Assessing dose of the representative person forthe purpose of radiation protection of the public
The Commission intended that its revised recommendations should be based on a simple, but widely applicable, system of protection that would clarify its objectives and provide a basis for the more formal systems needed by operating managers and regulators. The recommendations would establish quantified constraints, or limits, on individual dose from specified sources. These dose constraints apply to actual or representative people who encounter occupational, medical, and public exposures. This report updates the previous guidance for estimating dose to the public. Dose to the public cannot be measured directly and, in some cases, it cannot be measured at all. Therefore, for the purpose of protection of the public, it is necessary to characterise an individual, either hypothetical or specific, whose dose can be used for determining compliance with the relevant dose constraint. This individual is defined as the representative person. The Commissions goal of protection of the public is achieved if the relevant dose constraint for this individual for a single source is met and radiological protection is optimised. This report explains the process of estimating annual dose and recognises that a number of different methods are available for this purpose. These methods range from deterministic calculations to more complex probabilistic techniques. In addition, a mixture of these techniques may be applied. In selecting characteristics of the representative person, three important concepts should be borne in mind:: reasonableness, sustainability, and homogeneity. Each concept is explained and examples are provided to illustrate their roles. Doses to the public are prospective (may occur in the future) or retrospective (occurred in the past). Prospective doses are for hypothetical individuals who may or may not exist in the future, while retrospective doses are generally calculated for specific individuals. The Commission recognises that the level of detail afforded by its provision of dose coefficients for six age categories is not necessary in making prospective assessments of dose, given the inherent uncertainties usually associated with estimating dose to the public and with identification of the representative person. It now recommends the use of three age categories for estimating annual dose to the representative person for prospective assessments. These categories are 0-5 years (infant), 6-15 years (child), and 16-70 years (adult). For practical implementation of this recommendation, dose coefficients and habit data for a 1-year-old infant, a 10-year-old child, and an adult should be used to represent the three age categories. In a probabilistic assessment of dose, whether from a planned facility or an existing situation, the Commission recommends that the representative person should be defined such that the probability is less than about 5% that a person drawn at random from the population will receive a greater dose. If such an assessment indicates that a few tens of people or more could receive doses above the relevant constraint, the characteristics of these people need to be explored. If, following further analysis, it is shown that doses to a few tens of people are indeed likely to exceed the relevant dose constraint, actions to modify the exposure should be considered. The Commission recognises the role that stakeholders can play in identifying characteristics of the representative person. Involvement of stakeholders can significantly improve the quality, understanding, and acceptability of the characteristics of the representative person and the resulting estimated dose.
The optimisation of radiological protection:: Broadening the process
The principle of optimisation of radiation protection is defined by the Commission as the source-related process to keep the magnitude of individual doses, the number of people exposed, and the likelihood of potential exposure as low as reasonably achievable below the appropriate dose constraints, with economic and social factors being taken into account. According to the revised recommendations of ICRP, this process of optimisation below constraint should be applied whatever the exposure situation; i.e. planned, emergency, and existing. The previous recommendations for the practical implementation of the optimisation process are still valid. It must be implemented through an ongoing, cyclical process that involves the evaluation of the exposure situation to identify the need for action, the identification of the possible protective options to keep the exposure as low as reasonably achievable, the selection of the best option under the prevailing circumstances, the implementation of the selected option through an effective optimisation programme, and regular review of the exposure situation to evaluate if the prevailing circumstances call for the implementation of corrective protective actions. However, the way in which the optimisation process should be implemented is now viewed more broadly to reflect the increasing role of individual equity, safety culture, and stakeholder involvement in our modern societies. This report is a consolidation and an evolution of the Commissions recommendations concerning the optimisation principle. After some background information on the foundation and evolution of the principle, this report describes the main characteristics of the process, addresses the issue of exposure distribution in that process, and provides the basic requirements for its application in operation and regulation. A description of decision-aiding techniques commonly used for practical implementation of the optimisation process is provided in Annex A.
Assessing dose of the representative person forthe purpose of radiation protection of the public
1. INTRODUCTION 1.1. Objective 1.2. Background 1.3. Fundamental principles and concepts 2. ASSESSMENT OF DOSE 2.1. Purpose of dose assessment 2.2. Types of dose assessment 2.3. Overview of the dose-assessment process 2.4. Treatment of uncertainties in dose assessment 2.5. Deterministic and probabilistic methods for dose assessment 3. THE REPRESENTATIVE PERSON 3.1. Definition of the representative person 3.2. Pathways of exposure, time frames, and spatial distribution of radionuclides 3.3. Characteristics of the representative person 3.4. Age-specific dose coefficients 3.5. Determining compliance 4. OTHER CONSIDERATIONS RELEVANT TO THE REPRESENTATIVE PERSON 4.1. Relationship between environmental monitoring, modelling, and the representative person 4.2. Situations of potential exposure 4.3. Value of stakeholder input to characterising the representative person ANNEX A: ANALYSIS OF AGE CATEGORIES FOR USE IN ASSESSMENT OF DOSE TO THE PUBLIC ANNEX B: DETERMINING COMPLIANCE WHEN DOSE TO THE PUBLIC IS ESTIMATED PROBABILISTICALLY.
The optimisation of radiological protection: Broadening the process
1. INTRODUCTION 2. THE HISTORY OF THE OPTIMISATION PRINCIPLE 2.1. Foundation of the principle 2.2. Evolution of the concept 2.3. Recent developments 3. THE OPTIMISATION PROCESS 3.1. Framing the process 3.2. Characteristics of the process 3.3. Stakeholder involvement 3.4. Selection of the best option 4. EXPOSURE DISTRIBUTION 4.1. Use of collective dose 4.2. Exposure distributions in time and space 4.3. Collective dose matrix and decision-making process 5. THE APPLICATION OF OPTIMISATION IN OPERATION AND REGULATION ANNEX A: OPTIMISATION AND DECISION-AIDING TECHNIQUES
Comments (0)
Your review appreciation cannot be sent
Report comment
Are you sure that you want to report this comment?
Report sent
Your report has been submitted and will be considered by a moderator.