Radiation Protection Convention, 1960 (No. 115) - Argentina (Ratification: 1978)

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2015, published 105th ILC session (2016)

General observation of 2015. The Committee would like to draw the Government’s attention to its general observation of 2015 under this Convention, and in particular to the request for information contained in paragraph 30 thereof.

Article 14 of the Convention. Discontinuation of assignment to work involving exposure to ionizing radiation pursuant to medical advice and alternative employment. The Committee recalls that, in its previous comments, it requested the Government to adopt appropriate measures to ensure that workers shall not be employed or continue to be employed in work liable to expose them to ionizing radiation contrary to qualified medical advice. The Committee notes that, in its report, the Government refers to Title X of the Labour Contracts Act, the Occupational Risks Act, Resolutions Nos 37/10, 216/03 and 1300/04, and Decree No. 658/96. The Committee notes that the legislation referred to above does not give effect to this Article of the Convention. The Committee also wishes to draw the Government’s attention to paragraph 40 of its 2015 general observation, according to which employers should make all reasonable efforts to provide workers with suitable alternative employment in circumstances for which it has been determined that workers, for health reasons, may no longer continue in employment in which they are, or could be, subject to occupational exposure to ionizing radiations. The Committee once again requests the Government to adopt measures to ensure that workers shall not be employed or continue to be employed in work liable to expose them to ionizing radiations contrary to qualified medical advice. The Committee also invites the Government to provide information on any measures taken or envisaged with regard to the provision of alternative employment to workers in such a situation.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2011, published 101st ILC session (2012)

Article 14. Alternative work or other measures to maintain the worker’s income when to maintain the worker in a job involving exposure is contrary to qualified medical advice. With reference to its previous comments, the Committee notes that, according to the report, the possibility of framing national rules to reflect the provision establishing a guarantee of “alternative employment”, is beyond the authority of the Nuclear Regulatory Agency. The Committee points out that responsibility for the application of ratified Conventions lies with the Government and not some specific agency. The Committee again points out that paragraph 32 of its general observation of 1992 on the Convention indicates that every effort must be made to provide the workers concerned (i.e. those for whom continued employment in a specific job is medically inadvisable) with suitable alternative employment or to maintain their income through social security or other measures where continued assignment to work involving exposure is found to be medically inadvisable. This applies not only when workers are found to be already suffering from the occupational disease, but also prior to that stage, so that the disease can be prevented. Consequently, the Committee again asks the Government to consider adopting appropriate measures to ensure that workers shall not be employed or continue to be employed in work liable to expose them to ionizing radiation contrary to qualified medical advice, and to undertake such efforts as are necessary to provide them with suitable alternative employment or other means of maintaining their income, and asks the Government to provide information on this matter.

Protection against accidents and emergency situations. Further to its previous comments the Committee notes the information sent by the Government on the measures to make protection against accidents and protection during emergency operations as effective as possible. Furthermore, in its previous comments the Committee noted that point 144 of Nuclear Regulatory Authority Resolution No. 22/01, according to which “situations in which intervention implies the exposure of volunteers to an effective dose exceeding 1 Sv or an equivalent dose through the skin exceeding 10 Sv, may only be justified if they involve the saving of human lives”. It pointed out that paragraph 23 of its general observation of 1992, which refers to the 1990 recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP), establishes a dose limit of 0.5 Sv, and asked the Government to bring its legislation into line on this point. The Committee notes that the report justifies maintaining an effective dose of 1 Sv in the instance under study by citing scientific articles or comparing mortality indices. The Committee points out that 0.5 Sv is the dose the Committee established in its general observation of 1992 on this Convention, on the basis of the ICRP’s recommendations; that the general observation of 1992 continues to be the most up-to-date reference for the present Convention and that the dose limits established in the general observation are those required of all countries that have ratified the Convention. Consequently, the Committee again asks the Government to adopt the necessary measures to ensure that the dose limits established for intervention in the event of emergency are not higher than those laid down in its general observation of 1992 on the present Convention.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2006, published 96th ILC session (2007)

1. The Committee notes the information contained in the Government’s report.

2. Article 14. Alternative employment or other measures offered for maintaining income where continued assignment to work involving exposure is medically inadvisable. The Committee notes the Government’s reference to the activities of the National Nuclear Regulatory Agency which supervises and regulates nuclear activity and which is responsible for dictating the nuclear regulatory standards to be implemented in respect of radiological and nuclear safety, physical protection, the monitoring of the use of nuclear materials, authorization and monitoring of nuclear installations and international safeguards. The Committee also notes that, pursuant to Nuclear Regulatory Authority Resolution No. 22/01, in the event that a worker exceeds the dose limit (100 mSv) in one year “a medical and dosimetric assessment shall be carried out prior to his return to work. The head of the non-routine installation or practice shall decide whether the worker concerned may continue to be assigned to work involving exposure to sources of radiation”. The Committee notes SRT Resolutions Nos. 216/03 and 1300/04, under which the Occupational Hazards Act envisages occupational reclassification in cases where the worker is physically unable to perform the same work as before his accident or occupational illness. The Committee emphasizes that neither the Nuclear Regulatory Authority Resolution nor the resolution in respect of the Occupational Hazards Act make provision for the offering of alternative employment to workers for whom continued exposure to ionizing radiations is inadvisable for health reasons. Consequently, the Committee draws the Government’s attention to paragraphs 28-34 and 35(d) of its 1992 general observation on the Convention, and paragraph I.18 of the International Basic Safety Standards, which recommend establishing the possibility of alternative employment or social security measures for all workers who have accumulated an effective dose beyond which detriment considered unacceptable is to arise. In the light of the abovementioned indications, the Committee urges the Government to adopt the necessary measures to ensure that, for medical reasons, no worker shall be employed or shall continue to be employed, in work that involves exposure to ionizing radiations and to make every effort possible to provide these workers with suitable alternative employment or to guarantee them the means to be able to maintain their income.

3. Protection against accidents and emergency situations. The Committee notes point 144 of Nuclear Regulatory Authority Resolution No. 22/01, according to which “situations in which intervention implies the exposure of volunteers to an effective dose exceeding 1 Sv or a dose through the skin exceeding 10 Sv, may only be justified if they involve the saving of human lives”. The Committee recalls that paragraph 23 of the abovementioned general observation, which refers to the 1990 recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP), establishes a dose limit of 0.5 Sv, and it therefore invites the Government to bring the dose limits established for emergency interventions into line with those established in the recommendations of the ICRP. It also requests the Government to indicate the measures adopted or envisaged to make protection against accidents and during emergency operations as effective as possible, in particular with regard to the design and protective features of the workplace and equipment, and the development of emergency intervention techniques, the use of which in emergency situations would enable the exposure of individuals to ionizing radiations to be avoided.

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

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government.

1. Article 3, paragraph 1, and Article 6, paragraph 2, of the Convention. The Committee notes with interest that the "Basic Radiological Safety Standards", approved by the Argentine Regulatory Authority and revised for the second time in 1999, reflect entirely the maximum permissible dose limits adopted by the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) in 1990, which were reflected in the 1994 International Basic Safety Standards for Protection against Ionizing Radiation and for the Safety of Radiation Sources developed under the auspices of the IAEA, the ILO, the WHO and three other international organizations.

2. Provision of alternative employment. Premature accumulation of a lifetime dose. With regard to the provision of alternative employment for workers having accumulated an effective dose beyond which detriment considered unacceptable is to arise, the Government refers to article 29 of Decree No. 51/79. Pursuant to this provision, the physicians of the occupational health service shall, inter alia, draw the attention of the administration of the enterprise to industrial processes, which could cause harm to the workers’ health, and shall reveal the necessary introduction of modifications of these industrial processes. The Committee further notes provision No. 80 of the "Basic Radiological Safety Standards" prescribing that no worker is supposed to continue carrying out work contrary to qualified medical advice, and provision No. 81 of the above Standards provides that, in the case a worker has received an effective dose beyond 100 mSv in a single year, the responsible person of the undertaking shall decide whether the said worker could continue to be engaged in work involving the exposure to ionizing radiation. The Committee points out that neither article 29 of Decree No. 351/79 nor provision No. 81 of the "Basic Radiological Safety Standards" entail the provision of alternative employment to be offered to the worker whose continued exposure to ionizing radiations is inadvisable for health reasons. The Committee therefore draws the Government’s attention to its 1992 general observation under the Convention, paragraphs 28 to 34 and 35(d), and paragraph I.18. of the International Safety Standards, which recommend alternative employment or social security measures for all workers having accumulated an effective dose beyond which detriment considered unacceptable is to arise. The Committee accordingly requests the Government to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to guarantee the offer of alternative employment opportunities which do not entail exposure to ionizing radiations for workers who cannot continue, because of medical reasons, their employment involving exposure to ionizing radiations.

3. Protection against accidents and emergency situation. The Committee notes with interest provisions Nos. 93 to 99 of the "Basic Radiological Safety Standards", 1999, indicating the circumstances in which exceptional exposure is authorized. It further notes with interest provisions Nos. 100 to 104 of the same standards, which establish the criteria for workers’ exposure to ionizing radiations in emergency situations. With regard to exposure limits of workers in emergency situations, the Committee notes that provision No. 101 fixes a general dose limit of 1 Sv for interventions in emergency situations and a dose limit of 10 Sv for life-saving actions. The Committee recalls paragraphs 16 to 27 and 35 (c) of its 1992 general observation under the Convention. In particular, paragraph 23, referring to the 1990 ICRP Recommendations, provides for a dose limit of 0.5 Sv, that is, 25 times the average annual occupational dose limit, as well as for unlimited exposure, but exclusively for life-saving actions. The Committee accordingly invites the Government to adapt the dose limits established for interventions in emergencies to the Recommendations of the ICRP. It further requests the Government to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to make protection against accidents and during emergency operations as effective as possible, in particular with regard to the design and protective features of the workplace and equipment, and the development of emergency intervention techniques, the use of which in emergency situations would enable the exposure of individuals to ionizing radiations to be avoided.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1997, published 86th ILC session (1998)

The Committee notes the latest information provided by the Government.

1. Article 3, paragraph 1, and Article 6, paragraph 2, of the Convention. In accordance with the provisions of these articles, all appropriate steps shall be taken to ensure effective protection of workers against ionizing radiation, in the light of knowledge available at the time, and maximum permissible doses and amounts shall be kept under constant review in the light of current knowledge. The Committee notes with interest the information provided by the Government on the new "basic radiological safety standard" (Provision No. 30/91) approved by the Argentine Regulatory Authority, which envisages the Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) of 1990 (Publication No. 60) and the International Basic Safety Standards for Protection against Ionizing Radiation and for the Safety of Radiation Sources jointly sponsored, in 1994, by the IAEA, the ILO, the WHO and three other international organizations. The Committee requests the Government to provide a copy of Provision No. 30/91 and of any other new legislation adopted, in relation to this matter.

2. Provision of alternative employment. (a) Premature accumulation of a lifetime dose. With reference to its general observation of 1992, paragraphs 28 to 34 and 35(d), and the principles reflected in paragraphs 96 and 238 of the International Basic Safety Standards issued in 1994, the Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to guarantee the offer of alternative employment opportunities which do not entail exposure to ionizing radiation for workers who have already received an effective dose beyond which they would suffer a detriment considered to be unacceptable.

(b) Pregnant women. The Committee notes with interest the information provided by the Government in respect of the standards in force establishing the dose limits for women who are pregnant. According to these standards, all pregnant women shall notify their condition to the person responsible for the installation where they perform their duties. From that time and until childbirth, the equivalent dose shall not exceed 2 mSv, and it is especially recommended to avoid all exposure between the eight and fifteenth weeks of pregnancy. In this respect, the Committee requests the Government to indicate in its next report the measures taken or envisaged to guarantee the offer of alternative employment to pregnant women.

3. Protection against accidents and in emergency situations. With reference to paragraphs 16 to 27 and 35(c) of its general observation of 1992 and paragraphs 233 and 236 of the International Basic Safety Standards issued in 1994, the Committee requests the Government to indicate in its next report the circumstances in which exceptional exposure is authorized, the measures taken or envisaged to make protection as effective as possible against accidents and during emergency operations, in particular with regard to the design and protective features of the workplace and equipment, and the development of emergency intervention techniques, the use of which in emergency situations would enable the exposure of individuals to ionizing radiation to be avoided.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1992, published 79th ILC session (1992)

I. The Committee notes the information provided in the Government's latest report. It notes, in particular, the Government's indication that the Radiophysical Department of the Ministry of Health and Social Action is presently studying the new recommendations adopted by the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) in November 1990 which reduce the effective permissible dose limit for normal conditions to 100 mSv for a five-year period, but permit the limit for any one single year to reach as high as 50 mSv. The Committee would draw the Government's attention to its General Observation under this Convention and requests the Government to indicate the measures taken to ensure the effective protection of workers in the light of current knowledge, in conformity with Article 3, paragraph 1, and Article 6, paragraph 2, of the Convention, and to indicate the steps taken or being considered in relation to the matters raised in the conclusions to the General Observation.

II. The Committee notes with interest the information supplied in the Government's report in reply to its General Observation of 1987 concerning measures to be taken in abnormal situations. It notes the Government's indication that, in planned special exposures, the permissible dose limits are set at 100 mSv (10 rems) per year and 250 mSv (25 rems) for a lifetime. In this regard, the Committee would call the Government's attention to paragraphs 16 to 27 of its General Observation under this Convention. It requests the Government to indicate, in its next report, the steps taken in relation to the matters raised in the conclusions to the General Observation, particularly as concerns paragraph 35(c).