No abstract

Over the past decades, the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) has used radiation detriment, which is a multidimensional concept to quantify the overall harm to health from stochastic effects of low-level radiation exposure of different parts of the body. The tissue-specific detriment is determined from the nominal tissue-specific risk coefficient, weighted by the severity of the disease in terms of lethality, impact on quality of life and years of life lost. Total detriment is the sum of the detriments for separate tissues and organs. Tissue specific detriment values are used to determine tissue weighting factors for the calculation of effective dose. Calculating radiation detriment is a complex process that requires information from various sources and judgements on how to achieve calculations. As such, it is important to document its calculation methodology. To improve the traceability of calculations and form a solid basis for future recommendations, the ICRP Task Group 102 on detriment calculation methodology was established in 2016. It has reviewed the history of radiation detriment and the process of detriment calculation. This article summarizes the work of this Task Group and aims at clarifying the process of detriment calculation currently used by the ICRP.

Radiation detriment is a concept to quantify the burden of stochastic effects from exposure of the human population to low-dose and/or low-dose-rate ionising radiation. As part of a thorough review of the system of radiological protection, the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) has compiled a report on radiation detriment calculation methodology as Publication 152. It provides a historical review of the detriment calculation with details of the procedure used in ICRP Publication 103. A selected sensitivity analysis was conducted to identify the parameters and calculation conditions that can be major sources of variation and uncertainty. It has demonstrated that sex, age at exposure, dose and dose-rate effectiveness factor (DDREF), dose assumption in the lifetime risk calculation, and lethality fraction have a substantial impact on the calculated values of radiation detriment. Discussions are also made on the issues to be addressed and possible ways for improvement toward the revision of general Recommendations. These include update of the reference population data and cancer severity parameters, revision of cancer risk models, and better handling of the variation with sex and age. Finally, emphasis is placed on transparency and traceability of the calculation, along with the need to improve the way of expressing and communicating the detriment.

This article proposes a review of past and current ICRP publications dealing with the management of radon exposures. Its main objective is to identify and discuss the driving factors that have been used by the Commission during the last 50 years so as to better appreciate current issues regarding radon exposure management. The analysis shows that major evolutions took place in very recent years. As far as the management of radon exposures is concerned, ICRP recommended, until ICRP Publication 103 (ICRP 2007 ICRP Publication 103; Ann. ICRP 37), to use action levels and to consider only exposures above these levels. The Commission has reviewed its approach and now proposes to manage any radon exposure through the application of the optimisation principle and associated reference levels. As far as the assessment of the radon risk is concerned, it appears that the successive changes made by ICRP did not have a strong impact on the values of radon gas concentration recommended as action levels either in dwellings or in workplaces. The major change occurred in late 2009 with the publication of the ICRP Statement on Radon, which acknowledged that the radon risk has been underestimated by a factor of 2, thus inducing a major revision of radon reference levels.

The concepts of tolerability and reasonableness are at the core of the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) system of radiological protection. Tolerability allows the definition of boundaries for implementing ICRP principles, while reasonableness contributes to decisions regarding adequate levels of protection, taking into account the prevailing circumstances. In the 1970s and 1980s, attempts to find theoretical foundations in risk comparisons for tolerability and cost-benefit analysis for reasonableness failed. In practice, the search for a rational basis for these concepts will never end. Making a wise decision will always remain a matter of judgement and will depend on the circumstances as well as the current knowledge and past experience. This paper discusses the constituents of tolerability and reasonableness at the heart of the radiological protection system. It also emphasises the increasing role of stakeholder engagement in the quest for tolerability and reasonableness since Publication 103.