Demande directe (CEACR) - adoptée 1995, publiée 83ème session CIT (1996)

Convention (n° 115) sur la protection contre les radiations, 1960 - Japon (Ratification: 1973)

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in its report that the 1990 Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiation Protection (Publication No. 60) have been discussed by the Radiation Council since 1991. Referring also to its 1992 General Observation on the Convention, the Committee looks forward to the incorporation of the dose limits set out in the above Recommendations into national legislation, and requests the Government to supply information on the provisions adopted or envisaged as well as further details on the following points:

1. Emergency exposure situations. In its previous direct request, the Committee drew the attention of the Government to paragraphs 16 to 27 and 35(c) of its General Observation under the Convention. In this regard, the Committee would once again request the Government to indicate the steps taken in relation to the matters raised in the above paragraphs and in the light of paragraphs 233 and 236 of the 1994 International Basic Safety Standards, in particular with respect to the strict definition of circumstances in which exceptional exposure might take place, and the optimization of protection during accidents and emergency work through the design and protective features of the workplace and equipment and emergency planning for intervention relying on such techniques as robotized equipment.

2. The provision of alternative employment. With reference to paragraphs 28 to 34 and 35(d) of the 1992 General Observation under the Convention, and the principles reflected in paragraphs 96 and 238 of the International Basic Safety Standards, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on measures taken or contemplated to ensure effective protection of workers who may have accumulated exposure beyond which an unacceptable risk of detriment is to occur and who may be faced with the dilemma that protecting their health means losing their employment.