Canadian Radiation Protection Association - CRPA-ACRP

Transcription

Vol 32 No 2
Summer / Été 2011
Canadian Radiation Protection Association
Association canadienne de radioprotection
2011 CRPA conference Photos
In this special conference issue, check out our photos of social
events, awards, and even the new CRPA board of directors
Richard Osborne to Receive IRPA Sievert Award
CRPA already knew he was great . . . now the secret is out!
Canadian Publications Mail Agreement 41574554
Design of a Portable Alpha Detector
for a Radiation Triage Mask
2011 Anthony J MacKay Student Paper Contest Winner
and much more inside . . .
Contents/Contenu
The CRPA Bulletin is published quarterly and is
distributed to all members of the association.
Le Bulletin ACRP est publié trimestriellement et
distribué à tous les membres de l’association.
Chief editor / Rédacteur en chef
Regular Columns / Contributions permanentes
7
President’s Message / Message du Président
9
Editor’s Note / Message du rédacteur en chef
19
Book Review / Revue de livre
Radiation Protection and Dosimetry: An Introduction to Health Physics
25
ICRP News
A lot has happened since the last ICRP NEWS appeared in the Bulletin
27
Student Corner / Coin des étudiants
Leah Shuparski catches up with this year’s Student Paper Contest Winners
Stéphane Jean-François
Deputy editor / vice-rédactrice en chef
Leona Page
CRPA-ACRP Secretariat
Liz Krivonosov
Design and Production /
Montage et production
Michelle Communications
Production team / Équipe de production
Production manager
English copy editor
French copy editor
Translators
Proofreader
Michelle Boulton
Michelle Boulton
Carolyne Roy
Carolyne Roy
CRPA Translation Committee
Ursula Acton
36Contributors
Features / Articles
5
Richard Osborne to Receive IRPA Sievert Award
CRPA already knew he was great . . . now the secret is out!
10
2011 CRPA conference Photos
Check out the social events, awards, and even the new CRPA board of directors
14
Pour entrer dans le 21e siècle...avec assurance
Entrevue avec Dre Claire Cousins, présidente, Commission internationale de protection
radiologique
15
To Boldly Go...Into the 21st Century
An Interview with Dr. Claire Cousins, Chair, International Commission
on Radiological Protection (ICRP)
Advertising / Annonces
ph: 306-343-8519
email: [email protected]
Copyright © 2011 CRPA / ACRP
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be
reproduced, transmitted, or stored in a retrieval system
in any form or by any means—electronic, mechanical,
photocopying, recording, or otherwise—without prior
written consent of the publisher.
For reproduction information, contact
email: [email protected].
The views expressed in the CRPA Bulletin ACRP
are those of the authors and do not necessarily
represent the views of the editors or of the
association.
Canadian Publications
Mail Agreement No. 41574554
Send change of address notices and
return undeliverable Canadian addresses to
PO Box 83
Carleton Place, Ontario K7C 3P3
tel: 613-253-3779
fax: 1-888-551-0712
18Communication
Hoa Ly, CRPA Communications Committee “Web Champion” 2010, talks about one
of the keys to leading a successful organization
22
IRPA Workshop on Radiation Protection Culture
A report by Dave Wilkins
28
Design of a Portable Alpha Detector for a Radiation
Triage Mask
Index to
Advertisers
Canberra Co...........
...............20, 21, 40
Danatec....................
........................22
F & J Specialty Prod
ucts, Inc................6
Gamble Technologies
, Inc...................2
Lou Champagne Sy
stems Inc..............8
Mirion Technologies
..........................26
Radiation Measureme
nt Systems.......24
Stuar t Hunt & Asso
ciates..................16
Technical Manageme
nt Se ces........13
CRPA / ACRPrviBulletin
For more information about
advertising in the CRPA
Bulletin ACRP, please contact
Michelle Communications:
Michelle Boulton
ph: 306-343-8519
Vol 32 No 2 / 3
Canadian Radiation Protection Association /
Association canadienne de radioprotection
CRPA is an affiliate of the International Radiation
Protection Association / L’ACRP est membre de
l’Association internationale de radioprotection.
President / Président
Lois Sowden-Plunkett
ph: 613-562-5800
President Elect / Président désigné
Gary Kramer
Past President / Président sortant
Sandu Sonoc
Secretary / Secrétaire
Petra Dupuis
Treasurer / Trésorier
Christine Dehm
Directors / Directeurs et directrices
Ralph Bose, Jeff Dov yak,
Raymond Ilson, Leona Page
CRPA Committees / Comités de ACRP
Archives
Sunil Choubal (chair / président), Christine Dehm
(BoD Liaison), Wayne Tiefenbach
Conseil éditorial du Bulletin Editorial Board
Stéphane Jean-François (chief editor / rédacteur en
chef), Leona Page (deputy editor / vice-rédactrice en
chef); scientific advisors / conseillers scientifiques:
Douglas Boreham, Kevin Bundy, Lou Champagne,
Kirk Lamont, Jag Mohindra, Daniel Picard, Sandu
Sonoc, Frank Tourneur, Mary Weedmark
Communication
Ralph Bose (chair / président),Lamri Cheriet,
Chester Neduzak, Leona Page, Jeff Sandeman
(BoD liaison), Jodi Ploquin, Greg Zaporozan,
Bulletin Editor / Rédacteur en chef, CRPA/ACRP
webmaster, Ralph Bose (BoD Liaison), Hoa Ly,
Michèle Légaré-Vézina
Conference / Conférence
Pauline Jones (chair / présidente), Ralph Bose,
Mike Grey, Liz Krivonosov, Gary Wilson,
Pam Ellis, Gary Kramer (BoD Liaison)
CRPA Position Statements /
Déclarations publiques de l’ACRP
Sandu Sonoc (chair / président)
International Liason / Liaison internationale
Chris Clement (chair / président), Kevin Bundy,
Michèle Légaré-Vézina, Gary Kramer,
Liz Krivonosov, Gary Kramer (BoD Liaison)
Membership / Recrutement
Emmy Duran (chair / présidente), Gary Kramer,
Steve Webster, Gary Kramer (BoD Liaison)
Nominations
Debbie Frattinger (chair / président),
Geoff Byford, Stéphane Jean-François,
Petra Dupuis (BoD Liaison)
Registered Radiation Safety Professionals /
Enregistrement Certification
Jean-Pierre Gauivn, (chair / président),
Trevor Beniston,
Jeff Dovyak (BoD Liaison), Sandu Sonoc,
Gary Wilson, Pauline Jones, Steve Webster
Rules / Règlements
Frank Tourneur (chair / président),Lysanne
Normandeau, Ray Ilson (BoD Liaison)
Student Affairs / Liaison avec les étudiants
Leah Shuparski (chair / présidente), Donata
DrabikChaulk, Sonia Lala, Michèle Légaré-Vézina,
Dave Niven, Jodi Ploquin, Ray Ilson (BoD Liaison)
Translation / Traduction
Roger Hugron (chair / président), Aimée Lauzon,
Leona Page (BoD Liaison), Nathalie Ritchot, Carolel
Savoie, Valerie Phelan, Colette Tremblay
Prospectus
The Canadian Radiation Protection Association (CRPA) was incorporated in 1982. The
objectives of the association are
Les objectifs de l’Association canadienne de
radioprotection, dont les statuts ont été déposés en 1982, sont les suivants:
• to develop scientific knowledge and practical means for protecting all life and the
environment from the harmful effects of
radiation consistent with the optimum use
of radiation for the benefit of all,
• Développer les connaissances scientifiques
et les moyens pratiques pour protéger toute
forme de vie et l’environnement des effets
dangereux des radiations, et ce, d’une
manière compatible avec leur utilisation
optimale pour le bénéfice de tous;
• to further the exchange of scientific and
technical information relating to the science
and practice of radiation protection,
• to encourage research and scientific
publications dedicated to the science and
practice of radiation protection,
• to promote educational opportunities in
those disciplines that support the science
and practice of radiation protection,
• to assist in the development of professional
standards in the discipline of radiation
protection; and
• to support relevant activities of other societies, associations, or organizations, both
national and international.
The association publishes the Bulletin four
times a year and distributes it to all members.
Subscription rates for non-members, such as
libraries, may be obtained from the secretariat.
Members of the association are drawn from all
areas of radiation protection, including hospitals, universities, the nuclear power industry,
and all levels of government.
Membership is divided into five categories:
full members (includes retired members),
with all privileges; associate and student
members, with all privileges except voting
rights; honorary members, with all privileges;
and corporate members. Corporate membership is open to organizations with interests in
radiation protection. Corporate members are
entitled to have their name and address listed
in each Bulletin, a complimentary copy of each
Bulletin, a copy of the Membership Handbook
containing the names and addresses of all
CRPA members, reduced booth rental rates at
the annual meeting, and reduced advertising
rates in the Bulletin.
Application forms are available on the CRPA
website or from the secretariat.
PO Box 83
Carleton Place, Ontario K7C 3P3
tel: 613-253-3779
fax: 1-888-551-0712
website: www.crpa-acrp.ca
• encourager les échanges d’informations
scientifiques et techniques relevant
de la science et de la pratique de la
radioprotection;
• encourager la recherche et les publications
scientifiques dédiées à la science et à la
pratique de la radioprotection;
• promouvoir les programmes éducationnels
dans les disciplines qui soutiennent la
science et la pratique de la radioprotection;
• aider à la définition des normes professionnelles concernant la radioprotection, et
• soutenir les activités pertinentes des autres
sociétés, associations, organisations nationales ou internationales.
Les membres de l’association proviennent de
tous les horizons de la radioprotection, y compris les hôpitaux, les universités, l’industrie
nucléaire génératrice d’électricité et tous les
niveaux du gouvernement.
L’association publie le Bulletin quatre fois par
an et le fait parvenir à tous les membres. Le
prix d’un abonnement pour les non-membres, par exemple une bibliothèque, peut être
obtenu auprès du secrétariat.
Les membres sont classés selon cinq catégories: membres à part entière (y compris les
membres retraités), avec tous les privilèges;
membres associés et étudiants, avec tous les
privilèges sauf le droit de vote; membres honoraires, avec tous les privilèges; et membres
corporatifs.
Les membres corporatifs ont droit d’avoir leur
nom et leur adresse indiqués dans chaque
Bulletin, de recevoir un exemplaire du Bulletin,
de recevoir un exemplaire de l’annuaire de
l’association contenant les noms et adresses
de tous les membres de l’association, d’avoir
un kiosque à tarif réduit lors des conférences
annuelles, d’avoir un espace publicitaire à tarif
réduit dans le Bulletin.
Les formulaires de demande d’adhésion
peuvent être obtenus sur le site Web ou
auprès du secrétariat.
Richard Osborne to Receive
IRPA Sievert Award
CRPA was thrilled to learn that Richard Osborne was awarded the
International Radiation Protection Association (IRPA) Sievert Award for 2010.
The award was recently announced on the front page of the IRPA website:
www.irpa.net. Congratulations to Richard for this well-deserved recognition.
Of course, at CRPA, a professional association founded by Richard, we
knew already how great he was. Now the secret is out! Following is an
adaptation of the announcement that appears on the IRPA website.
Résumé
L’ACRP est ravie d’apprendre que
l’IRPA a choisi de décerner au Dr
Richard Osborne le prix Sievert
2010 en raison de ses contributions
exceptionnelles au domaine de la
radioprotection. Bien que l’annonce
fusse récemment publiée sur la page
d’accueil du site web de l’IRPA (www.
irpa.net), le prix sera présenté au
récipiendaire pendant la cérémonie
d’ouverture du 13e congrès international de l’IRPA, à Glasgow (Écosse), en
2012. Ce prix a été créé en l’honneur
de Rolf M. Sievert, un pionnier de la
radioprotection et de la physique des
rayonnements. Après avoir reçu son
prix, Dr Osborne prononcera le discours Sievert. Richard Osborne ayant
fondé l’ACRP, nous savions déjà
combien l’homme est un être magnifique. Mais aujourd’hui, ce n’est plus
un secret pour personne! Toutes nos
félicitations vont à Richard pour cette
reconnaissance bien méritée!
IRPA has selected Dr. Richard Osborne
to receive the Sievert Award for his
outstanding contributions to the field
of radiation protection. The award will
be presented at the opening session of
the 13th International IRPA Congress
in Glasgow, Scotland, next May (2012).
The award is made in honour of Rolf M.
Sievert, a pioneer in radiation physics and
radiation protection. Following the award
presentation, Dr. Osborne will deliver the
Sievert lecture.
Richard Osborne received his PhD
in biophysics from London University in
1962. In 1963, he joined Atomic Energy
of Canada Limited (AECL) at the Chalk
River Laboratories (CRL) as a research officer in the Health Physics Branch. He was
appointed manager of the Environmental
Research Branch at CRL in 1981. From
1991–1994, he was responsible for all occupational safety and health protection programs in AECL Research, and for directing
the research program in health sciences.
From 1994 until he retired from AECL in
1998, he directed the AECL research programs in radiation biology, health physics,
and environmental research.
Dr. Osborne received the Elda E.
Anderson Award of the Health Physics
Society in 1975, served as a member of the
society’s board of directors from 1976–
1979, was the society’s G. William Morgan
Lecturer in 1992, the Robert S. Landauer
Lecturer in 2004, and was elected a
Fellow of the society in 2005. He founded
and was first president of the Canadian
Radiation Protection Association in 1979
and was awarded an honorary life mem-
CRPA / ACRP Bulletin
bership in 2008. He was vice-president of
IRPA from 1992–1996.
Richard served on Committee 4
of the International Commission on
Radiological Protection (ICRP) from
1980–1993 and from 1997–2001, when
he became vice-chairman of that committee. In 1989, he chaired the ICRP Task
Group on Radon in Buildings, and from
1997–2001 he chaired the ICRP Working
Party on Controllable Dose. Dr. Osborne
has worked with committees and advisory
groups of the Nuclear Energy Agency
(NEA), a specialized agency within the
Organization for Economic Co-operation
and Development (OECD) in Paris; the
National Council on Radiation Protection
and Measurements (NCRP) in the United
States; the International Atomic Energy
Agency (IAEA), including the Radiation
Safety Standards Advisory Committee;
and various Canadian agencies, including
the Advisory Committee on Radiological
Protection of the Canadian Nuclear
Safety Commission (CNSC). He was a
member of the US National Research
Council’s Committee on Radiological
Safety in the Marshall Islands. He was
the Canadian representative to the
United Nations Scientific Committee
on the Effects of Atomic Radiation
(UNSCEAR) in 1996 and again in 1997.
Also in 1997, he was the task leader
for Tritium Safety and Environmental
Effects for the International Energy
Agency (IEA) Implementing Agreement
on Environmental, Safety and Economic
Aspects of Fusion Power.
Vol 32 No 2 / 5
6 / Vol 32 No 2
President’s Message /
Message du Président
Vous lisez présentement mon dernier message à titre de
président de l’ACRP. Si le temps passe vite, une année file
en un clin d’œil!
Dans notre communauté, on se souviendra fort
probablement de cette année comme celle de l’accident
nucléaire de Fukushima. Au moment d’écrire ces lignes, la
situation est considérée comme « très grave » par l’AIEA.
Espérons que la majorité des problèmes auront été résolus lorsque vous lirez cet article. Mes pensées vont aux
victimes de ce tremblement de terre et du tsunami qui a
suivi, ainsi qu’à leurs familles. J’admire les employés de la
centrale nucléaire, qui ont accompli un travail héroïque,
de même que tous les spécialistes en radioprotection du
Japon et du monde entier, qui ont géré ce désastre naturel
incomparable avec calme, dignité, compétence, sacrifice et
conscience, afin d’en limiter les conséquences. Vous serez
heureux d’apprendre que le comité organisateur local du
congrès de l’ACRP à Ottawa a réussi à inclure une session
consacrée à l’analyse de l’accident et aux premières leçons
qui pourraient en être tirées.
Je lisais récemment au sujet des répercussions environnementales liées à l’extraction pétrolière des sables bitumineux de l’Alberta. Par ailleurs, le mois d’avril marquait le
premier anniversaire de la catastrophe pétrolière dans le
golfe du Mexique. Il semble que notre société énergivore
ait atteint les limites de nos technologies et que nous ne
soyons plus en mesure de protéger notre environnement
comme nous le devrions. Cependant, nous ne pouvons
revenir au mode de vie de nos ancêtres et d’ici à ce que
nous parvenions à combler nos besoins énergétiques et à
les gérer de façon responsable à l’échelle environnementale, nous avons besoin de centrales nucléaires. Il nous
faut donc apprendre à rendre cette énergie encore plus
sécuritaire qu’elle ne l’est déjà.
Je tiens à remercier tous ceux d’entre vous qui ont
parlé avec le public et avec les médias. Je dois admettre que
j’ai été impressionné par la plupart des articles de presse
en lien avec l’accident nucléaire de Fukushima. Les communiqués de la Presse canadienne étaient plus modérés
et avaient moins tendance à porter sur les déclarations
sensationnelles que ceux de la presse étrangère. Je me plais
à croire, du moins en partie, que c’est grâce au travail de
notre association et des professionnels de la radioprotection du Canada.
Voilà venu le moment de l’année où nous nous
affairons tous aux derniers préparatifs du congrès annuel.
Le comité organisateur local est très occupé à finaliser les
This is my last message as
president. Time goes by
fast and a year looks like
nothing.
Most likely this year
will be remembered in
our community for the
Fukushima nuclear accident. At the time of writing, this
situation was characterized by the International Atomic
Energy Agency (IAEA) as “very serious.” Hopefully by the
time you read this, most of the problems will have been
solved. My thoughts go out to victims of the earthquake
and tsunami and to their families. My admiration goes out
to the heroic work done by nuclear power plant employees
and to all radiation safety specialists in Japan and from
around the world who, with calm, dignity, and ability, sacrifice and conscience, managed to limit the consequences
of this unprecedented natural disaster. The CRPA Ottawa
conference local organizing committee managed to include
a session dedicated to analysis of the Fukushima accident
and to possible first lessons learned.
I recently read about the environmental impact of oil
extraction in Alberta oil sands. This month is the anniversary of the Gulf of Mexico oil disaster. It looks like our
“energy hungry” society has stretched the limits of our
technologies and we are not protecting the environment as
we should. However, we cannot go back in time and live
like our ancestors. Until we solve our energy needs and
learn to manage them so that they have no impact on our
environment, we will need nuclear power plants. Yes, we
need nuclear energy, so we need to learn how to make it
even safer than it already is.
I want to thank all of the CRPA members who talked
with the public and with the media about the Fukushima
incident. I must say that I was impressed by most of the
media articles connected with this nuclear accident. The
Canadian Press news releases were more balanced and
were less likely to contain exaggerated statements. I like to
believe that this is, at least partially, due to CRPA’s work
as an association and to the work of our radiation safety
professionals in Canada.
As I write this final message, we are all making final
preparations for our annual conference. The local organizing committee in Ottawa is extremely busy finishing the
last details. The translation committee makes an extraordinary effort to have all the documents for the conference
and for the annual general meeting ready in both official
suite à la page 35 . . .
continued on page 37 . . .
Vol 32 No 2 / 7
Editor’s Note / Message
du rédacteur en chef
« Vous en avez d’abord entendu parler à l’ACRP! »
C’est en ces termes, et non sans un brin de fierté, que
Bliss Tracy a amorcé la séance spéciale sur les événements
de Fukushima Daiichi, qui concluait le congrès annuel de
l’ACRP à Ottawa, du 8 au 12 mai 2011. C’est au cours de
cette séance que les participants ont appris des détails sur
les événements de mars 2011 qui ont conduit tout droit
vers l’important accident nucléaire.
Le caractère international et factuel de cette séance
était d’ailleurs à l’image d’un congrès des plus réussis, regroupant un nombre record de participants et
accueillant, en ouverture de son volet international, pas
moins de quatre têtes d’affiche de la radioprotection, soit
Dre Claire Cousins, présidente de la Commission internationale de protection radiologique (CIPR), Dr Michael
Binder, président et premier dirigeant de la Commission
canadienne de sûreté nucléaire (CCSN), Dr Norman
Gentner, président du Comité scientifique des Nations
Unies pour l’étude des effets des rayonnements ionisants
(UNSCEAR) et Dr Kenneth Kase, président de l’Association internationale pour la protection contre les radiations
(AIRP), l’organisme d’attache de l’ACRP. Pas mal, n’est-ce
pas ? Il ne manquait plus que le secrétaire scientifique du
CIPR pour présider cette séance de niveau grand Chelem.
Oh, mais attendez! Chris Clement, membre de l’ACRP
et récipiendaire de l’édition 2011 du Prix pour accomplissement distingué, avait effectivement la tâche de présider
cette séance qui portait sur les défis et les opportunités en
radioprotection aux niveaux national et international.
Vous commencez à regretter de n’avoir pu participer à
ce regroupement de scientifiques? Soyez sans crainte, car la
présente édition spéciale du Bulletin vise à vous résumer
les points saillants du congrès. Je vous invite d’ailleurs à
lire l’entrevue du Bulletin avec la présidente de l’ICRP, Dre
Claire Cousins. Le président sortant de l’ACRP, Sandu
Sonoc, a livré un discours inaugural inspirant en osant
mettre en relation les besoins énergétiques de la planète
et les risques associés aux tentatives visant à combler ces
besoins. Il a également souligné les accomplissements
du comité organisateur qui a réuni un nombre record
de délégués au congrès, et a fait participer un nombre
inégalé d’étudiants au concours d’écriture. L’article
gagnant, Design of a Portable Alpha Detector for a Radiation
Triage Mask, rédigé par Lenora Makin et Chad Shew, est
d’ailleurs reproduit dans la présente édition du Bulletin.
Nous avons eu droit à un programme varié composé
de 78 conférences, dont une discussion sur l’avenir de la
profession en radioprotection, plusieurs visites techniques,
des occasions de formation en instrumentation, en mesures d’urgence et en transport de marchandises dangereuses
“You heard it first at
CRPA!”
It was with these words,
and a touch of pride, that
Bliss Tracy began the special session on the events
at Fukushima Daiichi that
closed the annual CRPA
conference held in Ottawa
from May 8 to 12. In this session, participants learned
more about the March 2011 events that led to this major
nuclear accident.
The international and factual nature of Tracy’s
session made for a very successful conference, with
a record number of attendees and the international
portion opening with no fewer than four leaders in
the radiation field—Dr. Claire Cousins, chair of the
International Commission on Radiological Protection
(ICRP); Dr. Michael Binder, president and chief executive officer of the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission
(CNSC); Dr. Norman Gentner, chair of the United
Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic
Radiation (UNSCEAR); and Dr. Kenneth Kase, chair
of the International Radiation Protection Association
(IRPA), CRPA’s parent organization. Not bad, right? What
more could you ask for . . . other than, perhaps, for the
scientific secretary of ICRP to preside over this grand
slam? Well, your wish was our command! Chris Clement,
CRPA member, recipient of the 2011 CRPA Distinguished
Achievement Award, and scientific secretary of ICRP, did
in fact chair this session on national and international
radiation safety challenges and opportunities.
Are you starting to regret not attending this scientific
event? Fear not, the purpose of this conference edition
of the Bulletin is to share the highlights of the conference
with those of you who could not join us in Ottawa. For
starters, I invite you to read our interview with Dr. Claire
Cousins, ICRP chair.
Sandu Sonoc, CRPA past-president, gave an inspiring
opening address, daring to make the connection between
the planet’s energy needs and the risks associated with
trying to satisfy them. He also highlighted the accomplishments of the local organizing committee, who brought
in a record number of delegates for the conference and
a record number of entries in the student paper contest.
The winning article, Design of a Portable Alpha Detector for a
Radiation Triage Mask by Lenora Makin and Chad Shew, is
also included in this issue of the Bulletin.
A jam-packed program consisting of some 78 talks,
including a discussion on the future of radiation protection
Vol 32 No 2 / 9
g at
in
z
li
e
Socia
elcom
w
the
ption
rece
Check out the
great displays at
the Museum of
Civilization where
we went for the
banquet
10 / Vol 32 No 2
Dave Tucker (outgoing
Past President) receiving
acknowledgement of
his term of office
from Sandu Sonoc
outgoing
Sandu Sonoc,
,
CRPA President
rt
be
presenting Ro
with
Bradley (left)
itorous
20 10 CRPA Mer
as
w
it
es
Award (y
d)
ar
last year’s aw
Say Cheese!
Look at how
much fun we all
had at the Sun
icebreaker.
Executive
mal,
Ramzi Jam
Regulatory
f
ie
VP & Ch
SC (left),
Officer, CN
r,
ichael Binde
with Dr. M
of
and CEO
president
).
ht
ig
CNSC (r
ference
2012 Con
rs had a
organize
g display
compellin
alifax
at the H
th
2012 boo
Vol 32 No 2 / 11
2011
CRPA Award Winners
Les gagnants des prix de l’ACRP
The Founders’ Award is presented for outstanding contributions toward the enhancement of the association. Volunteer work
by the recipients has enhanced the reputation of the association
nationally and internationally, encouraged participation in association activities, advanced the role and status of the association as
an important organization in radiation protection, or promoted
the merits of membership in the association to others. This year’s
recipient was Wayne Tiefenbach.
Le prix des fondateurs est présenté pour souligner les
contributions exceptionnelles à l’amélioration de l’Association.
Les lauréats de ce prix doivent avoir volontairement effectué des
activités dans l’un ou plusieurs des secteurs suivants : améliorer la
réputation de l’Association aux niveaux national et international
; encourager la participation aux activités de l’Association ; faire
avancer le rôle et la statut de l’Association comme organisation
d’importance en radioprotection ; ou faire connaître les avantages
du statut de membre à des personnes qui peuvent soit bénéficier
des activités de l’Association, soit contribuer à la réalisation de ses
objectifs. Cette année, le prix a été présenté à Wayne Tiefenbach.
The Distinguished Achievement Award is presented for
outstanding contributions in the field of radiation protection.
Recipients must have received recognition from peers, either
nationally or internationally, for accomplishments of major significance to the knowledge, practice, or advancement of the radiation protection profession. This year’s recipient was Christopher
Clement.
Le prix distinction est présenté pour souligner les contributions exceptionnelles au domaine de la radioprotection. Les
récipiendaires de ce prix doivent être reconnus nationalement
ou internationalement par leurs pairs en raison des accomplissements majeurs apportés à la connaissance, à la pratique ou à
l’avancement de la profession de la radioprotection. Cette année,
le prix a été remis à Christopher Clement.
The Meritorious Service Award is presented for significant
services provided to the association or to the radiation protection
community in general. This year’s recipient was Roger Hugron.
Le prix mérite est offert pour des services d’importance rendus
soit à l’Association, soit à l’ensemble de la communauté de la
radioprotection. Cette année, le prix a été présenté à Roger
Hugron.
For information about the 2011 Anthony J MacKay
Student Paper Contest winners, see page 27.
Pour connaître les gagnants de l’édition 2011 du concours
d’articles rédigés par des étudiants Anthony-JMacKay, rendez-vous à la page 27.
12 / Vol 32 No 2
Election results
We are pleased to introduce your 2011–12 Board of Directors:
Congratulations to the newly elected members of our Board of Directors—Gary Kramer, Ralph Bose, and Jeff Dovyak—and to Petra Dupuis, who was re-elected. While the
board members were all together at the conference, we managed to get their picture. Standing (from left to right): Liz Krivonosov (CRPA Secretariat), Ray Ilson (Director),
Gary Kramer (President-Elect), Ralph Bose (Director), Sandu Sonoc (Past President), Jeff Dovyak, (Director). Sitting (left to right): Leona Page (Director), Lois SowdenPlunkett (President), Petra Dupuis (Secretary), Christine Dehm (Treasurer).
Vol 32 No 2 / 13
Pour entrer dans le
21e siècle . . .
avec assurance
Entrevue avec Dre Claire Cousins,
présidente, Commission internationale de protection radiologique
La Dre Cousins était la conférencière principale
du congrès annuel de l’Association canadienne de
radioprotection (ACRP) qui s’est tenu à Ottawa du 8 au
12 mai 2011 et où elle a donné une présentation sur la CIPR et
les défis que l’organisation doit surmonter au 21e siècle. Sa présentation, ainsi que le
compte rendu du congrès, sera accessible à tous les membres de l’ACRP.
La Dre Cousins est avant tout radiologiste interventionnelle à l’Hôpital Addenbrooke de
Cambridge (Royaume-Uni) où elle se spécialise dans la réparation endovasculaire d’anévrismes au moyen de techniques moins effractives. Depuis 2008, elle est la radiologiste
vasculaire et interventionnelle principale de ce service très occupé. Passionnée et très
engagée en matière d’éducation et de formation dans le domaine de la radiologie, Dre
Cousins vise aussi, grâce à cette passion, à relever le défi de réduire les doses injectées
aux patientx. L’entrevue qui suit a été menée lors d’une rencontre rapide avec cette
femme fascinante, le temps d’un café. Le Bulletin étant un outil de communication, le
sujet principal portait sur la communication.
Bulletin : Dre Cousins, pendant votre
présentation, une phrase a particulièrement
retenu mon attention. Vous affirmez ne pas
être surprise que les professionnels de la
radioprotection ou les membres de l’ACRP
connaissent votre organisation, la CIPR,
mais, du même souffle, vous soulignez
votre surprise après avoir constaté que
de nombreux radiologistes ou membres
du domaine médical ne connaissent pas
l’existence de la CIPR. Comment expliquezvous cela?
Dre Cousins : Je pense que la vraie raison
est qu’on ne les a tout simplement
pas informés pendant leur formation
médicale. En tout cas, il est vrai qu’au
Royaume-Uni, ainsi que dans plusieurs
autres pays d’Europe, la CIPR n’est pas
nécessairement présentée par le matériel
de formation. Cela explique la dichotomie qui existe entre les véritables professionnels de la radioprotection qui nous
connaissent et ceux qui, si je puis dire,
sont légèrement plus « en marge ». Ainsi,
des professionnels du rayonnement ne
14 / Vol 32 No 2
connaissent pas nécessairement notre
existence, ou pis encore, n’ont lu aucune
de nos publications! (Rires)
Cette organisation a été fondée en 1928 par
des radiologistes et pourtant, vous dites
qu’un grand nombre de radiologistes ne la
connaissent pas?
Oui, et cela même si elle a été fondée par
la Société internationale de radiologie.
Selon moi, cette organisation ne reçoit
pas une visibilité particulièrement grande
de la part des services de radiologie de
certains pays de par le monde. Donc, les
radiologistes de ces pays peuvent savoir
que nous existons, sans toutefois connaître
notre travail.
Vous êtes une femme de terrain, une radiologiste interventionnelle et vous travaillez à
longueur de journée avec le rayonnement.
Est-ce que vous vous considérez comme le
« cheval de Troie » des radiologistes qui ne
connaissent pas la CIPR? Pensez-vous être
la mieux placée pour attirer leur attention?
(Rires) En tout cas, je l’espère! Au moins,
j’ai l’avantage d’être radiologiste et
radiologiste interventionnelle, de surcroît.
Mon principal objectif pour la CIPR est
bien entendu d’augmenter le nombre de
personnes dans l’auditoire qui connaissent
effectivement la CIPR et ses travaux. Les
médecins en apprendraient beaucoup,
rien qu’en lisant certains de nos documents très ciblés et axés sur leurs spécialités particulières. Mais je sais que ce n’est
pas ce qui se passe ou, en tout cas, cela
n’arrive pas assez souvent pour qu’ils en
tirent un quelconque profit.
Pensez-vous donc que ces « renseignements généraux erronés » en matière de
radioprotection peuvent expliquer pourquoi
tant de professionnels de la santé (qui ne
sont pas dans le domaine de la radiologie
ou du rayonnement) adoptent trop rapidement la théorie de la relation linéaire sans
seuil et sont particulièrement sensibles à la
question du rayonnement et de la santé?
Il s’agit selon moi, d’un domaine que nous
n’avons pas exploré suffisamment jusqu’à
présent, mais nous devons commencer
à nous y intéresser. Par le passé, nous
pensions très naïvement que les documents
produits par la CIPR étaient lus par les
personnes auxquelles ils étaient destinés.
Comme ce n’est pas le cas, il nous incombe
à présent de nous assurer d’atteindre
effectivement l’auditoire ciblé. Cela ne sera
pas facile, mais nous nous efforcerons d’y
parvenir. Une façon de s’y prendre, et que
j’encourage, est d’être davantage présents
aux réunions médicales, et pas seulement
à celles qui ont trait à la radioprotection,
mais aussi aux autres spécialités. Le nombre
To Boldly Go . . . Into the 21st Century
An Interview with Dr. Claire Cousins, Chair, International
Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP)
Dr. Cousins was the keynote speaker at the CRPA annual conference in Ottawa, May 9,
2011. She talked about the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP)
and its challenges in the 21st century. Her presentation will be available to all CRPA members in the conference proceedings.
Dr. Cousins is an interventional radiologist at Addenbrooke’s Hospital, Cambridge, United
Kingdom, working on the endovascular repair of aneurysms using less invasive techniques. Since 2008, she has been the lead vascular and interventional radiologist of this
very busy unit. She is a woman with passion for and commitment to education and training in the field of radiology. And thanks to her, this passion also includes the challenge of
reducing patient doses. The following interview is the result of a quick encounter (over a
cup of coffee) with a fascinating woman. Given that the Bulletin is a communication tool,
the main topic of our conversation was communication.
Bulletin: Dr. Cousins, during your keynote
address, there was one sentence that
caught my attention. You said you were not
surprised that radiation safety professionals, or CRPA members, would know about
your organization, ICRP, but you noted that
many radiologists, or people in the medical field, don’t know about ICRP. Can you
explain this?
Dr. Cousins: I think the real factor is that
people in the medical field are just not
told about ICRP during their training.
That is certainly the case in the United
Kingdom and in several European countries. ICRP does not necessarily feature in
any of the training material. That explains
the dichotomy between true radiation
safety professionals who hear about us and
those who, I might say, are slightly more
“on the fringe.” Those who actually use
radiation don’t necessarily know of our
existence, or worse still, haven’t read any
of our documents! [aughing]
Even though ICRP was founded by radiologists in 1928, it is not currently known to
many radiologists?
Yes, even though ICRP was founded by
the International Society of Radiology, it is
not currently known to many radiologists.
This organization, I think, may not have a
particularly high profile within radiology
departments in some countries around
the world. Radiologists may know about
its existence, but they may not necessarily
know about the work that is being done.
Being an interventional radiologist who
works all day with radiation, do you consider yourself a “Trojan Horse” for radiologists who are unaware of ICRP? Are
you at least the proper person to get their
attention?
a higher profile at medical meetings, not
only those dealing with radiation protection, but also those dealing with other
specialties. This is difficult with a limited
number of ICRP members, but we do
have members from all around the world.
So we will see more of ICRP in target
groups? Is that why we are lucky enough to
have you at the annual CRPA conference?
I have to be selective regarding the meetings I attend only because of my own
work commitment—I don’t always have
a huge amount of time to do this kind
of thing. I try to go to conferences where
I will have an opportunity to make an
I would like to think so! [aughing] At least
I have the advantage of being a radiologist,
and an interventional radiologist. One of
my main aims for ICRP is to expand the
number of people in the audience who
actually know about ICRP and the work
that we do. Doctors would learn a lot
just by reading some of our very focused
documents for their particular specialty.
But I know this may not be happening, or
not happening sufficiently often to be of
benefit to them.
Are you saying that, as a result of this
general health physics “misinformation,”
many medical professionals who are not in
the radiation business, like radiologists or
radio-oncologists, are embracing the Linear
No-Threshold theory.
It is an area that I think we definitely did
not explore enough before, but we need
to consider that arena. Historically, there
has been an assumption that ICRP was
producing documents and, very naively,
that they were being read by those we were
intending them for. Given the fact that
they are not, it is now up to us to endeavour to reach our target audience. I am not
saying this is going to be easy, but we will
try. One way I encourage this is to have
Vol 32 No 2 / 15
16 / Vol 32 No 2
An Interview with Dr. Claire Cousins
. . . continued from page 15
impact and to help get this message across.
Members of the Main Commission and,
of course, members of ICRP Committee
3 (Protection in Medicine) are the main
committee members who try to engage
more with the medical community. But
they don’t have a lot of time either . . .
They all have other jobs!
Exactly. But some members are retired
and, therefore, have more time to go out
and spread the word for ICRP.
chair of Committee 3, Eliseo Vañó, has
been very active, not only going to meetings in Europe, but in Asia and South
America as well. Some of these meeting
were radiological meetings, but he has also
been to cardiology meetings. We try to
attend the bigger medical meetings so we
can reach a broader, more international
audience. It would be nice to be able to
go to Africa or, say, the Middle East, as we
have only a few members from these areas.
I am flattered. Thank you very much for
the invitation, particularly if it helps raise
the profile of ICRP and what we are trying
to achieve. I hope my presence, and that
of other ICRP members, at meetings like
these is the way to engage with many societies and organizations. This is also a way
to recruit more members for our organization, which is another major goal that we
are trying to fulfill.
On the subject of venues, what do you think
of CRPA’s annual conference in Ottawa?
Dr. Cousins, thank you very much for this
delightful interview. I did not bring an ICRP
document for you to autograph; perhaps
next time! I wish all the best for the future of
ICRP and all your endeavours.
So we are privileged to have you with us
and to discuss ICRP challenges with you.
What other type of venues have you been to
over the past six months?
It has been an excellent venue so far. To
be in the capital of Canada is very nice,
and you’ve got a large number of attendees
at your meeting. I have very much enjoyed
your conference and the presentations.
I have been attending different national
and international medical meetings. The
Our high attendance is partly due to your
presence! We are pleased to have you here.
[Laughing] Thank you. It is by engaging
with a society like yours that we can
achieve better relationships and strengthen
ICRP in the future.
Entrevue avec Dre Claire Cousins
limité de membres adhérant à notre organisme complique les choses; toutefois, nous
comptons tout de même des membres de
partout dans le monde.
Donc, vous allez augmenter la présence
de la CIPR dans les groupes cibles. Est-ce
pour cette raison que nous avons le
privilège de vous compter parmi nous au
congrès annuel de l’ACRP?
(Rires) Je dois être sélective en raison de
mes propres engagements et je n’ai pas
beaucoup de temps pour le faire. J’aime
à penser que je participe aux congrès
dans le cadre desquels j’ai une chance de
laisser une impression, d’avoir un peu
d’influence quant à la diffusion de notre
message. Les membres de la commission
principale et, bien sûr, les membres du
comité 3 (Protection en médecine) sont les
principaux membres du comité qui s’efforceront de gagner la communauté médicale
à notre cause. Mais ils ne disposent pas de
beaucoup de temps non plus...
Ils ont tous une autre profession!
Exactement. Certains d’entre nous sont
retraités et disposent donc d’un peu plus
de temps pour véhiculer le message de la
CIPR.
C’est donc un privilège que de recevoir
votre visite et de parler des défis de la
CIPR. À quelles autres activités avez-vous
participé au cours des six derniers mois?
Différentes réunions médicales nationales et internationales. Le président du
comité 3, Eliseo
, est très actif et il ne
participe pas uniquement aux réunions
qui se tiennent en Europe. Il se déplace
également en Asie et en Amérique du
Sud. Certaines de ces réunions portaient
sur la radiologie, mais il a aussi participé
à des réunions sur la cardiologie. Nous
essayons d’être présents aux réunions
médicales les plus importantes afin de
toucher un auditoire plus vaste et plus
international. Il serait intéressant de se
rendre en Afrique ou disons, au MoyenOrient, car nous avons peu de membres
dans ces régions ou alors pas du tout.
Puisque nous abordons les différents lieux
de réunions, que pensez-vous du congrès
annuel de l’ACRP à Ottawa?
C’est un lieu excellent jusqu’à maintenant.
Se trouver dans la capitale du Canada est
vraiment agréable. Il y a un grand nombre
de participants; votre congrès et les conférences me plaisent énormément.
. . . suite de la page 14
Le nombre de participants est en partie dû à
votre présence, je dois dire! Nous sommes
heureux de vous avoir ici.
Je suis très flattée, merci beaucoup. Et si
cela peut permettre de présenter la CIPR
et ce que nous essayons d’accomplir, c’est
parfait. J’espère que ma présence aux
réunions, de même que la participation
d’autres membres de la commission, est la
façon la plus efficace d’établir le contact
avec de nombreuses organisations et sociétés. Nous pourrons alors recruter plus de
membres pour notre organisation puisque
c’est l’un des objectifs d’importance que
nous essayons d’atteindre.
Dre Cousins, merci beaucoup pour cette
agréable entrevue. Je n’ai pas apporté de
documents de la CIPR à faire autographier,
peut-être la prochaine fois! Je vous souhaite le meilleur des succès pour l’avenir de
la CIPR et vos divers projets.
(Rires) Merci, c’est grâce à des participations aux activités d’organisations comme
la vôtre que nous pourrons établir des relations et redresser l’avenir de la CIPR.
Vol 32 No 2 / 17
Communication
One of the Keys to Leading a Successful Organization
By Hoa Ly CRPA Communications Committee Past “Web Champion” 2010
As a CRPA conference attendee of few years ago, I had a chance to talk with
Stéphane Jean-François during a coffee break about communication strategies
for CRPA. Stéphane and I agreed on one thing—communication is one of the
keys to leading a successful organization.
Résumé
Lors d’un congrès de l’ACRP il y a
quelques années, Hoa Ly s’était entretenu avec Stéphane Jean-François
au sujet de différentes stratégies
de communications valables pour
l’ACRP. Les deux avaient convenu
qu’une communication efficace
représente l’un des éléments clés de la
gestion d’une organisation prospère.
Quelques mois plus tard, on demandait à Hoa de se joindre au comité
des communications de l’ACRP (le
« COM-COM ») à titre d’expert du
web. Faire partie du « COM-COM »
représentait pour Hoa une occasion
excellente d’en apprendre davantage
sur l’ACRP et d’y contribuer. Il en a
beaucoup appris sur les communications et a apprécié sa participation au
« COM-COM ». Vous avez pensé à
joindre un comité ou un sous-comité
de l’ACRP? Vous aussi, pouvez faire la
différence.
18 / Vol 32 No 2
A few months later, I got an email from
Michèle Légaré-Vézina and was asked
to join the CRPA Communications
Committee (COM-COM) as a “Web
Champion.” I was not sure what I was supposed to do with the webpage at that time,
but I said “yes” anyway.
So what does the COM-COM do? This
may sound very simple, but we strive to
keep up communications with our CRPA
members, and with the public, so that
CRPA can be considered a leader in radiation protection. We develop and establish
many communication strategies, and
implement them effectively using various
resources such as our website, conferences,
emails, meetings, and so on.
Have you visited the CRPA website
lately? The site, located at www.crpa-acrp.
ca, has a new look on the home page and
features our new mission statement and
other exciting features. Thanks to Liz
Krivonosov and Ramin Vakili for updating
the website and putting up with the
COM-COM members. I encourage you to
explore the website and tell us what you
think. You can send your feedback and
ideas to Liz Krivonosov, CRPA Secretariat,
at [email protected].
If you plan to attend the CRPA conference this year in Ottawa, please come to
the AGM to see what the COM-COM is
up to. We will be discussing our priorities
for 2011 and beyond, a CRPA vision state-
If you have never joined a CRPA committee or subcommittee,
please do. You can make a difference, too.
Joining CRPA and then being on the
COM-COM presented excellent opportunities for me to learn more about the
organization and to contribute my time
and expertise. I participate in teleconference meetings a few times a year, and I
have met face-to-face with COM-COM
members at the CRPA conferences in
meetings lead first by Michèle LégaréVézina and now by Ralph Bose as our
committee chair.
ment, and the effectiveness of our communication strategies for public inquiries.
I am glad I joined the COM-COM and
was able to contribute my time and expertise to the organization. I have learned a
great deal about communications from
the other COM-COM members, and I
have enjoyed serving as a member. If you
have never joined a CRPA committee or
subcommittee, please do. You can make a
difference, too.
Book Review / Critique de livre
Radiation Protection
and Dosimetry
An Introduction to Health Physics
Michael G. Stabin (Springer, New York, NY, USA, 2010)
Review by Michael Grey
Candesco Corporation,
Burlington, ON
Michael Stabin is a professor in
the Department of Radiology and
Radiological Sciences at Vanderbilt
University in Nashville, Tennessee, and a
well-known authority in the field of internal dosimetry. The preface to Radiation
Protection and Dosimetry states that “the
Résumé
Bien que Michael Stabin soit une
autorité reconnue dans le domaine
de la dosimétrie interne, la majorité
des étudiants auront probablement
avantage à écarter son livre Radiation
Protection and Dosimetry pour se
lancer directement dans la lecture de
l’ouvrage de Cember : Introduction
to Health Physics. En effet, Radiation
Protection and Dosimetry vise à « servir
de base à une série de deux cours
portant sur la radioprotection (ou la
protection nucléaire). » Tandis que le
premier cours serait une introduction
au domaine, le second serait plus
détaillé et requerrait l’utilisation de
matériel supplémentaire. Certes, la
partie traitant de l’introduction à la
dosimétrie interne y est beaucoup
plus approfondie que ce que l’on
trouve dans de nombreux autres
manuels d’introduction à la protection nucléaire. Malheureusement, la
suite du texte n’est pas aussi soutenue
: son organisation est parfois incompréhensible, le traitement qu’on y fait
de certains sujets importants est trop
bref pour être utile, les termes choisis
sont souvent imprécis ou fortuits et
enfin, certaines images et diagrammes
ont été téléchargés d’Internet et leur
qualité laisse à désirer.
text is meant to serve as the basis for a
two-course series in radiation protection
(aka health physics).” It goes on to say that
the first of these two courses would be an
introduction to, and an overview of the
field, while the second course would be
more detailed and the text would need
to be supplemented by other materials.
The organization is consistent with these
goals—the first seven chapters of the book
present the essential background material,
including radioactive decay, interactions
of radiation and matter, and the biological
effects of radiation, while the last six
chapters cover instrumentation, internal
and external dose, radiation protection,
environmental monitoring, and non-ionizing radiation.
Given the author’s background, it is no
surprise that the introduction to internal
dosimetry is much more thorough than
those found in many other introductory
health physics texts. Both the International
Commission on Radiological Protection
(ICRP) and Medical Internal Radiation
Dose (MIRD) methodologies are described
and examples of their use are presented.
Unfortunately, the rest of the text is not
as strong. Some of the major problems
include the following:
• The organization is sometimes
incomprehensible. For example, the
first sentence of section 9.7, “Tritium
and Noble Gases” states that “ . . . for
submersion in a cloud of tritiated water
(3H2O) and/or tritium gas (3H2), the
concern is for internal exposure. . .”
This might lead the reader to wonder why tritium is being discussed
in the chapter titled “External Dose
Assessment.” After that beginning, section 9.7 goes on to discuss, “Dose from
Standing on a Contaminated Surface”
and “Dose from Radioactive Patients
Released After Nuclear Medicine
Therapy” even though neither of these
discussions mention either tritium or
noble gases. So why are they included
in a subsection entitled Tritium and
Noble Gases?
• The treatment of some important
subjects is too brief to be useful. For
example, section 11.3, “Criticality and
Criticality Control,” covers the basic
theory of nuclear fission; describes the
different types of nuclear reactors, their
characteristics, and their fission product inventories; describes the design of
nuclear weapons; and discusses three
major criticality accidents—all in only
14 pages, including photos and diagrams. The entire subject of criticality
control, which is extremely important
in some facilities, is covered in two
paragraphs on page 302.
• Wording is often casual or imprecise,
which could cause confusion for
those being introduced to a subject
for the first time. One example of this
occurs in section 4.11.2, “Neutron
Absorption,” which states that
“Thermal neutrons are ‘captured’ by
nuclei with sufficiently large crosssections.” Even though the author has
previously given a very good explanation of the meaning of interaction
Vol 32 No 2 / 19
IRPA Workshop on
Radiation Protection Culture
Résumé
En février dernier, l’International
Radiation Protection Association
(IRPA) tenait un atelier à Charleston,
en Caroline du Sud, afin de discuter
de la culture de la radioprotection.
L’objectif était de contribuer à la
rédaction d’un document de l’IRPA
visant à définir la culture de la radioprotection et à identifier les traits de
l’organisation qui sont associés à une
bonne culture de la radioprotection.
L’auteur a participé à cet atelier à titre
de représentant de l’Organisation
canadienne des physiciens médicaux
(OCPM).
22 / Vol 32 No 2
by Dave Wilkins
Ottawa Hospital Cancer Centre
In February I had the opportunity to
represent the Canadian Organization of
Medical Physicists (COMP) at a workshop
of the International Radiation Protection
Association (IRPA) in Charleston, South
Carolina. Charleston is an historic
seaport, redolent with quaint historic
charm and graceful colonial architecture.
Unfortunately the workshop was held at
an airport hotel some distance from the
city centre, an area surrounded by freeways
and outlet malls and completely devoid of
any charm, historic or otherwise.
IRPA is an association based in France,
dedicated to the promotion of common
international approaches to radiation
protection, and acting as a forum for
discussion, research, and education about
radiation protection issues. The association
is made up of national member associations—the Canadian Radiation Protection
Association is the Canadian member
association, and the Health Physics Society
is the American member association.
The workshop was part of an initiative
by IRPA to define radiation protection
culture and to help promote this concept
among radiation protection professionals
and their organizations. In addition to the
member associations, IRPA invited representatives from medical physics organizations and government regulatory bodies,
as well as clinicians. There were 31 participants at the workshop from the United
States, Mexico, Peru, Argentina, France,
Italy, Uruguay, Colombia, Japan, and
Canada (me), representing various organizations including the American Association
of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM), the
American College of Radiology (ACR),
the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission
(USNRC), the Health Physics Society
(HPS), and the US Food and Drug
Administration (FDA). While their member associations primarily represent health
physicists, IRPA specifically asked COMP
and AAPM to send representatives who
could represent the importance of medical
physicists in radiation protection in the
health-care sector.
Radiation protection culture is closely
related to safety culture, a concept that is
well defined and permeates the operation
of many high risk industries such as the
chemical and airline industries. Safety
culture is very important in the nuclear
power industry, where it has become
central in the regulatory approach and
in day-to-day operations. The USNRC,
which has been using safety culture as
a guiding regulatory philosophy for the
power industry for 15 years, has published a guidance document that defines
organizational traits and audit criteria
associated with safety culture in nuclear
power. Radiation protection culture is
seen as an extension of safety culture in all
arenas where radiation is used. The goal of
this IRPA workshop was to provide input
for the development of a document and
communication strategy to help define
and promote radiation protection culture
among radiation protection professionals
and their organizations.
In response to a request to present the
COMP perspective, I did a short presentation on the mildly controversial point of
view that occupational radiation protection in the medical sector, in Canada at
least, is largely a solved problem, and that
the real risks associated with medical use
of radiation involve patient safety. While
there are certainly fires to put out and
some areas for minor improvement, data
from the National Dose Registry show
that, for the most part, occupational doses
in health care have been steadily decreasing with time, and average doses are very
low. Occupational radiation safety in
health care is largely in maintenance mode
and there is no justification for significant
new resources or initiatives. By contrast,
patient radiation safety and control of
exposures is a growing area of concern.
I outlined some Canadian patient safety
initiatives in which COMP has been
involved, such as the Winter School and
the activities of the Canadian Partnership
for Quality Radiotherapy (CPQR). I
argued that the expertise and resources
of radiation protection professionals in
the medical sector should be shifted to
include focus on patient safety initiatives.
This point of view generated some
discussion, because the regulatory framework in radiation protection focuses on
occupational and public exposure, while
patient exposures are explicitly excluded
from dose limits. Most regulators and
many radiation protection professionals
do not consider patient exposures to be
part of their mandate. However, ICRP 60
does call for application of the principles
of justification and optimization to medical exposures. Furthermore, this IRPA
workshop included representatives from
the Image Gently and Image Wisely campaigns, which are entirely concerned with
patient safety. It will be interesting to see
if the scope of the final document extends
to include patient safety.
The workshop succeeded in outlining
some organizational traits associated with
good radiation protection culture, many
of which could be used as audit criteria.
Examples of such traits include the
following:
• Leadership safety values Do leaders
demonstrate a commitment to safety in
their actions and behaviours?
• Problem identification and resolution
Are issues impacting safety promptly
identified, addressed, and corrected?
• Personal accountability Do individuals take personal responsibility for
their safety?
• Work processes Are work processes
planned and documented with safety
in mind?
• Continuous learning Do individuals
maintain current knowledge and
impart that knowledge to others in
their organizations?
• Certification of competence Does
the organization promote certifica-
tion and maintenance of certification
where appropriate?
• Environment open to raising concerns Are personnel free to raise safety
concerns without fear of retaliation or
intimidation?
• Questioning attitude Do individuals
avoid complacency and challenge
existing conditions to identify issues
that might lead to error?
Similar workshops have already been
held in Europe and Asia. Based on these
workshops, an IRPA committee will generate a draft document that should be ready
by the end of this year. When finalized,
this document should be useful to COMP
members in guiding initiatives for the safe
use of radiation in the health-care sector.
Book Review . . . continued from page 19
cross-sections, a student could
easily interpret this statement to
mean that there is some minimum
threshold below which absorption
does not occur.
• Finally, some of the photographs
and diagrams have been downloaded from the Internet and their
quality is poor.
Like many other introductory
health physics texts, the final chapter
of Radiation Protection and Dosimetry
covers non-ionizing radiation and,
again like many other texts, the treatment is so superficial that it is of little
value. The discussion of lasers is brief
but adequate, however, only four
pages are devoted to radiofrequency
and microwave radiation, and sub-RF
electromagnetic fields are covered in
slightly less than one page.
I agree with the advice given in the
preface, namely that supplementary
material would be required to support
this text, but it is interesting to note
that one of the most frequently cited
references is Cember’s Introduction to
Health Physics. With the exception of
the sections on internal dosimetry,
I would suggest that most students
would probably be better off skipping
over Radiation Protection and Dosimetry
and going straight to Cember.
Vol 32 No 2 / 23
ICRP News
NEWS
by Christopher H. Clement
ICRP Scientific Secretary ([email protected])
A lot has happened since the last ICRP
NEWS appeared in the Bulletin. We have
totally refurbished our website, www.icrp.
org, making it much more user friendly.
You can now register to receive automatic
notifications by email or through Twitter
regarding new news items on the website
or new consultations. The new site also
has a much more comprehensive list of
Résumé
Dans le présent numéro,
Christopher Clement nous parle
du récent lancement du site web
entièrement remis à neuf de l’ICRP :
www.icrp.org. Il nous livre également un résumé du dernier rapport de l’ICRP’s : ICRP Publication
113: Education and Training in
Radiological Protection for Diagnostic
and Interventional Procedures. Il nous
fait également part des résultats de la
consultation tenue récemment quant
à l’ébauche d’un rapport sur Early
and Late Effects of Radiation in Normal
Tissues and Organs: Threshold Doses for
Tissue Reactions and Other Non-Cancer
Effects of Radiation in a Radiation
Protection Context, et suggère que l’on
s’attende à la recommandation de
revoir les limites des doses reçues au
cristallin. Enfin, il rappelle au lecteur
le tout premier symposium de l’ICRP
sur le système international de la
radioprotection, qui aura lieu du
24 au 26 octobre 2011, à Bethesda,
au Maryland. Il est nécessaire de
s’inscrire d’avance au symposium (par
le biais du site web : www.icrp.org);
toutefois, aucuns frais d’inscription
ne sera facturé.
our publications and descriptions of all
active committees and task groups.
We are also on the verge of releasing ICRP Publication 113: Education
and Training in Radiological Protection for
Diagnostic and Interventional Procedures. If
you are a subscriber to Annals of the ICRP,
you might receive your copy of that report
before you receive this Bulletin. An abstract
for this report is found below.
By the time you read this, we will also
have completed public consultation for a
draft report with the long-winded (draft)
title of Early and Late Effects of Radiation in
Normal Tissues and Organs: Threshold Doses
for Tissue Reactions and Other Non-Cancer
Effects of Radiation in a Radiation Protection
Context. In that report, estimates will be
given for morbidity and mortality endpoints in all organ systems following acute,
fractionated, or chronic exposure. Because
of recent incidents resulting in injury
following lower than expected doses, particular attention will be paid to circulatory
disease and to opacities and cataracts in
the lens of the eye. This report will focus
on advances in scientific results; implications of these results on radiological
protection systems will be the subject of
a separate ICRP document. Of particular
importance will be revised recommended
dose limits for the lens of the eye, and
likely some cautionary messages regarding
circulatory disease. The intention is to
develop an ICRP statement on tissue reactions during the ICRP Main Commission
meeting at the end of April.
Arrangements for the first ICRP
Symposium on the International System
of Radiological Protection, to be held
in Bethesda, Maryland, October 24–26,
2011, are progressing well. We have what
I think are an excellent set of topics
and invited speakers from ICRP and
other organizations. Advance registration through www.icrp.org is required
to attend, but no registration fee will be
charged. I hope to see many of you there.
Finally, I would be remiss if I did
not mention that the difficulties at the
Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant in Japan
are on-going (at the time of writing). ICRP
has issued a brief statement through our
website, and we are doing everything we
can to assist in this difficult time. Our
thoughts are with the people of Japan as
they begin to recover from the terrible
loss of life and property resulting from
the devastating effects of the earthquake
and tsunami, and with the personnel at
the Fukushima NPP as they deal with the
situation there.
ICRP Publication 113: Education and Training in Radiological
Protection for Diagnostic and Interventional Procedures
The number of diagnostic and interventional medical procedures using ionizing
radiations is rising steadily, and procedures resulting in higher patient and staff
doses are being performed more frequently. As such, the need for education
and training of medical staff (including
medical students) and other health-care
professionals on the principles of radiation protection is even more compelling
now than in the past.
ICRP made basic recommendations
for the education and training of these
individuals in ICRP Publications 103 and
Vol 32 No 2 / 25
ICRP News
ICRP Publication 113
105. This publication, Publication 113,
expands considerably on these basic
recommendations with regard to various categories of medical practitioners
and other health-care professionals who
perform or provide support for diagnostic and interventional procedures using
ionizing radiation and nuclear medicine
therapy. It provides guidance regarding the
necessary radiological protection education and training for use by
• cognisant regulators, health authorities, medical institutions, and professional bodies with responsibility for
radiological protection in medicine;
• the industry that produces and markets
the equipment used in these procedures; and
• universities and other academic institutions responsible for the education of
professionals involved in the use of
ionizing radiation in health care.
In the context of this publication,
the term ‘education’ refers to imparting
knowledge and understanding on the
effects of radiation on health, radiation
quantities and units, principles of radiological protection, radiological protection
legislation, and the factors in practice
that affect patient and staff doses. Such
education should be part of the curriculum for degrees in medicine, dentistry,
and radiography, and for specialists such
as radiologists, nuclear medicine specialists, and medical physicists as part of their
postgraduate degree curriculums.
The term ‘training’ refers to providing
instruction with regard to radiological
protection for the justified application
of specific ionizing radiation modalities
(e.g. computed tomography or fluoroscopy) that a medical practitioner or other
health-care or support professional might
use during medical practice.
26 / Vol 32 No 2
Advice is also provided on accreditation and certification for providing the
recommended education and training. In
the context of this publication, the term
‘accreditation’ means that an organization
has been approved by an authorized body
to provide education or training on the
radiological protection aspects of using
diagnostic or interventional radiation
procedures in medicine. The accredited
organization is required to meet standards
set by the authorized body.
The term ‘certification’ means that an
individual medical or clinical professional
has successfully completed education or
training provided by an accredited organization for the diagnostic or interventional procedures to be practised by that
individual. The individual must demonstrate competence in the subject matter as
defined by the accredited body.
Student Corner / Coin des étudiant
Leah Shuparski Catches Up With This
Year’s Student Paper Contest Winners
by Leah Shuparski McMaster University
Lenora Makin (LM) and Chad Shew (CS), both students at University of Ontario Institute of
Technology (UOIT), are the 2011 Anthony J MacKay Student Paper Contest winners. Leah Shuparski
caught up with them via email after the conference to get their thoughts on the conference and to find
out how they are doing.
First things first, who is your favourite scientist and why?
Feynman. He was a brilliant scientist, but had a great
sense of humour and loved to live
adventurously.
LM: Marie Curie is very inspirational. She
was the first woman to win a Nobel
Prize and I admire her contributions
to isotope treatment methods. And
she has a radioactive cookbook!
idea to him, and suggested the thesis
project I wanted to work on, and he
accepted.
CS: Richard
Did you argue over who would get “first
author” on your paper?
CS: Not
at all. . . I would say we worked
as equals. Ultimately we were more
interested in the success of the project
than claiming credit for it. I am
grateful to have been able to work
with Lenora. She shared my strong
interest in the project, and we worked
exceptionally well as a team.
You are unlikely partners as you are in different years at UOIT, and you hadn’t really
met before you did the project together . . .
LM: It
was kind of a random matchup,
but it worked out really well! I
was finishing up my internship
with the Canadian Nuclear Safety
Commission (CNSC) when they
hired on the next round of students
from UOIT. The new hires were from
Chad’s year. I asked some of the new
interns for advice on who I could try
partnering up with, and Chad was
highly recommended! I proposed the
Résumé
Lenora Makin et Chad Shew, tous
deux étudiants de l’Institut universitaire de technologie de l’Ontario
(UOIT), ont remporté l’édition
2011 du concours de communications Anthony J. MacKay. Leah
Shuparski les a joints par courriel
après le congrès afin de recueillir
leurs impressions sur celui-ci, et de
prendre de leurs nouvelles. Chacun a
exprimé avoir grandement apprécié sa
participation au congrès et encourage
l’ACRP à continuer d’appuyer les
initiatives étudiantes.
LM:
I honestly don’t even remember who
got first author, maybe we switched it up
for each semester.
Chad, how is summer work going on the
radiation triage mask (RTM)? Do you
have any updates for us?
CS: At present, we are completing the
integration of the alpha detector
into the RTM. I am also working on
another project with Dr. Ed Waller
to investigate inhaled radioactive
particulates and facial swipes.
Lenora, in your paper you discussed work
that still needs to be done on the RTM
mask. What is the one part that you are
most disappointed about not being able to
take on now that you’re working?
LM: What
Chad is working on now,
integrating the alpha detector, would
actually be very exciting. I think the
testing, which can be tedious at times,
would have been the most fulfilling
and would provide a real sense of
achievement when it was successful. Lenora, what has been the biggest adjustment in your working life after being a
student?
LM: Well
my internship helped make the
transition back into working life a
Winning student pap
er
presented at confer
ence
smooth transition. The biggest adjustment would be the fact I am taking
lots of training—the studying doesn’t
come close to the load I had from
school. I have to say that the little
piece of paper I get in my mailbox
every two weeks is a nice change,
though!
Chad, you’re graduating in 2012. What’s
next for you after your UOIT undergrad?
CS: I
may enter the workforce as a health
physicist or radiation scientist. If not,
I will likely pursue graduate studies in
the field.
Ottawa 2011 was your first CRPA conference. What was your favourite conference
moment?
CS: The
banquet at the Canadian
Museum of Civilization was an inspiring event held in a beautiful facility. I
had the opportunity to speak to many
CRPA members about their experiences in our profession.
Vol 32 No 2 / 27
Design of a Portable Alpha Detector
for a Radiation Triage Mask
by Lenora Makin & Chad Shew
University of Ontario Institute of Technology
Background
A radiation triage mask (RTM) is a portable field device equipped
with radiation detection capabilities. This device would be used
in health risk or terrorist threat scenarios where a radiological dispersal device (RDD) could be detonated and a population could
be at risk of receiving radioactive particulate deposition, both
internally and externally. Through the installed Geiger–Müller
(GM) counter and gamma spectroscopy detectors, an RTM is
capable of detecting alpha, beta, and gamma radiation. However,
the RTM has very limited efficiency detecting alpha particles due
to their short range in air. The aim of this project is to design and
construct a dedicated alpha detector that can be incorporated
into an existing RTM.
The ultimate need for alpha detection capabilities in an RTM
would be in the event that an RDD containing an alpha emitter
were detonated. The alpha-emitting radionuclides most likely
used in an RDD are Am-241, Cf-252, Po-210, Pu-238, or Ra-226.
Alpha radiation particles cannot penetrate the dead layer of skin,
however, if inhaled, the particles irradiate the lining of the lungs.
Because of their high linear energy transfer (LET), inhaled alpha
radiation particles can cause direct damage to the critical targets
of cells (Giaccia & Hall, 2006).
Detection of particulate on the face indicates that there is
deposition in the lungs. This is represented quantitatively by what
is known as the orofacial-to-lung (OL) ratio. For the purposes of
an RTM alpha detector, this ratio is assumed to be 10% (Sangwan,
Burak & Gerald, 2003). That is, we assume 10% of the alpha
activity present in the lungs will be present on the orofacial region.
In the following section, we use the OL ratio to determine a target
minimum detectable activity for the alpha detector.
Table 1: Orofacial Detectable Activity Dependent on Dose for Pu-2
DCF(F) =1.1 × 10-1 mSv/Bq
Dose (mSv)
Intake
OF Activity
DCF(M) =4.6 × 10-2
Intake
DCF(S) = 1.6 × 10-2
OF Activity
Intake
OF Activity
1*
9.09
0.91
21.74
2.17
62.50
6.25
2
18.18
1.82
43.48
4.35
125.00
12.50
3
27.27
2.73
65.22
6.52
187.50
18.75
5
45.45
4.55
108.70
10.87
312.50
31.25
10
90.91
9.09
217.39
21.74
625.00
62.50
20
181.82
18.18
434.78
43.48
1250.00
125.00
50
454.55
45.45
1086.96
108.70
3125.00
312.50
100
909.09
90.91
2173.91
217.39
6250.00
625.00
* DCF Source: ICRP Publication 72: Age-dependent Doses to the Members of the Public from Intake of Radionuclides, Part 5: Compilation of Ingestion and Inhalation Coefficients, Table A.2: Inhalation Dose Coefficients (Values for Adults).
28 / Vol 32 No 2
Determination of Target Minimum
Detectable Activity
Design of the Detector
An RTM alpha detector is designed to detect alpha activity on the
face that corresponds to a 50 mSv lung dose. As stated earlier, the
OL ratio assumes that the detectable activity on the face is 10%
of the activity in the lungs. Therefore this ratio can be used to
determine the detector’s target activity, as shown below:
DCF Source: ICRP Publication 72: Age-dependent Doses to
the Members of the Public from Intake of Radionuclides, Part 5:
Compilation of Ingestion and Inhalation Coefficients, Table A.2:
Inhalation Dose Coefficients (Values for Adults).
Table 1 illustrates that a worst-case-scenario lung dose of 50
mSv corresponds to 45 Bq activity on the orofacial region. Thus,
the alpha detector should be able to determine the presence of at
least 45 Bq of alpha activity.
In this section, we provide the design of our RTM ZnS(Ag)
Scintillator Alpha Detector. This is followed by a theoretical
analysis of the detector performance, and then the supporting
laboratory results. A basic overview of the detector setup and its
expected use are also provided in this section. Justification for
our component choice, placement, and integration are provided
in the performance analysis section.
As seen in Figure 1, the detector consists of a series of components integrated sequentially into the RTM side panel. The
face-end of the RTM side panel becomes the detector window,
through which alpha particles pass. A protective steel mesh covers
the detector window. Directly behind the mesh is an ultrathin
layer of aluminized Mylar (thickness of approximately 2 μm).
There is a thin (60 μm) layer of ZnS(Ag) crystalline scintillator
powder immediately following the Mylar film. This powder layer
is applied directly to a thin layer of Lucite using optically transparent double-sided tape (not shown on schematic). The Lucite layer
is then followed by a 2 cm air gap, enclosed on the top, bottom,
and sides by plane mirrors. The back side of the air gap leads directly to the PMT, which extends another 4 cm toward the front
panel of the RTM. The PMT signal cable (not shown) extends
from the base of the PMT and connects to the RTM’s electronics
in the front panel.
Figure 1: Detector Assembly Overview Schematic (not to scale)
Vol 32 No 2 / 29
Figure 2: (a) RTM Upright View (b) RTM (side view) in operation for Alpha Detection
As seen in Figure 2(b), the detector window is designed to
be in contact with a Kimwipe, which is then in contact with the
individual’s face. In other words, the Kimwipe lies between the
detector and the individual’s face. Light pressure is applied to the
RTM handle to hold the Kimwipe in place against the face and to
eliminate unnecessary air gaps. The detector window encompasses
an area of approximately 12 cm2, which is enough to cover a large
portion of an average person’s orofacial region (Tilley, 2002).
Analysis of Theoretical Performance
What follows is a simulation of the detector’s efficiency. A starting activity of 45 Bq was chosen based on previous calculations.
Performance of each detector component is handled sequentially—energy, light, and count losses due to each component are
all taken into account. A conservative approach is used where
possible to avoid overestimation of the efficiency.
Figure 3: Sequence of Interactions in Detector (not to scale)
30 / Vol 32 No 2
In the event of radioactive dispersal, it is assumed a thin layer
of alpha-emitting radionuclide will be deposited on an individual’s face. The activity of the radionuclide is assumed to be low (≈
45 Bq), however it could potentially be spread over a large area.
Thus, it is essential to maximize the surface area of the detector
in order to maximize detectable activity. For this reason, a detector surface area of 12 cm2 was chosen. It should also be noted that
the deposited particulate layer is assumed to be sufficiently thin,
such that minimal self-absorption of alpha particles occurs.
As shown above, alpha particles may be emitted over 180
degrees from numerous points on the orofacial area. This results
in a diffuse spread of alpha particles away from the face. Since
the other 180 degrees (pointed toward the face) represents lost
(undetectable) alpha particles, we can immediately state the
following:
As stated previously, a Kimwipe is to be placed between the
face and the detector window. Empirically, it was found that
a standard Kimwipe attenuates a source of alpha particles by
approximately 50%. This measurement assumes essentially no air
gap between the face, Kimwipe, and detector window. Such an
assumption is valid, since the detector should be pressed lightly
against the Kimwipe (as seen in Figure 2).
The majority of the alpha particles reaching the detector
window will pass through the mesh and the ultrathin Mylar film,
however, some of the detector window surface area is taken up by
the steel mesh.
A square unit of the mesh is shown below:
It can be assumed all alpha particles that reach the Mylar film
will pass through the mesh, and some energy loss will occur. As
a conservative measure, this is taken into account by reducing
the incident alpha particle energy to 3 MeV from the average of
≈5 MeV at the source. This loss also accounts for any miniscule
air gaps between the detector and face or between the Kimwipe
layer and the detector. A loss of 2 MeV is roughly equivalent to a
2 cm air gap.
Aluminized Mylar was chosen to precede the ZnS(Ag) scintillator primarily due to its excellent light-blocking ability and its
availability as an ultrathin film. Optimal density thickness for
alpha penetration was found to be ≈ 0.25 mg/cm2 (Vainblat et
al., 2004). The Mylar density is 1.40 g/cm2 (National Institute of
Standards and Technology, 2010).
Upon passing through the Mylar film, the alpha particles
encounter the crystalline ZnS(Ag) scintillator layer. The ZnS(Ag)
layer must be sufficiently thin so as to not absorb its own scintillation light. Data show that loss of light becomes significant at
density thicknesses greater than 25 mg/cm2 (Knoll, 2000). The
ZnS density is 4.9 g/cm2 (Loyola University, 1992).
An individual alpha particle will promptly transfer its energy
to the ZnS(Ag), resulting in emission of photons at a wavelength
of 450 nm. The photon yield for ZnS(Ag) is ≈ 26,000 photons/
MeV (Derenzo, Boswell & Brennan, 2010), which leads to the
following:
As seen in figure 3, these photons will be emitted diffusely
into a 24 cm3 air gap. The top, bottom, and side boundaries of
the air gap are plane mirrors. These mirrors promote reflection of
photons toward the PMT target. Of the 78,000 photons, a large
percentage will not reach the PMT entrance window. This light
loss is due to the difference in size between the PMT entrance
window and the ZnS(Ag) scintillator surface.
Figure 4: Potential Photon Paths (not to scale)
Vol 32 No 2 / 31
Figure 4 (on page 31) shows a two dimensional simulation of
the emission of a few photons from the ZnS(Ag) surface. For this
illustration, a single point along the ZnS(Ag) surface was chosen,
from which only a few rays are emitted. It should be noted that
light can be emitted along the entire ZnS(Ag) surface in three
dimensions, and in any direction. If reflections are ignored and
the photons are assumed to emit in all directions, the following
calculation conservatively estimates the loss of light:
Table 2: Percentage Count Losses due to Individual Component
Sequence
Component/
Factor
% Loss
% Remain
α/s
0
Thin-Layer
Source
0
100
45
1
180°
Absorption
50
50
22
2
Kimwipe
50
25
11
3
Steel Mesh
20
20
9
4
Light Loss/
PMT
0
20
9
Experimental Results
It is then useful to determine the energy of each photon:
This leads to a simple determination of the total incident photon
energy per alpha particle:
Combining this quantity with the rate of α particles striking the
ZnS(Ag) produces the following yields:
The RTM alpha detector was used in the laboratory to count
small Po-210 and Am-241 disk sources. The Po-210 was approximately 4 mm in diameter and had an activity of 72 Bq, and the
Am-241 was approximately 4 mm in diameter with an activity of
33 kBq. Each counting run was performed for only ten seconds
to simulate the speed of counting in a field application. It should
be noted that due to the high light sensitivity of the PMT, the
counts obtained were significantly higher than the activity of the
sources. That is, for each alpha particle that interacted with the
detector, enough light was produced to result in multiple counts.
This phenomenon is taken into account by following calculation:
Using the count sensitivity quoted for the chosen PMT
(Hamamatsu, 2010), it is then possible to determine if any counts
will not be registered:
These equations indicate that the light output produced is still
about 2 orders of magnitude larger than the radiant power
required. This is primarily due to two major factors: (1) the
chosen PMT sensitivity exceeds the requirement, and (2) the
light output of ZnS(Ag) is relatively high. Taking all the aforementioned factors into consideration, it is finally possible to
determine the efficiency of the Portable Alpha Detector.
The dark counts associated with the electrical noise of the
PMT must also be considered. These are the counts that the PMT
will register when no source is present. They must be subtracted
from the gross counts because they are not generated by the
source. The dark counts were measured in the laboratory after
storing the PMT in darkness for 30 minutes. With no source
present near the detector, the dark counts were found to be
Table 3: Counting Results Averaged for Five 10-Second Counts with Two Different Sources
Nuclide
Gross Counts
Net Counts
Real Counts (10s)
Activity (Bq)
Efficiency (%)
Po-210
20300 ± 640
12300 ± 640
112 ± 6
72
16
Am-241
6299000 ± 6800
6291000 ± 6800
57190 ± 60
33200
17
32 / Vol 32 No 2
800 ± 2 cps. It should be noted that the dark counts did not vary
significantly, and therefore they could be reliably subtracted from
the gross counts.
Results were obtained by performing five 10-second counts
with each source placed over the detector. The averaged results
of the counting for the two sources are shown in Table 3 (on
page 32). The Gross Counts column shows the total counts registered by the detector. Net Counts refers to the counts after the
dark counts have been subtracted. The Real Counts are reported
by dividing the Net Counts by the Counts per Alpha Particle
(CPA), as determined above.
Conclusion
It is of interest to note that a very large portion of the count
losses are due to the external geometry of the counting. That is,
the intrinsic efficiency of the detector is expected to be very high.
It should also be noted that the theoretical calculated efficiency
is highly dependent on the thickness of the deposited layer of
radionuclide. This explains why the efficiency found in the counting experiments is lower than the theoretical efficiency. A thin
deposited layer with a large surface area would be detected with
a higher counting efficiency than the disk sources used in the
experiments. This is because the large surface area of the detector
favours a thin layer as opposed to a point source. In addition, for
a thin layer there would be less self-absorption of alpha particles,
which would further increase the counting efficiency.
In the event of radioactive dispersal, the radionuclide can be
modeled to exist as a thin layer on the face. In reality, the layer
may not be of uniform thickness, but it is still likely to be thinner
than the disk sources used in the laboratory. Thus the detector
would be expected to perform with greater efficiency in the field
than in the laboratory tests.
Even considering the lowest obtained efficiency (16%), the
detector is still able to achieve its target detectable activity. For an
intake leading to a 50 mSv dose, the orofacial activity is estimated
at 45 Bq and experimental results indicate that the detector
would register 7 cps (420 cpm). Therefore, in the event of a
dispersal of radioactivity, the detector is expected to be more than
capable of determining the presence and relative activity of an
alpha-emitting radionuclide.
References
Cember, H. (1996). Introduction to Health
Physics (3rd ed.). New York: The
McGraw-Hill Companies.
Derenzo, S., Boswell, M., & Brennan,
K. (2010, October 25). Scintillation
Properties. Retrieved November 27,
2010, from http://scintillator.lbl.gov.
Giaccia, A. J. & Hall, E. J. (2006).
Radiobiology for the Radiologist (6th ed.).
Philidelphia: Lippincot Williams &
Wilkins.
Hamamatsu. (2010). Photon Counting Head
H10682 Series. Japan: Hamamatsu
Photonics K. K.
Knoll, G. F. (2000). Radiation Detection and
Measurement. Hoboken: John Wiley &
Sons Inc.
Loyola University. (1992). Interactive
Materials. Retrieved November 25,
2010, from http://www.luc.edu/faculty/spavko1/minerals/zns/zns-main.
htm.
National Institute of Standards and
Technology. (2010, October 5).
Composition of Polyethylene Terephthalate
(Mylar). Retrieved November 25, 2010,
from http://physics.nist.gov/cgibin/
Star/compos.pl?matno=222.
Sangwan, S., Burak K., G., & Gerald C.,
S. (2003, October 21). Facemasks and
Facial Deposition of Aerosols. Pediatric
Pulmonology, 37(5), pp. 447-452.
Tilley, A. R. (2002). The Measure of Man
& Woman: Human Factors in Design
(Revised edition). New York: John
Wiley & Sons Inc.
Vainblat et al. (2004). Determination
of Parameters Relevant to Alpha
Spectrometry when Employing Source
Coating. Applied Radiation and Isotopes,
61, pp. 307-311.
Leah Shuparski Catches Up With This Year’s Student Paper Contest Winners
LM: My
favourite part of the conference
was right after I finished presenting.
I got to feel like an expert for 10
minutes and tell everyone about the
hard work and research we had done
at UOIT. That was pretty satisfying. I
also agree with Chad that the banquet
was a definite highlight of the week.
Your interview will be read by most of the
CRPA membership. Is there anything you’d
like to say to them? CS: I
would like to give my sincerest
thanks to the members and organizers
for putting on a great conference, and
for keeping CRPA at the forefront
of the industry. I would also like to
encourage continued support and
interest in student initiatives.
LM: Thank you! I really enjoyed myself
at the conference, and I definitely
encourage them to keep striving for
student involvement. My warmest
regards to the organizers and members for participating.
Vol 32 No 2 / 33
Editor’s Note
as a profession, several technical visits, and training opportunities
in instrumentation, emergency measures, and transportation of
dangerous goods, kept delegates busy. Conference co-chairs Chris
Clement and Gary Kramer, along with all 20 members of their
local organizing committee, have reason to be proud!
Again this year, we discussed key elements of radiation safety,
both ionizing and non-ionizing, focusing particularly on patient
dosing as part of new advances in medical imaging. The growing
proportion of doses coming from the medical field will be one of
the challenges in coming years. For many observers, communicating the associated risks and issues surrounding patient dosing
from medical imaging to the main stakeholders will be a cornerstone in addressing concerns.
It is worth noting that, other than the special presentations on
Fukushima and the development of emergency measures, we barely
discussed nuclear reactors at the CRPA conference, even though
the CANDU reactors are still making headlines in the three
nuclear provinces—Ontario, New Brunswick, and Quebec. On the
subject of our industry, the conference presented an opportunity
for exhibitors and service providers to spend a couple of days meeting regular and potential clients in a friendly atmosphere.
The national capital welcomed numerous radiation safety professionals who had a hunger for knowledge. Their physical appetite was
not to be ignored either; they received a very “civilized” invitation to
a reception at the Canadian Museum of Civilization in Gatineau.
This rather posh event recognized the work of several CRPA members, including Roger Hugron, chair of the translation committee,
who received the Meritorious Service Award (he is responsible for a
conference participant booklet); Wayne Tiefenbach, former CRPA
treasurer, who received the Founders Award; and Chris Clement,
for earned the prestigious Distinguished Achievement Award for
his outstanding contribution to CRPA. While chowing down on
bison, participants enjoyed Inuit throat singing and Native dancing,
which contributed to the “civilization” of the Museum.
Finally, while participants took part in the conference, the
board of directors and a few committees took an opportunity to
meet in person. The CRPA annual general meeting took place
once again. According to certain members, this meeting is becoming increasingly expeditious. Is it more efficient? In just an hour
and a half, a new board of directors was introduced, a budget
approved, a new electoral process (including online voting)
explored, and the results of the many CRPA task forces discussed
briefly. Maybe CRPA’s new document-free approach has something to do with it; it seems very few attendees had time to read
the documents ahead of the meeting. Perhaps these documents
could be presented on posters or projected during the session?
This might be a good question to put to our new president, Lois
Sowden-Plunkett, and president-elect, Gary Kramer. Over the
coming year, they will have to rise to many challenges, including
maintaining the association’s finances.
CRPA-registered members also met during the conference, as
did members of the communications committee and the Bulletin
34 / Vol 32 No 2
editorial board. In the next few issues of the newsletter, we will
explore the tasks of these committees. To begin, I would like to
introduce our regular Bulletin contributors: Mike Grey writes our
book reviews, Emélie Lamothe writes the Health Physics Corner
(Emelie will be back for the next issue), and Leah Shuparski (who
organized the discussion group on the future of radiation safety
careers for the conference) writes the Student Corner.
I will also take this opportunity to announce that the next
issue of the Bulletin will be a special issue on Fukushima. We
would like you to share your feelings about the accident and to
tell us how you used your expertise in response to what happened. Please send your ideas or thoughts to the secretariat at
[email protected].
Stéphane
Editor-in-chief, CRPA Bulletin
Message du
rédacteur en chef
ont tenu occupé les délégués. Les coprésidents du congrès, Chris
Clement et Gary Kramer, ainsi que l’ensemble des 20 membres
du comité organisateur local peuvent en être fiers!
Cette année encore, nous avons discuté des éléments clés en
radioprotection, tant ionisante que non ionisante, en insistant
particulièrement sur les doses administrées aux patients dans le
cadre des nouvelles avancées en imagerie médicale. La portion
grandissante de doses exposant la population et provenant du
domaine médical compte en effet parmi les défis des prochaines
années et, aux yeux de plusieurs observateurs, la communication
aux intervenants principaux des risques et des enjeux associés au
dosage des patients en imagerie médicale constituera l’une des
pierres angulaires pour répondre aux inquiétudes reliées. Fait à
souligner, mis à part la présentation spéciale sur Fukushima et
l’évolution des mesures d’urgences, le congrès n’a pas abordé la
question des réacteurs nucléaires, bien que les CANDU soient
toujours d’actualité dans les trois provinces nucléaires que sont
l’Ontario, le Nouveau-Brunswick et le Québec. Parlant d’industrie, le congrès a permis à nos exposants et fournisseurs de
services de rencontrer pendant deux jours leurs clients réguliers
et potentiels dans une atmosphère conviviale. La capitale nationale a accueilli plusieurs professionnels en
radioprotection qui avaient soif de savoir. Leur appétit physique
n’a cependant pas été ignoré et ces derniers ont été invités de
façon fort civile, comme dirait Lafontaine, au Musée canadien
des civilisations à Gatineau. Cette réception élégante a couronné
les efforts de plusieurs membres de l’ACRP, dont Roger Hugron,
président du comité de traduction, qui a reçu le prix des services méritoires. Roger était d’ailleurs responsable d’un cahier du
participant au congrès. Wayne Tiefenbach, ancien trésorier de
l’ACRP, s’est vu remettre le prix des Fondateurs et, comme nous
le mentionnions plus haut, Christopher Clement s’est mérité le
prestigieux prix pour accomplissement distingué en raison de son
Submission Procedures
Authors submitting manuscripts for consideration
are asked to follow these guidelines.
extraordinaire contribution à l’ACRP en
tant que co-organisateur du congrès. Entre
deux bouchées de bisons, les participants
ont pu apprécier les chants de gorges
inuit, tout comme les danses amérindiennes, ce qui contribuait au volet « civilisations » du Musée.
Finalement, pendant que les participants profitaient du congrès, le conseil
d’administration et quelques-uns de ses
comités en ont profité pour se rencontrer
en personne. L’assemblée générale de
l’ACRP a eu lieu une fois de plus et, aux
dires de certains membres, cette assemblée semble de plus en plus expéditive.
Est-elle plus efficace ? En une heure et
demie, un nouveau conseil d’administration a été présenté, un budget approuvé,
un nouveau procédé électoral effleuré,
incluant le vote électronique, et nous
avons même discuté sommairement des
résultats des nombreux groupes de travail
de l’ACRP. La nouvelle approche sans
document de l’ACRP y est peut-être pour
beaucoup, car il appert que bien peu de
participants à l’assemblée générale ont
eu le temps de lire les documents avant
la tenue de l’assemblée. Pourrions-nous
présenter ces documents sur des affiches?
Ou les projeter pendant la séance? Notre
nouvelle présidente Lois Sowden-Plunkett
et le président élu Gary Kramer devront
se pencher sur la question. Ils auront
d’ailleurs plusieurs défis à relever au cours
de la prochaine année, dont le maintien
des finances de l’association.
Les membres agréés de l’ACRP ont
également tenu une réunion, tout comme
les membres du comité de communication
et le comité éditorial du Bulletin. Dans les
prochains numéros, nous reviendrons sur
les tâches de ces comités. Entre temps,
j’aimerais présenter nos collaborateurs
réguliers : Mike Grey, critique de livres ;
Emélie Lamothe, chroniqueure du Coin
des spécialistes de radioprotection ; et
Leah Shurpasky, qui a organisé le groupe
de discussion sur l’avenir des carrières
en radioprotection pour le congrès, est
aussi chroniqueure pour le Coin des
étudiants. J’en profite également pour
annoncer notre prochain numéro spécial,
qui portera sur Fukushima. D’ici là, nous
aimerions recevoir vos témoignages :
Comment avez-vous vécu cette catastrophe
et comment avez-vous mis votre expertise
à profit en réponse à ce qui s’est produit?
N’hésitez pas à nous envoyer vos réflexions
et vos idées à l’adresse secretariat2007@
crpa-acrp.ca. Stéphane
Rédacteur en chef, Bulletin de l’ACRP
Message du Président
derniers détails; le comité de traduction accomplit un travail extraordinaire afin que
tous les documents soient prêts dans les deux langues officielles, non seulement pour
le congrès, mais aussi pour l’assemblée générale annuelle; et le conseil d’administration, ainsi que le secrétariat, se préparent à vous rencontrer et à rendre compte de leur
rendement au cours de la dernière année. Tandis que j’écris ces lignes, nombreux sont
les membres de l’association qui préparent leurs présentations pour le congrès annuel.
Le congrès est parfait pour rencontrer nos pairs, tisser de nouvelles amitiés et revoir
des amis de longue date. Bref, c’est une belle occasion de célébrer. J’espère que nous
réussirons bientôt à réunir tous les experts de la radioprotection du Canada lors de nos
congrès annuels. C’est le temps de rencontrer vos collègues et vos amis de longue date,
de faire de nouvelles connaissances et de célébrer. Mon souhait est de bientôt réussir à
réunir tous les spécialistes de la radioprotection du Canada à nos congrès annuels.
Sandu Sonoc
Président sortant, ACRP
1.Submit manuscripts (in English or French)
electronically as attachments (in Microsoft
Word®).
2.Include the title of the paper, author(s) name(s)
and affiliation(s), and email address to which
correspondence should be sent.
3.Include an abstract of no more than 200 words
and a biographical note of not more than 50
words for the author and any co-authors.
4.Submission of a manuscript implies that it is
not being considered for publication elsewhere.
Once accepted for publication in the Bulletin,
consent from the editor must be obtained
before a manuscript, or any part of it, may be
published elsewhere in the same form.
5.Authors are invited to submit manuscripts at
any time during the year to
Editor (c/o CRPA Secretariat)
ph: 613-253-3779
Deadlines
Materials must be received by the editor no later
than the following dates:
Number 1......................January 15
Number 2......................April 15
Number 3......................July 15
Number 4......................October 15
Advertising
While advertisements are sought after and
accepted to offset the production costs of the
Bulletin, the newsletter is published primarily
for, and on behalf of, CRPA / ACRP members.
Therefore inclusion of advertisements is entirely
at the discretion of the association. CRPA / ACRP
reserves the right to reject, omit, or cancel any
advertisements that are not in keeping with the
professional nature of the Bulletin or in any other
way inappropriate for our members.
Advertorials
Advertorials are a new advertising feature for the
Bulletin and are available at the same rate as
display advertising. If a client requires assistance with writing, editing, or production of their
advertorial, these services can be negotiated with
the production company responsible for producing the Bulletin. For more information, contact
Michelle Boulton at [email protected].
Publishing Office
For rates, technical specifications, deadlines, and
any information about advertising, contact the
publishing office.
Ph: (306) 343-8519
Email: [email protected]
Vol 32 No 2 / 35
Contributors
Chris Clement, a certified
health physicist, has worked
in radiation safety since the
1980s, first on environmental
restoration projects, then with
the Canadian Nuclear Safety
Commission, where he was the
director of radiation protection
when he left in 2008. He is currently the scientific secretary of
the International Commission
on Radiological Protection.
Chris Clement, expert de radiophysique médicale sanitaire
agréé, travaille en radioprotection depuis les années 1980,
d’abord dans des projets de
restauration environnementale,
puis avec la Commission canadienne de sûreté nucléaire, où
il portait le chapeau de directeur de la radioprotection à son
départ en 2008. Aujourd’hui,
il occupe le poste de secrétaire
scientifique de la Commission
internationale de protection
radiologique (CIPR).
Michael Grey is a senior analyst
with Candesco Corporation in
Toronto, Ontario, and pastpresident of CRPA.
Michael Grey est analyste
principal chez Candesco
Corporation de Toronto,
Ontario, et ancien président de
l’ACRP.
working for the Canadian
Nuclear Safety Commission
(CNSC), specializing in nuclear
waste and its management
in Canada. However, she has
always been interested in the
biological effects of radiation
and is interested in moving into
the health-care profession as a
certified health physicist.
Hoa Ly, a Canadian registered safety professional and
Certified in Management, has
worked in occupational health
and safety since 1992. He is
a CRPA(R) and has been a
member of CRPA since 1999.
He currently works as a radiation safety coordinator at the
University of Western Ontario
in London, Ontario.
Hoa Ly, professionnel en sécurité agréé du Canada et certifié
en gestion, a œuvré en santé et
sécurité au travail depuis 1992.
Il a obtenu le titre CRPA(R) et
est membre de l’ACRP depuis
1999. Il travaille présentement
à titre de coordonnateur en
radioprotection à la University
of Western Ontario, à London,
en Ontario.
Lenora Makin, récemment
diplômée de l’Institut universitaire de technologie de
l’Ontario (UOIT), détient un
baccalauréat en science de la
radioprotection et en science
du rayonnement. Elle habite
présentement à Ottawa et
travaille pour la Commission
canadienne de sûreté nucléaire
(CCSN), se spécialisant en
déchets nucléaires et en leur
gestion au Canada. Toutefois,
les effets biologiques de la radiation l’ont toujours intéressée et
elle pense faire éventuellement
le saut dans le secteur des soins
de la santé à titre de spécialiste
en radioprotection agréée.
Chad Shew is a 4th year student
in health physics and radiation
science at the University of
Ontario Institute of Technology
Lenora Makin, a recent gradu(UOIT). He is currently
ate from the University of
performing research under Dr.
Ontario Institute of Technology Ed Waller to investigate the
(UOIT), has a bachelor of
relationship between inhalation
science in health physics and
of radioactive particulates
radiation science. She is curand orofacial swipes. He has
rently living in Ottawa and
36 / Vol 32 No 2
also worked as a student in
the Bruce Power Radiation
Protection Department and at
the Ontario Power Generation
Health Physics Laboratory.
Chad’s interests include specialized detection instrumentation
and the biological effects of
radiation.
Chad Shew en est à sa quatrième année en radioprotection et en science du rayonnement à l’Institut universitaire
de technologie de l’Ontario
(UOIT). Il effectue présentement ses recherches sous
la direction de Dr Ed Waller
afin d’enquêter sur la relation
entre l’inhalation de particules
radioactives et la formation du
orofacial swipe. Il a également
travaillé comme étudiant à
l’unité de la radioprotection de
Bruce Power, ainsi qu’au labo
de radiologie de la Ontario
Power Generation. Les points
d’intérêt de Chad comprennent
l’appareillage de détection spécialisé, de même que les effets
biologiques de la radiation.
Leah Shuparski is an MSc candidate at McMaster University
and a soon-to-be medical
health physicist at the Ottawa
Hospital.
Leah Shuparski est étudiante à
la maîtrise en radioprotection
à l’Université McMaster et
bientôt, spécialiste en radiopro-
Processus de soumission
Les auteurs désirant soumettre des manuscrits
pour considération sont priés de suivre ces lignes
directrices.
tection médicale à l’Hôpital
d’Ottawa.
Dave Wilkins is the radiation
safety officer and a senior
medical physicist at the Ottawa
Hospital Cancer Centre. He is
the president of the Canadian
College of Physicists in
Medicine, and is on the board
of the Canadian Organization
of Medical Physicists.
Thank You
The editors would like to
extend special thanks to
Valerie Phelan, Radiation/
Chemical/Biosafety Officer
at Ryerson University, for
the use of her conference
photos, which were featured
prominently throughout this
issue of the Bulletin.
2.Inclure le titre de la communication, le(s) nom(s)
et l’affiliation de l’(des) auteur(s) et l’adresse
courriel à laquelle la correspondance devrait
être envoyée.
3.Inclure un résumé d’un maximum de 200 mots
et une note biographique d’un maximum de 50
mots pour l’auteur et tout co-auteur, s’il y a lieu.
4.La soumission d’un manuscrit implique qu’il
n’est pas considéré ailleurs pour publication.
Une fois sa publication acceptée dans le Bulletin, il est essentiel d’obtenir le consentement
du rédacteur en chef avant qu’un manuscrit, ou
toute partie d’un manuscrit, puisse être publié
ailleurs sous le même format.
5.Les auteurs sont invités à soumettre des manuscrits à tout moment au cours de l’année à
Rédacteur en chef (secrétariat de l’ACRP)
Tél : (613) 253-3779
Courriel : [email protected]
Dates limites
Le matériel doit être reçu par le rédacteur en chef
au plus tard par les dates suivantes :
Numéro 1......................15 janvier
Numéro 2......................15 avril
Numéro 3......................15 juillet
Numéro 4......................15 octobre
President’s
Message
Dave Wilkins est responsable de la radioprotection et
physicien médical principal
au Centre de cancérologie de
l’Hôpital d’Ottawa. Il est le
président du Collège canadien
des physiciens en médecine,
en plus de siéger au conseil
d’administration de l’Organisation canadienne des physiciens
médicaux. 1.Soumettre les manuscrits (en anglais ou en
français) par attachement électronique (sous
format Microsoft Word®).
languages. The board of directors and the
secretariat are preparing to meet and report
to you on our performance over the past
year. The corporate members are ready to
show us their marvellous new developments
and the invited presenters are preparing to
show us what is new in the field of radiation
protection in Canada.
As I am writing this message, many of
our members are preparing presentations for
the conference. The conference is a time to
meet your colleagues and your old friends,
and to make new friends; it is a time of celebration. My hope is that we will soon manage to bring together all Canadian radiation
safety specialists at our annual conferences.
Sandu Sonoc
Past President, CRPA
Publicités
Bien que les publicités soient recherchées et
acceptées pour contrer les coûts de production
du Bulletin, la lettre est d’abord publiée pour et
au nom des membres de l’ACRP. Ainsi, le fait
d’inclure des annonces demeure entièrement à
la discrétion de l’association. L’ACRP se réserve
le privilège de refuser, omettre ou annuler toute
publicité qui ne serait pas pertinente à la nature
professionnelle du Bulletin ou qui serait d’une
manière quelconque inappropriée pour nos
membres.
Articles publicitaires
Les articles publicitaires sont une nouvelle option
de publicité dans le Bulletin et sont disponibles
au même taux que les publicités par annonce. Si
un client a besoin d’appui avec la rédaction, l’édition ou la production de son article publicitaire,
ces services peuvent être négociés auprès de
l’entreprise responsable de la production du Bulletin. Pour plus d’information, contactez Michelle
Boulton à [email protected].
Bureau de publication
Pour les taux, les spécifications techniques, les
échéanciers et toute autre information au sujet de
la publicité, contactez le bureau de publication.
Tél : (306) 343-8519
Courriel : [email protected]
Vol 32 No 2 / 37
Election Nominations
CRPA Board of Directors
The Nominations Committee is seeking individuals for consideration to stand for election for the following positions:
President Elect • Treasurer • Director (2)
All full members are encouraged to submit the name of a person(s)who they would like to be considered as a candidate(s) by the
Nominations Committee for the upcoming election. Members nominated must be CRPA members in good standing.
If you are interested or know a member who should be considered, please contact any member of the Nominations Committee (see listing in
this Bulletin under CRPA Committees) or email the Secretariat at [email protected].
Deadline for recommendations is October 31st.
Nomination pour élection
Conseil d’administration de l’ ACRP
Le comité des nominations recherche des individus qui désirent soumettre leur nom afin d’être considérés pour les élections aux postes suivants :
Président(e)-élu(e) • Trésorier • Directeur (2)
Tous les membres à part entière sont encouragés à proposer des personnes qui aimeraient être considérés comme candidats par le comité de nomination pour les prochaines élections. Les candidats potentiels doivent être des membres en règle de l’Association.
Si vous êtes intéressé(e) ou connaissez une autre membre pouvant l’être, veuillez contacter une membre du comité de nominations (voir la liste dans ce
Bulletin sous les comités) ou envoyez un courriel à l’attention du Secrétariat à l’adresse suivante : [email protected].
La date limite est le 31 octobre.
CRPA members are drawn from all areas
of radiation protection, including hospitals,
universities, the nuclear power industry,
and all levels of government. Membership
is divided into five categories: full members
(includes retired members), associate and
student members, honourary members,
and corporate members.
Application forms are available on the
CRPA website (www.crpa-acrp.ca) or
from the secretariat (secretariat2007@
crpa-acrp.ca).
Readers’ Corner
This is where you get to share your
ideas and opinions or to comment on
something we have published in the
Bulletin. Try to keep your letters to no
more than 500 words, and include
your name and affiliation with your
letter.Send your letters to:
[email protected]
Les membres de l’ACRP proviennent de
tous les horizons de la radioprotection,
y compris les hôpitaux, les universités,
l’industrie nucléaire génératrice d’électricité
et tous les niveaux du gouvernement. Les
membres sont classés selon cinq catégories: membres à part entière (y compris les
membres retraités), membres associés et
étudiants, membres honoraires, et membres corporatifs.
Les formulaires de demande d’adhésion
peuvent être obtenus sur le site Web
(www.crpa-acrp.ca) ou auprès du secrétariat ([email protected]).
38 / Vol 32 No 2
Coin des lecteurs
Le Coin des lecteurs vous permet de
partager vos idées, d’émettre votre
opinion ou encore de donner votre
commentaire au sujet d’une publication antérieure du Bulletin. Nous vous
demandons de limiter votre correspondance à moins de 500 mots et d’y
inclure votre nom et affiliation. Envoyer
vos lettres à :
[email protected]
What's Up?
SPEAK OUT
Do you know of an upcoming event that
might be of interest to your fellow CRPA
members? Send the event information to
[email protected] and we
can include it in the next issue of the
Bulletin.
Quoi de neuf?
Connaissez-vous une activité qui
pourrait intéresser vos collègues de
l'ACRP? Faites-en parvenir les renseignements relatifs à l'adresse courriel
[email protected] et
nous pourrons en faire la promotion
dans la section "Réunions à venir"
du Bulletin.
CRPA Corporate Members /
ACRP Membres corporatifs
Coming Events /
Réunions à venir
• International Commission on
Radiological Protection (ICRP)
Symposium on the International
System of Radiological Protection
October 24–26, 2011, North Bethesda,
MD. Held every two years, this meeting
brings together scientists and policy
makers from around the world. Their
recommendations form the basis of
radiation safety standards, regulations,
policies, guidelines, programs,
and practice worldwide. For more
information, visit www.icrp.org.
• Health Physics Society 2012 Midyear
Topical Meeting—Issues in Waste
Management February 5–8, 2012,
Dallas, TX. For more information, visit
www.hps.org/meetings.
• Living with Radiation—Engaging with
Society, 13th International Congress
of the International Radiation
Protection Association (IRPA) May
13–18, 2012, Glasgow, Scotland.
For more information, visit www.
irpa13glasgow.com.
• 2012 CRPA Annual Conference
May 27-30, 2012, Halifax, NS. The
Conference will be planned around
the theme “Time to Prepare” and will
include invited presentations on both
ionizing and non-ionizing radiation.
Contributed papers spanning the full
range of health physics and radiation
protection are encouraged around this
theme. For more information, visit
www.crpa-acrp.com. Plan to attend
CRPA Halifax 2012 . . . There will be
so much to sea!
• Health Physics Society 57th Annual
Meeting. July 22–26, 2012, Sacramento,
CA. For more information, visit www.
hps.org/meetings.
Atomix Nuclear Services
Bruce Conning
Unit 1, 250 Thompson Drive
Cambridge, ON
Canada N1T 2E3
tel:519-624-7233
fax:519-624-6853
www. atomixnuclear.com
Gamble Technologies
Janice Langaigne
6535 Millcreek Drive, Unit 58
Mississauga, ON L5N 2M2
tel: 905-812-9200 or
800-268-2735
fax:905-812-9203
www.gtl.ca
BC Centre for Disease Control
Terry Spock
Main Floor, 655 12th Ave W
Vancouver, BC V5Z 4R4
tel:604-707-2442
fax:604-707-2441
www.bccdc.ca
Harpell Associates Inc.
1272 Speers Road, Unit 2
Oakville, ON L6L 2X4
tel:905-825-2588
800-387-7168
fax:905-825-0234
www.harpellassociates.com
Canadian Association of Medical
Radiation Technologists
Mark Given
Suite 1000, 85 Albert Street
Ottawa, ON K1P 6A4
tel:613-234-0012
fax:613-234-1097
www.camrt.ca
Hopewell Designs, Inc.
Joy Garrett
5940 Gateway Drive
Alpharetta, GA USA 30004
tel:770-667-5770
fax:770-667-7539
www.hopewelldesigns.com
Canberra Co.
Jim Outos
West - 50B Caldari Road
Concord, ON L4K 4N8
tel:905-660-5373
fax:905-660-9693
www.canberra.com
Danatec Educational Services
Warren Bailey
201, 11450 29th St. SE
Calgary, AB T2Z 3V5
tel:403-723-3289
www.danatec.com
Durridge Company, Inc.
Derek Lane-Smith
7 Railroad Avenue, Suite D
Bedford, MA USA 01730
tel:781-687-9556
fax:781-687-0955
www.durridge.com
Energy Solutions Canada
Ron Leblond
Head Office
190 Wilkinson Rd., Unit #2
Brampton, ON L6T 4W3
tel:800-665-7736
fax:905-450-8523
www.monserco.com
F & J Specialty Products
F. M. Gavila
404 Cypress Rd.
Ocala, FL USA 34472
tel:352-680-1177
fax:352-680-1454
www.fjspecialty.com
J L Shepherd & Associates
Mary Shepherd
1010 Arroyo Avenue
San Fernando, CA USA 91340-1822
tel:818-898-2361
fax:818-361-8095
www.jlshepherd.com
Landauer, Inc
2 Science Road
Glenwood, IL USA 60425
tel:708-755-7000
fax:708-755-7011
www.landauerinc.com
Lou Champagne Systems Inc.
Lou Champagne
Unit 6B,1195 North Service Rd. W.
Oakville, ON L6M 2W2
tel:905-338-1176
fax:905-338-6426
www.louchampagnesystemsinc.com
Marshield—
Division of Mars Metal Co.
David Holden
4140 Morris Drive
Burlington, ON L7L 5L6
tel:800-381-5335
fax:905-637-8841
www.marshield.com
www.marsmetal.com
Mirion Technologies
Louis Biacchi
2652 McGaw Avenue
Irvine, CA USA 92614
tel: 888-419-10000 or
949-419-1000, ext 2316
fax:949-296-1130
www.mirion.com
National Dosimetry Services
Radiation Protection Bureau
Dan Karov
775 Brookfield Road, 6301D
Ottawa, ON K1A 1C1
tel:800-261-6689
fax:613-957-8698
800-252-6272
www.hc-sc.gc.ca/hecs-sesc/nds
Radiation Measurement
Systems
Ernie Franzese
81 Romeo Crescent
Woodbridge, ON L4L 7A2
tel:905-856-5950
fax:905-851-7473
www.radiation-measurementsystems.com
Radiation Safety Institute
of Canada
Maria Costa
165 Avenue Road, Suite 300
Toronto, ON M5R 3S4
tel: 416-650-9090
fax: 416-650-9920
www.radiationsafety.ca
Ray-Bar Engineering
Vince Wohler
PO Box 415
697 Foothill Boulevard
Azusa, CA USA 91702
tel:626-969-1818
fax:626-969-6510
www.raybar.com
Stuart Hunt and Associates
Trevor Beniston
20 Rayborn Crescent
St. Albert, AB T8N 4B1
tel: 780-458-0291 or
800-661-4591
fax:780-459-0746
www.stuarthunt.com
Technical Management
Services
Robin Rivard
PO Box 226
New Hartford, CT USA 06057
tel:860-738-2440
fax:860-738-9322
www.tmscourses.com
Uni-Vert Tech
Willy Rhein
3737 Notre-Dame Ouest
Montreal, QQ H4C 1P8
tel:514-573-2858
fax:514-937-9440
www.univerttech.ca www3.
sympatico.ca/rad.tech/english.html

Canadian Radiation Protection Association - CRPA-ACRP

Transcription

Documents pareils

, le Objet : Demande de radiation Monsieur, Je vous prie de bien

Modèle de lettre de demande de radiation

demande de radiation - Conseil national de l`Ordre des sages

GROS LOTS A GAGNER

centre de formalites des entreprises

Modèle de lettre procuration pour radiation

Modèle de lettre de résiliation

Dépôt d`annonces légales

attestation perte carte artisan - Chambre de métiers et de l`artisanat

Classe de Seconde Physique Thème abordé : Lumière. Refraction