ICRU REPORT 12

Certification
of Standardized
Radioactive
Sources

Issued September 15, 1968

INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON RADIATION

UNITS AND MEASUREMENTS
4201 CONNECTICUT AVENUE, N.W.
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20008
U.S.A.

ICRU 2015 -- All rights reserved.

AAPM Member Copy
Single use only, copying and networking prohibited.
Copyright © International Commission on
Radiation Units and Measurements 1968

Library of Congress Catalog Card Number 68-58199

Copies of this report can be purchased for U.S. $1.00 each from
ICRU Publications
P.O. Box 4869
Washington, D.C. 20008
U.S.A.

(For detailed information on the availability of this and other ICRU Reports
see page 9)

ICRU 2015 -- All rights reserved.

AAPM Member Copy
Single use only, copying and networking prohibited.
 Contents

Preface.. . . . .. .. . .. .. . . ... . . . .. . ..... . . . . . .... . . . ... ...... . .. .. v

I. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
2. Description of Purity of Radioactive Material . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
3. Statement of Accuracy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
3.1 P recision ... ..................................... 2
3.2 Statement of Precision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
3.3 Systematic Errors.. ..... ... . . . .. . ... ... . .. .. . . . . .. .... 2
3.4 Overall Uncertainty ....... . . . ... .. .. . .... . .... . .. . . . .. 3
4. Certificat ion of Standardized Radioactive Sources in Solution
or in Gaseous Forms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4.1 Description of Solution. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4.2 Description of Gaseous Source. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4.3 Reference T ime and Date. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4.4 Measurement Method. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4.5 Measurement Result ...... .. . . . . . . .. . . . . . .. . . ... . ...... 4
4.6 Assessment of Radioactive Impurities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4.7 Decay-Scheme Assumptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4.8 Assessment of Accuracy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4.9 Additional Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.10 Form of Certificate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.11 Dispatch of Certificate. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
5. Certification of Solid Sources. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Appendix I. Summary of Information Required In Certification
of Standardized Radioactive Sources in Solution
Form . ... .. . . . ... . .. .... .. . . . .. . .. .. . ... .. . . . . ... . 8
ICRU Reports . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

iii

ICRU 2015 -- All rights reserved.

AAPM Member Copy
Single use only, copying and networking prohibited.
 Preface
Scope of ICRU Activities
The International Commission on Radiation Units
and Measurements (ICRU), since its inception in
1925, has had as its principal objective the development
of internationally acceptable recommendations re-
garding:
(1) Quantities and units of radiation and radio-
activity,
(2) Procedures suitable for the measurement and
application of these quantities in clinical radiology and
radio biology,
(3) Physical data needed in the application of these
procedures, the use of which tends to assure unifor:rrllty
in reporting.
The Com:rrllssion also considers and makes recom-
mendations in the field of radiation protection. In this
connection, its work is carried out in close cooperation
with the International Com:rrllssion on Radiological
Protection (ICRP) .
Policy
The ICRU endeavors to collect and evaluate the
latest data and information pertinent to the problems
of radiation measurement and dosimetry and to rec-
ommend the most acceptable values for current use.
The Commission's recommendations are kept under
continual review in order to keep abreast of the rapidly
expanding uses of radiation.
The ICRU feels it is the responsibility of national
organizations to introduce their own detailed technical
procedures for the development and maintenance of
standards. However, it urges that all countries adhere
as closely as possible to the internationally recom-
mended basic concepts of radiation quantities and
units.
The Commission feels its responsibility lies in devel-
oping a system of quantities and units having the
widest possible range of applicability. Situations may
arise from time to time when an expedient solution of a
current problem may seem advisable. Generally speak-
ing, however, the Commission feels that action based
on expediency is inadvisable from a long-term view-
v
point; it endeavors to base its decisions on the long-
range advantages to be expected.
The ICRU invites and welcomes constructive com-
ments and suggestions regarding its recommendations
and reports. These may be transmitted to the Chair-
man.
Current Program
In 1962 the Commission laid the basis for the devel-
opment of the ICRU program over the next several
years. At that time it defined three broad areas of
concern to the Commission:
I. The Measurement of Radioactivity
II. The Measurement of Radiation
III. Problems of Joint Interest to the ICRU and the Interna-
tional Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP)
The Com:rrllssion divided the e three areas into nine
subareas with which it expected to be primarily con-
cerned during the next decade. The division of work
agreed upon is as follows:
I. Radioactivity
A. Fundamental Physical Parameters and Measure-
ment Techniques
B. Medical and Biological Applications
II. Radiation
A. Fundamental Physical Parameters
B. X Rays, Gamma Rays and Electrons
C. Heavy Particles
D. Medical and Biological Applications (Therapy)
E. Medical and Biological Applications (Diagnosis)
F. Neutron Fluence and Kerma
III. Problems of Joint Interest to the ICRU and the ICRP
A. Radiation Protection Instrumentation and its Ap-
plication
The Com:rrllssion established a separate planning
board to guide ICRU activities in each of the subareas.
The planning boards after exa:rrllning the needs of
their respective technical areas with some care recom-
mended, and the Commission subsequently approved,
the constitution of task groups to initiate the prepa-
ration of reports. The substructure which resulted
from these actions is given below.
ICRU 2015 -- All rights reserved.
AAPM Member Copy
Single use only, copying and networking prohibited.
vi Preface
Planning Board I.A. Radioactivity-Fundamental Physi-
cal Parameters and Measurement
Techniques
Task Group 1. Measurement of Low-Level Radio-
activity
Task Group 2. Specification of Accuracy in Cer-
tificates of Activity of Sources for
Calibration Purposes
Task Group 3. Specification of High Activity
Gamma-Ray Sources (Joint with
P.B. II.B)
Planning Board I.B. Radioactivity-Medical and Bio-
logical Applications
Task Group 1. In Vivo Measurements of Radio-
activity
Task Group 2. Scanning
Task Group 3. Tracer Kinetics
Task Group 4. Methods of Assessment of Dose in
Tracer Investigations
Planning Board II .A. Radiation-Fundamental Physical
Parameters
Planning Board II.B. Radiation-X Rays, Gamma Rays
and Electrons
Task Group 1. Radiation Dosimetry; X Rays from 5
to 150 kV
Task Group 2. Radiation Dosimetry; X and Gamma
Rays from 0.6 to 100 MV
Task Group 3. Electron Beam Dosimetry
Planning Board II.C. Radiation-Heavy Particles
Task Group 1. Dose As a Function of LET
Task Group 2. High Energy and Space Radiation
Dosimetry
Planning Board II.D. Radiation-Medical and Biological
Applications (Therapy)
Task Group 1. Measurement of Absorbed Dose at a
Point in a Standard Phantom (Ab-
sorbed Dose Determination)
Task Group 2. Methods of Arriving at the Absorbed
Dose at any Point in a Patient (In
Vivo Dosimetry)
Task Group 3. Methods of Compensating for Body
Shape and Inhomogeneity and of
Beam Modification for Special Pur-
poses (Beam Modification)
Task Group 4. Statement of the Dose Achieved
(Dosage Specification)
Planning Board II.E. Radiation-Medical and Biological
Applications (Diagnosis)
Task Group 1. Photographic Materials and Screens
Task Group 2. Image Intensifier Radiography
Task Group 3. TV Systems
Planning Board II.F. Radiation-Neutron Fluence and
Kerma
Task Group 1. Neutron Fluence, Energy Fluence,
Neutron Spectra and Kerma
Planning Board III.A. Radiation Protection Instrumentation
and its Application
Task Group 1. Radiation Protection Instrumenta-
tion Handbook-Part I
Task Group 2. Neutron Instrumentation and its
Application to Radiation Protection
Because the Commission's basic recommendations
on radiation quantities and units relate to the work of
all of the planning boards, the Commission decided to
establish a separate committee with membership drawn
largely from the Commission itself to initiate the
revision of ICRU Report lOa, Radiation Quantities and
Units. Thus, the Committee on Fundamental Quantities
and Units was added to the above substructure.
In 1962 the Commission decided to abandon its past
practice of holding a meeting together with all of its
sub-units every three years. Instead, it was decided
that the Commission would receive reports from the
subgroups at the time of their completion rather than
at fixed deadlines. Meetings of the Commission and of
the subgroups are held as needed.
The adoption of the new substructure and mode of
operation was intended to alleviate some of the prob-
lems associated with the expanded program required
in recent years. In the past, the Commission's attempt
to administer and review the work of each of the
working groups imposed a very considerable burden
on the Commission itself. The need to concern itself
with each detail, which was inherent in such a scheme
of operation, when coupled with the procedure of
completing all reports at one time, subjected the Com-
mission members to an intolerable work load if rigorous
standards were to be maintained. The new substructure
and mode of operation is now beginning to produce
results in the form of reports drafted by the task groups
and reviewed by the planning boards. Present evidence
indicates that the substructure and mode of operation,
while not perfect, has to a substantial extent succeeded
in alleviating the problems previously experienced.
ICRU Reports
In 1962 the ICRU, in recognition of the fact that its
triennial reports were becoming too extensive and in
some cases too specialized to justify single-volume
publication, initiated the publication of a series of
reports, each dealing with a limited range of topics.
This series was initiated with the publication of six
reports:
ICRU Report lOa, Radialion Quantities and Units
ICRU Report lOb, Physical Aspects of Radialion
ICRU Report lOc, Radioactivity
ICRU Report lOd, Clinical Dosimetry
ICRU Report lOe, Radiolriological Dosimetry
ICRU Report lOf, Methods of Evaluating Radiological Equip-
ment and M alerials
These reports were published, as had been many of the
previous reports of the Commission, by the United
States Government Printing Office as Handbooks of
the National Bureau of Standards.
ICRU 2015 -- All rights reserved.
AAPM Member Copy
Single use only, copying and networking prohibited.

In 1967 the Commission determined that in the
future the recommendations formulated by the ICRU
would be published by the Commission itself. This is
the second report to be published under this new
policy. With the exception of ICRU Report lOa, which
was superseded by ICRU Report 11, the other reports
of the "10" series have continuing validity and, since
none of the reports now in preparation are designed to
specifically supersede them, will remain available until
the material is essentially obsolete. All future reports
of the Commission, however, will be published under
the ICRU's own auspices. Information about the
availability of ICRU Reports is given on page 9.
ICRU Relationships With Other Organizations
One of the features of ICRU activity during the
last few years has been the development of relationships
with other organizations interested in the problems of
radiation quantities, units, and measurements. In
addition to its close relationship with the International
Commission on Radiological Protection and its financial
relationships with the International Society of Radi-
ology, the World Health Organization, and the Inter-
national Atomic Energy Agency, the ICRU has also
developed relationships of varying intensity with
several other organizations. Since 1955, the ICRU has
had an official relationship with the World Health
Organization (WHO) whereby the ICRU is looked to
for primary guidance in matters of radiation units
and measurements, and in turn, the WHO assists in
the worldwide dissemination of the Commission's
recommendations. In 1960 the ICRU entered into
consultative status with the International Atomic
Energy Agency. The Commission has a formal relation-
ship with the United Nations Scientific Committee on
the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR), whereby
ICRU observers are invited to attend UNSCEAR
meetings. The Commission and the International
Standards Organization (ISO) informally exchange
notifications of meetings and the ICRU is formally
designated for liaison with two of the ISO Technical
Committees. The ICRU also corresponds and exchanges
final reports with the following organizations:
Bureau International des Poids et Mesures
Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences
Food and Agriculture Organization
International Council of Scientific Unions
International Electrotechnical Commission
International Labor Organization
International Union of Pure & Applied Physics
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organiza-
tion
Relations with these other international bodies do
Preface • vii
not affect the basic affiliation of the ICRU with the
International Society of Radiology. The Commission
has found its relationship with all of these organizations
fruitful and of substantial benefit to the ICRU program.
Operating Funds
Throughout most of its existence, the ICRU has
operated essentially on a voluntary basis, with the
travel and operating costs being borne by the parent
organizations of the participants. (Only token a.:isist-
ance was originally available from the International
Society of Radiology.) Recognizing the impracticability
of continuing this mode of operation on an indefinite
basis, operating funds were sought from various so~ces
in addition to those supplied by the Internat10nal
Society of Radiology.
Prior to 1959, the principal financial assistance to
the ICRU had been provided by the Rockefeller
Foundation which supplied some $11,000 to make
possible various meetings. In 1959 the International
Society of Radiology increased its contribution to the
Commission providing $3,000 for the period 1959-
1962. For the period 1962-1965 this was again increased,
the Society providing $5,000. In 1960 the Rockefeller
Foundation supplied an additional sum of some $4,000
making possible a meeting of the Quantity and Units
Committee in 1960.
In 1960 and 1961 the World Health Organization
made available the sum of $3,000 each year. This was
increased to $4,000 in 1962 and this amount has been
made available annually since then. It is expected that
this sum will be allocated annually, at least for the
next several years.
In connection with the Commission's Joint Studies
with the ICRP, the United Nations allocated the sum
of $10,000 for the joint use of the two Commissions.
The most substantial contribution to the work of
the ICRU has come from the Ford Foundation. In
December 1960, the Ford Foundation made available
to the Commission the sum of $37,000 per year for a
period of five years. This grant was to provide for such
items as travel expenses to meetings, for secretarial
services and other operating expenses. In 1965 the
Foundation agreed to a time extension of this grant
making available for the period 1966-1970 the unused
portion of the original grant. To a large extent, it is
because of this grant that the Commission has been
able to move forward actively with its program.
In 1963 International Atomic Energy Agency al-
located the sum of $6,000 per year for use by the ICRU.
This was increased to $9,000 in 1967. It is expected
that this sum will be allocated annually at least for
the next several years.
From 1934 through 1964 valuable indirect contri-
ICRU 2015 -- All rights reserved.
AAPM Member Copy
Single use only, copying and networking prohibited.
viii · Pre fac e

butions were made by the U. . ational Bureau of K. LIDEN

Standard where the Secretariat resided. The Bureau R.H . MORGAN

provided substantial secretarial services, publication V. A. PETROV (1965)

services and travel costs in the amount of several
thousands of dollars.
The Commission wishes to express its deep apprecia-
tion to all of these and other organizations that have
contributed so importantly to its work.
H. H. Rossr
Com position of ICRU Subgroups Responsible for
th e Initial Drafting of t his R eport

Serving on the Task Group on Specification of

Composition o f the ICRU Accuracy in Certificates of Activity of Sources for
Calibration Purposes during the preparation of this
It is of interest to note that the membership of the report were :
Commission and its subgroups totals 140 persons S. B. GARFINKEL, Chairman
drawn from 16 countries. This gives some indication of G. R. NEWBERY
the extent to which the ICRU has achieved interna-
tional breadth of membership within its basic selection Serving on the Planning Board on Radioactivity-
requirement of high technical competence of individual Fundamental Physical Parameters and Measurement
participants. Techniques during that time were:
The membership of the Commission during the F. W . SPIERS, Chairman
preparation of this report was as follows: H. HouTERMANS
w. B. MANN
LAuRISTON S. TAYLOR, Chairman J. K. MIETTINEN
M. TUBIANA, Vice Chairman
H . 0. WYCKOFF, Secretary K. Lrn:EN serves as the Commission Sponsor for the
A . ALLISY Planning Board.
J . W. BoAG (1965-1966) The Commission wishes to express its appreciation
R. H . CHAMBERLAIN
to the individuals involved in the preparation of this
F. P . COWAN
report for the time and effort they devoted to this
F. ELLIS (1965)
J. F. FOWLER task.
H. FRA.NZ (1965) LAURISTON s. TAYLOR

F. GAUWERKY Chairman, ICRU

J. R. GREENING Washington, D.C.
H. E. JOHNS (1965-1966) June 15, 1968

ICRU 2015 -- All rights reserved.

AAPM Member Copy
Single use only, copying and networking prohibited.
 Certification of Standardized
Radioactive Sources
1. Introduction
When a standardized radioactive source is issued,
there is clearly a need to provide information about
the nature of the source and the accuracy with which
the activity of the source is stated . Some consideration
was given to this problem by the International Com-
mission on Radiation Units and Measurements in their
Report lOc (1962) on Radioactivity [1] .1 In a section
on international comparisons, reference was made to
the discrepancies which can occur between laboratories
when stating the accuracy and precision of the measure-
ment of such standards and when describing the purity
of materials used for preparation of standardized
radioactive sources. The report emphasized the impor-
tance of presenting the results by different laboratories
in a uniform manner so that the corrections applied to
the various measurements and the derivation of quoted
errors were clearly stated. Among factors which could
affect the reliability of a source as a standard, the
report discussed such characteristics as the radionu-
clidic purity, half-life, decay scheme, chemical purity
and stability.
ICRU Report lOc discussed the statement of activity
of a standard source mainly in relation to international
comparisons; similar desiderata, however, apply to
the certification of any source issued as a standard.
This problem has been considered in some detail by
several authors in recent publications [2, 3, 4, 5] . The
consensus of opinion given by these authors is that
there are considerable variations in the form of the
data provided by suppliers of standardized radioactive
source and that agreement as to the information
2. Description of Purity of Radioactive M aterial
The nature of the radioactive material should be
1 Figures in brackets indicate the literature references
listed on page 7.
required in any certificate specifying a standard source
is highly desirable. In some of the papers, actual pro-
posals are made for the form and contents of a certifi-
cate. It is to the credit of some suppliers of standardized
radioactive sources that certificates embodying the
ideas discussed in these references are already being
provided.
This report endeavors to fulfill the intention expressed
in ICRU Report lOc that the problems of certification
of standardized radioactive sources should receive
further study; it attempts to clarify the terms men-
tioned in Section 3.3 of that publication and it em-
phasizes and augments some of the more important
aspects of the recent publications referred to above.
The report gives, finally, a comprehensive list of the
information which should be provided with a stan-
dardized source and which would characterize the
quality of the source as a standard. The report is in-
tended primarily as a guide for suppliers of standardized
radioactive sources but it is hoped that users will also
benefit from it.
It is not reasonable to expect suppliers of ordinary
grade radiochemicals to provide statements of measure-
ment accuracy or of impurity analyses with every
delivery of such materials. It is, however, recommended
that suppliers of these materials should publish specifi-
cations which quote the levels of accuracy and purity,
etc., which their materials will normally attain. In
the case of long-lived materials these specifications
may be replaced by data sheets reporting analyses of
the actual batches of material offered for sale.
stated unambiguously, and to this end certain terms
must be defined. It is recommended that the following
terms be used to describe the purity of a radioactive
substance:
ICRU 2015 -- All rights reserved.
AAPM Member Copy
Single use only, copying and networking prohibited.
2 3 . Statement o f Accuracy
2.1 "Radionuclidic purity"- the proportion of the
total activity which is the activity of the st ated radio-
nuclide.
3.
It is essential to specify exactly what is meant by
the statement of accmacy which is supplied with a
standard of activity. The as essment of accuracy is
complicated because both random and systematic
errors are involved. This section considers the separate
components of error and the problem entailed in com-
birung them to give an estimate of the overall uncer-
tainty in the stated activity.
3 .1 Precision
Precision is a measure of the uncertainty in the
calibration result that is attributable to random varia-
tions which can be treated statistically.
A typical calibration will consist of a number (n) of
individual measurements, each with a result (xi),
which are combined to give a mean result (x). If the
true value of the quantity being determined is X,
and assuming that there are no systematic calibration
errors, then a n becomes very large, x approaches X .
A satisfactory criterion of precision must relate the
mean result (x) for a practicable value of n to the true
value (X). One method of achieving this is to calculate
the standard error2 (Sm) of the mean result. Then the
probability of the mean result differing from the true
value by a stated amount can be calculated in terms
of Sm and n by the use of the Student " t " statistic
[6], provided t hat the individual measurements can be
expected to follow a normal distribution.
2 The standard error (Sm), which is also referred to as the
" standard deviation of the mean", is defined as:
't, (x; - x)•]112
sm -- [ !.:
·- ~l=------
n(n - 1)
The standard error (Sm) should not be confused wi th the esti-
mated standard deviation (S;), which is also referred to as the
"standard deviation of an individ ual measurement" and is
defined as:
12
't, (x; _ :i;)2] '
S,· = [ !..:
• -~''------
n - 1 = S,,.n1/2
It should be noted that as n -> oo and x -> X, Sm -> 0 and
S;-> u, where u is the true standard deviation.
2.2 "Radjochemical purity"- the proportion of the
total activity which is present in the stated chemical
form.
Sta temen t of Accuracy
The values of S 111 and n, therefore, serve as a satis-
factory index of precision and it is recommended that
precision be described in terms of the standard error
(Sm) and the number (n) of individual measmements
contributing to the mean result (x).
3.2 Statement of P t·ecision
The precision of a result is frequently described in
terms of the confidence interval which has a stated
probabilit y of including the true value. These confidence
intervals are commonly expressed in terms of x ± Sm ,
x ± 2Sm , x ± 3Sm etc., and the corresponding con-
fidence levels are shown in T able 1 for various values of
n. It should be noted that the confidence levels of 68.3 %,
95.5 % etc. apply only to the confidence intervals
x ± Sm , x ± 2Sm etc. when the value of n is very large
and t he distribution is normal.
Conversely, in order to determine the confidence
interval which corresponds to a given confidence level
and n, Table 2 should be used. This table gives t he
factor t by which the computed Sm must be multiplied
in order to derive the desired confidence interval.
Instead of representing the uncertainty attributable
to statistical variations by ±lSm , ±2Sm, or ±3Sm
(and noting n), it is recommended that t his uncertainty
be stated on a more uniform basis, i.e., t he confidence
interval associated with a stated confidence level3 (e.g.,
if n = 5, the confidence ljmits for the 95 % confidence
level would be ±2.776 Sm) . It is important to test
experimentally that for large n, for t he equipment
being used, the dat a are compatible with a normal
distribution.
3.3 Systematic EITors
Measurement results will usually be corrected for
any known errors, but t his process will leave residual
s The Australian National Standards Commission is the
only ational Organization which is known to have specified
a confidence level for its standards, a nd has chosen 99% for all
standards. (Sub-regulation 9 of regulation 80 of the weights
and measures (national standards) regulations- 15th July
1965.)
ICRU 2015 -- All rights reserved.
AAPM Member Copy
Single use only, copying and networking prohibited.
 3.4 Overall Uncertainty 3
uncertainties which do not behave tatistically and TABLE I- Probability that computed confidence intervals will
which cannot be assessed entirely objectively. In most bracket the trne value
circumstances it is nevertheless possible to estimate
the maximum values of such residual uncertainties
I Probability thatBracket
the Computed Confidence Intervals will
True Value X [7]
Confidence
Interval
and these should be referred to as the maximum un-
certainty due to assessable systematic errors. "=5 10 20 00

It is debatable how these residual uncertainties should x ± S.,, 0.626 0.657 0.670 0.683
be combined, but in the absence of any other currently x ± 2 Sm 0.884 0.923 0.940 0.955
accepted procedure it is suggested that the positive x ± 3 Sm 0.960 0.985 0.993 0.997
and negative uncertainties should be arithmetically
summed separately, to provide the limits ( +o, -o') TABLE 2- Stitdent t factor
of maximum uncertainty due to assessable systematic
Values of t for Confidence Levels
error. Other systematic errors may be suspected with- n - 1
out, however, being susceptible to evaluation. 903 95 % 99%

1 6.314 12 .706 63.657

3.4 Overall Un certainty 2 2.920 4.303 9.925
3 2.353 3.182 5.841
4 2.132 2.776 4.604
The overall uncertainty, often simply called the 5 2.015 2.571 4.032
accuracy, is an estimate of the possible divergence of 6 1. 943 2.447 3.707
the quoted result from the true value. It must allow 7 1.895 2.365 3.499
for the uncertainty attributable to tatistical variations 8 1.860 2.306 3.355
9 1.833 2.262 3.250
and for the total limits of uncertainty due to assessable 10 1.812 2.228 3.169
systematic error. 15 1. 753 2.131 2.947
The assessment of overall uncertainty raises the 20 1. 725 2.086 2.845
controversial problem of combining random and 30 1.697 2.042 2.750
systematic errors. 60 1. 671 2.000 2.660
120 1.658 1. 980 2.617
It is recommended that the overall uncertainty be 1. 645 1. 960
00 2.576
expressed, whenever possible, as positive and negative
limits and that these limits be taken as the arithmetic
sum of the uncertainties due to random and assessable combine the errors of the standard source with those of
sy 'tematic errors, i.e., his own measurements. One possibility is that the limits
+(tSm + o) (using t factor from Table 2) of overall uncer tainty of a standardized radioactive
source should be treated as possible systematic errors
and by the user.
-(tSm + o') New standards may be prepared by comparison with
an existing standard. When this is done, the standard
If it is necessary for a single figure to be used to express error of the comparison should be multiplied by the
overall uncertainty, it is recommended that the fol- appropriate t factor in order to give, for the chosen
lowing value be used: confidence level, the value of the uncertainty attrib-
utable to statistical fluctuations. Following the above
tSm + (°: 0
') proposal, the limits of overall uncertainty of the new
standard could then be obtained by adding linearly
In all cases the value used for the uncertainty attrib- (a) the statistical uncertainty of the comparison, (b)
utable to statistical fluctuations should be based on a the uncertainty due to the assessable systematic error
stated confidence level. of the comparison and (c) the limits of overall uncer-
There is no agreed method by which the user should tainty of the existing standard.

ICRU 2015 -- All rights reserved.

AAPM Member Copy
Single use only, copying and networking prohibited.
4 4. Sources in Solution or in Gaseous Form
4. Certification of Standa1·dized Radioactive Sources in Solution
or in Gaseous Form
Ideally a certificate for a standardized solution or a
gas sample should provide the information listed and
described below. In practice, however, the more infor-
mation a certificate contains, the more expensive will
be the standard. The best standards should neverthele s
be provided with the information listed below. Le
accurate standards, which may be expected to be less
expensive, but perhaps more readily available, may
reasonably be supported with less information.
4.1 Description of Solution4
4.1.1 Principal Radionuclide. To avoid ambiguity the
radionuclide for which a standard is being supplied
should be clearly stated a the principal radionuclide.
(This may be a parent or daughter, and the activity of
the principal radionuclide may not necessarily be the
large t activity present.)
4.1.2 Mass, or volume and density of the solution at
a given temperatme.
4.1.3 Chemical composition, including carrier, nor-
mality of t he solution and presence of any bacteriostatic
agent (e.g., 0.1 % Formalin). The recommended com-
position of the inactive olution which should be used
for further dilutions should also be stated.
4.1.4 Supplier's identification number of the source.
4.1.5 The user should be warned if the solution is
liable to be unstable after opening the ampoule, in
sub equent dilution procedures (e.g. prone to deposition
of activity on glassware), or when evaporated to dryness
(e.g., volatilization of some chemical compound).
4.2 Description of Gaseous Source
4.2.l Principal Radionuclide. To avoid ambiguity the
radionuclide for which a standard is being supplied
should be clearly stated as the principal radionuclide.
(This may be a parent or daughter, and the activity of
the principal radionuclide may not necessarily be the
largest activity present.)
4.2.2 Approximate volume and pressme of the ga at
a given temperature.
4.2.3 Chemical composition.
4.2.4 Supplier's identification number of the source.
4 This information should also accompany the material if
the certificate is sent separately.
4.2.5 Inasmuch as the source is usually in a break-
seal glass ampoule which generally must be fused onto
the user's gas-counting system, the type of glass used
for the ampoule should be stated.
4.3 Reference Time and Date
4.3.1 The reference time and date for t he quoted
value of activity should be stated unambiguously using
the stated local standard time on a 24 hour clock;
and Universal Time (which is t he same as Greenwich
Mean Time).
4.3.2 fonths should be stated by name to avoid
misunderstandings that can arise from the u e of ab-
breviations or digits (e.g., in particular, a date which
should be written a 1st October 1966 is often written
as 10/ 1/ 66 in t he U.S .A., but as 1/ 10/ 66 in most other
countries).
4.4 Measurement Method
4.4.1 The method of measurement should be indi -
cated and references given to relevant publications.
4.4.2 Distinction should be made between direct
(sometimes referred to as absolute) methods (i.e.,
not depending on other standardized radioactive
sources) and comparative methods. The latter may be
directly comparative (i.e., against a long-lived ab-
solutely standardized source) or indirectly comparative
(i.e., compared indirectly with one or more short-lived
absolutely standardized ources by means of an in-
strun1ent with good long-term stability) . Lack of
reproducibility in the experimental methods associated
with the short-lived source standardizations should be
treated as a component of the systematic error.
4.5 Measurement Result
4.5.1 The mean measurement result at the reference
time should be quoted as the activity of the principal
radionuclide per gram of the solution or per mole in
the case of a gas standard. (The terms "radioactive
concentration" and " pecifi.c activity" should not be
used because they have other possible meanings.)
4.5.2 If a parent and one or more daughters are
ICRU 2015 -- All rights reserved.
AAPM Member Copy
Single use only, copying and networking prohibited.

present, the activity of each radionuclide should be
quoted at the reference time.
4.5.3 The ICRU has defined activity [1] of a, radio-
nuclide as the number of nuclear transformations per
time interval and its unit is the curie (3.7 X 1010 s-1).
For standards of activity in solution or in gaseous
form, it is recommended that each radionuclide should
be specified on the certificate in terms of curies (or a
submultiple) per gram of solution or per mole of gas.
4.6 Assessment of Radioactive Impurities
Radioactive impurities have been shown to be a
very important cause of loss of accuracy in the use of
standardized radioactive sources, and it is imperative
that high quality standards should be accompanied
by an analysis of unwanted radionuclides present in
the solution at the reference time.
In preparing the certificate for a standardized radio-
active source, the following principles should be ob-
served in respect of impurities:
4.6.1 Known radionuclidic impurities should be
quoted as a percentage of the activity of the principal
radionuclide at the reference time.
4.6.2 For radionuclidic impurities which are sus-
pected but not detected, an upper limit expressed as
in 4.6.1 should be given.
4.6.3 It is most important that the wording of the
certificate should be arranged so that there is no am-
biguity as to whether the effect of each known or sus-
pected impurity has or has not been allowed for in
deriving the stated activity of the principal radio-
nuclide.
4 .6.4 Where possible the methods of analysis used to
determine the impurities should be stated. (Such
methods may include half-life determination, radio-
chemical separation, nuclear spectroscopy, etc.)
4 .6.5 The method of production of the principal
radionuclide should be stated. This should include any
chemical separation procedure, as well as the irradiation
details (e.g., relevant nuclear reaction, particle or
photon energy, irradiation time, flux density or fluence
rate, and date). This information is particularly im-
portant if for any reason the impurity analysis is not
available.
4 .6.6 The presence of known or suspected radio-
active impurities may contribute to the uncertainty
associated with quoted activity of the principal radio-
nuclide. Their effect must therefore be considered m
the assessment of accuracy. (Section 4.8.)
4 .8 Assessment of Accuracy • 5
4.7 Decay-scheme Assu m ptions
4.7 .1 If the standardization depends critically upon
assumed nuclear data, e.g., branching ratios, conversion
coefficients, fluorescence yields, etc., the assumptions
which have been made should be stated.
4. 7 .2 Under those circumstances, an assessment
should be made of the effect on the measurement result
of making changes in the assumptions quoted in 4.7.1.
4.7 .3 The certificate should make it clear whether or
not the uncertainty in the result, due to uncertainty in
the decay-scheme assumptions, has or has not been
included in the estimated systematic errors.
4.7 .4 Details of the decay scheme which are not
relevant to the standardization should not be given in
this section. (See Section 4.9).
4.8 Assessment of Accuracy
4.8.1 Precision. The value of the standard error
(Sm) and the number of individual measurements (n)
contributing to the mean result, should be stated.
4.8.2 Maximum Uncertainty Attributable to Statistical
Variations. The confidence limits, ±tSm, should be
quoted together with the corresponding confidence
level.
4 .8.3 Systematic Errors. Individual estimated system-
atic errors should be tabulated on the certii1cate
and then summed to provide maximum limits of positive
and negative total assessable syi;;tematic errors ( +o,
-o').
4.8.4 Overall Uncertainty. The limits of overall un-
certainty + (tSm + o) and - (tSm + o') should be
stated.
4.8.5 Accuracy as a Function of Time. Accuracy will
normally be assessed at the quoted reference time and
date. Uncertainties in the value of the half-life, in the
effect of impurities, and in the effect of growth or decay
of any daughter radionuclide, will cause the overall
uncertainty to change (usually to increase) progres-
sively after the reference time. The effect of the im-
purities will depend on the user's method of measure-
ment, so that it is usually not possible for the supplier
to assess accuracy as a function of time in a general
way that is suitable for all users.
Guidance on this subject should, however, be given
to the user to allow him to reassess accuracy after the
reference time. In particular, the uncertainty in the
recommended value of the half-life of the principal
radionuclide should be stated.
ICRU 2015 -- All rights reserved.
AAPM Member Copy
Single use only, copying and networking prohibited.
6 5. Certification of Solid Sources
The supplier may wish to indicate a period of time
during which the overall uncertainty associated with
the activity of the principal radionuclide will not
become significantly worse. To do this it may be neces-
sary, however, to increase the estimate of systematic
error arising from the effect of impurities, and the
quoted limits of overall uncertainty must therefore
also be increased. For maximum accuracy, samples of
solutions or gases to be standardized should be dis-
tributed before the reference time so that the user and
the standardizing laboratory can make measurements
simultaneously and both before and after the reference
time. Such sources should be accompanied by a pre-
liminary measurement report providing a description
of the sources, the approximate activity and the pro-
posed reference time and date.
4.9 Additional Information
Any further information which is not relevant to
the certification of the standard, but may be very
helpful to the user in obtaining the most accurate
results, should accompany the standard. Such infor-
mation, for example, may consist of:
4.9.l Specific items of nuclear data known to be
relevant to the use of the standard (e.g., half-life,
photons per 100 nuclear transformations, etc.), together
with an assessment, if possible, of the accuracy to
which they are known.
4.9.2 The full decay scheme of the principal radio-
nuclide.
4.9.3 References to publications containing nuclear
data. (e.g., RADIOACTIVE ATOMS, Auger Electron,
Alpha-, Beta-, Gamma- and X-Ray Data for Dose Cal-
culations [8], Radiochemical Manual [9]).
5. Certification of Solid Sources
5.1 A solid source will be considered as stand-
ardized, only if the magnitude of internal attenuation
and scattering is known, for example, in the case of
sources of gamma-ray emitting radionuclides of small
physical dimensions. Solid sources are therefore often
calibrated in terms of the radiation emerging from the
source.
5.2 Certificates for solid sources should state clearly
whether the source specification is in terms of (1)
activity, (2) exposure rate at a specified distance and
in a stated orientation, or of both. Radioactive sources
4.9.4 Extract from the AS/ RC Users Guide [10)
relevant to that radionuclide and references to other
relevant publications.
4.9.5 Recommended procedures (e.g., method for
opening ampoule, suggested diluent, etc.)
4.10 Form of Certifica te
The detailed design of a certificate must usually
conform to an institutional or commercial house style,
and there appears to be no great advantage in having a
single internationally agreed upon style of certificate.
For this reason a specimen certificate is not included
in this report and it is recommended that each supplier
should design an appropriate certificate incorporating,
in the suggested sequence, the information referred to
in the sections 4.1 to 4.9 and summarized in Appendix
I. It is strongly recommended, however, that the quoted
measurement result should be given a prominent posi-
tion in the certificate.
4.11 Disp atch of Certificate
Certificates should be dispatched as soon as possible
after the reference date. The user should appreciate,
however, that the supplier necessarily takes some time
to complete and check his measurements, and then to
prepare and dispatch the certificates.
Certificates for standardized radioactive sources
supplied after the reference date should, if possible, be
dispatched at the same time as the standard. It is
desirable to pack a copy of the certificate with the
standard in addition to mailing the certificate itself
separately.
are sometimes also specified in terms of the rate of
emergence of charged particles or photons. I n such
cases, emission of secondary charged particles or
photons may introduce complications, and the emergent
radiation may not be isotropic. Therefore, details of
the energy distribution of the emergent radiation with-
in a defined solid angle may have to be supplied. In
the special case of a radium source the specification
may be in terms of the mass of 226Ra element present.
The certificate should also state whether the source is
sealed or unsealed. In the latter case, rough handling
ICRU 2015 -- All rights reserved.
AAPM Member Copy
Single use only, copying and networking prohibited.

may not only cause contamination of the laboratory
but also invalidate the calibration. In the former case,
the result of a leakage test should be quoted.
5.3 Certificates for solid sources should provide
the following information:
5.3.1 Description of source.
Principal radionuclide.
Constructional details and dimensions.
Identification.
5.3.2 Reference time and date.
5.3.3 Measurement method.
References
1. International Commission on Radiological Units
and Measurements, RadioactiV'ity, ICRU Report
lOc, National Bureau of Standards Handbook 86
(U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington,
D.C., 1963).
2. H. E. Kolde and G. J. Karches, Some uimitat?·ons
of Available Radioactivity Standards, Health Physics
10, 635-641 (1964).
3. P. J. Campion and A. Williams, Radioactivity
Standards, Health Physics 11, 769-772 (1965).
4. The Radiochemical Centre, Standards of Activity,
[The Radiochemical Centre, Amersham, England,
1965 and 1967 (revised edition)].
5. S. B. Garfinkel, A. P. Baerg, and P. E. Zigman,
Certificates of Radioactivity S/,andards, Misc. Report
of the NAS/ NRC ( rational Academy of Sciences-
National Research Council, Washington, 1966).
References • 7
5.3.4 Measurement result.
5.3.5 Assessment of radioactive impurities.
5.3.6 Assessment of accuracy.
Precision.
Maximum uncertainty attributable to
statistical variations.
Maximum uncertainty attributable to
assessable systematic errors.
Overall uncertainty.
Accuracy as a function of time.
5.3.7 Additional information likely to be of value to
the user.
6. L. Bernstein and M. Weatherall, Statistics for
Medical and Other Biological Students (E. S. Living-
stone, Edinburgh and London, 1952) p. 78.
7. . V. Smirnov, Ed., Tables of Student's Distri-
bution Function and Density Function (Academy
of Science, U.S.S.R., 1960).
8. M. Martin and P. Blichert-Toft, RADIOACTIVE
ATOMS, Auger Electron, Alpha-, Beta-, Gamma- and
X-Ray Data for Dose Calculations, Section A, Jour-
nal of Nuclear Data (To be published).
9. The Radiochemical Centre, Radiochemical Manual
(The Radiochemical Centre, Amersham, England,
1966).
10. B. Kahn, G. R. Choppin and J. G. V. Taylor, Users
Guide Jor Radioactivity Standards (National Acad-
emy of Sciences-National Research Council,
Washington, 1967).
ICRU 2015 -- All rights reserved.
AAPM Member Copy
Single use only, copying and networking prohibited.
 APPENDIX I

Summary of Information Required In Certification of

Standardized Radioactive Sources in Solution Form
[Numbers are included as references to the tex t J

4.1 Description of solution. Method of production of principal radio-

Principal radionuclide. nuclide.
Mass, or volume and density at a given 4.7 Decay-scheme assumptions.
temperature. Nuclear data assumed.
Chemical composition. Effect on the final result of small changes
Identification. in the assumptions.
4.8 Assessment of accuracy.
4.3 Reference time and date.
Precision.
4.4 Measurement method. Maximum uncertainty attributable to statis-
Measurement method. tical variations.
References. Estimated residual systematic errors.
Maximum uncertainty attributable to as-
4.5 Measurement result. sessable systematic errors.
Activity of principal radionuclide per gram Overall uncertainty.
of solution. Accuracy as a function of time.
Activity of daughter radionuclide, if any, Uncertainty in recommended value of half-
per gram of solution. life.
4.6 Assessment of radioactive impurities . 4.9 Additional information.
Known radionuclidic impurities. Recommended half-life.
Suspected radionuclidic impurities. Recommended procedures.
Method of analysis. Etc.

ICRU 2015 -- All rights reserved.

AAPM Member Copy
Single use only, copying and networking prohibited.
 ICRU Reports

The ICR Reports listed below are available from:

ICRU Publications
P.O. Box 4869
Washington, D.C. 20008
U .S.A.
The prices given include postage for surface mail. For airmail add: U.S.
$0.35 per copy for addresses in the United States, U.S. $1.00 per copy for
addresses elsewhere.
Orders totaling less than U.S. $5.00 must be accompanied by a remit-
tance in the form of an international money order or a draft on a U.S. bank.
Orders totaling .S. 5.00 or more and not accompanied by a remittance
will be invoiced with payment due within 30 days of the date of the invoice.

ICRU
Report Price
No. Title (U.S. Dollars)
lOb Physical Aspects of Irradiation, ational
Bmeau of Standards Handbook 85 (1964) * $1.10
lOc Radioactivity, National Bmeau of Stand-
ards Handbook 86 (1963) * $0.80
lOd Clinical Dosimetry, National Bmeau of
Standards Handbook 87 (1963) * $0.80
lOe Radio biological Dosimetry, National Bureau
of Standards Handbook 88 (1963) * $0.65
lOf Methods of Evaluating Radiological Equip-
ment and Materials, National Bureau of
Standards Handbook 89 (1963) * $0.75
11 Radiation Quantities and Units (1968)
1 through 9 copies, each copy $1.00
10 through 99 copies, each copy $0.75
100 or more copies, each copy $0.50
12 Certification of Standardized Radioactive
Somces (1968)
1 through 9 copies, each copy $1.00
10 through 99 copies, each copy $0.75
100 or more copies, each copy $0.50

The following ICRU Reports were superseded by subsequent Reports

and are now out of print:
*These reports are also available from the Superintendent of Documents, U.S.
Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402, U.S.A. at the following prices:
NBS Handbook 85, U . . $0.70; NBS Handbook 86, U.S. $0.40; BS Handbook 87,
0.45; NBS Handbook 88, U.S. $0.35; NBS Handbook 89, U.S. $0.35. These Govern-
ment Printing Office prices do not apply when the reports are ordered from the
ICRU Publications office because the ICRU, as a nonprofit organization, has no
means of meeting the handling costs involved in distribution of these reports from its
Publications office.
9
ICRU 2015 -- All rights reserved.
AAPM Member Copy
Single use only, copying and networking prohibited.
10 • ICRU Reports
ICRU
Report
No. Title and Reference*
1 Discussion on International Units and Standards for
X-ray Work, Brit. J. Radiol. 23, 64 (1927)
2 International X-ray Unit of Intensity, Brit. J. Radiol.
(new series) 1, 363 (1928)
3 Report of Committee on Standardization of X-ray
Measurements, Radiology 22, 289 (1934)
4 Recommendations of the International Committee for
Radiological Units, Radiology 23, 580 (1934)
5 Recommendations of the International Committee for
Radiological Units, Radiology 29, 634 (1937)
6 Report of International Commission on Radiological
Protection and International Commission on Radio-
logical Units, National Bureau of Standards Hand-
book 47 (U.S. Government Printing Office, Wash-
ington, D.C., 1951)
7 Recommendations of the International Commission for
Radiological Units, Radiology 62, 106 (1954)
8 Report of the International Commission on Radiolog-
ical Units and Measurements (ICRU) 1956, Na-
tional Bureau of Standards Handbook 62 (U.S.
Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.,
1957)
9 Report of the International Commission on Radiolog-
ical Units and Measurements (ICRU) 1959, National
Bureau of Standards Handbook 78 (U.S. Govern-
ment Printing Office, Washington, D.C., 1961)
lOa Radiation Quantities and Units, National Bureau of
Standards Handbook 84 (U.S. Government Printing
Office, Washington, D.C., 1962)
* References given are in English. Many of the Reports were also published in
other languages.

ICRU 2015 -- All rights reserved.

AAPM Member Copy
Single use only, copying and networking prohibited.