Duration of implementation of measures for relocation of residents of settlements of the Techa River basin and territories of the East Ural Radioactive Trace

Relocation is a long-term radiation protection measure for the population of radioactively contaminated territories to prevent chronic exposure. The first experience of forced relocation of the population of radioactively contaminated territories took place in the USSR in the middle of the last century. The justification for such a radical protective measure is actively debated in the scientific literature. However, scientific research is more focused on the search for reasonable dose criteria and ways to optimise the resources needed to implement this protective measure. The question of the duration of measures for the resettlement of inhabitants from contaminated areas is poorly addressed. The aim of the study is to characterise the implementation of measures for the relocation of inhabitants of settlements of the Techa River basin and territories of East Ural Radioactive Trace. Materials and Methods: The main source of information on exposed inhabitants of radioactively contaminated territories of the Ural region is the medical-dosimetric database. Results and Discussion: For two radiation situations the conditions of relocation of settlements were analysed and compared. The implementation of measures for the relocation of the residents of the coastal settlements of the Techa River took eight years, and the actual relocation (excluding the preparatory period) of the residents lasted from two to four years. The agricultural settlement (Farm of Trust № 92) took longer to resettle of all the relocated settlements in the area. The relocation of the residents of the settlements located on the territory of the East Urals Radioactive Trace was carried out in a shorter period of time. At the same time, protective measures such as evacuation (lasted several days) and planned resettlement (lasted up to two years) were implemented. Conclusion: The implementation of the measures for the planned relocation of the population from the territory of the East Ural Radioactive Trace differed from the implementation of the measures for the relocation of the inhabitants of the settlements located on the Techa River - the duration of the actual relocation of the inhabitants from the contaminated territories of the East Ural Radioactive Trace did not exceed two years, and from the coastal territories of the Techa River - four years. The evacuation took several days.

1. ICRP Publication 103: Recommendations of the ICRP. 1st edition. Oxford: SAGE Publications Ltd; 2013. 334 p.

2. Arrangements for the Termination of a Nuclear or Radiological Emergency. International Atomic Energy Agency; 2018. 189 p.

3. IAEA safety glossary: 2018 edition. International Atomic Energy Agency; 2023. 359 p. (In Russian).

4. ICRP Publication 109: Application of the Commission′s Recommendations for the Protection of People in Emergency Exposure Situations. 1st edition. Amsterdam: SAGE Publications Ltd; 2010. 112 p.

5. ICRP Publication 111: Application of the Commission’s Recommendations to the Protection of People Living in Long-term Contaminated Areas after a Nuclear Accident or a Radiation Emergency. 1st edition. Amsterdam: SAGE Publications Ltd; 2010. 70 p.

6. INES: The International Nuclear and Radiological Event Scale, User's Manual, 2010 Vienna: International Atomic Energy Agency; 2010. 235 p. (In Russian).

7. Aleksakhin RM, Buldakov LA, Gubanov VA, Drozhko EG, Ilyin LA, Kryshev II, et al. Large-scale radiation accidents: consequences and protective measures. Moscow: IzdAT; 2001. 752 p. (In Russian).

8. Konstantinov YuO. Protection of the public in a large-scale radiation accident: mitigation of negative social consequences of protective actions. Part 1. Interpretation of dose characteristics of emergency. Radiatsionnaya Gygiena = Radiation Hygiene. 2019;12(2): 20-30. (In Russian).

9. Akleev AV, eds. Chelyabinsk region: Liquidation of consequences of radiation accidents. Chelyabinsk: South-Ural Book Publishing House; 2006. 344 p. (In Russian).

10. Waddington I, Thomas P, Taylor R, Vaughan G. J-value assessment of relocation measures following the nuclear power plant accidents at Chernobyl and Fukushima Daiichi. Process Safety and Environmental Protection. 2017;112: 16–49.

11. Linge I, Melikhova I, Pavlovski O. Medico-demographic criteria in estimating the consequences of the Chernobyl accident. In: One decade after Chernobyl: Summing up the consequences of the accident. Poster presentations - Vol. 1. International Conference 8–12 April 1996, Vienna. P. 206 – 214.

12. Wilson R. Evacuation Criteria after A Nuclear Accident: A Personal Perspective. Dose Response. 2012;10(4): 480–499.

13. Akleev AV, Kiselev MF, eds. Medical-biological and ecological impacts of radioactive contamination of the Techa River. Moscow: Medbioekstrem; 2001. 561 p. (In Russian).

14. Silkin SS, Krestinina LYu, Startsev NV, Akleev AV. Ural cohort of emergency-irradiated population. Meditsina ekstremanykh situatsiy = Medicine of Extreme Situations. 2019;21(3): 393-402. (In Russian).

15. Tryapitsyna SV, Kravtsova OS. Determination of the actual term of relocation of representatives of the Ural cohort of accidentally irradiated population from radioactively contaminated territories. Radiatsionnaya Gygiena = Radiation Hygiene. 2025;18(2): 37–46. (In Russian).

16. Starovoitov VV, Golub YuI. Data normalization in machine learning. Informatics. 2021;18(3): 83−96 (In Russian).

17. Tolstikov VS, Kuznetsov VN. Nuclear Heritage in the Urals: Historical Assessments and Documents: Nuclear Cities of the Urals. Ekaterinburg: Bank of cultural information; 2017. 400 p. (In Russian).

18. Consequences of technogenic radiation exposure and the problem of rehabilitation of the Ural region. Мoscow: Komtechprint; 2002. 204 p. (In Russian).