Overview of the Radiation Exposure Doses of the Workers at Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station

Similar documents
FGSZ Zrt. from 28 February 2019 till 29 February 2020 AUCTION CALENDAR: YEARLY YEARLY BUNDLED AT CROSS BORDER POINTS

Dementia Content Report January Produced By The NHS Choices Reporting Team

Kansas EMS Naloxone (Narcan) Administration

Flu Watch. MMWR Week 3: January 14 to January 20, and Deaths. Virologic Surveillance. Influenza-Like Illness Surveillance

From Analytics to Action

Complete Central Registry Treatment Information Requires Ongoing Reporting and Consolidation Well Beyond 6-Month Reporting

Flu Watch. MMWR Week 4: January 21 to January 27, and Deaths. Virologic Surveillance. Influenza-Like Illness Surveillance

Clostridium difficile (C. difficile) and Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia (MRSA and MSSA) Bi-annual Report. Surveillance: Report:

18 Week 92% Open Pathway Recovery Plan and Backlog Clearance

McLean ebasis plus TM

STRENGTHENING THE COORDINATION, DELIVERY AND MONITORING OF HIV AND AIDS SERVICES IN MALAWI THROUGH FAITH-BASED INSTITUTIONS.

Sexual Health Content Report June Produced By The NHS Choices Reporting Team

BJA Performance Measures

Dementia Content Report May Produced By The NHS Choices Reporting Team

Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Accident and Fukushima Medical University Activities

FAQs about Provider Profiles on Breast Cancer Screenings (Mammography) Q: Who receives a profile on breast cancer screenings (mammograms)?

IMPLEMENTING RECOVERY ORIENTED CLINICAL SERVICES IN OPIOID TREATMENT PROGRAMS PILOT UPDATE. A Clinical Quality Improvement Program

Quit Rates of New York State Smokers

Sleep Market Panel. Results for June 2015

Hand, Foot, and Mouth Disease Situation Update. Hand, Foot, and Mouth Disease surveillance summary

Pre-hospital thrombolysis (PHT) Clinical Audit Report 30 th November 2007

Alcohol & Drugs. Contents:

Crisis Connections Crisis Line Phone Worker Training (Online/Onsite) Winter 2019

Poster Session HRT1317 Innovation Awards November 2013 Brisbane

Date : September Permit/License or Registration Application. Permit/License/ Notification/ Registration Description. Remark

National Xpert MTB/RIF Programme

Tri-County Opioid Safety Coalition Data Brief December 2017 Clackamas, Multnomah, and Washington Counties

Avian influenza in poultry, wild and captive birds (AI)

BREATH AND BLOOD ALCOHOL STATISTICS

Analysis of Meter Reading Validation Tolerances proposed by Project Nexus

GREENWOOD PUBLIC SCHOOL DISTRICT PHYSICAL EDUCATION

Data Visualization - Basics

Magellan s Transport Route Lead Monitoring Program

Emergency Department Boarding of Psychiatric Patients in Oregon

Curators of the University of Missouri - Combined January 01, 2013 through December 31, 2013 Cost Management Report

Tobacco Use. Overview. General Data Note. Summary NYSDOH

Global and National Trends in Vaccine Preventable Diseases. Dr Brenda Corcoran National Immunisation Office.

Global Fund Approach to Health System Strengthening

An Updated Approach to Colon Cancer Screening and Prevention

Durham Region Influenza Bulletin: 2017/18 Influenza Season

Method for internal dose estimation of workers at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power station

Seasonality of influenza activity in Hong Kong and its association with meteorological variations

Successful Falls Prevention in Aged Persons Mental Health. Reducing the risk and decreasing severity of outcome

Adult Immunizations. Business Health Care Group (BHCG) April 25, Cathy Edwards. Immunization Program Advisor

MHSC Program Evaluation Mental Health Service Corps. Dana Collins, Social Work Intern Jessica Neufeld, MPH Virna Little, PsyD, LCSW-r, MBA, CCM, SAP

RTT Exception Report

Quality & Safety Committee Date: 22 June 2016 Agenda item: 4.4

Administrative Procedure

TB Outbreak in a Homeless Shelter

APPENDIX ONE. 1 st Appointment (Non-admitted) recovery trajectories

Curators of the University of Missouri - Combined January 1, 2016 through December 31, 2016

Supplementary Online Content

Breast Test Wales Screening Division Public Health Wales

Weekly Influenza News 2016/17 Season. Communicable Disease Surveillance Unit. Summary of Influenza Activity in Toronto for Week 43

HIV POSITIVE YOUTH: LINKAGE & RETENTION IN CARE

March 2012: Next Review September 2012

Improving care of HIV-infected breastfeeding

South Plains Emergency Medical Services, Inc. P.O. Box Lubbock, Texas 79453

Heroin & Fentanyl Related Deaths in Cuyahoga County

Turbulence Accidents and NTSB Research Update. Nathan Doble Turbulence Impact Mitigation Workshop 3 McLean, Virginia September 6, 2018

INFLUENZA IN MANITOBA 2010/2011 SEASON. Cases reported up to January 29, 2011

USING TEAM AUDITS TO IMPROVE IMAGE QUALITY: Our Institution s Experience

CONTROL CHART METHODOLOGY

5. BIOCHEMICAL COMPOSITION AND FOOD VALUE OF RIBBON FISH L. SAVALA

Building Capacity for Smoking Cessation Treatment Within Primary Care Teams

Has the UK had a double epidemic?

Education around PML risk and monitoring at NHNN Queen Square MS Centre

Figure 1: Quantity Dispensed/100 Members (Ambien and Sonata on left axis)

Paired Exchange Results Quarterly Report

FIDS Symposium The River Bender

Published by the Pharmaceutical Services Division to provide information for British Columbia s health care providers

Opioid Deaths in South Carolina. Daniela Nitcheva, PhD Division of Biostatistics Bureau of Public Health Statistics

pwc Smoking Ban Economic Effect Analysis

Influenza Surveillance Animal and Public Health Partnership. Jennifer Koeman Director, Producer and Public Health National Pork Board

Cincinnati Children s Hospital Medical Center PHO/OVPCA Constipation Initiative Monthly Report February 2018

East London Community Kidney Service

Energy efficiency and renewable options for dairy farms

In accordance with 902 KAR 2:020, cases of acute hepatitis A should be reported within 24 hours.

University of Pittsburgh Critical Care Medicine

The Infection Control Doctor and Clostridium difficile infection. Dr David R Jenkins University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust, England

Cancer Immunotherapy Pilot Program/ Patents 4 Patients. USPTO BCP Customer Partnership Meeting Alexandria, VA August 2, 2017

Update on the dengue situation in the Western Pacific Region

Saskatchewan HIV Strategy: Social Network Approach

Alignment Strategies at the JPS Health Network

Monitoring Protocol for Clozapine-induced Myocarditis. Copyright 2017, CAMH

Effects of a Televised Two-City Safer Sex Mass Media Campaign Targeting High Sensation-Seeking and Impulsive Decision- Making Young Adults

Marijuana Possession Arrests Continue Under Mayor de Blasio

Primary Care Dashboard December 2016

RADIATION SAFETY Metrics & Reports 2015

Lauren DiBiase, MS, CIC Associate Director Public Health Epidemiologist Hospital Epidemiology UNC Hospitals

Florida s New Economic Reality: The State of the State

MICHIGAN PATHOLOGY QUALITY SYSTEM (MPQS)

Exposure Status of Workers After the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant Accident. February 27, 2016 Mako Oshidori

Improving Opioid Agonist Therapies with System Change

Blood Alcohol Levels for Fatally Injured Drivers

Team: PIs Olveen Carrasquillo, MD, MPH Erin Kobetz-Kerman, PhD Anthony Amofah, MD (HCN PI)

Insulin Administration Errors in Adult Community Nursing. Hedy Lehman Assistant Director of Professional Standards, Adult Community Nursing

Cork Integrated Falls Service: New ways of working in specialist, community and continuing care

Empowering Weight Loss Charts & Logs Healthy Weight Chart Cholesterol Chart Blood Pressure Chart Exercise Calorie Burning Chart

Transcription:

Click here for the corrections made < Reference > December 3, 212 Tokyo Electric Power Company Overview of the Radiation Exposure Doses of the Workers at Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station * As of December 212, the radiation exposure doses of all workers who engaged in work at Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station after the accident are still being examined. Thus, the data presented in this document is subject to change. 1

(Reference) Radiation Exposure Dose Limit for the Workers FY 21 Mar. 11 FY 211 Dec. 16 Step II completed FY 212 FY 213 FY 214 FY 215 Exposure dose limit Exposure dose limit in emergency 25mSv Exposure dose limit at normal times 5mSv/year and 1mSv/5 years (until 215) Limit 1 Exposure dose limit in emergency Workers exposed to specially high radiation dose: 1mSv Limit 2 Examples Worker A: Exposure dose exceeded 1mSv after emergency work Dismissed Not allowed to work after Step II 12mSv (For example) Worker B: Exposure dose below 1mSv after emergency work Normal operation: Limit 1 is applied (5mSv/year and 6mSv left until 215) 4mSv (For example) Operation which involves specially high radiation dose: Worker C: Engage in work after step II Limit 2 is applied (6mSv left) Normal operation: Limit 1 is applied (5mSv/year and 1mSv left until 215) Operation which involves specially high radiation dose: Limit 2 is applied (Less than 1mSv) 2

1-1 Cumulative Radiation Exposure Doses of Radiation Workers from Cooperative Companies (Cumulative Amount since March 11, 211) Time period: March 11, 211 to August 31, 212 6 Cooperative company workers Number of workers 5 4 3 2 The majority of workers fall into low radiation exposure dose level Exposure msv dose limit: 1mSv/5years 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 11 12 13 14 15 Cumulative radiation exposure dose (msv) * The number of workers was counted in a unit of 1mSv (For example, approx. 2,2 workers fall into the range of 1mSv to 2mSv. Those with msv are counted as 1mSv.) 3

1-1 Breakdown Time period: March 11, 211 to August 31, 212 2-25 15-2 1-15 5-1 2-5 1-2 5-1 1-5 Classification (msv) 25 and up 1 and less Total (Number of workers) Max. (msv) Ave. (msv) Number of cooperative company workers 2 2 17 425 2799 338 2665 5386 5837 2171 238.42 9.57 Exposure dose limit until the start of Step II: 25mSv No worker falls into the range Exposure dose limit after Step II: 1mSv/5years 21 workers who engaged in work right after the accident Of Of the the 2,171 2,171 workers who who engaged in in work work during during the the period period from from March March 11, 11, 211 211 to to August August 31, 31, 212, 212, 2,15 2,15workers (99.9%): 1mSv or or less less 19,725 19,725workers (97.8%): 5mSv 5mSv or or less less (Cumulative) (Cumulative) 4

1-2 Radiation Exposure Dose Distribution among Workers Dismissed from Radiation Work (Cumulative Dose since March 11, 211) The exposure dose distribution among the workers dismissed from Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station is provided below. Workers dismissed during the period from March 11, 211 to August 31, 212 6 5 Cooperative company workers Similar tendency as the workers still in operation Number of workers 4 3 2 1 Exposure dose limit: msv 5mSv/year Exposure msv dose limit: 1mSv/5years 21 workers who engaged in work 1mSv right after the accident exceeded 21 the limit of 1mSv 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 11 12 13 14 15 Cumulative radiation exposure dose (msv) 5

1-2 Breakdown Workers dismissed during the period from March 11, 211 to August 31, 212 25 and up 2-25 15-2 1-15 5-1 2-5 1-2 5-1 1-5 Classification (msv) 1 and less Total (Number of workers) Max. (msv) Ave. (msv) Number of cooperative company workers 2 2 17 26 1555 245 1958 451 4268 14158 238.42 8.59 Exposure dose limit until the start of Step II: 25mSv Exposure dose limit after Step II: 1mSv/5years Similarly to to the the overall overall results, results, the the majority of of the the dismissed workers fall fall into into low low exposure dose dose level. level. Of Of the the 14,158 14,158 workers who who engaged in in work work during during the the period period from from March March 11, 11, 211 211 to to August August 31, 31, 212, 212, 14,137 14,137 (99.9%): 1mSv or or less less 13,877 13,877 (98.%): 5mSv 5mSvor or less less (Cumulative) (Cumulative) 6

p g from Radiation Work (Cumulative Dose since March 11, 211) Exposure dose distribution (cumulative dose since March 11, 211) among the dismissed workers 1 9 8 Ratio of each classification Cumulative ratio Exposure dose limit: 1mSv/5years 7 * Ratio 6 5 4 58.76 Substantial margin to the exposure dose limit 3 2 1 5mSv or less 5mSv-1mSv 13.83 1mSv-15mSv 8.98 15mSv-2mSv 5.47 2mSv-25mSv 3.76 25mSv-3mSv 2.43 3mSv-35mSv 1.86 35mSv-4mSv 1.24 4mSv-45mSv.92 45mSv-5mSv.77 5mSv-55mSv *Ratio (%) = [Number of dismissed workers in each classification] / [Number of all dismissed workers] x 1 As for the 21 workers who engaged in work right after the accident, the exposure dose exceeded 1mSv. The exposure doses of 99.9% of all workers are 1mSv or less and 98.% of all workers are 5mSv or less. Though there are some workers with high exposure dose due to the emergency work they engaged in right after the accident, the doses of most workers have a substantial margin to the dose limit. 7.49 55mSv-6mSv.47 6mSv-65mSv.22 65mSv-7mSv.15 7mSv-75mSv.12 75mSv-8mSv.16 8mSv-85mSv.5 85mSv-9mSv.6 9mSv-95mSv.5 95mSv-1mSv.7.15 1mSv or more 7

1-4 Cumulative Exposure Dose after the Accident --The majority of of the workers were dismissed with exposure dose substantially lower than the dose limit stipulated by by law, and therefore are still capable of of engaging in in radiation work. --Of Of the dismissed workers with exposure dose exceeding 1mSv or or close to to the dose limit stipulated by by law (exceeding 75mSv), 1 1 workers are still employed in in locations other than Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station. (Source: (Source: Interview Interview with with the the main main contractor contractor regarding regarding the the workers workers dismissed dismissed by by July July 31, 31, 212. 212. As As of of November November 212) 212) 8

2-1 Reduction in Radiation Exposure Dose per Month since the Accident (Monthly Average Dose) Monthly average exposure dose (msv)* 25 2 15 1 5 1.6mSv Exposure dose limit: 25mSv Monthly average exposure dose Equivalent to 2mSv/year Completion of Step II Exposure dose limit: 5mSv/year Monthly maximum exposure dose 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Monthly maximum exposure dose (msv) Mar. Apr. May Jun. Jul. Aug. Sep. Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May Jun. Jul. 211 212 Aug. Sep. *Average exposure dose = Total exposure dose in a given month / Number of workers who engaged in work in the month After Step II, the monthly average exposure dose and the monthly maximum exposure dose have been significantly reduced compared to right after the accident. 9

2-2 Change in the Monthly Average Exposure Dose (Close-up on lower dose level) Monthly average exposure dose (msv)* 1.6mSv Monthly average exposure dose Equivalent to 2mSv/year Completion of Step II Monthly maximum exposure dose Mar. Apr. May Jun. Jul. Aug. Sep. Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May Jun. Jul. Aug. Sep. 211 212 *Average exposure dose = Total exposure dose in a given month / Number of workers who engaged in work in the month After Step II, the monthly average exposure dose has been kept under 2mSv/year (1.6mSv/month). In FY 212 second quarter, the monthly average exposure dose was approx. 1mSv. In order to evaluate the current condition, the exposure dose distribution among workers who engaged in work in FY 212 is summarized. Monthly maximum exposure dose (msv) 1

3-1 Current Condition (Cumulative Radiation Exposure Doses of the Radiation Workers from Cooperative Companies, FY 212) Time period: From April 1 to August 31, 212 (5 months) 3 25 Cooperative company Number of workers 2 15 1 Exposure dose limit: 5mSv/year 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 Cumulative exposure dose (msv) 11

3-1 Breakdown Time period: From April 1 to August 31, 212 (5 months) 15-2 1-15 5-1 1-5 Classification (msv) 5 and up 4-5 3-4 2-3 1 or less Total (Number of workers) Max. (msv) Ave. (msv) Number of cooperative company workers 42 125 152 496 1319 2622 2959 7715 36.49 3.9 Exposure dose limit per year: 5mSv No worker falls into the range. Exposure dose equivalent to 5 months of the dose limit per year (5mSv): 5mSv x 5/12 months 2mSv 167 workers Of Of the the 7,175 7,175 workers who who engaged in in work work in in FY FY 212 212 (April (April to to August), 7,548 7,548 (97.8%): 2mSv 2mSvor or less less Given Given that that the the exposure dose dose equivalent to to 5 months months of of 2mSv/year is is 8.4mSv, 5,581 5,581 (72.3%): 5mSv 5mSvor or less less (Cumulative) (Cumulative) 12

3-2 Radiation Exposure Dose Distribution Among the Dismissed Workers (Cumulative Exposure Dose in FY 212) Target: Workers dismissed during the period from April 1 to August 31, 212 (5 months) 3 Cooperative company Number of workers 25 2 15 1 Exposure dose limit: 5mSv/year 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 Cumulative exposure dose (msv) 13

3-2 Breakdown Classification (msv) 5 and up 4-5 3-4 2-3 15-2 1-15 5-1 1-5 1 or less Total (Number of workers) Max. (msv) Ave. (msv) Number of cooperative company workers 25 52 45 88 268 654 1268 24 36.49 3.26 Exposure dose limit per year: 5mSv No worker falls into the range. Exposure dose equivalent to 5 months of the dose limit per year (5mSv): 5mSv x 5/12 months 2mSv 77 workers Similarly to to the the overall overall results, results, the the majority of of the the dismissed workers fall fall into into low low exposure dose dose level. level. Of Of the the 2,4 2,4 dismissed workers, 2,323 2,323 (96.8%): 2mSv 2mSvor or less less Given Given that that the the exposure dose dose equivalent to to 5 months months of of 2mSv/year is is 8.4mSv, 1,922 1,922 (8.1%): 5mSv 5mSvor or less less (Cumulative) (Cumulative) 14

3-3 Radiation Exposure Dose Distribution Among the Dismissed Workers (Cumulative Exposure Dose in FY 212) Cumulative exposure doses in FY 212 among the dismissed workers (5 months) 1 9 8 8.8 Exposure dose limit: 5mSv/year Ratio of each classification Cumulative ratio 7 Ratio* 6 5 4 3 2 1 5mSv or less 5mSv-1mSv 11.17 1mSv-15mSv 3.67 15mSv-2mSv 1.88 2mSv-25mSv Substantial margin to the exposure dose limit 2mSv 5mSv 5/12 months 2mSv 1.25 25mSv-3mSv.92 3mSv-35mSv Max. 36mSv.83 35mSv-4mSv.21 4mSv-45mSv 45mSv-5mSv 5mSv-55mSv 55mSv-6mSv 6mSv-65mSv 65mSv-7mSv 7mSv-75mSv 75mSv-8mSv 8mSv-85mSv 85mSv-9mSv 9mSv-95mSv 95mSv-1mSv 1mSv or more *Ratio (%) = [Number = of dismissed workers in each classification] 1 / [Number of all dismissed workers] x The exposure dose was 2mSv or less for 97% of all the dismissed workers. 15

3-4 Comparison between FY 212 First and Second Quarters The table below shows the comparison between the first quarter (April to June) and the second quarter (July to September) of FY 212. Second quarter (Number of workers) Did not work 5mSv or less 5-1mSv 1-15mSv 15-2mSv 2-25mSv 25-3mSv Total First quarter (Number of workers) 35-4mSv 2 2 Range exceeding 3-35mSv 11 the exposure dose 11 25-3mSv 6 7 6 limit 19 2-25mSv 14 1 12 7 43 15-2mSv 22 14 17 7 2 62 1-15mSv 32 43 44 5 2 3 129 5-1mSv 141 46 135 2 5 77 5mSv or less 1691 3363 27 6 14 5 1 544 Did not work 1615 189 74 11 4 1 1894 Total 198 5469 673 173 34 12 2 8271 - There is no worker with exposure dose close to the limit. - The workers with high exposure dose in the first quarter tend to have low exposure dose in the second quarter and vice versa. Workers are put on rotation between high and low exposure operations. 16

3-5 Current Condition --After Step Step II, II, the the monthly average exposure dose has has been kept kept under 2mSv/year (1.6mSv/month), and and was was approx. 1mSv in in FY FY second quarter. --The The majority of of the the workers were dismissed with with exposure dose substantially lower than than the the dose limit limit stipulated by by law, law, and and therefore are are still still capable of of engaging in in radiation work. --Based on on the the exposure doses in in the the first first and and the the second quarters, workers seem to to be be put put on on rotation between high high and and low low exposure operations. --Of Of the the 5 5 dismissed workers with with exposure dose exceeding 2mSv, 33 33 workers are are still still employed in in locations other than than Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station. (Source: Interview with with the the main contractor regarding the the workers dismissed by by the the end end of of July. July. As As of of November 212) 17

4. Summary Overall, the radiation exposure condition in the power station has improved. - Looking at the exposure doses of workers who engaged in work after the accident, there is a substantial margin to the dose limit (1mSv) for most workers. - After Step II, there is also a large margin to the dose limit of 5mSv/year. - The monthly average exposure dose has been kept under 2mSv/year (1.6mSv/month) since the start of Step II. - Though it is still necessary to continue considering work allocation/rotation, the current condition allows for exposure dose reduction. The The majority of of the the workers were were dismissed with with exposure dose dose substantially lower lower than than the the dose dose limit limit stipulated by by law, law, and and therefore are are still still capable of of engaging in in radiation work. work. We will continue our efforts in reducing exposure dose in the work environment and monitor workers exposure doses. 18