Health Physics Society 48th Midyear Meeting

Norfolk, Virginia

Norfolk Waterside MarriottNorfolk, Virginia w 1-4 February 2015

Preliminary Program

1

Table of ContentsGeneral Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1Tours/Social Events . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1Exhibitors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3Technical Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4AAHP Courses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10PEP Courses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12CEL Courses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16Registration Form . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18

HEADQUARTERS HOTELNorfolk Waterside Marriott

Enjoy the luxury accommodations with traditional charm at the Norfolk Waterside Marriott, 235 E Main Street, Norfolk, Virginia 23510 . Located downtown, the hotel is connected to the Waterside Convention Center, and near the Children’s Museum of Virginia, Naval Station Norfolk and Virginia Zoo - this Mar-riott is ideal for business or leisure guests .

Click here for the HPS hotel reservation link . The rate for the HPS block is $106 .

FOR REGISTERED COMPANIONSCompanion Registration includes Monday-Wednesday

breakfast buffet and Welcome Reception at the Norfolk Water-side Marriott, and Exhibitor Reception .

WELCOME RECEPTION& SUPER BOWL PARTY!

Sunday, 1 February6:00 PM Norfolk Waterside Marriott

Join us for the Welcome Reception, which will also in-clude a Super Bowl Party!

EXHIBITOR RECEPTIONMonday, 2 February

5:00-6:30 PM Norfolk Waterside Marriott

WELCOME TO NORFOLK! Norfolk has 144 miles of shoreline waiting to be explored!

With fun, vibrant entertainment and culture, and delicious cui-sine, there are so many things to do here . Enjoy the Chesapeake Bay, Atlantic Ocean and countless rivers - you are never far from the water .

WEATHERNorfolk has daily highs from 51o to 58o . Bring a medium

jacket, but be ready to enjoy nice temperatures!

MEETING LOCATIONNorfolk Waterside Marriott

235 E Main Street, Norfolk, Virginia 23510

TRANSPORTATIONThe Norfolk International Airport (ORF) is 9 miles away

from the Norfolk Waterside Marriott, with an estimated taxi fare of $25 .00 . Newport News/Williamsburg International Airport (PHF) is 28 miles away, with an estimated taxi fare of $80 .00 .

The 2015 Midyear Meetingis presented by the

Health Physics Society

2

TECHNICAL TOURSMonday, 2 February, 1:00-4:00 PM

Hampton University Proton TherapyPreregistration $35/Onsite $40

As one of the first proton therapy centers, Hampton University Proton Therapy Institute (HUPTI) is dedi-cated to patient treatment and research . It is the world’s largest free-standing proton therapy facility . Tour the facility and attend a seminar about Proton Therapy ad-vantages over traditional radiation therapy .

Tuesday, 3 February, 1:00-4:00 PMThomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility Preregistration $35/Onsite $40

Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility (Jefferson Lab) is a nuclear physics research facility lo-cated in Newport News, Virginia . The lab’s primary mis-sion is to conduct basic research of the atom’s nucleus using the lab’s unique 12 GeV electron accelerator, known as the Continuous Electron Beam Accelerator Facility (CEBAF) . The participants of the HPS Mid Year meeting technical tour will visit the SRF Institute, one of the worlds leaders in superconducting radiofrequency (SRF) science and technology, CEBAF control room, and various areas of accelerator and experimental end station enclosures .

Again this YearThe Professional Enrichment Program (PEP) handouts for the Midyear Meeting will not be available in hard copy. For those who pre-register, you will be provided with an access code for downloading the handouts. For those who register for courses on-site, you will be pro-vided the code when you register.

OOPS!We cancelled it because we didn’t

know you wanted it!Sometimes excellent courses with super instructors are cancelled when too many people wait until the last minute to reg-ister . We need a minimum number of participants enrolled before a class can take place in order to cover costs . This applies to tours as well as classes . Don’t wait - avoid disappointment - Register Early!

REGISTRATIONRegistration Hours

Sunday 1 February . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3:30-5:30 PMMonday 2 February . . . . . . . . . 7:30 AM-3:00 PMTuesday 3 February . . . . . . . . . 8:00 AM-3:00 PMWednesday 4 February . . . . . . 8:00 AM-1:00 PM

Registration Information• Preliminary registration is due by 20 January 2015

• Registration fees for members and non-members include the Welcome Reception, Exhibitor

Reception and lunches on Monday and Tuesday .

• Purchase orders are not accepted for PEP, AAHP or Tour Registration

Register now to reserve your place!

Register online at www.hps.org

OR:Register by fax: Fax your completed form with credit card information to (703) 790-2672

OR BY MAIL:Mail your completed form with payment to:HPS Headquarters1313 Dolley Madison Blvd ., Suite 402McLean, VA 22101Mail completed registration form with a check made payable to Health Physics Society, purchase order or credit card information. You are considered regis-tered when full payment or purchase order has been received.

3

EXHIBITSExhibit Hours

AM & PM Breaks are in Exhibit HallMonday . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9:45 AM-6:30 PMMonday . . 12:00-1:00 PM Complimentary LunchMonday . . . . . . 5:00-6:30 PM Opening Reception

Tuesday . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9:45 AM-4:00 PMTuesday . . Noon-1:15 PM Complimentary Lunch

2015 Meeting Exhibitors(as of January 2015)

To request a booth for the Midyear Topical Meeting, contact Jill Drupa at HPS Headquarters,

Exhibits@HPS.comBest MedicalBionomicsCanberra

Dade MoellerEckert & Ziegler

F&J Specialty ProductsGamma Products

Hi-Q Environmental Products CoHopewell Designs

JL ShepherdLANCS Industries

LandauerLaurus Systems

LudlumMirion Technologies

OrtecRadiation Safety & Control Services

SE InternationalRadeco

Radiation Safety & Control Services (RSCS)SE International

Spectrum TechniquesThermo Fisher

TracercoUltra Electronics LimitedUniTech Services Group

Is your Committee meeting at the Midyear?Contact Jennifer Rosenberg at JRosenberg@BurkInc.com

to set up your times!

4

Monday

7:00-8:00 am CEL 1 Comparison of the Radiation Risks of Flying Versus other Means of TransportationVoss, T, Miaullis, A; Voss Associates

8:15 AM-Noon

MAM-A Plenary SessionBeginning at the End of the Cycle: Issues

and Solutions for Decommissioning and Waste DisposalChair: Barbara Hamrick

8:15 AM IntroductionBarbara Hamrick, HPS President

8:30 AM MAM-A.1Operations to Decommissioning: An Executive Per-spectiveStoddard, D.Dominion Energy

9:00 AM MAM-A.2Progress and Challenges for the Fukushima CleanupBarrett, L.L. Barrett Consulting

9:45 AM BREAK

10:15 AM MAM-A.3The Waste Isolation Pilot PlantStafford, J.URS

11:00 AM MAM-A.4‘“A Decommissioning Renaissance”…If the Stall-ing Nuclear Renaissance Has you Down, a Booming Decommissioning Renaissance will Soon be Driving Demand, and Making Room, for New Nuclear Build’Abelquist, EORAU

12:00-1:00 PM Exhibit Hall

Complimentary Lunch for Registered Attendees

Preliminary Technical ProgramIf a paper is going to be presented by other than the first author,

the presenter’s name has an asterisk (*)All Sessions will take place in the Norfolk Waterside Marriott

1:00-2:30 PM

P Poster SessionP.1 Application of a Radiological Consequence Analysis Code to Dose Projections from Multiunit Accident in a Korean Nuclear SitePark, S., Jeong, S.Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety

P.2 Evaluation of Hazard Radiation Doses to Some Critical Organs During Pediatric Orthovoltage and Supervoltage RadiotherapyAllehyani, S.HMedical Physics

P.3 Excess life time cancer risk of workers in a Cs-137 contaminated steel recycling facilityNwankwo, C., Ogundare, F.National Institute of Radiation Protection and Research, University of Ibadan, Nigeria

2:30-4:45 PM

MPM-A Decommissioning, Reactor & Operational Health Physics

Co-Chairs: Bryan Lemieux, Frederic Mis2:30 PM MPM-A.1Innovative ALARA Work Practices Used During D&D WorkWaggoner, LLancs Industries

2:45 PM MPM-A.2EP Dose Assessment at a Decommissioned Nuclear Plant Shannon, DDominion

3:00 PM MPM-A.3Use of a CZT System and Collimator for Determina-tion of Corrosion Activity in a Light Water ReactorMis, FUniversity of Rochester

3:15 PM BREAK

5

3:45 PM MPM-A.4Pursuit of Decommissioning License Amendment for Routine Release of Buildings from Licensee ControlLemieux, B, LaGroue, AUniversity of Tennessee

4:00 PM MPM-A.5Historical Site Assessment and Survey for Release of the Seldon D. Feurt Memorial Building at UTHSCLemieux, B, Hansen, TUniversity of Tennessee, Ameriphysics

4:15 PM MPM-A.6How Randomness Affects our Decisions for Radia-tion SafetyJohnson, R.Radiation Safety Counseling Institute

4:30 PM MPM-A.7Radiation Protection against Loss of Offsite Power during Shutdown OperationJeon, I.Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety

The deadline for submitting abstracts for the 2015 Annual Meeting is 7 February 2015

Please submit your abstract (including Special Session abstracts!) through the HPS website

http://hpschapters.org/2015annual/abstracts/

Submittal & Presentation guidelines can be found at

http://hps.org/meetings/

Health Physics Society 60th Annual Meeting & ExhibitionCall for Papers

12–16 July 2015 ‑ Indianapolis, Indiana

6

Tuesday

6:45-7:45 am CEL 2 The Best Techniques of Great Gamma CalibrationsVoss, T.; Voss Associates

8:00-9:30 AM

TAM-A Environmental Co-Chairs: Jeffrey Lively, Mark Miller

8:00 AM TAM-A.1Nearest Neighbor Averaging and Its Effect on the Critical Level and Minimum Detectable Concentra-tion for Scanning Radiological Survey Instruments for Performing Facility Release SurveysMiller, M., Miltenberger, R., Fournier, S., Beall, P., Al-eckson, T., Schierman, M.Sandia, ERG, Inc.

8:15 AM TAM-A.2The Art & Power of Data ImagingLively, J.AMEC E&I

8:30 AM TAM-A.3Environmental Radioactivity Levels in a Polycythe-mia Vera Cluster in PennsylvaniaCharp, P., Werner, L.Centers for Disease Control and Prevention/ATSDR, ATSDR

8:45 AM TAM-A.4Radioecological Impacts of Iron and Steel industriesKhater, A., Bakr, W., Khater, A.King Saud University, Egyptian Nuclear and Radiologi-cal Regulatory Authority

9:00 AM TAM-A.5Consolidation of Environmental Monitoring Pro-grams at a Treatment and Waste Disposal FacilityMatthews, T., Cortez, C., Shaw, C.Waste Control Specialist

9:15 AM TAM-A.6Seasonality in Air Monitoring at a Low-Level Waste Disposal FacilityMatthews, T., Cortez, C., Shaw, C.

9:30 AM BREAK

10:00 AM-Noon

PEP-T1: Review of Radon & Radon Progeny

Instructor: Robert Hayes, WIPP Site

This PEP course is worth 4 credit points and is included in registration fees

The following topics will be covered to try to pro-vide an understanding sufficient to support operational decisions due to the effects of radon and radon progeny at nuclear facilities . This will start with radioactive decay chains which generate radon and its progeny, the alpha and beta radiation that is emitted during the decay pro-cess and radionuclide equilibrium . This will be followed by the basics of aerosol physics which effect measurable radon alpha and beta activity and the impact of meteoro-logical conditions on Radon and progeny concentrations . Then the basics of instrumentation for measuring alpha spectra to include of signal processing required to gener-ate alpha and beta spectra . The last section will cover how dust impacts radionuclide assay and identification along with how radon can mask TRU alpha activity . The conclusions will address implications for measuring var-ious air samples using alpha and beta spectrometry and traditional alpha spectrometry performed by radiochem-istry .

12:00-1:00 PM Exhibit Hall

Complimentary Lunch for Registered Attendees

1:15-3:15 PM

PEP-T2: Fundamentals of Gamma Spectroscopy

Instructor: David Pan, ORTEC

This PEP course is worth 4 credit points and is included in registration fees

This course offers a fast-paced review of the basic principles of gamma spectroscopic analysis . The course includes a review of the nature and origins of gamma emitting radioactivity, basic physics of gamma interac-tion with matter, consequences of gamma interactions on gamma spectra, gamma spectroscopy system com-ponents and calibrations, gamma spectroscopy analy-sis methods, and interpretation of gamma spectroscopy data .

3:15 PM BREAK

7

3:45-5:00 PM

TPM-A Accelerator, InstrumentationCo-Chairs: Frazier Bronson, Samuel Baker

3:45 PM TPM-A.1Solving CARIBU Open Source Contamination Prob-lemsBaker, S., Greene, J., Levand, A., Pardo, R., Savard, G.Argonne National Lab

4:00 PM TPM-A.2Validation Testing of the Canberra Mobile FeedRoll Assay SystemBronson, F., Suzuki, A., Ilie, G.Canberra, Canberra-Japan

4:15 PM TPM-A.3Validation Testing of the Canberra TruckScan Waste Assay SystemBronson, F., Suzuki, A.Canberra, Canberra-Japan

4:30 PM TPM-A.4On-line Low-Level Monitoring for SrY90 to Support the Fukushima Water Cleanup ProjectBronson, F., Zickefoose, J.Canberra

Health Physics Society Annual Meeting & Exhibition

12-16 July 2015 - Indianapolis, Indiana

Join us at the Indianapolis Convention Center for five days of education, networking,

and professional development

8

Wednesday

6:45-7:45 am CEL 3 Is Telling the Truth the Answer to Effective Radiation Risk Communication?Johnson, R.; Radiation Safety Counseling Institute

6:45-7:45 am CEL 4 Mastering Neutron Instrument CalibrationsVoss, T.; Voss Associates

8:00 AM-Noon

WAM-A Regulatory/Legal Issues, Environmental II & Risk Analysis Co-Chairs: Aaron Miaullis, Travis Matthews

8:00 AM WAM.1The Joint Commission Standards with RSO/Health Physics ImplicationsDielman, R.CRCPD Liaison to the Joint Commission

8:15 AM WAM.2United States Department of Transportation 2014 Radioactive Material Related Final RulemakingWilliams, J.U.S. Department of Transportation

8:30 AM WAM.3The NRC’s Allegation Follow-Up Program as it Ap-plies to the Nuclear Materials WorldBermudez, H.US NRC

8:45 AM WAM.4Natural Cosmic Radiation Dose Rates (uSv/hr) vs. Altitude and Public and Soldier and Public Percep-tions on RadiationMiaullis, A.AFRRI

9:00 AM WAM.5It’s Time for the FAA to Regulate Air Radiation SafetyShonka, J., Bramlitt, E.SRA, Self

9:15 AM BREAK

9:45-11:45 AM

PEP-W1: Why Our Natural Intuitive Process-es Fail for Radiation Risk

AssessmentsInstructor: Ray Johnson,

Radiation Safety Counseling Institute

This PEP course is worth 4 credit points and is included in registration fees

We often employ intuitive processes when we make assessments and choices in uncertain situations, such as dealing with radiation risks . The normal processes for safe-ty decisions by a caveman confronted with a saber-toothed tiger do not do very well in today’s world and may lead to decisions that are incongruous or even harmful . Studies have shown that the parts of our brain involved in decisions for risk assessments are closely connected to the seat of our emotions . The amygdala, which is linked to our emotional state, especially fear, is activated when we make decisions couched in uncertainty . Mechanisms by which people ana-lyze situations involving chance are a complex product of evolutionary factors, brain structure, personal experience, knowledge, and emotion . Making wise assessments and choices in the face of uncertainty is a rare skill . We often start with a naive realism, namely the belief that things are what they seem . However, when viewed more broadly, we may realize that things are not what they seem, but some-thing quite different . This is illustrated by the story of the wise men and the elephant . By necessity we employ cer-tain strategies to reduce the complexity of risk assessments and our intuition about probabilities plays a role in that process . Our subconscious mind is designed to jump in-tuitively to conclusions often with very little evidence . It is not designed to know the size of the jumps. Our confidence in our intuition is a function of the coherence of the story we construct . The quality or quantity of the evidence does not count for much because a very good story can be con-structed based on very poor evidence . How many people automatically conclude that radiation is bad with very little (and likely very poor) evidence? Kahneman says, “Con-sidering how little we know, the confidence in our intuitive beliefs is preposterous – and also is essential .” We have to believe in something . Swimming against the tide of hu-man intuition for safety decisions can be exceedingly dif-ficult. Confidence in our intuition is not usually based on a logical analysis of the probability that our judgment is correct. Confidence in our intuition is a feeling based on the coherence of information from which we construct a story and the ease of processing that information . While it

9

is not common to admit uncertainty, expressions of high confidence mean we have constructed a coherent story, not necessarily that the story is true . For example, many people are very confident about their intuition regarding radiation risks even though their beliefs are based on mythology (be-liefs not technically true) .

1:00-3:00 PM

PEP-W2: Training First Responders on Radiological Dispersal Devices (RDDs) and Improvised Nuclear Devices (INDs) Events

Instructor: Ken Groves, S2 Sevorg Services

This PEP course is worth 4 credit points

This PEP will present an overview of the current train-ing the author is presenting to First Responders (firefight-ers, emergency medical technicians, law enforcement and others) who may encounter either a Radiological Dispersal Device (RDD or Dirty Bomb) or an Improvised Nuclear Device (IND) as a part of their Emergency Response activ-ities . The emphasis of the training is putting the radiologi-cal/nuclear material in perspective as compared with other Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) materials such as chemical and/or biological weapon agents . A goal of the training is to help this First Responder Community under-stand that under almost all conditions, they can perform their primary mission of “putting out fires, rescuing and treating injured persons, and chasing bad guys” even in the presence of relatively large amount of radiological/nuclear contamination . The rare cases of high activity unshielded sources will be reviewed and explained . Current National/International guidance on dose “limits” will be discussed . The use of information contained in the New NCRP report entitled, “Response to a Radiological or Nuclear Terrorism Incident: A Guide for Decision Makers”, NCRP Commen-tary No . 19, “Key Elements of Preparing Emergency Re-sponder for Nuclear and Radiological Terrorism,” and the CRCPD “First Responders Handbook” will be used exten-sively in the presentation . A discussion of the use of Time, Distance and Shielding as well as appropriate Personal Protective Clothing and how it will provide the needed protection while immediate actions take place early in an RDD/IND event will be reviewed . The use of appropriate radiation detection instrumentation, documented Standard Operating Procedures along with realistic training, drills and exercises are the key to a successful response to an RDD/IND event for this community of critical emergency responders .

3:00 PM BREAK

3:30-4:30 PM

WPM-A External Dosimetry, Biokinetics/Bioeffects

Co-Chairs: Allen Brodsky, Nolan Hertel3:30 PM WPM-A.1Dose Rate Coefficients for Exposure to Ground Con-taminationsBellamy, M., Eckerman, K., Easterly, C., Leggett, R., Stewart, D., Hertel, N.*Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Georgia Institute of Technology

3:45 PM WPM-A.2Updated External Dose Coefficients for Air Submer-sion and Water ImmersionBellamy, M., Eckerman, K., Easterly, C., Leggett, R., Stewart, D., Hertel, N.*, Hertel, N.Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Georgia Institute of Technology

4:00 PM WPM-A.3Screening Radiation and Bystander-Response Genes and Exploring the Mechanism of Bystander Effects Using AHH-1 Exposure to the Different Dose of 60Co RaysYao X., Xian G., Daqin S., Ling H.*University of SMMU

4:15 PM WPM-A.4Why All Radiation Bioeffects, Acute or Long-term, Are StochasticBrodsky, A., Bradley, F.Georgetown University, Private Consultant

10

Registration for the HPS Midyear Meeting can be found at www.hps.org

Registration for Courses: *All Participants must be registered with HPS for midyear meeting. -Module 1& 2 $250 -Module 1 OR 2 $150 -Module 3 $100

Lodging and Accommodations: Norfolk Waterside Marriott These courses are pending CAMPEP credit and AAHP credit

Dade Moeller Health Group 1835 Terminal Dr., Suite 201, Richland, WA 99354 Phone: 1-888-316-3644 E-mail: brent.murphy@dmhg.net Website: www.dmhg.net

Module 1: CT (Feb 2, Afternoon)

Basics of CT Fundamentals of Backprojection and iterative

reconstruction Axial, helical volumetric scanners Principles of image quality in CT CTDI, DLP and dose monitoring in CT ACR and Joint Commission level testing and

accreditation process for CT Module 2: Mammography (Feb 3, Morning)

Basics of mammography Screen film mammography Full field digital mammography MQSA testing and compliance Breast tomosynthesis systems Module 3: Additional (Feb 3, Afternoon) Safety Culture Overview of ACR accreditation Sentinel events in cardiology and

interventional radiology

Medical Physicist & Health Physicist Training Courses:

CT and Mammography Training

Presents: CT and Mammography Training

at the Health Physics Society 48th Mid Year Meeting

February 1—4, 2015 Norfolk, Virginia

11

AAHP1 Nondestructive Assay of Nuclear Material HoldupBogard, J.

This 8-h course explores instrumentation and techniques used to locate and quantify nuclear materials held up in process equipment, pipes and ducts in pro-cessing facilities . Fundamental concepts of measurement dependence on distance and shielding will be reviewed, along with mathematical models for interpreting mea-surement results from ideal point, line and area sources . These concepts will be expanded to account for non-ideal ‘fat’ points and lines . Techniques for measuring or eliminating background in the complicated environment of a processing facility are reviewed, along with ways to estimate shielding parameters and material distribu-tion in uncharacterized vessels and complex geometries . The use of gamma spectrometry both to identify and to quantify nuclear materials is reviewed, along with the performance characteristics, advantages and disadvan-tages of different detector types . Techniques for calibrat-ing equipment for quantitative measurements and the criteria for treating point and line geometries as ‘ideal’ or ‘fat’ are also discussed . Counting statistics and reporting precision are reviewed, along with a discussion of the meaning of uncertainty values provided by some com-mercial instruments with internal algorithms for inter-preting measurement results .

The course is designed for anyone interested in characterizing and quantifying radioactive materials, particularly those in complex or poorly defined geom-etries . The techniques described were developed and are currently used for measuring nuclear material (U, Pu) holdup in processing facilities, but are applicable to any radioactive material that emits gamma photons or X rays . Commercial packages for characterizing radioactive ma-terials in drums or waste can be better understood and more effectively used with a familiarity of the principles and techniques described in this course . Relevant refer-ence materials will be provided in a digital format . The course is taught by Jim Bogard, CHP, who helped de-velop and present this training at the ORNL Safeguards Laboratory from 2003-2011 to students and profession-als with a wide variety of experience and backgrounds . A quantitative assessment is provided of the performance of these course attendees in controlled laboratory exer-cises using nuclear material standards hidden in fixtures

American Academy of Health PhysicsSaturday 31 January 2015 - 8:00 am-5:00 pm, Norfolk Waterside Marriott

and equipment typical of nuclear material processing fa-cilities .

AAHP2 How Randomness Affects Radiation Risk Assessments and Decisions for Radiation SafetyJohnson, R., Radiation Safety Counseling Institute

Randomness and Measurement Uncertainties - For a health physicist, radiation risk assessments begin ideal-ly with measurements to characterize the source of radia-tion . While we depend on radiation instruments to tell us about radiation, how often do we evaluate the uncer-tainties of measurements? Misunderstandings abound when it comes to interpretation of measurements . Most people want absolute values for measurements and do not want to know about uncertainties and seldom ask questions such as, “Was the best instrument used, was it calibrated and working properly, was it used properly, was the measurement taken in the right place, etc .?” In-terpretations of measurements may also have as much to do with attitudes and perceptions of risks as they do about technology . Also, measurements are only part of the information needed for risk assessments .

Randomness and Risk Assessments - While health physicists usually understand that radiation is of main concern for stochastic effects (future random chance of cancer), most of the world does not understand probabili-ties . Most people just want to know if they will be “safe or not safe .” They do not want to hear about radiation risk estimates as probabilities . When confronted with a risk probability, then are inclined to substitute an easier question, such as, “How do I feel about getting cancer?” They can easily answer this question without any techni-cal knowledge or understanding of statistics . Random-ness and Uncertainty in Safety Decisions - Research has shown that when chance is involved, people’s thought processes are often seriously flawed. How many people understand the principles that govern chance, the devel-opment of ideas on uncertainty, and how these processes play out in decisions for radiation safety? The normal processes for safety decisions can lead to mistaken judg-ments and technically inappropriate reactions for radia-tion safety (consider what is happening with public fears of ebola) .

Is Telling the Truth the Answer to Risk Communi-cation - While we may all agree that HPs have an ethical responsibility to tell the truth about radiation risk assess-ments, the big question is, “What is the truth?” If we

12

tell people the scientific truth about radiation will that allay their fears or lead to a better understanding? Can out best technical information overcome the common automatic belief in “deadly radiation” and other radia-tion myths perpetuated subconsciously throughout the population? Most importantly, how does anyone actu-ally determine the truth? Is seeing or hearing the basis for believing?

Possible Answers - Perhaps the best way to help people make appropriate decisions for radiation safety is to guide them in the steps for making the risk assessment themselves. People have more confidence in decisions they make for themselves rather than depending only on experts to tell them the answers . While experts may be-lieve they know the answers to risks assessments, their answers may not consider all of the nuances of safety decisions typically used by non-technical people .

13

Professional Enrichment ProgramSunday 1 February 2015 - 8:00 am-4:30 pm, Norfolk Waterside Marriott

Again This Year...Again This YearThe Professional Enrichment Program (PEP) handouts for the Midyear Meeting will not be available in hard copy. For those who pre-register, you will be provided with an access code for downloading the handouts prior to the meeting. For those who register for courses on-site, you will be provided the code when you register.

SUNDAY 8:00 am – 10:00 am

PEP 1-A FRMAC Dose Assessment Methodology as it relates to the Revised EPA PAG Manual - Part IThomas Laiche

The Department of Energy’s Federal Radiological Monitoring and Assessment Center (FRMAC) is an as-set comprised of representatives of multiple federal agen-cies that are available on request to support a response to nuclear/radiological accidents and/or emergencies . The FRMAC works with multiple agencies such as the En-vironmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to establish consistent radio-logical dose assessment methods to support public protec-tion guidance provided by the EPA’s and FDA’s Protective Action Guides (PAG) . The revised EPA PAG Manual ref-erences the FRMAC Assessment Manual (FAM) for radio-logical dose assessment methods in support of protective action decisions . This presentation provides an overview of the FRMAC Assessment Manual, describes the default methods for radiological dose assessment and introduces the Turbo FRMAC software tool that automates these as-sessment methods .

Part 1: Introduces the FRMAC function, organiza-tional structure and support capabilities; Introduces the EPA and FDA Protective Action Guides; Introduces the FRMAC Assessment Manual format and tables; Presents several mathematical concepts used in the dose assessment methods; Introduces the software tool, Turbo FRMAC . Students are encouraged to attend all three sessions as each builds upon lessons and information presented in the previ-ous class .

PEP 1-B The Essentials of Health & Safety at the Boundaries of Radiation Safety: A Three Part PEP Course Series (PART I)Robert Emery, Janet Gutierrez

In actual practice, there is virtually no work setting where the health and safety risks are limited solely to radio-

logical agents . Fire safety, occupational safety, and chemi-cal safety risks are ubiquitous in laboratory and produc-tion settings, and potentially infectious agents can also be present . Issues regarding insurance coverages and policy limitations also play an important role in decision mak-ing . Given the diversity of possible risks and exposures, it is prudent for radiation safety professionals to familiarize themselves with the essential aspects of these other spe-cialty areas of loss control . This course series is designed specifically for the radiation safety professional to afford a baseline orientation to a series of parallel health and safe-ty professions with which a radiation safety professional commonly interacts . Each section begins with a discussion of the relative public health impact of each specialty area presented, and ends with a description of the simple things a radiation safety professional can do to assist keeping the overall organization safe and compliant . Ample time will be allocated for questions, answers and discussion . The PEP series consists of three 2 hour segments:

Part 1 will address “The Basics of Risk Management & Insurance” and “The Basics of Fire & Life Safety” . The risk management & insurance portion of the session will address the issues of retrained risks (those which are not covered by insurance) and transferred risks (those covered by a financial vehicle), and how these aspects impact ra-diation safety operations. Included in the fire & life safety segment will be a discussion on the basic elements of the life safety code and the fire detection and suppression sys-tems . The requirements for means of egress will also be discussed

PEP 1-C Basic Training for the NRRPT exam – The-oryTom Voss, Paul Steinmeyer

This class presents the theory behind the operation of radiation detection instruments . The primary reference materials are taken from Glenn Knoll “Radiation Detec-tion and Measurement”,James Turner “Atoms, Radiation, and Radiation Protection”, and the wide experience of the

14

instructors . The instructors have many years of experience with radiation detection instruments . The lead instruc-tor began his career in radiation instrumentation in 1967, working at a commercial nuclear power plant (then under AEC rules) . The co-instructor has more than 30 years of experience in developing radiation detectors and program-ming software for their use . Between the two instructors their experience covers working with the AEC, NRC, DOE, US Military, Research, and the commercial world . The types of instruments covered include – ion chambers, plastic scintillators, ZnS scintillators, solid scintillators (NaI, HPGe, CsI, CLYC, etc .), liquid scintillators, solid state detectors, GM detectors, gas proportional detectors, air proportional detectors, and sandwich detectors . In ad-dition to the theory of the operation of radiation detectors, their mechanical construction will be presented . Examples of various radiation detectors will be on display .

PEP 1-D Fundamentals of Gamma SpectroscopyDavid Pan

This course offers a fast-paced review of the basic principles of gamma spectroscopic analysis . The course includes a review of the nature and origins of gamma emit-ting radioactivity, basic physics of gamma interaction with matter, consequences of gamma interactions on gamma spectra, gamma spectroscopy system components and calibrations, gamma spectroscopy analysis methods, and interpretation of gamma spectroscopy data .

SUNDAY 10:30am – 12:30 pmPEP 2-A FRMAC Dose Assessment Methodology as it relates to the Revised EPA PAG Manual – Part 2Thomas Laiche

See description above for PEP 1-A and information below .

Part 2: Presents an overview of the dose assessment methods and mathematical calculations used for Pub-lic Protection; Demonstrates the use of the software tool Turbo FRMAC to generate Public Protection dose assess-ments . This presentation is follow-on to Part 1 and builds on the information presented there .

PEP 2-B The Essentials of Health & Safety at the Boundaries of Radiation Safety: A Three Part PEP Course Series (PART II)Robert Emery, Janet Gutierrez,

See description above for PEP 1-B and information below .

Part 2 will examine “The Basics of Biological & Chemical Safety” and “Radiation Safety’s Role in Miti-

gating the ‘Insider Threat’ Risk”. The first part of this ses-sion will address the classification of infectious agents and the various assigned biosafety levels . Aspects of chemical exposures, exposure limits, monitoring and control strate-gies will also be discussed . The second part of the session will focus on the security threat ‘insiders‘ represent to an organization and radiation safety’s unique opportunity to mitigate such risks .

PEP 2-C Basic Training for the NRRPT exam - Prac-tical ApplicationsTom Voss, Paul Steinmeyer

This class presents the practical applications of the use of radiation detection instruments and radiation protec-tion . The primary reference materials are taken from Dan Gollnick “Basic Radiation Protection Technology” and the wide experience of the instructors . The instructors have many years of experience with radiation detection instru-ments . The lead instructor began his career in radiation instrumentation in 1967, working at a commercial nuclear power plant (then under AEC rules) . The co-instructor has more than 30 years of experience in developing radiation detectors and programming software for their use . Be-tween the two instructors their experience covers working with the AEC, NRC, DOE, US Military, Research, and the commercial world . Radiation instrumentation calibration techniques will be presented . Radiation survey techniques will be explored . The connection between radiation instru-ment calibration and radiation instrument usage will be dis-cussed . The limitations and interferences for various de-tector types will be explored in detail . Remember; almost every type of radiation detector responds to almost every type of radiation!

PEP 2-D Integration of Health Physics into the Medi-cal Management of Radiation Incident VictimsStephen L. Sugarman

In the event of a radiation incident it is essential that the radiation dose a patient may, or may not, have received is rapidly assessed so that proper medical treatment can be planned . The initial information needs to be easily obtained and able to provide a realistic potential of dose magnitude . Various techniques can be employed to help gather the nec-essary information needed . Evaluation of nasal swabs and wound counts can help with ascertaining the potential for significant intakes of radioactive materials, and mathemati-cal dose estimations can help with determining the poten-tial magnitude of external doses . Externally contaminated areas must be assessed so that treatment and decontamina-tion priorities can be determined . As time goes on and more information, such as bioassay or biological dosimetry data,

15

is received the health physicist will be called upon to inter-pret that data and communicate its meaning to the health-care staff . Support duties can also include assistance with communicating with the patient, other medical staff, or ex-ternal entities such as regulators and the media . Coupled with a good event history and other data, health physicists and physicians can develop a strategy for providing proper medical care to individuals who may have been involved in a radiological event . It is, therefore, essential that health physicists are able to seamlessly integrate themselves into the patient care environment . This PEP will describe meth-odologies to rapidly assess radiation doses and use real case reviews to reinforce the teaching points .

SUNDAY 2:30 - 4:30 pmPEP 3-A FRMAC Dose Assessment Methodology as it relates to the Revised EPA PAG Manual – Part 3Thomas Laiche

See description above for PEP 3-A and information below .

Part 3: Presents an overview of the dose assessment methods and mathematical calculations used for the Inges-tion Pathway; Demonstrates the use of the software tool Turbo FRMAC to generate ingestion dose assessments . This is a follow-on to Parts 1 & 2 .

PEP 3-B The Essentials of Health & Safety at the Boundaries of Radiation Safety: A Three Part PEP Course Series (PART III)Robert Emery, Janet Gutierrez

See description above for PEP 3-B and information below .

Part 3 will focus on “Radiation Protection Program Metrics That Matter (to Management)” . Radiation protec-tion programs typically accumulate data and documenta-tion so that regulatory officials can assess compliance with established regulations . The implicit logic associated with this activity is that compliance equates to safety . But in this era of constricted resources, mere regulatory compliance is no longer sufficient to justify all necessary programmatic resources . Radiation protection programs are now expect-ed to readily demonstrate how they add tangible value to the core missions of an organization . The demonstration of this value is expected to be in the form of some sort of per-formance metrics, but this is an area in which many radia-tion safety professionals have not been trained . The issue is further compounded by the need to display the metrics in manners that are succinct and compelling, yet another area where formal training is often lacking . This session will first describe a variety of possible radiation protection

program performance measures and metrics, and then will focus on the display of the information in ways that clearly convey the intended message . Actual before and after data display “make-overs” will be presented, and ample time will be provided for questions, answers, and discussion .

Each PEP segment is designed so that participants can take any session individually, although the maximum educational benefit will be derived from the participation in all three sessions . The particular topics included in the PEP series have been consistently identified as extraordinarily useful to participants in the highly successful week-long “University of Texas EH&S Academy” . Ample time will be allotted for questions answers and discussion, and each segment will be supplemented with key reference informa-tion .

PEP 3-C Basic Training for the NRRPT exam - Re-view of the applicable CFRs Tom Voss, Paul Steinmeyer

This class presents the interpretation of the CFRs ap-plicable to radiation protection . The class concentration is on 10CFR19, 10CFR20, 10CFR30, 10CFR34, 10CFR35, 10CFR835, 29CFR1910, and 49CFR100-199 . The CFRs are the federal laws that govern our work with radiation, an in-depth knowledge and understanding of those CFRs is vital to the radiation professional . The instructors have many years of experience with radiation detection instru-ments . The lead instructor began his career in radiation instrumentation in 1967, working at a commercial nuclear power plant (then under AEC rules) . The co-instructor has more than 30 years of experience in developing radiation detectors and programming software for their use . Be-tween the two instructors their experience covers working with the AEC, NRC, DOE, US Military, Research, and the commercial world .

PEP 3-D How Randomness Affects Our Decisions for Radiation SafetyRay Johnson, Radiation Safety Counseling Institute

As health physicists we understand that radiation is a random phenomenon . We also understand that our prac-tice of ALARA is to minimize the future random chance of cancer . Thus, dealing with randomness is a normal part of our practice as specialists in radiation safety . Unfortu-nately, most of the rest of the world wants to deal only with absolutes and does not want to know about uncertainty or probabilities. Most people want specific answers to ques-tions such as, “Am I safe or not safe?” “Will I be harmed or not harmed?” Most people do not want to hear about risk estimates . When presented with a probability of can-cer as a risk of one out of some number of those exposed,

16

they will often conclude that they are the one . Or, not un-derstanding risk probabilities, they may substitute an easier question, such as, “How do I feel about getting cancer?” This is a question they can readily answer without any knowledge of radiation science or statistics . This approach eliminates any concerns for randomness or probabilities . Everyone knows of someone who has had cancer and they are aware of the horrible consequences . The prospects of radiation causing cancer become an overwhelming influ-ence on decisions for radiation safety . Our natural human instincts for safety are not well suited to situations involv-ing randomness or uncertainty . Thus, while people may not be certain about the risks of radiation effects, they are certain that they do not want to become a victim of cancer .

How do people make judgments and decisions when faced with imperfect, incomplete, or uncertain informa-tion? Research has shown that when chance is involved, people’s thought processes are often seriously flawed. What are the principles that govern chance, the develop-ment of ideas about uncertainty, and how those processes play out in decisions for radiation safety? We will look at how we make choices and the processes that lead us to make mistaken judgments and poor decisions when con-fronted with randomness and uncertainty . When infor-mation is lacking, this invites competing interpretations . Unfortunately, misinterpretation of data may have very negative consequences . How often is past performance a good indicator of the future? The human mind is built to identify a definite cause for each situation and it can have a hard time accepting the influence of unrelated or ran-dom factors . According to Mlodinow, “Random processes are fundamental in nature and ubiquitous in our everyday lives, yet most people do not understand them or think much about them .” This PEP session will explore the role of chance in the world around us and how chance affects our decisions for radiation safety .

17

Continuing Education LecturesCELs take place in the Norfolk Waterside Marriott

7:15 - 8:15 AM Monday, 6:45 - 7:45 AM Tuesday and Wednesday

CEL 1 Comparison of the Radiation Risks of Flying Versus other Means of TransportationVoss, T, Miaullis, A; Voss Associates

This class discusses the pros and cons of flying ver-sus other means of transportation . What are the risks and what are the consequences? Should the radiation risk be the only risk to be accounted for when making the deci-sion to fly or drive? How do the radiation risks compare to the other risks we are exposed to each day? The instruc-tors have many years of experience with radiation detec-tion instruments. Both instructors are Certified Health Physicists . The lead instructor began his career in radiation measurements in 1967, working at a commercial nuclear power plant (then under AEC rules) . The co-instructor has more than 10 years of experience working with radiation detectors . Between the two instructors their experience covers working with the AEC, NRC, DOE, US Military, Research, and the commercial world . The co-instructor has made extensive radiation measurements while flying, the results of those measurements and their interpretation present interesting facts on the radiation risks of flying.

CEL 2 The Best Techniques of Great Gamma Cali-brationsVoss, T.; Voss Associates

This class discusses the techniques for gamma cali-brations . The instructors have many years of experience with radiation detection instruments . The lead instructor began his career in radiation measurements in 1967, work-ing at a commercial nuclear power plant (then under AEC rules) . The co-instructor has more than 10 years of experi-ence working with radiation detectors . Between the two instructors their experience covers working with the AEC, NRC, DOE, US Military, Research, and the commercial world . The objective of this CEL is to provide cali¬bration techniques for gamma survey instruments . The effects of geometry, distance, and scattering will be explored . Calcu-lations of chamber current flow and correction factors for barometric pres¬sure, temperature, and humidity will be presented . In¬terferences such as geotropism, EMF, rela-tive humidity, and interfering radiations will be discussed . The performance of vented air ionization chambers will be compared to various other types of gamma survey instru-ments including: pressur¬ized ion chambers, energy com-pensated GM detectors, and scintillation detectors . Field survey techniques with the vented air ionization chamber

will be discussed . A discussion of calibration techniques for personnel do¬simeters versus hand-held radiation sur-vey instruments will be included .

CEL 3 Is Telling the Truth the Answer to Effective Radiation Risk Communication?Johnson, R.; Radiation Safety Counseling Institute

A well known health physicist once told me, while shaking his finger in my face, “The answer to risk commu-nication is simple, just tell people the truth!” I responded to say, “I believe in telling the truth, however, my studies show that truth has different meanings to different people .” This HP then left in great disgust saying, “I can see that we are diametrically opposed .” My studies of nearly 4,000 radiation safety specialists with the Myers Briggs Type In-dicator (MBTI - a trademark of Consulting Psychologists Press) show that for the majority of HPs truth is what can be defended by logical rational analysis and corroborated by peers . However, for the majority of the general public truth may be what is best for people taking into account the circumstances, feelings, and emotions . These two views of the truth can be very different and both groups will hon-estly believe they are right and will swear they are telling the truth in a courtroom . The question to consider today is whether telling the “technical” truth about radiation is working? Have public sentiments against radiation mel-lowed over the decades since the advent of nuclear weap-ons? I believe most will agree that the public is as con-cerned about radiation safety today as they were decades ago . After all we now have proof that nuclear technology can go wrong (Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, and now Fukushima Dai-ichi) . Apparently the truth we are telling people about radiation risks is not generally accepted . This begs the question, “How do people determine the truth?” Insights on this question have been presented in a series of HPS News articles in 2012- 2013 . I have attempted to describe how people make decisions on truth for radiation safety based on processing information as normal func-tions of the subconscious mind . Our subconscious mind is wired to constantly search for signs of danger . However, since radiation does not give us any physical sensation, we have to rely on imagination to determine our safety . Our subconscious mind has been programmed by education and the media to automatically associate all radiation with “deadly radiation .” Thus, the associations by normal sub-conscious functions for safety will likely lead to decisions

18

based on images of unacceptable consequences of radia-tion exposures . This class will explore many questions on effective risk communications, such as: What is the truth? How does truth relate to beliefs, faith, and ethics? What is lying? How do we process data to determine the truth? How does randomness affect our lives? How does radia-tion mythology affect people’s views . What are possible answers to effective radiation risk communication?

CEL 4 Mastering Neutron Instrument CalibrationsVoss, T.; Voss Associates

This class discusses the various neutron sources and their energies and the energy response of various types of neutron detectors . The instructor began his career in radia-tion measurements in 1967, working at a commercial nu-clear power plant (then under AEC rules) . The instructor’s experience covers working with the AEC, NRC, DOE, US Military, Research, and the commercial world . The fol-lowing detector types will be discussed; fast neutron detec-tors, thermal neutron detectors, and neutron spectrometers . Neutron mod¬eration and absorption will be discussed . Common neutron sources including spontaneous fission, alpha-n reactions, and neutron generators (D-D and D-T) will be discussed . Neutron sources may have various types and amounts of moderation, how those relate to neutron instrument calibration will be discussed . Neutron detec-tor responses to interfering radiation and how to deal with them will be discussed .

Health Physics Society Midyear Meeting – Registration Form1-4 February 2015, Norfolk, Virginia

Name for badge: (Last)______________________________________________(First) ____________________________________________Affiliation (for badge)(limit to 18 characters and spaces): ____________________________________________________________________Address : _________________________________________________________________________HPS Member #: ____________________City:_____________________________________________________ State: _________________ Zip/Postal Code: ____________________Business Phone:__________________________FAX:_________________________Email: ________________________________________If Registering - Companion Name: ______________________________________________________________________________________

Preregistration Deadline: 6 JanuaryREGISTRATION FEES: (Mark Appropriate Boxes) Preregistration On-Site Feesq HPS Member (Receptions, Exhibitor Lunch) $430 .00 $530 .00q Non-Member* (Receptions, Exhibitor Lunch) $550 .00 $650 .00q HPS Member (Receptions, Exhibitor Lunch) + 2015 Dues $595 .00 $695 .00q Emeritus Member (Receptions, Exhibitor Lunch) $215 .00 $265 .00q One Day ONLY qMon qTues qWed $275 .00 $300 .00q Student (Receptions) $ 70 .00 $ 70 .00q One Day ONLY Student qMon qTues qWed $ 40 .00 $ 40 .00q Companion (Receptions, Breakfast) $110 .00 $110 .00q Emeritus Companion (Receptions, Breakfast) $ 55 .00 $ 55 .00q HPS Member PEP Lecturer (Receptions, Exhibitor Lunch) $130 .00 $230 .00q HPS Member CEL Lecturer (Receptions, Exhibitor Lunch) $280 .00 $380 .00*Includes HPS Associate Membership for year 2015 - First Time Members OnlyTECHNICAL TOURS:q Hampton University Proton Therapy Institute (Mon 2 Feb) # of Tickets ____ X $35 # of Tickets ____ X $40 _________q Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility (Tues 3 Feb) # of Tickets ____ X $35 # of Tickets ____ X $40 _________AAHP COURSES (Saturday, 31 January):q Course 1 – Nondestructive Assay of Nuclear Material Holdup (J Bogard) $275 .00q Course 2 – How Randomness Affects Radiation Risk Assessments and Decisions for Radiation Safety (R Johnson) $275 .00Medical & Health Physicist Training Courses: CT and Mammography Training (2-3 February):q Module 1* – CT (Basics of CT, etc) . February 2, afternoon $150 .00q Module 2* – Mammography. February 3, morning $150 .00q Module 3 – Additional (safety culture, overview of ACR accreditation, etc). February 3, afternoon $100 .00 *Sign up for Module 1 & 2 together and the cost is $250 .00PEP COURSES (Sunday, 1 February) - 8:00–10:00 AM1-A FRMAC Dose Assessment Methodology as it relates to the Draft EPA PAG Manual, Part 1 (T Laiche)1-B The Essentials of Health & Safety at the Boundaries... Part 1 (R Emery, J Gutierrez)1-C Basic Training for the NRRPT Exam - Theory (T Voss, P Steinmeyer)1-D Fundamentals of Alpha Spectroscopy (D Pan)10:30 AM–12:30 PM2-A FRMAC Dose Assessment Methodology as it relates to the Draft EPA PAG Manual, Part 2 (T Laiche)2-B The Essentials of Health & Safety at the Boundaries... Part 2 (R Emery, J Gutierrez)2-C Basic Training for the NRRPT Exam - Practical Applications (T Voss, P Steinmeyer)2-D Integration of HP into the Medical Management of Radiation Incident Victims (S Sugarman)

2:00–4:00 PM3-A FRMAC Dose Assessment Methodology as it relates to the Draft EPA PAG Manual, Part 3 (T Laiche)3-B The Essentials of Health & Safety at the Boundaries... Part 3 (R Emery, J Gutierrez)3-C Basic Training for the NRRPT Exam - Review of the applicable CFRs (T Voss, P Steinmeyer)3-D How Randomness Affects our Decisions for Radiation Safety (R Johnson)PAYMENT INFORMATION–Purchase Orders NOT Accepted for AAHP/PEP or Technical Tour RegistrationIf paying by check, make payable and mail to: Health Physics Society, 1313 Dolley Madison Blvd ., Suite 402, McLean, VA 22101q VISA q MasterCard qAmerican ExpressCard Number: ______________________________________________ CV2#: _________________Exp . Date: _____________________Cardholder Name: ________________________________________________________________________________________________Signature: _______________________________________________________________________________________________________Cardholder Address: _______________________________________________________________________________________________Cardholder City, State, Zip, Country: _________________________________________________________________________________Cardholder email: ____________________________________________________________Cardholder Phone: _____________________ Registration Section Total $__________ Technical Tour Total $__________ AAHP/PEP/Module Section Total $__________ TOTAL FEES $__________All cancellations are subject to a 20% service charge. Cancellations must be in writing via fax, email or regular mail to the HPS Business Office. Cancellation notices received by 6 January will be refunded total registration fees minus the 20% service charge . No refunds will be issued on cancellations received after 6 January .

If you are sending this by FAX, (703) 790-2672PLEASE do not mail the original

Federal TAX ID#04-6050367

8:00-10:00 AM___/___ = $90 .001st 2ndqYes, stand by10:30 AM-12:30 PM___/___ = $90 .001st 2ndqYes, stand by2:00-4:00 PM___/___ = $90 .001st 2ndqYes, stand by