Examples of experiences with self-monitoring(D-shuttle experiences)

Makoto Miyazaki
Vice-director
Health Promotion Center
Fukushima Medical University
Consultancy Meeting on Science, Technology and Society Perspectives on Nuclear
Science, Radiation and Human Health – The International Perspective, May 23, 2017

D-shuttle (Personal dosimeter, Chiyoda Technol Corp.)• Recording interval: 1 hour
• Measured radiation type:gamma-ray (also including natural radiation)• Minimum value: 0.01 microSv

The data shows where you were yesterdayExample: Graphs of a married couple
A: Husband’s dosetend to be low during
day time on weekdays.

B: The wife’s dose
was low at noon onWednesday. Why?
→ They visited Sendai together!
Possibility of using dosimeteras a communication tool
Quoted from Figure 2, “Using and Explaining Individual Dosimetry Data Case Study of Four Municipalities in Fukushima”
M Miyazaki, Asia Pacific Journal of Public Health, 29 (2S) 2017, 110S-119S

Developments in FY 2013-14• 2013 FY– August：Distributed to residents of Miyakoji district, Tamura-city (B)• Gave one-to-one consultation, requested by Support Team for Residents
Affected By Nuclear Accidents• One-to-one consultation sessions held until March 2014

• 2014 FY– April: Evacuation order was lifted inMiyakoji• D-Shuttle rental within 20 km radiuszone became responsibility of theMinistry of Environment.
• Tamura-city distributed dosimeter toALL elementary and junior- high school
students that re-opened.
• Held explanation sessions for teachers
in April, one-to-one consultation in
October to November.
Quoted from Figure 1, “Using and Explaining Individual Dosimetry Data Case Study of Four Municipalities in Fukushima”
M Miyazaki, Asia Pacific Journal of Public Health, 29 (2S) 2017, 110S-119S

Developments in FY 2014-15• 2014 FY– April: Started distributing in Suetsugi district, Iwaki-city (D)• Assisted data analysis and group explanation.

– July: Fukushima-city started distributing devices via public health nurses (C)• 2015 FY– Suetsugi: Continued data analysis and group explanations• Utilized “advisor (相談員)” system: One regular adviser who facilitated communityparticipation.
• Distributed around 100 devices and collected data.

– Naraha-town (within 20km radius): D-shuttle to be utilized upon the lifting ofevacuation order (E)• Data of returnees and visiting residents to be analyzed with their consent.
• Set “Intensive wearing period” of D-Shuttle, compare data with personal activity
record before aggregating data for publication.
• Set up one-on-one explanation and dialogues.

Comparison of D-Shuttle project
Location(Participant)M, T-city（400）

S, I-city（100）

F-city（less than100）

N-town（7,000）Distributor/Method

C. Office(before lift)
Ministry of Env.
(after lift)NPO(before)
Muni. + Advisor(Muni. Project)Pub. Health Nurse(Volunteer-basedparticipation)

Distributed to allresidents.
Consent to beobtained later.

Reading

Explainer

Explainer (before)
Advisor(now; someoutsourced)

Dosimetercollected fromnurses→read andprepare by
explainer

Residents：Gov’t
Battery change:
outsourced
vendorLiaison/schedul
ing w/Explainer

Relevant
ministry
provideslogistics & adm.
support, etc.

NPO andmunicipality work
together onscheduling

Gov’t provides
logistics & adm.
support, etc.

Gov’t provides
logistics & adm.
support, etc.

Follow Up

Regular contact
by ministry,
consultexplainer ifnecessary

NPO and advisor
contact and feedback to theexplainer

Pub. Health nurse
contact, feed-backto the explainer

Gov’t & vendor
contact and feedback to theexplainer

SubjectIndividuals(Result notpublished)

Individuals＋District shares
overall results

Individuals(Data aggregation
not planned)

Individuals＋Data collectedfor publication

Examples of the actual dose data of 2 residents
living in Fukushima-City

A: An office worker worked indoors

B: A farmer worked outdoors

Quoted from Figure 3, “Using and Explaining Individual Dosimetry Data Case Study of Four Municipalities in Fukushima”
M Miyazaki, Asia Pacific Journal of Public Health, 29 (2S) 2017, 110S-119S

microSv/day

Graph shows daily cumulative dose living in Suetsugi,
Iwaki-city obtained from D-shuttles
n = 14Error• Duration of possession period:
about 2 months• Both ends: before and after the measurement• Red bar:
4.22 μSv/day = 1.54 mSv/y = additional dose “1 mSv/y”• Green bar:
1.48 μSv/day = 0.54 mSv/y = Japanese average natural dose

Distribution of est. annual dose in Naraha-town
FY 2015 Summer – Winter (n = 16)
No. ofpeople

No. ofpeople

Est. Annual Additional Integral Dose(mSv/Year)(BG = 0.35 mSv/y = 0.04 microSv/h)Est. Annual Integral Dose(mSv/Year)

Naraha Town. 2015FY 2nd result of the Naraha Town D-shuttle survey (in Japanese).
http://www.town.naraha.lg.jp/kurashi/files/28.4.27%E8%B3%87%E6%96%99%EF%BC%91.pdf

Lessons Learned• Just measuring and handing back the result is NOT
enough to meet the residents’ needs• Individual needs differ (information, advice, etc.)• If the “dose” is at stake➢ Priority should be measuring and providing explanation(group or one-on-one)• If the “dose” is NOT at stake➢ Other measures become necessary• For appropriate follow-up : It is essential that someone
close to the residents find and involve people who will
benefit from measuring dose, as well as being present
when the measurement is explained.

Conclusion• This presentation showed to record various projects using
D-shuttle in various circumstances—different locations anddifferent users—in chronological order.
• Generalization of these projects is limited.
• However, as each emergency situation after a nuclear
accident is unique and different, there is no general setup toexplain the many types of “values” measured to the affected
population.
• In the case of D-shuttle project, the need to provide face-toface feedback of the measurement result led to the project
design.
• The experience in Fukushima explained in this presentationemphasizes the importance of face-to-face explanation aftera nuclear accident as well as the need to develop appropriate
system, including human resources, to provide such
explanation.