UNCERTAINTY EVALUATION IN MEASUREMENT OF THE PERSONAL DOSE EQUIVALENT AT NINE INDIVIDUAL MONITORING SERVICES IN ASIA AND THE PACIFIC REGION.

This paper presents the results of the evaluation of the uncertainty in measurement of the personal dose equivalent, Hp(10), at nine individual monitoring services (IMSs) in Asia and the Pacific region. Different types of passive dosemeters were type-tested according to the International Electrotechnical Commission 62387 requirements. The uncertainty in measurement was calculated using the Guide to the Expression of Uncertainty in Measurement approach. Expanded uncertainties ranged between 24 and 86% (average = 38%) for Hp(10) values around 1 mSv and between 14 and 40% (average = 27%) for doses around the annual dose limit, Hp(10) = 20 mSv. The expanded uncertainties were lower than the 1.5 factor in either direction proposed by the International Commission on Radiological Protection for doses near the relevant dose limits. This indicates an acceptable level of uncertainty for all participating IMSs. Uncertainty evaluation will help the IMSs to acknowledge the accuracy of their measurements.

RESULTS OF THE JOINT IAEA/ARPANSA INTERCOMPARISON EXERCISE ON WHOLE BODY DOSEMETERS FOR PHOTONS IN ASIA AND THE PACIFIC REGION.

An intercomparison exercise (IC) on whole body dosemeters to determine the quantity personal dose equivalent Hp (10) in photon radiation fields was jointly organised and conducted by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency (ARPANSA) for individual monitoring services (IMS) in Asia and the Pacific region. This was arranged to help the IMS in the region to achieve a more accurate dosimetry service and to improve their performance. Twenty-four IMS participated in this IC. Four sets of dosemeters were irradiated using X-ray and gamma radiation qualities at 0° and 20° angle of incidence, respectively. All the IMS provided results that were within the acceptable limits defined by the IAEA. However, only a minority of participants reported confidence intervals that included the reference dose, for each exposure scenario. For few systems, the overall performance could be significantly improved by reviewing calibration procedures.