The Holy See has once more expressed grave concern over the catastrophic humanitarian and environmental effects of the use of nuclear weapons , and called on all governments of states who adopted the United Nations Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW) to sign and ratify it.
Speaking on behalf of Archbishop Bernadito Auza, the Holy See’s Permanent Observer to the UN in New York, Second Counsellor, Father David Charters made the call in an address on Monday at a UN General Assembly discussion on nuclear disarmament.
The TPNW, or the Nuclear Weapons Ban Treaty, that prohibits the use, threat of use, development, testing, production, manufacturing and possession of nuclear weapons, will enter into force when 50 states have signed and ratified it.
Fr. Charters warned that a nuclear war or even a limited use of nuclear weapons would be a catastrophe of unimaginable proportions, and would kill untold numbers of people and cause tremendous environmental damage and famine.
Holy See vs nuclear weapons
The Holy See official pointed out that the continued existence of over 14,000 nuclear weaponsheld by a handful of countries is one of the greatest moral challenges of our time. Fr. Charters said that the Catholic Church has been opposing nuclear weapons since 1943.
St. John XXIII called for its ban in his encyclical “Peace on Earth” and the later popes have consistently called for the “abolition of these evil instruments of warfare that create both a false sense of security and foster distrust and disharmony”.
Wasted resources
Fr. Charters pointed out that the Second Vatican Council condemned nuclear arms race as “an utterly treacherous trap for humanity, and one that injures the poor to an intolerable degree.”
Fr. Charters noted that maintenance of nuclear weapons continues to siphon off immense resources that could be devoted, among other things, to the implementation and achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals, especially the eradication of extreme poverty and hunger.
The Holy See the concern of Pope Francis according to whom “nuclear deterrence and the threat of mutually assured destruction cannot be the basis for an ethics of fraternity and peaceful coexistence.”
Plan to complete Bellefonte Nuclear Plant takes another step backward Al Alabama, 24 Oct 18 By Paul Gattis | pgattis@al.com Developers of Bellefonte Nuclear Plant got their strongest public indication Tuesday that its much-needed potential customer in Memphis isn’t interested.
And that rebuke appears to make it more likely that the mothballed plant in northeast Alabama will continue to sit unfinished while again facing a bleak and uncertain future.
Memphis Gas, Light & Water signed a non-binding letter of intent in January to purchase power when Nuclear Development LLC completes the plant in about 2024. But now under new leadership, Memphis Light is pushing away from Bellefonte.
“Since (Memphis Light) has not completed its due diligence with respect to the Bellefonte proposal and has not yet received independent feedback on a multitude of concerns, management believes that it is premature to negotiate and commit to the terms of a (power purchase agreement),” the document said.
Without a customer, Nuclear Development has said it throws an $8.6 billion loan application with the U.S. Department of Energy into jeopardy. And given that jeopardy, Nuclear Development may decline to complete the purchase from TVA of the plant in Jackson County – which is scheduled to close by Nov. 14.
Nuclear Development has not responded to a request for comment from AL.com concerning its talks with Memphis.
At the Memphis city council meeting Monday, Memphis Light released a four-page document outlining its concerns for going into business with an unfinished plant as its power source and made its case for why it should walk away from the proposed deal………
Not when it comes to the amount of explosive radioactive material held at the plant, near Carson County, Texas.
Pantex is where the US nuclear arsenal is both constructed and disassembled.
New devices are built.
Old devices are broken down for safe disposal.
Naturally, it’s a high security site. And safety precautions are well established.
Local media reported “an unexpected event at the plant”.
But not what that unexpected event was.
“At this time, there appears to be no offsite impact and no need for the public to take any action.”
Those are calming words. To a point.
“The Pantex onsite response effort is being conducted by the Emergency Response Organization, a highly-trained group of employees with detailed knowledge of plant operations and emergency response procedures. These employees represent plant functions such as security, logistics, safety, medical response, radiological assessment, firefighting, operations and public information.”
That’s not so calming.
Security? Medical response? Radiological assessment?
The local sheriff closed local roads close to the eastern edge of the extensive facility.
Nuclear fusion: wrestling with burning questions on the control of ‘burning plasmas’ EurekAlert, 24 Oct 18,
Lehigh professor Eugenio Schuster has recently been named ITER Scientist Fellow in the area of Plasma Control; the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER), promises to be the first nuclear-fusion reactor to produce net energy
LEHIGH UNIVERSITY WHAT WOULD IT TAKE TO MEET THE WORLD’S ENERGY NEEDS, SUSTAINABLY, FAR INTO THE FORESEEABLE FUTURE? PERHAPS CREATING ENERGY THE WAY THE SUN DOES, THROUGH NUCLEAR FUSION.
Fission and fusion are very different nuclear reactions, according to Eugenio Schuster, Professor in the Department of Mechanical Engineering and Mechanics at Lehigh University. Fission, which produces the type of nuclear energy created by reactors here on Earth since the 1950s, involves splitting the nuclei of very heavy elements, such as uranium and plutonium, which starts a chain reaction that is difficult to slow–among the reasons it can be dangerous.
Nuclear fusion, on the other hand, is a very difficult reaction to spur and maintain. The sun creates energy–in the form of light and heat–by fusing atoms of hydrogen, the lightest gas, using its massive gravitational force to confine the hydrogenic gas long enough for the nuclear reaction to take place.
On Earth, many scientists believe the most promising path to creating energy through nuclear fusion is one that uses heat to spur a similar reaction. This method combines two isotopes of hydrogen, deuterium and tritium, by heating them up to 100 million Kelvin–approximately six times hotter than the sun’s core. The kinetic energy of these isotopes is increased by heating, which allows them to overcome the repulsion force due to the positive charges (protons) in the nuclei and to fuse. Scientists use magnetic fields to confine the resulting substance, which is no longer a gas, but a plasma. The “burning plasma,” as it is known, is confined in a toroidal-shaped apparatus: the tokamak, which is a Russian-language acronym that translates to “toroidal chamber with magnetic coils.”
Climate events are getting ever more complicated. Polar jet circulation changes bring Sahara dust to Arctic, increasing temperatures, melting ice. Arctic blast is set to sweep across Britain this week bringing sub-freezing temperatures of just 26F and wintery showers after an unseasonably warm autumn.
WASHINGTON (Reuters) OCTOBER 23, 2018, – President Donald Trump warned on Monday that the United States intended to build up its arsenal of nuclear weapons to pressure Russia and China.Speaking to reporters, Trump repeated his contention that Russia was not abiding by the 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, which he has threatened to abandon.
RUSSIA has issued a bellicose threat to the US after Donald Trump made public his plan to increase his country’s nuclear arsenal. AAP, staff writers, News Corp Australia Network, OCTOBER 23, 2018
A US withdrawal from the Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty would require Russia to undertake measures to ensure its security, the Kremlin has warned.
If the US develops intermediate-range nuclear weapons, then Russia would have to follow suit, to “restore the balance”, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said in comments carried by media on Monday.
US President Donald Trump announced over the weekend the US was pulling out of the deal amid accusations Russia had violated it.
The US has said Russia breached the treaty by developing the Novator 9M729 cruise missile, estimated to have a range of 2600 kilometres. The treaty, signed between the United States and the then-Soviet Union in 1987, had sought to restrict nuclear-armed missiles with a range up to 5500km.
Mr Peskov rejected accusations that Russia could have violated the deal. “Russia has been and remains committed to the provisions of this agreement,” he said, according to state news agency TASS.
Mr Trump’s announcement could herald fresh tensions between the former Cold War rivals.
While the US president has repeatedly praised Mr Putin, his administration has taken a tough line against Russia, repeatedly imposing sanctions on it.
US National Security Advisor John Bolton and his Russian counterpart, Security Council chairman Nikolai Patrushev, discussed arms control agreements, Syria, Iran, North Korea and the fight against terrorism in Monday’s meeting, according to the Security Council, as Russia sought clarification on the issue.
Russia hoped “to hear more details and clarifications on what steps the US side is planning to take,” Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov said in comments carried by state media.
The European Union called upon the US and Russia to preserve the agreement, calling it a “cornerstone” of European security.
Thanks to the INF treaty, which contributed to the end of the Cold War, almost 3000 missiles with nuclear and conventional warheads have been destroyed, EU foreign policy spokeswoman Maja Kocijancic told reporters in Brussels. NATO backed up the US claim that Russia could have violated the treaty, saying a “pattern of behaviour over many years has led to widespread doubts about Russian compliance”.
The Russian 9M729 missile system, unveiled earlier this year, raises serious concerns, NATO spokeswoman Oana Lungescu said in a statement. “In the absence of any credible answer from Russia on this new missile, allies believe that the most plausible assessment would be that Russia is in violation of the INF Treaty,” the spokeswoman said.
The US has also said the treaty limited US defence capabilities in response to potential Chinese medium-range missiles.
China’s Foreign Ministry said it was “completely wrong to involve the Chinese side into the withdrawal from the treaty”.
“This treaty has played an important role in easing international relations, advancing the process of nuclear disarmament, and even maintaining a global strategic balance and stability,” Chinese Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Hua Chunying said.
Last week, former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev has said he thinks Mr Trump is making a “mistake” by leaving its nuclear weapons treaty with Russia.
Mr Gorbachev was one of the original signatories to the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty, signed originally in 1987 with then-US President Ronald Reagan.
“Under no circumstances should we tear up old disarmament agreements. … Do they really not understand in Washington what this could lead to?” Mr Gorbachev said to Interfax news agency.
Euro News, By Alexander Smith with NBC News World News• 22/10/2018
A piece of reckless brinkmanship that could spark an arms race between NATO and Russia in Europe, or a hardball negotiating strategy that might push Moscow into keeping its longstanding promises on nuclear weapons?President Donald Trump was widely criticized this weekend when he announced his intention to scrap a landmark nuclear weapons agreement signed by President Ronald Reagan and Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev in 1987. The deal was designed to keep ground-based nuclear missiles out of Europe.Trump said that Russia has for years been violating the Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces Treaty, or INF.He’s not the first president to make this allegation. President Barack Obama said much the same.Many experts agree that Moscow continues to break the rules and flout the pact, but despite that some say ripping up the agreement is a bad idea.
These skeptics range from Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., to Gorbachev himself, with the Nobel laureate telling Russia’s Interfax news agency Sunday that Trump’s decision was “very strange” and not the work of “a great mind.”The White House’s decision to pull out, so this argument goes, will only allow Moscow to continue its current actions without having to maintain the pretense of compliance. Meanwhile, Russia, which also accuses the U.S. of violating the agreement, can point the finger at the U.S. as the one responsible for the INF’s failure.The 1987 agreement bans ground-based nuclear and conventional missiles that can strike between 300 miles to 3,400 miles.”One concern is that in the medium-term there may be the temptation to return intermediate-range missiles, potentially including nuclear weapons, to Europe,” said Karl Dewey, an analyst at Jane’s by IHS Markit, an open-source defense intelligence provider based in London…….. https://www.euronews.com/2018/10/22/will-trump-s-withdrawal-nuclear-treaty-spark-arms-race-or-n922731
US EPA withdraws Obama administration uranium safety regulation Mining Technology, By JP Casey, 23 Oct 18 The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has withdrawn a uranium safety proposal introduced in the last days of the Obama administration that would have introduced tighter regulation for uranium mill tailings to minimise the dangers of uranium extraction.
Uranium mill tailings are sandy materials produced as a by-product of uranium mining, which contain radioactive elements. The US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) states that only waste products produced by surface operations, such as in-situ recovery and ion exchanges, can be considered mill tailings, unlike waste materials left behind underground when ore bodies are depleted.
As a result, mill tailings can pose a threat to people, animals and the environment in the vicinity of a uranium mine, with water sources particularly vulnerable to surface waste.
Uranium operations in the US are governed by the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act, which places responsibility for the regulation and disposal of mining waste with individual states, rather than the NRC.
The Obama-era proposition sought to give the NRC greater authority over tailings regulation and removal, and would have addressed an imbalance in the number of states that regulate their own waste and those which rely on the NRC for guidance.
Currently, just 13 states defer to the NRC for tailing regulation……
While President Donald Trump, a steadfast Saudi ally, defended de facto ruler Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, he said the explanation had been marked by “deception and lies.’’ Bipartisan members of the U.S. Congress said it lacked credibility. France demanded more information, while Germany suspended arms sales.
Even Saudi Foreign Minister Adel al-Jubeir called Riyadh’s attempt to cover up the murder “a tremendous mistake,” though he stuck to the government’s line that Khashoggi, a Washington Post columnist, died after “discussions” turned violent.
Western leaders are balancing concerns about his death with their strategic interests. Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said the U.S. will continue its relationship with the world’s largest oil supplier, a major weapons buyer, while trying to “get to the bottom of what the facts are.”
Now the focus shifts to Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who’s promised to reveal tomorrow what happened to Khashoggi “in all its nakedness.” If he provides credible evidence that differs from the kingdom’s description, pressure to hold Saudi Arabia’s senior leadership accountable will intensify.
Total, the major French multinational oil and gas company, announced today a $300 million investment to install about 200 MW of solar capacity at 5,000 gas stations around the world. The investment is being presented as a way for Total’s operations to reduce its carbon footprint, but what if its the first step to convert the gas stations into electric vehicle charging stations?
As the global car fleet transition from being powered by gasoline and diesel to being powered by electricity, the refueling infrastructure is also bound to change. Gas stations have already mostly all become convenience stores, but they still depend on the traffic from drivers refueling their tanks.
Obviously, we will need less charging stations than gas stations when electric vehicles will be more common since the majority of the charging happens at home, but a significant number of stations will still be required for long distance travel and for EV owners without home access to charging, like apartment dwellers.
If you are to offer charging, you might as well produce the electricity from solar energy on location where it is economically viable, which is far from being everywhere yet, but it is quickly expanding in different markets.
Total didn’t specify where its new solar installations will be deployed other than at “5,000 of its service stations worldwide” including “800 in France” and they will be deployed over the next five years.
The panels will be supplied by Sunpower, which is owned by Total.
Philippe Sauquet, President of Gas, Renewables & Power at Total, commented on the announcement:
“The project is fully aligned with Total’s ambition of becoming the responsible energy major and its commitment to developing solar power. It will reduce our carbon emissions by 100,000 tons per year and cut our electricity bill by $40 million per year. The panels will be supplied by our affiliate SunPower, which offers the world’s most efficient solar technology. This project demonstrates Total’s confidence in SunPower, especially its ability to bring our customers competitive, clean energy.”
With charging stations and solar arrays being installed (separately for now) at gas stations around the world, I think we are seeing a glimpse of an important part of our future transport infrastructure starting to emerge. Soon enough, we should see stations with large solar arrays storing the electricity in battery packs and charging electric vehicles.
Metropolis interviews NGO leaders at the forefront of the recovery effort, BY SARAJEAN ROSSITTO OCTOBER 18, 2018 This past summer, while beaches in Fukushima were re-opening, UN experts were assessing how the nuclear disaster impacted people’s physical and mental health. The ending of government housing provision and living stipends for people from Fukushima in April 2017 greatly reduced the official numbers of disaster evacuees. Whatsmore, by making people from Fukushima invisible it gave the impression that problems were solved. I spoke with several NGO leaders about their work and the issues people from Fukushima face today. Meri Joyce, International Coordinator at Peace Boat, has been working on international programs and campaigns such as nuclear disarmament and Kazue Suzuki is an Energy Campaigner at Greenpeace Japan.
The impossible choice of returning to areas too contaminated to safely live or face economic hardship only exacerbates the victimization of the displaced in Fukushima. The lack of support systems, Suzuki said, resulted in people falling into poverty. Joyce further explained that it is hard for people to put down roots even if more areas are designated as “safe” because hard and soft infrastructure were lacking. Even if school buildings are safe, who will work in those schools? If businesses get up and running, are there any customers?
Greenpeace has served as witness to environmental risks in more than 55 nations for 47 years using non-violent direct action, advocacy and public education. Within days of 3/11, Amsterdam-based Greenpeace International dispatched experts to assist Greenpeace Japan with ocean radiation monitoring from a ship off the coast of Fukushima while other staff assessed terrestrial effects. Concerned that government radiation estimates were too conservative, they shared their radiation readings with governments, media and general public. To keep Fukushima visible, they release annual reports on radiation levels, the nuclear power industry and the socio-economic and health impacts the disaster on communities that depend on the nuclear power industry. Their 2017 report spotlighted rights’ violations — particularly those of women and children. A 2018 study shows that Fukushima radiation risks are expected to last into 2050 in some exclusion zone towns.
Since its founding, about 35 years ago, Peace Boat has been trying to stimulate public discussion on energy, nuclear weapons and development at the local, national and international levels. Joyce shared examples of how issues have impacted their ship programs. Since 2008 they have invited Hiroshima and Nagasaki hibakusha (people who experienced atomic/nuclear bombings) to join Peace Boat cruises where they share their experiences at ports of call. Students on board learn from these elders while also engaging in dialogue about what should be done to build a nuclear-free future. Since 2011, voyages have included sessions on learning from Fukushima and, in 2014, they launched the Fukushima Youth Ambassadors program. This provides youth the opportunity to leave social pressures behind and learn about struggles people face all over the world, while also discovering more opportunities for their future. Students who joined as junior high students after the disaster are now in university and mentoring younger students.
n January of 2012, in partnership with Greenpeace Japan (and others), Peace Boat organised the Global Conference on a Nuclear-Free World in Yokohama, to create a platform for a nuclear-free future and to build bridges between activists and ordinary citizens. An outcome of the Global Conference was the close collaboration between Peace Boat and the Fukushima Action Project (FAP), a local citizens’ group made up of residents and community leaders who have activated public engagement with government officials. The contents of the local nuclear power education center opened for school visits has been a focus point for dialogue. Some feedback has been incorporated, but given the gap in perspectives about nuclear power, FAP still works directly with the public. According to Joyce, an ongoing Peace Boat priority is to connect the local community to Tokyo and the international global community, so they support FAP by sharing access to the general public, international organizations and donors.
The “Lessons from Fukushima” booklet, created by a group of organizations, including Peace Boat, has been translated into 14 languages. Reaching people in countries such as Turkey and Poland where the Japanese government has been promoting nuclear power is part of their global strategy. While the official stance is that Japan can provide the safest power due to the Fukushima experience, the booklet illustrates real experiences and impacts.
Greenpeace Japan has been working with organizations such as Save the Children, Human Rights Now! and the Japan Bar Association to make the plight of people from Fukushima understood and have the voices of the people heard. They put pressure on the government by utilizing existing processes under international treaties and UN Human Rights systems. They have suggested new legislation in support of the victims such as free medical check-ups and treatment, radiation protection systems, establishment of the right to evacuate, dissemination of radiation protection information, participation of victims in decision making processes and the adaptation of UN principles for internally displaced persons.
Both organisations have directly engaged policymakers and bureaucrats in dialogue on energy policy, but activating the public remains necessary. Suzuki explained that local activism has been important for keeping the restarts of power plants at bay. Joyce added that decisions to restart plants are at the local government levels, but they need our support here in the capital where the media is based and where national policy decisions are made.
As this summer has shown, we do not know when the next disaster will strike and how our own lives may be affected, so we all need to get involved and not be under the false impression that everything is alright due to a lack of information.
Nuclear Plants Go Belly Up in Democratic Districts. Then What?, ROLL CALL, Jeremy Dillon, 22 Oct 18Most declining plants are in blue areas, and Congress is taking notice In Vermont, the relationship between the town of Vernon and its nuclear power plant, known as the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station, had always been contentious.From 1970s-era antinuclear protests to more recent legal battles over a proposal to extend the plant’s license, Vermont residents and their state legislature kept a skeptical eye on the power source, which at one point provided some 70 percent of the state’s electricity.
Still, when New Orleans-based Entergy announced in 2014 that it would close the plant by the end of the year and ahead of its intended closure in the 2030s, there wasn’t much celebration. Instead the community’s focus turned almost immediately to ensuring the plant was decommissioned as quickly and as safely as possible.
But as folks in Vernon and other communities across the country have learned as more nuclear plants reach the end of their operating lives, state and local governments have little legal or regulatory say over how companies approach the cleanup and radioactive legacy of their local nuclear power plants.
Adding to the tensions, federal regulators at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission are perceived in some of these communities as overly deferential to plant operators, though those decisions are backed by risk analysis.
“You have no control,” said Chris Campany, executive director of the Windham Regional Commission in Brattleboro, Vermont. “There’s an illusion of engagement, but it’s really only between the operator and the NRC.”
In the case of Vermont, which passed a state law requiring a citizen’s advisory panel, Entergy and citizens engaged in a public dialogue that did introduce more transparency into the process but ultimately resulted in little say for the community, according to the former chairwoman of the panel, Brattleboro resident Kate O’Connor.
“It was really frustrating,” O’Connor said. “You come to the realization that there really are no rules for decommissioning.”
Those complaints have registered with Vermont’s congressional delegation. “The people of Vernon, Vermont, have been knocking on the NRC’s doors trying to make sure they have a seat at the table,” said Rep. Peter Welch, a Democrat from the state. Communities should have a right to that input, he said. “Every community going through this is facing these concerns.”
The concerns — including how quickly plants are required to be torn down, how the owners pay for the cleanup and even enforcement of safety regulations — have lawmakers in Congress increasingly paying attention to the decommissioning process and the NRC’s role in it as the number of communities hosting shuttered or shuttering plants grows……..
The act of decommissioning a nuclear plant carries its own issues, such as the fact that almost every part of the plant has some level of radiological exposure that can harm humans. That means materials like cement and steel must be handled cautiously and go to landfills set aside for radioactive waste.
“Decommissioning is a gigantic industrial cleanup of huge industrial facilities that have a singular item, nuclear waste, that makes it more complicated and challenging than almost any other industrial cleanup,” said Geoffrey Fettus, a senior attorney with the Natural Resources Defense Council, at a congressional briefing this summer.
But radiation in concrete or worker clothing has a shorter half-life than the spent nuclear fuel sitting in pools on the site. For some of the isotopes in steel and concrete, the radioactivity decreases significantly after 50 years compared to the tens of thousands of years for the spent fuel……. https://www.rollcall.com/news/policy/nuclear-plants-democratic-districts-then-what
Ichiro Takekuro, a former vice president at Tokyo Electric Power Co., enters the Tokyo District Court in Tokyo’s Chiyoda Ward in this June 30, 2017
October 20, 2018
TOKYO — A former vice president at Fukushima Daiichi nuclear station operator Tokyo Electric Power Co. (TEPCO) told a court here on Oct. 19 that it was “natural” for the utility to put tsunami countermeasures at the plant on hold while it consulted experts.
Ichiro Takekuro, 72, is under indictment on charges of professional negligence resulting in death and injury over the nuclear disaster that broke out after tsunami hit the Fukushima Daiichi plant in March 2011. His testimony at the Tokyo District Court backed fellow defendant Sakae Muto, 68, who made the decision on the tsunami countermeasures.
TEPCO estimated in March 2008 that tsunami waves up to 15.7 meters high could hit the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant, based on a long-term evaluation made by the government’s Headquarters for Earthquake Research Promotion in 2002. While being aware of the company’s estimate, Muto put tsunami countermeasures on hold in July 2008 and instructed subordinates to ask experts to evaluate the reliability of the long-term evaluation.
A key point of contention in the trial is whether the Muto’s decision constituted “postponement” of countermeasures.
Sakae Muto, a former vice president at Tokyo Electric Power Co., enters the Tokyo District Court in Tokyo’s Chiyoda Ward in this June 30, 2017
Muto told earlier court hearings that he had informed Takekuro in August 2008 of the company’s maximum tsunami height estimate. However, Takekuro told the Oct. 19 hearing that he had no recollection of that, adding that he heard the estimate from another subordinate sometime in April or May 2009.
With regard to the government’s long-term evaluation, Takekuro said, “I heard that it wasn’t supported by specific proof. I thought thorough discussion was necessary if there were unclear factors,” again justifying Muto’s decision.
As to TEPCO’s estimation that 15.7-meter tsunami waves could hit the power station, Takekuro said he “didn’t feel any sense of urgency.”
Takekuro is standing trial along with Muto and former TEPCO President Tsunehisa Katsumata, 78, over the nuclear crisis.
Prosecutors had abandoned indicting the three. However, court-appointed lawyers indicted them after a prosecution inquest panel deemed twice that they deserved to stand trial.
The government concluded Friday that four companies had used foreign trainees to perform work cleaning up radioactive contamination after the March 2011 tsunami triggered meltdowns at the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear plant.
The headline figure from the final report on a survey conducted by the Justice Ministry, the labor ministry and the Organization for Technical Intern Training was the same as that in the interim report, released in mid-July, which reflected results of surveying fewer than 200 companies with foreign trainee programs.
Officials visited a total of 1,018 such companies with facilities in eight prefectures in eastern and northeastern Japan, interviewing technical interns there to confirm the situation, after the issue came to light in March.
Of the four companies, one in Iwate Prefecture has been banned from accepting foreign trainees for five years. It was found to have neglected to pay allowances for decontamination work, amounting to a combined ¥1.5 million, to three trainees.
The government has issued a similar ban for three years to a firm in Fukushima Prefecture for not paying a total of ¥180,000 to three interns for overtime work.
A company in Fukushima and another in Chiba Prefecture received warnings because foreign trainees there engaged in decontamination work, albeit for short periods of time. The names of the four companies were not revealed.
Justice Minister Takashi Yamashita told a news conference that the government gave guidance for improvement to three related regulatory organizations over insufficient inspections of companies with foreign technical interns.
“We will continue to work with the Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare and the Organization for Technical Intern Training to guide regulatory organizations and companies that accept technical interns, so they will not let them engage in decontamination work. We will take proper measures when we find inappropriate cases,” Yamashita said.
In March, a Vietnamese trainee at an Iwate Prefecture-based construction firm revealed he had been assigned to take part in radioactive decontamination work without being given sufficient explanation of the tasks involved.
The government announced later that month that it would not allow companies to use such foreign trainees for the removal of radioactive contamination, as such work is not consistent with the purpose of the program.
The technical trainee program was introduced in 1993 with the aim of transferring skills to developing countries. But it has drawn criticism both at home and abroad as being a cover for importing cheap labor for industrial sectors, including manufacturing and construction, where blue-collar workers are in short supply.
nuclear-news 