[en] There are number of countermeasures that can be used, singly and in combination, to reduce doses in the short-term following a nuclear accident. Which strategy is adopted will depend on local factors, such as the type of accident, local geography and demography, and the resources available, and on the form of national and international guidance is to facilitate a consistent level of response to accidents, wherever they occur, whilst at the same time providing for flexibility of response to suit local circumstances. This paper discusses the influence of all these factors on the choice of protective strategy. The goal of any off-site emergency response strategy should be the protection of the public, not just against radiation, but in the sense of providing overall benefit. To achieve this goal, differing local and national constraint mean that the precise strategy adopted may vary from site to site. (Authors). 22 refs., 1 fig., 2 tabs

No abstract available

[en] NRPB has a statutory responsibility for specifying Emergency Reference Levels (ERLs) of dose for use in the UK. It also provides guidance on the application of these ERLs, both for planning purposes and for the practical implementation of countermeasures following an accident. The accident at Chernobyl and the recent revision of fatal cancer risk estimates have stimulated national and international review of guidance for emergency response. In this paper some of the important issues are presented which have arisen in discussions about possible revisions to NRPB guidance. The views expressed are those of some members of NRPB staff; they do not constitute formal NRPB advice

[en] Full text: This paper will look at the key issues that need to be addressed during the transition from the emergency phase to the recovery phase, and the development of the initial recovery strategy. It will then discuss the extent to which current national plans and international advice address the needs of decision makers following contamination of inhabited areas and food production systems. Since the events of September 11^th 2001, attention is becoming increasingly focussed on the response to the deliberate dispersal of radioactive material, eg so called 'dirty bombs' or deliberate contamination of the food supply. Whilst some aspects of the response to a dirty bomb will be similar to those for a nuclear accident, in other respects such deliberate dispersal will pose additional challenges (e.g. identification of the radionuclide(s) involved, likely dispersion from within an urban area for dirty bombs, identification of the geographical spread of foods contaminated). This papers also considers the extent to which existing arrangements and assessments underpinning nuclear accident response would need modification/upgrading for response to deliberate dispersal. In the transition from the emergency phase to the recovery phase, decision makers will be under pressure to make rapid decisions concerning the lifting of countermeasures implemented during the emergency phase and the need for further measures. A failure to respond promptly will leave an information void in which other, self-styled, experts will advertise their solutions, thereby adding to the pressure. This may then lead to a loss of confidence by the public, and make it more difficult to develop a practicable recovery strategy that is also acceptable to those affected. However, if decisions are made without a full understanding of the contamination pattern and its likely future impact, then it is possible that promises or actions taken early on will need to be reversed as a fuller understanding of the situation is reached. This too, is likely to lead to a loss of public confidence and pressure to divert resources into recovery that would be better expended in other ways. In any case, those affected by the release will wish to be consulted about the recovery strategy being developed: a recovery strategy that does not take account of local concerns and priorities is very unlikely to be accepted. This process of involving all those likely to be affected by the recovery strategy, whilst essential, also runs the risk of preventing the implementation of an effective strategy owing to unrealistic public demands and mounting expectations. For those reasons, it is important that countries develop a generic recovery plan in advance of a radioactive release occurring. This plan will provide guidance on the prioritizing of actions and decisions, provide a framework for appropriate dialogue with those affected, and, enable response authorities to provide outline guidance to the public and farming/food production sector an the sorts of measures that might be required and the information that is needed before firmer decisions can be reached. Issues that might be appropriate for consideration in a generic recovery plan include: decisions on lifting emergency countermeasures; the assessment of doses received by people and future monitoring of their health; the characterization of the contamination pattern and its future impact on people and agriculture; the identification of goals for the recovery strategy and appropriate ways of demonstrating that they have been met; the identification and selection of options for recovery in both inhabited and agricultural areas; the identification of options for waste disposal (of both food and other contaminated wastes); long term environmental monitoring; the role (and limits) of stakeholder information and dialogue. International criteria have been developed for the marketing of food, with different criteria applicable in different situations or in different parts of the world. In some countries further guidance has been developed on practical strategies for dealing with interdicted foodstuffs. International criteria for relocation have also been published, with some additional national guidance developed on decontamination and other recovery issues. As with food criteria, this guidance has not been standardized worldwide. The extent to which international and national guidance meets the needs of decision makers in the recovery phase is explored in the paper, and examples of 'best practice' identified. In addition, the conclusions of research programmes into specific issues, in particular the management of food production systems and options for decontamination in inhabited areas, and the development of tools for assisting decisions in the recovery phase are discussed which reference to their potential usefulness to decision makers. From this discussion, areas in which decision makers require further support are identified. (author)

[en] As an aid to managing the offsite consequences of an accidental release of radionuclides, much emphasis has been placed on the provision of computer programs which can model the dispersion of radionuclides through the atmosphere and the terrestrial environment. At the very early stages of an accident, when the available monitoring information is sparse, reliance upon such predictive models is essential. However, our experience following Chernobyl shows that, as more detailed data become available, emphasis quickly shifts from theoretical predictions to assessments based on measurements. In order to facilitate this, it is helpful to have an integrated monitoring database and assessment computer program, which can both display measurements and provide comparisons of predictions with reality. Important requirements of such a system include the ability to: - display measurements on maps; - show trends with time; - alert the users to measurements which exceed selected values - combine measurements with predictive models, for comparison purposes and to provide dose estimates; - compare the predicted spread of the radioactive plume with the extent of measured contamination. It is also important that such a system can be used simultaneously by several individuals, each performing a variety of functions. It should be quick and flexible to use, acting as a tool-kit in the hands of an expert, and it should unambiguously record all assumptions and actions taken in producing maps and dose assessments. Currently NRPB is designing such an integrated system for its own use, the major features of which are described

[en] A framework is given for developing protective strategies for application during the recovery phase of an accidental release of radionuclides. This guidance includes quantitative criteria for the introduction of recovery countermeasures and a summary of the relative costs and benefits of a range of specific measures. (author)

[en] The N.R.P.B. has recently revised its advice on the principles for protection following a radiological emergency, and on emergency reference levels (ERLS) for the early countermeasures. One of the Board's principles for the introduction of a countermeasure is that it should bring the maximum net benefit to the population. All the harms and benefits which result from a particular measure should therefore be considered in reaching a decision as to whether or not it should be taken. The advice on intervention levels for evacuation cites physical risk (i.e. non-radiological risk) as one of the inputs to a decision on evacuation. The purpose of this article is to discuss and, as far as possible, to quantify this risk. (author)

[en] The work of the National Radiological Protection Board as an advisory service is outlined first, and then its role in the specific aspect of routine radioactive releases the civil nuclear industry in the United Kingdom is explained. A brief overview is given of the nature of radioactive decay, alpha, beta and gamma radiation. Then the nuclear fuel cycle of fabrication, use in power plants and reprocessing is explained with an indication of the sort of radionuclides that are discharged from each part of the cycle. Reprocessing at Sellafield discharges most but even the levels from here are very low. Exposure paths via radioactive clouds, rain and food chains are summarized and then the problem of relating discharge limits to dose limits is discussed. The NRPB monitors, surveys, keeps records and collects data. It has no regulatory authority. Nuclear discharges account for only 0.1% of the annual dose to individuals of which only 10% is from atmospheric releases. (U.K.)

[en] The Board published formal advice on emergency reference levels (ERLs) of dose in 1990. This document provides more detailed guidance on how it is intended that the ERLs should be applied in the development of emergency plans. In particular, specific guidance is developed in the following areas: how to incorporate the concept of averted dose in emergency plans; the choice of dose quantities to be compared with the ERLs; the use of ERLs in the event of an actual accident. In order to develop the role and application of the ERLs, the different types of accident response criteria are discussed. In particular, a distinction is drawn between intervention levels (usually expressed as dose averted) and action levels (often directly measureable quantities), and also between generic and site specific accident response criteria. The ERLs are identified as generic intervention levels and, as such, their primary role is for use during the development of emergency plans. If an accident occurs, it is recommended that any urgent response should be triggered by the site specific action levels specified in the emergency plan. Subsequently, ERLs may be used to determine whether major modifications to this response are necessary. Only in the unlikely situation of the occurrence of a serious accident, for which there was no emergency plan which could be activated, should the ERLs be used as direct criteria, and then only for determining the most urgent response. (author)

[en] Radioactive waste management can require difficult decisions involving many complex and often competing factors. In order to make decisions, the relevant factors need to be compared with each other and balanced, so that the resulting action produces the greatest net benefit. Decision-aiding techniques may help to carry out this balancing. A public survey has been designed and analyzed, which focused on the importance of both social values and the psychological processes likely to contribute to their formation. A method has been developed by which the preferences of the public concerning the consequence of waste management options may be obtained in a form suitable for use in multi-attribute decision-aiding techniques. It appears that this method is capable of producing useful, meaningful values for these weights, and therefore represents a major improvement on previous methods of obtaining weighting factors