Radiation Protection Convention, 1960 (No. 115) - Denmark (Ratification: 1974)

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2023, published 112nd ILC session (2024)

Previous comments: C.115, C.139, C.155 and C.187,C.162 and C.167

In order to provide a comprehensive view of the issues relating to the application of the ratified Conventions on occupational safety and health (OSH), the Committee considers it appropriate to examine the application of Conventions Nos 115 (radiation protection), 139 (occupational cancer), 155 (OSH), 162 (asbestos), 167 (OSH in construction), 187 (promotional framework for OSH) in a single comment.

Application in practice of Conventions Nos 115, 139, 155, 162, 167 and 187. In reply to the Committee’s previous request, the Government refers to the reports published by the Danish Working Environment Authority (WEA) and provides detailed information on the number of OSH inspections undertaken, the number of enterprises visited, the number of employees covered, and enforcement outputs (improvement notices, prohibitions, fines proposed, cases presented etc) for the period 2018–20. Furthermore, the Committee notes that the number of reported occupational accidents increased from 42,709 in 2019, to 46,391 in 2020 and to 63,707 in 2021, which is the highest number of reported occupational accidents in the period 2016–21. The number of fatal occupational accidents that were registered to the WEA remained stable at 36 each year 2019–21. Regarding notified occupational diseases, the Committee notes that there were 17,000 in 2019, 15,500 in 2020 and 18,300 in 2021. The Government indicates that the rise in notifications of infectious diseases in 2020 and 2021 was related to the COVID-19 pandemic. The Committee also notes the Government’s reply to its previous request on the increase in the number of reported cases of work-related cancer that, since 2007, certain cases of work-related cancer are notified automatically which resulted in increased notifications. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the causes of the increase in the number of reported occupational accidents. The Committee also requests the Government to continue to provide information on the application in practice of ratified OSH Conventions, including the number, nature and cause of occupational accidents and diseases reported, as well as information on the inspection activities carried out, including the number of investigations and inspections carried out and the number and type of violations detected and the penalties imposed. In particular, the Committee requests the Government to provide detailed information on the number of accidents and occupational diseases reported in the construction sector.

A. General provisions

Action at the national level

• National policy

Articles 4 and 7 of Convention No. 155 and Article 3 of Convention No. 187. National OSH policy and periodic review. In reply to its previous comments, the Committee notes the information provided by the Government on the results of the 2017 mid-term evaluation and the 2019 final evaluation of the aims of the 2012–20 OSH Strategy. The evaluations showed that the number of workers who reported being psychologically overloaded increased by 17 per cent from 2012 to 2018; the number of workers who experienced musculoskeletal disorders increased by 15 per cent from 2012 to 2016; and the serious occupational accidents decreased by 18 per cent from 2011 to 2014. The Government indicates that, following the negative trends observed in two of the aims set by the Government, it tasked an Expert Committee, comprised of researchers, OSH professionals and social partners’ representatives, to identify and recommend appropriate OSH initiatives. The Committee notes with interest that this resulted in the adoption of a new OSH Strategy in April 2019 (OSH Strategy 2020). The Government indicates that, through the OSH Strategy 2020, the Government and the social partners agreed on prioritised national OSH goals until 2030, including sector-specific targets agreed through dialogue with the Sector Working Environment Committees (BFAs). The OSH Strategy 2020 foresees regular evaluations and impact measurements as well as annual status meetings to evaluate progress. In this context, the Committee also notes the adoption of the Working Environment Act No. 2062 of 16 November 2021 (the Working Environment Act) which aims to create a safe and healthy physical and mental working environment. Welcoming the Government’s indications, the Committee requests the Government to continue providing information on the measures to implement and monitor the OSH Strategy 2020, as well as the arrangements made for its periodic review in consultation with the most representative organizations of employers and workers.

• National system

Article 9 of Convention No. 155 and Article 4(2)(c) of Convention No. 187. Mechanisms for ensuring compliance. System of inspection. In reply to the Committee’s previous request, the Government indicates that the WEA continues to choose companies for basic inspections based on the level of OSH risks that they face, into account information about the industry, the size of the company, number of employees, reported occupational accidents and diseases as well as OSH related complaints. Furthermore, the WEA assesses the incoming reports and complaints and decides which to investigate further. The Committee refers in this respect to its comments adopted in 2022 concerning the Labour Inspection Convention, 1947 (No. 81) and the Labour Inspection (Agriculture) Convention, 1969 (No. 129).

Article 11(c) of Convention No. 155. Notification of occupational accidents and diseases. In reply to Committee’s previous request regarding measures taken to address the underreporting of cases of occupational diseases based on the reports of physicians and dentists, the Government indicates that, in 2021, the WEA conducted a campaign aiming to encourage general practitioners to report occupational diseases by contacting them directly. It also indicates that the obligation to report is underlined in the context of the ongoing cooperation with the Danish Society of Occupational and Environmental Medicine. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the measures taken to promote the notification of occupational diseases.

• Protection against specific risks

Radiation Protection Convention, 1960 (No. 115)

Article 12 of the Convention. Medical examinations. With reference to its previous comments, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that under sections 2 and 3 of Order No. 10 of 5 January 2018 on medical examinations at work that may result in exposure to ionizing radiation, a medical examination is required for all workers who might be at risk of receiving an effective dose of radiation greater than 6 mSv per year or an equivalent dose greater than 15 mSv per year for the lens of the eye or greater than 150 mSv per year for skin and extremities. The prescribed medical examination shall be carried out prior to taking up such work and thereafter be followed by yearly medical examinations. The Committee takes note of this information which addresses its previous request.

Occupational Cancer Convention, 1974 (No. 139)

Article 5 of the Convention. Medical examinations of workers after the period of employment. In reply to Committee’s previous request, the Government indicates that although there is no provision for the examination of the state of health of workers after the period of employment, in the field of aviation who have been exposed to carcinogenic substances, Denmark’s healthcare system ensures necessary examination and treatment of workers, even after the period of employment. The Danish Health Authority in the field of radiation takes initiatives regarding further health examinations of crew. The Committee notes that according to sections 38 and 39 of the Executive Order on measures to prevent the risk of cancer when working with substances and materials, employees exposed to such substances and materials have access to occupational medical examinations at regular intervals even after their suspension, in accordance with the rules in Executive Order No. 1165 of 16 December 1992 on occupational medical examinations under the Working Environment Act. The Committee takes note of this information which addresses its previous request.

Asbestos Convention, 1986 (No. 162)

Article 11(2) of the Convention. Derogations from the prohibition of the use of crocidolite. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that, under section 2 of Order No. 1502 on Asbestos, it was prohibited to produce, import, utilize or work with asbestos or materials containing asbestos under any form with the following exceptions: (i) the production, import and utilization of diaphragms for existing electrolysis plants under stated conditions; and (ii) buildings, facilities and technical aids containing asbestos that were lawfully marketed prior to 1 January 2005 could continue to be marketed. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the first exception regarding diaphragms for existing electrolysis plants was lifted pursuant to Order No. 1792 of 18 December 2015, which replaced the previous Order. In this respect, the Committee notes that, under section 3 of the new Order on Asbestos (No. 1792), buildings, facilities and technical aids containing asbestos that were lawfully marketed prior to 1 January 2005 may continue to be marketed as long as: (i) the asbestos or the asbestos-containing material was legally installed; and (ii) the building, the facility, the technical aid, etc. was put into use before 1 January 2005. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the implementation of this derogation in practice, including the steps taken to ensure that the health of workers is not placed at risk.

Article 17(3). Consultation of workers or their representatives on the work plan. In reply to Committee’s previous comments, the Government refers to section 15(a)(3) of the Working Environment Act, according to which in the context of preparing a written workplace assessment of OSH conditions, the employer must involve the working environment organization or the employees in the planning, organization, implementation and follow-up of the workplace assessment. In this respect, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that the work plan for a demolition work is an elaboration of the general workplace assessment and therefore the involvement of the workers or their representatives is included. The Committee takes note of this information which addresses its previous request.

Article 18(4) to (5). Personal protective equipment (PPE). The Committee notes the Government’s indication, in reply to its previous request concerning Article 18(4), that pursuant to sections 1(1) and (2) and 6 of the Executive Order No. 1706 of 15 December 2010 on the use of personal protective equipment, as amended, the employer is responsible for the cleaning and maintenance of PPE, including clothing, intended to protect workers against OSH risks, as well as for normal clothing which, due to the nature of the work, may be contaminated. In this respect, the Committee notes that under section 20 of the new Order on Asbestos, PPE must be checked, cleaned and placed in a specified place after use. Furthermore, the cleaning of PPE must be done separately with equipment suitable for the purpose. With respect to Article 18(5) of the Convention, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that under section 15 of the new Order on Asbestos, the employer should provide facilities for the workers exposed to asbestos to shower at the workplace. The Committee takes note of this information which addresses its previous request

Article 20(4). Workers or their representatives right to request the monitoring of the working environment and to appeal to the competent authority concerning the results of the monitoring. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that, according to Chapter 9 of the new Order on Asbestos, employee representatives have to be consulted on the planning of the measurements of asbestos’ dust exposure and be informed of the results of the measurements. However, the Committee notes an absence of information on the right to request monitoring and the right to appeal. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the measures taken, in law or practice, to ensure that workers or their representatives have the right to request the monitoring of the working environment and to appeal to the competent authority concerning theresults of the monitoring.

Article 21(4). Means of maintaining workers’ income. In reply to Committee’s previous request, the Government indicates that diseases caused by exposure to asbestos at work are recognized as occupational diseases in Denmark under the Workers’ Compensation Act No. 1186 of 19 August 2022. In this respect, the Committee notes that, under the Act, persons suffering from occupational diseases are entitled to a series of benefits, including reimbursement of expenses for medical care, rehabilitation, aids, compensation for loss of earning capacity and compensation for permanent injury. The Committee takes note of this information which addresses its previous request.

Article 22. Information and education. In reply to Committee’s previous request, the Government indicates a series of provisions in national legislation which aim to promote the dissemination of information and the education of all workers concerned with regard to health hazards due to exposure to asbestos. With respect to Article 22(1) on information and education of all workers concerned, the Committee takes note of section 11 of the new Order on Asbestos according to which eemployees are provided with instructions on the dangers of asbestos, ways to perform work without risk, the use of personal protective equipment and the safe disposal of waste. The Committee takes also note of the Executive Order No. 2308 of 7 December 2021 on industry associations for working environment according to which industry associations provide industry specific information and guidance on OSH and can initiate and participate in company-oriented OSH activities within the industry. With respect to Article 22(2) on policies and procedures for education and training, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that, according to section 16 of the Order No. 1795/2015 on carcinogenic substances etc., as amended by Order No. 255/2019, the instructions regarding performance of work in safe manner and information about hazards of accidents and illness when working with carcinogenic substances must be supported by written material and to be repeated regularly. The Committee notes this information which addresses its previous request.

• Protection in specific branches of activity

Safety and Health in Construction Convention, 1988 (No. 167)

Article 23(b) of the Convention. Work over water. Rescue of workers from drowning. In reply to the Committee’s previous request, the Government indicates that the obligation of employers to provide for measures to ensure the rescue of workers in danger of drowning where work is done over, or in close proximity to water, is ensured through the Executive Order No. 2107 of 24 November 2021 on building and construction work (Order on building and construction work). The Committee notes with interest that the Government indicates that according to section 7 read in conjunction with Appendix 1(5), the written workplace assessment to be prepared by the employer, must, where there is a risk of drowning, cover how this will be prevented including to the rescue workers of who risk falling into the water. Furthermore, the written assessment must, where relevant, include the requirements regarding first aid and alarm systems provided for in sections 43–45 of the Order on building and construction work. The Committee takes note of this information which addresses its previous request.

Article 35(b). Appropriate inspection services. In reply to Committee’s previous request, the Government indicates that the supervision of the building and construction industry was streamlined from November 2017 and targeted with a large number of building and construction sites being visited annually throughout the country. The Government specifies that inspections also focused, inter alia, on required OSH joint safety measures, the requirements that apply to the client regarding coordination in relation to OSH as well as rules aimed at designers and client consultants. The Committee takes note of this information which addresses its previous request.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2017, published 107th ILC session (2018)

General observation of 2015. The Committee would like to draw the Government’s attention to its general observation of 2015 under this Convention, and in particular to the request for information contained in paragraph 30 thereof.

Article 7(1) of the Convention. Performance of work involving exposure to ionizing radiation by young persons. With reference to its previous request, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that in addition to compulsory schooling, young persons must have accomplished further education to qualify for an education programme that might involve exposure to ionizing radiation. The Government states that trainees who might be exposed to ionizing radiation are above the age of 18 years.

Article 12. Medical examinations. With reference to its previous comments, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that medical examinations are required for workers who engage in work under conditions which normally involve exposure to ionizing radiation in doses exceeding 6 mSv per year or three-tenths of the limits for the lens of the eye, skin and extremities, as provided for in Order No. 823 of 31 October 1997, Annex 1. The Committee recalls that Article 8 of the Convention requires the fixing of appropriate levels for workers who are not directly engaged in radiation work, and it refers in this respect to its general observation of 2015 that indicated that the annual effect dose limit for workers not directly engaged in radiation work should be 1 mSv per year, in line with the Radiation Protection and Safety of Radiation Sources: International Basic Safety Standards (General Safety Requirements Part 3), issued in July 2014 by the International Atomic Energy Agency. In special circumstances, a higher value of effective dose could be allowed in a single year, provided that the average over five years does not exceed 1 mSv per year. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the measures taken to ensure that all workers directly engaged in radiation work (including those workers directly engaged in radiation work whose exposure is below the levels set out in Order No. 823) undergo an appropriate medical examination prior to or shortly after taking up such work and to undergo subsequently further medical examinations at appropriate intervals, in accordance with Article 12.

Article 14. Alternative employment or other measures offered for maintaining income where continued assignment to work involving exposure is medically inadvisable. With reference to its previous comments concerning employers’ responsibilities for providing their workers with alternative employment, the Committee notes the information provided by the Government on the unemployment insurance fund from which workers benefit if they are medically considered unable to continue to work involving exposure to ionizing radiation.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2011, published 101st ILC session (2012)

Legislation. The Committee notes the detailed information provided by the Government in its report regarding legislative changes regarding occupational safety and health in general and regarding exposure to ionizing radiation in particular.

Article 7 of the Convention. Performance of work involving exposure to ionising radiation by young persons. The Committee notes the clarifications provided by the Government that Order No. 823 of 31 October 1997 provides that young persons aged 16–18 years who have completed compulsory education are exempted from the general rule and may perform work involving risky functions provided that such work is a necessary element of a formally qualifying training programme of at least 2 year’s duration. The Committee requests the Government to provide further information on the application in practice of this provision.

Article 12. Medical examinations. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government that Order No. 206 of 23 March 1990 provides that all workers directly engaged in radiation work shall undergo an appropriate medical examination, but that it confirms that in practice the word “appropriate” is interpreted in accordance with the Council Directive 96/29/EURATOM of 13 May 1996 according to which only workers performing radiation work under conditions which normally involve exposure to ionising radiation in doses exceeding 6 mSv per year or three-tenths of the limits for the lens of the eye, skin and extremities mentioned in Order No. 823 of 31 October 1997, Annex 1, are required to undergo medical examinations. Against this background the Committee deems it relevant to refer to paragraph 68 of its general comment of 1997 on the application of Conventions on safety and health where it noted that:

There is a difference between international standards and regional standards in the approach adopted to occupational safety and health problems and the manner in which they are to be addressed. The incorporation of regional standards into national legislation is not always sufficient to meet the requirements of the international standards of the ILO.

Recalling that Article 12 of the Convention requires all workers directly engaged in radiation work to undergo an appropriate medical examination prior to or shortly after taking up such work and to undergo subsequently further medical examinations at appropriate intervals, the Committee again requests the Government to take necessary measures to ensure that all workers directly engaged in radiation work undergo appropriate medical examinations in accordance with Article 12 of the Convention and to indicate the measures so taken in its next report.

Article 14. Alternative employment or other measures offered for maintaining income where continued assignment to work involving exposure is medically inadvisable. The Committee notes the further details provided by the Government regarding the benefits available in the referenced cases under the public unemployment insurance in Denmark. With reference to the terms of its 1992 General Observation on the application of this Convention, the Committee requests the Government to clarify whether employers’ carry any responsibilities for providing their workers with alternative employment. The Committee also requests the Government to provide information on the application in practice of this Article of the Convention.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2010, published 100th ILC session (2011)

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It hopes that a report will be supplied for examination by the Committee at its next session and that it will contain full information on the matters raised in its previous direct request, which read as follows:

The Committee notes the Government’s report and the information it contains regarding laws relevant for giving effect to the provisions of the Convention.

Article 7 of the Convention. Performance of work involving exposure to ionizing radiation by young persons. The Committee notes that section 11, cf. annex 6, of Order No. 239 of 6 April 2005, on work performed by young persons, provides that young persons must not perform work which involves exposure to ionizing radiation. It notes however that the rules issued by the State Institute for Radiation Hygiene of the National Board of Health (SIS) contain provisions prescribing a lower age limit of 16 years for work with ionizing radiation as per which young persons aged over 15 years, who have completed compulsory school education, may perform risky functions provided that such work is a necessary element of a formally qualifying training programme of at least two years’ duration. The Committee recalls that Article 7(2), of the Convention prescribes that no person under the age of 16 years shall be engaged in work involving ionizing radiation. Noting that this prohibition under Article 7(2), does not permit any exception to be made for the purpose of training, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that young persons below the age of 16 years do not perform any work that involves exposure to ionizing radiation and to indicate the measures so taken in its next report.

Article 12. Medical examinations. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that, under Order No. 206 of 23 March 1990 on medical control with work involving ionizing radiation, only persons performing radiation work under conditions which normally involve exposure to ionizing radiation in doses exceeding 6 mSv per year or 3/10th of the limits for the lens of the eye, skin and extremities mentioned in Order No. 823 of 31 October 1997, Annex 1, are required to undergo medical examinations. Recalling that Article 12 of the Convention requires all workers directly engaged in radiation work to undergo an appropriate medical examination prior to or shortly after taking up such work and to subsequently undergo further medical examinations at appropriate intervals, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that all workers directly engaged in radiation work undergo appropriate medical examinations in accordance with Article 12 of the Convention and to indicate the measures so taken in its next report.

Article 14. Alternative employment or other measures offered for maintaining income where continued assignment to work involving exposure is medically inadvisable. The Committee notes with interest the Government’s indications, in response to its previous comments in respect of workers whose continued engagement in work involving exposure to ionizing radiation has been found to be medically inadvisable, that the Public Employment Service will try to place him or her in another job, such as a job with a public subsidy, that if the person cannot be placed in a job but is otherwise assessed as being available to the labour market, he or she would qualify for employment benefits for a period of up to five years, that if the person is sick he or she would qualify for sickness benefits, possibly a pension, and that, furthermore, when there is a proven occupational injury, the employer’s insurance company should pay compensation to the worker concerned. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the application in practice of this Article of the Convention.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2005, published 95th ILC session (2006)

1. The Committee notes the Government’s report and the information it contains regarding laws relevant for giving effect to the provisions of the Convention.

2. Article 7 of the Convention. Performance of work involving exposure to ionizing radiation by young persons. The Committee notes that section 11, cf. annex 6, of Order No. 239 of 6 April 2005, on work performed by young persons, provides that young persons must not perform work which involves exposure to ionizing radiation. It notes however that the rules issued by the State Institute for Radiation Hygiene of the National Board of Health (SIS) contain provisions prescribing a lower age limit of 16 years for work with ionizing radiation as per which young persons aged over 15 years, who have completed compulsory school education, may perform risky functions provided that such work is a necessary element of a formally qualifying training programme of at least two years’ duration. The Committee recalls that Article 7, paragraph 2, of the Convention prescribes that no person under the age of 16 years shall be engaged in work involving ionizing radiation. Noting that this prohibition under Article 7, paragraph 2, does not permit any exception to be made for the purpose of training, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that young persons below the age of 16 years do not perform any work that involves exposure to ionizing radiation and to indicate the measures so taken in its next report.

3. Article 12. Medical examinations. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that, under Order No. 206 of 23 March 1990 on medical control with work involving ionizing radiation, only persons performing radiation work under conditions which normally involve exposure to ionizing radiation in doses exceeding 6 mSv per year or 3/10th of the limits for the lens of the eye, skin and extremities mentioned in Order No. 823 of 31 October 1997, Annex 1, are required to undergo medical examinations. Recalling that Article 12 of the Convention requires all workers directly engaged in radiation work to undergo an appropriate medical examination prior to or shortly after taking up such work and to subsequently undergo further medical examinations at appropriate intervals, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that all workers directly engaged in radiation work undergo appropriate medical examinations in accordance with Article 12 of the Convention and to indicate the measures so taken in its next report.

4. Article 14. Alternative employment or other measures offered for maintaining income where continued assignment to work involving exposure is medically inadvisable. The Committee notes with interest the Government’s indications, in response to its previous comments in respect of workers whose continued engagement in work involving exposure to ionizing radiation has been found to be medically inadvisable, that the Public Employment Service will try to place him or her in another job, such as a job with a public subsidy, that if the person cannot be placed in a job but is otherwise assessed as being available to the labour market, he or she would qualify for employment benefits for a period of up to five years, that if the person is sick he or she would qualify for sickness benefits, possibly a pension, and that, furthermore, when there is a proven occupational injury, the employer’s insurance company should pay compensation to the worker concerned. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the application in practice of this Article of the Convention.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2001, published 90th ILC session (2002)

Further to its observation, the Committee would draw the Government’s attention to the following point.

The provision of alternative employment. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the State Institute for Radiation Hygiene of the National Board of Health (SIS) registers the data on the total exposure to ionizing radiations of all workers recorded by dosimeters carried with the individual worker, and informs the worker concerned whether the threshold value is coming close. In this event, the SIS also gives advice to the worker to discontinue the work or employment involving a risk of exposure to ionizing radiation. With regard to external workers, that are workers employed with an employer performing work in a country of the European Union at places where there is a risk of exposure to ionizing radiations, they are obliged to hold a "radiation passport", issued by the SIS, which constitutes a prerequisite to start their employment in question. The SIS may refuse the issuing of this "radiation passport" if the worker concerned has already been subject to excessive exposure to ionizing radiations and has thus come close to the threshold limit. The Committee, taking due note of the information, again draws the Government’s attention to the explanations provided in paragraphs 28 to 34 and 35(d) of its 1992 general observation under the Convention, and requests the Government to indicate the measures taken or contemplated to provide the workers concerned with suitable alternative employment, or to maintain their income through social security measures or otherwise where continued assignment to work involving exposure to ionizing radiations is found to be medically inadvisable and therefore further exposure to radiation has been disapproved by the SIS.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2001, published 90th ILC session (2002)

1. The Committee notes with satisfaction that the State Institute for Radiation Hygiene of the National Board of Health (SIS) has issued Order No. 823 of 31 October 1997, on dose limits for ionizing radiation, which has been elaborated on the basis of the European Community Directive 96/29 EURATOM, and which, for its part, is in line with the Recommendations adopted by the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) in 1990. Section 3 of the above Order, read together with its Annex 1, reflects entirely the dose limits recommended by the ICRP for occupational exposure to ionizing radiations of the different categories of workers, which thus applies Article 3, paragraph 1, and Article 6, paragraph 2, of the Convention.

2. Scope of emergency work. The Committee notes with satisfaction that section 6 of Order No. 823 of 31 October 1997, repealing Notification No. 838 of 1986, limitsthe scope of emergency interventions where exceptional exposure of workers is justified to life-saving actions, actions necessary to prevent a significant exposure to radiation of the public, or to prevent the development of a catastrophe. Moreover, section 6 fixes the exposure levels at 50 mSv during an emergency, which is even lower than the dose limit recommended by the ICRP for the carrying out of immediate and urgent remedial work.

The Committee is addressing a request directly to the Government on another point.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1997, published 86th ILC session (1998)

The Committee notes that the Government's report has not been received. It hopes that a report will be supplied for examination by the Committee and that it will contain full information on the matters raised in its previous direct request, which read as follows:

1. Article 3, paragraph 1, and Article 6, paragraph 2 of the Convention. In its 1992 general observation and direct request, the Committee drew attention to the revised exposure limits adopted on the basis of new physiological findings by the ICRP, and asked the Government to indicate the steps taken to ensure effective protection of workers against ionizing radiation and to review maximum permissible doses of ionizing radiation in the light of current knowledge.

The Committee notes from the Government's report that the State Institute for Radiation is currently working on the evaluation of new knowledge; that no decisions have been made during the period under review to change the dose limits; and that this work takes place in close cooperation with the other EU countries. Noting the Government's indication that changes will be made in the form of submission of draft directives, the Committee hopes that the necessary changes will soon be made and that the Government will supply details of the directives adopted or envisaged.

2. Scope of emergency work. The Committee notes the Government's reference to Order No. 838 of 10 December 1986 on dose limits for ionizing radiation, which contains provisions on unintended radiation and exposure to radiation in emergency situations.

The Committee notes that under section 9 of Order No. 838, an emergency situation is to be understood as "a situation in which it is a matter of helping people in danger, to prevent radiation of a big number of persons or to save valuable equipment".

Referring to the explanations provided in paragraphs 23 to 27 and 35(c) of its 1992 general observation on the Convention, the Committee recalls that provision in law and practice should be made to ensure that work involving exceptional exposure of workers, exceeding the normally tolerated dose limit, must be strictly limited in scope and duration to what is required to meet an acute danger to life and health; exceptional exposure of workers is neither justified for the purpose of rescuing items of high material value, nor, more generally, because alternative techniques of intervention, which do not involve such exposure of workers, would involve an excessive expense. The Committee requests the Government to review section 9 of Order No. 838 accordingly and to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to ensure that workers or other volunteers in emergency situations are not exposed to exceptional levels of radiation in order to save valuable equipment, and that the necessary investment be made in robotized or other techniques of intervention aimed at minimizing exceptional exposure of workers.

3. The provision of alternative employment. Referring to the explanations provided in paragraphs 28 to 34 and 35(d) of its 1992 general observation on the Convention, the Committee again requests the Government to provide information on measures taken or contemplated to ensure the provision of suitable alternative employment to workers who exceed an accumulated dose of 1 Sv well before retirement age, and/or whose further exposure to radiation has been disapproved by the National Health Authority.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1995, published 82nd ILC session (1995)

The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government in its latest report.

1. Article 3, paragraph 1, and Article 6, paragraph 2 of the Convention. In its 1992 general observation and direct request, the Committee drew attention to the revised exposure limits adopted on the basis of new physiological findings by the ICRP, and asked the Government to indicate the steps taken to ensure effective protection of workers against ionizing radiation and to review maximum permissible doses of ionizing radiations in the light of current knowledge.

The Committee notes from the Government's report that the State Institute for Radiation is currently working on the evaluation of new knowledge; that no decisions have been made during the period under review to change the dose limits; and that this work takes place in close cooperation with the other EU countries. Noting the Government's indication that changes will be made in the form of submission of draft directives, the Committee hopes that the necessary changes will soon be made and that the Government will supply details of the directives adopted or envisaged.

2. Scope of emergency work. The Committee notes the Government's reference to Order No. 838 of 10 December 1986 on dose limits for ionizing radiation, which contains provisions on unintended radiation and exposure to radiation in emergency situations.

The Committee notes that under section 9 of Order No. 838, an emergency situation is to be understood as "a situation in which it is a matter of helping people in danger, to prevent radiation of a big number of persons or to save valuable equipment".

Referring to the explanations provided in paragraphs 23 to 27 and 35(c) of its 1992 general observation on the Convention, the Committee recalls that provision in law and practice should be made to ensure that work involving exceptional exposure of workers, exceeding the normally tolerated dose limit, must be strictly limited in scope and duration to what is required to meet an acute danger to life and health; exceptional exposure of workers is neither justified for the purpose of rescuing items of high material value, nor, more generally, because alternative techniques of intervention, which do not involve such exposure of workers, would involve an excessive expense. The Committee requests the Government to review section 9 of Order No. 838 accordingly and to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to ensure that workers or other volunteers in emergency situations are not exposed to exceptional levels of radiation in order to save valuable equipment, and that the necessary investment be made in robotized or other techniques of intervention aimed at minimizing exceptional exposure of workers.

3. The provision of alternative employment. Referring to the explanations provided in paragraphs 28 to 34 and 35(d) of its 1992 general observation on the Convention, the Committee again requests the Government to provide information on measures taken or contemplated to ensure the provision of suitable alternative employment to workers who exceed an accumulated dose of 1 Sv well before retirement age, and/or whose further exposure to radiation has been disapproved by the National Health Authority.

[The Government is asked to report in detail in 1997.]

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1992, published 79th ILC session (1992)

I. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in its latest report. The Committee would call the Government's attention to its General Observation under this Convention which sets forth, inter alia, the revised exposure limits adopted on the basis of new physiological findings by the International Commission on Radiological Protection in its 1990 recommendations (Publication No. 60). The Committee would recall that, under Article 3, paragraph 1 and Article 6, paragraph 2, of the Convention, all appropriate steps shall be taken to ensure effective protection of workers against ionising radiations and to review maximum permissible doses of ionising radiations in the light of current knowledge. The Government is requested to indicate the steps taken or being considered in relation to the matters raised in the conclusions to the General Observation.

II. The Committee notes with regret that the information provided in the Government's report contains no reply to its General Observation of 1987. The Committee would now call the Government's attention to paragraphs 16 to 27 and 35(c) of its General Observation under this Convention which concern the limitations of occupational exposure during and after an emergency. The Government is requested to indicate whether, in emergency situations, exceptions are permitted to the normally tolerated dose limits for exposure to ionising radiations and, if so, to indicate the exceptional levels of exposure allowed in these circumstances and to specify the manner in which these circumstances are defined, as well as any further measures taken or under consideration in relation to the matters raised in paragraph 35(c) of the General Observation.