[ RadSafe ] Health Canada's Radiation Monitoring Data

Wed Jun 29 16:20:24 CDT 2011

Matt:
The Rad-Net data was posted on EPA website at 
http://www.epa.gov/japan2011/data-updates.html

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_
> 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) [mailto:Al.Conklin at DOH.WA.GOV]
> 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
> [mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] 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
> Office # 780-486-7344
> Fax # 780-486-4685
> www.buffaloinspection.com
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> -
>
> 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 [mailto:Matt at buffaloinspection.com]
> 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
> Office # 780-486-7344
> Fax # 780-486-4685
> www.buffaloinspection.com
>
>
>
> *** 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 ****
> Le serveur de sécurité de la CCSN a examiné ce courriel et n'y a trouvé
> aucun contenu potentiellement hostile ou malveillant. Pour protéger votre
> ordinateur,
> n'ouvrez pas les pièces jointes en provenance d'expéditeurs inconnus.
>
>
> ****************************************************************************
> ***********************
> 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.
>
> Ce message est strictement réservé à l'usage du destinataire indiqué. Si
> vous n'êtes
> pas le destinataire de ce message, la consultation ou la reproduction même
> partielle de
> ce message et des renseignements qu'il contient est non autorisée. Si ce
> message
> vous a été transmis par erreur, veuillez en informer l'expéditeur en lui
> retournant ce
> message immédiatement.
> ****************************************************************************
> ***********************
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Peter Bossew [mailto:Peter.Bossew at reflex.at]
> Sent: June 28, 2011 2:06 PM
> To: radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu
> 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
>
> For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings visit:
> 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
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>