CMNT_TITLE

Referring also to its observation under the Convention, the Committee requests the Government to supply further information on the following points.

1. Article 8 of the Convention. The Committee once again requests the Government to indicate the manner in which maximum permissible dose levels are established and enforced for workers employed by undertakings that have no radiation sources, but whose work involves entering, on a temporary basis, establishments where direct or indirect exposure to ionizing radiations would occur. In this regard, the Committee would also draw the Government's attention to paragraph 14 of its 1992 general observation concerning dose limits for workers who are not directly engaged in radiation work, but who remain or pass where they may be exposed to ionizing radiations or radioactive substances.

2. Emergency exposure situations. Referring to the explanations given in paragraphs 16 to 27 and 35(c) of its 1992 general observation under the Convention and in the light of paragraphs 233 and 236 of the 1994 International Basic Safety Standards, the Committee hopes that the Government will provide information on the measures taken or contemplated in relation to emergency situations.

3. The provision of alternative employment. With reference to paragraphs 28 to 34 and 35(d) of its 1992 general observation under the Convention, and the principles reflected in paragraphs 96 and 238 of the 1994 International Basic Safety Standards, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on measures taken or contemplated to ensure effective protection of workers who have accumulated exposure beyond which an unacceptable risk of detriment is to occur and who may thus be faced with the dilemma that protecting their health means losing their employment.

4. In its communication dated 9 December 1994, the French Democratic Confederation of Labour (CFDT) indicates that no provision is made in government regulations to ensure that data concerning the monitoring of exposure to radiation of individual workers is made available to them, and that this data is sent to the Occupational Safety and Health and Conditions of Work Committee. The CFDT also indicates that there is no regulatory provision requiring a system of centralized storage for such data. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would make all comments it deems appropriate on the above indications of the CFDT in the light of Article 3, paragraph 2, of the Convention.

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