Dr. Micheál Lehane:

I thank the joint committee for the opportunity to attend this meeting to assist it with its deliberations. I am joined by Dr Ciara McMahon who was lead author of the 2013 report on the potential radiological implications for Ireland of the proposed nuclear power plants in the UK.

As the committee is aware, the Environmental Protection Agency, EPA, is an independent statutory body with a wide range of responsibilities. Since 2014, it also has responsibilities in regard to radiological protection, following its merger with the Radiological Protection Institute of Ireland. One of these roles is to monitor scientific and technical developments abroad in regard to nuclear installations and to provide advice to the Government on the implications for Ireland. Some specific areas of work in the EPA over the past number of years include the review of the new nuclear build plans in the UK, the provision of technical support at meetings of the UK-Ireland contact group on radiological matters and the preparation of national reports and reviews to the convention of nuclear safety. The EPA also carries out an annual programme to monitor radioactivity in air, food and water.

The EPA's monitoring of the environment confirms that while the levels of artificial radioactivity in the Irish environment are detectable, they are low and do not pose a risk to the human health of the Irish population.

The EPA has several key roles under the national emergency plan for nuclear accidents, including: maintaining arrangements for early warning and operation of an on-call duty officer system; maintaining the national radiation monitoring network; maintaining a national laboratory for the measurement of levels of radioactivity in the environment and food; and providing advice to the national emergency co-ordination group and Departments on possible protective actions to minimise radiation doses to the Irish population. Undertaking hazard assessments is a key element of emergency preparedness.

In 2010 the RPII was asked to carry out an assessment of the potential radiological impacts of the new nuclear power plants in the UK. That was published in 2013. One of its conclusions was that the routine discharges from the proposed nuclear power plant would be of no radiological significance for people living in Ireland. The assessment also considered the potential for severe nuclear accidents and five potential accident scenarios were assessed with probabilities ranging from 1:50,000 to 1:33 million chances per year. The impact of each scenario was modelled for a reference location on the east coast of Ireland over timescales ranging from 48 hours to one year after a release. Apart from the amount of radioactivity release weather was felt to be the most significant factor. Ninety per cent of the time, during the 48 hours after a potential accident scenario, radioactivity was not transported by wind over the reference location. On those occasions when the wind was blowing the radioactivity directly towards Ireland, the predicted levels of contamination and radiation doses varied significantly. Where the chance of an accident was estimated to be 1 in 50,000, the impact on Ireland was predicted to be relatively small. The radioactivity levels would not be high enough to warrant short-term measures but food controls and-or temporary agricultural protective actions would be required for a period of days to weeks following the accident.

On the other end of the scale, for the least probable but most severe accident studied, short-term measures, such as sheltering, may be warranted in the immediate aftermath of the accident to reduce exposure of the population. Food controls and protective actions would be required for many and protective actions would be required for many years to reduce radiation doses from consumption of contaminated food. While these controls have been shown to be very effective in controlling radioactivity levels in foods for sale, they do have significant socio-economic implications and costs. This was also subject to an assessment by the Economic and Social Research Institute, ESRI, in a subsequent study.

Dr. McMahon is the lead author and I can provide additional information and answer any questions on these matters, if the committee wants.