Confidential documents from Daikin Industries Yodogawa Plant

The health damage suffered by workers engaged in the production of PFOA at Daikin Industries has come to light. A research team consisting of Kyoto University’s researchers and doctors has uncovered the problem and published a paper on it.

Several workers suffered from interstitial lung disease, which reduces respiratory function. All of them had worked in environments where dust control measures were inadequate.

Tansa asked how Daikin would respond to this occupational hazard, but they refused to answer, citing that the paper was not written by the company.

This is as reported in our previous article: Daikin PFOA Workers Suffer From Interstitial Lung Disease: “Clothes Were Covered in Powder” Doctor: “The Number of Victims Goes Beyond 5 or 10”.

Why is Daikin refusing to answer? The reason for this is revealed in confidential Daikin documents obtained by Tansa.

Daikin predicted that its workers would be exposed to PFOA 25 years ago, but failed to take measures, resulting in health damage.

From Yodogawa Plant to Kyoto University

Tansa obtained documents sent to Kyoto University from Daikin’s Yodogawa Plant in 2005, 20 years ago. At the time, Yodogawa Plant manufactured and sold PFOA.

On the afternoon of May 17, 2005, Akio Koizumi, currently Professor Emeritus at Kyoto University, was in his laboratory when he received an envelope. Koizumi is a pioneer in PFAS research in Japan. At the time, he was investigating the actual state of PFOA and PFOS contamination across the country and publishing his findings in papers and other publications.

What arrived was a white A4-sized envelope from the Yodogawa Plant with the Daikin logo and address. There was no sender’s name written on it. It was postmarked in “Suita,” near the Daikin Yodogawa Plant. Inside was a cover letter and several stapled documents.

Since the sender was unknown, Koizumi decided to keep the documents.

Time passed, and in 2022, Koizumi informed Tansa of the existence of the documents. “I will entrust it to Tansa. Please investigate and report on it.” I received the original documents in an envelope.

Daikin’s “inconvenient truth” that was recorded

The envelope contained three different documents, 17 pages in total.

 ・”Business Report: Survey on DS101″ (September 18, 2000)

 

・”PFOA Q&A draft regarding the release of PFOA into the environment from the Yodogawa Plant” (December 8, 2003)

 

・”Opinion draft on ‘Distribution and Status of Perfluorooctanoic Acid (PFOA) in Domestic Rivers and Bays'” (December 9, 2003)

* “DS101” is Daikin’s internal code for “PFOA”

The names of the investigators and writers of the documents were blacked out with marker pen, but when held up to the light, their names were visible. Their titles were also visible. Tansa tracked down Daikin associates who knew these people, and traveled all over the country. From the testimony of multiple people, I learned that they were real people.

The “PFOA Q&A draft regarding the release of PFOA into the environment from the Yodogawa Plant” (December 8, 2003) included data on the amount of PFOA released outside the Yodogawa Plant site. This is data that Daikin has steadfastly refused to disclose. According to Koizumi, this is consistent with the level of contamination around the Yodogawa Plant.

The documents were also full of consistent information that only Daikin could know, such as a diagram showing the PFOA manufacturing process at the Yodogawa Plant and records of direct communication with the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry regarding PFOA regulations and obtaining information on trends in domestic regulations.

The documents are authentic.

Daikin: “We believe that the documents were created internally.”

On June 7, 2022, I and Tansa Editor-in-Chief Makoto Watanabe brought the documents to Daikin headquarters and conducted a face-to-face interview. Hiraga Yoshiyuki (Managing Executive Officer of Chemical Business, Chemical Environment and Safety), Satoshi Komatsu (Senior Manager, Global Advocacy Planning Dept., Chemicals Division), Kiyoshi Abe (Department Manager, PR Group, Corporate Communication Department), and Hisano Noda (Corporate Communications Office, Public Relations Group) responded. (Titles at the time)

Daikin stated that internal documents are “destroyed after about 10 years” and demanded copies of the documents Tansa had brought in. Three days later, Daikin responded by email after examining the documents, “We believe that all three documents were created for internal discussions more than 18 years ago.”

Daikin, on the other hand, refused to comment on the documents for the following reasons:

“We were unable to confirm the existence of the documents in question or the facts concerning its contents. As these are not official documents published by our company with supporting evidence, but rather documents that appear to be in the process of being created, and as we are unable to confirm the veracity of the contents, we do not believe it is appropriate to comment on the documents in question. We ask for your understanding that we are unable to comment on the documents in question or answer questions based on its contents.”

Daikin even went so far as to say that, “we believe that all three documents were created for internal discussions.” By interviewing the documents’ creator and those involved at the time, it should be possible to determine that the documents were prepared by the company. The contents of the documents contain information that only Daikin would know, and it should also be possible to confirm that the information has no contradictions or errors.

However, the company refuses to comment and does not confirm the authenticity of the documents, likely because the documents contain facts that are inconvenient for Daikin.

For example, the amount of PFOA discharged outside the premise, which Daikin has refused to disclose, as mentioned above, and the fact that until 2000, factory wastewater was not discharged into a sewage treatment plant but was instead discharged directly into a local irrigation canal. These details are recorded in “PFOA Q&A draft regarding the release of PFOA into the environment from the Yodogawa Plant” (December 8, 2003).

Additionally the  “Business Report: Survey on DS101” (September 18, 2000)  is a survey report conducted to understand the amount of PFOA leaking outside and the exposure status of workers during the PFOA manufacturing and use processes.

Along with the results of PFOA concentration measurements in the work environment within the PFOA manufacturing process, the following was stated:

In areas where powder is handled, especially where PFOA is extracted in powder form, the measured concentrations will be high and exposure will be an issue.

From Daikin Industries’ “Business Report: Survey on DS101” (September 18, 2000) = highlight added by Tansa

The lie of “knowing their health”

Daikin recognized the problem of workers’ exposure to PFOA 25 years ago.

However, the company did not inform workers about the toxicity of PFOA or the dangers of exposure to it, and instead made workers who are unaware continue working and continue to manufacture PFOA.

In previous investigations, Tansa has inquired Daikin about workers’ exposure to PFOA.

For example, in January 2022, we asked, “Have you ever tested the PFOA blood levels of your employees? If so, have any employees been found to have high levels of PFOA? If not, what is the reason for not testing?” Daikin’s response was as follows:

“We know the health status of past PFOA workers during annual health checkups, and no health effects attributable to PFOA have been found.”

PFOA worker: “My throat hurts after working”

Nevertheless, the research team has identified several patients with interstitial lung disease, the symptoms of which appear more than 20 years after exposure. Several workers have been exposed to high concentrations of PFOA, even if they have not developed interstitial lung disease. These individuals have one thing in common: they worked at Daikin, where PFOA was manufactured.

One of the workers, a former worker who was responsible for cleaning the containers used to transport PFOA, told Tansa:

“There was a ‘warning label’ on the container, informing people that it was a hazardous substance. But the company never explained anything to me about PFOA.”

“When I do this work, a lot of powder flies around. I wear a mask just to be safe, but my throat hurts after work. I’ve never had a special health checkup to test PFOA levels.”

The credibility of Daikin’s claim that they “know the health status of PFOA workers” and that “no health effects attributable to PFOA have been found” is undermined.

Daikin Union: “Check with the company’s public relations department”

Dr. Kunio Kanetani, who led the current study, said:

“Like asbestos, interstitial lung disease develops more than 20 years after exposure to PFOA. The health damage to workers will go beyond 5 or 10.”

In a situation where the company fails to fulfill its responsibility, who will protect the lives and health of workers?

Workers’ only hope is the labor union.

Daikin has an umbrella organization called the Federation of All Daikin Workers’ Union, which oversees 24 Daikin-related labor unions. It has more than 10,000 members.

From May to June 2022, I was in contact with the Federation of All Daikin Workers’ Union. I sent them a request for an interview and a questionnaire regarding worker exposure to PFOA, after conveying the contents of the confidential documents.

However, Minayoshi, a representative of the Daikin union, said in an email, “After internal consideration, we will refrain from both interviews and responses.”

Three years have passed since then. With the health damage caused to workers coming to light, I have once again asked the following in the questionnaire:

1. Did the Federation of All Daikin Workers’ Union have any knowledge of the PFOA exposure status of its members who are engaged in the PFOA manufacturing and use processes at the Yodogawa Plant?

 

2. Was the Federation of All Daikin Workers’ Union aware of the health hazards faced by its members who are involved in the production and use of PFOA at the Yodogawa Plant?

 

3. Will the Federation of All Daikin Workers’ Union make a request to Daikin’s management to provide compensation to those who develop interstitial lung disease as described in this paper?

 

4. In light of the contents of this paper, will the Federation of All Daikin Workers’ Union inform union members who were previously involved in the production and use of PFOA at the Yodogawa Plant of the toxicity of PFOA and the risk of developing associated diseases?

 

5. In light of the contents of this paper, will the Federation of All Daikin Workers’ Union take action to conduct a health survey of union members who were previously involved in the production and use of PFOA at the Yodogawa Plant?

 

6. This paper confirms high levels of PFOA exposure in people who have worked at the Yodogawa Plant. In light of these results, will the Federation of All Daikin Workers’ Union take action to conduct a survey of PFOA exposure among union members who have worked at the Yodogawa Plant in the past and present?

 

7. This is a significant paper that concerns the health and lives of union members. As the labor union of the PFOA manufacturing company that was the subject of this paper, does the Federation of All Daikin Workers’ Union need an opportunity to have a dialogue with the authors of the paper?

 

8. Daikin Industries had already predicted in its “Business Report: Survey on DS101” (September 18, 2000) that exposure to PFOA would become a problem for factory workers, yet it caused the high levels of exposure pointed out in this paper. Will the union protest against this fact to Daikin’s management?

 

9. Interstitial lung disease, like asbestos, is said to develop more than 20 years after exposure. In the future, people who have worked at the Yodogawa Plant may develop interstitial lung disease. Will the Federation of All Daikin Workers’ Union take action to prevent further damage?

 

10. The Federation of All Daikin Workers’ Union is aware of this issue through our requests for interviews and the sending of questionnaires in May and June 2022. In response to this, has the Federation of All Daikin Workers’ Union shared any information with its members?

 

11. The Federation of All Daikin Workers’ Union is aware of this issue through our requests for interviews and the sending of questionnaires in May and June 2022. In response to this, have the Federation of All Daikin Workers’ Union taken any measures to prevent health damage to your members?

However, there has been no response even after the deadline. There has also been no response to the email where I urged them to respond.

When I called to inquire, I was answered by the same Minayoshi as three years ago.

“We will refrain from answering. If necessary, please check with the company’s public relations department regarding the content of your question.”

When asked why they would not respond as a labor union, they replied, “We will refrain from answering that question either.”

When I replied, “This is an issue that affects the health and lives of workers, do you understand that?,” Minayoshi replied, “Um, we will refrain from answering that question as well.” When asked why, Minayoshi said, “There is no reason. We don’t think there is any need to go into that.” Then he repeated the following:

“Please check with the company’s public relations department regarding the content of your question including this matter as well.”

The company and the labor union are separate entities. However, Minayoshi tried to end the conversation, which had lasted less than three minutes, by saying, “We’re busy, too. How long do you intend to continue?”

How can they be so irresponsible? The purpose of labor unions is to fight companies and win workers’ rights. On the union’s website, the first of its “priority activities” is “improving the stability of union members’ lives.” Minayoshi has abandoned the purpose of the union and become one with the company.

Finally, I asked Minayoshi what department he was in, but he didn’t reveal his title. I also asked him for his full name, but he refused to say. I wondered if he felt guilty.

I looked it up and found out that his full name is Hiroki/Hiromi Minayoshi. Ten years ago, in 2015, he was the vice-executive chairman of the Yodogawa branch of the Daikin Industries Labor Union, which was responsible for manufacturing PFOA.

One of the workers found to have been exposed to high levels of PFOA and had interstitial lung disease in the study conducted by the research team is a current Daikin employee.

“If I report my symptoms to my company, will I get fired?”

(Originally published in Japanese on May 29, 2025. Translation by Mana Shibata.)

Polluted with PFOA: All articles