[ RadSafe ] Health Canada's Radiation Monitoring Data

Thomas Johnston tjohnstn at gmail.com
Wed Jul 6 15:27:58 CDT 2011


Hello Neil,
Good to hear from you.
Thomas
NIST

On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 1:42 PM, nmbarss at fred.net <nmbarss at fred.net> wrote:

>  Hi Cat...thanx for the info also....  BODY { font-family:Arial,
> Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:12px; }
>  On Wed 06/29/11 5:20 PM , Catalina Kovats kovatsc at georgetown.edu
> sent:
>  Matt:
>  The Rad-Net data was posted on EPA website at
>  http://www.epa.gov/japan2011/data-updates.html [1]
>  Catalina
>  --
>  Catalina E. Kovats, M.S.
>  Radiation Safety Officer
>  Georgetown University EH&S
>  LM-12 Preclinical Science Building
>  3900 Reservoir Road, N.W.
>  Washington, DC 20057-1431
>  Phone (202) 687-4712
>  Fax (202) 687-5046
>  On 6/29/2011 2:37 PM, Matt sargent wrote:
>  > FYI
>  >
>  > The link to Health Canada's Radiation Monitoring Data
>  >
>  > This is the link the CNSC supplied to monitor Radiation in Canada
> and its
>  > territories.
>  >
>  > That was mentioned in the original email below.
>  >
>  >
> http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/hc-ps/ed-ud/respond/nuclea/data-donnees-eng.php#ddrl
> [2]_
>  > mar2011
>  >
>  >
>  > I have tried to ask for the NRC comparison but have been given no
> address
>  > for any such location or information.
>  >
>  >
>  > Matt Sargent
>  >
>  > -----Original Message-----
>  > From: Conklin, Al (DOH) [Al.Conklin at DOH.WA.GOV [3]]
>  > Sent: June 29, 2011 11:59 AM
>  > To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics)
> MailingList
>  > Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Fukushima Hot Particles
>  >
>  > A very nice concise summary. Thanks.
>  >
>  > Al Conklin
>  > Lead Trainer and Health Physicist
>  > Radiological Emergency Preparedness Section
>  > Office of Radiation Protection
>  > Department of Health
>  > office: 360-236-3261
>  > cell: 360-239-1237
>  >
>  > -----Original Message-----
>  > From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu [4]
>  > [radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu [5]] On Behalf Of Matt sargent
>  > Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2011 9:24 AM
>  > To: 'The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics)
> Mailing List'
>  > Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Fukushima Hot Particles
>  >
>  > Thought I Would share this email I have received regarding
> questions to my
>  > regulatory authority, regarding the hot particles.
>  >
>  > Thanks
>  >
>  >
>  > Kindly,
>  > Matt Sargent
>  > Safety / Compliance Officer
>  > matt at buffaloinspection.com [6]
>  > Office # 780-486-7344
>  > Fax # 780-486-4685
>  > www.buffaloinspection.com [7]
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  >
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>  > -
>  >
>  > Matt: here's from one of our specialists.
>  >
>  > Good Afternoon,
>  >
>  > You had raised some questions about hot particles and their
> association with
>  > the Fukushima events. NCRP Report No. 130- Biological Effects and
> Exposure
>  > Limits for Hot Particles- is a good source of reference information
> about
>  > hot particles, including their detection.
>  >
>  > Hot particles have typically been associated with nuclear reactors
> and
>  > weapons testing and are usually beta emitting or gamma/beta
> emitting
>  > radionuclides, commonly Co-60 and other fission fragments. NCRP
> report No.
>  > 130 defines hot particles as being greater than 10 microns and less
> than
>  > 3000 microns. Hot particles are loosely defined as "high activity"
>  > particles. They are often electrically charged and are water
> insoluble. Hot
>  > particles are typically found on the skin, and therefore much
> attention has
>  > been given to the effects on the skin and on the skin dosimetry
> related to
>  > hot particles.
>  >
>  > Hot particles have been observed in association with the Chernobyl
>  > accident. The associated long distance transit with the large fire
> and
>  > explosions essentially caused a ballistic launch through the upper
>  > troposphere; not the usual mechanism of long range transit.
>  >
>  > Fukushima's primary containment was largely left intact; the
> releases were
>  > very different than with Chernobyl as they were mainly volatile in
> nature.
>  >
>  > It is unlikely that hot particles will be observed as a result of
> Fukushima
>  > especially in North America. However, in the coming months and
> years ahead,
>  > much work will be done in relation to Fukushima at which time more
>  > information will be available.
>  >
>  > Health Canada's network has observed volatile materials like
> Cesium, iodine
>  > etc. at stations outside of Japan and nothing that has looked like
> a piece
>  > of refractory material. In a few months, Health Canada may do some
>  > autoradiograghy on some Canadian filters to look at activity
> distribution of
>  > longer lived materials.
>  >
>  > The reports which were linked in your e-mail (Fairwinds) make
> several claims
>  > of hot particles being breathed in every day and makes specific
> claims of 5
>  > hot particles/day being "breathed in" in Seattle. We have not found
> any
>  > credible information which supports this claim.
>  >
>  > It is notable that in NCRP Report No. 130 it is stated that there
> have been
>  > no reported clinically observable human injuries due to hot
> particle
>  > exposures in the workplace.
>  >
>  > I Hope this helps.
>  >
>  > Melanie
>  >
>  >
>  > Regards,
>  > Melanie Rickard
>  > CNSC-CCSN
>  > External Dosimetry Specialist
>  > 613-996-7323
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  > ________________________________________
>  > From: Matt Sargent [Matt at buffaloinspection.com [8]]
>  > Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2011 12:54 PM
>  > To: Drolet, Marc
>  > Subject: Thanks
>  > Marc
>  >
>  > Thanks for the link, I appreciate the fast response. So is there an
>  > accurate way to count the hot particles? For example you have Arnie
>  > Gundersen and others talking about the amount of particles being
> inhaled in
>  > Japan Fukushima around 11 a day and Seattle around 5 a day. Is this
>  > accurate? Even though very little radiation is being detected what
> is the
>  > possibility that it is being created by hot particles? It's a very
>  > different situation if you are breathing the particles in rather
> than just
>  > absorbing the radiation/energy through the skin. As I am sure you
> are
>  > aware. I am just trying to understand the situation there is some
> many
>  > different explanations and opinions on it.
>  >
>  > Dose the Nuclear Regulatory Commission of the USA have a similar
> setup for
>  > monitoring radiation readings? I understand that the jet stream has
>  > sheltered us for the most part while the majority has gone down to
> our
>  > southern neighbors. I have talked to associates that claim at times
>  > upward of 30 x normal background. Is there any where that you know
> of to
>  > monitor the readings in the USA?
>  >
>  > Thanks for your time.
>  >
>  > Matt Sargent
>  >
>  > Kindly,
>  > Matt Sargent
>  > Safety Compliance Officer
>  > matt at buffaloinspection.com [9]
>  > Office # 780-486-7344
>  > Fax # 780-486-4685
>  > www.buffaloinspection.com [10]
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  > *** NOTE ***
>  > The CNSC email security server scanned this email and found no
> potentially
>  > hostile
>  > or malicious content. To be safe, do not open attachments from
> unrecognized
>  > senders.
>  >
>  > *** REMARQUE ****
>  > ordinateur,
>  >
>  >
>  >
>
> ****************************************************************************
>  > ***********************
>  > The information contained in this e-mail is intended solely for the
> use of
>  > the named
>  > addressee. Access, copying, or re-use of the e-mail or any
> information
>  > contained
>  > therein by any other person is not authorized. If you are not the
> intended
>  > recipient,
>  > please notify us immediately by returning the e-mail to the
> originator.
>  >
>  > partielle de
>  > message
>  > retournant ce
>  >
>
> ****************************************************************************
>  > ***********************
>  >
>  > -----Original Message-----
>  > From: Peter Bossew [Peter.Bossew at reflex.at [11]]
>  > Sent: June 28, 2011 2:06 PM
>  > To: radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu [12]
>  > Subject: [ RadSafe ] Fukushima Hot Particles
>  >
>  > Colleagues:
>  >
>  > Only now I noticed the 'hot particles' thread. I apologize if I
> missed
>  > something, and if I am repeating arguments.
>  >
>  > The only evidence for hot particles is
>  >
>  > (1) an autoradiography of an airfilter;
>  > (2) an electron microscope picture of an isolated particle.
>  > (3) XRF scan of the particle.
>  > (4) gamma and alpha spcs of the bare HP. Also easily done (I did it
> with
>  > Chernobyl HPs.) The r.n. composition is very different from the
> continuous
>  > phase on the filter.
>  >
>  > This is all done quite easily by standard techniques.
>  >
>  > Does anybody know about such findings? Please let me know any
> reference.
>  > (I haven't seen any.)
>  >
>  > A gamma spectrum of an air filter is no evidence. A NaI spectrum is
> just
>  > ridiculous for this purpose.
>  > The argument that Rn progenies attached to aerosols can appear as
> HPs is
>  > wrong. After a few hours 214Pb,Bi have decayed. 210Pb,Po are
> usually not
>  > present in enough activity, same for Tn. Btw. it can easily be
> checked by
>  > investigating BG filters, and if such suspected particle is found,
> perform
>  > g& a-spc on the isolated particle. Rn and Tn progenies are very
> easy to
>  > identify (should be a triviality in this forum.)
>  >
>  >
>  > Generally speaking, the release conditions were such that there is
> a
>  > chance of HPs. Therefore experimental evidence would be valuable
>  > contribution to understanding the accident.
>  >
>  >
>  > Thx.
>  >
>  > Peter Bossew
>  >
>  >
>  > (German Federal Radioprotection Authority, Berlin)
>  >
>  >
>  > _______________________________________________
>  > You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
>  >
>  > Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and
> understood the
>  > RadSafe rules. These can be found at:
>  > http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html [13]
>  >
>  > For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other
> settings visit:
>  > http://health.phys.iit.edu [14]
>  >
>  > _______________________________________________
>  > You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
>  >
>  > Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and
> understood the
>  > RadSafe rules. These can be found at:
>  > http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html [15]
>  >
>  > For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other
> settings visit:
>  > http://health.phys.iit.edu [16]
>  > _______________________________________________
>  > You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
>  >
>  > Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and
> understood the
>  > RadSafe rules. These can be found at:
>  > http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html [17]
>  >
>  > For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other
> settings visit:
>  > http://health.phys.iit.edu [18]
>  >
>  > _______________________________________________
>  > You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
>  >
>  > Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and
> understood the RadSafe rules. These can be found at:
> http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html [19]
>  >
>  > For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other
> settings visit: http://health.phys.iit.edu [20]
>  >
>  _______________________________________________
>  You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
>  Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and
> understood the RadSafe rules. These can be found at:
> http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html [21]
>  For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings
> visit: http://health.phys.iit.edu [22]
>
>
> Links:
> ------
> [1] http://www.epa.gov/japan2011/data-updates.html
> [2]
>
> https://webmail.xecu.net/parse.php?redirect=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.hc-sc.gc.ca%2Fhc-ps%2Fed-ud%2Frespond%2Fnuclea%2Fdata-donnees-eng.php%23ddrl
> [3] mailto:Al.Conklin at DOH.WA.GOV
> [4] mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu
> [5] mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu
> [6] mailto:matt at buffaloinspection.com
> [7]
>
> https://webmail.xecu.net/parse.php?redirect=http://www.buffaloinspection.com
> [8] mailto:Matt at buffaloinspection.com
> [9] mailto:matt at buffaloinspection.com
> [10]
>
> https://webmail.xecu.net/parse.php?redirect=http://www.buffaloinspection.com
> [11] mailto:Peter.Bossew at reflex.at
> [12] mailto:radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu
> [13]
>
> https://webmail.xecu.net/parse.php?redirect=http%3A%2F%2Fhealth.phys.iit.edu%2Fradsaferules.html
> [14]
>
> https://webmail.xecu.net/parse.php?redirect=http%3A%2F%2Fhealth.phys.iit.edu
> [15]
>
> https://webmail.xecu.net/parse.php?redirect=http%3A%2F%2Fhealth.phys.iit.edu%2Fradsaferules.html
> [16]
>
> https://webmail.xecu.net/parse.php?redirect=http%3A%2F%2Fhealth.phys.iit.edu
> [17]
>
> https://webmail.xecu.net/parse.php?redirect=http%3A%2F%2Fhealth.phys.iit.edu%2Fradsaferules.html
> [18]
>
> https://webmail.xecu.net/parse.php?redirect=http%3A%2F%2Fhealth.phys.iit.edu
> [19]
>
> https://webmail.xecu.net/parse.php?redirect=http%3A%2F%2Fhealth.phys.iit.edu%2Fradsaferules.html
> [20]
>
> https://webmail.xecu.net/parse.php?redirect=http%3A%2F%2Fhealth.phys.iit.edu
> [21] http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html
> [22] http://health.phys.iit.edu
> _______________________________________________
> You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
>
> Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood the
> RadSafe rules. These can be found at:
> http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html
>
> For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings
> visit: http://health.phys.iit.edu
>


More information about the RadSafe mailing list