IAEA Safety Standards
for protecting people and the environment

Radiation Protectionof the Public andthe Environment
Jointly sponsored byGeneral Safety Guide
No. GSG-8

IAEA SAFETY STANDARDS AND RELATED PUBLICATIONSIAEA SAFETY STANDARDSUnder the terms of Article III of its Statute, the IAEA is authorized to establish or adopt
standards of safety for protection of health and minimization of danger to life and property, andto provide for the application of these standards.
The publications by means of which the IAEA establishes standards are issued in the
IAEA Safety Standards Series. This series covers nuclear safety, radiation safety, transport
safety and waste safety. The publication categories in the series are Safety Fundamentals,
Safety Requirements and Safety Guides.
site

Information on the IAEA’s safety standards programme is available on the IAEA Internet
http://www-ns.iaea.org/standards/

The site provides the texts in English of published and draft safety standards. The texts
of safety standards issued in Arabic, Chinese, French, Russian and Spanish, the IAEA Safety
Glossary and a status report for safety standards under development are also available. For
further information, please contact the IAEA at: Vienna International Centre, PO Box 100,
1400 Vienna, Austria.
All users of IAEA safety standards are invited to inform the IAEA of experience in theiruse (e.g. as a basis for national regulations, for safety reviews and for training courses) for the
purpose of ensuring that they continue to meet users’ needs. Information may be provided via
the IAEA Internet site or by post, as above, or by email to Official.Mail@iaea.org.
RELATED PUBLICATIONSThe IAEA provides for the application of the standards and, under the terms of Articles III
and VIII.C of its Statute, makes available and fosters the exchange of information relating
to peaceful nuclear activities and serves as an intermediary among its Member States for thispurpose.
Reports on safety in nuclear activities are issued as Safety Reports, which provide
practical examples and detailed methods that can be used in support of the safety standards.
Other safety related IAEA publications are issued as Emergency Preparedness andResponse publications, Radiological Assessment Reports, the International Nuclear Safety
Group’s INSAG Reports, Technical Reports and TECDOCs. The IAEA also issues reports
on radiological accidents, training manuals and practical manuals, and other special safety
related publications.
Security related publications are issued in the IAEA Nuclear Security Series.
The IAEA Nuclear Energy Series comprises informational publications to encourage
and assist research on, and the development and practical application of, nuclear energy forpeaceful purposes. It includes reports and guides on the status of and advances in technology,
and on experience, good practices and practical examples in the areas of nuclear power, thenuclear fuel cycle, radioactive waste management and decommissioning.

RADIATION PROTECTION
OF THE PUBLIC AND
THE ENVIRONMENTThe following States are Members of the International Atomic Energy Agency:
AFGHANISTANALBANIA
ALGERIAANGOLA
ANTIGUA AND BARBUDA
ARGENTINA
ARMENIA
AUSTRALIA
AUSTRIAAZERBAIJAN
BAHAMAS
BAHRAINBANGLADESHBARBADOSBELARUSBELGIUM
BELIZEBENIN
BOLIVIA, PLURINATIONAL
STATE OFBOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINABOTSWANABRAZILBRUNEI DARUSSALAM
BULGARIA
BURKINA FASO
BURUNDICAMBODIACAMEROONCANADACENTRAL AFRICAN
REPUBLIC
CHAD
CHILE
CHINA
COLOMBIACONGOCOSTA RICA
CÔTE D’IVOIRECROATIACUBACYPRUSCZECH REPUBLIC
DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC
OF THE CONGO
DENMARKDJIBOUTIDOMINICADOMINICAN REPUBLICECUADOREGYPTEL SALVADORERITREAESTONIAETHIOPIAFIJI
FINLANDFRANCEGABONGEORGIAGERMANYGHANA
GREECEGUATEMALAGUYANAHAITI
HOLY SEE
HONDURASHUNGARYICELAND
INDIA
INDONESIA
IRAN, ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OFIRAQIRELANDISRAELITALY
JAMAICAJAPANJORDANKAZAKHSTANKENYAKOREA, REPUBLIC OFKUWAITKYRGYZSTANLAO PEOPLE’S DEMOCRATIC
REPUBLICLATVIALEBANONLESOTHO
LIBERIA
LIBYA
LIECHTENSTEIN
LITHUANIALUXEMBOURG
MADAGASCARMALAWI
MALAYSIAMALI
MALTA
MARSHALL ISLANDS
MAURITANIA
MAURITIUS
MEXICOMONACOMONGOLIAMONTENEGRO
MOROCCOMOZAMBIQUE
MYANMAR
NAMIBIANEPAL
NETHERLANDSNEW ZEALANDNICARAGUANIGERNIGERIANORWAYOMANPAKISTAN

PALAU
PANAMAPAPUA NEW GUINEAPARAGUAYPERU
PHILIPPINESPOLANDPORTUGALQATARREPUBLIC OF MOLDOVAROMANIARUSSIAN FEDERATIONRWANDASAINT VINCENT AND
THE GRENADINESSAN MARINOSAUDI ARABIASENEGALSERBIASEYCHELLESSIERRA LEONESINGAPORESLOVAKIASLOVENIA
SOUTH AFRICASPAIN
SRI LANKASUDAN
SWAZILANDSWEDENSWITZERLANDSYRIAN ARAB REPUBLICTAJIKISTANTHAILANDTHE FORMER YUGOSLAVREPUBLIC OF MACEDONIATOGOTRINIDAD AND TOBAGOTUNISIA
TURKEYTURKMENISTANUGANDAUKRAINE
UNITED ARAB EMIRATESUNITED KINGDOM OFGREAT BRITAIN ANDNORTHERN IRELAND
UNITED REPUBLICOF TANZANIAUNITED STATES OF AMERICAURUGUAYUZBEKISTANVANUATU
VENEZUELA, BOLIVARIAN
REPUBLIC OFVIET NAMYEMEN
ZAMBIA
ZIMBABWE

The Agency’s Statute was approved on 23 October 1956 by the Conference on the Statute of the
IAEA held at United Nations Headquarters, New York; it entered into force on 29 July 1957.
The Headquarters of the Agency are situated in Vienna. Its principal objective is “to accelerate and enlarge
the contribution of atomic energy to peace, health and prosperity throughout the world’’.

IAEA SAFETY STANDARDS SERIES No. GSG-8

RADIATION PROTECTION
OF THE PUBLIC AND
THE ENVIRONMENTGENERAL SAFETY GUIDEJOINTLY SPONSORED BY THE
INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY
AND UNITED NATIONS ENVIRONMENT PROGRAMMEINTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY
VIENNA, 2018

COPYRIGHT NOTICEAll IAEA scientific and technical publications are protected by the terms of
the Universal Copyright Convention as adopted in 1952 (Berne) and as revisedin 1972 (Paris). The copyright has since been extended by the World Intellectual
Property Organization (Geneva) to include electronic and virtual intellectual
property. Permission to use whole or parts of texts contained in IAEA publicationsin printed or electronic form must be obtained and is usually subject to royalty
agreements. Proposals for non-commercial reproductions and translations arewelcomed and considered on a case-by-case basis. Enquiries should be addressedto the IAEA Publishing Section at:
Marketing and Sales Unit, Publishing Section
International Atomic Energy Agency
Vienna International Centre
PO Box 100
1400 Vienna, Austria
fax: +43 1 2600 29302
tel.: +43 1 2600 22417
email: sales.publications@iaea.org
http://www.iaea.org/books© IAEA, 2018
Printed by the IAEA in Austria
May 2018
STI/PUB/1781

IAEA Library Cataloguing in Publication Data
Names: International Atomic Energy Agency.
Title: Radiation protection of the public and the environment / International Atomic
Energy Agency.
Description: Vienna : International Atomic Energy Agency, 2018. | Series: IAEA
safety standards series, ISSN 1020–525X ; no. GSG-8 | Includes bibliographicalreferences.
Identifiers: IAEAL 17-01100 | ISBN 978–92–0–102517–3 (paperback : alk. paper)
Subjects: LCSH: Radiation — Safety measures. | Ionizing radiation — Safetymeasures. | Radiation — Measurement.
Classification: UDC 614.876 | STI/PUB/1781

FOREWORD
by Yukiya Amano
Director General
The IAEA’s Statute authorizes the Agency to “establish or adopt…
standards of safety for protection of health and minimization of danger to life andproperty” — standards that the IAEA must use in its own operations, and which
States can apply by means of their regulatory provisions for nuclear and radiation
safety. The IAEA does this in consultation with the competent organs of theUnited Nations and with the specialized agencies concerned. A comprehensive
set of high quality standards under regular review is a key element of a stable andsustainable global safety regime, as is the IAEA’s assistance in their application.
The IAEA commenced its safety standards programme in 1958. The
emphasis placed on quality, fitness for purpose and continuous improvement
has led to the widespread use of the IAEA standards throughout the world. The
Safety Standards Series now includes unified Fundamental Safety Principles,
which represent an international consensus on what must constitute a high levelof protection and safety. With the strong support of the Commission on Safety
Standards, the IAEA is working to promote the global acceptance and use of its
standards.
Standards are only effective if they are properly applied in practice.
The IAEA’s safety services encompass design, siting and engineering safety,
operational safety, radiation safety, safe transport of radioactive material andsafe management of radioactive waste, as well as governmental organization,
regulatory matters and safety culture in organizations. These safety services assist
Member States in the application of the standards and enable valuable experienceand insights to be shared.
Regulating safety is a national responsibility, and many States havedecided to adopt the IAEA’s standards for use in their national regulations. For
parties to the various international safety conventions, IAEA standards provide
a consistent, reliable means of ensuring the effective fulfilment of obligations
under the conventions. The standards are also applied by regulatory bodies andoperators around the world to enhance safety in nuclear power generation and innuclear applications in medicine, industry, agriculture and research.
Safety is not an end in itself but a prerequisite for the purpose of theprotection of people in all States and of the environment — now and in the
future. The risks associated with ionizing radiation must be assessed andcontrolled without unduly limiting the contribution of nuclear energy to equitable
and sustainable development. Governments, regulatory bodies and operators
everywhere must ensure that nuclear material and radiation sources are usedbeneficially, safely and ethically. The IAEA safety standards are designed tofacilitate this, and I encourage all Member States to make use of them.

PREFACE
Requirements for the protection of people from harmful consequencesof exposure to ionizing radiation, for the safety of radiation sources and forprotection of the environment are established in the IAEA Safety Requirements for
Radiation Protection and Safety of Radiation Sources: International Basic Safety
Standards (IAEA Safety Standards Series No. GSR Part 3). GSR Part 3 is jointly
sponsored by the European Commission, the Food and Agriculture Organizationof the United Nations, the IAEA, the International Labour Organization, theOECD Nuclear Energy Agency, the Pan American Health Organization, theUnited Nations Environment Programme and the World Health Organization.
Three related Safety Guides were prepared to provide generic guidanceon meeting the requirements of GSR Part 3 for protection of the public andprotection of the environment, as follows:—— IAEA Safety Standards Series No. GSG-8, Radiation Protection of the
Public and the Environment, which provides guidance on the frameworkfor protection of the public and the environment;—— IAEA Safety Standards Series No. GSG-9, Regulatory Control ofRadioactive Discharges to the Environment, which provides guidanceon application of the principles of radiation protection and the safety
objectives associated with the control of discharges and on the process for
authorization of discharges;—— IAEA Safety Standards Series No. GSG-10, Prospective Radiological
Environmental Impact Assessment for Facilities and Activities, which
describes a framework and methodologies for prospective radiologicalenvironmental impact assessment.
These three Safety Guides are jointly sponsored by the IAEA and
UN Environment, the leading global environmental authority, which sets theglobal environmental agenda, promotes the coherent implementation of theenvironmental dimension of sustainable development within the United Nations
system, and serves as an authoritative advocate for the global environment.
The recommendations provided in these three Safety Guides, together withthe requirements of GSR Part 3, provide a basis for including environmental
considerations in the assessment and management of radioactive releases. In thiscontext, UN Environment encourages the application of these recommendations
in all its Member States, and their use as a foundation for the development of
national regulations on protection of the environment from harmful effects ofionizing radiation.

THE IAEA SAFETY STANDARDSBACKGROUNDRadioactivity is a natural phenomenon and natural sources of radiation arefeatures of the environment. Radiation and radioactive substances have many
beneficial applications, ranging from power generation to uses in medicine,industry and agriculture. The radiation risks to workers and the public and to theenvironment that may arise from these applications have to be assessed and, if
necessary, controlled.
Activities such as the medical uses of radiation, the operation of nuclear
installations, the production, transport and use of radioactive material, and the
management of radioactive waste must therefore be subject to standards of safety.
Regulating safety is a national responsibility. However, radiation risks may
transcend national borders, and international cooperation serves to promote andenhance safety globally by exchanging experience and by improving capabilities
to control hazards, to prevent accidents, to respond to emergencies and to mitigate
any harmful consequences.
States have an obligation of diligence and duty of care, and are expected tofulfil their national and international undertakings and obligations.
International safety standards provide support for States in meeting their
obligations under general principles of international law, such as those relating toenvironmental protection. International safety standards also promote and assure
confidence in safety and facilitate international commerce and trade.
A global nuclear safety regime is in place and is being continuously
improved. IAEA safety standards, which support the implementation of binding
international instruments and national safety infrastructures, are a cornerstoneof this global regime. The IAEA safety standards constitute a useful toolfor contracting parties to assess their performance under these international
conventions.
THE IAEA SAFETY STANDARDSThe status of the IAEA safety standards derives from the IAEA’s Statute,which authorizes the IAEA to establish or adopt, in consultation and, whereappropriate, in collaboration with the competent organs of the United Nations
and with the specialized agencies concerned, standards of safety for protection ofhealth and minimization of danger to life and property, and to provide for theirapplication.

With a view to ensuring the protection of people and the environment
from harmful effects of ionizing radiation, the IAEA safety standards establish
fundamental safety principles, requirements and measures to control the radiation
exposure of people and the release of radioactive material to the environment, torestrict the likelihood of events that might lead to a loss of control over a nuclear
reactor core, nuclear chain reaction, radioactive source or any other source ofradiation, and to mitigate the consequences of such events if they were to occur.
The standards apply to facilities and activities that give rise to radiation risks,
including nuclear installations, the use of radiation and radioactive sources, thetransport of radioactive material and the management of radioactive waste.
Safety measures and security measures1 have in common the aim ofprotecting human life and health and the environment. Safety measures andsecurity measures must be designed and implemented in an integrated mannerso that security measures do not compromise safety and safety measures do notcompromise security.
The IAEA safety standards reflect an international consensus on what
constitutes a high level of safety for protecting people and the environment
from harmful effects of ionizing radiation. They are issued in the IAEA Safety
Standards Series, which has three categories (see Fig. 1).
Safety Fundamentals
Safety Fundamentals present the fundamental safety objective and principles
of protection and safety, and provide the basis for the safety requirements.
Safety Requirements
An integrated and consistent set of Safety Requirements establishes
the requirements that must be met to ensure the protection of people and theenvironment, both now and in the future. The requirements are governed by theobjective and principles of the Safety Fundamentals. If the requirements are notmet, measures must be taken to reach or restore the required level of safety. The
format and style of the requirements facilitate their use for the establishment, in aharmonized manner, of a national regulatory framework. Requirements, including
numbered ‘overarching’ requirements, are expressed as ‘shall’ statements. Manyrequirements are not addressed to a specific party, the implication being that theappropriate parties are responsible for fulfilling them.

1

See also publications issued in the IAEA Nuclear Security Series.

Safety Fundamentals

Fundamental Safety Principles
General Safety Requirements

Specific Safety Requirements

Part 1. Governmental, Legal andRegulatory Framework for Safety

1. Site Evaluation for
Nuclear Installations

Part 2. Leadership and Management
for Safety

2. Safety of Nuclear Power Plants

Part 3. Radiation Protection and
Safety of Radiation Sources

2/1 Design
2/2 Commissioning and Operation

Part 4. Safety Assessment for
Facilities and Activities

3. Safety of Research Reactors

Part 5. Predisposal Managementof Radioactive Waste

4. Safety of Nuclear Fuel
Cycle Facilities

Part 6. Decommissioning andTermination of Activities

5. Safety of Radioactive Waste
Disposal Facilities

Part 7. Emergency Preparedness
and Response

6. Safe Transport ofRadioactive Material

Collection of Safety Guides
FIG. 1. The long term structure of the IAEA Safety Standards Series.

Safety Guides
Safety Guides provide recommendations and guidance on how to comply
with the safety requirements, indicating an international consensus that itis necessary to take the measures recommended (or equivalent alternative
measures). The Safety Guides present international good practices, andincreasingly they reflect best practices, to help users striving to achieve highlevels of safety. The recommendations provided in Safety Guides are expressedas ‘should’ statements.
APPLICATION OF THE IAEA SAFETY STANDARDSThe principal users of safety standards in IAEA Member States are
regulatory bodies and other relevant national authorities. The IAEA safety
standards are also used by co-sponsoring organizations and by many organizations
that design, construct and operate nuclear facilities, as well as organizations
involved in the use of radiation and radioactive sources.

The IAEA safety standards are applicable, as relevant, throughout the entire
lifetime of all facilities and activities — existing and new — utilized for peacefulpurposes and to protective actions to reduce existing radiation risks. They can beused by States as a reference for their national regulations in respect of facilities
and activities.
The IAEA’s Statute makes the safety standards binding on the IAEA in
relation to its own operations and also on States in relation to IAEA assisted
operations.
The IAEA safety standards also form the basis for the IAEA’s safety review
services, and they are used by the IAEA in support of competence building,including the development of educational curricula and training courses.
International conventions contain requirements similar to those in
the IAEA safety standards and make them binding on contracting parties.
The IAEA safety standards, supplemented by international conventions, industry
standards and detailed national requirements, establish a consistent basis forprotecting people and the environment. There will also be some special aspectsof safety that need to be assessed at the national level. For example, many of
the IAEA safety standards, in particular those addressing aspects of safety inplanning or design, are intended to apply primarily to new facilities and activities.
The requirements established in the IAEA safety standards might not be fully
met at some existing facilities that were built to earlier standards. The way inwhich IAEA safety standards are to be applied to such facilities is a decision for
individual States.
The scientific considerations underlying the IAEA safety standards provide
an objective basis for decisions concerning safety; however, decision makers
must also make informed judgements and must determine how best to balance
the benefits of an action or an activity against the associated radiation risks andany other detrimental impacts to which it gives rise.
DEVELOPMENT PROCESS FOR THE IAEA SAFETY STANDARDSThe preparation and review of the safety standards involves the IAEA
Secretariat and five safety standards committees, for emergency preparedness
and response (EPReSC) (as of 2016), nuclear safety (NUSSC), radiation
safety (RASSC), the safety of radioactive waste (WASSC) and the safe
transport of radioactive material (TRANSSC), and a Commission on Safety
Standards (CSS) which oversees the IAEA safety standards programme(see Fig. 2).
All IAEA Member States may nominate experts for the safety standards
committees and may provide comments on draft standards. The membership ofOutline and work plan
prepared by the Secretariat;
review by the safety standards
committees and the CSS

Secretariat andconsultants:
drafting of new or revisionof existing safety standard
Draft

Review bysafety standards
committee(s)DraftMember States
Comments

Final draft

Endorsementby the CSS

FIG. 2. The process for developing a new safety standard or revising an existing standard.

the Commission on Safety Standards is appointed by the Director General andincludes senior governmental officials having responsibility for establishingnational standards.
A management system has been established for the processes of planning,developing, reviewing, revising and establishing the IAEA safety standards.
It articulates the mandate of the IAEA, the vision for the future application of
the safety standards, policies and strategies, and corresponding functions andresponsibilities.
INTERACTION WITH OTHER INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS
The findings of the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effectsof Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR) and the recommendations of international

expert bodies, notably the International Commission on Radiological Protection(ICRP), are taken into account in developing the IAEA safety standards. Some
safety standards are developed in cooperation with other bodies in the United
Nations system or other specialized agencies, including the Food and Agriculture
Organization of the United Nations, the United Nations Environment Programme,
the International Labour Organization, the OECD Nuclear Energy Agency, the
Pan American Health Organization and the World Health Organization.
INTERPRETATION OF THE TEXT
Safety related terms are to be understood as defined in the IAEA Safety
Glossary (see http://www-ns.iaea.org/standards/safety-glossary.htm). Otherwise,
words are used with the spellings and meanings assigned to them in the latest
edition of The Concise Oxford Dictionary. For Safety Guides, the English versionof the text is the authoritative version.
The background and context of each standard in the IAEA Safety
Standards Series and its objective, scope and structure are explained in Section 1,
Introduction, of each publication.
Material for which there is no appropriate place in the body text
(e.g. material that is subsidiary to or separate from the body text, is included
in support of statements in the body text, or describes methods of calculation,
procedures or limits and conditions) may be presented in appendices or annexes.
An appendix, if included, is considered to form an integral part of thesafety standard. Material in an appendix has the same status as the body text,
and the IAEA assumes authorship of it. Annexes and footnotes to the main text,
if included, are used to provide practical examples or additional information or
explanation. Annexes and footnotes are not integral parts of the main text. Annex
material published by the IAEA is not necessarily issued under its authorship;
material under other authorship may be presented in annexes to the safety
standards. Extraneous material presented in annexes is excerpted and adapted asnecessary to be generally useful.

CONTENTS
1.

2.

3.

4.

INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

1

Background (1.1–1.6)  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 
Objective (1.7) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 
Scope (1.8–1.10) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 
Structure (1.11)  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

1
2
2
3

FRAMEWORK FOR THE PROTECTION OF THE PUBLIC
AND THE ENVIRONMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

4Introduction (2.1–2.2) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 
Exposure situations (2.3–2.7)  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 
Radiation protection principles (2.8–2.32)  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 
Responsibilities (2.33–2.48)  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 
Graded approach (2.49–2.54)  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

4
4
6
11
15

RADIATION PROTECTION OF THE PUBLIC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

16

Planned exposure situations (3.1–3.54) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 
Emergency exposure situations (3.55–3.76) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 
Existing exposure situations (3.77–3.103)  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

16
28
34

PROTECTION OF THE ENVIRONMENT (4.1–4.9) . . . . . . . . . . . . 

41

APPENDIX:DOSE CONSTRAINTS AND
REFERENCE LEVELS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

45

REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 
CONTRIBUTORS TO DRAFTING AND REVIEW  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

47
51

1. INTRODUCTIONBACKGROUND
1.1. The fundamental safety objective established in IAEA Safety Standards
Series No. SF-1, Fundamental Safety Principles [1], is “to protect people andthe environment from harmful effects of ionizing radiation.” It applies to all
circumstances that give rise to radiation risks. The fundamental safety objective
is associated with ten safety principles [1]. Virtually all of these safety principles
touch on the protection of members of the public and the environment. Principle 7
in particular states that: “People and the environment, present and future, must be
protected against radiation risks.”1.2. General requirements designed to protect members of the public and theenvironment from harmful effects of ionizing radiation are established in IAEA
Safety Standards Series No. GSR Part 3, Radiation Protection and Safety ofRadiation Sources: International Basic Safety Standards [2]. The requirements
for the governmental, legal and regulatory framework to be used are establishedin IAEA Safety Standards Series No. GSR Part 1 (Rev. 1), Governmental, Legaland Regulatory Framework for Safety [3]. The requirements for emergency
preparedness and response are established in IAEA Safety Standards Series
No. GSR Part 7, Preparedness and Response for a Nuclear or Radiological
Emergency [4].
1.3. Radiation protection has been largely focused on the protection of humans
and, for this purpose, three basic categories of exposure have been considered,namely occupational exposure, medical exposure and public exposure. The
relevant radiation protection requirements are defined according to the exposure
situation, namely planned exposure situations, emergency exposure situations
and existing exposure situations.
1.4. Public exposure is defined as exposure incurred by members of the public
due to sources in planned exposure situations, emergency exposure situations andexisting exposure situations, excluding any occupational exposure or medical
exposure [2]. GSR Part 3 [2] defines a member of the public as “any individualin the population except when subject to occupational exposure or medical
exposure. For the purpose of verifying compliance with the annual dose limit
for public exposure, this is the representative person.” GSR Part 3 [2] defines a
representative person as “an individual receiving a dose that is representative ofthe doses to the more highly exposed individuals in the population.”11.5. In recent years, consideration has also been given to the protection of
the environment. As noted by the International Commission on RadiologicalProtection (ICRP) [5–7], some national regulatory frameworks have alreadyaddressed the need to be able to demonstrate that the environment is protectedagainst harmful effects of ionizing radiation, irrespective of any humanconnection with the environment. The methods and criteria for radiologicalassessments are being developed and will continue to evolve.
1.6. This Safety Guide provides generic guidance on the application of therequirements of GSR Part 3 [2] and GSR Part 7 [4] in relation to the protectionof members of the public in planned exposure situations, existing exposure
situations and emergency exposure situations and protection of the environmentthat is applicable for all facilities and activities.
OBJECTIVE
1.7. The objective of this Safety Guide is to provide generic guidance on theapplication of the requirements for the protection of members of the publicagainst radiation exposure and protection of the environment established in
GSR Part 3 [2] and GSR Part 7 [4]. It is intended for use by:
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)

Governments;
Regulatory bodies;
Registrants and licensees, or the person or organization responsible forfacilities and activities for which notification only is required in planned
exposure situations;Those persons or organizations designated to deal with emergency exposure
situations or existing exposure situations.

SCOPE
1.8. This Safety Guide covers the generic application of the requirements given
in GSR Part 3 [2] that relate to the protection of the environment and protectionof members of the public in planned exposure situations and existing exposure
situations and in GSR Part 3 [2] and GSR Part 7 [4] in emergency exposure
situations.

21.9. This Safety Guide does not deal with the application of the requirements
in GSR Part 3 [2] to specific types of facility or activity or in specific exposure
situations. In this context, separate Safety Guides exist or are under development,such as:—— For planned exposure situations:●● IAEA Safety Standards Series No. GSG-5, Justification of Practices,
Including Non-Medical Human Imaging [8];●● IAEA Safety Standards Series No. GSG-10, Prospective Radiological
Environmental Impact Assessment for Facilities and Activities [9];●● IAEA Safety Standards Series No. GSG-9, Regulatory Control ofRadioactive Discharges to the Environment [10];●● IAEA Safety Standards Series No. SSG-36, Radiation Safety for
Consumer Products [11];—— For emergency exposure situations:●● IAEA Safety Standards Series No. GSG-2, Criteria for Use
in Preparedness and Response for a Nuclear or Radiological
Emergency [12];●● IAEA Safety Standards Series No. GS-G-2.1, Arrangements for
Preparedness for a Nuclear or Radiological Emergency [13];—— For existing exposure situations:●● IAEA Safety Standards Series No. WS-G-3.1, Remediation Process for
Areas Affected by Past Activities and Accidents [14];●● IAEA Safety Standards Series No. SSG-32, Protection of the Publicagainst Exposure Indoors due to Radon and Other Natural Sources ofRadiation [15].
1.10. Occupational exposure and medical exposure are not considered in this
Safety Guide; the relevant recommendations are provided in IAEA Safety
Standards Series No. GSG-7, Occupational Radiation Protection [16] and in
IAEA Safety Standards Series No. SSG-46, Radiation Protection and Safety in
Medical Uses of Ionizing Radiation [17].
STRUCTURE
1.11. Section 2 provides an overview of the basic framework for radiation
protection of members of the public and protection of the environment in planned
exposure situations, emergency exposure situations and existing exposure
situations. It covers the principles of justification, optimization of protection anddose limits, where appropriate. Section 3 deals with the practical application of the3radiation protection framework for protection of the public in planned exposure
situations, emergency exposure situations and existing exposure situations.
Section 4 provides guidance on meeting the requirements of GSR Part 3 [2] forprotection of the environment. The Appendix summarizes the framework fordose constraints and reference levels as applicable for each exposure situation, in
accordance with GSR Part 3 [2].

2. FRAMEWORK FOR THE PROTECTION OF
THE PUBLIC AND PROTECTION OF
THE ENVIRONMENTINTRODUCTION
2.1. Paragraph 2.15 of GSR Part 3 [2] requires the scope of applicability of
the legal and regulatory framework to be specified. The regulatory framework
established in GSR Part 3 [2] applies to all situations involving radiation exposurethat is amenable to control. Exposures that are deemed to be unamenable tocontrol are excluded from the regulatory framework. Examples of exposures thatare unamenable to control are 40K in the body and cosmic radiation at the surfaceof the Earth.
2.2. GSR Part 3 [2] establishes requirements for each of the three exposure
situations: planned exposure situations, emergency exposure situations andexisting exposure situations. In addition, in the context of emergency exposure
situations, GSR Part 7 [4] establishes requirements for an adequate level of
preparedness and response for a nuclear or radiological emergency.
EXPOSURE SITUATIONS
Planned exposure situations
2.3. A planned exposure situation is a situation of exposure that arises fromthe planned operation of a source or from a planned activity that results in an
exposure due to a source. Since provision for protection and safety can be madebefore embarking on the activity concerned, the associated exposures and theirlikelihood of occurrence can be restricted from the outset. The primary means4

of controlling exposure in planned exposure situations is by good design offacilities, equipment and operating procedures, by training and by fosteringsafety culture [2, 18].
2.4. In planned exposure situations, exposure at some level can be expected tooccur. If exposure is not expected to occur with certainty, but could result from ananticipated operational occurrence or accident or owing to an event or a sequenceof events that may potentially occur but is not certain to occur, this is referred
to as ‘potential exposure’. The magnitude and extent of potential exposure canusually be predicted. Both exposures expected to occur and potential exposures
can and should be taken into account at the planning or design stage.
2.5. A term closely related to planned exposure situation is the term practice,which is defined as any human activity that introduces additional sourcesof radiation or additional exposure pathways, or that modifies the network of
exposure pathways from existing sources, so as to increase the exposure or the
likelihood of exposure of people or the number of people exposed [19]. Bothterms are used in GSR Part 3 [2], although the term ‘planned exposure situation’emphasizes the planned or intentional nature of the facility or activity that may
give rise to radiation exposure.
Emergency exposure situations
2.6. An emergency exposure situation is a situation of exposure that arises as aresult of an accident, a malicious act or any other unexpected event, and requires
prompt action in order to avoid or reduce adverse consequences [2]. Preventive
measures and mitigatory actions have to be considered before an emergency
exposure situation arises. However, once an emergency exposure situation
actually arises, exposures can be reduced only by implementing protective
actions.
Existing exposure situations
2.7. An existing exposure situation is a situation of exposure that already exists
when a decision on the need for control needs to be taken [2]. Existing exposure
situations include situations of exposure to natural background radiation. They
also include situations of exposure due to residual radioactive material thatderives from past practices that were never subject to regulatory control or thatwere subject to regulatory control but not in accordance with the requirementsof current standards, situations of exposure due to residual radioactive material
deriving from a nuclear or radiological emergency after an emergency has been5declared to be ended, and situations of exposure due to commodities incorporating
radionuclides from such material.
RADIATION PROTECTION PRINCIPLES
2.8. The three basic principles that underpin radiation protection, which concern
justification, optimization of protection and safety, and application of dose limits,
are expressed in Safety Principles 4, 5, 6 and 10 of SF-1 [1]. The principles ofjustification and optimization of protection and safety relate to sources of ionizing
radiation and apply to all exposure situations. The principle of application of dose
limits relates to individuals and applies to public exposure in planned exposure
situations only. Requirement 1 of GSR Part 3 [2] requires that those responsible
for protection and safety ensure that these principles of radiation protection are
applied for all exposure situations.
Justification
2.9. Paragraph 2.8 of GSR Part 3 [2] states that “For planned exposure
situations, each party with responsibilities for protection and safety shall ensure,when relevant requirements apply to that party, that no practice is undertaken
unless it is justified.”
2.10. Paragraph 2.9 of GSR Part 3 [2] states that:“For emergency exposure situations and existing exposure situations, eachparty with responsibilities for protection and safety shall ensure, whenrelevant requirements apply to that party, that protective actions or remedialactions are justified and are undertaken in such a way as to achieve theobjectives set out in a protection strategy.”
2.11. For planned exposure situations, justification is the process of determining
whether a practice is, overall, beneficial, i.e. whether the expected benefits toindividuals and to society from introducing or continuing the practice outweighthe harm (including radiation detriment) resulting from the practice [19]. The
benefits apply to individuals and society as a whole, and include benefits to theenvironment. Radiation detriment may only be a small part of the total harm.
Justification thus goes far beyond the scope of radiation protection, and also
involves the consideration of economic, societal and environmental factors [5].

6

2.12. For emergency exposure situations, when considering the justification of
proposed protective actions and the overall protection strategy, para. 4.29 of
GSR Part 7 [4] states that:“Each protective action, in the context of the protection strategy, and theprotection strategy itself shall be demonstrated to be justified (i.e. to do
more good than harm), with account taken not only of those detrimentsthat are associated with radiation exposure but also of those detriments
associated with impacts of the actions taken on public health, the economy,society and the environment.”
2.13. Decisions regarding justification should be taken at a sufficiently highgovernmental level to enable all of the considerations that may be related to thebenefits and detriments to be integrated. Thus, while the regulatory body or othernational authority concerned with radiation protection should be responsible for
evaluating the assessment of the radiation detriment, it may not be in a position
to make the justification decision. Any justification decision should therefore
always involve a consideration of the radiation doses either to be incurred or
to be averted or reduced according to the circumstances. In planned exposure
situations, radiation risks from potential exposures are also required to beconsidered in the justification decision.
Optimization of protection and safety
2.14. Paragraph 2.10 of GSR Part 3 [2] states that “For all exposure situations,each party with responsibilities for protection and safety shall ensure, whenrelevant requirements apply to that party, that protection and safety is optimized.”
2.15. In this context ‘protection and safety is optimized’ means that optimizationof protection and safety has been applied and the result of that process has been
implemented.
2.16. Optimization of protection and safety is defined as the process fordetermining what level of protection and safety would result in the magnitude ofindividual doses, the number of individuals (workers and members of the public)
subject to exposure and the likelihood of exposure being as low as reasonably
achievable (ALARA), economic and social factors being taken into account [19].
This means that the level of protection would be the best possible under theprevailing circumstances, and will thus not necessarily be the option with thelowest risk or dose. Protection of the environment should also be considered in
the process of optimization of protection and safety.
7

2.17. Protection and safety should be optimized through an on-going cyclicalapproach that involves:
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)

Evaluation of the exposure situation to identify the need for action;
Identification of possible protective actions to keep the exposure as low asreasonably achievable;
Selection of the best protective actions under the prevailing circumstances;
Implementation of the selected protective actions;
Regular review of the exposure situation to evaluate whether the prevailingcircumstances necessitate any changes to the selected protective actions.

2.18. For planned exposure situations, Requirement 11 of GSR Part 3 [2] statesthat “The government or the regulatory body shall establish and enforce
requirements for the optimization of protection and safety, and registrants
and licensees shall ensure that protection and safety is optimized.” Paragraph3.23 of GSR Part 3 [2] requires registrants and licensees to ensure that protection
and safety is optimized.
2.19. For emergency exposure situations, Requirement 44 of GSR Part 3 [2] andRequirement 5 of GSR Part 7 [4] require the government to ensure that protection
strategies are developed, justified and optimized at the stage for taking protective
actions and other response actions effectively. Paragraph 4.31 of GSR Part 7 [4]states further that the government is also required to ensure that the protection
strategy is implemented safely and effectively in an emergency response throughthe implementation of emergency arrangements.
2.20. For existing exposure situations, Requirement 48 of GSR Part 3 [2] requires
the government and the regulatory body or other relevant authority to ensure that
protection and safety is optimized.
2.21. In all three exposure situations, the processes of justification andoptimization should, when possible, include consultation with interested parties,
such as community groups, local residents and members of the public.
Boundary conditions for optimization
2.22. Optimization of protection is a prospective, iterative process that examines
the available options for protection. Depending upon the circumstances, theprocess can include the use of a variety of quantitative and qualitative techniques.
Optimization should be conducted within a set of boundary conditions on therange of available protection options. These boundary conditions should include
8

individual source related values of dose or risk that may be regarded as values
that should not be exceeded for planning purposes. They are referred to as dose
constraints or risk constraints in the case of planned exposure situations and as
reference levels in the case of emergency exposure situations or existing exposure
situations.
2.23. A constraint is a prospective and source related value of individual dose
(dose constraint) or risk (risk constraint) that is used in planned exposure
situations as a parameter for the optimization of protection and safety for thesource, and that serves as a boundary condition in defining the range of optionsin optimization.
2.24. A dose constraint is a level of dose above which it is unlikely that protection
is optimized. It represents a basic level of protection and will always be lower
than the pertinent dose limit. However, treating a dose constraint as a target value
is not sufficient, and it is expected that optimization of protection will establish
an acceptable level of dose below the dose constraint.
2.25. Risk constraints correspond to dose constraints but apply to potential
exposure. A risk constraint is a source related value that provides a basic level ofprotection for the individuals most at risk from a source. This risk is a functionof the probability of an unintended event causing a dose and the probability ofthe detriment due to such a dose. The risk constraint should equate to a similar
health risk to that implied by the corresponding dose constraints for the same
source [5, 20]. However, there can be large uncertainties in estimations of theprobabilities and the resulting dose, which should be taken into account at thetime of defining and using the risk constraints for decision making or decisionaiding.
2.26. Reference level is defined as, for an emergency exposure situation or an
existing exposure situation, the level of dose, risk or activity concentration above
which it is not appropriate to plan to allow exposures to occur and below which
optimization of protection and safety would continue to be implemented [19]. The
value chosen for a reference level will depend upon the prevailing circumstances
for the exposure under consideration. In practice, reference levels for somesituations are likely to be established on the basis of one or more exposure
scenarios. As such, the chosen reference levels are dependent on the assumptions
used in their determination, and may not be universally applicable.
2.27. In an emergency exposure situation or in an existing exposure situation,
actual exposures could be above or below the reference level. The reference level9should then be used as a benchmark for judging the extent to which protective
actions are necessary and to assist in prioritizing their application. Optimizationof protection and safety is to be applied even if the initial estimates of the doses
received are below the defined reference levels, if justified and optimized actions
are available to reduce exposures. Further recommendations on the applicationof the concept of the reference level in an emergency exposure situation for
dosimetric purposes, in addition to the use of generic criteria, are given in
Section 3.
2.28. In an emergency exposure situation or in an existing exposure situation, theimplementation of optimized protection strategies should result in levels of dose,risk or activity concentration below the reference level and as low as reasonably
achievable, as long as these protection strategies are justified, with account takenof national factors.
2.29. The requirements of GSR Part 3 [2] for optimization of protection andsafety, including the use of dose constraints and reference levels, for each of thethree exposure situations, are presented in Section 3 of this Safety Guide. A tablesummarizing the values for the dose constraints and for reference levels asapplicable for each exposure situation as required in GSR Part 3 [2] is presented
in the Appendix.
Dose limits
2.30. Paragraph 2.11 of GSR Part 3 [2] states that:“For planned exposure situations other than for medical exposure, eachparty with responsibilities for protection and safety shall ensure that, whenrelevant requirements apply to that party, specified dose limits are notexceeded”.
2.31. Dose limits apply for exposure of workers and for public exposure inplanned exposure situations only. Dose limits for members of the public arepresented in Section 3. Dose limits do not apply for medical exposures. The
annual effective dose to members of the public, for comparison with the dose
limit for effective dose, is the sum of the effective dose from external exposurein one year and the committed effective dose from intakes within the same year.
2.32. Doses to members of the public are usually not assessed by individual
monitoring, as for occupational exposure, but are generally estimated using

10the predictions of models that simulate the transport of radionuclides in theenvironment combined with data on habits of members of the public for relevant
exposure scenarios and dose coefficients.
RESPONSIBILITIESResponsibilities of the government
2.33. The responsibilities of the government with regard to protection and safety
for all three exposure situations are established in general terms in paras 2.13–2.28
of GSR Part 3 [2]. These include:
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)

Establishing an effective legal and regulatory framework for protection andsafety in all exposure situations;
Establishing legislation that meets specified requirements;
Establishing an independent regulatory body with the necessary legal
authority, competence and resources;
Establishing requirements for education and training in protection andsafety;Ensuring arrangements are in place for the provision of technical services
and education and training services.

2.34. The responsibilities of the government or the regulatory body withregard to protection of the public in planned exposure situations are set out in
Requirement 29 and in paras 3.118–3.121 and 3.124 of GSR Part 3 [2]. These
responsibilities include:
(a)
(b)

(c)

Establishing the responsibilities of registrants, licensees and suppliers
and of providers of consumer products in relation to the application ofrequirements for public exposure in planned exposure situations;
Establishing and enforcing requirements for the optimization of protection
and safety, including establishing or approving constraints on dose andconstraints on risk to be used in the optimization of protection and safety
for members of the public;
Establishing dose limits for public exposure in planned exposure situations.

2.35. The responsibilities of the government for protection of the public inemergency exposure situations are set out in Requirements 43 and 44 of

11

GSR Part 3 [2] in general terms, and in greater detail in GSR Part 7 [4]. Some of
the responsibilities of the government include:
(a)
(b)
(c)

Establishing an integrated and coordinated emergency management system;
Developing justified and optimized protection strategies at the preparedness
stage;
Ensuring safe and effective implementation of emergency arrangements inaccordance with the protection strategy.

In addition to assigning responsibilities to the government in general terms,
GSR Part 3 [2] and GSR Part 7 [4] assign specific responsibilities in emergency
preparedness and response to response organizations.
2.36. The responsibilities of the government for protection of the public inexisting exposure situations are set out in Requirements 47, 48, 49 and 50 of
GSR Part 3 [2]. The government is required to ensure that existing exposure
situations that have been identified are evaluated to determine which public
exposures are of concern from the point of view of radiation protection, andto ensure that remedial actions and protective actions are justified and that
protection and safety is optimized. The government is required to ensure thatprovision for the management of existing exposure situations is included in thelegal and regulatory framework for protection and safety. The government, inthe legal and regulatory framework, is required to assign responsibilities for theestablishment and implementation of protection strategies to the regulatory bodyand to other relevant authorities, and, as appropriate, to registrants, licensees andother parties involved in the implementation of remedial actions and protective
actions.
Responsibilities of the regulatory body
2.37. The responsibilities of the regulatory body with regard to protection
and safety that are applicable to all three exposure situations are set out in
Requirements 16–36 of GSR Part 1 (Rev. 1) [3] and in Requirement 3 andparas 2.29–2.38 of GSR Part 3 [2]. These responsibilities include:
(a)
(b)
(c)

12

Establishing requirements for applying the principles of radiation
protection;
Establishing a regulatory system that meets specified requirements;
Ensuring the application of the requirements for education and training inprotection and safety;

(d)
(e)

Specifying acceptance requirements and performance requirements forprotection and safety;
Making provision for the establishment and maintenance of records.

2.38. The responsibilities of the regulatory body specific to protection of the
public in planned exposure situations are set out in Requirements 29 and 32, andin paras 3.118–3.124, 3.135, 3.136, and 3.139 of GSR Part 3 [2]. The regulatory
body is responsible for enforcing compliance with the dose limits for public
exposure; for authorization of practices; for establishing or approving authorized
limits for discharges; for ensuring that programmes for source monitoring andenvironmental monitoring are in place, and that the results from the monitoring
are recorded and are made available; and for authorizing the provision to the
public of consumer products.
2.39. The responsibilities of the regulatory body in relation to emergency
preparedness and response are set out in paras 4.11–4.15 of GSR Part 7 [4].
These responsibilities include:
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)

Ensuring that arrangements for preparedness and response to a nuclear orradiological emergency are dealt with through the regulatory process;Establishing or adopting regulations and guides to specify the principles,
requirements and associated criteria for safety upon which its regulatory
judgements, decisions and actions are based;
Requiring that arrangements for preparedness and response for a nuclear
or radiological emergency be in place for the on-site area for any regulated
facility or activity that could necessitate emergency response actions;
Establishing reference levels;
Ensuring that the on-site emergency arrangements are adequate;
Ensuring that the operating organization is given sufficient authority topromptly take necessary protective actions on the site in response to anuclear or radiological emergency.

2.40. The responsibilities of the regulatory body or other relevant authority
specific to protection of the public in existing exposure situations are set out
in paras 5.4 and 5.5 and in Requirements 48 and 51 of GSR Part 3 [2]. These
responsibilities include:(a)(b)

Establishing and implementing a protection strategy for an existing
exposure situation commensurate with the associated radiation risks;
Ensuring that remedial actions or protective actions are expected to yield
sufficient benefits to outweigh the detriments associated with taking them;
13

(c)
(d)
(e)

Ensuring that the form, scale and duration of remedial actions or protective
actions are optimized;
Establishing reference levels for exposure due to radionuclides incommodities;
Establishing reference levels and reviewing them periodically.

2.41. It is the responsibility of the regulatory body in relation to protection of
the environment to specify requirements for the prospective assessment ofradiological environmental impacts, as set out in para. 3.9(e) of GSR Part 3 [2].
Responsibilities of registrants and licensees, and operating organizations
2.42. Requirement 4 of GSR Part 3 [2] states that “The person or organization
responsible for facilities and activities that give rise to radiation risks shallhave the prime responsibility for protection and safety.”2.43. Requirement 9 of GSR Part 3 [2] states that “Registrants and licensees
shall be responsible for protection and safety in planned exposure situations.”
2.44. Registrants and licensees are required to ensure that protection andsafety is optimized and that relevant constraints are used in the optimization ofprotection and safety for any source within a practice (paras 3.23 and 3.25 of
GSR Part 3 [2]).
2.45. Registrants and licensees are required to ensure that exposures ofindividuals due to practices for which registrants and licensees are authorized
are restricted, so that neither the effective dose nor the equivalent dose totissues or organs exceeds any relevant dose limit specified in Schedule III of
GSR Part 3 [2].
2.46. Registrants and licensees are required to ensure that programmes for source
monitoring and environmental monitoring are in place and that the results fromthe monitoring are recorded and are made available [2].
2.47. In GSR Part 7 [4], the term ‘operating organization’ is used in this context.
The responsibilities of the operating organization in relation to emergency
preparedness and response are set out in GSR Part 7 [4], particularly in paras 4.16
and 4.17.

14

2.48. Further recommendations on the responsibilities of the government, theregulatory body and other national authorities, and of the registrant or licensee oroperating organization are provided in Section 3 and in Section 4.
GRADED APPROACH
2.49. GSR Part 3 [2] establishes requirements for a graded approach to be taken
to the control of exposures. In particular, para. 2.12 of GSR Part 3 [2] states:“The application of the requirements for the system of protection and safety shallbe commensurate with the radiation risks associated with the exposure situation.”
2.50. It is the general responsibility of the government to ensure that the overall
application of the principles of radiation protection are in line with this gradedapproach (see para. 2.18 of GSR Part 3 [2]). The regulatory body is responsible
for adopting the graded approach in the application of the regulatory requirements(see para. 2.31 of GSR Part 3 [2]).
2.51. Requirement 6 of GSR Part 3 [2] refers to the graded approach in thecontext of planned exposure situations, as follows:“The application of the requirements of [GSR Part 3 [2]] in planned
exposure situations shall be commensurate with the characteristics ofthe practice or the source within a practice, and with the likelihood andmagnitude of exposures.”
An important feature of the graded approach in planned exposure situations is
the provision for exemption and clearance, and for notification, authorization byregistration and authorization by licensing. These concepts are discussed further
in Section 3.
2.52. Requirement 4 of GSR Part 7 [4] states that “The government shallensure that a hazard assessment is performed to provide a basis for agraded approach in preparedness and response for a nuclear or radiologicalemergency.”
2.53. Paragraph 5.7 of GSR Part 3 [2] states that:“The government and the regulatory body or other relevant authority shallensure that the protection strategy for the management of existing exposure

15

situations … is commensurate with the radiation risks associated with theexisting exposure situation”.
2.54. The application of a graded approach in each exposure situation is discussed
further in Section 3.

3. RADIATION PROTECTION OF THE PUBLIC
PLANNED EXPOSURE SITUATIONSIntroduction
3.1. Paragraphs 3.1–3.4 of GSR Part 3 [2] set out the practices and sources
within practices that are included in the scope of planned exposure situations.
Practices include:
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
(g)

The production, supply, provision and transport of radioactive material andof devices that contain radioactive material;
The production and supply of devices that generate radiation;
The generation of nuclear power, including any activities within the nuclear
fuel cycle that involve or that could involve exposure to radiation or
exposure due to radioactive material;
The use of radiation or radioactive material for medical, industrial,
veterinary, agricultural, legal or security purposes;
The use of radiation or radioactive material for education, training or
research;
The mining and processing of raw materials that involve exposure due toradioactive material;
Any other practice as specified by the regulatory body.

3.2. Sources within practices include:
(a)

(b)

16

Facilities that contain radioactive material and facilities that containradiation generators, such as nuclear installations, medical radiation
facilities, facilities for the management of radioactive waste and mineral
extraction and processing facilities;
Individual sources of radiation, including the sources within the types offacility mentioned in para. 3.2(a).

3.3. In GSR Part 3 [2], exposure due to natural sources is generally considered
to be an existing exposure situation. However, para. 3.4 of GSR Part 3 [2]states that the relevant requirements for planned exposure situations apply, interalia, to:(a)(b)

Exposure due to material in any practice where the activity concentration in
the material of any radionuclide in the uranium decay chain, the actinium
decay chain or the thorium decay chain is greater than 1 Bq/g or the activity
concentration of 40K is greater than 10 Bq/g (exposure situations due toradionuclides of natural origin in food, feed, drinking water, agricultural
fertilizer and soil amendments, construction material and existing residues
should be treated as existing exposure situations);
Public exposure due to discharges or due to the management of radioactive
waste arising from a practice involving material as specified in para. 3.3(a).

3.4. Public exposures in planned exposure situations arise from:
(a)
(b)

(c)

Liquid and airborne discharges from facilities and activities (seeGSG-9 [10]);
Direct radiation from sources within practices, e.g. X ray equipment
in a medical facility, a patient released from hospital after radionuclide
therapy, industrial radiography, the transport of radioactive material, themanagement of solid radioactive waste;
Consumer products (see SSG-36 [11]).

3.5. Paragraph 3.78 of GSR Part 3 [2] states that:“Employers, registrants and licensees shall ensure that workers exposed
to radiation from sources within a practice that are not required by ordirectly related to their work have the same level of protection against such
exposure as members of the public.”
Therefore the dose limits and dose constraints for exposure of members of the
public apply for such workers.
3.6. For sources that are included in the regulatory system, appropriate tools
for application of the requirements for radiation protection and safety, based ona graded approach, are exemption and clearance, notification, and authorization;authorization may take the form of either registration or licensing.

17

Exemption and clearance
3.7. Exemption is defined as the determination by a regulatory body that asource or practice need not be subject to some or all aspects of regulatory control
on the basis that the exposure and the potential exposure due to the source orpractice are too small to warrant the application of those aspects or that this is
the optimum option for protection irrespective of the actual level of the doses orrisks [2]. Only justified practices may be exempted.
3.8. The general criteria for exemption, specified in para I.1 of Schedule I of
GSR Part 3 [2], are that:(a) “Radiation risks arising from the practice or from a source within thepractice are sufficiently low as not to warrant regulatory control, with
no appreciable likelihood of situations arising that could lead to a
failure to meet the general criterion for exemption; or(b) Regulatory control of the practice or the source would yield no net
benefit, in that no reasonable measures for regulatory control would
achieve a worthwhile return in terms of reduction of individual doses
or of health risks.”
3.9. Under these criteria, a practice or a source within a practice may be
exempted without further consideration from some or all of the requirementsof GSR Part 3 [2] provided that the effective dose expected to be incurred byany individual (para. I.2 of GSR Part 3 [2]) owing to the exempt practice or the
exempt source within the practice:—— Is of the order of 10 µSv or less in a year under all reasonably foreseeable
circumstances;—— Does not exceed 1 mSv in a year for low probability scenarios1.
3.10. Clearance is defined as the removal of regulatory control by the regulatory
body from radioactive material or radioactive objects within notified or authorizedpractices. The general criteria for clearance parallel those for exemption, are also
specified in para. I.10 of Schedule I of GSR Part 3 [2] and are that:

1

The individual dose criterion for low probability scenarios is based on the assumptionthat the probability of occurrence of such a scenario does not exceed 10–2 per year [21].

18

“(a) Radiation risks arising from the cleared material are sufficiently low as
not to warrant regulatory control, and there is no appreciable likelihoodof occurrence for scenarios that could lead to a failure to meet thegeneral criterion for clearance; or(b) Continued regulatory control of the material would yield no net benefit,
in that no reasonable control measures would achieve a worthwhile
return in terms of reduction of individual doses or reduction of healthrisks.”
3.11. Under these criteria, material may be cleared without further consideration
under the terms of para. 3.10(a) provided that in reasonably foreseeable
circumstances the effective dose expected to be incurred by any individual owing
to the cleared material is of the order of 10 μSv or less in a year. To take into
account low probability scenarios, a different criterion can be used, namelythat the effective dose expected to be incurred by any individual for such low
probability scenarios does not exceed 1 mSv in a year.
3.12. Based on the criteria for exemption and clearance, table I.1 of GSR Part 3 [2]presents activity concentrations and activities of radionuclides for moderateamounts of material that may be exempted without further consideration fromsome or all of the requirements of GSR Part 3 [2]. Table I.2 of GSR Part 3 [2]presents activity concentrations of radionuclides of artificial origin for bulk
amounts of solid material that may be exempted without further considerationand solid material that can be cleared without further consideration.
3.13. Paragraph I.3(c) of GSR Part 3 [2] provides for the exemption of radiation
generators of a type approved by the regulatory body, and para. I.6 of GSR
Part 3 [2] provides for the exemption of equipment containing radioactive
material if it is of a type approved by the regulatory body and the material is nototherwise exempted on the basis of its activity (table I.1 of GSR Part 3 [2]).
3.14. The provision in para. I.6 of GSR Part 3 [2] for the exemption of equipment
containing sealed radioactive sources can be applied to consumer products.
While a limit applies to the dose rate outside the equipment, no limit is specified
in terms of the activity of the sealed source. Thus, for example, smoke detectors
containing ionization chambers with higher levels of activity than those specified
for exemption can still be exempted without further consideration provided thatthe conditions stipulated by the regulatory body in respect of dose rate and othercriteria are met and they are of a type approved by the regulatory body [11].

193.15. Schedule I of GSR Part 3 [2] also provides for the exemption and clearanceof material containing radionuclides of natural origin. Table I.3 of GSR
Part 3 [2] establishes activity concentration levels for material containing naturalradionuclides that may be cleared without further consideration. Based on a dosecriterion of the order of 1 mSv, commensurate with typical doses due to natural
background levels of radiation, para. I.4 of GSR Part 3 [2] provides for the
exemption of bulk amounts of material on a case-by-case basis and para. I.12(c)of GSR Part 3 [2] provides for the clearance of residues for recycling into
construction materials or for which disposal is liable to cause the contaminationof drinking water supplies.
3.16. Further guidance on exemption and clearance may be found in IAEA
Safety Standards Series No. RS-G-1.7, Application of the Concepts of Exclusion,
Exemption and Clearance [22].
Notification and authorization
3.17. Within a graded approach for protection of the public and the environment,
notification to the regulatory body alone:“is sufficient provided that the exposures expected to be associated withthe practice or action are unlikely to exceed a small fraction, as specified
by the regulatory body, of the relevant limits, and that the likelihood andmagnitude of potential exposures and any other potential detrimental
consequences are negligible” (para. 3.7 of GSR Part 3 [2]).
3.18. The exposure and risk associated with activities subject to notificationis, by definition, so small as not to warrant many or sometimes any additional
control measures to ensure the protection of the public and protection of theenvironment. Decisions regarding the use of notification alone should be based ona generic assessment of safety. The doses expected from notified activities should
be sufficiently low that there is no need for further consideration regarding public
exposures or for investigations or assessments with respect to environmental
protection. Notification is not required for exempted sources or practices.

20

3.19. Paragraph 3.8 of GSR Part 3 [2] states that:“Any person or organization intending to carry out any of the actions
specified in para. 3.5 [of GSR Part 3 [2]2] shall, unless notification alone issufficient, apply to the regulatory body for authorization, which shall takethe form of either registration or licensing.”
3.20. The acceptance that a certain kind of practice is suitable for registration
is determined by the regulatory body, which also determines the accompanying
conditions (e.g. provision of working procedures, training of personnel, designof the equipment). The exposures, and potential exposures, of the public, andthe radiological environmental impact from a source that is registered should be
inherently small, so that separate investigations or assessments by the registrant
for demonstrating safety are not needed.
3.21. Licensing is the most complete and sophisticated form of authorization.
In principle, a licence should be required for higher risk or more complex
practices, including those for which radiation protection and safety depend
significantly or largely on human performance.
3.22. The applicant for an authorization is required by GSR Part 3 [2] toprovide the regulatory body with relevant information necessary to support theapplication, which includes:
(a)
(b)
(c)

An assessment of the nature, likelihood and magnitude of the exposuresdue to the source in normal operation and a description of all necessary
measures for protection and safety;
A safety assessment, as required by the regulatory body;
An appropriate prospective assessment made for radiological environmental
impacts, commensurate with the radiation risks associated with the facilityor activity, as required by the regulatory body.

2

Paragraph 3.5 of GSR Part 3 [2] states that:“No person or organization shall adopt, introduce, conduct, discontinue or ceasea practice, or shall, as applicable, mine, extract, process, design, manufacture,
construct, assemble, install, acquire, import, export, supply, provide, distribute,loan, hire, receive, site, locate, commission, possess, use, operate, maintain, repair,transfer, decommission, disassemble, transport, store or dispose of a source withina practice other than in accordance with the requirements of [GSR Part 3 [2]].”21

GSG-10 [9] provides guidance on how to evaluate exposures and on the useof criteria for the assessment of radiological environmental impact for planned
exposure situations.
3.23. A graded approach should be used within licensing that takes into accountthe expected likelihood and magnitude of exposures in normal operation and of
potential exposures, the complexity of the practice, and the protection and control
measures needed. The graded approach should be reflected in the content andextent of the safety assessment and the assessment for radiological environmental
impact. The regulatory body should evaluate the results of the assessments todetermine possible additional conditions on which a licence can be granted.
3.24. A source within a practice could also cause public exposure outside theterritory or other area under the jurisdiction or control of the State in which thesource is located. In accordance with para. 3.124 of GSR Part 3 [2], in suchsituations, the government or the regulatory body:“(a) Shall ensure that the assessment for radiological impacts includes
those impacts outside the territory or other area under the jurisdiction
or control of the State;(b) Shall, to the extent possible, establish requirements for the control ofdischarges;(c) Shall arrange with the affected State the means for the exchange of
information and consultations, as appropriate.”
Justification
3.25. Requirement 10 of GSR Part 3 [2] requires the government or the
regulatory body to ensure that only justified practices are authorized. Justification
is implemented as a structured process to determine whether the benefits froma practice outweigh the harm (including radiation detriment) to individuals,
society and the environment from the practice. This process should be repeated if
necessary when there is new information or experience.
3.26. Paragraph 3.17 of GSR Part 3 [2] defines a number of practices that are
deemed to be not justified. These are as follows:“(a) Practices, except for justified practices involving medical exposure,that result in an increase in activity, by the deliberate addition ofradioactive substances or by activation, in food, feed, beverages,

22cosmetics or any other commodity or product intended for ingestion,
inhalation or percutaneous intake by, or application to, a person;(b) Practices involving the frivolous use of radiation or radioactive
substances in commodities or in consumer products such as toys
and personal jewellery or adornments, which result in an increase inactivity, by the deliberate addition of radioactive substances or by
activation;(c) Human imaging using radiation that is performed as a form of art or for
publicity purposes.”
3.27. One consideration in justification is the possibility of alternative methods
that do not involve the use of radiation or radioactive material. All alternative
methods will have their own costs and benefits. Thus, the mere existence ofan alternative method should not be used as a reason for deciding that the typeof practice involving the use of radiation is not justified. Nevertheless, if suchcomparisons with ‘non-radioactive’ alternatives or ‘non-radiation-emitting’alternatives are necessary, they should be undertaken with appropriate caution.
The methods should be judged on the basis of their effectiveness in accomplishingthe intended objective.
3.28. Decisions regarding the justification of a particular type of practice shouldtake account of exposures in all the relevant categories of exposure (occupational
exposure, public exposure) and, as appropriate, the assessment of the radiologicalenvironmental impact. The decision should include consideration of exposures
expected to occur and the possibility of accidents (potential exposures) inoperations, decommissioning and waste management. Justification should not be
separately applied to one component part of a practice, such as the managementof radioactive waste at a nuclear power plant.
3.29. In some States, many of the facilities and activities that produce radiation
exposures may not have been subject to a formal justification process. A formal
procedure of justification would normally only take place when new techniques
are to be authorized for the first time. Nevertheless, the justification for any
particular type of practice is required to be subject to review.
3.30. Guidance on the elements that should be considered and the process thatshould be followed in determining whether the introduction of a particular typeof practice is justified is provided in GSG-5 [8].

23Optimization of protection and safety
3.31. Requirement 11 of GSR Part 3 [2] states that “The government or
the regulatory body shall establish and enforce requirements for the
optimization of protection and safety, and registrants and licensees shallensure that protection and safety is optimized.”
3.32. Optimization of protection and safety for a planned exposure situation will
include both formal reviews as part of the application and authorization process
at the design and construction stage, and reviews during operation.
3.33. Optimization of protection and safety can be applied to the component
parts of a particular practice and can be limited to consideration of the doses toparticular groups of people. However, the boundary conditions for any analysis
for the purposes of optimization should be carefully chosen since there may
be consequences for other component parts of the practice or other groups ofpeople. For instance, the costs and benefits of different effluent treatment
options at a nuclear power plant should be considered in the optimization ofprotection of the public and protection of the environment against exposures due
to radioactive discharges to the environment. Some of these options may havesignificant implications for the way solid wastes are stored at the facility, or forthe occupational exposure of workers, which also have to be considered in the
optimization process.
3.34. Optimization decisions involve many different factors, and thus may
benefit from consideration in a matrix type of approach [23], where the different
elements of the matrix, including protection of the public and of the environment,
are considerations contributing to the overall decision.
Dose constraints and risk constraints
3.35. Dose constraints should be expressed in terms of effective dose. The dose
calculated for comparison with the dose constraint is the sum of the effective
dose from external exposure in one year and the committed effective dose fromintakes within the same year.
3.36. The dose constraint for a particular source is intended to ensure that thesum of the doses from planned operations for all sources that may contributeto the exposure of the representative person remains within the dose limit. In
this respect, possible future practices should be considered at the design stage orplanning stage in establishing the dose constraint.
24

3.37. Dose constraints for public exposure in planned exposure situations are
required to be established or approved by the government or the regulatory
body (para. 3.120 of GSR Part 3 [2]). The dose constraint can be proposed by
the registrant or licensee or operating organization and be subject to review andapproval by the regulatory body. In setting dose constraints, the characteristicsof the site and of the facility or activity that are relevant for public exposure,good practices in the operation of similar sources, the dose contribution fromother relevant authorized practices, the scenarios for exposure and the views ofinterested parties should all be considered.
3.38. Dose constraints should be established in respect of public exposure due
to all sources for which an application for authorization is made, for example,
for discharges to the environment during normal operation from facilities or
activities or for optimizing the shielding in the design of facilities or activities(e.g. a room used for X ray imaging in a hospital or in an industrial radiography
facility).
3.39. The value for the dose constraint for public exposure in a planned exposure
situation should be below the dose limit for the effective dose of 1 mSv in ayear. The dose limit applies to the total dose received by an individual from all
sources in planned exposure situations. On the other hand, the value for the dose
constraint should be higher than the exemption level established by the regulatory
body, e.g. a dose of the order of 10 µSv in a year. Therefore, in practical terms,
dose constraints should be selected within the range of 0.1 mSv to <1 mSv in ayear.
3.40. The value for the dose constraint should be selected in accordance withthe characteristics of the exposure. In establishing the value, the regulatory
body should consider the typical number and type of radiation sources in use
in the State or region. Some States may establish a generic value for the dose
constraint for all sources. However, there may be circumstances that could allow
for a specific value for the dose constraint for a particular source to be set by theregulatory body (see para. 3.41).
3.41. In establishing the generic value or specific value for the dose constraint,
the regional contribution to the exposure of the public from existing or planned
practices and other existing or planned practices in the vicinity of the source
should be considered. For example, for nuclear installations, other installations on
the same site should be assumed to contribute to the exposure of the representative
person. In the case of facilities or activities in an urban environment (e.g. hospitals
or industrial applications), more than one source could be assumed to contribute25

to the exposure of the representative person. On the other hand, for facilities or
activities located in remote areas, e.g. a uranium mine in an extremely remotearea, the contribution from other local sources is not likely to be significant, andthus should not be included in the assessment.
3.42. Dose constraints should not be used as dose limits. More specifically,
exceeding a dose constraint should not represent a regulatory infraction, as
would be the case if a dose limit is exceeded. Given that the dose constraint
represents a level of dose for planning measures for protection and safety, if thedose constraint is approached or exceeded in the course of operations, this should
result in investigation of the situation, and development of modifications orfollow-up actions that may be necessary.
3.43. The risk constraint is a source related value that provides a basic level ofprotection for the individuals most at risk from a source. This risk is a function of
the probability of an unintended event causing a dose and the probability of the
detriment due to such a dose. Risk constraints correspond to dose constraints but
apply to potential exposure [2].
3.44. Potential exposure of the public includes events resulting in an unplanned
release of radioactive material to the environment (e.g. a major accident at anuclear facility or the malicious use of radioactive material); events resulting in
the loss of control of a radiation source; and events in which potential exposures
could occur far into the future and doses would be delivered over long time
periods (e.g. disposal facilities for radioactive waste after their closure) [5].
3.45. Paragraph 266 of ICRP Publication 103 [5] states that:“The evaluation of potential exposures, for the purpose of planning or
judging protection measures, is usually based on: a) the construction of
scenarios which are intended to represent the sequence of events leading
to the exposures; b) the assessment of the probabilities of each of thesesequences; c) the assessment of the resulting dose; d) the evaluation of
the detriment associated with that dose; e) comparison of the results withsome criterion of acceptability [e.g. risk constraint]; and f) optimisation ofprotection which may require several iterations of the previous steps.”
3.46. Risk constraints for public exposure are required to be set by the governmentor the regulatory body [2]. In setting risk constraints, the characteristics of thesource and of the practice, good practice in the operation of similar sources andthe views of interested parties are required to be considered [2]. The government26

or regulatory body should also take into account the prevailing legal, economic
and social conditions in establishing risk constraints.
3.47. The ICRP recommends that risk constraints for potential exposures should
equate to a similar level of health risk to that implied by the corresponding dose
constraints used for normal operation of the same source [5, 20]. However, there
can be large uncertainties in estimating the probability of an unintended event
causing exposure. It is often sufficient to use a generic value for a risk constraint.
3.48. GSG-10 [9] presents a general framework for assessing radiological impacts
to the public and for the protection of the environment, which describes theestimation of risk and the use of risk constraints for planned exposure situations.
Dose limits
3.49. Requirement 12 of GSR Part 3 [2] states that: “The government or the
regulatory body shall establish dose limits for … public exposure, andregistrants and licensees shall apply these limits.”
3.50. The dose limits for the public in planned exposure situations are set out in
Schedule III of GSR Part 3 [2]. The dose limits for public exposure are:“(a) An effective dose of 1 mSv in a year;(b) In special circumstances68, a higher value of effective dose in a single
year could apply, provided that the average effective dose over fiveconsecutive years does not exceed 1 mSv per year;(c) An equivalent dose to the lens of the eye of 15 mSv in a year;(d) An equivalent dose to the skin of 50 mSv in a year.
“68 For example, in authorized, justified and planned operational conditions thatlead to transitory increases in exposures.”3.51. Although averaging of effective dose over a five year period is permitted
in GSR Part 3 [2], this flexibility is generally not needed in the control of public
exposure in planned exposure situations. Furthermore, it is not a straightforward
matter to apply such averaging, since the dose limits for public exposure are
more hypothetical in nature than they are in the case of occupational exposure,
where doses to specific individuals are directly assessed. Thus, a regulatory bodyshould allow flexibility only upon application by a licensee, so that the specificcircumstances can be properly addressed. If averaging is used, this should not27

be done retrospectively of the date of implementation of the requirements of
GSR Part 3 [2].
3.52. Dose limits are restrictions related to an individual and apply to the total
dose received by an individual from all relevant sources in planned exposure
situations. The calculation of the dose for purposes of comparison with thedose limit should not include the dose due to the natural background levels ofradiation. Paragraph 3.27 of GSR Part 3 [2] states that:“The government or the regulatory body shall determine what additional
restrictions, if any, are required to be complied with by registrants andlicensees to ensure that the dose limits … are not exceeded owing topossible combinations of doses from exposures due to different authorizedpractices.”
3.53. The effective dose received by members of the public depends upon anumber of factors, such as the behaviour of radionuclides in the environment
and their transfer to people, the duration and rate of exposure and other relevant
factors. These factors cause a wide variation in the effective dose among theexposed population. For the purpose of verifying compliance with the annual
dose limit for public exposure, the dose to members of the public should be
estimated for the representative person. All members of the public are considered
to be adequately protected if the estimated effective dose to the representative
person complies with the dose limit. The ICRP indicates that the dose to therepresentative person “is the equivalent of, and replaces, the mean dose in the‘critical group’” [23].
3.54. According to Requirement 14 of GSR Part 3 [2], “Registrants andlicensees and employers shall conduct monitoring to verify compliance withthe requirements for protection and safety.” Such monitoring should provide
sufficient information to determine whether the levels of public exposures comply
with the dose limits and to demonstrate that protection and safety is optimized.
EMERGENCY EXPOSURE SITUATIONSIntroduction
3.55. The requirements in GSR Part 7 [4] and in Section 4 of GSR Part 3 [2] foremergency exposure situations apply for preparedness and response for a nuclear
or radiological emergency. These requirements include those relating to the28transition from an emergency exposure situation to an existing exposure situation(Requirement 46 of GSR Part 3 [2] and para. 5.99 of GSR Part 7 [4]).
3.56. Requirement 4 of GSR Part 7 [4] requires governments to ensure thata hazard assessment is performed to provide a basis for a graded approach inemergency preparedness and response. In the hazard assessment, facilities andactivities, on-site areas, off-site areas and locations are required to be identified
where an emergency could warrant taking protective and other response actions,with account taken of the uncertainties in, and limitations of, the information
available at the preparedness stage. Paragraph 4.19 of GSR Part 7 [4] introduces
five emergency preparedness categories that establish the basis for developing
generically justified and optimized arrangements for preparedness for andresponse to a nuclear or radiological emergency.
3.57. Paragraph 4.27 of GSR Part 7 [4] states that:“The government shall ensure that, on the basis of the hazards identified
and the potential consequences of a nuclear or radiological emergency,
protection strategies are developed, justified and optimized at the
preparedness stage for taking protective actions and other response actions
effectively in a nuclear or radiological emergency to achieve the goals of
emergency response.”
3.58. In the protection strategy for an emergency exposure situation, in orderto ensure that the goals of emergency response are achieved, different actions
should be considered for regaining control over the source and/or preventing
exposure. These actions should be considered in terms of all possible pathways of
exposure and/or the individuals who may be exposed, with account taken of thetime necessary for the effective implementation of these actions. For example,
in order to prevent or reduce the release of radioactive material following an
accident, mitigatory actions could be taken at the source. However, if it is nolonger possible to control the source or to prevent a release, actions will have tobe taken in respect of the pathways or in respect of those individuals who may
be exposed. In such cases, both urgent protective actions and early protective
actions and other response actions are warranted, such as evacuation, sheltering,iodine thyroid blocking, relocation, and restrictions on food, milk, drinking waterand other commodities.
3.59. The protection strategy and overall emergency arrangements developedin accordance with GSR Part 7 [4] should provide for the safe and effective
implementation of the emergency response, particularly during the urgent phase29

and the early phase of a nuclear or radiological emergency, when very little
information is available. However, as the emergency evolves, such as during
the transition phase, more information on the circumstances surrounding the
emergency and its consequences will become available.
3.60. In the light of increased understanding on the emergency situation as it
evolves, the effectiveness of actions and the overall strategy taken early in theemergency response are required to be assessed and adjusted on the basis of theprevailing conditions and the available information on the emergency. Further
justified and optimized strategies should then be considered and implemented asnecessary (para. 4.31 of GSR Part 7 [4]).
Goals of emergency response
3.61. Paragraph 3.2 of GSR Part 7 [4] lists the goals of emergency response as
follows:(a) “To regain control of the situation and to mitigate consequences;(b) To save lives;(c) To avoid or to minimize severe deterministic effects;(d) To render first aid, to provide critical medical treatment and to manage
the treatment of radiation injuries;(e) To reduce the risk of stochastic effects;(f) To keep the public informed and to maintain public trust;(g) To mitigate, to the extent practicable, non-radiological consequences;(h) To protect, to the extent practicable, property and the environment;(i) To prepare, to the extent practicable, for the resumption of normalsocial and economic activity.”
These goals should guide the development of a protection strategy and of
overall emergency arrangements for preparedness and response for a nuclear orradiological emergency in order to ensure an effective emergency response.
Justification
3.62. Requirement 44 of GSR Part 3 [2] and Requirement 5 of GSR Part 7 [4]state that the protection strategies are required to be justified at the preparedness
stage for taking protective actions and other response actions effectively in a
nuclear or radiological emergency.

30

3.63. As stated in para. 4.29 of GSR Part 7 [4], the requirement for justification
applies for each protective action, in the context of the protection strategy, andfor the protection strategy itself. Protective actions taken in an emergency can be
disruptive and have adverse psychological or societal consequences (particularly
for those individuals evacuated or relocated) as well as major economic andenvironmental impacts in the affected areas. In addition, the absence of adequate
preparedness can result in the taking of actions that are not warranted in the belief
that they provide for the protection and safety of individuals affected, but whichcause more harm than good. Therefore, it is required to demonstrate that theprotective actions and the overall protection strategy do more good than harm,with account taken not only of those detriments that are associated with radiation
exposure of individuals but also of those detriments associated with impacts of
the actions taken on public health, the economy, society and the environment.
3.64. Paragraph 4.30 of GSR Part 7 [4] states that “The government shallensure that interested parties are involved and are consulted, as appropriate, inthe development of the protection strategy.” In the context of an emergency,
interested parties should be consulted throughout the process of justification of
the overall protection strategy and any protective action in the context of theprotection strategy.
3.65. During the urgent phase and the early phase of an emergency, there may
be no time to consult interested parties or to consider justification of protective
actions and the protection strategy; therefore, adequate preparedness needs toaccount for this. As the emergency response moves towards the transition phaseand to remediation activities, there is time to consult interested parties and toaddress justification. In this phase, more thorough justification of the strategies toenable the termination of the emergency should be implemented. In this context,
para. 5.98 of GSR Part 7 [4] states that:“Both radiological consequences and non-radiological consequences shallbe considered in deciding on the termination of an emergency as wellas in the justification and optimization of further protection strategies asnecessary.”
3.66. GSR Part 7 [4] requires protective actions and other response actions to bediscontinued when they are no longer justified. When such decisions are taken,
they should be clearly communicated to all interested parties.

31

Optimization
3.67. Requirement 44 of GSR Part 3 [2] and Requirement 5 of GSR Part 7 [4]set a requirement for the protection strategies to be optimized at the preparedness
stage for taking protective actions and other response actions effectively in a
nuclear or radiological emergency.
3.68. As indicated in paras 4.30 and 4.31 of GSR Part 7 [4], in the context ofan emergency, consultation of interested parties throughout the process of
optimization of the overall protection strategy is required to be done at the
preparedness stage and the optimized strategy is required to be implemented in
the response.
3.69. During the urgent phase and the early phase of an emergency, there may
be no time available to dedicate to the optimization process; therefore, adequate
preparedness needs to account for this. The situation changes as the emergency
moves towards recovery activities and the transition phase. At this point, time
will allow for more thorough optimization of the strategy to be implemented toenable the termination of the emergency. The extent of optimization at this point
would be as at the preparedness stage.
3.70. The optimization of protection strategies should ensure that the bestprotective actions have been taken under the prevailing circumstances, andall that is reasonable and justified has been done to keep exposure as low asreasonably achievable.
Reference levels
3.71. For emergency exposure situations, GSR Part 3 [2] and GSR Part 7 [4]require that a reference level expressed in terms of residual dose be set, typicallyas an effective dose in the range of 20–100 mSv, acute or annual, that includes
dose contributions via all exposure pathways. The residual dose is the dose
expected to be incurred after protective actions have been terminated (or after
a decision has been taken not to take protective actions) and so is the dose
accumulated from the initiation of the event, through a specified period of time.
The purpose of a reference level in an emergency exposure situation is to guidethe optimization process of protection strategies aimed at reducing the doses tobe incurred by individuals and to be a benchmark for a retrospective assessmentof the effectiveness of protective actions taken and the protection strategy in an
emergency response.

32

3.72. The reference level is not the only input in the development, justificationand optimization of the protection strategies. Paragraph 4.28 of GSR Part 7 [4]indicates the need for using the reference level in this context in conjunction withthe goals of emergency response (see para. 3.61) and the specific time frame inwhich particular goals are to be achieved.
3.73. Although the decision to select a particular value within the proposed bandof reference levels remains with national authorities, para. 4.28 of GSR Part 7 [4]explains that such selection will depend on the phase of the emergency, thepracticality of reducing or preventing exposures and other factors.
Generic criteria and operational criteria
3.74. In addition to reference levels, national generic criteria are required to be
used to indicate the need for taking protective actions and other response actionsin an emergency. If the doses projected or received in an emergency exceed thenational generic criteria, protective actions and other response actions, either
individually or in combination within the protection strategy, are required to be
implemented.
3.75. Appendix II of GSR Part 7 [4] provides a comprehensive set of genericcriteria to be considered when developing the justified and optimized protection
strategy, including national generic criteria. The protective actions and other
response actions associated with these generic criteria are considered to prevent
severe deterministic effects, to reduce the risk of stochastic effects, to mitigate
the impact of non-radiological consequences by providing a basis for thecontinuation or the resumption of international trade following an emergency
and for enabling a transition to an existing exposure situation. The process forderiving national generic criteria while taking account of these generic criteria
should be such that the associated protective actions and other response actions
undergo thorough justification and optimization.
3.76. Once an emergency has occurred, protective actions and other response
actions should be promptly implemented on the basis of pre-establishedoperational criteria (emergency action levels, operational intervention levels andobservables) that derive from the national generic criteria providing a basis totake effective actions, particularly before substantial information on the situation
is available.

33

EXISTING EXPOSURE SITUATIONSIntroduction
3.77. Paragraph 5.1 of GSR Part 3 [2] sets out situations that shall be regarded asexisting exposure situations. These include:“(a) Exposure due to contamination of areas[3] by residual radioactive
material deriving from:(i) Past activities that were never subject to regulatory control or thatwere subject to regulatory control but not in accordance with therequirements of [GSR Part 3 [2]];(ii) A nuclear or radiological emergency, after an emergency has been
declared to be ended…
(b) Exposure due to commodities, including food, feed, drinking water andconstruction materials, that incorporate radionuclides deriving fromresidual radioactive material…
(c) Exposure due to natural sources, including:(i) 222Rn and its progeny and 220Rn and its progeny…. in dwellings
and in other buildings with high occupancy factors for membersof the public;(ii) Radionuclides of natural origin, regardless of activity
concentration, in commodities, including food, feed, drinking
water, agricultural fertilizer and soil amendments, and construction
materials, and residual radioactive material in the environment;(iii) Materials … in which the activity concentration of no radionuclidein either the uranium decay chain[, the actinium decay chain]or the thorium decay chain exceeds 1 Bq/g and the activity
concentration of 40K does not exceed 10 Bq/g”.
3.78. Contamination of areas can also arise from the operation of facilities andactivities that are subject to regulatory control under the requirements for planned
exposure situations, as a result of authorized activities such as discharges, themanagement of radioactive waste and decommissioning. The control of suchcontamination is through the requirements for planned exposure situations, andnot through the requirements for existing exposure situations.

334

The term ‘areas’ is used in its broadest sense and can include land and water bodies.

3.79. For existing exposure situations, exposures can be reduced only by either
protective action or remedial action on the source, the exposure pathway or the
exposed populations. In addition, some potential existing exposure situations
warranting such actions may be avoided by design. For example, high levels ofradon indoors may be avoided by incorporating appropriate preventive measures
for radon into the design of new dwellings. Further guidance on such measures isprovided in SSG-32 [15].
3.80. Requirement 47 of GSR Part 3 [2] states that:“The government shall ensure that existing exposure situations thathave been identified are evaluated to determine which occupational
exposures and public exposures are of concern from the point of viewof radiation protection.”
3.81. The government and the regulatory body should take measures to identify
and evaluate existing exposure situations, taking into account the types ofexisting exposure situations mentioned in para. 3.77, on the basis of indication
or evidence of public exposures that are of concern from the point of view ofradiation protection.
Justification
3.82. Requirement 48 of GSR Part 3 [2] states that “The government andthe regulatory body or other relevant authority shall ensure that remedialactions and protective actions are justified and that protection and safety is
optimized.”
3.83. The protection strategy for a particular existing exposure situation isrequired to be established in accordance with the principle of justification. Any
decisions to implement a remedial action or protective action to reduce theradiation dose to the public, which will always have some disadvantages, should
be justified in the sense that they are to do more good than harm.
3.84. The remedial actions or protective actions may include, depending on thetype of existing exposure situation and the level of projected doses:(a)(b)

Corrective actions in existing buildings and preventive measures in newbuildings to reduce radon levels [15];Remediation of areas with residual radioactive material [14];

35

(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)

Restrictions on access to contaminated buildings or to areas with residual
radioactive material [14];Restrictions on the use of locally produced feed, food or drinking water(see paras 3.99–3.102);
Restrictions on the use of construction materials [15];Restrictions on the use of agricultural fertilizer and soil amendments.

3.85. The justification process should consider, in addition to radiation exposure,other factors such as societal and ethical aspects, available resources, waste
management options and equity issues. Where public doses are relatively high,the radiation risk may be the most important factor in decision making. However,where exposures are low, other factors may become more important and thejustification process should go beyond the scope of radiation protection. This
broader decision making process calls for input from other organizations andfrom interested parties.
Optimization
3.86. The optimization process for an existing exposure situation is implemented
through the protection strategy. The protection strategy should be commensuratewith the associated radiation risks and may consist of more than one remedialaction or protective action. The remedial actions and protective actions selected
depend on their technical feasibility and on cost, societal factors, potential adverse
impacts, long term effectiveness and the concerns of the public. A process should
be applied to achieve residual doses to the public that are as low as reasonably
achievable and that are below the reference level.
3.87. Paragraph 5.8 of GSR Part 3 [2] states that:“The regulatory body or other relevant authority and other parties
responsible for remedial actions or protective actions shall ensure thatthe form, scale and duration of such actions are optimized. While thisoptimization process is intended to provide optimized protection for all
individuals subject to exposure, priority shall be given to those groups forwhom the dose exceeds the reference level. All reasonable steps shall betaken to prevent doses from remaining above the reference levels.”
3.88. The success of the implementation of the protection strategy depends
on the support and commitment of the parties involved, including the exposed
population. This can be achieved by involving interested parties in the decision
making process regarding the development and implementation of remedial
36actions and protective actions. The levels of public exposure also depend strongly
on living habits, which calls for transparent communication to the members of the
public on the possible ways they can reduce their exposure. The involvement of
the affected communities in the implementation of the protection strategy throughself-help actions can also reduce their exposure, and may make an important
contribution to the success of the strategy. The regulatory body or other national
authority should provide guidance on how self-help actions can be carried out
at the local or individual level. The regulatory body or other national authority
should periodically evaluate the effectiveness of such self-help actions to provide
support that could further improve the situation. Further guidance on self-help
actions in the remediation of contaminated areas is currently in preparation.4
3.89. The process of optimization should also consider that some remedialactions, such as cleanup work involving the removal of contaminated soil, may
lead to exposure of the remediation workers, as well as generating radioactive
waste requiring appropriate actions for its processing and disposal. The
collection, treatment, storage and disposal of large volumes of such waste maylead to exposure of the public.
3.90. The selection of the optimized remediation option is required to take into
account that some remedial actions could have considerable radiological andnon-radiological impacts on the environment, which should be considered within
the process of optimization, together with technical, societal and economic
factors (para. 5.12(d) of GSR Part 3 [2]).
Reference levels
3.91. Paragraph 5.4 of GSR Part 3 [2] states that “The regulatory body or otherrelevant authority assigned to establish a protection strategy for an existing
exposure situation shall ensure that it specifies … appropriate reference levels.”
Paragraph 5.8 of GSR Part 3 [2] states that:“Reference levels shall typically be expressed as an annual effective doseto the representative person in the range 1–20 mSv or other corresponding
quantity, the actual value depending on the feasibility of controlling thesituation and on experience in managing similar situations in the past.”

4

A revision of WS-G-3.1 [14] is in preparation.

37

3.92. For existing exposure situations, the reference level is expressed in terms ofeffective dose to the representative person, or in terms of activity concentration,with account taken of all possible pathways of exposure. The reference levelshould be used to guide the optimization of protection such that projected doses
greater than the reference level are reduced, and further reductions are achieved
given the circumstances. GSR Part 3 [2] provides a general framework forestablishing reference levels. Table 1 in the Appendix summarizes values of dose
constraints and reference levels in terms of effective doses.
3.93. Where activity concentrations of radon are of concern for public health,para. 5.20 of GSR Part 3 [2] requires the government to ensure that an action
plan for radon is established, which includes the establishment of an appropriate
reference level for 222Rn for dwellings and other buildings with high occupancy
factors for members of the public that in general will not exceed an annual
average activity concentration due to 222Rn of 300 Bq/m3.5 The reference level for
exposure indoors due to radon should be selected such that the resulting actions
are practicable and manageable. For example, it would be impractical to set areference level such that corrective actions would be necessary for the majorityof existing dwellings. The percentages of dwellings that would require corrective
remedial actions under different reference levels should be considered in the
choice of an appropriate reference level. SSG-32 [15] provides recommendations
and guidance on the establishment of a reference level for radon in dwellings andother buildings with high occupancy factors for members of the public, and on
protection of members of the public against exposure indoors due to 222Rn.
3.94. Requirement 51 of GSR Part 3 [2] states that “The regulatory body orother relevant authority shall establish reference levels for exposure due toradionuclides in commodities”, while para. 5.22 of GSR Part 3 [2] states that:“The regulatory body or other relevant authority shall establish specificreference levels for exposure due to radionuclides in commodities such as
construction materials, food and feed, and in drinking water, each of whichshall typically be expressed as, or be based on, an annual effective dose to
the representative person that generally does not exceed a value of about
1 mSv.”

5

On the assumption of an equilibrium factor for 222Rn of 0.4 and an annual occupancy
factor of 7000 hours, the value of 300 Bq/m3 corresponds to an annual effective dose of theorder of 10 mSv.

38

3.95. Tables 1 and 2 of RS-G-1.7 [22] provide values of activity concentration
for radionuclides of natural origin and for radionuclides of artificial origin,respectively. Paragraph 5.8 of RS-G-1.7 [22] states that:“National and international trade in commodities containing radionuclides
with activity concentrations below the values of activity concentration
provided in Tables 1 and 2 [of RS-G-1.7 [22]] should not be subject toregulatory control for the purposes of radiation protection.”
The commodities referred to above do not include foodstuffs, drinking water,
animal feed or any material intended for use in food or animal feed: these are alloutside the scope of RS-G-1.7 [22].
3.96. The activity concentration values for radionuclides of artificial origin set
out in table 2 of RS-G-1.7 [22] are for bulk quantities of solid material and were
derived using the dose criteria for exemption as set out in para. 3.9 of this Safety
Guide. The activity concentration values for radionuclides of natural origin set
out in table 1 of RS-G-1.7 [22] were selected on the basis of consideration of theupper end of the worldwide distribution of activity concentrations in soil.
3.97. Paragraph 5.1 of RS-G-1.7 [22] states that:“There are some situations (such as the use of some building materials
containing natural radionuclides) for which exposures from materials due
to radionuclides or natural origin with activity concentrations below thosegiven in Table 1 [of RS-G-1.7 [22]] would necessitate consideration by theregulatory body for some types of regulatory control.”
3.98. The regulatory body or other national authority should establish a process
to determine the compliance of building materials containing radionuclides ofnatural origin with the reference level. SSG-32 [15] provides an example of sucha process for a reference level of 1 mSv per year for external exposure to gamma
radiation for the protection of members of the public against exposure indoors
due to radionuclides in building materials. Factors to be considered include
amenability to control and the possibility of different values being determined for
different societal groups.
3.99. The regulatory body or other national authority should establish a process
to evaluate the levels of radionuclides in food grown in the State in areas that
may be affected by past activities or by a nuclear or radiological emergency, andin food imported into the State that may incorporate radionuclides arising from39

residual radioactive material deriving from a nuclear or radiological emergency
after it has been declared ended. This process should identify radionuclides that
may be of concern, and should include a methodology for developing guideline
levels of activity concentration for these radionuclides in food, on the basisof the specific reference level for food that does not exceed a value of about
1 mSv established by the regulatory body. While in most instances a reference
level of 1 mSv or less is appropriate, there may be special circumstances whereconsideration of a higher value for the reference level may be appropriate, owing
to local societal and economic circumstances.
3.100. In developing the national guidelines, the regulatory body or othernational authority should consider the methodology used, and is required
to consider the guideline levels for radionuclides contained in food tradedinternationally that could contain radioactive substances as a result of a
nuclear or radiological emergency, published by the Joint Food and Agriculture
Organization/World Health Organization Codex Alimentarius Commission [24](as established in para. 5.23 of GSR Part 3 [2]). It is noted that the Codex
guideline values for activity concentration of radionuclides in food were
calculated assuming that 10% of the diet consists of imported food, all of whichis contaminated, and assuming an exemption level for interventions of 1 mSv per
year.
3.101. The regulatory body or other national authority should establish aprocess to determine the compliance of drinking water in the State with theguideline levels for drinking water published by the World Health Organization(WHO) [25]. The WHO guideline levels for specific radionuclides are calculatedusing a generic criterion of 0.1 mSv per year for ingestion.
3.102. The situation may arise where the guideline levels for drinking water are
consistently exceeded for one radionuclide or for a combination of radionuclides.
The regulatory body or other national authority will then need to make a decision
regarding the need to implement protective actions or to place some restriction
on the continued use of the water supply for drinking [25]. In such situations,the regulatory body or other national authority should establish a reference levelfor drinking water that would be applied to those water supplies that containradionuclides that consistently exceed the guideline levels published by WHO.
The regulatory body or other national authority should provide guidance to the
public and to water authorities on the need for protective actions or on the need toplace restrictions on the use of the water supply for drinking. The regulatory bodyor other national authority will need to take account of the availability of other40

drinking water supplies, and of the costs of protective actions, such as additional
water treatment [25].
3.103. Paragraph 5.9 of GSR Part 3 [2] states that “The regulatory body orother relevant authority shall periodically review the reference levels to ensurethat they remain appropriate in the light of the prevailing circumstances.”

4. PROTECTION OF THE ENVIRONMENT
4.1. The Rio Declaration on Environment and Development states that“environmental protection shall constitute an integral part of the development
process and cannot be considered in isolation from it” [26]. According to the
ICRP [5–7, 27], the aims of environmental protection are to prevent or reduce thefrequency of deleterious radiation effects on flora and fauna to a level where theywould have a negligible impact on the maintenance of biological diversity, theconservation of species and the health and status of natural habitats, communities
and ecosystems. The Safety Fundamentals SF-1 [1] recognizes that the present
system of radiation protection generally provides appropriate protection of
ecosystems in the human environment from harmful effects of radiation exposure.
Paragraph 3.28 of SF-1 [1] states that:“The general intent of the measures taken for the purposes of environmental
protection has been to protect ecosystems against radiation exposure thatwould have adverse consequences for populations of a species (as distinct
from individual organisms).”
4.2. Paragraph 1.34 of GSR Part 3 [2] states that:“Radiological impacts in a particular environment constitute only one
type of impact and, in most cases, may not be the dominant impacts of aparticular facility or activity. Furthermore, the assessment of impacts on
the environment needs to be viewed in an integrated manner with otherfeatures of the system of protection and safety to establish the requirements
applicable to a particular source. Since there are complex interrelations, theapproach to the protection of people and the environment is not limited
to the prevention of radiological effects on humans and on other species.
When establishing regulations, an integrated perspective has to be adopted

41

to ensure the sustainability, now and in the future, of agriculture, forestry,
fisheries and tourism, and of the use of natural resources.”
In general this is achieved by the appropriate application of the optimization
principle [2].
4.3. Some States, on the basis of evidence such as experience or simplified
analysis, may consider that specific assessment of effects in the environment is
not necessary. In these cases, the regulatory body may decide that the radiologicalenvironmental impact assessment does not need to include explicit considerationof exposures of flora and fauna.
4.4. Other States may consider that it is necessary to include in the radiologicalenvironmental impact assessments for certain facilities and activities theestimation and control of exposures of flora and fauna.
4.5. Paragraph 3.9(e) of GSR Part 3 [2] states that:“Any person or organization applying for authorization … Shall, as requiredby the regulatory body, have an appropriate prospective assessment madefor radiological environmental impacts, commensurate with the radiation
risks associated with the facility or activity.”
4.6. Requirement 9 and para. 3.15 of GSR Part 3 [2] state the responsibilities
of registrants and licensees in planned exposure situations. Paragraph 3.15(d) of
GSR Part 3 [2] states that:“Registrants and licensees … Shall, for the sources for which they areauthorized and for which the regulatory body requires a prospective
assessment to be made for radiological environmental impacts … conduct
such an assessment and keep it up to date”.
4.7. GSG-10 [9] provides a framework for the prospective assessment ofradiological environmental impact in planned exposure situations, which
includes the assessment and control of the impact of radioactive releases during
normal operation and releases from events and accidents that are determined bymeans of a safety assessment. The use of such a framework should not impose
an unnecessary burden on registrants and licensees or on the regulatory body.
GSG-10 [9] discusses the aspects to be considered when prospectively assessing
the radiological environmental impact for planned exposure situations andprovides, in annex I of GSG-10 [9], a methodology to assess the radiological42

impact on flora and fauna from normal operation on the basis of the ICRP
approach for the protection of the environment [7, 27].
4.8. The requirements of GSR Part 3 [2] for a graded approach for the control
of exposures also apply to the assessment of radiological environmental impacts.
The efforts to assess radiological environmental impact, including protectionof flora and fauna if considered necessary, should be commensurate with theradiation risks associated with the particular facility or activity.
4.9. For the management of environmental aspects in existing exposure
situations and emergency exposure situations, impact on the environment should
be considered as an element in the process of optimization of protection andsafety. It will be of particular importance to give consideration to the impacts
on the environment from the protective actions and remedial actions to be taken
to reduce the exposure of members of the public, as such impacts may in somecases be irreversible. These impacts should be considered in the justification andoptimization processes of the overall protection strategy, as well as of individual
protective actions and remedial actions.

43Appendix
DOSE CONSTRAINTS AND REFERENCE LEVELS
A.1. Table 1 summarizes the dose constraints and reference levels for existing
exposure situations, planned exposure situations and emergency exposure
situations, and for different categories of exposure, as established in GSRPart 3 [2].
TABLE 1. FRAMEWORK FOR SOURCE RELATED DOSE CONSTRAINTS
AND REFERENCE LEVELS
Range in which the value for a dose
constraint or reference level is set

Category of exposure and type of exposure situation

20 to 100 mSv a,b,c● Reference level for public exposure in an emergency

1 to 20 mSv per year

● Dose constraint for occupational exposure in a

exposure situation

planned exposure situation● Dose constraint for medical exposure of carers andcomforters in a planned exposure situation● Dose constraint for individuals undergoing

non-medical human imaging that is conducted by
medical personnel using medical radiologicalequipment in a planned exposure situation● Reference level for workers in an existing exposure
situation● Reference level for public exposure in specificexisting exposure situations, e.g. exposure due toradon in dwellings, areas with residual radioactive
material
Not greater than 1 mSv per year

● Dose constraint for public exposure in planned

exposure situations● Reference level for public exposure in specificexisting exposure situations, e.g. exposure due toradionuclides in commodities such as food, drinking
water or construction materialsaAcute dose or annual dose.
In exceptional situations, informed volunteer workers may receive doses above this bandof values to save lives, to prevent severe deterministic health effects or to prevent thedevelopment of catastrophic conditions.
cSituations in which the dose threshold for deterministic effects in relevant organs or tissues
could be exceeded always require action.
b

45

REFERENCES[1] EUROPEAN ATOMIC ENERGY COMMUNITY, FOOD AND AGRICULTURE
ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS, INTERNATIONAL ATOMICENERGYAGENCY,INTERNATIONALLABOURORGANIZATION,
INTERNATIONAL MARITIME ORGANIZATION, OECD NUCLEAR ENERGYAGENCY, PAN AMERICAN HEALTH ORGANIZATION, UNITED NATIONSENVIRONMENT PROGRAMME, WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION,
Fundamental Safety Principles, IAEA Safety Standards Series No. SF-1, IAEA,
Vienna (2006).
[2] EUROPEAN COMMISSION, FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OF
THE UNITED NATIONS, INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY,
INTERNATIONAL LABOUR ORGANIZATION, OECD NUCLEAR ENERGYAGENCY, PAN AMERICAN HEALTH ORGANIZATION, UNITED NATIONSENVIRONMENT PROGRAMME, WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION, Radiation
Protection and Safety of Radiation Sources: International Basic Safety Standards,
IAEA Safety Standards Series No. GSR Part 3, IAEA, Vienna (2014).
[3] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Governmental, Legal andRegulatory Framework for Safety, IAEA Safety Standards Series No. GSR Part 1(Rev. 1), IAEA, Vienna (2016).
[4] FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS,INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, INTERNATIONAL CIVIL
AVIATION ORGANIZATION, INTERNATIONAL LABOUR ORGANIZATION,
INTERNATIONAL MARITIME ORGANIZATION, INTERPOL, OECD NUCLEAR
ENERGY AGENCY, PAN AMERICAN HEALTH ORGANIZATION, PREPARATORYCOMMISSION FOR THE COMPREHENSIVE NUCLEAR-TEST-BAN TREATY
ORGANIZATION, UNITED NATIONS ENVIRONMENT PROGRAMME, UNITED
NATIONS OFFICE FOR THE COORDINATION OF HUMANITARIAN AFFAIRS,WORLDHEALTHORGANIZATION,WORLDMETEOROLOGICALORGANIZATION, Preparedness and Response for a Nuclear or Radiological
Emergency, IAEA Safety Standards Series No. GSR Part 7, IAEA, Vienna (2015).
[5] INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON RADIOLOGICAL PROTECTION, The 2007
Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection, ICRP
Publication 103, Elsevier, Oxford (2007).
[6] INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON RADIOLOGICAL PROTECTION,
Environmental Protection: the Concept and Use of Reference Animals and Plants, ICRP
Publication 108, Elsevier, Oxford (2008).
[7] INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON RADIOLOGICAL PROTECTION, Protectionof the Environment under Different Exposure Situations, ICRP Publication 124, Sage,
London (2014).
[8] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Justification of Practices, Including
Non-medical Human Imaging, IAEA Safety Standards Series No. GSG-5, IAEA,
Vienna (2014).

47

[9] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Prospective Radiological
Environmental Impact Assessment for Facilities and Activities, IAEA Safety Standards
Series No. GSG-10, IAEA, Vienna (in preparation).
[10] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Regulatory Control of Radioactive
Discharges to the Environment, IAEA Safety Standards Series No. GSG-9, IAEA,
Vienna (in preparation).
[11] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, OECD NUCLEAR ENERGYAGENCY, Radiation Safety for Consumer Products, IAEA Safety Standards Series
No. SSG-36, IAEA, Vienna (2016).
[12] FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS,INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, INTERNATIONAL LABOUR
OFFICE, PAN AMERICAN HEALTH ORGANIZATION, WORLD HEALTHORGANIZATION, Criteria for Use in Preparedness and Response for a Nuclear orRadiological Emergency, IAEA Safety Standards Series No. GSG-2, IAEA,
Vienna (2011).
[13] FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS,INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, INTERNATIONAL LABOUR
OFFICE, PAN AMERICAN HEALTH ORGANIZATION, UNITED NATIONSOFFICE FOR THE COORDINATION OF HUMANITARIAN AFFAIRS, WORLDHEALTH ORGANIZATION, Arrangements for Preparedness for a Nuclear orRadiological Emergency, IAEA Safety Standards Series No. GS-G-2.1, IAEA,
Vienna (2007).
[14] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Remediation Process for Areas
Affected by Past Activities and Accidents, IAEA Safety Standards Series No. WS-G-3.1,
IAEA, Vienna (2007). (A revision of this publication is in preparation.)[15] INTERNATIONAL ATOMICENERGY AGENCY,WORLD
HEALTHORGANIZATION, Protection of the Public against Exposure Indoors due to Radon andOther Natural Sources of Radiation, IAEA Safety Standards Series No. SSG-32, IAEA,
Vienna (2015).
[16] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Occupational Radiation Protection,
IAEA Safety Standards Series No. GSG-7, IAEA, Vienna (in preparation).
[17] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Radiation Protection and Safety in
Medical Uses of Ionizing Radiation, IAEA Safety Standards Series No. SSG-46, IAEA,
Vienna (in preparation).
[18] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Leadership and Management for
Safety, IAEA Safety Standards Series No. GSR Part 2, IAEA, Vienna (2016).
[19] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, IAEA Safety Glossary:
Terminology used in Nuclear Safety and Radiation Protection, 2016 Revision, IAEA,
Vienna (in preparation).
[20] INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON RADIOLOGICAL PROTECTION, Protection
from Potential Exposure: A Conceptual Framework, ICRP Publication 64, Pergamon,
Oxford (1993).

48

[21] EUROPEAN COMMISSION, Principles and Methods for Establishing Concentrations
and Quantities (Exemption Values) below which Reporting is not Required in theEuropean Directive, Radiation Protection 65, Doc. XI-028/93, EC, Brussels (1993).
[22] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Application of the Concepts of
Exclusion, Exemption and Clearance, IAEA Safety Standards Series No. RS-G-1.7,
IAEA, Vienna (2004).
[23] INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON RADIOLOGICAL PROTECTION, Assessing
Dose of the Representative Person for the Purpose of Radiation Protection of the Public
and the Optimisation of Radiological Protection: Broadening the Process,
ICRP Publication 101, Elsevier, Oxford (2006).
[24] WORLDHEALTHORGANIZATION,
FOOD
AND
AGRICULTURE
ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS, Codex General Standard forContaminants and Toxins in Foods, Schedule I – Radionuclides, CODEXSTAN 193-1995, CAC, Rome (2006).
[25] WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION, Guidelines for Drinking-water Quality, 4th edn,
WHO, Geneva (2011).
[26] Rio Declaration on Environment and Development (1992),
http://www.un.org/documents/ga/conf151/aconf15126-1annex1.htm[27] INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON RADIOLOGICAL PROTECTION,
A Framework for Assessing the Impact of Ionising Radiation on Non-Human Species,
ICRP Publication 91, Pergamon, Oxford (2003).

49

CONTRIBUTORS TO DRAFTING AND REVIEWBerkovskyy, V.

International Atomic Energy Agency

Boal, T.

International Atomic Energy Agency

Cabianca, T.

Public Health England, United Kingdom

Cool, D.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
United States of America

Dale, P.

Scottish Environment Protection Agency, United Kingdom

Kliaus, V.

Republican Scientific-Practical Centre of Hygiene,
Belarus

Linsley, G.

Consultant, United Kingdom

Lorenz, B.

European Nuclear Installations Safety Standards Initiative

Markkanen, M.

Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority, Finland

Proehl, G.

International Atomic Energy Agency

Robinson, C.

United Nations Environment Programme

Telleria, D.

International Atomic Energy Agency

Thompson, P.

Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission, Canada

Wrixon, A.

Consultant, United Kingdom

51

@

No. 25ORDERING LOCALLY
In the following countries, IAEA priced publications may be purchased from the sources listed below orfrom major local booksellers.
Orders for unpriced publications should be made directly to the IAEA. The contact details are given at
the end of this list.

CANADA

Renouf Publishing Co. Ltd
22-1010 Polytek Street, Ottawa, ON K1J 9J1, CANADA
Telephone: +1 613 745 2665  Fax: +1 643 745 7660
Email: order@renoufbooks.com  Web site: www.renoufbooks.com
Bernan / Rowman & Littlefield
15200 NBN Way, Blue Ridge Summit, PA 17214, USA
Tel: +1 800 462 6420 • Fax: +1 800 338 4550
Email: orders@rowman.com Web site: www.rowman.com/bernan

CZECH REPUBLIC

Suweco CZ, s.r.o.
Sestupná 153/11, 162 00 Prague 6, CZECH REPUBLIC
Telephone: +420 242 459 205  Fax: +420 284 821 646
Email: nakup@suweco.cz  Web site: www.suweco.cz

FRANCE

Form-Edit
5 rue Janssen, PO Box 25, 75921 Paris CEDEX, FRANCE
Telephone: +33 1 42 01 49 49  Fax: +33 1 42 01 90 90
Email: formedit@formedit.fr  Web site: www.form-edit.com

GERMANY

Goethe Buchhandlung Teubig GmbH
Schweitzer Fachinformationen
Willstätterstrasse 15, 40549 Düsseldorf, GERMANY
Telephone: +49 (0) 211 49 874 015  Fax: +49 (0) 211 49 874 28
Email: kundenbetreuung.goethe@schweitzer-online.de  Web site: www.goethebuch.de

INDIA

Allied Publishers
1st Floor, Dubash House, 15, J.N. Heredi Marg, Ballard Estate, Mumbai 400001, INDIA
Telephone: +91 22 4212 6930/31/69  Fax: +91 22 2261 7928
Email: alliedpl@vsnl.com  Web site: www.alliedpublishers.com
Bookwell
3/79 Nirankari, Delhi 110009, INDIA
Telephone: +91 11 2760 1283/4536
Email: bkwell@nde.vsnl.net.in  Web site: www.bookwellindia.com

ITALY

Libreria Scientifica “AEIOU”
Via Vincenzo Maria Coronelli 6, 20146 Milan, ITALY
Telephone: +39 02 48 95 45 52  Fax: +39 02 48 95 45 48
Email: info@libreriaaeiou.eu  Web site: www.libreriaaeiou.eu

JAPANMaruzen-Yushodo Co., Ltd
10-10 Yotsuyasakamachi, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo 160-0002, JAPAN
Telephone: +81 3 4335 9312  Fax: +81 3 4335 9364
Email: bookimport@maruzen.co.jp  Web site: www.maruzen.co.jp

RUSSIAN FEDERATION

Scientific and Engineering Centre for Nuclear and Radiation Safety
107140, Moscow, Malaya Krasnoselskaya st. 2/8, bld. 5, RUSSIAN FEDERATION
Telephone: +7 499 264 00 03  Fax: +7 499 264 28 59
Email: secnrs@secnrs.ru  Web site: www.secnrs.ru

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Bernan / Rowman & Littlefield
15200 NBN Way, Blue Ridge Summit, PA 17214, USA
Tel: +1 800 462 6420 • Fax: +1 800 338 4550
Email: orders@rowman.com  Web site: www.rowman.com/bernan
Renouf Publishing Co. Ltd
812 Proctor Avenue, Ogdensburg, NY 13669-2205, USA
Telephone: +1 888 551 7470  Fax: +1 888 551 7471
Email: orders@renoufbooks.com  Web site: www.renoufbooks.com

Orders for both priced and unpriced publications may be addressed directly to:Marketing and Sales Unit
International Atomic Energy Agency
Vienna International Centre, PO Box 100, 1400 Vienna, Austria
Telephone: +43 1 2600 22529 or 22530 • Fax: +43 1 2600 29302 or +43 1 26007 22529
Email: sales.publications@iaea.org • Web site: www.iaea.org/books

17-11351

R E L AT ED PUBL ICAT IONS
Atoms for Peace

FUNDAMENTAL SAFETY PRINCIPLES
IAEA Safety Standards Series No. SF-1
STI/PUB/1273 (21 pp.; 2006)
ISBN 92–0–110706–4

Price: €25.00

GOVERNMENTAL, LEGAL AND REGULATORY FRAMEWORKFOR SAFETY
IAEA Safety Standards Series No. GSR Part 1 (Rev. 1)
STI/PUB/1713 (42 pp.; 2016)
ISBN 978–92–0–108815–4

Price: €48.00

LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT FOR SAFETY
IAEA Safety Standards Series No. GSR Part 2
STI/PUB/1750 (26 pp.; 2016)
ISBN 978–92–0–104516–4

Price: €30.00

RADIATION PROTECTION AND SAFETY OF RADIATION SOURCES:INTERNATIONAL BASIC SAFETY STANDARDSIAEA Safety Standards Series No. GSR Part 3
STI/PUB/1578 (436 pp.; 2014)
ISBN 978–92–0–135310–8

Price: €68.00

SAFETY ASSESSMENT FOR FACILITIES AND ACTIVITIESIAEA Safety Standards Series No. GSR Part 4 (Rev. 1)
STI/PUB/1714 (38 pp.; 2016)
ISBN 978–92–0–109115–4

Price: €49.00

PREDISPOSAL MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE WASTE
IAEA Safety Standards Series No. GSR Part 5
STI/PUB/1368 (38 pp.; 2009)ISBN 978–92–0–111508–9

Price: €45.00

DECOMMISSIONING OF FACILITIESIAEA Safety Standards Series No. GSR Part 6
STI/PUB/1652 (23 pp.; 2014)
ISBN 978–92–0–102614–9

Price: €25.00

PREPAREDNESS AND RESPONSE FOR A NUCLEAR OR
RADIOLOGICAL EMERGENCY
IAEA Safety Standards Series No. GSR Part 7
STI/PUB/1708 (102 pp.; 2015)
ISBN 978–92–0–105715–0

Price: €45.00

REGULATIONS FOR THE SAFE TRANSPORT OF RADIOACTIVE
MATERIAL, 2012 EDITION
IAEA Safety Standards Series No. SSR-6
STI/PUB/1570 (168 pp.; 2012)
ISBN 978–92–0–133310–0

www.iaea.org/books

Price: €44.00

Safety through international standards“Governments, regulatory bodies and operators everywhere mustensure that nuclear material and radiation sources are usedbeneficially, safely and ethically. The IAEA safety standards aredesigned to facilitate this, and I encourage all Member States tomake use of them.”
Yukiya Amano
Director General

INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY
VIENNA
ISBN 978–92­–0–102517–3
ISSN 1020–525X