  Thorough investigation into Mihama N-power plant accident is essential -- Akahata editorial, October 7The Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency has released an interim report on a pipe rupture accident in the No. 3 reactor at the Mihama Nuclear Power Plant of Kansai Electric Power Co. that caused eleven casualties. Although it is necessary to conduct thorough investigations into the cause of the accident to ensure safety, what the interim report points out is far from sufficient to prevent a similar accident from occurring. Lack of awareness of the danger Firstly, the interim report only concludes that a "fault in checking thinning pipes" or an exclusion of pipes from the inspection checklist was the cause of the accident, but it does not answer the most important question: why did the fault occur and why was it allowed to continue? After the accident, an inspection team also found that in the No.1 reactor at Tomari and the No.2 reactor at the Tsuruga plant a similar fault in the checklist had been discovered and corrected. In addition, Nihon Arm Co., which took over the inspection work, had already discovered that coolant pipe parts were missing from the inspection process in April last year. However, the inspection was postponed to August this year. There were chances to prevent the accident, but measures that KEPCO, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd., and Nihon Arm took are almost unmentioned in the interim report. Has the incomplete inspection checklist been recognized as a serious fault? Behind unchecked human errors and disregard of regulations is a lack of awareness of danger with the propagation of the "myth of safety". This is the biggest lesson we learned from the 1999 nuclear criticality accident at the JCO uranium reprocessing plant in Tokaimura, Ibaraki Prefecture. Relevant laws were revised after the revelation of cover-ups of damage at Tokyo Electric Power Co.'s nuclear power plant two years ago, so the government now can exercise the right to conduct an investigation not only in power companies but also inspection work companies. By using this right, thorough investigations should be conducted. Secondly, the interim report ignores KEPCO's profit-first policy that downplays the importance of safety. KEPCO excluded some pipes from its checklist on the grounds that their conditions can be known by analogy with checked pipes. KEPCO also overestimated the pipes' durability based on an arbitrary interpretation of technological standards. The report revealed these tricks but failed to mention that the omission was motivated by the cost-cutting policy. While calling for careful inspections to be carried out at old nuclear power plants, the report failed to point out that the regular check-ups have been conducted in a shorter period of time to reduce costs. A cause of the eleven casualties at the Mihama Nuclear Power Plant was that many workers were called up to prepare for regular inspections while the reactor was in operation in order to shorten the check-up period. It is necessary to unravel the situation in which the importance of safety is underrated for the sake of the profit-first policy related to electricity privatization Thirdly, the report failed to mention the responsibility of the government which has overlooked the faulty safety control. Four years ago, the Ministry of International Trade and Industry (present Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry) accepted as appropriate KEPCO's report that appropriate standards for check-ups are set up and applied to the pipes in the No.3 rector at the Mihama plant. Despite a revision following the accident, this year's METI inspection on KEPCO nuclear power plants assessed that the system of quality management is working. Further study is required to ascertain if the safety check system that was introduced to learn lessons from the criticality accident at JCO Co. has really been working. Government inspections failed to spot the faulty safety control. It is because the safety agency is supervised by the METI, and there is no regulatory institution independent of pro-nuclear energy administrative ministries. Need for independent investigators Drastic measures to ensure safety can be established only when the report makes clear the optimism in perceiving dangers, the policy of giving priority to securing profits over ensuring safety, and eventually questions the responsibility of the government. If the safety agency is incapable of fully probing into the cause of accidents, it is necessary to establish an independent investigative committee with the capacity of scientific and objective investigations to carry out thorough probes, as is called for by the government of Fukui Prefecture. (end) |