Greenpeace | Radioactivity on the Move 2020

Radioactivity
on the Move 2020

Recontamination and Weather-related E ffects
in Fukushima
March 20201

Greenpeace | Radioactivity on the Move 2020

Contents
04

1. Executive summary06

2. Introduction

08

3. Radiation survey methodology

10

4. Namie and Okuma exclusion zone survey results

17

5. Lifted evacuation areas - Namie and Iitate23

6. Typhoon Hagibis effect?
Radioactive mobility and recontamination resulting
from high rainfall

26

7. The 2020 Olympics

32

8. Conclusion and recommendations

Radiation risks (including hotspots) and human rights

36

Endnotes

37

Appendix

Greenpeace Japan Survey Report, March 2020
Nuclear Monitoring & Radiation Protection Survey Team:
Coordinators: Shaun Burnie, Michael Meyer-Krotz (Greenpeace Germany), andJan Vande Putte (Greenpeace Belgium)
Radiation Protection Advisors: Mai Suzuki (Greenpeace Japan), Ray Lei (Greenpeace East Asia),
Heinz Smital (Greenpeace Germany) and Mathieu Soete (Greenpeace Belgium)
Team members: Mari Chang (Greenpeace East Asia), Kazue Suzuki, Mitsuhisa Kawase andMaia Baconguis (Greenpeace Japan)
UAV technology development: Steve Wallace
Survey data compilation: Mai Suzuki and Jan Vande Putte
Report and analysis written by Shaun Burnie and Kazue Suzuki
Editing by Aniello Alioto and Maia Baconguis (Greenpeace Japan)
Photographs: © Christian Åslund / Greenpeace, Shaun Burnie / Greenpeace
A very special thanks to all house owners in Namie, Iitate, and Okuma and in particular Fukushima evacuees
Ms. Kanno and Mr. Anzai who were so very generous with their time and much appreciated and necessary
guidance during our survey work. We also would like to express our deep appreciation to Japanese citizens
who kindly donated to this project. Their critical support made this survey project possible.
2

Greenpeace | Radioactivity on the Move 2020

Cover: Aerial view of Azuma baseball stadium inFukushima city which will host baseball and softballgames during the 2020 Olympic (October, 2019)
Page 2-3: Radiation survey team along Abukuma river inFukushima prefecture (October, 2019)3© Christian Åslund / Greenpeace

Greenpeace | Radioactivity on the Move 2020

1

Executive summary
Greenpeace Japan’s latest extensive radiation survey
has found evidence of recontamination caused by
Typhoon Hagibis, which released radioactive cesium
from the forested mountains of Fukushima prefecture
which make up 70% of the region, and which cannot
feasibly be decontaminated. The Greenpeace Nuclear
Monitoring and Radiation Protection survey teamobserved concentrated radiation levels throughout
Fukushima Prefecture, including significant radiation
hotspots, localized areas where radioactivity has
been observed at higher levels than in previous years,
a reduction in radiation levels in some areas, andrecontamination elsewhere. This ongoing radiologicalemergency in parts of Fukushima prefecture runs
directly counter to the narrative of the Japanese
government which continues to push its propagandaof normalization in Fukushima.

streets of central Fukushima City, including tens ofmeters from the entrance to the Shinkansen train
line to Tokyo, highlights the ongoing scale of thenuclear disaster in 2011 and the continuing need fordecontamination.
In the case of the J-Village, our conclusion is thatradioactive contamination is not under control.
The situation remains complex, with high levels ofradiation in the area having the potential to spreadand re-concentrate with additional amounts of heavy
rainfall. The highest radiation hotspot identified by
Greenpeace at J-Village on 26 October was 71 microSieverts per hour (µSv/h) close to the surface and 32µSv/h at 10 cm (i.e. over 1,750 times above pre-2011
background levels). This prompted Greenpeace Japanto provide details to the Japanese government,
as well as the domestic and international Olympic
committees and Fukushima prefecture, calling for:The survey, which was conducted during three weeks
of October and November 2019 by Greenpeace’s
survey team, also identified high-level radiation
hotspots, including within Fukushima City. The
complexity of the radiological situation in Fukushima
prefecture, specifically in both the open and exclusion
zones of Namie, Iitate, and Okuma, leads Greenpeace
Japan to conclude that levels remain too high for thesafe return of thousands of evacuees to these areas.

1. an immediate extensive radiation survey of the
public area in and around the J-Village andnearby Olympic/Paralympic venues;
2. decontamination of the identified hotspots inparticular, but also of a wider area of soil (grass,forests, etc.) near the public area; and3. regular screening of the radiation levels in
J-Village to monitor possible re-contaminationof public areas.

The survey took place in the immediate aftermathof Typhoon Hagibis during which heavy rainfall fell
across Japan. The survey team found significant
variation in radiation levels at specific locations
when compared with previous years, suggesting thatthe radiation levels were affected by the weather.
The Greenpeace survey team extended its survey tolocations related to the upcoming Olympic Games inFukushima. Radiation levels were measured at both
the Azuma stadium and in central Fukushima City,
where two Olympic events will be held in summer
2020, as well as at the J-Village in Iwaki, where theOlympic Torch Relay will start.

Whilst the Japanese government generally chooses
to ignore the presence of radiation hotspots evenafter notification from Greenpeace Japan, thegovernment issued instructions to Tokyo ElectricPower Company (TEPCO) on 3 December 2019
to decontaminate the three highest contaminatedspots specifically identified in the communique by
Greenpeace Japan on 18 November 2019.
On 13 December our survey team returned to
the J-Village and found additional radiation
hotspots. Remarkably, we also found that standard
procedures for decontamination, including removalof contamination up to 20 meters from publicroads, had not been followed by TEPCO. In thiscase, only the few specific 1 square meter hotspots
were removed, despite the fact that the wider
surroundings also showed high levels of radiation.
As a high profile location for the start of the Olympic

The survey team discovered the widespreadpresence of radioactive hotspots in Fukushima Cityand the J-Village. Over a period of four hours, theGreenpeace survey team identified 45 hotspots inthe streets of Fukushima City in the area aroundthe central station. The fact that these hotspots arelocated in public areas along the pavements and04

Greenpeace | Radioactivity on the Move 2020

• In the interests of worker protection, suspend
current decontamination programs in the “Difficult
to Return” zones;

Torch Route one would have expected the authorities
to have made all possible efforts to remove highconcentrations of radiation upon specific notification
by Greenpeace Japan. The fact that this has notbeen done, raises many questions and uncertainties,
including how such high levels of radiation (71 µSv/h
at close to surface) were not detected during theearlier decontamination work by TEPCO.

• E
 stablish a fully transparent process to reflect
and consider residents’ opinions on evacuation
policy, including opening a council of citizens
including all evacuees;• P rovide full compensation and financial support
to evacuees, and take measures to reduceradiation exposure based on science and theprecautionary principle to protect public healthand allow citizens to decide whether to return or
relocate free from duress and financial coercion;
and,Through the support of local citizens, Greenpeace
was able to continue its survey work in Iitate
and Namie as well as in the highly contaminatedexclusion zone of Namie and Okuma.
The complex conditions in Fukushima resulting fromthe 2011 Daiichi triple reactor meltdown cannot beignored to suit the propaganda objectives of theJapanese government. Neither can this complexity
be explained in absolutist, simplistic slogans – forexample, neither “all is under control” nor “all of
Fukushima is radioactive and dangerous” reflect thereality. Such an approach is an enormous disservice
to the people of Fukushima.

• R espond in full to the offer of dialogue andguidance from UN Special Rapporteurs, including
accepting outstanding requests for Special
Rapporteurs to visit Japan.

The complexity of the radiation situation in
Fukushima needs to be further studied, explained,
and understood by the wider Japanese society
and international community. The attention Japan,
including Fukushima prefecture, will receive in 2020
as a result of the Olympic games is an opportunity
for attaining a deeper understanding of theconsequences of the Fukushima Daiichi disaster.

Recommendations to the Japanese
government and Fukushima Prefecture• S uspend the current return policy which ignores
Fukushima citizens and ignores science-based
analysis, including potential lifetime exposure
risks;• Immediately clarify its long-term decontamination
target of 0.23 μSv/h, equal to 1 mSv/y exposure
based on the government’s calculation, including
setting a date for when 0.23 μSv/h is to beattained, and halt any plans to revise the target
level to a higher limit;• U rgently assess the risks posed by radioactive
hotspots, including the presence of cesiumrich microparticles, including the long-term
consequences for public health;• A bandon plans to lift evacuation orders in thesix municipalities of Futaba, Okuma, Namie,
Tomioka, Iitate and Katsurao, including the Namie
districts of Tsushima, Murohara, Suenomori andObori;

05

Greenpeace | Radioactivity on the Move 2020

2

Introduction
Complexity of radiological situation

further evidence of the complex reality that remains
in Fukushima despite the Japanese government’s
propaganda of “normalization”.

The results of Greenpeace Japan’s latest survey inareas of Fukushima prefecture continue to reveal thehighly complex nature of radioactive contamination,with evidence that recontamination and levels ofradiation exposure remain too high for the safe
return of populations to Iitate, Namie and Okuma.

Radiation, Human Rights and the Olympics
In the last two years, there have been multiple
and sustained interventions from United Nations
Human Rights Special Rapporteurs (SRs) and other
United Nations (UN) Human Rights bodies whichhave exposed and challenged Japanese government
Fukushima Reconstruction policies as they relate
to the rights of children, women, and the wider
community of evacuees from Fukushima Prefecture(see Appendix). The rights of tens of thousands ofnuclear and decontamination workers have also
been raised by UN SRs. Despite the extensively
documented failure of the Japanese government tocomply with its international obligations to protect
human rights, including the setting of unacceptable
and hazardous public radiation exposure limits,
the Japanese government remains committed topolicies which aim to pressure tens of thousandsof Japanese Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) toreturn to their former homes.

The survey was conducted from 17th October to 4th
November 2019, in both the open and closed areasof Namie and Okuma municipalities, as well as theopen area in the village of Iitate. While the survey
schedule had been planned months in advance, theGreenpeace survey team found itself in Fukushima
in the immediate aftermath of Typhoon Hagibis,
also known as Typhoon No.19. This exceptional
typhoon deposited large volumes of rain acrossJapan, including in Fukushima Prefecture. In recent
years, scientists have been reporting the effectof heavy rainfall leading to increased migration ofradioactivity from mountainous forests throughthe river systems. When flooding occurs, thisleads to increased radionuclide deposition andrecontamination of land downstream. Greenpeace
Japan documented this occurrence in 2016 in its
report Radiation Reloaded, and highlighted the issue
that due to the impossibility of decontamination
throughout the mountainous forests of Fukushima,
which make up 70% of the region, high amounts ofrainfall had the potential to lead to significant land
contamination (including recontamination) as well as
an influx of radioactivity into the Pacific Ocean.

Radiation levels remain one, but not the only factor,
in determining whether people return to Fukushima.
As the latest population figures show, in the mostcontaminated areas of Fukushima the Japanese
government has largely failed in its aim of convincing
people that radiation dose rates are at a level
where it is safe to return. It is therefore importantto understand that in 2020 the Abe governmentis extending its efforts to convince the people ofJapan, including Fukushima citizens, that nine
years after the beginning of the Fukushima Daiichi
accident, radiation levels pose no risk, and that thesituation is ‘under control’. The platform for thisattempt to distort the complex reality in Fukushima
will be the XXXII Olympiad, better known as the2020 Tokyo Summer Olympics and Paralympics. For
the Japanese government these are labeled as the‘Reconstruction Olympics’, a branding that attempts
to change the perception of the region of Japandevastated by the tragic events of 11 March 2011.

Greenpeace used the opportunity of being inFukushima immediately following Typhoon Hagibis’s
heavy rainfall to determine if it was possible toidentify specific radiological impacts. As we
explain in this report, we found strong indicationsof weather-related effects where radioactivity
levels were significantly different from past years inpatterns that could not be explained by radioactive
decay. The Greenpeace Nuclear Monitoring
and Radiation Protection survey team observed
concentrated radiation levels throughout Fukushima
Prefecture, including significant radiation hotspots,
localized areas where radioactivity has been
observed at higher levels than in previous years,
a reduction in radiation levels in some areas, andrecontamination elsewhere. These examples areGreenpeace Japan takes no formal position on
the decision to host the 2020 Olympics in Japan.
06

Survey in Namie exclusion zone,
Fukushima prefecture.
Novermber 1, 2019

However, the decision to host two sporting eventsin Fukushima City raises genuine and importantquestions about radiation risks. Of great concern
is the route of the Olympic Torch Relay throughall the municipalities of Fukushima prefecture,including the districts of Iitate, Namie, and Okuma.
Greenpeace has measured radiation levels in boththe open areas of these municipalities and, in theremaining exclusion zones, and it is clear thatradiation levels are too high for the safe return ofthe population.

07© Shaun Burnie / Greenpeace

What does all this mean for the hosting of Olympic
events, including for athletes and visitors, and,most importantly, for residents? By conducting
extensive radiation investigations, Greenpeace
Japan attempts to explain the complex radiologicalenvironment, where nothing is straightforward.

Greenpeace | Radioactivity on the Move 2020

3

Radiation
surveymethodology© Shaun Burnie / Greenpeace

The Greenpeace radiation team used different
methods for survey work. Radio-cesiums (Cs137 and Cs-134) contribute almost all (98%) of
the long-term cumulative exposure. During the
Fukushima nuclear disaster, equal amounts of Cs137 and of Cs-134 were released.

• In line with scientific standards, statistics arecollected for each of these zones (average,
minimum, and maximum for each zone). The
average of all the zones of one house and landarea is then calculated as a weighted average,
with the same weight for each zone. This also
allows a comparison between different years (asthe number of measurement points for each year
is not identical).

Scanning
Systematic measurements:• Ambient dose rate measured at one meter(m) with a highly-efficient and calibrated NaI
scintillator (Georadis RT30: 2000 cps / μSv.h-1(Cs-137) with one measurement each second.
• Walking in a systematic way, without searchingfor hotspots, where possible in a grid pattern.
• We took measurements around individual
houses (with permission of the owners of thehouses). The area around each house wasdivided into zones (typically: a field, path, andforests around the house) and each zone wasmeasured separately. We defined around 5-10
zones around each house, with a minimum of
100 measurement points per zone, and a medianrange of 200 - 300 points per zone. The overall
total of radiation measurement points for eachhouse and land area typically ranged between
3,000 - > 5,000 points.

Hotspots
In addition, radiation hotspots, which are areas withconcentrated radioactivity, as well as other points
of interest around the houses, were identified andmeasured as follows:• Ambient dose rate at 10 / 50 / 100 cm using
a NaI scintillator (Radeye PRD- ER) and GPS
position from handheld Garmin Montana 650
were used.
• These points were collected for each of thedefined zones.

Car Scanning
To cover a wider area, we also measured radiationlevels from a vehicle, with the Georadis RT30
mounted outside the vehicle opposite the driver’s
08

Greenpeace | Radioactivity on the Move 2020

side of the vehicle at 1 meter above the street level,
recording one measurement every second.

importantly, we used a very light but sensitive
CsI(Tl) thallium activated caesium iodide scintillator
Kromek (Sigma-50), a LIDAR system to measure
the altitude, a precise GPS system for locating
the measurements, and a radio transmission tohave real-time readings on the ground. The data
was recorded and synchronized on a Raspberry Pi
mini-computer mounted under the UAV, with one
reading (GPS coordinates, altitude, and radiation
measurements) every second.

Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Scanning
The systematic measurements with the Georadis
and precise Global Navigation Satellite System(GPS) have proven to be highly accurate and reliable.
As mentioned later in this report and in earlier
Fukushima reports from Greenpeace Japan in 2018,the measurements collected since 2015 allow us tocompare trends in radiation levels. However, there
are some limitations to this approach. As 70% of
Fukushima prefecture is mountainous forest there isa physical challenge to accessing on foot, including
areas where vegetation is becoming more dense
each year. Precise replication between one year andthe next under such conditions is difficult. Given thegrowth of vegetation in evacuated areas such as in
the “Difficult to Return” Namie areas, access has
been particularly problematic around houses and in
the surrounding forests.

Our new monitoring system is performing extremely
well. We tested the use of the UAV monitor atdifferent altitudes and found multiple applications
starting from low altitude at 2 meter up to more than
100 meter. Even at 100 m, which enables virtually
all obstacles to be avoided (but still well below
the Japanese regulatory limit of 150 m for UAV
permissible altitudes), the sensitivity of the Kromek
Sigma-50 is sufficient with a count rate mostly
between 500-4000 cps in the areas we measured,
including the more highly contaminated areas in the“Difficult to Return” area in Namie.

In order to surmount these limitations, in 2018 wedeveloped a highly sensitive Unmanned Aerial
Vehicle (UAV) measurement system (i.e. drone). The
availability of technology that is both light and very
sensitive allowed us to demonstrate, in October
2018, the feasibility of precise measurementsfrom the air. From the technology point of view,
we deployed the DJI Matrice 200 UAV. More

After a successful demonstration of the concept
in 2018 and 2019, in 2020 Greenpeace will further
calibrate the UAV monitor. A detailed explanation of
the methodology and results will be given once thesystem is fully operational.

M ap1: Fukushima Special Decontamination
Area – SDA. Whole area decontamination in the
SDA was completed at the end of March 2017.
(Source: Environmental Remediation in Affected
Areas in Japan December, 2018 Ministry of theEnvironment, Japan)

09

Greenpeace | Radioactivity on the Move 2020

4

Namie and Okuma
exclusion zone
survey results
The global standard for radiation exposure is set by the International
Commission for Radiation Protection (ICRP). The maximum recommended
exposure for the general public was one milliSievert per year (mSv/y), andthis was applied by the Japanese government until 2012. However, as resultof the contamination of Fukushima prefecture by the nuclear disaster, theselevels were exceeded. As part of its strategy to lift evacuation orders, theJapanese government in April 2012 increased the maximum recommended
annual exposure to twenty (20) mSv/y.1
Before the March 2011 Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster, the averageradiation levels in Fukushima prefecture were 0.04 μSv/h. In March 2012, theJapanese government set a long-term decontamination target of 0.23 μSv/h,
which they calculate (if attained) would lead to a maximum annual exposureof 1 mSv. However, as this survey report and earlier Greenpeace Japansurveys have shown, in many areas of Fukushima, in particular in Iitate,
Namie, and Okuma, the levels far exceed 0.23 μSv/h. The government, nine
years after the start of the disaster and after 2.8 trillion yen assigned to its
decontamination program, has still failed to provide any timeframe for when it
thinks it will reach the 0.23 μSv/h target. As our 2018 report detailed, in somecases it will be well into the 22nd century and beyond when levels in someareas will reach 0.23 μSv/h, which remains nearly six (6) times higher thanbackground levels pre-March 2011.

Namie exclusion zone
House of Ms. Kanno
The home of Ms. Kanno is located in Shimo-Tsushima in the district ofNamie, 30 km west-northwest of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant. It was
subjected to significant radiation contamination resulting from the March2011 nuclear accident. The government selected Ms. Kanno’s house fordemonstrating its decontamination techniques and her home was subjected
to considerable effort during December 2011 and February 2012. Greenpeace
conducted its first radiation survey at the home of Ms. Kanno in September
2017, with a follow up survey in October 2018. In October 2019, we returnedto Ms. Kanno’s home with a focus on the immediate area around the house,
as well as on the family’s farmland and forest.
Overall, the weighted average recorded in October 2019 was 0.9 μSv/h forthe seven zones measured, compared with 1.3 μSv/h for the four zones
measured in 2018 (Table 1). Maximum levels in October 2019 were 2.2 μSv/hcompared with 5.9 μSv/h in 2018, and 5.8 μSv/h in 2017.
10

Greenpeace | Radioactivity on the Move 2020

There are significant variations that cannot be explained either byradioactive decay or by further official decontamination. Overall, the fourzones for which we have data from 2018 and 2019, show a reduction of
31% on the average levels in a year, which is significant, compared with azero reduction between 2017 and 2018. One plausible explanation for thiscontrast may be the absence of major rainfall comparable with Typhoon
Hagibis, which struck Japan in October 2019, during the year preceding our2018 survey. An explanation for the significant reduction in both the averageand maximum levels for all zones can be found in zone 9, the path to therice field. Here the average radiation measurement declined from 1.6 μSv/h
in 2018 to 1.1 μSv/h in 2019, and the maximum declined from 5.9 μSv/h to
2.1 μSv/h in the respective years. The question is: why this reduction in thiszone? Greenpeace Japan’s analysis indicates that the lower radiation levels
measured in 2019 very possibly could be the result of the very high rainfall
experienced during Typhoon Hagibis.
Annual radiation dose rates for 30% of the areas measured at Ms. Kanno’s
house (Table 2) could lead to an exposure between 5-10 mSv/y based onJapanese government methodology and between 8-17 mSv/y based onsustained exposure over one full year. 2 The International Commission on
Radiological Protection (ICRP) recommendation for the public sets the
maximum additional recommended dose at 1 mSv/y. 3 100% of the 3,722
measuring points exceeded the government’s current long-term radiation
target level of 0.23 μSv/h. In zone 1, which is in the immediate vicinityof the house (within 5-10 meters) and where workers had conducteddecontamination, radiation levels were on average 0.5 μSv/h in 2019,
compared to 0.6 μSv/h in 2018.

< = 2 and > =1.5μSv/h< 1.5 and > =1 μSv/h< 1 and > = 0.5μSv/h

9
Rice field
North

6

Gray areas are zones not measured in 201995
Forest behind
housePath to rice fieldNorth

Around house

Farmland

1

4

2

3
Garden and farmland

Diagram1: Schematic of Ms. Kanno’s housein Shimo-Tsushima, Namie exclusionzone, Fukushima prefecture, showing thedesignated Zones for the Greenpeaceradiation survey team.

8
7

Road

11

Rice field, South

Aroundwarehouseand path

Greenpeace | Radioactivity on the Move 2020

The house itself is surrounded on three sides by forest which has grownextensively since 2011. The survey results in zone 5 (see Table 1), a forest
area just behind the house, reveal the limited impact of decontamination
as well as variations in radiation levels for which there are no obvious
explanations. The average of the radiation levels measured in zone 5 were
1.5 μSv/h, with peak levels of 2.2 μSv/h in 2019 (compared with 2.0 μSv/h
and 2.4 μSv/h in 2018 respectively). The 25% reduction in the average levelin zone 5 cannot be explained either by radiation decay or decontamination.
The possibility of a heavy rainfall effect due to Typhoon Hagibis requires
further analysis by Greenpeace and other scientific bodies.

Table 1 : Breakdown of doserate in all Zones at Ms. Kanno house (walking on- and off-road, height 1m), 2017 - 2019.

Table 2 : Radiation in all Zones at Ms. Kanno’s house (walking on- and off-road, height 1m),
October 24, 2019.

12

Greenpeace | Radioactivity on the Move 2020

House Z
Located 25 km northwest of the Fukushima Daiichi plant, the survey ofHouse Z in October 2019 revealed, as in earlier years, very high levels ofcontamination, including hotspots. Greenpeace Japan did not conduct asurvey at House Z in 2018, so this was our first return to this site since 2017.
The overall average for all zones shows a decline from 3.3 μSv/h in 2017 to 2.4
μSv/h in 2019, with a similar decline from the maximum in 2017 of 8.2 μSv/h
to 6.8 μSv/h in 2019. The average levels in zone 2 of House Z, which is in
front of the house, were 3.0 μSv/h; with a maximum level of 6.1 μSv/h. 6% ofannual radiation dose rates in Zone 2 would be in excess of 20 mSv/y (basedon Japanese governmental methodology), and 33 mSv/y based on sustained
exposure over one full year. For 70% of the whole area around House Z, thedose rates were in excess of 10 mSv/y (based on Japanese governmental
methodology), and 17 mSv/y based on sustained exposure over one full year.
In zone 5, around a warehouse of House Z, the average 2019 readings were
2.5 μSv/h compared with 3.4 μSv/h in 2017, with a 2019 maximum level of
6.8 μSv/h compared with 8.2 μSv/h in 2017.
In zone 6, along Route 114, an average of 2.1 μSv/h was measured in 2019
compared with 2.71 μSv/h in 2017, and a 2019 maximum level of 5.3 μSv/hcompared with 7.3 μSv/h in 2017. It should be noted that this is a higher
maximum reading than the road scanning conducted both by the Japanese
government and by Greenpeace Japan, due to the fact that this is based ona walking scan at an altitude closer to ground.

Table 3 : Breakdown of doserate in all Zones at House Z (walking on- and off-road, height 1m), 2017 and 2019.

© Shaun Burnie / Greenpeace

Walking scan in Namie exclusion zone.
Novermber 1, 201913

Greenpeace | Radioactivity on the Move 2020

Table 4 : Radiation in all Zones at House Z (walking on- and off-road, height 1m),
November 1, 2019.

Okuma exclusion zone
The Japanese government has opened a small area of Okuma following
decontamination, but much of the area remains within the exclusion zone.
A citizen of Okuma requested that Greenpeace survey their family home,which lies in the exclusion zone of Okuma at a distance of 7.5 km from
Fukushima Daiichi. This is our first review at this location, with the intentionof returning in 2020. The average dose rate for the 3,263 points at House
X was measured at 1.1 μSv/h with a maximum of 4.2 μSv/h. 56% of points
were over 1 μSv/h and 100% of the 3,263 points measured were above
the government decontamination target of 0.23 μSv/h. These were not thehighest levels of contamination measured in Okuma.
Within meters of the new Ono train station, which was under construction
during the time of our 2019 measurements in Okuma, we found radiation
hotspots of 6 µSv/h at 1 m and 41 µSv/h at 10 cm. In the newly opened areaof Okuma, near the new town hall and within a few hundred meters of theplanned route for the Olympic torch, we measured radiation hotspots of 1.5µSv/h at 1 m and 2.5 µSv/h at 10 cm in the small forest.

14

Greenpeace | Radioactivity on the Move 2020

Dose rate (µSv/h)< 0.1< 0.25 and > = 0.1< 0.5 and > = 0.25
< 0.75 and > = 0.5< 1 and > = 0.75
< 2 and > = 1< 5 and > = 2< 10 and > = 5< 50 and > = 10

Map data © 2020 Image © 2020, Maxar Technologies

Image 1 : Aerial image of hotspots in Okuma, near Ono station (November 2, 2019)

Made from Google Maps

Table 5 : Breakdown of doserate in all Zones in Okuma (walking on- and off-road, height 1m), 2019.

Table 6 : Radiation in all Zones in Okuma (walking on- and off-road, height 1m),
November 2, 2019.

15

Greenpeace | Radioactivity on the Move 2020

Aerial view of Okuma exclusionzone, Fukushima prefecture.
November 2, 2019
© Christian Åslund / Greenpeace

16

Greenpeace | Radioactivity on the Move 2020

5

Lifted evacuation
areas - Namie and
IitateOn 31 March 2017, the Japanese government lifted the evacuation orders
for areas in Namie Town and Iitate Village, which lie north and northwest of
the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant, and are not in the “Difficult to Return”
zone. In March 2011, the populations of Iitate and Namie districts were
6,509 and 21,434 respectively.4 As of 31 January 2020, the population ofNamie was 1189 (compared with 896 in 2019), and the population of Iitate,
as of 1 January 2020, was 1,392 (compared with 1,003 as of 1 February2019).
Greenpeace Japan conducted radiation surveys in Namie and Iitate in
2011; we resumed survey work in Iitate in 2015 and have revisited each year
subsequently. In September 2017, Greenpeace Japan extended its survey
to the central area of Namie Town where the majority of the population
formerly lived. As with the results of our surveys in Iitate conducted in 2015,2016, and 2017, we found that as of October 2019 radiation levels in the areaof Namie where the evacuation order has been lifted are still significantly
higher than the government’s current long-term target level of 0.23 μSv/h.
As confirmed in our survey of these open areas, radiation exposure forpeople returning to Namie and Iitate would, in some cases, be well in excessof the recommended maximum of 1 mSv/y. The Japanese government
maintains that exposure up to 20 mSv/y is acceptable in these liftedevacuation order areas. This is despite clear scientific evidence of the cancer
risks from low dose radiation exposure in the 1-5 mSv/y range, which theJapanese government continues to disregard.5

Namie Town
The town of Namie lies 10 km north-northwest of the Fukushima Daiichi
nuclear plant, and has clearly undergone extensive decontamination between
2014 and 2017. However, in areas surveyed by Greenpeace Japan in 2019,
this decontamination has clearly failed to reduce radiation levels to thegovernment’s current long-term target of 0.23 μSv/h.
The Takase river, which flows through Namie, acts as a crossing point
between the publicly open area and “Difficult to Return” zone of Namie.

17

Greenpeace | Radioactivity on the Move 2020

Takase river
At the Takase river, near the hamlet of Tawatsuda, we extended our survey
further than in previous years. This is in an area of Namie where theevacuation order was lifted in March 2017. Radiation levels in this area areconsistently above the Japanese government’s 0.23 μSv/h long-term target.
Along the river bank and road where we measured 5,581 data points, levels
averaged 0.8 μSv/h with maximum of 1.7 μSv/h, with 99% exceeding thegovernment’s long term decontamination target. These average levels aretwenty (20) times higher than the pre-2011 background level of 0.04 μSv/h.
For Zone 1 of the Takase river survey (the path along the river), levels in2019 matched those of 2018, with an average of 0.7 μSv/h and maximumof 1.5 μSv/h. It was not possible to accurately measure zone 2 as in 2018,
due to deforestation work underway. Instead, we proceeded to measure
along a slope by the bank of the river. Measurements along the river showed
higher levels than on the higher roadway above, and there were indicationsof hotspots due to possible recontamination. The Takase river, like all therivers of Fukushima, experienced major flooding in October 2019, leading
to a major flux of radioactivity moving through the waters of Fukushima
Prefecture. It is worth noting that directly upstream from this area lies one of
the most contaminated areas in the Namie exclusion zone, Obori Village. The
Takase river passes directly through Obori Village.
In 47% of the area along the river bank slope, in the publicly accessible areaof Namie Town surveyed in October 2019, radiation levels would give anannual radiation dose between 5-8 mSv/year (based on the revised Japanese
government methodology) and between 8-13 mSv based on full exposure
over one year.

18© Shaun Burnie / Greenpeace

Survey along Takase river,
Fukushima prefecture.
October 24, 2019

Greenpeace | Radioactivity on the Move 2020

Table 7 : Breakdown of doserate in all Zones in Takase river (walking on- and off-road, height 1m), 2019.

Table 8 : Radiation in all Zones in Takase river (walking on- and off-road, height 1m),
October 29, 2019.

Namie kindergarten
and school
Greenpeace Japan first surveyed a kindergarten and school in Namie in2017 when we investigated radiation levels, including in a small forested areaadjacent to the school.
In our October 2019 survey the average radiation level in the forested areaadjacent to the school, was 1.6 μSv/h, compared to 1.8 μSv/h in 2018; andwith a maximum of 2.3 μSv/h compared to 2.9 μSv/h in 2018. These radiationlevels remain much too high or any area that has been declared open forhuman settlement, let alone a place where children are likely to gather.
In 45% of the recently surveyed area around the school, the annual dose would
be between 8-10 mSv based on the Japanese government methodology andbetween 13-17 mSv based on sustained exposure over a full year. For 8% of
the forested area, the annual dose would be between 10-20 mSv based on theJapanese government methodology and between 17-33 mSv based on sustained
exposure over a full year. 100% of the 2,190 points measured in 2019 exceeded
the Japanese government’s long-term decontamination target of 0.23 μSv/h.
19

Greenpeace | Radioactivity on the Move 2020

Table 9 : Breakdown of doserate in Namie school (walking on- and off-road, height 1m), 2019.

Table 10 : Radiation in Namie school (walking on- and off-road, height 1m),
October 29, 2019.

Mr. Anzai’s housein Iitate village
Since 2015, Greenpeace Japan has been conducting radiation surveys at thehouse of Mr. Toru Anzai, which is located in the south-east of Iitate, 35 km
from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant. Mr. Anzai was evacuated fromhis home on 24 June 2011. Mr. Anzai’s house and the surrounding area were
subjected to extensive decontamination by the authorities during the 20142015 period. This involved scraping away a layer of more than 5 cm of topsoil,
which was then removed from the site and stored as radioactive waste. In somecases, the surface was covered with uncontaminated soil. The survey resultsfrom Mr. Anzai’s house in 2015-2019 are shown in Tables 11 and 12.
Readings at Mr. Anzai’s house were taken at a total of 3,651 measurement
points in October 2019. When conducting the survey in October 2015,
decontamination work was still in progress, which led us to conclude
in 2016 that the measured decrease was a combined effect of further
decontamination, decay, and erosion.
In October 2019, while there has been a noticeable decline in the overall
average radiation level for all zones, 100% of all measurements in seven of
the ten zones still exceeded the government target of 0.23 μSv/h. In 2018,20

Greenpeace | Radioactivity on the Move 2020

the average was 0.7 μSv/h whereas the level measured in 2019 was 0.5
μSv/h, a 29% reduction. For the maximum levels of radiation observed,
there was an even wider variation with levels measured at 1.3 μSv/h in 2019
compared with 1.7 μSv/h in 2018, a 24% decline. Levels recorded in 2016
and 2017, after the completion of decontamination in 2015, had mostly
remained stable. The decline in radiation levels cannot be explained byradioactive decay alone, and indicates a weathering effect perhaps due tothe heavy rainfall of Typhoon Hagibis.
In earlier years we noted that decontamination efforts had been muchless effective in zone 5. A similar problem was experienced by houses in
Iitate which are also located in close proximity to hillside forests, where
decontamination is not possible. As is standard practice throughout thecontaminated regions, an area up to 20 meters from Mr. Anzai’s house into
the forest has been ‘decontaminated’. In 2019, we measured the levels in
Zone 5 at an average of 0.9 μSv/h and a maximum of 1.3 μSv/h comparedto 1.0 μSv/h and 1.7 μSv/h, respectively, in 2018. The radiation levels on
the steep slopes close to houses are crucial as they have a direct impact
on the radiation levels inside houses. We can also expect that radioactivity
from the non-decontaminated forest might re-contaminate the alreadydecontaminated area below and closer to houses. In the case of Mr. Anzai,
his house was demolished in 2018 and there are currently no plans torebuild at this location.
The most noticeable variation in levels between 2018 and 2019 were in zone 4
and zone 7, both are agricultural fields that were subjected to decontaminationin 2015. Average radiation levels in 2019 were 68% and 58% of the previous
year (see Table 11). This cannot be explained by radioactive decay alone,and suggests resuspension and weather related effects resulting from heavy
rainfall. These significant changes are particularly evident when examined
across the five year period for which we have data. Our return to Mr. Anzai’s
land in October 2020, in the absence of further heavy rainfall, will provide us ameans to confirm the cause of these significant variations in dose rates.
For 57% of the area at Mr. Anzai’s land, dose rates would be in excess of 3
mSv/y based on Japanese government methodology, and 4 mSv/y based onsustained exposure over one full year. For 4% of the area, radiation exposure
would be in excess of 5 μSv/y based on Japanese government methodology,
and 8 mSv/y based on sustained exposure over one full year.

Inside house
Forest behind house

Under the roof of house

Field up andleft of house

Path right of
the house

11

5
12

4

2

Field with former greenhouse
Field

7
9

Road to house

Field at road21

Gray areas are zones not measured in 2019

Front and sides of house3

1
Diagram 2: Schematic of
Mr. Anzai’s house in Iitate,showing the designatedZones for the Greenpeaceradiation survey team.

< 1.5 and > = 1μSv/h< 1 and > = 0.5 μSv/h< 0.5 and > = 0.23 μSv/h

6

10 Road on both sides
Rice fieldother side of road8

Greenpeace | Radioactivity on the Move 2020

Table 11 : Breakdown of doserate in all Zones in Mr. Anzai’s house (walking on- and off-road, height 1m),
2015 - 2019.

Table 12 : Radiation in all Zones in Mr. Anzai’s house (walking on- and off-road, height 1m),
October 28, 2019.

22

Greenpeace | Radioactivity on the Move 2020

6

Typhoon Hagibis
effect?

Flooding in Minamisoma city,
Fukushima prefecture.
October 25, 201923

© Shaun Burnie / Greenpeace

Radioactive mobility andrecontamination resulting
from high rainfall

Greenpeace | Radioactivity on the Move 2020

Greenpeace Japan’s annual radiation survey in areasof Fukushima coincided with the region being struck
by one of the most powerful typhoons of the last 100
years, Typhoon Hagibis. The resulting heavy rainfall
caused localized flooding and landslides, as well as
tragic loss of life. A lesser known fact is that flooding
is one of the major factors increasing downstream
migration of radioactivity.

fine particles to which most of the mineral-boundcesium is attached are also the most likely to be
carried into forest streams by rain and over long
distances in rivers. Some of this particulate cesium inrivers is not mineral-bound, but rather a wash-downof the hot glassy particles that were also released in
the most acute phases of the radioactive releases.
The effect of heavy rainfall on radioactive
concentrations of Fukushima’s river systems, andreleases into the Pacific Ocean, were studied in theinitial years after the Fukushima Daiichi disaster.
According to one study,7 an estimated 84-92% of theradiocesium transported in the Abukuma watershed
was carried in the form of suspended solids between
August 10, 2011 and May 11, 2012.

Heavy rains – such as typhoons – can further
increase cesium (Cs) discharge rates from
Fukushima forests by one or two orders ofmagnitude. The radioactivity, principally radiocesium, that was deposited in the mountainous
forests of Fukushima in March 2011 is a longterm source of downstream contamination. As
Greenpeace Japan reported in its 2016 report
Radiation Reloaded,6 the stocks of radio-cesiumin forests, hill slopes, and floodplains can beremobilized and contaminate areas downstream
by significant rainfall events, typhoons, and springsnowmelt. That would include areas that did notreceive fallout from the radioactive plumes in
2011, as well as areas that have already been
decontaminated, as increased water flows resulting
from typhoons can re-suspend or mobilize
contaminated sediment and organic matter – i.e.
rather than cesium simply being buried under
newer sediments, it can be mechanically remixed,
creating secondary contamination. In addition,
the contaminated particulates and organic
matter brought down from forests and fields withheavy rains and typhoons will create continuing,
subsequent influxes of radiocesium into lakes andcoastal ecosystems for years and decades to come.
Whether radio-cesium is transported via particulatematter (i.e. bound to minerals) or dissolved inwater is a critical factor in understanding both its
movement and its bioavailability – this is expressedas the ‘Kd factor’ which is the distribution coefficientfor cesium. Kd is one of the most importantparameters used in estimating the migration ofcontaminants. Fukushima discharges have been
documented to have a Kd factor 1-2 orders ofmagnitude higher than those found in Chernobyl
watersheds in the initial years after the disaster.
This means that the ratio of particulate-boundcesium transported in Fukushima river catchments
in relation to dissolved (bioavailable) cesium wasan order of magnitude or two higher than that in
Chernobyl.

The authors of that same study further stated that
“The total flux of radiocesium into the Pacific Ocean
estimated at the outlet station (basin area 5,172
km 2 ) was 5.34 terabecquerels (TBq) for 137Cs,
and 4.74 TBq for 134Cs, corresponding to 1.13%of the total estimated radiocesium fallout over thebasin catchment (890 TBq). This was equivalent to
the estimated amount of direct leakage from the
Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant to the ocean
during June 2011 to September 2012 of 17 TBq andthe Level 3 Scale Leakage on 21 August 2013 (24TBq).” 8
In particular, typhoons cause significant increases
in cesium discharges into the Pacific Ocean. This
study estimated that storm-mobilized cesium
discharges were at 6.18 TBq, accounting for 61.4%of the total cesium discharges to the coastal areas
during the observation period. Another study of the
Natsui River and the Same River in 2011 reported
that heavy rain and Typhoon Roke were responsiblefor 30-50% of the total annual radio-cesium flux
to coastal regions for these rivers.9 Further, duringbase-flow conditions, the particulate fraction of thetotal radio-cesium inventory was between 21–56%,
but increased to nearly 100% after Typhoon Rokewhich struck Japan in September 2011, six months
after the triple reactor meltdown, and spread radiocesium deposits widely across the region.
Eight years after Typhoon Roke, 2019’s Typhoon
Hagibis, traversed Japan on 12 October 2019.
Rainfall totals exceeding 400-500 mm fell overeast central Honshu, with many areas receiving atleast 200 mm. Locally, over 900 mm (0.9 meters)
was reported over a 24 hour period southwest ofTokyo. A few weeks later, Typhoon 21 (Bualoi) struck
parts of Japan on 25 October, including Namie inFukushima prefecture, where 245 mm of rain wasrecorded in 12 hours.

This has been attributed to several factors, including
higher precipitation levels in Fukushima compared to
Chernobyl, the high clay content of Fukushima soils,
and that fine clay particles, to which cesium has aparticular affinity, are also eroded soil particles. The

24

Greenpeace | Radioactivity on the Move 2020

Without comprehensive data of the cesium
concentrations of river water prior, during, andafter the October 2019 typhoons, it is not possible
to say with absolute certainty that they brought
about much higher radiation releases from themountainous forests of Fukushima. But the evidence
from earlier typhoons and resulting data strongly
suggests that there was a substantial increase indownstream contamination from October 2019.
Greenpeace Japan’s measurements showing major
variations in radiation levels over previous year(s)are indicative of these weather related effects. The
example of Ms. Kanno’s house, for which we havedata sets covering three years (2017-2019), showthat while both the maximum and average radiationlevels between 2017 and 2018 remained relatively
constant, in October 2019, there was a 63%
reduction in the maximum measured (and 31% inaverage). Greenpeace Japan proposes that such a
reduction could be a direct result of the very heavy
rainfall washing out radioactive cesium from theconcrete surface.

flows from the forest to the north of the screening
station across the side road and across Route 114,
indicating the pathway for radio-cesium migration.
During our survey work in October 2020, we willseek to verify this hypothesis and to observe, in theabsence of additional occurrences of heavy rain,
whether the major fluctuations in radiation levels
measured in the environment are confirmation of
the effect of heavy rain induced mobilization ofradioactivity.
The results of our 2019 survey demonstrate thecomplex and persistent nature of radionuclide
contamination in areas of Fukushima prefecture.
We hypothesize that the significant reduction ofradioactivity in certain zones, as measured aroundMs. Kanno’s and Mr. Anzai’s homes, results indownstream contamination and eventual release to
the Pacific Ocean. The fact is that the radioactivity
does not disappear but relocates.
While there have been some changes in radiocesium in the forests of Fukushima, including the
rapid decay of Cs-134 and how cesium is locatedin the soil structures/forest canopy, it can be
speculated that there was a significant increasein the radioactivity of Fukushima rivers during the
October 2019 period. That increased radioactivity inrivers results in deposition of radio-cesium in areas
flooded downstream, including floodplains, andeventually higher deposition into the Pacific Ocean.

The location of the highest hotspot in Zone 9 at
Ms. Kanno’s house, on the path to the rice field,
was first measured in 2017. The levels measured
in 2019 show almost no change from 2017. The
specific topography creates a small stream of water,
carrying radioactive material out of the forest
and across the path. The highest concentrationsof observed radiation at this site are at the point
where the water flows from the concrete path into
the immediate vegetation, before it carries on into
a ditch. The conclusion of Greenpeace Japan isthat this is an example of recontamination. One
trigger for this appears to be high rainfall andflooding resulting from that rainfall. Our 2019
survey at Mr. Anzai’s house in Iitate also provided
evidence of probable typhoon effects. Averageradiation levels in zones 4 and 7 in 2019 were 68%
and 58% of the previous year. This cannot be
explained by radioactive decay alone, and suggests
resuspension and weather related effects resulting
from heavy rainfall. These significant changes are
particularly evident when taken across the five year
period from 2015-2019 for which we have data sets.
A clear example of how radioactivity relocates fromcontaminated forests was observed along Route 114
in the exclusion zone of Namie. While the road was
opened to the public in September 2017, the land oneither side remains closed to visitors and habitation.
Along Route 114, from the junction opposite the
TEPCO Kakura screening station, Greenpeacemeasured (by road scanning) 2,511 points with anaverage of 0.4 μSv/h, and a maximum of up to 3.7
μSv/h. At the highest spots, which were measured
by handheld Radeye, we witnessed clear water
25

Greenpeace | Radioactivity on the Move 2020

7

The 2020 Olympics© Shaun Burnie / Greenpeace

Radiation risks (including
hotspots) and Human rights

The decision by the Japanese government to host 2020 Summer Olympics
and Paralympics events in Fukushima prefecture, as well as the opening of
the Olympic Torch relay at the J-Village (20km south of the Fukushima Daiichi
nuclear plant), has highlighted both Japanese government propaganda andimportant questions concerning the current radiological conditions in theregion. The Abe government is seeking to use the Olympics/Paralympics
as a global media platform to communicate that the entirety of Fukushima
prefecture has returned to ‘normal’ and that the devastating effects of
exploding reactors and radioactive fallout plumes across Fukushima are
all in the past and no longer relevant. The answer is, of course, far more
complicated and nuanced. Many areas of Fukushima have returned to a sortof normality. At the same time, areas of Fukushima including Namie, Iitate,
Okuma and Futaba remain highly contaminated. Since 70% of Fukushima
prefecture is mountainous forest, as a result of the contamination in 2011
these uphill forests serve a long-term source of radioactivity for the areas
below. The principle radioactive source, Cesium-137 has a half life of 30
years, and therefore will remain a hazard for around ten half lives, or 300
years. The forested mountains of Fukushima cannot be decontaminated andpose a radioactivity recontamination risk to all areas downstream after heavy
rainfall.
Greenpeace Japan surveyed the area around the Azuma sports complex
stadium, which lies to the west of Fukushima City. Two Olympic events will
be hosted at this location in July 2020 – baseball and softball. The sportingsite lies around 80 km to the northwest of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear
plant and outside the Japanese government evacuation and exclusion zones.
The area was subjected to radioactive contamination in 2011 and as such,levels of radio cesium can still be detected. Greenpeace Japan, measuring
data in October 2019, showed for 2,965 points average levels were 0.1 μSv/h,26

Greenpeace | Radioactivity on the Move 2020

Dose rate (µSv/h)< 0.1< 0.25 and > = 0.1< 0.5 and > = 0.25
< 0.75 and > = 0.5< 1 and > = 0.75
< 2 and > = 1< 5 and > = 2< 10 and > = 5< 50 and > = 10

Map data © 2020 Image © 2020, Maxar Technologies

Image 2 : Aerial image of hotspots at the Azuma stadium, path in the South(October 18, 2019)
Made from Google Maps

with all points below the government long-term decontamination target of
0.23 μSv/h. Nonetheless, these levels are 2.5 times higher than the averagebackground levels prior to the Fukushima Daiichi accident in March 2011,
which was 0.04 μSv/h.
For Fukushima City, where many visitors attending the Olympic events will
arrive from Tokyo, the radiation situation is more complex than at the Azuma
stadium. Greenpeace Japan measured 7,284 points in the area aroundthe central train station (see map). Average levels were 0.1 μSv/h with amaximum of 0.2 μSv/h. These are 2.5 times higher than before the accident
March 2011, and the maximum is 5 times higher. The principal concern froma human health perspective with these radiation levels relates to long-term
residents, and not so much short term visitors, including competing athletes
and spectators.

Survey team walking beside Azuma
stadium, Fukushima city.
October 18, 201927

© Christian Åslund / Greenpeace

However, the presence of large numbers of radiation hotspots in Fukushima
City (as detailed below), and other areas of Fukushima, including the
J-Village, is not normal. They raise important questions of radiation healthrisks, the answers to which are not simple.

Greenpeace | Radioactivity on the Move 2020

Radiation hotspots- J village
On 18 November 2019, Greenpeace Japan provided results of its Octobersurvey at the J-Village to the Japanese Minister of the Environment, as wellas the domestic and international Olympic Committees Chairpersons andFukushima Governor. The October survey had identified significant levelsof radiation in so-called hotspots. We decided at that time to give theauthorities one full month to respond to our request for urgent intervention
and to put in place a decontamination program at the J-Village. During
the following weeks, in our oral communication with the Ministry of theEnvironment and J-Village management there was little indication that action
was being planned. However, on 12 December, the Japanese Ministry ofEnvironment publicly confirmed the presence of the highest radioactive
hotspot identified by Greenpeace Japan, as well as a newly-identified
hotspot. Under instructions from the government, these specific hotspots
had been removed by the Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO). However,on 13-14 December, a small Greenpeace survey team returned to J-Village
where we measured public areas in and around the sports complex andwhere we detected additional radioactive contamination, and observed
the results of decontamination efforts that did not follow establisheddecontamination protocols.

Dose rate (µSv/h)< 0.1< 0.25 and > = 0.1< 0.5 and > = 0.25
< 0.75 and > = 0.5< 1 and > = 0.75
< 2 and > = 1< 5 and > = 2< 10 and > = 5< 50 and > = 10

Map data © 2020 Image © 2020, Maxar Technologies, Planet.com

Image 3 : Aerial image of hotspots in J village area
(October 26, 2019)

Made from Google Maps

Remarkably, after TEPCO removed just two of the hotspots identified
by Greenpeace Japan on 3 December, we observed that the standard
procedures for decontamination had not been followed by TEPCO. The
standard practice for Fukushima decontamination is to remove vegetationand soil up to 20 meters from the public road. In this case, only the specifichotspots were removed over an area of about 1 square meter, despite thefact that the wider surroundings of the hotspots also showed high levels ofradiation as well.

28

Greenpeace | Radioactivity on the Move 2020

Our conclusion, at the time of our second radiation survey of 2019 around
J-Village, was that radioactive contamination at J-Village is not undercontrol. The original location of the highest radiation hotspot identified by
Greenpeace Japan on 26 October was 71 µSv/h close to the surface and 32µSv/h at 10 cm. On 13 December, Greenpeace’s radiation survey team found
the radiation levels of the same location to be lower than 1 µSv/h at 10 cm
during the re-test. However, just to the north of this hotspot, Greenpeace
Japan identified a patch of ground adjacent to the parking lot where levels
were up to 2.2 µSv/h at 10 cm. Near the entrance of this same parking lot,
Greenpeace measured 2.6 µSv/h at 10 cm and 1 µSv/h at 1 m. Additionally, atthe edge of a forest north of the car park, radiation hotspots of 2.6 µSv/h at
10 cm were identified. A second forest, 300 meters north showed consistentlevels of 0.6 μSv/h at 10 cm, and 0.4 µSv/h at 1 m, which is almost double thegovernment’s decontamination target.

J-Village soccer facility in Naraha town,
Fukushima prefecture, the starting pointof the 2020 Tokyo Olympic torch relay.
October 26, 201929

© Christian Åslund / Greenpeace

As is well known, the J-Village is the location for the start of the Japaneseleg of the Olympic Torch Relay. As such, one would have expected theauthorities to have made all possible efforts to remove high concentrationsof radiation. The fact that this has not been done, raises many questions
and uncertainties, including how such high levels of radiation (71 µSv/h atclose to surface) were not detected during the earlier decontamination by
TEPCO. Why were only the most alarming hotspots, which were identified by
Greenpeace Japan, removed and not the wider areas following the standard
decontamination procedures? Given these apparent failures to ensure public
safety, the ability of the authorities to accurately and consistently identify
radiation hotspots appears to be seriously in doubt.

Greenpeace | Radioactivity on the Move 2020

Radiation hotspots- Fukushima City
During October 2019 we also measured radioactive hotspots in Fukushimacity. Over a period of four hours our survey team identified forty-five (45)hotspots in the streets of Fukushima City in the area around the central
station. Eleven of these hotspots equaled or exceeded the Japanese
government decontamination long term target of 0.23 μSv/h measured at
1 m. 100% of them exceeded 0.23 μSv/h at 0.1 m. Four of these hotspots
exceeded 3 μSv/h at 0.1 m. The highest measured hotspot was 0.7 μSv/h at
1 m, 1.6 μSv/h at 0.5 meters, and 5.5 μSv/h at 0.1 m. This is 137 times higher
than the background radiation levels measured in the Fukushima environment
prior to the 2011 nuclear disaster. The fact that these hotspots are locatedin public areas along the pavements and streets of central Fukushima City,
including tens of meters from the entrance to the Shinkansen (bullet train)line to Tokyo, highlights the scale of the nuclear disaster in 2011. Again theprincipal radiation hazard is to the resident population in Fukushima City, who
statistically have a higher chance of being exposed to these hotspots. But it
cannot be said that the risk to short term visitors is non-existent.
The Japanese government does not want to acknowledge that these levelsof radioactivity are a hazard to public health. And generally the levels
measured by Greenpeace Japan in Fukushima City in October/November
2019 are much lower than in Namie, Iitate, and Okuma. However, that does
not mean they are not a hazard. Under International Atomic Energy Agency(IAEA) guidelines, the hotspots of Cesium-137 which exceed a dose rate of
0.3 to 0.5 µSv/h at 10 cm, would contain an amount of radioactive Cs-137
that would require it to be declared as dangerous goods – or Radioactive
Material Class 7. This would mean that it would require classification under
IAEA Safety Standards if some of this soil would be shipped or moved.
Under certain circumstances a dose rate of 0.14 µSv/h could containthe amount of Cs-137 required to meet the IAEA definition of a dangerous
material. All forty-five (45) hotspots found by Greenpeace Japan (in lessthan four hours of survey work by a small team) in central Fukushima City
exceed the radiation limit of 0.3 µSv/h at 10 cm that classifies the material asa dangerous good. The Japanese government has failed to address the factthat this level of contamination can be found easily in Fukushima City.

Dose rate (µSv/h)< 0.1< 0.25 and > = 0.1< 0.5 and > = 0.25
< 0.75 and > = 0.5< 1 and > = 0.75
< 2 and > = 1< 5 and > = 2< 10 and > = 5< 50 and > = 10

Map data © 2020 Image © 2020, Maxar Technologies

Image 4 : Aerial image of hotspots in Fukushima city near Fukushima station(November 4, 2019) Made from Google Maps
30

© Shaun Burnie / Greenpeace

Hotspots and Cesium-rich MicroParticles
One factor that has concerned Greenpeace for anumber of years has been the discovery of small
particles containing high levels of radioactivity.
These so-called Cesium-rich MicroParticles(CsMPs) are on average a few millimeters indiameter and have been found several hundred
kilometers away from Fukushima Daiichi. Scientificstudies have reported on the chemical andisotopic compositions of the CsMPs, providing
information on the likely sources of the CsMPs andthe reactions that occurred inside the damaged
Fukushima Daiichi reactor units during the nuclear
disaster. As reported by scientific literature,including most recently in 2019, “Due to the small
size and high Cs specific activity, CsMPs havethe potential to penetrate deep into the humanrespiratory system and remain for decades,
which may lead to high localized radiation doses.
Nevertheless, there are currently no epidemiologicalstudies of the health effects caused by theseparticles. Furthermore, the number and distributionof CsMPs in the environment is not precisely
known... CsMPs in residential areas at present haveexperienced varying environmental conditions, suchas being surrounded by vegetation, concrete, andbuildings, and this may profoundly increase CsMP
mobility by being washed out from the surfaces.” 10
From a soil sample collected in Watari, which lies oneastern outskirts of Fukushima city, analysis showedthat there were 24 cesium-rich microparticles
per gram of soil, and where activity was 3.10
Becquerels/gram (Bq/g).11 The presence of thesemicroparticles, and the potential that radioactive
hotspots measured throughout Fukushima
prefecture, including Fukushima city, are thelocation of CsMPs, raise important issues over thehealth risks to the local population. As a recent 2019study observed, “a comprehensive understandingof CsMP distribution has not been completed,hence health risks cannot be properly evaluated.” 12
Once again, the simplistic communication of the
Abe government that there are no radiation risks in
Fukushima and that life has returned to normal does
not match with the complex reality in Fukushima
prefecture.

31

8Greenpeace | Radioactivity on the Move 2020

© Christian Åslund / Greenpeace

Conclusion andrecommendations

The results of the 2019 Greenpeace Japan’s radiation
survey highlight the complexity of the radiologicalconditions in Fukushima prefecture. There are strong
indications that the very heavy rainfall generated
by 2019’s Typhoon Hagibis and Typhoon 21 (Bualoi)
had a major impact on the mobilization of radioactive
cesium. The mountainous forests of Fukushima
prefecture remain an enormous stock of radioactivity
and evidence from the latest survey indicates that
this radioactivity was significantly disturbed andmobilized in October 2019.

considered possible without increased health risks
to returning citizens.
The Japanese government continues to defy
United Nations human rights specialists who havechallenged the policy of lifting evacuation orders,
exposing citizens, in particular women, children,
and workers, to unsafe radiation levels. The latest
Greenpeace Japan survey results highlight thescale of the ongoing nuclear crisis in the mostcontaminated areas of Fukushima, and why theUnited Nations human rights experts are fully
justified in expressing their urgent concerns.

As we have measured certain areas repeatedly overa number of years, we observed in our 2019 surveys
that radiation levels remained stable in certain areas
whilst in others there were significant variations,
including reductions. These reductions cannot be
explained by radioactive decay. At the same time,
Greenpeace identified areas of high concentrations,
including hotspots. There was clear visual evidenceof recontamination caused by water remobilizing
radioactivity from the contaminated forests. Thiswas witnessed in both the closed area of the Namie
exclusion zone and the open area of Namie Town.
As in 2018, average and maximum radiation levelsin the lifted evacuation areas (i.e. areas determinedby the Japanese government to be safe for return) ofNamie and Iitate remain too high for normal life to be

Greenpeace’s discovery of high levels of radiationand multiple hotspots, in both Fukushima City and
the J-Village sports complex, directly challenges
the Japanese government’s propaganda narrative
preceding the 2020 Summer Olympic Games.
The complexity of the radiological situation isunderscored by measurements in Fukushima City
and around J-Village.
The risk factors for these elevated radiation levels
remain unknown, and particularly relate to long term
residents. At the same time, the presence of Cesiumrich MicroParticles (CsMPs) across Fukushima
prefecture (which are respirable and therefore hold32

Greenpeace | Radioactivity on the Move 2020• P rovide full compensation and financial support
to evacuees, and take measures to reduceradiation exposure based on science and theprecautionary principle to protect public healthand allow citizens to decide whether to return or
relocate free from duress and financial coercion;and,the potential to deliver concentrated doses) exposes
Japanese government’s assurances that there
are no radiation risks to be mere propaganda. The
fact that every hotspot measured by Greenpeacein Fukushima City would classify it as a dangerous
good or Radioactive Material Class 7 under IAEA
regulations shows that the radiation situation in
Fukushima is very far from normal.

• R espond in full to the offer of dialogue andguidance from UN Special Rapporteurs, including
accepting outstanding requests for Special
Rapporteurs to visit Japan.

The complex conditions in Fukushima resulting fromthe 2011 triple reactor meltdown cannot be ignored
to suit the propaganda objectives of the Japanese
government. Neither can this complexity be
explained in simplistic slogans – neither “all is undercontrol” nor “all of Fukushima is radioactive anddangerous” reflect the reality. Such an approach is anenormous disservice to the people of Fukushima. The
complexity of the radiation situation in Fukushimaneeds to be studied, explained, and understood by
the wider Japanese society and the international
community. The attention Japan, including
Fukushima Prefecture, will receive in 2020 as a resultof the Olympic games is an opportunity for attaining
a deeper understanding of the consequences of the
Fukushima Daiichi disaster.

Recommendations to the Japanese
Government and Fukushima Prefecture• S uspend the current return policy which ignores
Fukushima citizens and ignores science-based
analysis, including potential lifetime exposure
risks;• Immediately clarify its long-term decontamination
target of 0.23 μSv/h, equal to 1 mSv/y exposure
based on the government’s calculation, including
setting a date for when 0.23 μSv/h is to beattained, and halt any plans to revise the target
level to a higher limit;• U rgently assess the risks posed by radioactive
hotspots, including the presence of cesiumrich microparticles, including the long-term
consequences for public health;• A bandon plans to lift evacuation orders in thesix municipalities of Futaba, Okuma, Namie,
Tomioka, Iitate and Katsurao, including the Namie
districts of Tsushima, Murohara, Suenomori andObori;• In the interests of worker protection, suspend
current decontamination programs in the “Difficult
to Return” zones;• E stablish a fully transparent process to reflect
and consider residents’ opinions on evacuation
policy, including opening a council of citizens
including all evacuees;

33

Greenpeace | Radioactivity on the Move 2020

Ms. Kanno in Tsushima (Namie exclusionzone) next to her house.
December 18, 2019.
© Shaun Burnie / Greenpeace

34

Greenpeace | Radioactivity on the Move 202035

Greenpeace | Radioactivity on the Move 2020

Endnotes
1.

IAEA, “Annex I of Technical Volume 5 EVOLUTION OF REFERENCE LEVELS FOR REMEDIATION AND
DEVELOPMENT OF A FRAMEWORK FOR POST-ACCIDENT RECOVERY”, see https://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/
Publications/PDF/SupplementaryMaterials/P1710/TV5/AnnexI.pdf
2. This higher estimate is on the basis that someone was in that area for 8,760 hours in one year; the Japanese
government 0.23 μSv/y long-term target would give a dose of 1 mSv/y based on citizens spending an averageof 8 hours per day outside and taking account of shielding from radiation while inside a house. The methodology
used by the Japanese authorities for many people is an underestimation. Residents in this agriculture and forestrydependent region mostly worked and lived outside prior to the Fukushima nuclear disaster, particularly during thespring, summer, and autumn seasons. Even during the winter period, work is conducted outside, for example in theforest. The maximum figure here is based on if a person was to spend the entire year of 8,760 hours at this location.
3. The ICRP sets a recommended public dose limit of 1 mSv in a year, with a higher value being allowed in special
circumstances as in the case of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear accident, provided the average over five years does
not exceed 1 mSv per year, see ICRP 111: Protection of People Living in Long-term Contaminated Areas after a
Nuclear Accident or a Radiation Emergency, available at http:// www.icrp.org. See also, OECD, Nuclear Energy
Agency: Evolution of ICRP Recommendations 1977, 1990 and 2007. Changes in Underlying Science and Protection
Policy and their Impact on European and UK Domestic Regulation, ISBN 978-92-64-99153- 8, 2011, see https://www.oecd-nea.org/rp/reports/2011/nea6920-ICRP-recommendations.pdf.
4. Fukushima prefecture, see http://www.pref.fukushima.lg.jp/site/portal/26-11.html (in Japanese)
5. The Lancet, “Ionizing radiation and risk of death from leukemia and lymphoma in radiation- monitored workers(INWORKS): an international cohort study”, Klervi Leuraud, David B Richardson, Elisabeth Cardis, Robert D Daniels,
Michael Gillies, Jacqueline A O’Hagan, Ghassan B Hamra, Richard Haylock, Dominique Laurier, Monika Moissonnier,
Mary K Schubauer-Berigan, Isabelle Thierry-Chef, Ausrele Kesminiene, National Institute for Occupational Safety
and Health (NIOSH) Public Health England’s Centre for Radiation, Chemical and Environmental Hazards (PHECRCE), University of North Carolina (UNC), Center for Research in Environmental Epidemiology (CREAL), Drexel
University - School of Public Health, Pompeu Fabra University (UPF), CIBER- BBN, IRSN laboratory Ionizing
Radiation Epidemiology Laboratory (LEPID), Lancet Haematol, 22 June, 2015 see http:// dx.doi.org/10.1016/
S2352-3026(15)00094-0. Funding for the study was provided by Funding – Centers for Disease Control andPrevention, Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare of Japan, Institut de Radioprotection et de Sûreté Nucléaire,
AREVA, Electricité de France, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, US Department of Energy,
US Department of Health and Human Services, University of North Carolina, Public Health England, as well as theCenters for Disease Control and Prevention (5R030H010056-02) and the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare ofJapan (GA No 2012-02-21-01)
6. Greenpeace Japan, “Radiation Reloaded: Ecological Impacts of the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Accident 5 years
later”, February 2016, see https://www.greenpeace.org/archive-japan/Global/japan/pdf/GPJ-Fukushima-RadiationReloaded-Report.pdf
7. Yamashiki, Y., et al. (2014). “Initial flux of sediment-associated radiocesium to the ocean from the largest river
impacted by Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant.” Scientific Reports 4, Article: 3714. http://www.nature.com/
articles/srep03714
8. Ibid.
9. Nagao, S., et al. (2013). “Export of 134Cs and 137Cs in the Fukushima river systems at heavy rains by Typhoon Rokein September 2011.” Biogeosciences. 10: 6215–6223. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/258758074_Export_
of_134Cs_and_137Cs_ in_the_Fukushima_river_systems_at_heavy_rains_by_Typhoon_Roke_in_ September_2011
10. Chemosphere, “Abundance and distribution of radioactive cesium-rich microparticles released from the Fukushima
Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant into the environment”, Ryohei Ikehara a, 1, Kazuya Morooka a, 1, Mizuki Suetake
a, Tatsuki Komiya a, Eitaro Kurihara a, Masato Takehara a, Ryu Takami a, Chiaki Kino b, Kenji Horie c, d, Mami
Takehara c, Shinya Yamasaki e, Toshihiko Ohnuki f, Gareth T.W. Law g, William Bower g, Bernd Grambow h, Rodney
C. Ewing i, Satoshi Utsunomiya a, *a Department of Chemistry, Kyushu University, 744 Motooka, Nishi-ku, Fukuoka,
819-0395, Japan b The Institute of Applied Energy, 1-14-2 Nishi-shimbashi, Minato-ku, Tokyo, 105-0003, Japanc National Institute of Polar Research, 10-3 Midori-cho, Tachikawa-shi, Tokyo, 190-8518, Japan d Department of
Polar Science, The Graduate University for Advanced Studies (SOKENDAI), Shonan Village, Hayama, Kanagawa,
240-0193, Japan e Faculty of Pure and Applied Sciences and Center for Research in Isotopes and Environmental
Dynamics, University of Tsukuba, 1-1-1 Tennodai, Tsukuba, Ibaraki, 305-8577, Japan f Laboratory for Advanced
Nuclear Energy, Institute of Innovative Research, Tokyo Institute of Technology, 2-12-1 Ookayama, Meguro-ku,
Tokyo, 152-8550, Japan g Radiochemistry Unit, Department of Chemistry, The University of Helsinki, Helsinki, 00014,
Finland h SUBATECH, IMT Atlantique, CNRS-IN2P3, the University of Nantes, Nantes, 44307, France i Departmentof Geological Sciences and Center for International Security and Cooperation, Stanford University, October 2019,see https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2019.125019
11. Ibid.
12. Ibid.

36

Greenpeace | Radioactivity on the Move 2020

Appendix
United Nations Human Rights and Fukushima Evacuees, Workers and Children
2018 - 2019
Ever since the start of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster in March 2011, many of the issues concerning therights of evacuees (particularly women and children), citizens, and workers have been raised by United Nations
human rights bodies and experts. The most significant of these was the 2012 Mission Report of Special
Rapporteur Anand Grover.
During the past 12-18 months there has been an escalation of interventions by United Nations human rights
bodies and Special Rapporteurs on the rights of Japanese citizens most impacted by the ongoing nuclear
disaster. This document provides links to the key documents, both United Nations statements, communications,and reports, as well as the response of the Japanese government.
26 February to 23 March 2018 – Universal Periodic Review of Japan, Human Rights Council, Decision ofWorking Group. Following intervention of the Governments of Germany, Portugal, Mexico and Austria the fourrecommendations were made to Japan.
Extracts: “161.215 Apply the Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement to all those impacted by the
Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster in order to ensure full and equal participation for both women and men indecision-making processes regarding their resettlement (Portugal);
161.216 Respect the rights of persons living in the area of Fukushima, in particular of pregnant women andchildren, to the highest level of physical and mental health, notably by restoring the allowable dose of radiation
to the 1 mSv/year limit, and by a continuing support to the evacuees and residents (Germany);”
Fukushima nuclear workers 26 June 2018 – Joint Communication From Special Procedures, to Taro Kono
Minister for Foreign Affairs, Japan - Baskut Tuncak, Special Rapporteur on the implications for human rights ofthe environmentally sound management and disposal of hazardous substances and wastes and Dainius Pȗras,Special Rapporteur on the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical andmental health, Urmila Bhoola Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of slavery, including its causes andconsequences.
Extract: “we would like to bring to the attention of your Excellency’s Government information we have received
concerning issues faced by workers employed in the ongoing decontamination and resettlement program in the
Fukushima Prefecture of Japan, more particularly, the existing and potential risks to which they are exposed
to, inconsistencies in the monitoring and implementation of guidelines aimed at protecting their security andrequired working conditions, reported consistent violations of their labour rights and their right to physical andmental health, including unsatisfactory levels of health and security safeguards in place.”
16 August 2018, Response to the Joint Communication from Special Procedures from the Government ofJapan, 16 August 2018.
Extract: “the claim that “decontamination workers working in this area will be subject to unjustifiable radiation
risks” is not appropriate.”
16 August 2018, Press statement United Nations Office of the Human Rights Commissioner, Special
Rapporteurs, “Japan: Fukushima clean-up workers, including homeless, at grave risk of exploitation, say UN
experts”
Extract: “Japan must act urgently to protect tens of thousands of workers who are reportedly being exploitedand exposed to toxic nuclear radiation in efforts to clean up the damaged Fukushima Daichi Nuclear Power
Station, say three UN human rights experts.

37

Greenpeace | Radioactivity on the Move 2020

Overall Fukushima Human Rights, 5 September, 2018 – United Nations Office of the Human Rights
Commissioner, Joint Communication from Special Procedures from Cecilia Jimenez-Damary, Special
Rapporteur on the human rights of internally displaced persons and Baskut Tuncak, Special Rapporteur on theimplications for human rights of the environmentally sound management and disposal of hazardous substances
and wastes to Taro Kono Minister for Foreign Affairs, Japan.
Extracts: “we have to note that the concerns we had expressed previously continue to persist, in light of
information and witness accounts which are conveyed to our mandates by various information sources...”“The impact of the decontamination programme places a great number of persons, including persons belonging
to vulnerable groups, under considerable constraints and could result in violations of their basic human rights...
We take this opportunity to recall that those persons evacuated or self-evacuated from their homes by the
Fukushima disaster constitute internally displaced persons (IDPs) and to remind your Excellency’s Governmentof its obligations relating to the human rights of IDPs, including those contained in the provisions of the 1998
Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement...”“Particular concern is expressed over the impact of the terms and modalities of ongoing resettlement
programmes on the enjoyment of human rights, in particular the right to life, health, physical integrity, housing,and food. The decision to not reflect the actual number of evacuees and recognizing these as internallydisplaced persons in the official records of the prefectural government, undermines the ability of local
authorities to provide vital services and financial assistance to a number of self-evacuees...”“...we are deeply concerned that the decision to lift evacuation orders in areas where radiation levels remain
high, and withdrawing housing support previously provided to a large number of households, create significant
pressures for internally displaced persons to return to their previous homes, where their life, safety or healthwould be at risk from exposure to hazardous levels of radiation...”“Returning evacuees, as well as those already living in municipalities of Fukushima, face additional health risks
posed by large scale, heavy transportation and storage of nuclear waste as well as the radiation that could be
released by waste facilities. We remain concerned by the fact that this practice is expected to increase during
the coming years, along with the long-term psychological effects associated with living in a nuclear waste
industrial zone.” and “In connection with the above alleged facts and concerns, please refer to the Annex
on Reference to international human rights law attached to this letter which cites international human rights
instruments and standards relevant to these allegations.”“In view of the urgency of the matter, we would appreciate a response on the steps and measures taken by
your Excellency’s Government to safeguard the rights of the nuclear evacuees in compliance with international
instruments.”
Evacuees, including children, 25 October 2018 - Opening remarks by the United Nations Special Rapporteuron human rights and hazardous substances and wastes, Baskut Tuncak at the 73rd session of the U.N. General
Assembly.
25 October 2018, United Nations Office of the Human Rights Commissioner, Press statement, Japan must halt
returns to Fukushima, radiation remains a concern, says UN rights expert.
Extracts: “The recommendation to lower acceptable levels of exposure to back to 1 mSv/yr was proposed by
the Government of Germany and the Government of Japan ‘accepted to follow up’ on it, according to the UN
database. However, in the expert’s view, the recommendation is not being implemented. Japan has a duty
to prevent and minimise childhood exposure to radiation, added the UN expert referring to his 2016 reporton childhood exposure to toxics. The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, to which Japan is a Party,
contains a clear obligation on States to respect, protect and fulfil the right of the child to life, to maximum
development and to the highest attainable standard of health, taking their best interests into account. This, theexpert said, requires State parties such as Japan to prevent and minimise avoidable exposure to radiation andother hazardous substances...

38

Greenpeace | Radioactivity on the Move 2020

The Special Rapporteur said Japan should provide full details as to how its policy decisions in relation to the
Fukushima Daiichi nuclear accident, including the lifting of evacuation orders and the setting of radiation limits
at 20 mSv/y, are not in contravention of the guiding principles of the Convention, including the best interests ofthe child.”“The combination of the Government’s decision to lift evacuation orders and the prefectural authorities’ decision
to cease the provision of housing subsidies, places a large number of self-evacuees under immense pressure to
return,” Tuncak said.
“The gradual lifting of evacuation orders has created enormous strains on people whose lives have already been
affected by the worst nuclear disaster of this century. Many feel they are being forced to return to areas that areunsafe, including those with radiation levels above what the Government previously considered safe.”
5 November 2018, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Government of Japan Response to the 5 September 2018 Joint
Communication from Special Procedures.
Extracts: “Lifting of the evacuation order is a measure to make return possible for those who prefer to return,and not a measure to force evacuees to return...the decision of the evacuees as to whether to return to their
original places to live or not is entirely up to them. The GoJ does not force them to return nor put any pressure
on them to do so...
“..the GoJ has no clear idea of what is meant by “living in a nuclear waste industrial zone”, the GoJ had alreadyexplained to the local residents about the results of the monitoring before the waste disposal facility started its
operation...
“With regard to the judicial decision in the Fukushima District Court on 10 October 2017, the GoJ lodged an
appeal on 23 October 2017 as a result of consideration within the government, because some of the findings ofthe facts and judgement by the court were at odds with the opinions of the GoJ. Therefore, this judicial decision
is not final. In addition, the GoJ is of the view that there is no indication that “the district court in Fukushima
Prefecture recognised self-evacuees as equal victims of the Fukushima Daiichi accident, affirming their right tocompensation” in the judicial decision.”“...the Special Rapporteur on the implications for human rights of the environmentally sound management anddisposal of hazardous substances and wastes released a press release that contains erroneous contents basedon a one-sided claim. The GoJ is seriously concerned about such claim, as it could unnecessarily inflame publicanxiety, cause confusion, and further trouble people suffering from harmful rumors in disaster-hit areas.”
Fukushima children – 1 February 2019, United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child, Concluding
observations on the combined fourth and fifth periodic reports of Japan.
Extracts: 1 “(a) Reaffirm that radiation exposure in evacuation zones is consistent with internationally acceptedknowledge on risk factors for children”“Implement the recommendations made by the Special Rapporteur on the right of everyone to the enjoyment of
the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health, (A/HRC/23/41/Add.3).”“52. The Committee recommends that the State party take all appropriate measures to ensure that therecommendations contained in the present concluding observations are fully implemented...”39

Greenpeace | Radioactivity on the Move 2020

Greenpeace is an independent
campaigning organisation that acts
to change attitudes and behavior,
to protect and conserve theenvironment, and promote peace.

Greenpeace Japan
Greenpeace Japan

8-13-11 NF Bldg. 2F, Nishi-Shinjuku,
8-13-11
NF Tokyo
Bldg. 2F,
Nishi-Shinjuku,
Shinjuku,
160-0023
Shinjuku, Tokyo 160-0023

For further information:
For further information:

Jan Vande Putte
Jan
Vande Putte
jan.vande.putte@greenpeace.org
jan.vande.putte@greenpeace.org
Heinz Smital
Heinz
Smitalheinz.smital@greenpeace.org
heinz.smital@greenpeace.org
Shaun Burnie
Shaun
Burnieshaun.burnie@greenpeace.org
shaun.burnie@greenpeace.org
Kazue Suzuki
Kazue
Suzukienergy.jp@greenpeace.org
energy.jp@greenpeace.org

www.greenpeace.org/japan
www.greenpeace.org/japan/ja/news/
PR-english/
40