Transcript alara and professional networks

ALARA AND PROFESSIONAL NETWORKS PROMOTING OPTIMISATION OF RADIATION
PROTECTION
Caroline SCHIEBER
IRPA RC-10 , Buenos-Aires, 22 October 2008
cepn
Content of the presentation

Foundation of optimisation of radiation protection
 Historical evolution
 From ICRP 60 to ICRP 103

Optimisation in practice
 Optimisation process
 Elements supporting the ALARA approach

Role and interest of professional networking

Challenges for the future
2
The foundation of the principle of optimisation of
radiation protection
3
Historical evolution of the concept (1)

Until the 40's, radiation protection was based on protection
against the deterministic effects of ionising radiation
 The individual dose limit, set up well below the threshold of
deterministic effects was a guaranty that such effects would
not appear below the limit.

During the 1940s
 Recognition of 'stochastic effects'
 Impossibility to demonstrate the existence or non-existence of
a threshold for such effects
 Due to this uncertainty, the limit is no longer a guaranty of
the absence of risk

=> Prudent attitude of the ICRP with the recommendation
"That every effort be made to reduce exposures to all types of
ionising radiation to the lowest possible level" (1955)
4
Historical evolution of the concept (2)
To reduce
exposure
to the lowest
possible level
To keep
exposure
as low as
practicable
To keep
exposure
as low as
readily
achievable
economic and social
consideration being
taken into account
Pub 9 1966
To keep
exposure
as low as
reasonably
achievable
economic and social
consideration being
taken into account
Pub 22
- 1973
To keep
exposure
as low as
reasonably
achievable
economic and social
factors being taken
into account
Pub 26
- 1977
Pub 1 1959
5
Historical evolution of the concept (3)

ICRP 60 (1990)
 Need to consider in the optimisation process :
"the magnitude of individual exposures, the number of people
exposed and the likelihood of incurring exposures where
these are not certain to be receivers
Emphasis on the equity issue : optimisation may introduce
inequity between one individual and the other (uneven
distribution of benefits and detriments through society)
=> Propose the use of dose constraint for practices:
• a source-related value of individual dose used to limit
the range of options considered into the procedure of
optimisation

6
Historical evolution of the concept (4)

ICRP 103 (2007)

'the likelihood of incurring exposures, the number of people
exposed, and the magnitude of their individual doses should all
be kept as low as reasonably achievable, taking into account
economic and societal factors.

This means that the level of protection should be the best under
the prevailing circumstances, maximising the margin of benefit
over harm.

In order to avoid severely inequitable outcomes of this
optimisation procedure, there should be restrictions on the
doses or risks to individuals from a particular source (dose
or risk constraints and reference levels)'
7
From ICRP 60 to ICRP 103 (1)

ICRP 60
 Practices
• justification, optimisation, limitation (except for medical
exposures)
• Dose limits
• Individual dose constraint

Interventions
• justification, optimisation
• Intervention levels
8
From ICRP 60 to ICRP 103 (2)
The ICRP 60 approach
Practices
Dose limit
Dose constraint
Interventions
"generic"
optimisation
Action/intervention level
Optimisation
9
From ICRP 60 to ICRP 103 (3)

ICRP 103
 Planned exposure situations: situations involving the
deliberate introduction and operation of sources.
• Justification, optimisation, limitation (except medical exposures)
• Dose limits, dose constraint

Emergency exposure situations: situations that may occur
during the operation of a planned situation, or from a
malicious act, or from any other unexpected situation, and
require urgent action in order to avoid or reduce undesirable
consequences.
• Justification, optimisation
• Reference levels

Existing exposure situations: exposure situations that
already exist when a decision on control has to be taken,
including prolonged exposure situations after emergencies
• Justification, optimisation
• Reference levels
10
From ICRP 60 to ICRP 103 (4)
The ICRP 103 approach
Planned exposure
situations
Dose limit
Emergency and existing
exposure situations
Reference level
Dose constraint
Optimisation
Optimisation
11
Levels of protection
Dose Limits
Dose Constraints and
Reference Levels
Protect individuals from public and occupational exposure…
from all regulated sources,
in planned exposure situations
from a source,
in all exposure situations
12
Dose range proposed by ICRP 103 for dose
constraints and reference levels (1)
Band of
constraint or
reference level
(ICRP 103)
Characteristics
Individuals exposed by sources that are not
controllable, or where actions to reduce doses
Greater than 20
would be disproportionately disruptive. Exposures
to 100 mSv
are usually controlled by action on the exposure
pathways.
Individuals will usually receive benefit from the
exposure situation but not necessarily from the
Greater than 1
exposure itself. Exposures may be controlled at
to 20 mSv
source or, alternatively, by action in the exposure
pathways.
1 mSv or less
Individuals are exposed to a source that gives them
little or no individual benefit but benefits to society
in general. Exposures are usually controlled by action
taken directly on the source for which radiological
protection requirements can be planned in advance.
13
Dose range proposed by ICRP 103 for dose
constraints and reference levels (2)
Band of
constraint or
reference level
(ICRP 103)
Examples
Greater than 20 • Reference level set for the highest planned residual
to 100 mSv
dose from a radiological emergency
Constraints set for occupational exposure in
planned situations
• Constraints set for comforters and carers of
Greater than 1 patients treated with radiopharmaceuticals
to 20 mSv
• Reference level for the highest planned residual
dose from radon in dwellings
• Reference level for existing situation resulting from
accidents: between 1 and 5 mSv
•
1 mSv or less
Constraints set for public exposure in planned
situations
•
14
Planned Exposure Situations

Occupational exposure
 Constraints usually set by operator
 Small operators may need guidance from regulator
 Transient/itinerant workers need special attention

Public exposure
 Constraints usually set by regulator
 About 0.3 mSv in a year appropriate
15
Emergency Exposure Situations

Optimisation recommended to and below Reference Levels
 The old intervention system implied optimisation to
intervention levels

Reference Level: An upper value of residual dose for all
pathways combined
 The old system implied averted dose for single
countermeasures

Additional guidance is under preparation
 Existing guidance in ICRP P63 is extended, not replaced
16
Existing Exposure Situations


Optimisation recommended to and below reference levels
 The 1990 system implied optimisation to intervention levels
Optimisation, an iterative process
 This does not mean a moving target – the reference level
stays
Step 1
Step 2
Step 3
Reference level
Individual dose level
17
Optimisation in practice
18
Optimisation process

A source related process to keep the magnitude of individual
exposures, the number of people exposed and the likelihood of
potential exposure As Low As Reasonnably Achievable, taking
into account economic and societal factors

An on-going, cyclical process:
 Evaluate exposure situation to identify the need for action
 Set up appropriate individual dose constraint or reference
level
 Identify possible protection options to obtain exposures below
the dose constraint
 Select best option under prevailing circumstances
 Implement the selected option
 Regular review of the exposure situation
19
Optimisation process (2)

Level of effort and formalisation has to be commensurate with the
level of individual and collective exposures (level of risk)

Evolution
 from a strict consideration of "cost-benefit" decision making
processes (the 'economic and social factors' being integrated
in the so-called 'alpha value - monetary unit of collective
exposure)
 to more flexible processes, integrating other considerations
and based on quantitative as well as qualitative judgements
20
The elements supporting an ALARA approach (1)

A commitment of all stakeholders, eg:
 Authorities
 Operating managers
 All non-exposed individuals whose action can impact the
level of exposure of other individuals
 The exposed individuals…

All stakeholders involved have to know an agree with the basic
assumption of radiation protection (any level of exposure can
induce a risk)
21
The elements supporting an ALARA approach (2)

Commitment of Authorities
 Regulations and willingness to enforce it
 Guidelines: balance between dialogue and control.

Commitment of operating management
 Definition of Radiation Protection policy
•
•
•
•
•

Set general goals,
Attribute responsibilities in ALARA implementation
Maintain independence of RP professionals from operation
Allocate means and resources for ALARA implementation,
Motivate (acknowledgment of efforts).
To set up a confident ambiance between all involved parties
(stakeholders).
22
The elements supporting an ALARA approach (3)

Commitment of individuals
 Individual empowerment
 Produce and share information
 Vigilant attitude
 Adapted training to functions and responsibilities
 Retraining for keeping motivation
 Self-education and training
23
The elements supporting an ALARA approach (4)

Decision-making and coordination structures
 Organise dialogue between the professional disciplines
involved in an operation
 Favour the transparency of the optimisation process
• Identification of decision criteria
• Traceability of the decision making process

Procedures, rules
 Clarify the responsibilities for the implementation of the
optimisation process

Tools
 Software (prediction of exposure, dose rate modelisation,…)
 Feed-back experience databases…
 ALARA check-list (design, preparation, operation, feed-back,..)
24
 Decision-aiding tools
Optimisation of protection and stakeholder
involvement (1)

ICRP 101 - examples of stakeholder
 Decision maker
 Exposed individual or their representative
 Institutional and non-institutional technical support to DMP
 Representatives of the society (elected and NGOs)

Stakeholder involvement: A proven means to achieve
 incorporation of values into the decision-making process
 improvement of the quality of decisions
 resolution of conflicts among competing interests
 building of shared understanding with both workers and the
public (does not mean a consensus!)
 building trust in institutions
25
Optimisation of protection and stakeholder
involvement (2)

Involving concerned parties reinforce the safety culture

Introduce flexibility in the management of radiological risk

Stakeholders may be particularly helpful for
 Identification of the attributes of exposure situations
 Identification of protective actions

Stakeholders involvement does not imply that the operating
management/the authorities do not have the responsibility for the
'final decision' with respect to the adequacy of protection
solutions
26
ALARA in summary

A behaviour and a frame of mind

A questioning attitude of 'individuals':


Have I done all I reasonably can to reduce individual
doses and the number of people exposed ?
A necessity usually to work collectively to be able to answer to
that question
27
Role and interest of professional networks
in promoting and implementing
optimisation of radiation protection
28
Different kind of 'professional' networks (1)

National, Regional, International level

Various fields: industrial, medical, nuclear,…

Authorities, professionals, members of the public, elected
people,…
29
Different kind of 'professional' networks (2)

Professional societies
• eg: medical physicists, industrial radiography, RP societies,…

Associations/NGO
•
•
•
•
eg: Patients association
eg: GMF- Group of EU Municipalities with Nuclear Facilities
eg: Local Liaison Committees
eg: ANCLI (French National Association of Local Commission of
Information)
• …

Dedicated network (one sector or multi-sectorial)
•
•
•
•
eg: Occupational RP (ISOE for RP in nuclear power plants)
eg: ALARA Networks (all sectors), eg EAN, RECAN, ARAN,..
eg: Authority networks (ERPAN)
…
30
Activities / tools of such networks

Directory of contact persons

Web site

Newsletters

Discussion Forum

Workshops / congresses

Working groups

Centralisation of documentation

Production of specific guidelines

Participation to decision-making processes

….
31
Interests (1)

Members sharing the same objectives

Particular benefit for isolated professionals

Creation of individual relationships

Sharing of experience

Identification of 'good practices'

Creation of knowledge
32
Interests (2)

Training

Benchmarking

Harmonisation of practices

Spreading a professional culture
 RP culture but also sharing issues of other professionals
 For a better understanding and better collaboration
• eg: RP professionals working with patient association to spread
RP culture or with agriculture professionals for preparation of
post-accident situations
33
Difficulties of networking

Resources
 Financial resources
 "Human" resources (time to be spent in participating in
activities of the network/association)

How to sustain motivation?

How to renew activities?

How to reach new members?
34
The European ALARA Network (EAN)

1996 : EAN Founded and
sponsored by EC (DG
Research / DG Environment)

Self-sustainable since 2005

2007 : 8  20 countries are
represented by at least one
person.
(13 in the Steering Committee)
Coordination :
 CEPN (France) - HPA (UK)
35
EAN Objectives

To maintain and develop competences in radiation
protection, with special emphasis on ALARA for all types of
exposures - occupational, public, patients - in routine
operations as well as emergency situations

To contribute to the harmonisation of radiation protection
policies and practices, particularly concerning ALARA, at
regulatory and operational levels

To cover all types of practices within the different sectors
(nuclear industry, other industries, medical, research, transport,
etc )

To cover radiation protection themes relevant to all sectors
(e.g. waste management), as well as themes specific to one or
more sector(s) (e.g. industrial radiography)
36
EAN Activities 1996-2006 (1)

10 Workshops (700 participants)
Decommissioning, NORMs, internal exposures, risks
management, industrial radiography, medical sector and
radiopharmaceuticals, site rehabilitation, inspection & control,
waste management
37
EAN Activities 1996-2006 (1)
10 Workshops
 ~ 100 topical recommendations to:
EU, ICRP, IAEA, National
Authorities, Operators, Workers
trainers, etc.

21 ALARA Newsletters
(2 issues/year)
 1,000s addressees

1 Website & its Forum
http://www.eu-alara.net/
 10,000s/y downloads

38
EAN Activities 1996-2006 (2)

Collaboration agreements signed with professional societies:
 EFNDT (Non Destructive Testing)
 ESR (Radiology)
 EFRS (Radiography)
 EFoMP (Medical Physics)

Co-operation with other existing networks:
 ISOE (Information System of Occupational Exposure)
 RECAN (Regional European & Central Asia ALARA Network)
39
EAN Challenges - Development of Networking

To involve various types of stakeholders which are not yet well
represented in EAN: operators, workers, NGOs, Unions, citizens,
etc.

To help in launching other international ALARA networks in
Africa, South Pacific, South America... and to collaborate with
them afterwards.

To become a place where differences and divergences between
stakeholders can be discussed and compromises and
consensuses worked out.

To become an active and recognised interlocutor in risk
management decision processes, influencing international rules
and regulations on the basis of the experiences sharing as well
as the promotion of good practices and lessons learned from
incidents and accidents.
40
Information System on Occupational Exposures
(ISOE)


Created in 1992 by the Nuclear Energy Agency of OECD
Joint secretariat with IAEA

Members:
 Nuclear power plant utilities (71 utilities in 29 countries)
 RP and/or Safety authorities (24 countries)

Objectives:
to provide a forum for radiation protection professionals from
nuclear electricity utilities and national regulatory authorities
worldwide to share dose reduction information, operational
experience and information to improve the optimisation of
radiological protection at nuclear power plants.
41
ISOE products

International database on occupational exposures in NPPs
 Collective doses (annual outage, job) since 1992 from more
than 300 NPPs
 Possibilities to extract data for trend and benchmarking
analysis

Regional and international symposia
 North America, Europe, Asia

Web site – “www.isoe-network.net”
 Forum of discussion
 Availability of database for members
 Various RP documents

Organisation of experience sharing visits between utilities
42
Challenges for the future
43
In view of optimisation of radiation protection

Foster optimisation in some fields
 Optimisation for medical exposures (patients and workers)
 Optimisation for emergency situations
 Optimisation for workers exposed to NORMs
 Optimisation for public and workers in existing exposure
situations

Need to identify the stakeholders / professionals in each field

In some fields, need to create new networks

Create links and cooperation between networks/societies of RP
professionals and other professional networks
44