Monday, June 13, 2011

#Fukushima I Nuke Plant: 6 More Workers Exceeded 250 Millisievert Limit

They are all TEPCO employees. One of them worked in the central control rooms for the Reactors 3 and 4, five others worked outside the control rooms, maintaining electrical and measuring equipments.

NISA's Nishiyama says it is regrettable.

Mainichi Shinbun Japanese (6/13/2011):

 東京電力福島第1原発で緊急作業に従事する東京電力社員2人の被ばく線量が限度(250ミリシーベルト)の倍以上の600ミリシーベルト超だった 問題で、厚生労働省は13日、東電の簡易検査で新たに6人が限度を超えた可能性があると発表した。いずれも東電の男性社員で、最高値は内部被ばくと外部被 ばくを合わせて497ミリシーベルト。現在、精密な検査を受けている。

The Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare announced on June 13 that 6 additional workers at Fukushima I Nuclear Power Plant may have exceeded the radiation exposure limit of 250 millisieverts. It was revealed by the quick testing done by TEPCO. All of them were male TEPCO employees. The maximum radiation was 497 millisieverts, counting both the external and the internal radiation exposures. They are currently undergoing more detailed testing. Earlier, two TEPCO employees at the plant had exceeded the limit, with the total radiation exposure of over 600 millisieverts.

 同省によると、東日本大震災以降、6人のうち1人が3、4号機の中央制御室におり、5人は室外で電気機器や計測機器の保守に従事していた。また、 この他に6人(東電社員4人、協力会社員2人)が200~250ミリシーベルトを被ばくした疑いがあり、同省は東電にこの12人を緊急作業から外すよう指 示した。

According to the Ministry, one of them has worked in the central control rooms for the Reactors 3 and 4 since the March 11 earthquake/tsunami, and the other 5 have worked outside the control rooms maintaining the electrical and measurement equipments. 6 additional workers (4 TEPCO employees, 2 TEPCO affiliate company employees) may also have received between 200 to 250 millisieverts radiation. The Ministry has instructed TEPCO to remove these 12 workers from the work at the plant.

 東電はこれまで緊急作業に従事してきた約3700人の被ばく線量の検査を進め、13日までに約2300人分の結果を同省に報告した。【井上英介】

TEPCO has been testing the radiation exposure levels of 3,700 workers who have worked at the plant so far, and reported the result of about 2,300 workers by June 13.

◇保安院「遺憾」

NISA "Regrettable"

 東電の松本純一原子力・立地本部長代理は「事故初期は空気中の放射性物質の検査ができておらず、作業環境の認識が不十分だったのが作業員の内部被ばくにつながった。マスクの着用状況など今後調査したい」と述べた。

Junichi Matsumoto of TEPCO said, "Initially, we did not conduct the radionuclide analysis in the air and we didn't fully understand the work condition, and that led to the internal radiation of the workers. We will investigate the situation further, including whether the workers wore masks."

 経済産業省原子力安全・保安院の西山英彦審議官は「極めて遺憾。東電に対し、6人についての被ばく量が確定次第、すみやかな報告と徹底的な原因究明を指示したい」と話した。

The Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency (NISA) spokesman Hidehiko Nishiyama said, "It is highly regrettable. As soon as the definite numbers for the radiation exposures for the 6 workers become known, we will instruct TEPCO to report immediately and to investigate the cause thoroughly."

3 months after the accident, in the NISA's mind it is still a local accident caused by a private business.

5 comments:

Matt said...

They didn't understand the work conditions or check for airborne radiation. The people in charge are a joke.

dharmasyd said...

I'd like fuller reporting on the health of workers. It seems that we are only given individual reports, without names and without follow up.

The first one I heard of was during the first week, a worker fell off a crane. Then there were the 2 workers who were standing in radioactive water.

I'd like to see some cumulative data, numbers, conditions, follow up. What has happened to the workers whose accidents and exposures were mentioned at first, but then just disappeared?

Anonymous said...

Robbie001 sez:

Unfortunately you probably won't see any detailed information because the workers don't want to officially join the ranks of the Hibakusha. There is evidence that evacuees are facing discrimination because of contamination fears.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hibakusha#Discrimination

Anonymous said...

Robbie001 sez:

If you aren't familiar with the term Relative Biological Effectiveness or RBE you many want to read up on the subject. It is a radiation weighting factor used to derive a biological equivalent dose. Not all ionizing radiation types do the same damage per unit. Nuclear apologist tend to avoid detailed talk about internal exposure and RBE especially alpha inhalation hazards because it doesn't paint a pretty picture.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relative_biological_effectiveness

And then there is also the chemical toxicity of some unstable isotopes.

" Uranium-238 is both radioactive and very toxic. Its half-life of 4.5 billion years means that only a few atoms emit radiation at a time. A sample containing enough atoms to pose a radiation hazard contains enough atoms to pose a chemical hazard. As a result, EPA regulates uranium-238 as both a chemical and a radiation hazard."

"Radioactive isotopes of lead are both radioactive and toxic. In spite of the severe effects of lead on the brain and the nervous system, the radiation hazard is greater. However, the radioactive forms of lead are so uncommon that paint or other lead containing products do not contain enough radioactive lead to present a radiation hazard. (Fukushima will generate radioactive lead) As a result, EPA regulates lead as a chemical hazard."

http://www.epa.gov/rpdweb00/understand/health_effects.html#typeandexposure

Now of course there have been problems with radioactive lead in some consumer products you just need to know where to look.

http://www.osha.gov/dts/hib/hib_data/hib19970624.html

"Some of the recent publications have made some very strong statements about the significance of these levels of radiation such as: E.A. Martell, Nature, 249, 217 (1974): 'Thus, is seems that alpha radiation from [Polonium-210] in insoluble smoke particles may be the primary agent of bronchial cancer in smoking."

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Radioactive_Lead_and_Polonium-210_in_tobacco_smoke

Radiological And Chemical Toxicity

www.cea.fr/var/cea/storage/static/gb/library/.../encadredgb.pdf -

Anonymous said...

"Initially, we did not conduct the radionuclide analysis in the air and we didn't fully understand the work condition, and that led to the internal radiation of the workers. We will investigate the situation further, including whether the workers wore masks."

Criminal negligence, at the very, very least.

Post a Comment