Table of Contents HPS Board of Directors Committee Meetings ...... Inside Cover Howard Dickson, President General Information...... 1 Edward F. Maher, President-Elect Tours/Social Events ...... 2 Richard E. Toohey, Past-President Exhibitors...... 8 Robert Cherry, Jr, Secretary Technical Program ...... 13 Darrell R. Fisher, Treasurer CEL Abstracts ...... 19 John P. Hageman, Treasurer-Elect Abstracts ...... 20 Richard J. Burk, Jr., Executive Secretary Author Index ...... 36 Board Convention Center Floorplans ...... 37 Edgar D. Bailey DoubleTree Floorplans ...... Inside Back Cover Alex J. Boerner Elizabeth Brackett Eric Goldin Registration Hours Barbara L. Hamrick SW Exhibit Hall Foyer Patricia L. Lee Sunday, January 24 ...... 3:30-6:30 PM Mathew P. Moeller Monday, January 25 ...... 7:30 AM-3:00 PM Dan Strom Tuesday, January 26 ...... 8:00 AM-3:00 PM Terry Yoshizumi Wednesday, January 27...... 8:00 AM-Noon Local Arrangements Committee Gus Potter, Chair Exhibit Hours John Bliss SW Exhibit Hall, Convention Center Steve Farmer Monday 5:30-6:30 PM Opening Reception David Farrar Rick Haaker Tuesday 9:30 AM-5:00 PM Exhibits Open Mark Miller 9:45-10:30 AM Refreshment Breaks Bob Miltenberger Noon Lunch-Exhibit Hall Mike Schierman 3:15-3:45 PM Refreshment Breaks Program Committee Task Force Kathryn Brock Wednesday 9:30 AM-Noon Exhibits Open Robin Hill 10:00-10:30 AM Refreshment Breaks Tim Kirkham Matt McFee Tara Medich Speaker Ready Room Laura Pring Estancia, Convention Center Sunday 1:00-5:00 PM Monday & Tuesday 8:00 AM-Noon; 1:15-5:00 PM Wednesday 8:00-11:00 AM

1 Tours…..Events….. Tours…..Events….. Tours…..Events…..Tours…..Events….. Tours….. the Weapons Neutron Research facility. The tour will NIGHT OUT DINNER require considerable walking, use of stairs and ducking NATIONAL MUSEUM OF under equipment. Unfortunately only US citizens can be NUCLEAR SCIENCE & HISTORY accommodated. Tuesday 26 January Ethicon Endo-Surgery Technical Tour National Museum of Nuclear Science & History 1:00-4:30 PM 6:00-10:00 PM Preregistration $40.00/Onsite $45.00 Onsite $73.00 Did you ever wonder where your doctors obtains Cash Bar, 6 PM, Dinner 7 PM. Museum exhibits the sterilized surgical instruments that they use (they open for viewing until 9 PM, when busses will return to rarely used boiled water anymore)? Join us for a tour of the hotel. Johnson & Johnson’s Ethicon Endo-Surgery Albuquer- The National Museum of Nuclear Science & His- que instrument packaging and sterilization facility. You tory, opened in April 2009, is the nation’s only congres- will see how the instruments are packaged and safely sionally chartered museum in its fi eld and is an intriguing sterilized by exposure to gamma radiation in a modern, place to learn the story of the Atomic Age, from early safe setting. You will get to see the pre-sterilized, pack- research of nuclear development through today’s peace- aged instruments,CANCELLED their movement on serpentine expo- ful uses of nuclear technology. It is a Smithsonian Af- sure room conveyor, the Co-60 source storage pool, and fi liate member. Exhibits include the outdoor Heritage the radiation safety systems employed to ensure worker Park, complete with planes, rockets, missiles and can- protection. The tour will be limited to 25 due to space nons, The Uranium Cycle, Hiroshima and Nagasaki, a constraints, so sign up early! (Due to proprietary consid- Cold War Fallout Shelter, Pioneers of the Atom, and the erations no Ethicon competitors, please.) actual Packard limousine that Oppenheimer used to go Technical Tour of Sandia National Laboratories between Los Alamos and the Trinity Site, where the fi rst Technical Area V atomic bomb was tested. The Museum Store will be 1:30-4:30 PM open for your convenience. Music for the evening will Onsite $45.00 be provided by the Sons of the Rio Grande. Dinner will Sandia National Laboratories is pleased to offer a be a delightful 5-item New Mexican buffet provided by technical tour of our Nuclear Facilities operations area. an Albuquerque favorite, Garduños (fi nd out what na- The facilities within this area provide combined neu- tives mean when they say “gotta get my green chile fi x”). tron/gamma radiation environments for radiation effects Space is limited to 150, so sign up early! testing. The tour is limited to 16 people who are U.S. TECHNICAL TOURS citizens. The tour will include: an overview presentation Wednesday 27 January regarding the operation and purpose of the facilities plus Technical Tour of the Los Alamos Neutron Science a physical tour of the Annular Core Research Reactor, Center (LANSCE) Sandia Pulse Reactor Facility and the Gamma Irradiation 7:00 AM-5:00 PM Facility. See how electronics are tested for the impacts of Preregistration $48.00/Onsite $53.00 radiation and Cherenkov radiation from a reactor pulse A technical tour of the Los Alamos Neutron Sci- and/or from the Gamma irradiation Facility. ence Center (LANSCE) is offered. LANSCE is a na- tional user facility comprising fi ve experimental areas that make use of a high-intensity 800-million-electron- volt (MeV) proton linear accelerator. A tour of the accel- erator and several of the experimental areas is planned. Depending uponCANCELLED availability, the tour will visit the iso- tope production facility, the Lujuan Neutron Scattering Center and its spallation target facility, the Proton Ra- diography facility, the Ultracold Neutron facility, and

2 ON YOUR OWN • Located across the plaza from the Albuquerque Skiing -- In the winter, the vaulting Sandia Peak’s Aquarium and bordered on the west by the famed Rio 5,000-foot elevation gain over the city of Albuquerque Grande and the largest cottonwood gallery forest in the provides the perfect amount of powder for action-packed world, the lush and peaceful Rio Grande Botanic Gar- alpine skiing and snowboarding. Hop on the Sandia Peak den is an oasis in the desert. Tramway (the world’s longest aerial tramway) and be • Founded in 1927, the 64-acre Rio Grande Zoo dropped off for skiing in a matter of 15 minutes. offers visitors close encounters with more than 250 spe- National Hispanic Cultural Center -- Recognized as cies of exotic and native animals. Popular species include one of the most culturally diverse cities in the country, seals and sea lions, chimpanzees, gorillas, orangutans, Albuquerque’s ethnic tapestry is refl ected in its archi- elephants, polar bears, giraffes, hippos, camels, tamarins, tecture, artwork, cultural centers and cuisine. Countless koalas, Mexican wolves, mountain lions, monkeys, jag- customs and traditions passed down over generations are uars, zebras and rhinoceros. State-of-the-art exhibit de- a vibrant part of daily life in the city, and make Albu- sign and eye-pleasing landscaping enhance zoo animal querque an epicenter of authentic Southwestern culture. husbandry by creating naturalistic habitats with trees, Albuquerque is home to more than the Native Ameri- grasses, water features and rockwork. Walking distance can, Hispanic, Latino and Anglo cultures for which New through the zoo is about 2.25 miles. Mexico is well known. Our multicultural city includes • Tingley Beach features three fi shing lakes, a strong African American, Asian, Middle Eastern and model boating pond and a train station with gift shop and other ethnic communities, creating a unique and modern food service. Southwestern blend. In fact, more than 70 different eth- nicities call Albuquerque home. Old Town -- Take a walk through history around Albuquerque’s Old Town, the serene village that has Centuries of History -- The one-of-a-kind charac- been the focal point of community life since 1706. Quiet ter of Albuquerque is the result of many different forces, hidden patios, winding brick paths, gardens and bal- perhaps none as important as the centuries of history conies are waiting to be discovered. Wrought iron and that have shaped the city of Albuquerque, New Mexico. adobe benches beckon you to rest in the shade and watch Starting with the Native Americans who have lived here people stroll by. Visit historic San Felipe de Neri Church for thousands of years and continuing through Albu- and relax in the Rose Garden. Shopping in Old Town is querque’s offi cial founding in 1706, the city has grown a truly delightful experience. Unique items from around into a multi-cultural metropolis of nearly 800,000 peo- the world, as well as those that are distinctly Southwest- ple. While the modern city of Albuquerque is a center ern, can be found in more than 150 shops, boutiques, of high-tech industry and research, it retains vital con- galleries and artist studios. When in New Mexico - Eat nections to the past, such as the ancient rock carvings at like New Mexicans! Try delightful chile dishes which Petroglyph National Monument, the historic Old Town evolved from a combination of Indian and Spanish Plaza and the trail of vintage neon signs along Route 66 recipes, or enjoy one of the many restaurants featuring spanning the city. everything from the All-American hamburger to fi ne DOWNTOWN AND Continental cuisine. For almost three centuries Old OLD TOWN ATTRACTIONS Town has been the crossroads of the Southwest. It is a Albuquerque Biological Park (http://www.cabq. Historical Zone of the City of Albuquerque and home for gov/biopark/): many families whose ancestors founded the town. More • The Albuquerque Aquarium takes visitors on information can be found at http://www.albuquerqueold- a journey down the Rio Grande from Albuquerque to town.com/. its mouth in the Gulf of Mexico. Fresh water riverine, Albuquerque Museum of Art and History -- The estuarine, surf zone, shallow waters, coral reefs, open art collection of The Albuquerque Museum concentrates ocean and deep ocean species are represented along the on works by regional artists, contemporary and histori- way. Other highlights include an eel tunnel, seahorses, cal. The collections include major holdings of paint- luminous jellies and a 285,000 gallon ocean tank where ings by the Taos Society of Artists as well as works by brown, sandtiger, blacktip and nurse sharks swim along- members of the Cinco Pintores and the Transcendental side brilliantly colored reef fi sh, eels, sea turtles and open Painting Group, along with works in all media by con- ocean species. 3 temporary regional, national and international artists. Holocaust and Intolerk - ance Museum of New The Museum also features a sculpture garden, which is Mexico -- Its purpose is to educate people about the Ho- open all year. The History Division researches, collects, locaust as well as to teach them about other genocides preserves, and exhibits the history of Albuquerque and and forms of bullying that have affected people around the Middle Rio Grande Valley from the founding early the world. More information can be found at http://www. Spanish settlements prior to the Pueblo Revolt in 1680 nmholocaustmuseum.org/. and the settlement of Albuquerque in 1706 to the present. American International Rattlesnake Museum More information can be found at http://www.cabq.gov/ -- You can earn an offi cial “Certifi cate of Bravery” for museum/welcome.html. visiting the new American International Rattlesnake Mu- New Mexico Museum of Natural History and seum in Albuquerque’s Old Town. Along both sides of a Science -- The Museum has eight permanent exhibit halls corridor stretching toward the back of the museum, rat- that take visitors on a journey through time referred to as tlers reside in glass display cases featuring the decor of “Timetracks” providing snapshots of New Mexico from their native habitats. As you move down the corridor, the formation of the universe to the present day. Space peering into each enclosure, the snakes become aware of Frontiers features the rich heritage and exciting future of your presence -- some greet your arrival with the steady space exploration in New Mexico. From ancient Native buzz of rattles at work. More information can be found American observatories at Chaco Canyon to modern day at http://www.rattlesnakes.com/. facilities such as the Very Large Array astronomical ra- Turquoise Museum -- The Turquoise Museum and dio observatory, New Mexico’s clear skies and high alti- its collections of turquoise have been used as a source tudes have provided an ideal location to study the heav- of information and pictures for over 40 years. Uncover ens. STARTUP is the fi rst museum exhibition dedicated the mystery of turquoise, delve into its rich history, learn to the microcomputer - the little machine that revolution- about the different mines, specimens, and stories of col- ized the way we live, work and play. The gallery fea- orful characters at The Turquoise Museum in Albuquer- tures one-of-a-kind artifacts, video and interactive dis- que, New Mexico. More information can be found at plays, including “Rise of the Machines” - an immersive http://www.turquoisemuseum.com/. multimedia theatre experience. The museum also has a DynaTheater and a Planetarium. More information can be found at http://www.nmnaturalhistory.org/index.html. ATTRACTIONS OUTSIDE OF ¡explora! -- Explora is a new kind of learning DOWNTOWN AND OLD TOWN place, providing real experiences with real things that Rio Grande Nature Center -- http://www.cabq.gov/ put people’s learning in their own hands. Explora is part aes/s1rgnc.html; a protected riparian habitat. science center, part children’s museum, part free-choice Sandia Peak and Tramway – http://www.sandiapeak. school, part grandma’s attic, part grandpa’s garage, part com/; the world’s longest tram at 2.7 miles long laboratory, part neighborhood full of interesting people, Petroglyph National Monument – http://www.nps. and part of many people’s lives. More information can gov/petr/index.htm; with 3 locations on the West Side of be found at http://www.explora.us/en/home/. Albuquerque, plus the Visitors Center. National Hispanic Cultural Center – The Nation- Coronado State Monument – http://www.nmmonu- al Hispanic Cultural Center is dedicated to the preserva- ments.org/inst.php?inst=4. tion, promotion, and advancement of Hispanic culture, arts, and humanities. Since the grand opening in 2000, Anderson-Abruzzo Albuquerque International Bal- they have staged over 25 art exhibitions and 500 pro- loon Museum http://www.cabq.gov/balloon/. grams in the visual, performing, and literary arts. They Unser Racing Museum – http://www.unserracingmu- provide venues for visitors to learn about Hispanic cul- seum.com/. ture throughout the world. The beautiful campus is lo- cated along the banks of the Rio Grande in the historic Maxwell Museum of Anthropology – http://www.unm. Albuquerque neighborhood of Barelas. More informa- edu/~maxwell/. tion can be found at http://www.nhccnm.org/. UNM Geology Museum – http://epswww.unm.edu/mu- seum.htm. 4 Museum of Southwestern Biology – http://www.msb. Starbuck’s - Hyatt Regency Albuquerque -- 330 Tijeras unm.edu/ ; collections of vertebrates, arthropods, plants Ave. N.W. (505) 842-1234 and genomic materials from the American Southwest, Village Coffee Roaster -- 519 Central Ave N.W. (505) Central and South America, and from throughout the 242-4781 world. Tinkertown Museum – http://www.tinkertown.com/. Continental/International Cuisine Artichoke Cafe -- 424 Central Ave. S.E. (505) 243-0200 RESTAURANTS DOWNTOWN Sol Restaurant - Doubletree Hotel Albuquerque -- 201 American Cuisine Marquette Ave. N.W. (505) 247-3344 ABQ.Nick’s Crossroads Cafe -- 400 Central Ave. S.W. Tucanos Brazilian Grill -- 110 Central Ave. S.W. (505) (505) 242-8369 246-9900 Cyprus Grille - Albuquerque Embassy Suites Hotel & Ice Cream Spa -- 1000 Woodward Pl. N.E. (505) 353-5345 Sweet Berry -- 101 Gold Ave. S.W. (505) 242-1517 Cafe Green -- 319 Fifth St. S.W. (505) 842-1600 Mediterranean Cuisine Flying Star Cafe -- 2701 Broadway Blvd. N.E. (505) Zohra -- 20 First Plaza N.W. (505) 247-2323 255-1128 Gold Street Caffe -- 218 Gold Ave. S.W. (505) 765- Pizza 1677 Farina Pizzeria -- 510 Central Ave. S.E. (505) 243- 0130 The Grove Cafe & Market -- 600 Central Ave. S.E. (505) 248-9800 JC’s New York Pizza Department -- 215 Central Ave. N.W. (505) 766-6973 McGrath’s - Hyatt Regency Albuquerque -- 330 Tijeras Ave. N.W. (505) 842-1234 SLICES - a unique style pizza joint -- 102 Fourth St. N.W. (480) 899-6266 The Library Bar & Grill -- 312 Central Ave. S.W. (505) 242-2992 Deli One Up Elevated Lounge -- 301 Central Ave. N.W. The Fix -- 319 Central Ave. N.W. (505) 247-4200 (505) 259-0406 OLD TOWN Slate Street Café -- 515 Slate Ave. N.W. (505) 243- American 2210 Shark Reef Cafe - Albuquerque Biological Park -- 903 Standard Diner -- 320 Central Ave. S.E. (505) 243-1440 Tenth St. S.W. (505) 764-6236 Asian Cuisine Seasons Rotisserie & Grill (Old Town) -- 2031 Moun- Sushi King -- 118 Central Ave. S.W. (505) 842-5099 tain Rd. N.W. (505) 766-5100

Teriyaki Kitchen Co. -- 508 Central Ave. S.W. (505) Coffee House/Tea Room 766-9405 Keep It Simple Stupid (KISS) Coffee (Old Town) -- Thai Crystal -Thai Cuisine -- 109 Gold Ave. S.W. (505) 404 San Felipe N.W. (505) 243-3033 244-3344 The St. James Tearoom (Old Town) -- 901 Rio Grande Blvd. N.W. (505) 242-3752 Bakery Isabella’s -- 200 Third St. N.W. (505) 244-9461 Continental La Crepe Michel (Old Town) -- 400 San Felipe St. N.W. Coffee House (505) 242-1251 Caffeina’s - Albuquerque Embassy Suites Hotel & Spa -- 1000 Woodward Pl. N.E. (505) 353-5345 New Mexican Cuisine Golden Crown Panaderia (Neighborhood Bakery) (Old Town) -- 1103 Mountain Rd. N.W. (505) 243-2424 5 Albuquerque Bar & Grill - Best Western Rio Grande Pizza Inn -- 1015 Rio Grande Blvd. N.W. (505) 843-9500 Old Town Pizza Parlor -- 108 Rio Grande Blvd. N.W. Casa de Ruiz - Church Street Cafe (Old Town) -- 2111 (505) 999-1949 Church St. N.W. (505) 247-8522 Deli Duran Central Pharmacy (Old Town) -- 1815 Central City Treats Museum Cafe (Old Town) -- 2000 Moun- Ave. N.W. (505) 247-4141 tain Rd. N.W. (505) 242-5316 Cafe Plazuela - Hotel Albuquerque at Old Town - A Spanish Heritage Hotel & Resort -- 201 Third St NW (505) 998- Cristobals - Hotel Albuquerque at Old Town - A Heri- 5426 tage Hotel & Resort -- 800 Rio Grande Blvd. N.W. (505) Cafe Plazuela - Hotel Albuquerque at Old Town - A 843-6300 Heritage Hotel & Resort -- 800 Rio Grande Blvd. N.W. Steak/Seafood (505) 843-6300 Antiquity Restaurant (Old Town) -- 112 Romero St. Monica’s El Portal Restaurant (Old Town) -- 321 Rio N.W. (505) 247-3545 Grande Blvd. N.W. (505) 247-9625 High Noon Restaurant and Saloon (Old Town) -- 425 San Felipe St. N.W. (505) 765-1455

6 2010 HPS Midyear Meeting Exhibitors Exhibits are located in the Southwest Exhibit Hall Exhibit Hours SW Exhibit Hall, Convention Center Monday 5:30-6:30 PM Opening Reception

Tuesday 9:30 AM-5:00 PM Exhibits Open Thank you to our Sponsors: 9:45-10:30 AM Refreshment Breaks Energy Solutions, Silver Sponsor Noon Lunch-Exhibit Hall Canberra, Bronze Sponsor 3:15-3:45 PM Refreshment Breaks

Wednesday 9:30 AM-Noon Exhibits Open 10:00-10:30 AM Refreshment Breaks

Exhibit Hall Floor Plan

Canberra 209 211 215

202 204 206 208 210 212 214 216 Thermo 301 307 311309 Landauer Fisher Food & Coffee

Dade 302 308 Mactec ENTRANCE Moeller Ortec Ezag Lounge

Food & Coffee 402 Mirion 410 412 Ludlum Energy 501 505 507 Solutions 515513

HP 502 504 506 508 512510 Journal

7 2010 HPS Midyear Meeting Exhibitors Exhibits are located in SW Exhibit Hall, Convention Center 2010 Annual Meeting Booth: 209 The new Canberra has the broadest array of Health Salt Lake City Physics capabilities in the industry. HP related prod- ucts include a full range of gamma and alpha spectros- 2011 Midyear Meeting Booth:211 copy equipment, personnel contamination monitors, Charleston, SC hand held survey instruments for alpha, beta, gamma Ameriphysics, LLC Booth: 513 and neutron measurement, whole body counters and 5320 South National Drive area monitors. The company also offers a full range of Knoxville, TN 37914 services including repair and maintenance, training and 865-654-9200; FAX: 865-531-0092 expert data review. www.ameriphysics.com Center for Disease Control & Booth:410 Ameriphysics is a full-service radiological and Prevention, Radiation Studies Branch waste solutions provider. Our personnel exhibit a wide 4770 Buford Hwy NE, MS-F58 variety of radiation protection and waste management Atlanta, GA 30341 experience. From simple laboratory surveys to com- 800-232-4636 plex cyclotron removals and MARSSIM-based decom- www.bt.cdc.gov/radiation missioning projects; Ameriphysics has the experience The Centers for Disease Control and Preven- necessary to complete your project on time and within tion, Radiation Studies Branch, is pleased to announce budget. a brand new radiation emergency tool kit for Public Bionomics, Inc. Booth: 402 Health Offi cials. Please stop by booth 315 to sign up PO Box 817 and receive a free kit. For more information e-mail cd- Kingston, TN 37763 [email protected]. 865-220-8501; FAX: 865-220-8532 Chase Environmental Booth: 307 www.Bionomics-Inc.com 109 Flint Road Radioactive and Mixed Waste Disposal Services. Oak Ridge, TN 37830 Bladewerx LLC Booth: 508 865-481-8801; FAX: 865-481-8818 103 Rio Rancho Dr NE, Suite C4 www.chaseenv.com Rio Rancho, NM 87124 Chase Environmental Group, Inc. is a full-service, 505-892-5144; FAX: 865-890-8319 decontamination, decommissioning, remediation, and www.bladewerx.com waste management fi rm, providing safe, high quality, Bladewerx and its subsidairy Shieldwerx provide practical, cost effective solutions to your environmental instrumentation, custom software, neutron and gamma needs. shielding, and neutron activation foils to the radiation Dade Moeller & Associates Booth: 304 protection and measurement industry. 1835 Terminal Dr, Ste 200 Canberra Booth: 106 Richland, WA 99354 Bronze Sponsor 509-946-0410; FAX: 509-946-4412 800 Research Parkway www.moellerinc.com Meriden, CT 6450 Dade Moeller & Associates (www.moellerinc. 203-639-2148, FAX: 203-235-1347 com) is a nationally-recognized consulting fi rm spe- www.canberra.com cializing in radiological & nuclear safety, public & en- Canberra is the world’s leading supplier of ana- vironmental health protection,occupational safety & lytical instruments, systems and services for radiation health, and radiation safety training. We provide the measurement. Applications for Canberra offerings in- full range of professional and technician services in ra- clude health physics, nuclear power operations, Radia- diation protection, health physics, and worker safety to tion Monitoring Systems (RMS), nuclear safeguards, government and commercial nuclear clients. nuclear waste management, environmental radiochem- istry and other areas. 8 Eckert & Zeigler Analytics Booth: 405 energy independence, reduced carbon emissions, envi- 1380 Seaboard Industrial Blvd ronmental protection. Atlanta, GA 30318 404-352-8677; FAX: 404-352-2837 F&J Specialty Products, Inc. Booth: 510 www.analytics.co 404 Cypress Road Eckert & Ziegler is the world largest supplier of Ocala, FL 34472 high quality NIST-traceable radioactive standards and 352-680-1177; FAX: 352-680-1454 operates 3 accredited calibration laboratories www.fjspecialty.com Eckert & Ziegler Analytics, located in Atlanta, GA F&J is a manufacturer of traditional and micro- and Eckert & Ziegler Isotope Products, located in Va- processor controlled air sampling systems, airfl ow cali- lencia, CA supply high quality, NIST-traceable radioac- brators, accessories and consumables. Products include tive reference sources and standardized solutions for the High Volume, Low Volume and PAS air samplers, fi lter calibration of radiation measurement instruments. Ra- media and radioiodine collection cartridges. Most in- diochemical performance evaluation samples are pro- struments comply with ANSI/UL electrical safety stan- vided quarterly for effl uent and environmental monitor- dards ing programs. Fluke Biomedical Booth: 501 The recent acquisition of Nuclitec GmbH, Braun- 6045 Cochran Rd schweig, Germany, formerly QSA Global GmbH added Cleveland, OH 44139 the Isotrak brand product range. Isotrak products include 440-248-9300; FAX: 440-349-2307 high quality anodized wide area reference sources and www.fl ukebiomedical.com a range of instruments like the DoseGuard/RAD60 and Fluke Biomedical provides the latest technology the Teletector 6112B/M. All Isotrak products are now in radiation detection meters available with wireless ca- available from Eckert & Ziegler Analytics, Atlanta. pability. The Victoreen® ASM 990 Series Survey Me- Ecology Services, Inc. Booth: 216 ter excels in detecting radioactive contamination. The 10220 Old Columbia Rd 451P/B Ion Chamber Survey Meters perform high-sen- Columbia, MD 21046 sitivity measurements of exposure and exposure rate. 410-381-2600; FAX: 410-381-2602 Our highly accredited Global Calibration Laboratory www.ecologyservices.com provides a one-stop service for all radiation, calibration Ecology Services Inc. Provides in depth services and repair needs. to waste generators to include waste minimization, char- Gamma Products, Inc. Booth: 515 acterization, tracking, packaging, manifesting, com- 7730 W 114th Pl plete shipment preparation. Remedial Services, facility Palos Hills, IL 60465 decon/decommissioning, close outs (MARSSIM). We 708-974-4100; FAX: 708-974-0071 support the requirements of both large and small gen- www.gammaproducts.com erators, tailoring services specifi c to customer needs. Gamma Products, Inc. has been designing and While committing to safety, regulatory compliance, en- manufacturing scientifi c instruments for 45 years. Our vironmental compliance, and complete customer satis- product line includes: low background α/β automatic faction. proportional counting systems, low background α/β Energy Solutions Booth: 509 manual proportional counting systems, a gas free au- Silver Sponsor tomatic α/β counting system, RA226/8 & gamma auto- 423 West 300 South, Ste 200 matic sample changers, lead or steel counting and stor- Salt Lake City, UT 84101 age shields. 801-649-2102; FAX: 801-413-5690 G/O Booth: 512 www.energysolutions.com 70161 Highway 59 EnergySolutions is an international nuclear energy Abita Springs, LA 70420 Services Company headquartered in Salt Lake City, 985-809-8085; FAX: 985-809-7440 Utah. Divisions include Federal Services, Commercial G/O Corporation is a supplier of both nuclear and Services, International Division and Logistics, Process- industrial safety equipment. G/O provides health phys- ing and Disposal. EnergySolutions takes great pride in ics supplies, rad-waste reduction items, many custom 9 the work we do and is committed safety fi rst to support signage and barrier products. Hi-Q Environmental Products Booth: 302 Lab Impex Booth: 202 7386 Trade Street Impex House, 21 Harwell Road San Diego, CA 92121 Poole Dorset, UK BH17 OGE 858-549-2820; FAX: 858-549-9657 44-120-2684-848; FAX: 44-120-2683-571 www.hi-Q.net www.lab-impex-systems.co.uk HI-Q Environmental Products Company has been Instruments for Alpha-Beta Continuous Air Moni- a leading Manufacturer of Air Sampling Equipment, toring (the SmartCAM), Area Gamma Monitoring, No- Systems & Accessories since 1973. Our product line ble Gas Monitoring and Iodine Monitoring. Complete includes: Continuous duty high & low volume air sam- systems for Stack and Duct Monitoring and Facility plers, air fl ow calibrators, radioiodine sampling car- wide networks. Applications within Nuclear, Industrial tridges, collection fi lter paper, combination fi lter hold- and PET. ers, and complete stack/fume hood sampling Landauer, Inc. Booth: 313 Hopewell Designs, Inc. Booth: 504 2 Science Road 5940 Gateway Drive Glenwood, IL 60425 Alpharetta, GA 30004 708-755-7000; FAX: 708-755-7011 770-667-5770; FAX: 770-667-7539 www.Landauerinc.com www.hopewelldesigns.com Landauer is the world’s largest radiation dosimetry Hopewell Designs, Inc. provides systems and so- service provider utilizing the proprietary OSL technolo- lutions for irradiation applications, X-ray inspection, gy found in both Luxel+ and InLight. InLight is a turn- and radiation shielding. We offer standard products and key onsite analysis system that meets routine person- custom designs to meet our customers’ requirements nel monitoring and emergency response requirements. Both dosimeter types are NVLAP and DOELAP ac- HPS Journal Booth: 514 credited. Landauer’s comprehensive diagnostic evalu- ICX Radiation, Inc. Booth: 301 ation and reporting is backed by over 50 years’ experi- 100 Midland Road ence. Oak Ridge, TN 37830 LND Inc. Booth: 210 865-220-8700; FAX: 865-220-7181 3230 Lawson Boulevard www.radiation.icxt.com Ocenaside, NY 11572 ICx Radiation, an ICx Technologies company, is 516-678-6141; FAX: 516-678-6704 a leading supplier of handheld and stationary radiation www.lndinc.com detection and radionuclide identifi cation instruments. Nuclear Radiation Detectors including, GM Tubes, With over 10,000 handheld instruments deployed Proportional Counters, He-3 and BF-3 Neutron Detec- worldwide, ICx continually receives compliments and tors, Ionization Chambers. World’s leading detector ideas from customers, which more often than not, end manufacturer. up as features or options in future instrument develop- ments. Ludlum Measurements, Inc. Booth: 414 PO Box 810, 501 Oak Street J.L. Shepherd Booth: 308 Sweetwater, TX 79556 1010 Arroyo Ave 325-235-5494; FAX: 325-235-4672 San Fernando, CA 91340-1822 www.ludlums.com 818-898-2361; FAX: 818-361-8095 Ludlum Measurements, Inc. has been designing, www.jlshepherd.com manufacturing and supplying radiation detection and Biological research, blood component, steriliza- measurement equipment in response to the worlds’ need tion and process irradiators. Gamma, beta and neutron for greater safety since 1962. Throughout its nearly fi ve instrument calibration facilities. Automated computer decade history, it has developed radiation detection controls and databases. Irradiator/Calibrator IC secu- technologies and instruments in support of enhancing rity upgrades, service, repair, relocations and decom- the safety of personnel, the environment and securing missioning. Hot cell manipulators, windows and lead borders. glass available 10 MACTEC Booth: 310 NRRPT Booth: 215 14062 Denver West Pkwy, Ste 300 PO Box 3084 Golden, CO 80401 Westerly, RI 02891 303-273-5071; FAX: 303-273-5000 401-637-4811; FAX: 401-637-4822 www.mactec.com www.nrrpt.org MACTEC, a $500M nationwide fi rm, routinely helps clients save time and money by providing world- ORTEC Booth: 403 class cleanup program support. We offer innovative 801 S. Illinios Ave technologies as well as expertise in health physics, reg- Oak Ridge, TN 37831 ulatory compliance, engineering, design, construction 865-483-2124; FAX: 865-425-1380 and remediation. MACTEC’s NRC license enables us www.ortec-online.com to minimize client liability for nuclear decontamination, ORTEC has over forty years of experience provid- demolition, and waste management projects. ing solutions for a wide variety of Nuclear Detection Applications. Our team of highly qualifi ed scientists Mirion Technologies (MGPI & DSD) Booth: 406 and engineers are dedicated to providing measurement 5000 Highlands Parkway, Ste 150 system solutions for Homeland Security, Waste Man- Smyrna, GA 30082 agement, Personal Monitoring, In-Situ measurements, 770-432-2744; FAX: 770-432-9179 and Radiochemistry Laboratory Applications. www.mirion.com Mirion Technologies (MGPI), Inc. provides a full Protean Instrument Corp. Booth: 309 range of instrumentation and engineering services for 231 Sam Ragburn Parkway health physics applications and radiation monitoring Lenoir City, TN 37771 systems for all nuclear facilities and civil defense mar- 865-717-3456; FAX: 865-717-3456 kets. We are #1 in North America in electronic dosim- www.proteaninstrument.com etry. Mirion Technologies Dosimetry Services Division Protean Instrument Corporation is a leading sup- is a worldwide leader in radiation dosimetry services. plier in high performance alpha/beta counting systems Offering the broadest array of dosimetry products in and the only company 100% dedicated to the manufac- the marketplace, under the Global Dosimetry Solutions ture of these systems. We manufacture a wide range of brand, we are fully accredited through several well- models, including automatic, manual, single detector, known organizations. multi-detector, windowed and windowless. We deliver twice the performance! MJW Technical Services, Inc. Booth: 311 243 Root Street, Ste 100 Radiation Safety and Booth: 507 Olean, NY 14760 Control Services, Inc. 716-372-5300; FAX: 716-372-5307 91 Portsmouth Ave www.mjwts.com Stratham, NH 03885 MJW Technical Services, Inc. provides high qual- 603-778-2871; FAX: 603-778-6879 ity and timely calibrations and repairs for all types of www.radsafety.com radiation detection equipment. MJWTS is the Ludlum RSCS is a leader in Radiological Services in- Measurements Authorized Eastern U.S. Service Center, cluding Instrument Sales, Calibration, and Repair, HP SAIC Dosimeter Service Center and the Wm B. John- Training, and Consulting. We specialize in: decom- son Authorized Service Center. With our new state-of- missioning, LTP/FSS support, regulatory compliance, the-art calibration facility strategically located in the Groundwater Investigations, REMP services, and as- northeastern U.S. we can quickly and effi ciently service sessments. Specialty products include Survey Meter our customers. In addition to instrument calibrations Simulators and HP Software. MJWTS is the Northeastern sales distributor for Wm B. Johnson instruments check out our website at www. mjwts.com or call toll free 1-866-300-3MJW for more information

11 Radiation Safety Associates, Inc. Booth: 206 able, in addition to pipe and plume and the latest ad- 19 Pendleton Dr, PO Box 107 vances in portables. Hebron, CT 06248 860-228-0487; FAX: 860-228-4402 Thermo Fisher Scientifi c Booth: 303 www.radpro.com 27 Forge Parkway Radiation Safety Associates, Inc. is a full-service Franklin, MA 02308 health physics consulting company, handling projects 800-274-4212 both large and small. Our services include radiation www.thermo.com/rmp consulting, training, custom instrumentation and soft- Thermo Fisher Scientifi c is the world leader in ware design, instrument calibration and repair, air sam- serving science. The Fortune 300 company enables pler calibration and repair, radiochemical analysis/lab its customers to make the world healthier, cleaner, and services, radiological surveys and assessments. safer by providing analytical instruments, equipment, software, and services. We are excited to introduce Radiation Solutions, Inc. Booth: 502 the next-generation personnel contamination monitor, 386 Watline Ave the iPCM12. Enhanced sensitivity and sophisticated Mississauga, Ontario, Canada L4Z 1X2 electronics keeps your personnel safe and protected. 905 890 1111; FAX: 905 890 1964 Our product line is comprised of portal monitors, light- www.radiationsolutions.ca weight and accurate hand-held radiation detector, con- Radiation Solutions Inc is a manufacturer of low tamination monitors, mobile radiation detection sys- level radiation detection instruments. Products include tems, spectroscopic isotope identifi cation equipment, handheld nuclide identifi cation (RIID) units, mobile and and ViewPointTM Enterprise, a remote monitoring systems for land vehicle, marine, airborne and station- software platform that integrates data from remote sen- ary monitoring. Applications range from environmental, sors to provide real-time personnel and area monitor- emergency response, security and geological mapping. ing. Our radiation measurement and protection prod- The various systems offer Survey / Search , ID, Map- uct lines provide unequalled radiological performance, ping and Directional capabilities. In addition, vehicle protection, and solutions for today’s challenges. More portal monitoring systems are also produced primarily information and descriptions of our instruments and for the scrap metal recycling industry. systems can be found at www.thermo.com/rmp. S.E. International Inc. Booth: 208 University of Missouri Booth: 212 PO Box 39 Research Reactor Summertown, TN 38483 1513 Research Park Dr 931-964-3561; FAX: 931-964-3564 Columbia, MO 65211 www.seintl.com 573-882-8366; FAX: 573-882-6360 Manufacturer of the Radiation Alert® product http://www.murr.missouri.edu line, offering affordable handheld ionizing radiation MU’s MURR (10 MWth) is a unique national cen- detection instruments including Geiger counters, do- ter for nuclear science education and research, focusing simeters, and multi-channel analyzers for surface and on isotope production, neutron scattering, and analyti- air contamination. Proven reliable in Emergency Re- cal testing. A problem-based curriculum for Radiation sponse, environmental, industrial, laboratory, research, Protection Technicians (USDOL/ETA HG-15355-06- Health physics, and educational fi elds. Stop by and see 60) has been developed for dissemination across the the new SENTRY alarming dose/rate meter. country at two-year technical schools partnering with nuclear industry employers. A new web-based math Technical Associates Booth: 505 math course for high schools, using a nuclear science 7051 Eton Avenue learning environment is also available to support stu- Canoga Park, CA 91301 dents entering an RPT degree program (NRC Education 818-883-7043; FAX: 818-883-6103 Grant 38-07-493-001), and a new curriculum for Nu- www.tech-associates.com clear Quality Control Technicians has been developed Recent additions to TA’s Health Physics instrument NRC Education Grant 38-07-493). line include air and area monitors, which are smarter, more sensitive and more rugged than previously avail- 12 Technical Program If a paper is going to be presented by other than the fi rst author, the presenter’s name has an asterisk (*) All Sessions will take place in the Albuquerque Convention Center, Ballroom A MONDAY 1:15-3:15 pm Ballroom A 7:00-8:00 am Ballroom A MPM-A Communicating Highly Technical CEL 1 The Future of Nuclear Power is Here Information to J. Paul Farrell, Jodi Strzelczyk Non-Technical People, Part 1 Brookhaven Technology Group, University of Colorado Co-Chairs: John Till, Scott Kirk Hospital 1:15 pm MPM-A.1 Approaches by Department of Energy Facilities to 8:15 am-NOON Ballroom A Radiological Risk Communication MAM-A Plenary Session: Radiation Risk Dixon GL, Welch K, Vylet V Communication to the Public Jefferson Lab; [email protected] Co-Chairs: Richard Toohey, Gus Potter 1:30 pm MPM-A.2 8:15 am Introduction Training First Responders at the National Institutes 8:30 am MAM-A.1 of Health Terrorism and Radiation Risk Communication McLellan K Becker SM National Institutes of Health; [email protected] University of Alabama at Birmingham; sbecker@ 1:45 pm MPM-A.3 ms.soph.uab.edu Availability and Limitations of Technical Data Dur- 9:15 am MAM-A.2 ing Radiological Emergencies Technically Speaking Bowman DR Hamrick B US Department of Energy; [email protected]. Dade Moeller & Associates, Inc.; barbara.hamrick@ gov moellerinc.com 2:00 pm MPM-A.4 10:00 am COFFEE BREAK Communication Techniques for HPs Cehn J 10:30 am MAM-A.3 Applied Sciences Co.; [email protected] Public Meeting Experience – Being Prepared and Dealing with the Unexpected 2:15 pm MPM-A.5 Collins S The Universal Hazard Index - A Non-Technical Risk US Nuclear Regulatory Commission; sam.collins@nrc. Communication Tool gov Quinn DM, Dauer LT, Williamson M DAQ Inc., Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center 11:15 am MAM-A.4 Getting Past Us Versus Them 2:30 pm MPM-A.6 Cravens G How to Communicate Radiation Safety and Risk to Knopf; [email protected] Custodians and Firemen Corti D NOON LUNCH ON YOUR OWN University of Montana; [email protected] 2:45 pm MPM-A.7 Radiation Safety Presentations for Preschoolers to Adults McLellan KE National Institutes of Health; [email protected]

13 3:00 pm MPM-A.8 3:45-5:30 pm Ballroom A Enquiring Minds Want to Know: HPS Initiatives in Public Information MPM-B Public Communication, Part 1 Classic K, Barlow A, Burress P, Cezeaux J, Davidson T, Co-Chairs: Laura Pring and Chris Martel Hartman M, Harvey R, Ottley D, Shimko R, Williams V “How To” Risk Communications, Principles, Tools, Mayo Clinic, Rochester Tufts University, Florida State and Techniques University, Battelle, SBC Global, University of Califor- Milligan P, Covello V nia, Davis, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, DOE Han- US Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Center for Risk ford, PA Veterans Administration, Merck Inc; classic. Communications; [email protected] [email protected] 3:15 pm COFFEE BREAK 5:30-6:30 pm SW Exhibit Hall Exhibitor Reception

14 TUESDAY 10:30 am-Noon Ballroom A 7:00-8:00 am Ballroom A TAM-B Public Communication, Part 2 CEL 2 Educating Medical Professionals about Co-Chairs: Tim Kirkham, Mark Miller the Risks Associated with Radiation 10:30 am TAM-B.1 Deirdre Elder, Jodi Strzelczyk US EPA Superfund Program’s Policy for Community University of Colorado Hospital Involvement at Radioactively Contaminated Sites Walker S, Martin K 8:15-10:30 am Ballroom A US Environmental Protection Agency; walker.stuart@ TAM-A Communicating Highly Technical epa.gov Information to Non-Technical People, Part 2 11:15 am TAM-B.2 Co-Chairs: Kelly Classic, Wayne Gaul Public Communication Lessons Learned on Sandia’s 8:15 am TAM-A.1 Environmental Restoration Project Radon Risk Communication - 2009 HPS Draft Posi- Miller ML, Peace GL, Nagy MD, Goering TR tion Statement on Indoor Radon Sandia National Labs, Los Alamos National Labs; Johnson J [email protected] Tetra Tech; [email protected] 11:40 am TAM-B.3 8:30 am TAM-A.2 Challenges in Conveying the Health Relevance of Comunicating Radiation Risk to Clinical Research Uranium Exposure to Potentially Affected Commu- Patients at the NIH nities Ribudo C, Kindrick S Sandoval D, Toth B, Krapfl H National Institutes of Health (NIH); ribaudoc@ors. New Mexico Department of Health; deyonne.sandoval@ od.nih.gov state.nm.us 8:45 am TAM-A.3 Noon-1:15 pm SW Exhibit Hall Identifi cation and Communication of the Potential Health Signifi cance of Off-Site Releases from Key Complimentary Lunch in Exhibit Hall Operations Identifi ed in CDC’s Los Alamos Histori- cal Document Retrieval and Assessment Project 1:15-3:15 pm Ballroom A Widner T, Le MH TPM-A Communication Techniques, Part 1 ChemRisk, LLC; [email protected] Co-Chairs: Bill Rhodes, Tara Medich 9:00 am TAM-A.4 1:15 pm TPM-A.1 Public Involvement Components of CDC’s Los Ala- Stanford’s Health Physics Program Custom Software mos Historical Document Retrieval and Assessment Moves to the Web Project Banghart D Widner T, Le MH Stanford University; [email protected] ChemRisk, LLC; [email protected] 1:30 pm TPM-A.2 9:15 am TAM-A.5 Creating Virtual Environments for Training Non- Nuclear is Hot!! An Effective Tool for Communicat- Technical Responders for Radiation Emergencies ing Nuclear Science to High School Students Ansari A, Caspary K, Burns D, Bolcar S, Scheller A Fisher D Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Oak Ridge Pacifi c Northwest National Laboratory; dr.fi sher@pnl. Institute for Science and Education, University of Min- gov nesota Center for Public Health Preparedness; AAnsa- [email protected] 9:30 am TAM-A.6 1:45 pm TPM-A.3 Hospital Response During the Red Dragon Drill West Coast Maritime Pilot – San Diego Public Out- Martz M reach Campaign [email protected] Inman JC Department of Homeland Security; james.inman@dhs. 9:45 am BREAK gov 15 2:00 pm TPM-A.4 4:15 pm TPM-B.3 Talk to the Patient Making ALARA Reviews Pay Off Fellman A Baker SI Dade Moeller & Associates; alan.fellman@moellerinc. Argonne National Laboratory; [email protected] com 4:45 pm TPM-B.5 2:15 pm TPM-A.5 Correction to the Effective Dose Published in ICRP The Physicist-Endochrinoligist - Radiologist Team 80 Approach for Preparation for Radioiodine Proce- Moussa H, Melanson M dures Battelle Memorial Institute, Walter Reed Army Medical Mozzor M, High MD Center; [email protected] New York Medical College/Westchester Medical Center; 5:00 pm TPM-B.6 [email protected] The Community Environmental Monitoring Pro- 2:30 pm TPM-A.6 gram: Conveying Radiation Risk to the Public Communicating Radiation Risk in Clinical Trials Through Direct Participation Balter S, Balter R, Brenner DJ, Weisz G Hartwell WT, Shafer DS, Curtis S Columbia University, John Jay College of Criminal Jus- Desert Research Institute; [email protected] tice; [email protected] 2:45 pm TPM-A.7 Risky Business: Challenges and Success in Commu- nicating Military Radiation Risks Melanson M, Geckle LS, Davidson BA Army Surgeon General, U.S. Army Center for Health Promotion and Preventive Medicine; mark.melanson@ us.army.mil Join us for the 3:00 pm TPM-A.8 HPS 55th Annual Meeting The Hardest Concepts I’ve Ever Tried to Communi- cate to a Health Physicist in Salt Lake City, Utah Strom DJ Battelle – Pacifi c National Northwest Laboratory; [email protected] 27 June - 1 July 2010 3:15 pm COFFEE BREAK See www.hps.org/meetings/ 3:45-5:15 pm Ballroom A for more details TPM-B Communication Techniques, Part 2 Co-Chairs: Tom Widner, Robin Hill 3:45 pm TPM-B.1 As Low As Reasonably Achievable-Based Initiatives Can Be “Risky Business” Nichelson SM, Klauenberg BJ, Montgomery NM US Air Force, Texas, US Air Force; Scott.Nichelson@ brooks.af.mil 4:00 pm TPM-B.2 An Effective Communication Tool for the Public: The International Nuclear and Radiological Event Scale Jones CG US Nuclear Regulatory Commission; cynthia.jones@ nrc.gov 16 WEDNESDAY 10:30 am-12:30 pm Ballroom A 7:00-8:00 am Ballroom A WAM-B Crisis and Public Risk CEL 3 ABHP Exam Fundamentals – Tips for Communication, Part 2 Successfully Completing the Certifi cation Process Co-Chairs: Patricial Milligan and Cathy Ribudo Cheryl Olson 10:30 am WAM-B.1 Dominion KPS Using Health Physicist Volunteers with Local Medi- cal Reserve Corps (MRC) as Emergency Communi- 8:15-10:00 am Ballroom A cators WAM-A Crisis and Public Risk Lanza JJ Communication, Part 1 Florida Department of Health; [email protected]. Co-Chairs: Cynthia Jones and John Lanza fl .us 8:15 am WAM-A.1 10:45 am WAM-B.2 Radiation versus Radioactivity: A Communication What Have We Learned about Public Communica- Challenge tions for Radiation Emergencies from Audience Re- Strom DJ search? Pacifi c Northwest National Laboratory; [email protected] Ansari A, McCurley MC, Pollard K, Miller CW, Whit- 8:35 am WAM-A.2 comb, Jr. RC Communicating Complex Information in a Crisis Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; AAnsari@ Harrington H cdc.gov US Nuclear Regulatory Commission; holly.harrington@ 11:00 am WAM-B.3 nrc.gov Communication of Radiation Risks and Benefi ts in 9:00 am WAM-A.3 Decision Making Lessons Learned from a Research Laboratory Pu Locke PA, McBaugh D, Tenforde TS Spill The Johns Hopkins University, Bloomberg School of Mengers T Public Health, Washington State Department of Public National Institutes of Standards and Technology (NIST); Health, Offi ce of Radiation Protection, National Council [email protected] on Radiation Protection and Measurements; plocke@ jhsph.edu 9:15 am WAM-A.4 Communicating Health Information to Decision 11:15 am WAM-B.4 Makers and Non-Governmental Organizations: Ex- Openess, Transparency, Communication; The NRC perience of Chornobyl and its Stakeholders Bebeshko V, Romanenko A*, Bazyka D Milligan P Research Center for Radiation Medicine, Kyiv, Ukraine; US Nuclear Regulatory Commission; patricia.milli- [email protected] [email protected] 9:30 am WAM-A.5 11:30 am WAM-B.5 Communication with Claimants and Survivors To Become Better Communicators We Need to Deal Toohey RE with Radiation Mythology ORAU; [email protected] Johnson RH Dade Moeller and Associates; ray.johnson@moellerinc. 9:45 am WAM-A.6 com Communication with Fearful Population Groups in Long-term Epidemiological Cancer/Leukemia Stud- 11:45 am WAM-B.6 ies in Ukraine Putting Radioactivity in Perspective with Radon Risk Bazyka D, Romanenko A, Gudzenko N Communication Research Center for Radiation Medicine, Kyiv, Ukraine; Smith TY [email protected] Spruce Environmental Technologies, Inc.; tsmith@ spruce.com 10:00 am COFFEE BREAK 17 12:00 pm WAM-B.7 Homeland Security Blankets - Care Packages for the Worried Well—Revisited Stansbury P, Strom DJ Pacifi c Northwest National Laboratory; paul.stans- [email protected] 12:15 pm WAM-B.8 Radiation Risks in Everyday Life Rutherford PD The Boeing Company, Santa Susana Field Laboratory; [email protected]

18 Continuing Education Lectures CELs take place in the Albuquerque Convention Center, Ballroom A Monday, January 25 7:00-8:00 am tion, complicated fl uoroscopically guided procedures may result in deterministic effects including radiation burns and CEL 1 The Future of Nuclear Power is Here skin necrosis. The use of radiation in medicine should be J. Paul Farrell & Jodi Strzelczyk governed by the concepts of justifi cation and optimization. Brookhaven Technology Group, University of Colorado Unfortunately, recent studies have indicated that a large Hospital percentage of diagnostic radiology may not be medically For over 20 years the psychological effects of mis- justifi able, and CT scans are ordered in cases where other information following the Chernobyl accident persisted imaging modalities would have provided the same diag- and shaped public opinion about nuclear power around the nostic information at a lower risk to the patient. It is impor- world, in the U.S in particular. Some of the consequences tant for physicians, nurses and technologists to be properly of the perceived risks are: a shortage of supply of radio- educated about the risks associated with the medical use of isotopes needed in medical and industrial applications and radiation. Medical professionals who do not understand the inevitable energy crisis in the US and other countries. the risks of radiological and nuclear medicine examinations While this crisis on a local scale was evident during recent are unable to provide patients with the information neces- natural disasters, growing population and energy demand sary to make informed decisions about their care. They are is likely to lead to a crisis on a global scale unless we put also poorly equipped to protect themselves, staff members to use all available technologies. Recent studies focused on and the public from unnecessary radiation exposure. LWRs with 10 to hundreds MW(e) outputs. However, even reactors smaller than 1000 MW(e) require large structures Wednesday, January 27 7:00-8:00 am in place, and operate for 30 years or more. There are site CEL 3 ABHP Exam Fundamentals – Tips for Suc- decontamination and radwaste issues associated with these cessfully Completing the Certifi cation Process systems. This session will present designs of very compact, Cheryl Olson transportable, shielded multi-megawatt nuclear power sys- This presentation will the advantages of being certi- tems, 10 and 50 MW(e) that, if needed, can be readily be fi ed discuss the fundamentals of the ABHP exam process – scaled up to 100 MW(e) with an accompanied thermal wa- from submission of the exam application to completion of ter and steam output of 300 MW(th) per reactor. These the Part 2 examination. Topics of discussion will include: designs offer safe and quick access to power and heat in • What are qualifying academic requirements? numerous situations ranging from back-up capabilities to • Why require a degree? disaster response needs and should be given immediate • What is meant by “professional level” experience? consideration by the scientifi c community and public. • How are the exams (Part 1 and Part 2) prepared? Tuesday, January 26 7:00-8:00 am • How is the passing point determined? CEL 2 Educating Medical Professionals about the • What are the keys to good performance on the Risks Associated with Radiation exam? Deirdre Elder, Jodi Strzelczyk • What pitfalls exist that detract from good exam University of Colorado Hospital performance? The number of medical procedures involving radia- This presentation will help persons interested in certi- tion and radioactive materials has increased dramatically fi cation to prepare an application that will accurately refl ect since the 1980s. Much of the growth has occurred in com- the applicant’s education and experience as well as provid- puted tomography (CT), nuclear medicine and interven- ing tips for preparing to take the exam and answering part 2 tional procedures, which deliver higher patient doses than questions in a format that promotes awarding partial credit. conventional radiography. Medical professionals often Persons who are already certifi ed may gain insight into the misunderstand the risks to patients and staff from the medi- process and identify areas where they would be willing to cal use of radiation and radioactive materials. The risks as- assist in certifi cation process. The material presented con- sociated with a single diagnostic procedure are very small; solidates pertinent exam policy/procedure into an easily di- however, some patients undergo repeated diagnostic and gestible format, offering real world examples of good and interventional procedures resulting in cumulative doses poor performance. that may signifi cantly increase the risk of cancer. In addi- 19 Abstracts MAM-A.1 Terrorism and Radiation Risk Com- MAM-A.3 NRC Stakeholder Interactions - Deliv- munication ering & Getting the Message Becker SM Collins S University of Alabama at Birmingham; sbecker@ US Nuclear Regulatory Commission; sam.collins@nrc. ms.soph.uab.edu gov Effective risk communication is now seen as one This fast paced, oral Plenary Session presentation of the most crucial components of radiological/nucle- will focus on storytelling and lessons-learned from ar terrorism preparedness and response. As a result, a high profi le, critical conversations conducted at Nu- wide range of efforts have been undertaken by gov- clear Regulatory Public Meetings. Learnings from un- ernment agencies, academic research institutes, private anticipated challenges such as impromptu demonstra- sector organizations, and others to begin to improve tions, civil disobedience and unique meeting forums public information and emergency messaging for radi- will be shared. Plain-language, body-language, empa- ation events. This presentation highlights some of the thy, sincerity and technical credibility will be empha- most signifi cant developments in radiation risk com- sized. Tune-up your right brain for this discussion….. munication, and traces out their practical implications. MAM-A.4 Getting Past Us Versus Them This is followed by a discussion of future research Cravens G needs and additional practical steps required to better Knopf; [email protected] address people’s concerns, help protect public health, I tell the story of how, while researching a book and maintain public trust and confi dence. about nuclear power, I went from being fearful about MAM-A.2 Technically Speaking all radiation to a calming shift in perspective thanks to Hamrick B patient explanations from HPS members Leo Gomez Dade Moeller & Associates, Inc.; barbara.hamrick@ and Raymond Guilmette. The public has a tendency to moellerinc.com adopt outlandish suppositions, often originating in sen- Much of the Health Physics Society’s recent out- sationalism based on worst-case analyses. But mem- reach efforts have focused on the “fear factor.” Health bers of the scientifi c community harbor biases as well, physicists encounter this reaction to radiation on a fre- and we all react similarly when faced with unknown quent basis. Whether the public relies on Hollywood, risks. Scientists resorting to technical language and ac- the media, or their elected offi cials, the message that ronyms to answer queries from concerned laypeople radiation is one of the scariest things on earth comes may sow misunderstandings that ultimately lead to leg- through loud and clear. However, even if we could get islation unsupported by science. Communication can beyond that primal reaction, we health physicists still be improved using community outreach and listening have a problem. That problem lies in the ever present respectfully to worries. Everyday examples, analogies, uncertainty associated with radiation, measurements, anecdotes, and imagery to help people distinguish low- calibrations, dose assessments, and all the other myr- dose exposure from high-dose are discussed. Employ- iad of activities associated with the practice of health ing attention and patience, health physics professionals physics. While we do need to continue addressing the can better help the public to move from myth to fact. emotional baggage with which radiation is laden, we also need to begin thinking more about how to com- MPM-A.1 Approaches by Department of Energy municate technical concepts in a more accessible way. Facilities to Radiological Risk Communication This presentation delves into some of the fundamental Dixon GL, Welch K, Vylet V technical issues that inhibit our ability to communicate Jefferson Lab; [email protected] clearly and effectively with a non-technical audience, Department of Energy (DOE) facilities are re- and explores alternatives for improving this commu- quired to prepare an Annual Site Environmental Report nication. (ASER), which includes data on radiation exposures to the public that are associated with site operations. The ASER is the primary means for informing stakeholders and the general public on all environmental issues. DOE has provided guidance on the presentation of radiologi- 20 cal exposure data, but leaves the issues associated with MPM-A.3 Availability and Limitations of Techni- radiological risk communication to each facility. This cal Data During Radiological Emergencies paper summarizes the DOE guidance on ASER content, Bowman DR then examines the risk communication approaches taken US Department of Energy; [email protected]. by facilities in California, New York, Illinois, Virginia, gov Georgia, New Mexico, and Tennessee. We qualitative- During radiological emergencies, it is important ly compare the completeness and comprehensibility of for emergency managers, governmental decision mak- the risk communications; completeness is assessed via ers, and public affairs offi cials to understand when a checklist of the contents of the “ideal” ASER, while technical information will become available and how comprehensibility is rank-ordered by a panel of Virginia reliable this information is likely to be. Understanding residents with varying backgrounds and education. This the limitations in the technical data is critical for them panel also assigns a “perceived risk” value to the pre- to be able to issue suitable Protective Action Decisions sented radiological exposures at each site. The Public and to communicate effectively with the public. In this Information Offi cer at each DOE facility is also asked paper, I will describe the technical information that for a perceived radiological risk indication, based upon will be provided by subject matter experts, the time experience. Finally, the calculated risk to the Maximally frames on which this data will be provided, and how Exposed Individual is presented for comparison. In con- the reliability of the information improves over the clusion, the paper recommends that DOE continue to course of the response. The support provided by the employ a “graded” approach that allows for necessary Department of Energy Radiological Response Teams - fl exibility, but that DOE facilities be given additional the 9 Regional Radiological Assistance Teams (RAP), risk communication tools from which to draw. the National Atmospheric Release Advisory Center (NARAC), the Aerial Measuring System (AMS), the MPM-A.2 Training First Responders at the Na- Radiological Emergency Assistance Center / Training tional Institutes of Health Site (REAC/TS), the Consequence Management Home McLellan K Team (CMHT), and the Consequence Management National Institutes of Health; [email protected] Response Team (CMRT) that comprises the DOE ele- The National Institutes of Health (NIH) is one of ment of the Interagency Federal Radiological Monitor- the largest biomedical research facilities in the world ing and Assessment Center (FRMAC) - will be used to using radioactive materials in implementing the mis- illustrate the time evolution of a radiological incident. sion of biomedical research. The NIH has a 250 bed research hospital which includes a nuclear medicine MPM-A.4 Communication Techniques for HPs department, a radiation oncology department, research Cehn J laboratories, vivarium facilities, several residential Applied Sciences Co.; [email protected] complexes and a METRO train stop. The NIH fi re- There are effective techniques for communicat- fi ghters and police are the fi rst responders to incidents ing with a lay audience. However, a model is diffi cult involving radioactive materials after hours on the NIH to construct. The approach we often use of “educat- campus and may be called to assist with response dur- ing the public” is rarely effective, especially in a high ing business hours. The fi refi ghters and police offi cers pressure environment like a public meeting. Rather, are trained by the Division of Radiation Safety. The the following techniques have been learned over many training prepares the responders to mitigate the con- years and have been found to work. Start with a con- tamination incidents until health physicists from the cise statement. This is the opposite of how we write Division of Radiation Safety respond to campus. This a technical paper—building to a conclusion. Rather, presentation outlines the training procedures and risk start with your conclusion, and then fi ll in the back- communications presented to both the NIH fi refi ghters ground. Look at any newspaper article and see how a and police offi cers. reporter does this. All reporters do it, and it’s a lesson we can learn. Know your audience. A presentation to a high school class will vary greatly from one given to a Rotary Club. Speak to someone from the group ahead of time. Find out their concerns and pre-concep- tions (and misconceptions). Then tailor your remarks accordingly. Be positive. Saying something is safe is 21 not the same as saying it isn’t dangerous. Research diseases will be presented. In addition, the presentation has shown that listeners react negatively to a word like will include a discussion of how benefi ts could also be “dangerous” even though you’re saying it’s not. Con- incorporated into a Universal Hazard Index. versely, people react to the word, “safe” positively. MPM-A.6 How to Communicate Radiation Safe- Diffuse any emotional bombs. Activists looking for ty and Risk to Custodians and Firemen headlines know how to craft and throw these. (e.g., Corti D “Our workers are dying!”) Get emotional right back University of Montana; [email protected] and diffuse the bomb. (“I’m one of those workers and Radiation safety and associated relative risk are a I’m more concerned than anyone…”) Once you’ve virtual unknown to anyone not working directly with done that, you can support your position with cold ionizing radiation. This presentation addresses two facts. Be aware of non-verbal communication. This is distinctly different groups who need technical infor- how you position your body, your facial expressions, mation presented in a easy to digest format; custodians who you look at or don’t look at. Standing with arms who may work in a facility doing routine maintenance crossed while you’re listening says you’re not really and fi remen who may have to respond to an emergency listening. Try watching a heated debate on TV with the where radioisotopes are present. Both groups need a sound off. It’s remarkable what is communicated non- basic understanding of the nature of radioactivity, what verbally. Finally, good communication takes practice. risk they may or may not face in the presence of radio- Like any skill, it has to be honed. Anticipate the ques- isotopes and an ability to communicate this informa- tions you’ll be asked and develop good, concise an- tion to co-workers in a comprehensible manner. This swers. Mark Twain once said, “The best ad-lib speech requires the information to be broken down into short, I ever gave took me two weeks to prepare.” easy to remember pieces that lack much of the detail MPM-A.5 The Universal Hazard Index - A Non- that health physicists love so much. This presentation Technical Risk Communication Tool focuses on lessons learned in a university setting with Quinn DM, Dauer LT, Williamson M low levels of radioactivity over many years and em- DAQ Inc., Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center phasizes what has worked well and to a lessor extent Risks from radiation and from other hazards are what has not worked well.” not well understood by the general public. There is a MPM-A.7 Radiation Safety Presentations for need for a simple scale of risks that can be easily un- Preschoolers to Adults derstood and is useful across a wide range of hazards McLellan KE and outcomes. This presentation suggests the use of National Institutes of Health; [email protected] a “Universal Hazard Index” as a useful communica- Radiation is all around us. You cannot feel it, tion tool. A Universal Hazard Index (UHI) could in- touch it, taste it nor see it. People are inundated with clude the following types of parameters that could be information from the news media, science shows and multiplied in order to derive the index value: level of other sources as to how bad radiation is for us. How injury (range 1-100), immediacy of injury (range 1-3), do we dispel the fears that the word radiation implies? number of people affected (the actual number of peo- The presentation will offer practical techniques em- ple affected), and probability of injury (a fraction of ployed in presentations given to preschoolers, middle 1.0). The multiplied values are then simplifi ed into an school students, high school students and adults of all index value using a base 10 logarithmic scale (i.e., a ages. Techniques employed include lectures, partici- product of 100 is UHI=2, and a product of 100,000 is pation exercises, show and tell and drill exercises. UHI=5). Using this Universal Hazard Index, risks can be compared across various types of hazards, and the results can be explained in a ways that the public is accustomed to, such as the Richter Scale or the Saffi r- Simpson Hurricane Scale (hurricane levels 1 – 5). A few specifi c comparisons will be presented, including example radiological risks such as CT scans, radon ex- posure, and releases from nuclear power plants. For comparison, a few non-radiological risks, such as au- tomobile accidents, snake bites, and risks from certain 22 MPM-A.8 Enquiring Minds Want to Know: HPS and local and State emergency response offi cials. The Initiatives in Public Information accident led to an overhaul of emergency planning reg- Classic K, Barlow A, Burress P, Cezeaux J, Davidson T, ulations and guidance. Based on existing regulations Hartman M, Harvey, R, Ottley D, Shimko R, Williams V and guidance, each licensee and local response orga- Mayo Clinic, Rochester Tufts University, Florida State nization is responsible for developing their own me- University, Battelle, SBC Global, University of Califor- dia and communication plans for a radiological event. nia, Davis, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, DOE Han- The lack of clear guidance has resulted in a wide range ford, PA Veterans Administration, Merck Inc; classic. of facilities and equipment available to support public [email protected] communications during an emergency as well as lack The Public Information Committee (PIC; former- of consistency throughout the industry and offsite of- ly the Public Education Committee) is responsible for fi cials in reporting events. To illustrate; a power plant informing the public on radiation safety issues; com- suffered a steam generator tube failure in 2000. The municating with news media personnel on radiation licensee was quick to state that there was no release of safety issues; gathering, organizing, and presenting radioactive materials while the NRC stated there was applicable information; responding to requests of the a minor release of radioactive materials. The ongoing President and others for presentation of this informa- confusion resulted in signifi cant lack of trust among tion to lay persons and to other scientifi c and techni- members of the public. The licensee in this case suf- cal organizations; facilitating dissemination of accu- fered from a number of problems at their joint informa- rate and unbiased information on ionizing radiation tion facility and this hampered effective communica- through the use of prepared educational materials; and tions with the public and damaged trust in the licensee other activities as suggested and/or approved by the which exists to this day. Board of Directors. The Public Information Committee There has been great emphasis on “risk” commu- is accountable to the HPS Board for duties that relate nications and “good” communications in professional to Strategic Plan Objective No. 5 “To foster the use of journals, at meetings, workshops, and conventions. sound science in public policy and the recognition of While these efforts at awareness are long overdue, in the HPS,” specifi cally goals 5.1, 5.3, and 5.5 - 5.7. To so many cases they lack the necessary tools to make achieve this responsibility, PIC generates white papers, them effective. The NUREG/CR upon which this pa- information sheets and fact sheets for dissemination to per is based provides tools and techniques for NRC all interested parties including members of congress, licensees and others to use to develop effective “risk” media, the public, and HPS members. Any member of communications. HPS may identify a topic to PIC that may be sought- This workshop will provide a “hands on” oppor- after by the groups served by PIC. Documents are tunity for participants to learn how to use the tools (i.e. prepared by PIC members with assistance by subject message mapping, templates) to develop and use pre- matter experts. Following PIC review and approval, scripted messages as part of their risk communications documents are edited by Web Operations editorial staff strategy. and approved as necessary by other HPS Committees. TAM-A.1 Radon Risk Communication - 2009 After formal approval, papers become offi cial Society HPS Draft Position Statement on Indoor Radon documents and are copyrighted. This presentation will Johnson J; Tetra Tech; [email protected] highlight committee accomplishments and future plans The Health Physics Society communicates with as they relate to communicating radiation risk to the the public on radiation protection issues through its public. Position Statements. In 2007, the HPS President and MPM-B.1 “How To” Risk Communications, Board of Directors established an Ad Hoc Commit- Principles, Tools, and Techniques tee to review the 1990 Position Statement on Indoor Milligan P, Covello V Radon and to revise it in accordance with the current US Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Center for Risk state of scientifi c knowledge regarding radon risk. The Communications; [email protected] Committee, consisting of individuals with expertise in The accident at the Three Mile Island Unit 2 nu- radon epidemiology, measurement, policy, and risk clear power plant in March 1979 highlighted the need communication, concluded that epidemiologic data for effective communication with the public, media, and dosimetric analyses support a recommendation for remediation at the EPA guideline indoor radon concen- 23 tration of 4 pCi/L (150 Bq/m3) and that there is cred- Millions of classifi ed and unclassifi ed documents were ible scientifi c evidence for an increase in lung cancer reviewed. Prioritization was diffi cult because many re- risk at indoor radon concentrations below the guide- leases were not monitored, documented, or otherwise line level. The Ad Hoc Committee produced a Draft quantifi ed for signifi cant periods. Radionuclides were Background Document describing the scientifi c basis prioritized based on annual dilution volumes required for the Position Statement. The Draft Position State- and chemicals based on usage data and published tox- ment and Draft Background Document were approved icity criteria. Releases before 1970 were most signifi - by the Scientifi c and Public Issues Committee in 2009. cant, and plutonium yielded the highest Priority Indi- (As of the date of this abstract, the documents had been ces among radionuclides. Organic solvents, TNT, and submitted to the Board of Directors for fi nal approval.) uranium ranked highest among chemicals. Releases TAM-A.2 Communicating Radiation Risk to judged to be of particular importance include airborne Clinical Research Patients at the NIH plutonium, beryllium, tritium, uranium, and radioac- Ribudo C, Kindrick S tivity from the Trinity test. Historical releases are of National Institutes of Health (NIH); ribaudoc@ors. particular interest because residential areas were built od.nih.gov closer to LANL production areas than at any other Clinical research is a branch of medical science U.S. nuclear site. A screening-level evaluation of plu- that determines the safety and effectiveness of medi- tonium facility stack releases using the methodology cations, devices and diagnostic procedures intended of NCRP Report No. 123 yielded results that exceeded for human use. The informed consent document is the limiting values that are based on 1 in 100,000 added main method of conveying risk of radiation in a re- cancer risk. A screening assessment of fi ve histori- search study to clinical research patients. While it is cal beryllium operations indicated that air concentra- important to make the patient understand the risk of tions in residential areas could have exceeded worker radiation, it must be done so with minimal verbiage. exposure limits, the USEPA reference concentration, Most often the main risk of radiation is the remote risk and the National Emission Standard limit on 30-d av- of cancer in the future from diagnostic studies. Since erage ambient concentrations. Summaries presented effective dose can be used to estimate cancer risk, it in a draft fi nal report and at a June 2009 public meet- is the term best used in the consent document to in- ing contained information for use by CDC and other form the patient of radiation dose. Occasionally, acute stakeholders in determining if further investigation is symptoms such as reduced blood count or alopecia can warranted for any historical releases from Los Alamos be caused by high dose radiation. Children and men- operations. tally impaired patients need special language to con- TAM-A.4 Public Involvement Components of vey risk which is given in an “assent” document. The CDC’s Los Alamos Historical Document Retrieval appropriateness of radiation risk language is reviewed and Assessment Project both by Institutional Review Boards and Radiation Widner T, Le MH Safety Committees. Some example informed consent ChemRisk, LLC; [email protected] language is shared for certain clinical research studies From 1999 through 2008, the Centers for Dis- at the National Institutes of Health. ease Control and Prevention (CDC) led an effort to TAM-A.3 Identifi cation and Communication of gather information at the Los Alamos National Labo- the Potential Health Signifi cance of Off-Site Releases ratory (LANL) that was relevant to historical off-site from Key Operations Identifi ed in CDC’s Los Ala- releases of radionuclides and chemicals. The goals of mos Historical Document Retrieval and Assessment the project were to collect relevant documents, make Project assembled information publically available in a proj- Widner T, Le MH ect information database, list the materials that were ChemRisk, LLC; [email protected] historically released, prioritize those releases, and de- From 1999 through 2008, a team of scientists and termine whether any past operations warrant a more engineers working for the Centers for Disease Control detailed evaluation. Relevant documents were pro- and Prevention (CDC) gathered information at Los Al- cessed for public release, scanned, and made available amos National Laboratory (LANL) that was relevant to the project team, members of the public, and other to off-site releases of radionuclides and chemicals. researchers via an Internet-based database application called DocSleuth. Additionally. interviews were con- 24 ducted of over 100 active and retired workers and local magazines, newspapers, movies, and television. Re- residents. A set of the selected documents is available views of Nuclear is Hot! have been outstanding. This at the Zimmerman Library at the University of New book should appeal not only to young readers, but also Mexico in Albuquerque. Sixteen public meetings were to teachers and parents who want to stay young at heart held at various locations in the Los Alamos-Espano- and up-to-date on nuclear energy and radiation health la-Taos-Pojoaque-Santa Fe region over the ten year issues. history of the project. These meetings included pre- TAM-A.6 Hospital Response During the Red sentations and discussions concerning progress in in- Dragon Drill formation gathering, knowledge gained about histori- Martz M cal activities of relevance to off-site releases, problems [email protected] that were being encountered in accessing and obtaining From March, 2009, to June, 2009, a series of relevant documents, plans for completion of informa- drills involving a radiological dispersal device (RDD) tion gathering, and progress toward prioritizing histor- were conducted in the metropolitan area of Milwau- ical releases. The project team also met with represen- kee, Wisconsin. Named Red Dragon, the drill consti- tatives of each of the Eight Northern Indian Pueblos. tuted the largest multi-agency RDD scenario attempted A project Web site provided availability of summaries to date in the United States. Froedtert Hospital and the of all public meeting presentations and associated pub- Children’s Hospital of Wisconsin comprise the Level lic comments and discussion, summaries of workshops One trauma center that served as the site for triage, that were conducted to offer more detailed overviews decontamination and treatment of over 100 victims of project-related topics, downloadable copies of In- who participated in the exercise. Examined are hospi- terim Reports of the project, and instructions on how tal resources, plans, interaction with external agencies, to contact project team members and access the project communications and lessons learned. document collection and the DocSleuth database. TAM-B.1 US EPA Superfund Program’s Policy TAM-A.5 Nuclear is Hot!! An Effective Tool for for Community Involvement at Radioactively Con- Communicating Nuclear Science to High School Stu- taminated Sites dents Walker S, Sanchez Y Fisher D US Environmental Protection Agency; walker.stuart@ Pacifi c Northwest National Laboratory; dr.fi sher@pnl. epa.gov gov This presentation describes the EPA Superfund In 2009, the EnergySolutions Foundation pub- program’s statutory requirements for community in- lished Nuclear is Hot! (Everything You Wanted to volvement. Initially, the CERCLA statute had com- Know About Nuclear Science but Were Afraid to Ask), munity involvement requirements designed to inform by Raul Deju, Harry Babad, and Michael Deju. Raul surrounding communities of the work being done at a Deju is the Chief Operating Offi cer at EnergySolutions site. This presentation also discusses the efforts the (Salt Lake City), and Michael, his son, is a high school Superfund program has made that go beyond these student in Moraga, California. Harry Babab is a re- statutory requirements to involve communities, and tired Hanford scientist. Michael wrote and edited a what lessons have been learned by EPA when trying substantial part of the book from the perspective of a to conduct meaningful community involvement at typical teenager. This vivid, full-color book provides sites. We’ve structured our program around two main an entertaining perspective on nuclear energy, radia- themes, building capacity in staff to enable them to be tion, health, and nuclear waste without all the typical effective in working with communities, and building jargon, technical analysis, and number-crunching that capacity in communities to enable them to be knowl- so often burdens standard teaching materials. What we edgeable about the site(s) in their communities, and to fi nd instead, up front, are direct answers to common provide them with constructive ways to discuss and questions—with fun and thought-provoking illustra- resolve site issues. In addition, the presentation dis- tions and photographs, and balanced factual informa- cusses the two tools that EPA has designed to specifi - tion. Nuclear is Hot! was designed to supplement the cally enhance community involvement at radioactively standard materials available to high school teachers contaminated Superfund sites. The fi rst is a booklet while dispelling many of the common myths and mis- entitled “Common Radionuclides Found at Superfund conceptions that young people often receive through 25 Sites.” The information in this booklet is intended to TAM-B.3 Challenges in Conveying the Health help the general public understand more about the var- Relevance of Uranium Exposure to Potentially Af- ious common radionuclides found at Superfund sites. fected Communities The second is a video entitled “Superfund Radiation Sandoval D, Toth B, Krapfl H Risk Assessment and How you can Help, an Over- New Mexico Department of Health; deyonne.sandoval@ view.” This 19 minute video describes the Superfund state.nm.us risk assessment process for radioactive contamination: The New Mexico Department of Health has a his- what it is, how it works, and most importantly, how tory of investigating New Mexicans’ exposure to ura- members of the public can be involved. nium through biomonitoring studies. Results of these studies demonstrate high levels of uranium exposure TAM-B.2 Public Communication Lessons even in areas with minimal uranium exploration and Learned on Sandia’s Environmental Restoration extraction. Given that naturally occurring uranium Project deposits are common in New Mexico, communities Miller ML, Peace GL, Nagy MD, Goering TR with uranium exploration may have higher exposure Sandia National Labs, Los Alamos National Labs; and therefore increased potential for adverse health [email protected] outcomes. The Health Department helps communities Over the 15 years of Sandia’s Environmental understand the potential health risks of living in ura- Restoration Project, 268 designated sites required res- nium rich areas due to naturally occurring and man- toration from legacy contamination remaining from made sources. Increasing knowledge is a key step to Cold War era testing. This involved various levels spurring activity to minimize exposure and increase of complexity and rigor depending on the size of the prevention practices. Outlined in the presentation are site, the testing involved and the residual contaminants the challenges and considerations of the health com- of concern. It could entail the excavation of former munication process in conveying the health relevance landfi lls, remediation of surface contaminants, cleanup of the biomonitoring studies to communities. of groundwater contaminants or documenting that no restoration was even required. At all of the sites, the TPM-A.1 Stanford’s Health Physics Program public was informed as to the proposed actions, and Custom Software Moves to the Web in many instances, their input was taken into consid- Banghart D eration for the fi nal remedial action planned. There Stanford University; [email protected] were poster sessions, Citizen Advisory Boards, public In 1992 Stanford Health Physics developed cus- meetings, public reading rooms and public hearings as tom 4D software to capture and manage all radioac- needed to ensure that the entire process was as trans- tive material data such as authorizations, user train- parent as possible. In spite of the best intentions of this ing, room surveys, sealed source leak tests, inventory, public outreach effort, there were a few instances of receipts, and more. While this software was power- intense disagreement as to what constituted appropri- ful and state-of-the-art in the early 90s, over time it ate remediation. This is where technical staff learned, has become more challenging to maintain. To take to their chagrin, that public communication involves advantage of the tools now available through a web more than presentation of “just the facts, ma’am.” Fi- interface, our developers are back to work. How can nal actions were sometimes based on political as well web-based software improve overall communication as technical considerations. In some instances, the and make everyone happy? By including a user self- facts spoke for themselves and there was little con- service modality, the program enables users to provide cern. In other instances, the public had concerns that inventory submittals, or access training records, daily were not assuaged by the facts as presented. Consid- log entries, and allows user survey documentation to erable consternation, credibility and trust loss could be entered. The Health Physics interface will include have been avoided by early recognition of issues that all of the benefi ts of the original 4D program plus it the public were overly sensitive to and development will have the additional access and organization of all of a strategic communication plan that was proactive user data, automatic reports, the ability to uploaded rather than reactive. photos, scan documents (such as oversight committee meeting minutes), waste disposal records and the in- creasingly important historic radioactive material use data to streamline preparations for decommissioning. 26 With users and health physicists logging in and obtain- TPM-A.3 West Coast Maritime Pilot – San Diego ing live updates while also locking in web security; Public Outreach Campaign this software ensures we are all literally on the same Inman JC page. Department of Homeland Security; james.inman@dhs. gov TPM-A.2 Creating Virtual Environments for The Domestic Nuclear Detection Offi ce (DNDO) Training Non-Technical Responders for Radiation of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security estab- Emergencies lished the West Coast Maritime Pilot (WCMP) to de- Ansari A, Caspary K, Burns D, Bolcar S, Scheller A sign, fi eld and evaluate a robust, layered, preventive Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Oak Ridge radiological/nuclear detection (PRND) capability for Institute for Science and Education, University of Min- public safety forces to address the risk of small mari- nesota Center for Public Health Preparedness; AAnsa- time vessels (>300 gross tons) being used to transport [email protected] illicit radiological/nuclear (rad/nuc) materials and/or Virtual environments can provide an interactive weapons. San Diego, and the surrounding area, was mechanism for communicating basic information as one of two selected pilot sites for the operational test- well as operational concepts to an audience who would ing and evaluation of this PRND capability. Washing- otherwise face challenges following the technical in- ton State’s Puget Sound is the other site. The capability formation and learning abstract procedures. Teaching consists of human portable and vessel-mounted rad/nuc the principles of screening a large population for radio- detectors; a regional maritime Concepts of Operations active contamination to public health and emergency (CONOPs) for Federal, State and local agencies; Stan- management professionals is one example where an dard Operating Procedures (SOPs) for the detection, interactive training environment can offer distinct ad- alarm resolution and interdiction of threats; as well as vantages. The Virtual Community Reception Center training on equipment, CONOPs, and SOPs. Although (V-CRC) is constructed in 3D using Second Life (an approximately 400 emergency responders will receive online virtual community) development tools. V-CRC training and equipment during the Pilot, the number of creates an immersive training environment that allows patrol vessels is greatly out numbered by the number users to explore the facility, learn multiple processes at of small private and commercial vessels in the waters their own pace, and access technical information and surrounding San Diego. As with all law enforcement resources as needed to facilitate their own planning. activity, it is critical that the public be aware of the By layering information throughout the virtual recep- risks, what is being done to protect them, and ways in tion center, users of all knowledge bases can benefi t which they can assist. The San Diego portion of the from this self-paced training experience. “Dirty Bomb! WCMP is actively engaged in a public outreach cam- After the Blast” is another online simulation intended paign to address these three subjects. The campaign for health care professionals and public health workers consists of brochures distributed by participating pub- (especially state and local health department staff) who lic safety agencies to the local boating community, in- are responsible for emergency preparedness as well as terviews and press releases with local and national me- the Medical Reserve Corps volunteers who may be dia outlets, and presentations at industry conventions, called upon to assist in their community’s response. conferences, and symposiums. This online training simulation incorporates principles of radioactive decontamination, fatality management, TPM-A.4 Talk to the Patient mass fatalities, and disaster mental health in a highly Fellman A interactive environment which engages the users and Dade Moeller & Associates; alan.fellman@moellerinc. provides them with instant feedback. com *The project at the University of Minnesota Cen- Imagine what it must be like to have a child with ter for Public Health Preparedness was supported in a condition that calls for treatment involving multiple part through a grant from the Centers for Disease Con- interventional radiology procedures, procedures that trol and Prevention, Grant/Cooperative Agreement result in upwards of one hour of fl uoroscopy time to Number U90/CCU524264. portions of the scalp and face. Depending on the op- erating parameters of the fl uoroscopy device, the dose to the skin will range from approximately 0.02 - 0.04 Gy per minute. Therefore, under some circumstances, 27 the 2 Gy threshold dose for temporary epilation is sur- TPM-A.6 Communicating Radiation Risk in passed during one procedure. Now imagine the horror Clinical Trials that both an underage patient and his or her parents Balter S, Balter R, Brenner DJ, Weisz G experience when, two to three weeks after the proce- Columbia University, John Jay College of Criminal Jus- dure, signifi cant clumps of hair fall from the child\’s tice; [email protected] head. It is inexcusable yet fairly common for interven- Many clinical trials add a research component in- tional radiologists and other medical practitioners in- volving radiation to a justifi ed baseline clinical proce- volved in these types of procedures to fail to take a few dure. Radiation is almost never the only risk of clinical minutes to prepare patients and their families for this trials; it is seldom a major risk. Research irradiation possibility. All health physicists working in medical needs to be discussed in the context of radiation use facilities as well as other radiation safety profession- in the baseline procedure as well as a discussion of all als with access to users of radiation generating devices other important non-radiation risks of both the baseline are encouraged to stress the importance of speaking to and research procedures. Researchers have an ethical patients about acute radiation health effects when such responsibility to effectively communicate essential effects are possible. risks in a balanced manner as well as in absolute terms. This is diffi cult due to psychological factors involving TPM-A.5 The Physicist-Endochrinoligist - Radi- both patients and researchers. Patients who may or may ologist Team Approach for Preparation for Radioio- not be research subjects are under stress; reducing their dine Procedures ability to appropriately use new information. Commu- Mozzor M, High MD nication is also impeded because few researchers have New York Medical College/Westchester Medical Center; suffi cient knowledge to adequately discuss radiation. [email protected] IRBs attempt to improve understanding by using ver- This paper describes an effective method of pa- bose templates that often visually dominate the written tient preparation for oral I-131 administration involv- informed consent form. In a sampling of IRB approved ing highly collaborative activities amongst radiation consent forms, the radiation portion of the text was 25- safety, radiology and endocrinology personnel. Case 50% of the entire risk text; this was unrelated to antici- studies are used to illustrate outcomes involving co- pated research radiation usage. This volume of words operative and minimally cooperative situations. For overemphasizes radiation and distracts attention away patients who require diagnostic procedures or thera- from many larger potential risks. It is confusing to state peutic treatment of thyroid disorders with I-131, con- risk in units of “chest x-rays,” “weeks of background,” sistent preparation and safety information must be or “airplane fl ights.” This convention is meaningless provided multiple times to the patient. This helps to most individuals without further discussion. Writ- minimize radiation dose to family members and others ten materials alone are inadequate (e.g. reading com- from the patient while maximizing the effi cacy of the prehension will signifi cantly decrease due to stress). A procedure. By addressing both the benefi ts and neces- two-way interaction is needed to communicate as well sary precautions early during the initial consult, and as to assess the patients understanding and concerns. multiple times prior to treatment, we have seen an in- Researchers should be trained in both radiation-risk crease in patient compliance. During this initial post- and patient psychology/communications. They must surgical visit, endocrinology performs psycho-social apply this knowledge when they seek informed con- prescreening and an overview of safety procedures. A sent. physicist participates in the initial patient evaluation with the endocrinologist. A team approach is utilized TPM-A.7 Risky Business: Challenges and Suc- to uncover potential compliance impediments, discuss cess in Communicating Military Radiation Risks the required preparatory procedures that need to be Melanson M, Geckle LS, Davidson BA followed, and address questions of radiation risk early Army Surgeon General, U.S. Army Center for Health in the treatment planning process. The physicist, with Promotion and Preventive Medicine; mark.melanson@ the nuclear medicine radiologist repeats these patient us.army.mil instructions just prior to the administration ensuring Given the general public’s overall lack of knowl- maximum opportunity to answer patient questions and edge about radiation and their heightened fear of its address any concerns. harmful effects, effective communication of radiation 28 risks is often diffi cult; this is especially true when it be for one to decide that it is not just noise? 2) How comes to communicating the radiation risks stemming does one decide whether a measurement represents a from military operations. Part of this diffi culty stems positive measurand and not a false alarm? 3) What do from the often classifi ed nature of many military op- negative counting results mean? 4) What’s the smallest erations along with a lingering distrust of the military measurement one should record as greater than zero? that harkens back to the controversy surrounding vet- 5) What is the largest measurand that one can fail to eran exposures to Agent Orange during the Vietnam detect 5% of the time? 6) What is the smallest measur- War. Additionally, there are unique military exposure and that one will almost always detect? 7) What value scenarios, such as the combat use of depleted uranium of the measurand can one detect with 10% uncertain- as anti-armor munitions that are simply not found in ty? The long and varied list of names given to the an- the civilian sector. Also, the lethality of combat often swers to many of these questions indicates the need for results in risk management decisions that make the use a fresh start in communications to and among health of traditional peacetime radiation safety practices un- physicists, managers, and regulators. realistic or even inappropriate. This presentation will TPM-B.1 As Low As Reasonably Achievable- highlight and discuss both the common and the distinc- Based Initiatives Can Be “Risky Business” tive challenges of effectively communicating military Nichelson SM, Klauenberg BJ, Montgomery NM radiation risks, to include communicating through the US Air Force, Texas, US Air Force; Scott.Nichelson@ media and dealing with international audiences. By brooks.af.mil drawing on their vast collective experience, the au- The concept of ALARA is frequently cited in pro- thors will also share risk communication success sto- posals for reductions in non-ionizing radiation (NIR) ries that were obtained through the innovative use of exposure limits. These proposals often create road a matrixed, team approach that combines both health blocks to effective risk communication A recent non- physics and risk communication expertise. peer-reviewed, internet-released compilation of advo- TPM-A.8 The Hardest Concepts I’ve Ever Tried cacy papers, the Bioinitiative Report (BIR), proposed to Communicate to a Health Physicist exposure limits less than 10-4 of the current IEEE Strom DJ standards. If adopted, these limits would lead to a de- Battelle – Pacifi c National Northwest Laboratory; cline in communication and RADAR infrastructure. [email protected] The authors feel the ALARA principle is inappropri- From the earliest days of radiation protection ate, because NIR has a deterministic effects threshold. growing out of the Manhattan Project, health physi- Reducing non-ionizing radiation exposures below the cists came to realize that it was important to detect current exposure limits produces no net benefi t nor re- tiny activities of alpha-emitters in the presence of duced risk, would needlessly limit benefi cial uses of background radiation, or small changes in the optical NIR, and fi nally raise irrational fears in members of density of radiation sensitive fi lm. However, too of- the public. The IEEE Committee On Man And Ra- ten they did not have the vocabulary to describe their diation (COMAR) scientifi c peer-reviewed article pro- problems. The vocabulary and concepts of measure- vided a critical review of the BIR. Despite this BIR ment decisions and capabilities began to be developed advocates continue to propose that public health is at in the 1960s. The vocabulary that has been used has risk and argue that precaution should prevail. CO- been nondescriptive, confusing, or even seriously mis- MAR noted that if the limits in the BIR were applied leading. Furthermore, most health physicists are fairly consistently, this would impact the installation and use sure they know what they mean by the words they use, of traditional radio and TV broadcasting services, air- and too often they are wrong. One key concept that port radar systems, police and other emergency com- was missing in my understanding is the notion of the munications systems, wireless telephone and wireless measurand, which ISO defi nes as the true value of the internet systems, and many other applications of the quantity one wishes to measure. Two other key con- radiofrequency spectrum – all of which have important cepts are those of population parameters contrasted benefi ts to public health and safety. Therefore ALARA with sample parameters. The answers to the following isn’t always the answer. questions involve the hardest concepts to communicate to health physicists and their managers: 1) For a given measurement system, how big does the signal need to 29 TPM-B.2 An Effective Communication Tool for techniques and results do you use to demonstrate the Public: The International Nuclear and Radiolog- that you are keeping doses ALARA? This presenta- ical Event Scale tion will discuss these questions and provide answers Jones CG on how to conduct meaningful reviews. The key to US Nuclear Regulatory Commission; cynthia.jones@ a strong ALARA program is work planning. Proper nrc.gov use of the Radiological Work Permit in this process The International Nuclear and Radiological Event is important. Review of the work by a team with the Scale (INES) is used internationally for promptly and proper expertise becomes necessary when the job is consistently communicating the safety signifi cance of of high risk and is non-routine or complex. A set of events associated with radiation to the public. It was de- triggers is provided to help determine when to require veloped in 1990 by international experts in cooperation an independent review of the work and what the level with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) of review should be. Also provided is a checklist of and the Nuclear Energy Agency to provide fast, fl ex- techniques that work for control of exposures. The ap- ible and authoritative information on the occurrence of plication of the process is primarily for operational ra- nuclear and radiological events that are of interest to diological work, but reviews of new facility design or the international community. Just as communicating modifi cation of existing facilities are also useful. Les- the safety signifi cance of earthquakes would be diffi - sons learned from implementation of the process for cult to understand without the Richter scale, the INES the past 15 years at Argonne National Laboratory are system explains the signifi cance of events from a range discussed based on actual work experiences. of activities including operational events at nuclear and TPM-B.5 Correction to the Effective Dose Pub- radioactive materials facilities and radioactive material lished in ICRP 80 transport events. Countries participating in INES then Moussa H, Melanson M classify these events in one of seven levels: Levels 4–7 Battelle Memorial Institute, Walter Reed Army Medical are termed “accidents” and Levels 1–3 are called “in- Center; [email protected] cidents.” The scale is designed so that the severity of The package insert accompanying a radiopharma- an event is about ten times greater for each increase in ceutical typically includes information on the expect- level on the scale. Events without safety signifi cance ed dose to the patient following administration of the are classifi ed as “Below Scale/Level 0.” IAEA’s INES pharmaceutical. The indicated dose is typically refer- communications network currently receives event in- enced to a publication of either the International Com- formation from more than 60 countries that participate mission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) or a report in sharing event information and then disseminates this of the Medical Internal Dose Committed (MIRD) of information worldwide. Historically, the scale was ap- the Society of Nuclear Medicine. Typically the dose plied to classify events that occur at nuclear installa- quantity reported is the “effective dose” of the ICRP. tions, but now a revised INES Users Manual (issued in The effective dose is used as a surrogate for radiation August 2009) brings together all uses such as transpor- risk in a comparative manner when evaluating alter- tation, fuel cycle, and radiation exposure events, into native treatment modalities and in discussions with one single manual. This paper will present an overview patients. In these discussion it is important that the of the new INES User’s Manual, how the rating scale information be clear of ambiguities and be correctly works, and present a summary of the worldwide re- communicated to enable agreement on a treatment mo- porting events over the past several years. dality or in engaging the subject in an ongoing studies TPM-B.3 Making ALARA Reviews Pay Off involving radiation exposure. In this paper we discuss Baker SI some issues associated with the evolution of the effec- Argonne National Laboratory; [email protected] tive dose quantity between ICRP Publication 53 and 80 Keeping radiation exposures as low as reasonably which result in some inconsistent values report in Pub- achievable (ALARA) is a goal without a well-defi ned lication 80 as derived from the organ dose information set of numerical values. Does $1,000 per person-rem in Publication 53. For some radio pharmaceuticals the or $10,000 per person-rem make sense? Does 20% numerical differences are of concern in proper and ef- of the limit make sense for design; for operations? Do fective communication. you use the administrative control level or the regula- tory limit? Can you determine cost vs. benefi t? What 30 TPM-B.6 The Community Environmental Mon- is the fact that many words are used with two differ- itoring Program: Conveying Radiation Risk to the ent meanings, one for radiation and the other for ra- Public Through Direct Participation dioactive material. The concepts of leak, leaking, and Hartwell WT, Shafer DS, Curtis S leakage have different meanings, for example, when Desert Research Institute; [email protected] applied to an x-ray tube housing and an underground The Community Environmental Monitoring Pro- radioactive waste tank. To further complicate matters, gram (CEMP) is a radiological and meteorological much of what people “know” about radiation and ra- monitoring program serving communities around the dioactivity is false. To illustrate, the local paper pub- Nevada Test Site (NTS), the primary location where lished the statement “a curie is the amount of radiation the United States conducted nuclear testing until 1992. in 1400 pounds of uranium.” The goal of this talk is to The monitoring network includes 29 monitoring sta- help understand what is wrong with such statements. tions located across an approximately 160,000 km2 We, as health physicists, must be very careful with our area of Nevada, Utah and California in the southwest- use of the language, and must strive to help students, ern US. Since its inception in 1981, the CEMP has in- colleagues, and the public understand and use the lan- volved stakeholders directly in day-to-day operations guage correctly. and data collection, as well as in dissemination of in- WAM-A.2 Communicating Complex Information formation on radiological surveillance in participating in a Crisis communities. Modeled in part after a citizen-run mon- Harrington H itoring program instituted around the Three Mile Is- US Nuclear Regulatory Commission; holly.harrington@ land nuclear power plant following the accident there, nrc.gov the program seeks to address public concern about ra- George Bernard Shaw once said: “The problem dioactivity from past nuclear testing activities by pro- with communication is the illusion that it has been ac- viding a hands-on role for the public, and by making complished.” This illusion during a crisis situation has the monitoring data as transparent and accessible as the potential to severely damage your organization’s possible. Involvement of stakeholders in the monitor- credibility– even if you are handling the actual event ing process provides a number of benefi ts, including successfully. Using the classic communication model increased public confi dence in monitoring results and (speaker, channel, message, receiver and noise), this the opportunity for stakeholders to serve their commu- presentation discusses the primary issues that affect nities as knowledgeable laypersons on issues related to communicating information in a crisis – with particu- the Nevada Test Site, and on topics such as radiation lar attention on the diffi culties of communicating com- and health. The CEMP is funded by the US Depart- plex information. Issues and solutions include: choos- ment of Energy’s National Nuclear Security Adminis- ing the right speaker, establishing trust, being timely tration Nevada Site Offi ce, and is administered by the but accurate, picking the correct channel, choosing the Desert Research Institute (DRI) of the Nevada System right message and repeating it, listening and acting on of Higher Education. feedback, and understanding barriers to understanding. WAM-A.1 Radiation versus Radioactivity: A First-hand experiences from specifi c crisis – including Communication Challenge the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake and 9/11 – as well as Strom DJ the difference between exercises and real events will Pacifi c Northwest National Laboratory; [email protected] be included. The presentation will also touch on how In our 2002 article “On Being Understood: Clar- the media operates during a crisis, what they are look- ity and Jargon in Radiation Protection” (Health Phys. ing for and why, and how to be prepared for acting 82(3):373–386), Chuck Watson and I explored the as a media spokesperson. Finally, some examples of diffi culty of communicating the distinction between components of a crisis communication plan and pre- radiation and radioactive materials. This presentation prepared messaging are discussed. highlights the challenge of distinguishing between “ra- diation and contamination,” as some have dubbed the problem. The press, public, politicians, entertainment media, and novice radiation workers have diffi culty in realizing there is a difference, much less in sorting out the fi ne points of the distinction. Part of the problem 31 WAM-A.3 Lessons Learned from a Research scientifi c background and conservatism (as much care Laboratory Pu Spill as achievable). Actions on public information and risks Mengers T communication include information for professional National Institutes of Standards and Technology (NIST); via international sources, postgraduate education of [email protected] teachers and physicians, regular workshops for staff In June 2008 an associate researcher at NIST’s of the population radiation protection medical units; Boulder Colorado facility working on enhanced spec- information for decision makers at annual parliamen- troscopy technologies broke a vial containing 0.25 tary sessions, national reports, informational materials grams of Plutonium powder. The resulting response, for responsible agencies; communication with NGOs, stabilization, and eventual clean up required signifi cant physicians and teachers contacting with the exposed resources and involved interaction with a wide range population, elaboration of orientation printed materials of stake holders including: impacted laboratory per- for patients and public. sonnel, ancillary facility staff, the Nuclear Regulatory WAM-A.5 Communication with Claimants and Commission, The Department of Energy, the munici- Survivors pal waste water treatment facility, local government, Toohey RE and Congressional oversight committees. This presen- ORAU; [email protected] tation reviews the primary factors that led to the inci- Veterans, workers, or their survivors who have dent, the initial response, and some of the challenges fi led compensation claims with the federal govern- of accurately and effectively communicating technical ment form a unique group of stakeholders. They have information to a wide range of interested parties. already suffered a debilitating disease, and the survi- WAM-A.4 Communicating Health Information vors have lost a spouse or parent to cancer. They have to Decision Makers and Non-Governmental Organi- little understanding and less interest in the concept of zations: Experience of Chornobyl probability of causation, and interpret the existence Bebeshko V, Romanenko A*, Bazyka D of compensation legislation as prima facie evidence Research Center for Radiation Medicine, Kyiv, Ukraine; of disease causation by radiation. Their innate sense [email protected] of justice tells them they are owed compensation by a The Chernobyl accident gave an opportunity to government that frequently appears to hiding behind study public response to the radiation accident in op- an impenetrable bureaucracy. The scientifi c process posite situations starting from a restricted information of dose reconstruction is rejected as impossible; how system to an open society with a close contact of deci- can people who weren’t even there understand their sion makers with non-governmental organizations and experiences? The only approach to effective com- free communication with general public. A retrospec- munication is compassion. The communicator must tive analysis shows strength and limitations of the re- sympathize with their disability or loss of a relative, sponse strategies used for during the fi rst years after and try to achieve empathy by requesting them to tell the accident with multi-agency cooperation, public in- their story and then listening intently and actively. Al- formation restrictions and absence of free information lowing their story to be expressed and heard is often from non-governmental sources. Workers recruitment all that is desired. The communicator must display a for cleanup activities was simplifi ed by the use of local personal interest in the claimant as a human being who military offi ces. Sanitary teams and an organizational has suffered, and not as a statistic. Reassurance of a structure of the Civil defence showed no effi ciency. communicator’s personal interest in their claim and a Medical staff was quickly recruited from the local promise to review their claim can establish an effec- health care institutions. Centralization enabled quick tive relationship. Specifi c questions about regulations, start of radiation research programs. Problems included eligibility, and compensation are best referred to the absence of a timely information on radiation situation operating agency, DVA or DOL. Questions about dose and radiation protection countermeasures; delays in and the process of dose reconstruction, although rare, medical-sanitary support of evacuation that led to ad- should be answered directly with only enough detail ditional exposure; absence of the informational manu- to satisfy the claimant. The health physicist must take als for medical staff and booklets for public. Modern pains to remember that in this particular relationship system of risks communication ensures requirements with a stakeholder, he or she must be a human being of adequacy and competitiveness to information, its fi rst and a technical expert second. 32 WAM-A.6 Communication with Fearful Popula- courage health physicists to volunteer for the Medical tion Groups in Long-term Epidemiological Cancer/ Reserve Corps (MRC) in their local communities. The Leukemia Studies in Ukraine MRC consists of groups of volunteers with varying Bazyka D, Romanenko A, Gudzenko N professional background and expertise who all have an Research Center for Radiation Medicine, Kyiv, Ukraine; interest in strengthening their local public health sys- [email protected] tem and providing help to their local communities in The goal is to summarize the experience of the emergencies. Health physicists are needed to assist in ethic standards implementation in the recent Cherno- preparation for and response after a radiological or nu- byl epidemiological study in Ukraine. In the Research clear incident. Health physicists have unique knowl- center for Radiation Medicine in Ukraine from the very edge, skills and abilities, and with training, could also beginning the monitoring of cancer incidence in suf- be effective radiation risk communicators. This risk fered population was organized to get strong evidenc- communication opportunity could be with other MRC es on realized health effects and to give the reliable volunteers, the local health department staff, or with predictions based on the real facts and their scientifi c the public through the organization’s public informa- analysis to avoid ungrounded either tragic or optimis- tion offi cer (PIO). This presentation will cover the tic statements. Majority of performed studies were basic information needed to prepare a MRC health population registries based and not required personal physicist as the technical expert to be or to assist a lead communication with suffered persons. US-Ukrainian spokesperson addressing radiological or nuclear issues Case-control study on Leukemia in clean-up workers in a crisis. in Ukraine was initiated in 1998, is lasting at present WAM-B.2 What Have We Learned about Public and due to its analytical origin requires personal data Communications for Radiation Emergencies from by contacting and interviewing study subjects. In this Audience Research? connection priority was given to the ethic aspects of Ansari A, McCurley MC, Pollard K, Miller CW, Whit- the study. Involved personal was trained to better com- comb, Jr. RC municate with clean-up workers and their relatives, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; AAnsari@ standard letter was send to each potential interviewee, cdc.gov standard way of the phone communication was used. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention In the frame of the study for the fi rst time in Ukraine (CDC) strives to prepare the public and public health the informed consent was signed by each study subject professionals for a radiological emergency incident by just to be interviewed. The informed consent included providing information and education, as well as de- the brief description of the study goal, interview objec- veloping messages to be used intra-event. CDC’s Ra- tives, person for contact and logistic aspects. Partici- diation Studies Branch (RSB) has conducted audience pants were informed on their voluntary participation in research to better understand the public’s knowledge, the study and free-will fi nish at any time without any attitudes, and behaviors related to a radiation emer- restrictions of social and medical service. Almost 1100 gency in order to guide information, education, and persons were interviewed. Response rate achieved was message development. Key fi ndings from the research from 64% to 93% depending on the group of inter- show that (1) the public’s most persistent concern is viewee. Conclusion. Ethic standards Implementation how to protect themselves and their families; (2) peo- in Leukemia study in Ukraine permits to form positive ple resist reassuring messages; (3) most people have attitude to the Chernobyl scientifi c activities among in- a poor understanding of radiation emergency termi- volved clean-up workers and to get as complete data as nology and concepts, including terms such as “shelter possible. in place” and “plume;” (4) people need to understand WAM-B.1 Using Health Physicist Volunteers with why they should take a particular protective action in Local Medical Reserve Corps (MRC) as Emergency order to accept it; and (5) the public will look to lo- Communicators cal responders and local offi cials as the most credible Lanza JJ spokespersons in a radiological emergency. This pre- Florida Department of Health; [email protected]. sentation will describe these and other research fi nd- fl .us ings and how RSB is applying them to its communica- There is currently an effort supported by the tion programs and strategies. CDC, HPS, CRCPD and other organizations to en- 33 WAM-B.3 Communication of Radiation Risks WAM-B.5 To Become Better Communicators We and Benefi ts in Decision Making Need to Deal with Radiation Mythology Locke PA, McBaugh D, Tenforde TS Johnson RH The Johns Hopkins University, Bloomberg School of Dade Moeller and Associates; ray.johnson@moellerinc. Public Health, Washington State Department of Public com Health, Offi ce of Radiation Protection, National Council Throughout our careers in health physics we have on Radiation Protection and Measurements; plocke@ all been confronted by workers, the public, and the me- jhsph.edu dia reacting from their beliefs in radiation myths. Un- Effective communication of radiation benefi ts less people have special training in radiation, it seems and risks has become an increasingly important aspect that everything they believe about radiation is my- of making and implementing decisions on radiation thology. This should not be too surprising since most health protection. The National Council on Radiation of what people hear about radiation is mythology. A Protection and Measurements (NCRP) will address myth is defi ned as a collective opinion or belief that is this subject in its 46th Annual Meeting to be held in based on false premises or is the product of fallacious Bethesda, MD on March 8-9, 2010. The primary topics reasoning. For example, the media perpetuate radiation to be featured at the meeting include: (1) methods of mythology by continuing to defi ne radiation as “dead- successfully conveying information on benefi cial ra- ly radiation.” People have heard these two words to- diation applications and potential health and environ- gether for so long (more than 60 years) that they are mental risks; (2) communicating benefi ts and risks in now accepted as the basis for understanding radiation. medical applications of radiation; (3) public and emer- With such myths fi rmly ingrained, it is little wonder gency responder communications following nuclear or that people so often react to radiation with fears that radiological acts of terrorism; and (4) communications seem out of proportion to the risks as we would know on public health and environmental protection aspects them. Radiation myths abound in the areas of health of nuclear facilities, materials, and radioactive waste effects, what is safe, nuclear power, radioactive waste, disposition. Modern social networking tools such as nuclear medicine, cancer treatment, x-rays and CT, Twitter, Facebook and blogging will also be discussed fertility, effects on DNA, effects on children (genetic as effective methods for communication. An overview effects), measurements, atomic bombs, WMDs, food will be given of the sessions and special lectures at irradiation, baggage x-ray scanning, concerns for indi- the 2010 NCRP Annual Meeting. [Information on the vidual radionuclides (such as uranium, radium, pluto- agenda and registration for the meeting will be avail- nium), cell phones, Chernobyl, and Three Mile Island. able at http:NCRPonline.org.] Radiation mythology and folklore about radiation have WAM-B.4 Openess, Transparency, Communica- led to widespread beliefs that there is no safe level. tion; The NRC and its Stakeholders Opposition to nuclear technology and safe uses of ra- Milligan P diation is typically built on radiation myths. People US Nuclear Regulatory Commission; patricia.milli- have not been told how to evaluate the risk of radiation [email protected] (steps from cause to effect) and commonly assume that Nuclear regulation is the public’s business, and it if it is there, it is automatically bad for you. While must be transacted publicly and candidly. The public better information can be helpful, a better way may be must be informed about and have the opportunity to to educate people on how to make their own evalua- participate in the regulatory processes as required by tions. We will review radiation myths and strategies for law. Open channels of communication must be main- countering these myths. tained with Congress, other government agencies, li- WAM-B.6 Putting Radioactivity in Perspective censees, and the public, as well as with the interna- with Radon Risk Communication tional nuclear community. The NRC has implemented Smith TY a number of programs to enhance stakeholder commu- Spruce Environmental Technologies, Inc.; tsmith@ nications. This presentation will discuss outreach ef- spruce.com forts on the diffi cult topics of emergency preparedness, Combining the work of several risk communica- nuclear power plant license renewal, nuclear power tions experts, this presentation challenges the assump- plant events of public interest, and remediation. tion that ‘presenting the public with enough informa- tion will enable them to make a good decision’ about 34 their relative risk from various radioactive sources all-important peace of mind to those who need it, thus and appropriate responses to that risk. Burgeoning re- minimizing civil chaos and stress-related illness. *Pa- search by the neurological sciences supports decades cifi c Northwest National Laboratory is operated for the of studies in psychology and sociology that differenti- U.S. Department of Energy by Battelle under Contract ate how and why different people respond differently DE AC06 76RLO 1830. to different methods of communicating risk. ‘Fear tac- WAM-B.8 Radiation Risks in Everyday Life tics’ used to urge an apathetic public to reduce their Rutherford PD exposure to household radon gas have been maligned The Boeing Company, Santa Susana Field Laboratory; as unduly frightening people into irrationality about all [email protected] radioactive risks. Instead, research shows that individ- Risk means very different things to scientists and uals live with a fairly constant anxiety level about risk the public. Risk, to the scientist, is undesired conse- in general; it’s just the objects of their fear that change. quence times probability. It is quantifi able, albeit with This presentation shows that giving people the tools appropriate assigned uncertainty. Risk, to the public, and getting them to respond with action to the radon sometimes means fear, emotion and outrage, and is message to test and fi x can more readily and quickly defi nitely not judged in a quantifi able manner. Risk help them put other radioactive risks into perspective. communication gurus warn against the use of quantita- WAM-B.7 Homeland Security Blankets - Care tive risk comparisons when trying to explain the impact Packages for the Worried Well—Revisited (or non-impact) of environmental issues to the public. Stansbury P, Strom DJ For instance, we are warned not to compare risk from a Pacifi c Northwest National Laboratory; paul.stans- Superfund site to the risk of driving because driving is [email protected] claimed to be a voluntary lifestyle choice (a question- Much of the initial radiation protection following able judgment), whereas living next to a Superfund site the use of a radiological dispersion device (RDD) or is not voluntary. Nevertheless numbers are what scien- a terrorist nuclear weapon will be done by non-health tists and engineers use to communicate with each other. physicists. First responders, such as police, fi re, emer- Math is the language of science. Therefore environ- gency medical technicians, municipal workers, na- mental scientists have a real problem with risk commu- tional guard, and healthcare workers will do the brunt nication. This is compounded even more in the health of the containment, boundary setup, decontamination, physics and radiation arena where we are required to etc. The proliferation of survey instruments and train- calculate small “theoretical” radiation risks based on ing courses ensures that there will be lots of “experts” small radiation exposures. Some health physicists be- from fi elds outside of health physics doing applied ra- lieve these theoretical risks, some health physicists do diation protection. What, then, is the role of the pro- not. The public either believes these theoretical risks, fessional health physicist? We should bring our com- or more usually believes that they are underestimat- prehensive knowledge of radiation and its effects to ed. Notwithstanding the aforementioned cautionary bear on the enormous problem of the “worried well,” statements, this paper provides comparisons of vari- those without trauma injuries, and perhaps without sig- ous regulated radiation risks vs. various non-regulated nifi cant contamination or dose, who are predicted to radiation risks using the same regulatory methodology. overwhelm the health care system. Our role can be to The conclusion is that enormous resources are being use our credibility, based on our depth and breadth of spent regulating theoretical radiation risks that are or- interdisciplinary knowledge, to tell people what not to ders of magnitude smaller than theoretical radiation worry about. We will be asked “Is it safe?” The an- risks we all face in everyday life. It is anticipated that swer that needs to be heard the most often is “I don’t the majority of the intended audience of this paper will know about ‘safe,’ but I know it is not dangerous.” already appreciate and understand this material. It is We should present, and explain, why radiation protec- also hoped that at least some of the public may also tion standards and practices differ in emergencies, and begin to appreciate the message. why and how intervention after a disaster differs from planning for benefi cial uses of radiation. Leading by example, we can show that panic or terror is not an appropriate response to a radiological terrorist event, and explain why. Health physicists can provide the 35 Author Index A H O Ansari A ...... 15, 17, 27, 33 Hamrick B ...... 13, 20 Ottley D ...... 14, 23 Harrington H ...... 17, 31 B Hartman M ...... 14, 23 P Baker SI ...... 16, 30 Hartwell WT ...... 16, 31 Peace GL ...... 15, 26 Balter R ...... 16, 28 Harvey R ...... 14 Pollard K ...... 17, 33 Balter S ...... 16, 28 High MD ...... 16, 28 Banghart D ...... 15, 26 Q Barlow A ...... 14, 23 I Quinn DM ...... 13, 22 Bazyka D ...... 17, 32, 33 Inman JC ...... 15, 27 Bebeshko V ...... 17, 32 R Becker SM ...... 13, 20 J Ribudo C ...... 15, 24 Bolcar S ...... 15, 27 Johnson J ...... 15, 23 Romanenko A ...... 17, 32, 33 Bowman DR ...... 13, 21 Johnson RH ...... 17, 34 Rutherford PD ...... 18, 35 Brenner DJ ...... 16, 28 Jones CG ...... 16, 30 Burns D ...... 15, 27 S Burress P ...... 14, 23 K Sandoval D ...... 15, 26 Kindrick S ...... 15, 24 Scheller A ...... 15, 27 C Klauenberg BJ ...... 16, 29 Shafer DS ...... 16, 31 Caspary K ...... 15, 27 Krapfl H ...... 15, 26 Shimko R ...... 14, 23 Cehn J ...... 13, 21 Smith TY ...... 17, 34 Cezeaux J ...... 14, 23 L Stansbury P ...... 18, 35 Cheryl Olson ...... 17, 19 Lanza JJ ...... 17, 33 Strom DJ ..16, 17, 18, 29, 31, 35 Classic K ...... 14, 23 Le MH ...... 15, 24 Strzelczyk J ...... 13, 15, 19 Collins S ...... 13, 20 Locke PA ...... 17, 34 Corti D ...... 13, 22 T Covello V ...... 14, 23 M Tenforde TS ...... 17, 34 Cravens G ...... 13, 20 Martin K ...... 15 Toohey RE ...... 17, 32 Curtis S ...... 16, 31 Martz M ...... 15, 25 Toth B ...... 15, 26 McBaugh D ...... 17, 34 D McCurley MC ...... 17, 33 V Dauer LT ...... 13, 22 McLellan K ...... 13, 21 Vylet V ...... 13, 20 Davidson BA ...... 16, 28 McLellan KE ...... 13, 22 Davidson T ...... 14, 23 Melanson M ...... 16, 28, 30 W Deirdre Elder ...... 15, 19 Mengers T ...... 17, 32 Walker S ...... 15, 25 Dixon GL ...... 13, 20 Miller CW ...... 17, 33 Weisz G ...... 16, 28 Miller ML ...... 15, 26 Welch K ...... 13, 20 F Milligan P ...... 14, 17, 23, 34 Whitcomb, Jr. RC ...... 17, 33 Farrell JP ...... 13, 19 Montgomery NM ...... 16, 29 Widner T ...... 15, 24 Fellman A ...... 16, 27 Moussa H ...... 16, 30 Williamson M ...... 13, 22 Fisher D ...... 15, 25 Mozzor M ...... 16, 28 Williams V ...... 14, 23 Mozzor M, High MD ...... 16, 28 G Geckle LS ...... 16, 28 N Goering TR ...... 15, 26 Nagy MD ...... 15, 26 Gudzenko N ...... 17, 33 Nichelson SM ...... 16, 29

36