Comments on the General IAEA Safety Requirements - Part 3 - and suggestions for the next publications

• Autor(a) principal: SORDI, GIAN M.
• Data de Publicação: 2020
• Outros Autores: INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS OF THE INTERNATIONAL RADIATION PROTECTION ASSOCIATION, 14th
• Tipo de documento: Artigo de conferência
• Título da fonte: Repositório Institucional do IPEN
• Texto Completo: http://repositorio.ipen.br/handle/123456789/31266

The international recommendations in question are described 52 requirements specified from chapter 2 to 5. The first chapter states that the number of fundamental safety principles has been increased form 3 to 10. To implement these requirments, the IAEA mentions 14 main parties but it is not clear which party is responsible for each of the fundamental safety principles. Chapter 2 presents 5 general requirements for protection and safety and makes it clear the responsibilities and competence of the government and regulatory body. ; but the responsibilities and competence of the other 12 principal parties reported in requeriment 4 are not clear. Chapter 3, which includes 37 requirements, is the most extensive and deals with planned exposure situations. Due to its extension, chapter 3 is left for a future paper, in case my comments are considered of some value by the principal parties involved. Chapter 4, with 4 requirements, deals with emergency exposure situations; and in chapter 5, the 6 requirements are about existing exposure situations. As to the requirements exposed in chapters 1, 2, 4 and 5 I have verified that the responsibilities and competence of the government and the regulatory body are clearly specified, which is not true for the other 12 principal parties. It is concerning this specific matter that I have made comments and suggestions. I also discuss the matters that are not under the responsibility of the radiological protection services but of other parties. Could the radiation protection service as a whole or in part be delegated to others, including the attributions of registrants or licensees?