Radiation Protection After Fukushima Daiichi Accident .
IAEA Report onRadiation Protection after theFukushima Daiichi Accident:Promoting Confidence andUnderstandingInternational Experts Meeting17–21 February 2014, Vienna, Austria@
IAEA REPORT ONRADIATION PROTECTION AFTER THEFUKUSHIMA DAIICHI ACCIDENT:PROMOTING CONFIDENCEAND UNDERSTANDING
The following States are Members of the International Atomic Energy DESHBELARUSBELGIUMBELIZEBENINBOLIVIABOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINABOTSWANABRAZILBRUNEI DARUSSALAMBULGARIABURKINA FASOBURUNDICAMBODIACAMEROONCANADACENTRAL AFRICANREPUBLICCHADCHILECHINACOLOMBIACONGOCOSTA RICACÔTE D’IVOIRECROATIACUBACYPRUSCZECH REPUBLICDEMOCRATIC REPUBLICOF THE CONGODENMARKDOMINICADOMINICAN REPUBLICECUADOREGYPTEL ONGEORGIAGERMANYGHANAGREECEGUATEMALAHAITIHOLY SEEHONDURASHUNGARYICELANDINDIAINDONESIAIRAN, ISLAMIC REPUBLIC ANKENYAKOREA, REPUBLIC OFKUWAITKYRGYZSTANLAO PEOPLE’S LAYSIAMALIMALTAMARSHALL ISLANDSMAURITANIA, ISLAMICREPUBLIC ZAMBIQUEMYANMARNAMIBIANEPALNETHERLANDSNEW UPANAMAPAPUA NEW PUBLIC OF MOLDOVAROMANIARUSSIAN FEDERATIONRWANDASAN MARINOSAUDI ARABIASENEGALSERBIASEYCHELLESSIERRA LEONESINGAPORESLOVAKIASLOVENIASOUTH AFRICASPAINSRI LANKASUDANSWAZILANDSWEDENSWITZERLANDSYRIAN ARAB REPUBLICTAJIKISTANTHAILANDTHE FORMER YUGOSLAVREPUBLIC OF MACEDONIATOGOTRINIDAD AND TOBAGOTUNISIATURKEYUGANDAUKRAINEUNITED ARAB EMIRATESUNITED KINGDOM OFGREAT BRITAIN ANDNORTHERN IRELANDUNITED REPUBLICOF TANZANIAUNITED STATES OF AMERICAURUGUAYUZBEKISTANVENEZUELA, BOLIVARIANREPUBLIC OFVIET NAMYEMENZAMBIAZIMBABWEThe Agency’s Statute was approved on 23 October 1956 by the Conference on the Statute of theIAEA held at United Nations Headquarters, New York; it entered into force on 29 July 1957. TheHeadquarters of the Agency are situated in Vienna. Its principal objective is “to accelerate and enlarge thecontribution of atomic energy to peace, health and prosperity throughout the world’’.
IAEA REPORT ONRADIATION PROTECTION AFTER THEFUKUSHIMA DAIICHI ACCIDENT:PROMOTING CONFIDENCEAND UNDERSTANDINGINTERNATIONAL EXPERTS MEETINGVIENNA, 17–21 FEBRUARY 2014Organized in connection with the implementationof the IAEA Action Plan on Nuclear SafetyINTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCYVIENNA, 2014
COPYRIGHT NOTICEAll IAEA scientific and technical publications are protected by the terms ofthe Universal Copyright Convention as adopted in 1952 (Berne) and as revisedin 1972 (Paris). The copyright has since been extended by the World IntellectualProperty Organization (Geneva) to include electronic and virtual intellectualproperty. Permission to use whole or parts of texts contained in IAEA publicationsin printed or electronic form must be obtained and is usually subject to royaltyagreements. Proposals for non-commercial reproductions and translations arewelcomed and considered on a case-by-case basis. Enquiries should be addressedto the IAEA Publishing Section at:Marketing and Sales Unit, Publishing SectionInternational Atomic Energy AgencyVienna International CentrePO Box 1001400 Vienna, Austriafax: 43 1 2600 29302tel.: 43 1 2600 22417email: ks IAEA, 2014Printed by the IAEA in AustriaSeptember 2014IAEA/IEM/6
FOREWORDBy Denis FloryDeputy Director GeneralDepartment of Nuclear Safety and SecurityIn response to the accident at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant,IAEA Member States unanimously adopted the Action Plan on Nuclear Safety.Under this Action Plan, the IAEA Secretariat was asked to organize InternationalExperts Meetings to analyse all relevant technical aspects and learn the lessonsfrom the accident. The International Experts Meetings brought together leadingexperts from areas such as research, industry, regulatory control and safetyassessment. These meetings have made it possible for experts to share the lessonslearned from the accident and identify relevant best practices, and to ensure thatboth are widely disseminated.This report on Radiation Protection after the Fukushima Daiichi Accident:Promoting Confidence and Understanding is part of a series of reports coveringall the topics dealt with in the International Experts Meetings. The reportsdraw on information provided in the meetings as well as on insights from otherrelevant IAEA activities and missions. It is possible that additional informationand analysis related to the accident may become available in the future.I hope that this report will serve as a valuable reference for governments,technical experts, nuclear operators, the media and the general public, and that itwill help strengthen nuclear safety.
EDITORIAL NOTEThe presentations on the attached CD-ROM (including the figures, tables and references)have not been reviewed by the editorial staff of the IAEA. The views expressed remain theresponsibility of the named authors or participants. In addition, the views are not necessarilythose of the governments of the nominating Member States or of the nominating organizations.This report does not address questions of responsibility, legal or otherwise, for acts oromissions on the part of any person.Although great care has been taken to maintain the accuracy of information containedin this publication, neither the IAEA nor its Member States assume any responsibility forconsequences which may arise from its use.The use of particular designations of countries or territories does not imply anyjudgement by the publisher, the IAEA, as to the legal status of such countries or territories, oftheir authorities and institutions or of the delimitation of their boundaries.The mention of names of specific companies or products (whether or not indicated asregistered) does not imply any intention to infringe proprietary rights, nor should it be construedas an endorsement or recommendation on the part of the IAEA.The authors are responsible for having obtained the necessary permission for the IAEAto reproduce, translate or use material from sources already protected by copyrights.Material prepared by authors who are in contractual relation with governments iscopyrighted by the IAEA, as publisher, only to the extent permitted by the appropriate nationalregulations.This publication has been prepared from the original material as submitted by theauthors. The views expressed do not necessarily reflect those of the IAEA, the governments ofthe nominating Member States or the nominating organizations.The IAEA has no responsibility for the persistence or accuracy of URLs for external orthird party Internet web sites referred to in this book and does not guarantee that any contenton such web sites is, or will remain, accurate or appropriate.The depiction and use of boundaries, geographical names and related data shown onmaps do not necessarily imply official endorsement or acceptance by the IAEA.
CONTENTS1.2.INTRODUCTION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11.1. Background. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1.2. Objective. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .23RELEASE OF RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL TO THEENVIRONMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4Aerial radioactive releases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Marine radioactive releases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Impact of radioactive releases: Radiation dose assessments . . . .Impact of radioactive releases: Foodstuffs and marine biota . . .46811MANAGING THE IMPACT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13Health monitoring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Lessons learned from past nuclear or radiological accidents. . . .Understanding local conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Capacity building . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13151820INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .222.1.2.2.2.3.2.4.3.3.1.3.2.3.3.3.4.4.4.1. Standards for the control of contaminated foodstuffs,drinking water and commodities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4.2. Review and revision of the International System ofRadiological Protection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2225COMMUNICATION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .285.1. Risk communication is essential for public understandingand acceptance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5.2. Social media bring new challenges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2830CONCLUSIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .31ANNEX A: CHAIRPERSON’S SUMMARY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .35ANNEX B: CONTENTS OF THE ATTACHED CD-ROM. . . . . . . . . . . . .445.6.
1. INTRODUCTIONFollowing the accident at TEPCO’s Fukushima Daiichi nuclear powerplant (the Fukushima Daiichi accident), the IAEA Director General convened theIAEA Ministerial Conference on Nuclear Safety in June 2011 to direct the processof learning and acting upon lessons to strengthen nuclear safety, emergencypreparedness and radiation protection of people and the environment worldwide.The Conference adopted a Ministerial Declaration on Nuclear Safety, which,inter alia, requested the Director General to prepare a draft Action Plan.1 Thedraft Action Plan on Nuclear Safety (the Action Plan) was approved by the Boardof Governors at its September 2011 meeting,2 and was subsequently unanimouslyendorsed at the 55th regular session of the IAEA General Conference on22 September 2011. The purpose of the Action Plan is to define a programme ofwork to strengthen the global nuclear safety framework.The Action Plan includes 12 main actions. One of the actions is focusedon communication and information dissemination, and includes six sub-actions,one of which mandates the IAEA Secretariat to “organize international expertsmeetings to analyse all relevant technical aspects and learn the lessons from theFukushima Daiichi nuclear power station accident”.3The International Experts Meeting (IEM) on Radiation Protection after theFukushima Daiichi Accident: Promoting Confidence and Understanding washeld from 17 to 22 February 2014 at IAEA Headquarters in Vienna. The IEMwas convened to provide an opportunity for participants to discuss and assessthe radiation protection challenges posed by the accident and the ways thesechallenges can be effectively addressed at the national and international levels.The IEM was attended by over 220 experts from 68 Member States and10 international organizations representing governmental, regulatory, operating,technical support, research and educational bodies. The IEM featured expertpresentations from keynote speakers and panellists, and provided severalopportunities for discussion, during which the participants shared their experienceand identified lessons learned.Each of the 15 technical sessions was summarized by the session Chair,and an IEM Chairperson’s Summary was produced at the end of the IEM(see Annex A).1Declaration by the IAEA Ministerial Conference on Nuclear Safety in Vienna on20 June 2011, INFCIRC/821, IAEA, Vienna (2011), para. 23.2Draft IAEA Action Plan on Nuclear Safety, Report by the Director General,GOV/2011/59-GC(55)/14, IAEA, Vienna (2011).3Ibid., p. 5.1
1.1. BACKGROUNDThe initiator of the Fukushima Daiichi accident was the Great East JapanEarthquake, a seismic event of extreme magnitude. The event was caused by asequential rupture of successive fault segments and resulted in a massive releaseof seismic energy, generating a tsunami beyond the design basis of the FukushimaDaiichi nuclear power plant.The defence in depth provisions at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear powerplant were insufficient to provide the appropriate levels of protection forcritical safety systems. Consequently, there was a failure of the power suppliesneeded to provide ongoing support to key safety functions, including coolingof the reactor and spent fuel. This led to severe core damage and the release ofsignificant quantities of radioactive material to the atmosphere and to the ocean.The released radioactive material exposed the local population to radiation in anumber of ways, including external radiation exposure from radioactive materialin the air and from radioactive material deposited on the ground, and internalradiation exposure from inhalation of radioactive material in the air and fromingestion of radioactive material in food or water. Immediate actions were takenby the Japanese authorities to reduce the population’s exposure to radiation.The Fukushima Daiichi accident raised a number of issues related toprotecting people and the environment from ionizing radiation, in particularconcerning the comprehensiveness and ease of implementation of the InternationalSystem of Radiological Protection4. A number of specific issues were highlightedfor further consideration, including the need to provide timely, factually correct,objective and easily understandable information to populations affected bya nuclear or radiological accident. This matter is addressed in a more specificmanner in the IAEA Report on Enhancing Transparency and CommunicationEffectiveness in the Event of a Nuclear or Radiological Emergency5.4The International System of Radiological Protection, developed, maintained andelaborated by the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP), is usedworldwide as the common basis for radiological protection standards, legislation, guidelines,programmes and practice.5INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, IAEA Report on EnhancingTransparency and Communication Effectiveness in the Event of a Nuclear or RadiologicalEmergency, IAEA, Vienna (2012), available /reports/enhancetransparency180612.pdf2
1.2. OBJECTIVEThe objective of this report is to highlight the lessons learned in the areaof radiation protection in the light of the Fukushima Daiichi accident. Thereport highlights the views expressed by international experts during the IEMon Radiation Protection after the Fukushima Daiichi Accident: PromotingConfidence and Understanding. This is supplemented by experience from otherrelevant IAEA activities, such as the first fact finding mission to Japan6 and theexpert missions dealing with decommissioning7 and remediation8.The report identifies key areas where the application of the InternationalSystem of Radiological Protection can be strengthened as well as lessons learnedfor radiation protection specialists worldwide. The report is expected to contributeto the ongoing efforts to assist Member States in strengthening the protection ofpeople and the environment from ionizing radiation worldwide and constitutes anintegral part of the implementation of the Action Plan.6INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Mission Report: The Great EastJapan Earthquake and Tsunami Expert Mission — IAEA International Fact Finding ExpertMission of the Fukushima Dai-Ichi NPP Accident following the Great East Japan Earthquakeand Tsunami, IAEA, Vienna (2011), available 011/cn200/documentation/cn200 FinalFukushima-Mission Report.pdf7INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Mission Report: IAEAInternational Peer Review Mission on Mid-and-Long-Term Roadmap towards theDecommissioning of TEPCO’s Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station Units 14, IAEA,Vienna (2013), available missionreport230513.pdf;INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Preliminary Summary Report: IAEAInternational Peer Review Mission on Mid-and-Long-Term Roadmap towards theDecommissioning of TEPCO’s Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station Units 14(Second Mission), IAEA, Vienna (2013), available missionreport041213.pdf8INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Final Report of the InternationalMission on Remediation of Large Contaminated Areas Off-site the Fukushima Dai-ichi NPP,IAEA Vienna (2011), available final report151111.pdf;INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Final Report: The Follow-up IAEAInternational Mission on Remediation of Large Contaminated Areas Off-Site the FukushimaDaiichi Nuclear Power Plant, IAEA, Vienna (2014), available final report230114.pdf3
2. RELEASE OF RADIOACTIVE MATERIALTO THE ENVIRONMENTThe Fukushima Daiichi accident resulted in the release of large quantitiesof radioactive material to the atmosphere and the marine environment. In thecontext of an accident at a nuclear facility, such releases are often referred to asthe source term. The radiological significance of the source term is defined by thecharacteristics of the radioactive material and its quantity. The most radiologicallysignificant releases from the Fukushima Daiichi accident were isotopes of iodineand caesium, in particular, 131I, 134Cs and 137Cs.The releases to the atmosphere are currently estimated to be in the rangeof 100–500 petabecquerels (PBq)9 for 131I and 6–20 PBq for 137Cs. The releasesof 134Cs were similar to those of 137Cs. These quantities are about 10–20% ofthe releases that occurred during the Chernobyl accident and took place over aprotracted period of many days. The main radionuclides released to the marineenvironment were 131I, 134Cs and 137Cs. Smaller amounts of tritium (3H) and otherradionuclides were also released.An understanding of the source term and of the distribution of radioactivematerial in the environment following an accident is important for decisionmaking on actions to protect people from exposure to ionizing radiation. In Japan,protective actions were implemented, including evacuation and restrictionson consumption of certain foods. These protective actions, combined with thesmaller source term, resulted in considerably lower radiation doses to the localpopulation around the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant than those incurredby the local population around the Chernobyl nuclear power plant.2.1. AERIAL RADIOACTIVE RELEASESLessons Learned: In the absence of measurement results, predictions of theaccident source term and of the dispersion in the atmosphere will have inherentuncertainties. However, the Fukushima Daiichi accident showed that appropriatepublic protection actions can be applied during the initial response to an accident,even in the absence of sophisticated source term and dispersion calculation tools.The source term for the Fukushima Daiichi accident has been estimatedby many institutions worldwide using computer based modelling techniques.941 petabecquerel (PBq) 1015 becquerels (Bq).
These estimates have been refined and updated as more information relating tothe accident has become available. There is potential for further development ofthese computer based modelling techniques to enable prediction of the accidentsource term during the early stages of an accident. Efforts such as intercomparisonexercises using these modelling techniques are one example of a potential areafor improvement.Following the Fukushima Daiichi accident, modelling techniques were alsowidely used by experts in many Member States to predict the movement of theradioactive release in the atmosphere. These techniques provided indications ofthe likely concentrations of radioactivity
IAEA REPORT ON RADIATION PROTECTION AFTER THE FUKUSHIMA DAIICHI ACCIDENT: PROMOTING CONFIDENCE AND UNDERSTANDING INTERNATIONAL EXPERTS MEETING VIENNA, 17–21 FEBRUARY 2014 Organized in connection with the implementation of the IAEA Action Plan on Nuclear Safety INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY VIENNA, 2014
The radiation released by the disaster at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant was about 5.5% of that of the Chernobyl accident.3,4 At the time of the accident, prevailing winds blew much of the radiation eastward and out to sea.2 This event marked the world’s most significant radiological accident in 25 years,
the third atomic bombing, after Hiroshima and Nagasaki' (Tashiro, 2011). Many others linked Fukushima and Hiroshima, as scenes of devastated towns were compared to pho-tographs of Hiroshima after the bombing. The atomic bomb survivors had long been advocates for the elimination of nuclear weapons but silent on nuclear energy. Fukushima .
Expert Group on Fukushima Waste Management and Decommissioning R&D (EGFWMD) Established under NEA RWMC in March 2014 Objectives -Evaluate management of post-accident waste, with focus on characterization and categorization -Provide a strategic approach to Japanese government to manage waste characterization Participation
Non-Ionizing Radiation Non-ionizing radiation includes both low frequency radiation and moderately high frequency radiation, including radio waves, microwaves and infrared radiation, visible light, and lower frequency ultraviolet radiation. Non-ionizing radiation has enough energy to move around the atoms in a molecule or cause them to vibrate .
Medical X-rays or radiation therapy for cancer. Ultraviolet radiation from the sun. These are just a few examples of radiation, its sources, and uses. Radiation is part of our lives. Natural radiation is all around us and manmade radiation ben-efits our daily lives in many ways. Yet radiation is complex and often not well understood.
Radiation Protection Series . The Radiation Protection Series is published by the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency (ARPANSA) to promote practices which . National Conference on Radiation Protection in Medicine was held on 3 October 2007, during the public consultation period, to provide the stakeholders a .
In December 2014, Canadian scientists published a paper in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences [12] discussing Fukushima contamination. The paper concludes that radioactive Cesium from the Fukushima accident reached the continental shelf of Canada in June 2013, and by February 2014 had reached a level equal to that found by WHOI .
Woodland Park School District Reading Curriculum English Language Arts Curriculum Writers: Elisabetta Macchiavello, Nancy Munro, Lisa Healey-Wilk, Samantha Krasnomowitz, Monica Voinov, Michele Skrbic, Krystal Capo, Nicole Webb, Veronica Seavy, Pamela Yesenosky, Steve Sans, Rosemary Ficcara, Laura Masefield, Meghan Glenn 2016-2017 Carmela Triglia Director of Curriculum and Instruction. 1 .
