EAN NORM announces its 7th Workshop
Please note that EANNORM plans its 7th Workshop on "Disposal of NORM in EU Member States" and a Topical Day on "Building Materials". The Workshop is to be held from 2nd to 4th December 2014 in Vlissingen (the Netherlands).
The 2nd annoucement (flyer) can be found here and the registration form downloaded here (.doc, 37 Ko - to be mailed to the Chairperson of the Organizing Committee). The template for abstract can be downloaded here (.doc, 24 Ko).
How to test the effectiveness of training ? A practical solution
The 15th EAN workshop on "Improving ALARA Culture through Education and Training" was in particular focus on measuring the effectiveness of training.
Following their presentation during the workshop E. Grindrod and J. Stewart from Public Health England propose in this article an "untraditionnal" approach to test knowledge, application and competences of emergency responders at the end of their training event. The article deals with the advantages and disavantages of this approach and looks for areas of future development.
The article can be downladed here (pdf, 132 Ko).
15th EAN Workshop on "Improving ALARA Culture through Education and Training"
15th European ALARA Network Workshop, Rovinj, Croatia, 7 – 9 May 2014
"Education and Training in Radiation Protection
Improving ALARA Culture through Education and Training"
Aims and Objectives
Previous EAN and EUTERP workshops have noted the importance of delivering effective radiation protection education and training to workers and other stakeholders. Consequently, this joint EAN-EUTERP workshop considers how education and training programmes can be delivered effectively, to improve radiation protection in practice and disseminate ALARA culture.
The workshop will consist of presentations (oral and posters) intended to highlight the main issues, and a significant part of the programme will be devoted to discussions within working groups. Participants will be expected to produce recommendations on education and training issues, to be addressed to relevant local, national and international stakeholders
Scope of the Workshop
The workshop programme covers education and training for various types of stakeholders and is expected to consider the following subjects:
- The new European BSS
- European qualification and accreditation schemes (ECVET, EQF, etc.)
- The effectiveness and efficiency of education and training
- Practical ALARA training
- New learning tools
As part of the programme, time has been devoted for discussions between participants (divided in four working groups). The working groups have tackled issues such as :
- How to assess the effectiveness of training (WG1)?
- Tools to improve the effectiveness of training (WG2).
- What is achieved by recognition schemes (WG3)?
- Incorporating ALARA culture in training requirements - How to improve risk awareness, radiation protection and ALARA understanding for different stakeholders and different levels of exposure (WG4)?
Session 1 - Setting the scene
- Welcome address to European ALARA Network and EUTERP Workshop on Education and Training in Radiation (823.53 kB) — F. Vermeersch
- Education and training in radiation protection: initiatives of the EUTERP Foundation (218.59 kB) — R. Paynter
- Education and training in radiation protection in the European Basic Safety Standards (1.89 MB) — G. Simeonov
- Conclusions & Recommendations by the HERCA Task force on Education &Training in Radiation Protection (1022.44 kB) — T. Vermeulen
- ENETRAP III (436.8 kB) — M. Coeck
- IRPA Guiding Principles for Establishing a RP Culture (2.39 MB) — C. Schieber
- Recent Developments within the European Framework of RP Education and Training (949.36 kB) — A. Schmitt-Hannig
Session 2 - Building ALARA into radiation protection trainig progremmes
- Optimization of radiation protection (ALARA: a practical guidebook (2.4 MB) — C. Schieber
- Reflections on ALARA in RP training (1.43 MB) — F. Vermeesch
- Elaboration of training scheme on radiation protection of patients: The French experience (2.72 MB) — C. Rousse
- Exercising Radiation Protection Planning as a Relevant Course Content for Training ALARA (2.24 MB) — G. Jahn
- Introduction to Working Groups (415.5 kB) — P. Shaw
Session 3 - Measuring the effectiveness of training, the role of qualification and recognition schemes
- Assessing the effectiveness of training - what are we looking for? (2.37 MB) — J. Stewart
- How to test the effectiveness of training? (787.97 kB) — E. Grindrod
- Teatching radiation protection principles – Possibilities for more effective approach (205.42 kB) — M. Koželj
Session 4 - Tools and methods
- The use of computer simulations in specific job training, risk communication and safety. (6.38 MB) — F. Vermeesch
- Serious 3D Game for education and training in radiation protection (5.03 MB) — movie (64.73 MB) — A. Pin
- How to integrate the « Humans factors » within a reviewing project of the HP training for outside wo (2.08 MB) — I. Fucks
Session 5 - National approaches
- Education and Training System in Croatia (Case Study) (125.55 kB) — D. Posedel
- Greek Atomic Energy Commission initiatives with respect to education and training of outside workers (2.9 MB) — C. Pafilis
- RP Education and Training in Germany in the light of the new EURATOM BSS (1.84 MB) — J. Vogel
- Challenge of implementing RPE RPO in Belgium Guidance document (1.27 MB) — P. Froment
Session 6 - Working Group conclusions and Workshop synthesis
- Group 1 “How to Assess the Effectiveness of Training” (61.31 kB) — WG1
- Tools to improve the effectiveness of training (50.73 kB) — WG2
- WG3. What is achieved by recognition schemes? (83.34 kB) — WG3
- Incorporating ALARA culture in training requirements (30.5 kB) — WG4
- ￼EUTERP Conclusions (593.98 kB)
- Conclusions and recommendations (1.86 MB) — P. Shaw
Issue 34 - February 2014
You can download here the 34thissue of the EAN Newsletter (pdf, 570 Ko).
6th EANNORM Workshop on "Alternatives in NORM Wastes Management" with EANNORM topical day "NORM in New BSS and Radon in NORM" a joint article by the members of EANNORM
ICRP 2013: the 2nd International Symposium on Radiological Exposure, Abu Dhabi, M. Fernand Vermeersch (SCK•CEN) and Peter Shaw (PHE).
United-Kingdom Health Service Trust prosecuted by Health and Safety Executive for Overexposure of an Interventional Radiologist, M. David Orr (Health & Safety Executive).
This article could be yours, EAN Newsletter Editorial Board.
14th EAN Workshop on "ALARA in existing exposure situations"
14th European ALARA Network Workshop, Ireland 4-6 September 2012
"ALARA IN EXISTING EXPOSURE SITUATIONS"
The concept of “existing exposure situations” was introduced by ICRP in Publication No. 103 (2007), and is included in the revised European Basic Safety Standards Directive. It is defined as exposure situations that already exist when a decision on control has to be taken, such as those caused by natural background radiation and radioactive residues from past practices or events. Examples include radon in dwellings and buildings with public access, building materials and management of contaminated areas from past practices and post-accidents. Other situations such as exposure from cosmic rays and NORMs may also be included.
Optimisation is the key radiation protection principle for existing exposure situations, although it is not always clear how to apply this in practice. Consequently, the aim of the 14th EAN workshop is to focus on how the ALARA principle can be applied to the whole range of existing exposure situations. The Workshop will consider the wider principles and strategies that might be adopted, as well as the specific methods for implementing ALARA in practice.
This workshop will consist of presentations intended to highlight the main issues, and a significant part of the programme will be devoted to discussions within working groups. From these discussions, participants will be expected to produce recommendations on ALARA in existing exposure situations addressed to relevant local, national and international stakeholders.
Working Group Topics
- ALARA challenges and practicalities at the national and regional levels
- Considerations in choosing reference levels
- Economical, technical factors and endpoints of optimisation
- Societal factors and stakeholders engagement
Radiation protection of aircraft crew
Between December 2010 and January 2012, EAN performed a survey about radiation protection of aircraft crew. The following questions were sent to the members of the network.
- What are the main requirements?
- What are the means and tools used to assess aircrew's exposure?
- Is there a specific dose criteria defined for aircraft crew?
3. Could you provide data on the number of aircrew exposed, maximum annual level of exposure, average annual level of exposure, etc.?
14 countries answered the request about radiation protection of aircraft crew: Belgium, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Lithuania, Slovenia, Sweden, the Netherlands and the UK. There is not a regulation concerning radiation protection requirements for aircraft crew in Norway.
Download the results of the survey: Aircraft crew
ERPAN (European Radiation Protection Authorities Network) carried out a survey in April 2010 on how dose constraints, as defined in the EU Directive are applied in the non-nuclear energy sector across Europe. The following questions were sent to the participants to the network.
- Does your country use dose constraints in the context of occupational exposures (non-nuclear sector)
- If so what are they called?
- Are occupational dose constraints mentioned in national legislation/regulations?
- If so, please provide a reference to the relevant regulations?
- Please provide (in English) the actual wording used in the regulations?
- For what industries, processes, tasks, types of workers – all workers? the most exposed workers? specific categories of workers? etc. – are dose constraints used?
- How are dose constraints used in practice?
- Why are dose constraints introduced?
- What are the benefits of introducing dose constraints?
- Who sets dose constraint (utilities or authorities)?
- How are dose constraints set e.g. for a set of sources or for individual sources?
- Are dose constraints “misused”, for example implicitly or explicitly as secondary limits (to dose limits)?
- Are dose constraints used as a regulatory instrument?
- Who manages performance against dose constraints and other occupational radiation protection criteria?
- In what context are dose constraints set: for sites (refers to design) or for tasks (refers to operation)?
- How are dose constraints fixed, implemented, and controlled in each of these cases?
- In practice, has enforcing (individual) dose constraints resulted in negative consequences (e.g. higher collective doses, increased costs, etc.)?
- What approaches have proven successful in discussing dose constraints between regulatory authorities and licensees?
- Have you any experience in balancing occupational radiation protection dose constraints with the management of other risks (e.g. industrial, chemical/biological safety issues)?
Answers from 11 countries were received: Belgium, France, Greece, Ireland, Luxembourg, Norway, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland and the UK. The detailed answers can be found in the Appendix 1 of the EGOE (Expert Group on Occupational Exposure of the CRPPH - Committee on Radiation Protection and Public Health) report on dose constraints. EGOE case study 2
A presentation was made of this survey in the ICRP symposium on the International System of Radiological Protection held at Bethesda on October 26th to 28th. ICRP presentation on dose constraints
EAN Strategic Plan 2010-2015
For 1.5 years, the EAN Steering Group has worked on a 2010-2015 Strategic Plan for the network. This document describes the expected work of EAN during this period taking into account the future challenges for ALARA in Europe.
RELIR/OTHEA - Lessons learned from radiological incidents
HPA (the UK) and CEPN (France) have launched the RELIR-OTHEA mirror-website. RELIR/OTHEA is provided by a network of French and English radiation protection stakeholders, who have a joint interest in sharing feedback and experience from radiological incidents, in order to improve the protection of persons working with similar radiation sources. More generally, the aim is to encourage good practices (especially the implementation of the ALARA/ALARP principle) within different sectors - medical and veterinary, industrial, research and education sectors, etc.
The incidents reports are anonymous and have been selected on the basis of those which provide interesting and useful lessons, to help others prevent such incidents and/or mitigate the consequences.