Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2001, published 90th ILC session (2002)

Radiation Protection Convention, 1960 (No. 115) - Latvia (Ratification: 1993)

With reference to its previous comments, the Committee would draw the Government’s attention to the following point.

Article 13(d) of the Convention. The Committee notes that according to clause 156 of Regulations No. 297 on the Protection against Ionizing Radiation, 1997, the permissible dose limits for workers’ exposure may be exceeded in emergency situations in order to save people’s lives, to prevent major exposure of the general public or to save assets of significant value. In this event, clause 157 of the abovementioned Regulations provides for the application of the dose limits established for sanctioned exposures (clauses 46 to 59). Clause 47.1 establishes a dose limit of 20 mSv for any case of especially sanctioned exposure. Clause 47.2 fixes a dose limit of 40 mSv, that is twice the effective annual dose limit set forth in clause 37, for activities to be taken in order to save assets of significant value, and clause 47.3 fixes a dose limit of 200 mSv, thus five times the annual dose limit, for activities taken to prevent a major exposure of the general public during an accident or to save people’s lives. With regard to the dose limit established under clause 47.2 of Regulations No. 297 on the Protection against Ionizing Radiation, 1997, the Committee recalls the explanations given in its general observation under the Convention (items 16 to 27 and 35 (c)), which refer to the 1990 Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) with regard to the limitation of exposure to ionizing radiation in emergency situations, where it is said that once the immediate emergency is under control, the normal occupational dose limits are to apply without any exception. Moreover, exceptional exposure of workers is neither justified for the purpose of rescuing "items of high material value", nor, more generally, because alternative techniques of intervention which do not involve such exposure to workers "would involve an excessive expense". The Committee therefore requests the Government to indicate the measures taken or contemplated with a view to ensure conformity with the abovementioned principles established by the ICRP in 1990.

In addition, the Committee would ask the Government to supply a copy of Regulations No. 136 of the Cabinet of Ministers of 14 April 1998 on the procedure of registration and control of nuclear substances; Regulations No. 223 of the Cabinet of Ministers of 20 June 1996 on the procedure of issuing licences and permissions to work with radioactive substances and other sources of ionizing radiation; Regulations No. 95 of the Cabinet of Ministers of 14 March 2000 concerning the amendments to Regulations No. 297 on the protection against ionizing radiation, 1997; Regulations No. 97 of the Cabinet of Ministers of 9 March 2000 concerning the amendments to the Regulations No. 297 on the protection against ionizing radiation, 1997; Regulations No. 96 of the Cabinet of Ministers of 9 March 1999 concerning regulations on controlling radioactive contamination of animal feed; and of Order No. 8 of the Ministry of Welfare of 20 January 1999 concerning the amendment to the regulations concerning the issuance of business licences and permits to the Health Statistics, Information and Medical Technologies Centre Commission to work with radioactive substances or other sources of ionizing radiation used in medicine.