It was announced that a visiting delegation from the Democratic Party, who had visited Japan to check the site of the contaminated water at the Fukushima nuclear power plant, requested Tokyo Electric Power Co., Ltd. to provide raw data related to the contaminated water and the timing of the discharge of the contaminated water. The Japanese officials who went to the site and met said that the Japanese government and Tokyo Electric Power are not providing accurate information to residents, and that 70% of Fukushima local governments and tourism and agricultural organizations oppose the discharge of contaminated water from the Fukushima nuclear power plant.
They also urged the Japanese government to request provisional measures from the International Court of Law of the Sea to prevent the release of the fish.
The Democratic Party of Korea’s Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant Contaminated Water Discharge Blocking Response Team (Head Seong-gon Wi, Secretary Won-young Yang, Yeong-deok Yoon, and Jae-gap Yoon) held a press conference at the floor representative’s conference room in the main building of the National Assembly on the followingnoon of the 10th. Fukushima City announced the results of activities conducted near the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant.
“I visited Japan for 3 days and 1 night with the goal of conveying the concerns and opposition of the Korean people to the discharge of contaminated water from the Fukushima nuclear power plant and requesting data to confirm safety,” said Director Wie Seong-gon. He explained that he had interviews with professors and listened to various issues. However, Director Wi said, “I tried to visit the headquarters of Tokyo Electric Power in Japan, but the meeting was not successful due to TEPCO’s refusal to do so, but I issued an open letter.” I judge it to be,” he said.
In particular, Director Wi said, “We reaffirmed the public opinion of the Japanese public once morest the discharge of contaminated water from the Fukushima nuclear power plant.” We have created conditions for transparent information disclosure.”
According to the materials of the visiting group, Professor Emeritus Kumamoto said in an interview that “discharge of water from the Fukushima nuclear power plant of Tokyo Electric Power Co., Ltd. is an irreversible risk not only to the current generation but also to future generations and people around the world, including neighboring countries.” said, “Local residents also suspect that TEPCO is systematically blocking the disclosure of information that can verify the safety of contaminated water at the Fukushima nuclear power plant.”
Through a request (open letter) to TEPCO, the visiting delegation △accurate time of discharge of contaminated water from the Fukushima nuclear power plant △raw data on the generation and storage of contaminated water △sampling data to identify the current status of contaminated water at the nuclear power plant △operation of ALPS We requested data such as current status and raw data before and following treatment, △source data of contaminated water provided to the Pacific Island Forum (PIF) scientist panel, △whether or not and results of reviewing alternatives such as delaying ocean discharge decision and expansion of storage tanks.
In response to a media today reporter’s question regarding why TEPCO and others refused to meet, Rep. Yang Won-young said, “When I was first recruited, I asked for a meeting with the president, and the president replied that he was looking for a replacement because he had a schedule that day, so he said, ‘What kind of I was discussing whether to interview people, and I was suddenly notified that I might not meet unilaterally.” Director Wie Seong-gon said, “I made a request through the local coordinator on the same day, but I only received an answer saying, ‘I’ll pretend I didn’t hear it.'”
Director Wi said that all the residents he met at the site objected to the release and pointed out that it would be possible to build a land tank to store it, but it was not done due to cost issues. Director Wi said that residents find it hard to believe that the Japanese government, TEPCO and NSSC are not providing enough information and are providing distorted information. In particular, it is explained that these residents contacted and met the government and Taoist power for more than 10 years following the accident, but it has always been so, and it is difficult to believe in this release decision. In addition, 70% of Fukushima local governments oppose it, and fisheries groups, environmental groups, and tourism groups also said they actually oppose it.
Internationally, the Democratic Party emphasized that China and Russia are expressing their opposition, as well as the PIF Pacific Islands member countries and Taiwan. Director Wie Seong-gon said, “The only things left are Korea and the United States,” and “Korea is unable to decide its position. The United States supports Japan’s position, but Japanese scholars and civil society organizations in the United States oppose it,” he said.
In particular, they were concerned that if the contaminated water from the nuclear power plant is discharged, it causes damage through deposition and accumulation, destroys the marine ecosystem, and makes it impossible for the fishery to make a living. Director Wi said, “The government, which is responsible for the lives and safety of the people, should not leave it to the IAEA, but rather verify it on our own, and if it is confirmed, do you think it can be approved?” No,” he criticized.
Rep. Yang Won-young said, “What we have confirmed is that even though the ALPS is treated water following (contaminated water) has been applied once, a large amount of substances such as plutonium and uranium 238 that are dissolved in nuclear fuel are dissolved in the treated water, and the entire treated water It was confirmed that 66% of the water is in a storage tank that is 2 to 4 times higher than the standard value and is 19,900 times higher,” he said.
Rep. Yoon Young-deok said, “According to the report to the National Assembly, the government has formed a task force in the Office for Government Policy Coordination to respond to the discharge of contaminated water from nuclear power plants. As a researcher at the Institute of Technology, he pointed out that there are limitations in disclosing (the content of investigations or observations) due to the provisions of the confidentiality memorandum.
Rep. Yoon also said that the IAEA’s expert monitoring group “only verifies the feasibility of TEPCO’s plan to discharge contaminated water from nuclear power plants into the ocean, and does not review the third plan” and “does not verify the biological effect”. It was criticized for being flawed in that there is. For this reason, it is pointed out that there is distrust in Japan as well.
Regarding realistic ways to prevent it, Director Wie Seong-gon said, “If we file a complaint with the United Nations Court of the Law of the Sea and request provisional measures, the act itself can be stopped.” Rep. Yang Won-young said, “The government has no choice but to make a decision, but I think the best thing the opposition party can do is to act like this, and try to form international solidarity for more pressure.” is the best,” he replied.
Regarding the government and ruling party’s criticism of the ‘second mad cow disease’, ‘pro-Japanese acts helping Japan’, and ’empty-handed diplomacy’, Director Wie Seong-gon said, “If that’s the case, I want to ask the government and the ruling party. What is the position of the government and the ruling party regarding the discharge of contaminated water from the Fukushima nuclear power plant, and what are the countermeasures?” Director Wi said, “Is the issue for the people’s life and safety such a matter of disparaging and ridiculing the opposition party?”
Park Hong-geun, floor leader, also attended a press conference that day and said, “How long will the government keep an eye on the Japanese government when it comes to matters of life and safety?” We need to take appropriate countermeasures at the national level.” Won-nae Park said, “Please tell the public in detail how the relevant ministries are responding,” and emphasized, “We must actively request information from the Japanese government through joint responses from neighboring countries.”
