Health Physics Society (HPS) Annual 2023 Meeting

PROFESSIONAL ENRICHMENT PROGRAM (PEP)

AAHP is evaluating the number of Continuing Education Credits awarded for each of the PEP (and CEL) courses based on technical content. Course instructors will be able to provide this information at the time of the presentation. This information will also be made available on the AAHP recertification site after data entry is completed.

Sunday, July 23, 8:00am – 10:00am

PEP 1-A: Radiation Safety’s Translation of Worker Well-being Principles into Practice: Positioning for the New Work Environment

RJ Emery, JM Gutierrez

Organizations are learning that efforts to protect the health and safety of their workers from risks both at work and away from work yields great dividends in the form of increased productivity, morale, and reduced health care costs. This realization has given rise to a variety of worker well-being and wellness initiatives that span far beyond the typical boundaries of traditional workplace health and safety programs. Examples include providing information and services on diet, exercise, personal habits, and mental health issues. Interestingly, the radiation safety profession has been historically involved with a series of progressive worker well-being practices that perhaps have not been fully appreciated by the well-being community. These include the tracking of occupational doses, training regarding doses arising from outside the workplace (such as medical procedures and radon exposures), and fetal protection policies, to name a few. This course will describe the shift in perspective from health and safety merely for the workplace to a more holistic approach. This information will be followed by a discussion about various well-being initiatives and how current radiation safety practices can be folded into these larger efforts. The discussion will describe likely points of engagement with well-being programs and necessary guardrails. Participants are asked to come prepared to describe any well-being activities that may be underway within their organizations and any role that radiation safety may currently be playing in these efforts.

PEP 1-B: Retrospective dosimetry in nuclear forensics and nonproliferation

RB Hayes

The use of thermoluminescence, optically stimulated luminescence and electron paramagnetic resonance will all be introduced and reviewed. Their applications in epidemiology, radiation safety and geological dating will then be reviewed. The session will end by reviewing how this research has developed capabilities for nuclear forensics in reconstructing the historical presence and type of radioactive materials for nuclear nonproliferation applications. Basically determining where and what type of sources were present or absent from any given location and distribution in history.

PEP 1-C: Critical Improvements for Health Physicists in Radiological and Nuclear Emergencies Part 1: Nuclear Power Plant Emergencies

WE Irwin, AE Leek, WJ Renno, BW Palmer, CL Alston, M Callan

The United States likely possesses the greatest capabilities for responding to and recovering from a radiological or nuclear incident. Much of this is built on the eight-year cycle of exercises for U.S. nuclear power plants (NPPs). Unfortunately, there are numerous opportunities to become complacent or formulaic in the Radiological Emergency Preparedness Program. Thankfully, the National Council for Radiation Protection & Measurements, federal agencies and national laboratories are developing new tools and guidance that allows us to better succeed should there be a major release from an NPP or other nuclear reactor. This first of a three-part series of Professional Enrichment Program sessions considers how the U.S. has traditionally exercised its plans and procedures for nuclear reactor releases and how much more is needed to be genuinely prepared. Because it is so rarely practiced and because it is going to be the most resource-intensive, there will be significant discussion about recovery needs following a major release at a nuclear power plant. In addition to offering recommendations to improve our profession’s support of response and recovery following an NPP release, we will share new tools, techniques and guidance. One of the greatest concerns is the potential loss of funding and declining support for offsite response organizations. Losing this capability may worsen our national preparedness capacity as well as that at the state and local level. We also will describe how recruiting new and retired HPs for nuclear emergency response and recovery should bolster the HP profession overall. One of the resources developed recently is the Radiological Operations Support Specialist (ROSS). This FEMA Typed position can help serve local jurisdictions with volunteer HPs trained to develop and implement radiological and nuclear emergency plans, training, and exercises. For example, ROSS volunteers may help with unfunded planning, training and exercise needs. Similarly, the now super-charged CBRNResponder can be used freely by state and local HPs to ensure high resolution situational awareness, effective verification of collected data and clear visualization of the initially modeled and then subsequently measured radiological impacts all to make decision making most effective. For example, CBRNResponder cannot only assign responders to teams and geolocate fixed survey and sampling sites for EOC staff and responders alike to see, but can provide simulated radiation levels based on the plume models so responders see radiation levels change as they traverse to emergency planning zones. A very new tool, RadTeamSim.Route is a game-based platform using GPS and radiological data to immerse the user as a field team member traversing a simulated scene where responder doses accumulate while accomplishing missions. All three parts in the series are taught by responder scientists who have helped develop and test the aforementioned tools, techniques and guidance: Christine Alston and Brendan Palmer of Chainbridge Technologies, Bill Irwin, ScD, CHP of Vermont, Angela Leek, CHP of Iowa and Wendy Renno, PhD of Radiation Emergency Services.

PEP 1-D: Radiation Safety Risk Mitigation in Y-90 Microsphere Administrations

WR Gibbons, KL Dillingham

Selective Internal Radiation Therapy (SIRT) using Yttrium-90 (Y-90) microspheres is widely performed for radioembolization of primary or metastatic tumors within the liver. Intravascular administration of glass or resin microspheres containing radioactive isotopes is performed in interventional radiology and typically involves a multidisciplinary team composed of authorized users, medical physicists, and nuclear medicine technologists. As the number of Y-90 microsphere administrations increases, so too are the number of reported medical events. The December 2022 final report of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission Advisory Committee on the Medical Uses of Isotopes Y-90 Microsphere Medical Events Subcommittee reported 93 total medical events over 4 years from Y-90 microsphere administrations, more than double the number of events of the next highest source of medical events. This discussion will engage the audience and introduce key topics to those newly tasked with or interested in developing Y-90 microsphere programs while offering those more experienced an opportunity to review the fundamentals of such procedures and share personal insights related to the safe and effective use of Y-90 for radioembolization. This presentation will review reported types of medical events and explore various practices that can be implemented to improve a multidisciplinary Y-90 microsphere program and mitigate associated safety risks.

PEP 1-E: PiMAL

CT Rose

PiMAL (Phantom wIth Moving Arms and Legs) is a collection of computational human phantoms useable with MCNP® for the assessment of radiation dose to various organs in standard and nonstandard positions through the user inputted articulation of arms and legs. A phantom model, included in the GUI, enables visualization of the arms and legs as they are positioned using slider bars. An MCNP® input file is then generated and the radiation transport simulations using MCNP® are performed through the GUI. Once simulation is complete, the computed organ dose values are extracted from the MCNP® output file, displayed, and exported as an ASCII file. Training objectives This training will guide the student through the use of PiMAL from installation to simulation with emphasis on use cases, methods, materials, sources, and tallies. A detailed tutorial on a simple modeling technique will conclude the training session.

Sunday, July 23, 10:30am – 12:30pm

PEP 2-A: Alpha Spectroscopy for the Health Physicist

C Maddigan

This course offers a fast-paced review of the basic principles of alpha spectroscopic analysis for the health physicist. The course includes a review of the nature and origins of alpha-particle emitting radioactivity, basic physics of alpha-particle interaction with matter, considerations and consequences of sample preparation for alpha spectroscopy, alpha spectroscopy system components and calibrations, and a primer on interpretation of alpha spectroscopy data.

PEP 2-B: Revisiting and Redefining TENORM for the 21st Century

PV Egidi

This PEP will cover the evolution of the definitions and regulation of naturally occurring radiation and radioactivity. The various definitions of NORM (naturally occurring radioactive material) and TENORM (technologically enhanced NORM) have not evolved with current polices and science. A revised and expanded definition of TENORM is presented with suggested justification for going forward with the changes. The legal framework for controlling radioactivity based on the Atomic Energy Act (AEA) is a Cold War relic; it is suggested that it should be revisited, since the AEA only addresses the nuclear fuel cycle. Publications and policies recommended by ICRP and NCRP over the recent past have added NORM/TENORM to the scope of radiation protection. ICRP recommends NORM should be regulated using a graded approach. Current IAEA recommendations call for member states to identify industries impacted by NORM, and conduct inventories of volumes and concentrations generated, along with exposure data for workers, none of which are federally required at this time; unlike radioactivity and radiation regulated under the Atomic Energy Act. The IAEA looks through the lens of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals with respect to reuse and remining of tailings, which can have a radiological component. The U.S. is also revisiting it’s policies with respect to critical minerals. States have the major responsibility to protect public health but are not funded enough and do not have the bandwidth to take on legal challenges from multiple industries; therefore, the aspirational suggestion here is that EPA take the lead and federally regulate the management (including reuse) and disposal of TENORM, perhaps in the solid waste regulations. Those programs can then be delegated to the states along with appropriations to stand up the programs.

PEP 2-C: Critical Improvements for Health Physicists in Radiological and Nuclear Emergencies Part 2: Radiological Dispersal Device (RDD)

WE Irwin, AE Leek, WJ Renno, BW Palmer, CL Allston, M Callan

PEP 2-D: Laser Safety for The Health Physicist

WR Gibbons, KL Dillingham

State and federal agencies comprehensively regulate ionizing radiation through licensing, policies, and consensus standards, and licensees are frequently visited by inspectors from regulatory agencies. Non-ionizing radiation requirements, on the other end of the spectrum, may be as simple as registering devices with state agencies. As time progresses, lasers are becoming more powerful and with that the associated hazards continue to increase. In many academic and research institutions, the responsibility for laser safety may be placed on existing health physics staff who may not be comfortable carrying out the duties of laser safety officers. Awareness of the hazards associated with lasers and more intimate knowledge of the subject will provide a stronger foundation on which to build a laser safety program. This discussion will engage the audience and introduce key topics to those newly tasked with or interested in laser safety duties while offering those more experienced an opportunity to review the fundamentals and share personal insights. Topics covered will include a brief review of laser safety terminology, aspects of successful laser safety programs, an overview of the Z136 laser safety standards, example laser safety calculations, and discussions on lessons learned.

PEP 2-E: Utility of Modeling in Operation Health Physics

SW Kelley

Health Physicists are required to make extensive use of models in their work to predict and/or estimate doses from many possible sources. Some of the parameters that require modeling include nuclide production rates, dose rates, shielding, internal doses and effluent effects. There are numerous models and software implementations of these models in use. While all of these models can be very useful, they all also have their limitations. These limitations can include incomplete or inaccurate input data, model simplifications, differences between model and real world and over conservative assumptions. This lecture will focus on the experience with models used at a high power electron accelerator nuclear medicine manufacturing facility from design phase to operation. Models to be discussed will include MCNP, RayXpert, MicroShield and others used to model nuclide production rates, accelerator vault shielding, hot cell shielding, effluent estimates and more. Model results will be compared to actual measured values, highlighting significant differences. Recommendations regarding the appropriate uses and cautions to be used when evaluating model results will be discussed.

Sunday, July 23, 1:00pm – 3:00pm

PEP 3-A: Gamma Spectroscopy for the Health Physicist

C Maddigan

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

PEP 3-B: Important Radiation Biology Concepts for Radiation Protection

KD Held

A good understanding of basic radiation biology concepts and new information and research approaches is critical for understanding and applying radiation protection practices. In recent years there has been a plethora of new thoughts and data derived using state-of-the-art molecular biology techniques that impact the application of radiation biology knowledge to many aspects of radiation protection, particularly in the low dose and low dose rate arena. In addition to knowing “classic” concepts such as acute and delayed effects on irradiated normal tissues, sparing by low dose rates, and mechanisms of radiation carcinogenesis, a health physics practitioner should now be familiar with concepts such as bystander effects, genomic instability, DNA damage repair fundamentals, and genomics and proteomics. This lecture will provide an overview of important radiation biology fundamentals relevant to protecting workers, the public and medical patients exposed to radiation, as well as an introduction to newer findings that could impact future approaches to protection.

PEP 3-C: Critical Improvements for Health Physicists in Radiological and Nuclear Emergencies Part 3: A Nuclear Detonation

WE Irwin, AE Leek, WJ Renno, BW Palmer, CL Allston, M Callan

PEP 3-D: Medical Lasers – Types, Uses and Safety

DH Elder

Healthcare facilities may have a variety of lasers, including excimer lasers with ultraviolet wavelengths, diode lasers with different visible wavelengths and carbon dioxide lasers that emit in the infrared. They are used in many clinical settings, including ophthalmology and dermatology clinics, interventional radiology and cardiology, and the operating room. This course will introduce the most common medical laser systems, describe the treatments performed with each and provide the framework for a medical laser safety program that complies with the current the American National Standard for Safe Use of Lasers in Health Care (ANSI Z136.3) and the Recommended Practices for Laser Safety in Perioperative Practice Settings developed by the Association of Perioperative Registered Nurses. Whether you need to develop a laser safety program for your institution, step into an existing program or are just curious about how lasers are used in medicine, this course has something for you.

PEP 3-E: Cognitive Dissonance; Heuristics & Logical Fallacies in Risk Perception: Why it’s so natural for so many to believe so much that is so wrong.

JT Bushberg

Public resistance and fear of radiation is not a new phenomenon. Research on affective influences on public opinion suggests cognitive influences compete with various emotional variables in their influences on public perceptions of risk from technology employing ionizing and non-ionizing radiation. Specifically, people are often influenced by more affective aspects, such as concerns or fears, which are more a function of the potential severe outcomes or of the vividness of potential risks rather than of objectively quantifiable probabilities or expectations. Even though cognitions, such as levels of scientific knowledge and education, are related to public support for radiation-related technology, they alone cannot fully explain the variations of public opinion on these issues. There is a significant body of literature that has empirically examined the influences of cognitive dissonance, heuristics, and logical fallacies in greater detail. This line of research has shown that (1) affective processes often precede cognitive evaluations and (2) people’s judgments about science and technology are sometimes based not on analytical judgment but on a general feeling about science and technology. The seminal research of Paul Slovic, Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky, and others on intuitive toxicology can be used as a starting point. An overview of these topics will be presented along with specific recommendations aimed at increasing the effectiveness of communicating the risks of radiation exposure in a public forum.

Sunday, July 23, 3:30pm – 5:30pm

PEP 4-A: Emergency Response and Information Communication – What Can a Health Physicist Provide?

SL Sugarman

It is essential that health physicists are able to seamlessly integrate themselves into the response environment and effectively communicate their findings to a wide variety of people that may include on-scene command staff, involved victims, medical care providers, public information officers, decision makers, and others. Response and communication go hand-in-hand. In the event of a radiation incident, it is essential that the radiological situation is properly, yet rapidly, assessed so that a proper response can be planned. It is not always necessary to incorporate wholesale changes to the way things may usually be done in the absence of radioactive materials. For instance, stand-off distances, universal precautions, and response PPE that are normally used can also serve to protect personnel when responding to a radiological event. Coupled with a good event history and other data, health physicists can help to develop a strategy for safely and effectively responding to a radiological event. HP support duties can also include assessment of dose to patients/victims. In addition to performing the “normal” health physics duties, assisting with messaging and communication should be looked at as an area where health physicists can be of help. As time goes on and more information – such as specific source term and chemical/physical form of the involved material, bioassay data, plume data, and other additional data – is received, the health physicist will be called upon to interpret that data and communicate the technical information in an understandable manner to people who need it.

PEP 4-B: On Uncertainty in Surface Activity Concentration Measurements

DO Stuenkel

Many environmental measurements involve the measurement of surface activity concentrations. These include walls, floors, or ceilings in buildings, or the top layer of soil outdoors. For measurements of surfaces in buildings, ISO 7503-1:2016, “Measurement of radioactivity — Measurement and evaluation of surface contamination — Part 1: General principles” provides guidance for measurements of surface activity concentrations of radionuclides that emit alpha, beta, and/or photon radiation. In addition to estimating the surface activity concentration, it is also important to estimate the uncertainty in the measurement. Guidance for determining the uncertainty for any measurement is provided by “Joint Committee for Guides in Metrology, Evaluation of measurement data – Guide to the expression of uncertainty in measurement” (JCGM 100:2008). This PEP presents the eight-step method outlined in the “Guide to the expression of uncertainty in measurement”, along with the use of different probability distributions, such the uniform, triangular, normal, and Poisson to represent various input quantities. Applications of the GUM method to surface activity concentration measurements, including stationary (i.e., static) measurements, averages of multiple static measurements, and quantitative scanning surveys are developed and presented. Finally, this PEP provides a brief overview of Monte Carlo methods for estimating quantities their uncertainties, along with a demonstration of software tools, such as the NIST Uncertainty Machine and Keith McCroan’s GumCalc. Participants are encouraged but not required to bring a laptop or tablet.

PEP 4-C: Federal Radiological Response Teams

KL Groves

This presentation reviews Federally-funded radiological response teams. These include state teams, National Guard WMD Civil Support Teams (in every U.S. state and territory), and Teams from the Federal agencies: DoD, DOE, EPA, CDC and VA. While all emergencies are local; a number of state and Federal agencies are available to help with radiological/nuclear incidents in a timely manner. Except in major incidents, the responding agencies report to and work for the local Incident Commander.

PEP 4-D: Characteristic Limits in Bioassay

TR LaBone, NM Chalmers

Characteristic limits are the general term for what we in health physics refer to as the detection level (DL), minimum detectable amount (MDA), and minimum quantifiable value (MQV). The DL and MDA are concerned with our ability to detect an analyte in a sample, whereas the MQV is concerned with our ability to quantify an analyte rather than just detect it. In the first part of this lecture we will discuss how to calculate the a priori DL, MDA, and MQV for an analytical process. This discussion is somewhat atypical because it is presented in terms of the reported result (e.g., mBq/L) rather than the signal (e.g., number of counts in the sample and background) and the use of replicate measurements is covered. In the second part of the lecture, the a posteriori DL, which is used to make decisions about detection for a particular analysis, will be derived using the combined standard uncertainty (csu) for the analysis that is reported by the analytical laboratory and coverage intervals constructed from this csu. As we shall see, this approach offers many benefits.

PEP 4-E: Medical Health Physics Update

MA Charlton

This PEP session will focus on institutional experience on the following topics of interest: dental PSP quality assurance, dose to interventional radiologists performing CT-guided procedures, GammaTile implant procedures, and safety considerations during Lu-177 PSMA and Y-90 Zevalin therapies.

Monday, July 24, 12:15pm – 2:15pm

PEP M-1: Dose Estimates to Workers From Y-90 Excluding Fluoroscopy During Microspheres Treatments

A Miller

During Y-90 microsphere treatments, workers receive occupational dose from fluoroscopy use and from the Y-90 microspheres. The dosimeters in use by the workers integrates the doses received from both sources during the wear period. The occupational dose received from the fluoroscopy use on each patient is highly variable and dominates the occupational exposure for the physician. The occupational dose received from the Y-90 sources is estimated by dose rate measurements and time/motion studies to provide a tool to provide customizable dose estimates for each user based on their tasks. This information can be used to better educate staff members in the interventional radiology suite who work with these patients. This will be a more detailed version of the methods and equipment used to develop a paper submitted for presentation at the meeting.

PEP M-2: An Introduction to Nuclear Security for the Health Physicist

JT Harris

Health physics is an essential function in most facilities that use radioactive materials or radiation generating devices and the primary responsibility is a safety function. Over the last several years, nuclear security has become increasingly important, and the health physicist may become tasked with understanding or even implementing security measures. Still, the role of the health physicist in nuclear security matters is not clearly defined even though a fundamental understanding of radiological hazards is required for understanding the total risk to the facility and/or material. Health physicists are multi-capable scientists, engineers and systems integrators that can contribute greatly at multiple levels for effective and efficient nuclear security. The purpose of this course is to introduce the basic elements of nuclear security, with specific emphasis on prevention, detection, delay, and response. The course will also cover two key components necessary for health physics integration with security: culture and insider threat mitigation. The course format will include lecturing, case-study analysis with discussion, and a small simulation. At the end of this course the participant should have a high-level overview of nuclear security and be able to formulate ways health physics can be integrated more effectively with security.

PEP M-3: Electromagnetic Energy Field Surveys for Comparison with Implanted Medical Device Manufacturers’ Maximum Allowable Field Strengths

DL Haes

There are many sources of electromagnetic energy (EME) which are used in industry and research. Their typical use results in both intentional and unintentional sources of various EME electric and magnetic fields. While regulatory Maximum Permissible Exposure (MPE) values have been published for workers and members of the general public, they are often above the field values that could cause Electromagnetic Interference (EMI) with certain Implanted Medical Devices (IMD). Workplace EME electric and magnetic fields can be evaluated using commercially available instrumentation and compared to IMD manufacturers published maximum allowable field strengths. In this PEP the attendee will learn the about the IMD manufacturers published maximum allowable field strengths, and how they compare to worker and public exposure limits. Some commercially available instrumentation will be introduced with actual survey results compared to sample IMD limits. In addition, we will cover how the EME survey fulfils the requirements of the latest revision to IEEE Std C95.7(TM)-2023 Standard for Electromagnetic Energy Safety Programs, 0 Hz to 300 GHz.

PEP M-4: Design and Optimization of Ambient Air Monitoring Networks using Atmospheric Dispersion Modeling and Frequency of Detection Methods

AS Rood

Ambient air monitoring networks are a critical part of environmental monitoring programs at nuclear power plants, nuclear processing facilities, and U.S Department of Energy sites. Often times annual wind roses or dispersion patterns from an atmospheric transport model are used to establish air monitoring locations. While these methods provide a good first cut at favorable monitoring locations, they do not provide a quantitative measure of either a sampler or network performance in terms of meeting the performance objectives of the network. Frequency of detection analysis provides a rigorous structure to analyze quantitatively the performance of an air monitoring network. The analysis first defines of the performance objective of the network followed by a quantitative evaluation of the network that establishes its acceptability in terms of meeting the performance objective. Frequency of detection methods can be applied to design of a new network or evaluation of an existing networks. The analysis can determine optimal sampler placement and operating parameters and identify redundant samplers. This course will provide an overview of frequency of detection methods including defining performance objectives, developing input, interpreting results, and developing network optimization. The method requires an atmospheric transport model capable of calculating hourly time-integrated concentrations. Basic principles of atmospheric transport modeling important for frequency of detection analysis will be reviewed and discussed including industry standard codes. Application of the method will be illustrated using three case studies at the Idaho National Laboratory, Hanford Reservation, and a former uranium mine. Frequency of detection methods will be demonstrated using software available to the attendant. Site environmental monitoring program technical and managerial staff and regulators should find this course useful.

PEP M-5: Quantitative Environmental Risk Analysis for Human Health

RA Fjeld, TA DeVol, NE Martinez

Environmental risk analysis is complex and interdisciplinary. While risk analysis involves equal contribution of risk communication, risk management and risk assessment, this lecture will focus on the latter. Risk assessments are conducted to quantify the likelihood of human health effects from an actual or potential release of a contaminant and are often conducted to meet a regulatory requirement. Quantitative risk assessment can be broken down into four steps: release assessment, transport assessment, exposure assessment, and consequence assessment. The objective of the release assessment is to identify the contaminants released and quantify the release rate. The objective of the transport assessment is to quantify the contaminant concentration in air, groundwater, surface water and food stuffs following movement of the contaminant in the environment from the release to the human receptor. The objective of the exposure assessment is to quantify the effective dose (Sv) or effective dose rate (Sv/hr) from a radiological contaminant, or the dose (mg of contaminant per kg of body mass) or average daily dose (mg of contaminant per kg of body mass per day) for a chemical contaminant. The exposure assessment will depend on the route of exposure: inhalation, ingestion, skin absorption/penetration as well as possibly external exposure from a radiological contaminant. The objective of the consequence assessment is to quantify the deterministic effects and/or the probability of stochastics effects in a human that may result from the exposure. In this lecture we will explore the fundamental concepts and analytical methods to quantify risk of radiological and chemical contaminants released into the environment on human health.

Tuesday, July 25, 12:15pm – 2:15pm

PEP T-1: Nuts and Bolts of Lutetium 177 (Lu-177) Therapies

KE Berry

Commercially available in the US today are Lutathera for neuroendocrine tumors and Pluvicto for prostate cancer. Worldwide there are 98 clinical trials recruiting patients as of February 20, 2023, 35 of which are open in the US. There are studies of new Lu-177 drugs to treat small cell lung cancer, midgut carcinoid tumors, prostate cancer, neuroendocrine tumors that are labeled as “completed” in clinicaltrials.gov. We can clearly anticipate that there are more Lutetium 177 commercial offerings in the pipeline. So where so you start? Start with this PEP course. This course will cover everything from the basics of what is Lutetium 177, the basic theory of Lu-177 as a cancer agent, licensing considerations, staffing requirements, differences between commercially available therapies, administration options, extravasations, contamination prevention, discharge instructions, how to handle the death of a patient, and lots of lessons learned along the way. The goal of this course is to prepare you to confidently speak with your team when one of your physicians says “I want to use Lutathera” or “I want to use Pluvicto on my patient.”

PEP T-2: Boot Camp for Radiation Safety Professionals Focusing on the Basics of Security, Biological and Chemical Safety

JM Gutierrez, RJ Emery

It is currently quite rare for organizations to maintain stand-alone radiation safety programs. Resource constraints and workplace complexities have served as a catalyst for the creation of comprehensive environmental health & safety (EH&S) or risk management (RM) programs, which include, among other health and safety aspects, radiation safety programs. But many of these consolidations were not inclusive of staff training to instill an understanding of the areas now aligned with the radiation safety function. This situation is unfortunate because when armed with a basic understanding of the other safety programs, the radiation safety staff can provide improved customer service and address many simple issues before they become major problems. This unique Professional Enrichment Program (PEP) is designed to address this shortcoming by providing an overview of a number of key aspects of EH&S programs from the perspective of practicing radiation safety professionals who now are involved in a broader set of health and safety issues. This PEP will examine “Security 101 for Radiation Safety Professionals” and “The Basics of Biological & Chemical Safety”. The first part of this session will focus on security as it is applied in the institutional settings. Various strategies employed to improve security controls will be presented. The second part of the session will address the classification of infectious agents and the various assigned biosafety levels. Aspects of chemical exposures, exposure limits, monitoring and control strategies will also be discussed. The particular topics included in the PEP, along with several other presentations have been consistently identified as extraordinarily useful to participants in the highly successful week-long “University of Texas EH&S Academy”. Ample time will be allotted for questions answers and discussion, and each segment will be supplemented with key reference information.

PEP T-3: The Case Against The LNT

AL Fellman

Radiation safety programs must establish compliance with radiation regulations which continue to be based on the linear no-threshold (LNT) hypothesis and the ALARA principle, despite overwhelming sound, peer-reviewed science that demonstrates the existence of a carcinogenic threshold and/or hormesis at low doses. LNT and ALARA insist that when we make changes that lower worker dose by as little as one µSv, we are making the workplace safer. Public health authorities and many radiation safety professionals have convinced most members of the public that when we evacuate 150,000 persons following Fukushima to keep them from receiving tens of mSv, we are improving public health despite the fact that this decision has resulted in more than 2,000 fatalities among evacuees. Yet despite compelling evidence revealing LNT to be fraudulent, the consistent response taken by regulatory agencies and scientific bodies whose recommendations are cited as the basis of regulatory actions is to deflect or rationalize away the science at best or simply pretend it doesn’t exist at worst so as to maintain allegiance to a worldview of radiation safety built on ALARA and LNT. A sample of relevant findings supporting this allegation will be presented.

PEP T-4: Introductory R programming with the ‘radsafer’ package

MG Hogue

Health physicists routinely perform computations, but many of us lack tools that help keep these computations accurate and transparent. Some even resort to – gasp – spreadsheets. In this PEP session, you learn how to quickly get started with R programming, using the radsafer package. The radsafer package provides easy-to-use functions in the following categories: radiation measurements, decay corrections, accessing radionuclide data, and tools for MCNP. (The MCNP tools will be reserved to the end of the class since they are of interest only to MCNP analysts.) R can be challenging to learn if starting from scratch. But starting with a package -- a documented set of shared code and data designed for your work -- makes the transition easier. All software in this course is free and open-source. The class will start with a brief overview of R and Rstudio. Attendees will perform simple computations in the Rstudio console, then run the same computations from the Rstudio source panel. This will transition to writing and saving work as scripts. A brief look at function writing will provide the user insight into the best way to use the functions provided in radsafer. Next, we will explore the radsafer package and try out functions on realistic examples. Many radsafer functions access the RadData package. RadData contains the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) Publication 107, Nuclear Decay Data for Dosimetric Calculations – one of the data sets used by ORNL’s Radiological Toolbox. More details on the packages are provided at github.com/markhogue/radsafer and https://github.com/markhogue/RadData. Attendees are encouraged to bring laptops, with any common operating system, loaded with the latest versions of R and Rstudio. Installing radsafer (through the Package menu in Rstudio) automatically installs all needed packages such as RadData. Loading R and RStudio is very straight-forward. If desired, a set of instructions to load the programs is located at: www.sthda.com/english/wiki/installing-r-and-rstudio-easy-r-programming.

PEP T-5: Pixelated, 3D CZT Detection Systems New Developments for Nuclear Power Plants, IAEA Safeguard Inspectors & Medical Imaging

DW Miller

The health physics presentation discusses the latest applications of pixelated, 3D CZT new technology at nuclear plants mapping, medical 3D imaging, homeland security surveillance, and decommissioning site isotopic characterization. The CZT detection system provides GPS location and digital camera color-coding of individual isotopic identification. The CZT system was developed by the University of Michigan over 22 years of extensive research. Seventy CZT monitors have been employed at nuclear plants globally. The North American Technical Center’s ALARA network program has provided information on new applications and lessons learned with the new technology. The CZT system has been successfully used to verify the adequacy of temporary shielding installed for refueling outages, contamination control, PWR CRUD burst isotopic mapping, and radwaste shipment surveys. The system allows room-temperature applications for process lines to accurately measure isotopic characterization without the delay of sample line collection and chemistry laboratory analysis. The use of the new spectra CZT system at Palisades is discussed including the new discovery of significant Ag-110m coolant line contamination. The IAEA has selected the pixelated, 3D CZT system for the IAEA safeguard inspectors based on comparisons of available similar isotopic characterization instrumentation. Position-sensitive, 3-dimensional CZT semiconductor gamma-ray spectrometers and imagers have been designed and are now in medical research laboratories for applications for PET and radionuclide patient isotopic imaging including 100 CZT detectors.

PEP Courses