Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 29 Nov 2000

Vol. 527 No. 1

Written Answers. - Radiological Protection Institute of Ireland.

John Browne

Ceist:

30 Mr. Browne (Carlow-Kilkenny) asked the Minister for Public Enterprise if she has any plans to change the functions of the Radiological Protection Institute of Ireland as currently it acts as both regulator and provider of radon related services; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [27752/00]

As a result of the transposition of Council Directive 96/29/Euratom on 13 May 1996, new obligations have been placed on employers to arrange for the minimization of radon in the workplace and to protect workers and the general public from high levels of radon. The relevant order is the Radiological Protection Act, 1999 (Ionising Radiation) Order, 2000 (S.I. No. 125 of 2000). It is the responsibility of the Radiological Protection Institute of Ireland (RPII) to enforce the legislation.

To enable implementation of the order there was a need when drafting the legislation to ensure that there were adequate radon measurement services available within the country operating to a satisfactory standard. At the time the order was prepared, it was my understanding that the RPII was the only Irish based service provider capable of carrying out the services necessary. For this reason, the RPII can seek accreditation from the National Accreditation Board under Article 24 of the order. Any other service provider may seek the same accreditation.

The measurement of radon concentrations is critical in determining whether a workplace falls within the scope of the order. It would have been meaningless to draft legislation, which relied on the provision of a service, which was not available to the required standard in the State. I should add that, the RPII have informed me that they would inform employers contacted of alternative accredited measurement services when issuing a direction to employers to carry out radon measurements.

Against this background, I believe adequate provision has been made to avoid a conflict between the RPII's role as regulator of radon in the workplace and its separate involvement in carrying out radon measurement services. In the circumstances, I do not propose to make any changes in existing arrangements at present but the matter will be reviewed if there is evidence of adequate alternative services to serve the future needs of employers in the country.
Barr
Roinn