Annals of the ICRP

The practical implementation of the International Commission on Radiological Protection’s (ICRP) system of radiological protection requires the availability of appropriate methodology and data. Over many years, ICRP Committee 2 has provided sets of dose coefficients to allow users to evaluate equivalent and effective doses for radiation exposures of workers and members of the public. The methodology being applied in the calculation of doses is state-of-the-art in terms of the biokinetic models used to describe the behaviour of inhaled and ingested radionuclides, and the dosimetric models used to model radiation transport for external and internal exposures. This overview provides an outline of recent work and future plans, including publications on dose coefficients for adults, children, and in-utero exposures, with new dosimetric phantoms in each case. For the first time, ICRP will publish dose coefficients for intakes of radon isotopes calculated using dosimetric models. Committee 2 is also working with Committee 3 on dose coefficients for radiopharmaceuticals, and leading a cross-committee initiative to provide advice on the use of effective dose. The remit of Committee 2 has now been widened to include all data requirements for the assessment of doses to humans and non-human biota.

Since the early 1980s, the European Radiation Dosimetry Group (EURADOS) has been maintaining a network of institutions interested in the dosimetry of ionising radiation. As of 2017, this network includes more than 70 institutions (research centres, dosimetry services, university institutes, etc.), and the EURADOS database lists more than 500 scientists who contribute to the EURADOS mission, which is to promote research and technical development in dosimetry and its implementation into practice, and to contribute to harmonisation of dosimetry in Europe and its conformance with international practices. The EURADOS working programme is organised into eight working groups dealing with environmental, computational, internal, and retrospective dosimetry; dosimetry in medical imaging; dosimetry in radiotherapy; dosimetry in high-energy radiation fields; and harmonisation of individual monitoring. Results are published as freely available EURADOS reports and in the peer-reviewed scientific literature. Moreover, EURADOS organises winter schools and training courses on various aspects relevant for radiation dosimetry, and formulates the strategic research needs in dosimetry important for Europe. This paper gives an overview on the most important EURADOS activities. More details can be found at www.eurados.org.

Phantoms simulating the human body play a central role in radiation dosimetry. The first computational body phantoms were based upon mathematical expressions describing idealised body organs. With the advent of more powerful computers in the 1980s, voxel phantoms have been developed. Being based on three-dimensional images of individuals, they offer a more realistic anatomy. Hence, the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) decided to construct voxel phantoms representative of the adult Reference Male and Reference Female for the update of organ dose coefficients. Further work on phantom development has focused on phantoms that combine the realism of patient-based voxel phantoms with the flexibility of mathematical phantoms, so-called ‘boundary representation’ (BREP) phantoms. This phantom type has been chosen for the ICRP family of paediatric reference phantoms. Due to the limited voxel resolution of the adult reference computational phantoms, smaller tissues, such as the lens of the eye, skin, and micron-thick target tissues in the respiratory and alimentary tract regions, could not be segmented properly. In this context, ICRP Committee 2 initiated a research project with the goal of producing replicas of the ICRP Publication 110 phantoms in polygon mesh format, including all source and target regions, even those with micron resolution. BREP phantoms of the fetus and the pregnant female at various stages of gestation complete the phantoms available for radiation protection computations.

Committee 2 of the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) has constructed mesh-type adult reference computational phantoms by converting the voxel-type ICRP Publication 110 adult reference computational phantoms to a high-quality mesh format, and adding those tissues that were below the image resolution of the voxel phantoms and therefore not included in the Publication 110 phantoms. The new mesh phantoms include all the necessary source and target tissues for effective dose calculations, including the 8–40-µm-thick target layers of the alimentary and respiratory tract organs, thereby obviating the need for supplemental organ-specific stylised models (e.g. respiratory airways, alimentary tract organ walls and stem cell layers, lens of the eye, and skin basal layer). To see the impact of the new mesh-type reference phantoms, dose coefficients for some selected external and internal exposures were calculated and compared with the current reference values in ICRP Publications 116 and 133, which were calculated by employing the Publication 110 phantoms and the supplemental stylised models. The new mesh phantoms were also used to calculate dose coefficients for industrial radiography sources near the body, which can be used to estimate the organ doses of the worker who is accidentally exposed by an industrial radiography source; in these calculations, the mesh phantoms were deformed to reflect the size of the worker, and also to evaluate the effect of posture on dose coefficients.

Internal doses are calculated using biokinetic and dosimetric models. These models describe the behaviour of the radionuclides after ingestion, inhalation, and absorption to the blood, and the absorption of the energy resulting from their nuclear transformations. The International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) develops such models and applies them to provide dose coefficients and bioassay functions for the calculation of equivalent or effective dose from knowledge of intakes and/or measurements of activity in bioassay samples. Over the past few years, ICRP has devoted a considerable amount of effort to the revision and improvement of models to make them more physiologically realistic representations of uptake and retention in organs and tissues, and of excretion. Provision of new biokinetic models, dose coefficients, monitoring methods, and bioassay data is the responsibility of Committee 2 and its task groups. Three publications in a series of documents replacing the ICRP Publication 30 series and ICRP Publications 54, 68, and 78 have been issued [Occupational Intakes of Radionuclides (OIR) Parts 1–3]. OIR Part 1 describes the assessment of internal occupational exposure to radionuclides, biokinetic and dosimetric models, methods of individual and workplace monitoring, and general aspects of retrospective dose assessment. OIR Parts 2–5 provide data on individual elements and their radioisotopes. Work is also in progress on revision of dose coefficients for radionuclide intakes by members of the public.

European Radiation Dosimetry Group (EURADOS) Working Group 7 is a network on internal dosimetry that brings together researchers from more than 60 institutions in 21 countries. The work of the group is organised into task groups that focus on different aspects, such as development and implementation of biokinetic models (e.g. for diethylenetriamine penta-acetic acid decorporation therapy), individual monitoring and the dose assessment process, Monte Carlo simulations for internal dosimetry, uncertainties in internal dosimetry, and internal microdosimetry. Several intercomparison exercises and training courses have been organised. The IDEAS guidelines, which describe – based on the International Commission on Radiological Protection’s (ICRP) biokinetic models and dose coefficients – a structured approach to the assessment of internal doses from monitoring data, are maintained and updated by the group. In addition, Technical Recommendations for Monitoring Individuals for Occupational Intakes of Radionuclides have been elaborated on behalf of the European Commission, DG-ENER (TECHREC Project, 2014–2016, coordinated by EURADOS). Quality assurance of the ICRP biokinetic models by calculation of retention and excretion functions for different scenarios has been performed and feedback was provided to ICRP. An uncertainty study of the recent caesium biokinetic model quantified the overall uncertainties, and identified the sensitive parameters of the model. A report with guidance on the application of ICRP biokinetic models and dose coefficients is being drafted at present. These and other examples of the group’s activities, which complement the work of ICRP, are presented.

The aim of the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) is to protect humans against cancer and other diseases and effects associated with exposure to ionising radiation, and also to protect the environment, without unduly limiting the beneficial use of ionising radiation. As of the second half of 2017, four committees are contributing to the overall mission of ICRP, including Committee 1 (Radiation Effects). The role of Committee 1 includes consideration of the risks and mechanisms of induction of cancer and heritable disease; discussion of the risks, severity, and mechanisms of induction of tissue/organ damage and developmental defects; and review of the effects of ionising radiation on non-human biota at population level. This paper gives an overview of the recent activities of Committee 1, and discusses the focus of its active task groups.

In 2009, the European Commission published the report of the high-level expert group that had been mandated to consider the scientific challenges posed by the issues of low dose effects of ionising radiation, and to formulate proposals for research policy evolution in this field at European level. This report formulated a first draft of a strategic research agenda. International scientific cooperation and an integrated approach are essential for the further development and enhancement of the international framework of radiation protection. This paper reflects on the results which have been gained through this integration approach: strategic research agendas have been established, policies and action plans have been developed for infrastructures and training education, several ambitious research projects have been launched, and a first draft of a European ‘joint road map’ for radiation protection research will be published. Reflecting on the challenges that lie ahead, this paper also presents the initiatives that the five European research platforms (MELODI: low dose research; ALLIANCE: radioecology; EURADOS: dosimetry; NERIS: emergency preparedness; EURAMED: radiation protection in medical applications) have jointly presented to the European Commission and Euratom member states to further enhance radiation protection research.

For stochastic effects such as cancer, linear-quadratic models of dose are often used to extrapolate from the experience of the Japanese atomic bomb survivors to estimate risks from low doses and low dose rates. The low dose extrapolation factor (LDEF), which consists of the ratio of the low dose slope (as derived via fitting a linear-quadratic model) to the slope of the straight line fitted to a specific dose range, is used to derive the degree of overestimation (if LDEF > 1) or underestimation (if LDEF < 1) of low dose risk by linear extrapolation from effects at higher doses. Likewise, a dose rate extrapolation factor (DREF) can be defined, consisting of the ratio of the low dose slopes at high and low dose rates. This paper reviews a variety of human and animal data for cancer and non-cancer endpoints to assess evidence for curvature in the dose response (i.e. LDEF) and modifications of the dose response by dose rate (i.e. DREF). The JANUS mouse data imply that LDEF is approximately 0.2–0.8 and DREF is approximately 1.2–2.3 for many tumours following gamma exposure, with corresponding figures of approximately 0.1–0.9 and 0.0–0.2 following neutron exposure. This paper also cursorily reviews human data which allow direct estimates of low dose and low dose rate risk.

The use of computed tomography (CT) imaging is clearly beneficial for millions of patients. However, the potential adverse health effects, particularly cancer, of ionising radiation exposure from CT early in life are an issue of growing concern in the radiological protection, medical, and public health communities. Although efforts to quantify these effects have been conducted, the precision and accuracy of reported risks needs confirmation. EPI-CT, a European collaborative epidemiological study, was set up to quantify risks from paediatric CT to optimise paediatric diagnostic protocol. The study, coordinated by the International Agency for Research on Cancer, was designed as a multi-national cohort study of children and young adults who underwent CT scanning for long-term follow-up. It combined data from existing and extended cohorts in France, the UK, and Germany, and from new cohorts assembled in Belgium, Denmark, the Netherlands, Norway, Spain, and Sweden using a common protocol. A flexible dose reconstruction approach that can accommodate collection of data from historical sources (prior to 2000) and automatically extract data from the Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine headers of recorded images available in the Picture Archiving Communication System was developed. Individual organ dose estimates for each child were derived from Monte-Carlo-based radiation transport calculations using hybrid phantoms of different sexes and ages. To account for uncertainties due to missing input data, a simulation method that maintains correlations of doses for persons within subgroups with similar exposure attributes and simulates uncertain dose-model parameter values was used. Simulation studies to evaluate the potential impact of a range of potential confounders (e.g. underlying medical conditions, socio-economic status, missing medical procedures performed outside of participating hospitals) on risk estimates were conducted based on data from some EPI-CT countries and/or reasonable scenarios. In total, 1,170,186 patients (before censorship) were enrolled in the national cohorts. Most patients (75%) had only undergone one CT scan and 29% of all patients were aged <5 years at the time of their first CT examination. The median duration of follow-up was 8 years for the entire cohort, although this varied between countries. Overall, the follow-up accounted for nearly 10 million person-years. This study received partial funding from the European Commission 7^th Framework Programme under Grant Agreement No. 269912.

The International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) mandated a task group (Task Group 64) to review recently published epidemiological studies related to cancer risk and incorporated alpha emitters, and to evaluate whether the results might consolidate or challenge assumptions underlying the current radiation protection system. Three major alpha emitters were considered: radon and its decay products, plutonium, and uranium. Results came mainly from cohorts of workers, while for radon, major studies of the general population contributed to a better understanding of the risk of lung cancer at low and chronic exposure. Selection criteria for the review were: assessment of individual exposure of the target organ, long duration of the health survey, availability of attained age at end of follow-up, and adjustment for major co-factors. Task Group 64 is composed of members from ICRP Committees 1 and 2 (because epidemiological and dosimetric expertise were needed) and external experts. A first report (ICRP Publication 115) considered the risk of lung cancer related to inhalation of radon and its decay products. As the estimated excess risk per unit of exposure was higher by a factor of 2 compared with a previous ICRP estimate in 1993, Task Group 64 suggested a reconsideration of the reference levels for the workplace and for the general population. A second report, using the same standardised methodology (lung cancer baselines, population, life expectancy), will include estimation of the cancer risk of nuclear workers exposed to plutonium, focusing on the risk of lung cancer. A comparison of these risks with those of populations exposed to external gamma radiation alone will be made in the near future. For uranium, the results related to the organ-specific dose were too sparse to draw reliable conclusions, despite a recent publication. More research is needed on this topic.

In the past few decades, it has become increasingly evident that sensitivity to ionising radiation is variable. This is true for tissue reactions (deterministic effects) after high doses of radiation, for stochastic effects following moderate and possibly low doses, and conceivably also for non-cancer effects such as cardiovascular disease, the causal pathway(s) of which are not yet fully understood. A high sensitivity to deterministic effects is not necessarily correlated with a high sensitivity to stochastic effects. The concept of individual sensitivity to high and low doses of radiation has long been supported by data from patients with certain rare hereditary conditions. However, these syndromes only affect a small proportion of the general population. More relevant to the majority of the population is the notion that some part of the genetic contribution defining radiation sensitivity may follow a polygenic model, which predicts elevated risk resulting from the inheritance of many low-penetrance risk-modulating alleles. Can the different forms of individual radiation sensitivities be inferred from the reaction of cells exposed ex vivo to ionising radiation? Can they be inferred from analyses of individual genotypes? This paper reviews current evidence from studies of late adverse tissue reactions after radiotherapy in potentially sensitive groups, including data from functional assays, candidate gene approaches, and genome-wide association studies. It focuses on studies published in 2013 or later because a comprehensive review of earlier studies was published previously in a report by the UK Advisory Group on Ionising Radiation.

The mandate of Committee 3 of the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) is concerned with the protection of persons and unborn children when ionising radiation is used in medical diagnosis, therapy, and biomedical research. Protection in veterinary medicine has been newly added to the mandate. Committee 3 develops recommendations and guidance in these areas. The most recent documents published by ICRP that relate to radiological protection in medicine are ‘Radiological protection in cone beam computed tomography’ (ICRP Publication 129) and ‘Radiological protection in ion beam radiotherapy’ (ICRP Publication 127). A report in cooperation with ICRP Committee 2 entitled ‘Radiation dose to patients from radiopharmaceuticals: a compendium of current information related to frequently used substances’ (ICRP Publication 128) has also been published. ‘Diagnostic reference levels in medical imaging’ (ICRP Publication 135), published in 2017, provides specific advice on the setting and use of diagnostic reference levels for diagnostic and interventional radiology, digital imaging, computed tomography, nuclear medicine, paediatrics, and multi-modality procedures. ‘Occupational radiological protection in interventional procedures’ was published in March 2018 as ICRP Publication 139. A document on radiological protection in therapy with radiopharmaceuticals is likely to be published in 2018. Work is in progress on several other topics, including appropriate use of effective dose in collaboration with the other ICRP committees, guidance for occupational radiological protection in brachytherapy, justification in medical imaging, and radiation doses to patients from radiopharmaceuticals (an update to ICRP Publication 128). Committee 3 is also considering the development of guidance on radiological protection in medicine related to individual radiosusceptibility, in collaboration with ICRP Committee 1.

While many areas of radiation protection have formed so-called ‘platforms’ in Europe which provide strategic research agendas for their areas of interest, this did not happen for a long while for medical exposure, which is the application of ionising radiation that causes the greatest man-made exposure, at least in first world countries. Finally, in 2015, a European medical radiation protection strategic research agenda was set up, and a corresponding platform was launched in 2016. This was named ‘EURAMED’ – the European Alliance for Medical Radiation Protection Research. In its strategic research agenda, EURAMED defined its vision for medical radiation protection and the corresponding research needed. Five major topics were identified, ranging from measurements of medical application-related parameters such as exposures and image quality and radiation biology aspects relevant for medical applications to individual optimisation strategies, to optimal use of techniques and harmonisation of practises, and finally to justification of the use of ionising radiation in medicine, all based on sufficient infrastructures for quality assurance. The ultimate goal is to reduce radiation exposure and risk individually for patients and staff by interdisciplinary research between clinicians, physicists, and engineers. Therefore, it is essential that the results are translated into clinical practice.

The ultimate goal of any radiotherapy is to eradicate the disease without inflicting damage on the normal tissues surrounding the tumours, which could be responsible for late treatment morbidity. To achieve this objective, the first step is to precisely select and delineate the target volumes to which a given dose will be prescribed. This step requires the use of multi-modal images from clinical examination to anatomical and molecular images. Imaging examination will be used not only to delineate the boundaries of the tumour volume, but also to assess tumour heterogeneity and, possibly, to guide a heterogeneous dose prescription (i.e. the so-called ‘dose painting’ approach). Last, re-imaging the patient during treatment to assess variation of the tumour volume during radiotherapy may also be performed in the framework of adaptive treatment. Over the last decade, a lot of information has been gathered on the use of multi-modal imaging for dose planning, and its potential and technical difficulties have been identified. During the lecture, the speaker will review the state-of-the-art of multi-imaging for treatment, using head and neck tumours as a paradigm, emphasising what should be considered as routine practice and what should still be viewed as research questions.

© 2018 ICRP. Published by SAGE.

The introduction of image guidance in radiation therapy and its subsequent innovations have revolutionised the delivery of cancer treatment. Modern imaging systems can supplement and often replace the historical practice of relying on external landmarks and laser alignment systems. Rather than depending on markings on the patient’s skin, image-guided radiation therapy (IGRT), using techniques such as computed tomography (CT), cone beam CT, MV on-board imaging (OBI), and kV OBI, allows the patient to be positioned based on the internal anatomy. These advances in technology have enabled more accurate delivery of radiation doses to anatomically complex and temporally changing tumour volumes, while simultaneously sparing surrounding healthy tissues. While these imaging modalities provide excellent bony anatomy image quality, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) surpasses them in soft tissue image contrast for better visualisation and tracking of soft tissue tumours with no additional radiation dose to the patient. However, the introduction of MRI into a radiotherapy facility has a number of complications, including the influence of the magnetic field on the dose deposition, as well as the effects it can have on dosimetry systems. The development and introduction of these new IGRT techniques will be reviewed, and the benefits and disadvantages of each will be described.

The use of proton therapy as a treatment modality is becoming more widespread in conventional radiation therapy practice. Commercialisation and introduction of compact systems has led to embedding of proton therapy facilities in existing hospital environments. In addition, technologically, proton therapy is currently undergoing an important evolution, moving from passive scattering delivery techniques to active pencil beam scanning, adopting image guidance techniques from conventional radiotherapy and introducing various range verification techniques in the clinic. An overview is given of today’s technological evolution of proton therapy in clinical environments, and its impact on aspects of radiation protection.

Systemic or locoregionally administered alpha-particle emitters are highly potent therapeutic agents used in oncology that are fundamentally novel in their mechanism and, most likely, overcome radiation resistance as the alpha particles emitted have a short range and a high linear energy transfer. The use of alpha emitters in a clinic environment requires extra measures with respect to imaging, dosimetry, and radiation protection. This is shown for the example of ²²³Ra dichloride therapy. After intravenous injection, ²²³Ra leaves the blood and is taken up rapidly in bone and bone metastases; it is mainly excreted via the intestinal tract. ²²³Ra can be imaged in patients with a gamma camera. Dosimetry shows that, after a series of six treatments for a 70-kg person with an overall administered activity of 23 MBq, ²²³Ra results in an absorbed alpha dose of approximately 17 Gy to the bone endosteum and approximately 1.7 Gy to the red bone marrow. During administration, special care must be taken to ensure that no spill is present on the skin of either the patient or staff. Due to the low dose rate, the treatment is normally performed on an outpatient basis; the patient and carers should receive written instructions about the therapy and radiation protection.

Radiation therapy of cancer patients involves a trade-off between a sufficient tumour dose for a high probability of local control and dose to organs at risk that is low enough to lead to a clinically acceptable probability of toxicity. The International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) reviewed epidemiological evidence and provided updated estimates of ‘practical’ threshold doses for tissue injury, as defined at the level of 1% incidence, in ICRP Publication 118. Particular attention was paid to cataracts and circulatory diseases. ICRP recommended nominal absorbed dose threshold for these outcomes as low as 0.5 Gy. Threshold doses for tissue reactions can be reached in some patients during radiation therapy. Modern treatment planning systems do not account for such low doses accurately, and doses to therapy patients from associated imaging procedures are not generally accounted for. While local control is paramount, the observations of ICRP Publication 118 suggest that radiation therapy plans and processes should be examined with particular care. The research needs are discussed in this paper.

Committee 4 of the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) is charged with the development of principles and recommendations on radiological protection of people and the environment in all exposure situations. For the term beginning in July 2017, the Committee has a total of 18 members from 12 countries. The programme of work includes a wide range of activities in five major thematic areas. The first is the consolidation and preparation of reports elaborating application of the system of protection in existing exposure situations. Second is the continuation of work on emergency exposure situations, and ICRP updates to recommendations in light of the accident at Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant. Third is examination of fundamentals of protection recommendations, including the ethical principles underlying the recommendations and application of those principles in practical decision making. Fourth is the new area of integration of protection of the environment into the system of protection. Finally, Committee 4 continues work to prepare specific topical reports on subjects in which additional information is useful to understand and apply the Commission’s recommendations in particular circumstances.

NERIS is the European platform on preparedness for nuclear and radiological emergency response and recovery. Created in 2010 with 57 organisations from 28 different countries, the objectives of the platform are to: improve the effectiveness and coherency of current approaches to preparedness; identify further development needs; improve ‘know how’ and technical expertise; and establish a forum for dialogue and methodological development. The NERIS Strategic Research Agenda is now structured with three main challenges: (i) radiological impact assessments during all phases of nuclear and radiological events; (ii) countermeasures and countermeasure strategies in emergency and recovery, decision support, and disaster informatics; and (iii) setting up a multi-faceted framework for preparedness for emergency response and recovery. The Fukushima accident has highlighted some key issues for further consideration in NERIS research activities, including: the importance of transparency of decision-making processes at local, regional, and national levels; the key role of access to environmental monitoring; the importance of dealing with uncertainties in assessment and management of the different phases of the accident; the use of modern social media in the exchange of information; the role of stakeholder involvement processes in both emergency and recovery situations; considerations of societal, ethical, and economic aspects; and the reinforcement of education and training for various actors. This paper emphasises the main issues at stake for NERIS for post-accident management.

The accident at Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant occurred following the huge tsunami and earthquake of 11 March 2011. After the accident, there was considerable uncertainty and concern about the health effects of radiation. In this difficult situation, emergency responses, including large-scale evacuation, were implemented. The Fukushima Health Management Survey (FHMS) was initiated 3 months after the accident. The primary purposes of FHMS were to monitor the long-term health of residents, promote their well-being, and monitor any health effects related to long-term, low-dose radiation exposure. Despite the severity of the Fukushima accident and the huge impact of the natural disaster, radiation exposure of the public was very low. However, there were other serious health problems, including deaths during evacuation, increased mortality among displaced elderly people, mental health and lifestyle-related health problems, and social issues after the accident. The Nuclear Emergency Situations – Improvement of Medical and Health Surveillance (SHAMISEN) project, funded by the Open Project For European Radiation Research Area, aimed to develop recommendations for medical and health surveillance of populations affected by previous and future radiation accidents. This paper briefly introduces the points that have been learned from the Fukushima accident from the perspective of SHAMISEN recommendations.

The accident at Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant on 11 March 2011 released radioactive material into the atmosphere, and contaminated land in Fukushima and several neighbouring prefectures. During rehabilitation, it is important to accurately understand and determine individual external doses to allow individuals to make informed decisions about whether or not to return to the affected areas. Personal dosimeters (D-Shuttle), used together with a global positioning system and geographic information system device, can provide realistic individual external doses and associated individual external doses, ambient doses, and activity patterns of individuals in the affected areas of Fukushima. This study involved more than 250 affected residents. The results help to determine realistic individual external doses, and corresponding time–activity patterns and airborne monitoring ambient dose rates, which can be used to predict future cumulative external doses after residents return to their homes in evacuation areas. In addition, insights gained by the study can help to explain the role of individual external dose measurements for affected residents in postaccident recovery, based mainly upon the experience gained in measuring, assessing, and communicating individual external doses.

Following a nuclear accident, a major dilemma for affected people is whether to stay or leave the affected area, or, for those who have been evacuated, whether or not to return to the decontaminated zones. Populations who have to make such decisions have to consider many parameters, one of which is the radiological situation. Feedback from Chernobyl and Fukushima has demonstrated that involvement and empowerment of the affected population is a way to provide them with the necessary elements to make informed decisions and, if they decide to return to decontaminated areas, to minimise exposure by contributing to the development of a prudent attitude and vigilance towards exposure. However, involving stakeholders in postaccident management raises the question of the role of experts and public authorities in supporting the inhabitants who have to make decisions about their future. Based on experiences in Chernobyl and Fukushima, this paper will discuss various principles that have to be taken into account by experts and public authorities about their role and position when dealing with stakeholders in a postaccident recovery process.

Ireland does not have any nuclear installations, but a nuclear accident at a site elsewhere, particularly in Europe, could result in widespread but low-level contamination of the Irish environment. Ireland’s National Emergency Plan for Nuclear Accidents was established, following the Chernobyl accident, for the national response to a nuclear accident abroad affecting Ireland. It has since been extended to also cover domestic radiological emergencies for which a national-level input is required to support the local response. This paper describes the approach taken to developing and maintaining arrangements for a nuclear accident abroad. The use of hazard assessments to prioritise resource use and planned protective actions, and the specifics of Ireland’s situation in terms of location, governance, economy, and available resources have heavily influenced the preparedness arrangements. In particular, the importance of the ingestion pathway to projected doses, together with the significance of agricultural exports to the Irish economy, has had a key influence on the arrangements in place.

In 2005, the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) decided to create a new committee, Committee 5, to take charge of the Commission’s work on environmental radiological protection. Committee 5 was tasked with ensuring that the system for environmental radiological protection would be reconcilable with that for radiological protection of humans, and with the approaches used for protection of the environment from other potential hazards. The task was completed over three consecutive terms, resulting in inclusion of protection of the environment in the 2007 Recommendations; in ICRP Publications 108 and 114 where the concept of Reference Animals and Plants (RAPs) and their corresponding data were described; in ICRP Publication 124 on how to apply the system in planned, existing, and emergency exposure situations; and in publications on improved dosimetry (ICRP Publication 136) and ecologically relevant ‘weighting factors’ for different types of radiation (being finalised for public consultation). With the beginning of this new term, ICRP has moved to integrate its approach to protection of humans and the environment within the system of radiological protection by tasking aspects of an integrated system to each of the committees. Acknowledging that Committee 5 had fulfilled its mission, in 2016, ICRP revised the mandates for the committees effective of 1 July 2017 (the mandate for Committee 3 was also widened to include exposures incurred in veterinary practice). ICRP is moving towards the future, building on the previous successes, and will under these revised mandates approach radiological protection in a holistic manner (an integrated system) where appropriate consideration is given to the understanding of exposures and effects in the environment under different exposure situations and scenarios, and what protective actions might be warranted under such circumstances.

Risks posed by the presence of radionuclides in the environment require an efficient, balanced, and adaptable assessment for protecting exposed humans and wildlife, and managing the associated radiological risk. Exposure of humans and wildlife originate from the same sources releasing radionuclides to the environment. Environmental concentrations of radionuclides serve as inputs to estimate the dose to man, fauna, and flora, with transfer processes being, in essence, similar, which calls for a common use of transport models. Dose estimates are compared with the radiological protection criteria for humans and wildlife, such as those developed by the International Commission on Radiological Protection. This indicates a similarity in the approaches for impact assessment in humans and wildlife, although some elements are different (e.g. the protection endpoint for humans is stochastic effects on individuals, whereas for wildlife, it is deterministic effects on species and ecosystems). Human and environmental assessments are consistent and complementary in terms of how they are conducted and in terms of the underlying databases (where appropriate). Not having an integrated approach may cause difficulties for operators and regulators, for communication to stakeholders, and may even hamper decision making. For optimised risk assessment and management, the impact from non-radiation contaminants and stressors should also be considered. Both in terms of the underlying philosophy and the application via appropriate tools, the European Radioecology Alliance (ALLIANCE) upholds that integration of human and ecological impact and risk assessment is recommended from several perspectives (e.g. chemical/radiological risks).

Six and a half years after the accident at Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant, an area of existing exposure situation remains. One of the main concerns of people is the higher level of ionising radiation than before the accident, although this is not expected to have any discernible health effect. Since the accident, several ‘abnormalities’ in environmental organisms have been reported. It is still not clear if these abnormalities were induced by radiation. It appears that the impact of the released radioactivity has not been sufficient to threaten the maintenance of biological diversity, the conservation of species, or the health and status of natural habitats, which are the focus in environmental protection. This highlights a difference between the protection of humans and protection of the environment (individuals for humans and populations/species for the environment). The system for protection of the environment has been developed with a similar approach as the system for protection of humans. Reference Animals and Plants (RAPs) were introduced to connect exposure and doses in a way similar to that for Reference Male and Reference Female. RAPs can also be used as a tool to associate the level of radiation (dose rate) with the biological effects on an organism. A difference between the protection of humans and that of the environment was identified: an effect on humans is measured in terms of dose, and an effect on the environment is measured in terms of dose rate. In other words, protection criteria for humans are expressed in term of dose (as dose limits, dose constraints, and reference levels), whereas those for the environment are expressed in terms of dose rate (as derived consideration reference levels).

The International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) recognises three types of exposure situations: planned, existing, and emergency. In all three situations, the release of radionuclides into the natural environment leads to exposures of non-human biota, as well as the potential for exposures of the public. This paper describes how the key principles of the ICRP system of radiological protection apply to non-human biota and members of the public in each of these exposure situations. Current work in this area within ICRP Task Group 105 is highlighted. For example, how simplified numeric criteria may be used in planned exposure situations that are protective of both the public and non-human biota. In emergency exposure situations, the initial response will always be focused on human protection; however, understanding the potential impacts of radionuclide releases on non-human biota will likely become important in terms of communication as governments and the public seek to understand the exposures that are occurring. For existing exposure situations, there is a need to better understand the potential impacts of radionuclides on animals and plants, especially when deciding on protective actions. Understanding the comparative impacts from radiological, non-radiological, and physical aspects is often important in managing the remediation of legacy sites. Task Group 105 is making use of case studies of how exposure situations have been managed in the past to provide additional guidance and advice for the protection of non-human biota.

Australia’s regulatory framework has evolved over the past decade from the assumption that protection of humans implies protection of the environment to the situation now where radiological impacts on non-human species (wildlife) are considered in their own right. In an Australian context, there was a recognised need for specific national guidance on protection of non-human species, for which the uranium mining industry provides the major backdrop. National guidance supported by publications of the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency (Radiation Protection Series) provides clear and consistent advice to operators and regulators on protection of non-human species, including advice on specific assessment methods and models, and how these might be applied in an Australian context. These approaches and the supporting assessment tools provide a mechanism for industry to assess and demonstrate compliance with the environmental protection objectives of relevant legislation, and to meet stakeholder expectations that radiological protection of the environment is taken into consideration in accordance with international best practice. Experiences from the past 5–10 years, and examples of where the approach to radiation protection of the environment has been well integrated or presented some challenges will be discussed. Future challenges in addressing protection of the environment in existing exposure situations will also be discussed.

The ALLIANCE working group on effects of ionising radiation on wildlife brings together European researchers to work on the topics of radiosensitivity and transgenerational effects in non-human biota. Differences in radiation sensitivity across species and phyla are poorly understood, but have important implications for understanding the overall effects of radiation and for radiation protection; for example, sensitive species may require special attention in monitoring and radiation protection, and differences in sensitivity between species also lead to overall effects at higher levels (community, ecosystem), since interactions between species can be altered. Hence, understanding the mechanisms of interspecies radiation sensitivity differences may help to clarify mechanisms underpinning intraspecies variation. Differences in sensitivity may only be revealed when organisms are exposed to ionising radiation over several generations. This issue of potential long-term or hereditary effects for both humans and wildlife exposed to low doses of ionising radiation is a major concern. Animal and plant studies suggest that gamma irradiation can lead to observable effects in the F1 generation that are not attributable to inheritance of a rare stable DNA mutation. Several studies have provided evidence of an increase in genomic instability detected in germ or somatic cells of F1 organisms from exposed F0 organisms. This can lead to induced radiosensitivity, and can result in phenotypic effects or lead to reproductive effects and teratogenesis. In particular, studies have been conducted to understand the possible role of epigenetic modifications, such as DNA methylation, histone modifications, or expression of non-coding RNAs in radiosensitivity, as well as in adaptation effects. As such, research using biological models in which the relative contribution of genetic and epigenetic processes can be elucidated is highly valuable.