CIVIL PROTECTION DRILL IN IBARAKI PREFECTURE

UNCLAS TOKYO 006346

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: ENRG JA PARM
SUBJECT: CIVIL PROTECTION DRILL IN IBARAKI PREFECTURE



1. SUMMARY: On September 29, 2006, in an exercise simulating
a large-scale terrorist attack, the Ibaraki Prefectural
Government conducted training with the central government,
the Self-Defense Force, police, firefighters, and other
organizations to practice rescuing citizens under the Civil
Protection Law. Participating in the drill were 2,100-2,400
people from approximately 80-100 organizations across the
nation. Some leading Japanese officials pointed out flaws in
the drill, saying it was unrealistic because participants had
advance copies of the scenario. According to Kayo Nozawa of
the Cabinet Secretariat, Ibaraki Prefecture engaged an
independent reviewer, Sogo Bosai Solution, to evaluate the
effectiveness of the drill. Findings will be issued in
mid-December. END SUMMARY.

Background
--------------


2. The Civil Protection Law, enacted in 2004, defines the
responsibilities of central and local governments for
responding to armed attacks, evacuating and rescuing
residents, providing medical and food relief, guarding key
facilities and other actions to protect citizens in an
emergency. GOJ cosponsors training exercises with local
governments to prepare actors in the event of an attack. The
first drill, conducted in Fukui Prefecture in November 2005,
simulated a terrorist attack on a nuclear power plant that
damaged the facility and caused a potential leak of
radioactive material. The scenario of the second drill, held
in Hokkaido Prefecture in August 2006, assumed a terrorist
attack against a petrochemical complex. The third drill, held
in Ibaraki Prefecture in September 2006, was similar to the
one in Fukui, except real evacuation drills were carried out
in Ibaraki. The fourth drill is scheduled in Tottori
Prefecture on November 26, 2006. It will involve a chemical
attack against a large, crowded facility with civilians
needing to be evacuated. The main purpose of these drills is
to examine the effectiveness of each prefecture's plan to
protect its citizens during a crisis.

GOJ also plans to conduct map exercises in eight prefectures
(Saitama, Tokyo, Fukui, Osaka, Tottori, Ehime, Fukuoka, and
Saga) on various scenarios including a bombing at a terminal
station and intrusion by gunmen of unknown nationality.
Participating prefectures in the map drills will practice
procedures to analyze the situation in the field and maintain
contact with government entities and other relevant
institutions.

Details of the Drill
--------------


3. Embassy Science officer attended the September drill.
Everything went according to plan. The chain of events
surprised very few people. For example, a player representing
one of the prefectural task force teams was reading the
scenario guide during the drill.


A. MAJOR EXERCISE SITES: The three main facilities included:
1) an emergency headquarters set up at the Ibaraki
Prefectural Office: 2) a Nuclear Off-Site Center where the
prefectural task force teams assembled; and 3) an evacuation
center or safe haven located inside a multipurpose gymnasium,
where radiological screening, first aid, and food was
provided. Video conferencing (VTC) at each site provided
information exchange and situational updates.


B. EVACUEES: Approximately 700 residents from TOKAImura and
nearby areas participated in the evacuation drill. Social
workers and firefighters helped those unable to evacuate
independently, including the elderly and school-aged
children. According to a site official, local residents were
informed of the time to vacate their homes or schools and the
amount of time necessary to reach the rescue center. To
facilitate the evacuation, a one-way restriction was imposed
on some streets in advance. The evacuees entered the
evacuation center quietly without any sense of urgency.


C. OVERALL SCENARIO: At 7:00AM, unidentified terrorists
attacked the Second TOKAI Nuclear Power Plant (Shirakata,
TOKAImura) of the Japan Atomic Power Company. The
high-voltage cable was destroyed and the reactor
automatically shut down. The Power Company alerted the
appropriate crisis management officials and the GOJ
established an emergency headquarters, an off-site center,
and a safe haven. At 8:10AM, the GOJ gave warning to the
residents, issued evacuation instructions to the local
governments, and assigned special tasks to other relevant
organizations as outlined in the Basic Policy Guidelines for
emergencies. At 10:15AM, at the off-site center, the Ibaraki
Prefectural Task Force Teams held its second meeting and the
Joint Response Council began drafting regional evacuation
plans. At 10:40AM, the GOJ issued additional evacuation
instructions. The GOJ conducted a VTC with the off-site
center. Following the VTC, a third task force team meeting
was held. By 12:00PM, the evacuation was completed and all
the terrorists were captured. At 12:10PM, release of
radioactivity began. The GOJ responded by conducting aerial
and maritime monitoring of radioactivity. At the safe haven,
a disaster guidance seminar for residents was convened and
radiological screenings were administered. At 12:20PM, the
Ibaraki Prefectural Task Force and the Joint Response Council
held a fourth meeting. By 13:10PM, the Japan Power Company
reported that the radioactivity release had ceased. At
13:20PM, the Ibaraki Prefectural Task Force and the Joint
Response Council held a final meeting.

The drill was followed by a 2:00PM press conference. Cabinet
Secretariat Councillor Genzo Inoue said that the scenario

SIPDIS
should not have been issued in advance. Governor Masaru
Hashimoto concurred with Inoue, but also pointed out the
value of having citizens practice their roles and
responsibilities in such training exercises. Since the
disastrous nuclear accident in 1999, Ibaraki has held regular
nuclear disaster drills. However, a drill based on a
terrorist attack was a first time occurrence and mystified
some. TOKAImura Head Tatsuya Murakami commented that, in his
view, the release of radioactive materials is a more
realistic threat to local residents than terrorism.
Therefore, he wondered which scenario should have been given
higher priority.
SCHIEFFER