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

Radiation Protection Convention, 1960 (No. 115) - Norway (Ratification: 1961)

The Committee notes the comments made by the Norwegian Federation of Trade Unions (LO), transmitted by the Government in January 2001. While awaiting the Government’s reply, the Committee refers to the comments made by the above workers’ organization in this observation.

1. As a general statement, the LO emphasizes that the ministry, when initiating legislative processes, should make an active effort to incorporate ratified ILO Conventions into Norwegian law, so that the implementation of the ILO Conventions, to which the country is a party, is not only a side effect of the implementation of its obligations under other international legal systems.

2. Article 13 of the Convention. Emergency exposure situations. In its comments, the LO complains that Norwegian legislation lacks rules or guidelines indicating what action should be taken in emergency situations in enterprises where workers are exposed to ionizing radiation. The Committee recalls that the Government had indicated in its previous report of 2000 that, while there were no regulations or codes of practices fixing dose limits for workers’ exposure in emergency situations, the Norwegian Radiation Protection Authority (NRPA), being the competent authority to issue regulations on radiation protection, had established so-called "non-legislative emergency planning documents" which reflect the Recommendations adopted by the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) in 1990 as concerns the limits for workers’ exposure to ionizing radiation in emergency situations. Taking into consideration the comments transmitted by the LO, the Committee requests once again the Government to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to guarantee that the "non-legislative emergency planning documents" are available in every enterprise where workers are exposed or likely to be exposed to ionizing radiation. The Committee further requests the Government to indicate the measures taken or contemplated as concerns the establishment of emergency plans regarding the design of protective features of the workplace and equipment, as well as the development of emergency intervention techniques. In this respect, the Committee refers to paragraphs 6.1 to 6.3.7 of the 1987 ILO code of practice on radiation protection of workers (ionizing radiations), which contains a set of practical recommendations which could provide guidance to the Government.

3. Article 14. Alternative employment. With regard to the provision of alternative employment, the LO points out that the Norwegian legislation lacks rules concerning the workers’ right to relocate and to change jobs in the event of danger arising out of exposure to ionizing radiation. The Committee recalls that the Government, in its previous report, indicated that neither regulations nor codes of practice exist dealing with the issue of alternative employment. In the light of the comments of the LO, the Committee once again draws the Government’s attention to paragraphs 28 to 34 and 35(d) of its 1992 general observation under the Convention, explaining that every effort must be made to provide workers with suitable alternative employment, or to maintain their income through social security measures or otherwise where continued employment in a particular job involving the exposure to ionizing radiation is contra-indicated for health reasons. It requests the Government to indicate the measures taken or contemplated to ensure effective protection of workers who have accumulated exposure beyond which an unacceptable risk of detriment is to occur and who may thus be faced with the dilemma that protecting their health means losing their employment.

The Committee is also addressing a request directly to the Government on certain other matters.

[The Government is asked to report in detail in 2003.]