Presentation on theme: "Caroline SCHIEBER IRPA RC-10 , Buenos-Aires, 22 October 2008"— Presentation transcript:
1Caroline SCHIEBER IRPA RC-10 , Buenos-Aires, 22 October 2008 06/04/2017ALARA AND PROFESSIONAL NETWORKS - PROMOTING OPTIMISATION OF RADIATION PROTECTIONCaroline SCHIEBERIRPA RC-10 , Buenos-Aires, 22 October 2008
2Content of the presentation Foundation of optimisation of radiation protectionHistorical evolutionFrom ICRP 60 to ICRP 103Optimisation in practiceOptimisation processElements supporting the ALARA approachRole and interest of professional networkingChallenges for the future
3The foundation of the principle of optimisation of radiation protection
4Historical evolution of the concept (1) Until the 40's, radiation protection was based on protection against the deterministic effects of ionising radiationThe 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 1940sRecognition of 'stochastic effects'Impossibility to demonstrate the existence or non-existence of a threshold for such effectsDue 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)
5Historical evolution of the concept (2) To reduce exposureto the lowestpossible levelTo keep exposureas low aspracticablePubreadily achievableeconomic and social consideration being taken into accountPub 9 -1966reasonably achievablePubeconomic and social factors being taken into accountPub
6Historical 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 receiversEmphasis 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
7Historical 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)'
8From ICRP 60 to ICRP 103 (1) ICRP 60 Practices Interventions justification, optimisation, limitation (except for medical exposures)Dose limitsIndividual dose constraintInterventionsjustification, optimisationIntervention levels
10From 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 constraintEmergency 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, optimisationReference levelsExisting exposure situations: exposure situations that already exist when a decision on control has to be taken, including prolonged exposure situations after emergencies
11Planned exposure situations From ICRP 60 to ICRP 103 (4)The ICRP 103 approachPlanned exposure situationsEmergency and existing exposure situationsDose limitReference levelDose constraintOptimisationOptimisation
12Dose Constraints and Reference Levels Levels of protectionDose LimitsDose Constraints and Reference LevelsProtect individuals from public and occupational exposure…from all regulated sources, in planned exposure situationsfrom a source,in all exposure situations
13Band of constraint or reference level Dose range proposed by ICRP 103 for dose constraints and reference levels (1)Band of constraint or reference level(ICRP 103)CharacteristicsGreater than 20 to 100 mSvIndividuals exposed by sources that are not controllable, or where actions to reduce doses would be disproportionately disruptive. Exposures are usually controlled by action on the exposure pathways.Greater than 1 to 20 mSvIndividuals will usually receive benefit from the exposure situation but not necessarily from the exposure itself. Exposures may be controlled at source or, alternatively, by action in the exposure pathways.1 mSv or lessIndividuals 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.
14Band of constraint or reference level Dose range proposed by ICRP 103 for dose constraints and reference levels (2)Band of constraint or reference level(ICRP 103)ExamplesGreater than 20 to 100 mSvReference level set for the highest planned residual dose from a radiological emergencyGreater than 1 to 20 mSvConstraints set for occupational exposure in planned situationsConstraints set for comforters and carers of patients treated with radiopharmaceuticalsReference level for the highest planned residual dose from radon in dwellingsReference level for existing situation resulting from accidents: between 1 and 5 mSv1 mSv or lessConstraints set for public exposure in planned situations
15Planned Exposure Situations Occupational exposureConstraints usually set by operatorSmall operators may need guidance from regulatorTransient/itinerant workers need special attentionPublic exposureConstraints usually set by regulatorAbout 0.3 mSv in a year appropriate
16Emergency Exposure Situations Optimisation recommended to and below Reference LevelsThe old intervention system implied optimisation to intervention levelsReference Level: An upper value of residual dose for all pathways combinedThe old system implied averted dose for single countermeasuresAdditional guidance is under preparationExisting guidance in ICRP P63 is extended, not replaced
17Existing Exposure Situations Optimisation recommended to and below reference levelsThe 1990 system implied optimisation to intervention levelsOptimisation, an iterative processThis does not mean a moving target – the reference level staysIndividual dose levelReference levelStep 1Step 2Step 3
19Optimisation processA 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 factorsAn on-going, cyclical process:Evaluate exposure situation to identify the need for actionSet up appropriate individual dose constraint or reference levelIdentify possible protection options to obtain exposures below the dose constraintSelect best option under prevailing circumstancesImplement the selected optionRegular review of the exposure situation
20Optimisation process (2) Level of effort and formalisation has to be commensurate with the level of individual and collective exposures (level of risk)Evolutionfrom 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
21The elements supporting an ALARA approach (1) A commitment of all stakeholders, eg:AuthoritiesOperating managersAll non-exposed individuals whose action can impact the level of exposure of other individualsThe 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)
22The elements supporting an ALARA approach (2) Commitment of AuthoritiesRegulations and willingness to enforce itGuidelines: balance between dialogue and control.Commitment of operating managementDefinition of Radiation Protection policySet general goals,Attribute responsibilities in ALARA implementationMaintain independence of RP professionals from operationAllocate means and resources for ALARA implementation,Motivate (acknowledgment of efforts).To set up a confident ambiance between all involved parties (stakeholders).
23The elements supporting an ALARA approach (3) Commitment of individualsIndividual empowermentProduce and share informationVigilant attitudeAdapted training to functions and responsibilitiesRetraining for keeping motivationSelf-education and training
24The elements supporting an ALARA approach (4) Decision-making and coordination structuresOrganise dialogue between the professional disciplines involved in an operationFavour the transparency of the optimisation processIdentification of decision criteriaTraceability of the decision making processProcedures, rulesClarify the responsibilities for the implementation of the optimisation processToolsSoftware (prediction of exposure, dose rate modelisation,…)Feed-back experience databases…ALARA check-list (design, preparation, operation, feed-back,..)Decision-aiding tools
25Optimisation of protection and stakeholder involvement (1) ICRP examples of stakeholderDecision makerExposed individual or their representativeInstitutional and non-institutional technical support to DMPRepresentatives of the society (elected and NGOs)Stakeholder involvement: A proven means to achieveincorporation of values into the decision-making processimprovement of the quality of decisionsresolution of conflicts among competing interestsbuilding of shared understanding with both workers and the public (does not mean a consensus!)building trust in institutions
26Optimisation of protection and stakeholder involvement (2) Involving concerned parties reinforce the safety cultureIntroduce flexibility in the management of radiological riskStakeholders may be particularly helpful forIdentification of the attributes of exposure situationsIdentification of protective actionsStakeholders 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
27ALARA 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
28Role and interest of professional networks in promoting and implementingoptimisation of radiation protection
29Different kind of 'professional' networks (1) National, Regional, International levelVarious fields: industrial, medical, nuclear,…Authorities, professionals, members of the public, elected people,…
30Different kind of 'professional' networks (2) Professional societieseg: medical physicists, industrial radiography, RP societies,…Associations/NGOeg: Patients associationeg: GMF- Group of EU Municipalities with Nuclear Facilitieseg: Local Liaison Committeeseg: 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)
31Activities / tools of such networks Directory of contact personsWeb siteNewslettersDiscussion ForumWorkshops / congressesWorking groupsCentralisation of documentationProduction of specific guidelinesParticipation to decision-making processes….
32Interests (1) Members sharing the same objectives Particular benefit for isolated professionalsCreation of individual relationshipsSharing of experienceIdentification of 'good practices'Creation of knowledge
33Interests (2) Training Benchmarking Harmonisation of practices Spreading a professional cultureRP culture but also sharing issues of other professionalsFor a better understanding and better collaborationeg: RP professionals working with patient association to spread RP culture or with agriculture professionals for preparation of post-accident situations
34Difficulties of networking ResourcesFinancial 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?
35The European ALARA Network (EAN) 06/04/2017The European ALARA Network (EAN)1996 : EAN Founded and sponsored by EC (DG Research / DG Environment)Self-sustainable since 20052007 : 8 20 countries are represented by at least one person.(13 in the Steering Committee)Coordination :CEPN (France) - HPA (UK)
3606/04/2017EAN ObjectivesTo 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 situationsTo contribute to the harmonisation of radiation protection policies and practices, particularly concerning ALARA, at regulatory and operational levelsTo 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)
3906/04/2017EAN Activities (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)The European Society of RadiologyThe European Federation of Organisations for Medical PhysicsThe European Committee of Radiographers and Radiological Technologists
40EAN Challenges - Development of Networking 06/04/2017EAN Challenges - Development of NetworkingTo 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.
41Information System on Occupational Exposures (ISOE) Created in 1992 by the Nuclear Energy Agency of OECDJoint secretariat with IAEAMembers: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.
42ISOE products International database on occupational exposures in NPPs Collective doses (annual outage, job) since 1992 from more than 300 NPPsPossibilities to extract data for trend and benchmarking analysisRegional and international symposiaNorth America, Europe, AsiaWeb site – “www.isoe-network.net”Forum of discussionAvailability of database for membersVarious RP documentsOrganisation of experience sharing visits between utilities
44In view of optimisation of radiation protection Foster optimisation in some fieldsOptimisation for medical exposures (patients and workers)Optimisation for emergency situationsOptimisation for workers exposed to NORMsOptimisation for public and workers in existing exposure situationsNeed to identify the stakeholders / professionals in each fieldIn some fields, need to create new networksCreate links and cooperation between networks/societies of RP professionals and other professional networks