1. Caroline SCHIEBER IRPA RC-10 , Buenos-Aires, 22 October 2008
06/04/2017
ALARA AND PROFESSIONAL NETWORKS - PROMOTING OPTIMISATION OF RADIATION PROTECTION
Caroline SCHIEBER
IRPA RC-10 , Buenos-Aires, 22 October 2008

2. 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

3. The foundation of the principle of optimisation of radiation protection

4. 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)

5. Historical evolution of the concept (2)
To reduce exposure
to the lowest
possible level
To keep exposure
as low as
practicable
Pub
readily achievable
economic and social consideration being taken into account
Pub 9 -
1966
reasonably achievable
Pub
economic and social factors being taken into account
Pub

6. 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

7. 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)'

8. From ICRP 60 to ICRP 103 (1) ICRP 60 Practices Interventions
justification, optimisation, limitation (except for medical exposures)
Dose limits
Individual dose constraint
Interventions
justification, optimisation
Intervention levels

9. From ICRP 60 to ICRP 103 (2)
The ICRP 60 approach
Practices
Interventions
"generic" optimisation
Dose limit
Dose constraint
Action/intervention level
Optimisation

10. 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

11. Planned exposure situations
From ICRP 60 to ICRP 103 (4)
The ICRP 103 approach
Planned exposure situations
Emergency and existing exposure situations
Dose limit
Reference level
Dose constraint
Optimisation
Optimisation

12. Dose Constraints and Reference Levels
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

13. Band 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)
Characteristics
Greater than 20 to 100 mSv
Individuals 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 mSv
Individuals 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 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.

14. Band 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)
Examples
Greater than 20 to 100 mSv
Reference level set for the highest planned residual dose from a radiological emergency
Greater than 1 to 20 mSv
Constraints set for occupational exposure in planned situations
Constraints set for comforters and carers of patients treated with radiopharmaceuticals
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

15. 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

16. 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

17. 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
Individual dose level
Reference level
Step 1
Step 2
Step 3

18. Optimisation in practice

19. 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

20. 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

21. 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)

22. 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).

23. 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

24. 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,..)
Decision-aiding tools

25. Optimisation of protection and stakeholder involvement (1)
ICRP 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

26. 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

27. 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

28. Role and interest of professional networks
in promoting and implementing
optimisation of radiation protection

29. Different kind of 'professional' networks (1)
National, Regional, International level
Various fields: industrial, medical, nuclear,…
Authorities, professionals, members of the public, elected people,…

30. 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)

31. 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 ….

32. 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

33. 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

34. 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?

35. The European ALARA Network (EAN)
06/04/2017
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)

36. 06/04/2017
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)

37. EAN Activities 1996-2006 (1) 10 Workshops (700 participants)
06/04/2017
EAN Activities (1)
10 Workshops (700 participants)
Decommissioning, NORMs, internal exposures, risks management, industrial radiography, medical sector and radiopharmaceuticals, site rehabilitation, inspection & control, waste management

38. EAN Activities 1996-2006 (1) 10 Workshops
06/04/2017
EAN Activities (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
 10,000s/y downloads

39. 06/04/2017
EAN 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 Radiology
The European Federation of Organisations for Medical Physics
The European Committee of Radiographers and Radiological Technologists

40. EAN Challenges - Development of Networking
06/04/2017
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.

41. 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.

42. 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 – “
Forum of discussion
Availability of database for members
Various RP documents
Organisation of experience sharing visits between utilities

43. Challenges for the future

44. 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