Radiation Protection Convention, 1960 (No. 115) - Netherlands (Ratification: 1966)

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2022, published 111st ILC session (2023)

To provide a comprehensive view of the issues relating to the application of the ratified Conventions on occupational safety and health (OSH), the Committee considers it appropriate to examine Conventions Nos 62 (safety provisions (building)), 115 (radiation protection), 139 (occupational cancer), 148 (air pollution, noise and vibration), 155 (OSH), 162 (asbestos), 170 (chemicals) and 174 (prevention of major industrial accidents) together.

The Committee notes the joint observations of the Netherlands Trade Union Confederation (FNV) and the National Federation of Christian Trade Unions (CNV) on Conventions Nos 139, 155, 170 and 174, received in 2021, and the Government’s response in this respect.

General Provisions

Occupational Safety and Health Convention, 1981 (No. 155)

Articles 4, 7 and 8 of the Convention. National OSH policy. Consultation with the most representative organizations of employers and workers. With regard to its previous comment on consultations with the social partners, the Committee notes that the Government indicates in its report that it continues to involve the social partners in the periodic discussions of the national OSH policy and future policy planning, specifying that: (i) in May 2020, the Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment organized a virtual open dialogue on the new strategic vision of the OSH policy 2040 with employers, workers, occupational health experts, occupational health services and the labour inspectorate participating in three sessions; and (ii) on the basis of this dialogue, the Government has submitted a formal request to the tripartite Social and Economic Council for advice on the OSH vision 2040. The Government also indicates that regular informal consultations have been held between the labour inspectorate and the trade union federations for environmental analysis and that every year stakeholders, including representatives of employers and workers, are consulted on the annual report (in March-April) and the annual plan (in September–October) of the labour inspectorate. In this regard, the Committee notes that the FNV and CNV are of the view that the Government fails to formulate, implement and periodically review a coherent national OSH policy and that the ad hoc and periodical consultations referred to by the Government do not lead to a such policy. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on any progress made in the formulation of the OSH policy 2040, including information on the consultations held with the tripartite Social and Economic Council in this regard, and to provide a copy of the national OSH policy once it has been adopted. The Committee also requests the Government to provide information on the measures taken or envisaged to ensure that the above-mentioned OSH policy is periodically reviewed in consultation with the social partners.

Article 11(c). Notification of occupational diseases. With regard to its previous comment on the system for the notification of occupational diseases, the Committee notes that the Government provides information on measures taken, indicating that: (i) following an amendment to the Working Conditions Act adopted in 2017, a basic contract for the provision of OSH services to employers was introduced, which includes minimum rights and obligations for employers, workers and providers; (ii) the basic contract states that occupational physicians shall report occupational diseases to the Netherlands Centre for Occupational Diseases (NCvB) and have to be able to devote time to this; and (iii) the NCvB is assisting and encouraging occupational physicians and OSH services to report occupational diseases through refresher courses, a helpdesk and the simplification of reporting procedures. The Government expects that by improving the infrastructure for reporting occupational diseases to the NCvB, the number of reported cases will increase. Regarding the latter, the Committee notes that, in their observations on the application of the Labour Inspection Convention, 1947 (No. 81), the FNV and CNV refer to the underreporting of occupational diseases to the NCvB and point out that this may be due to the non-compliance with reporting obligations by occupational physicians, the reduced contact of occupational physicians with workers for routine examinations, the lack of information on occupational diseases among self-employed and precarious workers, as well as the absence of a separate (additional) statutory insurance for occupational diseases. The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments in this respect. It also requests the Government to provide information on further measures taken or envisaged in order to improve the rate of notification of occupational diseases to the NCvB, as well as statistics on the reports received by the NCvB.

Regarding notification to the labour inspectorate, the Committee requests the Government to refer to its direct request regarding the application of Article 14 of Convention No. 81 and Article 19 of Convention No. 129 (notification of occupational diseases). 

B.Protection against specific risks

1.Radiation Protection Convention, 1960 (No. 115)

Article 1 of the Convention. Laws and regulations. Consultation. The Committee notes the adoption in 2017 of the Decree on basic safety standards for radiation protection and in 2018 of the Regulation on radiation protection for occupational exposure. The Committee also notes the Government’s indication that the Decree on basic safety standards for radiation protection has repealed the Decree on radiation protection of 2001 and has implemented the Council Directive 2013/59/Euratom of 2013 laying down basic safety standards for protection against the dangers arising from exposure to ionizing radiation. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the consultations held with representatives of employers and workers prior to the adoption of the Decree on basic safety standards for radiation protection and its corresponding Regulation.

Articles 2(2) and 6(1). Exemptions.The Committee notes that sections 11.7(1) and 7.31(1) of the Decree on basic safety standards for radiation protection provide that the competent authorities may grant exemptions from the provisions of its Chapter 7 concerning occupational exposure to radiation and from the dose limits prescribed in section 7.34 for workers directly engaged in radiation work, respectively. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any exemptions that may have been adopted under the above-mentioned provisions.

Articles 3(1), 6 and 7. Effective protection of workers in the light of the knowledge available. Maximum permissible doses. 1. Protection for pregnant and breastfeeding workers. With regard to its previous comment on the methods of protection at work for workers who are pregnant, the Committee notes that the Government refers to section 7.36(1) of the Decree on basic safety standards for radiation protection, which provides that the employer shall ensure that the working conditions for pregnant workers are such that the equivalent dose for the unborn child is as low as reasonably achievable and that it is unlikely that this dose will exceed 1 mSv from the moment the pregnancy is reported to the employer until the end of the pregnancy. The Committee notes that the Government also indicates that, pursuant to section 7.29(1) of the Decree on basic safety standards for radiation protection, the employer shall ensure that, before the commencement of work, women workers who are likely to be exposed to ionizing radiation are adequately informed of: (i) the need to report a pregnancy at an early stage in view of the risks of exposure to ionizing radiation for the unborn child; and (ii) the risks to a breastfed child from contamination from the mother's body. The Committee notes this information, which addresses its previous request.

2. Persons between 16 and 18 years of age. Prohibition on the engagement of workers under the age of 16 in work involving ionizing radiation. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that, pursuant to sections 7.4 and 7.35 of the Decree on basic safety standards for radiation protection, workers under the age of 18 are prohibited from working with radioactive sources with the sole exception of students from 16 years of age studying a profession in the nuclear or radioprotection field. The Committee notes that the dose limits provided for in the Decree on basic safety standards for radiation protection for this group have been established in accordance with the recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. Noting the absence of specific information in this respect, the Committee requests the Government to indicate whether maximum dose limits have been established for apprentices between the ages of 16 and 18 who are being trained for employment involving radiation, or whether the dose limits for students in sections 7.4 and 7.35 also apply to apprentices.

3. Lens of the eye. With regard to its previous comment on the review of the maximum permissible doses established with respect to the lens of the eye for radiation workers and for students and apprentices between 16 and 18 years of age, the Committee notes with interest that the Government refers to sections 7.34(2) and 7.35(2) of the Decree on basic safety standards for radiation protection, which respectively fix the limits for the equivalent dose for the lens of the eye at 20 mSv a year for workers directly engaged in radiation work and at 15 mSv a year for students between the ages of 16 and 18 who are exposed to radiation in the course of their studies. The Committee notes this information, which addresses its previous request.

Article 9(2). Adequate instruction of all workers engaged in radiation work. The Committee notes that section 7.28 of the Decree on basic safety standards for radiation protection provides that the employer shall ensure: (i) appropriate training and information programmes for workers, focusing, where appropriate, on high-activity sources; and (ii) that the employees cooperate in the information meetings and training organized for them, and comply with the instructions given to them pursuant to the Decree on basic safety standards for radiation protection. The Committee requests the Government to provide detailed information on the training and information programmes for workers carried out under section 7.28 of the Decree on basic safety standards for radiation protection, specifying the measures adopted to ensure that workers engaged in radiation work are adequately instructed, before and during such work, in the precautions to be taken for the protection of their health and safety and the reasons thereof.

Articles 12 and 14. Medical examinations. Employment involving exposure to ionizing radiation contrary to medical advice. The Committee notes that section 7.11(1) to (3) of the Decree on basic safety standards for radiation protection provides that employers shall classify each worker directly engaged in radiation work as an A or B worker, for the purpose of individual monitoring and health surveillance: category A-workers are those who receive an annual effective dose greater than 6 mSv and category B-workers are those who are not classified as category A-workers. The Committee also notes that sections 7.21(4) and 7.25 of the Decree on basic safety standards for radiation protection provide respectively that: (i) medical examinations of category A-workers shall take place before the commencement of radiation work, periodically during employment (at least once a year) and after the period of employment as a category A-worker; and (ii) a worker shall not be employed in a specific position as a category A-worker if, according to the results of an initial health examination, he or she is not suitable for that position. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the measures taken to ensure that: (i) category B-workers undergo appropriate medical examinations prior or shortly after taking up radiation work and subsequently undergo further examination at appropriate intervals (Article 12 of the Convention); and (ii) no category B-worker is employed or continues to be employed in work by reason of which the worker could be subject to exposure to ionizing radiations contrary to qualified advice (Article 14 of the Convention).

2.Occupational Cancer Convention, 1974 (No. 139)

Articles 2 and 6(a) of the Convention. Replacement of carcinogenic substances and agents. Consultations on measures to give effect to the Convention. With regard to its previous comment, the Committee notes that the Government indicates, in its report, that the occupational hygiene strategy prescribes substitution with less harmful substances as a first step as far as possible and makes a general reference to a self-inspection tool on working with hazardous substances available to employers on the website of the labour inspectorate. The Committee notes that the FNV and CNV reiterate that there is a lack of discussion on substitution of carcinogenic substances and that such substitution should be discussed in the tripartite Social Economic Council before determining limit values. Furthermore, the FNV and CNV indicate that the labour inspectorate is not in a position to provide information on the number of companies that have been inspected in relation to the application of section 4.17 of the Working Conditions Decree, which provides for the replacement of carcinogenic or mutagenic substances and processes with a view to minimizing the exposure of workers. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on further specific measures taken in practice to ensure that carcinogenic substances are replaced by non-carcinogenic substances or agents, or by less harmful substances or agents, including any discussion on the substitution of carcinogenic substances in the tripartite Social Economic Council. The Committee requests the Government to refer to its comment onArticle 6(c) (provision of appropriate inspection services) of the Convention. 

Article 3. Establishment of an appropriate system of records. With regard to its previous comment, the Committee notes the Government’s reference to a study of December 2017 on how to deal with work-related data and data on occupational side-effects to health, which the Committee noted in its previous comments on the Chemicals Convention, 1999 (No. 170). The Government indicates that, based on the 2017 study, improvements appear to be necessary in the field of compliance with the registration obligations of employers. In this regard, the Government refers to actions taken to disseminate information on the responsibilities of all stakeholders involved in the setting up a safe workplace when working with hazardous substances, as well as to improve compliance with risk-assessment obligations. The Committee notes that the FNV and CNV underline the absence of a commitment for action by the Government and indicate that an evaluation report on policy interventions prepared by the Government concluded that between 2012 and 2020 the communication actions did not have the expected policy effects. Recalling thatsection 4.15 of the Working Conditions Decree requires employers to keep a list of employees who are or may be exposed to carcinogenic substances, the Committee once again requests the Government to indicate the measures taken in practice by the labour inspectorate to identify companies where workers are exposed to carcinogenic substances and to ensure that these companies have established an appropriate system of records under the above-mentioned provision, as well as to indicate any consultations undertaken with the most representative organizations of employers and workers concerned.

Article 4. Workers provided with all the available information on the dangers involved from exposure. The Committee notes that the Government states that providing information, as well as education and internal supervision, are key regulatory provisions and that those matters have been the subject of much attention in the occupational disease prevention programme. In this respect, the Committee notes that the FNV and CNV indicate that these key regulatory provisions are neglected by employers and that the non-compliance with these provisions is partly the cause of most of the accidents investigated. Noting the absence of information in reply to its previous comment, the Committee once again requests the Government to provide information on concrete measures taken to ensure that workers, including “flex-workers”, exposed to carcinogens are provided with all the available information on the dangers involved and on the protective measures to be taken.

Article 5. Medical examinations after the period of employment. With regard to its previous comment, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that employers can request medical professionals to work out how to ensure transmission to the public medical services after the period of employment. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on concrete measures taken by medical professionals or public medical services to ensure that workers exposed to carcinogens are provided with medical examinations after the period of their employment.

Article 6(c). Provision of appropriate inspection services. With regard to its previous comment, the Committee notes that the Government indicates that the labour inspectorate has a specific inspection programme on health and safety issues related to work with hazardous substances and refers to the increased capacity of the labour inspectorate in this respect. The Committee notes that while the FNV and CNV acknowledge that these are improvements, they reiterate their concerns regarding the system of self-regulation of working conditions and the problems in the enforcement of the legal framework giving effect to the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on specific measures taken in practice by the labour inspectorate to ensure that workplaces where workers may be exposed to carcinogens comply with the provisions of the Convention. Furthermore, the Committee requests the Government to refer to its comments regarding the application of Conventions Nos 81 and 129. 

3.Working Environment (Air Pollution, Noise and Vibration) Convention, 1977(No. 148)

Article 4 of the Convention. Protection against occupational hazards in the working environment. Air pollution. Noting the absence of information in reply to its previous comment, the Committee once again requests the Government to provide its comments with respect to the previous observations of the FNV and CNV that while there are limit values established for many chemical substances, there are no specific health and safety regulations related to ultrafine particles.

Article 11(3) and (4). Continued assignment to work. With regard to its previous comment, the Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report that, pursuant to section 7:658a(1) of the Civil Code, employers must offer suitable work in their own companies if workers are temporarily unable to carry out their own work due to incapacity for work and that where suitable work is not available in the employers’ companies, the employers must seek suitable work with another employer. The Committee notes that the above-mentioned provision appears to provide that alternative work with other employers will be in place for the period during which the original employer is obliged to continue to pay wages of the workers concerned under section 7:629 of the Civil Code (104 weeks) or the relevant provisions of the social security and insurance legislation. The Committee notes this information and once again requests the Government to provide specific information on the measures or provisions in place to ensure that the rights of workers under social security or social insurance legislation are not adversely affected.

4.Asbestos Convention, 1986 (No. 162)

Articles 3(1) and (2), 4, 9(2) and 15(1) of the Convention. Laws and regulations. Consultation with the most representative organizations of employers and workers. Special rules and procedures for certain work processes. Exposure limits. With regard to its previous comment, the Committee notes that, in its report, the Government provides information on amendments to the Working Conditions Decree adopted in 2014, 2016 and 2017. Pursuant to these amendments: (i) a new certification and accreditation system was introduced whereby statutory certificates, including those for work involving exposure to asbestos, can only be issued by bodies accredited by the Dutch Accreditation Council; (ii) the limit values for the exposure of workers to asbestos (chrysotile and amphibole groups) were reduced; and (iii) corresponding changes were made to the asbestos risk classification (which is used to determine the preventive measures to be taken) and to the process of assessing the safety of workplaces following work with asbestos. The Government indicates that the latter amendments were adopted considering advice from the Committee on Limit Values for Substances at the Workplace, which is part of the tripartite Social and Economic Council. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on legislative measures undertaken with regard to the application of the Convention.

Application in practice. The Committee notes that, in reply to its previous comment, the Government provides information on the number of workers holding certificates for asbestos removal or demolition work (3,086 workers) and inventory activities (874 workers), specifying that the number of workers incidentally exposed to asbestos during maintenance work (mainly in the installation and constructions sectors) remains unknown. It also notes the Government’s indication that the total number of new occupational diseases due to exposure to asbestos in the past (including lung cancer and asbestosis) was estimated at around 1,300 in 2016 by the National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), when limit values of exposure were higher. The Committee also notes that the Asbestos Validation and Innovation Centre was established in June 2020 as an independent body under the RIVM that advises the Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment on the occupational safety of methods used for asbestos removal work (including working methods, techniques, devices or machines). The Committee notes this information which responds to its previous request.

5.Chemicals Convention, 1990 (No. 170)

Article 11 of the Convention. Transfer of chemicals. Noting the absence of information in reply to its previous comment, the Committee once again requests the Government to indicate the measures taken for employers to ensure that when chemicals are transferred into other containers or equipment, the contents are indicated in a manner which will make known to workers their identity, any hazards associated with their use and any safety precautions to be observed.

Application in practice. The Committee notes that the FNV and CNV reiterate most of their previous observations relating to problems in the enforcement of the legal framework giving effect to the Convention by the labour inspectorate. In this regard, the Committee notes that, as under the Occupational Cancer Convention, 1974 (No. 139), the Government refers to the inspection programme on health and safety issues surrounding work with hazardous substances and to the increased capacity of the labour inspectorate. It also indicates that compliance with relevant national legislation is enforced through traditional inspections and is further encouraged and promoted through, inter alia, self-inspection tools, making information on hazardous substances easily available to workers (via an online application), and information and awareness-raising campaigns. The Committee notes that the FNV and CNV recognize as an improvement the fact that the labour inspectorate is requesting information on hazardous substances from companies using these substances and testing the use of new enforcement methods in pilot-studies, such as requesting risk-assessments and chemical documents by digital enforcement. The Committee notes, however, that the FNV and CNV also point out that the labour inspectorate mainly focuses on awareness-raising activities, and generation of information and campaigns. The organizations further indicate that a 2019 study commissioned by the Government concluded that its previous policy (based on the idea of self-regulation of working conditions) has not led employers and workers to fulfil this public task. According to the FNV and CNV, the Minister of Social Affairs and Employment has considered that the aforementioned study includes interesting recommendations for the next policy agenda such as, , not focusing only on self-regulation and other soft instruments, but using a broader range of interventions. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on specific measures taken to ensure that the provisions of the Convention are applied in practice, including any follow-up actions to the conclusions and recommendations of the 2019 study commissioned by the Government. Further, the Committee requests the Government to refer to its comments regarding the application of Conventions Nos 81 and 129. 

6.Prevention of Major Industrial Accidents Convention, 1993 (No. 174)

Article 4 of the Convention. National policy. With regard to its previous comment on possible amendments to the Additional Risk Assessment and Evaluation (ARIE) Regulations, the Committee notes the Government’s indication, in its report, that these Regulations, which provide for supplementary risk assessment and evaluation obligations for companies working with large quantities of dangerous substances, were not amended between 2014 and 2021, but are undergoing revision and are expected to be amended in 2022. The Government also indicates that the recommendations of the tripartite Social Economic Council are being taken into consideration in the amendment process. The Committee notes that the FNV and CNV generally agree with the amendments to the ARIE Regulations and propose a number of recommendations in this regard, which the Government indicates will be taken into consideration.

Furthermore, the Committee also notes the Government’s indication that the Decree on hazards of major accidents of 2015, which implements the Directive 2012/18/EU on the control of major-accident hazards involving dangerous substances, will be repealed in the framework of a major adjustment of all environmental, nature and surroundings legislation that is also planned for 2022. The Committee requests the Government to provide detailed information on how effect is given to each provision of the Convention following such legislative reform process. It also requests the Government to provide copies of all relevant laws and regulations once adopted.

Article 16(a) and (b). Responsibilities of the competent authorities concerning off-site emergency preparedness. With regard to its previous comment, the Committee notes that the Government indicates that relevant information on off-site emergencies can be found on official websites containing a map of all risks to the public (for example, an accident involving dangerous substances), as well as instructions on actions to be taken. The Committee notes that this risk map has been developed within the framework of the Act on Safety Regions, according to which off-site emergency plans are drafted by local authorities. The Committee also notes the Government’s indication that in the event of a major accident, there are several ways of notifying the public under the Act on Safety Regions, including through a local alarm and signal system, a digital alert in harmful and life-threatening situations, such a major fire, and mobile notifications. The Committee takes note of this information which responds to its previous request.

Article 17. Siting of major hazard installations. With regard to its previous comment, the Committee notes that the Government indicates that the General Provisions Act (WABO) is the basis for many of the permits relating to the physical living environment and that together with the Environmental Management Act, they are the legal basis for ensuring that major hazard sites are separated from other areas. Moreover, it indicates that permits for major hazard installations are revised every five years under the above legislation if anything has changed. The Committee notes that also in the framework of the aforementioned legislative reform process, amendments regarding the siting of major hazard installations are expected to be adopted in 2022. The Committee requests the Government to refer to its comment on Article 4 (national policy) of the Convention.

Application in practice. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in reply to its previous request concerning the actions undertaken to improve safety at major hazard companies and the cause of the increase in the number of safety reports received by the labour inspectorate since 2011. The Committee takes note of this information which responds to its previous request.

C.Protection in specific branches of activities

Safety Provisions (Building) Convention, 1937 (No. 62)

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government, in its report, in reply to its previous request concerning: (i) the adoption of a new policy rule on OSH catalogues in 2019, the tools in place to assist the social partners in developing and improving OSH catalogues (for example, digital support to develop specific OSH catalogues and guidance manuals on a range of specific risks at work) and the number of OSH catalogues approved by the labour inspectorate (approximately 150); (ii) the amendment of Chapter 2, section 5 on construction processes of the Working Conditions Decree in 2016, which aimed at improving compliance with the relevant provisions and allowing better enforcement; and (iii) the number of workplaces in the building sector (190,340 in 2019 and 202,455 in 2020), the number of enterprises inspected (829 in 2019 and 844 in 2020), the number of accidents, including fatal accidents (470 in 2016 (fatal accidents: 16); 503 in 2017 (fatal accidents: 20); 415 in 2018 (fatal accidents: 11) and 374 in 2019 (fatal accidents: 14)). The Committee takes note of this information which responds to its previous request.

Furthermore, the Committee recalls that the ILO Governing Body at its 334th Session, October–November 2018, on the recommendation of the Standards Review Mechanism Tripartite Working Group, confirmed the classification of Convention No. 62 as an outdated instrument, and placed an item on the agenda of the 112th Session of the International Labour Conference (2024) for the consideration of its abrogation. The Governing Body requested the Office to undertake follow-up action to actively encourage the ratification of the up-to-date instrument concerning OSH in construction, the Safety and Health in Construction Convention, 1988 (No. 167). The Committee encourages the Government to follow up the Governing Body’s decision at its 334th Session (October–November 2018) approving the recommendations of the Standards Review Mechanism Tripartite Working Group, and to consider ratifying Convention No. 167.

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.

Articles 3(1) and 6(1) of the Convention. Dose limits for pregnant women and for the protection of the embryo/foetus. The Committee notes that pursuant to section 80(1) of the Decree on Radiation Protection, the employer must ensure that the working conditions for pregnant workers are such that the equivalent dose for the unborn child is as low as reasonably achievable and that it is improbable that this dose will exceed 1 mSv. The Committee also notes that pursuant to section 72, if a worker may be pregnant, special attention should be paid to the justification of exposure and the optimization of radiation protection, which takes into account the dosage for both the woman and the unborn child. In this respect, the Committee would like to draw the Government’s attention to paragraph 33 of its general observation of 2015, which provides that the methods of protection at work for women who are pregnant should provide a level of protection for the embryo/foetus broadly similar to that provided for members of the public, for which the annual effective dose limit is 1 mSv. Noting that section 80(1) of the Decree on Radiation Protection provides that working conditions must make it improbable for the dose to exceed 1 mSv for the unborn child, the Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the methods of protection at work for workers who are pregnant.

Articles 6(2) and 7(2). Dose limits in occupational exposure and dose limits for persons between 16 and 18 years of age. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that amendments to the Decree on Radiation Protection came into effect in January 2014. It notes in this regard that pursuant to section 77(1)(b)(1°) of the Decree on Radiation Protection, the equivalent dose to the lens of the eye for radiation workers is of 150 mSv in one year and that pursuant to section 78(3)(b)(1°), the equivalent dose to the lens of the eye for workers between 16 and 18 years of age is of 50 mSv in one year. With reference to paragraphs 11, 13, 32 and 34 of its 2015 general observation, the Committee draws the Government’s attention to the most recent recommendations of the International Commission for Radiological Protection according to which the equivalent dose to the lens of the eye for radiation workers should be 20 mSv, averaged over defined periods of five years, with no single year exceeding 50 mSv per year, and for students and apprentices between the ages of 16 and 18 who use sources of radiation in the course of their studies, an equivalent dose to the lens of the eye of 20 mSv/year. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on measures taken to review, in light of current knowledge, the maximum permissible doses established with respect to the lens of the eye for radiation workers and for students and apprentices between 16 and 18 years of age.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2009, published 99th ILC session (2010)

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government regarding the adoption of the Decree on Radiation Protection of 16 July 2001 (Stb. 397) (BS) and of the Decree on the Nuclear Power Plants amended by decree of 8 July 2002 (Stb. 417) which give further effect to the Convention including its Articles 7 and 8.

Article 3, paragraph 1, and Article 6 of the Convention. Maximum permissible doses for occupational exposure. The Committee notes that section 77 of the BS provides for a maximum permissible occupational exposure limit of 20 mSv per year which corresponds to the recommendations relevant for the application of this Convention by the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) referred to in the 1992 general observation under this Convention. The Committee requests the Government to keep it informed of any further reviews of these limits in the light of current knowledge.

Article 3, paragraph 1, and Article 6, paragraph 1. Dose limits for pregnant women and for the protection of the unborn child. The Committee notes the information that section 80 provides that pregnant women should report their pregnancy to their employer, and that the Confederation of Netherlands Industry and Employers (VNO NCV) has observed that this is a necessary obligation although it is in conflict with existing Dutch national legislation on the protection of private data. The Committee also notes that section 80 of the BS also provides that the unborn child is protected as a member of the public, that is 1 mSv per year maximum exposure. With reference to its 1992 general observation the Committee notes that while section 80 of the BS corresponds to the ICRP recommendations in other parts, the ICRP recommendations also indicate that the unborn child may be more sensitive to the induction of later malignancies. The ICRP recommendations further indicate that although no special limits are provided on exposure and intake for the women concerned before pregnancy is declared, once this declaration has been made, the ICRP recommendations consider that the unborn child should be protected by applying a supplementary equivalent dose limit to the surface of the women’s abdomen (lower trunk) of 2 mSv for the remainder of the pregnancy and by limiting intakes of radionuclides to about 1/20 of the ALI. The ICRP recommendations however emphasize that the use of source-related dose constraints usually should ensure compliance with the limit of 1/20 of the ALI, and that the employment of pregnant women should be of a type that does not carry a significant probability of high accidental doses and intakes. Identification of such situations should be determined by regulatory agencies. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on measures taken or contemplated to adapt the respective dose limits found in the national legislation to those of the recommendations adopted by the ICRP in 1990 to ensure effective protection of women workers of reproductive capacity.

Article 3, paragraph 1, and Article 8. Dose limits for non-radiological workers and for the general public. The Committee notes the information that section 80 of the BS provide that the maximum dose limit for non-radiological workers is set at 1 mSv per year which is the same limit that is set for the general public which corresponds to the ICRP recommendations relevant for the application of this Convention. The Committee requests the Government to keep it informed of any further reviews of these limits in the light of current knowledge.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2004, published 93rd ILC session (2005)

The Committee takes note of the comments provided by the Trade Union Confederation of Middle Categories and Senior Staff Unions (MHP) on the application of this Convention stating that the Committee, in its previous comments, was not in a position to determine precisely whether indeed effect is given to the provisions of the Convention. The MHP indicates that this is due to the fact that the text of the Radiation Protection Decree, to which the Government had referred, was not annexed to the Government’s report. The Committee, taking note of the observation of the MHP, notes that, at the time of its previous comments, the Radiation Protection Decree was not yet adopted. It however notes from the Government’s report that this Decree has been adopted on 16 July 2001, and came into force on 1 March 2002, as amended, to transpose the Basic Safety Directive 96/29/Euratom of 1996 and the Medical Radiation Treatment Directive 97/43/Euratom into national legislation, which reflect the 1990 Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiation Protection (ICRP) to which the Committee refers in determining the extent to which national legislations give effect to the provisions of this Convention. The Committee therefore requests the Government to supply a copy of the Radiation Protection Decree of 2001, as amended, for in-depth examination.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2000, published 89th ILC session (2001)

The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government in its report.

It notes with interest the Government’s indication that on 28 April 2000 a draft decree on radiation protection which is expected to come into force at the end of the year 2000 was submitted to Parliament. This draft decree incorporates provisions of basic safety standards of the European Union (Euratom), such as the Basic Safety Directive 96/29/Euratom of 1996 and the Medical Radiation Treatment Directive 97/43/Euratom, into national legislation. In this regard, the Committee notes that the incorporation of the Directive 96/29/Euratom into national legislation would implement at the same time the recommendations given by the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) in 1990 (Publication No. 60). As to the content of this draft decree, the Committee notes with interest the Government’s indication that the effective dose limits for workers are fixed at a lower level than the dose limits set out in the respective Directive 96/29/Euratom and those recommended by the ICRP in its publication No. 60, 1990 (Article 3, paragraph 2, and Article 6, paragraph 2, of the Convention), and that the maximum permissible dose limits for workers who are not directly engaged in radiation work would be set at 1 mSv per year (Article 8) which constitutes the same dose limit as for members of the public. The Government further declares that the draft decree also contains provisions with respect to the medical surveillance of workers exposed to ionizing radiation (Article 12) as well as provisions concerning alternative employment for workers who have exceeded their lifetime dose limits and provisions with respect to tolerated dose limits for occupational exposure during and after an emergency. The Committee, taking due note of this information, requests the Government to forward a copy of the draft decree once it has been adopted in order to enable the Committee to determine the extent to which this decree applies the provisions of the Convention.

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

1. The Committee notes that the Government has indicated in its report of 1995 that the 1990 Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) would be incorporated in the basic safety standards of the European Union (Euratom) and implemented into national legislation. The Committee notes that Directive 96/29/Euratom, adopted in May 1996, sets the effective dose limit of ionizing radiation at 100 mSv over five consecutive years, not exceeding 50 mSv in a single year. Recalling that, under Article 3, paragraph 1, and Article 6, paragraph 2, of the Convention, maximum permissible doses shall be kept under constant review in the light of current knowledge as a means to ensure effective protection of workers against ionizing radiation and recalling also its 1992 general observation under the Convention, and in particular its paragraph 35(b), the Committee hopes that the Government will soon be in the position to indicate the steps taken to review the existing dose limits, in the light of current knowledge as embodied in the ICRP Recommendations of 1990 and in the International Basic Safety Standards of 1994.

2. Article 8. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the manner in which maximum permissible dose levels are established and enforced for workers who are not directly engaged in radiation work, but who pass or remain in areas where they may be exposed to ionizing radiation or radioactive substances. Referring to paragraph 14 of its general observation of 1992, the Committee would recall that the dose limit for these non-radiation workers should be the one applied to the public, which is set at 1 mSv per year under the 1990 ICRP Recommendations.

3. Article 14. The Committee requests the Government to supply information in its next report on steps taken or considered to ensure that no worker is employed or continues to be employed in work involving exposure to ionizing radiation contrary to qualified medical advice.

4. Provision of alternative employment. With reference to paragraphs 28 to 34 and 35(d) of its 1992 general observation, and the principles reflected in paragraphs 96 and 238 of the 1994 International Basic Safety Standards, the Committee asks the Government to indicate the measures taken or contemplated with regard to the provision of alternative employment to ensure effective protection of workers who have accumulated exposure beyond which an unacceptable risk of detriment may occur and who may thus be faced with the dilemma that protecting their health means losing their employment.

5. Occupational exposure during and after an emergency. The Committee notes that the information provided in the Government's report does not reply to its previous direct request. The Committee would draw again the Government's attention to paragraphs 16 to 27 and 35(c) of the general observation of 1992, which concern occupational exposure during and after an emergency, as well as to paragraphs 233 and 236 of the International Basic Safety Standards of 1994. The Government is again requested to indicate whether, in emergency situations, exceptions are permitted to the normally tolerated dose limits prescribed for exposure to ionizing radiation and, if so, to indicate the exceptional levels of exposure allowed in such circumstances and to specify the manner in which these circumstances are defined.

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

I. The Committee notes the information provided in the Government's latest report concerning the adoption of the Nuclear Energy Act Radiation Protection Decree, 1986. It notes the statistics provided in the Government's report concerning the doses of radiation received by radiologists in the Netherlands. In 1989, 173 individuals received annual doses between 15mSv and 50 mSv and 9 individuals received annual doses over 50 mSv. The Committee would draw the Government's attention to its General Observation under this Convention which sets forth, inter alia, the revised dose limits for exposure to ionising radiations adopted on the basis of new physiological findings by the International Commission on Radiological Protection in its 1990 Recommendations (Publication No. 60). The Committee would recall that, under Article 3, paragraph 1 and Article 6, paragraph 2, of the Convention, all appropriate steps shall be taken to ensure effective protection of workers against ionising radiations and to review maximum permissible doses of ionising radiations in the light of current knowledge. The Government is requested 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 regret that the information provided in the Government's report did not reply to its General Observation of 1987. The Committee would now call the Government's attention to paragraphs 16 to 27 and 35(c) of its General Observation under this Convention which concern occupational exposure during and after an emergency. The Government is requested to indicate whether, in emergency situations, exceptions are permitted to the normally tolerated dose limits prescribed for exposure to ionising radiations and, if so, to indicate the exceptional levels of exposure allowed in such circumstances and to specify the manner in which these circumstances are defined.