1. SÄTEILYTURVAKESKUS STRÅLSÄKERHETSCENTRALEN RADIATION AND NUCLEAR SAFETY AUTHORITY Protection of the environment from ionising radiation - views of a regulator PROTECT WP1 workshop Chester 29-30 March 2007 Riitta Hänninen

2. SÄTEILYTURVAKESKUS STRÅLSÄKERHETSCENTRALEN RADIATION AND NUCLEAR SAFETY AUTHORITY Protection of environment - views of a regulator 2 29.3.2007/RiH Topics Environmental, radiation protection and nuclear energy legislation in Finland Progress in national development of regulations on protection of the environment from ionising radiation Role of optimisation Need for communication with other relevant environmental protection fields

3. SÄTEILYTURVAKESKUS STRÅLSÄKERHETSCENTRALEN RADIATION AND NUCLEAR SAFETY AUTHORITY Protection of environment - views of a regulator 3 29.3.2007/RiH General environmental protection legislation General environmental protection legislation in Finland includes international conventions and EU legislation. The Convention on Biological Diversity has come into force in Finland in 1994 (914/94). The Government of Finland has made a decision in principle in 1995, which includes a statement that each ministry on its own branch is responsible for protection of biological diversity and sustainable use of natural resources. The Act on Environmental Impact Assessment Procedure (468/94) and the Decree on Environmental Impact Assessment Procedure (792/94) require that the environmental impacts of projects specified by the legislation must be assessed. The projects include energy production.

4. SÄTEILYTURVAKESKUS STRÅLSÄKERHETSCENTRALEN RADIATION AND NUCLEAR SAFETY AUTHORITY Protection of environment - views of a regulator 4 29.3.2007/RiH The Finnish regulations on radiation protection are based on recommendations of the ICRP. The recommendations (ICRP 60 1991) have been taken into account in the Radiation Act (592/91). According to the ICRP 60, the level of protection necessary for protection of people is also enough for protection of other species. Occasionally individuals of other species may obtain adverse effects of ionizing radiation but not to the extent that the whole species or the balance between species would be disturbed. The Radiation Act (592/91) excludes direct reference to protection of biota or environment. The protection of the environment is mentioned as a general concept in the context of releases from practice and nuclear waste management. Legislative measures for protection of the natural environment from adverse effects of ionizing radiation in Finland

5. SÄTEILYTURVAKESKUS STRÅLSÄKERHETSCENTRALEN RADIATION AND NUCLEAR SAFETY AUTHORITY Protection of environment - views of a regulator 5 29.3.2007/RiH Radiation protection and nuclear energy The Finnish nuclear energy legislation includes a requirement that the environment must be protected. However, protection of the environment is stated as a general concept that is not specified. (Nuclear Energy Act 990/1987) An important factor of the legislation as concerns the impact on the environment, is the general principle that exposure to ionizing radiation must be kept as low as reasonably achievable. Accordingly, as to the nuclear energy production, besides keeping activity concentrations below the given discharge limits, it is required that discharges are kept as low as reasonably achievable.

6. SÄTEILYTURVAKESKUS STRÅLSÄKERHETSCENTRALEN RADIATION AND NUCLEAR SAFETY AUTHORITY Protection of environment - views of a regulator 6 29.3.2007/RiH Finland: Legal basis concerning nuclear energy

7. SÄTEILYTURVAKESKUS STRÅLSÄKERHETSCENTRALEN RADIATION AND NUCLEAR SAFETY AUTHORITY Protection of environment - views of a regulator 7 29.3.2007/RiH Radiation protection and nuclear waste No activity concentration or dose limits are used to limit r exposure of biota to ionizing radiation. Nevertheless, a regulation concerning the final disposal of low level nuclear wastes (Government decision 398/91) state that ‘Addition to the natural activity concentrations of radioactive substances caused by finally disposed nuclear wastes must stay low all over the living environment.’ A decision of the government of Finland (478/1999) concerning the safety of the final disposal of spent nuclear fuel states that ‘In addition to impacts on man, potential impacts on species of fauna and flora shall also be examined.’

8. SÄTEILYTURVAKESKUS STRÅLSÄKERHETSCENTRALEN RADIATION AND NUCLEAR SAFETY AUTHORITY Protection of environment - views of a regulator 8 29.3.2007/RiH Guide YVL 8.4 on long term safety of spent nuclear fuel Disposal of spent fuel shall not affect detrimentally to species of fauna and flora. This shall be demonstrated by assessing the typical radiation exposures of terrestrial and aquatic populations in the disposal site environment, assuming the present kind of living populations. These exposures shall remain clearly below the levels which, on the basis of the best available scientific knowledge, would cause decline in biodiversity or other significant detriment to any living population. Moreover, rare animals and plants as well as domestic animals shall not be exposed detrimentally as individuals.

9. SÄTEILYTURVAKESKUS STRÅLSÄKERHETSCENTRALEN RADIATION AND NUCLEAR SAFETY AUTHORITY Protection of environment - views of a regulator 9 29.3.2007/RiH Some factors in the national process in establishing specific regulations to protect the environment from ionising radiation International development of radiation protection concerning biota is only in an early stage with little specific guidance Although recognised as an area to be developed, no clear driving force has been identified for urgent action Rapid development of environmental protection legislation has caused changes in the operating environment of authorities and organisations only relatively recently. Interpretation and implementation of environmental protection legislation is a developing process in several other fields (chemicals, water, forests etc.) Lack of knowledge and communication on policy and methods used in other fields

10. SÄTEILYTURVAKESKUS STRÅLSÄKERHETSCENTRALEN RADIATION AND NUCLEAR SAFETY AUTHORITY Protection of environment - views of a regulator 10 29.3.2007/RiH Policy process and law At present problem identification in Finland has pointed out spent nuclear fuel as an area where protection of fauna and flora should be addressed in particular due to: planning stage – no experience Outcomes of other planned activities (nuclear power plants, hospitals, industry etc.): good experience on releases due to the application of optimisation principle

11. SÄTEILYTURVAKESKUS STRÅLSÄKERHETSCENTRALEN RADIATION AND NUCLEAR SAFETY AUTHORITY Protection of environment - views of a regulator 11 29.3.2007/RiH Some reasons for including optimisation as an integral part of radiation protection policy There are still uncertainties in understanding and meeting the goal of safeguarding biodiversity Uncertainties relate to the assessment of environmental impacts for various species and individual organisms in varying environmental conditions and therefore also to setting numerical limits for exposures or concentrations With optimisation there is less need for detailed assessments – e.g. to achieve assurance concerning protection of individuals of endangered species Good experience – optimisation has been a tool for good outcome in radiation protection of man

12. SÄTEILYTURVAKESKUS STRÅLSÄKERHETSCENTRALEN RADIATION AND NUCLEAR SAFETY AUTHORITY Protection of environment - views of a regulator 12 29.3.2007/RiH Some reasons for including optimisation as an integral part of radiation protection policy (cont.) Uncertainties in understanding the implications of the goal to safeguard biodiversity originate from the fact that biodiversity is a complex structure. Biodiversity can be described to comprise three conceptual levels –species diversity –genetic diversity –ecosystem diversity In this context the role of mutations is unclear

13. SÄTEILYTURVAKESKUS STRÅLSÄKERHETSCENTRALEN RADIATION AND NUCLEAR SAFETY AUTHORITY Protection of environment - views of a regulator 13 29.3.2007/RiH Optimisation Role of optimisation in protection of the environment should be: –An independent and parallel requirement in addition to any limits or reference values –Consistent with the role of optimisation in protection of man –Consistent with the role of related concept BAT (best available technique) in environmental protection legislation e.g. in European Union directive on integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC) Optimisation could also be one aspect when setting limits or restrictions for specific activities or circumstances

14. SÄTEILYTURVAKESKUS STRÅLSÄKERHETSCENTRALEN RADIATION AND NUCLEAR SAFETY AUTHORITY Protection of environment - views of a regulator 14 29.3.2007/RiH Summary In Finland protection of the environment has been taken into account in the Nuclear Energy Act, but at present specific regulations exist only for disposal of spent nuclear fuel. For other phases of nuclear energy production no urgent need has been identified. International development has an important role. Uncertainties call for inclusion of optimisation as an independent principle in management of radiation protection of the environment in addition to setting any criteria for assessment of safe levels of radiation exposure Safeguarding biodiversity and applying the principle of sustainable development requires increased communication and co-operation in various fields of society in order to apply common principles, approaches and methods both for radiological and non-radiological protection.