PROTECTFP Recommendations of Work Package 1 David Copplestone

PROTECTFP Objective of WP1 Was to consult widely with industry and regulators to review regulatory approaches to chemical and radioactive substances. Our emphasis was on: Regulatory instruments Procedures Underlying principles Criteria What is on the horizon (policy development)?

PROTECTFP Interaction with other workpackages. WP 1:Environmental Protection Concepts WP2: Assessment approaches: practicality, relevance and merits WP3: Requirements for protection of the environment from Ionising radiation. WP4: Management

PROTECTFP How the WP is being undertaken The workpackage was undertaken in two parts: 1)Information gathering (questionnaires, face to face, phone calls, website review) 2)Review of the information to identify similarities and differences in how chemicals and radioactive substances are regulated Included assessment of relevant ecological and biological endpoints of protection

PROTECTFP Responses received

PROTECTFP responses from 130 questionnaires broken down as:

PROTECTFP Of 18 regulators, 15 state they regulate to protect the environment Most rely on ICRP statement if man is protected…

PROTECTFP Recommendations from WP1

PROTECTFP Regulation PROTECT should not treat TeNORM differently to other radioactive substances (WP3) Emphasis on the positive benefits of regulation for the nuclear and non-nuclear sectors are being able to demonstrate that they are behaving in an appropriate and responsible manner especially in in terms of large scale environmental issues such as climate change (G) Optimisation of discharges should remain central to environmental/human radiological protection (G) Harmonise future international guidelines and recommendations (G)

PROTECTFP Protection Goals Protection should focus on the population level although rare or endangered species should be explicitly considered in the exposure modelling (WP3) Protection goals should be translated into measurable targets and advice provided on tolerable risks associated with these endpoints (WP3) Develop similarities between radiological protection and chemicals assessment processes. There are some technical differences but the underlying protection goals are identical (WP3) PROTECT should try to work together with the IAEA and the ICRP (G)

PROTECTFP Assessment Methods PROTECT should consider the following approaches to assessing radiological risks to biota (WP2) –R&D 128 –ERICA –RESRAD –Other approaches as identified within the IAEA EMRAS programme –ICRP approach

PROTECTFP Risk Characterisation - methods PROTECT should consider (WP3) –Literature values (expert judgement) –Assessment Factor approach –Species Sensitivity Distribution approach –Use of background levels PROTECT should focus on SSD and AF approaches to determine benchmark dose rates based on agreed tolerable risks. The use of expert judgement should be avoided where possible (WP3) The level of conservatism in the benchmark should be identified and recorded (WP3)

PROTECTFP Risk Characterisation - benchmarks PROTECT should assess the use of the numeric values currently being applied or suggested (WP2) PROTECT should consider the use of a screening value (WP3) PROTECT should consider the need for a standard number (i.e. an equivalent to the 1 mSv for public) (WP3) –What are the advantages and disadvantages of having a screening level and a standard? –Advice will be needed if either a screening level or a standard is exceeded (WP3) PROTECT should produce a clearly understandable document outlining the derivation and limitations. This document should be developed in consultation with stakeholders (WP3)

PROTECTFP Compliance Methods for demonstrating compliance should be evaluated (bearing in mind the use of any identified threshold(s) for example, if used as a regulatory limit then clear strong compliance will be needed)

PROTECTFP Improving the process We should continue to communicate in an open and transparent manner with clear documentation

PROTECTFP Summary Successful consultation process Number of recommendations made Recommendations now being considered in WP2 and WP3 Further details available in D3