The measurement point of the exposure around Motokomezaki Primary School is in a valley, which means that dose is underestimated. STA confirms, "the risk of cancer death is not zero. The dose for 436 people amounts to 1.6Sv."

STA should re-evaluate the exposure dose in the Tokai-mura criticality accident!

Assess the health risk of exposed residents! All victims must be compensated for their suffering!

STA should accept that they have underestimated the dose around Motokomezaki Primary School, and should re-evaluate the exposure dose completely.

Motokomezaki Primary School stands on a hill at a distance of about 500m from JCO plant, and aftert the accident, the neutrons from the plant directly hit the school. However, believe it or not, the nearest measurement point by the Science and Technology Agency (STA) of exposure is in the valley in front of the school. The STA acknowledged this for the first time in response to our demands. The low value at this point is effective in reducing the whole dose evaluation. As a result, the dose around the school is determined below 1 mSv. STA should accept the fact that their measurement is underestimated at least at this point, and should completely reassess the whole evaluation of exposure dose in the criticality accident. When the criticality accident in JCO plant occurred at 10:35, it was during "Green Time" in the school which goes from 10:20 to 10:45. During this time, all children were outside playing on the school grounds. Afterwards, they continued having lessons as usual, and then walked home in small groups at 4:30, in the rain which began falling in the evening. In spite of their susceptibility to radiation, based on the assumption that the exposure dose of these children was less than 1 mSv, it was concluded by the STA that there was no influence to them. Because that the school is further@than 350m from JCO plant, the school children are excluded substantially from the "health investigation" of the government. In the "health examination" carried out by the government this May, the examination points for children under eighteen years of age included only an interview, a body measurement, and a physical examination (eyesight test, hearing test, abdominal manipulation). "Only persons who requested" were given blood tests. How is it possible to keep health of children in this situation? We are calling on the STA reevaluate the dose around the school. We also demand that STA completely reassess the exposure dose in this accident.

STA refuses to carry out risk assessments based on the collective dose.

STA clearly stated in discussions with us on May 26 that "the government doesn't hold the view that 'residents would never get cancer'(*1)", and that "the risk of cancer death is not zero". Now that they have admitted that the risk is not zero, they have a duty to make the risk assessment more clear using concrete figures. But to date, they have not conducted a risk assessment based on the real accident. Even in the written answers to our questions dated June 2, it was still only "under consideration". In discussions with us they said that the reason they said "under consideration" was because "the dose of temporarily present people and so on was still under investigation". However, while they said it was still under investigation, the Health Management Investigation Committee (HMIC) has already published the "final report" for the healthcare of exposed residents (the final report concludes no need of special care). If it is still under consideration, how can they possibly publish a final report? During discussions with us, they only repeated the claims of HMIC that "the level of the risk of the exposure is that only one cancer death would increase by 10 mSv for 1000 people". But they said this as only a general argument. They say nothing of the risk based on the recent criticality accident in JCO plant.

Evaluate the risk of this accident. Accept responsibility for the exposure health damage. Even based on our modest estimations, there is a risk of at least three cancer deaths.

STA said for the first time in discussions with us that the total dose for the people they investigated within "the range of 350m" from JCO plant is 1.6Sv. This fact suggests that they have evaluated the risk on collective dose, even if it might perhaps have limitations and be underestimated. Nevertheless, they intentionally won't make public the results of their evaluation. Of course, this figure of 1.6Sv is grossly underestimated. (a) The exposure dose which they used in their calculations is 1/2 of the dose which the government announced in the beginning. (b) They underestimated the toxicity of neutrons. (c) They limited their evaluation to people within "the range of 350m" though they said "the exposure dose of the people who were at points farther than 350m from JCO plant are not zero", and so on. However, the only work left to do in order to calculate the risk of cancer death is to multiply 1.6Sv by the risk factor. Nevertheless, they are refusing to do so. According to the factor referred to in HMIC's report, the risk of cancer death from 1.6Sv is about 0.2 people. This value is lower than the "one person" argument which the government uses as a general argument in the same report. Still, the government refuses to carry out the risk assessments because it means accepting the risk of cancer death that was even if relatively little caused by this criticality accident. If they do so, their responsibility, compensation and so on for the exposure will become a real issue immediately. Their argument of "no damage from exposure", "no responsibility of the government", "no need of compensation" would become baseless. Even in our estimations using a minimum parameter, there is a risk of at least three cancer deaths. Our estimation doubles the risk of neutrons used in the STA report on November 4 and includes the residents in the range of 500m, and therefore the total exposure dose for about 1200 people is 7.6Sv(*2). If we use the risk factor of Mr. Gofman, the risk of the cancer death is three people. Let's make the government re-estimate the dose again because of their haphazard dose evaluation. Let's make them do the risk estimation based on the real accident.

STA claim, "No medical compensation will be given if you cannot prove causation with the accident."

STA and JCO have not compensated the residents exposed to radiation at all. They become aggressive and openly say, "without proof of the exposure effects, we will not compensate at all." On May 26, STA published a "Report on the Damage by Nuclear Power in the JCO Accident"(May 26) so that they could authorize the aggressive attitude. The report said that damage compensation for the accident is fundamentally finished as 94.5% of the people have agreed to a total amount of 11.6 billion yen for perceived damage. Next they published the "the Report of the Investigation and Research on the Damage by Nuclear Power" that cut down exposure compensation. This report concluded that future compensation would only be given "when plaintiff (the residents) could prove that their illness was a direct result of radiation exposure from the accident." The report also fundamentally excludes all exposed people from medical examination expenses, with the exception of the three workers of JCO. It says that compensation for resident's health damage is limited to when the claimant can prove causation between the radiation damage and the accident. In addition, with regards to medical examination costs, the government pays only the cost of the first examination which had to be received prior to the end of November last year. The cost of any further examinations is "limited to when the claimant can prove the necessity of the medical examination for him after the second time". In short, the government does not need to compensate residents for medical expenses, unless they can prove the causation of their damage with the accident. JCO says that "without 100% proof (of causation), we will not pay for second medical expenses". No one can medically distinguish between cancer caused by radiation from common cancer. Therefore, with regards to health damage after the nuclear accident, the government should admit that it is due to the effect of the accident, and must compensate for it. Exploiting the difficulty of proving the causation, the assailants say, "try to prove it" to the residents who are victims of this accident. They caused the accident, and forced people to be exposed, and then they turn around and say accept the fact you will not be compensated even if health damage appears. We can't allow the STA and JCO to get away with this type of highway robbery. We must extensively bring to light the many attacks by the government, STA and JCO to the residents, and protest against them. This issue does not only affect the residents of Tolai-mura or Naka-machi. If we do nothing, when another nuclear power accident happens, we will be treated in the same way by the government. Let's demand that STA re-estimate the exposure dose. Let's make them do the risk estimation of exposure group, and make them concretely admit the risk of cancer deaths. Let's make them accept responsibility for the accident and radiation exposure. Let's make them compensate for exposure damage. @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@fig1@@fig2@@fig3 *1 This statement was made in the explanation meeting by JCO to residents on April 9, by Tanooka Hiroshi from the National Cancer Center Japan. *2 This evaluation does not take into consideration the underestimated values from the problematic measurement points.

TOP