Recommendations to the Governments of Belarus, the Russian Federation and Ukrania on environmental m

1
Recommendations to the Governments of Belarus,
the Russian Federation and Ukrania on

environmental monitoring,
remediation and research. Summary
by
The Chernobyl Forum Vienna International Center
Vienna, Austria September 6th, 2005
Abel J. González ?Autoridad Regulatoria Nuclear
Av. Del Libertador 8250 Buenos Aires Argentina
?54 1163231306 ? agonzale_at_sede.arn.gov.ar
2
Contamination?
3
Significant radionuclides
IODINE ? (THYROID GLAND)

• CAESIUM
• ?
• (WHOLE BODY EXPOSURE)
• ?

4
Environmental monitoring
and research

• Environmental transfer and bioaccumulation of
  137Cs and 90Sr are now well understood
• Little need for major new research programmes
• Requirement for continued but more limited
  targeted monitoring of the environments

5
Environmental monitoring
and research

• Long term monitoring of 137Cs and 90Sr) is
  required to
• (Practical)
• To assess levels of human exposure and
  contamination of foods to determine the need for
  remedial actions
• To inform the general public about the
  radioactive contamination in food products and
  its seasonal and annual variability in natural
  food products as well as give dietary
  advice.          

6
Environmental monitoring
and research

• Long term monitoring of 137Cs and 90Sr) is
  required to
• (Scientific)
• To determine parameters of long-term transfer of
  radionuclides in various ecosystems and different
  natural conditions to improve predictive models
• To determine mechanisms of radionuclide behaviour
  in less studied ecosystems (e.g., role of fungi
  in the forest).

7
Remediation and countermeasures
8
Remediation and countermeasures

• Different effective long-term remediation
  measures are available,
• but their use should be justified and optimized.
• The general public should be informed and
  involved in the decision-making process.

9
(No Transcript)
10
mSv/year
NATURAL BACKGROUND VERY HIGH
100


10
1
100


10 1
INTERVENTION ALMOST ALWAYS JUSTIFIABLE
EXTANT ANNUAL DOSE
INTERVENTION MAY POSSIBLY BE JUSTIFIABLE
TYPICALLY HIGH
INTERVENTION IS NOT LIKELY TO BE JUSTIFIABLE
AVERAGE
11
Remediation and countermeasures

• Remediation measures on radiocaesium in soil may
  be justified in agricultural areas with sandy and
  peaty soils where there might be a high transfer
  from soil to plants.

12
Remediation and countermeasures

• Efficient regular agricultural countermeasures
  are
• Radical improvement of pastures and grasslands
  as well as draining of wet peaty areas may be an
  effective remediation measure
• Enhanced application of mineral fertilisers in
  plant breeding, application of Prussian Blue to
  cattle and pre-slaughter clean feeding
  accompanied with in-vivo monitoring.

13
Remediation and countermeasures

• There are still agricultural areas in the three
  countries which are out of use. However this land
  can be safely used after appropriate remediation.

14
Remediation and countermeasures

• Restricting harvesting of wild food products such
  as game, berries, mushrooms and fish from closed
  lakes by the public may still be needed.

15
Remediation and countermeasures

• It is unlikely that any future countermeasures to
  protect surface waters will be justifiable.
• Restrictions on consumption of fish may remain in
  a few closed lakes.

16
137Cs activity concentrations in predatory Pike
fish from Kiev reservoirs
Codex level
17
Codex level
137Cs activity concentrations in non-predatory
Bream fish from Kiev reservoirs
18
Remediation and countermeasures

• Particular attention must be given to the
  production of milk where 137Cs concentration may
  exceed action levels.

19
137Cs activity concentration in milk
Codex level
20
What is the main problem?
21
radionuclides released during the accident might
be incorporated into materials, goods,
merchandises, products
22
and, in general, into any
commodity

of public use.
23

• September 2000
• IAEA General Conference, following a request from
  Belarus, decided the development of radiological
  criteria for
  radionuclides in commodities.

24
(No Transcript)
25
(No Transcript)
26
(No Transcript)
27
Codes Alimentarious levels (incorporated into the
BSS as
generic action levels for
foodstuffs)
28
Guideline levels for radionuclides in foods
29
Drinking water

• The WHO levels

30
Environmental aspects of the shelter
dismantlement and radioactive waste management

• A comprehensive safety and environmental impact
  assessment should be performed.
• Development of an integrated radioactive waste
  management programme for the Shelter.
• Strategy for rehabilitation of the Exclusion
  Zone
• Overall plan for the long-term development of the
  Exclusion Zone

31
Epilogue

• Preservation of the vast tacit knowledge that is
  available on the Chernobyl experience.
• What to do?

32
.and patience!!
33
Detectability limits in radioepidemiology

• Because radiation is a
  weak carcinogen,
  it is
  practically impossible
  
  to detect effects at low doses.

34
Exposed group N people E cancers n
probability of naturalcancer pD probability
of radiation cancer
Control group N people C cancers n
probability of natural cancer
35
Epidemiological significance

• The expected number of cancers in the control
  group will be
• C n N
• The expected number of cancers in the exposed
  group will be
• E n N pd D N
• The expected number of excess cancers will be
• E C

36
Difficult to detect!
E-C
37
Epidemiological significance

• The standard deviation is
• ? ? 2 n N pd D N
• If the excess cancers are to be detected with a
  statistical confidence of 95
• E C gt 2 ?

38
Epidemiological significance

• Operating algebraically and as n gtgt pd D,
• N gt constant / D2
• which is the equation giving the number of
  people, N, needed for detecting excess cancers at
  dose D.

(Constant 8 n / pd2)
39
Dose (mSv)
DETECTABILITY OF SOLID CANCERS
Region of detectability
Region of undetectability
1 mSv
10 9 p.
People
40
Dose (mSv)
DETECTABILITY OF SOLID CANCERS
Region of undetectability
Region of detectability
Chernobyl doses 50 mSv
Population 270 000
People
41
Epidemiological significance thyroid cancer in
children
42
Thyroid cancer in children in Belarus
43
Dose (mSv)
DETECTABILITY OF HEREDITABLE EFFECTS
Region of detectability
Region of undetectability
10 mSv
1010 people!
People
44
Dose (mSv)
Region of detectability
100.000 man Sv x 5/Sv 5000 deaths!
0.001 Sv
100.000.000 p.
People
45
Dose (mSv)
Region of detectability
Do the effects in this region actually occur?
Epistemological Limitation No grounds of
knowledge!!
People
46
.and patience!!
47
Responding to this demand, three years ago, the
IAEA General Conference requested that
commodities requiring regulatory control shall be
identified.
48
If it is satisfied that the doses of radiation
incurred will be trivial, the competent authority
should waive the requirements of
operations which do not involve the use of
radioactive substances at concentrations
exceeding 0.002 ?Ci/g (74 Bq/g) or solid natural
radioactive substances at concen-trations
exceeding 0.01 ?Ci/g (370 Bq/g).
49
I.e., it can be construed that the first BSS
applied to controllable operations involving
radioactive substances at concentrations exceeding

• some 10s of Bq/g!

50
?1000 miles
51

• 2001 2004 Extensive discussion!
• foodstuffs and water
• WHO and FAO

52

• 2001 2004 Extensive discussion!
• foodstuffs and water other materials
• WHO and FAO IAEA DS161

53
Epidemiological significance
Solid Cancers

• N gt 109 / D2

54
Not surprisingly,
people (and their
representatives)
have been asking a simple basic question
to the radiation protection communityWhat is
the radioactivity level below which the
commodities are safe to be used without any
control?
55
Commodities carry
becquerels (or curies)
NOTsieverts (or
rems)
Therefore, levels should be derived in terms of
Bq/kg rather than in terms of hypothetical
individual doses.
56

• Our problem is
  to provide a
  rational, logical and sustainable answer to these
  simple questions!

57
Dose (mSv)
DETECTABILITY OF LEUKÆMIAS
Region of detectability
Liquidators av.doses 10 mSv
Region of undetectability
Chernobyl liquidators 160 000
People
58
Relatively low dosesExposure of residents
affected by Chernobyl

• Average doses
• 
  (1986-1995)
• External Internal Total
• Russian Federation 4 2.5 6.5 mSv
• Belarus 5 3 8 mSv
• Ukraine 5 6 11 mSv
• Average (10 years) 5 3 8 mSv
• (lifetime) 9 4 13 mSv