REPORTTHASSESSMENT ON THE 66 DAY OF PROJECTED
EXTERNAL DOSES FOR POPULATIONS LIVING IN THE
NORTH-WEST FALLOUT ZONE OF THE FUKUSHIMANUCLEAR ACCIDENT- OUTCOME OF POPULATION EVACUATION MEASURES -Report DRPH/2011-10

DIRECTORATE OF RADIOLOGICAL PROTECTION AND HUMAN HEALTH

Assessment on the 66th day of projected external doses from the nuclear accident in Fukushima

CONTENTSEXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................... 6
2 FIRST-YEAR EXTERNAL DOSE ASSESSMENTS FROM THE FUKUSHIMA ACCIDENT. ...... 7
2.1 FIRST-YEAR EXTERNAL DOSE ESTIMATE CARRIED OUT BY IRSN 28 DAYS AFTER THE ACCIDENT ........... 7
2.2 FIRST-YEAR EXTERNAL DOSE ESTIMATE CARRIED OUT BY UNITED STATES DOE/NNSA 38 DAYSAFTER THE ACCIDENT ..................................................................................................... 10
2.3 FIRST-YEAR EXTERNAL DOSE ESTIMATE CARRIED OUT BY THE JAPANESE "MINISTRY OF
EDUCATION, CULTURE, SPORTS, SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY" (MEXT) 44 DAYS AFTER THE
ACCIDENT. .................................................................................................................. 11
2.4 FIRST-YEAR EXTERNAL DOSE ESTIMATE FROM THE MAPPING OF CESIUM DEPOSITS (MEXT) ............. 14

3 IMPACT OF EVACUATION MEASURES ON PROJECTED EXTERNAL DOSES ............... 20
3.1 IMPACT OF EVACUATION MEASURES ON POPULATION SIZES ACCORDING TO THE PRESCRIBEDREFERENCE LEVELS ........................................................................................................ 20
3.2 IMPACT OF EVACUATION MEASURES ON PROJECTED EXTERNAL DOSESACCORDING TO

IMPLEMENTATION TIMES .................................................................................................. 22

4 CONCLUSIONS ..................................................................................... 24

Report DRPH/2011-010

3/28

Assessment on the 66th day of projected external doses from the nuclear accident in Fukushima

EXECUTIVE SUMMARYOn April 8, 2011, 28 days after the nuclear accident at the Fukushima nuclear power plant (NPP),IRSN published on its website the first worldwide map of doses likely to be received by the Japanese
population as a result of external irradiation occurring the 1st year following the accident. This map
was derived from dose rate data collected by the US DoE/NNSA based on airborne measurements
and published on their website on April 7, 2011. The IRSN map revealed significant external doses ina northwest zone from the NPP, about 20 km in width and 50 to 70 km in depth. Other dose maps
were then produced and published by DoE/NNSA on April 18, 2011 and more recently by the Japan"Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology" (MEXT), on the 44 th day after
accident. These dose maps were consistent with the first dose assessment carried out by IRSN andshow dose values of the same order of magnitude (difference less than a factor of 2.5).
On the 56th day after the accident, MEXT published the first maps of caesium depositions. They
revealed high values comparable with the most contaminated areas of Chernobyl, even beyond theinitial 20 km-radius evacuation zone around the Fukushima plant. A new dose assessment was
carried out by IRSN on the 66th day after the accident to estimate projected doses due to external
exposure from radioactive deposits, for exposure durations of 3 months, 1 year and 4 years before
evacuation.
The estimated projected doses reach particularly significant values, some of them even above
200 mSv, which are no longer in the range of "low doses" according to UNSCEAR definition. Moreoverthese dose levels do not take into account neither the doses received from other pathways such as
immersion within the plume and inhalation of particles in the plume during the accident nor thedoses already received or to be received from ingestion of contaminated foodstuffs. The total
effective doses to be received (external + internal) could be much higher according to the type ofdeposit (dry or wet), diet and source of food.
The number of Japanese people living in the most contaminated areas outside the initial 20 kmradius evacuation zone around the Fukushima plant (874 km 2 with caesium 134+137 deposits higher
than 600,000 Bq/m2) was estimated to 70,000 people including 9,500 children of 0-14 years in age.
This significant number reaches about 26% of that of Chernobyl (270,000 people) for a surface area
only 8.5% of that of Chernobyl (10,300 km2).
IRSN have also studied:the impact of the selection of a dose reference level, within the range of 20 to 100 mSv
recommended by ICRP in emergency situations, on the number of people to be evacuated;averted doses for these populations resulting from an evacuation according to 3 different
scenarios: evacuation 3 months, 1 year or 4 years after the accident.
The level of projected external doses in upcoming years - up to 4 Sv lifetime dose in the mostcontaminated areas (30 million Bq/m 2 of caesium-137 + 134) - requires the implementation ofprotective actions such as evacuation of population.
Report DRPH/2011-010

4/28

Assessment on the 66th day of projected external doses from the nuclear accident in Fukushima

According to the ICRP recommendations in emergency situations, the selection of the highest
protective reference level, i.e. 20 mSv, would avert external doses above this level for 15,000 to
20,000 people.
If the Japanese authorities decide to take an even more protective reference level, for example 10
mSv for the 1st year, the averted external doses for the affected populations (70,000 people) would
be much higher if the evacuation is quickly prescribed. An evacuation one year after the accident
would result in a 59% decrease of the projected external dose for this population; evacuation threemonths after the accident would result in an 82% decrease.
This policy for preventing the risk of developing long-term leukaemia and radiation-induced cancer
has been clearly understood by the Japanese authorities as shown in the map of population
evacuation beyond the initial zone of exclusion of 20 km brought to the IRSN knowledge on May 16,i.e. the 66th day after the accident. The prescribed evacuation area seems to meet the 20 mSv
reference level - the most protective dose value within the range recommended by ICRP in an
emergency situation. This decision made by the Japanese authorities proves retrospectively therelevance of the IRSN's radiological assessment map - the first to have been published worldwide, 28days after the accident.

Report DRPH/2011-010

5/28

Assessment on the 66th day of projected external doses from the nuclear accident in Fukushima

1 Introduction
The radiological consequence of the nuclear accident in Fukushima was not estimated in the days
following the accident due to the lack of reliable data from Japan about the composition of release,
the environmental measurements and the individual monitoring performed in the affected
population by the radioactive fallout in the neighbourhood of the nuclear plant.
The only health-related information available at that time was concerning the evacuation of theJapanese population within a radius of 20 km around the plant and the sheltering of the population
in a 20-30 km area as well as the instructions from U.S. authorities to evacuate their nationals
within a radius of 80 km, a precautionary measure that was rather tricky to interpret.
Airborne dose rate measurements performed by the US DoE/NNSA1 and published on their website
on April 7, 2011 enabled IRSN to publish on its own website, on April 8, 2011, the first map of doses
likely to be received by the population via external exposure during the 1 st year following theaccident in the fallout zone to the northwest of the plant. Other maps were then published by the
DoE/NNSA and more recently by the "Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science andTechnology" (MEXT) of Japan.
The purpose of this report is to provide insight on all radiological assessments performed to ourknowledge to date and the impact of population evacuation measures to be taken to minimize themedium and long-term risks of developing leukaemia or other radiation-induced cancers. This report
only considers the external doses already received as well as the doses that may be received in the
future from fallout deposits, regardless of doses received previously from the radioactive plume. It
should be noted that as regards the risk of developing thyroid cancer in children and adolescents,
doses to this organ have already been received. As a result, the impact of protective measures, suchas the administration of stable iodine within hours after exposure at the latest, can no longer beconsidered.

1

US Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration
Report DRPH/2011-010

6/28

Assessment on the 66th day of projected external doses from the nuclear accident in Fukushima

2 First-year external dose assessments from the Fukushima
accident
2.1 First-year external dose estimate carried out by IRSN 28 days
after the accident
The first assessment of projected doses2 from the Fukushima accident published worldwide to ourknowledge, was carried out by IRSN from airborne measurements of external dose rates performed
between March 30 and April 3, 2011 by the American National Nuclear Security Administration(NNSA) and published on the U.S. Department of Energy's website the 7th of April 2011. The
American map (Figure 1) shows higher dose rates in a zone of about 20 km in width and 50 to 70 km
in depth in a northwest direction. In this area, deposits of radionuclides seem to have beensignificantly higher than elsewhere, probably because of precipitation (rain and snow), which fell
while the radioactive plume was dispersing.

Figure 1: Dose rates in mRoentgen/hr measured by the NNSA between March 30 and April 3, 2011
(map published on the DoE website on April 7, 2011)2

The projected dose is defined by the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) as the dosethat would be expected to be incurred if no protective measure(s) were to be taken.
(ICRP Publication No. 103, 2007)
Report DRPH/2011-010

7/28

Assessment on the 66th day of projected external doses from the nuclear accident in Fukushima

From this map of measured dose rates, IRSN derived a mapping of doses that could be received by
the population in the 1st year following the accident, and which result from the external irradiationfrom deposited radionuclides in the contaminated areas in the northwest zone described above. The
methodology used to calculate these projected doses from dose rates have taken into account thefollowing assumptions:
The temporal evolution of dose rates measured by the radiation monitors located in the
Fukushima prefecture has shown that the radioactive releases occurring between 15 and 16
March 2011 are at the main origin of these deposits.
The projected doses were calculated from the dose rates measured by the U.S. aircraft andhave considered also the radioactive decay of these dose rates over time (from 30 March to3 April 2011). The dose received by a person living in the contaminated area for a year has
been calculated by integrating the hourly dose rate over the year.
To estimate the dose rate decay over time, the relative contributions of the various
deposited radionuclides to the measured dose rate have to be known, because the activityof each radionuclide decreases over time according to its half-life.
The relative contributions of different radionuclides to the measured dose rate were
estimated based on an assessment of the activity of radionuclides released into theatmosphere by the damaged reactor; this estimation was carried out by the nuclear facility
assessment unit of the IRSN emergency response centre.
According to this assessment, the dose rates measured 2 weeks after the accident result
mainly in the presence of caesium (Cs-137 and Cs-134), iodine-131, tellurium-132/iodine132, ruthenium-103/rhodium-103, barium-140/lanthanum-140 and niobium-95.
A shielding factor of 0.3 applied for 12 hours per day was assumed to take into accountshielding by buildings.
This assessment of the composition of radionuclide deposits has been used to derive a mapping of
external doses potentially received during the first year from 16 March 2011 to 16 March 2012
(Figure 2).

Report DRPH/2011-010

8/28

Assessment on the 66th day of projected external doses from the nuclear accident in Fukushima

Figure 2 published on the IRSN website on April 8, 2011 shows that the external doses received thefirst year are very high: in some areas outside the inhabited exclusion zone doses are above 30 mSv,
i.e. 12.5 times the annual average dose due to natural sources in Japan.
It is of the utmost importance to remind that these dose estimates only refer to external exposuredue to deposits, and do not take into account the additional dose that could be received as aconsequence of consumption of contaminated foodstuffs produced locally.
It is estimated that the effective dose from ingestion may be significantly higher than the external
dose according to the deposit conditions and depending on the effectiveness of implemented foodrestrictions.

First-year Projected External Dose estimatebased on US DoE/NNSA measurements

Above

4 mSv
Above

18 mSv

Above

30 mSv

DoE NNSA Measurements

Above

0.5 mSv

Figure 2: IRSN Mapping of external doses received during the 1st year derived from airborne
measurements of dose rates carried out by the DoE/NNSA from March 30 to April 3, 2011
(map published on the IRSN website on April 8, 2011)

Report DRPH/2011-010

9/28

Assessment on the 66th day of projected external doses from the nuclear accident in Fukushima

2.2 First-year external dose estimate carried out by United States
DoE/NNSA 38 days after the accident
On April 18, 2011, 38 days after the accident, DoE/NNSA published an assessment of external doses

for the 1st year based on airborne measurements of dose rates performed from March 30 to April 3,2011 (Figure 3). This mapping of doses potentially received during the 1 st year is similar the one thatIRSN published on April 8, 2011. The only noticeable difference in the mapping representation
concerns the choice of the upper limit of the doses received, i.e. > 20 mSv for the US-DoE and > 30
mSv for IRSN.

Figure 3: DoE/NNSA mapping of external doses for the 1st year derived from airborne measurements of dose
rates carried out by the DoE/NNSA from March 30 to April 3, 2011

Report DRPH/2011-010

10/28

Assessment on the 66th day of projected external doses from the nuclear accident in Fukushima

2.3 First-year external dose estimate carried out by the Japanese"Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science andTechnology" (MEXT) 44 days after the accident
On April 26, 2011, 56 days after the accident, MEXT published on its website a map of dose rates in
the northwest zone ranging from 1 to 50 µSv/h (Figure 3A) as well as the first official Japanese mapof projected doses in mSv from external irradiation due to deposits for the first year following theaccident. This assessment assumed a shielding factor of 0.4 for 16 hours per day, i.e. a dose
reduction by a factor of 0.6. This value is to be compared to the value of 0.65 (0.3 for 12 hours perday) considered in the IRSN assessment.
External doses for the 1st year are between 10 and 200 mSv (Figure 3B). This is the first time that an
external dose likely to exceed 100 mSv is published, a value that corresponds to the limit above
which a significant excess risk of radiation-induced cancer was shown by epidemiological studies.

Figure 3A: Mapping of external dose rates(µSv/h), published by MEXT on April 26, 2011

Figure 3B: Map of external doses (mSv) for the
1st year following the accident (map produced
by MEXT and published on April 26, 2011)

Report DRPH/2011-010

11/28

Assessment on the 66th day of projected external doses from the nuclear accident in Fukushima

In order to make easier the comparison of MEXT and IRSN maps, IRSN produced a new version of the"MEXT map" by reducing to 5 values the isodoses considered: 5; 10; 20; 50; 100 mSv (Figure 4).

Projected External Dose for the first year following theaccident (assessment performed by MEXT)KeyMEXT Doses

Figure 4: Map of external doses for the 1st year (mSv) based on the MEXT map (Figure 3B) after
reducing the isodoses to 5 values: 5, 10, 20, 50 and 100 mSv (adapted by IRSN)
The 5 mSv isodose (blue line) in Figure 4 does not appear in the original MEXT map (Figure 3B). This
5 mSv isodose was derived by IRSN from the 1 µSv/h dose rate curve appearing in Figure 3A,
assuming a conversion factor of 5 between the dose rate (in µSv/h) and the annual dose (in mSv),
given that the 20 mSv dose curve matches the 4 µSv/h dose rate curve.

Report DRPH/2011-010

12/28

Assessment on the 66th day of projected external doses from the nuclear accident in Fukushima

A comparison of the first official Japanese map to the first IRSN map (Figure 2) shows higher doseson the MEXT map (Figure 5).

Above

4 mSv
Above

18 mSv
Above

30 mSvAbove

0.5 mSvKey
MEXT Doses

DoE Dose-rates

Figure 5: Comparison of the map of external doses for the 1 st year produced by IRSN (Figure 2) tothe MEXT map published on 24 April (Figure 4)
Report DRPH/2011-010

13/28

Assessment on the 66th day of projected external doses from the nuclear accident in Fukushima

The comparison of the MEXT 10 mSv isodose (green line) to the IRSN green zone (> 4 mSv) showsthat the factor between the two assessments is about of 2.5.
One reason that might explain this discrepancy between the two assessments could stem from anoverestimation of the barium-140/lanthanum-140 ratio initially assessed by IRSN.

2.4 First-year external dose estimate from the mapping of caesium
deposits (MEXT)On May 6, 2011 MEXT published on its website maps of deposits of Cs-134, of Cs-137 and the sum ofboth activities in Bq/m2 (Figure 6A) in the northwest zone, as well as a map of external dose rates
in µSv/h (Figure 6B) resulting from these deposits. It should be noted that the Cs-134/Cs-137 ratio is
equal to 1 in this assessment.

Figure 6A: MEXT and DoE map of deposits on the ground surface (Bq/m2) of Cs-137 and Cs-134 (mapestablished from airborne measurements collected between April 6 and April 29, 2011)
Report DRPH/2011-010

14/28

Assessment on the 66th day of projected external doses from the nuclear accident in Fukushima

Figure 6B: MEXT and DoE map of dose rates from airborne measurements collected between April 6
and April 29, 2011
The map of caesium deposits (Cs-134 + Cs-137) shows 5 levels of surface activity ranging from <0.3
to 30 MBq/m2, i.e. < 0.3, 0.3, 0.6, 1, 3 MBq/m 2. The map of dose rates shows 6 levels: < 1, 1, 1.9,
3.8, 9.5 and 19 µSv/h.
The comparison of both maps shows that the dose rate conversion factor from surface activity isaround 300,000 Bq/m2 by µSv/h.
A new map of caesium deposits was designed by IRSN (Figure 7). It uses the same levels of deposits
as the MEXT map between 0.3 and 3 MBq/m2. An additional level was also added: this new level
corresponds to 6 MBq/m2 and was determined applying to the dose rate value of 19 µSv/h theconversion factor mentioned above (300,000 Bq/m2 per µSv/h).

Report DRPH/2011-010

15/28

Assessment on the 66th day of projected external doses from the nuclear accident in Fukushima

Cumulative deposits of Caesium (Cs-134 and Cs-137)

Key
Deposits of

Figure 7: Map showing the data from MEXT on cumulative deposits of caesium 137 and 134 from
0.3 to 30 MBq/m2 and in which IRSN added the 6 MBq/m2 level

Report DRPH/2011-010

16/28

Assessment on the 66th day of projected external doses from the nuclear accident in FukushimaComparing this caesium deposits map to the MEXT map of external doses potentially received during
the 1st year following the accident (Figure 4) enables to derive a conversion factor between theactivity of caesium deposits and the projected external dose for the first year of living in thesecontaminated areas. Figure 8 shows these two maps (deposits and doses) considering 3 levels of
external dose: 5, 10 and 20 mSv.

Cumulative deposits of Cesium (Cs-134 and Cs-137) anddoses estimated by MEXT (5 mSv, 10 mSv, 20 mSv)

Key
MEXT Doses estimates ( mSv)

Deposits of

Figure 8: Map of caesium 137 + 134 deposits (Figure 7) superimposed on the map of projected
doses for the 1st year (Figure 4) for 3 dose levels (5, 10 and 20 mSv)
Report DRPH/2011-010

17/28

Assessment on the 66th day of projected external doses from the nuclear accident in Fukushima

Deposits of 300,000 to 600,000 Bq/m2 correspond to the external dose values of 5 to 10 mSv
projected for the 1st year. The conversion factor from the surface activity of caesiums to theprojected external dose for the 1st year is 16.6 mSv/year per MBq/m2. The correspondence between
caesium deposit levels and projected external doses for the 1st year is shown in Table 1.
The size of the populations located in the different contaminated areas is also given in Table 1.
They are based on demographic data of the Fukushima Prefecture from the Statistics Bureau,
Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications, Japan (website http://www.stat.go.jp/);
The number of people in each contaminated zone is assumed to be proportional to the concerned
districts surface area and based on an average population density for each district. For Minamisoma
and Namie districts where urban areas aren’t concerned, the average density used was derived fromthe rural part of these districts. The administrative limits of the districts used in the calculations ofsurface areas come from the "Global Administrative Area database” (website www.gadm.org).
Table 1: Deposits, projected external doses for the 1st year and affected populations
Deposits of caesium(137 + 134)
(Source MEXT)> 300,000 > 600,000
Bq/m2
Bq/m2

> 1 million
Bq/m2> 3 millions
Bq/m2

6 - 30 millions
Bq/m2

External dose 1st year
(16.6 mSv by MBq/m2)> 5 mSv> 16 mSv> 50 mSv

100 - 500 mSv> 10 mSv

69,400Affected population(excluded the no-entry
zone)

292,000

26,40043,00021,100

3,100

2,200

Projected doses for the 10-year and 70-year periods after the accident in Fukushima considering thedeposits of caesium and affected populations are presented in Table 2. These doses were derived
from:the projected dose for the first year calculated by MEXT,
the ratios between the projected doses for 10 and 70 years, and the projected dose for the
1st year. These ratios were determined using a new IRSN term source. According to this new
source term, the dose rates measured 2 weeks after the accident result from:o

43% caesium (Cs-137, Cs-136 and Cs-134),o

17% iodine-131,o

13% tellurium-132/iodine-132,
Report DRPH/2011-010

18/28

Assessment on the 66th day of projected external doses from the nuclear accident in Fukushimao

10.5% ruthenium-103/rhodium-103,o9.5% barium-140/lanthanum-140,o

4% niobium-95.

Table 2: Deposits, external doses projected at 10 and 70 years and affected populations
Deposits of caesium(137 + 134)
(Source MEXT)> 300,000 > 600,000
Bq/m2
Bq/m2

> 1 million
Bq/m2> 3 millions
Bq/m2

6 - 30 millions
Bq/m2

External dose at 10 years(70 mSv by MBq/m2)> 19 mSv> 38 mSv> 63 mSv> 190 mSv

380 – 1,900 mSv

External lifetime dose
(70 years)(160 mSv par MBq/m2)> 41 mSv> 82 mSv> 136 mSv

> 408 mSv

816 – 4,080 mSv

69,400Affected population(excluded the no-entry
zone)

292,000

26,40043,00021,100

3,100

2,200

Projected external doses for the people living lifetime in contaminated areas show significant
values, even beyond values of low doses according to UNSCEAR3 definition, i.e. less thanaround 200 mSv. The number of people affected could also be high, around 70,000 including
9,500 children from 0-14 years, assuming that children represent 13.7% of the total Japanese
population in 2005.
These dose levels do not take into account other exposure pathways such as external
exposure by immersion within the plume and internal contamination resulting from inhalationof particles in the plume, and internal doses already received or to be received as a result ofingestion of contaminated food.
The total effective doses (external + internal) could be increased considerably according to
the type of deposit (dry or wet), diet and source of food.
First-year external dose estimates, surface areas and populations in the heavily contaminated zones
impacted by the accident in Fukushima can be put into perspective with those of the Chernobyl
accident (see Table in Appendix).

3

United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation
Report DRPH/2011-010

19/28

Assessment on the 66th day of projected external doses from the nuclear accident in Fukushima

Heavily contaminated territories located outside the initial evacuation zone of 20 km aroundthe Fukushima plant were 8.5% in surface of those in Chernobyl (874 km 2 compared to 10,300km2) and the order of magnitude of the affected population size would be 26% of that ofChernobyl (69,400 compared to 270,000).

3 Impact of evacuation measures on projected externaldoses
Lessons learnt from the Chernobyl accident led ICRP to develop a doctrine for the protection of
population in emergency situations, which was introduced in publication 1034 (2007) and describedin more detail in publication 1095 (2009).
Any evacuation measure to protect the population which are or that will be implemented in Japan
should be based on ICRP recommendations 103 and 109.

3.1 Impact of evacuation measures on population sizes according to
the prescribed reference levels
Publication 103 of the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) provides aconceptual framework for the protection of the population in an emergency radiation exposure
situation. The recommendations were specified by the ICRP in its Publication 109 and the primaryconcern must be to avoid or reduce doses received by the population. However, the accident that
led to this situation may have consequences going far beyond the health effects of radiation (e.g.
economic, psychological and social consequences).
The implementation of any protection action shall be justified, i.e. should maximise the margin of
benefit over harm (individual or societal benefit should be sufficient to offset the detriment it
causes), and shall be optimized to ensure that the magnitude of individual doses, the number ofindividuals subject to exposure are as low as reasonably achievable, economic and social factors
being taken into account.
To do this, ICRP recommends the use of reference levels. These reference levels represent the levelof residual dose or risk:-

above which exposure is judged unacceptable and requires the implementation ofprotective actions,

4

Recommendations 2007 of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. Publication 103. Editions
Tec&Doc (2009)
5

Application of the Commission's Recommendations for the Protection of People in Emergency Exposure
Situations. ICRP Publication 109. Ann. ICRP 39 (1) (2009)
Report DRPH/2011-010

20/28

Assessment on the 66th day of projected external doses from the nuclear accident in Fukushima-

below which protection should be optimized, by taking into account all exposure pathways.

ICRP suggested reference levels in terms of effective dose in a range from 20 to 100 mSv
received in one year for radiation emergency situations. The selection of the reference levelvalue should be adapted to the situation and to the protection strategy.
The resources required to implement protective measures are not the only factors that mightinteract within an overall protection strategy. Other such factors include individual and social
disruption, anxiety and reassurance, and indirect economic consequences. In particular, theprolonged evacuation of a population requires relocation in acceptable conditions.
The comprehensive protection strategy selected must provide more benefits than harms and it isimportant that relevant stakeholders (or their representatives) are involved at the preparedness
stage of the decision making process.
The recommendations of the ICRP publication 103 for the Fukushima situation would entail different
number of people to evacuate according to the reference level selected by the Japanese
authorities.
Table 3, an excerpt from Table 2, exhibits the number of people to evacuate, for a range ofreference levels from 20 to 100 mSv.
Table 3: External doses for the 1st year, affected populations and reference levels
recommended by the ICRP in an emergency radiation situation

Table 3 shows that 2,200 people whose external dose would exceed 100 mSv for the 1 st year shouldbe evacuated. Depending on the level selected between 20 and 100 mSv the number of people toevacuate could range between 2,200 and about 15,000 to 20,000. These data prove the need toevacuate at least 2,200 people that would likely receive doses above 100 mSv the 1 st year.

Report DRPH/2011-010

21/28

Assessment on the 66th day of projected external doses from the nuclear accident in Fukushima

3.2 Impact of evacuation measures on projected external doses
according to implementation times
The Fukushima population living in the northwest fallout zone and likely to exceed external dose of
10 mSv for the 1st year has been distributed in subgroups according to the range of projected
external doses for the 4 first years after the accident if no evacuation action is prescribed. The
number of people in these subgroups follows an exponential decrease curve (blue line in logarithmic
scale in Figure 9A).
The comparison with Chernobyl in terms of external doses received in the same period puts theradiological impact of the Fukushima accident into perspective compared to that of Chernobyl forthree scenarios: evacuation after 4 years (Figure 9A), evacuation after 1 year (Figure 9B) andevacuation after 3 months (Figure 9C).
The distribution of the 270,000 people who lived in the most contaminated areas by the Chernobyl
fallout6 (> 555,000 Bq/m2) in subgroups according to the external dose received in 4 years also
decreases exponentially as illustrated by the red line in logarithmic scale in Figure 9A. The
comparison of external doses received during the 4 first years by 270,000 people who lived in theheavily contaminated territories by the Chernobyl accident with those who are likely to bedelivered, for the same period, to 70,000 people residing in the northwest zone of the Fukushima
Daiichi plant, shows that a fraction of the Japanese population would be more impacted than those
for Chernobyl. For the highest doses (above 100 mSv over 4 years), the size of population impacted
in Fukushima (3,100+2,200 = 5,300) is higher than that of Chernobyl (2,800 +530+120= 3,450).
Number of people

4 yrs

External doses (mSv) in Chernobyl (1986-1989) and in Fukushima (2011-2014)

Figure 9A: Distribution of Fukushima and Chernobyl populations based on external doses projected
and received during the four years following the accident

6

Chernobyl: Assessment of Health and Radiological Impact. 2002 Update of Chernobyl Ten Years On, for OECD
Nuclear Energy Agency Table 11 p. 77
Report DRPH/2011-010

22/28

Assessment on the 66th day of projected external doses from the nuclear accident in Fukushima

A risk indicator that takes into account both the radiological impact and the size of the populationis the collective dose (in person.Sv), product of the dose multiplied by the number of affected
people.
The external collective dose received over 4 years by the population of 270,000 people in
Chernobyl was 7,300 person.Sv.
The projected external collective dose over 4 years for the 70,000 people in Fukushima is 4,400
person.Sv. Therefore, without evacuation during the 4 years after the accident, the radiologicalconsequence of the Fukushima accident from external exposure would reach 60% of that ofChernobyl and could be in the same order of magnitude.
Figure 9B illustrates the distribution of first-year external dose estimate following the accident inFukushima. This distribution has shifted towards lower doses compared to the dose distribution ofChernobyl (1986-1989).
Number of people

1 yrExternal doses (mSv) in Chernobyl (1986-1989) and in Fukushima (2011-2012)

Figure 9B: Distribution of Chernobyl populations according to 4 years of external doses andFukushima populations following evacuation one year after the accident
The evacuation of Japanese population one year after the accident would significantly reduce thisradiological consequence as shown in Figure 9B. The collective dose would decrease to 1,800
person.Sv, i.e. a reduction of 59 % of the accident's dosimetric consequence.
Figure 9C illustrates the external dose estimate for the 3 months following the accident inFukushima. This distribution has very clearly shifted towards lower doses compared to the dose
distribution of Chernobyl (1986-1989).

Report DRPH/2011-010

23/28

Assessment on the 66th day of projected external doses from the nuclear accident in Fukushima

Number of people

3 months

External doses (mSv) in Chernobyl (1986-1989) and in Fukushima (March 2011- June2014)

Figure 9C: Distribution of Chernobyl populations according to 4 years of external doses andFukushima populations following evacuation 3 months after the accident

The evacuation of Japanese populations 3 months after the accident would drastically reduce theradiological consequence. The new collective dose would be 800 person.Sv, i.e. a reduction of
82% of the accident's dosimetric consequence.

Thus, in case of total evacuation of the population 1 year and especially 3 months after theaccident in Fukushima, the long-term risk of developing leukaemia and radiation-induced cancer for
the Japanese population would be very much lower than in Chernobyl.

4 Conclusions
Since the accident in Fukushima has occurred several dose assessments have been carried out by
IRSN, US DoE and Japan MEXT. The results are of the same order of magnitude; a high degree ofconsistency between these radiological assessments and the magnitude of cesium-137 and cesium134 deposits is observed.
Projected external doses for the people living lifetime in contaminated areas include significant
values, even beyond low doses according to UNSCEAR definition, i.e. less than around 200 mSv. The
number of people involved could also be high, around 70,000 including 9,500 children of 0-14 years
in age (13.7% of the total Japanese population in 2005).
These dose levels do not take into account other exposure pathways, such as immersion within theplume and internal contamination resulting from inhalation of particles in the plume, as well asinternal doses already received or to be received from contaminated food ingestion.
Report DRPH/2011-010

24/28

Assessment on the 66th day of projected external doses from the nuclear accident in Fukushima

The total effective doses (external + internal) could be increased considerably according to the typeof deposit (dry or wet), diet and source of food.
The level of external doses projected in upcoming years - up to 4 Sv lifetime in the mostcontaminated areas (30 million Bq/m2 of cesium-137 + 134) - requires the implementation ofprotective actions such as evacuation of population.
According to the ICRP recommendations in radiation emergency situations, the selection of thehighest protective reference level, i.e. 20 mSv, would avert external doses above this level for
15,000 to 20,000 people.
If the Japanese authorities decide to take an even more protective reference level, for example 10
mSv for the 1st year, the averted external doses for the affected populations (70,000 people) would
be much higher if the evacuation is quickly prescribed. An evacuation one year after the accident
would result in a 59% decrease of the projected external dose for this population; evacuation threemonths after the accident would result in an 82% decrease.
This policy for preventing the risk of developing long-term leukemia and radiation-induced cancer
has been clearly understood by the Japanese authorities as shown in the map of population
evacuation beyond the initial zone of exclusion of 20 km reported to the IRSN knowledge on May 16
i.e. the 66th day after the accident (Figure 10). The prescribed evacuation area seems to meet the
20 mSv reference level - the most protective dose value within the range recommended by the ICRP
in an emergency situation. This decision made by the Japanese authorities proves retrospectively
the relevance of the IRSN's radiological assessment map - the first to have been publishedworldwide, 28 days after the accident.

Report DRPH/2011-010

25/28

Assessment on the 66th day of projected external doses from the nuclear accident in Fukushima

Figure 10: Planned evacuation zones or evacuation preparation zones established by the Japanesecompetent authorities including the "Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency" (NISA) and MEXT

Report DRPH/2011-010

26/28

Assessment on the 66th day of projected external doses from the nuclear accident in Fukushima

APPENDIX

Comparison between Chernobyl (1986) and Fukushima (2011)accidents in terms of Cs 137 deposits, surfaces of contaminatedareas, 1st year external doses and population sizes

Report DRPH/2011-010

27/28

Assessment on the 66th day of projected external doses from the nuclear accident in Fukushima

CHERNOBYL
Less contaminated areas

Most contaminated areas
INITIALEVACUATION
ZONE
30 km

« STRICTLY CONTROLLED ZONES (SCZs) »Control Zone

Voluntary Evacuation ZoneEVACUATION
ZONE

Cs-137 Deposits

37,000 Bq/m2 185,000 Bq/m2 370,000 Bq/m2(1 Ci/km2)(5 Ci/km2)(10 Ci/km2)

1st year External Dose

> 0,5 mSv

Surface

116,000 km2

19,000 km2

Population Size

5,281,000(1995)

1,300,000(1995)(13 mSv par MBq de Cs-137 /m2)

> 2,4 mSv

> 5 mSvOBLIGATORY EVACUATION ZONE

555,000 Bq/m2(15 Ci/km2)

1,5 million
Bq/m2(40 Ci/km2)

3,7 millions
Bq/m2(80 Ci/km2)

7,4 millions
Bq/m2(200 Ci/km2)> 7 mSv> 20 mSv> 50 mSv> 100 mSv

7,200 km2

3,100 km2

Up to 37 millions
Bq/m2(1,000 Ci/km2)

2,830 km2

270,000 (1986)

135,000

FUKUSHIMA Dai-ichi
Cs-137 deposits(MEXT)> 150,000
Bq/m2> 300,000
Bq/m2> 500,000
Bq/m2> 1,5 million
Bq/m2

3 -15 million
Bq/m2

1st year External Dose

> 5 mSv> 10 mSv> 16 mSv> 50 mSv

100 - 500 mSv

INITIALEVACUATION
ZONE
20 km

1,241 km2

320 km2

384 km2

91 km279 km2628 km2(33 mSv per MBq of Cs-137 /m2)

Surface
Outside of the
Evacuation Zone
Population Size
Outside of the
Evacuation Zone?

?

69,400?

?

292,000

43,000

Report DRPH/2011-010

85,00026,40021,100

3,100

2,200

28/28