Transcript Meeting the ICRP Main Commission

Meeting the ICRP Main Commission
Abu Dhabi, 20th October 2013
Dr. Bernd Lorenz
Chairman, ENISS Expert Group on Radiation Protection
Contents
•
•
•
ENISS
Liaison Organization
Implementing ICRP Recommendations: Observations from Practice
• Continuity & Stability versus Changes
• Environment
• Optimization
• Dose Constraints
•
Summary
B. Lorenz, MC Meeting, October 2013
2
European Nuclear Installations Safety Standards Initiative
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
ENISS is an organization of European NPP operators/licensees.
Belgium (Tractebel, Electrabel)
Finland (Fortum, TVO)
Germany (EON, RWE)
Italy (SOGIN/ENEL)
Spain (UNESA)
The Netherlands (EPZ)
France (EdF, AREVA NC)
Sweden (EON-Se, Vattenfall AB)
Switzerland (swissnuclear)
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Czech Republic (CEZ)
Hungary ( Paks NPP)
Slovakia (Slovenske Elektrarne,
JAVYS)
Romania (Nuclearelectra)
Bulgaria (Kozloduy NPP)
United Kingdom (EdF)
Slovenia (Krško NPP)
Lithuania (Ignalina NPP)
ENISS is dedicated to safety.
It has a commitment to a continuous improvement of Nuclear Safety.
One of our goals is the harmonization of safety requirements.
B. Lorenz, MC Meeting, October 2013
3
Radiation Protection Situation within ENISS
•
ENISS members operate a very large number of Nuclear Power Plants and
employ many thousands of occupational exposed workers.
•
The protection of workers as well as the protection of the public and the
environment is based on the European BSS which follow the ICRP
recommendations.
•
The radiation protection situation is characterized by low occupational doses and
no severe accident or incident.
•
Development of radiation protection is always important, but the current system
with hundreds of reactor years of experience feedback has proven to be robust.
•
There is no need for a fundamental change of the system.
B. Lorenz, MC Meeting, October 2013
4
Liaison Organization
•
•
•
ENISS is honored to be in the group of acknowledged organizations.
•
ENISS is keen to share its experience and participate in working-level
engagements.
•
“Tolerability of Risk” and the “Philosophy of Radiation Protection” could be
areas of cooperation and fields of closer engagement.
Implementation is our field of competence.
Work in Committee 4 is therefore of utmost interest for us.
B. Lorenz, MC Meeting, October 2013
5
Implementing ICRP Recommendations
•
•
•
ICRP is scientifically oriented.
The operators have to follow the law and regulations.
Recommendations to become reality need to be transformed into a
regulation.
•
Workers on the spot have to be guided so that they understand how to do
the right things. It is not the managing director who gets the exposure.
•
Of course, the management will determine the direction, but this will be
easier with recommendations having
• easy language,
• concepts that are easy to understand
• and are transparent.
B. Lorenz, MC Meeting, October 2013
6
Changes versus Continuity and Stability
•
Do you remember Lars-Erik Holm? It was his message “continuity and
stability” when he presented ICRP 103.
•
•
•
But the reality is somewhat different.
A lot of time is invested to identify in which exposure situation we are.
New terminology provides for at least some confusion.
• “Critical Group” is now the “Representative Person”, but is that really the same?
•
Dose Constraints have been defined as the center of optimization.
• ALARA was the driving force until now.
•
The tissue reaction report is proposing a new limit for the lens of the eye:
• People are now asking if they were at high risk before.
• Assessments have to be started to clear up the situation.
B. Lorenz, MC Meeting, October 2013
7
Environment is all around
•
For decades the concept has been that when man is protected then the
environment with its plants and animals is also sufficiently protected.
•
ICRP has now presented a new concept for “environmental exposure” in
parallel to the human protection system.
•
•
ENISS and other organizations and individuals have commented.
ENISS e.g. asked for the need of this new concept, taking into account the
very small discharges by its facilities.
•
Further work is needed to clarify the concept and its implementation.
B. Lorenz, MC Meeting, October 2013
8
Optimizing the Optimization
•
•
•
It was a long way from ICRP 26 via ICRP 60 to ICRP 103.
At the time of ICRP 26 we discussed the so called de-minimis-concept.
But except for clearance and exemption of radioactive material, the
concept is still not established in occupational radiation protection.
•
ALARA in terms of a dose where further reduction is not needed, would
help to concentrate on the important things.
B. Lorenz, MC Meeting, October 2013
9
How to find the right dose constraint?
•
•
Since ICRP 60 we try to find out the added value behind dose constraints.
How can one say a solution is outside the range of optimization when the
optimization process has not started?
•
•
For each and every source a dose constraint?
There are thousands of sources, e.g.
• Smoke detectors
• Filling level gauges
• The repair of a contaminated part
• Dental X-rays
B. Lorenz, MC Meeting, October 2013
10
Summary
•
ENISS is an organization with broad experience in the practical
implementation of radiation protection.
•
•
As Liaison Organization we hope to bring in this experience.
For implementing ICRP Recommendations:
• A balance needs to be found between “Continuity & Stability” and “Change”
• The environment is already protected.
• Optimizing optimization calls for a cut-off.
• To find the right dose constraint, more advice is needed.
B. Lorenz, MC Meeting, October 2013
11