ALARA Newsletter - Issue 26 - February 2010

Details

Published: 04 February 2010

Authors: K. Wichterey (BfS, Germany), H. Schulz (IAF, Germany), A. Schmitt-Hannig (BfS, Germany)

The 2^nd EAN-NORM Workshop, organised and hosted by IAF, was held from 24-26 November 2009 in Dresden. More than 50 experts from 17 different countries, coming from leading European and international organisations, authorities, universities, research institutes and industry representatives shared their experiences in the NORM sector.

In the 1^st Session on General Requirements of Radiation Protection against Exposures due to NORM and other natural radiation sources, Å. Wiklund (EC) presented the provisions for NORM in the new European Basic Safety Standards and G. Proehl (IAEA) gave an Overview of the IAEA Activities to Improve the Management of NORM. The session was followed by a round table discussion where the following topics were addressed:

• Identification of exposure situations pursuant to the new draft BSS by national authorities: Which strategies, experiences?
• Should all industries listed be considered in general or only parts of them? Does the “Positive List” describe the sectors with NORM sufficiently?
• What are the issues at stake in the NORM sector related to ALARA? (Realistic dose assessment of NORM industries, monitoring of workers, discharge control, transport and waste management problems)
• What the different industrial branches in the NORM sector have in common with regard to the implementation of the ALARA principle?
• Existing or planned situations - Must work activities (resp. practices according to the draft BSS) be justified in the future? Who has to justify it and why?

Not all questions could be discussed in detail and the opinions were not always consistent, of course. Only some aspects are summarized here.

The draft BSS include in an Annex a list of industries involving NORM (the “Positive List”), which has been given as supporting guidance, although investigations of specific situations are still required. By means of ALARA, e.g. by replacement of certain materials, optimisation of technological processes, occupancy times, or paying regard to conventional health and safety measures, the need for further control procedures in some industries can also be avoided. In the future, justification should be applied to NORM, as well.

In the 2^nd Session on EAN and EAN-NORM – Experience with networking, A. Schmitt-Hannig (BfS, Germany) presented the European ALARA Network - Experience with networking to support optimisation of protection in practice and K. Wichterey (BfS) shared some first thoughts about the Continuation of the EAN–NORM Network and Support by the Federal Office for Radiation Protection of Germany. H. Schulz (IAF, Germany) talked about the Optimization of the EAN-NORM Webportal as a Fundament for a more active Networking and L. Geldner (Robotron, Germany) about some Technical Aspects of the EAN-NORM Network. A. Poffijn, (FANC, Belgium) presented Past and Future of NORM meetings and the Role of the Network. The round table discussion dealt with the following topics:

• Do we need the ALARA-NORM network? How to achieve self-sustainability: financing, human resources, maintenance of website etc.?
• What benefits do we expect from building a group and exchanging experiences? How can this be realized?
• Is it necessary to organize the scientific discussion (e.g. identification of issues of general interest, summarizing of the discussion results)?
• Can one expect contributions from the different industrial sectors industries (experience, solutions, dose results)?

Here it was stated that the NORM-network is a useful instrument to get information but individual contributions are still rare. Without giving input to the network no lively discussion will take place. It does not seem to be realistic to get detailed information from the industry due to competitive concerns. No support could be achieved with regard to financing in addition to the current contract with BfS which covers the period till 08/2011.

In the 3^rd session The Implementation of the BSS in the Industrial Practice was presented by different examples. K. Gehrcke (BfS) showed a graded approach to regulation in the NORM-sector and R. Gellermann (FUGRO-HGN, Germany) described his experiences in implementing NORM-legislation in several South Eastern European countries. Representatives from industrial branches in the Netherlands and Germany talked about practical issues for dealing with NORM, the organization of radiation protection in the oil and gas industry and guidelines for dose estimations. The discussion touched the following topics:

• Provisions for NORM in the new BSS: Is this what we need? Strengths and weaknesses?
• What is the position of the group with regard to requirements for NORM industries in the “European Commission Services considerations with regard to natural radiation sources in the BSS Directive”?
• Is a licensing procedure for NORM activities appropriate? What does it mean for NORM industries? How could a graded approach be implemented in the authorisation process?
• Application of the principle of exemption - who decides on exemption cases?
• What does "significant" mean with regard to exposures of workers and members of the public? Can a general definition be established or do we need specials ones for the types of practices?
• Does the 1 Bq/g criterion meet the requirements of radiation protection?
• Reuse options for residues: How materials with enhanced radioactivity used as additives to building materials have to be controlled?
• Do we need European Guidelines for dose estimations?

In addition to the BSS, there is a need for further guidance, e g. on dilution and mixing of materials. With regard to dose assessments, it was stated that RP 122 Part II is used in most cases.

In the 4^th Session the Experience in Radiation Protection in NORM Industry in different Countries was discussed. Presentations from Bulgaria, Croatia, Ireland and Italy were given on the situation regarding NORM in their countries and in special fields, e.g. in thermal spas. The overview was complemented by a round table discussion on the following topics:

• Experience with implementing NORM regulations: feedback and practical radiation protection issues. Are there differences in implementing NORM regulations between different NORM sectors?
• To what extent is harmonisation within EU necessary? Are there parts of the NORM sector where harmonisation is more urgent than for other parts, e.g. measurements techniques or dose assessment methods? To what extent (for which parts) would harmonisation with IAEA be beneficial?
  
• What kind of experience exists with methods, programmes, results, documentation etc.?

It was shown that some countries followed a different approach regarding the consequences of the BSS. Some more harmonisation of the regulations is desirable within the EU. Especially with regard to free trade (e.g. of building materials), more clarification is needed.

In the 5^th Session Practical applications in NORM industry in Belgium, Germany, Norway and Poland were presented. Different problems were highlighted like the analysis of radionuclides in TENORM, transport regulations, release behaviour, activity measurements in bulk quantities, end disposal options and the control of occupational exposure. Some solutions were shown which are acceptable to industries and authorities. The round table discussion addressed the following topics:

• How the interfaces from RP-NORM to waste management, soil protection, product declarations, etc. should be developed?
• What are the problems regarding transport of NORM? Criteria for safe NORM transport?
• Final disposal of NORM-residues - requirements, methods, regulatory control.
• Practice of release from the regulatory control: feedback experience from countries.
• Dose assessments in advance of authorizing discharges of radioactivity from NORM industry into the environment.
• Where are the differences in different industrial branches? Are there similarities or differences between the branches with regard to awareness of radiation protection issues?
• Inclusion of health & safety requirements: progress made, issues to be discussed.
• How do the different branches tackle the issue of education and training of personnel?

Not all questions could be answered during the discussions. Nevertheless, useful information on NORM issues was presented and exchanged and fruitful relations were established. The manager of the EAN-NORM network, H. Schulz, encouraged all participants of the workshop to send their statements on the topics discussed and additional contributions on regulations, experiences, and scientific results to the EAN-NORM network and to participate in further discussions.

All presentations can be downloaded from the website www.ean-norm.net.

Details

Published: 04 February 2010

Author: A. Schmitt-Hannig (BfS, Germany)

The development of a common ALARA culture among radiation protection professionals and other stakeholders in Europe is one of the fundamental objectives followed and shared by all EAN members. Moreover the 10th EAN Workshop on “Experience and new Developments in Implementing ALARA in Occupational, Public and Patient Exposures” (Prague, 2006) identified that there is no universally agreed definition of what ALARA culture is, despite the wide acceptance of the need for such a culture. It was then recommended that EAN should develop a definition of “ALARA culture”.

In this context, the EAN Steering Committee proposed to give its support to the work engaged by the IRPA working group on “Improvement of the Radiation Protection Culture” which was launched at the occasion of the IRPA 12 Associate Societies Forum held in Buenos Aires in October 2008 with the aim of preparing IRPA Guiding Principles on that topic. The EAN proposal was officially accepted by IRPA in May 2009.

The objective of the WG is to maintain and further develop the high level of radiation protection by

• promoting the ALARA culture in all fields of application,
• implementing the ALARA principle into practice, and
• analysing feedback from implementing ALARA in various sectors.

The EAN WG ALARA Culture will produce a document, which will reflect the EAN position on the role of ALARA in radiation protection culture. The document will be discussed and then endorsed by the Members of the network, and finally published on the EAN Website’s welcome page.

The EAN position will be developed along the lines of the EAN Workshop recommendations on ALARA Culture and on the basis of the discussions of the WG ALARA Culture, the EAN Steering Committee, the subnetworks (ERPAN and EAN-NORMnet) and the input of the EAN cooperation partners (EFNDT, EFRS, ESR and EFOMP).

The first meeting of the Working Group took place 2^nd October 2009 in Rome. The findings of this meting were:

• The distinction between ALARA and good radiation protection is often difficult to make, as the optimisation principle is the central concept of radiological protection.
• Thus it may not be relevant to propose a specific definition of ALARA culture beside the definition of RP culture, but to identify the specific contribution of the ALARA approach in the radiation protection culture.
• The ALARA approach is the most important element in the RP culture because of the linear no-threshold dose-effect relationship (LNT), new findings of new health effects due to ionising radiation, and the application of the precautionary principle.
• Implementation of the ALARA principle in practice is a major contribution to RP culture. The implementation involves elements such as:
• ALARA training,
• commitment at all levels,
• task planning: prediction of doses likely to be received during specific tasks or specific exposure situations,
• dose evaluation and risk estimation (potential exposure situations),
• analysis whether or not to further reduce doses, remediation actions and feedback,
• relationship between justification-optimisation, etc.

A short and simple definition of the ALARA approach to radiation protection culture has been developed and will be placed on the EAN homepage:

Details

Published: 04 February 2010

Author: A. Schmitt-Hannig (BfS, Germany)

 The 4^th International Conference on Education and Training in Radiological Protection (ETRAP), organised by the European Nuclear Society (ENS) in cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and hosted by Portugal’s Instituto Technologico e Nuclear (ITN), was held from 8 - 12 November 2009 in Lisbon. The Conference was attended by more than 120 participants from 26 countries. Experts from leading European and international organisations, universities, research institutes and industry representatives shared their experiences in delivering education and training in the field of radiological protection during 8 sessions for oral presentations and two poster sessions.

The “Setting the scene” session featured five keynote speakers from the European Commission (EC), the International Radiation Protection Association (IRPA), the IAEA and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development Nuclear Energy Agency (OECD/NEA), respectively.

S. Mundigl, EC Directorate-General for Energy and Transport, introduced the revised European Basic Safety Standards (BSS) with a special focus on education and training requirements. The results of the three EUTERP workshops have been accepted and will be considered in the new BSS. A. Jouve, EC Directorate-General for Research, presented the EURATOM framework programme for nuclear research and training activities and E. Gallego introduced the IRPA strategic plan for the next 10 years. He stated that the IRPA will encourage activities to attract young people to the profession and young professionals to the IRPA congresses. J. Wheatley highlighted the IAEA’s achievements in the field and its future focus on the education and training in radiation protection. IAEA-run post-graduate education courses in radiation protection and safety of radiation sources are open to young professionals with a science/engineering degree. U. Yoshimura, OECD/NEA, raised the issue of the retention of skills and competence in radiation protection.

Very informative presentations were given on the ENETRAP project, the EUTERP platform, the role of the Federation of Independent Organisations of Medical Physics in Europe (EFOMP), the European Nuclear Education Network Association (ENEN) and the Cooperation for Higher Education on Radiological and Nuclear Engineering (CHERNE).

In the closing session, the achievements of the past four years with regard to education and training were summarised. A considerable move forward has been made in the areas of clarification and harmonisation with the two projects: EUTERP and ENETRAP. The Qualified Expert concept has been reviewed and the definitions for Radiation Protection Expert and Radiation Protection Officer have been developed. Three workshops have been organised and all participants gave a commitment to a harmonised approach to radiation protection training. Ongoing international projects and other activities show that the level of international cooperation and commitment to achieving this goal is evolving. Network structures can meet the needs for ongoing exchange of information on training activities and developments. A rationalisation of the existing networks is necessary to develop a common radiation protection and safety culture and apply a multidisciplinary approach to radiation protection training. These points will be included in a conference declaration, which will be issued later.

Details

Published: 04 February 2010

Preamble

 When the paper about 60Co contaminated lift buttons was drafted and published (see European ALARA Newsletter No. 25, October 2009) some Italian colleagues informed us that Italy, too, had been involved in the problem, but at that moment no information was available for dissemination, because the enquiry was still open and the public prosecutor decided both to keep media unaware of the event and to not authorise involved experts to release information on it. Now the enquiry is closed, the technical information has been unclassified and this short note was received to be published as an update to the Newsletter.

Author: Lt. V. Scarfoliero (Pollution from Radioactive Sources Unit, Carabinieri Environmental Care Command, Italy)

In October 2008, OTIS, a Milan-based metallurgical engineering company, informed the Italian Authority about some batches of steel lift buttons manufactured in France probably contaminated with ⁶⁰Co.

After investigation and inspections, the Pollution from Radioactive Sources Unit of the Carabinieri Environmental Care Command, with the technical support of ARPAs (Environmental Protection Regional Agencies) and OTIS technicians detected 254 buttons contaminated with ⁶⁰Co out of about 9,000 buttons monitored.

Specifically, 212 buttons were found in a subsidiary of OTIS near Bologna; another 42 buttons, which had already been installed, were retrieved from a shipping company near Bergamo.

The buttons in the notified batches containing ⁶⁰Co-contaminated steel from India had been produced for OTIS by the French society MAFELEC, and had reached the subsidiary company near Bologna for assembly.

At the end of the investigation, with the approval of the Bologna’s Public Prosecutor and the Local Prefecture, the OTIS subsidiary near Bologna obtained the necessary permits for exporting the contaminated buttons.

On 14 September 2009 all contaminated buttons were shipped by plane through an authorised carrier to France and delivered to the OTIS headquarters.