Decision making for late-phase recovery from nuclear or radiological incidents

Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear, and Explosive (CBRNE) Science and the CBRNE Science Medical Operations Science Support Expert (CMOSSE)

A national need is to prepare for and respond to accidental or intentional disasters categorized as chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, or explosive (CBRNE). These incidents require specific subject-matter expertise, yet have commonalities. We identify 7 core elements comprising CBRNE science that require integration for effective preparedness planning and public health and medical response and recovery. These core elements are (1) basic and clinical sciences, (2) modeling and systems management, (3) planning, (4) response and incident management, (5) recovery and resilience, (6) lessons learned, and (7) continuous improvement. A key feature is the ability of relevant subject matter experts to integrate information into response operations. We propose the CBRNE medical operations science support expert as a professional who (1) understands that CBRNE incidents require an integrated systems approach, (2) understands the key functions and contributions of CBRNE science practitioners, (3) helps direct strategic and tactical CBRNE planning and responses through first-hand experience, and (4) provides advice to senior decision-makers managing response activities. Recognition of both CBRNE science as a distinct competency and the establishment of the CBRNE medical operations science support expert informs the public of the enormous progress made, broadcasts opportunities for new talent, and enhances the sophistication and analytic expertise of senior managers planning for and responding to CBRNE incidents.

NCRP Vision for the Future and Program Area Committee Activities in 2018

The National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements' (NCRP) congressional charter aligns with our vision for the future: to improve radiation protection for the public and workers. This vision is embodied within NCRP's ongoing initiatives: preparedness for nuclear terrorism, increasing the number of radiation professionals critically needed for the nation, providing new guidance for comprehensive radiation protection in the United States, addressing the protection issues surrounding the ever-increasing use of ionizing radiation in medicine (the focus of this year's annual meeting), assessing radiation doses to aircrew related to higher altitude and longer flights, providing guidance on emerging radiation issues such as the radioactive waste from hydraulic fracturing, focusing on difficult issues such as high-level waste management, and providing better estimates of radiation risks at low doses within the framework of the Million Person Study of Low-Dose Radiation Health Effects. Cutting-edge initiatives included a reevaluation of the science behind recommendations for lens of the eye dose, recommendations for emergency responders on dosimetry after a major radiological incident, guidance to the National Aeronautics and Space Administration with regard to possible central nervous system effects from galactic cosmic rays (the high-energy, high-mass ions bounding through space), reevaluating the population exposure to medical radiation, and addressing whether the linear no-threshold model is still the best available for purposes of radiation protection (not for risk assessment). To address these initiatives and goals, NCRP has seven program area committees on biology and epidemiology, operational concerns, emergency response and preparedness, medicine, environmental issues and waste management, dosimetry, and communications. The NCRP vision for the future will continue and increase under the leadership of President-Elect Dr. Kathryn D. Held (Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, and current NCRP executive director and chief science officer). The NCRP quest to improve radiation protection for the public is hindered only by limited resources, both human capital and financial.

A restatement of the natural science evidence base concerning the health effects of low-level ionizing radiation

Exposure to ionizing radiation is ubiquitous, and it is well established that moderate and high doses cause ill-health and can be lethal. The health effects of low doses or low dose-rates of ionizing radiation are not so clear. This paper describes a project which sets out to summarize, as a restatement, the natural science evidence base concerning the human health effects of exposure to low-level ionizing radiation. A novel feature, compared to other reviews, is that a series of statements are listed and categorized according to the nature and strength of the evidence that underpins them. The purpose of this restatement is to provide a concise entrée into this vibrant field, pointing the interested reader deeper into the literature when more detail is needed. It is not our purpose to reach conclusions on whether the legal limits on radiation exposures are too high, too low or just right. Our aim is to provide an introduction so that non-specialist individuals in this area (be they policy-makers, disputers of policy, health professionals or students) have a straightforward place to start. The summary restatement of the evidence and an extensively annotated bibliography are provided as appendices in the electronic supplementary material.