ISSN 2189-7107

KURRI-EKR-13
PRINT ISSN 1342-0852
KURRI- KR-139

Multi-side Approach to the Realities of the Chernobyl NPP Accident- Summing-up of the Consequences of the Accident Twenty Years After (II) -チェルノブイリ原発事故の実相解明への多角的アプローチ－ 20 年を機会とする事故被害のまとめ (II) －Edited by : Imanaka T.
編集：今中哲二

京 都 大 学 原 子 炉 実 験 所
Research Reactor Institute, Kyoto University

Multi-side Approach to the Realities of the Chernobyl NPP
Accident- Summing-up of the Consequences of the Accident Twenty Years After (II) -Report of a research grant from the Toyota Foundation(November 2004 – October 2006)

Project leader Imanaka T.
May 2008

チェルノブイリ原発事故の実相解明への多角的アプローチ－ 20 年を機会とする事故被害のまとめ(II) －トヨタ財団助成研究（2004 年 11 月～2006 年 10 月）

研究報告書（英語版）

研究代表者 今中哲二
200８年５月

Preface
This is the English version report of the international collaboration study, “Multi-side Approach to
the Realities of the Chernobyl NPP Accident: Summing-up of the Consequences of the Accident
Twenty Years” which was carried out in November 2004 – October 2006 supported by a research
grant from the Toyota Foundation. Twenty three articles by authors of various professions areincluded about Chernobyl. The Japanese version was already published in August 2007, whichcontains 24 articles. (http://www.rri.kyoto-u.ac.jp/NSRG/tyt2004/CherTYT2004.htm) Out of them,
12 articles are included in both versions.
As a specialist of nuclear engineering, I have been investigating the Chernobyl accident
since its beginning. Before the 20th anniversary of Chernobyl, I hoped to start a new project to try
to make an overview of “Chernobyl disaster” by collecting various viewpoints of persons who havebeen involved in Chernobyl in their own ways: scientists, journalists, NGO activists, sufferers etc. I
thought that a new image of Chernobyl could be constructed through learning different viewpoints.
Fortunately the Toyota Foundation supported my proposal.
I think we could make a unique report about Chernobyl. In addition to this report, thefollowing two reports were already published through the previous collaborations:¾ Research Activities about the Radiological Consequences of the Chernobyl NPS Accident andSocial Activities to Assist the Sufferers by the Accident. KURRI-KR-21, 1998.
http://www.rri.kyoto-u.ac.jp/NSRG/reports/kr21/KURRI-KR-21.htm¾ Recent Research Activities about the Chernobyl NPP Accident in Belarus, Ukraine and Russia.
KURRI-KR-79, 2002
http://www.rri.kyoto-u.ac.jp/NSRG/reports/kr79/KURRI-KR-79.htm
I wish all these reports will be useful to young people who want to know about Chernobyl as wellas to the generation who experienced Chernobyl and are going to reconsider it again.
As the project leader, I would like to greatly appreciate authors of articles. At the same time,
I express my deep apology for delaying the publication.
Imanaka T.
May 2008＜Collaboration member＞
IMANAKA Tetsuji (leader)
HIROKAWA Ryuichi
SUGENOYA Akira
KOIDE Hiroaki
KITAWADA Shusuke
MUKAI Yukiko
TATSUMI Masako
SUGA Seiko
KAMIO Kyoko
WATANABE Mikiko
HOSHI Masaharu
TYKHYY Volodymyr
MALKO Mikhail
STRELTSOV Dmitri
SHCHERBAK Yuri

Research Reactor Institute, Kyoto University
Days Japan Editorial
Chernobyl Medical Fund, Mayer of MatsumotoResearch Reactor Institute, Kyoto University
Chernobyl Medical Fund
Chernobyl Children’s Fund
Information Center of Japanese Culture (Minsk, Belarus)
Freelance writer
CATALOGU HOUSE Company
Citizens’ Nuclear Information Center
RIRBM, Hiroshima University
Institute of Cybernetics, NASU, Ukraine
Joint Institute of Power and Nuclear Research, BAS, Belarus
Institute of Oriental Studies, RAS, Russia
Ex-Minister of Environment of Ukraine

-i-

はじめに
本報告書は、「チェルノブイリ原発事故の実相解明への多角的アプローチ：20 年を機会とする事
故被害のまとめ」というテーマで、2004 年から 2006 年にかけてトヨタ財団から研究助成をうけて実施した国際共同研究の英語版報告書である。日本語版報告書は、論文 24 編と付録 3 編をまとめて、すでに 2007 年 8 月に出版した（http://www.rri.kyoto-u.ac.jp/NSRG/tyt2004/CherTYT2004.htm）。本報
告書には 23 編の論文が含まれているが、そのうち 12 編は日本語版に含まれている。つまり、11
編が新たな収録である。
国際共同研究の目的は、チェルノブイリ事故から 20 年になるのを機会に、専門的な枠を越え、ジャーナリスト、支援運動家などさまざまな人々の視点からみた「チェルノブイリ」をまとめてみることであった。さまざまな「チェルノブイリ」をいろいろなやり方で重ね合わせてみることによって、新たな「チェルノブイリ」が見えてくると考えたからである。この 20 年あまりの間にチェ
ルノブイリ事故についてさまざまな報告が発表されているが、チェルノブイリ事故という巨大な厄災の全体を考えるうえで、我々の報告書はユニークなものに仕上がったと考えている。
今中らはこれまでにも、トヨタ財団や学術振興会からの研究助成をうけて国際共同研究を実施し、その成果を以下のような英文報告書にまとめている。
¾

チェルノブイリ原発事故影響研究と被災者救援の現状に関する調査報告
KURRI-KR-21（1998 年３月）http://www.rri.kyoto-u.ac.jp/NSRG/reports/kr21/KURRI-KR-21.htm¾

チェルノブイリ原発事故に関するベラルーシ、ウクライナ、ロシアでの最近の研究状況
KURRI-KR-79（2002 年７月）http://www.rri.kyoto-u.ac.jp/NSRG/reports/kr79/KURRI-KR-79.htm

前者には 32 編、後者には 23 編の論文を収録してある。これらの報告書と合わせて、本報告書が、チェルノブイリ事故ひいては、原子力をエネルギー源とすることの意味を考える資料となれば幸いである。
研究助成を頂いたトヨタ財団ならびにお世話になった多くの方々に感謝するとともに、本報告書の出版が遅れたことをお詫びする。
2008 年 5 月＜共同研究メンバー＞
今中 哲二 （代表）
広河 隆一
菅谷 昭
小出 裕章
北和田 修介
向井 雪子
辰巳 雅子
菅 聖子
神尾 京子
渡辺 美紀子星 正治
TYKHYY Volodymyr
MALKO Mikhail
STRELTSOV Dmitri
SHCHERBAK Yuri

今中 哲二

京都大学原子炉実験所
Days Japan 編集部
チェルノブイリ医療基金、松本市市長
京都大学原子炉実験所
チェルノブイリ医療基金
チェルノブイリ子ども基金
日本文化センター、チロ基金（ミンスク在住）
フリーランスライター（株）カタログハウス 編集部
原子力資料情報室
広島大学原爆放射線医科学研究所
ウクライナ科学アカデミー・サイバネティックス研究所
ベラルーシ科学アカデミー・原子力合同研究所
ロシア科学アカデミー・東洋研究所日本センター
旧ソ連最高会議員、元ウクライナ環境大臣- ii -

Many-sided Approach to the Realities of the Chernobyl NPP Accident- Summing-up of the Consequences of the Accident Twenty Years After (II) Preface

Page

1.

What happened at that time?

........................................................ Imanaka T.

1

2.

Current state of «Shelter» object.................................................. Klyuchnykov O.

20

3.

Analysis of the version “Earthquake is the cause of the Chernobyl accident” ........ Karpan N.

66

4.

Chornobyl: the danger for the global civilization

79

5.

Military liquidators in liquidation of the consequences of Chornobyl NPP
accident: myths and realities................................. Skaletsky Y., Nasvit O.

91

My good life in Pripyat, the disaster caused by Chernobyl, andthe catastrophe of the nuclear power station and of our lives............................. Dikaya T.V.

105

Discrepancy between the contamination pattern and the daily radiation
survey data used for external dose estimation of evacuees fromthe 30-km zone................................ Imanaka T., Koide H.

110

Early and late cytogenetic effects study in groups exposed due tothe Chernobyl accident using conventional chromosome analysis andfluorescence in situ hybridisation (FISH) technique........................................ Maznyk N.

116

Some issues of long-term investigations of genetic consequences of
the Chernobyl accident.............................. Lazjuk G., Satow Y.

129

10. Doses of the whole body irradiation in Belarus as a result of the Chernobyl accident.......................................... Malko M.V.

136

11. Increase of regional total cancer incidence in north Sweden due tothe Chernobyl accident............................................ Tondel M.

147

12. Radiation risk assessment of leukemia in children of Belarus............................ Malko M.V.

151

13. Trans-generational effects of radiation exposure from the Chernobyl
nuclear plant accident: a review of studies using mutation
markers of repeat DNA sequences......................................... Furitsu K.

165

14. Cytogenetic effect of low dose radiation in plant test-systems:
non-linear dose-effect relationship................................. Geras’kin S. et.al

179

15. Social-economic consequences of the Chernobyl catastrophe........................ Kholosha V.

193

16. Do we have reliable tool? Considering the efficiency of Chornobyl legislation .... Nasivit O.

203

17. Solving the social problems caused by the Chernobyl catastrophe:
20 years is not enough............................................. Tykhyy V.

211

18. Six of us left behind with mom....................................... Melnichenko E.

230

19. Activities of Chernobyl Children's Fund, Japan.............................................. Mukai Y.

233

6.
7.

8.

9.

............................................ Scherbak Yu.

20. NANOHANA project at contaminated area by bio-remedy with rapeseed
plant in Narodichi, Ukraine: a challenge of Chernobyl-Chubu Association ............... Tomura K.

238

21. Episodes from my experience in Belarus.............................. Kitajima R.

244

22. Citizens’ action in response to radiation from Chernobyl........................... Watanabe M.

248

23. From archives of VUChK-GPU-NKVD-KGB: Chernobyl tragedy
in documents and materials............................... Tykhyy V.

252- iii -

チェルノブイリ原発事故の実相解明への多角的アプローチ－ 20 年を機会とする事故被害のまとめ (II) －
はじめに

ページ

1.

そのとき何が起きたのか？

......................................................... 今中哲二

1

2.

「シェルター」の現状............................................. O・クリュチニコフ

20

3.

「チェルノブイリ事故の原因は地震だった」説の分析

4.

チェルノブイリ：文明への警告

5.

................... N・カルパン

66............................................ Y・シチェルバク

79

チェルノブイリ原発事故処理に従事した軍関係リクビダートル：
その神話と現実..................................... Y・スカレツキー、O・ナスビット

91

すばらしいプリピャチの町での暮らしと、チェルノブイリのもたらした不幸、原発事故と私たちの人生の破局について............ T・V・ディーカヤ

105

30km 圏避難住民の外部被曝量推定に用いられた放射線サーベイ
データと原発周辺汚染パターンの不一致............................. 今中哲二、小出裕章

110

従来法と FISH 法を用いた染色体分析による、チェルノブイリ
被曝者における早発および晩発生の細胞遺伝学的影響....................... N・マズニク

116

チェルノブイリ事故による遺伝影響についての長期的研究....... G・ラジューク、佐藤幸男

129

10. チェルノブイリ事故によるベラルーシ国民の全身被曝線量 .................... M・V・マリコ

136

11. 北スウェーデンでのガン発生率増加はチェルノブイリ事故が原因か？
........................................... M・トンデル

147

12. ベラルーシにおける小児白血病のリスク評価............................ M・V・マリコ

151

13. チェルノブイリ原発事故の放射線被曝による DNA 反復配列の突然変異を指標とした継世代的影響研究...................................... 振津かつみ

165

14. 植物における低線量放射線の細胞遺伝学的影響：非直線的線量・効果関係........................... S・ゲラーシキン他

179

15. チェルノブイリ災害にともなう社会経済的損害.............................. V・ホローシャ

193

16. チェルノブイリに関する法制度は有効か？

............................... O・ナスビット

203

17. チェルノブイリ事故が起こした社会的問題の解決：20 年はまだ短い….......................... V・ティーヒー

211

18. 母のもとに六人残った....................................... E・メルニチェンコ

230

19. チェルノブイリ子ども基金の活動を通して.......................... 向井雪子

233

20. チェルノブイリ「ナロジチ再生・菜の花プロジェクト」.......................... 戸村京子

238

21. 私のベラルーシ体験より.......................... 北島理恵

244

22. チェルノブイリの放射能と向かい合った市民の活動......................... 渡辺美紀子

248

23. ウクライナ KGB アーカイブ「チェルノブイリ災害に関する文書・資料」
からの抜粋............................................ V・ティーヒー

252

6.
7.
8.
9.

- iv -

What Happened at That Time?
IMANAKA Tetsuji
Research Reactor Institute, Kyoto University
Kumatori-cho, Osaka, 590-0494 Japan The eve
On April 25, 1986 (Fri), at the 4th block of the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant (NPP) in Ukrainian
Republic of the former USSR, the procedure started to stop the reactor for maintenance for the first timesince its operation in December 1983. At the Chernobyl NPP, four RBMK-1000 type reactors (1 GWelectricity) were in operation and No. 5 and No. 6 blocks were under construction at that time.
It was in 1971 that a large project began to construct a nuclear power station on the bank of Pripyat
river, a branch of Dnepr river, located about 100 km north from the Ukrainian capital, Kyiv (Fig. 1). In
parallel with the power station, a new town named Pripyat city was constructed for station workers. The
first block became in operation in 1977.
“RBMK” is an abbreviation of the Russian term meaning “Channel-type Big Power Reactor”. From
its structure, it can be called “graphite-moderator, light-water boiling, channel-type reactor” (Fig. 2. Table1). RBMK was developed from the reactor originally constructed to produce plutonium for making Soviet
atomic bombs. Its merits are the followings: refueling is possible while the reactor is in operation,
power-upgrading is easy by attaching additional channels, inland construction is easy without difficulty oftransporting heavy structures such as pressure vessel of light water reactor and so on. Meanwhile, thefollowings are its weak points: reactor control is complicated because of a lot of power channels (1,661 in
the 4th block), vulnerable reactor characteristics that power will increase in a case of vapor increase at thereactor core (positive void reactivity coefficient), as well as power will surge in an extreme case that allcontrol rods move down together into the core (positive scram). The last two design defects are considereddirectly related with the Chernobyl accident, but operators did not know such defects [1].
A emergency generator test was planned at the time of the shutdown of the 4th block on April 25. It
was a test of a generator aimed to provide electricity to pumps at the time of blackout, using inert energy
of free-wheeling turbines [2]. At 01:00 on April 25, the process began to reduce the reactor power from thenominal value (3.2 GW thermal). At 13:05, when the power decreased to 1.6 GWt, one of two turbines
was isolated. Although it was planned to continue decreasing the reactor power, because of the order fromthe Kyiv grid center, the 4th block continued to operate at the power level of 50 %.

Fig. 1: Construction of No. 1 block at Chernobyl NPP.

-1-

Separator drum

C rod

Fuel
assembly

Water-steam two-phaseflow

Channeltube

Graphiteblock

Supply water

Primary
coolant

TurbineGenerator

Condenser
Secondarycoolant
Pump
Pump

Fig. 2: Basic scheme of RBMK
Table 1: Basic parameters of RBMK1000
Item
Power
TurbineReactor coresizeGraphite block

Reactor space
size

Fuel channel

Control rod
channel

Fuel

Fuel bundle

Coolant loop

Contents
1 GW electricity, 3.2 GW thermal (Efficiency 31.3％）
500 MW×2
Cylinder diameter: 11.8 m, height: 7.0 m
・ Primary structure is a pile of graphite moderator block.
・ Each block has a vertical hole in its center to penetrate a channel tube.
A square box of 25cm×25cm×60cm. Density:1.65 g/cm2.
・ Diameter of the hole for channel tube: 11.4cm
・ Total weight of graphite block: 1,700 ton
Cylindrical diameter: 14.52 m, height 9.75m.
・ Graphite reflector blocks are surrounding the reactor core. The metal shroud confines the reactor space,making it airtight.
・ Design pressure of the core space: 0.8kg/cm3．
・ Outside the shroud, annulus water tank of 2.4 m width, a layer of sand and then concrete shield.
・ The upper core plate (diameter: 17m, height: 3m) and the lower core plate (diameter: 14.5m, height: 2m)
have holes like a honeycomb for channels to penetrate.
Number of fuel channel: 1,661
・ Outer diameter: 88 mm, inner diameter: 80 mm.
・ Tube material: zirconium ally for the position corresponding to reactor core, welded with stainless stealtubes at upper and lower sides.
・ A fuel assembly is inserted in each fuel channel.
・ Coolant water goes up inside the fuel channel, boiling to steam.
・ Refueling is performed while operating reactor, by isolating channel tube one by one from the coolant loop.
211 channel
・ Neutron absorber: boron carbide
・ Automatic rod: 12, local automatic rod: 12, manual rod: 115, emergency rod: 24, local emergency rod: 24,
shortened rod: 24.
Uranium dioxide (UO2). Enrichment: 2 %.
・ Fuel pellet size: diameter 11.5 mm, height 15 mm.
・ Fuel rod: outer diameter 13.6 mm, length 3.5 m. Tube material: zirconium alloy, thickness 0.9 mm.
・ Amount of uranium in the core: 194 ton. Designed burnup: 20 MWD/kg
Bundle length 7 m.
・ Two sub-bundles (3.5 m) are connected up and down.
・ Sub-bundle: length 3.5 m, 18 fuel rods are fixed around the central supporting rod.
・ Uranium amount per fuel bundle: 114.7 kg
Two loops. Coolant: light water・Inlet temperature of fuel channel: 270°C.
・ Out let: 284°C, pressure 70kg/cm2, steam quality 14.5 ％.
・ 4 circulation pumps per loop (including one reserve). Totally 8 pumps.
・ Coolant flow rate: 37,600 ton/h. Steam supply: 5,800 ton/h.

The above information is mainly based on the 1986 USSR report [2].
-2-At 23:10 on April 25, theshutdown
．
．
．
．
．
．
．
． procedure was restarted. Then 00:00 on April 26, the shift of thecontrol room changed from Tregub’s team to Akymov’s team (each constitutes 4 staff). Soon after the shiftchange, when the power control system was replaced from local automatic control to automatic control,
the reactor power suddenly fell down almost to zero. The generator test was planned to be performed at
power level of 700 – 1,000 MW. If it could not be done, the next chance would be several years later.

 The 4th block exploded
Fourteen people were at the control room of the 4th block. Dyatlov, Deputy Chief Engineer was inresponsibility to carry out the test. By the order of Dyatlov, the operators tried to revive the reactor power,by pulling out almost all control rods from the reactor core. As is shown in Table 2, around 01:00, therector was somehow stabilized at the power level of 200 MWt. Then, it was decided to carry out thegenerator test at the power less than the planned.
At 01:23:04, by closing the steam valve to No.8 turbine, the generator test started using inert
energy of the free-rotating turbine. According to Dyatlov’s testimony, the reactor power was stable during
the test and there was no sign requiring operator’s attention or alarms.
The emergent event started just at 01:23:40 when the operator turned on the AZ-5 button to shut
down the reactor by inserting all control rods into the core. On the contrary to the intension of the operator,
a positive scram phenomenon happened, which led a power surge at the lower part of the core, damaging
several nuclear fuels and channel tubes. Then, following the rupture of channel tubes, a large amount ofvapor appeared at the core. A bigger-scale power surge was caused by the effect of positive void
Table 2: Event chronology (April 25 – 26, 1986)
01:00 April 25
03:47
04:13 -12:36
13:05
14:00
23:10
00:00 April 26
00:28
00:41-01:16
About 01:00
01:03 and 01:07
01:23

01:23:04

01:23:40
01:23:43
01:23:46-47
01:23:49
01:24

Shutdown procedures began by reducing the power from the nominal value (3.2 GWt).
Power decreased to 1.6 MW.
At power level of 1.6 GW, control systems and vibration characteristics were checked of No. 7 and No. 8
turbine-generators.
One (No. 7) of two turbines was detached.
ECCS system was detached. Owing to the request from the Kyiv electric center, the power was kept at 1.6
GWt.
Shutdown procedure restarted.
The control room shit was replaced from Tregub team to Akymov team.
At 500 MWt, power control system was switched from local automatic control to average automatic
control. When switching, abrupt power decrease occurred to almost zero power.
No. 8 turbine was detached. Its vibration characteristics were measured during inert rotation.
After the efforts to increase the power, the reactor somehow became stable at 200 MW. The decision wasmade to perform the emergency generator test at the level below the planned power.
Two main circular pumps (MCP) were added in operation. All eight MCP began operating.
According to the analysis after the accident, at this time the reactor was under the extremely unstablecondition because of the increase of positive void reactivity coefficient due to withdrawal of almost allcontrol rods as well as reactor operation at the low power level. The operators, however, did not knowsuch situation.
The test was started by closing the steam valve to No. 8 turbine. Coolant flow rate of 4 MCP that wereconnected to the test generator decreased to some extent, which in turn increased steam generation a little
at the core. The effect of this increase was compensated by a small increase of the pressure as well as bygradual insertion of automatic control rods. The reactor power was kept stable during the test, without any
extraordinary symptom prompting operator action or alarming signal.
Chief operator Akymov turned on the scram button (AZ-5).
Alarm of “rapid power increase” and “over power”.
Loss of electricity for MCP. Flow rate decreased. High pressure and high water level in steam separator
tank. “Control system failure” alarm.
“High pressure in the reactor space”, “Loss of electricity for control rod”, ”Failure of driving automatic
control rods” signals
The operator wrote in the log note, “01:24 strong explosion. Control rods stopped halfway before reaching
the bottom of the core. Loss of driving electricity for control rods.” According to eyewitnesses who wereoutside the reactor building, there were two sequential explosions, blowing up something like fireworks
into the night sky.

・The above sequences are mainly cited from the Steinberg report [3].

-3-

coefficient of reactivity, which led to explode the reactor and destroyed the building. According to theanalysis after the accident, the explosion occurred 6-7 seconds after pushing AZ-5. Eyewitnesses outside
the reactor building told that there were a series of explosions like fireworks up into the night sky.
Concerning the accident sequence, there are several versions. The above is based on the Steinberg reportin 1991 that reinvestigated the cause of the accident by the request of the USSR parliament [3].
It was 3 am when the first information on the accident reached the responsible person of the Soviet
Communist Party in Moscow. At 9 am in the morning, the first expert team flew from Moscow and arrived
at the scene of the accident in the afternoon. A special medical team from Moscow also arrived in theevening. They have checked patients of workers and firefighters being cared at the Pripyat hospital
because of acute radiation syndrome. They selected persons to be sent to Moscow for special treatment.
Mr. Shcherbina, Deputy Ministry of USSR, nominated as the chairman of the governmental committee for
the Chernobyl accident also arrive at Pripyat in the evening of April 26. The first tasks of the government
committee meeting held in the night of April 26 were the followings:
 To determine the method how to extinguish the graphite fire that continued in the destroyed core,discharging a large amount of radioactivity into the environment, Decision whether or not residents in Pripyat should be evacuated.
The committee decided to extinguish the fire by dropping the material such as sand, lead, boron etc.
onto the core using military helicopters. After the long discussion, by the decision of Shcherbina, theevacuation of Pripyat was scheduled on the next day.

 120 thousand evacuees
The weather was fine in Pripyat on April 26. Most residents (population 50,000) did know that something
serious event happened at the NPP. They spent, however, that day as usual Saturday. A lot of people wereat shops and even a wedding was celebrated. Some people watched the smoking 4th block from the roof of
the apartment while sunbathing (Fig. 3-4). Only few people were afraid of radiation and stayed inside theirflats closing windows.

Fig. 4. View of Sarcophagus from the roof ofan apartment in Pripyat. Photo by
Imanaka, October 2005.
Fig. 3. The 4-th reactor on the day of theaccident. Photo by Igor Kostine.

-4-

It was lucky for the people in Pripyat that the first “hot” radioactive plume released from thedestroyed 4th block did not hit directly on the city. It flowed to the west from the destroyed reactor, wherepine trees within 5 km died in several days because of strong radiation (Fig 5).
On April 27, because of the change of wind direction, radiation dose rate in Pripyat began to increase.
At 07:00, dose rate of 2 - 6 mSv/h was recorded inside Pripyat. Around noon, the following wasannounced through the local radio: “Dear citizens! Evacuation was ordered in relation with the accident at
NPP. Please take passport, indispensable materials and food for three days. Evacuation will begin at
14:00”. 1,200 buses were mobilized from Kyiv to evacuate Pripyat. 45,000 people were evacuated in twohours. Panic that the authority was afraid of did not happen. Many evacuees thought that they could comeback home in three days, but they could not restore their life in Pripyat again.
The region surrounding Chernobyl NPP was traditional rural area except Pripyat city. Although
Pripyat city were evacuated quickly on the second day, the people within the 30 km zone were left
uninformed for a while. It was on May 2, one week after the accident that the evacuation was decided ofthe people who were living in the 30 km zone other than Pripyat. Their evacuation began on May 3. In aweek about 71,000 people left their home. Compared with the case of Pripyat, the evacuation of rural
towns/villages was far more difficult. Several hundred thousands of livestock were evacuated together
with their owners. Many people reminded their experience at the time of the Nazi invasion. But, different
from the previous experience, they could not return home this time. In total 116,000 people were
evacuated from the 30 km zone around the Chernobyl NPP in two weeks after the accident.
Figure 6 indicates radiation monitoring data in settlements within the 30-km zone on May 1, 1986 [4].
The maximum of 3,306 µGy/h is seen in Krasnoe village about 6 km north from the ChNPP. The maincontamination in this direction was considered to occur on April 27-28 and Krasnoe village was evacuatedon May 3. This situation makes us easily suppose serious radiation exposure of residents staying there.
Imanaka previously estimated that some fraction of the residents in Krasnoe could receive more than 1 Gyof external dose, a criterion of acute radiation syndrome [5].
Meanwhile, according to the Chernobyl Forum report [6] that was released at a conference held by
IAEA and other organizations in September 2005 as a summary of 20-year investigation on theconsequences of the accident, the average dose of evacuees was evaluated to be about 30 mSv and theirmaximum was several hundreds of mSv.
○ Usov

131

Pripyat river○

Krasnoe○○

Shepelichi

Zimovishche

Pripyat city
Yanov St.

1

5

○

3

Krivaya gora

2○

Chistogolovka

4

5

Coolingpond
1 km

1.1st-4th blocks(1st is west side)
2. 5-6 blocks (under construction)
3. Water inlet canal
4. Water outlet canal
5. Railway for cargo
Solid line: road○○

Starocele

KopachiNorth-south distance from the Chernobyl NPP (km)

30

261
104
PogonnoeDernovichi
252
348
OrevichiRadin
696
Molochki
348

20

10

0

-10

-20

Lelev

157
Puchin104
Savichi

1044
Kulazhin
1914
Kryuki70
Grushnoe 44
70
Suvidi70

Kranosel 870
Pirki
435
Ulasi
Borshchevka
122
96
Doblyadi
96
957
3045
Denisovich 174
Mashevo
Usov
Zalese131 Khutor Les
3306
252
Khatki
Krasnoe
Benyovka
244
Rudki
261
139 148
Zimovishche
139
1053
Nov. Shepelichi
Chikalovichi
148
Chapaenka
165
Yanov
Krasnoe
870
3045
174 Nov. Krasnitsa
Krivaya Gora
1740 ChNPP
9174 Chistogolovka 1044 331
Starocele
653
Kopachi87 St. Krasnitsa
174
435
87
Lelev
Lubyanka
Koshovka
35
Stechaika
Ilintsi
26
78
61
87
174
Razezhnee
Parishev
Chernobyl
Korogod
122
35 Bichiki
96 Zalese
Lodizhichi
35
87
GlinkaCherevach78
122 Chipol
Rodinka87
44

Rudnya Veresnya

Rossokha

-30
-30

○

Fig. 5: Map just around Chernobyl NPP.

157
Vigrebnaya

-20
-10
0
10
20
East-west distance from the Chernobyl NPP (km)30

Fig 6. Dose rate in air at settlements within the
30-km zone around Chernobyl NPP on May 1,
1986 [4], unit: µGy/h.

-5- Accident liquidation and construction of Sarcophagus
Five minutes after the explosion at the 4th block, thefirst firefighter team arrived at the scene. It was firemenof the power station led by lieutenant Pravik. Five
minutes later another firemen team led by lieutenant
Kybenok arrived from Pripyat city. Pravik’s team started
extinguishing the fire on the roof of the turbine building
in order to prevent the spread of the fire. The Kybenok’s
team fought the fire at the central hall of the destroyed
4th reactor. Nobody hesitated at the fight being afraid ofFig. 7: Construction of Sarcophagus
radiation. Rather, they were not taught about danger ofradiation. They became feel sick one after another, and were carried to the hospital in Pripyat.
When the explosion happened, operators at the control room of the 4th block could not understandwhat happened at the reactor. As shown in Table 2, operator wrote in a log note, “At 1:24, a strong
explosion, control rods stopped halfway before reaching the bottom of the core”. The first priority for
operators was to prevent the reactor from destruction. Therefore, they tried to insert control rods to the fullposition and keep the core cooling by continuing pumping the coolant. In reality, however, the reactor core
was completely destroyed by the first explosions. The operators and other workers should quickly
evacuate and go to the shelter. On the contrary, as a result of useless efforts and unreasonable orders totackle the situation, radiation symptom also appeared in operators.
According to the reports from the USSR authorities, about 300 people was hospitalized, 28 out of
which died because of acute radiation syndrome. In addition, one worker became missing under the debris,
another died of severe burn on the day of the accident. Adding one more death of other reason, it wasreported that 31 people died in total by the Chernobyl accident.
The chemical detachment of the USSR army that was being trained to prepare nuclear wars arrived at
the scene on the second day, April 27. It is certain that the first step to liquidate the accident consequences
was carried out by this regular army. But, details of their works and radiation dose were yet unknown.
During three weeks of their stay, debris such as fuel rods, graphite block etc. thrown from the core andscattered on the ground around the 4th block building were cleared in order to begin the construction of“Sarcophagus” (Fig. 7).
In June, the construction began of “Sarcophagus” that would confine the whole destroyed block by
the concrete structure. “Patriotic workers” gathered to Chernobyl from all over USSR. They did heroic
works under the condition of strong radiation.

Fig. 8: Working scene of liquidators. From DVD movie “Sacrifice” [7].

-6-A large scale mobilization of reserves was also taken place for the works of decontamination of theterritory within the Chernobyl station as well as settlements within the 30 km zone. Their age was 30 – 40years old and called “liquidators”. The right photo in Fig. 8 shows a scene of clean-up work of radioactive
debris that had scattered on the roof of 3rd block. It was done by human-wave tactics at the final stage of
the Sarcophagus construction in September 1986. About 3,000 reserves were engaged in this work. The
exposure limit was set 25 Roentgen (about 250 mSv), but it is said there were a lot of cases of over
exposure.
Up to the end of 1990, the total number of liquidators amounted to 800,000 people, among which
200,000 worked in 1986 and 1987 under the condition of strong radiation.

 28 acute radiation deaths
In the evening of the day of the accident, a special medical team arrived from Moscow. Among thepatients accommodated at the hospital in Pripyat, serious ones were selected to be sent to No. 6 hospital in
Moscow. Dr. Gale, a US specialist of bone marrow transplantation came to Moscow to help the treatment.
He and his colleague did operation of bone marrow transplantation for 13 patients, but all cases could notsurvive. In spite of insensitive care at No. 6 hospital, 28 people died of radiation syndrome. Tabl 3 lists
these 28 people together with two persons who died on the day of the accident. It is noted that most of the
Name

Table 3. List of deaths by radiation syndrome
Date of
Working place
Age
death

Firefighters 6: persons
Lieutenant Pravik V.P.
NPP fire station
Lieutenant Kybenok V.M.
Pripyat fire station
Sergeant Vashchuk M.V.
do.
Staff sergeant Ihnatenko V.I.
do.
Staff sergeant Tytenok M.I.
do.
Sergeant Tyshchura V.I.
do.
Plant staff and business traveler: 24 persons
Akymov O.F.
Chief operator shift
Toptunov L.F.
Reactor operator
Kudryavtsev O.H.
Trainee operator
Proskuryakov V.V/
do.
Perevozchenko V.I.
Chief reactor engineer
Kurhuz A.K.
Reactor engineer
Khodemchuk V.I.
Machine engineer
Dehtyarenko V.M.
do.
Perchuk K.H.
Turbine engineer
Vershynun Y.A.
do.
Brazhnyk V.S.
do.
Novyk O.V.
do.
Lelechenko O.H.
Deputy of electric section
Baranov A.I.
Electric engineer
Lopachuk V.I.
do.
Shapovalov A.I.
do.
Konoval Y.I.
do.
Sytnykov V.I.
1･2 block deputy engineer
Orlov I.L.
Deputy chief of 1st block
Popov H.I.
Engineer
Savenkov V.I.
do.
Shashenok V.M.
Engineer of industrial meter
Luzhhanova K.I.
Guard
Iwanenko K.O.
do.

-7-

Remarks

23
23
27
25
26
26

May 11
May 11
May 14
May 13
May 16
May 10

33
25
28
31
39
28
35
31
33
27
29
24
47
32
25
45
44
46
41
46
28
45
59
53

May 11
15Gy
May 14
May 14
May 17
June 13
May 12
April 26
Missing inside debris
May 19
May 20> 10 Gy
July 21do.
May 14do.
July 26do.
May 7
25 Gy, dead in Kyiv
May 20
May 17
May 19
May 28
May 30
May 13June 13
Trip from Harkov
May 21
April 26 Dead by burns on the day
July 31
Entrance gate
May 26Spent fuel buildingdeaths occurred in the middle of May, 2 - 3 weeks after the accident, which indicates that the
blood-forming functions of their bone marrow were destroyed by radiation.
According to Gorbachev’s speech on May 14, about 300 firemen and plat staff were hospitalized
because of radiation syndrome. In November 1986, this number was reduced to 237 people. Then, after“reexamination of syndrome”, the current number is given to be 134 cases [8].
When the present author visited the Chernobyl museum in Kyiv, he found an exhibition of a medical
certificate that a serviceman (31 yr) of Ukrainian ministry of Internal Affairs was admitted at No.25
hospital in Kyiv on May 22 – August 12, 1986 and received bone marrow transplantation. He was again at
hospital December 1 – 31, 1986. His dose was estimated 3.2 – 3.7 Gy. Of course this case was notincluded in the official reports. We have to wonder how many such patients were who were not included
in official reports.

 Acute radiation syndrome among residents
According to official reports beginning from the USSR report [2] in 1986 up to the Chernobyl Forum
report [6] in 2005, acute radiation syndrome occurred only among station staff and firefighters who wereat the scene of the accident, but no radiation syndrome was observed among residents living around the
ChNPP. However, a number of descriptions about radiation syndrome among the residents were found in
the secret protocols of the communist party that was disclosed after the collapse of USSR [9]. In theformer USSR, The communist party was the core of its centralized power system, and its central
committee in Moscow was the summit of the power. When the Chernobyl accident occurred, a special
Table 4. Excerpts of descriptions of the health state of inhabitants from the secret protocols of theCommunist Party of the Soviet Union .
<Date of protocol><Description of the health state of people>
As of May 4, 1,882 people are hospitalized in total. Total number of examined people reached 38,000.
1986
May 4: Radiation disease of various degrees of seriousness appeared in 204 people, including 64 infants.
May 5: Total number of hospitalized people reached 2,757, including 569 children. Among them, 914 people
have symptoms of radiation disease. 18 people are in a very serious state and 32 people are in a serious
state.
May 6: As at 9:00 on May 6, the total number of hospitalized people reached 3,454. Among them, 2,609 people
are in hospital for treatment, including 471 infants. According to confirmed data, the number of radiationdisease cases is 367, including 19 children. Among them, 34 people are in a serious state. In the 6th
Hospital in Moscow, 179 people are in hospital, including two infants.
May 7: During the last day, an additional 1,821 people were hospitalized. At 10:00 May 7, the number of people
in hospital for treatment is 4,301, including 1,351 infants. Among them, diagnosis of radiation disease
was established in 520 people, including staff of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the USSR. 34 people
are in a serious state.
May 8: During the last day, the number of hospitalized people increased by 2,245, including 730 children. 1,131
people left hospital. As at 10:00 May 8, a total of 5,415 people are in hospital for treatment, including
1,928 children. Diagnosis of radiation disease was confirmed for 315 people.
May 10: During the last two days, 4,019 people were hospitalized, including 2,630 children. 739 people left
hospital. In total 8,695 people are in hospital, including 238 cases with diagnosis of radiation disease,among which 26 are children.
May 11: During the last day, 495 people were hospitalized and 1,017 people left hospital. In total, 8,137 people
are in hospital for treatment and examination, among which 264 people with diagnosis of radiationdisease. 37 people are in serious state. During the last day 2 people died. Total number of death by theaccident amounted to 7 people.
May 12: During the last day, 2,703 people were hospitalized, most of which were in Belarus. 678 people left
hospital. 10,198 people are in hospital for treatment and examination, among which 345 people havesymptom of radiation disease, including 35 children. Since the time of the accident, 2 people perishedand 6 people died of diseases. 35 people in serious state.
remark: The total number of 40 protocols are contained in the secret document.

-8-

working group was formed at the central committee to decide basic policies to cope with the accident
consequences. The disclosed documents were protocols of the WG meetings.
Excerpts from the protocols are shown in Table 4. The numbers of deaths and serious patients seemto correspond to those of station staff and firefighters, but it is certain that a lot of radiation patients werealso among residents. For example, on May 12 when the evacuation of the 30-km zone almost finished, it
was written, “10,198 people are in hospital for treatment and examination, among which 345 people havesymptom of radiation disease, including 35 children”.
A noteworthy description is that two infants were at No. 6 hospital on May 6. In the protocol of thesame day, it was written “taking into consideration the situation that American doctors are working at No.
6 hospital, the proposal from Health Ministry was agreed that the number of patients and their condition
should be announced properly”. This means that the information would not have been released if Dr. Galeand his colleague were not at the hospital.
Meanwhile, Lupandin of Sociological Institute, Russia investigated in 1992 the remaining carte thatwas made at the time of the accident at the central district hospital, Khoyniki, Gomel region, Belarus. A
part of Khoiniki district was included in the 30 km zone (Fig. 9). Lupandin found 8 cases of radiationdiseases as well as 20 cases with some radiation symptoms. He described that more than 1,000 cases ofacute radiation diseases could have been in total at that period [10].

BelarusBorderAlienation Zone

60 km

30 km

Ch NPP

Zone Boundary

UkraineKiev reservoir

Fig. 9. Current alienation zone around Chernobyl. The areas on Ukrainian and Belarusian sides
are 2,000 and 1,700 km2, respectively. The map is made based on the figure in National
Geographic, April 2006. Basic photo is made using Google Earth.

-9- The blame was put on the operators
In August 1986 USSR government presented the report on the Chernobyl accident to IAEA [2]. Then thefirst expert meeting on the Chernobyl accident was held in August 25 – 29, 1986 at the IAEA headquarters
in Vienna. Specialists from the western countries were impressed with the frank presentation by Dr.
Legasov of the chief of the Soviet delegation, and accepted his explanation about the accident.
According to the 1986 USSR report, the reason for the Chernobyl accident was “a very rarecombination of a series of regulation violation by the operators”. Six violations pointed in the USSR
report are listed in Table 5. As a result of the combination of these violations, the reactor began runaway
during the test of emergency generator. The operator, having noticed sudden power increase, turned on thescram button, AZ-5, but it was too late to stop the reactor.
Table 5. Six violations by the operators pointed in the 1986 USSR report.
1. Reactor was operated in a condition that operational reactivity margin (ORM) was below thepermissible limit.
2. The generator test was conducted below the planned power level in the test program.

3. Coolant flow rate exceeded the limit because two additional pumps were operated.
4. Reactor trip signal for steam valve closure was bypassed.
5. Reactor trip signal for parameters in steam separator tank was bypassed.
6. ECCS signal was dispatched.
Dyatlov, Deputy Chief Engineer was responsible at the control room at the time of the accident. He
was sentenced to 10 years confinement in 1987. After being discharged from the prison earlier than theterm in 1990, he wrote an article [11] appealing, “There was noting extraordinary in the control room until
the operator switched on AZ-5. It was three seconds after pushing AZ-5 when the alarms of powerincrease appeared. Operators should not be blamed due to decrease of operational reactivity margin(ORM) because there was no instrument directly indicating ORM. Operating reactor at low power was notforbidden, but such regulation was made after the accident... The primary causes of the accident was
design defects of the reactor as well as the people who did not take countermeasures knowing such design
defects” and “The 1986 USSR report was full of lies. I can not understand why specialists of IAEA could
accept such explanation”.
It was already pointed out in May 1986 that the main causes of the Chernobyl accident likely were

Fig. 10 Control room of 4th block. October 2002.

Fig. 11 Control rod position panel of 1st block- 10 -

“positive void coefficient of reactivity” and “positive scram” [3]. It is a conventional trick by theauthorities to put the responsibility on personnel at the scene. If the cause of the accident was found to be
the design defects in RBMK, the responsibility should be asked of its designer of Academician
Alexsandrov, the president of USSR Academy of Sciences. In addition, it would become difficult tocontinue operation of 14 RBMK reactors other than the ChNPP. At the beginning of July, the official
conclusion on the cause of the accident was decided at the meeting of the central committee of the USSR
communist party where Gorbachev also participated [12].
With the progress of “Perestoroika” and “Glasnost” at the final period of USSR, intensive efforts
were made at the USSR parliament to reevaluate the consequences of the Chernobyl accident. In 1991 a
special committee nominated by the parliament released a report. It concluded that the real cause of theaccident was not the regulation violations by operators, but design defects and idleness of authorities
neglecting them. According to the report, the accident such as Chernobyl was inevitable [3].

 Positive void reactivity coefficient and positive scram
Neutrons produced by nuclear fission are with high energy (average 2 MeV), the speed of which is about
1/10 of light. Because of a small probability of high speed neurons to be caught by other uranium nuclei, it
is difficult to maintain fission chain reaction using high energy neutrons. So, in thermal reactors such as
RBMK, neutrons are designed to collide with light nuclei of “moderator” to slow down the speed. If the
distribution of neutron speed becomes equilibrium with the temperature inside the reactor, these neutrons
are called as “thermal neutrons”. The ability of thermal neutrons to cause fission reaction with uranium
nucleus is about 500 times larger than “fast neutrons”. Thermal neutrons are also captured easily by othernuclei than uranium. Therefore, thermal reactors are designed to slow down neutrons using moderator and,avoiding neutron capture by materials other than fuel, make thermal neutrons to be captured by uranium asmuch as possible. Good candidates of moderator are heavy water and graphite, while light water is worse
than them because light water itself will capture neutrons.

Full withdrawal

Full insertion
Wire

Control rod

Upper edge of the core
Wire

Graphite follower

Water column

Lower edge of the coreFig. 12. Control rod and graphite follower

Fig. 13: Power distribution before the- 11 -

Positive void coefficient of reactivity: “Reactivity” indicates a scale how fission rate is increasing or
decreasing. If reactivity = 0, the number of fission per unit time is constant. If it >0, the reactor power will
increase and if it<0, the reactor power will decrease. Reactivity depends on various factors such as
position of control rods, fuel enrichment, fuel temperature etc. “Void coefficient of reactivity” indicates
how reactivity will be effected by density change of coolant material. If it is positive, the reactor power
will increase when steam fraction at the core increases.
In the case of the Chernobyl accident, a positive value of void reactivity coefficient was exaggerated
by the facts operating the reactor at low power and pulling almost control rods out of the core. Afterseveral channel tubes were ruptured by “the first power excursion”, which made the steam fraction having
increased. Subsequently a more large power excursion was caused by the positive void coefficient ofreactivity”. It lifted up the upper structural plate tearing all channel tubes at a time, which led to anotherexcursion [1,3].
Positive scram: “Scram” means emergency shutdown of nuclear reactor. “Positive scram” is a word
made after the Chernobyl accident, reflecting an unbelievable event that the reactor power increased bypushing the scram button.
The structure of RBMK control rod is shown in Fig. 12. A graphite follower is pending under thecontrol rod that absorbs neutrons. The left part of the figure illustrates the complete pullout, making awater column under the graphite follower at the bottom of the core. The right part shows the full insertion.
Plotted data in Fig. 13 are power distribution it the core just before the accident [13]. An interesting
feature is seen that a large peak of power distribution was at the lower part of the core. The operator of the
4th block pushed the scram button (AZ-5) when almost control rods were fully pulled out. Water columns
in the left part of Fig. 12 were replaced with graphite followers, producing positive reactivity at the lower
part of the core, which was considered to cause the first power excursion [1].

 The amount of released radioactivity
Amount of radioactivity accumulated in the reactor core of 1 GWe NPP is about 1.5 × 1020 Bq, excluding
those of short half-lives. It is rather difficult task to estimate the amount of radioactivity released into theenvironment for such case as Chernobyl because radiation monitor was useless in the situation that thereactor core exploded and ruined together with the building. Several methods were elaborated to estimate
the amount of released radioactivity, for example, using ground contamination data of all over the worldfrom Chernobyl fallout. Table 6 is the radioactivity release estimated in the Chernobyl Forum report in2005 [6]. Rare gas elements such as 133Xe were released 100 % of the reactor core. Radioiodines to which
attention should be paid at the early stage were released 55 %. 137Cs, which is important at long-tem
contamination, was 30 %. Smaller fractions were seen for less volatile isotopes of 90Sr and 239Pu.
Compared with previous values given in the 1986 USSR report, these estimates were 2.8 and 2.3 times
Table 6. Estimates of radioactivity released by the Chernobyl accident（decay-corrected to 1986.4.26)
NuclideHalf life
Released activity, Bq
Ratio to core inventory
18
100 %Xenon-133
5.3 days
7 × 1018
Iodine-131
8.0 days55 %2 × 1016
Caesium-137
30 years
30 %9 × 10164.9%Strontium-90
29 years
1 × 1013
Plutonium-239
24,000 years
1.5 %2 × 1019
About 10 %＜Total release including others＞
1.4 × 10- 12 -

large for 131I and 137Cs, respectively. In total, about 10 % of the radioactivity in the core was released into
the environment beyond the territory of ChNPP.
Where is nuclear fuel?: The nuclear fuel mass loaded in the core of the 4th block was 190 ton.
According to the 1986 USSR report, about 3 % of nuclear fuel was released, while the rest remained in thecore where channel tubes, fuel tubes, graphite blocks etc were crowded together with materials of sands,
lead etc thrown down from helicopters to distinguish the fire (about 5,000 ton). Two year after the accident,
TV camera was inserted into the core through a hole bored in the side wall of the reactor cavity.
Surprisingly almost vacant space was found at the position of the reactor core (Fig. 14) [14]. 5,000 ton ofmaterial did not reach the core, but only piled up on the floor of the central hall.
Part of the reactor core was blown up and away by the explosion around the destroyed building. The
remaining fuel and channel tubes melted due to high temperature and formed materials like lava, which
moved along the floor and corridor to the lower compartments and dropped into pools (Fig.14). Most of
1,700 ton graphite in the core was considered to burn out during the fire that continued about 10 days.
Interestingly, as can be seen in Fig. 14, a concrete panel of the building wall was on the bottom of thereactor cavity. Considering the size of the concrete panel, it was supposed that this panel fell down into thecavity while the upper core structure plate (2,000 ton) was blown up in the air by the explosion.
Strong radiation as well as additional layers of concrete pored during the construction of Sarcophagus
is still preventing detailed investigation inside Sarcophagus. A current estimate for the amount of nuclear
fuel remaining inside Sarcophagus is about 60 % (± 20 %) of uranium in the core at the time of theaccident.
Separation tank
Upper structure
plate

Torn fuel channels

Outlet channel
pipes
Caughtconcrete plate

Water shield tank

Fallenconcrete panel

Lower structure
plate: 1/4 melted“Elephant leg”
Lava-likematerial
Pipes to steam
condensation poolFig. 14. Cross sectional view of the destroyed reactor.
- 13 -

 High level contamination at 200 km away was disclosed 3 years later
The Chernobyl accident happened in the midst of the cold war between USA and USSR. In USSR Mr.
Gorbachev appeared in March of the previous year as the General Secretary of Communist Party, andbegan to propose two slogans of Perestoroika (reconstruction) and Glasnost (openness), but innatecharacteristics of the communist acquired for the past 70 years hardly changed. Citizens, even scientists,
were forbidden to talk freely about the consequences the Chernobyl accident.
It was in spring of 1989, about three years after the accident that the situation seemed to changed
with enlargement of the movement seeking for democracy in USSR. A 137Cs contamination map around
Chernobyl was published in a newspaper in Belarus for the first time. Although previous contamination
maps reported by USSR specialists were limited to the area just near Chernobyl, the new map indicated ashockingly wide-scale of contamination. As can be seen in Fig. 15, there were spreading of strong
contamination detachedly at distances 200 – 500 km from Chernobyl [15].
Various kinds of radionuclides will be released by reactor accidents. Iodine-131 (half life: 8 days) is
important at the early stage after the accident, which irradiates specifically thyroid grand whenincorporated into the body. From the point of long-term contamination, 137Cs is the most importantbecause of its long half life (30 yr), high volatility and transportability, and accessibility to foodstuff. A
vast area was contaminated by 137Cs in Ukraine, Belarus and Russia. (Table 7) [16].
In July 1989 the Belarus parliament, which began to criticize the Moscow government requesting
countermeasures for the Chernobyl consequences, decided to relocate 110,000 residents from thecontaminated territories. At the end of 1991, however, the central USSR government that should takeprimary responsibility of the Chernobyl accident disappeared. Then, the responsibility of countermeasuresand compensation was transferred on the shoulder of newly independent governments. Each affected
republic independently established laws for countermeasures and compensation from the damages by the
Chernobyl accident.
Moscow

Belarus
RussiaMogilev

Minsk
Bryansk

Gomel

400km
Cs137 contamination
37〜185 kBq/m2

500km

100km
Kiev

185〜555 kBq/m2

200km

300km

Ukraine555 kBq/m2以上

Fig. 15. Cesium-137 contamination map around Chernobyl.

- 14 -

600km

Table 7. Areas contaminated with 137Cs in three affected countries, km2.

Level of 137Cs density（kBq/m2)
37 ∼ 175175 ∼ 555

555 ∼ 1,440> 1,440

RussiaBelarus
Ukraine48,80029,90037,2005,720
10,200
3,200

2,100
4,200
900

300
2,200
600

56,92046,50041,900Total

115,900

19,120

7,200

3,100

145,320>37 total

According to Chernobyl laws in these countries, contaminated territories are classified by the levelof caesium-137 contamination on the ground as follows:¾ > 1,440 kBq/m2 :zone of alienation,¾ 555〜1,440 kBq/m2 :zone of obligatory resettlement,¾ 175〜555 kBq/m2 :zone of guaranteed voluntary resettlement,¾ 37〜175 kBq/m2 :zone for radiation control.

 Almost all northern hemisphere was contaminatedIn the morning of April 28, 1986, an alarm of radiation monitor sounded at the Forsmark NPP located in
the southern part of Sweden, 1,200 km away from Chernobyl. Radioactivity leakage from the Forsmark
plant was suspected, but no extraordinary was founded. In this morning radiation level also increased atother nuclear facilities in Sweden. Radioactivity likely came from the USSR territory passing over theBaltic Sea. It was 9:00 pm on April 28, responding the query from the Swedish government, that TASS
News Agency in Moscow reported a short announcement about the accident at the Chernobyl NPP.
Table 8. Area of137

2

Cs contamination in European countries (excluding Ukraine, Belarus and Russia): km
Area
Level of 137Cs contamination, kBq/m2
Country
（km2）
10〜20
20〜37
37〜185
Sweden450,000
31,00033,00023,000Finland337,000
32,00059,00019,000Bulgaria
111,000
27,50040,4004,800
Austria
84,00028,00025,00011,000
Norway324,000
44,00023,0007,200
Rumania
238,000
54,00013,0001,200
Germany
366,000
29,00014,000320
Greece132,000
21,0008,300
1,200
Slovenia
20,000
8,100
8,700
610
Italy
301,000
15,0007,000
1,400
Moldova
34,00019,0001,900−
Switzerland
41,000
6,400
2,300
730
Poland313,000
10,0003,500
520
Hungary
93,000
5,200
230
−
U.K.
240,000
15,0001,700
160
Estonia
45,0001,700
280−
Litania
65,00050−−
Chex79,00013,0003,500
210
Slovakia
20,0006,800
800
20Croatia
56,0001,100
30
20France550,000
1,200−−

Remark: The level due to previous nuclear tests is 2 – 3 kBq/m2.

- 15 -

The fire at the Chernobyl 4th block continued about 10 days, releasing a large amount of radioactivity.
The first radioactive plume from ChNPP moved to the north-west direction, passing over the territories ofBelarus, Latonia and the Baltic Sea, and then arrived at Scandinavia. The second plume went to the west
direction over Belarus and Poland, which then reached Austria and Switzerland at the end of April. Table 8shows 137Cs contamination in European countries [17]. High level of the contamination was observed in
the Scandinavian countries and the Alpine countries, where rain occurred with the passage of theradioactive plumes. Simply saying, the average level of 137Cs contamination in European countries wasequal to the sum of the past fallout contamination by all atmospheric nuclear tests in 50s and 60s.

 Radioactive fallout in Japan
The present author clearly remembers that it was in the morning of April 29,1986, the holiday for theprevious Emperor’s birthday that for the first time he heard the unfamiliar name of “Chernobyl”. TV news
told that something serious NPP accident occurred at “Chernobyl”, while the details were unclear. The
Chernobyl news became bigger and bigger with time, reporting radioactive contamination in various
European countries. Japanese meteorologists told in TV rather negative opinions about whether or notradioactivity would come to Japan, traveling 8,000 km of the distance from Chernobyl.
Hearing the news of radioactive contamination in European countries, Imanaka and his colleague,
which were used to radioactivity monitoring around nuclear facilities in Japan, half in doubt prepared toobserve radioactive fallout from Chernobyl at their institute in Osaka. The first radioactivity was observedin rainwater that was sampled in the evening of May 3. A clear gamma-ray peak of 361-keV specific to 131I
was seen by gamma-ray spectrometry using Ge detector. Figure 16 indicates gamma-ray spectrum of air
filter sampled on May 5. A series of fission products can be seen: 131I, 132I, 132Te, 134Cs, 136Cs, 137Cs,
103
Ru… Seeing this spectrum, Imanaka was surprised, asking himself, “Can we breathe this air?” He
quickly calculated concentrations and, comparing them with permissible levels, said to himself, “It’sirritating, but we can not live without breathing air”. Iodine-131 concentration at that time was 0.8 Bq/m3[18]. If an infant breathed this air for one day, thyroid dose from inhaled 131I would be 0.01 mSv using a

Fig. 16. Gamma-ray spectrum of air filter sampled May 5, 1986 at Research Reactor
Institute, Kyoto University in Kumatori, Osaka.

- 16 -

Fig. 17. Monthly deposition of 137Cs and 90Sr observed at Meteorological ResearchInstitute, 1955 - 2005．

breathing rate of 3 m3/day and a dose conversion coefficient of 3.7×10-3 mSv/Bq. This value seemed not
so high to be nervous and not so low to be negligible.
The same level of fallout contamination was observed through the whole territory of Japan. The
maximum 131I concentration was 500 Bq/l in rainwater and 25 Bq/l in cow milk. The average deposited
amount of 137Cs was 200 Bq/m2. Figure 17 is the deposition trend of 137Cs and 90Sr observed at themeteorological research institute for the past 50 years in Japan [19]. The 137Cs deposition from Chernobyl
was about 3 % of the total deposition from nuclear tests. Estimates of the average dose for the first year
after the accident in Japan is shown in
Table 9. Average radiation dose in Japan by Chernobyl
fallout during the first year after the accident. mSv
Table 9 [20]. Compared with annual
AdultsChildrennatural background dose of 1 mSv, theExternal exposure: whole body
0.003
0.003
whole body dose from Chernobyl could beInternal exposure: whole body
0.001
0.006
negligible, but some attention should beInternal exposure: thyroid
0.15
0.5
put on thyroid doses.

 Chernobyl sufferers
Almost all people who were on the northern hemisphere at the time of the accident received someradiation from Chernobyl. Of course the contamination around Chernobyl was predominant. Chernobyl
sufferers can be classified as listed in Table 10. Other than the total body dose, evacuees and inhabitantsreceived 10 – 100 times lager dose to thyroid from incorporation of 131I.
Table 10 Category of Chernobyl sufferers

Category
Population
A. Staff of NPP and firefighters who were at the scene.
1,000∼2,000
B. Liquidators (military, construction workers etc)
600,000∼800,000
C. Evacuees from the 30km zone
120,000
D. Inhabitants of highly contaminated areas and resettlers
250,000∼300,000
2E. Inhabitants of contaminated areas (>37 kBq/m )6 million*; The present author considers that this value is underestimated.
- 17 -

Total body dose1∼20 Sv
0.1∼1 Sv
Average 30 mSv*
Average 50 mSv
Average 10 mSv

 Cancer deaths and indirect effects
As a result of 20-years of investigations on the consequences of the Chernobyl accident, Chernobyl Forumconcluded that the total number of deaths due to the accident was 4,000 people, including the future
cancer deaths [6]. Following this conclusion, mass media in the world announced “The true effects of theChernobyl accident was found to be far smaller than those previously considered.” The breakdown of
4,000 deaths is as follows: 60 deaths so far confirmed and 3,940 cancer deaths estimated by a model
calculation among 200,000 people of liquidators in 1986 and 1987, 120,000 evacuees from the 30-km
zone and 270,000 inhabitants in heavily contaminated areas.
This conclusion of the Chernobyl Forum was criticized by specialists from Ukraine and Belarus aswell as by the Belarusian government. In addition, WHO [21] and IARC (International Agency for
Research on Cancer) [22] published their own estimates that were several times larger than that of theChernobyl Forum.
Table 11 summarizes various estimates of total cancer deaths due to the Chernobyl accident. The
Chernobyl Forum gives the lowest estimate, while the highest estimate by Greenpeace [24] is more than
20 times larger than that by Chernobyl Forum. This difference reflects the fact that the number of cancer
deaths largely depends on the risk model and the size of population used by the evaluator. Considering
uncertainty of estimates, the present author considers that a total of 20,000 – 60,000 cancer deaths seem tobe a reasonable one.
Table 11. Various estimates of cancer deaths due to the Chernobyl accident
Cancer death
Evaluator
Cancer deaths
Population
risk per 1 Sv
Chernobyl Forum (2005) [6]3,940
600,000
0.11
WHO (2006) [21]9,000

7.4 million in three countries

0.11

IARC (2006) [22]16,000570 million in Europe

0.1

NGO Kiev conference(2006) [23]30,000〜60,000

Whole world

0.05〜0.1

Greenpeace (2006) [24]93,000Whole world−

One comment should be added about the health effects of the Chernobyl accident. Through theexperience of the present author who has been involved in the study of the Chernobyl consequences formore than twenty years, it became clear that radiation effect is merely one aspect of the huge catastrophethat the Chernobyl accident brought upon. He thinks that more attention should be paid to the effects notdirectly related to radiation exposure. For example, it can be easily imagined what an adverse change oflife would arise when the old people who had been quietly living in rural areas were suddenly obliged toevacuate to a big city such as Kyiv. Some evacuees who lost their jobs might become alcoholics in despairof their future. These cases should be recognized as indirect effects of the Chernobyl accident.
According to Scherbak Yu who gave a lecture about Chernobyl at the institute of the present author
in April 2006, there were 17,000 families in Ukraine, the death of whose householder were admitted to becaused by the Chernobyl accident and receiving special privileges for it. This number suggests thatindirect deaths could be far more than the direct deaths from radiation exposure.
The present author is sure that scientific approach is effective to reveal what happened. However,considering the areas is limited where the scientific approach is effective, he is also sure that ourimagination should be trained in order to understand the whole picture of the Chernobyl accident.

- 18 -

References
1. Imanaka T. “Why did the operator push the AZ-5 button?: the process of the power excursion process of
the Chernobyl accident”, Gijutsu-to-Ningen, May 2005 (in Japanese).
2. USSR State Committee on the Utilization of Atomic Energy, “The Accident at the Chernobyl Nuclear
Power Plant and Its Consequences”, August 1986.
3. Комиссия Госпроматомнадзора СССР, “О причинах и обстоятельствах аварии на 4 блоке
чернобыльской АЭС 26 апреля 1986г”, 17.01.1991.
4. I. K. Baliff and V. Stepanenko ed. “Retrospective Dosimetry and Dose Reconstruction”. Experimental
Collaboration Project No.10, EUR 16540, EC, 1996.
5. Chernobyl Forum, Chernobyl’s Legacy: Health, Environmental and Socio-economic Impacts andRecommendations to the Governments of Belarus, the Russian Federation and Ukraine. IAEA, 2005．
6. E. Andreoli, W. Tchertkoff, “The Sacrifice”, Feldat Film, 2003 (Japanese subtitle by CNIC)
http://www.dissident-media.org/infonucleaire/sacrifice.html．
7. UNSCEAR Report 1988, Annex G, Appendix, United Nations 1988.
8. А. Ярошинская. ЧЕРНОБЫЛЬ: Совершенно Секретно. Другие-Берега, Москва, 1992.
9. Lupandin V., “Invisible Victims” NABAT No. 36, Minsk, October 1992 (in Russian).
10. Dyatolov A. “How it was: an operator’s perspective”, Nuclear Engineering International, November 1991.
11. NANASAWA Kiyoshi, “Question about NPP accident: From Chernobyl to MONJU”, Iwanami-shinsho,
1996 (in Japanese).
12. Chan and Dastur, “The Sensitivity of Positive Scram Reactivity to Neutronic Decoupling in the
RBMK-1000”, Nuclear Science and Engineering, 103:289-293, 1989.
13. Абалин С.С. и др. Диагнотические исследование аварийного реактора Чернобыльской АЭС//АТОМНАЯ ЭНЕРГИЯ. 68: 2 (1990) С.355-359.
14. Radioactivity Lab for food contamination,, “Contamination map by the Chernobyl NPP accident” (1990).
15. Imanaka T. ed. “Radioactive disaster by the Chernobyl accident: International collaboration report”
Gijutsu-to-Ningen, 1998 (in Japanese)..
16. M. De. Cort et.al, “Atlas of Caesium Deposition on Europe after the Chernobyl Accident, EUR16733, EC,
1998.
17. Imanaka T., Koide H., “Fallout in Japan from Chernobyl”, J. Environ. Radioactivity, 4:149-153 1986.
18. “Research for man-made radioactivity in the environment 2005”, Meteorological Research Institute,
2005.
19. Imanaka T, Koide H. “Cancer risk coefficient and radioactive contamination in Japan”
BESSATSU-KEISEMI, August 1988 (in Japanese).
20. WHO, “Health Effects of the Chernobyl Accident and Special Health Care Programmes”, Report of the
UN Chernobyl Forum Expert Group "Health", 2006
21. IARC, Press Release No. 168, 20 April 2006.
22. Fairlie I. and Sumer D. “A Scientific Report Prepared for the ‘Chornobyl+20: Remembrance for the
Future’ Conference”, Kyiv, April 23-26, 2006.
23. Greenpeace, “The Chernobyl Catastrophe: Consequences on Human Health”, 2006.

- 19 -

Current State of «Shelter» Object
Oleksandr KLYUCHNYKOVThe Interdisciplinary Scientific & Technical Center “Shelter”
36-a, Kirova st., Chornobyl, Ukraine
INTRODUCTIONOn April 26, 1986, the biggest accident in power engineering history took place at the ChNPP Unit 4,
which resulted in total destruction of reactor core, damage of reactor department, deaerating stack, turbinehall (TH) and a range of other buildings. Barriers and safety systems, which were protecting theenvironment from radionuclides contained within the irradiated fuel, were destroyed, and the activity was
released from reactor. That release, being of some million curies per day, was occurring in the course of
10 days, from 26.04.86 to 06.05.86, thereafter it dropped at some thousand fold, and subsequently, wasgradually reducing (Fig. 1).
The main «Shelter»’s peculiarity is its remaining potential danger, much more greater, that is
accepted by the norms and rules existing for the objects, that contain nuclear hazardous fissile andradioactive materials.
As a whole, in the view of radiation safety, the «Shelter» object is an opened source of alpha-,beta-, gamma- and neutron radiation, which with its radiation characteristics has no analogues in worldpractices
Definition of «Shelter» object’s current status is described in the addendum to NRBU-97«Radiation protection from potential exposure sources» (NRBU-97/D-2000).

Release intensity
MCi/day

0.05-0.15 MCi/day

April

May

Figure 1 – Intensity of fission product release of reactor core (the first 10 days)- 20 -

It reads: «…»Shelter» object in its today conditions should be classified as «the place forsurface storage of unorganized RAW («temporary repository of unorganized RAW being in stage ofstabilization and reconstruction»).
1.

UNIT 4 DESTRUCTIONS AFTER ACCIDENT AND CREATION OF «SHELTER»OBJECT
After the explosion occurred in the 26.04.86 night at ChNPP Unit 4, a part of reactor unit
structures, deaerating stack, turbine hall and other buildings become ruined (Fig.2). The main damages ofbuildings, which it succeeded to detect during the external examination and when penetrating into
accessible (due to radiation level and destruction rate) premises, were as regards:
Reactor unit.
Active core is completely destroyed. Its fragments were thrown out by the explosion into building
breakdown, to the roofs of neighbouring buildings, ventilation pipe sites, scattered along adjoining
territory. It was cleared up later, that a part of nuclear fuel came to bottom marks of reactor department in
the shape of fuel lava.
Upper plate of biological shield (scheme «E») is torn off from its place and is standing inclined
across the reactor vault. Walls and ceilings of reactor Central Hall are destroyed. Ceilings are displaced
and walls of drum-separators’ premises are destroyed. Reloading machine was torn off and came down.
Premises of northern main circulating pumps (MCP) are completely destroyed, premises of southern MCP– are partially destroyed.
Deaerating stack.
Two upper floors are destroyed; framework columns are displaced to turbine hall side.
Turbine hall.
As a result of fire and debris collapse, roofing is destroyed in many places. Air-blast deformed
several building trusses, framework columns along axis A are displaced.

Figure 2 - Destroyed ChNPP Unit 4- 21 -

Unit of reactor department auxiliary systems.
It has several local destructions.
Reactor scram system.
Is completely destroyed and blocked with building structures.
Except the above main destructions, there were numerous destructions of individual structures andpremises, which did not exerted any great influence to general buildings' stability.
Territory.
After the explosion occurred, the territory adjoining directly to destroyed unit was contaminatedby the scattered fragments of active core: fuel rod debris, graphite stack parts, structure elements. Theycame to the roof and inside the turbine hall, deaerating stack, on Unit 3 roof, metallic supports ofventilation pipe, etc.
In the middle of 1986 May, the Government Commission took the decision on long-term
conservation of Unit 4 aimed at prevention of radionuclides release into the environment and reduction ofpenetrating radiation impact at the ChNPP site.
In keeping with the CC CPSU and USSR CM Decree No 634-188 of 29.05.86, the USSR Ministryof medium machine-building was vested with “the works for burial of ChNPP power Unit 4 and related toit buildings”. The facility was called as «the Shelter of ChNPP Unit 4».
1.1. «Shelter» object structure
The erection of «Shelter» was completed in 1986 November.
On November 30, 1986, the State Acceptance Inspection appointed by the USSR Council of
Ministers Decree of October 23, 86, No 2126рс, accepted to the maintenance the ChNPP conservatedpower Unit No 4 (Fig.3, 4).
In turbine hall between the power units, 2.3-m thick cast concrete wall was erected to mark +19,0,
and above – that of 1.4-m thick. In the deaerating stack, partition walls are made of 1-m thick castreinforced concrete along the row along the row Б between the axes 41-35, and along the axis 41 between
the rows Б-В.
In reactor unit, partition wall to mark +12,0 m between the rows Т-Л is made by the way of fillingwith concrete of transport corridor between the axes 41-42. In other places, existing walls and partitions

Figure 4 – A view of «Shelter» object

Figure 3 – Erection of «Shelter» object- 22 -

after appropriate filling up of apertures, openings, cracks, etc., were used.
Along the Unit 4 perimeter, at first «pioneer» protective ferroconcrete walls were made of height:- around 6 mfrom obstruction side (northern unit side);- around 8 mfrom southern and western side.
Northern cascade wall was made of concrete in the shape of around 12-m high projections.
Preserved western wall from the outside is closed with the wall having 50-m high buttresses.
To support the main B1/B2 beams installed along the П and Ж rows, around 0,9-m thick debris offerroconcrete wall at western part were used along axis 50, and ferroconcrete ventilation shafts near theaxes 43-44, which preserved after explosion.
Damaged wall site within the area of row Ж before the beams installation is reinforced by steel
stay with its subsequent concreting.
Over B1/B2 beams, 27 metallic tubes of 1220-m diameter and 34,5-m length are laid, and over the
tubes - the roofing is made of profiled deck – 6 spatial units.
As a support for steel boards in southern side, steel «Mammoth» beam serves, which is installed
along the row В, and which, in its turn, rests upon concrete bearers near the axes 41 and 51.
The bearers were made on an obstruction of destroyed ferroconcrete structures of ceilings of two
upper floors, equipment and pipeline debris.
For the ceiling of unit site between the axes 40-50 in rows Б-В along the row Б supporting on theanother ceiling that was obstructed by destroyed structures, chest beam was designed and manufactured(«Octopus»), which serves as a distributing structure.
Over the turbine hall (TH) in the axes 40-50 between the rows А-Б, a new roofing is designed tobe made of beam-trusses and steel boards resting, along the row A, upon newly installed spatial columns
and preserved cantilevers in columns along the row В. Between the axes 54-50 and 40-34, spatial steel
units on existing coating are laid.
2.
NUCLEARLY HAZARDOUS MATERIALS INSIDE THE «SHELTER» OBJECT(INTEGRAL ESTIMATES)
2.1
Nuclear fuel located inside Unit 4 before the accident
Before the accident, nuclear fuel was located in four places of Unit 4 reactor department:- in active core of RBMK-1000 nuclear reactor;- in pool for exposition of spent fuel cassettes;- at site for preparation of fuel cassettes in Central Hall;- in premises for preparation of fresh fuel.
Distribution of nuclear fuel before the accident is shown in the Table 1.
Table 1 - Location and amount of nuclear fuel in Unit 4 reactor department premises before accident
Premises
Technological assignment of premises
Nuclear fuel amount on uranium, t
504/2
Reactor vault*190.2505/3Southern cassette exposition pool**14.8914/2
Central hall
**5.5
503/2
Premises for fresh fuel preparation**. ***4.1
Total**214.6* - to accident moment, reactor active core contained 1659 fuel assemblies (FA), 1 additional absorber (AA)and one unloaded fuel channel. Major part of FA represented the cassettes of first loading with burnup being 11 15 MWt · day/kg (U). The core also contained some amount of fresh fuel. Uranium mass in each cassette madeup – 0,1147 t. Total mass of fuel loaded in active core, made 190,2 t.
** - data are taken from “Certificate of nuclear fuel amount at Chornobyl NPP Unit 4 at accident moment”,
confirmed by Chief Engineer of IA ChNPP on 30.01.96. Besides, the data on fuel amount in exposition pool aredelivered on the basis of log for registration of NSD and NM, and in Central Hall and premises 503/2 - on thebasis of «Certificate for write-off of fresh nuclear fuel from Unit 4 of 26.04.86».
*** - nuclear fuel from preparation premises (premises 503/2) was removed in 1986 (after accident) to
ChNPP fresh fuel storage.
- 23 -

2.2.
Fuel-containing materials that are currently located in «Shelter» object premises
Currently, inside the «Shelter» object, there are nuclear fuel modifications, which produced in thecourse of proceeding of accident active stage and during interaction of that fuel with structural materials,
dynamic and thermal impact of explosion, as well as during oxidation of uranium dioxide when contactingwith air oxygen before and after the reactor burning.
Such modifications include as follows:
2.2.1. Active core fragments
During the mitigation of accident
aftermath, a part of active core fragments (ACF)
representing fuel pellets, debris of fuel rods, fuelassemblies, graphite, located around the building,
was displaced to the breakdown and thereafter
buried in cascade wall, a part is collected incontainers with high-level waste, another part isburied under the layer of concrete and crushedstone strewn near the Unit. Destroyed fuel that was
released on buildings roofs and pipe sites, wasthrown down in reactor ruins (Fig.5).
Significant ACF amount must be locatedin the CH and premises 305/2.
2.2.2. Lava-like fuel-containing
materials (LFCM)
Lava-like materials containing nuclear fuelwere detected in many subreactor premises (Fig.67). They contained a significant part of uranium
located before the accident in active core, and aconsiderable part of radionuclides, which were
produced in reactor.
LFCM represents a heterogeneous solid
solution, whose «dissolvent» is vitreous silicate
matrix with great amount of diverse impurities,
among which uranium oxides, uranium-zirconiumoxygen phase (so called “chernobylite”), andmetallic globules are encountered.
Uranium percentage within the LFCM
fluctuates within the range from 5 to 10%.

Figure 5 – Premises 305/2. Southeast sector.
Active core fragments

Figure 6 – Lava in steam discharge valve of SDC

2.2.3.

Total amount of nuclear fuel in
different premises of «Shelter»objectIntegral estimate of current nuclear fuelamount in different premises of «Shelter» object
are shown in Table 2.
Figure 7 – Lava in PSP-1- 24 -

Table 2 – Fuel amount estimates in «Shelter» object premises
Name (numbers) ofpremises

FCM
modifications inpremises

Detected fuel,t (U)(estimates for year of 2004)

Central hall
(914/2)

active corefragments

more 21

Southern exposition pool(505/3)All upper premises,
including CH(mark +24.00 and above)
304/3

active corefragments
fuel dust

14.8

LFCM

∼5 on obstruction surface inCH,∼30 total
6±2

301/5+301/6+303/3
217/2

LFCM
LFCM

4.5 ± 2.5
0.4 ± 0.2

Subapparatus 305/2 and504/2 before mark 24m.

fragments of
AC, LFCM,
dust
LFCM
LFCM

85 ± 25

SDC (210/5+210/6+210/7)
PSP-2(012/14+012/15+012/16)
PSP-1(012/5+012/6+012/7)
Fuel under cascade wall
Water in all premises ofreactor department
Fuel at «Shelter» site

LFCM
fragments ofAC, dust
soluble uranium
salts, dredge.
Fragments
AC, dust

12 ± 6minimum - 3,
maximum - 14
1.9 (+1.0; -0.5)

Notes
Considering 48 assemblies withfresh fuel (5.5 t)
Is possible LFCM presence
129 spent fuel cassettes.
Is possible LFCM presence
Estimate 30 t includes surface
contamination inside obstruction
in CH and in all other premises«Horizontal lava flow». FCM are
included in breakdown between
prem.304/3 and 305/2.
«Horizontal lava flow»«Elephant foot», «stalactites».
LFCM came from «horizontal
flow».
Estimates were made for 6 FCM
clusters.
Origin of all LFCM flows.
«Big vertical flow» and «small
vertical flow»?
∼4 kg
0.75 ± 0.25

Specific activity of some emitters for base fuel content of power Unit 4 for 01.02.2005 is shown in
Table 3
Table 3 - Specific activity of some emitters for base content of power Unit 4 fuel at 01.02.2005, Bq/guranium
Alpha-emitters
Beta-emitters
Beta-gamma-emitters6
8
Pu-238 --- 6.7 · 10
Sr-90 --- 7.60 · 10
Rh-106 --- 1.29 · 104
68
Pu-239 --- 5.0 · 10
Y-90 --- 7.60 · 10
Sb-125 --- 7.12 · 105
Pu-240 --- 8.19 · 106
Ru-106 --- 1.29 · 104
Cs-134 --- 1.61 · 1063
7
Pu-241 --- 9.32 · 10
Pm-147 --- 2.65 · 10
Cs-137 --- 9.09 · 10848
Pu-242 --- 1.30 · 10
Pu-241 --- 3.89 · 10
Ce-144 --- 1.20 · 103
7
Am-241 --- 1.95 · 10
Eu-154 --- 1.64 · 107
3
Am-243 --- 8.73 · 10
Eu-155 --- 4.45 · 1066
Cm-244 --- 1,07 · 10
In sum ≈ 80 Ki/kg uraniumThus, total activity of fuel currently located in «Shelter» object makes around 14 MCi.

- 25 -

3. WATER LOCATED IN «SHELTER» OBJECT PREMISESOne of the main sources of radiation hazard in the object is the water. Water influences thenuclear safety conditions, thus leading to change of reproducing system «FCM+water». Water interactingwith the FCM dissolves and transports radionuclides, which, as a result, can come into the environment.
Water coming to the SO in the shape of atmospheric precipitation, condensate and dustsuppressing solutions, moving from upper marks to the premises at SO bottom marks, washes FCM
cluster and contaminated surfaces of structural materials. As a result of that processes, high-level alkalicarbonate solutions are produced, representing, practically, liquid radioactive waste. LRW leakings
produce permanent and temporary LRW clusters at Unit bottom marks. It is stated that between many
LRW clusters exist hydraulic connections.
Northern LRW flow
Northern LRW flow, whose consumption makes 700 – 800 m3/year, passes through the premises
001/3, where the biggest LRW cluster is localized (Fig.8, point 30). In that premises, numerous leakings
are collected from central and northern part of units «B» and RDAS, as well as from the cascade wall side.
Further, SO LRW flow percolates through partition wall into Unit 3 RDAS premises, and, finally, comesto premises 0005 sump (Fig.8, point 111). As soon as the sump is filled, LRW is pumped out in ChNPP
chemical shop for temporary storage and treatment. Practically, northern LRW flow represents naturally«averaged» leakings from central and northern part of Units «B» and RDAS.
Southern LRW flow
Southern LRW flow, whose consumption does not exceed 300 m3/year, passes through theLava-like FCM cluster

Assumed FCM cluster

Monitoring points

740 m3/y
620 m3/y

Low-level LRW flow

90 m3/yNon-leaked
cluster???? m3/y
MAMMOTH beam support

Figure 8 - SO LRW clusters and flows in pressure suppression pool (mark –0.650)
and RDAS unit premises (mark –2.600 and – +6.000)- 26 -

premises 017/2 and 061/2 and produces sufficiently large clusters in southern part of that premises (Fig.8,
point 18). Water level in this premises is permanent – under intensive inflow, water excess spills over thethreshold in premises 018/2, where special sewer system traps are located, or percolates in premises 025/2.
In premises 061/2, water level depends on the season – in condensation period, the level increases, in dry
period, as a result of evaporation, it reduces. Pathways of LRW leaking from that premises are not defined.
Radionuclide and chemical content of LRW
LRW radionuclide content at Unit bottom marks is formed as a result of interaction of
atmospheric precipitation, condensation moisture and technogenic solutions with the following nuclear
fuel modifications, which were produced during the accident:• «hot» particles of condensation type;• dispersed fuel in the shape of UO2 and U3O8;• lava-like fuel-containing materials.
Hot particles of aerosol-condensation type define at a significant rate the level of surface
contamination of internal premises of «Shelter» object, besides, currently, the biggest contribution into
activity is made by 137Cs and 125Sb isotopes. As a result of these particles dissolution, water contamination
occurs with caesium isotopes. The main source of «unit» water contamination with fissile elements and90
Sr are oxidated fuel particles (U3O8). Chemical stability of oxidated particles in relation to water is lower,
than that of initial fuel (UO2) and, moreover, of lava-like FCM.
Table 4 – Average concentrations of radionuclides and uranium in SO LRW main clusters
Point
numb.

Mark
m

Number ofpremises

Volumem3Component concentration, Bq/l

6

+ 2.20012/1660 m3

6.2*1079.9*106-+ 6.00

219/2

10 m3

4.0*106

17- 0.65

017/2

7 m3

18

- 0.65013/230- 2.60

31

137

90

241

Am

ΣU, mg/l

4000

1.7*10448

1.0*105--1.1

5.0*106

1.0*105

-

-

8.9

20 m3

4.0*106

0.8*105

-

-

1.1

001/3

270 m35.2*106

1.0*106360

4.0*103

3.6- 0.65

012/5

20 m3

6.1*107

8.9 *1063100

1.3*104

43

32- 0.65

012/7

10 m3

1.3*1082.2*1064200

2.8*104

110

111- 6.000005

5 m3

6.8*106

1.0*1061600

2.0*103

5.7

Cs

Sr

Σ Pu

Atmospheric precipitation, technogenic solutions and condensate during movement from uppermarks to bottom ones leach the most soluble concrete components – carbonates, bicarbonates, chlorides
and sulphates of alkaline metals. Heavy metals transfer to a solution due to metal structures corrosion. As
a result of these processes, formation itself of radionuclide, chemical and phase content of «unit» water
occurs. Averaged radionuclide content and activity of main water clusters and flows of «Shelter» object isshown in Table 4. A part of this activity is concentrated in silt sediments, and depending on dryout rate insummer-autumn period, poses a treat as aerosol source.
4. FUEL AT «SHELTER» OBJECT INDUSTRIAL SITE
During the accident and works for mitigation of its aftermath, ground layer produced at the sitearound ChNPP Unit 4, contaminated by released radioactivity. One could succeed to remove it only
partially, for site decontamination purposes the active ground was covered with clean materials. As a
- 27 -

result, an original «sandwich» produced, in which the materials were located in the following order (fromdepth - to surface):
initial ground (pre-accident) – active layer –coating materials.
It seems as important to study the active layer because of several reasons:- it may contain considerable fuel amount ;- displacement of active layer under the influence of natural factors can lead to ground waters
contamination;- conversion of «Shelter» into an ecologically safe system will demand performing works at the
Object industrial site, during which the active layer is to be touched upon, that is why one should havemaximally full information about it.
As analysis of new data shows, active layer thickness in local zone is predominantly laying within
the range of 10 – 30 cm. Total ground volume is estimated (according to value order) at 15000 m3.
Applying the research data and drilling the boreholes, it is offered to take as an expert estimate thefact that the fuel amount in local zone makes (0.75 ± 0.,25) t.
5. RADIOACTIVE AEROSOLS OF «SHELTER» OBJECT
Air migration of radionuclides from the «Shelter» object is one of the main sources ofenvironmental contamination under normal operation, and, especially, during the accidents.
Radioactive particles located in the «Shelter» object can be (very roughly) divided into two types– condensation and fuel ones.
The first particles type was produced as a result of condensation of radionuclides having
relatively low boiling temperature and coupled from the fuel during accident active stage on particles ofdust, soot, graphite, building structures, etc.
The second particles type – fuel particles produced during fuel dispersion and containing isotopesof plutonium, americium, and curium. They can be comfortably divided into two subtypes: «large» fuelparticles with size from dozen and hundred micron and «small» fuel particles with average median
diameter of 3-4 microns.
Most hazardous in terms of radiation safety are «small» fuel particles.
When performing the works in the «Shelter» object premises, concentration of alpha-active
aerosols can reach 104 admissible concentrations.
3Бк/м
1,00E-01
9,00E-02
8,00E-02
7,00E-02
6,00E-02
5,00E-02
4,00E-02
3,00E-02
2,00E-02
1,00E-02

0,00E+00
1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

200

2001

2002

2003

Figure 9 - Estimates of annual volumetric summary alpha- beta-activity in near-surface air
aerosols of «Shelter» object local zone using aspiration facility data
- 28 -

Figure 10. Scheme of location of collectors and zones covering upgraded DSS.
In order to reduce aerosols concentrations in the «Shelter» object and their release into
atmosphere, stationary dust suppression system (DSS) was commissioned in 1989 end, which includes thesystem for preparation and supply of dust-suppressing compositions through 14 nozzles located over
«Breakdown» surface of central hall. Since December 1989 till now, more 1 000 tons of dust-suppressing
compositions were laid, that allowed significantly reducing and stabilizing the aerosols release from the«Shelter» object (Fig.9). To increase regular DSS efficiency, it was upgraded, which included assemblageof two additional collectors and 35 nozzles covering the perimeter of sub-roofing space and the space
between Unit 4 western wall and buttress wall (Fig.10).

6. SYSTEMS FOR NUCLEAR SAFETY MONITORING
Obtained recently experimental information on distribution, configuration and composition of
spent and fresh nuclear fuel for «Shelter» object individual premises does not possess the accuracy, which
would be sufficient for substantiated forecast of nuclear safety.
In existing conditions, in terms of nuclear safety provision, the «Shelter» object represents aspatially distributed uncontrollable cluster of nuclear hazardous fissionable materials without emergency
protection means.
In current real conditions, the FCM, when moderator is absent, are subcritical ones. However,generation of self-sustained fission chain reaction is not excluded when pouring with water the FCM withgreat enough fuel heterogeneity.
Currently, to monitor «Shelter» object nuclear safety, readouts of following systems are used:- 29 -

- information-measuring systems (IMS) «Finish-R», which monitors the FCM conditions (thermophysical and nuclear-physical parameters);- FCM monitoring systems (СК FCM) «Signal».Such a configuration was formed relatively notlong ago. Complex «Finish-R» is set up as an autonomous system after withdrawal in December 1998
from the structure of research system «Finish». Appropriate operation documentation was designed for it,
and metrological certification of measuring channels and hardware was made.
Since 1998, system “Signal” was accepted in pilot-industrial operation. According to its results,
the system was adopted as meeting technical documentation and transferred to normal operation mode(technical decision IA ChNPP of 26.03.2000).
7. RADIATION PARAMETERS OF «SHELTER» OBJECT
7.1 General characterization of radiation state of Object premises
Exposure dose rates (EDR) in internal premises and on «Shelter» roofing are within a very
extended range. Thus, a need appears in introducing special classification of industrial, administrative,
storage facilities and other premises and territories – to split them into zones due to radiation hazard rate.
Such a classification is realized in the document - “Provision of zoning “Shelter” object premises(2003 year).
In this document, the notion “subzone” is introduced and all the premises are split into threegroups, depending on EDR value in them:«1 subzone» — unattended premises; gamma radiation EDR > 3,3 mR/hour.
«2 subzone» — premises of periodical stay of personnel, gamma radiation EDR 3,3 - 1,6 mR/hour.
«3 subzone» — premises of permanent stay of personnel; gamma radiation EDR < 1,6 mR/hour.
Currently, distribution of «Shelter» premises due to EDR value looks like as follows (see Table 5,compiled on the basis of “Provision of zoning…»).
Table 5 - Distribution of investigated «Shelter» premises» on EDR level
Units

Radiation conditions,
R/hour

Unit «Б»

Unit «В»

Unit RDAS

to 0,50,5 – 1
1-5
5 - 10
10 – 50
50 – 100
100 – 500
> 500
Inaccessible premises

66
13
70
7
14
7
4
7
126

17

59

Unit «Г»
(А-Б)
59
6
1

4

28

Unit «Г»
(Б-Г)
140
1
1

7

The Table shows that in majority of accessible premises of reactor Unit «Б», the mean value ofgamma-radiation EDR does not exceed 1 R/hour. So, inside of more 60 of them, the EDR is lower 0,5
R/hour.
Those premises are excepted, in which fuel-containing materials have penetrated. That premises
are characterized by availability of heterogeneous, with high gradients, gamma-field EDR defined by
FCM spatial location in premises and by uranium content in FCM and its fission product. Thus, EDR- 30 -

values in premises 305/2 - 1800 R/h (mark +12.200, row И+1200, axis 46+2800) and 1 – 3 R/h (near apertureof northern sliding gate).
The premises З04/3 floor is completely filled with LFCM layer, EDR value in premises - 50 - 350 R/h.
EDR value on «heap» of 1-st floor of pressure suppression pool (prem. 012/7) makes around 400 R/h, 10
m northward – around 2 R/h. EDR over open laying LFCM of premises 210/6 SDC (И+1500, 47-400) – 300
R/h and 0,2 – 0,5 R/h over concrete surface in northern part of this premises. In central hall within the areaof scheme «E» at mark +39.000 the EDR value makes 280 R/h, at mark +49.000 – 30 R/h.
7.2 Radiation conditions on «Shelter» roofing
After explosions, roofing over CH, premises of southern and northern drum-separators, practicallyceased its existence. On neighboring roofing, numerous active core fragments were released –assembly
parts, graphite, metallic structures elements, etc. Later, during the active stage, considerable amount offuel dust dropped on them.
Immediately after «Shelter» erection, radiation conditions on its roofing was defined, mainly, by
gamma-radiation penetrating from internal premises and coming from neighboring structures. It is clear
seen considerable EDR reduction, which occurred as a result of natural decay of emitters and large
complex of decontamination works carried out on the roofing.

Figure 11 - Chart of EDR value on «Shelter» object roofing in the axes 35 – 54, rows Б – Ю- 31 -

Eventually, in «Shelter» roofing contamination, a great role began playing radioactive dust
released from the building through technological openings and coming from neighboring contaminatedroofing.
Results of radiation conditions measurement on the roofing, which were made in June 2000, theFig.11 illustrates.
7.3 Contamination rate of premises surfaces and territory
The idea of total contamination rate of surfaces in «Shelter» object premises, BK-3, RDAS, aswell as of roads and pavements at industrial site territory is shown in Table 6.

No

Table 6 - Contamination rate of premises and territory
Monitored object
β - contamination rate
α - contamination rateparticles(readout) cm ×min
Fact
RL
100
2÷3

0
0
0÷5
0÷1
0

0
0
10÷15010÷5020÷100

2

1
2
3
4
5
6

RDAS unit (premises of personnel permanentstay)
BQ-3 («clean»)
BQ-3 («dirty»)
premises of periodical personnel stay (4 unit)
premises of personnel permanent stay (4 unit)
territory (surfaces of roads and pavements insideindustrial site)

particles(readout) cm ×min
fact
RL
1
1
0
1
10
5
1

2

0
100
500
200
200

7.4 Radiation conditions at industrial site
EDR at territory close to the SO is defined by two factors: gamma-radiation of «Shelter» itself andemanation of radioactively contaminated grounds and objects located at SO industrial site.
The most contaminated is territory in close vicinity to ChNPP Unit 4, so called local zone of«Shelter» object. Distribution of exposure dose rate in local zone of SO industrial site is shown in Fig.12.
The chart of EDR distribution demonstrates that the contamination of territory has heterogeneous
character. Analysis of EDR chart gives a reason to assume the existence of notable contribution ofradiation from the SO side from the area of staircase-elevator unit. However, such evident influence iswell observed only in a place being close to the SO.
SO influence onto volumetric EDR distribution over industrial site is well illustrated in Fig.13.
Gamma-field intensity increases in eastern direction (when approaching to «Shelter» object) andgrows with more height.
Abrupt growth in direction to Unit is observed within the area of row А. One can assume that acause of above abnormality can be local intensive gamma-radiation sources located on the roof of turbinehall and deaerating stack.
8. Carried out and planned SO stabilization measures«Shelter» object is a unique spatial building, whose structural scheme represents a combination of
two constituents:• «old» structures of destroyed power Unit 4;• «new» structures erected in the year of 1986 during «Shelter» construction.
Post-accident conditions of power Unit 4 «old» structures are characterized by total or partial
destruction, large damages of remained intact elements and junctions, overloading of weight of structures
obstructions and equipment collapsed on them, as well as the materials, that were used during accident
mitigation period. Bared armature and metal structures are subject to corroding processes. Availability of- 32 -

Figure 12 – Chart of exposure dose rate distribution in local zone as of January 1, 2002.
such serious defects requires permanent survey over conditions of these structures and taking, in case ofneed, of stabilization measures.
The «new» structures that were erected after the accident (protective-partition walls and coating’s
metal structures) were designed in conformity with norms and rules of structural design valid in that time
period. However, for this group of structures also the problems exist of their reliability and longevity
provision that conditioned by following reasons:• technologies of remote assemblage and concreting in complicated radiation conditions that wereapplied, restricted possibility to control the quality of work production ;- 33 -EDR, mR/h
_ 60
_ 50
_ 40
_ 30
_ 20
_ 10

a

b

c
Figure 13 – Model of gamma-field in NSC erection zone (June 2004)a – cross-section along axis 54 + 120 m;
b – cross-section along axis 54 + 156 m;c – cross-section along axis 54 + 226 m• structural elements are fragmented – not connected one to another, rest freely upon bearing
structures without physical connection and are retained in designed position due to friction forces(i.e. welded-, bolt or other strengthenings of support parts are absent);• access is embarrassed to elements and metal structures joints for periodical survey and recovery ofanticorrodent coating.
The first document, in which a general estimate was given of «Shelter» building structures
conditions, was the «Conclusion on reliability and longevity of coating’s structures, as well as on radiation- 34 -

safety of reactor department of Chernobyl NPP Unit 4», set forth by Government Commission on October
11 1986 to special commission of USSR Gosstroy.
The «Conclusion …» included as regards:«Considering low corrosion velocity within the conditions of structures work, under performed
protective coatings, one can regard as provided their service life:- for pipes 30-40 years,- for beams 30 years».
Unfortunately, in later period these figures, as it were legalized not only for service life of newly
erected metal structures, but also for all «Shelter» object as a whole. Often the time of 30 years wasindicated in documents, as guaranteed time for safe conditions of «Shelter» object.
At the same time, the mentioned «Conclusion…» had as written:«In connection with the fact that the shelter of reactor department is being erected on destroyed
structures and within the conditions of high radiation levels, it does not seem as possible to obtain reliabledata on their bearing capacity, as well as, considering the complexity of structures installation and controlof their position..., that leads to essential reduction of bearing capacity of remotely assembled
structures...».
So, the main conclusion was that within the conditions, in which the Object was erected, it is
impossible to reliably assess its longevity.
That is why immediately after the construction was completed, the works started for research ofreliability and additional strengthening (stabilization) of «Shelter» basic bearing structures.
As a whole, three main stages of such works can be distinguished.
During the first stage (1987 – 1991), researches and certification of accessible premises wereconducted, and zones of emergency conditions of building structures, which influence the «Shelter»
general stability and integrity, were identified.
Three zones were identified that demand conduct of immediate anti-damage works: deaeratingstack (premises 635/3), premises for MCP motors (premises 402/3), premises for exhaust ventilation airducts (premises 805/3).
When surveying the upper tier of deaerating stack framework (rows Б-В axes 41-51) it was statedas regards: columns between the marks +24.27 and +38.60 inclined from vertical to turbine hall side atvalue 700 - 1100 mm. In places of column junction in mark level around +24.30, fractures produced witharound 150-mm wide crack opening, longitudinal effective reinforcement had broken, crack penetration
depth into column cross-section depth made 0,6 - 0,9 m. Rigid joint couplings of column and girder werealso destructed, that is confirmed by rupture of upper effective reinforcement rods of extended zone andgirder shift from supporting cantilevers into mark level +38.60 at 70 - 150 mm. Simultaneously, on theceiling (above mark +38.60), obstructions of building structures, equipment and materials produced,
which were used during the mitigation of accident aftermath, of height being 3...5 m.
Such conditions of upper tier framework structures of deaerating stack were classified as
emergency one. Seriousness of situation was conditioned by the fact that the damaged columns along therow Б were overloaded due to leaning against them coating’s structures over turbine hall. Destruction ofcolumns would provoke a collapse of this coating, as well as of other metal structures of «Shelter»
southern part («Octopus» beam, southern boards-“clubs”). Under a more unfavourable situation
development, collapse of «Mammoth» beam supports and a probability of subsequent collapse of metal
structures of central hall coating were not excluded.
Based on data collected on conditions of upper tier framework structures of deaerating stack,strengthening of upper zone of ferroconcrete columns of row Б was operatively realized by way of
installation of inclined tensions made of two channel bars No 16 welded to dearator tanks filled with the- 35 -

concrete. Simultaneously, knees made of two channel bars No 24 were installed to strengthen the center ofgirder span in mark level +38.60 (Fig.14).

Club cover boards
Octopus beam

Mammoth beam

Initial cover overT rbine HallClub cover boards
Octopus beam

Mammoth beam

New cover over Turbine Hall

Figure 14. Structures, whichstrengthen deaerating stack
framework:А - pre-strengthening conditions;Б – post-strengthening conditions.

Fer. Con.
wall

Besides, in 1988, trusses of turbine hall coating were dismantled, which were resting upon the
cantilevers of row Б columns (design decision of 1986), and instead of them the new coating wasassembled with resting upon steel-concrete walls, newly erected in turbine hall between the rows А-Бalong axes 41 and 49.
As a result of examination of MCP motors premises (premises 402/3) between the rows Г-Е axes
41-50, it was stated, that wall and columns along the row Г had inclined to row В side of deaerating stack.
In the level of supporting cantilevers (mark +30.30), the columns displaced to row В side at 400...600 mm.
In coupling joints of girders with the columns, ruptures of upper rods of girder armature and considerable
concrete breakoffs were observed.
Column framework and ceiling conditions (mark +31.50) over premises 402⁄3 of southern MCP
motors also was recognized as emergency ones.
The strengthening of indicated ceilings concluded in strengthening the supporting sites of girders
and was realized by means of installation of the supporting steel structures under girders within the area of
their resting upon the column cantilevers (Fig.15). The strengthening structures represented bearing steel
trusses, united in spatial units by system of horizontal and vertical connections, and thereafter wereremotely slided in designed position along existing crane railways of bridge crane using the winches.
As a result of examinations it was stated that the ceiling (mark +35.50) over premises of exhaust
ventilation air ducts (premises 805/3) between the axes 40-50, rows В-Е, is also in emergency condition- 36 -

Figure 15. Scheme of MCP premises
structures strengthening.
and requires the urgent strengthening. Couplings of ferroconcrete girders with the columns along the row
Г and ferroconcrete wall near row Е are partially destroyed, the girders are displaced from supporting
cantilevers.
The ceiling strengthening was performed by way of erection under the bottom girth offerroconcrete girders of cribworks made of antiseptized wooden half-sleepers (Fig.16).

Figure 16. Scheme ofstrengthening ofstructures ceilings overpremises 805/3.

After the earthquake within the ChNPP area on May 30 and 31, 1990, being of 3,5 - 4 number
intensity, the «Shelter» was investigated and “Certification of «Shelter» object conditions investigation”
written, which reads that no position changes and notable deterioration of main building structures
conditions were fixed.
Research peculiarities of the second stage (1992-1997) concluded as regards:• extension of research volumes (additionally, supporting structures conditions was assessed ofwestern fragment - ferroconcrete wall along the axis 50 with adjoining framework and walls
between the axes 49-51′, supporting joint units of Б1 beams and Б2 on the wall along axis 50,
protective-partition wall and coating’s metal structures, foundation grounds, adjacent structures ofunits В and RDAS);- 37 -

•

complex approach (combination of field investigations with probabilistic analysis andcomputational modeling, with creation of physical models).

Figure 17. Strengthening of Б1 beams
supporting parts and ferroconcrete wallalong axis 50 in place of resting upon itof Б1 beams unit (row Ж)Figure 18. Strengthening of Б2 beams
supporting parts and ferroconcrete wallalong axis 50 in place of resting upon itof Б2 beams unit (row Ж)

Field investigations have revealed a range of major defects of ferroconcrete wall along the axis 50,
which influence essentially not only on bearing capacity and stability of above wall, but also the westernfragment as a whole, as well as supporting joint units of Б1 beams and Б2 along the row Ж and П. Shift ofwall upper part within the area of abutting of Б1 and Б2 beams units (mark +58.50) in relation to wallbottom part (mark +12.50) makes 500-700 m near row П and around 1000 m near row Ж. Indicated- 38 -

position of bearing wall was considered in erecting the «Shelter», on the site of abutting Б1 and Б2 beams
unit along axis 50 row Ж, a need arose in installing a concrete support in non-removable bearing metallic
casing. Because of a range of reasons, design decisions for installation of such a support (andsimultaneous local wall strengthening) were not fully realized.
Using the results of field investigations, which were made in 1993, actual parameters of indicatedmetallic casing were defined, conditions of its resting upon structures obstructions and on the wall along
the axis 50, as well as the rate of its filling with concrete. The conditions of Б1 and Б2 beams supports unit
along the axis 50 row Ж were recognized as unsatisfactory.

Figure 19. Strengthening of Б1 beams
supporting parts and metallic support
under Б1 beams in place of Б1 beams
unit abutting on ferroconcrete wallalong axis 50 (row П)Figure 20. Strengthening of supportingparts Б2 beams and metallic supports
under Б2 beams in place of Б2 beams
unit abutting on ferroconcrete wallalong axis 50 (row П)

In 1994, strengthening of support by way of erection under bottom girths of Б1 and Б2 beams unitof metallic posts abutted on concrete surface inside the casing. However, metallic posts installed in 1994
in conformity with indicated design did not strengthen the support, and were seen as made for the safety,- 39 -

since were installed on concrete body, which together with metallic casing rests upon the preserved ceilingfragment at mark +49.95 through the obstruction of building structures.
At the next third stage (since 1998 till now), researches and works for strengthening «Shelter»
main bearing building structures acquired system and large-scale character, and they are performed within
the framework of international cooperation.
The works started from the strengthening of ventilation pipe (VP-2) structures. Organizations of
Ukraine, USA and Canada were involved in them. Strengthening started late in 1997 and was successfullycompleted in 1998 summer.
Further works for investigation and stabilization of «Shelter» object structures were continued inconformity with Shelter Implementation Plan (SIP) at the «Shelter» object with direct participation ofInternational Consortium ICC (MK) JV (MORRISON KNUDSEN (USA) – leader, BNFL (UK),
Ukrainian organizations NIISК, KIEP and ISTC «Shelter») – Package A tender “Civil engineering”
winners.
As an urgent measure of SO building structures stabilization, consortium ICC (MK) JV prepared
the draft design of strengthening Б1 and Б2 beams supporting joint units along axis 50, which foreseen thestrengthening of both supporting sites of metallic beams and of the sites of wall, on which they leanagainst (Fig.17-20). The project was realized by Ukrainian building organization «Ukrenergobud» in theyear of 1999.
According to results of additional field investigations and refined estimates, consortium ICC(MK) JV substantiated the list comprising 15 stabilization measures, whose realization allows providing
structures stability during the time exceeding 15 years, i.e., more, than it is needed for construction andcommission of new safe confinement (NSC).
Later this list was reduced to 8 stabilization measures, that is fixed in program decision P2«Decision for stabilization strategy of roofing, support and structures» of December 24, 2000. Thisdecision is based on changed design criteria in the part of changing designed tornado loading for extreme
wind loadings.
During 2002-2003, the consortium KSK comprising Ukrainian organizations KIEP, NIISK and
ISTC «Shelter» developed and accorded with regulatory bodies the draft design of stabilization measures.
Recently, the works started for its realization.
Developed measures were grouped for the following SO zones.
WESTERN ZONE
Stabilization of “Shelter” object western zone covers the strengthening of western fragment,
which includes:• western buttress wall;• framework and unit Б walls along the axis 50, 51′ between the rows Д – С;
• Б1, Б2 beams support units along axis 50 rows Ж and П;• coating between the buttress wall and the wall along axis 50 between the rows Д-С.
Strengthening idea covers the erection of two metallic spatial rod towers with plan sizes being
12×15 m, total height 48 m, with 23-m spatial cantilever span in east direction (Fig.21) to buttress wall
west. Indicated towers are installed at mark+14.00 between the rows Е-И and Н-Р in the axes 53-57 on
ferroconcrete foundations and connected one to another by spatial systems (trusses) in north- south
direction in two levels. The first level corresponds to marks from +26.00 to +32.00; second level – tomarks from +44.00 to +50.00. From the eastern side, to spatial truss of second level the brackets are
fastened with the step 6 meters that are located in vertical plane, on whose end an abutment of h-beamcross-section is envisaged, adjoining to framework and wall structures along axis 51′. Abutments andbrackets are destined for taking horizontal forces in «east-west» direction from the framework and wall
- 40 -

Figure 21. Stabilization measures 2 «Strengthening of western fragment». Scheme of strengthening’s
metal structures.
along the axis 51′ and therewith prevent the wall displacement in western direction. Towers cantilevers arelocated in Б1 and Б2 beams units range along the rows Ж and П. At the mark +60.00, on cantilevers ends
the welded beams are envisaged, on which by means of special joints at mark +60.55 reconstructed buttends of Б1, Б2 beams supporting parts units are abutted. At the mark +56.65, on cantilevers, abutments areenvisaged in the wall along the axis 50, which are destined for taking probable horizontal forces fromseismic impact in «east-west» direction, thus, strengthening the bearing ferroconcrete wall along the axis
50. Besides, on towers cantilevers the spatial truss is abutted of western fragment coating (spatial systemof 3-rd level), to which the upper ends of coating knees (mark +58.525) are fastened.
Ferroconcrete foundations under towers are performed in local zone to buttress wall west between
the axes 53-59 and rows Д-К и М-С. Concreting of foundations is tentatively assumed from the mark+0.20 to mark +14.00 – foundations top. Between the axes 54-56, foundations are abutted on foundation
plate and bearing unit of buttress wall.
Thus, the works for western fragment stabilization will be performed in local zone, in closed space,between the buttress wall and wall along axis 51′, in upper part of ferroconcrete wall along the axis 50 at
the levels from mark +56.40 to mark +58.50 along the row Ж, and at the levels from mark +57.40 to mark+58.50 along the row П, under «Shelter» object coating, as well as on western fragment coating.
SOUTHERN ZONE
Stabilization of deaerating stack framework must be realized by way of strengthening theframework structures of deaerating stack upper tier along the axes 42-50 and rows Б, В. The works will be
performed in non-developed premises Г635/3, whose floor level corresponds to mark +24.27.
Strengthening envisages the installation at mark +37.50 (under ceiling girder with mark +38.60)
additional horizontal struts fastened to internal blind walls along the rows Б and В and to upper support
unit, installed earlier under the girder, as well as the installation at marks +28.40 and +32.90 two more
struts (connecting elements), between the inclined knees of additional support.

- 41 -

Figure 22. Scheme of location of connection truss on «Shelter» object coating that unites southern«boards-clubs» and southern roofing boards in a rigid disk
Strengthening provides the taking of estimated seismic loadings in “north – south” direction.
Connection of «southern boards-clubs» with «southern boards».
Installation of connection elements between ‘southern boards – clubs” and “southern boards” ismade on outward surface coating, on its southern slope, at the site between the axes 41 and 50 along therow В, i.e. over the place of their resting upon the “Mammoth” beam (Fig.22).
Connection will provide withstanding the extreme wind and seismic loadings.
Stabilization of western support of “Mammoth” beam.
All braces of support’s vertical connections are strengthened by way of welding to each brace Lbeam of additional L-beam forming “small box” with the existing one.
The strengthening provides the taking of extreme, including seismic loading, in “east – west”
direction.
NORTHERN ZONE
Two measures are planned to simultaneously perform here:- strengthening of northern buttress walls along axis С and its coupling unit with northern clubs;- uniting of northern boards-clubs with northern buttress wall using anchor-clamps.
Unification of northern boards-clubs with northern buttress wall will be made by way of
installation and strengthening of anchors-clamps on supporting cross-arms of boards-clubs. Anchor parts
being sealed are placed in partially concreted wall space and made monolithic when filling with theconcrete the space of wall upper part, which was not fully concreted during the erection.
The concreting of upper part of northern buttress wall till designed mark provides its bearing
capacity.
Installation of anchors-clamps provides the bearing capacity of northern clubs for horizontal
loadings, including extreme ones.

- 42 -

EASTERN ZONE
Local stabilization of ventilation shaft walls, which support the Б1 beams.
Stabilization is reached by way welding from bottom part to Б1 beam support plate the two
abutments made of L-beams that closely adjoin from the both side to wall lateral surfaces, on which thebeam is leaned against. Strengthening provides the durability of Б1 beams abutting zone by way of
involvement in work for horizontal loadings of all ventilation vault wall thickness.
The strengthening of “Mammoth” beam eastern support, under which the cavities existing infoundation support from northern and eastern side, must be filled with the concrete. Concreting is assumed
to perform in a fixed metallic casing-iron-ring.
The fulfillment of planned scope of building and assembly work (BAW) for building structures
stabilization within «Shelter» object conditions is a sufficiently complicated engineering task. First of all,it is related to the problem of safety provision for personnel involved in these works, and maintenance ofappropriate and sufficient level of radiation and ecological safety of the Object. To decide that tasks
within the framework of stabilization project, a range of documents was developed that substantiate thesafety during realization of stabilization measures. The main documents include as regards:• Report on radiation safety;• Report on environmental impact assessment;• RAW management program.
Radiation safety
Development of design decisions and measures providing radiation protection within the “Shelter”
object conditions started from analyzing radiation conditions in assumed workplaces and ways of
personnel movement.
After completion of conceptual developments for stabilization, complex pre-project researches
were conducted. They also included investigation of radiation conditions.
When developing structural and technological decisions, traditional methods and technologies
were applied, which are realized in organizing radiation protection at the «Shelter» object. First of all, they
include as follows: protection with time and distance, shielding, use of remote technologies, etc. Taken
decisions allowed performing the main assembly works using remotely controlled load-lifting crane, andthe sites for acceptance of articles and metal structures, prefabricated assembly were removed at
maximally possible distance from the «Shelter» object. Besides, the sites will be shielded from the SO by
a protective wall, which will provide the personnel protection during assembly works. An important stage
for reducing collective effective dose was the choice of optimal access ways for personnel and loaddelivery. This circumstance has especially essential character during the work in zones with enhanced
EDR values, when changeability of a group or brigade in a shift is made several times.
All complex of measures for provision of personnel radiation protection, during SO stabilization
work, is divided into following measures groups:• organizing;• radiation-hygienic;• technical.
Within the “Shelter” object conditions, the measures of first two groups are compulsory.
Their application is regulated by “Shelter” object documentation, and their realization provides theobservance of non-exceeding principle.
The organizing measures include:• contractor’s personnel training;• organization of work production;• control and supervision.

- 43 -

Special contractor’s personnel training is realized in personnel training centre (PTC) in the townof Slavutich (theoretical training) and at the SO industrial site (practical training). To upgrade thepersonnel skills for individual technological operations, training ground is created with mock-ups of future
workplaces.
Choice of breadboarding units and conditions defining the need in preliminary trainings was madeaccording to the following main indices:• constrained conditions в planned places for work conduct;• considerable EDR value at workplace;• complexity of constructive decision realization;• opportunity to apply known experience.
When the personnel is trained at mock-ups, the following items are perfected:• estimate of acceptability of adopted equipment application;• skills during fulfillment of operations;• technological process of assembly of strengthening’s metal structures;• time-keeping of all operations;• recommendations to reduce dose expenses.
To improve the work conduct safety, as well as to check the observance by contractor for
erection of design decisions, including the measures for radiation protection, permanent supervision
will be provided over the fulfillment of building and assembly works. Especially, one should monitor
the accumulation of collective effective dose (CED) during work production. The above will allow
comparing the real collective dose to designed values, and, in case of need, to make in proper time
the corrective actions.
Radiation-hygienic measures include as follows:• sanitary-hygienic zoning of work conduct place and sanitary-hygienic classification of works;• provision of personnel with main and additional individual protection gears (IPG), as well as
check of their correct application;• provision of personnel with appropriate equipment and means of personal and collective hygiene;• medical services and rehabilitation;• organization of dosimetric control.
To minimize the prevention radioactive substances transport beyond WPZ boundary, except
general requirements to zoning, additional zoning of workplace is envisaged, that is concluded as regards:
within the limits of a subzone the sites are defined with different essentially differing levels of radioactive
contamination. At the boundary of these sites, transport sanitary locks are located, which provide minimal
spread of radioactive substances along «Shelter» object territory. Organization of permanent radiation
control in these places was defined in conformity with the ALARA principle.
Choice of individual protection gears (IPG) is made in conformity with requirements of regulatory
and operation documentation. Volume and nomenclature of additional IPG application was defined in
dependence of activity type:The factors defining the choice of IPGRO types, include:• character and quantitative content of radioactive and other harmful substances in air (aerosols
disperse content and toxicity, availability of steam phase, harmful substance concentration);• microclimatic conditions at workplace (temperature, relative air humidity, thermal radiation);• in-air oxygen content at work conduct site;• heaviness of work being performed;• protective and operation properties of individual IPGRO samples.
Additional factors, defining the choice of IPGRO types in specific work conditions for structures
stabilization, are as regards:- 44 -

••••

work conduct time;density of surface contamination with radionuclides;
EDR value;
work conduct conditions (works in closed space, constrained conditions).
For substantiated choice of IPGRO types, measurement of labour conditions indices is needed,which includes the both radiation condition indices, and microclimate indices in the WPZ. Special
attention will be drawn to measurement of radioactive substance concentrations directly in the breathingzone of workers, since when performing some technological operations that concentrations can, dozens,hundred and, even, thousand fold, exceed their average-shift or average-day values defined withapplication of stationary samplers.
To protect the personnel from beta-radiation, use of protective eyeglasses, shields and dashboards
is planned.
For personnel entry to contamination control area (CCA), sanitary checkpoint for 1430 persons
will be used. Personnel passage directly to work performance zones will be made through the stationary
sanitary locks in deaerating stack. During work production time, additional temporary sanitary locks are
assumed to install in the local zone.
Dosimetric control is an integral part of all radiation safety system during realization ofstabilization work. As far as the monitoring of external exposure is concerned, the means existing at«Shelter» object are sufficient and adequate to requirements during realization of stabilization measures.
Commission of state-of-the-art system of individual dosimetric control (IDC) will improve the situation,
since it also meets the requirements for monitoring of external beta-exposure and neutron (emergency)
exposure. The operative control of internal exposure can be improved with installation high-sensitive SHE,
which will be placed in premises of new sanitary check point, and daily double (before and after shift)monitoring of personnel exposure, which works in the most contaminated work zones, as well as
biophysical personnel monitoring.
Shielding is the most effective method of protection of personnel staying in work production
zones. Shielding of work production zones and access ways to them will be set up as permanent or
temporary.
Permanent shielding represents the boards-shields manufactured of protective materials andplaced in special metallic framework. The boards can be installed on existing structures or on new metal
strengthening structures (MSS). They are installed during the preparative work and, without absolute need,
are not subject to subsequent dismantling.
Under temporary shielding, specially created sliding protective buildings of box type (PB),
shielded attached and sliding sites, is implied. Their manufacture is assumed to make at a plant locatedoutside the exclusion zone. Depending on box location places, they are destined for personnel stay duringforced technological breakdowns, control and survey over work process, putting on and off additional IPG,
etc.
Except temporary and permanent shielding of work production zone, local shielding of radiation
sources can be used – first of all, radwaste clusters close to workplaces. This shielding method can beapplied in case of detection (e.g., during obstructions clearing) of intensive radiation sources, and theirremoval from work zones is embarrassed by different circumstances (e.g., source is located under aconcrete layer).
In conformity with ALARA principle, the decisions being developed for shielding were optimized.
That process included the reduction of collective effective dose (CED) for personnel, as well as
optimization of shielding facility installation thickness and choice of their installation place.
Most important factor for shielding optimization is the data on gamma-radiation angular
distributions at workplaces. Optimization was made in the following sequence:- 45 -

•

analysis of results of angular distributions measurements of gamma - radiation intensiveness close
to workplace;• definition of direction to main sources forming EDR in measurement places;• gamma-radiation sources are identified for measurement places;• forecast of probable location of sources defining EDR at workplace with considering the distanceto sources, possibility to shield workplace from the source by «Shelter» object structures;• estimate of relative contribution into EDR from identified sources;• estimate of contribution into EDR of radiation from six main directions, which can be shielded.
When shielding the access ways, as the main parameter defining expediency of shielding,intensity factor of using defined route sites is accepted. Considering large labor expenses for displacement
and installation of shields, in the routes inside the «Shelter» object, where is impossible to hoist the shields
with load-lifting mechanisms, a conclusion was made on inexpediency of manual shielding of access ways.
When choosing a material for shielding, analysis was made of main characteristics of different
materials applicable for gamma – radiation attenuation: lead, steel, concrete, tungsten and depleted
uranium.
The analysis has shown, that for work inside the «Shelter» object, the lead is the most preferable
material. Use of expensive materials with big atomic number gives no principal advantages, but only
increases the design costs.
A quantitative characteristic of efficiency of shielding measures application is preventable CED.
According to estimate data, the preventable collective dose of personnel, due to shielding, made more 35
Sv.
During stabilization works, a need will arise of involvement of large amount of people (to 150
men per a shift) and machinery. On top of that, simultaneously will be performed large scopes of work in
different places, both inside the object, and on industrial site territory. Such a work organization requires
an effective management of personnel and of industrial processes. The use of video survey will allow
reducing the exposure dose for «Shelter» object personnel and for contractor organizations due to controlof observance of installed routes, allowed work time, as well as preliminary familiarization of contractor
personnel with the place and character of work conduct. Using video survey system, permanent presenceof work leader in place of their conduct is not required in conditions of unfavorable radiation situation.
Estimate of expediency of dust suppression works was based on comparative analysis of positive
and negative factors of measure realization.
As positive factors, the following items are considered:• prevention of dust production during the works and movement of personnel, reduction ofprobability of additional internal exposure;• exclusion of probability to transport the dust arisen during personnel movement behind theboundaries of working site and its precipitation on the personnel, which is not linked with theconduct of stabilization measures;• minimization of environmental influence.
To negative factors additional material expenses, labor- and dose expenses for dust suppression
realization can be referred.
When arranging the WPZ and access ways, decontamination is inexpedient, if it will provide
reduction of external exposure dose. For instance, the removal of detected sources of intensive gammaradiation can essentially improve the work production conditions. Such sources can be detected whenclearing the WPZ territory, removal of concrete inflows, etc. In considering the expediency of
decontamination of WPZ surfaces, e.g. cutting-off of apertures along buttress wall height,
decontamination is recognized as inexpedient one. Exclusion makes the decontamination of internal andexternal surfaces of protecting boxes.
- 46 -

Welding and fire works during realization of stabilization measures are performed outside thestructures fencing «Shelter» object or in premises having considerable sizes (e.g., breakdowns of premises
2001/4, 2007/3 et al.). Radioactive aerosols being produced are to be removed. That is why an actual
becomes organization of safe removal of discharged air, since this flow can lead to radioactive aerosols
resuspension, which will entail considerable increase of radioactive substance concentrations not only in
the WPZ, but also in adjoining premises and territory. The above, first of all, is related to the works ininternal premises, where the place of probable air release can be distant from WPZ more than at 50 m.
Use of local fan is taken as inexpedient only in individual places.
Assessment of environmental impact
The “Shelter” object being an ecologically hazardous facility represents an enhanced treat
associated, in first turn, with the penetration of radioactive substance into environment. Despite the factthat currently the radioactive releases from the SO are lower than established reference levels, hazard
exists of their considerable intensification as a result of realization of measures for SO structures
stabilization. When drafting the project, impacts were assessed to aerial, water mediums, as well as on
topsoil, social and technogenic media.
Based on building decisions, release values were estimated in conducting different stabilization
works. Results of estimates of radioactive substance releases for each measurement are shown in Fig. 23.
Impacts onto aerial environment.
Because of the fact that radioactive release sources are located at different height over earth level,that essentially influences the spread and transport of radioactive substances in aerial environment, releasesources grouping was made on this attribute and summary release was calculated. It allowed obtaining
maximally probable volumetric contamination at any distance from the SO.
Thus, release sources from earth level are forming a release being of 8,12·106 Bq, from sources
located at SO roofing level, the release will make around 1,88·109 Bq, and release from ventilation pipe
(VP-2) will make around 3,2·108 Bq.
In Table 7, maximally probable volumetric air contaminations at 10-km and 30-km distance areshown, ДКА and ДКв, as well as comparisons of concentrations with admissible.

Fig. 23. Releases during realization of different measures- 47 -

Table 7
Admissible
concentrations,
Bq/m3
ДКа
ДКв
60
0.8
10
0.2

Concentrations under normal
operation,
Bq/m3
10 km
30 km
0.009
0.003
0.008
0.002

Relation to
ДКа
10 km
0.00020.0008Relation to ДКв
30 km
0.004
0.01

Nuclides
137
Cs
90
Sr
Alpha-emitting
transuranic
0.03
0.00040.00055
0.000160.018
0.40
isotopes
As Table 7 demonstrates, in normal conditions of work realization, impacts to aerial environment
will be considerably less than admissible levels.

Impact to soil.
The main way of radioactive substance coming onto topsoil is natural precipitation on soil surfaceof radionuclides from radioactive release in the air, which are produced during the SO stabilization.
Estimates have shown, that the operation, which exerts the most impact to soil medium at small
distances from the SO - territory planning in local zone, and at a more distance from the SO - averagerelease during realization of all stabilization measures.
Table 8 shows maximally probable surface contaminations at 10-km distance, as well as theircomparison with the RL.
Table 8
Surface contaminations under
Relation toReference
Nuclidesnormal conditions at distance 102RLlevels, Bq/m
km, Bq/m2
137
3.1
Cs
90
2.8
Sr
Beta sum33300
6.0
0.0002Alpha-emitting transuranic333
0.2
0.0006elements
The data demonstrated in Table 8 give the reason to conclude that under normal conditions ofwork conduct for stabilization, the impacts to soil will not exceed the RL.
Impact to water medium.
Due to small values of radioactive releases to air under normal conditions of work conduct, eventotal penetration of this activity into water medium will not notably reflect at value of its contamination(activity release from exclusion zone by river Prypyat makes around 5⋅1012 Bq/year).
Impact ways to water medium under an accident - radionuclides precipitation from air release, as
well as, washout from soil surface.
A conclusion is made, that under normal conditions of work conduct, and under an accident, no
supernormative impact to water medium will occur.
Effective dose.
Under normal conditions of work conduct, the dose obtained in the maximum of near-surface
concentration, makes around 4 mkSv.
In case of an accident with maximal aftermath, effective dose at 10-km distance will make around
4 mSv, and under a condition, that a man will stay during the accident from lee side from the SO and will
- 48 -

not use any IPG. At 30-km distance (at the boundary of exclusion zone), effective dose will make around
1 mSv.
Impact to plant and animal world, reserved objects.
As a result of stabilization activities, the most probable impact to plant and animal world will beradionuclides penetration into adjoining ecosystems of neighbouring territories in aerosols composition.
On top of that, summary average daily activity amount under a release, which is produced by SO
stabilization measures, is essentially less of reference average daily levels of radionuclides releases
through VP-2. Based on above, a conclusion is made, that radiation constituent will no exert any influence
to natural topsoil of adjoining territories and faunal complexes.
Impacts to social environment.
A large scope of works, which is planned to realize during SO structures stabilization, stipulates
the involvement of considerable amount of additional personnel, that can exert indirect positive impact toconditions of social environment of the town of Slavutich – satellite town of ChNPP.
Closure of hail growth enterprise, which for Slavutich is ChNPP, increased essentially theprobability of deterioration of social status of majority of town inhabitants. Emotional stress provoked by
the above exerts a negative impact to psychological condition of public that produces general deteriorationof vital activity conditions. Origination of new opportunities for job placement, due to planned SO works
will serve to strengthening of confidence in the future and will enhance public well-being.
Guaranteed provision of employment for a part of public when performing the work at the SO,
will serve as a factor, contributing to improvement of social environment conditions of Slavutich and for apart of public of other Ukraine’s regions.
Analysis of probable impacts to exclusion zone personnel and public, which dwells behind its
limits has shown, that a solely probable impact type is radiation factor. Estimates of additional dose
loading to personnel and public are conditioned by trouble-free work conduct for SO stabilization, testify anegligibly small size of impacts.
Impact to technogenic medium.
At the territory adjoining to SO, acting facilities of housing and communal services and sociocultural assignment are absent, as well as monuments of architecture, history and culture guarded by theState. In zones of probable impacts, recreational zones and cultivated landscapes are absent.
Stabilization activity does not assume any change of existing conditions of operation ofenterprises located (or planned) at ChNPP industrial site and behind its limits (SNFR-2, ПКО SRW et al.).
That is why, a solely factor of impacts is the increase of dose loading to personnel of these enterprises.
Carried out analysis has shown, that dose loading increase under normal work conduct (maximally 0,0042
mSv) will be negligible.
Performed assessment of environmental impact allowed developing adequate protective measures.
The main measures include as regards:• survey over radionuclides penetration into environment during the work conduct for SO
stabilization (radiation monitoring);• radioecological monitoring of personnel working in ChNPP close and far zones.
Radiation monitoring of natural media, during conduct of SO stabilization measures, must provide
obtaining of reliable data on current radiation conditions of components of medium undergoing theimpacts. Currently, existing routing monitoring net covering the major part of exclusion zone territory
satisfactorily provides representative radioecological monitoring of current conditions of environmental- 49 -

components. It is a sufficient one and there is no need in its expansion and inserting of additional items
into existing regulation.
Thus, realization of stabilization measures will increase «Shelter» object radiation safety, andduring the conduct of building and assembly works, human and environmental radiation protection will be
provided.
9. NSC conceptual design
Creation of New safe confinement (NSC), as a part of activity for «Shelter» object (SO) conversion
into an ecologically safe system is regulated by ratified by Ukraine of international laws [1-5], laws of
Ukraine [6-13], regulatory-legislative acts [14-21] and other documents.
The funds for design are granted by European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD)
on behalf of donor countries.
Conceptual design (Feasibility report) of New safe confinement (CD (NSC FR) was developed byorder of State Specialized Enterprise Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant (SSE ChNPP, town of Chornobyl)
by Consortium (comprising: Bechtel International Systems (USA); Electricite’ de France (France); andBattelle Memorial Institute (USA)), which performed the works with participation of Ukrainian
consortium KSK (comprising: Research and Development Institute for building structures (NIISK, cityof Kyiv); Kyiv Research and Development and design-constructor Institute «Energoproekt» (KIEP, cityof Kyiv); Interdisciplinary Scientific-Technical Centre «Shelter» (ISTC «Shelter», town of Chornobyl)).
Creation NSC is one of the main stages of conversion of «Shelter» object, representing a treat forenvironment, into an ecologically safe system.
In conformity with Provisions of Law of Ukraine «Of general fundamentals of further operationand decommission of Chernobyl NPP and conversion of destroyed power Unit 4 of this NPP into an
ecologically safe system», NSC creation must provide the achievement of the following goals:• provision of protection of personnel, public and environment from influence of
nuclear and radiation hazard sources associated with the SO existence;• provision of conditions for realization of activity aimed at SO conversion into an ecologically safe
system, including for dismantle/strengthening of unstable SO structures, FCM removal and RAW

Figure 24. General view of NSC- 50 -

management.
Based on above goals of NSC creation, its functions are defined as follows:• Restriction of radiation influence to public, personnel and environment by established limits
under NSC normal operation, violation of normal operation, emergency situations and accidents,
including the accidents during the dismantle of unstable structures, and future handling of FCM andRAW;• Restriction of spread of ionizing radiation and radioactive substances located in the SO undernormal operation, violations of normal operation, emergency situations and accidents. The conduct of
this function is provided by:- integrity of NSC fencing structures during a long-term operation period;- prevention of SO unstable structures collapse, by means of their dismantle or strengthening fora period defined by conditions of NSC safe operation;- restriction of penetration of rain (storm) and from melted snow water;- protection of groundwater from contamination with radioactive substances, located in SC.
A general view of NSC is shown in Figure 24. In architectural design, the NSC will present acomplex of buildings, which comprise:• new fencing structural casing;• internal premises for placement of NSC system equipment, control boards, doghouses and sites
for primary treatment of dismantled radioactively contaminated elements;• auxiliary buildings (sewer-pumping station, building of fire-extinguishing facility, et al.).
Conceptual design envisages the creation, within the framework of NSC design, of thefollowing elements:• Load-lifting mechanisms to provide the works for NSC operation and SO conversion into an
ecologically safe system;• Systems providing the NSC operation.
New fencing structural casing will represent a metallic structure of arched type with gables.
Arched structure will cover the «Shelter» object, a part of Unit В, southern and western pioneer walls, aswell as a part of currently existing SO local zone. Eastern gable will abut to existing structures of Plant,

Figure 25. General view of bearing structures of NSC casing.
- 51 -

western one will lean upon own foundation. Turbine hall will partially come forward through western wall.
General view of bearing structures of NSC casing is shown in Fig.25. Geometrical sizes of casing
make: span - 257,44 m, width - 150 m, height - 108,39 m, thickness -12 m.
In conformity with selected decisions, arched structure consists of bearing and fencing elements:• Main bearing elements are circular contour arches comprising a range of internal andexternal arches connected one to another by truss lattice (arched type trusses);• Fencing structures consist of two decks - outward deck (roofing) and internal (ceiling) deck,
which are attached to horizontal purlins fastened to arched truss girths.
Arched structure consists of 13 flat arches. Span between the flat arches makes 12,5 m.
NSC envisages the following systems providing NSC operation:• Dust suppression system;• NSC fire systems;• Ventilation systems;• Water supply systems;• Sewer systems;• Heat supply and conditioning systems;• Decontaminating solution supply system;• Compressed air supply system;• Power supply and electrical safety system;• Integrated NSC management system;• Communication and industrial television system;• Physical protection system;• Liquid and solid RAW management system.
Main parameters influencing the period of NSC building structures operation are as regards:• Radiation factors impact;• Corrosion factors impact.
In conformity with CD (FR) NSC, designed NSC operation term makes 100 years. Indicatedterm is reached due to:• consideration during design of extreme loadings and impacts in conformity with acting
regulatory documents;• application of materials with enhanced corroding resistance;• choice of optimal operation mode;• structural decisions providing maintainability.
NSC structure envisages a probability of subsequent change of roofing and wall panelsin operation period, which does not demand NSC partial opening. Change of panels will bemade using shielded platforms of technical maintenance hanged on rails inside and outside of NSC archmain elements.
Within the framework of CD (FR) NSC, strength estimates were made of NSC fencing structural
casing and foundations with considering the following external impacts associated with natural
phenomenon: seismic impacts; wind loadings; snow loadings; tornado loadings; air temperature changes;
lightning impact; precipitations.
In estimating, for seismic impacts the following values were taken:• Designed earthquake (one time per 100 years)- 5 numbers according to MSK-64 scale• Maximal estimated earthquake (one time per 10 000 years) - 6 numbers according to MSK64 scale.
- 52 -

For wind loading, the following values were used (in accord with SNiP 2.01.07-85 and PiNAE5.6):• Normative value of wind pressure - 0,3 kPa (30 kgc/m2);• Estimated loading - 0,42 kPa (42 kgc/m2),• Extreme loading -0,75 kPa (75 kgc/m2);• Reliability coefficient for loading-1,4 and 2,5 correspondingly for estimated andextreme loading.
For snow loadings, the following values were used (according to SNiP 2.01.07-85 and PiN
AE-5.6, as well as with considering historical climatological data based on repetition rate, one timeper 10 000 years):•
Normative value of snow cover weight - 0,7 kPa (70 kgc/m2);•
Estimated loading -1,0 kPa (100 kgc/m2);• Extreme loading - 2,1 kPa (210 kgc/m2);• Reliability coefficients for loading - 1,4 and 2,0 correspondingly for estimated andextreme loading.
For tornado loadings, estimate is made in conformity with «Main regulatory requirements
and estimated characteristics of tornadoes for Chernobyl NPP site», introduced by Order No 64 of
Ukraine’s Derzhbud of 21.10.2002.
In conformity with NP 306.1.02/1.034-2000, probability of realization of initial event, bringing toa need of public resettlement in case of exceeding estimated tornado class for newly designed objects ofnuclear power engineering should be established equal to Р=1·10-6 1/year, and for facilities underconstruction, operation and reconstruction - Р=1·10-5 – 1/year. Estimated characteristics of tornado withindicated probability for ChNPP site are shown in Table 9:
Table 9For tornado with
For tornado with
Estimated tornado characteristics
probability 1·10-5
probability 1·10-6
Estimated class of probable tornado
1.5
3.0
Exceeding probability, (event/year)
1·10-5
1·10-6
Maximal velocity of funnel rotation, (m/s)
5081
Velocity of tornado forward movement, (m/s)
12.6
20.3
Pressure difference between funnel centre and31.0
81
periphery, (gPa)
Length of tornado propagation path, (km)5.0
28.6
Width of tornado propagation path, (km)
0.05
0.29
For air temperature characteristics, the following values were used (according to SNiP 2.01.07-85):•

Normative temperature value:•

Estimated temperature value:••

Reliability coefficient for loading
Extreme temperature values (one time per 10 000 years) Minimum
Maximum

Minimum
Maximum
Minimum
Maximum-20°С;+26°С;-22°С;+29°С;
1,1;-43°С;+45°С.

Lightning impacts are expected at the level, under which is enough to have lightningprotection system meeting the requirements of PUE and «Instruction for arrangement of lightningprotection for buildings and structures (RD 34-21-122-87).

- 53 -

For maximal precipitation amount, the following values were used:• On average over 20-minute period - 31 mm;• Extremely over 20-minute period (one time per 10 000 years) - 72 mm;• Extremely during a day (one time per 10 000 years) -190 mm.
Strength estimates confirmed that realization of proposed constructive decisions would
provide the NSC stability under all considered external impacts associated with natural phenomena.
Particularly, stability of NSC main supporting structures and foundations under a class 3.0 tornado isconfirmed, and absence of a need, under such initial event, of public evacuation in conformity with
criteria of NRBU-97, NRBU-97/D-2000 and NP 306.1.02/1.034-2000.
When developing CD (FR) NSC, the following external technogenic impacts were considered:• explosion;• aircraft collapse;• fire;• initial events associated with existing ChNPP facilities.
Analysis of impact to NSC structures from explosion sources at the ChNPP site and behind its
limits has shown that under such initial events the loadings will be less of expectable by a tornado.
Aircraft collapse was excluded from consideration as a designed base due to following reasons:• In conformity with the national requirements of acting in Ukraine regulatory-legislative
documents, such initial event is not seen for the facilities for RAW and FCM management, towhich the SO is referred, and, correspondingly, the NSC;
• В ChNPP zone, organizing-technical measures accorded with appropriate bodies are envisaged,
which prevent aircraft flights;• Based on estimates performed in designing other ChNPP objects, probability of such initial
event evaluated at the level of 1·10-6/year. Existing estimates of probability of aircraft collapse
on a specified object for western-European countries, where aerial traffic is more intensive, thanin Ukraine, makes <10-7/year. In conformity with criteria, established in NRBU-97, such a rare
initiating event can be not considered.
• Use of this event as a design basis would lead to considerable unjustified increase in cost andmaking more complicated the NSC structures.
In CD (FR) NSC, aircraft collapse is seen as “out-of-design” event.
Analysis performed at pre-project development stage has shown, that additional impacts
influencing NSC design decisions are absent under external fires.
Analysis of initial events associated with existing ChNPP objects has shown, that ventilation
pipe VP-2 collapse on the NSC would lead to destruction of bearing structures of casement, and aprobability of such event is above, than it is admitted by acting regulations. In this connection, in CD (FR)NSC a conclusion is made on a need to dismantle ventilation pipe before the start of NSC pushing into
designed position.
Emergency situations at other ChNPP objects (LRTP, ПКОSRW, SNFR-1, SNFR-2) will not
provoke any additional loading on the NSC.
Main decisions for NSC erection technologies
Within the framework of CD (FR) NSC, main decisions were developed for such aspects oferection organization as regards: preparation of building territory, infrastructure for provision of
construction, possible erection technology is drafted.
- 54 -

Territory preparation works include clearing of building site, works for arrangement ofengineering mains at building site, works for planning territory at building site, organization of auxiliary
objects for construction.
Proposed in CD (FR) NSC infrastructure for provision of NSC construction must enable
delivery of tube and ferroconcrete structures, as well as of building materials, such as concrete, sand,fixturing, armature, etc. Besides, infrastructure must provide power supply, water supply, heat supply,
sewer (storm and household), and removal of producible RAW and construction waste.
In CD (FR) NSC, comparative analysis of construction technologies options is made. As aresult it was stated, that most preferable option is manufacture of section elements of arched structures at
Ukraine’s plants, their assembly beyond the site limits with subsequent delivery to assembly site.
Manufacture behind the site limits has a whole range of advantages, since plant-manufactures
are equipped with all appropriate infrastructures and possess opportunities to provide required quality
control, and considerable part of works will be performed beyond the limits of zone with high radiation
fields. On top of that, the amount of equipment, workforce and scope of work, performed at building site,
will be minimized.
Assembly of arched structure starts after installation of pushing ways, assembly site andinstallation of supporting units and bearing beds under the first supportable section. Structure will beassembled of individual 12.5-m wide sections. On top of that, two methods of arched structure assembly
are seen.
The first method includes the assembly of arched structure sections using crane with loadlifting capacity 1600 t and two cranes of less load-lifting capacity.
The second method is based on the point that assembly of arched structure sections is madewith using winch-hoisters. The both methods are real and technically realized, on top of that, the second
one permitting to perform more quantity of assembly works on earth level, that increases their safety andproductivity, is considered in CD (FR) NSC as a more preferable.
Pushing of arched structure (Fig.26) is made after installation of pushing ways, foundations
under arched structure, foundations of eastern and western gables, as well as completion of assembly ofpushing equipment and ventilation pipe dismantle. Most preferable pushing method and, according to CD(FR) NSC estimate results, is the pushing with applying tractive effort. This pushing method provides therequired friction coefficient and is more floppy due to possibility to change the amount of ropes andtowing jacks at each stage of arched structure pushing.

Figure 26. Modeling of arched structure’s pushing process to «Shelter» object.
- 55 -

After the arch is pushed in design position, completion of gables arrangement is made andsealing of arched structure. Connection of engineering mains and arched structure equipment can bestarted after pushing completion and assembly of equipment inside the NSC.
Management of RAW producible during NSC erection
Proposed in CD (FR) NSC decisions for RAW management under NSC construction are based on
the following positions:• For management of RAW producible during construction – existing at ChNPP RAW management
scheme will be maximally used;• In defining the decisions for management of RAW producible during construction - main
decisions и planned measures, developed within the framework of integrated program of ChNPP
RAW management are considered;• In defining the decisions for control and inventory of nuclear materials and RAW during
construction – it is adopted that this activity will be realized within the framework of system
existing at the SO;• Under NSC construction, only the RAW are subject to removal, which are located in building
work zones, for the rest RAW located in technogenic layer of local zone and SO industrial sitemust be provided possibility of their delayed removal during operation or dismantle of NSC.
During the NSC erection, the main RAW volumes will be produced by:• removal/displacement of on-land objects covered by construction zone (building structures and theirfragments, mains, construction waste, etc.) and cleaning of areas from shrubs etc.;• earthwork (crushed stone, ground, sand, concrete fragments, etc.);• drilling works (cores containing the above fractions).
SRW, producible under the NSC construction, according to contamination type will bepresented as both surface contaminated materials (large-sized fragments structures and buildings being
dismantled), and volumetrically contaminated (small-sized fragments and loose waste). Main
contamination of indicated materials is expected by radionuclides of 137Cs, 90Sr, 239+240Pu, and 238Pu, 241Am,
which will determine gamma-radiation EDR, surface and volumetric contamination rate.
As volumetrically contaminated SRW the high-level waste (HLW) are expected, which
can be presented as fragments of negligible sizes (active core fragments and strongly contaminatedconcrete fragments). The rest SRW will be referred to low- and intermediate-level waste (LIL SRW), ofpredominantly 1 category low-level waste).
During works for removal/displacement of existing mains, removal around 1300 m3 of groundis expected, which received radioactive contamination as a result of 1986 year accident, in which can
include the impurities that due to contamination level are referred to SRW 3 category. Performed in CD(FR) NSC estimate of volumes of technogenic layer demanding removal have demonstrated that during
creation of NSC foundations, up to 82500 m3 ground can be excavated. It is assumed that the volumeof SRW 3 category (HLW) during earthwork would make around 120 m3.
When preparing internal sites under arched structure, additional ground can be excavated involumes of 24170 m3 (for the most, with contamination at background level values).
General scheme of radioactively contaminated ground management includes two level of theirsorting:• primary sorting according to ground removal place with the purpose:- primary identification and HLW segregation using the criterion «EDR of extractableground»;- dividing the rest waste into small-sized and large-sized;- 56 -

• detailed ground sorting at a specially arranged site with the purpose to divide into the waste subject
to burial and, the waste that can be used for backfilling during erection of foundations.
The grounds having high contamination level will be forwarded to interim monitoring point forcertification, and from that place they will be transferred for long-term storage/burial:• to PLRW «Buryakivka»,• to industrial complex for handling solid radioactive waste (ICSRW) - after its commission.
Large-sized LIL SRW meeting the burial acceptance criteria, after surfaces dust strengthening canbe transported directly to PLRW « Buryakivka » or to ICSRW.
To provide the fulfillment of above works, the sites for waste removal and management
envisage the following equipment and facilities:• specially equipped machinery with attached equipment for handling radioactively contaminatedmaterials;• specially equipped site for ground segregation into categories;• check points with dosimetric control;• stations for decontamination of RAW management machinery and equipment.
In order to reduce radioactive substance concentrations in the atmosphere in work production places,
use of dust suppression is envisaged.
Nuclear safety provision
Under normal conditions of NSC construction, to provide nuclear safety of CD (FR) NSC isenvisaged:• not to worsen the conditions of atmospheric precipitation discharge from existing SO roofing;• not to create additional apertures in SO roofing, as well as other ways for incoming atmosphericprecipitation in premises, where nuclear hazardous FCM clusters are localized;• not to worsen conditions in part of condensation moisture production as compared to existing
conditions;• not to realize technical decisions, which could change existing water flows system inside the SO
and contribute to moisture accumulating in nuclear hazardous zones;• not to worsen the conditions for functioning of current system for collection and removal of SO
radioactively contaminated water;• exclude the use of technological waters when performing work at the sites adjoining to SO nuclear
hazardous zones ;• exclude conditions violating efficiency of existing system for nuclear safety monitoring:- information-measuring system (IMS) «Finish-Р»;- FCM monitoring systems (MS FCM) «Signal»;• to go on maintaining FCM in subcritical condition in volume established by acting SO
technological regulation, using the existing systems:- system for supply of nitric gadolinium solution;- facility for operative insertion of neutron-absorbing solution;- dust suppression systems (in mode of neutron-absorbing solution supply).
• to realize organizing measures for nuclear safety provision in conformity with acting SO
technological regulation.
During NSC construction, to reduce SCR generation risk in emergency situations occurred as aresult of SO building structures collapse, CD (FR) NSC envisages as follows:• Measures for stabilization of SO building structures will be performed before NSC- 57 -

construction start, that will result in reducing collapse risks to acceptable level;• NSC structures will be designed in conformity with criteria и requirements of nuclear and radiation
safety;• Considerable part of building and assembly works will be performed at safe distance from the SO,
which excludes direct mechanical impact to it;• Building and assembly works in close vicinity from the SO, including NSC pushing, will be
realized with applying technologies and technical means с high reliability indices;• For fire extinguishing in nuclear hazardous zones is assumed using of water-free compositions
and/or aqueous compositions with neutron-absorbing additives;
As a whole, during NSC construction (in normal conditions and in emergency situations)with considering envisaged measures, nuclear safety will be provided at the level existing for operated
SO. When the NSC will be commissioned, SO nuclear safety level will be essentially improved.
Radiation safety provision
Availability of radioactive materials in the SO defines potential radiation hazard of all activity
for SO conversion into an ecologically safe system, including activity in NSC design scope. In CD(FR) NSC, measures for provision of radiation safety were prepared with considering the fact that
NSC construction and operation will be realized as activity with open ionizing radiation sources.
During NSC design realization, radiation conditions will be defined by:• availability of radioactive substance in work production zones;• radiation background created by SO;• radioactive aerosols release from SO;• direct activity (dust rise, RAW management, including FCM).
To provide radiation safety, CD (FR) NSC envisages at all stages of NSC design realization:• organizing measures;• technical measures;• sanitary-hygienic measures.
Organizing measures, which are common for all stages of NSC design realization, include:• personnel training;• planning of work; organization of safe work production;• control and supervision.
As designed reference levels of individual exposure of personnel and radiation conditions for all
the stages NSC design realization, CD (FR) NSC takes the values established currently at the SO.
During NSC construction, the main technical measures providing radiation safety will include as
regards:• protection with distance;• shielding;• dust suppression.
Protection with distance implies minimization of works being performed close to SO, especiallyon high marks, for the above the CD (FR) NSC envisages the following decisions:• Part of labor-intensive work will be carried out beyond exclusion zone limits;• Assemblage of NSC building structures and a range of its technological system will be
realized at a far distance from SO (150 m);• Structures assembly procedure envisages their assemblage on earth level.
Shielding of work production zones will be provided by application of:• protective boxes;• relocatable shields;- 58 -

• shielded attached or traveling platforms;• shielding of operator cabins for technical means.
Measures for short-term dust suppression (damping with water) will be carried out underprobable increase of dust rise in work zone during work production, or personnel movement. Longterm dust suppression (laying of localizing compositions) will be carried out in case of need to
localize radioactive contamination (dust-strengthening) on surfaces of transportable large-sized
structures and other elements without containerization.
Dosimetric control during construction includes as regards:• monitoring of radiation conditions, which provides:- EDR monitoring;- monitoring of contamination levels by radioactive substances of work surfaces of premises,
equipment and vehicles;- monitoring of volumetric activity of radioactive substance in work zone air;- radiation control at all RAW management stages;• individual dosimetric control (IDC) of personnel including:- IDC of external exposure due to beta- and gamma-radiation with application of individual
dosimeters;- IDC of internal exposure, which is made on the basis of data of direct and indirect
biophysical measurements;• system of operative and long-term planning, inventory and storage of data on individual
personnel exposure doses.
Collective effective dose of personnel during NSC construction, preliminary evaluated in CD(FR) NSC with considering realization of indicated measures, made - 450 men-Sievert. It is assumed
that realization of organizing and technical measures according to ALARA principle can reduce thisvalue to -250 men -Sievert. The above estimate is subject to more precise definition at the stage ofdetailed design during preparation of Work Production Project (WPP).
Assessment of impacts to components surrounding natural environment
During the works over CD NSC design, estimates of impacts of activity under design tosurrounding natural environment were made.
Impacts to aerial medium
As a result of performed estimates, for emergency situation scenarios under consideration thefollowing impact levels were established:• value of radioactive releases penetrating into atmosphere, under condition of SO collapse without
NSC, makes around 1,59·1013 Bq;• value of radioactive substance releases, under condition of SO collapse inside NSC, will makefrom 8,49·1010 to 8,08·1011 Bq depending on SC ventilation conditions (from 0,1 to 1 SC volume
a day).
Impacts to soils
Under normal conditions of NSC design realization, impact to soils from SO aerosol releases
precipitation till construction completion will be preserved at existing level, negligible as compared toradioactive contamination occurred in the first months after 1986 year accident.
After NSC commission, release amount will reduce.
Under emergency situations, the most soil contamination is predicted in case of base option (SO collapse
without NSC) and first option (SO collapse during NSC pushing), under extraordinary meteorologicalcondition (atmosphere stability category on Pasquill F, wind velocity - 1 m/s). On top of that, maximal(along plume central axis), surface contamination values at 10-km distance (additionally to existing- 59 -

contamination) will make from 5% to 60% of existing contamination of ChNPP exclusion zone
soils at given distance.
At the boundary of ChNPP exclusion zone, maximal (along plume central axis), additional surface
contamination will make from 30% to 100% of existing contamination of soils at the boundary of ChNPP
exclusion zone.
Beyond ChNPP EZ limits, at 50-km distance, maximal (along plume central axis)
additional surface contamination will make:• with radionuclide 137Cs - 3,2 104Bq/m2;• with radionuclide 90Sr- 2,8 104Bq/m2;• with radionuclides 238+239/40Pu - 6,5 102Bq/m2,
that will exceed existing levels in several times.
For SO collapse inside NSC option, maximal soil contamination under analogous
meteorological conditions is forecast in dozen-hundred times less (depending on NSC ventilation mode) as
compared to contaminations under SO collapse without NSC.
Maximal summary (for all radionuclides) additional surface contamination at 10-km distance isforecast at level of 1,7 104 Bq/m2 that makes not more 2% of existing contamination of ChNPP EZ soils
at given distance.
At the exclusion zone boundary, maximal summary surface contamination is forecast at level3
3,3·10 Bq/m2 that makes not more 10% of existing contamination.
Impacts to water medium
Under normal conditions of NSC design realization, impact to surface water from SO aerosol
releases precipitation before the completion of construction will be preserved at existing negligible level.
After NSC commission, SO releases amount will reduce.
Under emergency situations, impact to surface water will be defined by direct atmosphericprecipitation on water surface of river Prypyat, as well as precipitation on its flood plain close to
NSC with subsequent radionuclides outflow from drainage areas. Forecast of emergency
contaminations of surface waters performed in the EIAR covers Kyiv, Kaniv, Kremenchuh and Kakhovka
reservoirs. The largest aftermath are forecast in SO without NSC collapse and SO collapse during NSC
pushing.
The biggest peak of 90Sr concentrations in water is forecast for 41 day after the accident, and forboth options of emergency situation will make:• for Kyiv reservoir (Kyiv SPP) - 684 Bq/m3;• for Kaniv reservoir - 389 Bq/m3;• for Kremenchuh reservoir - 225 Bq/m3;• for Kakhovka reservoir - 178 Bq/m3.
The maximal value of presented above (for Kyiv reservoir) makes 34% of admissible 90Sr
concentrations in drinking water.
The maximal 137Cs concentration under basic and first options in Kyiv reservoir makes 455 Bq/m3, in
Kaniv reservoir - 137 Bq/m3 (correspondingly 32% and 11% of admissible 137 Cs concentration in
drinking water). Maximal concentration of Pu, 23 Pu and 41 Аt forecast for Kyiv reservoir, does notexceed 1 Bq/m3 for each radionuclide.
For SO collapse under NSC option, level of radionuclides income depends on NSC ventilation
conditions. Under ventilation equal to 1 NSC volume a day, maximal increase of 90Sr and 137Csconcentrations as compared to background level makes 25% and 91% correspondingly (11% and 2% ofadmissible concentrations for drinking water). Under ventilation equal to 0,1 SC volume a day, 90Sr andCs concentrations will be an order less, and annual concentrations will be only at 0,3% exceed thebackground values of indicated radionuclides content in Kyiv reservoir water.
- 60 -

Simulation of impacts to underground water is made in the EIAR with considering the fact that themain contamination source is water infiltration from SO premises 001/3. On top of that, radionuclides
transporting by underground waters was considered independently of current contamination ofunderground waters conditioned by other sources (surface contamination, burial sites near the SO,etc.).
For 90 Sr possessing the biggest migration capacity, the following results were obtained:• Under scenario of SO collapse without NSC, concentration in underground waters, exceeding 4109 Bq/m3, will be observed at less 100-meters distance, 1·102 Bq/m3 level will be provided yet at
600-m distance from the SO. Contamination field will reach river Prypyat after 800 years, on topof that, 90Sr concentration, because of radioactive decay, will drop at 5,7·10-9 fold of initial values.
• by SO collapse under NSC, 90 Sr concentration in underground waters will be reduced,
practically, to zero.
Assessments of impacts to geological medium and climate, which were described in the EIAR atconceptual level, has shown the absence of some significant impacts to these medium components.
In connection with existing high contamination level of ChNPP EZ territory, a conclusion ismade in EIAR on the fact that impact to flora, fauna and reserved objects within the limits of thisterritory will be weakly distinguished even under base option of emergency situation (SO collapse
without NSC). On top of that, extremely restricted atmospheric transport and availability of backgroundcontamination of flora and fauna makes negligible emergency impacts behind the ChNPP EZ limits.
Estimate of mutual impacts of NSC and objects of surrounding technogenic medium
As a result of performed impacts analysis, it was defined as regards:• impacts of emergency situations at LRTP, ICSRW, SNFR-1, SNFR-2 will not entail any additionalloading to the NSC;
• unfavourable impact of collapse of existing ventilation pipe of power Unit 4 is ruled out, since it(pipe) is being dismantled. Newly erected pipe will be designed for extreme impacts. On top of
that, in conformity with NSC construction schedule, existing ventilation pipe must be dismantled
before starting NSC pushing works.
Under normal conditions of NSC design realization, its impact to surrounding technogenic
medium will be expressed in displacement of existing life support systems of the SO and ChNPP
Unit 3 (electricity supply networks, systems of water supply and household sludge sewer, etc.) located at
NSC construction site.
Assessment of impacts to social environment
Realization of NSC design will positively impact to social environment in several fields:• it will essentially reduce the risks of public exposure under emergency situations at the SO;• it will reduce psychological tension in society associated with SO collapse treat;• it will provide employment for part able-bodied public of towns of Slavutich, Chernihiv and othersettlements;• it will provide loading of Ukraine’s industrial enterprises during manufacture of NSC structures andcomponents.
Measures for minimization of environmental impacts
NSC creation, in itself, is a measure aimed at minimization of SO environmental impacts, since
NSC availability will allow:• isolate RAW located in SO;• reduce probability of nuclear incidents due to exclusion of atmospheric moisture penetration on FCM
clusters inside SO;• perform works for handling FCM and RAW under protective casing.

- 61 -

Minimization of negative environmental impacts during NSC construction will be achieved bymeans of realization of following technical and organizing measures:• dust suppression in earthwork production places;• dust strengthening;• decontamination of applicable mechanisms and vehicles;• application of technologies with minimal dust rise;• organization and control over RAW transporting and management.
Minimization of negative environmental impacts during NSC operation in the course of
dismantling unstable SO structures will be reached by means of realization of the following technicaland organizing measures:• Arrangement of ventilation system, with using aerosol filters for exhaust air cleaning;• Zoning of NSC territory and premises;• Dust suppression in work production places;• Organization of radiation control system;• Decontamination of vehicles leaving the NSC limits;• Use of revetment of premises, where radioactive substance release into premises is possible;• Organization of building structures control system;• Restriction and control of NSC discharges and releases.
Estimate of potential exposure
In CD (FR) NSC, analysis was made of potential exposure of personnel and public as a resultof realization of activity associated with NSC construction and operation, and substantiation of nonexceeding of exposure risk criteria defined in NRBU-97/D-2000 was made.
Estimate of potential exposure during NSC construction
In CD (FR) NSC, the following emergency situations during NSC construction are seen, which
can lead to potential exposure of public and personnel:• SO fire due to error of personnel/failure of equipment during NSC construction before pushing
NSC arch;• SO collapse due to error personnel/failure of equipment during NSC construction before pushing
NSC arch;• SO collapse due to extreme wind during NSC construction before pushing NSC arch.
Fire at the SO due to error of personnel/failure of equipment during NSC construction before
pushing NSC arch can occur as a result of the following initial events:• ignition of materials during the welding;• ignition of electrical equipment;• vehicle accident in local zone.
When assessing potential exposure under a fire at the SO, the following assumption and initial
data were applied:• It is assumed that as a result of fire no SO collapse occurs;• Total release during origination of fire at the SO makes 4,8·1010Bq;• Fire duration makes 4 hours;
As a result of estimates it was stated that individual effective dose under a fire for nonprotected personnel close to SO makes around 12,6 mSv.
At a distance from SO under given initial event, maximal individual dose is formed at around
10-km distance and makes - 7·10-3 mSv. Thus, release influence under a SO fire to personnel locatedat far distance from the SO, will be negligible.
Dose of public at the ChNPP EZ boundary makes 4-10-3 mSv.

- 62 -Collapse of SO building structures, due to error of personnel/failure of equipment during
NSC construction before pushing NSC arch, can occur because of collapse of assembly crane or loadon the SO.
In conformity with existing models, volume of SO aerodynamic shadow was estimated around 106 m3. Thus, conservatively assuming that all activity precipitates in aerodynamic shadow
zone, radioactive substances concentration in air makes around 7,79·106 Bq/m3. Cloud existence time
is taken as equal to time, during which the wind will pass distance equal to aerodynamic shadow
length. Under wind velocity of 3.3 m/s, this time is equal to 45 s. Over this time, individual effective
dose for non-protected personnel, close to the SO, makes -58 mSv.
At a more far distance from the SO, maximal individual dose is formed at 1-km distance andmakes around 4 mSv. Thus, inhalation dose for personnel located at a bigger distance from the SO
will be significantly less, than the above dose close to the SO. Dose for public at the ChNPP EZ
boundary makes 0,1 mSv.
Estimates of potential exposure during NSC operation
To estimate potential exposure during NSC operation, the following emergency situations under
NSC operation are seen, which can lead to potential exposure of public and personnel:• SO fire under essential reduction of fire protection due to personnel error under NSC operation;• SO collapse due to earthquake with loss of power supply during SO structures dismantle and
NSC operation;• impossibility to close NSC transport gate due to error of personnel/failure of equipment during SO
collapse.
Potential exposure in case of realization of indicated emergency situations is associated withinhalation intake of radioactive aerosols into organism. The source of aerosols origination is a fire or
SO collapse. Since these critical events occur after NSC arch is pushed on its place, therefore, producible
aerosols are scattered inside the NSC. Eventually, a part of aerosol materials comes into environment, theremained materials precipitate inside the NSC. Reduction of radioactive substance release is provided
due to shut off of arched space ventilation. It is evident, that maximal individual dose of potential
exposure for personnel staying inside the NSC is essentially higher, than for the personnel being outside
the NSC.
Fire at SO under and essential reduction of fire protection due to personnel error during NSC
operation can occur as a result of the following initial events:• ignition of materials in the course of welding;• ignition of electrical equipment;• vehicle accident inside the NSC.
In estimating potential exposure by an SO fire, the following assumption and initial data are used:• It is assumed that as a result of fire, no break of NSC structures integrity will occur;• Total release during SO fire origination inside the NSC makes 4.8·1010 Bq [2].
• Fire duration makes 4 hours;
Maximal individual dose of potential exposure will be received by personnel located inside the
NSC due to radioactive aerosols inhalation, on top of that, inhalation time makes 1 hour (it is assumed
that the fire was detected and the personnel was evacuated through 1 hour after origination of strong fire,that is a sufficiently conservative assumption).
Results of estimate have shown that over the time needed for evacuation, maximal
individual dose of potential exposure for non-protected personnel inside the NSC makes around 11,3
mSv. Considering the fact that the personnel in NSC will work in IPGRO, or in isolated premises, real
dose is forecast at least at order less – 1,1 mSv.
Release from the NSC will make 2·108 Bq.
- 63 -

Maximal individual dose outside the NSC makes around 4·10-4mSv. Evidently, that inhalationdose of potential exposure of personnel inside the NSC is essentially less of dose inside the NSC.
Dose of public at the boundary of ChNPP EZ makes 3·10-8 mSv.
Under SO collapse due to earthquake with loss of power supply during SO structures dismantle
and NSC operation, the estimates made have shown as regards. During loss of power supply, failureof NSC control systems can occur, which will entail the event when ventilation system shutters canremain in open position. The above brings to increase of air exchange with surrounding environment to200% NSC volume per a day and relevant accelerated drop of radioactive aerosols concentrations inside
the NSC.
When estimating potential exposure dose, the following assumptions and initial data are used:• Under earthquake, no NSC structures destruction will occur;• Total release under collapse of SO structures building inside the NSC makes 7.79-1012 Bq:
Maximal individual dose of potential exposure will be received by the personnel located inside
the NSC due to radioactive aerosols inhalation; on top of that, inhalation time makes 20 min (maximal
time needed for emergency evacuation of worker);
Over the time needed for evacuation, maximal individual dose of potential exposure of
personnel inside the NSC makes 44 mSv. Under an essentially more probable particular collapse, the dose
makes around 15 mSv.
Release beyond the NSC limits will make 8,4·109 Bq. Maximal individual dose of personnel
outside the NSC will make around 3 mSv (under partial collapse - around 1 mSv). Evidently, that
inhalation dose of potential exposure outside the NSC is much more less than the dose inside NSC.
Dose for public at the ChNPP EZ boundary makes around 10 mSv.
Conclusion
Choice of all principle technical decisions for NSC is confirmed by estimated substantiations
performed within the framework of CD (FR) NSC. Particularly, estimated substantiation are made fordifferent options:• mode of NSC thermal isolation and ventilation;• arched structure configuration;• structural decisions on foundations, et al.
For NSC structure being proposed in CD (FR) NSC, strength estimated substantiations arecarried out, which confirm NSC stability under extreme values of different loadings and their
combinations. Particularly, stability of supporting structures and NSC foundations is confirmed under aclass 3.0 tornado.
In CD (FR) NSC, assessment of environmental impacts during NSC design realization ismade. It is shown that under normal realization of design and in emergency situations, “Shelter” object’s
environmental impacts have essentially smaller aftermath, if the NSC is available, as compared toabsence of fencing casing.
In CD (FR) NSC, potential exposure of personnel and public as a result of realization of activity
associated with NSC erection and operation is evaluated, and non-exceeding of exposure risk criteria issubstantiated, which is defined in NRBU-97/D-2000.
As a whole, in CD (FR) NSC at conceptual level, probability of achievement of set objectives in
NSC creation is demonstrated, which are as follows:• providing protection of personnel, public and environment from the influence of sources ofnuclear and radiation hazard associated with the SO existence;- 64 -

• providing conditions for realization of activity aimed at SO conversion into an ecologically safe
system, including that for dismantling/strengthening unstable SO structures, FCM extraction and RAW
management.
List of references
1. Law of Ukraine «Of ratification of United convention of safety under spent fuel management and ofsafety under radioactive waste management «, No1688-111 of 20.04.2000.
2. Law of Ukraine «Of ratification of Convention of nuclear safety», No 736/97-ВР of 17.12.1997.
3. Law of Ukraine «Of ratification of Convention of access to information, participation of community
during adoption of decisions and access to justice in issues, which refer to environment», No 832-XIVof 06.07.1999.
4. Law of Ukraine «Of ratification of Convention of assessment of environmental influence intransfrontier context», No 534-XIV of 19.03.1999.
5. Memorandum of mutual understanding between the Ukraine’s Government and Governments of G-7
countries and Commission of European Commonwealth in relation to Chernobyl NPP decommissionof 20.12.1995.
6. Law of Ukraine «Of general bases of Chernobyl NPP further operation and decommission andconversion of destroyed power Unit 4 of this NPP into an ecologically safe system» No 309-XIV of
11.12.1998.
7. Law of Ukraine «Of legislative regime of territory, which underwent radioactive contamination due toChernobyl catastrophe» No 791а-ХП of 27.02.1991.
8. Law of Ukraine «Of natural environmental protection « No 1264-ХП of 25.07.1991.
9. Law of Ukraine «Of use of nuclear energy and radiation safety» No 39/95-ВР of 08.02.1995.
10. Law of Ukraine «Of radioactive waste management» No 255/95-ВР of 30.07.1995.
11. Law of Ukraine «Of licensing activity in sphere of nuclear energy use» No 1370-XIV of 11.01.2000.
12. Law of Ukraine «Of protection of men from ionizing radiation impact» No 15/98-ВР of 14.01.1998.
13. Law of Ukraine «Of ecological expertise» No 45/95-ВР of 09.02.1995.
14. Decree of Ukrainian CM «Of measures for «Shelter» object conversion into an ecologically safe
system» No 1561 of 28.12.1996.
15. Decree of Ukrainian CM «Of approval of Shelter Implementation Plan» No 421 of 31.03.2003.
16. Strategy of «Shelter» object conversion approved by decision of Government Commission for issuesof complex solution of Chernobyl NPP problems. No 2 of 12.03.2001.
17. NRBU-97. Norms of radiation safety of Ukraine. State hygienic regulations. Ukraine's HM (1997).
18. SSE 6.6.1-6.6.087-02. Norms of radiation safety of Ukraine. Main sanitary rules (OSPU), regulations
and requirements in relation to application order (NRBU/ОСПУ). State sanitary rules. Ukraine's HM(2002).
19. NRBU-97/D-2000 Norms of radiation safety of Ukraine. Supplement: Radiation protection frompotential exposure sources. Ukraine’s HM (2000).
20. DBNA.2.2-3-97. Content, order of development, agreement and approval of design documentation for
construction, (1997).
21. DBN А.2.2-1-95. Composition and content of materials for environmental impacts assessment (EIAR)
under design and construction of enterprises, buildings and structures. Main designing principles,(1995).

- 65 -

Analysis of the Version “Earthquake is the Cause of the Chernobyl Accident”
N. V. Karpan,
Eengineer-physisist, Kyiv, Ukraine

For the first time an earthquake as a possible cause of the accident at the 4th unit of Chernobyl NPP was
discussed in 1996, after publication of an article by Vitali Pravdivtsev "Chernobyl: 10 years after" inDecember issue of "Technika – molodezhi" magazine. It was argued in the article that the reactor wasdestroyed by an explosion after the earthquake which occurred under the nuclear power plant at 01:39 AM
26 April 1986. The article attracted attention of nuclear physicists at Kurchatov Institute of Atomic Energy(KIAE), and with assistance of geophysicists they promptly checked the information provided in thearticle. A clear mismatching of the time of the described event and the moment of the beginning of
breakdown process at the NPP forced them to systematically reveal and count all mistakes anddiscrepancies of Vitali Pravdivtsev's article (there were more than 80 of them). That's why the result ofcomparison of the drawing from the article (by which the author supported his sensational conclusions)with the original of seismograms, presented by geophysicists participating in the investigation, was not
surprising. They stated that "an illustration (that was the word they used for Pravdivtsev's seismogram –N.K.)... is a hand-made drawing of the imaginary event that allegedly occurred at 1:39! [1]". Pravdivtsev,
the author of the article, did not dare to argue with experts' conclusions.
In 1997 a group of scientists from the United Institute of the Physics of Earth (RAS, Moscow,
Russia) Institute of Geophysics of NAS of Ukraine, Institute of Geography of NAS of Ukraine revisited
this theme. Although their conclusions were formulated in a more prudent manner, they preserved a lessstringent approach to the selection of facts that they needed to prove their point. For example, it is stated in
the paper that the seismic event occurred (with one second precision!) at 01:23 39±1 s. At the same time,
an inaccuracy of the distance to the epicenter of the seismic event is ± 10 km, which immediately adds tothe error of the moment of seismic event ± 3.4 s (10 km divided by velocity of surface waves V=2.9 km/s
gives 3.4 s). Besides, the paper did not indicate the moment of receiving seismic signal at registration
points, i.e. at seismic stations, and distance which the signal traveled from the point of origin – all thismakes verification of authors' conclusions difficult.
A little later (in 2000) the same group of authors wrote on Chernobyl accident again [3]: "Weakearthquake (МРУ = 2.6, MS = 1.4) was recorded by three seismic stations in the area of Chernobyl
NPP... Preliminary analysis of the seismograms tells of the natural origin of the shake..."An accuracy of the distance to epicenter was specified by the authors once as ± 10 km [2], then as ± 15 km[3]. Although this fact leads to the increase in uncertainty of the moment of event to (1± 5.3) s, it is nottaken into account.
Further on in the papers an appearance of a "low frequency extensional clatter and strong vibrationof units" is described, with indication of the precise time (allegedly documented by the NPP personnel)
when this event started. This is not true. Yes, there was vibration and clatter during 6-8 seconds, as
witnesses stated. But there was no registration of these events as commencing at precisely 1:23:39 (there is
no proof for this in these papers). Even with one-minute precision no one at Chernobyl NPP noticed thecommencement of "clatter and vibrations", because explosions that followed brought totally new tasks(evidences provided by witnesses give time between 1:15 to 1:25, and records of personnel which
participated in the programme – 1:24-1:25).
- 66 -

One more point. Authors consider only two hypotheses on the nature of the event which was
registered by seismic stations: earthquake and explosion. Thus they have overlooked a third version,
namely that seismic stations might have recorded, for example, the following sequence of events:- most powerful clatter and hydroblows which accompanied local increase of power generation in thelower part of right half of the reactor; during this period control systems recorded drop of flow rate
through all eight main circulation pumps [5];- several explosions – one of them lasting, resembling a double explosion, and in 2-3 s a very strong
third explosion (quotation from explanations by personnel).
Thus, even from preliminary analysis of papers [2, 3] it is possible to conclude that authors werewilling to relate the accident at unit 4 of Chernobyl NPP with a hypothetical earthquake.
Let's quote from the abovementioned papers some excerpts, which served as a basis for authors'conclusions:"An analysis conducted at KSE OIEPh RAS shows that in the night of 25-26 April 1986 (25 April at
21:23' Greenwich time) all three stations recorded a relatively weak seismic event. Surface waves could beseen on all channels of three stations...
For estimates of the time of event and coordinates of epicenter of seismic source... velocity of surface
waves with the period about one second was used (2.9 km/s)...
Results of the analysis of seismic records show that the examined event took place at 01:23:39 (± 1s) local
time (here and further on local time is used for chronology of the events at Chernobyl NPP)...
The time of the seismic event recorded by the KSE OIEPh RAS stations coincide with the accuracy to firstseconds with the low frequency extensional clatter from the direction of water intake station at the coolingpond and strong vibration of units (01: 23: 38)...
In accordance with estimates which could be found in different reports, the explosion at unit 4 ofChernobyl NPP occurred during the time interval from 01: 23: 49: to 01: 23:59. Thus it is possible toassume that the event in question did occur at least 10 s before the explosion at ChNPP, but more likely
16 s before...
It was estimated that the epicenter lay about 10 km to the East of ChNPP. Low amplitudes at seismogramsand the fact that stations were located at one side from epicenter would not allow for better accuracy ofepicenter location than ±10 km. Thus it could not be ruled out that the epicenter of the event may coincidewith the location of the NPP.
It is not possible with the available data to make estimates of the depth of the source...
Dynamic characteristics of the seismograms differ from recordings of the surface explosions and resemble
forms of the registered local earthquakes which were obtained during seismic monitoring of Chernobyl
NPP in 1995-1996...
Direct comparison of the form of the Chernobyl event record and records of explosions at local quarries
at similar distances was also made.
Finding out the tectonic nature of the seismic event is based on data of detailed seismic description of theterritory of Chernobyl NPP... Additional investigation provided evidence that... the highest number ofmicro-earthquakes is observed... at a distance 10-15 km to the East of ChNPP... Thus, the most likely
center of the local earthquake of the night of 25-26 April could be the junction of Teterev and SouthPripiat deep faults, located 10-15 km to the East of ChNPP site...
Envelope line of maximum seismic intensity... may lead to the estimate of earthquake intensity of 7.25.
These estimates, of course, are made for epicenter of the earthquake.

- 67 -

Note that due to resonance effects in buildings accelerations could be several times higher. Hence it could
not be ruled out that the system of reactor, unprotected against vibrations, would suffer from seismic
impact during testing, and this would lead to disruption of technological processes and eventually to an
explosion of the reactor.
Evaluated... intensity of seismic shakes at ChNPP industrial site in these cases would be equal
approximately 2...
In case of epicenter location at the depth up to 1 km, from formula... we obtain the magnitude 5-6...
Conclusions. So, the obtained data indicate that the considered seismic event with... epicenter near
ChNPP occurred, most likely, 16 s before the explosion at the power plant; its beginning approximately
match the time of low-frequency sound and vibrational effects, noticed by power plant operators;
spectral- time characteristics of this event significantly differ from records of the quarry explosions withepicenters at the same distances.
Hence it is possible to conclude that there is a high likelihood that the system of reactor 4 of Chernobyl
NPP, unprotected against vibrations, suffered from a seismic impact combined with resonance effects, andthat made insertion of the graphite absorption rods impossible, a sharp increase of reaction was notprevented and this resulted in intensive generation of gases and their explosion."
Let's consider two hypotheses on the nature of the recorded event. According to the first one, therecorded signals are a consequence of one or two explosions at the ChNPP, which occurred due to an
accident at unit 4. According to the second hypothesis, an earthquake occurred in the area of ChNPP. Let'slook how the real fact can match these hypotheses.
Comparison of the events at ChNPP 26 April 1986, which was presented in official materials of
the Governmental Commission of the USSR on the investigation of the causes of the accident at ChNPP,
including the well-known report, prepared by USSR for IAEA experts [Abagian et al., 1986], as well as inreports by Institute of Nuclear Researches of Academy of Science of Ukrainian SSR, NIKIET and reportsby the Complex expedition of the Institute of Nuclear Energy (INE), demonstrates the following:• The moment of the beginning of the seismic event, registered by seismic stations, within seconds
coincides with the low-frequency clatter from the side of water-intake station at the cooling pond andstrong vibration of units, noticed by power plant operators (1:23:38).
• At 01:23'40" the unit shift supervisor ordered pressing button EPS-5, which commands insertion ofabsorption rods in the core. The rods moved downward, but in several seconds shocks were heard andoperator saw that the rods stopped before they reached lower limit stop switches.
• At 01:23:48 technological control devices recorded grows of pressure in the reactor and in steam
separator drums.
• Not later then 01:23:49 the centralized monitoring system "SKALA" switched itself off.
According to estimates made in different reports, the first explosion at unit 4 of ChNPP occurred
during interval from 1:23:49 to 1:23:59. If one uses only records of the NPP personnel and readings of the
NPP control system, then some impact on the NPP did take place between 21 and 11 sec before theexplosion. Results of the analysis of seismograms show that seismic source also appeared 11 seconds
before the control system failed to function. According to the record in operating log, at 01:39 one more
explosion occurred, but for some reason it was not recorded by the seismic stations.
On the basis of these facts reports conclude: "It is not possible to rule out the possibility, that thesystem of reactor 4 of Chernobyl NPP, while it was operating in upset conditions, suffered a seismic
impact and this led to impossibility of insertion of graphite absorbing rods with all implied consequences".

- 68 -

Is this conclusion trustworthy? To answer this question, let's consider in more detail information presented
in papers [2, 3]. If the facts are presented in a table, we will have a compact and easy to analysis form of
the material.
Table 1. Data from papers on seismic event near ChNPP (26.04.86).
1. Seismic event occurred at 1:23:38±1
2. Moment of registration of event at the sites of seismic stations – NOT CITED
2. The depth of the source of seismic event - NOT DEFINED.
3. Distance from seismic stations to epicenter of the event - NOT CITED
4. Accuracy of distance to epicenter - ±10 km, ±15 km
5. Most likely location of epicenter - 10-15 km to the East of ChNPP.
6. Intensity of seismic shakes on industrial site of ChNPP – 2.
7. Oscillation which was registered best – SURFACE WAVES.
8. Velocity of propagation of surface waves - 2.9 km/s
9. Explosion at unit 4 occurred during interval from 1:23:49 to 1:23:59.
Table 2 Conclusions of the papers on seismic event in the area of ChNPP (26.04.86).
1. «Some impact on NPP did occur during the period 21-11 s before the explosion».
2. «Seismic stations recorded not explosion or several explosions, but an EARTHQUAKE».
3. «So, the obtained data indicate that the considered seismic event with... epicenter near
ChNPP occurred... 16 s before the first explosion at the power plant»
4. «Envelope line of maximum seismic intensity... may lead to the estimate of earthquake
intensity of 7.25. These estimates, of course, are made for epicenter of the earthquake".
5. «Hence it is possible to conclude that there is a high likelihood that during the period of
testing the system of reactor 4 of Chernobyl NPP, unprotected against vibrations, sufferedfrom a seismic impact and that, combined with resonance effects, made impossible aninsertion of the graphite(?) absorption rods to stop reaction runaway, and this resulted inintensive generation of gases and their explosion.»
6. «According to the record in operating log, at 01:39 one more explosion occurred, which was
not recorded by the seismic stations.».
Comparing the information in Table 1 and Table 2, one can notice obvious mismatch between theinitial data and conclusions made on the basis of these data.
Let's consider this phenomenon in more detail. To begin with, lets try and find an answer to thequestion – are earthquakes of 6 points and more possible in the area of ChNPP?
The following is the answer to this question provided by the Research and Design Institute of Building
Elements of the State Committee of Civil Engineering of the USSR (НИИ строительных конструкций
Госстроя СССР) in 1995 [4]: «Analyzing the map of general seismic zone classification ОСР-87,
presented by the Institute of Earth Physics of the Academy of Science of USSR, as well as information onearthquakes of 1230 and 1510 on the territory of Kyiv oblast... the area of the ChNPP is indeed locatedon the border of 5 and 6 point seismic zones...
An earthquake of 1230, according to the data of S.V.Evseev..., for Kiev region also could be ranged as 6point (S.V.Evseev writes "6-?") according to the description in Lavrentijevsky Chronicle... a collapse of
the stone church (if it was not decrepit or poorly built, and the data were not exaggerated) corresponds, in- 69 -

accordance with the scale of intensity of earthquakes MSK-84 to the intensity about 7 points (more than 6).
However, this single fact (even if it indeed occurred) is not sufficient for ranging this zone as 7-point,
because subsequent (well documented remote earthquakes of the Vranch zone (ZONA VRANCHA)
earthquakes of 1790, 1802, 1940, 1977… according N.V.Shebalin's data did not exceed 5 points on
MSK-84 scale for Kiev and its vicinities».
One more question – what was the assumed seismic impact which main buildings of the ChNPP had
to withstand? This is an answer provided in 1995 by the institute "Atomenergoproekt" (the question, andhence the answer, were relevant for both 3rd and 4th units of ChNPP [5]: «The "Norms of designing
nuclear power plants with reactors of different types" (PiNAE-5.6), enacted in 1.01.87, require thatbuildings and constructions of NPP of the 1st category in terms of their radiation and nuclear safety,
should be designed taking into account particular impacts, including seismic impacts: Design impact (DI)and Maximum design impact (MDI). The former and the letter are defined for Chernobyl NPP as follows:
DI – 5 points, MDI – 6 points.
…In accordance with categorization of PiNAE-5.6, constructions of the main building: main compartment(units A, B and BCPO) and deaerator construction were assigned 1st category.
Taking this into account, the Moscow Branch of "Atomenergoproekt" Institute in 1987 accomplishedtheoretical and experimental investigations of earthquake resistance of constructions (equipment) ofbuildings belonging to categories I and II for Kursk, Smolensk and Chernobyl NPPs.
Results of these investigations are presented in the report "Measures to provide for seismic resistanceof nuclear power plants with reactors RBMK"...
Calculations that were carried out demonstrated that load bearing capacity of constructions of main
compartment (units A, B and BCPO) and deaerator construction, with seismic impacts taken into account,
are in general achieved».
Next question: did the personnel of ChNPP identify the shaking it experienced as an earthquake?
Personnel of shift N 5, which worked at ChNPP in the night of 26.04.86, did not hear the clatter ofearthquake. Even the explosion, which demolished the unit 4, was not heard by all, nor in all rooms of thestation. From almost 20 explanatory notes (which the author of this paper has at hand), which were writtenby the duty personnel of 26.04.86, it follows:• personnel of the station, which was outside of the main building (ABK-2), noticed at first activation of
the main emergency valves (GPK), then "awful noise" or clatter with rattle, strong vibration of thebuilding and hollow roar, after which a shower of glowing (burning) debris of various forms and sizes;• people who were in the main building noticed prolonged and intense low-frequency sound similar tohydro-shocks, which could be heard only in the premises adjacent to mechanical and reactor
equipment (at Control Room of unit 4, in turbine building, in the premises of main circulation pumps
and the like); not everybody heard these sounds – some noticed only "shaking" or "trembling" of thefloor and walls (in the premises of KRU, "Skala" etc.);• for controllers of the central Control Room of Unit 3 (adjoining Unit 4) everything began with themost powerful shocks and sounds of explosions, and then a dust fog appeared in the Control Roomand sharply increased readings of radioactive background gauges;• simultaneously with shocks, in corridors and premises of the main building of NPP (located at 9 m
and higher) almost instantly a lot of dust appeared (it was compared with white fog), maybe throughcable ducts, as one of the eye-witnesses commented;- 70 -

•

•

•
•
•

in some premises people experienced penetration of an air wave, even where doors were closed; thenfollowed two combined blows perceived as one prolonged explosion, after which followed a third
powerful blow (explosion) from some upper point (upper explosion);from the moment when intensive vibrations (blows) appeared, until the first explosion which wasperceived by witnesses as a double prolonged explosion in the area of the core and main circulation
pump (lower explosion), a time period estimated by witnesses was (an average) from 6 to 8 seconds;
estimate of the interval between the double blow and the third – from 1 to 3 seconds;
duration of the whole process, according to their impressions – from 7 to 11 seconds;
those who were near the reactor premises of unit 4 noticed blows of extraordinary power, it seemed tothem that monolithic concrete wall may collapse any moment.

And, at last – when did these events happen?
It is possible to arrange them (using texts of explanatory notes of the ChNPP personnel) in the following
order:
1) vibration of buildings and equipment;2) activation of emergency valves (GPK);3) first and second explosions, as one prolonged explosion;4) shaking of buildings and constructions caused by first explosions;5) the last explosion.
It should be noticed that people who were in the lower level premises of the main building did not hear thesound of activated GPK. People who were in the nearby buildings not far from reactor section mentioned
in their explanatory notes appreciable "shaking" simultaneously with the sound of out-through of steam
through GPK.
Let's consider in more detail the sequence of events which was reconstructed above in accordancewith evidences of witnesses.
Point 1.
At 01:20:30, growth of reactor power began (reading of the device of physical control of reactor energy
release – SFKRE). Insignificant (within the range of regulation by the rods of automatic regulator AR)
increase of reactor power was compensated by the AR-1 system, until it was fully inserted in the reactor,
then an automatic power regulator AR-2 started working. By 01:23:39 the reactor power increased by 30
MW. This was initiated by the positive steam effect due to reduced water flow in the circulation loop after
01:23:04, when four MCP started working from "rundown" of TG-8. From 01:23:04 to 01:23:39 waterflow decreased [6] by 5,800 m3/h (from 56,800 to 51,000 m3/h). In the beginning the process was gentle,
decrease of flow was on the level of 180 m3/s.
At 01:23:39 (reading from teletype; from DREG reading at 01:23:40) EPS-5 signal recorded (asA.S.Diatlov, the supervisor of testing, stated, as well as it follows from explanatory notes of Metlenko G.P.
and Kukhar - chief of shift ordered that senior reactor engineer should press the EPS-5 button). The EPS
rods started to move down into the core, introducing negative reactivity during the first second and thenpositive reactivity during 2 second (thus a deficiency of EPS rods manifested itself – the so called "effectof displacements"). Reactivity from increased steam concentration in the core was added to this, since theflow rate through MCP decreased three time faster after switching off of rundown MCP 14, 24,13, 23
from bus lines of sections 8 RA and 8 RB. This happened during interval 1:23:41.3 to 1:23:41.9, most
likely due to activation of MCP emergency protection when water flow rate dropped to 5000 m3/h. There
was no activation of protection due to minimal voltage on electric motors (0.75 Un, with delay of- 71 -

activation 0.5-1.5 s, as indicated in [7]), because voltage on sections 8 RA and 8 RB (recorded on
oscillogram) was no lower than 84% of nominal value. Approximately 3 s after disconnecting of rundown
MCPs from the grid, reverse valves between MCPs and pressure pipeline started closing.
At 01:23:42 (recorded by DREG at 1:23:43) – appear emergency signals of reactor overpower and of
exceeding power increase rate (DREG cycle N 135D).
So, not later than at 01:23:42 local power runaway commenced in the reactor with a doubling period of
about 1 s, which could not be accompanied by clutter, roar and vibration of engineering structures.
At 01:23:45 – not later, shutting down of reverse valves on rundown MCPs.
At 01:23:46 (DREG – 1:23:47) flow rate dropped to zero through rundown MCPs and at least by 35-40 %in other MCPs [6]. This could be done only by a huge force applied from reactor. With that, impulse forclosing was received by the reverse valves Du 300, installed on all 44 RGK. Besides, from 01:23:45 on thebuses of 8RB section changes of currents began with variation 217-320 A and frequency 3 to 10 per
second. They lasted about 3 s and finished when the current increased to 2170 A during the last second
before the section was fully switched off at 01:23:49.
From 01:23:46 a current instability on buses of section 8 RNA was noticed, with a peak (looking like shortcircuit) at 01:23:47. Analysis of oscillograms shows that from 01:23:46 sections 8 RB and 8 RNA reflected
events which happened with the pumps powered through these sections, including short circuits andfailures.
It should be also noticed that during all period connected to section 8 RNA (after initial stages when startup currents are much higher) that current through the section was higher by 500-550 A than the sum of
nominal currents of the equipment connected to this section.
Point 2.
Activation of GPK (emergency valves) begins at the pressure 75 kg/cm2 in BS (separator drums). Between
01:23:45 and 01:23:46 pressure in BS on the right side exceeded predefined level for activation of GPK
and all 8 GPK were activated.
In this same cycle (N137D) DREG recorded activation of BRU-K1 and sharp decrease of flow rate in
KMPC cooling contour to 18,000 m3/h (flow through running down MCP fell to 0). These events –cannonade from activation of GPK, shutting of reverse valves on MCPs, RGKs and from hydroshocks
accompanying this process completed the phase which preceded destruction of the reactor core.
Point 3.
At 01:23:49 (in N 138 D cycle) a signal К06L005=1 was recorded. This signal spells that the pressure in
the reactor space exceeds 0.15 kg/cm2 (due to rupture of one or several fuel channels). Time period during
which the prescribed level is reached is at least 1.4 s [6-8], and this causes delay of the emergency signalby the same time period. That's why the ruptures of the fuel channels should be timed at 01:23:47.
Increased pressure in the reactor space tears lower and upper compensators of system OR (lower core plate
structure) and system E (upper core plate structure). Premises of SLA (steam localization space), BS (steam
separation drum) and CZ (central hall) get connected with the reactor space through under-reactor spaceand safety valves. For some time this reduces growth of pressure in reactor space.
It is quite likely that these events were perceived by witnesses as the first (lower) double explosion.

- 72 -

Point 4.
Explanations of witnesses show that the last (upper) explosion was heard 1-3 s later than "lower", i.e.
approximately at 1:23:49-1:23:52. And switching off of reliable power supply, caused by the explosion,
occurred at 1:23:49.
Thus it is possible to assume that the emergency process, which was accompanied by vibration,hydro-shocks and explosions began not later than 01:23:43 (beginning of power runaway) andended not earlier than 01:23:49 (upper explosion).
Conclusions
If the calculated time of the beginning of the seismic event (at a distance 10-15 km from ChNPP) was
correctly pointed out by the authors of "earthquake" papers (01:23:39), then taking into accountuncertainty of the distance to epicenter, it will fall within interval 01:23:39±6 s. If we superimpose(moving closer to seismic stations) the calculated point of epicenter with coordinates ChNPP, the time
when the event occurred will be 01:23:45. In this case the seismic event began immediately after the
beginning of the wrecking phase of the emergency process in the reactor, which was at 01:23:43 asdemonstrated above. That's why we can state that on 26.04.86 seismic stations recorded local andpowerful shakes (blows, explosions), which accompanied disastrous destruction of Chernobyl NPP
unit 4.
References
1. K.Checherov. Successful experiment which ended as a catastrophe. «Техника – молодежи»Magazine N9, 1977 (in Russian).
2. V.N.Strakhov et al. Seismic phenomena in the area of Chernobyl NPP. "Geofizicheskij zhurnal",
V. 19, N3, 1997. pp.3-15 (in Russian).
3. F.F.Aptikaev et al. On seismic event of 26 April 1986 in the area of Chernobyl NPP. "Fizika
zemli", N3, 2000. pp. 75-80 (in Russian).
4. Comment of the Institute of Construction Elements (НИИ строительных конструкций) ( reg. №
27-799 of 29.08.95) on office memo by Doctor of Geological Science V.A. Kopejkin of 12.06.95
to Deputy Director General of ChNPP, Head of "Ukrytije" Object V.I.Kupny – "On evaluation of
maximum design earthquake in the region of Chernobyl NPP" (in Russian)
5. Information of MO AEP on the issue of seismic resistance of engineering constructions of mainbuilding of Unit 3 of Chernobyl NPP. (reg. № 0240-17/132 of 19.04.95)(in Russian)
6. Analysis of functioning of electro-energy system of NPP in the rundown regime of turbogeneratorof Unit 4 of ChNPP, report,1995 (in Russian)
7. Chernobyl accident, initial data for analysis. Part 2. NIKIET, Inv. № 270-Ot-3966 (in Russian)- 73 -

Annex 1
Fragments from DREG data tape [7]- 74 -

Annex 2
Fixation of discrete signals after DREG was switched on:
01:39:29 – appeared (maybe not for the first time, because interruption in the work of Skala and DREG was over 15min) signals "decrease of level in the SUZ emergency tank" and "pressure in BS premises over 500 kg/m2"
01:40:01 – appeared sygnal "increased pressure in solid-tight sections (those to the right, closer to SAOR) over 500
kg/m2"
01:40:04 – this signal disappered
01:40:24 – signal appeared abain - "increased pressure in solid-tight sections (those to the right, closer to SAOR) over
500 kg/m2"
01:40:39 – pressure in BSright fell from 40 to 22 atm, pressure of BSleft was not registered.
01:40:36 – level BSleft = +750 mm.
01:40:49 – signal disappered - "increased pressure in solid-tight sections (those to the right, closer to SAOR) over 500
kg/m2" 01:40:49 – appearde signal – "decrease of pressure in SUZ pressure collector"

Annex 3Fig. 1 Original seismogram, recorded by Norinsk station 26.04.86 г. [1]In the upper part of the seismogram there is a mark of time when signal "goes into" the probes of seismic
station. This time is defined as a sum, i.e. a time of travel of signal from epicenter to seismic station isadded to the time of the beginning of the event in epicenter. From this seismogram we can find the time
when the event began at epicenter (at ChNPP).
a) The signal "goes into" at 21:24:19 Greenwich time, or 01:24:19 local time.
The signal traveled (see Annex 4) 34 s. Subtraction of "travel" time gives the time when the event at
ChNPP began: 01:24:19 – 34 = 01:23:45
So, the probable time of the beginning of seismic event at ChNPP - 01:23:45- 75 -

Annex 4.

Fig 2. Map of the area [2 ]:1 – seismic stations
2 – fixing location of epicenter of the event of 26 April 1986
3 – location of the zone of increased seismic emission
4 – deep faults.
Using the scale, 29 mm = 40 km, and between Norinsk and ChNPP, on the map, 75 mm. Hence the distance traveledby the signal between ChNPP and seismic station
S = 73x40 / 29 = 100 km.
Velocity of signak 2.9 km/s. From here, the time of signal delivery
Ts = 100/2.9 = 34 s.
So, the time of travel of signal from epicenter of the event to seismic station equals 34 seconds.

- 76 -

Annex 5.
21 -23-57.5
Norinsk V= 172 thous.

Glushkovichi V = 432 thous.

Podluby V = 480 thous.

1 min!____________77 mm___________!
Fig. 3. Seismograms of the event of 26 April 1986 (narrowband channels) [3].
The number of maximums on Fig.3 equals two (the first, with a wider base – looks as a double explosion; interval
between maximums equals approximately 3.5 mm). Let's calculate how much time elapsed between two peaks:
1 min = 77 mm, and between peaks – 3.5 mm. Thus, an interval between two events symbolized by these twopeaks
T = 3.5×60/77 = 2.7 s,
which could be considered as a time between "upper" and "lower" explosions.
So, an interval between explosions could be 2.7 seconds.

- 77 -

Annex 6.

X

а

b

с

2.8 s

6.6 s

7.5s

9,5s

d

e

10.5s 11.4

YT, seconds

12.6s

Fig. 4. Envelope line of two explosions in quarries and the Chernobyl event (Norinsk station).
Distance to the source is approximately the same in all cases.
This picture does not agree with the DREG data and explanatory notes of the personnel. It follows fromthe picture that the duration of seismic event was between 30-40 seconds (distance between peaks II and
III, between I and III). And interval between I and II is 10 s, which does not look like a double (prolonged)
explosion. If we compare lower fragment with two above, then for the explosions an interval between I
and II (one event – explosion, but many dots) is over 10 seconds. It means that between dots we do not see
an interval of time between two different events, but some "seismophase" of one event. Chernobyl line
(lower) has three such phases – from 30 to 67 s continuous double phase (peaks I and II), and from 67 to
100 s a third phase (peak III). Then the time scale at this picture has nothing in common with the real
event in epicenter. This is a time scale for "seismic echo".
But if we compare this picture with seismograms (Annexes 3 and 5) we will see, that the time interval
between explosions equals 2.7 s. Due to this we can introduce a new time scale, and on this scale we canmark moments of events at epicenter. Dot b – in the middle of the base of the double (lower) explosion.
Dot d – on the peak of the last explosion. Between b and d – about 3 s. Thus we can define the measure of
the new time scale, 1 s = 11 mm.
Then we receive that the time interval during which shocks, shakings and explosions occurred, could beof about 10 s (from X to Y).
Continuous (lower) explosion could sound up to 3 s.
(Translated from Russian to English by V. Tykhyy)- 78 -

Chornobyl: The Danger for the Global Civilization
Yuri Scherbak
Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of Ukraine

1.
I was born in Kiev in 1934. Kiev is the ancient capital of Rus-Ukraine with more than 1500-year
history. Built on high hills above Dnieper – one of the biggest rivers in Europe – Kiev is famous for its
ancient churches, monuments of history and architecture.
I remember the beginning of the German-Soviet war in June 1941: German aircrafts bombing Kiev,
the Red Army retreating and our family evacuating from Kiev to Russia. We came back only in 1944 andfound the native city burned and ruined. In 1958, I graduated from the Kiev Medical University andbecame an epidemiologist. I worked at the Research Center for Epidemiology and Infectious Diseases andtook part in the fight against outbreaks of such diseases as abdominal typhoid, diarrhea, cholera,brucellosis, rabies, and other viral infections. While working in Asia, I witnessed plague and leprosy.
As a doctor, I traveled all over Ukraine, visited hundreds of villages and small towns. But until
1986, I had never been to Chornobyl.
Before the Chornobyl accident, I had never been interested in nuclear power and had only a very
rough idea of what a nuclear power station was and of how a nuclear reactor operated. At the height of theCold war, in the 1960-1980ies, citizens of the USSR were frightened by the nuclear war, the possibility of
nuclear-missile strokes by the United States at the territory of the Soviet Union. We knew well about thosehorrors which befell Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945 and sympathized with the Japanese who sufferedfrom the nuclear weapon.
In one of my surrealistic poems (I became a writer and published, starting from the sixties, novels,
stories, poems and essays), I quoted data from the American book entitled The Medical Effects of theAtomic Bombs in Japan. I was amazed by the story of a Japanese mother who covered her child with her
body and saved him from death in that way. The power of love turned out to be insurmountable for cruelgamma rays and neutron flows!
Despite all that, the possibility of a nuclear accident in the USSR never crossed our minds: welived in hermetically closed totalitarian society with powerful propaganda machinery – one might say the
Ministry of Lie – and almighty censorship. Until 1986, we did not know about nuclear accidents in theSoviet Union because all such information was classified.
2.
Saturday, April 26, 1986, was sunny and warm in Kiev: it was one of those really nice spring days
when the weather causes joy to people tired because of long winter, March thaws and frost - during suchdays most of Kievers would go out. The trees had already become green. The first brave people bathed in
Dnieper and sunbathed in suburban forests.
On that day we celebrated the birthday of a friend of mine – a well-known Kiev
professor-physician. In the afternoon we went out to the balcony where we basked in the sun and tookpleasure in the simple joys of life.
Suddenly, my friend said, “I had a call from the central hospital – they said something had
happened at the Chornobyl nuclear power plant. Some accident. Victims were brought to the hospital.”- 79 -

“It is quite possible,” I said carelessly, “Perhaps, they got burned by steam or were injured.”
My friend agreed. It did not cross our minds that on that day the humankind turned a new page in
its history.
3.
Rumors about the terrible accident at the Chornobyl nuclear power plant (NPP) quickly spread allover Kiev. No one knew for certain what had happened there but there was no trace of carelessness inconversations. On the contrary, anxiety rose in the absence of official information. There wereunbelievable rumors about thousands of victims, the imminent risk of a massive explosion at the plant anda possible evacuation of Kiev.
The first official communiqués were very brief and did not give a slightest idea of what was really
going on at the Chornobyl NPP. A group of journalists from governmental newspapers Pravda, Izvestia
and others started to publish reports from the scene of the events, focusing on feats of firemen and plant
personnel. However, those publications provided no information about the issue millions of people in
Ukraine and Belarus worried about – the danger posed to health, especially to children, by the radioactive
substances with which the air, water and soil around the plant were contaminated.
All information regarding the level of radiation was subject to severe censorship and this fact
frightened people even more. Everyone recalled Hiroshima and Nagasaki and no one believed the
optimistic propaganda of the communist regime. Elderly people recalled the official propaganda lying in1941 in attempt to conceal the truth about terrible losses of the Red Army in the beginning of the war.
History repeated itself. The policy of “glasnost”, proclaimed by the Secretary General of theCentral Committee of the CPSU Michael Gorbachev in 1985, did not stand the first test and wascompromised by the bureaucratic system which cared not about people, their physical and moral healthbut about the preservation of the authoritarian state model.
A friend of mine who happened to be in the building of the Central Committee of the Communist
Party of Ukraine at that time told me that panic was reigning there. There was a long line to the in-houserail ticket office – the Committee staff bought tickets to take their families out of Kiev. At the same time,
one of Kiev top officials, asked whether children should be taken out of the city, said, “We do not worry
about Chornobyl. It worries us more whether vodka should be sold during holidays” (he meant the 1st of
May – an official Soviet holiday; at that time, the fight against consumption of alcoholic drinks, initiatedby M. Gorbachev, became a state doctrine).
On May 1, 1986, traditional Communist demonstrations were held in all cities and towns of
Ukraine, including Kiev and areas neighboring the Chornobyl NPP: tens of thousands of schoolchildren
were taken out in the street to create a festive mood. Later there was information that a part of Ukrainian
leaders insisted on cancellation of the manifestations, which jeopardized children. Nevertheless, the headof the Ukrainian communists, dogmatist V. Scherbytsky, came to the demonstration with his 10-year old
grandson, trying to set an example for his fellow party members.
Hypertrophy of thyroid gland and other health anomalies were detected later in many of thechildren who took part in those demonstrations.
4.
In 1984, I abandoned medical and scientific activities and totally devoted myself to literature.
Now I had time for writing stories, novels and plays. Simultaneously, I worked as a correspondent for the
popular Moscow newspaper Literaturnaja Gazeta (Litarary Newspaper) and magazine Junost (Youth). At
that time, those were liberal periodicals that supported Gorbachov’s perestroika and published bold articles- 80 -

about the situation in the Soviet Union. I also contributed to some Ukrainian newspapers and magazines.
The communist regime liberalized little by little, and true articles appeared on the pages of progressive
periodicals more and more often.
However, in the case of the Chornobyl catastrophe, the old Stalin syndrome showed itself – notruth about the scale and consequences of the accident should have gotten out. Only articles full of
official optimism were published.
People read and reread the official information, trying to understand something by reading the truth
between the lines, but without success.
In the end of April – in the beginning of May, I discussed the problem with a friend of mine who
was a representative of the Literaturnaja Gazeta in Kiev and we decided to try to get into the closed zone
to find out at least a particle of truth. By then, there were no representatives of the Literaturnaja Gazeta inthe zone – they were not allowed to write about the catastrophe. I expressed my wish to go to Chornobyl
voluntarily, as a doctor-epidemiologist, and to write a series of articles for the Literaturnaja Gazeta about
everything I would see there.
The Ministry of Health of Ukraine, where I went to obtain a permission to enter the zone of thecatastrophe, was in a total mess and confusion. The Minister was in the United States and one of his
deputies – the person with whom I used to work at the laboratory – acted for him. I made my way to his
office and offered my help in informing the population about how to behave in conditions of a nuclear
catastrophe. He waved me away and quite harshly said (before that we were considered friends) that it was
not my business. He told me they knew themselves what to do.
Later I learned that there was a severe order of higher leaders hanging over him and other membersof nomenclatura - to do all they can to keep the secret of the Chornobyl accident and its aftermath. In fact,that was a criminal order but, unfortunately, doctors had to execute it.
In a corridor of the Ministry, I was approached by a familiar radiologist, who whispered to me thatthe situation was very serious: the wind drove the radioactive clouds from the north towards Kiev. He
recommended me to shut windows at home tightly, keep small children indoors and give all members of
my family iodine in order to block thyroid from consumption of radioactive iodine. I was grateful to him
for his advice.
I went to the drugstore situated near the Ministry of Health, in Lypky district – the area ofgovernmental buildings and apartment houses for high state officials. There was quite a long line
consisting mostly of pensioners. To my great surprise, everybody in the line asked for solution ofpotassium iodine! It turned out that doctors from the governmental policlinic (the so-called 4th
Department) had recommended their patients to carry out iodine prophylaxis. At the same time, millions
of people that were in the zone of the accident had not been even informed about the nuclear catastrophe!
That warm and sunny day is engraved in my memory: thousands of men and women walking inthe street; children playing, as usual, in send-boxes in parks; people lining up to buy sneakers, canned
green peas or some other scarce goods.
I was overflowed with the feeling of danger approaching the city. In the small square at Prorizna
Street I said to a young mother playing with two children, “Take them away, it’s dangerous – there isradiation!” She looked at me as if I were crazy and harshly said, “Stop panicking. Go away and do notbother me.” That was the end of my attempts to save the younger generation of Kievers.
Only in the yard of my house I approached my neighbors who had a child born shortly before theaccident and told them about the situation. They took the child immediately indoors and until now are
grateful to me for the warning.

- 81 -

5.
The editors of the Literaturnaja Gazeta wrote a letter to the Minister of Health of Ukraine Dr.
Romanenko. He finally came back from the USA – just when the wave of panic was growing. The
Minister ordered to create a special medical group consisting of three professors – one from the Instituteof Oncology, another one from the Institute of Endocrinology and me, in capacity of a
doctor-epidemiologist with wide experience of fighting against various epidemics. It took three or fourdays to pass all bureaucratic procedures.
Finally, in the beginning of May, after all permissions and passes had been received, our medical
car went to the north - to the regions directly neighboring the zone of the catastrophe.
The highway leading to the Chornobyl zone ran through a picturesque area near Dnieper, buteverything that we saw was rather gloomy and disquieting – the highway reminded us of battlefront roads.
There were columns of military trucks and trailers laden with bulldozers and engineering
equipment going towards the Chornobyl NPP. Vehicles with cattle slowly moved in the opposite direction.
Poor cows - taken out of the radioactive zone, they did not know that they were conveyed toslaughterhouses! There were big problems with utilization of skins – the hair of cows was covered withlarge amounts of radioactive dust.
Villages looked extinct. The nature celebrated springtime: trees were in blossom, rivulets werefilled with water and verdure was sappy.
The road traffic was regulated by officers of highway patrol police. I noticed their unnaturally red
faces. I thought they had become sunburnt but I found out that the redness was caused by alpha-burns
produced by radioactive dust. Many of those traffic-controllers did not have respirators and inhaled air
contaminated with radioactive particles. Subsequently many of them became invalids.
One of my fellow travelers was joking all the time and commented on everything in an excited andironic manner. We laughed loudly, as if we had taken a sip of good wine. This was a manifestation of thefear of the unknown - soldiers often felt that way when they approached a battlefield. The other doctor was
more reserved. Later he became a leading expert in the field of endocrine diseases caused by the
Chornobyl accident.
Our destination was Polisky and Invankivsky districts, which neighbored the place of thecatastrophe and to which tens of thousands of evacuees from the 10-km zone were taken. Subsequently thearea of alienation was enlarged to 30 km.
We had to evaluate the medical situation on the spot, give necessary consultations to local doctors
and provide assistance in organizing preventive measures.
What we saw struck us: living 100 km from the zone of the catastrophe, we had no information
about what was really going on near Kiev. The scale of those events reminded war: tens of thousands ofevacuees, families who lost connection with their relatives and friends, numerous field hospitals andlaboratories and hundreds of medical teams. Ambulance cars carried number plates from all regions of
Ukraine. Hospitals were overcrowded. Offices of head doctors looked like improvised headquarters, wherepressing decisions were taken regarding assessment of the radiation situation, ensuring monitoring of theradiation level of drinking water and foodstuffs, and organization of life of numerous medical personnel
who came to the area of the catastrophe.
Absence of any reliable information regarding the level of radiation pollution of the area aroundthe Chornobyl NPP was the main problem at that time. This information, which was available to theemergency governmental commission working in Chornobyl, was strictly secret. To assess the level ofradioactive pollution of nearby areas, local health authorities had to use their own dosimeters designed forwartime and not sufficiently precise.
- 82 -

We met our colleagues–doctors and saw first victims of the accident at the plant. A local
obstetrician-gynecologist told me that in the first days after the catastrophe, many pregnant women,
succumbing to panic and being afraid to give birth to children-monstrosities, had abortions.
Another doctor took us to a hospital basement, where piles of mattresses, pillows and blankets lay.
All that stuff remained after the first wave of mass evacuation and was extremely polluted with radioactive
nuclides – as they said then, it “glowed”. Doctors did not know what to do with that – they encounteredsuch problem for the first time.
It was during the first trip to the catastrophe zone that I started to record tapes. At first, I did nothave any clear plan – I just wanted to record the most interesting stories about the catastrophe to use in myarticles. However, soon I realized how powerful these materials could be if one would conduct a system
questioning of everybody relating to the accident at the Chornobyl NPP and to overcoming of its
consequences.
I started to collect testimonies purposefully and, in half a year, I had a big collection of taperecords – from an academician to a student, from a NPP operator to a doctor, and from a farmer to amilitary helicopter pilot.
These records became a basis of the documentary story Chornobyl published in 1987. I still keep
those old tapes – evidence of our tragic history, out of which the whole humankind should makeconclusions.
6.
I got to Chornobyl just in a couple of days after the first trip. After passing several checkpoints, wedrove into a desert highway, covered with some white substance, which led to Chornobyl.
I was really terrified. For the first time in life, I looked into an incredible, unnatural world of
beyond – the world that no one on earth had seen before. I saw a nice Ukrainian small town with ancienthistory, in which destinies of Ukrainians, Poles, Jews and Russians intertwined. The town was desert,
extinct, without usual almost countrylike, unhurried life. Shutters of one-storey wooden houses weretightly closed; a big padlock was hanging on the door of a church; all stores and institutions were locked
and sealed. Life was in full swing only in front of the building of the District Committee of theCommunist Party, where the governmental commission worked, but that was specific, half-military life.
There were radio stations and armored troop carriers under masking net. Tens of black cars belonging toKiev senior officials were parked nearby. These cars, which collected a lot of radiation, remained in thezone forever in a special “graveyard”.
It should be explained that Chornobyl, as an administrative center of Chornobyl district, did notpractically relate to the nuclear power plant, which was built in 18 km to the north-west. The town only
lent to the plant its name, which became world-known. The service personnel of the plant lived in the newtown of Prypyat - much more modern than Chornobyl and located at the distance of 2-3 km from the plant.
Prypyat, which consisted of comfortable apartment houses, was immediately covered with a radioactive
cloud. The population of the town - more than 50 thousand persons - was evacuated in 24 hours after theaccident, and the town practically ceased to exist. Prypyat became a sui generis Atlantis of the nuclear era,
having disappeared forever.
The town of Chornobyl became a place of location of the governmental commission for combating
the consequences of the catastrophe, headquarters of various research and engineering organizations,canteens and residences for those who participated in the liquidation of the accident aftermath.
New inhabitants of Chornobyl – mainly men – were dressed in white or green overalls of NPP staff
or camouflage military uniform. Because of this circumstance, the town gave an impression of being on a
- 83 -

front-line.
I went to Chornobyl and Prypyat regularly (in fact, that was half-legal): first, together with doctors
from the Ministry of Interior who were friends of mine, later with acquaintances from the Institute for
Nuclear Research of the Academy of Sciences, who told me a lot of interesting facts – about possible
causes of the explosion, about the radiation state in the zone and about the imminent danger of a new
explosion.
The matter was that there were tons of radioactive water accumulated in the room under the
nuclear reactor (so called bubbling chamber). If the red-hot core of the blazing 4th reactor had burned
through the concrete floor and fallen into water, an extremely powerful steam explosion would have takenplace and could have destroyed the 3rd reactor adjacent to the 4th one. Consequences of this newcatastrophe could have been much more terrible than the effect of the events of April 26, 1986.
Now all efforts were directed at pumping water out of the bubbling chamber. Several teams offiremen, working in the zone of very high radiation, tried to bring fire-hoses to the bubbling chamber andto set pumps. I had an occasion to be in Chornobyl during those critical days. I saw pale, tired firemen,
who had performed the dangerous work and come to a medical center for a checkup. I remember one
officer said, “Now we can celebrate one more Victory day. There will be no explosion”.
7.
During those days panic in Kiev escalated to a breaking point. At the railway station, thousands ofpeople stormed trains heading to Moscow. People tried to take children and grandchildren out of the cityin the first place. Columns of cars were moving to the west and east of Kiev – in direction of Lviv andPoltava, which were not affected by radiation. Whole families were leaving, not believing in soothingwords of the official propaganda.
In case of a new, steam explosion at the NPP, the whole Kiev was supposed to be evacuated. WhenI learned about that, I suggested to my mother preparing herself to the possible rapid evacuation. Mother,
who was then 82 years old, looked at me sadly and said, “No, son. I already evacuated in 1941. I will go
nowhere from the city anymore. You take the family and go. I will stay. I want to die here.”
Luckily, the evacuation of Kiev did not happen, but I remembered the sad mother’s voice and herrefusal to leave the family nest for the rest of my life. I imagined that there would be a lot of people likemy mother in the empty city. What would these old, infirm people do? What would their children do,
being forced to leave their home?
Friends of mine gave me a dosimeter and my children amused themselves by measuring the levelof radiation at our balcony. The readings exceeded background levels hundreds of times.
In the beginning of May, production of a film based on my scenario started in Kiev. A famous
Moscow actor was invited for the role of the main hero. Everyone in the Soviet Union knew him for hisrole of a secret-service agent in a popular TV serial. In that film, the Russian agent somehow became ageneral of SS and, while working in Berlin, informed the Russian leadership about Hitler’s plans.
I went to meet the actor at the railway station. The morning train from Moscow arrived almost
empty. A group of officers came out of it, met by other military men. Several casuals looked roundfrightened as if asking what happened in this radioactive Kiev to which they were so scared to go.
Finally, an elegant gentleman came out of the first class carriage. I recognized him immediately– that was the famous actor. He asked me angrily, “What is the mess going on here? Somebody spreads
rumors about the scale of the accident. I have just come back from Austria, and they unleash an anti-Soviet
campaign. They want to present us as a threat to the West in the interests of NATO. Don’t people in Kiev
understand that? How can you succumb to propaganda of enemies?”- 84 -

My efforts to explain him something were futile. We came to my house to have lunch. I asked
him to take off his shoes on the doorstep, and my son passed the Geiger counter over his boots. The levelof radiation was higher than the biggest scale mark of the counter. We showed the readings of the counterat the balcony covered with dust to the actor. Nevertheless, he refused to believe, being convinced that
Kievers had become victims of anti-Soviet propaganda.
The next day he was filmed in a scene in the streets of Kiev in the course of the International Cycle
Race. At the time when Western states refused to participate, the Soviet Union satellites – Poland,
Czechoslovakia and others – sent their teams to the competition. To our horror, we could watch youngwell-trained men pumping over their lungs the Kiev air polluted with radioactive nuclides and “hotparticles”.
Another shooting took place in the Institute of Neurosurgery: the actor played the role of aprominent Kiev cybernetician who was diagnosed with brain tumor. In the diagnostic laboratory, where
the episode was filmed, we were told that they had stopped their activities because the level of radiation
exceeded the allowable maximum hundreds (!) of times.
This information played a decisive role. The actor, who had accused Kievers (including me) of
panic and Western governments of unleashing enmity towards the USSR, suddenly threw off his mask of ahero, turned pale, became pitiable and recalled his diseases that required him to return to Moscow
promptly. Having spent incomplete three days in Kiev, he fled from the city infamously and disappeared
forever.
I gathered a significant part of the information about the catastrophe, which became a basis forthe documentary story Chornobyl, at Kiev hospitals where victims of the accident - NPP operators,
firemen, military men and constructors – underwent medical treatment.
Those who received the highest doses of radiation were taken to Moscow by plane to a special
hospital No. 6. The main indication of acute radiation sickness was irrepressible vomiting, which wasevidence of the received dose above 100 rads (the annual allowable dose for NPP personnel was 5 rads!).
Some of the victims were doomed to death since their radiation doses were incompatible withlife. Those people died despite all efforts of doctors. Even Dr. Robert Gale – the Head of the UCLA Center
for Bone Marrow Transplantation (USA) - did not help them. I met this youthful swarthy doctor in Kiev inJune 1986 when he came for the first time to visit local clinics. Thanks to television, the doctor became themost popular American in the Soviet Union.
We met each other repeatedly during Dr. Gale’s visits to Kiev – at hospitals and international
conferences. In 1996 – the year of 10th anniversary of the Chornobyl catastrophe – I met him in
Washington, where I served as the Ambassador of Ukraine to the USA. Robert Gale was going throughhard times of his life: several American doctors accused him of self-advertisement and of inadmissiblecommercial use of terrible pictures of patients from the Moscow hospital No. 6 (Gale published them inthe popular magazine National Geographic). In the United States, there was a good film produced on thebasis of his scenario about the Chornobyl events. Our meeting was cordial – we had memories to shareabout the days of the Chornobyl disaster.
At one of Kiev hospitals I met Mayor Leonid Telyatnikov, Hero of the Soviet Union and head ofthe military-fire unit No.2 of the Chornobyl NPP. On the day of the accident, Telyatnikov was on leave but,having received a distress call, he immediately went to the station. Having climbed on the roof, he sawthat it was burning in several places above the 3rd block. The block still functioned and, if the roof had
fallen to the reactor, the country and the world would have faced a catastrophe much more horrible than
the 4th block explosion. Telyatnikov told me how he and his firemen had extinguished fire on the roof andhow he had felt unwell after two hours of this infernal work - that was the beginning of acute radiation- 85 -

sickness.
Thanks to Telyatnikov, I – and my readers together with me – learned the details of deaths of
those firemen who rushed to extinguish fire in the reactor compartment of the exploded 4th block,
ignoring radiation hazard (and, actually, not knowing seriously anything about it). They perishedthemselves in the radiation flame of the catastrophe…
Many acquaintances of Telyatnikov testified that he had come to the fire straight after a wedding,being not sober. Some nuclear specialists believed that alcohol protected from radiation and that explained
Telyatnikov’s survival despite the high level of radiation on the roof. Alcohol abuse “as a preventive
measure” was widespread in the zone.
During two years – 1986 and 1987 – I regularly visited Chornobyl, Prypyat, the NPP and its
surroundings to collect materials for the story.
During that time I lived simultaneously in two worlds. The new one was an absolutely incredible
world of the nuclear catastrophe which seemed to come to the earth from the distant future, symbolizing
the end of civilization. Coming back to Kiev, I immersed into the ordinary life with its usual joys andconcerns – far from nuclear nightmares. In the former times, this second life had sometimes looked
monotonous and boring but now, compared to the anti-world that appeared in the zone of the Chornobyl
catastrophe, it seemed magnificent. Similarly, the lost peace appears so wonderful when there is war
raging around. Those who were not in the zone during those days did not understand me: I felt delight inthe most commonplace details of the city life – even operation of the subway, no-break power, regularwatering of streets to wash away radioactive nuclides, removal of leaves polluted with radiation, control ofradiation level of foodstuffs at markets, organized sending of children to the regions of Ukraine free fromradiation and so on.
Panic of the first half of May 1986 has subsided, and inhabitants of Kiev got used to living underradioactive hazard - “spots” of increased radiation were detected at rooftops, in parks and on hillsides near
Dnieper. Although maps of radioactive contamination remained secret, civilian defense forces and local
authorities made efforts to deactivate the dangerous zones: top layer of soil in parks was collected andtaken out of the city; buildings and playgrounds were thoroughly cleansed. It was much more difficult toensure such measures in rural districts near the Chornobyl NPP: it was necessary to organize supply ofmilk to villages (farmers’ cows that had collected radiation were slaughtered), delivery of drinking water(wells were polluted with radioactive nuclides), vegetables, bread and meet. The size of radioactive
pollution zones was regularly assessed and, in a number of cases, decisions about resettlement of
inhabitants of certain villages in “clean” regions of Ukraine were taken.
My first publications in Moscow and Kiev periodicals about the situation in the zone of theaccident generated great interest and I started to receive hundreds of letters. I still keep these moving
human documents of time, which give an idea of the gigantic scale of the events that affected destinies of
millions of people in Ukraine, Belarus, Russia, other republics of the Soviet Union and neighboring
countries.
During those days I often spoke in public in Kiev and was asked the most unexpected questions,answers to some of which I did not know then. I had a persistent feeling that an abrupt shift in the mood of
most people took place in the country (at least in Ukraine). In fact, the USSR – once a seemingly
imperishable empire whose territory stretched from the Kuril Islands to Berlin – started to dissolve in the
hot summer of 1986. The state that was called the Empire of Evil was collapsing in the souls of people
who had not forgiven the ruling Communist Party for lie and cynical ignoring of danger posed tochildren’s health.
Never being a member of the Communist Party, I was surprised by the sharpness of the criticism- 86 -

directed at Ukrainian and Soviet leaders, expressed by seemingly orthodox communists during various
meetings. The era of Gorbachov, who advanced slogans of “perestroika” and “glasnost”, began from very
deep public disillusionment over the ruling system of that day. This process, first unnoticed not only bywestern observers but also by Soviet political scientists, led to serious consequences in 1991 when theSoviet Union dissolved.
However, then, in 1986, few people thought about the incipient chain reaction that subsequently
led to the USSR demise. The question about whose fault was the Chornobyl catastrophe seemed much
more important. What did really happen at the plant on the night of April 26, 1986? Why the country
turned out to be so unprepared to the biggest man-caused accident of the 20th century?
8.
I advanced towards my own understanding of the causes and consequences of the catastropheslowly and practically blindly. That path was not easy – from the first, sometimes accidental impressions
and meetings, from narrow perception of the scale and peculiarities of the catastrophe to comprehension ofphilosophical, political and social roots of Chornobyl. The work on the book Chornobyl (Moscow,
Sovetskij pisatel Publishing House, 1991) took four years of my life – four years of intensive search forthe truth, meetings, trips and study of documentary evidence of what had happened.
As I delved into the topic, professional secrets of the Chornobyl nuclear power plant revealed
themselves to me. Thanks to testimonies of witnesses, it became possible to reconstitute the picture ofwhat was happening during that terrible night in the premises where fatal decisions regarding conduct ofan experiment with the nuclear reactor and energy-generating turbine were taken. Experts taking part ininvestigation of causes of the accident helped me (and my readers) to understand the sense of those eventsin greater detail.
If, during the trial, which took place in 1987 in Chornobyl, the main blame was put on the NPP
top managers and operators of the 4th block, in the course of a more thorough study of all circumstances,it became clear that the RBMK reactor itself was imperfect and had become a source of increased danger.
Being a typical military reactor designed to produce plutonium for atomic bombs, the RBMK reactor wascharacterized by instability: physical specifications of RBMK operation at reduced capacity were
understudied, and reactor rods conduced, under certain conditions, to a sharp increase of reactor capacity,
up to an explosion. All this resembled a situation when a driver, wishing to stop his car suddenly, steps ona break, but the car accelerates instead.
Certainly, the accident might have not happened, if it were not for the outrageous mistakes of thepersonnel who performed inadmissible experiments in the nighttime and turned off the systems of reactor
protection. All this was evidence of serious problems that existed in the Soviet nuclear-power system –from reactor designers to ordinary operators.
I was greatly impressed by a meeting with one of the leading nuclear scientists, academician
Valery Legasov, Deputy Director of the famous Moscow Kurchatov Institute, who was a member of thegovernmental commission working in Chornobyl. He was a man of great civic courage and scientificintegrity, who was one of the first to understand that what had happened at the Chornobyl NPP was not an
incident and not only an operators’ fault but a natural result of development of the Soviet system which
was based on non-professionalism, lie and careerism.
For the first time in the USSR, he told the bitter truth saying that now not human-beings should
be protected from technology but technology (complex and superpower) should be protected fromhuman-beings. He was one of the first to understand that the RBMK reactor – the favorite brainchild of
President of the USSR Academy of Sciences Alexandrov – was imperfect. This discovery of Legasov- 87 -

undermined the myth about complete safety of the reactor, which was propagated by its designers. Manyof Legasov’s colleagues and Communist party leaders did not like this truth. The end of Legasov was
tragic: he committed suicide on the anniversary of the Chornobyl catastrophe. Academician Legasov, who
told the truth about the accident, became one of the victims of Chornobyl. My meeting with him remains
one of the unforgettable events in my life.
For me, the dead town of NPP personnel Prypyat, in which more than 50 thousand people lived
prior to the accident, became a symbol of the Chornobyl catastrophe and a bitter warning for thehumankind.
The radioactive cloud that formed after the 4th reactor exploded immediately covered thisbeautiful modern town. There are amateur videos showing how the peaceful life of the doomed town
passed – children playing on playgrounds, friends congratulating a newly wedded couple, people having
rest – and no one thinks of the terrible danger threatening the inhabitants of Prypyat. At first, authorities
tried to do everything possible to create an appearance of normality, but a sharply increasing level ofradiation in the town forced them to make a dramatic decision – to evacuate the whole population of
Prypyat, leaving only those who were engaged in salvage operations.
The decision about the evacuation was taken late at night on April 26 (the accident took place at
1:23 A.M. on April 26). Preparation for the evacuation took place all night long: more than a thousandbuses were gathered, and in the early morning of April 27 (Sunday) they came to Prypyat and were parked
in several town districts. Evacuees were allowed to take one bag (suitcase) with personal belongings.
Stupefied by the necessity to evacuate, people were in shock. Many of them did not have time to take themost necessary. And what is more, they were leaving the town not for several days, as they were told, butforever.
FOREVER.
Even today, 20 years after the catastrophe, for many inhabitants of Prypyat, the memory of evacuation is
the most painful. The peaceful life of thousands of people was tumbling down. This is reflected in thelanguage of eyewitnesses of those events, who say “before WAR” (i.e., before April 26, 1986) and “thenthere was WAR.” The explosion at the Chornobyl nuclear power plant divided time into two parts – time
before war (peaceful and beautiful) and time of suffering.
For the first time in the history of the humankind, a dead town appeared on the map of Europe
during a peaceful period. In 1986-1987, I visited this phantom city dozens of times; I was in its houses
deserted forever. 16- and 9-storied white buildings stood in silence. Building cranes froze forever overconstruction sites. The market place had turned into an auto graveyard with hundreds of cars rusting in the
open air. Birds had left this dead city; no cats or dogs were seen. A building in the center was crowned by
giant letters making a surrealistically sounding slogan of Soviet physicists, who were optimists before
1986, - “May atom be a worker not a warrior.” Wild grass grew through cracks in concrete, and white riversand drifted at the central square.
The town was sinking into non-existence as once Aztec buildings did. Maybe in a thousand years,
archaeologists of the future will dig out the perished town – the monument of the nuclear catastrophe
caused by human beings.
It seems I will remember forever the sickening smell of the dead town and the existential sadnessof parting with life that I felt in this zone of high radiation.
From all warnings given to the humankind, Prypyat is, perhaps, the most sinister. Do not play with
the nuclear genie. This artificial creature, after coming out of the bottle, may destroy life on earth.

- 88 -

9.
On the early morning of April 26, 1986, after the night explosion, several NPP operators madetheir way, with great difficulty, to the room from which the flank of the 4th block was seen. There were
heaps of debris, torn-away slabs and wall panels everywhere. Water was gushing out of torn fire-mains.
The room was covered with gloomy dark-grey dust. Fragments of reactor graphite were scattered all overthe place.
“What we saw was so horrifying that we were afraid to express that aloud”, recalled a participantof that expedition to the edge of the nuclear night, saved by a miracle. – “The generous spring sun isshining over the ruins, over this terrible invisible danger. The mind refuses to believe that the most terrible
thing has happened. But this has already become a reality, a fact. The reactor exploded. The explosion
threw out of the reactor cavity 190 tons of fuel with fission products, together with reactor graphite.”
For those who were first to realize what had happened, that was equal to admitting the end of theworld. That was nuclear hell.
The first feeling of the NPP personnel – from the director to operators – was a DISBELIEF inwhat had happened. I was astonished at this conservatism of so-called “professionals”, the dullness of
their thinking. Their confidence in designers’ infallibility and reliability of the RBMK reactor was sostrong and limitless that they refused to believe that the maximum hypothetical accident had taken place.
Probably, people of the Earth, having learned that they planet is splitting up, would refuse to believe thatin a similar way.
The lack of imagination, the technocratic philosophy of dull rationalism, the monopoly of anarrow group of scientists and technicians, who imposed their creature on society, the lack of objective
expertise and other reasons contributed to the disaster.
This is one of the first lessons of Chornobyl: it is necessary to take into account an everincreasing danger for civilization emanating from technological supersystems - energy, biological,
chemical and informational - which can go out of control as their complexity and capacity concentration
increase.
That is why Chornobyl was not an ordinary accident. That was a challenge to sustainable
development of the humankind, an alert sent to us from the future. Chornobyl raised the question ofdead-end ways of technical civilization development.
The Chornobyl catastrophe is characterized by involvement of multimillion population masses(children in the first place), emergence of hundred thousands of environmental refugees, long-term
radioactive pollution of soil, water (including groundwater) and air, irreversible change in the naturalenvironment and a number of ecosystems. In the Chornobyl zone, the nature has returned to its wild state,
to the medieval period.
Chornobyl participants and witnesses went through a severe psychological shock; many of themsuffered a peculiar syndrome of “the end of the world” characterized by paralysis of the will to live, lossof all hopes, apathy, loss of libido, and suicidal tendency.
Chornobyl also emphasized the problem of efficiency of the state-political system that existed in
the Soviet Union. All state and public mechanisms were subjected to a stability test – above all, thoserelating to quick decision-making on issues concerning security of millions of people. The totalitarianmonopolistic one-party system of the Soviet Union did not survive the Chornobyl test. The USSR decline
started from the Chornobyl catastrophe, as a result of which the communist system lost its credibility
among the people.
The Chornobyl explosion caused a burst of public indignation over the system of official lies andconcealment of truth. As a result of this, an environmental and political opposition quickly formed in- 89 -

Ukraine. On the tide of this public discontent, I (at that time, the leader of Ukrainian environmental
movement “Green World” and of the Green Party) was elected to the Supreme Soviet of the USSR. I
fulfilled my election pledges – to tell the truth about Chornobyl. As the Head of the Subcommittee for
Nuclear Power and Nuclear Ecology of the Committee for Environment of the USSR Supreme Soviet I
initiated, for the first time in the history of the Soviet Union, hearings about the Chornobyl problem. By
joint efforts, we tore down the curtain of secrecy created in 1986-1987 by nuclear- and military-industrial
complexes.
Chornobyl drew attention to the problem of political stability of any state possessing nuclear
reactors on its territory and to the related problem of international terrorism. It is not difficult to imagine
possible explosions of nuclear reactors if such had been located in the countries that were seized with civil
wars (Lebanon, Yugoslavia, Ethiopia, Rwanda, etc.). The problem of raising security of nuclear power
plants becomes more and more topical because of the spread of international terrorism.
Today, 20 years after the accident that shocked the world, a number of problems remain unsolved.
First of all, this concerns the problem of the “sarcophagus” – a giant concrete shelter constructed above
the destroyed reactor. Corroded by radiation, the sarcophagus may be ruined under the influence of ahurricane or an earthquake shock. There are tens of tons of highly radioactive dust inside the sarcophagus.
Each year tons of radioactive waters flow out of it.
If the sarcophagus tumbles down, that will lead to a new considerable emission of radioactivity andpollution of certain regions not only in Ukraine but also in neighboring countries. Therefore, constructionof a new shelter above the old sarcophagus became the highest priority.
The issues concerning the health of hundreds thousands of people evacuated from the zone andthose who participated in the liquidation of the catastrophe aftermath remain no less topical. The numberof victims of the Chornobyl accident is estimated to be tens of thousands of the deceased, although there is
no absolute agreement among medical experts as to the precise number of the dead and causes of deaths ofmany “liquidators”.
In conclusion of this short story about certain moments of the Chornobyl catastrophe, I shouldstress that, by its implications, Chornobyl can be compared to the most devastating wars and invasions ofenemies that had serious political, environmental, medical, psychological and cultural consequences.
Chornobyl is a lesson for the humankind for all times which should never be forgotten.

- 90 -

Military liquidators in liquidation of the consequences of Chornobyl NPP
accident: myths and realities
Yuriy Skaletsky, OlegNasvit
Institute of the National Security Problems,National Security and Defence Council of Ukraine

Twenty years have passed after the Chornobyl accident, but its consequences are so immense thateven now some facts are still not sufficiently investigated and being a subject for analysis by specialists onradiation protection and emergency response. In this article we will present the available information andour considerations concerning advisability and results of many thousands of military contingents that wereinvolved in liquidation of the Chornobyl NPP accident consequences (LAC).
Some historical information on military involvement into LAC works
Since 1986 the participants of LAC mission were termed “liquidators” in abbreviation form. Then
this expression migrated to mass-media and later on to scientific publications. Military liquidators
mustered from reserve sometimes are termed “partisans”. Overwhelming majority of liquidators wascomprised of such “partisans”.
When the Chornobyl accident happened in 1986, the National (State) system of prevention andresponse for man-caused emergency situations was not established in USSR [1]. Independently
establishments and departments formed response systems for emergency conditions at their best.
Missile Forces of strategic destination and Naval Forces armed by nuclear armaments and defence
technology with transport nuclear power units had object and territorial systems of prevention andresponse for emergency. But these classes of Military Forces (MF) were not involved in liquidation of
Chornobyl NPP accident consequences.
In case of a crash of spacecraft with nuclear power unit, a system was planned to be organised ona scale of all MF. 122 mobile detachment of special destination subordinated to Armed Forces General
Staff (Headquarters) and extraordinary joint detachments, formed from chemical, radiation and biologicaldefence units in each territorial command and Naval Forces, would be involved in this system.
It was cosidered that MF, including units of Civil Defence (CD), which were subordinated to
Ministry of Defence at the time of accident, were technically, organisationally and psychologically readyfor operation in conditions of nuclear war. These circumstenses and high mobilisation abilities of MF
made themselves involving into emergency works from the first hours after the Chornobyl accident.
In the afternoon of April 26 the first mobile group of Kyiv Civil Defence regiment arrived at theaccident site. By the order of Commander of General Staff (Headquarters) of Military Forces, 122 mobile
detachment of special destination from the region of Volga River and an extraordinary joint chemical
detachment of Kyiv command began to relocate to the ChNPP accident area in the morning of April 27.
Those were forces assigned and trained for liquidation of crash consequences of aircraft with nuclear
power unit on board.
On April 27 the Air Forces helicopters became to perform reconnaissance flights around ChNPP
with the aim of radiation survey and working-off the means for dropping loads into the reactor core. Local(civilian) population together with military personnel of the garrison ‘Chornobyl-2’ that was deployed at
10 kilometers to the south-west from ChNPP long before the catastrophe were involved in loading thehelicopters with sand and other materials. Chemical service of this garrison performed in the morning- 91 -

April 26 (5.00 – 10.30 a.m.) the first radiation survey along the road Chornobyl – Prypyat, inside the city
Prypyat, the river harbor, the railstation and around the industrial base of ChNPP and destroyed reactor.
From April 29 the loading of the helicopters were performed by detached battalion of civil
defense special protection. Military medical subdivisions provide medical assistance to the population
who were evacuated from the 30-km zone from the very beginning.
From the very beginning after the accident, Military units were engaged in implemetation of themost urgent, difficult and dangerous measures on the site. However, later on the governmental leadershipbegan to task irresponsible and absolutely impossible missions of decontamination of the 30-km zone(including Prypyat town) and re-evacuation by early 1987 of the evacuated inhabitants . It caused thecommitment of many thousands military contingent to the zone of radioactive contamination. Fig.1
illustrates the dynamics of the cumulative number of military liquidators and the strength of Chornobyl
Forces overall the period of MF participation in consequences liquidation.
By the middle of August 1986, the strength of the Chornobyl military contingent amounted to 40
thousand persons. But, considering the unfeasibility of decontamination of settlements located in the 30km zone, the quick withdrawal of forces from the accident site has begun. By the end of 1986 the number
was reduced to a half. During 8 months of 1986, about 100 thousand military took part in LAC.
During 1987, the quantity of soldiers continued to decrease and at the end of the year it was about
13 thousand. The total number of military involved this year mounted to 120 thousands. Next year in 1988,
the quantity of Chornobyl contingent went up to 20 thousands and during the year the overall number ofliquidators was about 80 thousands.
Mobilisation of large-scale army contingent to LAC was due both to the large scale of tasks posed
to MF and predominance of manual labor along with required promptness in liquidation actions. The
construction of the protective fence around the 30-km zone was a striking example. This fence of 200 km
length was set in 13 days only (from 8.06 till 20.06.86), which involved 7.3 thousand military for hard
manual work [3]. But, according to the opinion of specialists, this work could be done by 5 times lessmilitary personell if it had been better planned and provided with necessary equipment.
In general, MF were charged withn the following tasks:• сovering of crater of the destroyed power-unit (reactor);

45

1
2

250

30

200
150
100

15

Strength, thsd

Total number, thsd

300

025.04.86

25.04.87

24.04.88

24.04.89

24.04.90

Time

Fig. 1. Dynamics of the total number (cumulative total) of military liquidators (1) and strength ofChornobyl forces (2) during the period of military forces participation in LAC.

- 92 -

•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

continious radiation survey;
decontamination of industrial area and NPP premises;
decontamination of settlements, roads;
special treatment (decontamination) of the vehicles;
fencing in the exclusion zone;
provision of the industrial zone functioning (concrete-mixing plants, communications,loading/unloading works);
construction of water-protective structures;construction of radioactive waste disposal and temporary storage places for debris ofdestroyed reactor and other radioactive wastes, etc.

According to official data, the total amount of military liquidators during all the period of LAC amounted
to 239.3 thousands [2]. Reservists (“partisans”) formed the absolute majority, and the number of otherpersonnel amounted to 17 thousands only, including career servicemen and soldiers of service for the
fixed period. As a matter of fact, the absolute majority of military liquidators were not military men. They
were civilians dressed in military uniform, who were neither physically nor mentally prepared toadequately tackle LAC missions. Some of them, especially in the initial period of LAC works, were
deployed in the Chornobyl zone without special training, others were trained for a short time. But neither
mustered reservists, nor their trainers could imagine real situation in the Chornobyl zone before being
there.
The substantial problem for military subdivisions during the first weeks after the catastrophe was
the rapid increase of their number under the condition of constantly changing radiation situation.
Consequently, some military units found themselved in areas with gamma-ray dose rate of 50 mRh/h andhigher. In search of cleaner areas, some units changed their dislocation up to three times – a major
physical and psychological challenge for the servicemen in addition to their unjustified exposure toradiation.
The % fraction of the strength of different branches and provision units of Chornobyl forces ispresented in Table 1.
Table 1.
The % fraction of the strength of different branches and provision units of Chornobyl forces.
Subdivisions of MF branches and provision units in
Chornobyl forces
ChemicalEngineers
Civil defence
Rear forces
Technical provision
Administration and others

Proportion, %40 – 44
28 – 32
6–8
6 - 10
7-9
4-6

Arrangements for military liquidators dose control.
Already since the first days following the Chernobyl NPP accident, it became evident, that MD
Order № 285 dated 08.12.1983 [4] merely outlines a system of radiological protection of military men anddosimetric monitoring in case of radiation emergencies. For such a system to function effectively, dozens
of regulatory and guidance documents had to be prepared and a wide range of arrangements made.
The unprecedented scale of the Chernobyl Disaster, difficulties in forecasting the scope of work to
mitigate its consequences were the main reason for a debate within General Staff between the Military- 93 -

Medicine Service Command, who insisted on setting peacetime norms (25 rem), and the Head of the
Radiation, Chemical Biological Protection Department, who proposed wartime personnel exposure norms(50 rem) as the basis [2, 5].
However, even with such an uncertainty in exposure limits in the first post-accident days,
Radiological Protection Service (RPS) and Dosimetric Monitoring (DM) within the LAC units did
function. Thus, the KMD Air Force Commander – 1 May 1986 [6], and later on the KMD Commander– 4
May 1986 [7] issue orders on RPS arrangements in the subordinate military units involved in LAC. Theseorders establish exposure limits for military servicemen throughout LAC: 24 rem for Air Forceservicemen and 25 rem for the rest of military liquidators.
Therefore, RPS including DM, was organized within all units arriving at the wrecked ChNPP area
and getting under command by the KMD Force Commander already since the first days of their stay in theaccident area. It is primarily indicated by the high level of provision of military liquidators with dosimetricmonitoring data during that period in the State Chernobyl Registry [8].
It is worth mentioning, however, that the first post-accident activities of the military radiologicalprotection services did not catch up with the situation as it developed, and regulatory requirements were
not fully met. Particularly, already as of 1 May 1986 (issue date of the KMD Air Force Commander
Order), the strength of units involved in the accident area activities almost reached 600 persons, including
up to 100 representatives of KMD Air Force units, and as of 4 May (issue date of the KMD Commander
Order) it was already a multi-thousand military contingent that participated in the emergency activities. In
violation of i. 35 of MD Order № 285 dated 08.12.1983 [4] personnel were involved in ACL withoutorders authorizing work under high exposure doses, the first order of this kind was only issued on 1 May.
The permissible dose limit debate lingered until 21 May 1986. The normative uncertainty withrespect to external exposure doses resulted during the first post-accident weeks in the exposure of 52
servicemen of Special-Purpose Chemical Force Unit 122 directly subordinated to Department Head of the
RCB Protection Force, to doses of up to 72 rem [2, 9]. Meanwhile, the personnel of the military units
subordinated to KMD, who carried out radiation reconnaissance missions of comparable radiologicalhazard or even more hazardous ones (flights over the wrecked unit), were exposed to much lower doses(Table 2). This Table demonstrates a dependence of the average military liquidator dose during the firstmonth of liquidation activities on the set dose limits.
Table 2.
Doses of radiation to military units staff members participated in LAC in April-May 1986№
Units
SampleDose
Confines of dose
size,
limits,intervals, Rempersons
Rem
Min
max
1
Chemical Force Unit 122
38
50
40
72
2
KMD Consolidated Chemical Unit
25
25
25
30.9
3
KMD Air Force
31
24
13.5
29

Averagedose, Rem54.2±1.3
26.7±0.2
21.6±0.4

The permissible dose limit uncertainty was ended by MD Order №110 dated 21 May 1986 [10],which set the dose limit for all military servicemen at 25 rem. Item 3 of this Order provides for using“group” and estimated “group” dose assessment methods along with individual dosimetry. In addition, thepermissible daily dose of 2 R [11] is introduced to prevent mass exposure of liquidators to major doses in
the accident area. This measure made it virtually impossible to use common military dosimetry equipment
to monitor exposure doses of military liquidators (Table 3).

- 94 -

Table 3.
№
за/п
1
2
3
4
5

Precise characteristics of domestic common military dosimetry equipment
Type
Range of measurement
Possibility of automated reading ofdata
Means of military dosimetric controlИД – І (ID-I)
20 - 500 rem
absentДКП - 50 А (DKP-50A)
2 - 50 R
absentMeans of individual dosimetric control
ДК - 0,2 (DK-0.2)
10 - 200 mR
absentИД- ІІ (ID-II)
10 – 1500 rem
absentДП - 70 М (DP-70M)
50 - 800 R
absentIn addition, another 30 various regulatory and guidance documents were developed [12, 13, 14],which detailed specific provisions for radiological protection of military liquidators.
In spite of all instructions for implementation of individual dosymetric control in liquidators units
with the use of individual dosimeters, such kind of control was not implemented. Thus the group method(one individual dosimeter in a group) and group-calculated method (dose evaluation is made for militarygroup taking in account the dose rate of gamma-ray at the working place and working hours) prevailed in
Chornobyl forces. According to of some authors [15] the errors of these methods were 250% and 500%,
respectively.
The execution of decontamination of the Unit #3 roof in the period from 19.09 till 2.10.1986 could
be the only exception. In these works, besides the calculation method, the obligatory operational control ofradiation dose for participants was put into practice using dosimeter ДКП-50 А (DKP-50A) [16, 17]. In
total 3,026 militaries took part in this work. I.e., taking into account that the total number of militaryliquidators amount to about 300 thousands, we should conclude that only about 1% of liquidators werereally provided with instrumental dosimetric control, but not 14% as was mentioned by V.V.Chumak [8].
It should be noted, however, that the organization of ChNPP Unit 3 decontamination work also
gave an example of failing to meet the Order-established norms: in defiance of all the then existing orders,the one time exposure dose limit of 20 rem was established for participants of ChNPP Unit 3
decontamination work by the Guidance For Work Organization And Performance [18], which was not
introduced by any order. And because military man were involved, who had already been exposed to somedoses, in certain cases the total dose exceeded 25 rem.
Another attempt to organise the day-to-day dosimetric control of almost all military liquidators
using dosimeter ДПГ-03 (DPG-03) was made at the end of 1989 –beginning of 1990, and also failed.
The liquidator contingent with reliable doses can not be expanded by individuals from groups
where doses were monitored by the «group» method, since servicemen who wore ID were constantly
replaced. Therefore, total individual exposure doses for military liquidators, identified based on individual
dosimeters are virtually missing.
It should also be borne in mind that the estimated “group” dose assessment would normally use
the military roentgenometer-radiometer DP-5, while the “group” assessment method– the DP-50А
dosimeter. Both devices were calibrated in Roentgens, accordingly, the records in the ACL military unit
exposure logs were also made in Roentgens. However, when filling out Registry questionnaires, instead of
Roentgens, the same value but in rem was entered automatically, without factoring in the conversion rateof 0.67–0.71, which also contributed to overestimating the official dose records (ODR).

- 95 -

Therefore, on the one hand, military liquidators are best provided with official dose records [8],while on the other hand – there are serious doubts about the quality of those dose values because of the
predominance of the “group” and estimated “group” methods of their assessment. A major effort to verify
those doses would be needed if we were to use the data on the exposure of military men in
epidemiological studies [8, 15].
Veryfication of radiation doses to military liquidators
The first stage of verification addresses the objectivity issue of dosimetric monitoring. A whole
series of verification methods to deal with available dosimetry information has been proposed, thepredominant majority of which are based on variation statistical methods.
Due to monitoring of the doses with near-permissible values, the distribution of doses around theboundary value becomes normal. The so-called hybrid lognormal distribution (combination oflogarhithmically normal and normal distribution) gives a good reflection of data observed in many of suchcases [18].
The attempts to clarify the dosimetric monitoring objectivity situation in the LAC Units that weknow of were made based on a statistical analysis of too generalized information [15, 19], or using
insufficiently accurate database of the All-Army Registry [20] without considering the organization
specifics of service, work and dosimetric monitoring in those units.
The irregular distribution of military liquidator exposure doses, being generally limited within arange of 10–25 rem, led some authors to conclude that the main source of distorted dosimetry informationin Chornobyl Registrys are the relevant Services of MD units [15, 19]. These authors believe that therange of activities performed by MD units was very wide and only a portion of it was related to exposure
to significant individual doses. In other words, a wide range of tasks to deal with must correspond to awide enough and smooth distribution of individual doses.
To clarify this issue, we have analyzed the military liquidator exposure doses for various LAC
activities, which differed in principle by nature of activity and health conditions. The outcome of thisanalysis for May 1986 - May 1987 is given in Table 4 and Figures 2–6.
Table 4.
№
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

Average radiation doses to personnel of different units
Name of the unit and branch
Sample size,
Region ofWork character
persons
operation
Detached
Mechanised
4704
ChNPP
DecontamiRegiment (DMR) of Civil
nationDefence
Military
Construction
3489
ChNPP,
DecontamiBattalion (MCB), sappers
10-km zone
nation,construction
Gas Defence Brigade (GDB),
2465
ChNPP,
DecontamiChemical Forces
10-km and 30- nation
km zones
Rear and technical provision
2158
30-km
zone Rear technicalunits
and outside itprovision
817
Operational
Group
1164
30-km zone
Management(OG), management body- 96 -

Averagedose, cSv
22,57±0,10
20,02±0,08
20,08±0,15
7,82±0,91
9,23±0,60

The Table 4 data indicate that the average military liquidator exposure doses are determined by
the area and nature of LAC activities performed. Specifically, the average doses are much lower for units
that did not performed work directly at the ChNPP industrial site. Maximum doses are observed in CD,
chemical and engineering units; much lower ones in administrative units; and minimum ones in logistics
units.

1983

2000
1517
1500
1000

5-7,5

7,5-10

46

44

158

17,5-2035

229

15-17,544

12,5-1540

10-12,5

52

2,5-5

556

500

0-2,5

Number, persons

2500

25 andmore

22,5-25

20-22,50Dose, cSv

Fig. 2. Distribution of radiation doses to military personnel of detached mechanised
regiment in period since May 1986 to May 1987 (n=4704).
1783

1500
1000

739

10-12,565

43
25 andmore

7,5-1031

22,5-25150

20-22,589

17,5-2034

15-17,5

29

5-7,5

0

45

2,5-5

500

12,5-15

481

0-2,5

Number, persons

2000

Dose, cSv

Fig. 3. Distribution of radiation doses to personnel of military building battalion inperiod since May 1986 to May 1987 (n=3489).
917

800
499

414
142

76
25 andmore

15-17,5

12,5-1573

22,5-25209

98
10-12,57,5-10

34
5-7,5

0

162

44
2,5-5

200

20-22,5400

17,5-20

600

0-2,5

Number, persons

1000

Dose, cSv

Fig. 4. Distribution of radiation doses to military personnel of 25 gas defence brigade
in period since May 1986 to May 1987 (n=2465).
- 97 -

Accordingly, the exposure dose values for SMR and MEB, which worked under the mostradiologically hazardous conditions, are skewed towards the permissible dose limit of 25 cSv (Fig. 2, 3).
Because various CPB units were both onsite at ChNPP and at various distances from it, the exposure dose
distribution for this part of liquidators has a somewhat different nature, but most doses still are placedaround 25 cSv (Fig. 4).
In the opinion of some authors [8], that we share, such an irregular distribution of doses for CD,
chemical and engineering units resulted from a stringent dose management rather than total falsification.
Therefore, the major doubts held by some authors as to objectivity of dosimetric monitoring in LAC units
are primarily due to these researchers’ insufficient awareness of the organization of dosimetric monitoring
and activities of this liquidator contingent. Yet one cannot totally dismiss facts of dose falsification, nor
the possibility of unmonitored exposure of a certain part of liquidators to doses significantly exceeding thepermissible ones [9].
It should be taken into account that a monetary compensation adding up to 5 monthly
remuneration rates was provided for exposure to a dose of 25 cSv and above. In other words, there was asignificant material “interest” in receiving a dose of 25 cSv and higher. Once the dose limit was set at 10

Number, persons

350

312

280
210

162

155

140

94

88

76

156
65

42

70

14
25 andmore

20-25

17,5-20

15-17,5

12,5-15

10-12,57,5-10

5-7,5

2,5-5

0-2,5

0

Dose, cSv

Fig.5. Distribution of radiation doses to military personnel of 817 OG in period since May 1986
to May 1987 (n=1164).
500

452

Number, persons

404
375

336
276

250

206
90

125

76

60

68

48

16
25 andmore

22,5-25

20-22,517,5-20

15-17,5

12,5-15

10-12,57,5-10

5-7,5

2,5-5

0-2,5

0

Dose, cSv

Fig. 6. Distribution of radiation doses to military personnel of rear and technical provision units
in period since 22.06.1986 to 08.08.1987 (n=2158).
- 98 -

cSv, cases of reaching the dose limit became singular, and cases of exceeding 10 cSv went virtuallyunrecorded, which can support our assumption. It should be noted, however, that cases of modifying
exposure doses for social reasons had place among liquidators from other ministries and agencies [8].
For OG 817 and especially for the logistic units that worked under more favorable conditions interms of radiation exposure than the aforementioned ACL units, the exposure dose distribution is close tologarithmically normal (Fig. 5, 6).
Therefore, the exposure dose value and the nature of dose distribution in military liquidators are
generally consistent with the nature of LAC activities and exposure conditions. But, in general summaries
the dose distribution specifics in serviceman of LAC units, which worked under safer radiologicalconditions, is offset by the data on exposure doses in the more numerous CD, chemical and engineering
forces.
Another step in dose verification is to establish a ratio between officially recorded (obtained via
the “group” and estimated “group” methods) and specific reference military liquidator exposure doses,
which objectively reflect the real situation.
As reference ones, we will use 2,447 records for military liquidator exposure doses measured withthermoluminescent dosimeters, courtesy of the archives of Kombinat Production Association (eventuallytransformed into RPA Prypyat).
Based on these data we have calculated the average doses received by servicemen for two weeks(basic term of wearing a dosimeter), total exposure doses were calculated for 12 weeks – a duration of
military liquidator stay in the ChNPP area that is also a conservative enough assumption.
A comparison of doses calculated based on measurement and official dose records (ODR) in thesame contingents is shown on Table 5. The Table 5 data indicate that ODR exceed the doses obtained
through individual dosimeters, by an excess of 4.5 times in1988 and more than twice – in 1989 and 1990.
Table 5.
The ratio between calculated and measured by individual TLD doses for military liquidators№
Year Average dose obtained by Average dose measured by individual Ratio between
estimated andз/пestimation method,ers DPG-03, cSv/number of persons
measured
cSv/number of persons inin group dosimet.
exposure doses
group
For 2 weeks
For 3 months
1
1988
5.56 ± 0.97/7502
0.2± 0.05/68
1.2
4.63
2
1989
3.12 ± 0.12/5862
0.22±0.03/568
1.32
2.36
3
1990
4.94 ± 0.22/2748
0.36±0.03/1811
2.16
2.29
Also noteworthy is the ratio between projected (estimated) and actually measured with ID of the
RMP 50А type exposure doses of the military men who decontaminated the ChNPP Unit 3 roof. Table 6
provides literature [17, 20] and archive data on the exposure doses of this contingent. Again we see thatthe projected (estimated) dose in average is twice that actually obtained.
When analyzing other archive materials, we found evidences of dose overstating aimed on preterm exemption from military training [22], as well as methodic problems of different kind [23, 24]. By
the way, cases in which the group method gave precise values were quite rare, and dosimeters Д-2Р (D-2R,
desined for use in nuclear industry, being a kind of ionisation chamber) used in this method in theconditions of hard beta-radiation overstated the dose no less than twice.
I.e. the analysis of radiation doses of large contingents of military liquidators showed that ODR noless than twice overstated the really received radiation doses.
Table 6.
- 99 -

The ratio between calculated and measured by individual dosimeters doses for military liquidators
participated in decontamination works on the roof of Power Unit #3.
Average dose by
Average dose
Number ofindividualRatio
by calculation№
Date of work
liquidators,
dosimeter
method, R
persons
meterage, R
1
28.07.86
8
1
0.4
2.5
2
19-20.09.86
133
20
8.5
2.35
3
21.09.86
307
20
10
2.0
4
22-23.09.86
953
20
9
2.22
5
24.09.86
376
20
10.6
1.89
6
26.09.86
270
20
13
1.54
7
27.09.86
300
20
16.2
1.23
8
14.10.86
30
20
8.26
2.42
9
15.10.86
16
20
9.9
2.02
10
16.10.86
28
20
10.29
1.84
Total
2421
2.07
Morbid and mortal events of military liquidators during performance of LAC works
The data on pre-term dismissal of military servants of SMR and CPB units for the reason of healthproblems are presented in Table 7. First of all, it should be mentioned that these data are not fully
consistent with the realities and are insufficient for well-grounded conclusions. In particular, it is unlikelythat the aforementioned units should have had more cases of dismissals for health considerations in 1987
than in 1986. Yet these data are quite enough to state that in a predominant majority of liquidators
dismissed for health considerations, their exposure doses and duration of stay in the accident area weresignificantly less than in their colleagues who had no health concerns.
In a predominant majority of liquidators exposure doses were at the level where they had justsome likelihood of physiological deviations unrelated to health dysfunctions. The opinion that radiologicalfactors made a very insignificant contribution to deterioration of liquidators' health can be attested by thefact that two out of three liquidators deceased were recorded on the third and fifth day of their stay in thewrecked ChNPP area, and the duration of stay of the third deceased was also within average for their unit.
The main cause of death in all these cases was acute cardiovascular deficiency.
In some orders issued by military unit commanders we find records on other lethal cases amongliquidators, but no summary information available on this issue. Therefore, we can provide but very roughestimates of total lethality by extrapolating the ratio of the number of SMR serviceman and number ofdeaths among them onto the total number of liquidators. Since the total number of persons who served in
SMR in January – June 1987 was about 2–3 thousands, then the total death-toll for the contingent of 300
thousands could have been about 300–450 cases.
The Chornobyl Military Force Commander Order № 5 dated 29 January 1990 [26] indicates thatin a majority of military units no in-depth medical examinations are conducted, resulting in cases of latediagnostics of ailments, up to lethal ones (private К. – shower & laundry detachment, praporshchik D. –military trade unit 960, private S. – military detachment 63279 etc.). And that happened in 1990, when the
military liquidator exposure dose did not exceed 5 rem.

- 100 -

Table 7
Dismissals, exposure doses and duration of stay in the accident area for servicemen of SMR and CPB
during 1.05.1986 through 31.12.1987
Year
Work
Exposure dose, cSv
Average duration of
Number of liquidators
periodperiods of staying indismissed for health
Chornobyl zone
considerations
DMR
GDB
DMR
GDB
DMR
GDB
April- May
23.23±0.2 18.4±0.4
28.9±0.6
21.6±0.8- ???
1*(7)/(25)1986
June22.17±0.4 14.3±0.6
55.7±0.529.3±0.4
1
1*(36)/(2.5)
August1*(28)/(14)September- 23.1±0.2
24.3±0.3
57.3±0.3
41.7±2.2
1
DecemberJanuary22.1±0.19 18.1±0.5
69.6±0.769.1±1.9
1**(53)1987
June
1**(3)
1**(5)
1*(53)
July10.7±0.28 9.3±0.2
72.1±1.2.
54.1±1.5
1*(20)
1*(39)/(4.8)
December
1*(21)
1*(51)/(7.02)
1*(30)/(0.2)
1*(49)/(6.0)
1*(47)/(4.3)
1*(39)/(8.8)
1*(71)/(3.7)
1*(35)/(5.5)
1*(44)/(9.1)
1*(35)/(5.7)
1*(69)/(8.9)
Total during 19861014
and 1987* in parenthesis duration of period of staying, days (numerator) and radiation dose, cSv (denominator);** liquidators died in Chornobyl zone, in parenthesis duration of period of staying in the zone.
Researchers of the morbidity problem detected no essential connection between availability ofliquidator complaints and duration of their stay in the accident area, as well as the location and nature ofrecovery activities [27]. The Table 8 data can also confirm that it was other factors rather than theradiological one that was the cause of liquidator health condition deterioration.
Table 8.
Dismissals and exposure doses for military liquidators of the first and third sectors during 20.12.1986
through 30.03.1987
Number of
Average dose for
Average dose for№ Subordination
dismissed for health dismissals for healthliquidators in
Periodconsiderations
considerations, cSv
1986–1987, cSv
Sector 1
20.12.861(Blorussian84
2.39±0.13
5.7±0.3
16.03.87
Command)
Sector 3
03.01.872(Prycarpathian23
9.57±1.29
15.17±2.330.03.87
Command)- 101 -

The exposure doses for military liquidators of the first and third sectors who were dismissed for
health considerations did not exceed the average for the whole sectors and those levels that could
theoretically cause changes in their health condition.
In our opinion, the sudden conscription with a drastic change of habitual living and working
conditions, frequent relocations in the accident area provoked a major strain of adaptive mechanisms andtransition of certain body parts and systems, primarily the cardiovascular one, to a critical functioning
mode. It was what induced the aggravation of chronic diseases and sometimes – emergence of criticalconditions and lethal cases. The radiation factor is seen from the exposure doses available to have been
one of the least significant one.
As a results of a large number of liquidators dismissed for health considerations, people developed
a belief that recovery work at ChNPP was extremely dangerous, hence the liquidator contingent grew,which intensified the psycho-social consequences of the accident.
Conclusions
1. The State’s unpreparedness for action in emergencies; charging the Armed Forces with unfeasible tasks;
predominance of manual labour in LAC; use of DM methods that overestimated dose by about twice;imperfect system of medical selection of reservists drafted for a training assembly for LAC, –that
altogether unreasonably enlarged the liquidator contingent, increased LAC costs and intensified thesocio-psychological consequences of the Chernobyl Disaster.
2. The system of radiation safety and security of the Chernobyl Military Force, whatever its shortcomings
may have been, has prevented military servicemen from being massively exposed to doses capable ofinflicting radiation injuries.
3. The exposure doses and duration of stay in the accident area of military liquidators who were dismissed
for health considerations or died during their stay in the accident area were notably lower and shorter
than average for the unit where they served.
4. Scientific attention should be paid also to the influence of non-radiation factors (such as stress etc.) on
the health state of military liquidators during their recovery works and in long-term aspects.
References
1. Il’yin L.A. Reality and Miths of Chernobyl. – M.: АlaRа Ltd, 1996. – 466 p. (rus)
2. Chvyrev V.G., Kolobov V.I. Organisation of Sanitary-hygienical Measures in Troops During the
Liquidation of the Consequences of Chernobyl Catastrophe in 1986. // Military-Medical Journal.-1996.#4.- P.4-7. (rus)
3. Chernobyl: Catastrophe. Feat. Lessons and Conclusions// Dyachenko A.A., Grabovoy I.D., Il’yin L.N..M.: Inter – Vesy.- 1996. -784 p. (rus)
4. The Main Sanitary Regulations in Work with Radioactive Substences and other Sourses of Ionising
Radiation in Soviet Army and Navy: Order of Ministry of Defence #285 of 1983. –M.- 57 p. (rus)
5. About Putting in Force the Recommendations on Evaluation of Consequences of Damages Factors of
Nuclear Explosion on Army and Navy Personnell, Civil Defence Detachements and Population: Orderof USSR Ministry of Defence #310 of December 23, 1983. –M., 1983. – 44 p. (rus)
6. On the Organisation of Radiation Safety and Protection of Personnel During the Performance of Workon the Liquidation of Consequences of Accident on the Chernobyl NPP: Order of the Air Force
Commander of Kiev Command. – May 1, 1986. - #063.-K. – 2 p. (rus)- 102 -

7. On the Organisation of Radiation Safety Procedure in the Forces Engaged in the Liquidation ofConsequences of the Accident on Chernobyl NPP: Order of the Kiev Commander. – May 4, 1986. - #041.-K.- 2 p. (rus)
8. Liquidators’ Dosimetry in 14 years after Chernobyl Accident: Problems and Achievements/ Chumak
V.V., Bakhanova E.V., Sholom S.V. and oth. // Internationa Journal of Radiation Medicine. -2000. #1/5. –P. 25-26. (rus)9. Skaletsky Yu.M. Cases of overirradiation in significant doses as criterion of efficacy assessment ofRadiation Protection System of Military Liquidators. / Hygienic Science and Practice on the Break ofCentury // Materials of the XIV Congress of Hygienists of Ukraine. – Dnipropetrovsk: ART-PRES, 2004. –V.II , -P. 472-476 (ukr)
10. On the establishment of temporary maximum permissible radiation doses for military personnel,
taking part in the liquidation of the consequences of accident on Chernobyl NPP, permissible levels ofcontamination of water, foodstuffs and objects: Order of the USSR Ministry of Defence. – May 21,
1986. - #110. (rus)
11. Temporary hygienic (sanitary) safety requirements during the performance of work on the liquidationof the consequences of accident on the Chernobyl NPP. Approved by Deputy Minister of middle
machinery building Melikov A.G. –M., 1986.-5 p. (rus)12. Methodical Recommendations on Radiation Protection Service Organisation in the unit / Berezin A.A.,
Grebtsov V.P.; Approved by Commander of Military Unit 06407 of July 7, 1986. – Chernobyl, 1986. –11 p. (rus)
13. Temporary Regulations concerning Chief Radiologist of Sector’s Operation Group / Approved by theCommander of Military Unit 06407 on July 3, 1986. – Chernobyl, 1986. – 5 p. (rus)
14. Temporary Direction on organisation of individual control of external radiation doses for military
personnel / Vladimirov V.A., Baul’ Yu.M., Klintsevich G.N. and oth.; Approved by the Commander of
Military Unit 06407 on September 8, 1986. – Chernobyl, 1986. – 13 p. (rus)
15. Irradiation levels of participants of liquidation of consequences of Chernobyl accident during 1986 1987 and dosimetric data verification / Il’yin L.A., Kryuchkov V.P., Osanov D.P. and oth. // Radiation
Biology. Radioecology. – 1995. – Vol.35, #6. – P.803-828. (rus)
16. Samoilenko Yu.N., Starodumov V.M., Karpan M.V. Organisation of Radiation Control // Chernobyl88: Reports of the Ist All-union Scientific and Technical Conference on the Results of the Liquidationof Consequences of the Accident at Chernobyl NPP. – Vol.I – Radiation situation. Chernobyl – 1989. –P.226-260. (rus)
17. Tarakanov N. Two Tradegies of the XX Century. Documentary Stories. – M. – Sovietsky Pisatel’,1992. – 431 P. (rus)
18. Direction on organisation and conducting of the works on the zone “N” decontamination fromradioactive waste. Approved by Chief Commander of troops of South-West Direction Army General
Gerasimov I. 19.09.1986. (rus)
19. Retrospective Dosimetry of Participants of Liquidation of the Consequences of Accident at Chernobyl
NPP / Illichov S.V., Kochetkov O.A., Kryuchkov V.P. and oth.; Editors – Kryuchkov V.P., Kosovskiy
A.V. – K.: Seda-Styl’, 1996. – 234 p. (ukr)
20. Ivanov V.K., Tsyb A.F. Ivanov S.N. Liquidators of Chernobyl Catasrophe: Radiation-epidemiologic
Analysis of Medical Consequences. – M.: Galanis, 1999. – 312 p. (rus)
21. Radiation control of different objects in course of the work on the liquidation of accident
consequences / Kochetkov O.A., Goldshtein D.S., Osanov D.P. // Medical Aspects of Accident on the
Chernobyl Nuclear power plant : Proceedings of the Scientific Conference, May 11-13, 1988. Kiev. –K.: Zdorov’ya, 1988 P.91-95. (rus)- 103 -

22. On unjustified replacement of the military servants in Special zone of Chernobyl NPP. Order of theKiev Command Commander # 103 of 25.08.86. -3 p. (rus)23. On the weakness of the radiation safety conditions in the Military Forces units and formations: Orderof the Commander of Operation Group 912 of the USSR Civil Defence #91 of 20.12.1989. – Chernobyl,
1989. – 3 p. (rus)24. On organisation of dosimentric control of units and subdivisions personnel of Operation Group 912 of
the USSR Civil Defence. Order of the Commander of Operation Group 912 of the USSR Civil Defence# 27 of 21.03.1990. – Chernobyl, 1990. – 3 p. (rus)25. On medical selection of persons, temporary engaged in the performance of works in the zones with theincreased radiation. Instruction of the General Staff of USSR Military Forces # ДГШ (DGSh)-22 of
30.06.1986. – 4 p. (rus)26. On the state of medical provision of militaries, taking part in the liquidation of consequences ofaccident on the Chernobyl NPP. Order of the Commander of the military unit 06407 of 29.01.1990 # 5.
– 5 p. (rus)27. Shantyr’ N.N., Romanovich N.K., Makarova N.V., Derena L.N., Saygina E.B. Hygienic analysis ofradiation doses of participants of liquidation of Chernobyl NPP Accident Consequences (after the dataof All-Army Registry). – Military-medical Journal. – 1995. - #3. –P. 58-63. (rus)- 104 -My Good Life in Pripyat, the Disaster Caused by Chernobyl, and theCatastrophe of the Nuclear Power Station and of Our Lives
Tamara Vlodimirovna Dikaya
Social Organization for the Chernobyl People “ZEMLYAKI”
Mayakovskyy st. 7B, Kyiv, 02225 Ukraine

I would like to begin my story by writing about the beautiful natural setting of the land where I
was born. My village is called Leskonope. Its houses are small and lie hidden in the dense green of its
many trees. It is located on a hill and from its highest point there is a beautiful view of the river, a branchof River Desna, that flows nearby, with thick tall rushes and woods on each bank. However often I visit
my birthplace, I am never tired of its beauty. My heart beats more quickly at this magnificent view. Forme, nowhere is as beautiful as this place with its vast meadows, its forests and the fast-flowing Desna.
At the village school I attended, I was taught to love nature, to respect my elders, to study hard,
to do my best to earn better grades, and to love hard work. For these lessons, I will always be grateful to
my first teachers. Looking back on my childhood, I remember how proudly I used to sing at village
concerts. Students from my school participated in the concerts the village held on every festive occasion.
After finishing the eighth grade, I continued on to the ninth and tenth grades at Ushinsky Boarding Schoolin the same district. At the center of this ancient region is Novgorod-Seversky, from which, as thehistories of long ago record, Prince Igor Svyatoslavich departed on his punitive expeditions against thePolovtsians. I studied hard at school and participated in extra-curricular activities. I loved to sing andalways dreamed of continuing on to sing before audiences.
When I finished the tenth grade, I took the university entrance examinations. I went to a
preparatory course at night and worked as an electric panel controller at the steel mill in a machineryfactory in Kostroma during the day. However, when I was unable to enter the department of engineering
at the university, I returned home. At that time one of my relatives was home from Pripyat and hesuggested I get a job in that town. He praised the place where he lived, telling me that it was a town ofyoung people and that I would come to love everything there.
That autumn I went to see him in Pripyat. With his help, within a month I found work planting
trees for the town. I have never been afraid of hard work. I lived in a dormitory at work. How I loved
this small, quiet town of Pripyat where most of the residents were young people. It was as if my youth
spread its wings and took flight. This was the happiest time of my life.
I often think of the time when I was young and had just arrived in Pripyat to start working. I
made many new friends in the dormitory. One of them was an acquaintance of the leader of a music
ensemble of young working people. Most of the members of this ensemble were five or seven years
older than I, and some were already married. That did not matter as long as they shared the same interest
in music. After work they gathered and practiced in a music room, which was in the men’s dormitory
and was where all the instruments were stored. There were such instruments as drums, cymbals, a bass
guitar, a rhythm guitar, a lead guitar, an electronic organ, a saxophone, a trumpet and an electronic bayan.
The ensemble’s leader Stanislav Ivanovich was responsible for all of the instruments.
One day when my new friend heard me singing, she suggested I should go to see Stanislav
Ivanovich. So one evening we went to the music room to see him. He asked me to sing something andhe liked my voice very much. This was how I made more new friends and began to sing in this music
ensemble. Singing with accompaniment, I thought my modest dream had come true. How happy I was
every day rushing to rehearsals to practice new songs and talk with friends after work!
During the summer, concerts were held in front of the Pripyat Culture Center on holidays.
- 105 -

Many groups like our ensemble performed on these occasions. These days in 1981 and 1982 were truly
filled with joy. We often played for the nuclear power plant construction workers. At first I had
inexplicable fear in front of that audience but later I became more courageous. Such cheerful and carefree
days flew by so quickly. How beautiful were the summer nights in our town, with the sweet fragrance ofwhite peonies and Chinese roses growing near the culture center. Around the town there were many bedsof roses whose scent always reminded me of the river near my home with its white water lilies. The
smell of these splendid flowers somehow resembled each other. There were pine trees beside the bus
terminal I used to walk through the woods to work. These woods also reminded me of my home village.
The air in our town was very clean! The many pine trees filled it with much oxygen. We
frequently played and sang at Lazurny, where every year the power plant workers celebrated theanniversary of the start of operations at the nuclear power station. So my youth flew by quickly withwork and singing practice. After working for the tree planting project for a while, I got a job at the‘Jupiter’ Radio Factory. This was a subsidiary company of the ‘Mayak’ Radio Factory in Kiev. I was
employed as an apprentice lathe operator in the mechanical press section. Most of girls working in thesame team were between seventeen and twenty-five, and there were only four over thirty-five. I beganwork on a machine with only two functions. Within a month I was already working on a semi-automatic
lathe with 16 functions, grinding side units of the ‘Jupiter’ tape recorder. This work was very hard.
We had to grind 600 units per shift. When I was working the first shift, I used to run to the music room
to see all my friends after work. When I was on the second shift, I did not see them for a whole week.
One day my friend told me that a knitting course was open to us. I wanted to learn machine knitting, andso I began to attend the course before I set off to work the second shift. I learned the basic usage ofknitting machines and I liked it very much.
It was time that girls of our group of young lathe operators should be married. At one of theseweddings held at Chistagolovka, a village five kilometers away from Pripyat, I met my future husband,
Viktor. Later I heard from his grandmother that he immediately fell in love with me and told her that hewould be the happiest man in the world if I would marry him. Two years would pass after that firstmeeting before we met again. During that time, I completed the crane operators’ course, which wasattended by mostly only young people.
Passing the examination, we obtained certificates that allowed us to operate both gantry andtower cranes. It was time to find a job as a crane operator. I remember that I was so scared to climb up
on a crane for the first time that I almost had to be driven up there with a willow switch. With great
effort, I got into the cabin but getting down from it was another big task for me. I had to fight andovercome my fear of heights. I continued to sing with the ensemble as before. We began to perform at
weddings on the side. I sang and the others played instruments. It was so nice to perform in front ofhappy young couples with their eyes shining and full of love.
I decided to look for work as a tower crane operator. I visited the crane section of aconstruction office and they told me that they had hired a crane operator only a few days before. I told
this to my friend in the ensemble. She calmed me down by telling me that she would immediately
telephone a mechanic in the crane section who would help me. Her telephone call in fact gave me a lotof hope. I took the bus to once again visit the head office of maintenance of the crane section. This
time I was hired as a substitute crane operator.
The next day, I went to my new work and was given instructions on technical safety. And thatmorning I met my future husband for the first time in two years. He greeted me first and then asked
whether I had attended the wedding at Chistogolovka. I answered yes. Gazing at something on his
desk, he then asked if I had a picture taken at the wedding. I had no memory of a photo with anyone at
the wedding but I was actually in a photo with other girls and beside me was Victor. It was only in spring2000 that my husband brought that photo back from Chernobyl. I had never seen it before because he- 106 -

had always kept it with him at work.
This was our second meeting. I began to work in the same section where Victor had been
already working as a mechanic. He had a good relationship with his boss in the construction division.
Victor’s approach to me was quite elegant. But I was a very serious girl even tough I had more malefriends than female ones. I worked as a substitute, learning how to operate all kinds of gantry cranes atthe loading and unloading area and then tower cranes at the second and the third construction sites of thenuclear power station. How I liked this work, up on a crane where I could see everything. For me
going to work was like going to a festival, and with such joy I went to my job as a substitute crane
operator. My effort and sense of responsibility gained me the respect of the assemblers I worked with.
I was proud of working at the nuclear power station and living in this city surrounded by green and filledwith young people. I continued to sing with my friends in the ensemble. I loved music and I loved to sing.
Victor and I had been very good friends for a whole year and in spring 1984 we decided to getmarried on July 14. At the end of September, Victor was offered a one-room flat for a small family, with
one big room, a kitchen, a closet, a balcony and a toilet with bath. It was splendid for us. We left
Victor’s parents’ house, though their village was only five kilometers away from Pripyat, and we started tolive on our own. I stopped singing when I got married. Soon our first son Yuri was born. He was asickly child, and often suffered from colds and tonsillitis. When I was on parental leave to look after him,
I was always curious to know how it was going at the construction site: which cranes were they using andhow high were the walls they were building? I was very interested in any news I could get about
construction progress.
And so the spring of 1986 arrived. By that time, Yura (our nickname for Yuri) could walk alittle if we took his hands, and we often visited Victor’s parents with him in a buggy.
Victor’s
youngest brother was about to depart for military service.
We went to the parents' house a day before
his farewell party and helped to prepare for it. That evening many relatives and friends gathered and theparty continued until the next morning. Yuri and I were outside. Friends and relatives drove Nicolai tothe national service command just after five o’clock in the morning. At seven o’clock people in thevillage started to talk about an explosion at the nuclear power station. Although I could not believe thenews, I was anxious waiting for the car to come back from the Chernobyl national service command.
Many little children besides my son were left waiting with me. The car had to take a roundabout way
through the forest to come back, as roads were closed down everywhere. It was true that there had been
an explosion at the plant. But we continued to clear the tables and wash the dishes.
At three o’clock in the afternoon, Victor’s sister's husband, a police officer, arrived. He said he
had come to evacuate us. The wind was blowing towards the village and thus the amount of radiation
was increasing. We got into the car and decided to go towards the nuclear power plant, but we stopped at
a restaurant called Evrika. My husband said it was better for us not to go any farther with a child, and weturned the car around. We saw flames burning under the smokestack of the power plant. It was only
because Kolya was a police officer that we could reach that point at all. So we became witnesses of thenuclear power plant accident, without understanding all the seriousness of the disaster that had happened.
We went up on the roof of our apartment and through binoculars we watched the flames of the plant untillate that night. That night we received iodine treatment and were told to close the windows.
Nevertheless we did not understand sufficiently what all had happened.
The next day, on Sunday, the evacuation started. We were told to take only the things
necessary for three days. Yura and I went to my parents’ and Victor stayed at home in Pripyat. Victor’s
parents stayed in the village until May 9th and then they were evacuated to a village in Borodyansky
district. I well remember the day of the evacuation and how we went through villages and the city of
Pripyat in a bus. We saw people standing on roadsides whose eyes were telling us, “you are going and
we are staying.”- 107 -

When we arrived at my home village, there were six other mothers with children like me.
Their husbands had stayed behind to join in the clean up after the accident. Our clothes and shoes were
examined to check the amount of radiation. The radioactivity detector made sounds. Our clothes wereconfiscated and we were given new clothes and shoes to wear. Victor stood guard duty against an
invisible enemy who could not be heard or seen. He came to the village to my parents after finishing his
shift. He told me that a cold sweat ran down his back as he rode in an armored car with young soldiers
through the forest that had taken on an orange color, and that he was sorry for those young soldiers who
had just begun their duty and their lives were brought to clean up after the accident.
When my husband came to us in June, he took me and Yuri to Chernikov for Yuri to have an
operation – he was suffering from an acute hernia. Victor drove us to Chernikov early in the morningand then he returned to his duty. Two weeks later, after Yuri was already out from the hospital, Victor
visited us again.
A new place to live was provided to us in the middle of August but my son and I did not move in
until the 21st of September. We gradually bought some furniture with the compensation money we had
been paid then. We were now in Kiev and I thought there was no way we could get used to this big andnoisy city. We missed Pripyat and still do to this day. What a small and peaceful town was our beloved
Pripyat! We could walk all round the town in just a short time.
As time passed, Yuri was growing up. My husband continued to work as a watchman and soon
he became the chief watchman. I pleaded with him not to go to work in the contaminated area but to staywith us. Yet his answer was, “Can you imagine not being able to go back to your hometown?”
However, his hometown had already been turned into a wasteland with only one shop, a war memorial,
and a single house left at the edge of the village.
When big holes were dug and the houses in the village were all buried, Victor asked the whitebirch growing by the well be left to mark where his house used to stand. Victor always visited his village
whenever he was on watch. He loved it so.
My health declined with time. I began to suffer severe headaches and very frequently felt
something wrong with my heart. In five years, two more babies, Vovochka and Maryka, were born andYuri turned 5 years old. They were not very strong children and I stayed home with them. Victor’shealth was also clearly unstable but he never wanted to listen to us telling him to quit his job in Chernobyl.
I begged him to be treated in the hospital, but he was somehow scared to go. One day he told me thatwhen he goes to the hospital it means he is dying. None of my attempts to persuade him had any effect.
He was always telling himself that he would not die until our daughter got married. I myself often had tocall the ambulance, and, when Victor was away in Kiev, I would enter the hospital for treatment.
He continued to work at Chernobyl. In 1995 there was a large amount of salary that was owed
to the people working at Chernobyl. Workers organized a strike and those who went on a strike were
paid, but what my husband received was very small. We could barely survive with the help of my parents.
The amount of unpaid salary kept increasing until 2000. My husband did not quit his job only because
he had hopes of receiving what he was owed. Even now, however, we have yet to be paid this money.
At the end of 2000 my husband’s condition went terribly bad---he could not sleep or lie down,
but could only stand and walk. Once when he was feeling very hard he said to me, “Tamara, I have not
had a single day off for seven years.” Nevertheless, he did not go to hospital. He was scared. In
November he took time off to rest at home. December passed and at the end of January he at last went tohospital and had an X-ray taken. Doctors said that he was suffering from tuberculosis, but I neverbelieved them. Later I was proven right. He did not cough at all. Instead he had a severe backache.
It was as though an iron hoop were squeezing his chest. He abruptly lost weight. The results of theexaminations were bad, but nothing was made clear by ultrasound.
At the hospital in Solomenka district, a professor told me after administering an ultrasound- 108 -

Younger son, Vova. He died in 2001.

Daughter, Maria and elder son, Yuri. 2004.

examination that my husband had pancreatic cancer. It was as if the ground collapsed under my feet andI felt like I lost my consciousness for a moment. I did not want to believe the doctor’s words. I prayed
day and night believing that a miracle would happen after all. With all my might, I tried not to cry infront of my husband but on the way home I could not stop tears from flowing. At home I also held backin front of my children. I prayed to God and begged for help. Before going into the operation, Victor
wept and I assured him that everything would be all right. That night he was moved to surgery from theintensive care unit. Hope for life seemed to light up in his eyes. On the second day, Friday, he wasagain moved to the intensive care unit and the light of his hope was snuffed out. Ten days after theoperation, he passed away.
However reluctant I was to go on living, I had to bring up and educate my three children. Still
I felt that life without Victor was meaningless. I cried and my medical condition was aggravated. I had
had medical treatment but did not get well. When I lost my younger son, three years after my husband’s
death, I thought I would go mad. It was the second time and I was saying to myself “why my son andnot me?” Two children were left. Even though I knew that they needed me, I could only walk like arobot for a whole year. How hard it is to live with such wounds, unable to breathe deeply or to stand up
straight, unable to do anything with such a burden on my shoulders. I am always afraid about how I can
go on living.
I am very grateful to the kind Japanese people who support us by sending money and medicines.
Medicines are essential for us but doctors cannot prescribe expensive medicines at no cost. It is
impossible to buy expensive medicine for my children and myself even when they are ill. Dear friends,
may be God with you and protect your families from misfortune and grief. I thank you for your kindness.
May the same kind of accident that happened here never happen anywhere else. I would like to finish
my story of why I came to live in Pripyat and how we live in Kiev now. May all people of the world be
blessed with happiness and love.
(Translated into English by HASEGAWA Kaoru)
This manuscript was published in SEKAI, April 2007 (in Japanese).

- 109 -

Discrepancy between the Contamination Pattern and the Daily Radiation Survey
Data Used for External Dose Estimation of Evacuees from the 30-km Zone
IMANAKA Tetsuji and KOIDE Hiroaki
Research Reactor Institute, Kyoto University
Kumatori-cho, Sennan-gun, Osaka, 590-0494 Japan
Introduction
A series of the first explosions at the Chernobyl-4 reactor occurred at 01:23:45-50 on April 26, 1986. The
large amount of radioactivity release continued about 10 days due to the graphite fire at the reactor core.
Figure 1 shows daily release of radioactivity based on the data given in the report the USSR government
presented to IAEA in August 1966 (1986 USSR Report) [1] Depending on the fluctuation of wind direction,
radioactive plumes flew to various directions from the destroyed reactor. Figure 2 indicates changes of winddirections and the contamination pattern during the period of large radioactivity release [2]. On April 26, thefirst strong radioactive plume moved to the west direction. Then, on April 27-28, radioactive plumes
contaminated north-west and north areas. The basic pattern of the contamination near the Chernobyl power
plant (ChNPP) was considered to be formed in the first three days. After that, the plumes direction moved toeast and south directions.
On April 27, the next day the accident, the Pripyat city where workers of ChNPP were living was
evacuated. Meanwhile, the people living in settlements other than Pripyat were left uninformed about theaccident. It was on May 2 that the evacuation of all people within the 30-km zone was decided [3]. The
evacuation finished around May 10. That is, these evacuees had been in the strong contamination for one
week or more. Therefore, these evacuees were supposed to receive far more radiation than Pripyat citizens.
Table 1 shows estimates of average external dose for evacuees from the 30-km zone given in 1986
USSR Report. It is noted that the average dose of 26,200 evacuees from 19 settlements within 15 km from
ChNPP was 450 mSv, which is 14 times larger than the value for Pripyat citizens of 33 mSv. Unfortunately,
detailed information how to obtain these values was not given in the report.

④

4/27-2870③ 4/27-28

Radioactivity(MCi)
放射能放出量（ＭＣｉ）

60⑤ 4/2850① 4/2640② 4/26-27⑥ 4/29

30
20

⑧ 5/2

10
0

⑦ 4/29-5/1

4/26 4/27 4/28 4/29 4/30 5/1 5/2 5/3 5/4 5/5 5/6

1986

Fig.1. Daily radioactivity release, excluding
noble gases.

Fig.2. Daily direction of radioactive plumes on
the back of 137Cs contamination map.
Made from Izrael’s paper [2]- 110 -

Table 1. Average external dose of evacuees reported in the 1986 USSR reportDistance from the
Number ofPopulation
Average external
Chernobyl site
Settlement(persons)dose(mSv)
3 - 6 km(Pripayt)
45,00033
3 - 7 km
5
7,000
540
7 - 10 km
4
9,000
460
10 15 km
10
8,200
350
15 - 20 km
16
11,60052
20 - 25 km
20
14,90060
25 - 30 km
16
39,20046
On the other hand, Chernobyl Forum, which was organized by IAEA and other international institutions
to summarize 20 years of investigation on the consequences of the Chernobyl accident, reported that the
average dose of the evacuees from the 30-km zone was 20-30 mSv and the maximum was several hundred
mSv [4]. The main source of the Chernobyl Forum report was considered to be the study by Likhtarev et.alfor Ukrainian evacuees [5], in which the average external doses of 11.5 and 18.2 mSv were estimated forevacuees from Pripyat and other-than-Pripyat, respectively, by combining daily radiation survey data insettlements within the 30-km zone with individual questionnaires on the behavior after the accident. It isnoteworthy that the dose ratio of Pripyat to other-than-Pripyat is obtained 1.6, while the corresponding ratioof the 1986 USSR report is 4.8. Although the detailed data about in the Pripyat city was shown in reference,the daily radiation survey data were not shown for other-than-Pripyat settlements in the 30-km zone [5].
Radiation survey data within the 30-km on May 1, 1986
In March, 1986, at an international conference for the 10th anniversary of the Chernobyl accident held in
Minsk, an interesting map (Fig. 3) was presented about radiation exposure survey data on May 1, 1986, fivedays after the accident in settlements within the 30-km zone was released [6]. The maximum of 3,306 µGy/h131

North-south distance from the Chernobyl NPP (km)30

157
Vigrebnaya

261
Pogonnoe

104
Dernovichi
252
Orevichi20

348

Savichi

348
Radin
696
Molochki

Kranosel 870
Borshchevka
122
Doblyadi

-10

-20

435
Ulasi

1044
Kulazhin
1914
Kryuki70
Grushnoe 44
70
Suvidi
70
Pirki

96
957
Mashevo
Zalese131 Khutor Les
3306
252
Khatki
Krasnoe
Benyovka
244
Rudki
261
Zimovishche
139 148
139
1053
Nov.
Shepelichi
Chikalovichi
148
Chapaenka
165
Yanov
Krasnoe
870
3045
174 Nov. Krasnitsa
Krivaya Gora
1740 ChNPP
9174 Chistogolovka 1044 331
Starocele
653
Kopachi87 St. Krasnitsa
174
435
87
Lelev Koshovka
Lubyanka
35
Stechaika
Ilintsi
26
78
61
87
174
Razezhnee
Paryshev
Chernobyl
Korogod
122
35 Bichiki
96 Zalese
Lodizhichi
35
87
GlinkaCherevach78
122 Chipol
Rodinka87

10 96Denisovich 174

0157
Puchin
104

3045
Usov

44

Rudnya Veresnya

Rossokha

-30
-30

-20
-10
0
10
20
East-west distance from the Chernobyl NPP (km)30

Fig.3. Dose rate in the 30-km zone on May 1, 1986,µGy/h．

- 111 -

(380 mR/h) was seen in Krasnoe village located 6 km north of ChNPP. This dose rate equals 80 mGy/day.
In the same report, the time trend of dose rate per unit 137Cs deposition measured at Khoiniki located 50
km north from ChNPP was also presented, which was
137
shown as diamonds in Fig. 4. The solid curve Table 2. Relative deposition composition ( Cs=1)(Calculation 1) is calculation by Imanaka, assuming and dose conversion factor of nuclides depositedaround the Chernobyl site.
fallout composition given by Izrael et.al [7] as well as
Relative
Dose factor
Nuclide Half life
dose rate conversion factors (Table 2) [8]. The dottedcomposition* (µR/h)/(Ci/km2)
91
9.7 h
1.2
20
curve is obtained by reducing the deposition ratio of
Sr
95
65.5
d
3.3
29
Zr-Nb to half of Izrael’s values. Calculation 2 could
Zr
97
17 h
1.6
29
Zr
reconstruct the dose rate change well at the early stage of
95
35
d
3.3
15
Nb
the contamination.
99
2.75 d7.5
2.8
Mo
Assuming that all radioactive contamination in
103
39
d
5.3
9.6
Ru
Krasnoe occurred at 12:00 on April 27 and all residents
106
367 d
1.3
3.7
Ru
were evacuated at 12:00 May 3, Imanaka estimated the
131
8.04
d
20
7.6
I
average dose in Karasnoe to be of 0.48 Sv, including
133
21 h
40
12
I
internal exposure from inhalation. In the process to
135
6.7
h
35
34
I
obtain this vale, the average body shielding coefficient132
3.25 d33
46
Te
of 0.8 (Sv/Gy) and the average occupation-shielding
134
2.05 y0.5
29
Cs
factor of 0.62 were used from the Likhtarev paper [5].
136
13
d
0.3
39
Cs
137
Taking into consideration the distribution of individual
30 y
1
11
Cs
140
doses, it was concluded that 18 % of residents in
12.8
d
3.6
43
Ba
140
1.67 d3.6
39
Krasnoe could receive external dose more than 1 Sv, a
La
141
32.3
d
3.5
1.8
criterion of acute radiation syndrome [8].
Ce
143
1.38 d3.1
4.9
Ce
Our estimates of radiation dose for evacuees agreed
144
284
d
2
0.55
Ce
with those given in 1986 USSR report, while about 3*; Decay-adjusted at the time of the accident
times larger than those by Likhtarev et.al.

May 1

Fig. 4. Dose rate change in Khoiniki normalized per unit
deposition of 137Cs.

- 112 -

Radiation survey data within the 30-km zone on other days
In 2002, Muck et.al at GSF, Germany together with Ukrainian scientists published estimates of on inhalationdose for the evacuees from the 30-km zone [9], in which daily radiation survey data for the first two weeks inthe 30-km zone were indicated. More details were found in GSF report [10]. Parts of daily radiation survey
data are plotted in Fig. 5, divided directions around ChNPP into five sectors.
It is extremely surprising that maxima of exposure rate in Fig. 5 were not seen in April 26-28 when thestrongest plumes were released, but in later days. For example, in two settlements of Chitogolovka andTolsty Les in Sector-A (West) where the first radioactive plume passed over on April 26, the maximum ofradiation exposure were recoded on May 3 and May 4, respectively, and no serious radiation increase wasrecorded in the firth three days. It is also noted that in Sector-C (North) the maximum value (3,300 µGy/h) in
Krasnoe is seen on May 1, which corresponds to the maximum in Fig. 3 of 3,306 µGy/h.
Considering the plume directions and 137Cs contamination pattern shown in Fig.2, it is difficult to accept
the exposure rate trends of Fig. 5 as real ones, in spite of the description [6] that radiation survey was carriedout every day in all settlements in the 30-km zone after the accident. Preferably we should consider that the
5,000

Sector A: West
Gamma dose rate, µSv h

-1

4,000

Yanov 5km
Chistagolovka 7km
Tolsty Les 25km

3,000

Pripyat city 3km

2,000

1,000

26
-A
pr
27
-A
pr
28
-A
pr
29
-A
pr
30
-A
pr
1-M
ay
2-M
ay
3-M
ay
4-M
ay
5-M
ay
6-M
ay
7-M
ay
8-M
ay
9-M
ay
10
-M
ay
11
-M
ay
12
-M
ay

0

1986

5,000

5,000

Sector C: North
4,000

-1

4,000
N Sheprlichy 7km
S Shepelichy 12km

3,000

Benyovka 12km

2,000

1,000

Gamma dose rate, µSv h

Gamma dose rate, µSv h-1

Sector B: NNW

Krasnoe 6km
Kryuki 17km

3,000

2,000

1,000

0

26
-A
pr
27
-A
pr
28
-A
pr
29
-A
pr
30
-A
pr
1Ma
y
2Ma
y
3-M
ay
4-M
ay
5-M
ay
6Ma
y
7Ma
y
8Ma
y
9-M
ay
10
-M
ay
11
-M
ay
12
-M
ay

26
-A
pr
27
-A
pr
28
-A
pr
29
-A
pr
30
-A
pr
1-M
ay
2Ma
y
3-M
ay
4Ma
y
5-M
ay
6Ma
y
7-M
ay
8Ma
y
9-M
ay
10
-M
ay
11
-M
ay
12
-M
ay

0

1986

1986
5,000

5,000

Sector E: South
Krivaya Gora 7km
Zimovish 6km

3,000

Koshevka 12km

2,000

1,000

Gamma dose rate, µSv h

-1

4,000

4,000
Kopachi 5km
Lelev 10km

3,000

Chernobyl 15km

2,000

1,000

0

0
26
-A
pr
27
-A
pr
28
-A
pr
29
-A
pr
30
-A
pr
1-M
ay
2Ma
y
3-M
ay
4-M
ay
5Ma
y
6-M
ay
7-M
ay
8-M
ay
9-M
ay
10
-M
ay
11
-M
ay
12
-M
ay

26
-A
pr
27
-A
pr
28
-A
pr
29
-A
pr
30
-A
pr
1-M
ay
2-M
ay
3-M
ay
4-M
ay
5-M
ay
6-M
ay
7-M
ay
8Ma
y
9Ma
y
10
-M
ay
11
-M
ay
12
-M
ay

-1

Sector D: East
Gamma dose rate, µSv h

Usov 11 km

1986

1986

Fig. 5. Dose rate monitoring data supposed to be used in the previous study. A-E: direction sector.

- 113 -

monitoring activities in the first week for settlements within the 30-km zone were quite insufficient.
Therefore, dose estimations that directly used the data of Fig. 5 could lead to underestimation of real values.
Our new estimation of external dose for evacuees
After detailed investigation of the radiation survey data shown in Fig. 5, we assumed that, although theplotted data in the first three days could not be accepted, the data of later period could be used to estimate
external radiation of the evacuees, by extrapolating them to the earlier period. Examples of such
extrapolation for Chistagolovka and Novaya Shepelichy villages are shown as dashed lines in Fig. 6. Then
we assumed that the deposition occurred at a time at 12:00 April 26 and 00:00 April 27 in Chistagolovka andNovaya Shepelichy, respectively. The evacuation time at 12:00 May 3 was assumed for both villages. The
results of external dose estimation based on the extrapolation method are shown in Table 3 (Model-1)
together with estimates for several other settlements in different sectors.
We also applied another method to estimate external dose for evacuees (Method-2), in which external
exposure was evaluated based on the amount of total 137Cs deposition given in ref [10], relative deposition
composition [11] and dose rate conversion factors (Table 2). The results by the Model-2 are also shown in
Table 3. A reasonable agreement can be seen between the results by Method-1 and by Method-2.
6,000

Chistagolovka: Sector-A(W) 7 km
Gamma dose rate, µSv h

-1

5,000

Survey data

4,000

Extrapolation
3,000
2,000
1,000

12-May13-May12-May13-May11-May9-May

10-May

8-May

7-May

6-May

5-May

4-May

3-May

2-May

1-May

30-Apr

29-Apr

28-Apr

27-Apr

26-Apr

0

1986
3,000

Gamma exposure rate, µSv h-1

Novaya Shepelichy: Sector-B(WNW) 7km
Survey data
2,000

Extrapolation

1,000

11-May10-May

9-May

8-May

7-May

6-May

5-May

4-May

3-May

2-May

1-May

30-Apr

29-Apr

28-Apr

27-Apr

26-Apr0

1986
Fig. 6. Extrapolation of radiation survey data to the earlier period after the accident. Survey data
between May 1 to May 7 were used for extrapolation of Chistagolovak. May 3 – May 9 was used
for Novaya Shepelichy.
- 114 -

Table3 New external dose estimation based on two different methods as well as previous
GSF/Ukraine values.
137

Average external dose until
evacuation, mSv
Present study
GSF/Ukraine(2000)
Method-1 Method-2

Date ofevacuationCs
density,kBq/m25

12:00April26 12:00April29

18,450

180

250

9.5

Chistogolovka

7

12:00April26

12:00May 3

10,000

230

200

70

(B)
WNW

N.Shepelichy

7

00:00April27

12:00May 3

3,530

96

72

13

S.Shepelichy

1200:00April27

12:00May 3

830

58

12

23

(C)
North

Kryuki

1700:00April28

12:00May 5

15,090

140

200

−

Usov

11

00:00April28

12:00May 3

4,790

160

55

154

(D)
East

Kryvaya Gora

7

00:00April29

12:00May 4

2,150

68

59

51

Zimnovishe

6

00:00April29

12:00May 3

4,020

55

95

42

(E)
South

Kopachi

500:00April29

12:00May 4

2,690

59

65

53

Chernobyl

15

00:00April29

12:00May 5

1,780

14

14

6

SectorVillage

Distance,
km

(A)
West

Yanov

Time ofdeposition

Compared with the values given by GDF/Ukraine group, our new estimations indicate significantly
larger values in Sector-A and Sector-Bt, while values in other sectors indicate agreement each other within an
acceptable range. Considering that radioactive plumes began to contaminate Direction-D (East) and –E(South) after April 29, the agreement seen in Sector-D and –E might may reflect the situation that thesystematic radiation survey in contaminate settlements other than Pripyat became effective at this period.
Conclusion
A clear discrepancy is seen between the contamination pattern around ChNPP and the daily radiation survey
data used to evaluate external dose of evacuees. Reassessment is necessary especially west and north-west
directions from ChNPP.
Refereces
1) USSR State Commission on the Utilization of Atomic Energy, “The Accident at the Chernobyl Nuclear Power
Plant and Its Consequences” August 1986.
2) Izrael Yu. A. “Chernobyl Radionuclide Distribution and Migration” Health Physics 93 (2007)410-7.
3) Piers Paul Read, “ABLAZE: A story of Chernobyl”. Aitken Stone & Wylie Ltd. London 1993.
4) Chernobyl Forum, “Chernobyl’s Legacy: Health, Environmental and Socio-economic Impacts andRecommendations to the Governments of Belarus, the Russian Federation and Ukraine”, IAEA, 2005．
5) I.A.Likhtarev et.al., “Retrospective Reconstruction of Individual and Collective External Gamma Doses ofPopulation Evacuated after the Chernobyl Accident”, Health Physics, 66(6), (1994) 643-652.
6) I.K.Baliff and V.Stepanenko ed., “Retrospective Dosimetry and Dose Reconstruction”, Experimental
Collaboration Project ECP-10. EUR 16540, EC, 1996.
7) Израэль Ю.А. и др. «Радиоактивное загрязнение природных сред в зоне аварии на Чернобыльской
атомной электростаныий» МЕТЕОРОЛОГИЯ И ГИЛРОЛОГИЯ 1987 №2 5-18.
8) T. Imanaka, H. Koide, “Assessment of External Dose to Inhabitants Evacuated from the 30-km Zone Soon
after the Chernobyl Accident”, Radiation Biology Radioecology, 40, No.5 (2000) 582-588.
9) K. Much et.al., “Reconstruction of the Inhalation Dose in the 30-km Zone after the Chernobyl Accident”,
Health Physics, 82 (2002)157-172.
10) G. Prohl et.al., “Reconstruction of the Doses to the Population Evacuated from the 30 km-zone around theChernobyl Reactor”, GSF-Bericht 07/2000 (2000).
11) K. Much et.al., “A Consistent Radionuclide Vector after the Chernobyl Accident”, Health Physics, 82(2002)141-156.

- 115 -

Early and Late Cytogenetic Effects Study in Groups Exposed Due to theChernobyl Accident Using Conventional Chromosome Analysis andFluorescence In-Situ Hybridisation (FISH) Technique
Nataliya A. Maznyk
Institute of Medical Radiology named by S.P Grigiriev, Academy of Medical Science of Ukraine
Pushkinskaya St., 82, Kharkiv, 61024 Ukraine: lrcg.imr@mail.ru

Introduction
During last two decades a large body of scientific data have been accumulated by observations
targeted to assessing and quantifying various biomedical effects in humans exposed to ionizing radiation
due to the catastrophe at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant (Ukraine, former USSR) in 1986. It wascommonly believed that Chernobyl-related radiation doses for the majority of affected individuals wereclinically low, particularly not exceeding 1 Gy of equivalently acute low-LET rradiation, and that was
confirmed by the absence of stable deterministic sindroms. But whatever low, those doses must be taken
into account when late stochastic effect risk is calculated for the exposed populations, which are generally
subdivided into three main categories: (i) the population evacuated from 30-km exclusive zone around theChernobyl NPP and some nearby regions heavily contaminated with radionuclides, (ii) clean-up workers(“liquidators”) who were irradiated during their duties in the Chernobyl zone and (iii) people who
continue to live in areas with increased levels of radioactivity [1].
The cytogenetic analysis based on chromosomal aberration scoring in cultured human peripheral
lymphocytes appeared to be one of the most demanded techniques for monitoring the Chernobyl criticalgroups. Firstly, post-Chernobyl cytogenetic research provided fundamental radiobiological data about
spectrum and magnitude of genetic damage caused in human somatic cells by Chernobyl genotoxic factors,
amongst which ionizing radiation dominated, but chemical agents also played quite a noticeable role [2-5].
But more importantly, the cytogenetic method was applied so intensively because of its ability to serve as
the most powerful tool for biological dosimetry [6]. It should be fairly noted that initial steps ofchromosomal dosimetry in the post-Chernobyl critical groups sometimes suffered from limitations due tospecific irradiation scenarios (chronic or protracted exposure) and low number of cells scored per person
when huge number of cases required rapid cytogenetic screening. With time pass after the accident anatural process of elimination of lymphocytes carrying unstable chromosomal aberrations comprised
another big problem for conventional chromosomal biodosimetry, and stable chromosome aberration
analysis using fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) technique also didn’t provide an ideal alternativeat the beginning of its application into real biodosimetry practice. It took about 20 years to develop proper
methodological approaches which allow satisfactory overcoming the majority of listed problems [4, 7-10].
Regarding cytogenetics, evacuees from the 30-km Chernobyl exclusive zone have remained lessinvestigated in compare with liquidators and inhabitants of radioactively contaminated areas. That could
be a result of the lack of specialized cytogenetic laboratories in research institutes and hospitals, where
initial examinations of those persons took place. Nevertheless cytogenetic data in evacuees were obtainedby research groups from Minsk [11], St. Pitersburg [12], Moscow [2, 13] and Kharkiv (Ukraine) [3]. But
only the Radiation Cytogenetics Laboratory of Kharkiv Institute for Medical Radiology started thecytogenetic survey in this group nearly immediately after the accident (since 28th April 1986). We carriedout our study during long period of time, with several time-effect points gathered in randomly sampledcohort between the first few days and 14 years after evacuation. The summary results of theseinvestigations performed by conventional cytogenetic analysis and additional data concerning the- 116 -

possibilities of retrospective biological dosimetry using FISH technique in Chernobyl evacuees andchronically exposed residents of radioactively contaminated areas are presented in this paper.
Materials and Methods
Study groups
In total 112 evacuees had been investigated by the conventional chromosome analysis. They were
50 adult males and 52 adult females, age ranged from 23 to 66 years, and also 10 children 4 to 17 years
old. Blood samplings for cytogenetic assay were done in the time range from 2 days to 14.8 years after the
departure from the Chernobyl exclusive zone. Amongst them there were 18 individuals (7 males and 11
females, age ranged from 16 to 55 years), for whom FISH analysis was also carried out in period 12.814.8 years after evacuation. The studied evacuees group did not contain cases of acute radiation syndrome,
local skin and soft tissue injuries or cancer.
Another examined group consisted of 21 residents of radioactively contaminated regions ofBelarus (6 males and 15 females). They were children at the time of the Chernobyl accident and continued
to live in areas with increased levels of radionuclide deposition. Their age varied from 15 to 26 years at
the time of blood sampling which was performed 12.8-14.8 years after the Chernobyl accident. This group
was investigated by FISH technique only. Blood samples from the Belorussian residents group werecollected at the Institute of Genetics and Cytology (Minsk, Belarus) and passed to the National
Radiological Protection Board of the United Kingdom (NRPB, currently HPA-RPD) for cell culturing,and then coded metaphase preparations were transferred to the KhIMR for further FISH analysis.
Control group established for conventional chromosomal assay consisted of 50 healthy persons(19 males and 31 females), unexposed inhabitants of Kharkiv region aged from 19 to 58 years (mean 33
years). Amongst them a subgroup of controls for FISH study was formed, comprising 5 males and 7
females, aged from 19 to 58 years, randomly selected in trying to cover the age ranges in both exposedgroups.
Cell culturing, conventional analysis, FISH painting and aberration scoring
The details of techniques and aberration scoring criteria used at KhIMR Radiation Cytogenetic
Laboratory during investigations in post-Chernobyl human cohorts were published earlier [3-5, 8-10].
Briefly, throughout all the period of investigations the unified method of peripheral blood lymphocyte
culturing was used with PHA-stimulated lymphocyte cultures set up for 48-50 h, metaphases harvesting
after 4 h colchicin treatment and fixing in methanol/acetic acid mixture, that well corresponds to thestandard technique described in IAEA manual [6]. From each sample replicated slides were prepared,
coded and either stained by Giemsa for conventional analysis or processed by FISH technique according
to the protocol [14].
For conventional assay all cytogenetic abnormalities recognised without special karyotyping wererecorded, i.e. dicentrics and centric rings, both accompanied by acentric, excess acentric fragments,
chromatid breaks and exchanges (combined below into total chromatid aberrations), hyper- and polyploids(combined below into total genomic abnormalities; all polyploids found didn’t contain replicatedaberrations; virtually all hyperploids represented threesomics, i.e. 47 chromosomes).
For FISH assay slides were FITC painted, highlighting chromosome combinations 1, 2 and 4(Cambio), other chromosomes were counterstained with DAPI (diamidino-2-phenylindole),pancentromere probes (Oncor) that fluoresced red were also applied. Slides were examined underfluorescence microscopes (Nikon, Zeiss) equipped with filter sets for FITC, DAPI and all three
fluorochromes vizualizing. Aberrations were counted in cells containing 46 centromeres and diploidamount of painted material from FITC-highlighted chromosomes. Translocations were recorded using themodified hybrid of conventional/PAINT descriptive nomenclature as complete tcomp or incomplete tincAb
and tincBa. The latter were subdivided into three subgroups: involving an unshorterned painted- 117 -

chromosome – tincBa*, accompanied by a fragment from the painted chromosome – tincBa+ac, involving amarkedly shorterned chromosome with no missing painted fragment present somewhere in the cell –tincВаМР (“missing part”). Insertions of Aba and Bab-types were pooled into one category. Each exchange,
either complete or incomplete, was accounted as an entity. Deleted painted chromosomes with a segment
absent, dicentrics and centric rings accompanied by fragment and excess acentrics in painted
chromosomes were also recorded for data completeness.
Statistical analysis
From 50 to 1200 metaphases were analyzed per person. Numbers of actual cells scored by FISH
assay were converted into genome equivalents by monocolour version of Lucas’ formula for the sum of
DNA content in highlighted chromosomes [15, 16].
When individual data were pooled, the randomness of the individual aberration yield distribution
within the group was checked and weighted mean yields of cytogenetic damage were estimated. Standard
errors for the mean were calculated from the observed dispersion of the cytogenetic damage yields
amongst individuals that nearly always was close to Poisson statistics. For intergroup data comparison
Student’s t-test was applied.
Results and discussion
The yield of aberrations measured by conventional analysis: general characteristics and time course
Kharkiv region remained non-polluted by the Chernobyl fallout and therefore comprised one of
the main destinations for the routs of evacuation of citizens from town Pripiat’ and nearby villages locatedwithin 30-km exclusive zone around the Chernobyl NPP. Thus initial decontamination procedures andbiomedical examinations of exposed persons were carried out by specialised departments and laboratoriesof the Kharkiv Institute for Medical Radiology (KhIMR). Chernobyl-related cytogenetic research started
at KhIMR 28th April 1986, i.e. just 2 days after the catastrophe, and continued for the following 15 years.
Individual cytogenetic data in evacuees were combined depending on time gap between departurefrom the Chernobyl zone and investigation (Table 1). Within each group the individual aberration yields
appeared at random. The individual values of total aberration frequency varied from 1.2 to 12.0 per 100
cells in groups studied up to 1 year after exposure; later that range narrowed to 0.0-5.0 per 100 cells.
Dicentrics and centric rings accompanied by fragment represented a significant proportion amongst
chromosome type aberrations: 30-40 % at the beginning of the observation, 18-29 % later, in comparewith 13.4 % in the control group. Cells with more than 1 chromosome exchange were not found, thus
aberration-per-cell distribution in that cohort was in a good agreement with Poisson statistics.
Table 1. Total cytogenetic damage yields in evacuees sampled at various times after their departure fromthe 30-km Chernobyl exclusive zone
Time after evacuation
range

mean ± SE

1-9 days
4.25±0.65 d.
0.2-1.0 y.
0.73±0.03 y.
1.4-3.7 y.
2.13±0.11 y.
4.6-10.7 y.
7.99±0.87 y.
12.8-14.8 y. 14.32±0.15 y.
Controls

Mean cytogenetic damage yield per 100 cells ±SE
Number of Cells
Chromosome Chromatid
Genomic
persons scored Aberrant cells
aberrations
aberrations abnormalities

20
40
20
14
18
50

2316
4221
2065
3603
9314
19289

4.66±0.54
5.19±0.39
4.65±0.60
2.66±0.38
1.48±0.21
1.24±0.11

2.94±0.36
3.61±0.29
2.52±0.40
1.72±0.26
0.64±0.14
0.62±0.09

1.77±0.34
1.85±0.21
2.61±0.51
1.17±0.22
0.91±0.12
0.66±0.07

0.48±0.15
0.31±0.08
0.34±0.13
0.17±0.10
0.14±0.04
0.08±0.02

Here and in other tables: SE is a standard error for the mean; chromosome aberrations don’t include abnormal
monocentrics resulted from translocations and insertions; genomic abnormalities comprise the sum of hyper- andpolyploids.

- 118 -

Up to 2 years after exposure the mean frequency of aberrant cells remained on the plateau of the
4-fold excess above control, the mean yields of chromosome type aberrations and genomic abnormalities
were 4-6 times higher and chromatid type aberrations – 3-4 times higher than the respective spontaneous
values (p<0.001 for all end-points). Later an elimination of lymphocytes carrying chromosome aberrations
took place, and the difference between evacuees and controls became statistically insignificant for
genomic abnormalities approximately 8 years after exposure, for chromosomal rearrangements – 14 years
after departure from the Chernobyl zone.
According to well known mechanisms of cytogenetic damage formation in mature human
lymphocytes, the over-spontaneous excess of chromosome type aberrations, particularly dicentrics andcentric rings in evacuees can be attributed to ionizing radiation exposure, but elevated yield of chromatidaberrations, polyploids and aneuploids should be considered as fingerprints of chemical genotoxic action
or non-specific, stress-related endogenous mutagenesis (for details see [7]). In our opinion, the mostpossible source of chemical genotoxic action could be various compounds released from the reactor andalso some reagents used during firefighting and decontamination procedures. The conclusion about
appearance of those chemical factors in the environment due to the the Chernobyl accident is confirmedby the finding of the same spectrum and very similar quantitative outcome of cytogenetic damage
inspecific to radiation in Chernobyl clean-up workers [17, 18].
The time course for dicentric and centric rings yield in evacuees is presented in Fig. 1. The generaltendency for this end-point was gradual disappearence. However, the phenomenon of an initial rise of thedicentrics plus rings frequencies over one year was found, that can be explained by continuing exposuresfrom short-lived radionuclides. After that aberration yield declined quite rapidly and in 14 years after
irradiation it nearly reached the control level.
Dependence on age, gender and departure time
Regarding these results, the following analysis of cytogenetic data in relevance to age and gender
was concentrated on 60 persons examined within 1 year after evacuation, when the dicentrics plus centricrings yield didn’t start a decrease (Table 2). In control donors subdivided into appropriate subgroups nodifference for cytogenetic parameters was found between males and females, and the same occurred for
non-exposed individuals of different age, with the only exception of excess chromosome acentricFig. 1. Time effect relationship for the mean dicentrics plus centric rings yield in evacuees from the
30-km Chernobyl zone (1) in compare with controls (2). Y axis – aberration frequency per 100 cells;
X axis – time after departure, years. Vertical bars represent standard errors of the mean.
- 119 -

Table 2. Early cytogenetic damage levels in evacuees depending on age and gender
Mean cytogenetic damage yield per 100 cells ±SE
Group
Numberformation
Groupof
Excess
Chromatid
Genomic
Dic+CR fr
parameter
persons
acentrics
aberrations abnormalities
4-17 years
10
0.92±0.26
1.30±0.32а
1.53±0.28
0.31±0.19bAge23-35 years
30
1.31±0.20
2.18±0.20
1.96±0.30
0.50±0.11c1.78±0.29
0.20±0.11
36-66 years
20
1.39±0.21
2.52±0.35
Females28
1.26±0.19
2.22±0.24
1.89±0.29
0.50±0.13
GenderMales
32
1.25±0.18
2.02±0.23
1.76±0.22
0.26±0.08
Dic+CR fr are dicentrics and centric rings accompanied by fragment; a, b & c – the spontaneous level ofexcess acentrics in the respective age subgroups in control, that were a = 0.09±0.09; b = 0.37±0.11; c =0.91±0.22 per 100 cells.
fragments yield (for acentrics see footnote for Table 2; for other cytogenetic damage data not shown, as
they didn’t differ from the mean control values presented in Table 1 and Fig. 1). No changes in chromatidaberrations and genomic abnormalities levels were observed with evacuees’ age. The difference fordicentrics plus centric rings yield between the youngest and the oldest age subgroups didn’t reach thestatistical significance (р>0.05), but the tendency for lower yield of radiation-specific chromosome
exchanges in children may reflect some attempts to minimize the radiation load for youth, probably bylimiting their outdoors activity between the accident and evacuation. The positive age dependence forexcess acentric yield in evacuees was obviously related to the similar tendency for the spontaneous levelin control donors. The statistical difference between respective evacuees and controls age subgroups foreach cytogenetic end-point was equally highly significant (p<0.001).
No obvious influence of gender on cytogenetic parameters was initially found in evacuees, butwhen children were excluded from the data analysis a statistically higher yield of chromatid exchanges
was observed in young adult males in compare with young adult females (p<0.05), and the latters also had
an increased outcome of poliploids in compare with three other age/gender subgroups (Fig. 2). The
possible reasons for those differencies, particularly active smoking status in young males and higher
intensity of endogeneous mutagenesis resulted from more reactive neuro-humoral response topsichological stress in young females, were discussed earlier [5].
The initial phase of the time course for unstable aberrations yields was compared between

Chromatid exchanges

Polyploids

Fig. 2. The yields of chromatid exchanges and poliploids in lymphocytes of adult evacuees samples
within 1 year after departure from the Chernobyl zone: 15 females (1) and 15 males (2) aged 23-35
years, 10 females (3) and 10 males (4) aged 36-66 років years. Y axis – cytogenetic damage
frequency per 100 cells. Vertical bars represent standard errors of the mean.
- 120 -

Table 3. Chromosomal rearrangements in evacuees with different time of departure from the
Chernobyl zone
Time between Time between
explosion and evacuation andevacuation
blood sampling
4.2±0.8 d
2 days
0.79±0.03 y
2.20±0.14 y
5.7±1.2 d
3-11 days
0.66±0.05 y
2.07±0.17 y

Number of
persons
13
22
10
7
18
13

Mean aberration yield per 100 cells ±SE
Excess
Chromatid breaks
Dic+CR fr
acentrics
0.87±0.16
2.60±0.36
1.60±0.42
1.30±0.24
1.95±0.22
1.18±0.19
0.58±0.24
1.75±0.61
1.36±0.62
0.98±0.35
0.98±0.29 a
1.48±0.41
1.65±0.33
2.45±0.36b
1.82±0.31
0.87±0.29
1.83±0.40
3.47±0.57 а,bThe difference is statistically significant (р<0.05): a – between subgroups “2 days” and “3-11 days” at similar
time after exposure; b – in compare with the first time point inside the subgroup “3-11 days”.

evacuees with different time of departure from the Chernobyl zone (Table 3). During the first two years
after exposure chromatid break yield slightly declined in persons evacuated in 2 days after the accident but
increased in those who left the Chernobyl zone later. These changes appeared to be associated withchromosome acentrics behaviour that was expessed as elimination in the former evacuees’ subgroup andstability in the latter. The initial increase of dicentrics plus centric rings yields during 1 year after
irradiation appeared to be a common feature for all evacuees but was more pronounced in persons who
were evacuated from 3 to 11 days after the accident compared with those who left sooner; just 2 days after
the explosion, and this tendency could be traced during 2 years after exposure. As the duration of exposurein evacuees had such a remarkable influence on the aberration outcome, it was judged as a main factor tobe considered during biological dose estimating, in addition to the known role of exposure protraction inderiving an appropriate dose-response equation from a standard acute calibration curve for chromosomal
dosimetry [6].
The observation of significantly increased level of chromatid aberrations in evacuees, apart fromdetection of chemical impact, provided a serious implication for biodosimetry: the list of end-points
suitable for dose reconstruction must be restricted to dicentrics and rings only, with all excess acentrics
excluded, because the latter could be caused with quite high probability by chemical mutagens either
directly or as derived from chromatid breaks in lymphocyte precursors.
Biological dose estimations based on conventinal analysis data
To carry out the radiation dose estimation the individual dicentrics plus centric rings yields from
evacuees investigated during non-elimination phase of those aberrations dynamics (i.e. within 1 year postexposure) were pooled in two subgroups depending on when they left the exclusion zone – 2 days or 3-11
days (Table 4). In both groups, chromosome aberrations appeared at random amongst individuals, and theparameters of distribution were close to Poisson statistics that indicated an absence of persons
significantly overexposed in compare with others inside the groups. Thus, carrying out group
biodosimetry was methodologically correct.
According to the IAEA Chromosomal Biodosimetry Manual [6], mean doses for the evacuees
groups were calculated by referring their mean dicentrics plus centric rings yields to intralaboratory invitro dose response curve constructed for acute γ-exposure within low dose range [7], with quadraticcoefficient reduced by the Lea & Catchiside G-function, which takes into account the exposure duration.
Thus the dose response equation Y = с + α • D + β • G • D2 was solved using the following parameters: thespontaneous level of aberrations c=0.08 per 100 cells and linear term α = 2.98 per 100 cells per Gy forboth groups; initial acute quadratic term β = 8.05 per 100 cells per Gy2 was reduced to 1.5 per 100 cells
per Gy2 for persons evacuated in 2 days after the accident and to 0.52 per 100 cells per Gy2 for those who
left later (average departure time was 7 days after the explosion).

- 121 -

Table 4. Individual dicentrics plus centric rings yields distributions and mean biological dose estimations in former citizens of t. Pripiat’ and 30-km
Chernobyl exclusive zone depending on time of their evacuation
Individual Dic+CR yield per 100 cells
Mean Dic+CR yield
Biological dose
Departure after the accident
0
1
2
3
4-5
per 100 cells
estimation, mGy(number of persons)
Number of individuals
2 days (35)
9
15
9
2
0
1.13±0.17300±29
3-11 days (25)
5
10
7
2
1
1.44±0.20420±39Total (60)
14
25
16
4
1
1.25±0.13
360±16

Table 5. Aberration levels measured by FISH technique in Chernobyl groups in compare with controls
GenomeAberration frequencies ±SE per 100 genome equivalents (actual numbers are given in parenthesis)Group
equivalents Dicentrics
Acentric
tcomp
tinc (Ba*),
Deleted(number of persons)tinc (Ab)tinc (BaMP)
Insertions
scored+Ringsfragments
chromosomes(Ba+ac)a(Ab+Ba)0.10±0.04
0.66±0.11
0.37±0.05
0.42±0.06
0.07±0.03
0.29±0.06
0.07±0.04
1.44±0.12
Controls
4088
(4)
(27)
(15)
(17)
(3)
(12)
(3)
(59)
(12)
Evacuees0.17±0.05
0.98±0.13
0.57±0.07
0.63±0.10
0.15±0.07
0.44±0.10
0.13±0.06
2.08±0.27
5282
(18)
(9)
(52)
(30)
(33)
(8)
(23)
(7)
(110)
Residents of RCA
0.10±0.03
0.71±0.12
0.29±0.05
0.44±0.07
0.10±0.03
0.21±0.05
0.09±0.037916
1.20±0.14 (95)
(21)
(8)
(56)
(23)
(35)
(8)
(17)
(7)
Spontaneous levels for inhabitants
0.10±0.04
0.54±0.16
0.22±0.02
0.27±0.02
0.00
0.18±0.02
0.02±0.01
1.17±0.04(mean age 21 yrs)b

RCA – radioactively conraminated territories. a – one tinc (Ba+ac) was detected in the control group, one in evacuees group and six in residents group. b – applying ageeffect regressions for complete translocations, insertions and deleted chromosomes and real yields of acentrics and incomplete translocations observed in a subgroup ofyoung control donors [6].

122The resulted dose estimate of protracted irradiation appeared to be 1.4 times higher in those
persons who were evacuated during the period 3-11 days after the accident that was well in line with
irradiation scenario. To the best of our knowledge, these are the only results of direct (i.e. early dicentric)
biodosimetry obtained for the Ukrainian Chernobyl evacuees in accordance with methodologicalrequirements of IAEA Manual [6]. A group of Belorussian children evacuated from contaminated areas
soon after the reactor explosion and examined cytogenetically in short time after exposure by authors [11]showed quite similar dicentric yields and similar resultant dose estimates to that of in our study.
However, any biodosimetry data limited to group mean dose only, whatever useful, seems to be
not informative enough for epidemiologists, who also need a picture of individual dose distribution within
exposed cohort. It turned to be a real challenge due to very large statistical uncertainty of individual dose
assessments occurred with low number of aberrations (up to 5) found in limited number of cells (typically,100) scored per person in early post-accident period. Moreover, the significant proportion of all cases
were those with zero dicentrics observed, so according to classic biodosimetry the zero should be set asmean radiation dose for such individuals, but statistics showed that with zero dicentrics in 100 cells we
can not exclude doses up to 0.5 Gy.
To solve this problem we applied a probabilistic approach, namely Bayesian analysis, that allows
looking at aberrations as stochastic events, which occur with some probability and moreover can bedetected (observed) also with some probability. The Poisson distribution of aberrations amongst cells seenin all exposed individuals in our study provided an opportunity to apply this function as a main part of apriori – a posteriori equation, which links the probability of existence of “true” number of aberrations inthe sample in case when any particular number of aberrations is observed. The “true” number ofaberrations divided by number of cells scored results into the “true” yield of aberrations, and that can beconverted into absorbed radiation dose using an appropriate dose response curve. Initially we applied thisapproach and accordant mathematical algorithm to the group of Chernobyl clean-up workers that showedvery satisfactory results [4, 10].
The probability distributions of absorbed dose were constructed for every evacuee in our study. It
was done in two variants: using dose response relationship for protracted exposure but also for acuteexposure. The later provided dose values which can be used in risk assessment without necessity ofcorrecting data for relative biological effectiveness of protracted irradiation. All individual distributions
were pooled together by combining the probability density in short dose intervals – 50 mGy, and in thisFig. 3. Probability density distributions of protracted and equivalently acute doses of γirradiation estimated using Bayesian analysis applied to cytogenetic data in evacuees from t.
Pripiat’ and 30-km Chernobyl exclusive zone.
- 123 -

manner the total probabilistic distribution of protracted and equivalently acute radiation doses were finallyobtained (Fig.3).
Mean dose of protracted γ-irradiation estimated from the total probability density distribution
appered to be equal to that of obtained by classic biodosimetry data treatment. Modal protracted doses in
evacuees fall within 200-400 mGy. Probability density up to 1 Gy of protracted exposure was the mainpart of total dose range, but about 20 % of protracted doses in evacuees exceeded this 1 Gy limit. The
distribution of probability density for equivalently acute radiation doses within the interval from zero to
750 mGy appeared to be nearly symmetrical around modal values (tha same 200-400 mGy, as for
protracted doses), and 99.8 % of all probability density of acute doses was contained by the dose range up
to 1 Gy. Such data were in total agreement with clinical observations in those persons, particularly with
absence of acute radiation syndromes.
It should be noted, that physical dose calculations for citizens of t. Pripiat’, which represented thebasis for “official” opinion about radiation doses to that population, resulted into estimations of average
effective dose about 11.5 mSv, the maximum of individual dose about 114 mSv and 0.75 % of Pripiat’population exceeded the accidental permissible limit 50 mSv for public [19]. Obviously, these results wereobtained by modeling involved many assumptions concerning irradiation conditions, and some factors
seem to be not taken into account (e.g. remarkable external radioactive contamination of those evacuees),
therefore the mentioned dose values were in controversy to our results of cytogenetic dosimetry carriedout in the group of evacuees from t. Pripiat’. However, there is another set of physical dose calculations
for this category of persons affected by the Chernobyl [20], where the estimations of accumulated doses
appeared to be up to 1 Gy for inhabitants of certain villages around the reactor, and that was well in excess
of estimates in publication [19], but in a good agreement with our data presented here.
Cytogenetic data and biodosimetry estimations resulted from the FISH assay
Regarding the debates around true radiation doses to evacuees from Chernobyl, who (in contrast
to clean-up workers) were non-monitored by physical dosimetry, and for whom modeling dosimetry data
appeared to be unsure, the necessity occurred for additional verification of chromosomal biodosimetry
results. From the studies of time course of conventionally scored aberrations (see Fig. 1) it became
obvious, that any attempts of applying the conventional cytogenetics based on unstable aberrations
analysis several years after the accident wouldn’t give sufficient results for biological dosimetry due toelimination of cells carrying dicentrics from the circulating lymphocyte pool [3, 6, 8]. Therefore thealternative approach based on stable chromosome rearrangements quantification should be used for
estimating the yield of cytogenetic damage in lymphocytes of exposed persons. To solve this task, the lastgroup of evacuees amongst five mentioned in Table 1 (12.8-14.8 years after exposure) was examined byboth conventional cytogenetic analysis and FISH technique, specifically applied for stable aberrations
visualizing. Simultaneously, a group of young residents of radioactively contaminated areas of Belarus’
was also surveyed by FISH to check whether this method can serve as biodosimetry tool for quantifying
low doses of not past, but long lasted chronic exposure.
Actual numbers of unstable and stable chromosome aberrations and their yields per 100 genome
equivalents in studied groups are shown in Table 5. Cytogenetic parameters in evacuees were compareddirectly to those of in total control group due to similarity of mean age values. The spontaneous levels oftranslocations, insertions, acentrics and deleted chromosomes for inhabitants were calculated using ageeffect regressions generated for our control group earlier [21]. Metaphases with complex rearrangements
were rare and all aberrations from the complexes (apart from insertions) were included into appropriate
columns of Table 5. Individual aberration yields were randomly distributed in consistence with Poisson
statistics within both groups.
The average levels of dicentrics plus centric rings and acentric fragments in evacuees wereslightly increased above control, but no statistical difference was observed (р>0.05). That was in a very
- 124 -

good agreement with cytogenetic effects outcome measured by conventional method, confirming again
the fact of elimination of lymphocytes with unstable aberrations from the circulating pool during years
post-irradiation. The level of unstable aberrations in residents was even more close to spontaneous values
than that of in evacuees that probably reflected very low dose rates during their living in contaminatedareas.
In contrast to unstable aberrations, the average yields of stable rearrangements were markedly
increased in exposed groups above control. However that was related mainly to exchanges, but not todeleted chromosomes. This type of chromosomal abnormalities was rarely reported to be measured in
exposed persons, because they obviously resulted from the lost of chromosome acentrics or chromatid
breaks during mitosis of the lymphocyte precursors, where fragments were initially induced. Both types of
unstable aberrations have no exclusivity to radiation, so a low sensitivity of deleted chromosomes as an
exposure marker after protracted or chronic irradiation to low doses could be concluded. Unlike deleted
chromosomes, the stable chromosome exchange yields were increased above control, and the meaningful
difference with spontaneous level occurred for tcomp in evacuees (р<0.05), tincАb, tincBa* plus tincBa+ac andinsertions in inhabitants (p<0.05-0.01). The total level of incomplete translocations was statisticallyelevated in both exposed groups (p<0.01-0.001). Noteworthy, the sum of incomplete translocations was
1.9-2.6 times higher than the level of complete ones. The ratio of tincАb to total tincBa translocations had
similar values in evacuees (1 : 0.9) and residents (1 : 0.7).
The cytogenetic parameter applied for biological dosimetry was the yield of stable exchanges withactual or assumed full presence of chromosomal material in “stable” cells. That represented a combinationof complete translocations, insertions, incomplete translocations tincBa* and virtual proportion of tincАb
involving unshortrened chromosome – tincАb*. The reasons of choosing this particular combination ofparameters instead of total translocation level for practical purposes of retrospective biodosimetry were
fully explained earlier [7].
Particularly, it was suggested that incomplete translocations with “missing part” had no
exclusivity to ionising radiation and may occur as a result of segregations of chemically-induced balanced
chromatid exchanges in dividing lymphocyte precursors [22]. The presence of increased level ofchromatid exchanges in post-Chernobyl critical groups (including residents of contaminated areas) was
reported in several independent studies [17, 18], and particularly for evacuees it can be seen in early
conventional analysis results presented here. Thus for preciseness of radiation exposure detection the data
analysis in Chernobyl groups has to be restricted to chromosome exchanges in cells with full presence ofchromosomal material. Additionally, incomplete translocations accompanied by acentric fragments werealso withdrawn due to instability of their wholeness during mitotic divisions of lymphocyte precursors.
Elimination of acentrics would result in a lack of genetic material following by cell death or arising ofincomplete translocations with “missing part” in daughter lymphocytes. It should be noted, that amongst
three exposed groups a significant number of tincBa+ac was detected only in inhabitants of radioactively
contaminated areas that obviously reflected the radiation induction of this type exchanges directly inmature cells during lymphocyte lifetime. Therefore, the cytogenetic assessment of radiation doses
accumulated years ago or during long term chronic exposure has to be based on the yield of chromosome
exchanges formed without accompanying acentrics. Amongst incomplete translocations these were
unshortened chromosomes with joined counterstained material that probably represented reciprocal
exchanges involving a small telomeric region beyond the limits of visual resolution by FISH. Aassuming
the identity of the mechanisms of tAb and tBa exchanges formation, the yield of tincАb* was calculated bymultiplying the number of total tincАb by the respective fraction of tincBa* within total tincBa in studiedgroups. The obtained values were rounded off to the integer numbers and applied for deriving the fullgenome yields of tincАb*, which was used for calculating the total yield of stable chromosome exchanges
as described above (the most full version of this approach was patented [23]).

- 125 -

The calibration dose-response curve for the mentioned end-point was constructed in vitro within alow dose range (up to 1 Gy) and fitted to a linear-quadratic model [7]. Taking into account the protracted
exposure conditions in both Chernobyl groups the biological dose assessment was performed using only
the initial linear slope of the curve, that was expressed by equation Y = c + α • D, where α=1.401 per 100
genome equivalents per Gy, and the background incidence of aberrations for evacuees was established in
the total control group (c=0.55±0.09 per 100 genome equivalents), and that for young residents wascalculated from the empirically generated regression YSp=0.11+2.68 • 10-4 •А2, where A is age in years(for A=21 years c=0.23±0.11 per 100 genome equivalents) [7, 21].
The mean yields of stable exchanges of 0.97±0.14 per 100 genome equivalents in evacuees and
0.44±0.06 per 100 genome equivalents in residents corresponded to protracted dose estimations about
300±130 mGy and 150±90 mGy, respectively (errors for mean doses were calculated applying Poisson
standard errors for the excess of aberration level above control).
The results of retrospective FISH biodosimetry in evacuees were in a good agreement with earlydose estimates based on conventional aberration scoring (see Table 4). In residents of contaminated areas
the yield of dicentrics measured by FISH technique appeared to be unsuitable even for distinguishing
exposed group from the control. It is well known that chromosomal biodosimetry utilizing unstable
aberrations in chronically irradiated persons is a highly challenging task, which particularly can be solved
using an elegant approach suggested by M. Sasaki [24]. We were happy to succeed with FISH-detected
stable chromosome exchange yield, which provided another tool for identification of the exposed
population and quantitative measurement of the low radiation dose.
From data present in literature concerning dose estimations by FISH analysis in Chernobyl
cohorts one can see that biodosimetry performed by other authors were based on measuring the yield of
either complete translocations alone or total translocations (including those with missing part ofchromosomal material) [25-33]. Our approach with splitting translocations into “full presense ofchromosomal material” and “missing part” categories seems to be unique in application to biodosimetry invivo. Therefore our data have to be better compared with other authors’ results regarding totaltranslocation levels or, even better, overspontaneous excess for this end-point in Chernobyl groups, rather
than for dose estimations made by other laboratories. The literature analysis showed that in general our
results of measuring the translocation yields were in a good agreement with other data presented forsimilar categories of persons exposed to ionizing radiation due to the Chernobyl accident [25, 28, 32, 33].
Thus, in total, retrospective FISH biodosimetry confirmed our early assessments of radiation doses
accumulated by common population due to the Chernobyl NPP accident.
Conclusions
The cytogenetic survey carried out in population exposed to ionising radiation due to thecatastrophe at the Chernobyl NPP showed the significantly increased level of unstable chromosomal
aberrations in blood lymphocytes of individuals sampled early after the accident, and also the presence ofmarkedly increased yield of stable chromosomal rearrangements was detected by FISH technique latetime after irradiation. The time-course changes of chromatid type aberrations, chromosome type fragments,
hyperploidy and polyploidy levels in evacuees were displayed as a gradual decline of chromosomal
rearrangements and genome abnormality frequencies from the statistically elevated level in the first 1-2
years after the accident to the subcontrol meanings at the end of the 14-years period. The increased levelof these cytogenetic damages indicated the role of the combination of mutagenic factors acted in theaccidental situation at Chernobyl zone.
In Ukrainian evacuees from the Chernobyl zone both early dicentric assay and late FISH
translocation measurement resulted in very similar mean dose estimates in range 300-400 mGy of
protracted γ-irradiation. The yield of stable chromosome exchanges in Belorussian inhabitants ofradioactively contaminated areas corresponded to doses of chronic exposure about 150 mGy.
- 126 -

According to our data, both evacuees from the 30-km Chernobyl exclusive zone and residents ofradioactively contaminated areas should be considered as a category of exposed persons, who’s radiation
doses (especially if expressed in acute exposure equivalents) were below the threshold of induction ofdeterministic radiation syndromes, but high enough for expecting an increased risk for late effects
occurrence on population level. Thus, development of advanced technologies in chromosomal analysis
and, more importantly, gradual improvement of methodology of cytogenetic data interpretation allows
obtaining meaningful practical results for biological dosimetry of past and chronic radiation exposure to
low doses. Therefore medico-biological observations in Chernobyl groups have to be continued and earlydata can also be retreated and discussed using knowledge and experience obtained during post accident
period by various scientific groups throughout the world.
References
1. Medical Consequence of Chernobyl Accident. IPHECA scientific report – Moscow: Vidar, 1996. – 560 p.
2. V. A. Shevchenko, A.B. Semov, E.A. Akayeva et al // Radiation Biology. Radioecology. – 1995. – Vol. 35, No.
5. – P. 646-654.
3. N.A. Maznik, V.A. Vinnikov, D.C. Lloyd, A.A. Edwards // Radiation Protection Dosimetry. – 1997. – Vol. 74,№ 1/2. – P. 5-11.
4. N.A. Maznik, V.A. Vinnikov, V.S. Maznik // Radiation Biology. Radioecology. – 2003. – Vol. 43, No 4. – P.
412-419.
5. N.A. Maznyk // Cytology and Genetics. – 2004. – Vol. 38, No 6. – P. 33-44.
6. Cytogenetic analysis for radiation dose assessment. A manual. IAEA Techn. Report Series № 405. – Vienna:
IAEA, 2001. – 127 p.
7. N.A. Maznyk, V.A. Vinnikov // Ukrainian Journal of Radiology. – 2004. – Vol. 12, No 4. – P. 415-425.
8. N.A. Maznyk, V.A. Vinnikov // Cytology and Genetics. – 2004. – Vol. 38, No 4. – P. 14-22.
9. N.A. Maznik, V.A. Vinnikov // Cytology and genetics.–2005. – Vol. 39, No 4. – P. 26-31.
10. N.A. Maznyk, V.A. Vinnikov // Radiation Biology. Radioecology. – 2005. – Vol. 45, No 6. – P. 700-708.
11. Mikhalevich L.S., Lloyd D.C., Edwards A.A., Perepetskaya G.A., Kartel N.A. // Radiation Protection Dosimetry.
– 2000. – Vol. 87, No 2. – P. 109-114.
12. I.E. Vorobtsova, M.V. Vorobyova, A.N. Bogomazova et al // Radiation Biology. Radioecology. – 1995. – Vol.
35, No 5. – P. 630-635.
13. E.V. Domracheva, M.D. Brilliant, A.I. Vorobyov, G.P. Gulina // Haematology and Transfusiology. – 1990. –Vol. 35, No 6. – P. 3-9.
14. P. Finnon, J.E. Moquet, A.A. Edwards, D.C. Lloyd // Int. J. Radiat. Biol. – 1999. – Vol. 75, № 10. – P. 12151222.
15. J.N. Lucas, A. Awa, T. Straume et al // Int. J. Radiat. Biol. – 1992. – Vol. 62, № 1. – P. 53-63. 251.
16. N.E. Morton // Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. – 1991. – Vol. 88. – P. 7474-7476.
17. M.A. Pilinskaya, A.M. Shemetun, S.S. Dybskiy et al // Radiobiology. – 1992. – Vol. 32, No. 5 – P. 632-639.
18. N.A. Maznyk, V.A. Vinnikov // Problems of Nuclear Plants’ Safety and of Chornobyl. – 2005. – Issue 3, Vol. 2.
– P. 65-74.
19. I.A. Likhtarev, V.V. Chumack, V.S. Repin // Health Physics. – 1994. – Vol. 66, No 6. – P. 643-652.
20. T. Imanaka, H. Koide // Radiation Biology. Radioecology. – 2000. – Vol. 40, No 5. – P. 583-589.
21. N.A. Maznyk, V.A. Vinnikov // Radiation Biology. Radioecology. – 2002. – Vol. 42, No 6. – P. 704-710.
22. A. Edwards, N. Maznik, J. Moquet et al // Radiation Research. – 2002. – Vol. 157. – P. 469-471.
23. N.A. Maznyk, V.A. Vinnikov / A technique for biological dosimetry of past radiation exposure. Patent 11689,
G11B 15/43, G01N 33/53, № 200504493 (UA). Appl. 13.05.2005. Publ. 16.01.2006.
24. M.S. Sasaki // Radiation-induced chromosome damage in man / Eds.: Ishihara T., Sasaki M. – NY (USA).: A.
Liss, 1983. – P. 585-604.

- 127 -

25. F. Darroudi, A.T. Natarajan // Proc. International Conf. “The radiological consequencies of the Chernobyl
accident” (Minsk, 1996). – Luxembourg: OOPEC, Eur 16544 EN. – 1996. – P. 1067-1072.
26. G. Snigiryova, H. Braselman, K. Salassidis et al. // Int. J. Radiat. Biol. – 1997. – Vol. 71, No 2. – P. 119-127.
27. V. Shevchenko, G. Snigiryova // Consequence of the Chernobyl Catastrophe: Human Health / Ed.: Burlakova
Ye.B. – Moscow, 1996. – P. 23-45.
28. I.E. Vorobtsova, J.D. Tucker, N.M. Timofeeva et al // Radiation Biology. Radioecology. – 2000. – Vol. 40, No 2.
– P. 142-148.
29. D.H. Moore II, J.D. Tucker, I.M. Jones et al. // Radiation Research. – 1997. – Vol. 148. – P. 463-475.
30. M.A. Pilinskaya, S.S. Dibskiy // International Journal of Radiation Medicine. – 2000. – Vol. 1, No 5. – P. 83-95.
31. M.A.Pilinskaya, S.S. Dybskiy // Cytology and Genetics. – 2001. – No 4. – P. 50-54.
32. S. Salomaa, A. Sevan’kaev, A. Zhloba et al. // International Journal of Radiation Biology. – 1997. – Vol. 71, No
1. – P. 51-59.
33. A.V. Sevan'kaev, D.C. Lloyd, O.I. Potetnya et al // Radiation Protection Dosimetry. – 1995. – Vol. 58, No 4. – P.
247-254.

- 128 -

Some Issues of Long-Term Investigations on Genetic Consequences by the
Chernobyl Accident
Lazjuk G.I.1, Satow Y.2
1– Belarus State Medical University, Minsk, Belarus
2– Hiroshima University, Hiroshima, Japan

1. SUMMARY
Results of almost 20-year investigations of possible consequences of the Chernobyl accident for
Belarussian population, obtained by the National Research Institute for Hereditary and Inborn Diseases,
provide grounds for the conclusion that at least four facts, related to genetic consequences, had connectedto the Chernobyl accident: three could be defined as proven and one – as probable. The first three are:•Significantly increased level of chromosome aberration in pregnant women and their newborn babies,
who resided in 1986-1988 in zones with 137Cs contamination of 555 kBq/m2 and higher;•

Significant three-year increase of prevalence of embrional development defects in the same
abovementioned zones and in the same years, which lead to the increase of prevalence of congenital
anomalies in social abortuses, fetuses and newborns;•

January peak of babies with Down syndrome, born by women who were in the zones of maximum
irradiation in the period 26-30 April 1986;
Of possible but not yet proven consequences we shall mention investigation in contaminated andcontrol zones before and after the Chernobyl accident of the ratio of de novo structural chromosomal
aberrations (SCA) to inherited SCA, which induce chromosomal diseases. This investigation revealed anincrease of the share of de novo SCA in after-Chernobyl period. Etiology of observed changes is not
uniform. While an increased level of chromosome mutations, including trisomies, is essentially induced byadditional ionizing radiation, many congenital anomalies which determined increased frequencies ofdefects in 1987-1989, belong to the group of multifactoral defects, i.e. for their etiology important areradiation as well as nutritional problems, hormonal and immunological upheavals.
2. RESULTS OF INVESTIGATION OF CYTOGENETIC EFFECTS
Cytogenetic effects in pregnant women and their newborn babies who have lived in the regionswith most severe contamination by Chernobyl fallouts (Gomel and Mogilev oblasts of Belarus) were
investigated. Standard practices were used for cultivation of peripheral blood lymphocytes and registrationof chromosome aberrations (G. Lazjuk et al., 1999). As could be seen from Table 1, all pregnant womenand their fetuses received biologically effective doses of ionizing radiation, which resulted in increased
numbers of dicentrics and ring chromosomes.
It appeared that mutagenic effect in evacuated pregnant women (group 1) was higher than inwomen who became pregnant 0.5-1 year after the disaster (group two) and women, who have lived morethan 2 years on the territories with the soil contamination of 555 kBq/m2 and higher. The level ofdicentrics and ring chromosomes in newborns was also higher than in their mothers (0.38% and 0.32% in
Gomel oblast, 0.21% and 0.19% in Mogilev oblast, respectively).

- 129 -

Table 1. Frequency of dicentrics and ring chromosomes in pregnant women and newborn babies incontaminated and non-contaminated regions of Belarus.
Regions
Investigated groups
Number of investigatedFrequency of rings andmetaphases
dicentrics
1st group*
14645
0.32
Newborn babies of 1st
Gomel oblast
9167
0.38
group
2nd group**
7753
0.14
3rd group***
7715
0.19
Mogilev oblast
Newborn babies of
7486
0.21
3rd group
CONTROL
Novopolotsk
4th group****
4965
0.04
Minsk
Newborn babies
9670
0.04
• * - 1st group – pregnant women evacuated during May-June 1986 from districts of Gomel oblast
with maximum contamination;• ** - 2nd group - pregnant women who have lived more than a year in zones with 137Cs contaminationof 555 kBq/m2 and higher;• *** - 3rd group - pregnant women, who have lived more than two years in zones with 137Cs
contamination of 555 kBq/m2 and higher;• **** - 4th group – pregnant women of control group from the city of Novopolotsk
3. RESULTS OF INVESTIGATION OF THE PREVALENCE OF EMBRYONICDEVELOPMENT DISRUPTIONS
Embryonic development disruptions were investigated by registration of congenital anomalies insocial abortuses, infants and foetuses.
3.1.

Results of investigation of social abortuses
By social abortion we understand the product of conception (embryo or fetus) was obtained after
the termination of pregnancy on woman's request. Since the material was collected without sampling, itmeans that in fact this is a population investigation. Pregnancy terminations were carried out in specialized
medical facilities by gynecologists, by curettage of uterine cavity when gestational age was 5 to 12 weeks.
This material was investigated by embryologists of the National Research Institute for Hereditary andInborn Diseases on non-formaline-fixed material with stereomicroscope and on histological sections.
When necessary, cytogenetic investigations in cultivated tissues of embryos were carried out. The
prevalence of embryonic development disruption was calculated for the number of investigated organs.
The total number of investigated abortuses exceeded 31,000, of which 2,701 were received from the
Chernobyl zone and the remaining were from Minsk, they were used as control. The frequency ofembryonic development disruption in social abortuses from the contaminated areas was significantly
higher than in Minsk during the same period (7.2% and 4.9%, respectively). Increase in malformations
was observed in all systems of organs, while more significant prevalence was observed for cleft of lip
and/or palate, dubling of kidneys and ureters, polydactyly and neural tube defects. The overwhelming
majority of malformations in social abortuses are etiologically heterogenic and due to this reason an
accurate estimate of the potential share of ionizing radiation in increased prevalences is impossible.
Moreover, in our investigations we have not observed neither higher number of aneuploids, nor cluster
death of cells during organogenesis, which are indicative for radiation effects.

- 130 -

3.2.

Results of investigation of congenital anomalies prevalences
Prevalence of congenital anomalies was investigated in medical abortuses, obtained aftertermination of pregnancy due to genetic indications, in stillborns and newborns. Data of the national
registry of congenital anomalies (collected since 1979 at the National Research Institute for Hereditaryand Inborn Diseases) were used to this end. The details on the Belarus registry could be found in: G.
Lazjuk et al., 2003 (7). In this paper we describe only the results of investigation of prevalence of strictregistration congenital anomalies (SR CA). To this group belong anomalies which could be unambiguosly
diagnosed in prenatal and neonatal periods. So, to SR CA group belong: anecephaly (Q00), spina bifida(Q05), cleft of lip and/or palate (Q35, Q37), polydactyly (Q69), limb reduction defects (Q71, Q73),
digestive system atresia (Q39, Q39,2), anal atresia (Q42, Q42,3), Down syndrome (Q90), multiple
congenital anomalies (Q86, Q87, Q89,7, Q91-93, Q96-99). Analysis of SR CA prevalence was carried out
in 4 groups. The first group was represented by the material from 17 districts of Gomel and Mogilev
oblasts, where there are territories with the surface density of soil contamination by 137Cs from 555
kBq/m2 and more, the 2nd group – control for the 1st group – 30 districts of Belarus in which the level ofcontamination by cesium was less than 37 kBq/m2 , the 3rd group – all territory of Gomel and Mogilev
oblasts (oblast centers excluded), not taking the level of radioactive contamination into account, the 4thgroup – control for the 3rd group - all territory of Minsk and Vitebsk oblasts (without the capital andoblast centre of Vitebsk oblast).
It is easy to see from Figure 1 that while the initial prevalences of anomalies in both groups arepractically equal, during the first three years after the Chernobyl disaster the prevalence of SR CA is muchhigher in the first group than in the control.

Figure 1. Prevalence of SR CA in 17 contaminated (Zone of Strict Radiological Control, ZSRC) districts(N=982) and 30 control districts of Belarus (N=1876)
After these three years, the prevalence of anomalies in two compared regions was not statistically different,
but there existed an annual smooth growth, and during 1990-2003 the level of prevalence of investigatedanomalies in both groups reached the level that was observed in the most contaminated districts (Table 2)
between 1987-1989.

- 131 -

Table 2. Prevalence of SR CA in ZSRC and control districts during three periods (1981-1986,
1987-1989, 1990-2003)
Contaminated districts of ZSRC
Control districts
Districts(N=17)(N=30)
Years
1981-1986 1987-1989 1990-2003 1981-1986 1987-1989 1990-2003
Number of liveborns
58128
23925
72143
98522
47877
153680and stillborns
Total number of SR
237
187
558
430
239
1207
CA
Prevalence (1:1000)
4.08
7.82*
7.73
4.36
4.99
7.85
When prevalence of SR CA is compared on regional (oblast) level in the groups 3 and 4, there
could be seen a trend to increased prevalence of anomalies during the first 3 years, bur this rise was not as
distinctive as in zones of maximum contamination.

Figure 2 - Prevalence of SR CA in contaminated (Gomel, Mogilev; N=5692) and control (Vitebsk,
Minsk; N=10008) oblasts.
The reason for a less clear 3-year rise of SR CA prevalence on oblast level as compared with theresults obtained for districts, apparently is a "diluting" of the results of 17 districts severely contaminatedby Chernobyl fallouts (with soil contamination by 137Cs of 555 kBq/m2 and more) by material obtained
from other districts of the same oblasts where population lives on territories with low contamination or
relatively clean areas. Moreover, there were territories in Minsk oblast (4th group) with soil contaminationthat exceeded 185 kBq/m2.
Relative risk of SR CA for 17 most severely contaminated districts of Gomel and Mogilev oblasts
increased from 0.9 in 1981-1985 to 1.6 in 1987-1989. After that (in 1990-2003) the relative risk fell to 1.0.
The clearest increase, and hence the higher relative risk, was observed for polydactyly, limb reduction
defects and multiple congenital anomalies. Significant input of dominant mutations, for which ionizing
radiation is believed to be important, is characteristic for these anomalies. Summing up, in the mostcontaminated by Chernobyl fallouts regions of Belarus a three-year (1987-1989) increase in prevalence ofCA was observed. In the following years the prevalence of CA increased in all areas indiscriminately tothe level of contamination and there was practically no difference between "clean" and contaminatedregions. Thus, if investigations of the prevalence of CA in Belarus were started 4-5 years after the
Chernobyl disaster, as it happened in Japan after the nuclear bombardment, the difference between
prevalence of CA in contaminated and non-contaminated zones would not have been detected.
- 132 -

4. RESULTS OF INVESTIGATION OF THE CONSEQUENCES OF CHROMOSOME AND
GENOME MUTATIONSAs it was demonstrated by numerous investigations, the irradiation of population by radioactive
fallouts of Chernobyl has induced an increase of mutations level in somatic cells (I.Eliseeva, 1991,
M.Pilinskaya, S.Dybinskiy, 1992; G.Lazjuk et al,1995). It's not impossible that commeasurable changes
did occur in gametal cells, but there are no investigations of this potential aftermath oft the Chernobyl
disaster. Indirect assessment might be conducted by usage of the National Research Institute for
Hereditary and Inborn Diseases results of investigation of prevalence of births with Down syndrome andprevalence of chromosomal diseases caused by non-balanced structural changes of chromosomes before
and after Chernobyl period.
4.1. Investigations of prevalence of Down syndrome revealed that while variations of annual prevalence
were in general low (about 1 case per 1000 births throughout the country and slightly higher variation in
individual oblasts). In January 1987 a high increase (by the factor of 2.5) of births with Down syndrome
was observed in Belarus. In Gomel oblast this factor reached its maximum – 3,6%о. These prevalences of
Down syndrome were 2-3 times higher than expected (Table 3).
Table 3. – Territorial distribution of children with Down syndrome born in January 1987.
Prevalence (‰)
RegionОЕО/Е
95% СI
January 1987
1981-1989
Belarus
2.5
1.0
31
13.9
2.2
1.5
3.2
Gomel oblast
3.6
1.1
8
2.6
3.1
1.4
6.2
Minsk oblast
3.1
1.1
6
2.2
2.8
1.0
6.0
Minsk city
2.7
1.1
6
2.6
2.3
0.9
5.1
Vitebsk oblast
2.2
1.0
4
1.8
2.1
0.6
5.7
Grodno oblast
1.7
0.9
3
1.6
1.9
0.2
4.6
Mogilev oblast
1.2
0.9
2
1.5
1.3
0.2
4.9
Brest oblast
1.0
0.8
2
1.8
1.1
0.1
4.0
Notes:
О – observed number of Down syndrome cases
Е – expected number of Down syndrome cases
CI – confidence interval
Investigation of possible reasons for abrupt increase in the prevalence of Down syndrome(G.Lazjuk et al, 2002; G.Lazjuk et al, 2003) allowed for ruling out such factors as a change of mothers'
age at birth, prenatal diagnostics and possible effect of increased (due to extraordinary situation) attention
to this anomaly. After numerous discussions of these results it was defined that the only reason is an
impact of short-term intensive irradiation of Belarus women's gametes. This conclusion is supported by
the time period when the increase appeared (9 months after irradiation, when babies conceived in the
period of the maximum increase of radiation were due to be born); by territorial distribution of numbers ofsuch babies, which resembles a trajectory of air masses during first days after the accident; and by aknown high radiosensitivity of mammals at the stage of ovogenesis preceding conception, whichcoincided with the maximum level of irradiation.

- 133 -

4.2. Investigation of frequencies of chromosomal diseases caused by sporadic structural changes ofchromosomes
One of causes of chromosomal diseases is non-balanced sporadic structural changes ofchromosomes (sporadic chromosomal aberrations - SCA). Such chromosomes could be found in gonadsof parents (SCA de novo) or more remote ancestors (inherited SCA). By observing changes of the ratio
SCA de novo to SCA inherited it is possible to estimate the pressure of mutagenic factors, including
ionizing radiation, on hereditary structures.
Investigation of the ratio of SCA de novo to SCA inherited in the contaminated and the control
zones before and after the Chernobyl disaster was carried out at the National Research Institute for
Hereditary and Inborn Diseases of Belarus. For this purpose material of the Belarussian National Registryof congenital anomalies collected in 1979-1998 was used. Altogether, 209 families with various
chromosomal diseases caused by SCA were examined. Of them, such children were born in 72 families
before the Chernobyl disaster, and in 173 – after. As follows from Table 4, during the pre-Chernobyl
period there was no statistical difference (t=0.9; P=0.58) between ratios of SCA de novo to SCA inherited
in two compared regions. The ratio of inherited SCA to SCA de novo in families which had children withsame diseases during 1987-1998 period shifted in favor of SCA de novo both in the contaminated and the"clean" zones, but the increase in the contaminated zones was more significant (89% and 68%,
respectively, where t=2.99; P<0.01).
Table 4 – Comparison of sporadic (de novo) and inherited structural changes of chromosomes inchildren with chromosomal diseases in Belarus
Zones contaminated byZones free from radionuclide
Years of birth
Totalradionuclides
contamination
de novoinheritedtotal
de novoinherited
total
11(61%)
7
18
28(52%)
26
54
1979-1986
72
24(89%)
327
75(68%)
35
110
1987-1998
137
1979-1998
35
10
45
103
61
164
209
Thus, in spite of the fact that the presented data need more wide population investigations, alreadyobtained data that the ratio of SCA de novo to SCA inherited has changed in favor of SCA de novo
support the assumption that the pressure of mutagenic factors on hereditary structures increases, which iseven more visible in zones with high contamination by Chernobyl fallouts.
REFERENCES
1. Eliseeva I.M. Citogenetic effects observed in various groups of Chernobyl NPP accident sufferers.
Autoabstract of thesis (candidate of medical sciences). Moscow, 1999. – 24 pp. (in Russian)
2. G.I.Lazjuk, I.A.Kirilova, D.L.Nikolaev, I.V.Novikova, Z.N.Fomina, R.D. Frequency changes ofinherited anomalies in the republic of Belarus after the Chernobyl accident// Radiation Protection
Dosimetry. -1995. – V.62, N1/2. – p.71`-74.
3. Lazjuk G.I., D.L.Nikolaev, I.V.Novikova, Polityko A.D.., Khmel R.D. Irradiation of the population ofBelarus as a result of Chernobyl disaster and dynamics of congenital anomalies. //Международный
журнал радиационной медицины. - Issue 1(1), - 1999. – pp. 63-69. (in Russian)
4. Lazjuk G.I., Zatsepin I.O., Verger P., Gargniere B., Robert E., Kravchuk Zh.P., Khmel P.D. Down
syndrome and radiation exposure: causal relation or accidental association // Радиационная
биология.-2002.-Vol.42-N 6.-pp. 678-683. (in Russian)- 134 -

5. Lazjuk G., Zatsepin I., Verger P., Gargniere B., Robert E, Khmel P. Cluster of Down’s syndrome
casese registered in January of 1987 in Republik of Belarus as a possible cobsequence of Chernobyl
accident// Int.J.Rad.Med. - Kiev.-2003.-V6 N 1-4. -p.55-69.
6. Pilinskaya M.A., Dybinsky S.S. Frequency of chromosomal aberrations in peripheral blood
lymphocites of children living in regions with different radioecological situation. /Цитология игенетика, 1992. –N 26 (2).-pp. 11-17. (in Russian)
7. Lazjuk G.I, Verger P., Gargniere B., Robert E., Zatsepin I.O., Kravchuk Zh.P., Khmel P.D. The
congenital anomalies registry in Belarus: a tool for assessing the public health of the Chernobyl
accident. – Reproductive Toxicology, 2003.-N 17. –p.659-666.

- 135 -

Doses of the Whole Body Irradiation in Belarus As a Result of the Chernobyl
Accident
M. V. Malko
Joint Institute of Power and Nuclear Research-Sosny,
National Academy of Sciences, Minsk, Belarus

Abstracts An assessment of the collective and mean individual doses of the whole body
irradiation as a result of the Chernobyl accident for children, adults and total population ofBelarus are described in the present report. The assessment was carried out on the basis of dataon the surface contamination of Belarus and empirical data on contribution of internal exposure
to the total irradiation of the whole body. It was found that in case the mixed population ofBelarus collective and individual doses achieve some plateaus after 1990. The mean value of thecollective dose of the mixed population in the period 1986-2004 is about 2.3·104 person-Sv. The
mean individual dose of the whole body irradiation of the Belarusian population in this period oftime is about 2.3 mSv. In case of the childhood population the whole body irradiation doses
decrease since 1990. As a result of this decrease, collective and population doses of children of
Belarus decrease to some fractions of background irradiation doses at 2004. The different
temporal patterns of the whole body irradiation of different Belarusian subpopulations are
determined by demographic factors such as birth, achieving of a definite age by children, deathand external and internal migration.
Materials and Methods.
Assessment of the whole body irradiation doses was carried out on the basis of normalized doses of thewhole body irradiation. The normalized doses are based on using normalized exposition doses in free air,P γ (t ) that is a function of radioactive contamination of territory. The following expression determines
normalized doses:−1*h (t ) = µ ⋅ C1 ⋅ C 2 ⋅ F1 ⋅ [F 2 + (1 − F 2 ) ⋅ F 3] ⋅ Pγ (t ).

(1)Here, h* (t ) - the normalized equivalent dose delivered to the whole body at the time t ,µ - the contribution factor of external irradiation to the total dose,
C1 - the conversion factor for transfer from exposition dose to tissue-absorbed dose,C 2 - the conversion factor for transfer from tissue-absorbed dose to equivalent dose,
F1 - the correction coefficient (considers different factors that can influence the exposition dose inair, for example such as soil cultivation etc.),
F 2 - the outdoor occupancy factor (fraction of time spent outside buildings),
F 3 - shielding factor of buildings,

Pγ (t ) -the exposition dose in a free air at the height 1 meter above the ground at the time testimated for contamination level in the isotope 137Cs equal to 37 kBq/m2 at the end of April 1986.
Data on exposition doses in free air assessed in the report [1] for so-called “caesium spot” wereused in the present report for calculation of normalized doses. They were estimated for real composition of- 136 -

radionuclides deposited in Belarus as a result of the Chernobyl accident [2]. In the process calculating

Pγ (t ) values, all radionuclides that gave some measurable contribution to the total exposition in 1986
were considered [1]. They are 131I, 132Te, 103Ru, 106Ru, 140Ba, 134Cs and 137Cs. According to data [1] theshort-lived isotopes 131I, 132Te, 103Ru, 106Ru, 140Ba and 134Cs determined approximately 85% of thesummary exposition dose in the period from 26 April 1986 to 31 August 1986, while approximately 20%
in the period from 26 April 1986 to 31 December 1986. The isotope 137Cs was taken after the accident at
the Chernobyl NPP as an indicator of the radioactive contamination. Therefore, only this isotope ismentioned here and below by characterizing of radioactive contamination despite the fact that contributionof other isotopes to irradiation doses is also included.
Individual dose at any arbitrary level of radioactive contamination of territory can be assessed byusing of the formula:137

h(t ) = A0 ⋅ h* (t ).
(2)37Here, h(t ) is the equivalent dose of the whole body irradiation on the territory with contaminationin the isotope 137Cs equal to A137
kBq/m2 at the end of April 1986 delivered at the time t. It is the0arithmetic mean dose of the whole body irradiation of population living on the territory contaminated with
the isotope 137Cs to the level A137
kBq/m2. This is the mean individual dose for this territory.
0
Multiplication of h(t ) with the number of irradiated persons gives the collective equivalent dose of thewhole body irradiation delivered at the time t:Coll
H t = h(t ) ⋅ N t .

(3)

The total collective dose of irradiation delivered to the whole body during some time period canbe determined by summing data estimated with the formula (3). It is to be noticed here that in case oflong-term irradiation some special procedure has to be used for correct estimation of the collective doses
received by irradiated population for some time period. The use of direct summing of data estimated on
the basis of the formula (3) can cause a significant overestimation of the collective dose delivered in somefinite time. Data on population numbers given in statistical handbooks [3-6] were used in the present
report by estimation of collective doses.
Results and discussion.
Irradiation doses.
All contaminated territories in Belarus were divided after the accident at the Chernobyl NPP in clean

territories, characterized by contamination level in 137Cs at the end of April 1986, A137
0 , less than 37
kBq/m2 (1 Ci/km2), and contaminated territories, characterized by contamination level in 137Cs equal or
higher than 37 kBkBq/m2 (1 Ci/km2) [7]. Contaminated territories in Belarus were then divided infollowing categories: 37 ≤ A137
≤ 185 kBq/m2, 185 ≤ A137
≤ 555 kBq/m2, 555 ≤ A137
≤ 1,4800002kBq/m2, A137
0 > 1,480 kBq/m .

Table 1 gives annual total (external plus internal) individual dose of the whole body irradiation ofrural inhabitants living in areas with these levels (fourth, fifth and sixth column) and specific values of- 137 -

contamination. The second column is doses of irradiation of rural inhabitants living in areas with thecontamination level in 137Cs equal to 3.7 kBq/m2, which is approximately the same contamination with137
Cs existed in Belarus before the Chernobyl accident. It was resulted from the atmospheric test of atomic
weapon [8]. The third column of Table 1 gives the mean individual doses of the whole body irradiation for
the territory with the contamination level equal to 37 kBq/m2 or normalized doses assessed for rural
inhabitants of Belarus.
Table 1. Annual mean individual equivalent doses of the whole body irradiation of rural inhabitantsof Belarus (mSv/a).
Level of 137Cs contamination, kBq/m2 (Ci/km2)
Year37-185185-555555-1,4801,48037
3.7 (0.1)(1-5)(5-15)(15-40)
( 40)
(1)
1986
0.0972
0.9719
2.896
8.339
23.62
51.22
1987
0.04680.4681
1.395
4.016
11.37
24.67
1988
0.0296
0.29570.8812
2.537
7.186
15.58
1989
0.01810.1806
0.5382
1.549
4.388
9.517
1990
0.01040.10420.31040.8938
2.531
5.490
1991
0.00890.08850.26390.7597
2.152
4.666
1992
0.00790.07720.2302
0.6628
1.877
4.071
1993
0.00690.06860.20430.5883
1.666
3.614
1994
0.00620.06210.18490.5324
1.508
3.270
1995
0.00570.05700.16980.48901.385
1996
0.00530.05310.15830.45561.290
1997
0.00490.04950.14750.42471.203
1998
0.00470.04690.13970.4021
1.139
1999
0.00440.04430.13190.37991.076
2000
0.00430.04250.12670.36471.033
2001
0.00410.04050.1206
0.34720.983
2002
0.00390.03890.11600.33390.946
2003
0.00380.0382
0.11380.32770.928
2004
0.0036
0.03620.10780.31040.879
1986-2004
0.27642.76398.236423.7141
67.162110.555

Conversion factors C1 and C 2 used for assessment of normalized doses were taken from the report[9]. The coefficient F 1 = 0.368 was accepted for the period 1990-2004. This value was assessed in thereport [1] on the basis of empirical data. For the period 1986-1990, the value of the factor F 1 wasassumed to linearly change from 1 to 0.368. The coefficient F 2 equal to 0.295 was accepted as theoccupancy factor of rural inhabitants of Belarus [10,11]. The value of shielding factor for rural inhabitantsin Belarus was taken equal to 0.212. It was also assessed on the basis of empirical data [1]. The
coefficient µ characterizing contribution of the external irradiation equal to 0.736 was used inassessments. This value was assessed on the basis of empirical data given in the report [12].
Estimation of mean individual doses of rural inhabitants living in territories with contaminationlevels 37-185, 185-555 and 555-1480 kBq/m2 (fourth, fifth and sixth columns of Table 1) was performedon the basis of respective average contamination levels. They are 110.2, 317.5 and 899.1 kBq/m2,
respectively, at the end of April 1986. These values were estimated on the basis of data given in the report[1] on the basis of empirical data [13].
Data given in the sixth column of Table 1 allow to assess the individual dose of the whole body
irradiation accumulated in the period 1986-1995 for persons living in the area with the level ofcontamination 555-1480 kBq/m2. It is 57.7 mSv.
- 138 -

The Russian specialists [14] estimated the cumulative dose of the whole body irradiation of rural
inhabitants lived in 1986-1995 in territories with the same level of contamination equal to approximately
60 mSv. This is practically the same as irradiation dose estimated for rural inhabitants of Belarus living in
the area with the level of contamination 555-1480 kBq/m2.
A very good agreement in data assessed for the Belarusian rural inhabitants and data estimated by
the Russian specialists [14], which used more sophisticated model, justifies the simplified method of thewhole body irradiation described in the present report.
As can be seen from Table 1, assessment of irradiation doses for inhabitants of the territory with thelevel of contamination 1,480 kBq/m2 was performed only for the period 1986-1994. This was because allresidents of territories contaminated with 1,480 kBq/m2 and higher were resettled to clean areas in Belarus
in 1990-1994 [15]. According to our assessment, the mean individual dose accumulated by them before
resettlement is approximately 100 mSv.
Data presented in Table 1 show that mean arithmetic individual doses of the whole body
irradiation of rural inhabitants of Belarus accumulated in 1986-2004 vary from some fractions of
millisivert to hundreds of millisivert. In some cases inhabitants of the Belarusian rural settlements
accumulated much higher doses of the whole body irradiation for much shorter periods of time.
Assessment made on the basis of the method described in this report gives for inhabitants of the rural
settlement Vysoki Borak the population dose of the whole body irradiation equal to 135 mSv. This dose
was accumulated in the period 1986-1990. The population dose of the whole body irradiation in the same
period in case of inhabitants of the rural settlement Chudzyany is approximately 295 mSv. The settlement
Vysoki Borak is situated in the Krasnopolie district of the Mogilev region approximately 230 kilometersfrom the Chernobyl NPP. The settlement Chudzyany is situated in the Cherikov district of the Mogilev
region approximately 250 kilometers from the Chernobyl NPP. The average contamination of thesettlement Vysoki Borak was 2,480 kBq/m2 and of the settlement Chudzyany 5,420 kBq/m2 [13].
It is well known that maximum individual doses often exceed the mean dose by a factor of 3-5[16]. This means that some inhabitants of the rural settlement Chudziany received doses of the whole body
irradiation up to 1,500 mSv. In this respect they are comparable with atomic bomb survivors.
Table 2 presents collective doses of rural and urban inhabitants of Belarus in 1986-2004,
collective doses of the total population of Belarus (sixth column) as well as mean individual doses of thewhole body irradiation of the entire Belarusian population in this period (seventh column). The data in theseventh column of Table 2 were calculated by dividing the data given in the sixth column by the total
population of Belarus.
The following simplified method was used for assessment of data presented in Table 2. The entire
Belarusian population was divided into two subpopulations: rural and urban subpopulations. Normalized
doses of the whole body irradiation of rural and urban subpopulations were assessed separately for these
two subpopulations. In case of rural subpopulation the same values of coefficients F 2 and F 3 as inprevious assessment (Table 1) were taken. For assessment of the normalized doses for urban inhabitants ofBelarus coefficient F 2 equal to 0.2 and coefficient F 3 equal to 0.1 were used [11].
Calculation of population doses for urban subpopulation was performed for an averagecontamination of the Belarusian territory equal to 78.42 kBq/m2. This value was estimated from the total
amount of the 137Cs isotope deposited in Belarus [1]. Values of collective doses of the urban population ofBelarus were calculated for the average contamination equal to 37 kBq/m2 [11].

- 139 -

Table 2. Annual normalized and collective irradiation doses of the Belarusian population as a resultof the Chernobyl accident.
Year
Rural population
Urban population
Total Population
Normalized Collective Normalized Collective Collective Individual
dose, mSv dose, PSv dose, mSv dose, PSvdose, PSv dose, mSv
1986
0.97197,749
0.6133
3,818
11,567
1.1583
1987
0.4681
3,732
0.29541,839
5,571
0.5547
1988
0.29572,358
0.1866
1,162
3,520
0.34891989
0.18061,440
0.1140709
2,149
0.21171990
0.1042617
0.0657409
1,026
0.1007
1991
0.0886491
0.0559348
839
0.0823
1992
0.0773400
0.0488303
703
0.06891993
0.0686330
0.0433269
599
0.05851994
0.0621275
0.0392244
519
0.0507
1995
0.0570232
0.0360224
456
0.0447
1996
0.0531216
0.0335209
425
0.04181997
0.0495201
0.0312
194395
0.03891998
0.0469191
0.0296184
375
0.0372
1999
0.0443180
0.0279174
354
0.0352
2000
0.0425173
0.0268167
340
0.03392001
0.0405165
0.0255159324
0.0324
2002
0.0389158
0.0246153
311
0.0313
2003
0.0382156
0.0241150
306
0.03092004
0.0362147
0.0228142289
0.02931986-2004
2.763919,2111.7442
10,85730,0682.9900

Data presented in the sixth column of Table 2 gives for the period 1986-1995 the collective dose of
the whole body irradiation as a result of the Chernobyl accident 26,949 PSv. This value is by 28,7%
higher than the collective doses assessed for Belarus for the same period in the report [12]. The authors[12] carried out detailed study of irradiation doses in different regions of Belarus and estimated the totalcollective dose of the whole body irradiation of the Belarusian population equal to 20,940 PSv. However,they studied only inhabitants of rural and urban settlements situated in territories with the contaminationlevel with 137Cs equal or higher than 37 kBq/m2. On the contrary, data shown in Table 2 were assessed for
all contaminated territories of Belarus. Our assessment included also areas with the contamination level
less than 37 kBq/m2. Additionally, the method of assessment described in the present report consideredalso on an indirect way the irradiation of persons that worked as liquidators in the 30-km zone in 19861989. This was done by including radioactive nuclides deposited in the Belarusian part of the 30-km zone
for the estimation of the average contaminated level in case of rural inhabitants of Belarus. Excluding of
the 30-km zone as well as areas contaminated to levels less than 37 kBq/m2 gives practically the samecollective dose as it was estimated by authors [12].
The very good agreement between the data assessed in this report and the data estimated in reports[12,14] allows to conclude that reliable data characterizing irradiation of affected inhabitants of Belarus
are established.
Data in the sixth and seventh column of Table 2 can be used for estimation of cumulative collective
and individual doses of the whole body irradiation of the Belarusian population for any period of interest.
Direct summing of data presented in these columns, however, does not give correct doses unless two
opposite processes for dose accumulation are taken into consideration. The first process is positive
accumulation of irradiation doses year by year. The second process is loosing of already delivered doses
as a result of demographic processes. The influence of demographic processes can be demonstrated for- 140 -

irradiation of the Belarusian population in 2004. According to the data of Table 2, the collective dose of
the whole body irradiation of the Belarusian population in 2004 was approximately 289 person-Sv. The
cumulative mean individual dose for the period 1986-2004 was 2.99 mSv (seventh column of Table 2).
140,064 persons died in Belarus in this year. It is well known that older people give the main contribution
to the mortality in each country. Therefore it is possible to assume that all people that did in Belarus werealive at the time of the Chernobyl accident. This means that the individual dose accumulated by persons
who died in 2004 is practically the same as the cumulative the dose delivered in the period 1986-2004,
which is 2.99 mSv (seventh column of Table 2). Multiplying of this value with a number of people thatdied in 2004 gives the collective dosed loosed by the Belarusian population in 2004 equal to 418.8
persons-Sv. This is by 129.8 person-Sv larger than that delivered to the whole Belarusian population in
2004.
The influence of demographic processes on the cumulative irradiation doses can be much moresignificant in case of “truncated” populations that include persons with some definite age. The populationof children gives an example of such populations. It contains only persons at the age less than 15 years.
Consequently, the children’s subgroup in 2004 contained only children who were born after 1989 whendoses of the whole body irradiation in Belarus were much lesser than in 1986-1989. The loosing of high-

0.9

3.6
corrected
noncorrected

a)

3.2
3.0
2.8
2.6
2.4
2.2
2.0
1.8
1.6
1.4

0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1

1.2
1.0

0.0

1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004

1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004

Years

Years

1.8

0.50

corrected
noncorrectedc)Collective dose / 10,000 PSv

1.7

Collective dose / 10,000 PSv

corrected
noncorrected

b)

0.8

Collective dose / 10,000 PSv

Collective dose / 10,000 PSv

3.4

1.6
1.5
1.4
1.3
1.2
1.1
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6

corrected
noncorrected

d)

0.45
0.40
0.35
0.30
0.25
0.20
0.15
0.10
0.05
0.00

1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004

1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004

Years

Years

Fig.1. Collective equivalent doses of the whole body irradiation in Belarus as a result of theChernobyl accident: a) total population of Belarus, b) children of Belarus, c) total populationof the Gomel region, d) children of the Gomel region.

- 141 -

irradiated children decreases the cumulative doses of the subgroup of children.
As can be seen from here, different concepts of cumulative doses have to be distinguished in case ofchronic irradiation. The first concept is a cumulative dose that was delivered to the population living onsome contaminated territory. In the second concept, cumulative dose was possessed by the population
during certain time when they live on some contaminated territory. In the first concept one needs only todetermine the sum of doses delivered in the period of interest. In the second concept, cumulative doses ofirradiation are some functions of time one needs to take into account about demographic processes. Fig.1
and Fig.2 demonstrate collective and population doses of irradiation of the entire Belarus and of theGomel region assessed for these two different concepts.
In case of the Gomel region the same method of assessment as in case of the entire Belarus wasused in estimation of the data presented in Fig.1 and Fig.2. It was also assumed that normalized doses of
the whole body irradiation are the same for children as for adolescents and adults.
Figure 1 demonstrates influence of demographic processes on collective doses of the whole body
irradiation of the entire population of Belarus as a result of the Chernobyl accident. The subscript“corrected” in Fig.1 refers to data assessed by considering of demographic processes mentioned above.
The subscript “noncorrected” denotes in case of the entire Belarus data assessed by simple summing up
values presented in Table 2.
The influence of the natural demographic processes on mean individual doses of Belarus and the
3.4
3.2

corrected
noncorrected

a)

2.8

Population dose, mSv / a

Population dose, mSv / a

3.0

2.6
2.4
2.2
2.0
1.8
1.6
1.4
1.2
1.0

3.4
3.2
3.0
2.8
2.6
2.4
2.2
2.0
1.8
1.6
1.4
1.2
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2

corrected
noncorrectedb)1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004

1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006

Years

Years

13
corrected
noncorrected

c)

13
12

11

11

10

10

Population dose, mSv / a

Population dose, mSv / a

12

9
8
7
6
5

corrected
noncorrected

d)

9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2

4

1

3
1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006

0
1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006

Years

Years

Fig.2. Mean individual (population) equivalent doses of the whole body irradiation in Belarus asa result of the Chernobyl accident: a) total population of Belarus, b) children of Belarus, c) total
population of the Gomel region, d) children of the Gomel region.

- 142 -

Gomel region is shown on Fig.2.
As can be seen from Fig. 1, collective doses of the whole body irradiation in case of total
populations of Belarus as well as the Gomel region increase up to 1991 and then remain practicallyconstant showing some plateaus in the time period 1991-2004. Our assessment shows that the same
temporal patterns demonstrate also collective doses of the whole body irradiation of entire populations ofother regions of Belarus.
On the contrary, “noncorrected” collective equivalent doses in case of total populations of Belarus
and the Gomel region demonstrate the further increase after 1990 although it is much slower than in 19861990. Comparison of “corrected” and “noncorrected” collective doses assessed for the entire population ofBelarus as well as for the Gomel region shows that “noncorrected” collective doses in 2004 are byapproximately 20% higher than “corrected” doses. This difference correlates with number of people thatdied in the period 1987-2004. Assessment on the basis of statistical handbooks [5,6] shows that 2,239,782
persons died in Belarus in this period. This is about 22.7% from the total number of the Belarusian
population averaged for the period 1987-2004 (approximately 10,000,000 persons).
Quite different situation arises in case of children’s population. Here “corrected” collective
equivalent doses increases up to 1989 and then decreases rapidly to very small values after 2000. For
example, “corrected” collective equivalent doses of children’s populations of Belarus and the Gomel
region in 2004 were by one order in magnitude less than in 1989. Such significant decrease of collective
doses resulted from the “loss” of persons who were children in 1986-1989 and left the children’s
population before 2004 as a result of their transition to the population of adolescents and adults.
The same temporal patterns demonstrate mean individual doses of the whole body irradiation,
which can be seen on Fig.2. Such temporal patterns of irradiation doses of children indicate that possible
medical effects of the Chernobyl accident in children have to be expected only immediately after this
accident. Table 3 contains cumulative collective and population doses of the whole body irradiationassessed for children, adults and the mixed population of Belarus for the period 1986 –2004 by
considering the described correction procedure.
Table 3. Collective and mean individual doses of the whole body irradiation of different subgroups
in Belarus as a result of the Chernobyl accident.
Children doses
Adults doses
Whole population
Year Collective Individual Collective Individual Collective
Individual
4
4
4
mSv
/10 PYSv
mSv/10 PYSv
mSv/10 PYSv
1986
0.25691.12200.8936
1.15671.1505
1.15201987
0.3722
1.61071.32551.7091
1.69771.69051988
0.42971.84571.60142.05452.03112.01301989
0.4501
1.92301.77672.26912.22672.19341990
0.4396
1.8772
1.86332.37442.30292.2602
1991
0.42281.8132
1.93342.45912.35622.3123
1992
0.3863
1.6696
1.93802.45232.32432.27911993
0.34891.5254
1.94902.45092.29782.24521994
0.31091.38181.96242.46002.27332.2192
195
0.28211.28042.00562.50972.28762.24041996
0.2516
1.17232.04382.55042.29532.2554
1997
0.2192
1.05312.08202.59072.30112.26891998
0.18430.91972.11962.62792.30382.28261999
0.1471
0.76312.15562.65952.30272.29232000
0.10970.58982.19262.69212.30232.29792001
0.07710.43182.22522.71872.30232.3045
2002
0.05880.34452.24002.72602.29882.3102- 143 -

Assessment on the basis of data presented in the sixth column of Table 3 gives for the period 19902004 the mean time-averaged collective dose of the whole body irradiation of the Belarusian population asa result of the Chernobyl accident equal to 2.3·104 person-Sv. Data shown in the seventh column of Table
3 gives as the mean time-averaged mean individual dose of the whole body irradiation for this period
equal to 2.28 mSv.
It is evident that the described method of correction can not give fully correct doses of the wholebody irradiation because it does not take in account other important factors that influence the accuracy ofassessed values. Significant influence on the correctness of dose assessment has internal (movement toother regions of Belarus) and external (movement to other countries) migration of inhabitants ofcontaminated areas. It began soon after the Chernobyl accident. As a result, a large fraction of people
migrated from territories affected by the Chernobyl accident. For example, one sixth of inhabitants of the
Slavhorod district (Mogilev oblast) left their contaminated settlements during the first three years after theaccident [17]. The similar situation arose in other contaminated districts of the Mogilev oblast. The
process of migration was even more pronounced in contaminated areas of the Gomel oblast [18].
According to the official information, the number of people that changed their place of residence inborders of Belarus in 1986-2000 reached 1,500,000, while the averaged total number of people in thisperiod in Belarus equal to 10 millions. 675.1 thousand of people migrated in 1990-2000 from Belarus toother countries of the world. Out of this number, 524 thousand of people migrated to countries of theCommunity of Independent States (CIS) and 151.1 thousand of people immigrated to countries beyond thebounds of the former USSR. For example, approximately 130 thousand of persons of the Jewish
nationality immigrated to Israel from the contaminated areas in Belarus and the Ukraine [19]. About 50%
persons from this number have immigrated to Israel from Belarus.
The internal migration from the contaminated areas of Belarus was occurring with a partial
assistance of the state. On this way approximately 135,000 persons had left the territories strongly affectedby the Chernobyl accident with the support of the state [20]. About 200,000 persons migrated fromcontaminated areas without assistance of the state [20].
The external and internal migration causes significant incorrectness in assessment of irradiation
doses carried out by using the method based on contamination levels. The external migration decreases
collective and population doses of the affected populations because of a transfer of irradiation doses toother countries. This transfer means a “loss” of radiation risk for Belarus. This means that using doses
presented in Table 3 assessed without taking in account the loss of some fractions of doses will cause anunderestimation of radiation risks.
The internal migration does not cause such underestimation of radiation risk because the transfer ofirradiation doses between different regions of Belarus causes only leveling of radiation risk in different
regions of Belarus. However, the internal migration causes decrease of statistical power of analysis
because it disturbs the correlation between levels of contamination and incidence rates of analyzed
diseases. The effect of internal migration can even exclude the possibility of using of standard method ofanalysis based on comparison of incidence rates in contaminated and not contaminated regions.
Conclusions
Collective and individual doses of the whole body irradiation of the Belarusian population were assessedon the basis of contamination of Belarus caused by the accident at the Chernobyl NPP. Assessment was
carried for the period 1986-2004 years. The influence of such demographic factors as birth, achieving of
the age 15 years by children as well as death was taken into account in course of assessment. Estimated- 144 -

results demonstrate that in case of children collective and individual doses increase in the period 19861989 and then decrease practically to fractions of collective and population doses of the background
irradiation. The collective and individual doses in case of adults of Belarus demonstrate a significant
increase in the period 1986-1989 and changed with some weak increase after 1990. The collective andindividual doses of the whole population of Belarus increase in the period 1989-1989 and then remain
practically constant up to 2004.
References.
1. Malko, M.V. Assessment of the Chernobyl radiological consequences. In the report; Research
activities about radiological consequences of the Chernobyl NPS accident and social activities to assist
the sufferers by the accident. Edited by Imanaka T. Research Reactor Institute. Kyoto University,
Japan. KURRI-KR-21. ISSN 1342-0852, 1998, p.65-85.
2. Chernobyl Radioactive Contamination of Natural Environments. Edited by Yu.A.Izrael. Leningrad.
Hydrometeoizdat. 1990 (in Russian).
3. Ministry of Statistics and Analysis of the Republic of Belarus. Population of the Republic of Belarus
by Sex, Age and Marital Status. Minsk, 2000.
4. Ministry of Statistics and Analysis of the Republic of Belarus. Population of the Republic of Belarus.
Minsk, 2003.
5. Ministry of Health Care of the Republic of Belarus. Public health in the Republic of Belarus. An
official statistical collection, 2003. Minsk, 2004.
6. Ministry of Health Care of the Republic of Belarus. Public health in the Republic of Belarus. An
official statistical collection, 2004. Minsk, 2005.
7. Ministry of Emergency Situations and Protection of Population from Consequences of the Catastrophe
at the Chernobyl NPP of the Republic of Belarus. Academy of Sciences of Belarus. Consequences of
the Chernobyl Catastrophe in the Republic of Belarus. National Report. Editors.: Konoplya E.F.,
Rolevich I.V. Minsk, 1996, p.11.
8. UNSCER. Ionizing Radiation: Sources and Biological Effects. United Nations Scientific Committee
on the Effects of Atomic Radiation 1982 Report to the General Assembly, with annexes, United
Nations, New York. 1982, p.221.
9. UNSCER. Sources, Effects and Risks of Ionizing Radiation. United Nations Scientific Committee on
the Effects of Atomic Radiation 1988 Report to the General Assembly, with annexes, United Nations,
New York. 1988, p.320.
10. Malko M.V. Assessment of population doses of rural inhabitants of Belarus irradiation as a result of
the accident at the Chernobyl NPP. In: Materials of the international conference of leading specialists,
young scientists and students “Sacharov’s Readings 2003: Ecological problems of the XXI century”.
Minsk, 19-20 May, 2003. Ministry of Education of the Republic of Belarus, A.D.Sachorov
International State Ecological University. Minsk, 2003, p. 49-50 (in Russian).
11. Malko M.V. Assessment of the collective equivalent dose of the Belarusian population irradiated as aresult of the accident at the Chernobyl NPP. In: Materials of the international conference of leading
specialists, young scientists and students “Sacharov’s Readings 2003: Ecological problems of the XXI
century”. Minsk, 19-20 May 2003. Ministry of Education of the Republic of Belarus, A.D.Sachorov
International State Ecological University. Minsk, 2003, p. 50-52 (in Russian).
12. Minenko V.F., Drozdovich V.V., Tretiakovich S.S. et al. Irradiation of the population of Belarus after
the Accident at the chernobyl NPP: collective doses and prognoses of stochastic effects. Medicobiologicheskie aspecty avarii na ChAES. Minsk. № 4, 1996 p 50-65 (in Russian).

- 145 -

13. State Committee of Hydrometeorology of the USSR. Date of radioactive contamination of settlementsof the Belorussian SSR with Caesium-137 and Strontium-90 (status of June 1989). M.
“Hydrometeoizdat”, 1989 (in Russian).
14. Ministry of Russian Federation on Civil Defence, Emergency and Elimination of Consequences of
Natural Disasters (EMERCOM of Russia). Chernobyl Accident:Ten Years On. Problems and resultsof Elimination of the Consequences of the Accident in Russia. Russian National Report. Moscow,
1996.
15. Ministry of Emergency Situation of the Republic of Belarus. Belarus and Chernobyl: the second
decade. Editor: I.A.Kenik. Baranovichi. 1998.
16. UNSCER. Sources and Effects of Ionizing Radiation. United Nations Scientific Committee on the
Effects of Atomic Radiation. UNSCEAR 2000 Report to the General Assembly with Scientific
Annexes, United Nations, New York. 2000, p.482.
17. Simurov A., Ulitenok A. Belarusian zone. Newspaper of the Central Committee of the CP of USSR
“Pravda”. M., № 205 (25,923), 24 June 1989.
18. Committee on Problems of Consequences of the Catastrophe at the Chernobyl NPP of the Council of
Ministers of the Republic of Belarus. Consequences of Chernobyl in Belarus: 17 years after.
Belarusian National Report. Edited by V.E.Shevchuk, V.G.Gurachevski. Minsk, 2003, p.18.
19. Goldsmith J.R., Kordysh E., Quastel M.R., Merkin L., Poljak S., Levy Y., Gorodisher R., Barki Y.,
Wynberg J. Elevated TSH in children who emigrated to Israel from Belarus and the Ukraine near
Chernobyl. Proceedings of the International Conference held in Vienna, 8-12 April 1996 “One decade
after Chernobyl: Summing up the consequences of the accident”, Poster presentations – Volume 1, p.
69 – 72. IAEA, September 1967.
20. Pastayalka L.A. Medical consequences of the Chernobyl catastrophe in Belarus: problems andperspective. Meditsinskiya Novosti. Minsk. No 11, 2004, p.3-17 (in Russian).

- 146 -

Increase of Regional Total Cancer Incidence in North Sweden Due to theChernobyl Accident?
Martin Tondel
Division of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Linköping University, Sweden
Abstract
Study objective. Is an increase of cancer incidence detectable in Sweden due the Chernobyl accident?
Design. The fallout of caesium-137 was studied in relation to the cancer incidence 1988-1996.
Setting. In Northern Sweden, affected by the Chernobyl accident in 1986, we categorised 450 parishes by
caesium-137 deposition: <3 (reference), 3-29, 30-39, 40-59, 60-79 and 80-120 kBq/m2.
Participants. All individuals 0-60 years of age and living in these parishes in 1986 were included i.e. 1
143 182 persons. In the follow-up 22 409 cancer cases were recorded in 1988-1996.
Main results. Controlling for age and various other factors, potentially to influence the result, the adjusted
relative risks for the exposure categories were 1.00 (reference <3 kBq/m2), 1.05, 1.03, 1.08, 1.10 and 1.21.
The excess relative risk was 0.11 per 100 kBq/m2 (95% CI 0.03;0.20). The cancer incidence rate
differences between 1988-1996 and the reference period 1986-1987 in each category were 30.3, 36.8, 42.0,

Figure 1. Parishes in the study area classified by ground deposition of caesium-137 andnumber of parishes in parentheses for each category. The map was originally produced by
the Geological Survey of Sweden on behalf of the Swedish Radiation Protection
Authority, here modified after permission from the latter.
- 147 -

45.8, 50.1 and 56.4 per 100 000 persons. No clear excess occurred for leukaemia or thyroid cancer.
Conclusions. A slight exposure-related increase in total cancer incidence has occurred in Northern
Sweden after the Chernobyl accident.
Introduction
In Europe concerns about the consequences of the Chernobyl accident have focused on childhood
malignancies, especially leukaemia, assumed to have a short latency period after irradiation. Several
studies have been performed outside the former Soviet Union, but none has shown any clear relationshipwith the fallout from the Chernobyl accident. However, children exposed during pregnancy have shown an
increased risk of leukaemia in Greece, Germany and Ukraine, but not in Belarus. A recent study from
Ukraine reports an increase in adult leukaemia after exposure from Chernobyl radiation. In Belarus,
Ukraine and the western part of Russia, there has been a dramatic increase in thyroid cancer incidence inchildren related to the accident. In other parts of Europe a similar increase in thyroid cancer has been seenin adults.
Five percent of the released caesium-137 from the Chernobyl accident was deposited in Sweden due
to heavy rainfall on 28-29 April 1986, mainly in the eastern coastal regions from Umeå in the North toStockholm in the South. During the first weeks the main contributors to the radiation dose were shortlived nuclides replaced by long-lived caesium-134 and caesium-137 isotopes. The dose to the inhabitants,
depending on place of residence, outdoor activity and dietary habits, ranged from 1-2 mSv to a maximumof about 4 mSv the first year.
Our investigation includes the population of seven counties with the highest fallout, all in Northern
Sweden. There were also unaffected areas in these counties serving as internal reference areas. The Southof Sweden was excluded as much less affected by the fallout, but also because of higher backgroundcancer incidence rates, especially in the largest cities.
Methods
Out of Sweden’s 21 counties, the seven counties included in this study were Norrbotten, Västerbotten,
Jämtland, Västernorrland, Gävleborg, Västmanland and Uppsala County. These counties and some major
cities are shown in Figure 1. All individuals in the population registry who were 0-60 years old in 1986
and who had the same address both on 31 December 1985 and 31 December 1987 were included in the
study. Cancer cases and deaths along with date of diagnosis were retrieved from the Swedish Cancer
Registry for 1986 to 1996. The follow-up period started on January 1, 1988 including 1 143 182 persons
with information on age, sex and parish of residence during the two preceding years. Number of cancer
cases during the follow-up 1988-1996 are given in Table 1.
By assignment with the Swedish Radiation Protection Authority, the Geological Survey of Sweden
had performed aerial gamma-measurements over the entire Sweden from May to October 1986 resulting
in a ground deposition map of caesium-137 in 12 different categories. Collapsing these categories, thepopulation in the 450 parishes, i.e., the smallest administrative units of these seven counties, wereclassified into six exposure categories: <3, 3-29, 30-39, 40-59, 60-79 and 80-120 kBq/m2 (Figure 1 andTable 1). The 117 parishes not affected (<3 kBq/m2) in these counties served as reference areas.
The relative risks were adjusted by population density, smoking habits, socio-economic factors andcancer incidence in the parishes before the accident (1986-1987). The risk difference was calculated as
the age adjusted cancer incidence during the follow-up (1988-1996) minus the cancer incidence in eachexposure category before the Chernobyl accident (1986-1987). Hence, the relative comparison inincidence is within the column and the difference is a horizontal comparison of incidence before and after
the Chernobyl accident.

- 148 -

Table 1. Number of individuals and cancer cases by exposure category. Adjusted relative risks by
category in relation to the unexposed (reference category). Age standardised risk difference asincidence per 100 000 persons during the follow-up period 1988-1996, minus the incidence 19861987 for each exposure category, respectively. Statistical uncertainty expressed as confidence
interval (95% CI) i.e. a relative risk above 1.00 and a risk difference above 0.00 is statisticalsignificant, respectively.
ExposurekBq
Cs-137/m2

Population
1 January 1988

Number ofcancer cases
1988-1996<3

359 509

6 691

3-29

527 812

10 37830-39

92 323

1 827

40-59

124 862

2 744

60-79

21 625401

80-12017 051

368

Total number

1 143 182

22 409Relative risk
(95 % CI)

Risk difference(95% CI)

1.00(reference)
1.05(0.99-1.11)
1.03(0.95-1.12)
1.08(0.94-1.23)
1.10(0.89-1.34)
1.21(0.98-1.49)

30.3(25.5-35.2)
36.8(32.6-41.0)
42.0(33.0-51.0)
45.8(37.9-53.4)
50.1(29.4-70.8)
56.4(33.9-78.9)

Results
The relative risk for all cancer sites showed a slight increase in all exposure categories using <3 kBq
caesium-137/m2 as the internal reference. As an average over the categories an excess relative risk of 0.11
(95% CI 0.03-0.20) per 100 kBq/m2 was calculated. Because of an ageing population it was necessary to
restrict the population to 5-59 years of age in order to obtain the risk difference corresponding to 13 823
cancer cases for the follow-up period. The risk difference of 30.3 per 100 000 persons in the reference
category represents the underlying time trend i.e. the increase in cancer incidence not affected by the
Chernobyl fallout (Table 1). Neither the relative risks, nor the risk differences could be explained bydifferent smoking habits in the exposure categories. Radiosensitive neoplasms with assumed shortlatencies like leukaemia and thyroid cancer did not increase in relation to the radioactive fallout in North
Sweden after the Chernobyl accident.
Discussion
Before the study we realized that if there would be a effect on the cancer incidence due to the Chernobyl
accident it would only be a small such risk. Therefore we designed our study to be as sensitive as possible
to catch such an increase, if existing. As many exposed counties as possible were included, small
geographical areas (parishes) were used for assessing the exposure, we used a two year residence inclusion
criteria as a considerable part of the dose from the Chernobyl accident was achieved during that time andfinally we applied an age restriction i.e. an age span with expected low incidence of malignancies ingeneral. A better exposure assessment would have been obtained if we could have traced the addresses ofeach individual during the follow-up period. However, most likely the majority of the population has
continued to live in the same parish throughout the duration of the study.
Unless simply representing a chance phenomenon, the findings in our study are somewhat
unexpected indicating a possible cancer effect of the Chernobyl fallout in North Sweden despite a shortlatency period and low degree of exposure. This is the first study suggesting a possible increase in total- 149 -

cancer incidence after the Chernobyl accident outside the former Soviet Union, let alone only a marginally
increased risk. Out of the 22 409 cancer cases an estimated 849 cases could be attributed to the fallout
from the Chernobyl accident. However, no less than 494 of these cases are derived from the second
category 3-29 kBq/m2. A slightly different classification of the reference categories would therefore
dramatically influence the number of exposure-related cancer cases.
Using the estimated collective dose in Sweden of about 6 000 man-Sv during 50 years due toChernobyl contamination, and the risk estimates given by the International Commission on RadiologicalProtection, the number of expected extra cancer deaths could be calculated to 300. Given a true effect, ourstudy indicates that the risk from low dose irradiation might come earlier and be slightly higher than
predicted by the International Commission on Radiological Protection estimates. The official risk estimate
relies to a great extent on the follow-up of the atomic bomb survivors in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but has
been questioned because only those alive in 1950 were included in the study, hence ignoring early cancer
cases.
A short latency period like in our study has been seen in other epidemiological studies on ionisingradiation. Our findings of an increase of total cancer incidence in Sweden soon after the Chernobyl
accident is therefore not a unique finding, but we have not been able to detect any specific cancer site
responsible for our findings. An interpretation could therefore be that the ionising radiation might exert alate stage general promoting effect on cancer.
A larger problem is that the exposure assessment was based on the ground deposition of caesium-137
from the Chernobyl accident, not taking into account any internal dose contribution through food andinhalation. This is especially important in regions with relatively low ground deposition where a highintake of wild berries, mushrooms, game meat et cetera would give a higher internal than external dosefrom caesium-137. Restrictions in food intake due to governmental regulation are likely to have led tolower doses, especially in higher exposed areas, hence lowered the radiation-induced cancer risks for the
population in comparison to what would otherwise have prevailed. Such information on an individuallevel is practical is impossible in a large population as in our study.
We could not find an association between the radiation from the Chernobyl accident on thyroid
cancer. Regarding the thyroid cancer the iodine status of the Swedish population is good in contrast to
children in the former Soviet Union where a dramatic increase has been seen. This is probably making theSwedish population less sensitive in addition to that locally produced food plays a limited role in the areas
with high fallout in Sweden. It is also possible that the radiation levels were too low in Sweden to cause anincreased risk of thyroid cancer.
We were also unable to detect any clear increase in leukaemia during the follow-up in relation to theradiation from the Chernobyl accident. Similarly, not even in the most heavily polluted areas in the former
Soviet Union any clear increase of leukaemia has been observed as yet, except a recent report from
Ukraine. On the other hand, it has been suggested that the established association between ionisingradiation and leukaemia is unique for the relatively high, but short exposure to radiation after the atomic
bomb explosions and maybe not applicable in low dose studies.
The follow-up period is still rather short in our study and a longer study period is necessary for any
more definitive conclusions about a causal relationship between the radioactive fallout in Sweden and thecancer incidence. Should we be observing some late stage promotion effect on ongoing cancer
development in the population, there might even follow a decrease in the cancer incidence with an aboutnormal cumulative incidence over a longer period of time. This remark, however, is a speculative
conjecture to be addressed in future studies.
Reference
Tondel M, Hjalmarsson P, Hardell L, Carlsson G, Axelson O. 2004. Increase of regional total cancer incidence inNorth Sweden due to the Chernobyl accident? J Epidemiol Community Health 58:1011-1016.
- 150 -

Radiation Risk Assessment of Leukemia in Children of Belarus
M. V. Malko
Joint Institute of Power and Nuclear Research-Sosny,
National Academy of Sciences, Minsk, Belarus

Abstracts. Results of an analysis of the incidence in the acute childhood leukemia in Belarus in
1980-2004 carried out on the basis of ecological model are discussed in the report. Publisheddata of the Belarusian Republican Registry of Childhood Hemoblastoses and Hemopoiesis
Depressions as well as the Belarusian Cancer Registry were used in the analysis. Only mixed
childhood subgroup was considered without separating boys and girls. It was found that a shorttime increase in the incidence of leukemia in children of Belarus (0 – 14 years at the time ofdiagnose) occurred in Belarus soon after the Chernobyl accident. The increase is statisticallysignificant. After 1992 a decline in the childhood leukemia incidence began. As a result, theincidence in the childhood leukemia of Belarus after the period 1986-1992 became less than it
was before the Chernobyl accident. 708 cases of acute leukemia were registered in Belarus in
the period 1986-1992.
The number of expected leukemia in this period was assessed to be approximately 625 cases.
These data give the standardized incidence ratio for the period 1986-1992 equal to 1.13 with
95% CI from 1.02 to 1.26. Radiation risks and attributive risk of leukemia incidence wereassessed on the basis of an assumption that observed short-time increase in the childhood
leukemia in Belarus had radiation origin. They are for the period 1986-1992: ERR = 7.8% per 1
mSv (95% confidential interval is from 1.0 to 15.4% per 1 mSv), EAR = 30.1 cases per 104
PYSv (95% confidential interval is from 3.9 to 59.2 cases per 104 PYSv), AR = 11.7% (95%CI
is from 1.5 to 23%).
Introduction.
It is well known that hematopoietic tissues and organs are very sensitive to carcinogenic impact ofionizing radiation. This was established in epidemiological studies that have shown an increase ofleukemia in different irradiated groups. It was found that infants and children have the highest radiation
risks of leukemia [1-3]. This makes leukemia in infants and children a qualitative indicator of irradiation.
A number of epidemiological studies [4-15] were performed after the accident at the Chernobyl
NPP in order to study the possible increase in the leukemia incidence in countries that were affected as aresult of this accident. Results of these studies are quite controversial.
Petridou et al [4] found an elevated increase in leukemia in infants (from 0 to 11 months after
birth) born in Greece in the period from 1 July 1986 to 31 December 1987. The incidence in leukemia inthis cohort was by factor 2.6 (95% confidence interval, 1.4 to 5.1: p(2-tailed) ≈ 0.003: 12 cases in the‘exposed’ and 31 cases in the control group) higher than in infants born in the periods 1/1/1980 to
31/12/1985 and 1/1/1988 to 31/12/1990 (control group). It was also found that the incidence in leukemia
in infants born in contaminated areas in the period from 1 July 1986 to 31 December 1987 correlated witha level of a radioactive contamination. These results were established for areas with low contamination(less than 100 Bq/kg of soil), intermediate (999-1000 Bq/kg) and high contamination (> 1000 Bq/kg) with
137
Cs. According to our assessment, such contamination of soil corresponds with levels of the surface- 151 -

contamination in this isotop less than 5 kBq/m2, 5 to 50 kBq/m2 and higher than 50 kBq/m2. Petridou et al[4] explained their findings as a result of an in utero irradiation.
The authors [4] established also some small and statistically insignificant increase in theleukemia incidence in children at the age 12-47 months at the time of diagnoses exposed in utero to
Chernobyl radiation. The ratio of the incidence in leukemia of such children to the incidence of children
born in the period 1/1/1980-31/12/1985 and 1/1/1980-31/12/1990 was equal to 1.1 (95% confidence
interval, 0.8 to 1.5: p(2-tailed) ≈ 0.56: 43 cases in the ‘exposed’ and 266 cases in the control group).
Studies of the infant leukemia were performed also in Germany and Belarus [5-7] by using
similar temporal cohorts as in the report [4]. Michaelis et al [5,6] compared incidence rates of infants bornin the former FRG in areas with the ground contamination with the 137Cs < 6 kBq/m2, 6 –10 kBq/m2, > 10
kBq/m2 with the incidence of “unnexposed in utero” infants. They have found also an increase in theincidence in infant leukemia in West Germany, although smaller than in Greece (rate ratio: 1.48 with 95%
CI: 1.02 to 2.15; 35 cases in the ‘exposed’ and 143 in the control group). However, no correlation between
rate ratios and level of contamination was found in the German studies. Therefore authors [5,6] concluded
that excess in the leukemia incidence occurred in infants in West Germany after the Chernobyl accident
was not related to radiation.
An increase in the infant leukemia was observed after the accident in Belarus [7]. The rate ratio
for entire Belarus including Gomel and Mogilev regions was found equal to 1.26 (95% CI: 0.76 to 2.10:
17 cases in the ‘exposed’ and 89 in the control group). In case of Gomel and Mogilev regions combined
together the rate ratio was equal to 1.51 (95% CI: 0.63 to 3.61: 6 cases in the ‘exposed’ and 27 in thecontrol group). These findings indicate the existence of qualitative correlation between the level ofincrease and level of contamination of Belarus. In this respect the Belarusian data agree well with data
established by Petridou et al [4]. However, excess in the infant leukemia observed in ‘exposed’ cohorts ofGomel and Mogilev regions was lesser than in Greece despite the fact that average contamination of theseregions is higher than the maximal contamination in Greece. This and the absence of statisticalsignificance of rate ratios in case of the Gomel and Mogilev as well as entire Belarus was considered byauthors [7] as an evidence that increase in the infant leukemia in Belarus had no link to in utero irradiation
caused by the Chernobyl accident.
Controversial results were established also in epidemiological studies of the incidence in leukemia
in children. Auvinen et al [8] compared incidence rates in leukemia in children in Finland observed in
1986-1988 and 1989-1992 with incidence rate registered in 1976-1985. According them a relative risk
assessed for the period 1986-1988 was equal to 0.95 (95%CI from 0.80 to 1.35) and for 1989-1992 – 1.01
(95%CI from 0.87 to 1.17). An excess relative risk equal to approximately 7% per mSv (95%CI from –27% to 41%) have been estimated in this study for the period 1989-1992.
An analysis of childhood leukemia observed in 1986-1992 in areas with different surface
contamination was undertaken in Sweden [9]. For all cases diagnosed after May 1986 in highly
contaminated areas (> 10 kBq/m2) compared with areas of low contamination (< 10 kBq/m2) authors
estimated the odds ratio equal to 0.9 (95%CI from 0.7 to 1.3). For acute lymphoblastic leukemia inchildren aged under 5 years at diagnoses the odds ratio in highly contaminated areas compared with areasof low contamination was 1.2 (95%CI from 0.8 to 1.9). Dose-response analysis undertaken by authors [9]showed no correlation between the degree of contamination and the incidence of childhood leukemia.
A slight increase in the incidence in childhood leukemia in Belarus was observed soon after theaccident at the Chernobyl NPP in Belarus [10,11]. 655 cases of leukemia in children aged from 0 to 15
years were observed in Belarus in 1979-1985 and 708 in 1986-1992. The rate ratio assessed for these
periods is 1.034 (90% CI from 0.946 to 1.131). The statistical power of the rate ratio was very low- 152 -

(χ2=0.383, p = 0.268). The observed increase in the childhood leukemia in Belarus after the Chernobyl
accident, as can be seen from these data, was statistically not significant. No statistical significant change
in the incidence in leukemia in the Belarusian children was found also in the report [12].
The importance of the incidence in the childhood leukemia that is a qualitative indicator ofirradiation requires a careful analysis of different aspects of the childhood leukemia in Belarus before andafter the accident. And this is the main aim of the present report.
Materials and Methods.
Data of the Belarusian Republican Registry of Childhood Hemoblastoses and Hemopoiesis Depressions(number of registered cases of leukemia) that were published previously [10-12, 15-17] were used in thereport. The work on creation of the Registry has been begun in 1988. In course of it specialists of theInstitute of Hematology and Transfusion of the Ministry of Health Care of the Republic of Belarus
assessed under the scientific supervision of Prof. E.P.Ivanov all information on childhood hemoblastoses
and hemopoieses. This information came to the Institute of Hematology and Transfusion from oncologicaldispensaries, clinics and polyclinics as well as from hematological consultative establishments. It includes
the following data: the name and address of the patient, age, date, place of diagnosis, ICD number ofdiagnosis, and the diagnostic method (e.g. biopsy, autopsy, myelogram, immunohistochemical method
used, etc.) [10-12]. These data are available for each oblast (region) of Belarus, the city Minsk (capital ofBelarus) and for the entire country. There are 6 oblasts in Belarus: Brest, Gomel, Grodno, Minsk, Mogilev
and Vitebsk.
Data of the Belarusian Cancer Registry for the period 2001-2004 [18-20] were also used in thepresent report. Numbers of children used in the analysis were determined on the basis of population
census of the Republic of Belarus [21] and statistical handbooks [22-24]. The analysis was carried out for
combined children’s population without separate consideration of boys and girls. Using data on theleukemia incidence as well as other data time-averaged radiation risks of the incidence in childhood
leukemia in Belarus were assessed.
The excess absolute risk was assessed on the basis of the following simplified expression:
Oj − Ej.
EAR j =(1)j
N PYSv
Here EAR j - excessive absolute risk in jth period of time, O j and E j - numbers of observed andj- number of person-years-sievert in the jth period.
expected leukemias in this period respectively, N PYSvj
is determined by the expression:
The value of N PYSvn

N PYSv = ∑ H i , j .
j

Coll

(2)

i =1

Here

H i , j collective equivalent dose of the whole body irradiation accumulated from theCollbeginning of irradiation to the end of the ith year in the jth period.
The excess relative risk was assessed by using the formula:(O j / E j ) − 1 ,ERR j = jj
N PYSv / N PY

- 153 -

(3)j
- number of person-years in the jth period of time.
where N PY

The attributive risk , AR j , was assessed on the basis of the expression:
AR j = 100% ⋅Oj − Ej
Oj(4)

Results and discussion.

Doses of irradiation
Table 1 presents cumulative doses of the whole body irradiation of the total Belarusian childhood
population as a result of the Chernobyl accident. Data given in this table were taken from Table 3 of thereport [25].
As can be seen from this table, collective and mean individual doses of the whole body irradiation
to children of Belarus increased rapidly up to 1989 and then decreased slowly after achieving somemaximal values. This temporal pattern of irradiation doses appears in case of children because thechildhood subpopulation is an open system. Its composition is determined through two continuous flows.
One flow is directed from outside to inside. This is the flow a newborn children. It adds irradiation doses
to already accumulated doses. The second flow is directed from inside to outside. This is a flow of persons
that achieved the age of 15 years. They leave the subpopulation of children carrying a fraction of
accumulated irradiation doss to the subgroup of adolescents and adults.
Table 1. Cumulative collective and mean individual doses of the whole body irradiation of thechildhood population of Belarus as a result of the Chernobyl accident.
Collective
IndividualCollective
Individual
Year
Year
104 PSv
mSv
104 PSv
mSv
1986
0.25691
1.122041996
0.25159
1.17229
1987
0.3722
1.61069
1997
0.21916
1.05311988
0.42971
1.84569
1998
0.184280.919721989
0.45005
1.922961999
0.14706
0.76311990
0.43956
1.877172000
0.10972
0.58983
1991
0.42278
1.81315
2001
0.077120.43181
1992
0.38629
1.669622002
0.05883
0.34451993
0.34885
1.525412003
0.04834
0.296061994
0.31089
1.38177
2004
0.03834
0.24613
1995
0.282071.28037

It was demonstrated in the report [25] that the main contribution to irradiation doses in Belarus
gave irradiation in 1986-1989. After 1989 a significant decrease in irradiation doses occurred in Belarus.
All those persons that were members of the children’s subpopulation in 1986-1989 left this subgroup in
2004 because achieving of the age 15 years. And this caused significant decrease of irradiation doses of
the children’s subgroup.

Incidence in acute leukemia in children of Belarus
Figure 1 and Table 2 present time-averaged incidences in the acute childhood leukemia in different
regions of Belarus. Three time periods are shown here. They are 1980-1985, 1986-1992 and 1993-2000.
The time after the Chernobyl accident was divided in two periods: 1986-1992 and 1993-2000.
- 154 -

As can be seen from Fig.1 and Table 2, a short-time increase in the childhood leukemia occurred
immediately after the Chernobyl accident in all regions of Belarus except the Mogilev oblast. In case of
the Mogilev region a permanent decrease in the incidence in the childhood leukemia was observed in the
period 1980-2000. The most plausible reason of this temporal pattern of the incidence in the childhood
leukemia in case of the Mogilev region could be an incorrectness of the empirical data established for thisregion before the Chernobyl accident.
Data presented in Fig.1 and Table 2 demonstrate that time-averaged incidence rates in practically all
regions of Belarus as well as in the entire Belarus in 1993-2000 were lower than in 1980-1985. This is an
4.6

Brest region

Gomel region

4.0

4.4

Cases in 100,000

Cases in 100,000

4.2

3.8

3.6

3.4

4.0
3.8
3.6
3.4

3.2
3.2

3.0

3.0

1980-1985

1986-1992

1993-2000

1980-1985

Time periods

5.0

Grodno region

4.2

1986-1992

1993-2000

Time periods

city Minsk

4.8
4.6

Cases in 100,000

Cases in 100,000

4.0
3.8
3.6
3.4

4.4
4.2
4.0
3.8
3.6
3.4

3.2
3.2
3.0

3.0
1980-1985

1986-1992

1980-1985

1993-2000

1986-1992

1993-2000

Time periods

Time periods
4.4
Minsk region

4.8
4.6

4.0

Cases in 100,000

Cases in 100,000

Mogilev region

5.0

4.2

3.8
3.6
3.4

4.4
4.2
4.0
3.8
3.6
3.4

3.2

3.2
3.0

3.0
1980-1985

1986-1992

1980-1985

1993-2000

Vitebsk region

5.0

1986-1992

1993-2000

Time periods

Time periods

4.6

4.8

Belarus in total

4.4

4.6

Cases in 100,000

Cases in 100,000

4.4
4.2
4.0
3.8
3.6
3.4
3.2
3.0

4.2
4.0
3.8
3.6
3.4
3.2

2.8
3.0

2.6
1980-1985

1986-1992

1993-2000

1980-1985

1986-1992

1993-2000

Time periods

Time periods

Fig. 1. Time-averaged incidences in the acute childhood leukemia in different regions of Belarus.

- 155 -

Table 2. Incidence in the acute childhood leukemia in regions of Belarus in 1980-1985,
1986-1992 and 1993-2000.
Region
Cases
Person·years IR·105, a
SE·105, a
1980-1985
Brest
80
2,268,213
3.527
0.394
Gomel
80
2,385,799
3.353
0.375
Grodno59
1,588,899
3.713
0.483
City Minsk
90
2,002,278
4.495
0.474
Region Minsk
75
2,226,026
3.369
0.381
Mogilev
84
1,756,243
4.783
0.522
Vitebsk
70
1,843,033
3.798
0.454
Belarus538
13,349,317
4.030
0.174
1986-1992
Brest
108
2,793,433
3.866
0.372
Gomel
117
2,724,858
4.294
0.397
Grodno71
1,808,251
3.926
0.466
City Minsk
122
2,623,805
4.650
0.421
Region Minsk
103
2,518,720
4.089
0.403
Mogilev
86
2,024,855
4.247
0.458
Vitebsk
101
2,103,497
4.802
0.478
Belarus708
16,256,056
4.355
0.164
1993-2000
Brest
92
2,718,244
3.385
0.353
Gomel
104
2,642,182
3.936
0.386
Grodno77
1,932,447
3.985
0.454
City Minsk
113
2,647,839
4.268
0.401
Region Minsk
96
2,544,115
3.773
0.385
Mogilev
74
2,003,962
3.693
0.429
Vitebsk
64
2,145,307
2.983
0.373
Belarus620
16,758,117
3.700
0.149

indication of a decreasing trend of spontaneous incidence in the childhood leukemia in Belarus
The slight decline in the leukemia incidence in Belarus began already before the accident at the
Chernobyl NPP. This can be seen in Fig.2 that shows annual incidence rates in Belarus in the period 19801985 (left panel). The right panel of the Fig.2 displays annual incidence rates in the periods 1980-1985
and 1993-2004 combined together.
In case of data presented in the left panel of Fig. 2 only data of the Belarusian Republican Registry
4.7

Y =219.21089-0.10854 X
2
R = 0.61903, n = 6, P(2-tailed) = 0.06334

4.6

4.5

Cases in 100,000 children

Cases in 100,000 children

4.6

4.4
4.3
4.2
4.1
4.0
3.9
3.8

Y =47.99013-0.02218 X
2

R = 0.39071, n = 18, P(2-tailed) = 0.00554

4.4
4.2
4.0
3.8
3.6
3.4

3.7
1980

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1980

Years

1985

1990

1995

2000

2005

Years

Fig.2. Incidence in the childhood leukemia in Belarus in 1980-1985 (left panel) and in 1980-1985,
1993 –1994 (right panel).

- 156 -

of Childhood Hemoblastoses and Hemopoiesis Depressions were used. The data presented in the rightpanel of this figure were constructed by using data of the Belarusian Republican Registry of Childhood
Hemoblastoses and Hemopoiesis Depressions for the periods 1980-1985, 1993-2000 and data of theBelarusian Cancer Registry for the period 2001-2004 [18-20].
The decreasing trend in the childhood leukemia observed in Belarus before the Chernobyl accident
indicates the necessity to analyze the increase of the childhood leukemia in Belarus after the Chernobyl
accident on the basis of comparison of observed and expected incidences in this period of time. Threedifferent simplified methods can be used for assessment of expected incidence rates in the period 19861992. At first, expected incidence rates in the period 1986-1992 can be determined as arithmetic means ofempirical incidence rates estimated in periods 1980-1985 and 1993-2000. This method gives for the entire
Belarus the value 3.865·10-5 a-1 as the expected incidence rate for the period 1986-1992.
The second method of assessment is based on combining numbers of leukemia cases and personyears established in different periods of time. Assessment on the basis of Table 2 determines the total
number of leukemias in registered in children of Belarus in periods 1980-1985 and 1993-2000 equal to1,158 cases. The combined number of person-years in these periods is 30,107,434 person-years. Dividingof the first number by the second gives the value 3.846·10-5 a-1. It differs only by 0.5% from the value
assessed with the first method.
The third method in case of the entire Belarus is based on using the fitting expression shown in theright panel of Fig.2. It gives the value 3.877·10-5 a-1 that is practically the same as values assessed by using
two first methods. This means that any described methods can be used for estimation of expected timeaveraged incidence rates of the childhood leukemia in the entire Belarus.
The analogous methods can be used also by estimation of expected incidence rates in the period
1986-1992 for separate regions of Belarus.
Table 3 presents standardized incidence ratios (SIRs) of the childhood leukemia in the period 19861992 estimated as ratios of observed incidence rates in the childhood leukemia in the period 1986-1992 toexpected incidence rates in the same period 1986-1992 for separate regions of Belarus and for the entire
country. The second method for estimation of the expected incidences was used by assessment of SIRs
shown in this table.
As can be seen from Table 3, analysis on the basis of standardized incidence ratios demonstrates
an increase in the incidence in the childhood leukemia in the period 1986-1992 in all regions of Belarus
including the Mogilev region. The highest increase occurred in the Vitebsk region. It was statisticallysignificant only in this region. The lowest increase occurred in the Mogilev and Grodno regions.
The use of standardized incidence ratios instead of rate rates demonstrates the existence ofstatistical significance of the increase in the incidence of the childhood leukemia in the entire Belarus.

Table 3. Standardized incidence ratios of the childhood leukemia in Belarus in 1986-1992.
P(1-tailed)RegionSIR
95%CI of SIR
χ2 (1df)
Brest
1.121
0.881 - 1.426
0.864
0.184
Gomel
1.173
0.931 - 1.479
1.831
0.091
Grodno1.017
0.763 - 1.355
0.013
0.456
0.303
0.299
City Minsk
1.065
0.851 - 1.333
Region Minsk
1.141
0.893 - 1.457
1.116
0.146
Mogilev
1.011
0.777 - 1.314
0.00640.464
7.420
0.00326
Vitebsk
1.429
1.104 - 1.850
Belarus1.133
1.017 - 1.261
5.168
0.0123- 157 -

Radiation risks
It is clear, that any increase of the incidence in some cancer in population with the stabile age distribution(for example, in population of children) could be caused by two different reasons. At first, it can be a
result of an improved screening of this cancer. At second, it can arise due to appearance of new
carcinogen/carcinogens in the environment as well as a result of an increase in amounts ofcarcinogen/carcinogens that was/were in the environment before the increase in the incidence in thiscancer. In the first case the incidence rate has to reach some increased value that remains constant later. In
the second case, a decrease of the incidence will occur after some short-time increase in the incidence incancer. Data given in the present report show a short-time increase in the incidence in the childhood
leukemia in all regions of Belarus after the Chernobyl accident and the following decline. Such temporal
pattern excludes the screening improvement as a main reason of observed increase in the incidence in thechildhood leukemia in Belarus after the accident at the Chernobyl NPP. It is clear that appearance of new
carcinogen/carcinogens or increasing of their amount is responsible for observed change in the leukemia
incidence in Belarus after the Chernobyl accident.
It is remarkable that the observed short-time increase in the childhood leukemia manifested at thesame time when a constant decrease in the chemical pollution occurred in Belarus [26,27]. It began in
Belarus in seventies of the last century as a result of a transfer from the use of hard fuel to natural gas forelectricity and heat production. This caused a significant improvement in the environment of Belarus.
Starvation of industry and agriculture at the beginning of eighties contributed also very significantly to theimprovement of the environment in Belarus [26,27]. As a result of these processes the discharge ofdifferent pollutants into the environment of Belarus decreased by factors 2-3 in the period 1985-2004[26,27].
The decrease of antropogenic pollution caused by industry, agriculture etc occurred in Belarus
simultaneously with an increase of irradiation as a result of the Chernobyl accident. All these facts
indicate that radiation is the most probable factor that caused observed changes in the childhood leukemia
in Belarus after the Chernobyl accident because this change can not result from the decrease in the amountof chemical pollutants.
There is only one finding that contradicts with the assumption that the increase in the childhood
leukemia in Belarus after the accident at the Chernobyl NPP was caused by the impact of ionizing
radiation. As can be seen from Table 3 standardized incidence ratio of the childhood leukemia in the
Vitebsk region is the highest in Belarus. However this region was practically not affected by the
Chernobyl accident [28]. Amount of radioactive substances deposited in this region is lower than in theGomel region approximately by three orders in magnitude [29]. A question arises. If radiation were theorigin of the observed increase in the childhood leukemia in Belarus after the Chernobyl accident why thestandardized incidence ratio of the childhood leukemia in the clean Vitebsk region is than in the highcontaminated Gomel region?
There is a plausible answer on this important question. Probable the high value of the standardized
incidence ratio of the incidence in the childhood leukemia in the clean Vitebsk region could be a result of
the migration of inhabitants of high-contaminated territories of the Gomel and Mogilev regions to thisregion.
The migration began soon after the accident at the Chernobyl accident. In first 10 years after the
Chernobyl accident 842.6 thousand of the Belarusian citizens or 8.4% of the total population changed theplaces of their living in borders of Belarus [30]. The internal migration (moving in borders of Belarus) was
especially high in contaminated territories. According to information [31], approximately one sixth of
inhabitants of the high-contaminated Slavhorod district (Mogilev oblast) left their contaminated- 158 -

settlements during three first years after the Chernobyl accident. The similar situation arose in othercontaminated districts of this region. The process of migration was even more pronounced incontaminated areas of the Gomel oblast [30].
The total number of people that changed their place of residence in borders of Belarus in 1986-2000
is 1,500,000 or 15% of the averaged population that was approximately 10 Million persons in this period[30].
The internal migration in Belarus from contaminated regions of Belarus was occurring partly as aresult of an implementation of the State Program of minimization of the Chernobyl consequences. On thisway about 135,000 persons were resettled from contaminated to clean territories [32]. Approximately
200,000 persons migrated from contaminated areas of Belarus without any assistance of the state [33].
Simultaneously with internal migration an intensive external migration began in Belarus after theaccident at the Chernobyl NPP. As a result of it only in 1990-2000 the country was left for other states of
the world 675.1 thousand of the Belarusian citizens [30]. This is 6.75% of the total population of Belarus.
Significant fraction of people that emigrated from Belarus after the accident at the Chernobyl NPP
lived on the territories affected by this accident. For example, approximately 130 thousand of persons of
the Jewish nationality immigrated to Israel from contaminated areas of Belarus and the Ukraine [34].
About 50% persons from this number lived before the emigration in high-contaminated territories ofBelarus.
It is evident that external and internal migration influences significantly the possible correlation
between incidence rates in different disease and levels of a radioactive contamination caused by the
Chernobyl accident. This influence had to be very significant in case of rare diseases such as the childhood
leukemia. This indicates that more correct analysis of radiation risks of the childhood leukemia caused in
Belarus as a result of the Chernobyl accident can be established only on the basis of data established forthe total country.
Radiation risks of the childhood leukemia assessed on the basis of an assumption that increase in
the incidence in the childhood leukemia observed in Belarus after the Chernobyl accident were assessed in
the present report. Results of this assessment are presented in Table 4. They were estimated for two
periods: 1986-1992 and 1986-2004. Data estimated by Auvinen et al [8] are shown also in Table 4 (fourthcolumn).
Table 4. Radiation risk of the incidence in the childhood leukemia.
This report
Auvinen et al [8]Parameters
1986-1992
1986-2004
1989-1992
Person-years
16,256,056
39,698,347
Observed cases
708
1,567
Expected cases
625
1,484
Observed-expected
83
83
SIR
1.133
1.056
95% of SIR
0.984 ∼ 1.134
1.017 ∼ 1.261
NPYSv/104 PYSv
2.758
4.833
EAR·104 PYSv
30.1
17.2
95% CI of EAR
3.9 ∼ 59.2
-5.0 ∼ 41.0h, mSv
1.694
1.151
0.47
ERR, %/mSv
7.8
4.9
7
95% CI of ERR in %/1mSv
1.0 ∼ 15.4
-1.4 ∼ 11.6
-27 ∼ 41
AR,%
11.7
5.3
95% CI of AR
1.5 ∼ 23.0
-1.6 ∼ 12.7

- 159 -

For the assessment of data presented in Table 4, incidence rates in the childhood leukemia in theentire Belarus given in Table 2 were used. The expected incidence rate in the period 1986-1992 was thenassessed by combining noncorrected numbers of leukemia cases established for periods 1980-1985 and1993-2000 and respective person-years also presented in Table 2. Collective and mean individual doses of
the whole body irradiation presented in Table 1 were used for assessment of radiation risks given in thesecond and third columns of Table 4.
As can be seen from Table 4 the relative excess risk of 7.8% per mSv (95%CI from 1.0% to 15.4%
per mSv) was estimated for the period 1986-1992 for the entire Belarus on the basis of observed data. Thisvalue agrees very well with estimation of Auvinen et al [8] that found relative risk for Finnish children forthe period 1989-1992 equal to 7% per mSv (95%CI from –27% to 41%).

Comparison with other studies
The very good agreement in radiation risks established in the present report and study [8] gives anadditional evidence of a radiation origin of the short-time increase in the childhood leukemia manifested
after the accident at the Chernobyl NPP in Belarus and Finland.
It is clear that a very good agreement in radiation risks found in this report and by Auvinen et al [8]could not be achieved simply by chance. Two sets of data are used for estimation of radiation risks. One
set consists of data of medical statistical account. The second set consists of physical data such as
contamination and irradiation levels. All these sets of data are quite different in case of children of Finlandand children of Belarus. Therefore the existing agreement in radiation risks established in the present
report and by Auvinen et al [8] gives an evidence that increase in the childhood leukemia manifested in
Belarus and Finland is a result of irradiation caused by the Chernobyl NPP. The same conclusion can be
drawn in respect of findings [4-5,9].
It is known that the rejection of link between radiation and an increase in the leukemia by infants[4-5,6] and children [9] observed after the Chernobyl accident is mostly based on results of analysis of theleukemia in infants and children of Belarus [7,10-12]. No statistical significance of the increase inleukemia incidence as well as no correlation between the incidence and correlation between contaminationlevel was established in the reports [7,10-12]. However the reports [7,10-12] had significant methodical
shortages. In case of reports [10,11] incidences in leukemia registered before the accident at the Chernobyl
NPP were compared with data established in 1986-1992. The authors [10,12] could not find the statisticalsignificance in the increase in leukemia in 1986-1992. However, data registered in Belarus after the period
1986-1992 demonstrate a decreasing trend of spontaneous childhood leukemia to the incidence before theChernobyl accident.
An inappropriate method of analysis was used also in the report [12]. In this case the childhood
leukemia in children of Belarus was analyzed by comparing annual incidences. Moreover boys and girls
were analyzed separately. Such analysis was performed separately for different regions of Belarus. As aresult, the children’s population of Belarus was divided in the big number of subgroups. This splitting
excluded any possibility to find the increase in the childhood leukemia in Belarus.
The indicated shortages and the influence of demographic factors are reasons for decreasing
findings made in reports [7,10-12]. However, specialists in radiation protection concluded on the basis ofthese findings that there was no increase in infants and childhood leukemia in Belarus after the Chernobyl
accident at whole [13,14]. As a result, they concluded the increase in infants and children leukemia
observed in reports [4-6,9] had no any link to radiation.
Data established in the present report demonstrate that all these conclusions made in reports [13,14]
are incorrect. The statistical significant short-time increase in the leukemia incidence occurred after the- 160 -

Chernobyl accident in Belarus. The most probable reason of this increase is irradiation of Belarus as aresult of the Chernobyl accident. The same conclusion can be made in respect of the increase in theleukemia incidence observed in some countries of Europe [4-6,9].
It is to notice here that ecological method was used in the present report as well as in reports [4-1012,15-17] for analysis of the incidence in infants and children’s leukemia. This method has significant
limitations in interpreting of established results because both exposure and outcome are determined at thelevel group level. Therefore, ecological studies do not allow an assurance that the individuals who areexposed are actually those who develop the disease [35]. As a result of these limitations, ecological studies
have significant problems by answering a very important question about possible threshold in inducing of
the disease. For example, according to the assessment carried out in the report [36] doses of the wholebody irradiation of the Belarusian population caused by the Chernobyl accident are in the range from somefractions of millisievert up to some hundreds of millisievert. It is impossible to determine on the basis ofdata estimated for the Belarusian children in the presented report if there is a threshold in case of thechildhood leukemia.
Qualitative answer on the last question can give in case of the childhood leukemia ecologicalstudies carried out in range of lower doses.
The highest dose of the whole body irradiation accumulated by of Finland in the first 2 years after
the Chernobyl accident was 0.97 mSv [8]. It is known that irradiation dose of some small number of
persons (critical group) in any irradiated group is by 3-5 times higher than the arithmetic mean dose.
Assumption that radiation-induced leukemia in case of children of Finland developed in the critical groupindicates, that ionizing radiation can induce radiation-induced leukemia at least at doses of the whole body
irradiation in the range 3-5 mSv. This means that if the threshold exists in reality it can not be higher than
3-5 mSv in case of the childhood leukemia.
It was demonstrated in the previous section that radiation risk of the childhood leukemia in Belarus
agrees very well with radiation risk established for children of Finland [8]. It is also quite close toradiation risk found for inhabitants of Hiroshima and Nagasaki irradiated at the age 0-9 years [37].
According the authors [37] excessive relative risk of leukemia incidence in persons irradiated at the age 09 years and followed up to the age 20 years is 44/Sv. This corresponds to a relative risk of 4.4% per mSv.
This is a fully unexpected result. According the paradigm of radiation protection [38] radiation risk
depends on doses and dose rates of irradiation. It is well known that doses and doses rates of theBelarusian population differ very significantly from doses and dose rates of survived inhabitants ofHiroshima and Nagasaki. The main contribution to the whole body doses of the Belarusian population, as
can be seen from Table 1, gave irradiation in 1986-1989. In case of atomic bomb survivors the main
fraction of dose was delivered within 1 minute [39]. Individual dose of the whole body irradiation of theBelarusian children was by 2 orders in magnitude lower than population dose of the atomic bomb
survivors. The higher radiation risk of the incidence in leukemia in children of Belarus than in atomic
bomb survivors despite of such immense difference in irradiation doses gives the clear evidence that usingof the DRREF factor in case of chronic or protracted irradiation is not relevant at least in case of thechildhood leukemia.
Conclusions
The analysis of the childhood leukemia in Belarus carried out for the period 1980-2004 indicates that theaccident at the Chernobyl NPP caused manifestation of additional leikemias in the Belarusian children.
Their number is about 83 cases in the period 1986-1992. The excessive relative risk of leukemia assessed- 161 -

for this period is 7,8% per 1 mSv. This value agrees very well with radiation risk found after the
Chernobyl accident in Finland. Quite good agreement exists also of radiation risks estimated in this reportwith radiation risks established for atomic bomb survivors irradiated at the age 0-19 years. This is an
unexpected result because of very significant difference in temporal patterns of irradiation of theBelarusian children and atomic bomb survivors. The dose rates of irradiation of the whole body in case ofchildren of Belarus were approximately 1014 times lower than dose rates of atomic bomb survivors
irradiation. The population doses of the whole body irradiation of the Belarusian children were lower by
two orders in magnitude lower than in case of atomic bomb survivors. Despite these differences in doses
and dose rates radiation risks of the leukemia incidence in children of Belarus are by some factors higher
than in atomic bomb survivors. This indicates that the hypothesis about decrease of radiation risk withdecrease of doses and dose rates is not relevant at least in case of the childhood leukemia.
References.

1. Preston D.L., Kusumi S., Tomonaga M., Izumi S., Ron E., Kuramoto A., Kamada N., Dohy H.,
Matsuo T., Mabuchi K. Cancer incidence in atomic bomb survivors. Part III: Leukemia, lymphoma
and multiple myeloma, 1950-1987. Radiat. Res. 137 (Suppl.), S68-S97 (1994).
2. Bithell J.F., Stuart A.M. Pre-natal irradiation and childhood malignancy: A review of British datafrom the Oxford Survey. Br. J.Cancer, 31, 271-287 (1975).
3. Doll R., Wakeford R. Risk of childhood cancer from fetal irradiation. Br. J.Radiol., 70, 130-139(1997).
4. Petridou E., Trichopoulos D., Dessypris N., Flytzani V., Haidas S., Kalmanti M., Koliouskas D.,
Kosmidis H., Piperopolou F., Tzortzatou D. Infant leukemia after in utero exposure to radiation from
Chernobyl. Nature, 382, 352-353 (1996).
5. Michaelis J., Kaletch U, Burkart W., Grosche B. Infant leukemia after the Chernobyl accident. Nature,
387, 246 (1997).
6. Steiner M., Burkart W., Grosche B. Kaletch U, Michaelis J. Trend in infant leukemia in West
Germany in relation to in utero exposure due to the Chernobyl accident. Radiat. Environ. Biophys., 37,
87-93 (1998).
7. Ivanov E.P., Tolochko G.V., Shuvaeva L.P., Ivanov E.V., Iaroshevich R.F, Becker S., Nekolla E.,
Kellerer A.M. Infant leukemia in Belarus after the Chernobyl accident. Radiat. Environ. Biophys., 37,
53-55 (1998).
8. Auvinen A., Hakama M., Arvela H. et al. Fallout from Chernobyl and incidence of childhood
leukemia in Finland, 1976-92. British Med.J.1994. Vol. 309, pp.151-154.
9. Hjalmars U., Kulldorff M., Gustafsson G. Risk of acute childhood leukemia in Sweden after the
Chernobyl reactor accident. British Med. J. 1994. 309, pp. 154-157.
10. Ivanov E.P., Tolochko G.V., Shuvaeva L.P., Iaroshevich R.F, Ivanov E.V., Lazarev V.S.
Hemoblastoses in children of the Republic of Belarus after the Chernobyl accident. In: Status of thehematoimmune system in children of Belarus after the catastrophe at the Chernobyl NPP. Minsk.1996,
p.46-54.
11. World Health Organization. Statistics of hemoblastoses in Belarus. In: Health Consequences of theChernobyl Accident. Results of the IPHECA and related national programs. Ed. G.N.Sushkevich and
A.F.Tsyb. Summary Report. WHO. Geneva.1995, p. 381-398 (in Russian).

- 162 -

12. Ivanov E.P., Tolochko G.V., Shuvaeva L.P., Becker S., Nekolla E., Kellerer A.M. Childhood
leukemia in Belarus before and after the Chernobyl accident. Radiat. Environ. Biophys., 35, 75-80(1996).
13. United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation. Sources, Effects and Risks
of Ionizing Radiation. UNSCEAR 2000 Report to the General Assembly, with annexes. United
Nations. New York. 2000.
14. World Health Organization. Health Effects of the Chernobyl Accident and Special Health Care
Programmes. Report of the UN Chernobyl Forum Experts Group “Health” (EGH). Working Draft.
August 31, 2005.
15. Malko M.V. Ivanov E.P, Parkin M, Ivanov V.E. Chernobyl leukemia in children of Belarus. In:
Materials of the II International conference “Medico-Social Ecology of Individual: Status andPerspective”. 2-3 April 2004. Ministry of Education of the Republic of Belarus. Belarusian State
University. Minsk, p. 97-101, 2004 (in Russian).
16. Malko M.V. Ivanov E.P. Assessment of risk of radiation-induced leukemia in children of Belarus. In:
Materials of the I International conference “Medico-Social Ecology of Individual: Status andPerspective”. 4-5 April 2003. Ministry of Education of the Republic of Belarus. Belarusian State
University. Minsk, p. 101-106, 2003 (in Russian).
17. Ivanov E.P, Malko M.V, Ivanov E.P. Leukemia in children of Belarus after the accident at the
Chernobyl NPP. In: Materials of the International conference of leading specialists, young scientists
and students “Sacharov’s Readings 2002: Ecological problems of the XXI century”. Minsk, 17-21
May, 2002. Ministry of Education of the Republic of Belarus, A.D.Sachorov International State
Ecological University. Minsk, “Trioleta”, 2002, p. 89-92 (in Russian).
18. Malignant neoplasms in Belarus: 1993-2002. Ministry of Health Care of the Republic of Belarus.
Belarusian Center of Medical Technologies, Information, Management and Economic of Health Care.
Minsk, 2003.
19. Malignant neoplasms in Belarus: 1994-2003. Ministry of Health Care of the Republic of Belarus.
Belarusian Center of Medical Technologies, Information, Management and Economic of Health Care.
Minsk, 2004.
20. Malignant neoplasms in Belarus: 1995-2004. Ministry of Health Care of the Republic of Belarus.
Belarusian Center of Medical Technologies, Information, Management and Economic of Health Care.
Minsk, 2005.
21. Ministry of Statistics and Analysis of the Republic of Belarus. Population of the Republic of Belarus
by Sex, Age and Marital Status. Minsk, 2000.
22. Ministry of Statistics and Analysis of the Republic of Belarus. Population of the Republic of Belarus.
Minsk, 2003.
23. Ministry of Health Care of the Republic of Belarus. Public health in the Republic of Belarus. An
official statistical collection, 2003. Minsk, 2004.
24. Ministry of Health Care of the Republic of Belarus. Public health in the Republic of Belarus. An
official statistical collection, 2004. Minsk, 2005.
25. Malko M.V. Doses of the whole body irradiation in Belarus as a result of the Chernobyl accident. This
Edition, p
26. Ministry of Statistics and Analysis of the Republic of Belarus. Statistical Yearbook of the Republic of
Belarus. Minsk, 1998, p.243, 361.
27. Ministry of Statistics and Analysis of the Republic of Belarus. Statistical Yearbook of the Republic of
Belarus. Minsk, 2004, p.280-290, 393.
- 163 -

28. State Committee of Hydrometeorology of the USSR. Date of radioactive contamination of settlementsof the Belorussian SSR with Caesium-137 and Strontium-90 (status of June 1989). M.
“Hydrometeoizdat”, 1989 (in Russian).
29. Malko, M.V. Assessment of the Chernobyl radiological consequences. In the report; Research
activities about radiological consequences of the Chernobyl NPS accident and social activities to assist
the sufferers by the accident. Edited by Imanaka T. Research Reactor Institute. Kyoto University,
Japan. KURRI-KR-21. ISSN 1342-0852, 1998, p.65-85.
30. Committee on Problems of Consequences of the Catastrophe at the Chernobyl NPP of the Council of
Ministers of the Republic of Belarus. Consequences of Chernobyl in Belarus: 17 years after.
Belarusian National Report. Ed.: V.E.Shevchuk, V.G.Gurachevski. Minsk, 2003, p.18 (in Russian).
31. Simurov A., Ulitenok A. Belarusian zone. Newspaper of the Central Committee of the CP of USSR
“Pravda”. M., № 205 (25,923), 24 June 1989 (in Russian).
32. Ministry of Emergency Situation of the Republic of Belarus. Belarus and Chernobyl: the second
decade. Editor: I.A.Kenik. Baranovichi. 1998 (in Russian).
33. Pastayalka L.A. Medical consequences of the Chernobyl catastrophe in Belarus: problems andperspective. Meditsinskiya Novosti. Minsk. No 11, 2004, p.3-17 (in Russian).
34. Goldsmith J.R., Kordysh E., Quastel M.R., Merkin L., Poljak S., Levy Y., Gorodisher R., Barki Y.,
Wynberg J. Elevated TSH in children who emigrated to Israel from Belarus and the Ukraine near
Chernobyl. Proceedings of the International Conference held in Vienna, 8-12 April 1996 “One decade
after Chernobyl: Summing up the consequences of the accident”, Poster presentations – Volume 1, p.
69 – 72. IAEA, September 1967.
35. Moolgavkar S.H., Moller H., Woodward A. Principles of the epidemiological approach to QEP. In:
Quantitative Estimation and Prediction of Human Cancer Risks. Edited by S.Moolgavkar, D.Krewski,
L.Zeise, E.Cardish and H. Moller. IARC Scientific Publications No.131. International Agency for
Research on Cancer IARC. Lyon, France. 1999, p.61-73.
36. Malko M.V. Assessment of population doses of rural inhabitants of Belarus irradiation as a result of
the accident at the Chernobyl NPP. In: Materials of the international conference of leading specialists,
young scientists and students “Sacharov’s Readings 2003: Ecological problems of the XXI century”.
Minsk, 19-20 May, 2003. Ministry of Education of the Republic of Belarus, A.D.Sachorov
International State Ecological University. Minsk, 2003, p. 49-50 (in Russian).
37. Shimizu Y., Kato H., Shull W.J. Studies of the Mortality of A-bomb survivors. 9. Mortality, 19501985: Part 2. Cancer Mortality Based on the Recently Revised Doses. Radiat. Res. 121, p. 120-141(1990).
38. International Commission on Radiological Protection. Publication 60. Pergamon Press. Oxford. New
York. Frankfurt. Seoul. Sydney. Tokyo. 1991, pp.108-111.
39. Kerr G.D. et al. Transport of initial radiation in air over ground. Chapter 3, p.66-142 in: U.S. – Japanreassessment of atomic bomb radiation dosimetry in Hiroshima and Nagasaki: Final Report. V.1.
DS86 Dosimetry System 1986. Edited by Roesch W.C. Hiroshima. RERF. 1987. Citation after
Gofman J.W. Radiation –Induced Cancer from Low-Dose Exposure: an independent analysis. San
Francisco. California. 1990: First Edition. Chapter 8, p.8-1.

- 164 -

Trans-generational effects of radiation exposure from the Chernobyl Nuclear
Plant Accident: A review of studies using mutation markers of repeat DNA
sequences
FURITSU Katsumi
Department of Genetics, Hyogo Collage of Medicine,
Mukogawa-cho 1-1, Nishinomiya, Hyogo 663-8131, Japan

Introduction
The assessment of the possible radiation effects on the children who were conceived after the
Chernobyl accident is needed in order to estimate the long-term health effects of the accident, including
the effects on future generations. If germline cells were even exposed at the stage before conception, thehealth effect of children could be “trans-generational”. Additionally, the health effects of children due toexposure to radiation might also be caused by exposure at successive stages after conception including theembryonic and fetal stages.
We already have definite evidence of the trans-generational effect of radiation from experimental
animals. However, it has not yet been demonstrated in humans. The Radiation Effect Research Foundation(RERF) reported, “Extensive studies of the children of survivors of the atomic bombings in Hiroshima andNagasaki have thus far yielded no statistically significant increases in genetic effects compared to control
populations.” They have done an on-going epidemiological study collecting mortality from all causes, andhave performed molecular studies of DNA, as well as conducting a clinical health study investigating thefrequency and prevalence of adult-onset life-style-related diseases.1) Under such circumstances, we have
only the genetic risk assessment of radiation exposure, which was estimated from the data of spontaneous
mutation rates in human Mendelian diseases and chronic multi-factorial diseases, and the data of theradiation-induced germline mutations of experimental mice.2) Studying the possible trans-generational
effects induced by radiation exposure from the Chernobyl nuclear power plant accident is important inorder to discuss the reassessment of the genetic risk of radiation. People who were exposed to theradiation from the Chernobyl accident form another large population, other than the atomic survivors ofHiroshima and Nagasaki where the radiation exposure was quite different.
This review focuses on the studies using mutation markers of repeat DNA sequences which isrelevant to the radiation exposures that resulted from the Chernobyl accident.
Repeat DNA sequences as markers for detection of “trans-generational effects”
The choice of mutation markers is one of the critical issues in the studies of the trans-generational
effects of mutagens including radiation. The markers should be sensitive and be able to effectively detectmutations, and the system should be capable of obtaining quantitative results of the dose-effect.
Spontaneous mutation rates of protein-coding genes are at most in the order of 10-5-10-6 per generation.
Trying to detect trans-generational effects using markers of these coding genes requires very large numberof samples. Therefore, it is not realistic to expect “significant results” using these markers in a population
which is actually available for study.
There are considerable numbers of sites with repeat DNA sequences, multiple repeats of a certain
sequence of bases (a repeat unit), in the genomes of various living things including human beings. The
different numbers of repeat units at a site in the genomes of individuals of the same species may lead to- 165 -

polymorphic phenotypes. Most of the repeat sequences are in non-coding regions. These are sites, which
can spontaneously mutate in high frequencies per generation. These sites can be used as markers to detect
the genetic effects of mutagens in a limited-size population. In studies of the trans-generational effects ofradiation, the results of research using markers of hypervariable minisatellites and microsatellites havebeen reported in human studies, as well as the results of experiments using markers of Expanded Simple
Tandem Repeat (ESTR) in mice have also been reported.
Hypervariable minisatellites in humans are composed of varying numbers of GC-rich core repeats of
10 - 100 base pairs (bp). The core repeats within a stretch of minisatellite are related but are not identical.
The total number of base pairs in a minisatellite is up to a few tens of thousands. There are more than ten
thousand minisatellite loci in the human genome and most of them are situated close to telomeres. Someminisatellites exhibit spontaneous instability in germ cells with mutation frequencies as high as 10-1 - 10-2
per gamete, however such high mutation rates can not be seen in somatic cell lines. Recombination andgene conversion at minisatellite loci during meiosis result in complex changes in the loci, while
recombination and slippage during mitosis lead to minisatellite instability of somatic cells. These different
mechanisms for mutations are considered to be one of the reasons for such high instability found only in
the germline.3)
Microsatellites in humans are composed of repeat units of less than 10 bp and the total length of a
microsatellite is usually less than 100 bp. There are more than a hundred thousand microsatellites in thehuman genome and they are dispersed widely throughout the genome. The spontaneous mutation ratevaries in each locus and is 10-2 - 10-4 per generation. It is considered that replication slippage leads tomicrosatellite mutations. A higher mutation rate was reported in paternal loci compared to maternal loci.
Larger numbers of mitotic germline cell divisions in spermatogenesis than in oogenesis might be one
possible reason for the difference in mutation rates between paternal and maternal germlines.4)
ESTRs of mice were at first cloned for their sequence homology to human minisatellites and they
were called “minisatellites of mice” at first. However, their repeat units are only 5 - 6 bp and there is novariation of repeat units within a locus. Because of these structural differences between human and mouseminisatellites, these repeat sequences in mice were renamed ESTRs.5) Replication slippage is thought tocause the instability of ESTR although other mechanisms are possible.3)
Human experimental somatic cells showed a dose-dependent increase in mutation rates atminisatellite and microsatellite loci, when they were exposed to radiation.6) As for human germ cells, noincrease was detected in the minisatellite mutation rate of sperm from volunteer patients who were given
radiotherapy for seminoma.7) There is no similar research examining the radiation effects on the humanmicrosatellite mutations of germline cells using samples from volunteer patients.
Induction of germline mutations of ESTRs in male mice by acute gamma irradiation was reported
independently by two research groups.8, 9) The observed mutation frequency induced by irradiation was
two orders of magnitude higher than the frequency which could be expected from the assumption that the
DNA double strand break at the ESTR locus would cause the mutation. This suggests that ESTR locimight not be a direct target of radiation, but rather radiation might induce an indirect mechanism of some
sort that would increase genetic instability in a cell.3) Further research is needed to clarify this mechanism.
As for the most sensitive stage during spermatogenesis, different results were reported from these two
research groups. Niwa’s group reported that the late spermatid stage of post-meiosis was most sensitive toradiation with regard to ESTR mutations.9) This result was compatible with the findings previously
obtained from the experiments of the specific recessive loci in mice germline. On the contrary, Dubrova’s- 166 -

group reported that the pre-meiotic stages of spermatogenesis were sensitive.10)
Research on children living in contaminated areas of Chernobyl
In 1996, ten years after the Chernobyl accident, Dubrova et al. reported the results of studies on
residents in the Chernobyl contaminated areas in Belarus, which showed that “the frequency of mutation
was found to be twice as high in the exposed families as in the control group.”11) This research drew theattention of the scientific community as it was the first “evidence” that radiation could increase germline
mutations in human beings. In 1997, they published another report which included additional subjects andminisatellite probes to reinforce the results of the first report.12) However, these reports were criticizedbecause they used samples of Caucasian families in the UK as the non-exposed control group which wereof different ethnic origins than the Belarusian exposed families.13) Therefore, they conducted further
research on the residents in the contaminated areas in Ukraine. In this study, they compared the children
who were conceived before and after the accident, so that they could investigate the exposed subjects andunexposed controls from the same ethnic background. They analyzed the paternal and maternal mutation
rates using eight single-locus hypervariable minisatellite probes and reported that “a statisticallysignificant 1.6-fold increase in mutation rate was found in the germline of exposed fathers, whereas thematernal germline mutation rate in the exposed families was not elevated.”14)
Dubrova et al. also investigated the populations around the Semipalatinsk nuclear test site in
Kazakhstan, as well as exposed populations in rural villages along the Techa River, which were
contaminated by radioactive releases from the Mayak plutonium separation combine. They used the sameeight hypervariable minisatellite probes as mutation markers and again reported elevated minisatellite
mutation rates in the exposed populations.15, 16)
However, the results reported from Dubrova’s group were contrary to the findings of other groups
which had also investigated human populations using minisatellite markers. Significant elevations of theminisatellite mutation rates were not detected in the reports of the study using sperm samples of volunteer
patients whose testicles had been irradiated by radiotherapy for treatment of seminoma,7) in the research offamilies of atomic bomb survivors in Hiroshima and Nagasaki,17-19) or in the study of the families ofChernobyl clean-up workers who were called “liquidators”.20-22) The reasons for this discrepancy are as yet
unknown. Only the research group of Dubrova investigated the exposed residents in the contaminatedareas. The residents in the contaminated areas were chronically exposed to low-dose-rates of radiation,
while atomic bomb survivors and the Chernobyl liquidators were mainly exposed to high-dose-rates ofradiation for certain limited periods. These differences in type of radiation exposure might be the reason
for the discrepancy. In the case of the residents in the contaminated areas, exposure might not be limited toa specific stage of germline maturation, but could be a successive irradiation throughout the whole processof germline maturation and it could even include the stages after conception.
One of the backgrounds of these studies using minisatellite markers to detect the radiation effects onhuman germline was from previous studies using experimental mice. Mutation rates of ESTRs (these lociwere formerly called “minisatellites of mice”) of the experimental mice were significantly increased byacute gamma irradiation.8, 9) As mentioned above, because of the structural differences between humanminisatellites and “minisatellites of mice”, the latter were renamed ESTRs and different mechanisms are
considered to cause mutations at these loci in mice.5) Radiation may possibly cause changes that increase
the genetic instability in cells, which could lead to mutations of ESTRs in mice. Considering possible
different mechanisms causing mutations, the experimental model of ESTR in mice cannot be directly
applied to solve questions related to human minisatellite mutations. Further research for the mechanism of- 167 -

human minisatellite mutations is necessary before minisatellites will be used more widely as markers todetect and monitor the trans-generational effects of radiation in human populations.
Studies of the children of Chernobyl liquidators
As for the children of Chernobyl liquidators, results of studies using minisatellites20-22) or
microsatellites22, 23) as mutation markers have been reported. There is no study as yet which has
demonstrated “significant effects” with regard to germline mutations in liquidators.
The exposure period was much shorter in liquidators as compared to residents in contaminated areas;in most cases it was a period of up to several months. The radiation dose of individual liquidators varied
widely depending on location and occupation. (However, the information on individual radiation dose wasquite limited and usually external exposure alone was recorded.) In the studies of liquidators, only thepaternal exposure was analyzed because the liquidators were largely men. Children conceived before theaccident or residents in the non-contaminated areas of the same country were used as the non-exposed
control groups.
Kiuru et al. studied the offspring of Estonian liquidators using the mutation markers of eight
hypervariable minisatellite probes which Dubrova had also used in their study of residents. The
minisatellite mutation rate was nonsignificantly increased among children born after the accident (Odds
ratio: 1.33, 95% CI: 0.80-2.20). The rate was higher in the children born to fathers with recorded doses of
0.2 Sv or above (Odds ratio: 3.00, 95% CI: 0.97-9.30) relative to their siblings born before the accident,
although this increase was not statistically significant.21)
Livshits et al. reported that children of Chernobyl workers in Ukraine did not show elevated rates ofmutations in minisatellite alleles. They used the five hypervariable minisatellites as mutation markers
which had also been used by Dubrova. Their control group was made up of residents in non-contaminatedareas in Ukraine. Their results showed as well that the mutation rate of the residents in the contaminatedareas in Belarus (4.94%) was higher than the mutation rate of their controls (3.72%) that were residents of
non-contaminated areas in Ukraine. This was reasonable as it suggested an elevated mutation rate in theresidents in the contaminated areas as compared to those in non-contaminated areas; both groups were ofsimilar ethnic background.20)
The study using microsatellite mutations as markers to investigate the trans-generational effects ofradiation in humans presents a more recent challenge than studies using minisatellites. The protocol forexperiments using microsatellite markers is relatively simple: amplifying a target site including a
microsatellite locus with a pair of primers, one of which is fluorescence-labeled, and analyzing thedifferences in length of PCR (Polymerase Chain Reaction) products using an automatic genetic analyzer.
One of the advantages of this method is higher sensitivity which can detect even a difference in the lengthof a single base in microsatellite loci. However in the experiments using minisatellite markers, thesensitivity is less than this, with bands of different lengths of DNA fragments being analyzed in Southern
Blotting.
However, as is mentioned above, the spontaneous mutation rate of microsatellite loci is one order lessthan that of minisatellite loci. Furitsu and Ryo et al. used as many as 72 microsatellite loci as mutation
markers when they investigated a population of a limited number of liquidator families in Belarus. These
72 microsatellites loci were selected from the loci which had been reported in the literature as having
higher spontaneous mutation rates. Analyzing the mutation of 40 Y-linked mincrosatellite loci, a higher
mutation rate (2.9 x 10-3) was detected in the families of liquidators in Belarus as compared to the- 168 -

mutation rate of the unexposed control group (2.1 x 10-3), although the increase was not statisticallysignificant.23)
There is not yet sufficient basic experimental data on the sensitivity to radiation with regard to
microsatellite mutations in mammalian germlines. Further research on experimental mice and humanpopulations with different radiation doses as well as various types of exposure is necessary.

Studies on living things other than human beings in Chernobyl-contaminated areas
There have been studies of mutations in DNA repeat sequences in barn swallows and wheat plants in
the Chernobyl-contaminated areas. In the study of barn swallows, an increased germline mutation rate wasobserved at the two hypervariable microsatellite loci in populations breeding in Chernobyl- contaminatedareas in Ukraine. European populations of barn swallows migrate across the Sahara desert, wintering insouthern Africa. Ellegren et al. captured adult and nestling barn swallows (as “families”) in Ukraine and
Italy in 1991 and 1996. The mutation rate in the two microsatellite loci was 7.2% (number of meiosis
investigated: 138) for the “families” in the contaminated areas. This rate was significantly higher than themutation rates of control groups in the non-contaminated areas in Ukraine (3.8%, meiosis: 131) and Italy(2.0%, meiosis: 2,002).24)
In the study of wheat plants, two genetically identified populations derived from the same
homogeneous parental line were compared. One population was grown in heavily contaminated plots ofland near the Chernobyl nuclear power plant, the other was sown in a clean (<1 Ci/km2) control area 30
km away with comparable agrochemical characteristics. They analyzed the 13 microsatellite loci in theoffspring plants and estimated that the spontaneous mutation rate was 1.03 x 10-3 per locus (95% IC: 0.44
- 2.03 x 10-3), whereas the mutation rate in the exposed group was 6.63 x 10-3 (95% IC: 4.28 - 9.70 x10-3).25) They also analyzed the complex pattern of microsatellite mutations in the germline of wheat andconcluded that a simple model of replication slippage could not account for mutation events at these lociin wheat.26)
A study on the variation in the hypervariable portion of the mitochondrial control-region haplotypes
in a population of the bank vole in northern Ukraine has been carried out, although it is not a study on therepeat sequences of nuclear DNA. Specimens of the bank vole exhibit the highest internal doses ofradiocesium among small mammals inhabiting the most contaminated sites in Chernobyl. The rate ofvariation in the Chernobyl population was higher than in the control group living in less contaminatedsites. This suggested that exposure to ionizing radiation in the contaminated environments increased thematernal mutation rate and has consequently increased mitochondrial DNA diversity.27) However, thisincreased diversity might be a function of asymmetric migration from a genetically diverse source
population existing before the Chernobyl accident. The longitudinal genetic monitoring project is also
on-going.28)
Plants and small animals usually alternate generations more rapidly than humans and they cannot
intentionally avoid the environmental contamination. Therefore, it is very important to monitor the genetic
changes of these living things in the contaminated areas to estimate the long-term consequences of theChernobyl accident in the whole ecosystem.
Conclusion
In the studies of the children of Chernobyl victims so far, only Dubrova’s study showed a significant
increase in the mutation rate of repeat sequences of DNA, through research done on the residents in the- 169 -

contaminated areas using the markers of minisatellite loci. Other studies investigating the Chernobyl
liquidators did not show any significant increase in the mutation rate even using the same hypervariable
minisatellite probes as mutation markers and the same experimental method as Dubrova’s group. This
discrepancy might be due to the different types of exposure to radiation between residents and liquidators.
Further investigation is required to solve the question: to what extent the increase in mutations in
repeat sequences would reflect in actual human health through its phenotype. Most of the repeat sequencesin the human genome are in non-coding regions. However, some of them are known to cause diseases, orincrease the severity of diseases, as they are in coding or modulator regions in DNA, or near them. The
sensitivity to radiation in the repeat sequences, which relate to certain diseases, should be further
examined and discussed concretely with respect to each site. If some radiation-induced mechanism, whichleads to increased genetic instability in cells, would affect various regions in the genome other than inregions with repeat sequences, it could also influence the coding or modulator regions and induce anumber of deleterious expressions of genes which might lead to the ill health of individuals.
Further research is needed on the mechanism and sensitivity for the induction of mutations throughradiation exposure in DNA repeat sequences in the human germline, in each stage of germ cell maturation
and also in the stages after conception.
As for the studies using microsatellite loci as mutation markers, the studies on barn swallows andwheat plants showed a significant increase in mutation rates, while studies on liquidators have so far failed
to show a significant increase in mutation rates. The residents in the contaminated areas have not yet been
investigated using the mutation markers of microsatellites. Basic data using microsatellite loci inexperimental mice should be obtained. Further research using microsatellite markers with other humanpopulations exposed to radiation in various ways should also be carried out.
In the studies which demonstrated significant increases of mutation rates in DNA repeat sequences,
the observed mutation rate is much higher than the rate which could be expected from the assumption thatthe locus itself is the direct target of radiation and a double strand break at the locus can lead to mutation.
This suggests that the loci might not have been directly targeted by radiation, but radiation might haveinduced some sort of mechanism to increase the genetic instability of a cell. The mechanisms, possibly
including an epigenetic process, might be at work here and they could conceivably be common
mechanisms for other biological effects of radiation, especially at low doses and through chronic
exposure.
As mentioned above, there are still many unsolved problems regarding radiation effects on mutationsof DNA repeat sequences. However, these results, including the significantly elevated mutation rate inmice ESTR, suggest that the genetic instability is actually increased by radiation to the germline.
Therefore, it should not be ignored when we assess the risk of trans-generational effects of radiation. It isespecially important in the genetic risk assessment of low dose and chronic exposure to radiation.
It is critical to carry out a long-range scientific monitoring of the trans-generational effect of the
populations exposed to radiation from the Chernobyl accident. For that purpose, it is vital to establish aninternational research system in cooperation with the researchers in the affected countries.
Not only the environmental contamination by the Chernobyl accident but also other social andeconomic factors have affected the health of people in the Chernobyl areas. This complicated situation
makes it more difficult to investigate the radiation health effects from the Chernobyl accident. It is noteasy to study the radiation health effect separately from other risk factors. The exact radiation dose
estimation is critical in assessing the health effects. However, estimating the exact individual radiation- 170 -

dose from both external and internal exposures can be problematic as it depends on multiple factors suchas individuals’ working conditions, life styles and so on. Therefore, analyzing health effects according todoses received by individuals who may be ill is not a simple process.
Many problems are still unsolved, even though more than 20 years have passed since the Chernobyl
accident. Challenges in the scientific assessment of the various radiation effects of the accident, includingtrans-generational effects, remain with us. However, we should not just wait for the results of further
research, which could provide us with scientific information about radiation, mutations and their relation
to health effects in people, without taking any action right now. We must take action, if we seriously
consider the wellbeing of future generations and remedies for the Chernobyl victims as well as the
problem of nuclear energy in our society.
Table 1 and 2 are the summaries of reports so far on “Trans-generational effects” of humanpopulations using mutation markers of minisatellites and microsatellite, respectively.

Table 1. Reports on the “Trans-generational effects” of human populations using mutation markers
of minisatellites
A. Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant Accident(1) Dubrova et al. (1996) [11]z Residents in the heavily contaminated rural areas of the Mogilev¾ Exposed groupprovince in Belarus: 79 families with children born between
February and September 1994; both parents had resided
continuously in the contaminated areas.
z Caucasian families in the UK: 105 families; sex was matched with
¾ Non-exposed control
the offspring in the exposed group.
group¾

Estimated radiation dose¾

Minisatellite probes¾

Main results¾

Radiation Effects(2) Dubrova et al. (1997)[12]¾ Exposed group¾

Non-exposed control
group

z The level of Cs137 contamination was 1-15Ci/km2．Individual
radiation dose for external and internal chronic exposure to Cs137
was estimated to be less than 5mSv/year.
z A multi-locus probe: 33.15(MS1, MS31), single-locus probes:
MS32, CEB1．
z The overall mutation rate was 1.97-fold as high in the exposed groupas it was in the control group.
z Number of mutations / Total number of bands in offspring: exposedgroup [49/1615], control group[23/1491]
z Mutation rate was correlated with the level of Cs 137 surface
contamination.
z Mutation spectrum (ratio between male and female germline
mutations, gain or loss of repeat units, size distribution) was similar
in both groups.
z Positivez Residents in the heavily contaminated rural areas of the Mogilev
province in Belarus: 127 families with children born between
February and September 1994 (male: 60, female: 67) ; both parents
had resided continuously in the contaminated areas.（They added
samples to the previous study reported in 1996.）
z Caucasian families in the UK: 120 families; sex ratio of children wasmatched with the offspring in the exposed group (male: 53, female:57).（They added samples to the previous study reported in 1996.）- 171 -

¾

Estimated radiation dose¾

Minisatellite probes¾

Main results¾

Radiation effects

z The mean dose over all families for parental external and internal
chronic exposure to Cs137 was 27.6±3.3mSv.
z Multi-locus probes: 33.15, 33.6, single-locus probes: MS32, CEB1,
B6.7, CEB15, CEB25, CEB36.
z A 1.87-fold increase in the mutation rate was found in the exposedgroup.
z Number of mutations / Total number of bands in offspring: exposedgroup [136/6616], control group [56/5099]
z Mutation rate was correlated with the estimated radiation dose of theparents.
z Mutation spectrum (ratio between male and female germline
mutations, gain or loss of repeat units, size distribution) was similar
in both groups.
z Positive(3) Dubrova et al.(2002)[14]¾

Exposed group¾

Non-exposed control
group

¾

Estimated radiation dose¾

Minisatellite probes¾

Main results¾

Radiation effectsz Ukrainian families inhabiting in the contaminated areas with 240
children conceived after the Chernobyl accident and born between
1987 and 1996; number of families [171+27], 27 families withchildren conceived before and after the accident.
z Ukrainian families inhabiting in the contaminated areas with 98
children conceived before the Chernobyl accident and born between
1976 and 1986; number of families [54+27], 27 families withchildren conceived before and after the accident. Ethnic background,maternal age, parental occupations and number of smokers ofparents were similar for both exposed and control groups. The
paternal age in the exposed group exceeded that for the control
group.
z The level of Cs137 contamination was >2Ci/km2 and estimated dosefrom chromosome aberrations was 0.2-0.4Gy．
z Single-locus probes: B6.7, CEB1, CEB15, CEB25, CEB36, MS1,
MS31, MS32．
z A 1.56-fold increase in the paternal mutation rate was found in the
exposed families.
z Number of mutations / Total number of bands in offspring:∗ Paternal mutation: exposed group [112/178], control group[29/706]∗ Maternal mutation: exposed group [25/1727], control group[10/701]z Paternal: positive, maternal:negative(4) Livshits et al. (2001)[20]¾

Exposed group¾

Non-exposed control
group
Estimated radiation dose¾

z Liquidators families from Kiev in Ukraine; fathers had worked on
the Chernobyl site during the period 1986-1987; 161 families with183 children; 88 children were conceived while the fathers were
working on the Chernobyl site or within 2 months after the fathers
stopped working on the site and 95 children were conceived at least
4 months after the fathers had stopped working on the site.
z Families from southern Ukraine (non-contaminated areas); 163
families with 163 children.
z 0.048 - 1.2 Sv．Data on individual dose estimate were provided for
only 28% of liquidators.

- 172 -

¾

Minisatellite probes¾

Main results¾

Radiation effectsz Single-locus probes: B6.7, CEB1, CEB15, CEB25, CEB36, CEB42,
CEB72．
z Only paternal mutations were analyzed and mutation rates per locus
in the children of liquidators did not differ significantly from thecontrol group．
z Number of mutations / Total number of bands in offspring (analyzing
the result of paternal mutations using the seven single-locus probes):
exposed group [53/1154], control group [51/1036].
z Analyzing the result of mutation rates using the five single-locus
probes, which were common to Dubrova’s group:∗ The mutation rate of the families in the contaminated areas ofBelarus (4.94%, Dubrova’s data) was 1.33-fold higher than themutation rate of the families from non-contaminated areas in
Ukraine (3.72%, Livshits’s data).
∗ The mutation rate of the families from non-contaminated areas in
Ukraine was 1.35-fold higher than the mutation rate of Caucasianfamilies in the UK (2.75%, Dubrova’s data).
z Negative(5) Kiuru et al. (2003)[21]¾

Exposed group¾¾

Non-exposed control
group
Estimated dose of
exposed group
Minisatellite probes¾

Main results¾

Radiation effects¾

z Estonian liquidator families; father had been worked at Chernobyl
over a median period of 3 months between 1986 and 1991; 147
families with 155 children born within 33 months after fathers were
exposed at Chernobyl (post-Chernobyl children).
z The same 147 liquidator families with 148 children born before theChernobyl accident (pre-Chernobyl children).
z Mean radiation dose was 0.11±0.06 Sv with less than 1.4% of thecohort receiving more than 0.25 Sv.
z Single-locus probes: B6.7, CEB1, CEB15, CEB25, CEB36, MS1,
MS31, MS32．
z Mutation rate was higher in post-Chernobyl children than in
pre-Chernobyl children but the elevation was not statisticallysignificant (Odds ratio: 1.33, 95% CI: 0.80-2.20).
z Number of mutations / Total number of bands in offspring: exposedgroup [52/1238], control group [42/1182]
z Post-Chernobyl children of fathers with radiation dose of ≧0.2Sv
had a threefold higher mutation rate (Odds ratio: 3.00, 95% CI:
0.97-9.30).
z Negative (There was some indication in the liquidator exposed group≧0.2Sv.)(6) Slebos et al. (2004)[22]¾

Exposed group¾

Non-exposed control
group

z Liquidator families from Kiev and Chernigov in Ukraine; father had
served in the cleanup operation of the Chernobyl accident between
1986 and 1990; 75 families with 75 children conceived after the startof the cleanup operation (within them, 39 families with 39 children
did not have children before the start of the cleanup operation).
z 41 liquidators families from Kiev and Chernigov in Ukraine, fromthe same registry as the exposed group, with 41 children conceived
before the start of the cleanup operation (within them, 5 families
with 5 children did not have children after the start of the cleanup
operation). Both “before” (control) and “after” (exposed) children in- 173 -

¾¾¾

Estimated radiation dose
Minisatellite probes
Main results¾

Radiation effects

a family were conceived by the same mother.
z Median accumulated dose was 152mSv.
z Multi-locus minisatellite probes: 33.5, 33.15
z No statistically significant difference in mutation rates between
exposed and control groups was observed. (Small sample size
limited statistical power.)z Number of mutations / Total number of bands in offspring: exposedgroup [9/82], control group [9/472]
z Negative (Small sample size limited statistical power.)

B. Nuclear tests(7) Dubrova et al. (2002)[15]¾

Exposed group¾

Non-exposed control
group

¾
¾

Estimated radiation dose
Minisatellite probes¾

Main results¾

Radiation effectsz Three-generations of families inhabiting the rural areas of theBeskaragai district of Kazakhstan around the Semipalatinsk nuclear
test site: those in the first generation [P0] were born between 1920
and 1950, those in the second generation [F1] were born between
1951 and 1974 and those in the third generation [F2] were childrenof F1. 40 families with 135 of F1 and 97 of F2.
z Three-generations of families from the geographically similar
non-contaminated rural area of Kazakhstan; matched with theexposed group by ethnicity, year of birth, parental age, occupation,
whether or not they were smokers. 28 families with 83 of F1 and 65
of F2.
z >1Svz Single-locus probes: B6.7, CEB1, CEB15, CEB25, CEB36, MS1,
MS31, MS32．
z A statistically significant 1.8-fold increase in mutation rate wasfound in the P0 generation and a less marked 1.5-fold increase wasfound in the F1 generation.
z Positive

C. Mayak plutonium separation combine(8) Dubrova et al. (2006)[16]z Populations in rural villages along the Techa River, which were
¾ Exposed groupcontaminated by radioactive releases from the Mayak plutonium
separation combine; children conceived between 1950 and 1972;both parental exposure [53 families with 101 children], paternal
exposure [10 families with 18 children] and maternal exposure [22families with 40 children].
z
53 families of non-irradiated parents with 110 children: 49 families¾ Non-exposed control
from the non-contaminated areas with children conceived between
group1946 and 1977, and 4 families from the village along Techa River
with all children born between 1950 and 1952 before the discharge;
sex ratio, paternal age, parental occupation and number of smokers
were matched with the exposed group, but maternal age in thecontrol group was higher than that of the exposed group.
¾ Estimated radiation dose z Mean paternal dose was l02±12mSv and mean maternal dose was
86±9mSv. Over 80% of the total parental dose was attributed to theinternal exposure of the radionuclide.
z Single-locus probes: B6.7, CEB1, CEB15, CEB25, CEB36, MS1,
¾ Minisatellite probes
MS31, MS32．

- 174 -

¾

Main results¾

Radiation effectsz A statistically significant 1.67-fold increase in mutation rate wasfound in the paternal mutations, whereas maternal mutation rate was
not elevated in the exposed families.
z Number of mutations / Total number of bands in offspring:∗ Paternal mutation: exposed group [42/861], control group[31/1044]∗ Maternal mutation: exposed group [6/980], control group [10/885]
z Paternal: positive, maternal: negative

D. Atomic bombings(9) Kodaira, Satoh et al. (1995, 1996, 2004)[17,18,19]
z Atomic bomb survivor families in Hiroshima and Nagasaki in which¾ Exposed groupone or both parents received A-bomb radiation of > 0.01Sv (gonadal
dose). Most of the children were born more than 10 years after thebombing. Within a total of 48 families with 61 children, 1 child hadparents both of whom were exposed, 29 children had exposure only
through the father and 31 children had exposure only through themother.
z
Atomic bomb survivor families in Hiroshima and Nagasaki in which¾ Non-exposed control
one or both parents were exposed to less than 0.01Sv or the families
groupwhich were not in Hiroshima or Nagasaki at the time of thebombing; 49 families with 58 children.
¾ Estimated radiation dose z More than 75% of the exposed parents had an estimated dose of>1Sv (using a neutron RBE value of 10).
z Single-locus minisatellite probes: B6.7, CEB1, CEB15, CEB25,¾ Minisatellite probes
CEB36, MS1, MS31, MS32.
z No evidence that the mutation clustered in individual offspring was¾ Main results
found.
z Number of mutations / Total number of bands in offspring:∗ Paternal mutation: exposed group [11/240], control group [33/709]∗ Maternal mutation: exposed group [2/256], control group [6/694]
z Negative¾ Radiation effects
E. Radiotherapy(10) May, Tamaki et al. [7](2000)
z Three seminoma patients aged 33-49 years donated semen samples¾ Exposed group
after radiotherapy. The post-treatment samples represented sperm
derived from cells irradiated at different stages of spermatogenesis,
the sperms having been taken for several times on different days
after irradiation.
z
Sperm samples donated from the same three patients before having¾ Non-exposed control
radiotherapy.
group¾ Estimated radiation dose z Total testicular X-ray doses were 0.75, 0.82 and 0.38 Gy for eachpatient.
z Single-locus minisatellite probes : B6.7, CEB1.
¾ Minisatellite probesz No significant difference in pre- and post-irradiation mutation rates¾ Main results
was observed at any stages.
z
Negative¾ Radiation effects- 175 -

Table 2. Reports on the “Trans-generational effects” of human populations using mutation markers
of microsatellites
A. Chernobyl nuclear power plant accident(1) Slebos et al. (2004)[22]z Liquidator families from Kiev and Chernigov in Ukraine; father had¾ Exposed groupserved in the cleanup operation of the Chernobyl accident between
1986 and 1990; 75 families with 75 children conceived after the startof the cleanup operation (within them, 39 families with 39 children
did not have children before the start of the cleanup operation).
z 41 liquidator families from Kiev and Chernigov in Ukraine, from the¾ Non-exposed control
same registry as the exposed group, with 41 children conceived
group
before the start of the cleanup operation (within them, 5 families
with 5 children, that did not have children after the start of thecleanup operation). Both “before” (control) and “after” (exposed)
children in a family were conceived by the same mother.
¾ Estimated radiation dose z Median accumulated dose was 152mSv.
z Autosomal loci: 4, X-linked locus: 1¾ Microsatellite lociz More paternal mutations were seen in “after” children than in¾ Main results“before” children, although differences were minimal.
z Total number of mutations at the 5 microsatellite loci / Total numberof microsatellite loci examined: exposed group [6/325], control
group [2/174]
z D7S1482 demonstrated germline hypermutability.
z Negative (Small sample size limited statistical power.)¾ Radiation effects(2) Furitsu, Ryo et al. (2005)[23]z Belarusian liquidator families, in which either or both of the parents¾ Exposed groupwere involved in cleanup operations in the contaminated areas ofChernobyl between April 1986 and July 1987 during the periods
from several weeks to several months; Total number of families
examined was 64 with 73 children; among them, 61 children, whose
fathers were exposed before conception, were analyzed.
z Belarusian families living in the non-contaminated areas in Belarus,¾ Non-exposed control
in which none of the parents were involved in cleanup operations ingroup
the contaminated areas; sex ratio of the children were matched to the
exposed group; 66 families with 69 children.
¾ Estimated radiation dose z Very little information of the recorded individual radiation dose wasavailable for this cohort. UNSCEAR (2000) reported that the meaneffective dose was 39mSv for the liquidators in Belarus during
1986-1987 according to the national registry.
z Autosomal loci: 31, Y-linked loci: 40, X-linked locus: 1.
¾ Microsatellite lociz A higher mutation rate (2.9 x 10-3) of Y-linked loci was detected in¾ Main results
the families of liquidators as compared to that of the control group(2.1 x 10-3), although the increase was not statistically significant.
z Number of mutations / Total number of microsatellite loci examined:∗ 40 Y-linked loci: exposed group [4/1392], control group [3/1458]∗ 31autosomal loci: exposed group [11/1852], control group [18/2108]∗ 1 X-linked locus: no mutations were detected in either exposed orcontrol groupsz
Negative¾ Radiation effects- 176 -

(3) Satoh et al. (1996)[18]¾

Exposed group¾

Non-exposed control
group

¾

Estimated radiation dose¾¾

Microsatellite loci
Main results¾

Radiation effectsz Atomic bomb survivor families in Hiroshima and Nagasaki in which
one or both parents received A-bomb radiation of > 0.01Sv (gonadal
dose). Most of the children were born more than 10 years after thebombing. Within the totally 50 families with 64 children, all children
were exposed through either the mother or the father except one
child where both parents had been exposed.
z Atomic bomb survivor families in Hiroshima and Nagasaki in which
one or both parents were exposed to less than 0.01Sv or the families
that were not in Hiroshima or Nagasaki at the time of the bombing;
50 families with 60 children.
z Mean doses for gametes: maternal 1.7Sv, paternal 2.1Sv (using aneutron RBE value of 20).
z Autosomal loci: 3, X-linked loci: 2.
z There was no significant difference in the mean mutation rate
between the children of the exposed and control groups.
z Total number of mutations in the 5 microsatellite loci / Total numberof microsatellite loci examined: exposed group [0/307], control
group [4/809]
z Negative

References
1) Nakamura N., Genetic effects of radiation in atomic-bomb survivors and their children: past, present andfuture, J. Rad. Res., 47, Sup. B.67-73, 2006.
2) Committee to Assess Health Risks from Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation, NRC, Health Risks
from Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation: BEIR VII – Phase 2, 4 HERITABLE GENETIC
EFFECTS OF RADIATION IN HUMAN POPULATIONS, pp. 91-131, Washington, D.C., National
Academies Press, 2006.
3) Niwa O, Indirect mechanisms of genomic instability and the biological significance of mutations at tandem
repeat loci, Mut. Res., 598, 61-72, 2006.
4) Ellegren H, Microsatellite mutations in the germline: implications for evolutionary inference. Trends Genet.,
16 (12), 551-8, 2000.
5) Bois P, Bois P, Stead JD, Bakshi S, Williamson J, Neumann R, Moghadaszadeh B, Jeffreys AJ. Isolation andcharacterization of mouse minisatellites, Genomics, 50 (3), 317-30, 1998.
6) Boyd M, Livingstone A, Wilson LE, Marshall EM, McCluskey AG, Mairs RJ, Wheldon TE, Dose-response
relationship for radiation-induced mutations at micro- and minisatellite loci in human somatic cells in
culture, Int. J. Radiat. Biol., 76 (2), 169-176, 2000.
7) May CA, Tamaki K, N May CA, Tamaki K, Neumann R, Wilson G, Zagars G, Pollack A, Dubrova YE,
Jeffreys AJ, Meistrich ML, Minisatellite mutation frequency in human sperm following radiotherapy, Mutat
Res., 453 (1), 67-75, 2000.
8) Dubrova YE, Jeffreys AJ, Malashenko AM, Mouse minisatellite mutations induced by ionizing radiation,
Nature Genet., 5 (1), 92-4, 1993.
9) Sadamoto S, Suzuki S, Kamiya K, Kominami R, Dohi K, Niwa O, Radiation induction of germline mutation
at a hypervariable mouse minisatellite locus, Int. J. Radiat. Biol., 65 (5), 549-57, 1994.
10) Dubrova YE, Plumb M, Brown J, Fennelly J, Bois P, Goodhead D, Jeffreys AJ, Stage specificity, dose
response, and doubling dose for mouse minisatellite germ-line mutation induced by acute radiation, Proc.
Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 95 (11), 6251-5, 1998.
- 177 -

11) Dubrova YE, Nesterov VN, Krouchinsky NG, Ostapenko VA, Neumann R, Neil DL, Jeffreys AJ, Human
minisatellite mutation rate after the Chernobyl accident, Nature, 380 (6576), 683-6, 1996.
12) Dubrova YE, Nesterov VN, Krouchinsky NG, Ostapenko VA, Vergnaud G, Giraudeau F, Buard J, Jeffreys
AJ, Further evidence for elevated human minisatellite mutation rate in Belarus eight years after the
Chernobyl accident, Mutat Res., 381 (2), 267-78, 1997.
13) Neel JV, Genetic studies at the atomic bomb Casualty Commission-Radiation Effects Research
Foundation: 1946-1997, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 95, 5432-5436, 1998.
14) Dubrova YE, Grant G, Chumak AA, Stezhka VA, Karakasian AN, Elevated minisatellite mutation rate in
the post-Chernobyl families from Ukraine, Am J Hum Genet., 71 (4), 801-9, 2002.
15) Dubrova YE, Bersimbaev RI, Djansugurova LB, Tankimanova MK, Mamyrbaeva ZZh, Mustonen R,
Lindholm C, Hulten M, Salomaa S, Nuclear weapons tests and human germline mutation rate, Science, 295(5557), 1037, 2002.
16) Dubrova YE, Ploshchanskaya OG, Kozionova OS, Akleyev AV, Minisatellite germline mutation rate in the
Techa River population. Mutat Res., 602 (1-2), 74-82, 2006.
17) Kodaira M, Satoh C, Hiyama K, Toyama K, Lack of effects of atomic bomb radiation on genetic instabilityof tandem-repetitive elements in human germ cells, Am J Hum Genet., 57 (6), 1275-83, 1995.
18) Satoh C, Takahashi N, Asakawa J, Kodaira M, Kuick R, Hanash SM, Neel JV, Genetic analysis of childrenof atomic bomb survivors, Environ Health Perspect., 104 Suppl 3, 511-9, 1996.
19) Kodaira M, Izumi S, Takahashi N, Nakamura N, No evidence of radiation effect on mutation rates at
hypervariable minisatellite loci in the germ cells of atomic bomb survivors, Radiat Res.,162 (4), 350-6,
2004.
20) Livshits LA, Malyarchuk SG, Kravchenko SA, Matsuka GH, Lukyanova EM, Antipkin YG, Arabskaya LP,
Petit E, Giraudeau F, Gourmelon P, Vergnaud G, Le Guen B, Children of Chernobyl cleanup workers do notshow elevated rates of mutations in minisatellite alleles, Radiat Res., 155, 74-80, 2001.
21) Kiuru A, Auvinen A, Luokkamaki M, Makkonen K, Veidebaum T, Tekkel M, Rahu M, Hakulinen T,
Servomaa K, Rytomaa T, Mustonen R, Hereditary minisatellite mutations among the offspring of Estonian
Chernobyl cleanup workers, Radiat Res., 159 (5), 651-5, 2003.
22) Slebos RJ, Little RE, Umbach DM, Antipkin Y, Zadaorozhnaja TD, Mendel NA, Sommer CA, Conway K,
Parrish E, Gulino S, Taylor JA, Mini-and microsatellite mutations in children from Chernobyl accident
cleanup workers, Mutat Res., 559 (1-2), 143-51, 2004.
23) Furitsu K, Ryo H, Yeliseeva KG, Thuy le TT, Kawabata H, Krupnova EV, Trusova VD, Rzheutsky VA,
Nakajima H, Kartel N, Nomura T, Microsatellite mutations show no increases in the children of theChernobyl liquidators, Mutat. Res., 581 (1-2), 69-82, 2005.
24) Ellegren H, Lindgren G, Primmer CR, Moller AP, Fitness loss and germline mutations in barn swallows
breeding in Chernobyl, Nature, 389 (6651), 593-6, 1997.
25) Kovalchuk O, Dubrova YE, Arkhipov A, Hohn B, Kovalchuk I, Wheat mutation rate after Chernobyl,
Nature, 407 (6804), 583-4, 2000.
26) Kovalchuk O, Kovalchuk I, Arkhipov A, Hohn B, Dubrova YE, Extremely complex pattern ofmicrosatellite mutation in the germline of wheat exposed to the post-Chernobyl radioactive contamination,
Mutat Res., 525 (1-2), 93-101, 2003.
27) Baker RJ, Van Den Bussche RA, Wright AJ, Wiggins LE, Hamilton MJ, Reat EP, Smith MH, Lomakin MD,
Chesser RK, High levels of genetic change in rodents of Chernobyl, Nature, 390 (6655) 100, 1997.
28) Wickliffe JK, Dunina-Barkovskaya YV, Gaschak SP, Rodgers BE, Chesser RK, Bondarkov M, Baker RJ,
Variation in mitochondrial DNA control region haplotypes in populations of the bank vole, Clethrionomys
glareolus, living in the Chernobyl environment, Ukraine, Environ Toxicol Chem., 25 (2), 503-8, 2006.

- 178 -

Cytogenetic Effect of Low Dose γ-Radiation in Plant Test-Systems: NonLinear Dose-Effect Relationship
Stanislav Getas’kina*, Alla Oudalovaa, Vladimir Dikareva, Tatyana Evseevab, David
Copplestonec, Nina Dikarevaa, Elena ChernonogaaRussian Institute of Agricultural Radiology and Agroecology RAAS, 249020, Obninsk, Kaluga region,
Russia,b
Institute of Biology, Komi Scientific Center, Ural Division RAS, Kommunisticheskaya 28, 167982,
Syktyvkar, Russia,cEnvironment Agency, Warrington, U.K.

Over several decades, modelling the effects of ionizing radiation on biological system has reliedon the target principle [Timofeeff-Ressovsky et al., 1935], which assumes that cell damage ormodification to genes appear as a direct consequence of the exposure of biological macromolecules tocharged particles. It is assumed that there is no threshold for the induction of biological damage and thatthe effects observed are proportional to the energy absorbed. Following this principle, the average numberof hits per target should increase linearly with dose, and the yield of mutations per unit of dose is assumed
to be the same at both low and high doses. This principle has served as the scientific background for the
linear no-threshold (LNT) concept that forms the basis for the radiological protection for the public andthe environment [ICRP, 1990]. It follows from the LNT that there is an additional risk for human healthfrom exposure to any radiation level, even below natural background.
Since the mid 50s, however, the scientific basis for the LNT concept has been challenged as
experimental data have shown that, at low doses, there was a non-linear relationship in the dose response.
Luchnik and Timofeeff-Ressovsky were the first who showed a non-linear response to a low dose
exposure [Luchnik, 1957; Timofeeff-Ressovsky & Luchnik, 1960]. Since then, many data have been
accumulated which contradict the LNT model at low doses and dose rates. However, the hit-effectparadigm has become so strong and indissoluble that it has persisted even under the growing pressure ofscientific evidence for phenomena at low dose exposure that can not be successfully accounted for by the
LNT concept.
In recent years, additional information on non-targeted effects of radiation has been accumulated
following the first reports of an adaptive response in human lymphocytes [Olivieri et al., 1984] as well as
bystander mutagenic effect of alpha-particles [Nagasawa & Little, 1992; Mothersill et al., 1995]. Other
phenomena including genomic instability, low-dose hypersensitivity, and increased radiation resistanceeffects are also under study [Marples et al., 1997; Kadhim et al., 2004; Bonner, 2004].
The nonlinearity of the dose-effect relationship with low level exposures has been demonstrated in a
number of studies where chromosome aberrations were considered as the endpoint of interest. For
example, the number of radiation-induced dicentrics in human peripheral blood lymphocytes found in[Pohl-Ruling et al., 1983; Lloyd et al., 1988, 1992] did not exceed the control level at doses below 40
mGy, with some experimental points lying significantly below control values. Essential deviations ofchromosome aberrations appearance from linearity in mammals were also shown at higher doses of 100300 mGy [Luchnik & Sevankaev, 1976; Takahashi et al., 1982].
In other species, deviations of cytogenetic effect induced by low doses from linearity have also
been reported. For example, the dose response for cytogenetic effects in Chinese hamster fibroblasts andVicia faba germs at doses from 0 to 2.5 Gy was shown to be non linear with a plateau at low doses by[Zaichkina et al., 1992]. Frequency of chromosome aberrations in root meristem cells of Pisum sativum- 179 -

plantlets in the dose range of 0-10 Gy also showed non-linear responses with a plateau for doses up to 1
Gy [Zaka et al., 2002].
However the available information on dose-effect relationships at low doses for non-humanspecies is scarce despite its importance. In their natural environment, some non-human species may be at ahigher risk of impact than humans because of differences in ecological niches occupied [Geras’kin et. al.,2003]. Currently, radiation protection of the environment and maintenance of ecosystem sustainability isof a special concern and the development of a harmonized approach to human and biota protection has
been recognized as a challenge for modern radiobiology and radioecology [Copplestone et al., 2004;
Pentreath, 2002]. In this context, much more information on non-human species response to low level
exposures is needed.
This paper summarizes findings of several studies on the cytogenetic effects induced by low level
exposure to external γ-radiation in plant meristem cells.
Materials and Methods
Four of the experiments presented here were carried out on spring barley (Hordeum vulgare L.,
variety Zazerskiy 85) and one with Tradescantia (clone 02).
Barley is one of the most genetically well-studied crops and has been identified as an excellent
organism for studies of induced chromosome aberrations [Constantin & Nilan, 1982]. Barley has 14 (2n)relatively large (6-8 µm) chromosomes which are easy to identify. In addition, a general procedure forroot-tip aberration bio-assay is well-known, relatively quick and inexpensive to undertake. The following
protocols were assigned for treatment and exposure of barley seeds and germs:
Protocol I. Dry seeds of H. vulgare L. were acutely irradiated with 60Co γ-rays (in a “GammaCell”) at doses of 0.1, 0.5, 1, 5, 10, 25, 50, 100, 200, and 300 Gy. 24 h after exposure, the exposed seeds
were placed in Petri dishes on distilled water-moistened filter paper for germination. Sections of mainroots (approximately 5-10 mm long) were cut from 20-40 seedlings per dose point and fixed in acetic
alcohol (1:3).
Protocol II. Seeds of H. vulgare L. were soaked for 24 h in distilled water at +4 0С in the darkness
to synchronize cell division and provide evenness of swelling by beginning of germination [Konzak andNarayanan, 1977]. The seeds were removed from cold storage and maintained on moistened filter paper at
24 0С. After 12-16 h of germination, barley seedlings were irradiated with 137Сs γ-rays at doses of 10, 50,
100, 150, 200, 300, 500, 750 and 1000 mGy at a dose rate of 0.5 Gy/h (Lutch Irradiator, Latenergo,
Latvia). The germination continued until a root length of ≈ 10 mm was achieved and then 20-70 seedlings
per dose point were fixed as above.
Protocol III. Seeds of H. vulgare L. were kept for 24 h in distilled water at +4 °C to synchronize
cell division and exposed to 60Co γ-rays at doses of 3, 5, 10, 50, 100, 150, 250, and 300 mGy at a dose rateof 60 mGy/h immediately after removing from cold storage, then allowed to germinate at +24°C in Petridishes on filter paper wetted with distilled water. When the main root length reached about 10 mm, roottips of 20-80 seedlings per dose point were cut and fixed.
Protocol IV. Prior-exposure treatment of seeds was the same as in Protocol II. Doses of 5, 10, 50,
100, 150, 300, 500, 750, and 1000 mGy were delivered to seedlings 24 h after germination at +24°C at
three dose rates of 120, 300 and 900 mGy/h with 60Co γ-ray source (“Lutch Irradiator”, Latenergo, Latvia).
The germination continued until a root length of ≈ 10 mm was achieved. 15-50 seedlings per dose point
were fixed as above.
Preconditioning of seeds in cold storage provides a simultaneous initiation of barley seeds’
germination. So at the moment of irradiation, the cell population would be nearly homogeneous in termsof the cell cycle. Maximal frequency of scorable chromosome aberrations can then be registered in thefirst mitosis. However, it is not always possible to say precisely at what time cells come into mitosis as, in- 180 -

exposed cells, the cell cycle can be influenced not only by the treatment received (preconditioning,temperature, etc) but also by the type and severity of any impact (source of irradiation, dose rate, etc).
From published data [Sandhu et al., 1994], as well as from our pilot studies, the first peak of mitotic
activity in barley root tip cells was found at the moment when the main root reaches a length ofapproximately 10 mm, which was then taken as the point for samples to be fixed for cytogenetic analysis
in the barley studies.
In all four studies with H. vulgare L., temporary squash slides for cytogenetic analysis wereprepared from the root apical meristem of every seedling, coded and stained with aceto-orcein. In eachslide, all ana-telophase cells (from 700 to 9800 cells at dose point in various studies) were scored todetermine the fraction of cells with aberrations.
In the study with Tradescantia (2n=12), plants were grown under controlled conditions (t = 22 ± 1°С; 18 hours per day of illumination at 11580 Lux; 44% air humidity). Irradiation was started at a moment
when the first blossoming appeared in an inflorescence. At least 5 plants per dose point were exposed to γrays of 226Ra during 72 hours with various dose rates so that the resultant doses amounted to 0.2, 1.1, 2.5,
9.1, 22.2, 54.9, 91.0, 267.4, and 422.4 mGy, as measured at the inflorescence position. Different dose rates
were achieved by varying the distance of the plants from the source. Stamen hairs were analyzed from 4
up to 30 days of blossoming. Somatic mutations were registered according to [Ichikawa et al., 1978].
Results and discussion
1. Aberrant cells in barley root tips after seeds exposure (Protocol I)
Crops are an important component of food chains and have been extensively studied by the
Russian Institute of Agricultural Radiology and Agroecology (RIARAE). Numerous radiobiologicalstudies have been carried out in crops, including the study of the effect of ionizing radiation on
reproduction potential of seeds (pre and post sowing) [Alexakhin & Korneyev, 1992]. With this historicalbackground and the well-established techniques in RIARAE for seed irradiation, acute γ-exposure of seeds
was used to study cytogenetic effects in crops induced by low and moderate doses to investigate theapplication of the LNT concept in non-human species [Geras’kin et al., 1993; 1995; 1997a].
Generally, the range of plants’ radioresistance is higher than that of mammals, with dormant seeds
being more radioresistant than during crop vegetation [Sarapultzev & Geras’kin, 1993]. The dose range inProtocol I was chosen to compare the plants radiosensitivity for different stages of ontogenesis. For
example, it is known that, for Monocotyledons, radioresistance of dormant seeds is 4.8-5.6 times higher
than that for vegetating plants [Sarapultzev & Geras’kin, 1993]. Thus, the doses from 0.1 to 300 Gy
chosen for exposure of barley dry seeds could be considered as small (up to 5-10 Gy) and moderate dosevalues, regarding to high radioresistance of seeds.
Fig. 1 shows the frequency of aberrant cells (AC) observed in the root meristem of barleyseedlings following exposure of the dormant seeds [Geras’kin et al., 1997a]. There is no significant
difference from the control level following exposure to doses of 0.1 and 0.5 Gy. However at higher doses,
the AC frequency is elevated compared with an unirradiated control, but the relationship shows nodependence on exposure applied in a range from 1 to 25 Gy, despite the 10 times increase in absorbed
dose. Only at doses above 25 Gy is there an apparent linear increase in cytogenetic damage withincreasing radiation dose.
Despite all the criticism directed towards the LNT concept, the fundamental principles regarding
the interaction of radiation with DNA and other biological macromolecules is known to induce primarydamage. Thus the effect of ionizing radiation at a molecular level is actually non-threshold as the energyof any charged particle is far above the binding energy in biological macromolecules. Consequently, adose is specified as being low if a critical target receives not more than one radiation ‘hit’ [Kellerer, 1976].
Being aware of the critical target volume (i.e. size of cell or cell nucleus), it is possible to determine the- 181 -

Aberrant cells, %

12

8

4

0
0.0

0.1

1.0

10.0

100.0

Dose, Gy

Figure 1. Frequency of aberrant cells (mean ± s.e.) in barley root meristem in dependence on doseabsorbed by dormant seeds.
upper margin of low dose range based on the stochastic theory of radiation track distribution in a cell
population [Spitkovskij et al., 1994b; Oudalova et al., 2002]. At doses from natural background up to thisupper limit of the low dose region, the mean energy deposited in a cell’s sensitive volume is a constant;with discordances from ‘one-track’ events being negligibly small. As the dose increases within this range,
only the fraction of targets experiencing the radiation-absorption event increases linearly but not theenergy absorbed in a single affected target volume [Bond et al., 1988]. Therefore, there seems to be noreason for an induction of response patterns different from background effect appearance, and an AC
frequency should not differ significantly from the spontaneously observed level. This consideration
underlies the first part of the dose-response curve in Fig. 1, i.e. between the control and 1 Gy, where there
is no increase of the AC frequency over the control level.
At doses from 1 to 25 Gy, a ‘plateau’ in dose curve is observed. A dose-independence of
cytogenetic effect in a low dose region of dose curves, ‘plateau’, has been reported in many studies, inparticular, for human peripheral blood lymphocytes and melanoma cells, Chinese hamster fibroblasts,
Vicia faba and Pisum sativum seedlings [Sevankaev, 1991; Shmakova et al., 2002; Zaichkina et al., 1992,
Zaka et al., 2002]. To explain this deviation from linearity, most authors propose a hypothesis onradiation-induced repair system, which is triggered by a certain dose or certain level of biological damage[Luchnik & Sevankaev, 1976; Geras’kin, 1995a; Zaka et al., 2002]. In [Geras’kin, 1995b], induction of themutagenic SOS-response, which is normally repressed, was suggested as providing restoration of cell
survival but at the cost of an elevated frequency of genetic defects. At low doses, the contribution fromradiation-induced effects compared with authentic spontaneous ones is rather small [Sarapultzev &Geras’kin, 1993; Pollycove & Feinendegen, 2001a] and so an increase in cytogenetic damage throughmisrepair appears important. The observation of the “plateau” in the dose dependency is a sign of theactivation of repair mechanisms in response to the exposure received. These could be registered throughalterations in other response patterns such as chromatin structure transformation or modifications in gene
expression [Spitkovskij et al., 1994a]. Within the plateau range, the occurrence of scorable chromosome
abnormalities reflects complex cellular responses that are triggered by the external insult (i.e. radiation
exposure) but they do not depend on its value. As a result, an anomalous dose range is observed
experimentally within which 2-10 fold changes in dose is not accompanied by any significant increase inchromosome aberration frequencies. As the dose increases further, the potential of the SOS-response
systems to respond effectively decreases until it is overwhelmed and the dose-response curve then shows a- 182 -

continuous increase in cytogenetic effect with increasing dose.
2. Aberrant cells in root tips after germs exposure (Protocol II)
To reduce misinterpretation and uncertainty resulting from the influence of physiologicalprocesses which may occur during germination after seeds exposure to ionising radiation and prior toscoring of chromosome aberrations in seedlings, other experimental protocols were designed (Protocols IIIV) to expose germinated and not dormant seeds. Actively dividing cells of meristem tissues are the mostradiosensitive parts of a plant. Previous work has demonstrated that the test-system of “AC frequency inthe intercalary meristem of spring barley” is as sensitive to γ-radiation as the generally accepted test of“aberrations in lymphocytes of human peripheral blood” [Geras’kin et al., 1996].
The results of cytogenetic analysis in barley root meristem after irradiation of 12-16 h seedlings(Protocol II) at doses from 10 mGy to 1 Gy are presented in Fig. 2 [Geras’kin et al., 1999]. The
relationship between AC frequency and dose is obviously non-linear. A significant difference in AC
frequency from the control was found at doses > 50 mGy (p<5%, Kolmogoroff-Smirnov test [Sachs,
1976]). There are three parts to the dose curve which essentially describe differences in the dependencesof the cytogenetic disturbance on dose. Thus, at doses from 500 mGy and higher, the AC percentage
significantly differs from the control level (p<1%) and increases with increasing dose. However, within
the dose range 50-750 mGy there are no significant differences in the AC occurrence, although the effectobserved is higher than the spontaneous level of the AC frequency (p<5%). Hence, a ‘plateau’ in thisstudy is revealed, and a non-linear relationship in dose-cytogenetic effect dependence is observed inbarley root tip cells.

3

Aberrant cells, %

4

3

2

2

1

0
0

200

400

600

800

1000

Dose, mGy
Figure 2. Frequency of aberrant cells (mean ± s.e.) in barley root meristem in dependence on doseabsorbed by 12-16 h seedlings and approximation of the data with linear (1), piecewise linear (2) and 4th
degree polynomial (3) models.
The use of the linear extrapolation from high doses into the low-dose region for an estimation ofhealth risk and, correspondingly, in radiological protection, has been justified by a lack of reliable data,
which are increasingly difficult to obtain at lower exposures because of large sample size needed [Upton,
2003; Brenner et al., 2003; Bonner, 2004; Tubiana, 1998]. At present, many authors have expressed theopinion that the validity of the LNT concept needs to be tested [Bonner, 2004; Tubiana, 1998, Mothersill& Seymour, 2004]. Under the increasing weight of experimental evidence which supports the non- 183 -linearity at low doses, there has been a shift in a perception of the LNT hypothesis from the indisputably
correct dogma to one which is the most convenient, prudent and transparent operational tool inradioprotection and radiotherapy practise [Tubiana, 1998; Mothersill & Seymour, 2004]. In the interim, it
is useful to test the application of the LNT concept and to continue to challenge its superiority from not
only biological but also a mathematical viewpoint.
With this in mind, a comparison of goodness-of-fit of AC yields versus radiation dose using
mathematical models of different types and complexities was performed on an example of the dataobtained under Protocol II [Geras’kin et al., 1999; Oudalova et al., 2005]. A set of polynomial models( ym =m∑ a ⋅ x ) including linear function as a special case (m = 1), and a piecewise-linear (PL) model
i

i =0

i

were used. The PL model pre-supposes a non-linearity of a dose dependency, which consists of several
linear parts with different slopes, including a dose-independent plateau in a dose range [D1, D2], and has
five free parameters.
For the polynomial models, values of free parameters were found from generalized linear
regression [Draper & Smith, 1981]. In particular, an intercept and slope of the linear model (y = a + b·x)
are a = (0.74 ± 0.21) %, b = (3.00 ± 0.46) 10-3 %/mGy, correspondingly. Free parameters of the PL model
were found using an iterative regression tool based on the method of coordinatewise descent [Vasiliev,
1988]. Important findings from the PL model verification are the lower and upper limits of the ‘plateau’that are defined as D1 = 83.4 mGy and D2 = 513.7 mGy for the experimental data obtained in this study.
Fitting the data on the AC frequency in barley root meristem with the linear and PL models is illustrated inFig. 2.
The various models applied for the data approximation were followed by a quality review of theseapproximations with several different criteria, and the results are shown in Table 1. All six models are able
to fit the data satisfactorily (F not less than 12.5, p<5%). However, the polynomial models of 2, 3, 4
degrees and the PL model show the lower values of residual sum of squires, SSres, than the linear model,
resulting in higher Fisher statistics, F, and multiple correlation coefficient, R2 (Table 1). It is known thatthe predictive reliability of a model breaks down as the number of free parameters increases [Algorithms...,1988]. To test the relative complexity of the models, the criteria of structural identification, T [Geras’kin& Sarapult’zev, 1993] was used. This method penalizes a model for the more additional free parameters it
has; so that the lower T-value the more optimum the ratio between the complexity and goodness of data
fitting the model has. From Table 1, the lowest value of the T-criteria is acquired by the polynomial modelof 4th degree as well as PL model despite their 5 free parameters (np=5) and its correspondingly highcomplexity. This result means that the improved quality of approximation is reached not so much bymaking the model more complex, but due to its more adequate mathematical description (or, in otherwords, functional isomorphism) of the biological phenomenon.
To check the significance of the approximation improvement, a hypothesis was tested whether the
linear model fits the experimental data significantly worse than other models, using the Hayek criterion, H,[Gofman, 1990]. From the calculated values of H (Table 1), the goodness’s of experimental data fit byboth the PL model and 4th degree polynom is significantly higher than by the linear model (H>H0.95=1.96).
A common feature for two the best functions is a tendency to fit a ‘plateau’ in the cytogenetic
disturbances occurrence (Fig. 2). The 4th-degree polynom is, however, consistent with the biologicalresponse observed only in the dose range studied, 0 – 1 Gy, while at higher doses this function drops to ∞ very fast, which illustrates an errancy of formalistic approach to data verification. On contrary, the good
fit with the PL model is provided through conformity achieved between a biological phenomenon and its
mathematical model. Consequently, this study shows that the PL model which assumes non-linearity ofthe dose-effect dependency, and implies the presence of a plateau, fits the cytogenetic disturbances- 184 -

occurrence in barley root meristem cells within the low dose range significantly better than any otheramong the tested models (and, in particular, better than the linear approach).
Table 1. Comparison of approximation quality of aberrant cells frequencies with different models. Data
are obtained in dose range 0-1000 mGy (Protocol II) and 0-300 mGy (Protocol III)Modelnp
0-1000 mGy
0-300 mGy
SSR F
R2 , % T
H
SSR F
R2 , % T
H
1. Linear
2 1.80 41.7 83.9 0.45 0.41 24.4 77.7 0.12 2. Piecewise linear
5 0.30 180.2 97.3 0.30 3.55*
0.03 228.9 98.3 0.04 4.92**
3. Polynom (m= 2)
3 1.69 39.3 84.9 0.72 0.50
0.24 40.7 87.1 0.12 1.53
4. Polynomial (m= 3) 4 1.20 49.7 89.2 0.80 1.25
0.06 161.5 97.0 0.05 4.04**
5. Polynomial (m= 4) 5 0.21 258.8 98.1 0.21 4.35** 0.02 377.5 99.0 0.02 6.38**
6. Polynomial (m= 5) 6 2.70 12.5 75.8 4.06
0.01 459.5 99.4 0.02 7.09**
7. Piecewise linear II 3
0.11 91.3 93.8 0.06 2.84*** – α<1%, * – α<5% - model fits the data significantly better than the linear model;

Aberrant cells frequency, %3. Aberrant cells in root tips after germs exposure (Protocol III)The study of AC frequencies induced by low doses up to 300 mGy (Protocol III) was initiated toget more information on dose-cytogenetic effect relationship at doses below 50 mGy. The lack of suchinformation became obvious at analysis and modeling of the previous experiment data at doses below 100
mGy, as there were only two experimental point below 83.4 mGy, the plateau lowest limit (Fig. 2).

3

2.5

2.0

1

1.5

2

1.0

0.5
0

100

200

300

Dose, mGy
Figure 3. Frequency of aberrant cells (mean ± s.e.) in barley root meristem in dependence on doseabsorbed by germs (Protocol III) and approximation of the data with linear (1), piecewise linear (2), andpolynomial of 5th degree (3) models.
The common difficulty in assessing effects observed at low level exposures and making statisticalinferences is related to the lack of a suitable quantity of available data to overcome uncertainties resulting
from “experimental error” or “inter-species variation” when the induced effect itself has a small
magnitude. In an attempt to provide a lower uncertainty of AC frequency estimates, exposure in thisexperiment was delivered to initiated barley germs immediately after their removal from cold storage,- 185 -

assuming that in this case a cell population would be found in the most synchronized state. Moreover,attempts were made to provide experimental volumes that were as large as reasonably possible. Thus,
2000-9800 ana-telophase cells were scored at different doses as opposite to 1300-2600 cells in theprevious study.
Data from AC scoring are presented in Fig. 3. Significant increase of cytogenetic damage over thecontrol level is found at a γ-rays exposure of > 100 mGy as follows from Student t-test, or > 50 mGy as
follows from non-parametric Kolmogorov-Smirnov test (p<5%), which is in a good accordance with theprevious study. There are no significant changes in AC occurrence within the dose range from 3 to 100
mGy. AC frequencies at doses of 100, 150 and 250 mGy are significantly different to the control level, but
do not differ from each other. The yield of cytogenetic damage at 300 mGy increases significantly overthe values obtained at all other doses, even 250 mGy (p<5%).
To test a validity of the LNT extrapolation, a goodness-of-fit of the data on the AC frequency
approximation by different models was performed. A set of polynomial models, and several piecewiselinear models of different shape were used. The results are presented in Table 1. Piecewise linear model II
assumes an absence of dose dependence below a threshold dose (D0) and a linear dose-dependence at
higher doses. All models were able to fit the data satisfactorily (F not less than 24, p<0.1%). However thebest models (Table 1) were the polynomial 5- (Fig. 3, curve 3) and 4-degree functions as well as the PL
model that includes a ‘plateau’ (Fig. 3, curve 2). A common feature for these three best functions is anabsence (for the PL model) or very slight dependence (for the polynomial models) of AC yield on dose at
low doses, as can be seen from plotting the best-of-fit functions (Fig. 3). The linear function shows theworst characteristics of the data fitting (Table 1) obtained in this study.
4. Dose-cytogenetic effect relationship at different dose rates (Protocol IV)
It is well understood that the dose rate is of importance in assessing radiation-induced effects andthe risks at low doses. Numerous studies have reported direct dose-rate effects, with an absence of dosedependence and even an inverse dose-rate effect being found as well [Lyon et al., 1972; Sorensen et al.,
2000; Min et al., 2003]. In the LNT concept, the risk of detrimental effects per unit absorbed dose issmaller for lower doses than at higher exposures, which is acknowledged by an application of the doserate effectiveness factor [Tubiana, 1998; Sorensen et al., 2000]. In territories contaminated after severeradiation accidents, both humans and the biota have been exposed to radiation at dose rates that varies
through time and space, and the doses absorbed during the cellular and ontogenetic cycles of development
are consequently a function of the dose rate. Therefore, an issue of varying dose rate is of high relevancein regard to radiological regulation and practice policy.
To study an effect of dose rate value on cytogenetic damage level, barley germs were exposed atthree dose rates of 120, 300 and 900 mGy/h (Protocol IV) and ACs were scored in seedling root meristem[Oudalova et al., 2002]. Frequencies of ACs obtained in this study are presented in Fig. 4. Dosedependences at different dose rates keep the shape with a characteristic ‘plateau’ region of 10-300 mGy,and can be approximated with the PL model much better then with the linear one. There is a change inmagnitude of the AC yield with a change of dose rate used. Remarkably, in the exposure range
investigated, the induced cytogenetical disturbances appeared in a reverse dependence on dose rate, andthe lower the dose rate the higher the AC frequency (Fig. 4). Significant increase over the control (p<5%)
was found from dose of 10, 100, and 500 mGy and above for dose rates of 120, 300 and 900 mGy/h,correspondingly.
Observations of a reversed dependency of mutation frequency [Lyon et al., 1972] and DNA
damage [Min et al., 2003] on dose rate at low-level exposures are known. For example, more point
mutations and chromosome aberrations per unit dose at low level radiation than at higher levels were
found in [Shevchenko et al., 1972]. The most generalised explanation refers to an assumption of a
- 186 -

diminished activation of repair at very low dose rates [Min et al., 2003]. In other words, the inducible
repair system is probably activated by a certain threshold value of damage [Shevchenko et al., 1972;
Calkins, 1973]. This means that, at low exposures, the accumulation of damage needs to reach a certain
value or threshold before the repair mechanism is switched on. The lower the intensity of impact (i.e. doserate) the more damage is required, which results in an inverse dependence of AC registered on dose rate inthis exposure range.
3.0

Aberrant cells, %

2.5

2.0

1

1.5

2
1.0

3
0.5
0.1

1.0

10.0

100.0

1000.0Dose, mGy

Figure 4. Frequency of aberrant cells (mean ± s.e.) in barley root meristem in dependence on doseabsorbed by 24 h seedlings at dose rate of 120 mGy/h (1), 300 mGy/h (2), and 900 mGy/h (3).
An important finding of this study is that a non-linear shape of dose-effect dependence withplateau in low dose region is confirmed, and the independence of dose curve profile on dose rate in thestudied exposure range is shown. An inverse dependence of chromosome aberration yield and dose rate isdemonstrated for the first time in plant meristem cells, and requires further investigation. To obtain more
information on the role of dose rate in cytogenetical damage induction patterns, a study identical to thework done under Protocol III has been launched but with several different dose rates.
5. Somatic mutations in Tradescantia stamen hair cells
To corroborate finding obtained with another plant system, Tradescantia (clone 02) was chosen as
test-species in next experiment [Evseeva & Geras’kin, 2001]. Tradescantia has known as the best object
for genetic and radiobiological studies [Sax, 1938; Ma et al., 1996] and been useful for detection of thegenetic effects of both ionizing radiations and chemical mutagens at low exposure levels [Ichikawa, 1992].
The Tradescantia-Stamen-Hair-Mutation (Trad-SHM) bioassay uses the mitotic cells of stamen hairs formutation induction in which the stamen hair cells mutate from dominant blue to pink constitutes a system
unique in sensitivity; it can register doses of X-rays as low as several mGy [Sparrow et al., 1972].
Exposures in the study of radiation-induced somatic mutations in Tradescantia stamen hair cells[Evseeva & Geras’kin, 2001] were planned to provide detailed information at very low doses by choosing
a dose interval between experimental points that was as small as possible. Experimental dependency ofsomatic mutation frequency on dose value presented in Fig. 5 demonstrates an obvious non-monotonousshape showing common features with dose dependencies obtained in barley studies (Fig. 1-4). Three dose
ranges could be separated. At the exposure to doses of up to 9.1 mGy, the registered frequencies of- 187 -

Somatic mutations, %

1.0

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0.0
0

1

10

100

1000

Dose, mGy
Figure 5. Frequency of somatic mutations (mean ± s.e.) in stamen hair cells from γ-ray-exposed
Tradescantia plants
mutations do not differ from the level of spontaneous disturbances and are not significantly different fromthe control. In the second dose range, namely at doses of 22.2, 54.9 and 91.0 mGy, occurrence of somatic
mutations is significantly higher than the control level and the values observed at the lower doses (up to 10mGy) but does not significantly change within this dose range, which indicates a ‘plateau’. When the dose
increases over 100 mGy, a steady increase of the mutation frequency is observed; somatic mutation
occurrence at doses of 267.4 and 422.4 mGy is significantly over the previous values at 0-9.1 mGy and9.1-91.0 mGy.
Conclusion
In the present study, attempts were made to investigate the biological effect of ionising radiation atlevels similar to those that may be observed in the environment. A correct assessment of risk of low doses
for human health is impossible on a basis of current epidemiological data because of large uncertainties
and experimental difficulties. There is a need to develop a more comprehensive understanding of theprocesses which govern cellular responses at low level exposures to ionising radiation. These processes
are likely to have a lot in common, at least for eukaryotic organisms, because of uniformity infundamental principles of genome organization and functioning. It is becoming increasingly clear that at
low doses indirect and non-targeted effects play a crucial role in cell response that are, in some ways,
similar to systematic stress [Mothersill & Seymour, 2004; Kadhim et al., 2004] and relevant toenvironmental toxins other than radiation. In this context, high sensitivity, low level of spontaneous
mutagenesis, accessibility to large volumes of compatible experimental data, and acknowledgement inenvironmental genotoxins testing make those plant-based systems excellent models for studying low-dose
effects.
The non-linearity and presence of plateaus in dose dependencies for cytogenetic disturbances havebeen reported in a number of works carried out with different species and test-systems. On the basis ofthese information and data obtained in several studies on cytogenetic effects in plant meristem, a conceptof biological effect of low-level radiation on cell was suggested [Geras’kin, 1995b; Geras’kin et al.,1997b]. It postulates uniformity for different species relating to an essentially non-linear dose dependence
shape, with only species-specific variations in critical doses at which slope modifications appear and thatthese critical doses depend on species radiosensitivity. The results of several studies presented in thisreview confirm the main postulates of this concept [Geras’kin, 1995b]. For example, the ‘plateau’ limits in- 188 -

dose curve observed by the Trad-SHM bioassay, 20-200 mGy (Fig. 5), are shifted down to smaller doses
in comparison to 80-500 mGy for barley (Fig. 2), which is in a perfect accordance with a higher
radiosensitivity of Tradescantia stamen hairs than that of barley cells. Furthermore, the concept[Geras’kin, 1995b] supposes an existence of one more dose-independent part that should not differ fromthe level of spontaneous cytogenetic variability. With the Trad-SHM bioassay, this theoretical prediction
has, for the first time, received an empirical confirmation on vegetative object. Indeed, the high sensitivity
and low level of spontaneous mutagenesis in Tradescantia made it possible to reveal such a dose range as
low as 0.2 – 9.1 mGy (Fig. 5).
Ignoring the fact that the non-linear character of dose−response curves leads to a substantial
underestimation of cancer risks, if high doses and linear dose−response curves are used for estimation of
the hazard of low-level radiation, the following points can be made:• Although many researchers believe that the estimation of cancer risks by the linear extrapolation ofhigh-dose data to the range of low radiation doses may only give overestimated values [Tubiana,
1998], the data presented in this paper suggest that the LNT concept should not be used for estimating
the risks of genetic defects induced by low-level radiation, since this concept has no sound biologicalunderpinning and comes into contradiction with available experimental and epidemiological data
[Gofman, 1990; Pollycove & Feinendegen, 2001b; Wei et al., 1990].
• The linear model is presumed to be advantageous as simple and prudent at modeling ambiguous
biological effects at low doses, so its benefits follow from mathematical properties of the linear
function, while the biological background of the LNT has been admitted as controversial. Findings ofthis work demonstrate, however, that it is not hard to call in question advantages of the LNT in fitting
available experimental data from mathematics point of view, as well.
• New data obtained in these studies concern a perception of fundamental mechanisms governing cell
response to low level exposures. These findings are of general biological interest, since response to
low level exposures is one of the manifestations of basic laws determining and ensuring the living
systems resistance and their adaptation potential under varying habitat conditions. An accumulation of
information on cell responses to low level exposures and validating LNT hypothesis eligibility are
relevant not only to an improvement of radiation safety standards but to the development of a general
ideology for the public and environment protection. It should be acknowledged that more studies areneeded for further validation of concepts for risk assessment at environmentally relevant levels.
Acknowledgements
Russian Foundation for Basic Research (contract № 03-04-96353), ISTC project № 3003 and INTAS(award Ref. Nr. 04-83-2796) have contributed to funding studies presented in this paper.
References
Alexakhin, R.M. & Korneyev, N.A. (eds). (1992) Agricultural Radioecology. Ecologiya Publish., Moscow (inRussian).
Algorithms and Programmes for Dependencies Reconstruction (1984) Ed. V.N. Vapnik, Nauka Publish., Moscow (inRussian).
Bond, V.P., Feinendegen, L.E., Booz, J. (1988) What is a ‘low dose’ of radiation? Int. J. Radiat. Biol., 53(1), 1-12.
Bonner, W.M. (2004) Phenomena leading to cell survival values which deviate from linear-quadratic models, Mutat.
Res., 568, 33-39.
Brenner, D.J., Doll, R., Googhead, D.T., Hall, E.J., Land, C.E., Little, J.B., Lubin, J.H., Preston, D.L., Preston, R.J.,
Puskin, J.S., Ron., E., Sachs, R.K., Samet, J.M., Setlow, R.B., Zaider M. (2003) Cancer risk attributable tolow doses of ionising radiation: assessing what we really know, Proc. Natl. Acad.Sci. U.S.A., 100, 1376113766.

- 189 -

Calkins, G. (1973) The T-N-PR Model Radiation Response. J. Theor. Biol., 39, 609-622.
Constantin, M.J. & Nilan, R.A. (1982) Chromosome aberration assays in barley (Hordeum vulgare). A report of the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Gen-Tox Program, Mutat. Res., 99, 13-36.
Copplestone, D., Howard, B.J., Bréchignac, F. (2004) The ecological relevance of current environmental protection
from exposure to ionising radiation. J. Environm. Radioact., 74, 31-41.
Draper, N.R. & Smith, H. (1981) Applied Regression Analysis, J. Wiley & Sons, New York.
Evseeva, T.I. & Geras’kin, S.A. (2001) Radioactive and Non-Radioactive Factors Combined Effect on Tradescantia.
Ural Division RAS Publishers, Ekaterinbourg. (in Russian)Geras’kin, S.A. & Sarapul’tzev, B.I. (1993) Automatic classification of biological objects on the level of theirradioresistence, Automat. Rem. Contr., 54, 182-189.
Geras’kin, S.A., Zjablitzkaja, Ye.Ya., Oudalova, A.A. (1993) Statistical analysis of mutafacient efficiency of low
doses chronic irradiation on technogenic pollution background. Russ. J. Genet., 9(11), 1901-1913.
Geras’kin, S.A. (1995a) Critical survey of modern concepts and approaches to the low doses of ionising radiation
biological effect estimation, Radiat.Biol. Radioekol., 35(5), 563-571.
Geras’kin, S.A. (1995b) Concept of biological effect of low dose radiation on cells, Radiat.Biol. Radioekol., 35(5),571-580.
Geras’kin, S.A., Zyablitskaya, Ye.Ya., Udalova, A.A. (1995) Radiation-induced structural mutations in root
meristem of γ-irradiated hexaploid wheat seeds. Radiat.Biol. Radioekol., 35(2), 137-149.
Geras’kin, S.A., Dikarev, V.G., Dikareva, N.S., Oudalova, A.A. (1996) Effect of ionising irradiation or heavy metalson the frequency of chromosome aberrations in spring barley leaf meristem, Russ. J.Genetics, 32(2), 240245.
Geras’kin, S.A., Zjablitzkaja, Ye.Ya., Oudalova, A.A., Sharapova, I.V. (1997a) Structural mutations in the root
meristem of irradiated barley seeds. Radiat.Biol. Radioekol., 37(1), 82-90.
Geras'kin, S.A., Dikarev, V.G., Oudalova, A.A., Alexakhin, R.M. (1997b) Problem of Correct Assessment of
Cytogenetic Effect Induced by Low Doses of Ionising Radiation. Proceedings of Conference - Low Doses of
Ionising Radiation: Biological Effects and Regulatory Control. Seville, 1997. IAEA-CN-67/205, 687-690.
Geras’kin, S.A., Dikarev, V.G., Oudalova, A.A., Dikareva, N.S. (1999) Cytogenetic damages in root meristem ofbarley seedlings after low dose irradiation, Radiat. Biol. Radioekol., 39, 373-383.
Geras’kin, S.A., Kim, J.K., Fesenko, S.V., Dikarev, V.G., Oudalova, A.A. (2003) Cytogenetic effects of low dose
ionizing radiation in plants and a problem of the radiological protection of the environment. Proceedings ofthe International conference on the Protection of the Environment from the Effects of Ionizing Radiation.
Stockholm, Sweden, 2003. IAEA-CN-109, 272-275.
Gofman, J. (1990) Radiation-Induced Cancer from Low Dose Exposure: an Independent Analysis, CNR Book
Division, San Francisco.
Ichikawa, S., Nauman, C.H., Sparrow, A.H., Takahashi, C.S. (1978) Influence of radiation exposure rate on somatic
mutation frequency and loss of reproductive integrity in tradescantia stamen hairs, Mutat. Res., 52, 171-180.
Ichikawa, S. (1992) Tradescantia stamen-hair system as an excellent botanical tester of mutagenicity: its responses
to ionizing radiations and chemical mutagens, and some synergistic effects found, Mutat. Res., 270, 3-22
ICRP (1990) Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. ICRP Publication 60,
Annals of the ICRP, 21, 1-3.
Kadhim, M.A., Moore, S.R., Goodwin, E.H. (2004) Interrelationships amongst radiation-induced genomic instability,
bystander effects, and the adaptive response, Mutat. Res., 568, 21-32.
Kellerer, A.M. (1976) A Survey of Approaches to Radiation Biophysics. Proceedings of the Fifth Symposium on
Microdosimetry, Luxembourg: Commission of the European Communities, EUR 5452, edited by J. Booz,
H.G. Ebert and B.G.R. Smith, 409-442.
Konzak, C.F. & Narayanan, K.R. (1977) In: Manual on Mutation Breeding (Second Edition), FAO/IAEA Tech. Rep.,
Series No. 119, IAEA, Vienna, 71-74.

- 190 -

Lloyd, D.C., Edvards, A.A., Leonard, A., Deknut, G.L., Natarajan, A.T., Obe, G., Palitti, F., Tanzarella, A., Tawn,
E.J. (1988) Frequencies of chromosomal aberrations induced in human blood lymphocytes by low doses of
X-rays, Int. J. Radiat. Biol., 53, 49-55.
Lloyd, D.C., Edvards, A.A., Leonard, A., Deknut, G.L., Verschaeve, L., Natarajan, A.T., Darrudi, F., Obe, G., Palitti,F., Tanzarella, A., Tawn, E.J. (1992) Chromosomal aberrations in human lymphocytes induced in vitro byvery low doses of X-rays, Int. J. Radiat. Biol., 61, 335-343.
Lyon, M.F., Papworth, D.C., Phillips, R.J.S. (1972) Dose-Rate and Mutation Frequency after Irradiation of Mouse
Spermatogonia. Nature. New Biol., 238(82), 101-104.
Luchnik, N.V. (1957) About anomaly reaction at low doses of radiation, Biophyzica, 2, 86-93.
Luchnik, N.V. & Sevankaev, A.V. (1976) Radiation-induced chromosomal aberrations in human lymphocytes. 1.
Dependence on the dose of gamma-rays and on anomaly of low doses, Mutat. Res., 36, 363-378.
Ma, T.H., Xu, C., Liao, S., McConnell, H., Jeong, B.S., Won, C.D. (1996) In situ monitoring with the Tradescantia
bioassays on the genotoxicity of gaseous emissions from a closed landfill site and an incinerator, Mutat.
Res., 359(1), 39-52.
Marples, B., Lambin, P., Skov, K.A., Joiner, M.C. (1997) Low dose hyper-radiosensitivity and increased
radioresistance in mammalian cells, Int. J. Radiat. Biol., 71, 721-735.
Min, J., Lee, C.W., Gu, M.B. (2003) Gamma-radiation dose-rate effects on DNA damage and toxicity in bacterial
cells, Radiat. Environ. Biophys., 42, 189-192.
Mothersill, C. & Seymour, C. (2004) Radiation-induced bystander effects and adaptive responses—the Yin and Yangof low dose radiobiology? Mutat. Res., 568, 121-128.
Mothersill, C., Harney, J., Lyng, F., Cottell, D., Parsons, K., Murphy, D., Seymour, C.B. (1995) Primary explants ofhuman uroepithelium show an unusual response to low-dose irradiation with cobalt-60 gamma rays, Radiat.
Res., 142, 181-187.
Nagasawa, H., & Little, J.B, (1992) Induction of sister chromatid exchanges by extremely low doses of alfa-particles,
Cancer Res., 52, 6394-6396.
Olivieri, G., Bodycote, J., Wolff, S. (1984) Adaptive response of human lymphocytes to low concentrations ofradioactive thymidine, Science, 223, 594-597.
Oudalova, A.A., Geras’kin, S.A., Dikarev, V.G., Nesterov, Ye.B., Dikareva, N.S. (2002) Induction of chromosome
aberrations is non-linear within low dose region and depends on dose rate, Radiat. Prot. Dosim., 99, 245248.
Oudalova, A.A., Geras’kin, S.A., Dikarev, V.G., Evseeva, T.I., Dikareva, N.S. (2005) Cytogenetic effects induced bylow level radiation in plant meristems. 7th Int. Symposium ‘Change and Continuity in Radiation Protection’,
Cardiff, U.K., 356-361.
Pentreath, R.J. (2002) Radiation protection of people and the environment: developing a common approach, J.
Radiol. Prot., 22, 45-56.
Pohl-Ruling, J., Fischer, P., Haas, O., Obe, G., Natarajan, A.T., van Buul, P.P., Buckton, K.E., Bianchi, N.O.,
Larramendy, M., Kucerova, M., Polikova, Z., Leonard, A., Fabri, L., Sharma, T., Binder, W., Mukherjee,
R.N., Mukherjee, U. (1983) Effect of low dose acute X-irradiation on the frequencies of chromosomal
aberrations in human peripheral lymphocytes in vitro, Mutat. Res., 110, 71-82.
Pollycove, M. & Feinendegen, E. (2001a) Biologic responses to low doses of ionizing radiation: detriment versus
hormesis. Part 1. Dose responses of cells and tissues, J Nuclear Medicine 42(7), 17N-27N.
Pollycove, M. & Feinendegen, E. (2001b) Biologic responses to low doses of ionizing radiation: detriment versus
hormesis. Part 2. Dose responses of organisms, J Nuclear Medicine 42(9), 26N-32N.
Sachs, L. (1972) Statistische auswertungsmethoden, Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
Sandhu, S.S., Serres de, F.J., Gopalan, H.N., Grant W.F., Veleminsky, J., Becking, G.C. (1994) Environmental
monitoring for genotoxicity with plant systems: an introduction and study design, Mutat. Res., 310, 169–173.
Sarapul’tzev, B.I., & Geras’kin, S.A. (1993) Genetic Basics of Radioresistancy and Evolution. Energoatomizdat- 191 -

Publish., Moscow (in Russian).
Sax, K. (1938) Chromosome aberrations induced by X-rays, Genetics, 23, 494-516.
Sevankaev, A.V. (1991) Quantitative estimation of the cytogenetic effects of low-level radiation: current aspects,
Radiobiology, 31(4), 600-605.
Shevchenko, V.A., Pechkurenkov, V.L., Abramov, V.I. (1992) Radiation Genetics of Natural Populations: The
Genetic Consequences of the Kyshtym accident. Nauka Publish. Moscow.
Shmakova, N.L., Fadeeva, T.A., Nasonova, E.A., Krasavin, E.A., Rsyanina, A.V. (2002) Cytogenetic effects of low
dose radiation in mammalian cells: the analysis of the phenomenon of hypersensitivity and induced
radioresistance, Radiat.Biol. Radioekol., 42, 245-250.
Sorensen, K.J., Zetterberg, L.A., Nelson, D.O., Grawe, J., Tucher, J.D. (2000) The in vivo dose rate effect of chronic
gamma radiation in mice: translocation and micronucleus analyses, Mutat. Res., 457, 125-136.
Sparrow, A.N., Underbrink, A.G., Rossi, H.H. (1972) Mutations induced in Tradescantia by small doses of X-rays
and neutrons: analysis of dose-response curves, Science, 176, 916-918.
Spitkovskij, D.M., Ermakov, A.V., Gorin, A.I., Pospekhova N.I., Sorokina T.A., Talisina T.A. (1994a) Unscheduledsynthesis of DNA and changes in structural parameters of nuclei in human lymphocytes after low doses ofγ-radiation along and in combination with UV-radiation, Radiat.Biol. Radioekol., 34(1), 23-31.
Spitkovskij, D.M., Zaitzev, S.V., Talysina, T.A. (1994b) Modelling peculiarities of genetic damage initiation by low
doses of ionizing radiation in eukaryotic cells from a concept of evolution reserve cell population existence,
Radiat.Biol. Radioekol., 34(6), 739-747.
Takahashi, E.I., Hirai, M., Tobari, E., Utsugi, T., Nakai, S. (1982) Radiation-induced chromosome aberrations inlymphocytes from man and crab-eating monkey: the dose-response relationships of low doses, Mutat. Res.,94, 115-123.
Timofeeff-Resovsky, N.W. & Luchnik, N.V. (1960) Cytological and biophysical basis of radiostimulation in plants,
Proc. Inst. Biol. Ural Br. Sc. Ac. USSR, 5-17.
Timofeeff-Ressovsky, N.W., Zimmer, K.G., Delbruck, M. (1935) Uber die Natur der Genmutation und derGenstruktur, Nachr. Gess. Wiss. Gottingen, 1, 189-245.
Tubiana, M. (1998) The report of the French Academy of Science: ‘Problems associated with the effects of low
doses of ionising radiation’, J. Radiol. Prot., 18, 243-248.
Upton, A.C. (2003) The state of the art in the 1990’s: NCRP report no. 136 on the scientific bases for linearity in thedose-response relationship for ionizing radiation, Health Physics, 85, 15-22.
Vasiliev, F.P. (1988) Numerical Approaches to Extreme Task Solution, Nauka Publish., Moscow.
Wei, L., Zha, Y., et al. (1990) Epidemiological investigation of radiological effects in high-background areas of
Yangjang, China, J. Radiat. Res., 31, 119−136.
Zaichkina, S.I., Aptikaeva, G.F., Akhmadieva, A.Kh., Smirnova, E.N., Antipov, A.V., Prilutskaia, N.B., Kuglik, V.,
Shlotova, Ia., Ganassi, E.E. (1992) The characteristics of the realization of cytogenetic damage inmammalian and plant cells exposed to low doses of radiation, Radiobiology, 32, 38-41.
Zaka, R., Chenal, C., Misset, M.T. (2002) Study of external low irradiation dose effects on induction of chromosome
aberrations in Pisum sativum root tip meristem, Mutat. Res., 517, 87-99.

- 192 -

Social-economic Consequences of the Chornobyl Catastrophe
Volodymyr Kholosha
First Deputy Chief of State Department–
Administration of Exclusion Zone and Zone of Absolute (Compulsory) Resettlement

1.

Introduction

The largest in its scale and consequences man-caused catastrophe that took place on April 26 1986 on the# 4 Reactor at the Chornobyl Nuclear Power Plant in the former Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic
became national tragedy, condemned millions of people to sufferings, and showed how unprotected was
the state in the face of global disaster in peace-time.
The Chornobyl NPP disaster was responsible for serious economic losses within the former
Soviet Union and beyond. The accident disrupted production as well as the normal activities of daily life
in many areas of Ukraine, Belarus, and Russian Federation. In Ukraine, it led to a significant loss ofelectrical power production and a direct impact on the regional industrial economy. Further, it caused
substantial damage to the agricultural economy and limited the use of the area's forests and waterways(use restrictions were imposed on 5,120 km2 of farmland and 4,920 km2 of forest). For the entire Ukraine
population, the reduction in the Gross National Product and the loss of monies that could have been spenton improving health care and preventive medicine, and in other areas to promote general health and wellbeing was a significant blow.
In 1986, approximately 116,000 persons were evacuated from areas with radiation level higher
than 5 mRem per hour. This evacuation required the construction of additional housing for the evacuees.
Approximately 15,000 apartments; several living quarters with a total capacity exceeding 1,000 persons;
23,000 houses; and approximately 800 social and cultural institutions were constructed during 1986
and 1987. The city of Slavutych was built to house former Pripyat residents (Chornobyl NPP workers andtheir families). Other people from the contaminated areas were located in Kiev.
The measures implemented by the authorities immediately following the accident were designed
primarily to protect the public from the effects of radiation and minimize the immediate threat to humanlife and health. The evacuation was accompanied by various measures. To provide social and economic
assistance to the public and individual enterprises, machinery, equipment, livestock, and other materials
were relocated to less contaminated areas.
Assistance to the affected regions in Russia, Ukraine, and Belarus was provided from
centralized all-Union financial and technical resources in the Soviet Union. The assistance focused
primarily on restoring daily living activities. These activities included employment; restoring production
activities (e.g., restarting evacuated industrial facilities, finding alternate power sources); decontaminatinghouses and roadways in areas believed to be salvageable; as well as providing social assistance,
environmentally uncontaminated products, and medical services to members of the public who continued
to reside in contaminated areas.
2. Assessment of losses caused by the Chornobyl catastrophe for the USSR economy
The 116,000 people who were evacuated from their homes and those who voluntarily left (known as thevictim population) were partially compensated for material losses related to the evacuation: lost personal
property, crops in the ground, residences, etc. Industrial and agricultural enterprises (including collective
farms) were compensated for lost financial, material, and technical resources.

- 193 -

In regions with radioactive contamination levels less than 555 kBq/m2 (15 Ci/km2) (intensive
radiation monitoring zones), which were not subject to evacuation under the regulations, each resident was
paid approximately 30 rubles ($33) per month to purchase “uncontaminated” food products imported from
elsewhere. (At this time 1 kg of meat cost approximately 2 rubles and bread cost 20 kopecks.1) The useof local foodstocks (such as meat, milk, vegetables, and potatoes) was temporarily forbidden.
In 1990, the USSR Finance Ministry assessed the direct losses as a result of the Chornobyl NPP
accident. The losses were determined by analyzing data provided by various ministries and agencies, aswell as the industrial departments of the USSR Council of Ministers and the Councils of Ministers of theunion republics. The USSR Finance Ministry found that the total direct loss (including expenditures fromall funding sources) for 1986–1989 was approximately 9.2 billion rubles or about 12.6 billion US dollars 2.
As Ukraine's share of the all-Union budget was 30%, Ukrainian losses from the accident are in the same
proportion.
In 1990, the USSR State Budget included 3.324 billion rubles for remediation of the Chornobyl
NPP accident. Another 1 billion rubles was appropriated from the individual budgets of the RussianFederation and Ukrainian and Belorussian republics. The USSR State Budget for 1991 had included
expenditures of 10.3 billion rubles for these purposes; however, because of the disintegration of the USSR,
only a portion of the funding came from the all-Union budget. By the end of the year, remediation efforts
were being funded by the state budgets of the three newly independent and most severely affected
countries (Russian Federation, Ukraine, and Belarus), Gosstrakh (an insurance company), and voluntary
contributions to the Chornobyl NPP Accident Remediation Fund. A total of 2.97 million rubles of foreign
currency resources (including 2.2 million dollars in convertible currency) were also received and used.

3.

Assessment of summarized economic losses of Belarus Republic

According to estimations of leading Scientific Research Institutes and specialists of various branches ofnational economy, the summarized social-economic detriment to Belarus Republic caused by the
Chornobyl Catastrophe over the period from 1986 up to 2015 comes to 235 billion US dollars [3-5].
The sum includes losses connected with bad effects on population health, detriment to industry
and social sphere, agriculture, construction complex, transportation and communication, municipal
services; contamination of mineral and raw material, land, water, forest and other resources; also
additional expenses connected with mitigation and minimization of the consequences of the accident andproviding safe conditions for vital activities of population.
In the structure of total detriment during the years 1986 – 2015 the main part (81.6%) take costs,
connected with industry functioning support and protective measures implementation, which come to
191.7 billion US dollars. The part of direct and indirect losses totals approximately 30.0 billion US dollars(12.6%). Lost profits are valued at 13.7 billion US dollars (5.8%). Direct losses include the cost of taking
out of use of constituent part of national wealth of the republic: main and circulating production funds,
objects of social infrastructure, living premises and natural resources.
To indirect losses are attributed those caused by influence of economic and social factors (living
conditions and state of health of population) that caused disruption and cessation of production, slowing
down labour productivity, rise of costs and aggravating provisions of other installations of state, cooperative and privet property, also losses inflicted by population migration from affected areas.

1

A kopeck is equal to one-hundredth of a ruble.
This information was officially presented at an ECOSOC (UN Economic and Social Council) meeting by the USSR,
Belarussian, and Ukrainian delegations (letter No. A/45/342 and E/1990/102 dated 06 July 1990 addressed to the UN
Secretary General).
2- 194 -

Constituents of lost profits evaluated in money are: reduction of output, works and services in
the contaminated territories, cost of food turned useless due to radiological contamination, additional
expenses in order to make up for production failed to be produced, cost of restoration of the lost quality of
production, losses from canceled contracts, annulled projects, credits kept idle, penalty, fine and forfeit
payments, etc.
Additional costs include expenses on mitigating of the consequences of the accident andsecuring of he normal functioning of different branches of national economy in radioactively polluted
zones, and providing safe conditions for vital activities of people. They also include compensating ofconsequences of negative factors effects, cost of additional resources, used to compensate losses and lost
profit, cost of decontamination measures and of radiological monitoring.
The cited above evaluation of losses is not final as cause and effect relationship, reflecting thatthe effects of radiological contamination of territories on various aspects of vital activities are rather
complicated. Science still doesn’t have complete and final information on medico-biological, social andecological consequences of the Chornobyl catastrophe.
Table 1. Sectoral structure of social-economic losses of Belarus Republic caused by Chornobyl NPP
accident (billion of US dollars) [5]yearsSectors of
National Economy
1986-1990
1991-1995
1996-2000
2001-2015
1986-2015
Health of population
4.05
16.77
18.13
54.32
93.27
Agro-industrial complex
18.3
20.0
15.6
18.1
72.0
Forestry
0.58
0.68
0.70
2.15
4.11
Industry
0.06
0.13
0.11
0.33
0.63
Construction industry
0.15
1.25
0.32
0.96
2.68
Raw materials, mineral and
2.00
0.12
0.15
0.40
2.67
water resources
Transportation and
0.93
1.20
0.36
0.90
3.39
communication
Social sphere
2.84
5.45
2.96
6.45
17.70
Decontamination of the
0.04
4.19
22.48
10.12
36.83
territories
Radio-ecological monitoring
0.05
0.21
0.19
1.27
1.72
Total
29.00
50.00
61.00
95.00
235.00Belarus Republic still carries the burden of direct financial expenses for mitigation of theconsequences of the Chornobyl catastrophe. For example, 200 million US dollars were spent on so-called“Chornobyl programs” from the state budget in 2004.
4.

Assessment of summarized economic losses of Russian Federation

From 1986 through 1991 minimization of the consequences of the Chornobyl catastrophe in the RussianFederation was financed from the USSR budget. It should be mentioned that there is no data on the direct
losses. It could be assumed that they were not as considerable as in Ukraine and Belarus, as there was nolarge-scale evacuation of population from the exclusion zone [6].
As for the period 1992 through 2000 when Russian Federation started to finance “Chornobyl”
programs on her own, it was planned to allocate 247.7 billion rubles (on the value bases by the year 2000.)
In fact during these years more than 46 billion rubles were finance from the Federal budget. Additional 36
billion rubles were paid as privileges and compensations, which gives us a total of more than 3 billion US
dollars. Payments on “Chornobyl” programs from Russian Federation budget after the year 2000 are still
kept in the same proportion.
- 195 -

5.

Assessment of summarized economic losses of Ukraine

5.1.

Direct losses. Direct expenses and indirect losses, including additional losses caused byprescheduled decommissioning of the ChNPP.

5.1.1. Assessment of direct losses
The city of Pripyat was completed in 1985 and had a population of 48,000 at the time of the accident. In
1986, the city contained three large enterprises under all-Union jurisdiction (Chornobyl NPP, the Jupiterplant, and an integrated residential construction plant); a vocational and technical school; a music school;a complex of hospital institutions; a recreation center; three libraries; and a movie theater.
When calculating losses caused by the consequences of the Chornobyl catastrophe, waste ofinfrastructure facilities located at the ChNPP construction site and in the territory of the exclusion zone,
including the towns of Pripyat and Chornobyl are considered.
Losses caused by waste of material objects of national economy in the exclusion zone due to the
Chornobyl NPP accident total to 1,010.6 million rubles (Table 2). [1]Table 2. Losses from Ukraine Economic Facilities Removed from Service in the Exclusion Zone
After the Accident.
Year of
Cost of Fixed Assets or
Description of Physical Facility Lost as a Result of
Valuation as
Inventory Items
Chornobyl NPP Disaster
Fixed Asset
Rubles,
Dollars,
or Inventory thousands thousands
Item
Facilities and expenses associated with stopping construction on
1986(a)99,028136,120ChNPP Phase III
ChNPP Unit 4
1964(b)201,000
223,330
Chornobyl-2
1984(c)97,700137,027
Enterprises in telecommunications equipment industry (1)1986
51,07070,199Enterprises in the metallurgical industry (1)1986
44,70061,443Enterprises in the construction materials industry (1)
1986
7,750
10,653Enterprises in the river transportation industry (2)1986
21,05028,935
Paved roads (353 km)
1986
60,55083,230Enterprises in the woodworking industry (1)
1986
4,720
6,488
Enterprises in the concentrated feed industry (1)
1986
4,550
6,254
Enterprises for primary processing of agricultural raw materials
1986
4,900
6,735
(1)
Enterprises in the food industry (1)
1986
5,010
6,887
Enterprises engaged in the repair of tractors and agricultural
1986
760
1,045
machinery (1)Enterprises in the forestry industry (1)
1986
4,700
6,460
Collective farms (14)1986
79,693
109,544
State farms (2)1986
18,65925,648
Joint enterprises (3)1986
18,69425,696
Water systems and facilities
1986
4,405
6,055
Sewer systems and facilities
1986
3,850
5,292
Electrical transmission and distribution
1986
315
433
Heating systems and facilities
1986
3,390
4,660
1986
Housing space:
288,316
209,750- State-owned (402)
9,761
7,101
- Privately owned (2,278)
38,76328,200- Rural farmsteads (9,050)
Vacation centers (10); hospital facilities (midwifery centers)
1986
29,10440,005- 196 -

Description of Physical Facility Lost as a Result ofChornobyl NPP DisasterYear of
Valuation as
Fixed Assetor InventoryItem(44); Educational institutions in the vocational education system(3); general education schools (34); music schools (2); recreation
centers (16); movie theaters (2); clubs (39)Total(a)Exchange rate as of April 1986: $1 = 72.75 kopecks(b)Exchange rate as of October 1984: $1 = 71.3 kopecks.
(c)Exchange rate as of 1964 $1 = 90 kopecks.
ChNPP = Chornobyl Nuclear Power Plant

Cost of Fixed Assets orInventory Items
Rubles,
Dollars,
thousands thousands

1,010,649

1,338,979

In addition to the items in Table 2, the substantial loss of infrastructure facilities in the
Exclusion Zone was accompanied by further losses of equipment, tools, and machinery that became
contaminated with radionuclides during the accident remediation operations. These contaminatedmaterials were disposed at the Buryakovka radioactive waste disposal site and at the Rozsokha Equipment
Holding Facility 1 and 2. Items in the Buryakovka disposal site include 1,958 trucks, 14 fire trucks, and19 bulldozers; the total estimated cost as of 1986 of the equipment in this disposal site was 17,566
thousand rubles or $24,146 thousand U.S. dollars (estimated cost as of 1986). This is from internal
accounting data from Kompleks State Enterprise. Items in the Rozsokha holding facilities includes 30
helicopters and 11 residential buildings; the total estimated cost as of 1986 of the equipment in thisholding facility is 16 million rubles or about $22 million U.S. dollars (estimated cost as of 1986).
The total loss -- loss of property and individual facilities of economic importance -- was 1,044 million
rubles or $1,385 million U.S. dollars in the Exclusion Zone alone
Besides, other losses, caused by population evacuation and waste of fixed assets during the postaccident period, should also be considered. Those measures were taken after the radiation situation in the
territory of the exclusion zone was specified in 1990’s.
The cost of lost residential constructions and private property outside the Chornobyl exclusionzone equals to 0.2 billion rubles (as of the year 1984 prices.) The loss of fixed assets outside the exclusionzone equals approximately to 0.4 billion rubles (as of the year 1984 prices.)
Consequently, summarized direct losses of material objects and economic facilities outside theexclusion zone total 0.6 billion rubles, which is equal to 0.84 billion US dollars.

5.1.2. Assessment of Direct Costs
The cost of emergency measures was based on the general amount of financing of:works on direct mitigation of the consequences of the accident in the exclusion zone;social protection of the affected population and corresponding medical programmes,
scientific research programmes;
radiation monitoring of the environment;
decontamination and RAW management-

Summarized data on actual amount of financing is given in Table 3 [1]- 197 -

Table 3.
Summarized data on actual amount of financing of mitigation of the consequences of the Chornobyl
catastrophe and social protection of population for the period of 1986–1996 (1986 – 01.09.91
financed from the State budget of the USSR; from 01.09.91 – financed from the State budget of
Ukraine) /in millions of US dollars/.
Line

Heading1.

Social protection of
citizens, total
Special assistanceScientific research
Radiation monitoring
Environmental remediation

2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

1992

1993

197.33 196.51 478.07 383.97 545.65 636.93

53.62
57.76
63.79

6.32
3.23
1.99

0.17

0.27

2.99
4.45
1.64
0.01

1994

8.83
4.99
2.28
0.37

1995

22.81
5.92
3.15
0.36

1996

1997(a)1986 1991
6606.55

19.02
7.04
4.44
0.19

8.21
10.54
5.4
0.23

Rehabilitation and disposal
0.08
0.20
0.13
0.16
0.29
of radioactive waste
3173.62 276.07 197.78 205.28 167.44 194.10 89.87
7. Capital investment.
Resettlement and creationof appropriate conditions
for members of the public
residing in contaminatedareas
8. Work in Exclusion Zone
8923.75
19.70 25.84 46.45 44.95 52.08 56.1
9. Other
228.9717.72 15.88 25.91 41.94 43.36 37.0
Total:
19108.23
Ukrainian5732.47 510.81 436.01 755.72 638.30 835.19 844.6
portion**Assuming that in 1986-1991 the Ukrainian portion in the expenditures of all-Union budget was 30%,
then the losses of Ukraine caused by the accident could be evaluated in the same proportion
Since 1998 from the State budget of Ukraine approximately in the same proportion to solve ‘Chornobyl’
problems expenditures were financed:

Year
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004

Million US dollars
584.72371.76
332.64358.34376.00259.09450.11It should be noted that since 2001 as the result of the pre-scheduled shut-down of the Chornobyl NPP
Ukraine is put into additional expense to maintain safe condition of the shutdown reactor units of the
Chornobyl NPP and to convert the object ‘Shelter’ into the ecologically safe system. Annual expenditure
amounts approximately 50 million US dollars. Consequently, in the course of 4 years (up to 01.01.05)
approximately 200 million US dollars were allocated for these purposes.

- 198 -

5.1.3 Analysis of Indirect Losses
Losses from inability to use contaminated arable lands, water and forest resources
The land contaminated by the Chornobyl NPP accident in Ukraine includes rich forests where mushrooms
and berries were harvested and agricultural lands where thousands of metric tons of hay were harvested.
The loss of the ability to use farmland, water resources, and forest resources because of contamination iscurrently estimated to be 8.6–10.9 billion rubles. This is more than 2% of the gross national income
produced by Ukraine in 1986. These figures are for Ukraine alone from 1986–1991. All economic
activity was suspended on land with contamination densities greater than 555 kBq/m2 (15 Ci/km2), andsome activity was suspended on land with contamination densities between 185 kBq/m2 and 555 kBq/m2(5 Ci/km2 and 15 Ci/km2). It will take several decades for the contamination on this land to decreasesufficiently to permit use.
Forestry industries also incurred significant losses. More than 5,000 km2 of forest land waswithdrawn from use. The direct losses due to loss of lumber were nearly 100 million rubles. The total
loss incurred by forestry and related woodworking industries for the 1986–1991 time period wasapproximately 1.8–2.0 billion rubles (in 1984 prices).
Although only 0.6% of the pine stock in the former Soviet Union was located here, this area
produced more than 50% of the total amount of resin collected in the former Soviet Union.
Approximately 60,000 metric tons of coniferous sawdust per year, worth 15 million rubles, was collected
here.
The loss to water resources and fisheries in the Dnepr and Black Sea watersheds because ofradioactive contamination in bodies of water during the first few years following the accident was 2.3–
3.1 billion rubles.
Thus, average evaluation of losses caused by inability to use contaminated arable lands, waterand forest resources for the period of 6 years (1986 – 1991) gives us (8.6 + 10.9 )/ 2 = 9.75 billion rubles.
This indirect loss evaluated for a one year period gives us 9.75 / 6 = 1.625 billion rubles. In 30 years (tothe year 2015) indirect losses in this field of activities will reach 1.625 × 30 = 48.75 billion rubles.
Loss of power production and its industrial impact
Because of the accident, electrical power was not produced using the Chornobyl NPP and goods andservices were not produced because of the loss of power. These losses are especially important relative tothe other losses resulting from the Chornobyl NPP accident. The amount of electrical power not generated
because Unit 4 was not used for its entire design lifetime and because other Chornobyl NPP units wereshut down in 1986 was 62 billion kWh. At a mean cost of 1.5 kopecks/kWh for Chornobyl NPP power,
the direct loss was approximately 1 billion rubles. Economists estimate that each unit of electrical power
cost supplied to other branches of industry increases national income by 20 units. Electrical power
shortages have a substantial effect on production volume in areas such as machinery, light industry, foodindustry, and other processing industries. Thus, the total loss due to lack of electric power wasapproximately 20 billion rubles (in 1984 prices). < I think this estimate is acceptable in case there
happened a large and long scale of electric shortage after the Chernobyl accident. I did not know suchsituation happened. Imanaka>
After the Chornobyl NPP accident, a moratorium was issued regarding bringing any new nuclear
power plants on line at existing power plants. Because of this decision, the national economy failed toreceive 6 million kW of installed capacity. Economists' estimates indicate that a mere 1-year delay inbringing 1 million kW of electrical power on line is capable of reducing the national income by 2 billion
rubles. If the delay becomes long term, the cost of the moratorium could reach 48 billion rubles (in1984 prices) within 4 years.

- 199 -

One might consider that the last mentioned arguments are not convincing. There are no known
reports about long and deep shortage of electricity in Ukraine after the Chornobyl accident. But let us notforget, that at that time Ukraine was a part of the Soviet Union, which was a rather specific country.
Beside it was large enough to mask underproduction of electricity in Ukraine by redistributing of its
production and consumption over it’s whole large territory, it was also closed country with the total
control over information, especially that, which provided evidence of its weakening.
After disintegration of the Soviet Union the independent Ukraine in early and middle 90th of the20th century faced problems of underproduction of electricity. The shortage in electricity production was
so severe, that during autumn-winter periods the whole regions (including schools, hospitals andkindergartens), not only industrial enterprises, were being switched off electricity according to schedule oras a result of emergency cutout.
Of course it should be taken into account that the general economic and fuel crisis took place in
Ukraine in middle 90th of the last century, but let us mention also that nuclear electrical power production
was maybe the only stably operating branch of economy during this period. Since 1985 till 1993 electrical
power production in Ukraine dropped down at 27% due to fuel shortage, but at the same time the share of
NPP in produced electricity increased from 19.5 to 40% [7].
Thus, to summarize the indirect losses, the total irretrievable loss to Ukrainian economy fromthe Chornobyl NPP disaster is 116.75 billion rubles (in 1984 prices). The structure of the indirect losses isprovided in Table 4.

Table 4. Structure of Ukrainian indirect losses due to Chornobyl NPP accident
Indirect Loss
Losses caused by inability to use arable lands, water and forestry
resources
Cost of electricity not generated
Cost of moratorium against bringing new capacity on line at existing
nuclear plants
Total:

Rubles in billions
48.75
20,0
48,0
116.75As the exchange rate of the US dollar to the USSR ruble was approximately 71.3 kopecks, we
can estimate the indirect losses as a result of the Chornobyl NPP accident to total 163.74 billion US
dollars, or 3.4 times the Ukrainian gross domestic product for 1997. This is also as much as about 13 statebudgets of Ukraine in 1997, or about 8 in 2005.< How many times larger than the state budget ?> Itshould be noted that indirect losses evaluation is given only on most affected branches of national
economy.

5.2.

Assessment of total economic losses of Ukraine

Direct losses (property and economic facilities) only in the exclusion zone in the territory of Ukraine
totals 1044 million rubles or 1385 million US dollars.
Direct expenditures of Ukraine to mitigate the consequences of the Chornobyl catastrophe at theexpense of different sources of financing during the period of 1986 – 1991 totaled approximately 6 billion
US dollars. During the last 13 years, when Ukraine is independently financing costs of mitigation of theconsequences of the accident, i.e. 1992 through 2004, expenditures reached 6.95 billion US dollars.
However, it is complicated to determine the scale of indirect losses, caused by inability to use
contaminated agricultural lands, water and forest resources [2], decrease of power production, andsequentially decrease in output of goods and rendering services. The Ukrainian specialists estimations
show that by the year 2015 summarized economic loss will come to 179 billion US dollars.

- 200 -

Consequently, summarized economic losses of Ukraine caused by Chornobyl catastrophe havethe following scale and structure (Table 5)
Table 5. Structure of summarized Ukrainian economic losses till 2004
Item
Cost, million
U.S. dollars
1.
Direct losses of inventories and economic assets
1.1 in the exclusion zone1385.01.2 outside the exclusion zone
840.0
2. Direct costs of financing activities on mitigating of the consequencesof theaccident
2.1 1986 – 1991 (Ukrainian share in the USSR budget expenditure)5732.5
2.2
1992 – 2004 (Ukrainian expenditure after declaration of6953.3independence)
3.
Indirect losses according to Table 4 (for the 30 year period up to1637402015)
Total:
178650.8
These losses are not exhaustive, as they do not include all indirect Ukrainian economic losses but omit
items such as:– Loss of health and fitness for work (for the current and future generations)– Future costs for reclamation of contaminated land and water bodies– Future costs for decommissioning of the ChNPP, transform object ‘Shelter’ into ecologically safe
system, disposal of radioactive waste from the Shelter.
.
6.

Conclusions and proposals

1. The accident brought out clearly that nuclear facilities safety expenses are considerably lower thanthose needed to mitigate the consequences of possible accidents – large-scale man-caused catastrophes dotremendous economic damage to countries that are located within the zone of their effect.
2. The Chornobyl catastrophe did enormous social-economic damage above all to three most affected
countries: Ukraine, Belarus and Russian Federation.
As the result of direct losses of material and economic establishments and financial expenses onminimization of the consequences of the accident, the total sum of losses of Ukraine, Belarus and RussianFederation reached tens of billions of US dollars.
The Chornobyl accident is also characterised by considerable indirect losses, which mean
damnification caused by uderproduction in energetics, agriculture, forestry, fish industry, water
facilities etc.I have changed this sentence< I can not understand the meaning. >3. Present estimations of indirect losses of Ukraine and Belarus are based on different methodologicalapproaches and do not enable correct evaluation of health damage, demographic changes, future
expenditure for rehabilitation of contaminated territories and facilities. In light of this development of
universal approaches for estimation of indirect losses caused both by Chornobyl accident and other similardisasters are necessary.

- 201 -

4. Weight of expenditure to minimize consequences of the Chornobyl disaster will continue to be a heavy
burden for the economy of three most affected countries for many years.
Considering that the extent of social-economic damage in Ukraine and Belarus isincommensurable with real economic resources of the countries, the assistance of the international
community is essential.

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.

References
Comprehensive evaluation of risks as a result of the ChNPP accident. – K., 1998
‘Emergency’ #1., 2001, k., pages 6 – 9.
G.M. Lych, Z.G. Pateyeva. Chernobyl catastrophe: social-economic problems and means of solving
them. Minsk, 1999.
Belarus and Chernobyl: second decade. Minsk, 1998.
15 years after Chernobyl catastrophe: consequences for Belarus Republic and ways of overcoming.
National report. Minsk, 2001.
‘Chernobyl. Five painful years’. Moscow. Izdat, 1992.
Chornobyl catastrophe. Ed. V.G.Baryakhtar. “Export Ukrainy” Publishing House. Kyiv, 1997. – 575
P.

- 202 -

Do We Have Reliable Tool?
Considering the Efficiency of Chornobyl Legislation
Oleg Nasvit
Institute of National Security Problems, National Security and Defence Council of Ukraine

Among experts involved in the Chornobyl Disaster issues, one can often come across an opinion
that the Chornobyl legislation is not part of the nuclear legislation. Therefore, it should be measured with adifferent yardstick. The nuclear legislation indeed does not identify Chornobyl-related laws as its part,rather referring to them for any Chornobyl Disaster issues like radiation protection measures, social
security, and damage reimbursements. At the same time the makers of Chornobyl laws themselves admitthat the issues of affected public social security and the Disaster’s environmental after-effects are
inseparable from radiation safety and radiological protection of population issues [1], having a far broader
context than just that of Chornobyl.
On the year of Chornobyl Disaster 20th anniversary we find it reasonable to look back and see if
we have learnt all the lessons taught by Chornobyl. It is an analysis of lessons-learned and recognition of
mistakes that can significantly contribute to further progress in the area. The author of this text isconvinced that common sense is a tool universal enough to study even such an extraordinary subject as theChornobyl legislation, and attempts to analyze its efficiency will undoubtedly contribute if not to direct
improvement of the situation, then at least to finding right ways to do so.
Efficiency of any means and measures is determined by their ability to achieve the set goal in the
fixed time constraints and using determined resources. Of primary importance here is scientific validity of
the goal itself, the relevant tasks to be carried out for goal attainment, ways to fulfil these tasks, andappropriate terms and resources allocated for it.
Today, 20 years after the Chornobyl Disaster, we have to admit that its consequences have notbeen overcome yet and that raises the issue of Chornobyl legislation as a means to overcome the Disasterconsequences. Sad as it is, a major part of measures initiated in line with the Chornobyl legislation happen
to have two common features – none of them were carried through and none of them satisfied hopes andexpectations. The main reason for their sad fortune is usually claimed to be lack of funds allocated fortheir implementation. However, there is one more reason of no less importance, which is rarely realized
and even less frequently mentioned – it is lack of scientific justification for these measures.
You will find no published information that by the time the Ukrainian SSR Verkhovna Rada
(Parliament) approved Chornobyl laws in February 1991, there had existed detailed calculations of theirimplementation costs, however, back then it was clear this would be a serious challenge for Ukraine totackle. The Ukrainian SSR Verkhovna Rada Decree № 797 dated February 28, 1991 “On the Order of
Implementation of the Law of Ukrainian SSR “On Status and Social Protection of Population Sufferedfrom Chornobyl Catastrophe” among other things charged the Ukrainian SSR Council of Ministers withfollowing action items:“- suggest to the USSR Cabinet of Ministers that 100% USSR Budget funding be allocated to cover the
implementation of activities and measures mitigating the Chornobyl Accident consequences.
In case that proposal is rejected, reduce money deductions to the USSR budget assigned forfinancing activities and measures mitigating the Chornobyl Accident consequences.”- 203 -

One can find statistical information about the costs incurred by Ukraine to mitigate the Chornobyl
Disaster consequences, and correlation data on planned and actual budget expense aimed at financing
necessary measures stipulated by the Chornobyl legislation beginning with 1992 [2, 3]. But you will findno figures of funding needed to implement the complete set of measures according to the Chornobyl
legislation, nor their correlation with the planned and/or actual cost to cover them earlier than 1996 [2, 4](Table 1). Despite some discrepancies in the figures provided in the sources, analysis of the available data
enables us to come to a number of conclusions.
First, financial requirements stipulated by the current legislation consistently tend to grow, goingup as higher as 4.4 times in the 1996 through 2004 period. The tendency is caused by two reasons:inflation factors and increased cost of living on the one hand, and constant “improvement” of the
Chornobyl legislation by amendments and addenda eventually resulting in multiplying amounts andnumbers of benefits and compensations and widening the circle of people eligible for them on the other
hand.
Second, there is a stable tendency towards increasing the gap between figures planned in the State
Budget and those needed for the Chornobyl law implementation. In 1996 – 1998 planned financing
reached 44–57% of the requirement, in 1999 – 2002 it went down to 21–29%, and 2003 – 2004 it made as
little as 11% of the legally stipulated expenses. Paradoxical as it is, lawmakers keep increasing theexpenses legally stipulated by the Chornobyl law, yet at the same time they limit budgeting of Chornobyl
programmes by suspending articles and paragraphs of the laws at the point of adopting the State Budget
Law of Ukraine, constantly limiting the scope of measures funded by the State Budget, a tendency
obviously caused by awareness of the country’s inability to finance the whole set of programmes and also
by doubts as for these benefits and compensations being valid.
The author of the text worked in 1991 – 2002 for the MinChornobyl (later the Ministry of
Emergencies) Department for Public Radiation Protection and can with confidence state that during thewhole period no attempts to substantiate or at least analyze the benefits and compensations stipulated by
the Law of Ukraine “On Status and Social Protection of Population Suffered from Chornobyl Catastrophe”[5] were made in terms of radiological protection.
Third, all plans for financing Chornobyl programmes adopted by 1999 were never fulfilled, actual
funding covering 55–87% of the plan, and it was in 2000 only that funding drew close to the planned.
The notion of a gap between the legally stipulated requirement and financial resources at theTable 1. Status of financing the Chornobyl accident consequences elimination and affected populationsocial security associated measures in 1996 – 2005. (million of UAH) [4].
% toOutstanding
Legally
Actually % of financed
Budgeted forthedebt at theYearsstipulated
the given year require- financed
to budgeted beginning of therequirement
ment
given year
3363.32
1794.5653.4
1527.8885.1
160.591996
1997

5681.722513.00

44.2

1746.5969.5

310.04

1998

4548.52606.00

57.3

1432.2655.0

457.75

1999

6015.95

1746.8029.0

1535.5187.9

763.21

2000

7479.25

1812.89

24.2

1809.6399.8

931.48

2001

8744.46

1843.99

21.08

1925.02

104.4

786.4

2002

9957.82144.5

21.5

2002.893.4

729.3*

2003

126567.4

1381.1611.0

1381.16100.0

760.3**

2004

14872.5

1710.9711.5* including 634.6 for social protection. ** including 596.4 for social protection.
- 204 -

685.4

State’s disposal does not seem to be something new. It was already in the National Report dedicated to the
Chornobyl Disaster 10th anniversary prepared by the Ministry of Chornobyl of Ukraine, where Clause 6.6.
“Development of the Legal Basis for Population Protection from the Consequences of Chornobyl
Catastrophe” stated a disparity between the legislation and economical potential of the country, being asource of constant social tension [3].
Under the given conditions Ukrainian authorities were naturally forced to seek help on behalf of
the international community. The issue of international assistance for Ukraine to remedy the Chornobyl
Disaster consequences could make up the subject for a separate study, while we will limit ourselves tostating that Ukraine has received substantial assistance, yet its volumes tend to shrink in the recent years,
making sense to revisit the validity of assistance requests and that of Chornobyl legislation itself. The
situation gets clearer if viewed in retrospect.
One of the key moments that determined further ways of planning and implementing the measuresof public protection against the Chornobyl Disaster consequences, was “Concept of Popular Residence on
Territories of Ukrainian SSR with Increased Levels of Radioactive Contamination as a Result ofChornobyl Accident” (hereafter referred to as the Concept) adopted by the Ukrainian SSR Verkhovna
Rada in 1991 [6]. The Concept holds the main population radiation protection principle to be step-by-stepresettlement of population from the affected areas to the radioecologically clean regions against atemporary criterion of soil radionuclide (caesium, strontium, plutonium) contamination density.
The main argument substantiating this principle referred to unavailability of comprehensive dataas to the radiological situation on the Ukrainian territory and additional public exposure doses received
since the ChNPP Accident and those that could yet be received throughout the residence on contaminatedterritories.
This principle and radioactive contamination density criterion served the basis for contaminatedarea zoning stipulated by the laws “On the Legal Regime of the Territory Subjected to Radioactive
Contamination as a Result of the Chornobyl Catastrophe” and “On Status and Social Protection ofPopulation Suffered from Chornobyl Catastrophe”.
On July 23, 1991, the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine adopted Decree № 106 “On Implementing
the Ukrainian SSR Verkhovna Rada Decrees “On the Legal Regime of the Territory Subjected toRadioactive Contamination as a Result of the Chornobyl Catastrophe” and “On Status and Social
Protection of Population Suffered from Chornobyl Catastrophe”, which identified a series of measures toimplement the current legislation on public protection against adverse factors of Chornobyl Disaster andmitigation of its consequences, as well as listing settlements referred to the radioactive contamination
zones (numbering 2293 settlements)
It should be noted that the Concept and the Chornobyl laws originally featured essential
inconsistency and internal conflicts that drew Chornobyl law experts’ attention [7-12]. Thus, the Concept
initially states that the system of countermeasures on territories with high-level radioactive contamination
is not efficient (while not specifying what particular countermeasures are meant), which may cause a drivefor resettlement, and the statement is followed by a proposal to implement a system of countermeasures onterritories with lower radioactive contamination levels. Experts are well aware that countermeasures are
more efficient on territories with higher contamination levels. Therefore, the Concept puts forth measures
known to be inefficient a priori.
Furthermore, according to Clause 1 of the Law of Ukraine “On the Legal Regime of the Territory
Subjected to Radioactive Contamination as a Result of the Chornobyl Catastrophe” [13], the territories
contaminated due to the Chornobyl Disaster include those whose residents could be exposed to a doseover 1.0 mSv (0.1 rem) a year. A semantically similar statement is present in Clause 3 of the Law of- 205 -

Ukraine “On Status and Social Protection of Population Suffered from Chornobyl Catastrophe” [5] which
provides for residence and work for people without radiological restriction if their additional exposure
dose due to living on the affected territories does not exceed 1.0 mSv (0.1 rem) a year. These regulations
are in perfect compliance with respective international recommendations [14, 15] and Ukrainian national
nuclear legislation provisions coordinated with those recommendations [16, 17]. However, amongradioactive contamination zones, Clause 2 of both laws mentioned identifies an enhanced radioecologicalmonitoring zone (the so-called 4th zone) as the territories with soil contamination density exceeding the
pre-Disaster level by 1.0 to 5.0 Ci/km2 for cesium isotopes, or 0.02 to 0.15 Ci/km2 for strontium, or 0.005
to 0.01 Cі/km2 for plutonium, provided the calculated effective exposure dose with radionuclide migration
coefficients for plants and other criteria taken into account exceeds a dose that had been received by theindividual in the pre-Disaster period by 0.5 mSv (0.05 rem) a year.
That means some legal clauses consider the enhanced radioecological monitoring zone to be aterritory unaffected by radioactive contamination and requiring no any radiation factor restrictions
regarding population residence and activity, while according to other clauses of the same laws, thisterritory should undergo radiation protection measures and its residents receive benefits andcompensations for living on a radioactively contaminated territory with relevant activity restrictions
applied. By official statistics [4], the population of radioactively contaminated zones totals around 2.3
million people, of which 1.6 million are residents of the enhanced radioecological monitoring zone. It also
has to be noted that by the Concept, the soil radionuclide contamination density is used as a temporary
decision-making criterion until an individual effective exposure dose will be ascertained for the residents.
Beginning in 1991, dosimetric passportization of settlements affected by the Chornobyl Disaster has been
carried out in Ukraine on a regular basis. Individual effective exposure doses for residents of thosesettlements (so-called passport dose) and their dynamics are regularly published and are well known [1827]. Today, as a result of the natural environment attenuation processes and counter-measures undertaken,
the radionuclide content in the environment objects has gone down by 37% and by 1.5 – 2 and more times
in agricultural produce, which is reducing in its turn the public external and internal exposure dose by 2-3
times as is reflected in the changed distribution of settlements by passport dose levels, see Table 2.
For comparison, the same Table refers the number of settlements in each radiation contamination
zone according to the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine Decree № 106 dated July 23, 1991 that remains inforce as of today except for 6 settlements in Volyn and Rivne Regions, which, according to a relevant
Table 2. Distribution of settlements (referred to radiation contamination zones accordingly to acting
legislation) by additional exposure dose derived from dosimetric passportization data.
Average exposure dose in the settlements,
Year of passportization(mSv per year)< 0.5
0.5-0.99
1.0-4.99
> 5.0
1996
1307
333
507
6
1997

1350

359

443

9

1998

1332

375

440

7

1999

1375

380

397

9

2000

1417

298

440

6

2001

1455

314

389

5

2002

1471

317

372

3

2003

1538

338

285

2

2004
1991, Directive № 106
of Cabinet of Ministers

1551

410
1290
(zone 4)202
835
(zone 3)0
92
(zone 2)-- 206 -

enactment [28], were transferred from the compulsory resettlement zone to the guaranteed voluntary
resettlement zone category. From Table 2 it is evident that there are contrasting differences between theregulatory reference of the settlements to the zones of radioactive contamination and dosimetry realities oftoday. But now there is no approved mechanism for altering settlements radiation contamination zone
attribution with the issue itself having lost its validity, becoming merely a political one instead.
Chornobyl legislation experts highlight one more detail. Up to 1998, NRP-76/87 national
radiological protection standards had been in force in Ukraine stipulating that the permissible exposure
dose for residents of the 30 km zone around NPPs in operation (Category B) be 5 mSv a year. Therefore,zone 4 and 3 residents enjoyed exposure dose reductions and were given benefits and compensations evenprovided the exposure dose did not exceed 1 mSv and 5 mSv per year respectively, while residents ofzones neighbouring operating NPPs could be exposed to doses up to 5 mSv a year without any
compensations, which entailed legal discrimination and social injustice [9].
National reports dedicated to the Chornobyl Disaster 10th and 15th anniversaries [2, 3] contained
cautious criticism of the decision to resettle residents of the contaminated territories, especially in the
period after 1990. But the national report is a documentary genre where criticism apparently has to be
cautious. Although the paper [9] treated both the very idea of resettlement (which itself makes the key
point of the Concept) and the way it was implemented with severe criticism, the present author only
concluded that resettlement as a countermeasure turned out to be totally unjustified in terms of averted
exposure doses and economical and socio-psychological aspects. Resettlement, the way it was stipulatedby the Concept against the radionuclide area contamination, is not consistent with the scientific basics ofhuman radiation protection– exposure dose is the only thing to measure potential adverse effects.
The research generally indicates that the Concept and respective laws were found not to abate but
to further sharpen the public concern about their and their families’ lives, which itself negatively affected
their health. Moreover, benefits and compensations depending on the exposure dose value (radionuclide
contamination of food and territory) stimulated the recipients of benefits to try and keep the exposure dose
received instead of acting to reduce it. That is another negative aspect of the aforementioned laws [9].
According to experts, one essential drawback of the Concept and laws adopted on its basis is theprevalence of protectionist measures in respect to residents of contaminated territories rather thanstimulating the residents’ activity to reduce their exposure dose load [10].
In recent years the Government of Ukraine has made attempts to lift this conflict between thecurrent legislation and economical capability of the country on the one hand, and between the level ofsocial security offered to affected people and growing socio-psychological tension on the other, yet with
no appreciable effect. Numerous claims to make changes and additions to the Chornobyl Catastrophe
associated laws proposed to eliminate the controversies between certain clauses and regulations of thelaws, to bring the current legislation in compliance with economical ability of the country and to set up asystem of comprehensive security for the affected people, were rejected by relevant committees (formerly
permanent commissions) of the Ukrainian Parliament under the pretext of incompliance with the effective
Concept. It urged specialists to elaborate a new document as a basis for revision of relevant laws. For
example, a document was prepared and approved by the Ukrainian Government, and was passed to the
Verkhovna Rada in 1997 and 1998 for ratification, but in late 1999 it ended up to be withdrawn by the
new government for validity check and further elaboration.
The last version of the Concept defining public security provisions in relation to the Chornobyl
Disaster consequences was based on the internationally and scientifically acknowledged radiological- 207 -

criteria and recommendations substantiated by experience and knowledge that domestic and foreign
specialists had built up in different fields over years of practice in mitigating the Disaster consequences.
Understanding the importance of the Concept, the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine with their Decree“On Parliamentary Hearings Dedicated to the Chornobyl Catastrophe 14th Anniversary” recommended
the Ukrainian National Academy, Academy of Medical Sciences, and Academy of Agrarian Sciences toconsider the draft Concept. The presidiums of all the mentioned academies supported it as a basis tofurther improve the current legislation.
In 2000-2001 the Government of Ukraine made more attempts to submit the new draft Concept
for consideration by the Verkhovna Rada, but its committees’ resistance resulted in the document being
never discussed in the session hall. The story ended by the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine issuing a
Decree dated 25.07.2002“On Approval of the Draft Concept for the Law of Ukraine “On Amending theLaws of Ukraine “On the Legal Regime of the Territory Subjected to Radioactive Contamination as a
Result of the Chornobyl Catastrophe” and “On Status and Social Protection of Population Suffered from
Chornobyl Catastrophe”.
One more aspect worth noticing is a significant difference between exposure dose-based
compensation amounts stipulated by the relevant Chornobyl laws and those provided for by the Nuclear
legislation of Ukraine. The Law of Ukraine “On Protection of People against Ionizing Radiation” [16]contains Clause 19 “On Compensation for Exceeding of Basic Annual Exposure Dose Limit” providing
for the yearly basic exposure dose limit excess based compensation to be given to people residing or
temporarily staying on the territory of Ukraine in case of radiation contaminated food and drinking water
forced to consumption, radiological insecure living, work and study conditions, which is completely
attributable to the Chornobyl Disaster context.
The mentioned clause stipulates that compensation for the exceeding of annual basic exposure
dose limit comprises 1.2 times of an individual minimum non-taxable income amount for every
millisievert in excess of the set permissible radiation limit. According to the Law of Ukraine “On Personal
Income Tax” [29] (Paragraph 22.5 of Clause 22.) in case other legal regulations refer to the minimum nontaxable income, the amount of 17 UAH is taken as a basis, except for administrative and criminal
legislation regulations in the part of crime or law violation qualification for which the minimum nontaxable income amount is set at the level of a social tax privilege defined by Subparagraph 6.1.1 Paragraph
6.1 of Clause 6 of the Law for a given year (including stipulations of Paragraph 22.4 of Clause 22 of theLaw).
Thus, according to the Ukrainian nuclear legislation, the yearly basic exposure dose limit excess
based compensation makes 20.4 UAH for every millisievert in excess of the set permissible radiation limit(the set limit for population is 1 mSv a year). Getting back to Table 2, one can easily reckon that, in caseresidents of the affected territories were given compensations under the nuclear legislation in compliancewith the 2004 dosimetric passportization of settlements attributed to the radiation contamination zones,
only residents of 202 settlements would be entitled to claim compensations for excessive radiation(exceeding the basic dose limit) and this compensation amount would not exceed 81.6 UAH per individuala year as far as the maximum dose did not exceed 5 mSv and basic dose limit excess was no more than 4
mSv.
Total compensations amount provided by the Chornobyl legislation for residents of settlements
belonging to radiation contamination zones happen to significantly exceed yearly basic exposure dose
limit excess based compensation stipulated by the nuclear legislation which violates social equality
principle.

- 208 -

To sum it up we can draw a conclusion that the Chornobyl legislation, despite its high humanistic
trend, is inconsistent and contains significant internal controversies:• directed at preserving the status quo and does not provide for internal mechanisms of adaptation
to radiation situation changes on contaminated territories; prioritizes protectionist measures inrespect to people rather than stimulating the people’s activity aimed at their radiation load
reduction, causes social passivity and paternalistic mood among contaminated regions residents;• the scope of benefits and compensations stipulated by it is ungrounded from the perspective ofradiological protection; total cost of its provisions is out of proportion with the economical
ability of Ukraine;• its provision for a yearly basic exposure dose limit excess based compensation does not comply
with the nuclear legislation of Ukraine which is in violation of the social equality principle.
Thus, the Chornobyl legislation could never become an efficient tool of eliminating the Chornobyl
Disaster consequences.
In our opinion one of the root-causes of this situation is that, trying for a lengthy period of time tocover up for their reluctance or inability to normalize the situation on the contaminated territories bymeans of stimulating the residents social mobilization and backing economic and business initiatives,
authorities of all levels (however not the State power in general as there were officials who sought ways toimprove the situation), perhaps even not being aware of it themselves, happened to be objectively
interested in hyperbolizing the radiation threat. It was easier to hide their mistakes and inertia in a dense
shade of the boosted nuclear monster, exposing the public to something that was so loved by our people their uncompromised fight for enlarging and widening the benefits and compensations. Besides, as statedin [11], the Chornobyl legislation improvement issue runs into a resistance on behalf of a number ofprominent Ukrainian scientists, mainly in medical sphere who seem to be subjectively interested in the
problem conservation.
Do we see a way out from this complex situation? Well, the exit itself is not on the horizon yet,but the direction to it can be discerned. There are a number of possible options and all of them call forpolitical will to bring order to the Chornobyl legislation on behalf of the Parliament, Cabinet of Ministers
and the President of Ukraine.
References
1. Samoilenko Y.I. Chornobyl and Ecology on the Joint of Economics and Politics // Radiation Security in
Ukraine. NRSCU Bulletin. – 2001. – № 1–4. – P. 80–85.
2. 15 Years after the Chornobyl Disaster. Handling Experience. National Report of Ukraine. – К., 2001. –144 p.
3. 10 Years after the Chornobyl NPP Disaster. National Report of Ukraine. – К., 1996. – 213 p.
4. Information Materials on Legislation Implementation Status, Associated with the Chornobyl Disaster
Consequences Elimination Complex, Prepared by MES of Ukraine on the Occasion of the Government
Day in the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine on 12.04.2005. – К.,2005.
5. The Law of Ukraine “On the Status and Social Security of People Affected by the Chornobyl Disaster”,
Doc. 796-12 dated 28.02.1991 // The Ukrainian SSR Verkhovna Rada Bulletin dated 16.04.1991 - 1991.,№ 16, P. 200
6. Concept of Population Residence on the Territories with Increased Radiation Level Caused by the
Chornobyl Disaster. Approved by The Ukrainian SSR Verkhovna Rada Decree dated 27.02.91 № 791 //The Ukrainian SSR Verkhovna Rada Bulletin. – 16.04. 91 № 16. – P. 197.
7. Solomatin Y. Where Chornobyl Winds are Blowing from. // The Mirrow of the Week. – 2–8.11.96. – №
44 (109). http://www.zerkalo-nedeli.com/ie/show/109/8699/
8. Nasvit O. Legislation in Ukraine about the radiological consequences of the Chornobyl Accident //Research Activities about the Radiological Consequences of the Chornobyl NPS Accident and Social
Activities to Assist the Sufferers by the Accident. Report of an International Collaborative Work under- 209 -

the Research Grant of the Toyota Foundation in 1995–1997. Research Reactor Institute, Kyoto
University. KURRI-KR-21. – 1998. – P. 51–57.
http://www.rri.kyoto-u.ac.jp/NSRG/reports/kr21/kr21pdf/Nasvit1.pdf
9. Los I.P. Critical People’s Health Protection Elements in Situations of Accident Radiation (Lessons
Taught by the Chornobyl Disaster) // Radiation Security in Ukraine. NRSCU Bulletin. – 2001. – № 1–4.
– P. 104–112.
10. Grodzinskiy D.V., Bezdrobniy Y.V. Some Significant Practical and Scientific Aspects of the
Radiation Security in the Post-Chornobyl Period // Radiation Security in Ukraine. NRSCU Bulletin. –2001. – № 1–4. – P. 97–103.
11. Solomatin Y. The Fourth Chornobyl Zone: How “Patriots” were Aiming at the USSR in 1991 andTergeted - … the Independent Ukraine in 1992 // Russian Nuclear Nonproliferation Site. – 27.01.03. –http://nuclearno.ru/text.asp?4981
12. Solomatin Y. Science and the Chornobyl Legislation in Ukraine: to Punish not to Spare? // Russian
Nuclear Nonproliferation Site. – 4.11.03. – http://nuclearno.ru/textml.asp?7106
13. The Law of Ukraine “On Legal Regime for the Territories Affected by the Chornobyl Disaster”, Doc
791а-12 dated 27.02.1991 // The Ukrainian SSR Verkhovna Rada Bulletin dated 16.04.1991 - 1991, №
16, P. 198
14. ICRP Publication 60. Radiation protection 1990: Recommendations of the International Commission
on Radiological Protection (ICRP). – New York: Pergamon Press, 1991. – 197 p.
15. Basic International Security Norms for Ionizing Radiation Protection and Secure Treatment of the
Radiation Sources. Security Publication Series №115. – The Vienn: IAEA, 1997. – 382 p.
16. The Law of Ukraine „On Human Ionizing Radiation Protection” // Official Bulletin of Ukraine. –26.02.98. – № 6. – p. 55.
17. Radiation Security Norms of Ukraine (NSCU-97). State Hygienic Standards of SHC 6.6.1.–6.5.001-98.
Official Publication. – К., 2003. – 135 p.
18. Dosimetric Passportization of Settlements in Ukraine Affected by the Chornobyl Disaster Radiation
Contamination (Set 1). – К.: Ministry of Health of Ukraine, 1991. – 92 p.
19. Dosimetric Passportization of Settlements in Ukraine Affected by the Chornobyl Disaster Radiation
Contamination (Set 2). – К.: Ministry of Health of Ukraine, 1992. – 86 p.
20. Dosimetric Passportization of Settlements in Ukraine Affected by the Chornobyl Disaster Radiation
Contamination (Set 3). – К.: Ministry of Health of Ukraine, 1993. – 179 p.
21. Dosimetric Passportization of Settlements in Ukraine Affected by the Chornobyl Disaster Radiation
Contamination (Set 4). – К.: Ministry of Health of Ukraine, 1994. – 241 p.
22. Dosimetric Passportization of Settlements in Ukraine Affected by the Chornobyl Disaster Radiation
Contamination (Set 5). – К.: Ministry of Health of Ukraine, 1995. – 312 p.
23. General Dosimetric Passportization of Settlements in Ukraine Affected by the Chornobyl Disaster
Radiation Contamination (Set 6). – К.: Ministry of Health of Ukraine, Ministry of Emergency
Situations and Chornobyl Disaster Consequences Public Protection Issues of Ukraine України, NCRM
AMS (АМН) of Ukraine, 1997. – 103 p.
24. Retrospective-Prognostic Population Exposure doses and 1997General Dosimetric Passportization of
Settlements in Ukraine Affected by the Chornobyl Disaster Radiation Contamination (Set 7). – К.: MHof Ukraine, 1998. – 155 p.
25. General Dosimetric Passportization of Settlements in Ukraine Affected by the Chornobyl Disaster
Radiation Contamination. Average Data for 1998 and 1999. (Set 8). – К.: MES of Ukraine, NCRM of
Ukraine, IRS ATS of Ukraine, 2000. – 58 p.
26. General Dosimetric Passportization of Settlements in Ukraine Affected by the Chornobyl Disaster
Radiation Contamination. Average Data for 1998, 1999 and 2000. (Set 9). – К.: MES of Ukraine,
NCRM of Ukraine, IRS ATS of Ukraine, 2001. – 59 p.
27. General Dosimetric Passportization of Settlements in Ukraine Affected by the Chornobyl Disaster
Radiation Contamination. Average Data for 2001–2004. (Set 10). – К.: MES of Ukraine, NCRM of
Ukraine, IRS ATS of Ukraine, 2005. – 62 c.
28. The Law of Ukraine „On Referring Some Settlements in Volyn and Rivo Regions to the Guaranteed
Voluntary Resettlement Zone” // The Verkhovna Rada Of Ukraine Bulletin. – 19.03.04. – № 12. – P.
161.
29. The Law of Ukraine “On Personal Income Tax” // The Verkhovna Rada Of Ukraine Bulletin. –12.09.03. – № 37. – P. 308.
- 210 -

Solving the social problems caused by the Chernobyl catastrophe:
20 years is not enough
Volodymyr Tykhyy∗

Introduction
Nearly twenty years that passed after the Chernobyl nuclear disaster call for deep investigation of its
consequences for people who were affected - usually referred to as "Chernobyl sufferers". Approximate
numbers (it is believed that exact numbers will never be known) reveal a real humane catastrophe:• more than 600,000 participated in the re-construction of the nuclear power plant itself and clean-up of
the area ("liquidators" of the aftermath of the accident; more than 300,000 of them live in Ukraine see details below);• more than 350,000 were resettled, of them about 120,000 evacuated during the first period, including
49,360 inhabitants of the city of Pripyat on 27 April 1986;• several millions live on contaminated lands since 1986.
Fortunately, it is not a scale of a major war, but it is a scale of a regional military conflict involving
several countries...
Economic sufficiency, optimal health, reasonable housing, access to education and recreation, andhappy relationships are some of the fundamental needs that constitute the essence of a social wellbeing. The importance of it is recognised by governments and policy makers. Governments andpolicy makers are those who influence social conditions of living to the greatest extent, especially instrongly regulated systems like the system of "developed socialism" that existed in the Soviet Union
and which dominated a great deal the life in Ukraine in the first half of 90th. What impact has the
Chernobyl catastrophe had on the social well being of affected population?
Due to limitations on the scope of this paper, we will not discuss health-related and children-related
issues, because these are separate big and most complicated topics.
Chernobyl had various repercussion not only for three most seriously affected nations (Ukraine,
Belarus, Russia), but all over the world. In 2002, a UN report "The Human Consequences of theChernobyl Nuclear Accident. A Strategy for Recovery" 1 was released. However, due to the goal of thatassessment the report is too general and in some aspects controversial (see, for instance, comments by
Nesterenko, Yablokov, Grodzinsky2). The most comprehensive account of events in Ukraine that followed
Chernobyl disaster could be found in the book published by the National Academy of Science of Ukraine
in 1995-1996 "Chernobyl Catastrophe", edited by Academician V.G.Baryakhtar 3 . The positive andnegative feature of this book is that almost all papers on social protection measures were written by those
who implemented them: thus, the papers comprise good factual data, but they reflect positions ofrespective government agencies that provided assistance and not the opinions of recipients. Since different
authors wrote different sections in the book, references are given accordingly. The Institute of Sociologyof the Academy of Science of Ukraine has published detailed reports of scientific investigation of social,economic and psychological consequences of Chernobyl Catastrophe4.
* Volodymyr Tykhyy has Ph.D. in applied nuclear physics. He works in Kyiv, Ukraine as an independent
researcher and consultant in the field of environmental management. Participant of the liquidation of theconsequences of Chernobyl accident, category 2A. E-mail: voltykhyy@gmail.com.

- 211 -

In this paper we will briefly outline only problems of those who live in Ukraine - liquidators,
resettled, those who still live in contaminated areas. The issue of several thousands workers of theChernobyl nuclear power plant (NPP) - veterans from before 1986 and newcomers - needs a separate
research, as it was developing first in the unique "closed" system of the Soviet nuclear industry, and later
under the influence of a fierce struggle between international community trying to close Chernobyl NPP
and the Ukrainian government trying to smooth over numerous negative consequences of closing the NPP.
Closely linked to their problems is the history of the city of Slavutych (population 26,000, built in 1987-89
chiefly to house personnel of Chernobyl NPP): all pains and tensions caused by changing social protection
policy and by the process of closing Chernobyl left their traces here.
For each affected community, each family and individual the disaster had various social, economic,
health and psychological impacts. From the first days after the catastrophe the state (first the Communist
Party and the Government of the Soviet Union, later Governments of independent states) played a majorrole in attempts to protect the affected population and to provide compensations for incurred adverse
impacts. An outline of these attempts (adopted legislative acts, economic decisions, social policies, directinternational assistance etc.) will be discussed in this paper, as well as results of implementation of theplanned measures. International assistance to the city of Slavutich, which was quite significant and which
went hand in hand with the political pressure on the Ukrainian government - to close down Chernobyl
NPP - will not be discussed in this paper.
Evolution of the social and political system of Ukraine between 1986 and 2004: brief
outline
The present-day Ukraine (a 48-million nation in Eastern Europe) at the time of Chernobyl catastrophe wasa republic within the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, USSR. The Communist Party ruled the country
in the so-called "command and control" manner. In 1985, attempting to solve numerous internal andexternal problems, a new dynamic leader of the USSR, Mikhail Gorbachev, launched "perestroika" reconstruction of the whole system. This eventually led to a collapse of the USSR and resulted in many
hardships and successes for the people of the country.
The social and political system of the USSR at the time of Chernobyl catastrophe - known as"developed socialism" - was fully centralised with almost all important decisions taken in Moscow, withpractically 100 % state ownership of natural resources, bank system, industrial enterprises, infrastructure,
health care and educational systems, etc. Civil society virtually did not exist: municipalities, nongovernmental organisations (NGOs), even church were all under the strict control of the state.
This situation has gradually changed over two last decades: multi-party political system developedwith decisions taken by the Parliament, the nationally elected President and the Cabinet of Ministers
appointed by them; independent from the state business sector has been created and flourishes; third sector
emerged with hundreds of de-jure and de-facto independent NGOs, protecting civil rights and interests of
their members; administrative reforms provide more and more power and financial resources tocommunities.
Several events have had deep influence on Ukrainian society in the last quarter of the XXth century.
We can list them starting with Chernobyl catastrophe (1986), which dislocated hundred of thousands ofpeople, created the state of anxiety in millions, and placed such a burden on the national economy andfinance that it obviously hastened the collapse of the USSR.
Disintegration of the Soviet Union that followed the unsuccessful attempt of coup-d'etat in 1991 led
not only to the feeling of instability, but also to huge economic problems with eventual impoverishment ofsome 90 % of Ukrainian population during 1992 - 1994. In some periods monthly inflation was higher
than 100 %, and all savings completely disappeared with the collapse of the State Savings Bank of the
USSR. All this created the feeling of insecurity and pessimism.

- 212 -

Still this was not the end of hardships, because in mid-90s privatisation of the state property waslaunched, with members of political and economic "elites" becoming incredibly rich, while the majority of"ordinary" people becoming poor. During 90s a new political and economic system emerged. After the
stepping down of the President Leonid Kuchma in January 2005, who was elected in 1994, this system
was nicknamed "kuchmizm". The system was characterised by 50-60 % share of "black" and "grey"
economy, mass export of capital and total corruption in all spheres of social and economic life.
Transparency International index of Ukraine, which was 69th of 85 countries when Ukraine first appearedon the list in 1998, became 87th of 90 countries in 2000 (for comparison, Russia was 76th in 1998 and82nd in 2000)5.
During that period, sophisticated "schemes" of avoiding taxation were invented, and this led toserious budget problems. Many opportunities for avoiding taxation were created by the government itself most common were special "preferences" which allowed some companies and territories not to pay certain
taxes, custom duties and other "mandatory" payments to the budget (the reader may guess how thesecompanies and territories were selected). To give the feeling of incurred budget losses, we can mention
that when a new (appointed after the "orange revolution" of 2004) government cancelled these preferences,
the resulting planned additional income was 8.7 billion hryvna (US$1.64 billion) - more than 10 % of thebudget. Various preferences were created by the Chernobyl legislation as well, but most of them wereannulled several years ago. Of course, all this did not help in solving numerous problems of Chernobyl
sufferers. Only in the very end of 1990s the state finances became stable, as well as the funding for
Chernobyl programs.
Additional circumstance which seriously aggravated the situation in all rural areas - and more so in
those affected by Chernobyl contamination - were slow and inconsistent reforms in agrarian sector. These
reforms included reorganisation of soviet collective farms and state farms into "collective agricultural
enterprises" and joint-stock companies. Old system disintegrated, and the new one served only interests of
new owners - usually former "red directors". Limited opportunities opened for establishing independent
farms, but without governmental supports such attempts were often unsuccessful. The unresolved issues ofland ownership and agricultural land use were hindering transformations in agrarian sector, and thesituation changed only in 1999 when the special decree of the President was issued. With it, and with thefollowing decree of 2000, a market system in agrarian sector started to function and the population of therural areas obtained framework for implementation of economic initiatives that possibly can lead peasantsto prosperity.
Legislation, number of sufferers and budget expenditures
Chernobyl-related legislation and government policy for social assistance to affected
peopleDespite the fact that the USSR was a country with extensive military and civil nuclear programs, a country
with several tens of nuclear power reactors in operation, there was no law on the use of nuclear energy. In
cases of nuclear accidents that happened before Chernobyl, problems were settled behind the closed doors
of responsible ministries - of course, without any public consultations. Social issues were settled in thesame manner, and usually sufferers of the accidents were ordered to sign a special commitment of nondisclosing the matter: this was a condition sine qua non for obtaining assistance and social benefits.
When the Chernobyl catastrophe occurred, there was no existing legal base and no existing policy ofhandling the problem. All decisions were taken ad-hoc at the highest level of the government. Because
there were very limited possibilities of evaluation of real and expected doses for each affected community(due to enormous scale of affected territory and population, the insufficient background and current
information, lack of knowledge among those who were taking decisions and those who implemented them,- 213 -

absence of capacities for processing huge amount of radiological data), during the first period of 19861989 the decisions were based on the levels of contamination of soil by radioactive substances.
First government decisions after the Chernobyl catastrophe dealing with social problems (evacuationof the 30-km zone, compensations for loss of property, mobilisation of resources and manpower for
resettling people etc.) were taken by the Politburo of the Central Committee of the Communist Party andthe Council of Ministers of the USSR. Only in April, 1990, the legislative body of the country - theSupreme Council of the USSR adopted a Resolution "On a comprehensive programme to liquidate theconsequences of the accident on Chernobyl NPP..."
The law of the USSR, which specified relations between the state and the affected population "On
Social Protection of Citizens who suffered from the Consequences of the Chernobyl Catastrophe", wasadopted in May 1991 - five years after the accident. Earlier that year, in February 1991 two basic
Ukrainian laws were adopted by Verkhovna Rada (Parliament) of the Ukrainian SSR: "On the legal statusof contaminated territory..." and "On the status and social protection of citizens who suffered due to theChernobyl catastrophe".
It should be kept in mind, that Soviet and most of Ukrainian laws are indirect, which means that they
define general policy, but later specific regulatory acts are needed to start their implementation. For
serious problems such acts are adopted by the Cabinet of Ministers, and this was the case with Chernobyl:
the Resolution of the Council of Ministers of Ukrainian SSR № 106 of 23.07.1991, in accordance with thetwo Laws mentioned in the previous paragraph, specified the list of 86 communities of "mandatory"
resettlement and 800 communities in the zones of "guaranteed voluntary resettlement" (it meant that thepeople willing to move out of this zone were allowed to do so and the government would pay
compensation for their property left behind).
But we must remember that on 8 December 1991 leaders of Russia, Ukraine and Belarus signed anagreement to dissolve the Soviet Union. Resources from the "Soviet Union" ceased to come to Ukraine forsolving various Chernobyl-related problems. Economic decline that followed forced the Cabinet of
Ministers of Ukraine to reduce the number of "voluntary resettlement" communities to 49 in January 1993.
The country was unable to provide resources for resettlement to the people from 751 communities thatwere excluded from the list. However, a huge programme of construction of housing and infrastructure
continued.
For the purpose of this paper we will make just several observations on the Law "On social
protection..." Naturally it was fully oriented on the soviet system, in which everything was produced bystate-owned and state controlled enterprises, almost all goods were centrally distributed and everything
was in scarce supply (in "deficit"). Because of this, many provisions of the Law were formulated in thisway: "Chernobyl sufferers can receive certain goods and services "in the first place" or "without queue"".
With coming of market economy during 90s these provisions lost their importance.
Essential feature of the law is that it deals both with incurred damage (either loss of health orproperty, loss of jobs etc.) and with risks which have not yet resulted in real damage (risk of livingon contaminated land, risk which poses to liquidators radiation exposure that occurred during theirwork at and around the Chernobyl NPP). And it is very difficult to determine the real levels of theserisks, although the National commission on radiation protection and other agencies made many attempts
to resolve the problem.
Many benefits (especially for liquidators) were defined in the form of preferences - e.g. certain
categories of liquidators were exempt from paying custom duties, excise duties, income tax and so on.
This led to many abuses and later most of these privileges were cancelled.
Some provisions provided for sufferers' access to subsidies and cheap loans either for individual
building of house or for opening own business. These privileges were mostly suspended by the year 2000.
- 214 -

A very large part of the Law deals with health care (which we will not touch here) and recreation.
There are several articles, which preview direct payments to sufferers - e.g., addition to pension "for lossof health".
But on the whole the system of social protection was built in such a way that almost all budgetary
resources were left in hands of responsible government agencies and then these agencies "served" theneeds of sufferers. This was a typical soviet system that provided all opportunities of abuses, because theone who needed assistance had to ask for it. And it was a decision of authorised official to satisfy therequest or to refuse - and with a total deficit of everything (as could be seen from the following sections)in no way was it possible to satisfy all requests.
Legislation evolved significantly over the past 20 years. As it is mentioned on the web-site of the
Ministry of Ukraine of Emergencies, more than 800 documents regulate now Chernobyl related issues.
Basic law - "On social protection..." - was modified 26 times: the first correction made 19.12.91 and thelast 03.03.05. The law "On the status of territory..." was modified 8 times. It is clear that new law isneeded, but due to the huge scale of territory and very large number of people affected it is hard to expect
quick changes.
Number of sufferers
It is very difficult to describe the diverse and big pool of Chernobyl sufferers in a short paper.
Apparently the first are those who are considered sufferers according to the Law. As of 1 January
2002 in a special Data Bank there were data on 2,422,212 persons of a total 3,096,814 people registeredby the State Committee of Statistics as Chernobyl sufferers 6 . This comprises roughly 6 % of the
population of Ukraine. There are two major categories: 335,785 liquidators (people who worked on
liquidation in 1986-1990) and 1,709,146 sufferers (people who live or have lived in contaminated areas).
These people are scattered all over Ukraine (see map on Figure 1, bars for oblasts with highest numbers,
data from6).

Figure 1. Number of liquidators of categories 1-3 (1), sufferers of categories 1-3 (2) andsufferers of category 4 (3) in some oblasts of Ukraine (bars are shown only for oblasts withhighest numbers).
- 215 -

All liquidators and sufferers are divided into 4 categories, and receive benefits according to the category
they have. A liquidator, for example, can have:• category 1 if he/she is disabled (invalid) and his disability has causal relation with Chernobyl (thisrelation is established by an authorised panel of doctors);• category 2 if he/she worked in the 30-km zone either any number of days before 1 July 1986, or morethan 5 days between 1 July 1986 - 31 December 1986, or more than 14 days in 1987;• category 3 if the number of days is big enough (it's specified in the law) but not sufficient for
obtaining category 2.
Sufferers can have categories 1-3 if they live or have lived on the territory of mandatory or
guaranteed voluntary resettlement (here again, category 1 is for disabled) or category 4 if they live in zoneof "strict radiological control".
Children (evacuated, children who had lived in contaminated areas, or those with at least one parentliquidator) constitute a separate very large group of 1,048,628.
Among liquidators and sufferers there are hundreds of thousands of those who already incurred
damage either to health (number of invalids whose diseases have a proven causal connection withChernobyl catastrophe reached 96,000 by 2002), or loss of property, or loss of family. There are 13,027
families who receive welfare payments due to the loss of provider.
There were doubts as to whether all those who were registered as liquidators indeed earned this status.
From January 1997, 388,755 personal files have been reviewed, and 22,708 persons (6 %) were denied thestatus6.
Of course there are many people who have been experiencing hardships after the catastrophe, but are
not listed in the registries. Of them we can mention members of the families of liquidators, or thosecitizens of Kyiv and other cities and towns who were waiting in queue (sometimes for decade and more)
on a municipal or built by their enterprises flats and houses - and suddenly these flats and houses were
given to families evacuated from Chernobyl zone. For thousands of families this meant additional years oflife in over cramped conditions. Indirectly, the sufferers are all people of Ukraine who have been paying
for liquidation with their tax money.
Dynamics of required and provided financial means
During the first period (1986-1989) the funding for liquidation of the consequences of Chernobyl
catastrophe was provided by the budget of the Soviet Union, and only small portion of it was taken fromthe budget of Ukrainian SSR 7:
Table 1. Expenditures directed on mitigation of the consequences of Chernobyl catastrophe, million
roublesYear

1986

From the budget of
Ukrainian SSR
Total
1585.5

1987

1988

1989,
January-August

70.8

76.4

95.4

1646.4

735.1

551.2

At that period the official exchange rate was roughly 1 rouble = 1USD. In 1986-1989, main
component of social investments was construction of houses and social infrastructure (for evacuated andresettled). There was also significant funding for decontamination of soil and settlements. The volume of
construction works done by only one leading Ukrainian contractor - Ukragrobud company - and its
subcontractors is given in the following table. (Ukragrobud was a "head contractor", that means that it
subcontracted other design and construction organisations as needed):- 216 -

Table 2. Funding provided to Ukragrobud company for construction of housing and infrastructure
for liquidation of the consequences of Chernobyl disaster in 1986-19898.
Date of decision of Council of
Ministers of Ukraine allocating 10.06.86
funding
Allocated funding, million
377.0
roubles

14.10.86

12.12.86

08.04.87

08.12.88

TOTAL

31.4

231.9

87.0

14.0

746.7

These figures do not include other construction companies, and they do not include the city of Slavutich,because the leading contractor for Slavutich was "Slavutychenergobud" company of the Ministry ofEnergy of the USRR. The cost of building of Slavutich is estimated at 490,000,000 roubles9.
After 1988, there was a general expectation that the problem of resettlement has been resolved, but it
became obvious that many more thousand people have to be resettled in the safer environment.
There exist more information on the Chernobyl budget expenditures after the dissolution of the
USSR1.
Table 3. Chernobyl budget expenditure of Ukraine, millions of US dollars
1992
197.3
6.3
2.0
-

Social protection
Special medical care
Radiation control
Environmental recovery
Radiologicalrehabilitation
and0.3
radioactive material disposal
Resettling, housing and living
276.1
conditions improvement
Other expenditures
TOTAL
510.8

1994
478.1
8.8
2.3
0.4

1996
545.6
19.0
4.4
0.2

1998
429.1
8.2
8.7
0.2

2000
290.1
6.4
2.7
0.04

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.05

205.3

194.1

86.5

13.7

755.7

835.2

584.7

332.7

It is important to notice that the real GDP of Ukraine was steadily declining in 1990s (between 1991 and1994 the national income of Ukraine declined by 60 %10), and the share of Chernobyl fund in the budget
was also declining. However, the size of Chernobyl budget was still on the level of several percents of
GDP (4.6 % in 1992, 1.9 % in 1993, 2.2% in 199410). Of course it constituted even higher share in thenational budget.
In the same time, the needs of Chernobyl programs were growing. This is clear from the following
11
table :
Table 4. Funding for social protection of Chernobyl sufferers: needed, planned and provided (inmillion Hryvna)
Year
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001

Averageexchange rateof Hryvna12$US1 =
1.83
1.86
2.45
4.13
5.44
5.37

Needs according
Planned intoChernobyl
state budget
legislation
2004.1
3291.73474.94408.05771.96731.51150.81799.3
1953.51310.1
1578.41559.6- 217 -

the Planned,
needs
57.4
54.7
56.2
29.7
27.3
23.2

% of

Providedfunds,
needs
49.8
36.0
30.2
27.4
27.3
23.2

%

of

For example, the state budget of Ukraine (expenditures) for the year 2000 was 33,946.5 million Hryvna13,
and Chernobyl needs were 5771.9 million Hryvna, that makes nearly 17 %. Provided funds amounted to
4.6 % of the state budget.
The gap between the needs and provided funds shows that the national economy was unable to carry
the burden of Chernobyl expenditures required by the law. How could it happen? One explanation is thatseveral generations of Parliament members became legislators using in their election campaigns promises
to improve the situation for Chernobyl sufferers. So these Parliament members lobbied interests ofChernobyl fund, and probably not only for the benefit of the sufferers, but also to satisfy requests ofnumerous lobbyist groups who were making good money on Chernobyl related contracts. So far, theParliament has been unable or unwilling to make fundamental amendments to Chernobyl legislation, andthere are indeed serious social reasons for this.
Implementation of social protection measures
Measures aimed at solving economic problems of the sufferers
The area contaminated by Chernobyl radionuclides is agricultural. If we set aside a case of the satellite
city of Chernobyl NPP - Prypiat (which we do not discuss in this paper), most economic activities in thearea were agricultural or centred around agricultural production (processing of crops and other agricultural
products, maintenance of agricultural machinery and infrastructure, transportation of raw materials andproducts etc.)
Papers and reports dealing with economic consequences of Chernobyl catastrophe usually speak
about loss of production: loss of energy generated by Chernobyl NPP, loss of industrial and agricultural
output, loss of agricultural lands. But social dimension of all these means loss of jobs, severe decrease infamily income, loss of perspectives for future. Domination of publications on consequences for economic
output is very characteristic both for the soviet era and for the first decade of post-soviet era, when
economy was considered much more important than people who were just "work force" for national
economy.
In Ukraine, however, even this account of economic losses was not done with necessary diligence. In
Belarus, six national evaluations of economic losses caused by Chernobyl on its territory were prepared
between 1986 and 1992, while in Ukraine this work started only in 19917.
Ability to work and to receive a decent income is a basic social need. After the catastrophe, thisability immediately disappeared for tens of thousands of peasants whose work directly depended on
agriculture: their crops were not needed, meet from their pigs and livestock could not be consumed, milk
and products harvested in forests were contaminated.
It should be mentioned that during the first period after the catastrophe the state made significant
efforts to keep economic life in affected areas running - even if the goal of that work was formulated interms of "production", and not "saving jobs and family income". To a great degree both went hand in hand,
and thus saved the economic potential and the employment.
On the contrary, decontamination measures in settlements proved inefficient14:"As an example, let's take desactivation of settlements in the zone of "strict" control, which wasdone by contingents of civil defence. During 4 years, 1.5 million man-rem (120,000 people wereinvolved) and 1.5 billion roubles were used on desactivation. Efficiency of this desactivation wasvery low. The radiation background was reduced by 10-15 %"A whole series of agromelioration measures was developed and implemented between 1986-1994 on
vast territories: application of lime - 4962 sq.km, application of higher doses of fertilisers - 7301 sq.km,
improving meadows and pastures - 6137 sq.km. The intensity of these measures was 2-3 times higher than

- 218 -

before the catastrophe. Special measures were developed which allowed production of "clean" crops,
production of "clean" meat and milk on contaminated territories15.
However, the funding provided for these measures were always low (see Table 3 above) - some 1000
times lower than funding directed for resettlement. So, the efforts aimed at keeping the economy runningwere insufficient and production (and hence the number of jobs) dropped significantly. The area of usedarable land in four most contaminated oblasts dropped by 6.5 - 11.3 %. It is impossible to find in
published materials information about creation of new (for this area) sectors of employment. It is hard tosay whether this was possible - from the point of view of available humane potential, traditions andeconomic practicability, and only attempts could have provided an answer.
Only one new sector of employment emerged: control of radioactive contamination. As of September
1995 778 radiological laboratories were in operation only in the system of the Ministry of Agriculture andFood Production of Ukraine16, and there are other ministries and state committees. It is important, ofcourse, but for local people information about radioactive contamination can be useful only if
contaminated food products could be substituted - and usually this is not the case.
Equally serious problems waited evacuated and resettled on the new territories. There is no
information about new industrial facilities, farms, greenhouses and the like in the long lists of what was
built - only houses, schools, hospitals, roads etc. How could people make their living there, if jobs were in
scarce supply in most areas even without Chernobyl resettlers?
In the Law " On the status and social protection..." there were provisions for small loans "to startsmall business or individual farm", but there is no information on how many people were able to use theirchance. Apparently not too many.
It seems that only one business opportunity was intensively used until it was banned in 1995 - duty
and excise free import of some goods (like vodka) on contaminated "Chernobyl" territories. But there is no
information about benefits created by these activities for the territories and local people (and, respectively,
about loss of income of the state budget).
Housing and social infrastructure
Construction of cottages, apartment houses, housing and social infrastructure (water pump stations,schools, kindergartens, hospitals, outpatients health centres, roads, gas supply pipelines etc.) was a major
investment in the post-war period. As already mentioned, in early 90s annual expenditures for constructionof houses and social infrastructures reached several percents of GDP. Total figures of construction
between 1986-2000 are summed up in table1:
Table 5. Housing and social infrastructure construction, 1986-2000
Houses and flats
28,692
Schools (number of places)
48,847
Kindergartens (number of places)
11,155Outpatient health centres (visits/day)
9,564
Hospitals (beds)
4,391
The main effort was undertaken by August 1986, when 90,784 people were evacuated17. During 19901991 13,658 people were resettled from zones of mandatory resettlement. In all, by the end of 1991
105,000 were evacuated and resettled in mandatory order, and 58,700 people moved from the zones of"guaranteed voluntary resettlement" and other contaminated zones.
But the programme of resettlement continued, and by June 1996 additional 7,864 families weremoved from zones of mandatory resettlement, while 5,852 (of them 1,426 families with children) werestill living in these zones. It should be noticed that according to a special survey conducted in summer of
1995, only 56 % of families living in zones of mandatory resettlement were willing to move out17.

- 219 -

By the end of 2002, 1612 families still lived in the zones of mandatory resettlement, of them 762
families refused to be resettled. During 1990-2002 13,787 families were resettled from the zones of"guaranteed voluntary resettlement"6.
The figures above confirm that the huge work has been accomplished. The question is to what extent
it solved the problem of Chernobyl? And were there other ways of handling these problems? We are not ina position to answer this question, but as it is stated by informed specialists:"Unfortunately, the attempt of resettling Chernobyl sufferers into new villages practically failed at that time they were still hoping that they would be able to return back to their houses in Polissia,
and they did not want to settle on new lands. So, the big and hard work of construction workers
was in fact used not for what it was intended 8".
So, the resources were used, and there were obviously many people who benefited - not only Chernobyl
sufferers. There are several reasons that could be mentioned. First, major part of resources was not given
to sufferers, but was transferred to different government agencies. Officials at all levels were responsible
for planning (without consultations with ultimate beneficiaries - affected population). Officials were in
charge of contracting construction companies and in charge of accepting their work. Officials were
responsible for distribution of houses and flats. In the Internet Russian version of the book3, which could
be found on the web site http://stopatom.slavutich.kiev.ua/1.htm, there is a page missing in the
Ukrainian version (it should be placed somewhere between pp.88 -89), which provides evaluation of theresults of the housing construction programme:"...more than 500 of built houses were not inhabited by fall of 1986... In Chervonoye village of
Yagotyn rayon by 1 June 1988 40 of 65 constructed houses were not inhabited, in Supoyevka
village - 53 of 140. Main reasons for this were low quality of construction, unsatisfactory social
conditions, absence of jobs for new settlers... When 27,800 inhabitants living in houses built forevacuated were inspected, it was found that part of them had no relation to evacuated. They werelocal residents and people from other "clean" areas of Ukraine and Russia who improved theirliving conditions."
Of course, a low quality and unfinished construction means that construction companies were overpaid
and construction materials used for something else. Obviously there were a lot of abuses during
distribution of houses and flats. At present, it seems unlikely that the truth about all this will ever be foundand disclosed.
Compensations to sufferers and personal benefits
Benefits for sufferers have been provided in form of free access to some services (free treatment insanatoria and rest houses, free or partly reimbursable tickets), privileges (tax exempt status, opportunity toimport some goods duty free), access to cheap loans (for purchase of house or flat, or starting small
business), easier access to budget-sponsored higher education in monetary form.
Access to loans and tax and custom duty privileges are already mostly annulled, some due to many
abuses (it is said that some entrepreneurial liquidators managed to import without paying duty more than
100 cars each before this privilege was cancelled). On the list there are still many benefits which werevaluable during the period of socialism, but which in fact lost most of their importance at present, becauseof the changes in the society, which looked during last decade more like a "wild capitalism".
A very big sector of social assistance is free medical service (annual medical examinations, free
medicines and so on) and free health improvement holidays for adults and children. This is arranged
between authorised government agencies and sanatoria/rest houses located all over Ukraine. Officials are
responsible for signing and paying contracts with sanatoria and "control of the quality of provided
services". Vouchers are distributed by various authorised agencies among liquidators, sufferers andchildren.

- 220 -

The numbers of those who used these free vouchers are impressive (data from1 and 18, although they
do not match precisely).
Table 6. Number of Chernobyl sufferers (1,000 persons) who used health improvement
holidaysYear
AdultsChildren
Total

1990
214
182
396

1991
160
282
442

1992
354
320
674

1993
185
505
690

1994
96
300
396

1995
49
401
450

1996
49
453
502

1997
37
467
504

1998
42
482
524

1999
30
427
457

2000
25
348
373

However, due to the insufficient funding only a fraction of those who have rights to use this benefit
according to the law, were able to enjoy it. In 1991, the system served each second sufferer, in 1992 each third, in 1995 - eighth (ibid.) The question remains whether the funding that was provided from thestate budget was used in the most efficient manner. With such deficit of free vouchers all sorts of abuses
could happen, and all people who have experience of living in the system of "developed socialism" knowwhat might be a quality of "free services". Also there were little stimuli for sanatoria and rest houses toimprove the quality and economic efficiency of their services, because in fact they were not competing on
the market - their goal was obtaining a wholesale contract from a government official.
Liquidators of categories 1 and 2 (see section "Number of sufferers" above) have a benefit of free useof public transport in cities and free use of commuter trains. This provision cannot be regarded as really
fair, because for a person living in a big city this privilege could amount to some $100-150 a year, while itis useless for someone living in a village. Serious problems with this benefit appear due to strengtheningof market system: transportation companies want to be reimbursed for their services, but nobody knows
how many rides liquidators make - they do not receive tickets of any sort. Only recently it became
necessary for any possessing such benefit to obtain free ticket on commuter trains so now a railway
company can count what it spends on Chernobyl sufferers.
Many benefits for sufferers of all categories are paid in monetary form. These payments comprise thebiggest share in Chernobyl budget, and they are important for hundreds of thousands of liquidators andpeople living on contaminated territories.
Those who were evacuated or resettled from the zone of mandatory resettlement, or who moved toclean areas from the zone of "guaranteed voluntary resettlement" have received compensations for lost
property: houses and other buildings, crops, livestock, fruit trees etc. This process is ongoing (partly
because it involves also heirs of those who were resettled), partly because of significant changes in pricing
during past 18 years. In accordance with the laws adopted in 1996 and 2002, compensations paid between
1992-1996 (during the period of galloping inflation) have to be recalculated into current Ukrainiancurrency (hryvna) and paid to sufferers by 31 December 2007.
People living in contaminated areas receive several forms of compensations. The basis for theircalculation is usually minimal salary, which is fixed by the government for each year: in 2004 it was 262
hryvna (about $50) per month. Payments are different for different categories, usually they include:• monthly payments as compensation for restrictions on the use of locally produced food (30-50 % ofminimal salary) for those living in contaminated areas;• additional annual payments for those who live and work in contaminated areas (1-3 minimal salaries);• higher salaries for civil servants and workers of budget organisations (like schools, hospitals etc.);• higher pensions and scholarships.
Liquidators, invalids (disabled, whose disability is caused by Chernobyl catastrophe) and liquidatorspensioners also receive some payments in monetary form (annual payment for recreation, payment for- 221 -

food, addition to pension) and some payments as discounts, e.g. reduced communal payments (water, heat,
telephone etc.)
On the whole, regular payments to sufferers play extremely important role for them and their families.
Very often these payments are of the same level or even bigger than an average wage a person can earn in
his/her locality. Other benefits like health care, sanatoria, free public transport are also important, although
there is a need to improve efficiency of them.
Evolution of the national policy and international assistanceCountry's policy on liquidation of the consequences of the Chernobyl catastrophe was approved by the
Parliament in February 1993 as a "Concept of the national programme of liquidation of the consequencesof Chernobyl catastrophe and social protection of citizens for 1994-1995 and for the period until the year2000". It worth to note that it was not the "national programme", but a "concept" - a legal act of no
immediate force, so practical work was regulated by the effective laws.
In 1996 the Parliament turned down a bill "On radiation protection of people", which might hadprovided a legal basis for national actions. However, in February 1997 the improved version of the billpassed the first reading and in January 1998 the Law "On the protection of man from ionising radiation"entered into force. The Law is not retroactive, but together with the Law "On the protection of populationand territories from extraordinary situations of technogenic and natural sort" adopted in 2000 it provides
necessary legal basis for potential future nuclear disasters.
The "Concept of the national programme..." mentioned above should have been replaced after theyear 2000, and in November 2002 a bill "On the national programme of minimisation of the consequencesof Chernobyl catastrophe for 2002-2005 and for the period until 2010" passed the first reading in the
Parliament. However, as of March 2005, it has not been submitted for the second reading by the
Parliament. Institutional changes are also considered, namely creation of the special State Committee
dealing with liquidation of the consequences of Chernobyl Catastrophe (see, for example 19).
As we already mentioned, international assistance focused mainly on the issues of Chernobyl NPP,
including damaged reactor and shutting down of the remaining reactors. Significant support was also
provided for managing the 30-km exclusion zone and for the social assistance to Chernobyl NPP workers
and the city of Slavutich. Many international organisations, including organisations of the UN system,
governments and non-governmental organisations provided humanitarian assistants to Chernobyl sufferers.
Detailed account of these efforts can be found in 20.
Among other efforts the UNESCO-Chernobyl Program which was implemented in three countries(Belarus, the Russian Federation and Ukraine) should be mentioned. It was launched in 1991 andterminated in1997. Although the work was fully relevant to the sufferers' needs, and more than $9,000,000
was mobilised, the results did not have a follow-up (except for one project), and the running costs andcosts not directly benefiting the Chernobyl victims were very high (executive summary of the external
audit of the programme21). Anyway, this effort could not influence the situation significantly - during thatyears annual budget expenditures of Ukraine on social Chernobyl programs reached US$200-500 million(see Table 3).
In Ukraine, with the support of the UNESCO-Chernobyl Programme, three centres of socialpsychological rehabilitation of population were established by the Ministry of Ukraine of Emergencies in1994 and two more centres in 2000. These centres provide advice and psychological help to most sociallyunprotected groups of population (liquidators, resettled, disabled, unemployed, young people). A goal of
the work of these centres - abatement of general tension and alarm among population, professional
orientation for young people and unemployed, environmental education and information activities. Morethan 50,000 people appeal to these centres each year22.
In 2002, UNDP in Ukraine, along with the Ministry of Ukraine of Emergencies and Affairs ofPopulation Protection from Consequences of Chernobyl Catastrophe, launched Chernobyl Recovery and- 222 -

Development Programme (CRDP). CRDP addresses issues highlighted in the joint UN report1. CRDP iscurrently funded by the UN and the governments of Switzerland, Japan and Canada. So far over
$3,000,000 was acquired, and the programme is expected to run until 200723.
CRDP components include policy development, community development, social development,
economic development and environmental recovery. Until the end of 2004, the programme worked in 63
communities in 3 oblasts of Ukraine (Kyivska, Zhytomyrska, Chernihivska) and from 2005 6 more rayons
will be added. Over 70 community development projects were implemented in 2003-2004, with funding
coming from communities themselves (20 %), local governments (50 %), CRDP project (30 %) and othersponsors (10 %). More than 90 community organisations were formed and received support in the form of
training, development of networks of business services providers and initial grants. The programme also
provided information materials on environmental recovery and development opportunities in agriculture,
water supply, energy efficiency and other issues.
Conclusions
A huge system for social protection of Chernobyl sufferers has been built in Ukraine during 19 years. In
principle it is a "soviet-type" paternalistic system, in which government officials take almost all decisions,and sufferers are "dependants". Major part of financial resources stays in hands of responsible government
agencies. The figures of budget lines (after 1995 when the published state budget became more detailed)confirm this conclusion. E.g., in 1995 money allocated for those "who are moving out of Chernobyl zone
individually, and state construction programme for liquidators of category 1" comprised 16 % of money
allocated for state construction programme (for Chernobyl sufferers); in 1996 - 38 %; in 1997 - 44 %; in2000 - 39 %. Apparently this ratio was even lower before 1995. (It is not clear how much was paid
directly to people for individual building, and how much was spent for state-contracted construction of
housing for sufferers of category 1).
Similarly, with health improvement holidays main part of money is spent by government agencies.
For example, average price of one recreation voucher in 2000-2004 was around $150, while direct annual
monetary payment for "recreation" to each liquidator of category 2 was equal around $5. Compensations
for unused holidays were also several times lower than the price of recreation voucher, and they were notalways paid.
The system that emerged probably gives people some feeling of safety, but it does not stimulate
initiative. As sociological investigations show, an attitude of "dependant" became a common feature
among Chernobyl sufferers24. People do not take initiative in their hands, and often do not want to takesuch initiative. Social monitoring in contaminated territories and among sufferers is needed; it could havehelped in finding solutions. Such monitoring was started in 1997, but after several years discontinued on
the initiative of the Ministry of Ukraine of Emergencies (ibid.).
It is clear that the current system of social assistance to Chernobyl sufferers needs serious reforming,
but this reform cannot be abrupt due to very big numbers of those which depend on this system and thefact that many people, excluding children, are not at all young - an average age of liquidator in 2004 was
52 years. We would agree with the conclusion of the UN Report1 that several years of preparation areneeded. The Report proposed a ten-year Recovery Phase of initiatives:"The new approach should focus on enabling the individuals and communities affected by thedisaster to enter fully into society by taking control of their own lives and acquiring the means for
self-sufficiency through economic and human development" (ibid.).
New and much more significant efforts are needed for careful investigation of the current situation andformulation of possible solutions. All this should be done in an open and transparent manner and withintensive public consultations. Only after this, the needed changes to the system could be made without
creating additional psychological stress for sufferers and serious risk for the stability of the social situation- 223 -

(we should learn lessons from Russian experience with monetarization of benefits in the beginning of2005).
Those who formulate the state policy of social protection of Chernobyl sufferers should notconcentrate on struggle for higher budget allocations (which is probably impossible), but on finding waysof better use of available resources with the goal of creating the situation when sufferers and territories
become economically and socially self-sufficient.
***************************
Case study: the town of Poliske, Kyiv oblast
Poliske (Russian spelling Polesskoye) - a settlement (town) in Kyiv oblast, centreof Poliske rayon. Population 11,300 (1986). Sewing, furniture, flax processing
factories. Cannery. Production of construction materials, logging and lumber
processing.
(Ukrainian Soviet Encyclopedic Dictionary, 1987).
The town of Poliske is located 55 km to the SW of Chernobyl NPP, on the river Uzh, in geographicalprovince of Ukrainian Polissia. The region is known for its ancient and unique culture. The town (known
as Khabne before 1934) was first mentioned in written documents in 1425.
(As it was shown by later investigations, the town lies on the Southwest trace of Chernobyl fallout, withcontamination by Cs137 between 15-40 Ci/km2 and more. In 1987-88 scientists (who were closely
involved in drafting the boundary of the 30-km zone back in 1986) told the author of this paper that theyknew that Poliske should have been evacuated, but a town with a developed infrastructure was badly
needed to serve various logistical purposes - laundry, etc. - and thus it was decided to leave it outside thezone. Moreover, nearly 28,000 people from Prypiat and evacuated villages were temporarily stationed
nearby Poliske between 27 April - 5 May 198625.
A secret report, prepared 25.05.86 by the USSR State Committee on Hydrometeorology, listed Poliske
among 15 settlements where the level of gamma-radiation on 10 May 1986 was between 3-5 mR/h.
Settlements with levels over 5 mR/h were subject to "temporary resettlement"26, which in effect turned out
to be permanent).
In 1986 and later - in 1987-1989 - when many villages were resettled, the town was not evacuated. Instead,a massive decontamination effort was undertaken: replacing roofs and fences, removing contaminatedasphalt and paving roads, squares and school yards with new asphalt etc. These works were executed bymen aged 30-40 years liable for military service (nicknamed "partisans"), who were drafted for"temporary military service". Effectiveness of this "decontamination" proved to be insufficient for making
living conditions safe.
(In the fall of 1988, when the author worked in Poliske conducting yard-by-yard measurements of soil
contamination with caesium, he had a chance to present some results and to talk to the Head of Rayonadministration. Results clearly showed that contamination exceed all existing limits, but the Head ofRayon insisted that "It is our land, we were born and we will live on it, and we will stay here". It is hard tosay what were his reasons to insist on this position - local patriotism, underestimation of danger,
willingness to obey orders or some personal agenda. His own position could have been important - he wasa Member of the Supreme Council (the Parliament) of the USSR, and that meant high level of authority.
Of course there were no consultations with the public...)- 224 -

Millions of roubles were invested in social infrastructure - new hospital, a whole district of multi-story
apartment houses, natural gas pipelines and gas ovens for individual cottages, summer vacations in "clean"regions for children and adults, - this is an incomplete list of measures undertaken by the state in 19861991.
Serious efforts were applied to continue (and even increase!) agricultural production in the vicinity of
town and the processing of agricultural products on the town cannery. Looking from present time andknowing what we know now, it must seem at least strange, because processed food products included wild
berries and mushrooms, dairy products, vegetables... Milk and meat production, working vegetablegardens, flax growing and processing, logging, production of construction materials - all these activities
mean work on soil or in a forest - that is, breathing dust.
In 1996, a special Resolution of the Cabinet of Ministers classified certain places outside the 30-km
zone, where working conditions in 1986-87 should be considered equally dangerous as in the zone itself.
Among them were Poliske rayon hospital, Poliske flax processing factory, dosimetric stations on the road
Dibrova-Poliske-Vilcha, Poliske station for desactivation of vehicles and other machines. Equal statusreceived also workers who were involved in logging in nearby forests, as well as those who worked onreforestation and sowing grass on abandoned lands.
(In the same meeting with the Head of Rayon administration the author also raised an issue ofcompensations. I argued that these should be diversified according to the living and working conditions ofpeople, and hence potential (and actual) radiation doses. It is easy to understand that a person living on asecond floor of a concrete house with tap (artesian) water supply and a central heating receives much
lower doses then many others who live in wooden cottages, take water from private water wells in theyard and heat their houses with locally collected firewood. Even bigger difference must be between dosesof a tractor driver and an accountant sitting in the office where the floor is moped out five times a day.
However, the reaction of the Head of Rayon was straitforward: "We all live in this settlement, so we allmust receive same compensations").
By early 90s, when information about the real levels of radioactive contamination in the town became
widely known and most people acquired adequate and often exaggerated understanding of radiation
related risks, the feelings in the town were close to frustration. People, especially those with little children(there were two schools and three kindergartens) were looking for all possible ways of leaving the town.
But they needed permission - without such permission they could not receive compensations for theproperty left behind, and thus their fortune in any new place would be miserable.
(An international community was well aware of Poliske problems. Thus, for example, in 1991 a Swissorganisation SKH equipped Poliske rayon hospital with modern diagnostic equipment and organised
permanent consultations of patients and doctors by Swiss specialists, who stayed in Poliske on shift basis.
Many other teams of doctors, experts in dosimetry and radiation medicine visited Poliske).
Despite many efforts to improve the radioecological situation in the town, contamination remained
too high. So, the Resolution of the Council of Ministers of Ukrainian SSR (CMU) of 14 December 1989
gave permission to families with children under 14 to leave the town if they were willing to. Two months
later in February 1990 followed the decision on mandatory resettlement from Poliske of families withchildren and pregnant women. But of course there were no free houses and flats to implement this decision
immediately... And then at last followed a decisive Resolution of the Council of Ministers of 23.08.90 on"mandatory resettlement" of all population of the town. Later this decision was repeated in the Resolutionof CMU № 106 of 23.07.1991 in which the town of Poliske was listed among other 86 Ukrainian
communities as destined for "mandatory evacuation".
(In 1990, the author accompanied to Poliske a large delegation of Parliament Members, doctors andjournalists from Switzerland. The delegation met with town officials, who told about their efforts to makeliving conditions safe. Only one MP from Ukrainian Parliament joined his nine Swiss colleagues and 40
journalists for that visit.
- 225 -

Figure 2. Resettlement of the town of Poliske. Numbers near the name of the town
(village) indicate numbers of flats or houses built or provided for Poliske's resettlers.
Later that year a team from Swiss TV (Vladimir Tchertkoff) interviewed teachers at school andkindergarten, and they complained that radiation levels remained high, and that desactivation did nothave effect. Parents told about incredible bureaucratic obstacles in obtaining permission for resettlement.
It was still a soviet era, and people were not free in choosing the place to live - permits to settle depended
upon decisions of the state officials. Later on, in 1998, Tchertkoff's team revisited some people from
Poliske - in suburbs of Kyiv and in Kyiv oblast where they lived - and these people told about unbearable
humiliation they experienced when the decision on evacuation eventually was taken: they needed to bribe
officials to be resettled earlier, to receive better compensation for their property, to choose a place of
resettlement...)Resettlement of some 10,000 people was not an easy job. The government tried to relocate people inlarge groups to preserve to the extent possible existing families and traditional relations, to make it easierto the people to start new life on new places. But of course there were problems with new construction,
demand for new housing was very high. People from Poliske were resettled to 50 different communities in
Kyiv oblast (see map from 3 on Fig.2), 9 to 560 families in each. Rarely were they able to renew old
traditions on a new land - not only surrounding nature was different, but quite often people from "host"communities were hostile to newcomers. Due to economic hardships of mid 90s, jobs were in scarce
supply and no one wanted competitors. Older people who were willing to wait sometimes received better
living conditions - they were moved by groups as communes (usually these were neighbourhoods fromone or several streets of Poliske). There are several examples, like a half-isolated settlement (which later
became a part of the town of Berezan), where people from Poliske have formed a compact commune andlive friendly with their neighbours. However, since there are no jobs for younger generation, life in thiscommune dies out.
After all remaining inhabitants (most of them pensioners) left the town in early 1996, during someperiod its destiny remained unclear: legally it was still the centre of Poliske rayon. The end to the Poliske's
almost 600 years of civil history was enunciated by the Decree of Verkhovna Rada (Parliament) of
Ukraine N 204 of 10.07.1996 "On moving the centre of Poliske rayon to the village of Krasiatychi". When- 226 -

the resettlement of the town and all legal procedures were completed, the deserted town was passed under
the jurisdiction of the Administration of the 30-km zone.
(Several times after this the author visited Poliske. The view was really pathetic... Of all town's life, militia
quarters were guarding the empty town form looters; paramilitary fire brigade was permanently on alert
because of numerous fires in forest around the town. Newly-built apartment houses and century-old
cottages with new gas-heating ovens were gutted - partly by their owners who removed all that could be
used for their new houses (like windows, doors, pipes and toilets etc.), partly by looters. A dozen of older
people who refused to leave their houses and self-settlers from nowhere who live in the town depend on
bread supply from a bus-shop that made stop in the town once a week. The hospital built and refurbishedin 1987-1991 is in operation, but now it serves the needs of the workers of 30-km zone).
Addendum 26 April 2008
The work on this paper was completed in April, 2005. Few significant changes occurred during three
years that have passed. Some information and recent data are provided below.
In March 2006 a "State Programme of Mitigation of the Consequences of Chernobyl Catastrophe for2006-2010" was approved by the Parliament. It lists numerous activities that need to be implemented to
improve social situation, including new legislation, systemic approach, scientific justification of measuresetc. Main problem with this, as well as with other governmental programs, is that there is no money in thestate budget to fully fund it.
It is estimated that the total costs spent by Ukrainian government between 1991-2005 on liquidationof consequences of Chernobyl disaster have reached about 8 billion US$ (Section 3 of the "Programme...")
On 16 April 2008, a hearing dedicated to the 22nd anniversary of the Chernobyl disaster was held in
the Parliament of Ukraine. For this hearing, the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine prepared "Referencematerials". Follow some figures from these "Reference materials", which provide up-to-date information.
The number of Chernobyl sufferers which are registered by the Ministry of Labour and Social
Protection was (as of 01.01.2008) 2,376,218, of them: 276,327 liquidators (including 65,361 disabled),
2,099,891 sufferers (including 41,242 disabled and 541,641 children). Compensations, pensions andpayments for liquidators and sufferers have been increased during 2005-2007. Budget allocation for social
protection and pensions of Chernobyl sufferers for 2008 was increased by 27.8 % comparing to the year
2007, and reached 5,947,200 UAH (approximately US$1.2billion). Unfortunately, inflation and risingfood prices will significantly reduce real benefits for sufferers.
In 2007, the total of 147,110 sufferers used "free" health improvement holidays (compare Table 6
above). "Free" vouchers were provided to 15.5 % children and 1.4 % adult sufferers.
The ongoing work on "dozimetric pasportization" (calculation of average doses obtained byinhabitants of particular settlements) indicate gradual decrease in number of settlements where people
obtain high doses of radiation. Of 2130 settlements where this work has been performed, the data for
2002-2006 are distributed as follows:
Table 7. Number of settlements according to average calculated dose of irradiation of
population
Year
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006

<0.5
1471
1538
1551
1716
1763

0.5 - 0.99
317
334
405
298
294

Dose, mSv/year
1.00-3.99
368
289
202
112
72

- 227 -

> 4.0
7
5
5
4
1

Milk > 100 Bq/l
406
339
363
134
84

It becomes clear that status of some settlements could have been revised: thus, in accordance with theeffective legislation, there are 86 settlements in the zone of mandatory resettlement, and according to
pasportization data there should be 45; in the zone of "guaranteed voluntary resettlement" there are 841
settlements and could be 447. However, necessary legislation for such changes has not been passed yet.
The funding for radiological reclamation of agricultural lands in 2003-2007 was increased to about 5
mln Hryvna/year (in previous years it was about 2-3 mln Hryvna/year). Comparatively larger share of thisfunding is now allocated for purchase and application of higher doses of fertilizers and production of
fodder with radioprotective additives. However, because the total level of funding for improvement ofradioecological situation in contaminated areas was reduced after the year 2000 to about 12 mln
Hryvna/year (while at least 20 mln Hryvna/year is needed), there are no significant improvements andcurrent activities just keep the situation under control.
One of main issues raised at the Chernobyl hearing 2008 was significant underfunding ofcommitments which should be funded according to the effective Chernobyl legislation (compare Table 4
above, which shows that only about 25 % of needed funding was indeed allocated. The situation during
recent years was either similar or worse). Many MPs stated that it is necessary to "gather political will
and pass new Chernobyl legislation instead of outdated law of 1991", but with permanent politicalinstability and populistic habits of all Ukrainian parties it is unlikely that such legislation would be passedin the near future (controversial experience of Russia in this area is also quite discouraging). This meansthat the government bureaucracy will have same opportunities to manipulate insufficient funds as it has
had before.
References
1 The Human Consequences of the Chernobyl Nuclear Accident. A Strategy for Recovery. - A reportcommissioned by UNDP and UNICEF with the support of UN-OCHA and WHO. 6 February 2002.
2 Nesterenko V.N., Yablokov A.V., Grodzinsky D.M. “Chernobyl Disaster for the Health of People
Continues (Marginalia on the UN Report of 2002). http://www.atomsafe.ru/books/gumposl/chernobl.htm
3 Chernobyl Catastrophe, V.G.Baryakhtar (chief editor). Kyiv, "Naukova Dumka", 1996. 576 p. (inUkrainian). There are numerous changes in Ukrainina edition compared to the Russian edition that was
published in 1995. In 1997 the English edition followed.
4 Chornobyl i Socium. Issues 1-8, 1995-2002. - K., Centre of social expertises and forecasts of theInstitute of sociology of NANU.
5 Web site of Transparency International: www.transparency.org
6 Web site of the Ministry of Ukraine of Emergencies - http://mns.gov.ua/chornobyl/soczahist/
7 Olshevsky V.I., Krymska L.E. Economic and ecological losses. - in Ref.3, pp.145-151.
8 Cherep V.I. et al. Construction of housing for resettlers in 1986-1987. in Ref.3, pp.90-94.
9 Sobotovich E.V., Bondarenko G.M. Analysis of efficiency of nature-protection measures. In Ref.3,
pp.351-358.
10 Doroguntsov S.I, Olshevsky V.I. Impact of consequences of Chernobyl catastrophe on the developmentof productive forces of Ukraine. In Ref.3, pp.130-135.
11 web-site of the Ministry of Ukraine of Emergencies, http://mns.gov.ua/chornobyl/soczahist/
12 Web site of the National Bank of Ukraine
http://www.bank.gov.ua/Fin_ryn/KURS_MID/kurs_96_last.htm
13 Web site of the Parliament of Ukraine, the Law of Ukraine № 1458-III of 17.02.2000
14 Sobotovich E.V., Bondarenko G.M. Analysis of efficiency of nature protection measures. In: ref. 3, pp.
351-358.
15 Prister B.S. et al. Agricultural aspects of Chernobyl disaster. In: ref.3, pp.362-371- 228 -

16 Liaschenko S.O. et al. Agricultural production on radioactively contaminated territories. In ref 3, pp.
135-143.
17 OlshevskyV.I., Ruban Yu.Ya. Evacuation and resettlement. In.Ref 3, pp. 84-90.
18 Evminova L.O., Korkach V.I., Torbin V.F.. System of health improvement holidays of population
which suffered from Chernobyl catastrophe. In Ref 3, pp.127-130.
19 Web site of the Parliament of Ukraine, Resolution of 3 February 2005 "On ... preparation for 20th
anniversary of Chernobyl disaster".
20 Popova L.M. et.al. World Community and abatement of the consequences of Chernobyl Catastrophe.
In: Ref.3, pp.158-179.
21 External evaluation of the UNESCO-Chernobyl Programme (1997)
http://www.unesco.org/ios/eng/evaluation/evaluations_completed/chernobyl.htm
22 web-site of the Ministry of Ukraine of Emergencies. http://mns.gov.ua/inter/coop/un/main.ua
23 Web-site of UNDP in Ukraine. http://www.undp.org.ua/?page=projects&projects=142424 Saenko Yu. Planetarnyi Chernobyl. Universum, 2002, N 3-6, pp.101-104 (quoted by
http://www.universum.org.ua/journal/2002/sayenk_3.html).
25 Romanenko A.Yu., Avramenko A.I., Petrychenko O.O. Organization and providing first medical
assistance to sufferers in the process of evacuation. In: Ref.3, pp. 539-543.
26 Yaroshynska A. Chernobyl: top secret. - M., "Drugie berega", 1992. p.338.

- 229 -Six of Us Left Behind with Mom
Elena Melnichenko
Vocational school student,
Dzerzhinsk, Belarus
My life since childhood has been full of sadness
and misfortune. I was in second grade when everything
happened, and since then I have witnessed the people’s
suffering and sorrow and have myself had to endure it,
together with my family.
We lived in a village called Pogonnoe when theaccident happened. Our family was very large.
I remember that April morning. It was a sunny
and warm day. The grownups hurried to work andchildren ran to school. It was clear and bright outsidewith everything green and birds singing everywhere.
New leaves were already appearing on trees. The sun
shone brighter with the coming of spring.
That day I went to school but soon I found it
unbearable to keep sitting at my desk. The other children
also felt their heads spinning and intense pain in their eyes. Everyone felt heavy and drowsy.
not understand what had happened but it was definitely out of the ordinary.

We could

Nobody could ever suspect what a fearful thing had happened not only to us but also to ourwhole village. Evacuation started after a few days. It was a horrible scene that even now makes myheart ache. Children cried and it was difficult to move the elderly who had deep emotional wounds as
they faced leaving their homes and village behind and going somewhere they did not know.
We were told to take only what was necessary for a few days. Some people did and some did
not. Some just stood there not knowing what to do since we never had such an experience. People felt
only confusion and despair. And what amounts of tears were shed!
We were taken to Gomel where we were examined for radioactivity and told that our clothes andshoes were highly contaminated. They were all taken from us to be incinerated. Then we were put into
hospital for examination. After the examination, my mother, my older brother who was in the fourth
grade, my younger brother who was then eleven months old, and I were sent to the sanatorium of the
Minsk truck factory. We did not know where my other older siblings had been sent and my motherworried very much about them. Thanks to a kind doctor, we soon found out that they were at the laborholiday camp in Shumilino, Viteb district. My father went to work as a metal-worker in Petkovich
village in the suburb of Minsk and lived in a dormitory there. When my older brother and sister wrote
how difficult it was for them without their parents and that they were living under unsanitary conditions,
my father went to see and brought them home with him.
- 230 -

However, with only one bed for the three of them, they were not able to live in the dormitory forlong. Father found a flat and soon he called us all to live together as the sanatorium where we werestaying was going to be closed down for repairs. Still we longed to go back home to Pogonnoe. But
then we were told that our village was fenced off with barbed wire and nobody lived there any longer.
The people of the village had all been relocated to many different places.
A few days later we moved again to Dzerzhinsk city. The flat had two rooms and was sharedby two families, our family of nine and another family of four. We continued to go to school. Life washard. Autumn came but there was no heating in our flat and we had to sleep on the floor without any
blankets.
Nobody understood our situation, our sadness and pain.
adults as well as children looked at us as strangers.

People approached us cautiously and

In March 1987, we were offered a house in Petkovich village in Dzerzhinsk district. We werevery pleased and happy to move to this beautiful big house and go to the Petkovich village school. Our
joy did not last long as we children began to fall ill one by one, and soon we fell behind with our studies.
We were all sent to a radiology medical clinic for examination. Since then we have been going for an
examination every year. One day my father received bad results from a blood examination. Threemonths later he died. That was in June 1988.
Misfortunes and grief followed, one after another. In the same year my grandmother and aunt
both died. It was an awful shock to us. Six of us were left with Mother. She, all by herself, had tobring us up. After all those sorrows, my mother too became subject to illness. Nevertheless, she tried
to overcome all the grief and hardship, and wrapped us with love and affection. And we tried tounderstand her to ease her sufferings and tears.
Years have passed, and our life has changed a little. The pain and sorrow that filled our hearts
has gradually abated.

“Grief of Chernobyl”, Isasiya Yana, 14 yr, Gomel region, Belarus, provided by Chernobyl Children’s Fund
- 231 -

We still live in the village of Petkovich. My sisters and my oldest brother have married. My
next oldest brother serves in army, I am studying in vocational school, and my younger brother, Volodya,
is in the third grade. Most of our fellow villagers now live in the Zhlobin district, and one of my brothers
also now works there. I longed to visit him and meet people from our home village and so my motherand I visited Kirov village in the Zhlobin district. There I met a former classmate of mine. We used to
be good friends, playing and studying together. After eight years, however, we did not recognize eachother because we had grown and changed. It was as if we were meeting for the first time and I was both
happy and upset. I was happy because I could meet my former classmates and a good friend, while I wasannoyed and hurt because I had not seen them for so many years and could not go to school together
because of the damned Chernobyl. I really did not want to leave them. But on the way home, I thoughtof my mother who is burdened with much sorrow and hardship, of many people’s lives that were ruined
and devastated by Chernobyl, and especially of innocent children who suffered and are still suffering
without knowing what has taken away their happiness and health.
No matter how many years may pass, this tragedy will still leave indelible damage in our society,in the destiny of a great many people and in the memory of the whole world.

Remember, remember, everyone,
So long as we use atomic energy,
we cannot protect peace and harmony.
Let us clean the earth from this stain
and let nothing remain from nuclear drunkenness.
(Translated into English by HASEGAWA Kaoru)<This manuscript was published in “Snowman was melted by our tears: Chernobyl for children” (1995)
edited by Chernobyl Kyushu （http://www.cher9.to/） >- 232 -

Activities of Chernobyl Children's Fund, Japan
MUKAI Yukiko
Chernobyl Children's Fund, Japan
Shirogane-cho 29, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo, 162-0816 Japan: http://www.smn.co.jp/cherno/
Chernobyl Children's Fund, Japan (CCFJ) was established in1991 by HIROKAWA, Ryuichi, a photojournalist, senioradvisor of CCFJ at present. Since its establishment CCFJ has
been actively supporting people of the stricken areas: donating
medicines and medical equipments, supporting theadministration of sanatoriums and local relief organizations,giving financial aid for children's recuperation and the
medical care of children having had thyroid gland operations.
In 2006, twenty years after the accident, CCFJ has carried onsome projects. We would like to impart information about
these efforts, while referring, simultaneously, to activities of
CCFJ in the past and future.
 Chernobyl Photo Exhibition in Belarus
As part of the 20-year campaign we organized and held aphoto exhibition in Belarus in 2006. Chernobyl is becoming amere disastrous past even in Belarus as well as in Japan. Or
top government officials expect that the Chernobyl disaster
Mother and child in the contaminatedarea. Photo by Hirokawa.
should be over completely. How far can people in Belarus
know about the accident when they are not given enoughinformation? It is quite dubious. Hirokawa as a photojournalist had an ambition to make known thereality of Chernobyl by exhibiting his photos to doctors, specialists and all people concerned withhospitals.
In April 2006, we exhibited the photos at the venue of the International Conferences held in Minsk and
Gomel. Having made an official proposal to theconference office for the exhibition, our negotiation
with the office began around June 2005. After
number of twists and turns, it was realized thanks tomuch help of the volunteers. The exhibition washeld for five days in Minsk and two days in Gomel.
Many people came to see it during the period:
participants of the conference from and out of
Belarus, members of citizen's organizations fromvarious countries as well as ordinary citizens. It was
especially impressive to see school students, led bytheir teachers, watching the photos so eagerly.
People of Belarus were moved, above all, by the Volunteer students at the photo exhibition in Minsk.
- 233 -

fact it is all Japanese who took such touching photos and managed the exhibition.
 Fund-Raising Activities in Japan
Chernobyl Aid Calendar
Since 1996 CCFJ has been making aid calendars. This project of Hirokawa's photo calendar was intended
to make known the state of the stricken areas, and at the same time to raise the fund from its profit. The
2006 calendar was entitled '20- years old stigma of Chernobyl'. We carefully selected photos which
Hirokawa took during his visits to the stricken areas for over many years and the calendar received a highreputation.
Aid Concerts
All the events we organize are entitled with the word 'aid' on top, because they are not mere events but
always assigned to be fund raising campaigns. Every year on/around 26 April we organize aid concerts.
This year we planned the concerts of Ukrainian singers Natasha and her sister Katya. We managed to holdnine concerts all over the country with the help of citizen's organizations. Many audience came to theperformances of Natasha and Katya with the collaboration of a bayan player, enjoyed Ukrainian
traditional music and had chances to think about Chernobyl and relief activities.
In 1996, to mark the 10th anniversary of the accident, we invited 'Chervona Kalina', a children's traditionalmusic group, from Ukraine. They performed in various places in Japan. Natasha was a member of thisgroup then. This music group was born from a music teacher's proposal in Pripyat, now a ruined city,
who appealed to the children of evacuated families to form a music group, hoping the children would
recover their health and hopes and expectations through their music activities. The group is still active,
and children are practicing to sing and dance. In April 2006 they performed a stage in Kiev, together withprevious members of the group who are already grown ups.
As for the 20th anniversary campaign, we also organized a summer concert. It was another fund raisingconcert with collaboration of Belarussian ballet and Ukrainian songs joined with a Japanese citizen's choir.
All our activities are greatly supported by volunteers. Without their dedicated participation, we have notbeen able to continue to hold aid concerts for these years. They ask shops around the concert halls to put

Rehearsal of Chervona Kalina. Photo by Hirokawa.

- 234 -

on posters, distributing leaflets to make known the concerts and so on.
Money collected through concerts is all used for children of stricken areas, for the purchase of medicines
and the payment for recuperation.
CCFJ News “Chernobyl Children”
We issue a quarterly newsletter, a circulation of about three thousand, giving financial reports to donors.
The reports mention the state of donation, the uses of the money, conditions and states of children ofstricken areas, events etc. All the operations for issuing newsletter: editing, printing, posting, are done byvolunteers and the staffs of CCFJ office.
CCFJ news from 1997 can be also read in our homepage [http://www.co.jp/cherno/index.html]
Chernobyl Photo Exhibition and Children's Art Exhibition'Photo exhibitions' and 'art exhibitions' play the biggest role in our publicity activity. The photos selected
for the exhibition were taken by Hirokawa during his
visits to stricken areas that count nearly fifty times. A
sister organization, Supporting Group of HIROKAWA,
Ryuichi Nonnuclear Peace Photo Exhibition possesses
and manages about one hundred pieces of exhibition
photos and pictures each.
In 1996, ten years after the accident, an Ukrainianorganization appealed to children over the country for
pictures about the Chernobyl accident. A selection of
those children's pictures was sent to CCFJ as a gift.
Another selection of children's pictures was sent from a
Belarussian organization, too. We have chosen fromthese selections one hundred pictures to lend out for
exhibitions. Later they were gathered into a book ofchildren's pictures and poems 'Ikiteitai’('We want to live!'
1998, Edited by CCFJ, issued by Shogakukan) which has
been read by many people.
Hurt by the atom from Chernobyl.

These photos and pictures have been exhibited at various
By Orga Sokolovskaya, 14yr.
places such as CCFJ organized charity concert halls,
citizen's organizations, city halls, schools, kindergartens, churches and temples.

 Relief Activities in Stricken Areas
In the beginning of its foundation CCFJ tried to do any support as much as possible. Eventually it turned
to focus on the aid for children having had thyroid gland operations. Those children having had their
thyroid removed by operation would no longer be able to produce thyroid hormone; consequently, they
have to take hormone drugs throughout their lives. They also have to take vitamins and calcium tablets atthe same time. Moreover, the children are facing the risk of breaking out of some other disease or
spreading cancer to other organs. Some children must have many operations, and even more, many years
after operations they might have to suffer from various symptoms: headache, heartache, exhaustion, etc.
Therefore, it is necessary to support these children by providing them with medicines and occasions for- 235 -

recuperation.
Support for the Children Having Had Thyroid Gland Operations and Support for Young Families< Special recuperation >CCFJ staffs with several volunteers have been visiting the stricken areas in summer to join the special
summer recuperation at the sanatorium 'South'(Yuzhanka) in Ukraine and the sanatorium 'Hope21'(Nadezda XXI vek) in Belarus. This special summer recuperation, having been held since 1996, isplanned for the children having had thyroid operations, and CCFJ bears the total recuperation charge.
However, as the situation has been changing, we now also accept elder age groups and children gone
through other operations than thyroid. About fifty to eighty children in Ukraine and about seventy to one
hundred fifty children in Belarus each year joined the recuperation.
< Foster parents system >Originally it was the system to support the children gone through thyroid gland operations by sending fifty
dollars per month to each child for the period of at least two years. This system, too, has been changed
from supporting only 'the children having had thyroid operations' to 'the children of families in need andvictims of Chernobyl'. A hundred children at present are supported by this system and two hundred
children in total have had this aid.
< Scholarship system >This system of scholarship is addressed tothe children having had thyroid operations.
We send fifty dollars per month to each
student, the same amount as foster children
aid, to support until their graduation fromcolleges. Presently fifty students arereceiving the scholarship and eighty
students in total have been granted with thisscholarship.
< Support for young families >We have been supporting children who had
thyroid gland operations mainly throughabove-mentioned three systems. Most
children we have been supporting have now
grown up and it is a time we should evenconsider the renaming of our organization.
We have been discussing the matter thesefew years. Considering the present situation
we have come to a conclusion that weshould continue to support those grownups’
children having had thyroid operations who
are now facing such problems as marriage
and birth. We think continuous support isimportant for them. If one of the parents
has thyroid disease and their baby has

Sanatorium “Hope 21” in Belarus

Sanatorium “South” in Ukraine- 236 -

health problems, it is impossible for them to work fully as a healthy person even though they need money
for medical treatments. CCFJ thus decided to support actively such young families with babies. At
present we send fifty dollars per month to twenty four families.
In 2006, a couple who both had thyroid operations, experienced recuperations and received medicineswith support of CCFJ have got married. It is happy news and we would like to watch over them fondly.
Supporting Local Relief Organizations and Management of Sanatoriums
We have been supporting the running expenses of the Sanatorium 'Hope 21' which has a function ofschool as well. It was built by Belarusian government in cooperation with a German citizen's organization.
CCFJ has been collaborating to support the sanatorium from the beginning of its foundation. At first we
mainly donated equipments needed for the sanatorium. Now we 100% support the special recuperation
expenses and part of the rotational recuperation expenses of children who join in school class units fromcontaminated areas.
The amount of the backup money from Belarusian government and the donation from Germany are
gradually decreasing. However, this is the best place for children for recuperation where they can also
study and have safe food. Moreover, it is a beautiful place surrounded by forests and a lake and it canaccommodate three hundred children at the same time.
In Ukraine we support the sanatorium 'South' located by the coast of the Black Sea. The sanatorium ismanaged by a support group in Kiev, 'the Help for Families of Chernobyl', and run only during summer.
From the end of June to the end of August fifty children at a time recuperate in rotation. With cooperationof the local support group and hospitals CCFJ choose the children, attend the recuperation with them andproceed to send doctors to the sanatorium. The special recuperation for the children who had thyroid
operations is also held there.
Since the summer 1996 we have been organizing a 'Japanese Week' at 'Hope 21'in Belarus and at 'South'in Ukraine during the special recuperation. Japanese volunteers join to carry out this special week. In 1998
eighteen volunteers flew from Japan to introduce Japanese culture and had enjoyable time with children.
CCFJ is helping the activities of local relief groups. We support the salary of the staffs, the office rents
and communication expenses. We have sent them office equipments such as fax and personal computers.
Through the groups we also send medicines to the children having had thyroid operations.
 Relief Activity in the Future
CCFJ have been supporting various local relief groups, some with big budget and others with small. We
are also supporting some groups which were found during Hirokawa's visits to stricken areas to be in needof emergent help. Many relief groups and hospitals are receiving our help. All our supporting activities arealways arranged through the local groups including personal support to foster children.
Unfortunately the amount of the donation has been on decline since 2001. Twenty years have passed fromthe Chernobyl accident. There are many people in the world suffering from wars, floods, earthquakes,
tsunamis and other natural disasters. We must give priority to people who need the most urgent help. We
will not forget to turn our eyes to the world and, at the same time, we will never turn our back to thevictims of Chernobyl. We are going to continue our best efforts to support them.
(Translated into English by HASEGAWA Kaoru)- 237 -

NANOHANA Project at Contaminated Area by Bio-remedy with Rapeseed
Plant in Narodichi, Ukraine:
A Challenge of Chernobyl-Chubu Association
TOMURA Kyoko
Chernobyl-Chubu Association
Rakuen-cho 137 1-10, Shouwa-ku, Nagoya, 466-0822 Japan: http://www.debug.co.jp/ukraine/On April 13, 2007 we sowed seeds of NANOHANA (rapeseed) in the farmland at the Narodichi
district. After the Chernobyl Accident, the land has been contaminated with radiation and has not beencultivated for 21 years. We imagined scenes that the rapeseeds were growing, bees were gathering aroundthe flowers and the aroma of the yellow blossoms and sweet honey were everywhere. This was the
beginning of our NANOHANA project to revive the Narodichi district.
Activities of our NGO, Chernobyl-Chubu Association
The local residents of Nagoya, Chubu District, Japan founded our organization, Chernobyl-Chubu
Association to Help Chernobyl in April 1990. The aim of the organization was to provide relief for thevictims of the Chernobyl accident. We sent a letter to democratic newspapers and magazine publishers in
USSR (the then) inquiring about relief operation. Soon we received a reply from Ukrainian NGO, Fund
Resettlement (the present Fund Chernobyl-Hostage), explaining that its members were journalists in
Zhytomyr, Ukraine. In the letter, we offered our help to cooperate with them to help the victims.
In August 1990 our delegation brought relief goods to the disaster area. It was our first relief
activity and relief goods as Japanese NGO for the victims of the Chernobyl accident. Since then we have

Rapeseed flower in Narodichi. June 2007
- 238 -

been continuing our relief activity for the victims in Zhytomyr, the area of Ukraine where the worst
damage occurred.
At the beginning of our activities we had no idea how we could help them. We decided to sendbasic relief goods such as powder milk for babies, disposable syringes, and radiation instruments. We also
sent a large quantity of Japanese calendars that were collected from Japanese citizens to raise funds so thatthe counterpart organization could purchase houses for the resettlement of victims to safe areas. Then wesent large amounts of medicine, incubators for newborn babies, as well as medical machinery requested by
the local hospitals in Zhytomyr.
We have been also supporting several NGOs in Ukraine. One of them is the Fund ChernobylFireman, an organization of liquidators who were engaged in operations coping with radioactivity justafter the Chernobyl accident. They are helping incumbent firemen who are working in contaminated areas.
Others are funds for disabled person due to liquidation works of the accident. The Milk- Campaign raises
funds in order to send powdered milk to local hospitals. We believe that mental support is also a fruitfulrelief for suffering people, so we send cards every year at New Year and Ukrainian Christmas, which iscalled Card-Campaign.
Narodichi district, area of the highest contamination
Province Zhytomyr is located on the west side of Chernobyl NPP. 42 per cent of its land has been
affected by radiation, 440,000 people suffered, and 9 out of 22 districts in the province were contaminated.
The northern area of the province suffered especially high levels of radioactive contamination.
Based on the Ukrainian law, the level of contamination is classified into 4 categories: the 1st
zone-prohibition entry zone (40 Ci/km2 of Cesium-137 and above), the 2nd zone-obligatory resettledzone(15~40 Ci/km2), the 3rd zone-optional resettled zone(5~15 Ci/km2), and the 4th zone-radioactive
control fortified zone (1~5 Ci/km2). The Narodichi district is divided into two parts with contamination:

Contamination map of Narodichi- 239 -

the northern area where the central town of Narodichi is located and the southern area where the Bazal
village is located. Several other small villages surround the two areas. According to the map of radioactive
contamination, we can see that the most severely contaminated area was the central part of the district
where people cannot live.
Formerly there were 84 towns and villages in this district and now there are only 64. Before theaccident there were 27,000 inhabitants in Narodichi district, but after the accident about half of them were
resettled in non-contaminated areas. Currently, 10,300 people remain even though the circumstances ofradioactive contamination. Almost all areas belong to the 2nd and the 3rd zone where people are better
off resettling in other locations. Since the disintegration of USSR and the independence of Ukraine, theeconomic situation continues to be difficult. The population consists of 1,987 children, 4,330 pensioners
and 2,374 working people, while 1,250 people are working outside the district.
Farming is the economic foundation of this district since before the accident. Today living
conditions are difficult as the population suffer from health problems caused by radiation exposure andhigh unemployment. These conditions have led to a dysfunction of social structure. Inattention to thesesystemic problems has left people feeling of hopeless about their future.
People continue to suffer from internal radiation exposure due to the high level of radiative
contamination in food sources. Subsistence farming produces most of the food that nourishes the
Narodichi population. In addition to these cultivated food sources of crops, milk and domesticated animals,
the Narodichi also gather wild mushrooms and berries from the woodlands surrounding the community.
The high levels of radiation found in these local sources of food continue to cause internal radiation of thepeople. Substituting this local supply of food with cleaner food would entail a radical change in traditional
eating habits and culture. As a part of its research efforts, the local government is measuring the level ofradioactivity found in the foods that people occasionally bring into the regional health center laboratory.
According to the heads of local government and local hospital, researchers discovered high internal
cesium readings by measuring the radiation levels in these patients’ environments, including farmland,
firewood, and foods, etc. In the last 10 years (1996 – 2006), morbidity of this district has risen by a factor

Ruined houses and goats- 240 -

of two and the incidence of cancer is increasing 1.5 times faster than the decade before the accident.
Tuberculosis also remains at a high level due to continued poverty. Anxiously, no children is healthy, they
have some health problems.
Our assistance in Narodichi district includes repairing the hospital boiler, water infrastructure in a
few villages and so forth. We have also sent medical equipment to hospitals. Despite our efforts, we could
not help realizing that there remained a chain of problems: Radioactive contamination Æ Internal
exposure Æ Radiation injury Æ PovertyÆ Need of aid. Therefore, we thought of a novel approach that
could cope with the principal roots of these problems.
The purpose of the project
The principal concept of this project is to use bio-remedial technology to reduce the number ofpatients in Narodichi suffering from radiation exposure. This technology depends on cultivating oilseed
rape plants that can absorb cesium-137 and strontium-90 from the contaminated soil. The products ofrapeseed and biomass are used for making bio-energy useful to agricultural and other purposes.
This project has been developed as a collaborative work of Chernobyl-Chubu Association with six
Ukraine organizations: Narodichi Local Administration, The Local Assembly, National Agro-Ecological
University in Zhytomyr, Narodichi Regional Specialized Station of the Land control in the Obligatory
Resettling and Chernobyl Hostage Fund.
The first step to the land rehabilitation
Our job is to remove radioactive materials from the contaminated soil by growing rapeseeds.
Rapeseed absorbs cesium-137 and strontium-90 from soil, but does not distinguish them from potassium(kalium) and calcium because of their similar nature. We can remove radiation gradually. The following
explains the process of cleaning up the land.
First, we grow rapeseeds in Stare Sharne village located at the east end of Narodichi town,
categorized 2nd zone (Cs-137 10~15 Ci/km2). One of our members, a scientist of ecological-biology,
collaborates with researchers at National Agro-Ecological University. During the first year of the project,
we grew rapeseed dividing the field into 4 parcels according to the soil conditions and the amount of used
fertilizer. We found that cesium-137 was accumulated mostly in seed; while strontium-90 was mostly instalks. We are preparing a detailed report on this work.
Radioactivity concentration in different section
Root
Stalk
Hull
Seed
Cs137
190
121.9
148.8
570.
Sr90
197
289
220.7
153
Mean on parcel of full fertilizer unit: Bq/kg
The work was shared as follows; the researchers of the Agro-Ecological University measured andanalyzed radioactivity in the field and rapeseeds, and the agricultural technologists and workers of
Narodichi Regional Specialized Station were responsible for growing rapeseed. They have to protect
themselves by the guard manual to prevent exposure to radiation.
The second step: producing bio diesel fuelAfter the first harvest, we planed to produce bio diesel fuel (BDF) from oil seeds. Our research data
showed that the extracted oil was not contaminated with radioactivity, therefore, we can convert- 241 -

the oil to bio diesel fuel like the economic policy in Germany and other European countries. We
believe the use of fuel will be very effective for the local residents in the region because it could be
used for the agricultural tractors, cars, and public transportations like school buses.
In the meantime, a Japanese company, MSD Co., Ltd. in Tendo city, constructed a bio diesel fuelplant in Yamagata prefecture. The company showed a great interest in our project and decided to help us.
However, we are worried about several problems. For example, it will be a long journey from Japan to theport Odessa, Ukraine, sending the BDF plants and other relief goods by ship might meet with any accident.
Also, we hope to pass through the law and customs of Ukraine without taxation as a relief.
Producing Biogas
The other purpose is to produce biogas. After producing BDF, there will remain oil cake andbotanical mass. These materials can be used to make biogas such as methane for fuel or electricity, which
will be self-sufficient energy in the district. After producing biogas, we have to deal with the residue that
contains a hint of radioactivity as radioactive waste. The experimental plant for that purpose was alreadydesigned in Japan by one of our members, a specialist of bio-energy. This is a starting stage before
constructing a plant with our colleagues in Narodichi. Because very few biogas plants exist in Ukraine;
there are a lot of problems we have to tackle with.
If the project progresses well, it will contribute to the regional economy, not only the agriculture
section but also the industry in general. It will be obviously good also for the ecological problems such as
global warming. We aim to make good use of bio energy for the victims to improve their lives. We should
strive to develop our research and discuss with the local people how to use the new energy. We are going
to continue this project for 5 years. Then after the project the equipments will be passed to the Ukrainianside.
Social and Economical Reconstruction and Development Programs of Narodichi District
The local economy in Narodichi district greatly depends on the subsidy from the central
government. There is a program “Social and Economical Reconstruction and Development Program of
Narodichi District” to improve the self-governing economic capabilities. The crucial problems are stable
employment, improving and reconstructing the lives of the people.
It is proposed that the contaminated land should be divided into 3 areas; preservation area, forest–land, and farmland by radioactive contamination. In the farmland, new job opportunities will be createdfor growing rapeseed and producing BDF. Creating new economic opportunities is not our main purpose,but we are heading, as a result, toward the same direction of improving the peoples’ lives.
The problems about social infrastructure are to repair of schools, kinder gardens, clinics, gas
equipment in villages and so on. They are problems partly once we have supported. The head of
administration said, “We are not unhappy and not poor in this district basically.” They have some ideas
and plans by themselves, but they are appealing for economic assistance for the resource. The stagnationof this district for these 21 years did not turn around, so it is difficult to do everything at a burst.
We hope that our project will become a model for the step to revival of Narodichi district. We
believe it will be able to open up a hopeful vista in the future for the local administration as well as for thepeople.
With the same dream of revival in Narodichi district
So far we, Chernobyl-Chubu Association have supported the people in Narodichi by the ways as
we thought better at the time. So our organization was occasionally requested for our activities like a- 242 -

Farmer family and horse carriage

relief store. At the same time, we could not have a good grasp of the local situation nor the proper processof assistance. Frankly speaking, we experienced stresses with counterparts. Sometimes our relationshipwas not understandable each other. Recently, partly because of business recession, donation fromJapanese citizen to our finance is decreasing. It brought us relying on official subsidies to maintain our
activities. This tendency is not good both for our mentality and financial balance for retaining ouridentity and autonomy as a non-governmental organization.
In such a situation, the NANOHANA project is now attracting interests of many Japanese citizens
who want to share the same dream of the project reviving Narodichi district as well as helping the people
to find hope in their future.
The project is going on for 5 years, and it needs finance about 43,000 thousands yen. We could
already collected half of it as donations from many citizens and as a subsidy from Japan Postal Office in2007. But we have to continue raising donation, always appealing to people to share the dream of
NANOHANA project. Instead of the current scenery with sparse people on the street and lots of ruinedhouses, wee wish to revive Narodichi district as it was in the previous days where people come and go
lively and children are cheerfully smiling.

- 243 -

Episodes from My Experience in Belarus
KITAJIMA Rie
The Art Project of Chernobyl
M-box 95, Tokyo Voluntary Action Center, Kaguragashi 1-1, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo, 162-0823 Japan

Prologue
The damage of Chernobyl is always described through the collection of different numerical data such as thenumber of migration, the number of children diagnosed with thyroid cancer and so forth. Systematically, it isessential to keep collecting, analyzing and reassessing these numbers. However, it is merely one side of thedamage. It is necessary to try and look at Chernobyl with a more extensive perspective, otherwise we could
never really understand the damages brought by the Chernobyl’s disaster.
When I visited Belarus, I stayed at a health resort for Chernobyl’s children in Minsk. Occasionally I met
some people from foreign NGOs who visited the facility for few days for the purpose of investigations on thecircumstances of these children. Afterwards and similar with all previous visitors they simply were satisfied
with expressing the persisting sufferance of these children from the effect of radiation and then superficiallythey described the beauty of children’s eyes. This behavior reminded me of my own experience when I first
visited Belarus. I can say that our attitudes were exactly alike. I also had a preconception in my mind of what
Chernobyl should look like and I only was able to see things from a unilateral perspective. Therefore I could
not see or deal in depth with this disaster. I believe at that time it was a mere confirmation of my own
expectations.
Since 2004 I have visited Belarus for three times and in total I have spent in Belarus more than half ayear. Since I have a passion for photography, I decided to teach the children staying at the facility how to takepictures. I also visited contaminated areas, met the local people, performed some interviews and took many
photos. Hereinafter are three selected episodes that I decided to share from my own experience while I was

A scene of a classroom. At a school in Vetka, Gomel province.
- 244 -

staying in Belarus 20 years following the Chernobyl accident.
Episode 1: Children
There were some impressive places while I visited schools in Belarus. One is a school in Vetka village in
Gomel provinces where many villages of the neighborhood became deserted. A teacher said before I entered aclassroom "In the next moment, you’ll see what the nuclear accident brought to this region in 20 years.”
It was a familiar scene that the electricity of the schoolhouse went off. But, I felt the classroom was themost cavernous in any schools I had seen. The number of children was extremely little compared with the sizeof the classroom. I embraced them with talking and looking into the eyes of the children who cannot hide theircuriosity and shyness; while they touched their hair and shoulders and walked between the desks.
I noticed through touching each of the children that there were children, who have not set their
viewpoints, who had language-disorder issues, or squirmed and kept moving their hands and foot. Suchchildren came a lot to the institution where I stayed in. The most anxious thing for me was the boy who stared
me with kind shy eyes, showing a wrinkly face like an old man because of his dry skin. The symptom of theboy was the same as a 17 years developmentally-disabled girl who is a member of family I stayed in. I had
never seen a child who has such a face in Japanand Belarus either. I met two children of the same
symptom in this small village.
These children live quietly without being
viewed as a victim by the damage of the problem
of Chernobyl. Once again, the number of thesechildren is not included in the data telling
Chernobyl. Nobody can delineate "where is thedamage area" because the damage is too wide, toolong and too deep.
After leaving the classroom, the teacher said,
A disabled boy at school (see txt).
"All the things which you saw now are reality to
be accepted and the product of that accident.
Almost all children became weak and they can easily catch a cold. The developmental disorder stands out
besides abnormal blood and thyroid, too. We were proud this village had breaded a lot of excellent children
before. But recently, it was the finest record that I gave a student a silver medal* five years ago. We are very
proud of our school which started from teaching at a church in 1888 and having a history of more than 100
years. However, now we have only 160 students, while there were about 800 students in 1985 to 1986.
Because a lot of villagers migrated to Minsk and Gomel since the accident happened." Every word of hers
resonated deeply with me.
※ In the schools of Belarus, a gold medal is presented when all subjects are best A, and a silver medal is given
when a result is close to a gold medal.

I felt often in disaster-stricken villages that it’s difficult for the people to find a piece of hope for the
future, although it’s easy to find a piece of happy memory from the past. Children should be hope to the future
for a region of Belarus where various things are taken over from adults to children routinely, and continued.
Though time goes by, adults are looking back on their past with bright eyes how the classrooms were full ofstudents in happy harmonious.

- 245 -

Sad time is going by in disaster-stricken villages. A flow of time seems to have stopped from the day 20
years ago without looking the bright hope of a development of the village and continuation.
Episode 2: Story of Natalia
Natalia is a 55-years old woman, who living in Rechitsa, one of the contaminated areas. She felt unease withher body following the 1986 accident. She was always irritated and feeling dizzy all the time. After her visit to
the village doctor and following his examination, the doctor informed her that everything looked normal
because the size of her thyroid was constant. Then he prescribed for her a medicine that apparently was notworking because she lost more than 20 kg in 15years and she did not feel any improvement in her healthsituation.
In 2001, she asked the village doctor if he could refer her to a more advanced and specialized hospital in
Gomel. She felt that her symptoms were resulting from the exposure of the radiation of Chernobyl andtherefore she wanted to hear another opinion and receive further examination. Accordingly she went to awell-equipped hospital in Gomel and she took more examinations. The doctor at this hospital has confirmed
her fears and it turned out that her thyroid was damaged by the radiation. Fortunately after taking the medicine
that was prescribed by the hospital doctor, her situation got much better.
During our conversation she said: “20 years have passed and still our medical capacity in the village isprimitive. Their knowledge of the damage caused by radioactivity is still weak. I do feel nothing has changed
since the occurrence of the disaster.”
After I explained for her how radiation could affect the human body, she was surprised. According to her,
nobody raised their awareness and informed them about these influences. She was stunned by the fact that aforeigner who was visiting from Japan could explain many things that she could not learn from her everyday
life in Belarus. She said that even the doctors did not feel the urge to communicate and clearly explain to her
what was happening with her thyroid. She felt that even 15 years after the accident the village doctor could
not locate the real problem and provide the sufficient medical care.
I do believe that there are many other misdiagnoses like Natalia’s case. Unfortunately these cases are notincluded in the Chernobyl’s conventional way of performing the research study. Actually we are unaware
about their situation and therefore we do not include these victims in the investigation. Simply they are notcounted. There could be many others who are still suffering from a misdiagnosis and were not as lucky as
Natalia. Therefore we need to perform
more investigation to locate these people
and to provide them with the necessary
assistance and awareness. It is our duty tohelp each other, and we need to do more.
Episode 3: Ignorance
Human body is continuously affected byradiation if people keep living incontaminated area. That is why, they areincluded as victims generally. However,during I stay in contaminated area, I found
the fact that many people who live there
are not realized that they themselves areWith Natalia- 246 -

one of victims.
In their understanding, they categorized only the people as victims who has physical symptom. They
believed that huge amount of radiation affected them at the time, and it is the all result what was brought by
Chernobyl I was very surprised because no one did not expect that the problem would come out gradually as
symptom.
In some villages, people also told me that their village has been entered into the first stages of recovery
program. That is, some of new construction would be started soon by government: water service, sewage
system, and communal facilities etc. People dreamed the life with these stuff and they seemed to be so excited.
In fact, many people said to me “After the accident, many people left our village. But in few years, the life inthis village can be more convenient and then it brings the people back. It means, we can overcome the tragic
accident”
Radiation is, by no means to be caught up by five senses, because it works without any smell, taste,colour and so on. On the other hand, improvement of living by facilities is easy to see. As a result, local
people have “hope” for bright future with improvement stuff making their daily life better.
Local people still does not have correct information about radiation even 20 years after the accident.
When their life will get more convenient and people back to their village as their wish, I am afraid it would
make a situation producing new victims.
Conclusion :For the past 20 years the approach in analyzing the damage of the Chernobyl disaster always depended on
numerical data. This methodology is understandable, but it is important to recognize that it does not represent
the whole picture of the disaster.
Now more than ever we are in need of innovative ideas to resolve problems that are still persisting andcould not be detected through the conventional ways. I think it is necessary at first to try to look at the
problem from a wider perspective and with more depth.

With my pupils and interpreter.
- 247 -

Citizens’ Action in Response to Radiation from Chernobyl
WATANABE Mikiko
Citizens’ Nuclear Information Center
Sumiyoshi-cho 8-5, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo, 162-0065 Japan: http://cnic.jp/

Over twenty years have passed since the nuclear accident at Chernobyl. As a result of this
accident, the world, in particular Europe, moved towards a phase out of nuclear energy. In Japan too, theChernobyl accident led many citizens to face up to the problems associated with nuclear power plants anda wide variety of campaigns sprang up around the country.
However, Japan continues to promote nuclear power. At the time of the accident, there were 32
nuclear power reactors in operation in Japan. There are now 55 reactors and the Rokkasho Reprocessing
Plant is about to begin commercial operations.
Radiation from Chernobyl Reached JapanThe Chernobyl accident occurred on 26 April 1986. About a week later, radioactivity reached Japan, which
is 8,000 kilometers away from Chernobyl. Rain which fell at the beginning of May was far moreradioactively contaminated than expected. Quite high levels of radioactivity were recorded in leafy
vegetables, fresh tea, milk from cows which ate contaminated grass, and so on.
The Ministry of Health and Welfare set a provisional standard of 370 Bq/kg (combined
Cesium-134 and Cesium-137) for imported food and established an inspection system. Beginning withhazelnuts from Turkey, which in January 1987 recorded 520~980 Bq/kg, food from Europe exceeding theprovisional standard kept turning up.
The Japanese government and the Ministry of Health and Welfare announced that “Japan’s foodis safe and imported food is being strictly controlled”. Nevertheless, citizens’ anxiety about contaminatedfood rose abruptly. Citizens’ Nuclear Information Center (CNIC) received dozens of phone calls each dayfrom people asking questions such as, “Which foods are contaminated?” or “What are the health effects?”
In Japan, many people who discovered that the spaghetti that they ate and the tea that they drank wascontaminated due to the Chernobyl accident faced up to the problems of nuclear energy for the first time.
Until then, most city residents saw nuclear energy as someone else’s problem, but in response to theChernobyl accident many people began to take an interest in nuclear power as an issue of relevance tothem personally.
CNIC’s Activities
Through its newsletter, CNIC published the state of contamination throughout Europe and data obtained
through measurements by Kyoto University Research Reactor Institute’s Nuclear Safety Research Groupand university researchers who supported a nuclear phase out. It also responded to inquiries from citizens
and the media.
In April 1987 CNIC published a booklet, which covered the basics of nuclear power andradiation and also provided measurement data and information about the foods and regions for which- 248 -

precautions should be taken. The title of the booklet translates as “Fallout on the Dinner Table – FoodContamination from the Chernobyl Accident”. The impact of the booklet far exceeded expectations. In
response to popular demand new information was provided in further publications: Part 2 (August 1987)
and Part 3 (December 1988) of the same booklet and “Fallout on the Dinner Table” by Takagi Jinzaburoand Watanabe Mikiko (Kodansha Gendai Shinsho series, 1990).
In October 1987 a symposium on food contamination was held under the title “How to Protect
the Dinner Table from Fallout”. In the same month, Nuke Info Tokyo, a bimonthly English newsletterfrom the Japanese movement, was launched with a view to actively disseminating information from Japanto the rest of the world. Through these initiatives, the range of CNIC’s activities and its support base
expanded greatly.
Anti-Nuke Delivery Shop
Taking a hint from the Dutch grass roots “Science Shop”, Takagi Jinzaburo suggested starting an“Anti-Nuke Delivery Shop”. This started from the desire of non-expert citizens to communicate theproblems of nuclear power in their own words.
It began in Tokyo in January 1987 with an “Anti-Nuke Delivery Shop” to train teachers with aaccurate knowledge of nuclear power. After receiving 10 training lessons, in response to requests fromcitizens groups around Japan, the “shop keepers” began explaining the problems of nuclear power andcommunicating their concerns in their own words at study sessions around the country. Requests arrived
for sessions ranging from study meetings for a few people to lectures for over a hundred people. A wide
range of topics were covered, including food contamination, the structure of nuclear power plants andtheir dangers, accidents, energy and so on.
Training courses were also held in Hokkaido, Aomori, Chiba, Kanagawa, Nara and “Anti-Nuke
Delivery Shops” sprang up throughout Japan.
Citizens’ Radiation Measurement in Japan
Citizens were very anxious, because Japan is very dependent on food imports. Incidents of shipments ofhazelnuts, herbs and spices, mushrooms, etc which had to be returned continued to arise and there werealso incidents of imported food processed in third countries that was contaminated with European
ingredients.
Stimulated by activities in Europe, there were calls in Japan for an independent center tomeasure radioactivity. In September 1987 CNIC installed a radiation measurement device (Sodium Iodine
Scintillation Counter) and began taking measurements where the demand was greatest, for example baby
milk powder and spaghetti. In November, the device was moved from CNIC and an independent center(“Radioactively Contaminated Food Measurement Center” - Director Fujita Yuko) began taking orders formeasurement. The Center had a management committee comprising staff involved in taking measurements,
citizens, experts, consumers groups and cooperatives.
At the same time, several other organizations independently installed radioactivity measuring
equipment and began carrying out measurements for citizens. In Aomori, members of the students’ group“Environmental Medicine Research Group” at Hirosaki University Graduate School began taking
measurements. “Hamamatsu Radioactively Contaminated Food Measurement Center” and the- 249 -

Tokyo-based Tampopo House radioactive contamination measurement team began in the middle ofDecember 1988, while in Osaka the “Committee to Measure Radioactivity in Food” began in April 1989
in the Environmental Monitoring Research Center.
Also, there was an active movement all over Japan to encourage local governments to install not
thrown away. It was turned into animal feed, so it will return as contaminated cows milk and meat. It will
also make its way to third world countries, so a strict international information and monitoring network isneeded to prevent this.
What is the Value of Continued Measurement?
As time went by the trend was for measurements not to detect any radioactivity. Citizens became lessinterested as contamination of imported food was brought under control and requests for measurement
became fewer. We faced the problem of how to maintain testing activity. There was a fundamental debate
about the purpose of continuing measurements. However, we learnt that it is strict monitoring activities by
citizens that brings pressure to bear on the government and companies.
Chernobyl showed us that one accident at a single nuclear power plant can spread radioactivity
throughout the whole world and leave lasting effects. Some people said that they felt despair when they
thought of the problems for the next generation of children facing contamination of food and of theenvironment. On the other hand, there were also many people who found hope in the friendships formed
through their activism.
Measurement equipment is now approaching its use by date. In some places lack of funds toreplace equipment and the failure of local governments to provide continuing funding have forced
programs to close. Many groups are involved in numerous local issues besides measurement. Along withyounger people, they continue their steady efforts, screening films and taking up themes closely connected
to daily life such as sustainable energy, nuclear disaster prevention, etc..
The Criminality of Japan’s Radiation Effects Researchers
Five years after the accident, in May 1991, the IAEA’s International Advisory Committee concluded,“There were no disorders directly attributable to radiation exposure, but the survey did find many healthdisorders. The accident affected people psychologically, and also worsened the socioeconomic situation(the report suggests that these were related to the health disorders).” It also dismissed the increase in childthyroid cancer which had begun to appear as follows: “There are no definite pathological records ofincreases in thyroid cancers caused by radiation,….”
We at CNIC promptly criticized the report in a special 15 June 1991 edition of our Japanese
newsletter and in a special edition English newsletter of our entitled ‘Erasure of the Chernobyl Accident is
Unforgivable, A Critique of the IAEA/ IAC (International Advisory Committee) “Assessment ofRadiological Consequences and Evaluation of Measures for the Chernobyl Accident ”(May 21, 1991) ’ .
We also sent our protest overseas through our English newsletter, Nuke Info Tokyo. An article in
the July/August 1991 (No. 24) reported on a demand by anti-nuclear groups’ for the cancellation of an
IAEA seminar held in Tokyo in relation to the report.
The chairperson of this Committee was Shigematsu Itsuzo, who at the time was head of the
Radiation Effects Research Foundation in Hiroshima. It was criminal that the head of an organization- 250 -

tasked with researching the effects of radiation exposure at Hiroshima and Nagasaki played such a role.
Before pursuing the question of whether the illnesses suffered by victims of the accident were the result ofradiation, the first priority should have been to clarify what type of illnesses there were and to provide
relief. Based on the precautionary principle of protecting people’s health, it was necessary to respondpromptly to suspected causes.
At the center of those strongly refuting the claims of a sudden increase in thyroid cancer were
Shigematsu Itsuzo and researchers from the Radiation Effects Research Foundation. They should admitthat the 1991 report got it wrong, but to this day we have heard no statement from them admitting their
mistake.
To say there is no effect and ignore the issue, just because it has not been scientifically proven,is not a scientific response. They should carefully examine the data to find the trend in the incidence ofcancer and the rate of death from cancer over the period since exposure, then extend that to estimate theincidence of cancer and the number of deaths from cancer into the future.
Epidemiological studies of victims of the nuclear bombs in Hiroshima and Nagasaki are still
continuing 60 years after the bombs were dropped and as time goes by valuable new information keeps
emerging. In regard to solid cancer, the latest Life Span Study (Report 13) report (Preston et al. Radiation
Research, 2003), “The excess solid cancer risks appear to be linear in dose even for doses in the 0 to 150
mSv .”
Japanese researchers into the effects of radiation should thoroughly come to terms with this fact
and spread the message to the world. They should also strive to clarify the effects of long term exposure to
low doses of radiation, including the effects of internal exposure.
The American National Academy of Sciences’ BEIR-VII report (Biological Effects of Ionizing
Radiation VII, National Research Council of the National Academies, 2005) concludes, “current scientificevidence is consistent with the hypothesis that there is a linear dose-response relationship between
exposure to ionizing radiation and the development of radiation-induced solid cancers in humans.”
There are new moves in Europe. In regard to the assessment of the effects of radiation from the
Chernobyl accident and for people living near nuclear facilities, the European Committee on Radiation
Risk (2003 Recommendations of the ECRR, Green Audit 2003)) is demanding that, instead of depending
on a risk model based on exposure data from Hiroshima and Nagasaki, organizations which promote
nuclear energy such as IAEA and ICRP should conduct Europe-wide epidemiological research employing
a new scientific basis.
Most of Japan’s radiation effects researchers are ignoring these moves. They still refuse toengage in deep debate. They continue to dismiss the effects of low radiation doses to Chernobyl victims,
victims of the JCO criticality accident, people living in the vicinity of reprocessing and nuclear power
plants, and nuclear workers saying, “There were no effects on the hibakusha of Hiroshima and Nagasaki atthese levels of exposure, besides which the dose is unclear.”
We must engrave these problems in our hearts and continue to monitor and critique the situation.

- 251 -

From Archives of VUChK-GPU-NKVD-KGB
Chernobyl Tragedy in Documents and Materials(Summary)
Volodymyr Tykhyy

General overview of the book
The book "From archives of VUChK-GPU-NKVD-KGB. Chernobyl tragedy in documents andmaterials" (Z arhiviv VUCHK-GPU-NKVD-KGB. Chornobylska tragedia v dokumentakh ta materialakh,№1(16) 2001) was published by the Security Service of Ukraine (SSU) in 2001. SSU is a naturalcontinuation of the Soviet KGB (Committee of the State Security of the USSR), so SSU inherited KGB
archives and disclosed some documents when the appropriate legislation was passed by the Parliament of
Ukraine beginning in 1994 with the Law "On State Secrets". It is essential to note that on 10 December
2005 the book was also posted on the web-site of the SSU(http://www.sbu.gov.ua/sbu/control/uk/publish/article?art_id=39296&cat_id=46616).
KGB is a unique source of information, because it worked "across the lines": it was subordinated neither
to nuclear industry nor to army generals; it supervised activities of industry, government and municipal
authorities, construction companies and cooperative shops alike. KGB officers collected information fromall sources they deemed reliable, they often were able to cross-check it and then to present to higher levelsof hierarchy - in KGB, Communist Party, Government of Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic. So, thisinformation contained quite reliable facts, which were formulated without flatter - moreover, it was either"secret" or "top secret". Unfortunately, this does not mean that their reports were given any special
attention - the system had its own inertia, and KGB was an integral part of the system. This is especiallywell illustrated by the case of Chernobyl nuclear accident of 9 September 1982, which is well represented
in the published documents.
In fact, the book is an encyclopedia of everyday technical, professional, social life of Chernobyl NPP
before and after the accident of 1986, and that is why it is difficult to make a summary of it. The bookperhaps deserves a careful translation with necessary comments, to serve as a source of very importantlessons. It should be remembered, however, that the selection of documents was made by KGB itself andthus they might not represent a whole picture.
The book (400 pages with 17 photographs) consists of Introduction, Preface, 121 documents (mainly
information communications) of different KGB units and 5 memoirs of participants of the liquidation ofChernobyl catastrophe. Of 121 published documents, 20 are of pre-disaster period, and 101 cover period
from 26 April 1986 - 6 December 1988. Original KGB documents are in Russian, while other materials
and comments in the book are in Ukrainian.
This summary is based on internet version of the book. For convenience, documents were grouped
according to their dates and main topics. Two most representative documents were translated to give areader first-hand feeling of wording and style.

- 252 -

Summary of Introduction and Preface
Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant named after V.I.Lenin, as an industrial object of strategic importance, wasunder the permanent supervision of KGB organs from the first day of its construction. In the process ofregular investigations by the KGB personnel in the pre-disaster period numerous facts were revealed ofbad construction work quality, supply of faulty equipment, violation of technical rules of operation,
violation of fire and radiation protection rules. Reports on these cases were presented to the managementof the Chernobyl NPP and highest party (Communist Party - VT) and government authorities of the
Ukrainian SSR and former USSR.
Already at 2:30 am on 26 April 1986, after the message about explosion and subsequent fire on Chernobyl
NPP was received, investigators from KGB of Ukrainian SSR were dispatched to the city of Pripiat andChernobyl NPP. On the same day the accident on the NPP was reported to the high command of KGB of
USSR.
During first five years after the accident 1,500 officers of KGB of Ukrainian SSR and hundreds of KGB
officers from other republics of USSR participated in investigation of causes and the work on liquidationof the consequences of the disaster.
Specific feature of the documents of the soviet secret services related to the Chernobyl catastrophe is thatthey present a complex picture, unlike materials of other government agencies that are concentrated on
narrow special issues. This allows for producing a rather full and systematic analysis of all spectrum ofChernobyl problems.
In preparation of this special edition (of Archives of KGB - VT), the most characteristic and informational
deep documents were selected. They provide integral picture not only about pre-conditions, circumstancesand consequences of the accident, but also about problems and mistakes during localization andliquidation of the consequences of the accident.
Documents are presented in chronological order covering the period from 1971 to 1988.
Summary of documents: Pre-disaster period
Technical characteristics and faults of the design of RBMK reactor
In September 1971, when the decision to build the Chernobyl NPP with two units was made, KGB
prepared information memo on the design of the plant and reactors (Document 1). Information was basedon materials of the Ministry of Energy of Ukraine, however, it is not clear to whom this memo was
submitted.
Apart from providing general technical data, the document tried to analyze the safety issues of reactors,
and mentioned several drawbacks and weak points (like accidents with break of main pipelines).
Concluding paragraphs of the document are very important because they show that Ukrainian authorities
did not have necessary information and capacity to control the situation:"This is a brief summary (based on the experience of use of Soviet reactors and found in open
published materials) of the radiation safety issues of NPP. More detailed information, including
safety regulations, organization of operation and requirements to the personnel is in the disposition ofGlavatomenergo of the Ministry of Energy of the USSR and other specialized organizations. The- 253 -

Ministry of Energy of Ukraine does not have other information and does not have experience of
operation of nuclear power plants".
After four years of operation, insufficient reliability of control equipment became clear. The summary waspresented by Kyiv oblast KGB Department to KGB of Ukraine in the memo of 16 October 1981
(Document 8).
"During the period of operation 1977-1981 there were 29 emergency shut downs, for 8 of them
personnel was responsible, and other were due to technical reasons... Investigation shows that control
equipment does not meet the requirements for reliability due at the nuclear power plant... The issue
was several times brought to the attention of "Soyuzatomenergo" and design institute "Hydroproekt",but it is not resolved yet... In the system of control rods logical schemes, as well as relay andcontactors are of low reliability, and this caused emergency shutdowns in 1979 and 1981".
In a special information of October 1984 (Document 17, entitled "Main engineering and technical faults ofChernobyl NPP units, resulting from design"), a summary of problems was reported to the KGB of
Ukrainian SSR.
"In the process of counterintelligence measures... we conducted analysis of the reliability of the workof Chernobyl NPP... The first and second units are less reliable in terms of environmental safety,
because in case of the break of main pipelines with diameter more than 300 mm, the systems ofemergency shutdown and safety will not secure localization of cooler, and this will lead to radioactive
contamination of the area...
The system of cooling of main circulation pumps is insufficient (lower than norms by approximately
39 %)... The designer (Hydroproekt Institute) was notified on this after the analysis of experience
with unit 1, but even on units 5 and 6 that are now under construction, these comments are not taken
into account...
Because these and similar problems can lead to emergency situations, we officially notified the
management of the Chernobyl NPP in August, with a recommendation to tackle these faults. Until
now, necessary measures have not been implemented".
Problems encountered during construction period of Chernobyl NPP
There were numerous reports by different KGB departments on unsatisfactory quality of design ofChernobyl NPP units, as well as the quality of construction works. Altogether, 7 documents from 1976 1986 are published. These reports were submitted to higher levels of KGB and to the Ukrainian State andParty authorities. Often the reported faults were howling.
KGB reported of the bad quality of welding on main pipelines, which anyway were accepted and installed(Document 2, 1976), of faulty equipment supplied by numerous factories from all over the USSR. There
were permanent violations of technical rules during concrete works, roofing, welding. On 17 January 1979,a special memo on violations during construction works was submitted to the Central Committee of theCommunist Party of Ukraine (Document 3). Not only Soviet, but also other suppliers shipped faulty
equipment, like Yugoslav companies which supplied pipes and steam separators (Document 15, 9 January1984).
Some violation demonstrated negligence of technical requirements: during construction of unit 5, insteadof small rock fraction 5-20 mm, a fraction 20-40 mm was used, and this did not allow filling of
reinforcement of the floor/ceiling (which had to carry 1000 tons of equipment - steam separators). The- 254 -

problem was uncovered in time, but hundreds of square meters of concrete had to be replaced (Document
20, 26 February 1986).
Nuclear accident of 9 September 1982 at reactor # 1
On 10 September 1982, a report of KGB Department in Kyiv and Kyiv oblast was submitted to KGB of
Ukraine and USSR about the nuclear accident at reactor # 1 of Chernobyl NPP: rupture of one of 1640
technological channels. KGB reported that there was no contamination of the plant and that estimated 5days are needed for repair (Document 9).
In the next document more full and severe picture of the accident appears. Already on 13 September(Document 10) detailed technical information was presented: channel's stainless steel pipe, diameter 88
mm with walls 4 mm broke up at the depth 9.6 m from the top, and graphite blocks near the rupture were
washed out by water and steam, to the diameter of 170 mm and surface area 660-670 mm. Fuel waswashed into this hole. Estimated time needed for repair - 10 days.
"According to the statement of Director of NPP Briukhanov and Chief Engineer Akinfiev, zirconium
casing of the fuel was not destroyed, so there was no radioactive contamination of technologicalchambers".
High levels of radioactive contamination inside the reactor building and around it were reported 14
September (Document 11, 12). It was also reported that fuel was sucked into the washed out hole during
repair works. Gamma-level in some chambers of gas contour and drainage systems was 1000
microroentgens/sec. Radioactive aerosols were also released through ventilation stack, and gamma-levels
on the surface near the station in some point were 0.01-0.02 microrem/sec. "Administration of the NPP
started decontamination measures (concrete and asphalt surfaces are covered with soil, leaves etc.)"
The full picture of the consequences of the accident was reported to the Head of the KGB of Ukraine on
30 October 1982 (Documents 13), and subsequently to the First Secretary of the Communist Party of
Ukraine. These reports were based on the findings of commissions, organized by the nuclear industry(including specialists from Chernobyl and Pripiat, as well as from Moscow institutes) and of Academy of
Science of Ukrainian SSR, created by the decision of the Minister of Energy of UkrSSR V.Skliarov.
Commission of nuclear industry investigated radioactive contamination near the plant itself and in sanitary
protection zone of NPP (3 km radius) and observed zone (35 km radius). The distance of pollution reached
5 km from the stack of the plant in S-SW direction and 14 km in the N-NE direction. As of 10 September,levels of radiation in the sanitary-protection zone varied between 0-03 microrem/sec. By 25 October, thelevels of radiation dropped by 1.8 times. Various fission nuclides were detected in samples, and iodine
was detected in the air at the levels of 10-14 Ci/l.
The conclusion of the Commission states, that"the radioactivity of air and the density of radioactive depositions as of 25 October does not differ
from parameters, characteristic for the normal regime of exploitation of NPP (during repair works onunit 1 and operation of two other units at full capacity). Radionuclides were not detected in discharge
water and in cooling lagoon".
On contaminated territory in S-SW direction "hot" particles were detected, with activity between 5*10-8
and 2*10-7 Ci. Uranium was identified in these particles.
The Commission concluded that there is no need for implementation of measures, envisaged by the"Temporary guidelines... for protection of population in case of nuclear accidents" approved 18.12.80.

- 255 -

The group of scientists from the laboratory of biophysics of the Institute of Nuclear Research of the
Academy of Science of UkrSSR came to somewhat different conclusions. They measured the betaactivities of soil samples, which was between 2.6*10-9 to 2.23*10-7. Fission radionuclides, as well as
products of activation were detected in these same samples. Near Chistogalovka village , located at 5 km
from NPP in S-SW direction hot particles were registered, with activities up to 10-7 Ci, which is hundredof times higher than permissible levels. Radioactivity caused by the accident and the following
desactivation was registered in the cooling lagoon and bottom sediments. In the opinion of thiscommission, hot particles could lead to serious, even lethal consequences. This requires further analysis
and decisions regarding liquidation of "hot" particles, and this decision depends on the 3rd Main
Directorate of the Ministry of Health of the USSR.
Members of the Commission reported that their findings would be presented through the Minister ofEnergy and the President of the Academy to the Central Committee of CP of Ukraine and the Council of
Ministers of Ukraine.
Similar report was indeed submitted to the First Secretary of the Central Committee of CP Ukraine
V.Scherbytsky on 5 November 1982 as "top secret", "personally". It was added that "situation at the power
plant and the vicinity is normal, no facts of panic and rumors".
Another report of October 1984 (Document 17) provided still more details:"The reason for disaster was an overheating of the channel due to insufficient flow of cooling water.
During the accident a large volume of water (more than 200 tons) permeated the graphite core of thereactor".

Summary of documents: Post-disaster period
Catastrophe of 26 April 1986 and it's immediate consequences
First report about the explosion was filed already on 26 April (Document 21). Other reports describe
radiological situation around the stricken power plant, in nearby towns and villages, inform about
evacuation measures:
Several reports mention radioactive contamination of food products, recommendations for handling
contaminated food and other practical problems. In Kyiv, 4 samples of bread baked on two bakeries (#2
and #7) were contaminated to the levels of 5.9*10-8 Ci/kg - 8.8*10-8 Ci/kg. This happened apparently due
to use of whey in leaven (Document 39, 28 May 1986). Document 30 reports about the absence of reliabledosimentric devices in civil defense system, and ignorance of population on radiation protection issues.
During all period represented in the book, reports provide detailed information on the levels of radiation,
like"Situation with radioactivity levels remains stable. The level of radiation at the site of NPP is 0.5-1000
roentgen/hour, in the zone of lean-up 1.4-200 roentgen/hour, in the city of Prypiat 0.2 roentgen/hour, in
Chernobyl 6 miliroentgen/hour, at the boundary of the 30-km zone 8 miliroentgen/hour" (Document 34,
15 May 1986).
In later reports the data on levels of radiation become more detailed - obviously because the number andaccuracy of measurements improved.

- 256 -

Reports on liquidation measures and encountered problems
Already on 5 May emergency works for protection of river Pripiat from contamination were started construction of 6 dikes. 120,000 sq.m of film and liquid glass for desactivation were received. 100 miners
started digging the tunnel under the damaged reactor (Document 28).
Many documents provide evidence of the bad organization of work in the exclusion zone. Stations ofsanitary treatment of wastes and contaminated clothes were not operational, personnel not trained,
wastewater discharged in surface water without treatment (Document 32, 12 May 1986). Workers drafted
for work in the zone were not informed about radiation levels, terms and conditions of their work,transportation and living conditions were bad. This led to complaints from the workers (Document 33, 13
May 1986).
Tens of reports mention cases of negligent and irresponsible behavior of workers. "Miners and militarymen do not use individual protection measures, they receive exposure that is not caused by work need,
they rest near contaminated machinery and inside of it, do not keep up to hygiene rules. This leads to early
overexposure" (Document 37, 22 May 1986). But there were also problems with supply: "... plutonium
concentrations exceed the permissible level by 1000 times. This requires use of gas masks, but until now
responsible ministries have not provided their personnel with necessary protective equipment" (Document41, 1 June 1986).
"For liquidation of the consequences of the Chernobyl NPP disaster, by the order of the Minister ofDefense of the USSR 94 military units were mobilized and stationed in the area... These include
regular military, civil defense, chemical defense, medical, engineering units, land-forces and aviation,with total number of 32,329 men" (Document 46, June 1986).
These troops and servicemen not always were used efficiently. Many were drafted without explanations
and consent, were not told they will serve in Chernobyl zone. Some appeared to be unfit for the work,some were over 45 years old, some were ill. Hundreds had to be sent back home. Many received doses
higher than permissible. There were cases of short hunger strikes (Document 51, 4 July 1986 and otherdocuments).
Some decisions by the State Commission were highly controversial, like the decision to restart unit 3 of
the NPP. Many specialists express their objections (see translated Document 75, 1 February 1987 in the
Annex). By the end of May 1987, desactivation of the Unit 3 was not completed, e.g. "radiation levels atwhere cables need to be replaced are quite high - up to 1 Roentgen/hour, on the other hand, it is necessary
to remove by hacking about 1000 m3 of contaminated concrete..." (Document 83, 4 June 1987).
KGB was also concerned with technical problems of the "Shelter". Many details were unclear, e.g.
specialists of the Academy of Science of Ukraine estimated that 6 % of fuel were released from thedamaged reactor, while specialists of the Minsredmash opined for release of 30 to 50 %. This madedecisions difficult (Document 108, 2 April 1988). The problem of radioactive waste remained serious aswell:" - there are two operational PZRO (repositories for radioactive wastes):
1. "Buriakovka" for wastes up to 5 Roentgen/hour. Design capacity 450,000 m3. There are altogether
30 trenches, of which 14 filled.
2. "Podlesnyi" - for radioactive wastes 5-250 Roentgen/hour. Altogether 8 vaults 50x28x8 meters...
Vaults 1 and 2 are partially filled.
- 257 -

- there are 8 temporary repositories, where radioactive wastes were stored during first months after theaccident;- more that 200 sites where various buildings, materials, contaminated soil etc. are buried.
Some specialists express opinion that temporary repositories are below critic from the point of view of
construction norms. Clay lining on some of these storages can fail to work ling before the guaranteed
term, and that will lead to filtration of radioactively contaminated water into natural aquifers"(Document 120, 9 November 1988)".
Technical problems of nuclear industry in Ukraine
Chernobyl nuclear accident highlighted many problems of insufficient safety of nuclear industry. KGB
paid a lot of attention to this - tens of published documents deal with these issues.
Investigation of preparedness for nuclear accidents revealed big gaps. At Zaporizha NPP:"...the stock of iodine medicines was sufficient only for personnel of NPP (for two days instead of 10,
as required), and there was no such stock of medicines for NPP construction workers, citizens ofEnergodar city and the 30 km zone. As of beginning of July, the stock of iodine preparations for
population of Zaporizha oblast was about 20 % of needs? and in Mykolaiv oblast - about 22 %. The
procedure of delivering these preparations to users is not in place." (Document 56, 27 July 1986).
Confinements of some reactor units at Rivne NPP and South Ukrainian NPP were built and are used
despite of significant faults. "At Rivne 3 uptightness is 2.44 % while design requirement is 0.1 %. Similar
problems at South-Ukrainian 1 and 2. This may lead to serious consequences in emergency situation. The
reason is in the absence of unified requirements to designing, construction and operation of such systems."
Control equipment was often uncertified and unoperational:"At South Ukrainian NPP, of 811 control devices, including equipment for radiation measurements,
tested by organs of State Standards Committee of the USSR, 469 appeared to be unusable" (Document
72, December 1986).
KGB informed the Central Committee of CP of Ukraine that there are numerous problems with water use
for nuclear industry needs. Problem existed on all NPPs. In Chernobyl, very high filtration of water fromcooling lagoon due to the absence of special antifiltration measures. In spite of the decision of the Councilof Ministers of Ukraine of 1982, similar problem exists at Zaporizka NPP. At Rivne NPP and SouthUkrainian NPP discharges of water from plants lead and will lead to river contamination (Document 62,
August 1986).
Spent fuel storage was a persistent problem:"At South-Ukrainian NPP, the Ministry of Energy of the USSR did not reconstruct the basin for spent
fuel assemblies, so instead of 162 (design capacity) currently 171 are stored at Unit 1. In 1987, 73
assemblies will have to be unloaded, and it is not possible to store them without violations. Similar
situation exists at Unit 2" (Document 71, 14 November 1986).
"At Chernobyl NPP, radiation situation in central halls of Units 1 and 2 is very unfavorable. Gammaradiation level exceeds permissible level by 10-15 times, and it leads to additional exposure of
personnel. The reason is storing of unacceptable high numbers of spent fuel assemblies in basins... At
unit 1, there are 2803, while the design capacity is 1728, at Unit 2 - 2414 and 1568 respectively"(Document 87, 29 June 1987).
There were continuos problems with reloading of fuel. At Chernobyl NPP, reloading of technologicalchannel 50-21 failed, because the fuel assembly could not be pulled out neither at regular pull 500 kg, nor- 258 -

3000 and 4000 kg (maximum permitted). Later it was reported that personnel applied 5000 kg without any
permission. Reload was delayed by 10 days until the scheduled shutdown of the unit. Similar problems
occurred on 26 and 30 April at unit 1. (Document 84, 7 June 1987). On 17 June 1988, there appeared
problem with hermetization of channel 57-37 after reloading (Document 113, 9 July 1988)
Factors that influence the safety of NPP operation were summed up in the report of 16 July 1987, which
was prepared with participation of KGB department in several oblasts:"During the current year, there were 66 emergency shutdowns at NPPs, located in Ukrainian SSR. Of
them 41 at Rivne NPP, 19 at Zaporizha NPP, 5 at South Ukrainian NPP and 1 at Chernobyl NPP.
... main causes of emergency shutdowns are:
- faults of design and construction works - 37%;
- faulty equipment - 43%);- unskilled actions of NPP personnel -20%.
There exist substantial design defects in the design of VVER-1000 (approved by the Order of the
Ministry of Energy of the USSR on 30 December 1985). Faulty decisions and mistakes continue to becopied in documentation for construction, assembling and start-up works, as well as designs for
suppliers of equipment. These designs are provided to the NPPs of Ukraine, as well as abroad (toBulgaria, Hungary, GDR and Czechoslovakia)". (Document 88, 16 July 1987)
Secrecy and foreign visitors
Secrecy was an essential feature of all Soviet nuclear program, and Chernobyl disaster was no difference.
All ministries and other government agencies working in the 30-km zone were obliged to keep secrecy.
"Upon the directive of the Head of the Government Commission, requirements regarding secrecy were
presented to the heads of organizations by the representative of the KGB of USSR". When it became
known that transmission of radiometric data by radio would be organized, KGB was on alert: "Somespecialist admit that digital code might be deciphered, and this would make possible leakage of
information to an enemy. Department 6 of the KGB of Ukrainian SSR supervises these works".
(Document 57, 10 August 1986).
Violations of secrecy were apparently quite common. "In the 30-km zone, groups of specialists from over
70 research and design institutes work on permanent or temporary basis. Most of them violate rules ofwork with secret documents prescribed by the Instruction 0166-72." (Document 85, 22 June 1987).
The secrecy hindered the work on liquidation of the consequences. The Minister of Water Resources of
Ukraine V.N.Tkach complained that to protect water resources, detailed information on radioactive
contamination of territory is needed. However, it is possible to obtain such a map only in the State
Committee of Hydrometeorology of the USSR and Minsredmash of USSR. The Minister raised this issue
several times after 10 May at the meetings of different commissions, but there was no positive decision sofar. (Document 42, 3 June 1986).
Since autumn of 1986, there are numerous reports on visits of foreign journalists, scientists, otherdelegations to the 30-km zone (Documents 73, 77, 80, 81, 96, 98, 110). Usually the conclusion was "there
were no hostile intentions from foreigners; information passed to their agencies was objective".
Sometimes, however, incidents did occur: journalist of NHK telecompany Yamayghi Toshihiro tried tocollect samples near Chernobyl NPP and used dosimeter with automatic recording of data. These attempts
were, of course, suppressed. (Document 96, 6 October 1987). In November 1987 KGB reported:- 259 -

"We obtained direct evidence of intelligence efforts by foreigners who visited Pripiat and Chernobyl in
1986-1987. There were attempts to acquire secret data on liquidation of the consequences of thedisaster, on technical condition of reactors, radiation situation in the zone, new methods ofdesactivation of territory, industrial buildings and equipment, chemicals that are used for these purpose
and so on. Attempts to collect and export samples of soil, water and biomass were disclosed andsuppressed" (Document 98, 14 November 1987).
Health, social and other impacts
As it was already mentioned, KGB reported about cases when patients evacuated from the 30-km zone
and NPP workers were delivered to hospitals in Kyiv or Moscow. Later there appeared controversy
between Ukrainian and Moscow doctors. KGB reported, that according to obtained information, Ukrainianscientists headed by Academician K.S.Ternov achieved good results when treating patients with their
methods. Professor Gail (USA) noted successful treatment in Kyiv clinics. But use of these methods wasbanned by Academician L.N.Ilyin and Major-General E.E.Gogin without explanations, and the state ofpatients worsened.
"One of Prof. Kindzelsky's patients, firefighter Miagkov visited in the clinic of the Institute ofBiophysicss of the Ministry of Health of the USSR his colleagues, who participated with him in
combating the fire at Chernobyl NPP. He found them in bad condition (loss of hair, "parchment" skin,hemorrhages and necrosis of tissues at burns etc.) They told Miagkov, that they receive practically notreatment, doctors only observe them". (Document 63, August 1986).
High committed doses were serious problem for works at Chernobyl NPP: "Effectiveness of organizationof work is seriously deteriorated by the fact that of 124 senior specialist more than a half already received
doses 25 rem and more. If these specialists are replaced, the stability of management can be seriously
deteriorated". On the other hand, some workers try to hide committed zones because they can lose theirjobs in the zone. In such cases it is very difficult to control radiation doses of personnel. There are 4925
employees at the NPP, 91.8 % of needed engineers and specialists, 88 % of needed workers. (Document74, 20 January 1987).
"...analysis of individual doses of those who are controlled by the Dosimentry Directorate of"Kombinat" enterprise shows the following results as of 15 August 1987:
Subdivision

PeriodAllorganisations, 1986
except ChNPP
1987
Personnel of ChNPP
1986
1987
Total
1986
1987

Distribution of personnel according to their doses (rem)
0-5
5-10
10-15
15-20
20-25
25
26471
1494
522
285
161
196
22706
154
41
21
12
27
3052
304
175
147
53
4150
14
7
5
3
31017
826
460
258
416
27010
55
28
17
30

According to official data of the Dosimetry Directorate, necessary investigations on the cases of excess
exposure, materials of such investigations are not submitted to the Directorate, in spite of numerous
requests to the managers of organizations... Since those who received more than 25 rem are entitled to 5
monthly salaries, this creates a certain incentive for artificial overexposure in expectation of remuneration.
On the other hand, there are also cases when received high doses are concealed." (Document 93, 5September 1987).

- 260 -

Due to various reasons, there were numerous conflicts at the Chernobyl NPP. People were nervous
because of working and living conditions (families lived in Kyiv and Chernigiv, personnel worked on
shift basis and stayed at Zelenyi Mys settlement), there were tensions about distribution of apartments in
Kyiv, questions on possibilities of keeping these apartments etc. Thus, on 20 August 1986, in thedormitory of Polessky technical college, where about 800 construction workers of Chernobyl NPP werequartered, there was an appeal to go to Kyiv to clarify the issue of apartments allocation. Of 1400 workers
700 families received flats in Kyiv and Chernigiv, but remaining 680 were worried. (Document 61).
Personnel of ChNPP protested against changes in duration of shifts (the plan was to introduce 8 hour shifts
instead of 12 hour). They argued that this will take much more time for transportation, condition for rest
would be worse and so on. Active discussions among people were triggered by article in central
newspapers and film "Chernobyl. Two colors of time".
"Main points of the discussions:- real cause of the accident (whether it's faulty design or mistakes of the personnel) is not established;- there was no analysis of the action of personnel - where sacrifices were justified, and where not;- still there is no model for actions of the personnel in case of major accident, to avoid panic or"heroism";
it is not clear, what to do with those whose actions had led to the accident;- Ministry of Health of the USSR is obviously hiding the effects of exposure both in low and highdoses. This contradicts the policy of "glasnost" and leads to neglecting of radiation protection norms,
which can damage the health of current and future generations. (Document 114, 8 August 1988)
Further problems appeared when it became necessary to relocate NPP personnel and their families to the
new city of Slavutich. Many refused to leave their Kyiv and Chernigiv apartments. There were muchprotest because of information that Slavutich is located on contaminated site (Documents 93, 102).
Investigation demonstrated that permissible limits in the city of Slavutich are not exceeded, but there aresome "hot spots" in nearby forests. On the 2 October 1987, the decision to start settling the city of
Slavutich was made, but additional measures like removal of contaminated soil and forest wererecommended (Document 97).
According to the report of 28 June 1988, morbidity and mortality of population in Narodichi, Ovruch and
Luginy district follow usual patterns. To normalize the situation, replacement of roofs and fences,improvement of dusty roads were started in these rayons. Special measures for additional supply of clean
milk top these rayons during summer period were approved, but the request to provide additional foodsupply was refused (Document 111).

- 261 -

Annex: translated documents
Document 4.
SECRET
TO THE CHAIRMAN OF THE COMMITTEE OF STATESECURITY OF UKRAINIAN SSR
Colonel-general
Comrade FEDORCHUK V.V.
Kiev
SPECIAL COMMUNICATION
On emergency shutdown of unit 1of the Chernobyl nuclear power plant
According to information received on 19 February of 1979 by the KGB Department, at 23:40 18 February
unit 1 of the Chernobyl nuclear power plant was shutdown by emergency activation of automatic safetysystem AZ-5. Investigation of the special technical commission, created by the administration of the NPP
established that the cause of the shutdown was switching off of main circulation pumps, supplying coolingwater in the reactor, due to permeation of air in hydrosystem. In accordance with technological norms,
operating reactor is cooled by 4 main circulation pumps, of which one is permanently kept in reserve.
During 18.02.79 the reserve pump was repaired and water from unit's hydrosystem was used for liftingpump's rotor. Upon completion of the reaper at 23:05, to avoid loss of desalinated water, workers
discharged backwater through closed loop drainage device. During this process air penetrated in thehydrosystem, thus causing misfunctioning of pumps.
The Commission concluded that the cause of penetration of air in hydrosystem is technical imperfection of
the drainage device laid down in the design. In connection with this, the nuclear power plant managers
summoned representatives of the design institute from Leningrad, to prepare technical recommendation on
the mentioned device.
After the liquidation of the emergency by 6 am of 20 February unit 1 was put into operation at prescribed
power. As a result of its shutdown, the national economy have not received 11.5 million KWt of electricity.
Chernobyl rayon Committee of the Communist Party of Ukraine and Oblast Committee of the Communist
Party of Ukraine were notified on this fact.
Reported as information.
Head of the Department of KGB of Ukrainian SSR
for the city of Kiev and Kiev oblast
major-general

N.Vakulenko«21» February 1979
Resolution on the document: «c[omrade]. Zubatenko N.I. For consideration. Fedorchuk. 21.2.».
SA SSU. — F. 65. — File. 1. — V. 5. — Pages. 30–31.
Original. Typewritten.

- 262 -

Document 75.
SECRET
Extract
From the report on the situation at the Chernobyl NPP region[...] When interviewed, the Chief Engineer of Chernobyl NPP Shteinberg N.A. stated, that it is notadvisable to put Unit 3 of Chernobyl NPP into operation, and that he proposed to the top management of"Minatomenergo" to put it up into conservation. He also informed that the top management of"Minatomenergo" and Chernobyl NPP studies a possibility of penetrating the sarcophagus of Unit 4,
because 56 fuel assemblies 16 m long each loaded with uranium are buried in the used fuel storage. Undercertain situation these circumstances can lead to explosion. In individual interviews scientist representing
Kurchatov Institute and "Minatomenergo"'s Research and Design Institute also said that it is unwise to
rehabilitate Unit 3 [...] Serious specialists motivated this opinion by the damage to health of many people
who would be involved in rehabilitation, and huge material costs (taking into account the permissible doseloads it is planned to engage no less than 25 thousand people).
The dates of putting Unit 3 into operation appeared unrealistic due to extremely unsatisfactoryorganization of rehabilitation works, and even now the contractor for the work has not been approved.
In October 1986 the Director of the NPP signed a document that all chambers of Unit 3 building were
desactivated by 95 %, while the investigation carried out in December 1986 determined that of 1180
chambers only 80 were desactivated, and no one even opened remaining chambers.
According to the reports of NPP management, in 1986 more than 390 tons of highly contaminated 4threactor debris were thrown down from the roof of Unit 3, although, according to expert estimates, thesefigures are significantly exaggerated because the roofing could not sustain even one half of this mass.
There was an opinion expressed that due to unjustified involvement of military personnel into clean up of
the roof of reactor 3, more than 3 thousand servicemen were irradiated, because the radiation levels on theroof of the reactor were not 500, but in some areas more than 10 thousand roentgens per hour [...].
The Chief of Special Department of KGB of USSR
for <acronym could not be deciphered>
Major-general Mironiuk
1 February 1987

- 263 -



KURRI-KR-21 (1998) http://www.rri.kyoto-u.ac.jp/NSRG/reports/kr21/KURRI-KR-21.htm

Research Activities about the Radiological Consequences of the Chernobyl NPS
Accident and Social Activities to Assist the Sufferers by the Accident
page1.

Research Activities of the Nuclear Safety Research Group of KURRI with Belarusian, Russian
and Ukrainian Colleagues about the Chernobyl Accident
1
Tetsuji IMANAKA

2.

Chernobyl Accident: the Crisis of the International Radiation Community
Mikhail V. MALKO

5General Situation of the Radiological Consequences of the Chernobyl Accident in Ukraine
Dmytro M. GRODZINSKY

18

Legislation and Research Activity in Belarus about the Radiological Consequences of theChernobyl Accident: Historical Review and Present Situation
Vladimir P. MATSKO, Tetsuji IMANAKA

28

Legislation and Research Activity in Russia about the Radiological Consequences of theChernobyl Accident
Igor A. RYABZEV, Tetsuji IMANAKA

40

Legislation in Ukraine about the Radiological Consequences of the Chernobyl Accident
Oleg NASVIT

51

Research and Managing Institutions in Ukraine concerning the Radiological Consequences of
the Chernobyl Accident
Oleg NASVIT

58

Assessment of the Chernobyl Radiological Consequences
Mikhail V. MALKO

65

Relationship between 131I and 137Cs Deposition on Soil in the Territory of Belarus after the
Chernobyl Accident.
Vladimir. A. KNATKO, Igor I. IVACHKEVICH, Valentina D. ASIMOVA

90

10. Isotope Fractionation of Uranium in the Process of Leaching of Nuclides of Dispersed Fuel of
RBMK of the Chernobyl NPP
German N. BONDARENKO, Emlen V. SOBOTOVICH

93

3.
4.

5.

6.
7.

8.
9.

11. Impact of Radiation on the Population during the First Weeks and Months after the Chernobyl
Accident and Health State of the Population 10 Years Later
104
Alla YAROSHINSKAYA
12. Chernobyl 1996: New Materials concerning Acute Radiation Syndrome around Chernobyl
Vladimir M. LUPANDIN

108

13. Overview of Different Information about Acute Radiation Syndrome among Inhabitants
around Chernobyl
Alla YAROSHINSKAYA

114

14. Dose Assessment for Inhabitants Evacuated from the 30-km Zone Soon after the Chernobyl
Accident
Tetsuji IMANAKA, Hiroaki KOIDE

121- 264 -

15. Current State of Epidemiological Studies in Belarus about Chernobyl Sufferers
Vladimir P. MATSKO

127

16. Epidemiological Studies in Russia about the Consequences of the Chernobyl APS Accident
Igor A. RYABZEV

139

17. Dynamics of Health Status of Residents in the Lugyny District after the Accident at the ChNPS
149
Ivan GODLEVSKY, Oleg NASVIT
18. Radiation Situation and Health Statistics of the People in the Tula Region of Russia after the
Chernobyl Catastrophe
J. Socorro DELGADO ANDIA

157

19. Present Status of Childhood Thyroid Carcinoma in Belarus following the Chernobyl Accident
165
Akira SUGENOYA, Yuri E. DEMIDCHIK, Evgeny P. DEMIDCHIK
20. Lens Opacities in Children of Belarus Affected by the Chernobyl Accident
A. N. ARINCHIN, L. A. OSPENNIKOVA

168

21. Genetic Consequences of the Chernobyl Accident for Belarus Republic
Gennady LAZJUK, Yukio SATOW, Dmitri NIKOLAEV, Irina NOVIKOVA

174

22. Monitoring of Cytogenetic Damages in Peripheral Lymphocytes of Children Living inRadiocontaminated Areas of Belarus
Ludmila S. MIKHALEVICH

178

23. Study of Genetic Effects in Somatic Cells of Children Living on the Contaminated Territories
in Belarus
Ludmila S. MIKHALEVICH

184

24. Results of Long-term Genetic Monitoring of Animal Populations Chronically Irradiated in theRadiocontaminated Areas
194
Rose GONCHAROVA and Nadezhda RIABOKON
25. Cytogenetic Effects of the Action of Ionizing Radiations on Human Populations
Vladimir A. SHEVCHENKO, Galina P. SNIGIRYOVA

203

26. Estimation of Absorbed Doses on the Basis of Cytogenetic Methods
Vladimir A. SHEVCHENKO, Galina P. SNIGIRYOVA, Alexander V. RUBANOVICH

216

27. Peculiarities of Biological Action of Low Irradiation Doses and Their Probable Relation to the
Health State of Participants of Chernobyl Accident Liquidation
E.B. BURLAKOVA, A.N. GOLOSHCHAPOV, N.V. GORBUNOVA, S.M. GUREVICH, G.P. ZHIZHINA, A.I.
KOZACHENKO, A.A. KONRADOV, D.B. KORMAN, E.M. MOLOCHKINA, L.G. NAGLER, I.B. OZEROVA, S.I.
223
SKALATSKAYA, M.A. SMOTRYAEVA, O.A. TARASENKO, Yu.A. TRESHCHENKOVA, V.A. SHEVCHENKO
28. Chernobyl Sufferers in Ukraine and Their Social Problems: Short Outline
Volodymyr TYKHYI

235

29. Social Aspects of the Chernobyl Activity in Belarus
Mikhail V. MALKO

246

30. Problems of Social Assistance to the Chernobyl Sufferers in Russia
Alla YAROSHINSKAYA

257

31. Legal Regime of the Chernobyl Problems in the USSR, Belarus, Russia and the Ukraine
Milan ZGERSKY

266

32. Collection of Interesting Data Published in Various Documents
Tetsuji Imanaka

271



KURRI-KR-79 (2002) http://www.rri.kyoto-u.ac.jp/NSRG/reports/kr79/KURRI-KR-79.htm- 265 -

Recent Research Activities about the Chernobyl NPP Accident
in Belarus, Ukraine and Russia
page
1. Current Topics about the Radiological Consequences by the Chernobyl Accident
Tetsuji IMANAKA

1

2. The Chernobyl Reactor: Design Features and Reasons for Accident
Mikhail V. MALKO

11

3. The Causes and Scenario of the Chernobyl Accident, and Radioactive Release on the CHNPP
Unit-4 Site
Boris I. GORBACHEV

28

4. Nuclear Fuel in the Destroyed 4th Unit of Chernobyl NPP
Volodymyr M PAVLOVYCH

45

5. Analysis of Radioactive Contamination in the Near Zone of Chornobyl NPP
Alexander GAYDAR and Oleg NASVIT

59

6. Radioecological Situation in the Cooling Pond of Chornobyl NPP
Oleg NASVIT

74

7. Iodine-131 Contamination, Thyroid Doses and Thyroid Cancer in the Contaminated Areas of
RussiaValery F. STEPANENKO, Evgeny M. PARSHKOV, Viktor A. SOKOLOV, Mark Yu. ORLOV, Alexander I.
IVANNIKOV, Valery G. SKVORTSOV, Elena K. IASKOVA, Timofey V. KOLIZSHENKOV, Irina G.
KRYUKOVA and Anatoly F. TSYB

86

8. Radioactive Contamination of Food in Stepanivka Village, Zhytomyr Region, Ukraine: in 1992
and in 2001
97
Volodymyr TYKHYY
9. Content of Radionuclides of Chernobyl Origin in Food Products for the Belarusian Population
105
Vladimir P. MATSKO and Tetsuji IMANAKA
10. Long-Term Observation of Radioactivity Contamination in Fish around Chernobyl
Igor N. RYABOV

114

11. EPR Dosimetry of Chernobyl Liquidators
Vadim CHUMAK

125

12. Retrospective Dose Assessment of Inhabitants in the Contaminated Areas of Russia by EPR
Measurement of Tooth Enamel
Alexandre I. IVANNIKOV, Valeri G. SKVORTSOV and Valeri F. STEPANENKO

144

13. Estimations of Radiation Risk for the Population of Contaminated Territory of Belarus
Vladimir A. KNATKO, M. M. KOMOCHKOV and A. E. YANUSH

154

14. Estimation of Thyroid Doses from Inhalation of 131I for Population of Contaminated Regions ofBelarus
Vladimir A. KNATKO and Inga N. DOROZHOK
162
15. Radiation Epidemiological Studies in Russian National Medical and Dosimetric Registry:- 266 -

170

Estimation of Cancer and Non-cancer Consequences Observed among Chernobyl Liquidators
Marat M. MAKSIOUTOV
16. Review of Epidemiological Finding in Study of Medical Consequences of the Chernobyl
Accident in Ukrainian Population
Anatoly Ye. PRYSYAZHNYUK, Volodymir G. GRISHTSHENKO, Zoya P. FEDORENKO, Ludmila O. GULAK
190
and Mykola. M. FUZIK
17. Intelligence and Brain Damage in Children Acutely Irradiated in Utero As a Result of theChernobyl Accident
Angelina I. NYAGU, Konstantin N. LOGANOVSKY, Tatiana K. LOGANOVSKAYA, Viktor S. REPIN and
Stanislav Yu. NECHAEV

204

18. Health State of Belarusian Children Suffering from the Chernobyl Accident: Sixteen Years
after the Catastrophe
Alexander N. ARYNCHYN, Tatiana V. AVHACHEVA, Nika A. GRES and Ekaterina I. SLOBOZHANIA

233

19. Chernobyl Radiation-induced Thyroid Cancers in Belarus
Mikhail V. MALKO

242

20. Analysis of Chromosome Aberrations in Human Lymphocytes after Accidental Exposure to
Ionizing Radiation
Galina SNIGIRYOVA and Vladimir SHEVCHENKO

258

21. The Follow-up Study of Chromosomal aberrations in Chernobyl Clean-up Workers
Natalia M. SLOZINA and Elizaveta G. NERONOVA

270

22. Chromosomal Aberrations in Blood Lymphocytes of the Residents of 30-km Chornobyl NPP
Exclusion Zone
Larysa BEZDROBNA, Tetyana TSYGANOK, Olena ROMANOVA, Larysa TARASENKO, Volodymyr TRYSHYN
279
and Ludmila KLIMKINA
23. Cytogenetic Effects of Radiation on Agricultural Plants Observed in the Chernobyl region
during the First Years after the Accident
Stanislav A. GERASKIN, Vladimir G. DIKAREV, Yevgenia Ya. ZYABLITSKAYA, Alla A. OUDALOVA andYevgeniy V. SPIRIN

289

24. Abstracts (in Japanese)299- 267 -

KUR REPORT OF
KYOTO UNIVERSITY RESEARCH
REACTOR INSTITUTE
発行所
発行日
住所

京都大学原子炉実験所
平成 28 年 10 月
大阪府泉南郡熊取町朝代西 2 丁目
TEL（072）451- 2300

掲載された論文等の出版権、複製権および公衆送信権は原則として京都大学原子炉実験所に帰属する。
本誌は京都大学学術情報リポジトリに登録・公開するものとする。 http://repository.kulib.kyoto-u.ac.jp/dspace/