A method for estimating (41)Ar, (85)(,88)Kr and (131m,133)Xe doses to non-human biota

Assessment of dose rates to non-human biota from radioactive discharges from Sellafield Ltd. using PC-CREAM

PC-CREAM is a tool for assessing the radiological impact of routine discharges of radionuclides to the environment. It can be used for prospective assessments, to calculate doses to members of the public for authorisation of proposed discharges, or for retrospective assessments of previous discharges where doses are compared with dose limits. These types of assessment are a fundamental requirement of regulations governing the control of radioactive discharges. However, the latest publications of the basic safety standards for radiation protection, EU (Council of the European Union, 2014) and the IAEA (IAEA, 2014), now include the requirement to demonstrate protection of the environment as well as members of the public. To this end, a module has been added to PC-CREAM for calculating dose rates to non-human biota (Anderson et al., 2022). The methodology used for this calculation is based on the recommendations contained in ICRP Publication 108 (ICRP, 2008), which provides a general framework for protection of the environment. The additional module means that PC-CREAM can be used to assess doses to humans and dose rates to biota in an integrated way, for the same set of discharges and using the same dispersion models. This paper describes an assessment of dose rates to biota living in the vicinity of the Sellafield nuclear site, carried out using the new biota module of PC-CREAM. Historical discharges from Sellafield to the sea and atmosphere were considered for the period 1951 to 2017, excluding those from the Windscale fire in 1957. Dose rates calculated for marine biota (flatfish, crabs and brown seaweed) are less than 1 mGy d-1 and are below the lower derived consideration reference level (DCRL) for the ICRP marine reference animals and plants (RAPs). Dose rates for terrestrial biota (bees, deer, earthworms, frogs, wild grass, pine trees and rats) are less than the relevant lower DCRL for terrestrial RAPs, ie 0.1 mGy d-1. Dose rates were also calculated for a user defined organism 'seabird' to represent birds which inhabit both marine and terrestrial environments near Sellafield. For seabird, the lower DCRL of 0.1 mGy d-1 is exceeded throughout the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s, when the discharges were at their highest, due to exposures from the marine environment. Since the mid-1980s, no dose rates were calculated that exceeded the lower DCRLs.

Ensuring robust radiological risk assessment for wildlife: insights from the International Atomic Energy Agency EMRAS and MODARIA programmes

In response to changing international recommendations and national requirements, a number of assessment approaches, and associated tools and models, have been developed over the last circa 20 years to assess radiological risk to wildlife. In this paper, we summarise international intercomparison exercises and scenario applications of available radiological assessment models for wildlife to aid future model users and those such as regulators who interpret assessments. Through our studies, we have assessed the fitness for purpose of various models and tools, identified the major sources of uncertainty and made recommendations on how the models and tools can best be applied to suit the purposes of an assessment. We conclude that the commonly used tiered or graded assessment tools are generally fit for purpose for conducting screening-level assessments of radiological impacts to wildlife. Radiological protection of the environment (or wildlife) is still a relatively new development within the overall system of radiation protection and environmental assessment approaches are continuing to develop. Given that some new/developing approaches differ considerably from the more established models/tools and there is an increasing international interest in developing approaches that support the effective regulation of multiple stressors (including radiation), we recommend the continuation of coordinated international programmes for model development, intercomparison and scenario testing.

Bounding uncertainties around the conceptual representation of species in radiological assessment in the context of routine atmospheric release

Wildlife protection has become of regulatory interest since the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) developed an approach to assess the level of radiological protection specifically for animals and plants. For the purpose of demonstrating compliance with regulation to protect the environment against routine authorised discharges from nuclear facilities, the wide variety of biota inhabiting an ecosystem needs to be condensed to a limited set of representative organisms, as proposed by the ICRP with a set of 'reference animals and plants' which can be considered representative of many other species. It is now recommended in the International Atomic Energy Agency Safety Standards, and internationally accepted, that the use of such a limited number of organisms to represent a pool of species is adequate for radiation protection purposes, particularly in planned exposure situations. Adding site-specific species to that set of surrogate species can respond to various interests, such as ensuring a site-specific context to the assessment that addresses stakeholder interests and can aid in stakeholder consultation and risk communication. Moreover, there is a need to question whether the use of the set of surrogate organisms is conservative enough to cover a wider range of biodiversity. Previous studies partially answered this question and this paper adds a range of test cases. A selection of hypothetical representations of possible site-specific species are assessed on the basis of possible variations in size (mass) and occupancy habits. Dose rates are evaluated to determine the greatest difference between hypothetical organisms and those for reference organisms (ROs), considering radionuclides (RNs) potentially discharged in atmospheric routine release from different nuclear facilities. Differences observed in the results between hypothetical organisms and ROs were less than one order of magnitude in all cases, the difference being dependent on the RNs considered. These findings do not preclude the inclusion of site-specific species in environmental radiological assessments if it is considered necessary, but they provide reassurance that using ROs for radiological impact assessments in the case of routine atmospheric discharges is sufficient.

ALLIANCE perspectives on integration of humans and the environment into the system of radiological protection

Risks posed by the presence of radionuclides in the environment require an efficient, balanced, and adaptable assessment for protecting exposed humans and wildlife, and managing the associated radiological risk. Exposure of humans and wildlife originate from the same sources releasing radionuclides to the environment. Environmental concentrations of radionuclides serve as inputs to estimate the dose to man, fauna, and flora, with transfer processes being, in essence, similar, which calls for a common use of transport models. Dose estimates are compared with the radiological protection criteria for humans and wildlife, such as those developed by the International Commission on Radiological Protection. This indicates a similarity in the approaches for impact assessment in humans and wildlife, although some elements are different (e.g. the protection endpoint for humans is stochastic effects on individuals, whereas for wildlife, it is deterministic effects on species and ecosystems). Human and environmental assessments are consistent and complementary in terms of how they are conducted and in terms of the underlying databases (where appropriate). Not having an integrated approach may cause difficulties for operators and regulators, for communication to stakeholders, and may even hamper decision making. For optimised risk assessment and management, the impact from non-radiation contaminants and stressors should also be considered. Both in terms of the underlying philosophy and the application via appropriate tools, the European Radioecology Alliance (ALLIANCE) upholds that integration of human and ecological impact and risk assessment is recommended from several perspectives (e.g. chemical/radiological risks).

A method for assessing exposure of terrestrial wildlife to environmental radon (222Rn) and thoron (220Rn)

A method is presented to calculate radiation dose rates arising from radon, thoron and their progeny to non-human biota in the terrestrial environment. The method improves on existing methodologies for the assessment of radon to biota by using a generalised allometric approach to model respiration, calculating dose coefficients for the ICRP reference animals and plants, and extending the approach to cover thoron in addition to radon-derived isotopes. The method is applicable to a range of environmental situations involving these radionuclides in wildlife, with an envisaged application being to study the impact of human activities, which bring NORM radionuclides to the biosphere. Consequently, there is a need to determine whether there is an impact on non-human biota from exposure to anthropogenically enhanced radionuclides.

Dose assessment in environmental radiological protection: State of the art and perspectives

Exposure to radiation is a potential hazard to humans and the environment. The Fukushima accident reminded the world of the importance of a reliable risk management system that incorporates the dose received from radiation exposures. The dose to humans from exposure to radiation can be quantified using a well-defined system; its environmental equivalent, however, is still in a developmental state. Additionally, the results of several papers published over the last decade have been criticized because of poor dosimetry. Therefore, a workshop on environmental dosimetry was organized by the STAR (Strategy for Allied Radioecology) Network of Excellence to review the state of the art in environmental dosimetry and prioritize areas of methodological and guidance development. Herein, we report the key findings from that international workshop, summarise parameters that affect the dose animals and plants receive when exposed to radiation, and identify further research needs. Current dosimetry practices for determining environmental protection are based on simple screening dose assessments using knowledge of fundamental radiation physics, source-target geometry relationships, the influence of organism shape and size, and knowledge of how radionuclide distributions in the body and in the soil profile alter dose. In screening model calculations that estimate whole-body dose to biota the shapes of organisms are simply represented as ellipsoids, while recently developed complex voxel phantom models allow organ-specific dose estimates. We identified several research and guidance development priorities for dosimetry. For external exposures, the uncertainty in dose estimates due to spatially heterogeneous distributions of radionuclide contamination is currently being evaluated. Guidance is needed on the level of dosimetry that is required when screening benchmarks are exceeded and how to report exposure in dose-effect studies, including quantification of uncertainties. Further research is needed to establish whether and how dosimetry should account for differences in tissue physiology, organism life stages, seasonal variability (in ecology, physiology and radiation field), species life span, and the proportion of a population that is actually exposed. We contend that, although major advances have recently been made in environmental radiation protection, substantive improvements are required to reduce uncertainties and increase the reliability of environmental dosimetry.