Harmonisation and dosimetric quality assurance in individual monitoring for external radiation

The current situation amongst Member States is that there are widely differing national requirements for dosimetric services and for dosemeter performance. It is clear that with the free movement of workers within the European Union (EU) and the requirements for individual dosimetry given in Council Directive 96/29 EURATOM, a degree of harmonisation of requirements and procedures of EU Member States would be desirable. A EURADOS action group, made up of members from each of the EU Member States plus Switzerland, was set up with the overall objectives of consolidating within the EU the quality of individual monitoring using personal dosemeters and assisting movement towards harmonised procedures. An outline of the work of the action group is given and the term 'harmonisation' is discussed.     

Thermoluminescent detectors applied in individual monitoring of radiation workers in Europe--a review based on the EURADOS questionnaire

Among the activities of EURADOS Working Group 2 formed by experts from several European countries is the harmonisation of individual monitoring as part of radiation protection of occupationally exposed persons. Here, we provide information about thermoluminescent detectors (TLDs) applied by the European dosimetric services and the dosimetric characteristics of dosemeters in which these detectors are applied. Among 91 services from 29 countries which responded to the EURADOS questionnaire, 61 apply dosemeters with TLDs for the determination of personal dose equivalent H(p)(10) for photons and beta radiation, and 16 services use TLDs for neutron albedo dosemeters. Those most frequently used are standard lithium fluoride TLDs (mainly TLD-100, TLD-700, Polish MTS-N and MTS-7, Russian DTG-4), high-sensitive lithium fluoride (GR-200, MCP-N) and lithium borate TLDs. Some services use calcium sulphate and calcium fluoride detectors. For neutron dosimetry, most services apply pairs of LiF:Mg,Ti TLDs with (6)Li and (7)Li. The characteristics (energy response) of individual dosemeters are mainly related to the energy response of the detectors and filters applied. The construction of filters in dosemeters applied for measurements of H(p)(10) and their energy response are also reviewed.     

Extremity ring dosimetry intercomparison in reference and workplace fields

An intercomparison of ring dosemeters has been organised with the aim of assessing the technical capabilities of available extremity dosemeters and focusing on their performance at clinical workplaces with potentially high extremity doses. Twenty-four services from 16 countries participated in the intercomparison. The dosemeters were exposed to reference photon ((137)Cs) and beta ((147)Pm, (85)Kr and (90)Sr/(90)Y) fields together with fields representing realistic exposure situations in interventional radiology (direct and scattered radiation) and nuclear medicine ((99 m)Tc and (18)F). It has been found that most dosemeters provided satisfactory measurements of H(p)(0.07) for photon radiation, both in reference and realistic fields. However, only four dosemeters fulfilled the established requirements for all radiation qualities. The main difficulties were found for the measurement of low-energy beta radiation. Finally, the results also showed a general under-response of detectors to (18)F, which was attributed to the difficulties of the dosimetric systems to measure the positron contribution to the dose.     

Present status of approval procedures in the EU member states and Switzerland

The European Union Council Directive 96/29/EURATOM requires that 'individual monitoring shall be ... based on individual measurements which are established by an approved dosimetric service' and that 'Each Member State shall make arrangements to recognise, as appropriate, the capacity of ... approved dosimetric services'. At present, approval of dosimetric services does not have the same meaning within EU Member States and Switzerland. In some countries, service and dosemeter approval is clearly separated, in some others only one of the two is supposed to be tested, and in others no approval is required. Dosimetric requirements and criteria are based on different international documents (e.g. IEC, ISO, ANSI, CEC report) or national specific rules. Approval frequency can be once, every 2 or more years. Approval can be based on either evaluation of technical and management reports, irradiation tests, inspection on-site or the three steps together. In most cases, approval involves photon dosimetry while beta and neutron dosimetry test procedures are not as well established. However, comparisons may lead to some convergent evolution of procedures and to a greater degree of harmonisation and quality consolidation.     

Implementation of standards for individual monitoring in Europe

A large number of standards are available for radiation protection and individual monitoring purposes. They are published by various organisations, international and national. Moreover, the increasing policy of "Quality" applied to individual monitoring requires the implementation of standards on Quality Assurance (QA) both in technical and management aspects of a dosimetric service. Implementation of standards is not mandatory; therefore, varying degrees of implementation can be found in different European countries. However, for a number of good reasons, a degree of harmonisation within the European Union (EU) of the requirements and procedures for individual monitoring would be desirable. Harmonisation as applied to dosimetric services does not mean that they should all follow exactly the same procedures, but that they should aim to meet the same general requirements, and their results should be comparable. This article aims to compile information on the use of all standards applied within individual monitoring practices, be it on the calibration of dosemeters or on the QA procedures to be applied to the overall dose evaluation process. Both "technical standards" and "quality standards" will be discussed. A list of documents of relevance to subjects such as recommendations and requirements in the field of individual monitoring, whose application could help in the harmonisation of procedures, will also be given. As it is agreed that implementation of quality standards is a relevant framework within which harmonisation can be achieved, guidance on the implementation of quality standards in a dosimetric service is given. Accreditation and approval of dosimetric services will be of relevance in the process of harmonisation of individual monitoring within the EU. In this article, a discussion of various procedures and the meaning of both forms of recognition is also provided. Although most of the text applies to the monitoring of internal and external exposure to ionising radiation, the emphasis of this practical guidance is on monitoring for external radiation with passive dosemeters.     

State-of-the-art dosimetric methods for internal and external exposures: conclusions of a EURADOS action

In radiation protection dosimetry the quantity of interest is the effective dose (E); the dose limit to an adult worker applies to the sum of the relevant doses from external exposures and the relevant committed effective doses from intakes of radionuclides, during the same period of time. A EURADOS study was carried out to investigate how the results from personal dosemeters for external radiation, from workplace monitoring and from monitoring of internal exposures can be combined into a consistent system of individual monitoring. The integration of dosimetric methods and data for external and internal radiation require the complete characterisation of the occupational exposure present at the workplace, and the availability of adequate equipment and tools for the assessment of effective dose. To evaluate the capability of services to accomplish this approach, a European Dosimetry Network has been established among 28 European countries through the respective contact-persons and their dosimetric facilities which collaborated with EURADOS providing relevant data about performance and legal aspects. The information collected was presented as a monograph in Radiation Protection Dosimetry in 2004. The more relevant conclusions of this study are presented here.     

The ENEA neutron personal dosimetry service

The ENEA Radiation Protection Institute has been operating the only neutron personal dosimetry service in Italy since the 1970s. Since the 1980s the service has been based on PADC (poly allyl diglycol carbonate) for fast neutron dosimetry, while thermal neutron dosimetry has been performed using thermoluminescence (TL) dosemeters. Since the service was started, a number of aspects have undergone evolution. The latest and most important changes are as follows: in 1998 a new PADC material was introduced in routine, since 2001 TL thermal dosimetry has been based on LiF(Mg,Cu,P) [GR-200] and (7)LiF(Mg,Cu,P) [GR-207] detectors and since 2003 a new image analysis reading system for the fast neutron dosemeters has been used. Herein an updated summary of how the service operates and performs today is presented. The approaches to calibration and traceability to estimate the quantity of H(p)(10) are mentioned. Results obtained at the performance test of dosimetric services in the EU member states and Switzerland sponsored by the European Commission and organised by Eurados in 1999 are reported. Last but not least, quality assurance (QA) procedures introduced in the routine operation to track the whole process of dose evaluation (i.e. plastic QA, acceptance test, test etching bath reproducibility and 'dummy customer' (blind test) for each issuing monitoring period) are presented and discussed.     

Standards, documents of relevance and directives in individual monitoring: is European individual monitoring in compliance with standards?

Individual monitoring services (IMS) in Europe do not comply with the same legal or approval requirements. Anyway, a degree of harmonisation existing in individual monitoring practices in Europe has been achieved mainly thanks to documents as standards or international recommendations, which with different weight represent invaluable vehicles of condensed information transfer. However, implementation of standards is not straightforward and harmonisation is not directly a consequence. Somehow, 'harmony' is needed also in standards: IEC and ISO standards, on performance requirements for dosemeters sometimes have different approaches (i.e. performance criteria). Moreover, standards do not all refer to reliability, and therefore being in compliance with standards does not by itself assure that dose results are reliable. Standards are not the only reference documents for an IMS. EURADOS working group on 'Harmonisation of Individual Monitoring in Europe', who has been active in the years 2001-2004, suggested a classification of publication on individual monitoring, distinguishing between standards and documents of relevance, which can be both national and international. None of the two categories are mandatory unless specified in legislation. The Council Directive 96/29/EURATOM and its implementation in each EU Member States has fostered harmonisation of the approach (i.e. approval of dosimetric services) and of the reference quantities for individual monitoring within EU, but national legislation still allow substantial differences in individual monitoring from country to country.     

Estimating effective dose for a cardiac catheterisation procedure with single or double personal dosemeters

In most countries of the European Union legislation requires individual determination and registration of the dose to radiological workers exposed to ionising radiation to check whether dose limits are exceeded. To assess stochastic risk, ideally effective dose (E) should be known. In practice, personal dose equivalent [H(P)(10)] is used as it can be measured with a personal dosemeter. The dosemeter reading may provide a reasonable assessment of H(P)(10), but it may deviate strongly from E, in particular in radiology procedures for medical diagnosis or intervention when protective clothing like lead-equivalent apron and thyroid collar is worn. In the literature various correction factors and algorithms to convert readings of single or dual dosemeters to an estimate of E can be found. An illustrative example of a cardiac catheterisation procedure, in which dose calculations are made by Monte Carlo simulation of radiation transport, shows that such corrections may still yield considerable overestimation.     

EURADOS trial performance test for photon dosimetry

Within the framework of the EURADOS Action entitled Harmonisation and Dosimetric Quality Assurance in Individual Monitoring for External Radiation, trial performance tests for whole-body and extremity personal dosemeters were carried out. Photon, beta and neutron dosemeters were considered. This paper summarises the results of the whole-body photon dosemeter test. Twenty-six dosimetry services from all EU Member States and Switzerland participated. Twelve different radiation fields were used to simulate various workplace irradiation fields. Dose values from 0.4 mSv to 80 mSv were chosen. From 312 single results, 26 fell outside the limits of the trumpet curve and 32 were outside the range 1/1.5 to 1.5. Most outliers resulted from high energy R-F irradiations without electronic equilibrium. These fields are not routinely encountered by many of the participating dosimetry services. If the results for this field are excluded, most participating services satisfied the evaluation criteria.     

Hp(0.07) photon irradiations at Seibersdorf for the EURADOS extremity dosemeter intercomparison 2009

In August 2009, almost 1000 passive extremity dosemeters were irradiated at the Dosimetry Laboratory Seibersdorf as part of the EURADOS intercomparison IC2009. Forty-four European individual monitoring services participated, with a total of 59 dosimetry systems (46 finger ring, 4 finger tip and 9 wrist/ankle dosemeter systems). Additionally, finger-ring dosemeters from the Dosimetry Service Seibersdorf were irradiated in a non-competitive manner. Dosemeter irradiations on rod and pillar phantoms in four photon-radiation fields complying with the ISO standard 4037 were performed with personal dose equivalent values (H(p)(0.07)) ranging from 4 to 480 mSv. Traceability was established by using an air-kerma-calibrated monitor ionisation chamber together with the X-ray facility as well as a calibrated (137)Cs gamma radiation field with a collimated beam geometry. The ISO-tabulated conversion coefficients from air kerma free-in-air to H(p)(0.07) were applied, resulting in the main contribution to the expanded measurement uncertainties.     

Criticality accident dosimetry systems: an international intercomparison at the SILENE reactor in 2002

In criticality accident dosimetry and more generally for high dose measurements, special techniques are used to measure separately the gamma ray and neutron components of the dose. To improve these techniques and to check their dosimetry systems (physical and/or biological), a total of 60 laboratories from 29 countries (America, Europe, Asia) participated in an international intercomparaison, which took place in France from 9 to 21 June 2002, at the SILENE reactor in Valduc and at a pure gamma source in Fontenay-aux-Roses. This intercomparison was jointly organised by the IRSN and the CEA with the help of the NEA/OCDE and was partly supported by the European Communities. This paper describes the aim of this intercomparison, the techniques used by the participants and the two radiation sources and their characteristics. The experimental arrangements of the dosemeters for the irradiations in free air or on phantoms are given. Then the dosimetric quantities measured and reported by the participants are summarised, analysed and compared with the reference values. The present paper concerns only the physical dosimetry and essentially experiments performed on the SILENE facility. The results obtained with the biological dosimetry are published in two other papers of this issue.     

Harmonisation of individual monitoring in Europe

In 1996, the European Radiation Dosimetry Group (EURADOS) begana coordinated activity to investigate the degree of harmonisationof the dosimetric requirements and procedures for individualmonitoring (IM) in European Union (EU) Member States. The mainreason for this initiative was the publication of the CouncilDirective 96/29 EURATOM of 13 May 1996 ‘laying down basicsafety standards for the protection of the health of workersand the general public against dangers arising from ionisingradiation’. The working group set up to carry out thisaction published their results in the form of three scientificreports in     

Individual monitoring for internal exposure in Europe and the integration of dosimetric data

The European Radiation Dosimetry Group, EURADOS, established a working group consisting of experts whose aim is to assist in the process of harmonisation of individual monitoring as part of the protection of occupationally exposed workers. A catalogue of facilities and internal dosimetric techniques related to individual monitoring in Europe has been completed as a result of this EURADOS study. A questionnaire was sent in 2002 to services requesting information on various topics including type of exposures, techniques used for direct and indirect measurements including calibration and sensitivity data and the methods employed for the assessment of internal doses. Information relating to Quality Control procedures for direct and indirect measurements, Quality Assurance Programmes in the facilities and legal requirements for "approved dosimetric services" were also considered. A total of 71 completed questionnaires were returned by internal dosimetry facilities in 26 countries. This results in an overview of the actual status of the processes used in internal exposure estimation in Europe. In many ways harmonisation is a reality in internal dose assessments, especially when taking into account the measurements of the activity retained or excreted from the body. However, a future study detailing the estimation of minimum detectable activity in the laboratories is highly recommended. Points to focus on in future harmonisation activities are as follows: the process of calculation of doses from measured activity, establishment of guidelines, similar dosimetric tools and application of the same ICRP recommendations. This would lead to a better and more harmonised approach to the estimation of internal exposures in all European facilities.     

Prediction analysis of dose equivalent responses of neutron dosemeters used at a MOX fuel facility

To predict how accurately neutron dosemeters can measure the neutron dose equivalent (rate) in MOX fuel fabrication facility work environments, the dose equivalent responses of neutron dosemeters were calculated by the spectral folding method. The dosemeters selected included two types of personal dosemeter, namely a thermoluminescent albedo neutron dosemeter and an electronic neutron dosemeter, three moderator-based neutron survey meters, and one special instrument called an H(p)(10) monitor. The calculations revealed the energy dependences of the responses expected within the entire range of neutron spectral variations observed in neutron fields at workplaces.     

Esorex 2005

The European Study on Occupational Radiation Exposure called ESOREX was initiated by the European Commission in the 1997 year. The objectives of this European study are: (1) to provide the European Commission and the national competent radiation protection authorities with reliable information on how personal radiation monitoring, reporting and recording of dosimetric results is structured in European countries; (2) to collect reliable and directly comparable data on individual and collective radiation exposure in all occupational sectors where classified workers are employed. Therefore, it is important to receive information about the levels of individual personal radiation doses to workers in the different sectors and the trends and developments of these doses over a period of several years; (3) at present, all 25 European Union Member States, plus Bulgaria, Iceland, Norway, Romania and Switzerland, participate in the study; and (4) the study was executed under the leadership of German BfS in co-operation with Czech SUJB. First results and analyses based on the data collected in the previous studies are presented in the paper 'Frasch, Petrová: Dose trends in occupational radiation exposure in Europe-Results from the ESOREX project'. As a result of a call for tender of the European Commission/DGTREN in the year 2003, the new ESOREX study called 'ESOREX2005' has been initiated. This study will end at the year 2007 and its main objectives are-to finalise the updating of the country-wise reports by describing the current situation in the field of occupational exposure control, evaluation and registration of personal doses of radiation workers and as a second part of the study, to collect dosimetric data for the period 2001-2005.     

Hp(0.07) photon dosemeters for eye lens dosimetry: calibration on a rod vs. a slab phantom

In recent years, several papers dealing with eye lens dosimetry have been published as epidemiological studies are implying that the induction of cataracts occurs even at eye lens doses of less than 500 mGy. For that reason, the necessity to monitor the eye lens may become more important than it was before. However, only few dosemeters for the appropriate quantity H(p)(3) are available. Partial-body dosemeters are usually designed to measure the quantity H(p)(0.07) calibrated on a rod phantom representing a finger while a slab phantom much better represents the head. Therefore, in this work it was investigated whether dosemeters designed for the quantity H(p)(0.07) calibrated on a rod phantom can also be worn on the head (close to the eyes) and still deliver correct results (H(p)(0.07) on a head). For that purpose, different types of partial-body dosemeters from routine use were irradiated at different photon energies on both a rod and a slab phantom. It turned out that their response values are within ±5% independent of the phantom if the quantity value for the respective phantom is used. Thus, partial-body dosemeters designed for the quantity H(p)(0.07) calibrated on a rod phantom may be worn on the head and used to monitor the eye lens dose due to photon radiation via the measurement of H(p)(0.07) on the head.     

Overview of active personal dosemeters for individual monitoring in the European Union

In 2001, the European Radiation Dosimetry Group, EURADOS, started a working group on 'Harmonisation of Individual Monitoring in Europe and the Dissemination of Information on New Techniques in this Field'. Within this group, one of the projects consisted of analysing the status of active personal dosemeters (APDs) in Europe. This paper reviews the regulatory requirements for APDs in 15 EU member states and summarises the main characteristics of commercial and new developments in this field. In particular, it focuses on the comparison of APD performance and standard passive dosimetry systems. Based on this information, an evaluation is initiated to establish why several countries are reluctant to accept APDs for dose records.