Report from the Belgian stakeholder panel on scope, format and content of the Guidance for lifting of countermeasures

Research output: Report/bookER - External report

Documents & links

Documents

Abstract

Some relevant remarks .. • This guidance might have a better place as part of the inhabited area handbook than as a standalone document. It is good to stimulate discussions, define a common terminology and launch discussions in order to derive at the level of each country practical arrangements and procedures. However it suffers in the current form from a certain amount of lack of clarity and good structuring, especially in its chapter 2 on influencing factors... • The guidance would be more useful if specific scenario's are developed, trying to be generic over a too wide range of accident scopes makes the guidance too vague. • It is suggested to discuss the radiological criteria prior to discussing the adequacy of monitoring data. Related to the latter, the analysis should follow the chain: conceptual criteria => operational criteria => measurements needed. • Socio-economic aspects should be included as well in the list of influencing factors. In general, a broader discussion framework is necessary, while having the radiation-protection standpoint as a good start. The parts of the guidance concerning communication, socio-economic and psychological aspects might have to be developed with the help of specialists in these domains.

Details

Original languageEnglish
PublisherBelgian Nuclear Research Center
Number of pages13
Volume1
Edition0
Publication statusPublished - 31 Jan 2008

Publication series

NameSCK•CEN Reports
PublisherStudiecentrum voor Kernenergie
No.ER-50

Keywords

  • Emergencency management, stakeholders, lifting of countermeasures

ID: 95210