WAM-B - Special Session: ICRP/IRPA - Tolerance and Reasonableness Orlando V 08:10 - 12:30
|
| Chair(s): Theirry Schneider, Nichole Martinez
|
| |
WAM-B.0
08:10 Introduction
|
WAM-B.1
08:15 About the Tolerability of Radiological Risk J Lochard*, Nagasaki University
Abstract: In the radiological protection system the notion of tolerability of the radiological risk, combined with the radiological detriment, is used for the setting of the dose criteria which delimit the scope of the optimization of the protection. First applied in ICRP Publications 26 and 60 to set individual dose limits for workers and the public in planned exposure situations, the notion of tolerability of risk has been extended in ICRP Publication 103 to also set individual reference levels in existing and emergency exposure situations. However, while the dose limits are universally well accepted, this is not the case for reference levels that remain the subject of debate as illustrated in the case of the Fukushima accident or the management of radon in dwellings. The purpose of the presentation is first to review how the notion of tolerability of radiological risk has evolved in the various general recommendations of ICRP and then to propose a unifying framework for the various exposure situations and categories of exposure defined in the radiological protection system.
|
WAM-B.2
08:45 Where do we go from here on the quest for reasonableness? DA Cool*, ICRP
Abstract: Many organizations are now beginning to consider what it really means to be reasonable in decisions on protection from radiation. Although the As Low As Reasonably Achievable (ALARA) approach has been in use for many years, in many cases the reasonable part has been left out in the quest for lower and lower exposures. The International Commission on Radiological Protection Committee 4 on Application of the Commission’s recommendations has initiated work to specifically examine the concepts of reasonableness and tolerability as a follow on action to Publication 138 on Ethics. This special session is part of that work. One key component to be considered is how to look at all the hazards and benefits that are attendant to a decision on controlling exposure. There are physical effects that come with moving people, or prohibiting consumption of some foods, or dressing out workers in additional contamination control clothing. There are also social implications for decisions, some perhaps being benefits perceived for avoiding an exposure, and some negative with the loss of stability, friendship, even ostracizing those involved. No decision will have exactly the same implications, because the details of the situation, individuals involved, and perceptions of hazards are infinitely complex. Nevertheless, progress can, and should be made to more clearly recognize all of the implications that are present, and provide a framework within which the involved individuals can make their decisions in a knowledgeable and constructive manner. This presentation will briefly describe the ICRP activities moving forward, and some of the challenges faced in taking an all hazard approach.
|
WAM-B.3
09:15 IRPA/SFRP workshops on the practical implementation of the ALARA principle JF Lecomte*, Institut de Radioprotection et de Sûreté Nucléaire (IRSN)
; T Schneider, Centre d’Etude pour l’Evaluation de la Protection dans le Domaine Nucléaire (CEPN); C Schieber, Centre d’Etude pour l’Evaluation de la Protection dans le Domaine Nucléaire (CEPN); S Jean-François, Canadian Radiation Protection Association (CRPA); Y Billarand, Institut de Radioprotection et de Sûreté Nucléaire (IRSN)
Abstract: The French Radiation Protection Society (Société Française de Radioprotection, SFRP) launched a new initiative on the practical implementation of the optimization principle (ALARA principle).Two workshops were organized in Paris in February 2017 and October 2018. This initiative followed a request from IRPA concerning the evolution of the radiological protection system. The objective of the workshops was to share experiences on the current ALARA approach in different sectors (nuclear, medical, radon, contaminated sites, post-accident situations). The aim was to show in particular the role of the decision-aiding tools, the stakeholder involvement and the ethical and societal values that lead to decisions considered reasonable by the stakeholders within the optimization process. The second seminar was focused on case-studies illustrating the implementation of the general approaches for addressing reasonableness, notably the involvement of stakeholders. In all sectors, optimization remains a challenge and a deliberative process is needed to reach reasonable compromises with all informed parties.
|
WAM-B.4
09:45 Practicality, Common Sense and Value for Society R Coates*, International Radiation Protection Association
Abstract: Sometimes in our profession we can become distracted by great philosophical or theoretical concepts. And as a result it can be argued that on occasions we lose sight of issues that could be regarded as ‘common sense’. What are the key ‘common sense’ issues relating to Tolerability and Reasonableness? How do we judge the overall context of radiation exposure? How can our profession best serve society? This paper presents a ‘stand back’ look at the issues behind Tolerability and Reasonableness.
|
WAM-B.5
10:45 Thoughts on Tolerability/Reasonableness from NCRP KD Held*, NCRP
Abstract: The National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP) began 90 years ago and was chartered by the US Congress in 1964 with the mission to support radiation protection by providing independent scientific analysis, information, and recommendations that represent the consensus of leading scientists. Over the years, NCRP has produced a series of Reports providing recommendations on radiation protection and dose management, the latest being NCRP Report 180, “Management of Exposure to Ionizing Radiation: Radiation Protection Guidance for the United States (2018)”. A key element of NCRP views is aptly expressed in a quote from the NCRP founder, LS Taylor: “Radiation protection is not only a matter of science. It is a problem of philosophy, and morality, and utmost wisdom.” The recommendations in Report 180 integrate scientific knowledge on the biological effects of ionizing radiation, experience in the use and management of radiation, and established ethical principles. The Report expresses three radiation protection principles: justification, optimization of protection, and numeric protection criteria for management of dose to an individual. Relevant to this Symposium is the recommendation that optimization (ALARA, as low as reasonably achievable) is to be applied in all exposure situations and is the approach by which doses are managed, reasonably, in practice to be well below the numeric protection criteria. The outcome of optimization depends on the exposure situation and the particular circumstances. The ethical principles of doing good, avoiding harm, being just, and respecting the autonomy of individuals – all reasonable principles – are important to decision making in radiation protection. Also important is the need to incorporate practical experience and involve stakeholders in radiation protection decision making.
|
WAM-B.6
11:15 A Dilettante Looks at ICRP Publication 138 NE Hertel*, Georgia Tech
Abstract: This presentation will be an individual's look at the ICRP Publication on ethics and does not represent an official review by the Society of the content of the publication. At best, the author is a dilettante on the topic and will therefore give his thoughts upon reading the document. This presentation will discuss perceived strengths of the publication as well as the weaknesses.
|
WAM-B.7
11:45 What is Reasonable Radiation Protection for Non-human Biota? NE Martinez*, Clemson University
; L Van Bladel, Federal Agency for Nuclear Control
Abstract: As we work towards a holistic approach to radiation protection, we begin to consider and integrate protection beyond humans to include, among other things, non-human biota. Non-human biota not only includes the flora and fauna of the environment, but also livestock, companion animals, working animals, and the like. Unlike humans where the focus in on protection of the individual, for environmental non-human biota, we generally aim to preserve biodiversity and protect vulnerable or otherwise endangered species, and radiation protection guidance exists to help inform decision-making. Although under consideration, there is currently little guidance in terms of protection strategies for other types of non-human biota. For example, in recent years veterinary procedures that make use of ionizing radiation have increased in numbers and have diversified considerably. Digitalization of planar X-ray procedures, CT-scanning, interventional radiology applications, radiotherapy and nuclear medicine procedures are all accompanied by greater potential radiation risks than the plain film-screen X-rays we have known in previous decades. The changes in these practices have made radiation protection in veterinary applications of ionizing radiation more challenging, both for humans and the animal patients. What is reasonable protection for an animal patient? What factors should we consider and how do we determine, and then balance, the risk and benefit in such situations? This presentation provides a brief overview of protection of non-human biota and poses a variety of questions and perspectives for consideration and further discussion.
|
WAM-B.8
12:05 Open Discussion
|
WAM-B.9
12:15 Panel Discussion
|
