Provision of Health Physics Monitoring resource

[JGinniver@AOL.COM]

This may be too large a subject to cover in a single posting but I would like 

to try.



With the current business models adopted by most organisations there is 

considerable pressure to reduce the cost of provide monitoring of the workplace and 

of work in progress by Health Physics Personnel (would include RCTs, 

Monitors, Surveyors etc.).   While I recognise that it is impossible to identify a 

single approach that would suit all sites/activities and all tasks I would like 

the views of the list on several key issues.



a) The use of operations/maintenance personnel to undertake task based 

monitoring.   One of the drivers towards this approach is ALARA and Dose Reduction 

(Radworkers?).   Wherever possible HP staff will no longer be exposed alongside 

operations/maintenance staff.   I have no issue with the principle of this 

approach however several things concern me.   The adequacy of training, is it 

hours/days or weeks and the type of refresher training.   The scope of the work 

undertaken, very often the largest reductions in dose for these groups of 

workers can be achieved on the highest hazard work.   The collection and retention 

of data from these groups of workers, how is this fed through to the 

professional Haps and collated and retained for future reference.   Confidence that 

these skill are maintained at an appropriate level, that they are not simply 

being trained and then left for long periods of time when they are not using the 

skils/knowledge that they have learned.

b) The divestment of radiological monitoring (and the provision of 

professional advice) into project teams, i.e. the fragmentation of HP staff into small 

project teams.   The concern here is that HP personal may then have to report 

to a project manager who's prime concern is meeting project goals and deadlines 

and who may not support HP personnel on issues that could affect project 

milestones.   Agaibn there is the issue of the collation and retention of 

monitoring records, particularly where these may affect future tasks e.g. the project 

ma be to process some waste storage vessels containers.   Once processed a new 

contract may be let to decommission the empty vessels storage facilities and 

the results of surveys undertaken during the processing work could be key to 

the ALARA planning for decomissioning.

c) The use of a 'turnkey' contractor for specific projects where complete 

responsibility for radiological issues is handed to the contractor.   Some of the 

issues are similar to item b) above.   In addition however there are 

questions about competence of HP personnel.   What systems are in place to ensure that 

staff are competent to undertake the monitoring.   I believe for example that 

the DoE requires all RCTs   to have completes the DoE HP core competency 

module? and other identified courses.   Is it appropriate for all of these 

individuals to be interviewed by the Prime Contractor/Site Operator/Site Licensee.   

Is there any independent oversight e.g. HP staff who are independent of the 

project undertaking reassurance monitoring.   Should contractors personnel be 

responsible for clearance monitoring of items from the site, or should 

independent final clearance surveys be undertaken.   Is there sufficient independent HP 

resource available to meet the near, medium and long term needs of the 

industry.   As outage times get shorter, and clean up/decommissioning programmes 

accelerate there may be fewer individuals willing to enter into world of contract 

HP.   Again the issue of records is a key concern.



On a final note, many organisations in the past have used mostly an in-house 

resource for radiological monitoring with contract resources used for short 

term peaks.   This led to large groups of experienced personnel being available 

on sites and the ability to 'succession plan'.   If organisations move to 

smaller core groups e.g limited to undertaking the minimum level of 

legal/statutory monitoring are there independent contracting organisations willing and able 

to fill the gap with well trained personnel who are willing to cover limited 

fixed term contracts where there is no lucrative per-diem payment involved.



Finally, I would like to state that the intention of the above was not to 

slight individuals or contracting companies who provide contract support.   Nor 

to suggest that the only way to manage HP monitoring issues is to maintain an 

iron grip on everything and not to look for modern solutions to modern issues.  

 On the contrary I'm interested in the experience of others and to understand 

how these solutions have or have not worked and in what context they were 

applied.



Feel free to reply either directly or to the list, I am happy to collate 

responses and to try to provide a definitive response (if this is possible) to 

these questions.



Regards,

Julian