Some 50% from Namie actually moved to locations where the contamination levels were higher than at their homes – and the same with about 25% of those fleeing Futaba and Tomioka. Even though all reputable experts agree that the contamination levels experienced by evacuees were well-below harmful levels, radiophobia continues to plague many. “For the rest of my life, my health will be threatened by the fact that I was evacuated to a highly radioactive area. Why did the government withhold the information?” said one resident from Namie. (Mainichi Shimbun)
  • (Sunday) On another issue, Chairman Kiyoshi Kurokawa is opposed to restarting the Oi nukes. Kurokawa feels the Prime Minister should delay nuclear plant restarts until his group files its official report later this month, “Why (doesn’t the prime minister) wait until he receives reports from the Diet’s investigation committee before restarting the reactors?” Conversely, Kyushu University research professor Kazuhiko Kudo says, “The government’s criteria ensure a certain level of safety, and I can understand (the prime minister’s decision) that took a potential power shortage seriously.” (Mainichi Shimbun)
  • (Sunday) Meanwhile, the Osaka City expert panel says the Oi restarts are OK, but not permanently. An emergency statement issued Friday said, “The reactivation should be limited to the minimum necessary period, and the reactors should be suspended again after the power-saving period ends in September.” The statement also says, “The planned reactivation will lead to the undermining of public safety and ignore the lessons learned from the Fukushima nuclear crisis.” (Kyodo News) On the other hand, Fukui governor Issei Nishikawa objects to limited operation, saying that running a nuclear power plant is different than “supermarket’s bargain sales, which are often held for limited periods.” (Nuclear Street)
  • (Sunday) Governor Nishikawa says he is pleased with Prime Minister Noda’s public explanation about the Oi restarts. In a statement made on Friday, he commended the prime minister’s firm endorsement of nuclear power and added he will ensure that an accident like last year’s Fukushima disaster will never happen in Fukui. However, he has yet to personally consult the Fukui nuclear safety expert panel and the Oi mayor for their input. Until both meetings are held, he is holding back his final decision on the Oi nuke restarts. (NHK World)
  • (Sunday) Anti-nuclear campaigners condemned PM Noda’s plea for the restart of two Oi nuclear units as an attempt to intimidate the Japanese public. Approximately 4000 protestors massed outside the Prime Minister’s office building. Kazumasa Aizawa, a village assembly member in Tokai, said: “No convincing data has been presented. Still, the prime minister was saying that the reactors would resume operations because of the threat of power shortages. It is intimidation of the public. He repeatedly said the government would defend people’s security, but all his words were empty.” Long-time anti-nuke activist Kazuyuki Takemoto added, “He pressed the people to reopen the plant, waving power shortages and economic issues (in front of them). It was very much like a threat.” Takeichi Saito, the representative of a study group, also said, “It is a step in (the administration’s) self-destruction.” Finally, Nozomu Suzuki, one of the organizers from Shizuoka Prefecture, said, “The decision to restart the Oi reactors was too sloppy and rough. It was a political decision giving a top priority to the energy problem.” (Asahi Shimbun)
  • (Monday) The local safety commission of Fukui Prefecture said they now support the Oi restarts. In their report released Sunday, prefectural officials stated that necessary safety measures have been put in place and resumption of operations can proceed. The meeting was temporarily disrupted by some members of the public opposed to the restart, but it did not alter the panel’s conclusion. All that remains for the restart work to begin is Fukui governor Nishikawa’s approval, which is expected to occur this week. (Kyodo News) The panel’s report will be submitted to governor Nishikawa today. Nishikawa says he will probably announce his decision on or before Saturday. (NHK World)