rad signs- collected info

[Lester.Slaback@nist.gov]

I previously asked, in part...
Do any of you have special procedures or special signs to
highlight a new or changed condition that you might like to
share?..

I received a number of responses, some of which I summarize here (either
by direct quote or by selected excising - apology for any mangling):

Some commercial power plants use a different shape sign to
distinguish various areas. For instance MYAPC uses an
octagon shaped caution sign (with pocket inserts) to
designate High Radiation areas. Note that this is the same
shape as a STOP sign. Also available are "talking signs" or
commercially available "talking" motion detectors.
Mark Readinger

At SJSU ... we maintain a plastic box (much like a mailbox) which we place
new or significantly changed information about the
facility location.  Users of those locations are instructed to review the
information when entering. We control the information by placing a large
cover sheet with a date on it when the
information has been posted. This method appears to be effective. 
Comments have been positive. John Pickering


There are two things I can think of that might interest you. We made up a
sign that we posted conspicuously near the posting that read "A NEW SIGN
IN YOUR AREA" and had instructions on how to contact Radiation Health
Protection for more information. The person who did it inserted a smaller
copy of the sign in question between the title and the instructions, which
tended to make the sign rather visible.

In a related issue, we had a need to inform emergency responders (fire,
haz-mat, etc.) of the potential radiological hazards posed by worst-case
accidents in something over a hundred industrial facilities. We utilized a
rating and communication method similar to the NFPA fire diamond directed
specifically at radiological hazards. Changes to those postings are
extremely visible since the ratings are not only numbered but color-coded.
You might also be interested in the rating system and color
codes:
  0  Black lettering on white...no hazard present
  1  White lettering on green...minor controls suggested
  2  Black lettering on yellow...controls strongly advised
  3  White lettering on red...strong controls mandatory
  4  Red lettering on black...don't go there. Period.

Of course the radiological controls are expressed a bit
differently for regulators and in formal documentation. The color codes
were so effective that emergency responders who had not even been
introduced to the system were able to give us correct responses regarding
the level of hazard and the appropriate
actions to take in an emergency response.
Rick Edwards, Analyst
Richard.W.Edwards@Boeing.com


A few suggestions for radiological postings from a veteran. 
1. Reduce the amount of information from all sources on the
doors.
2. Minimize the number of different radiological messages to
promote consistency and ease of understanding for the workers.  Stick to
the fundamental postings of radiation area, contaminated area, high
radiation area, airborne area, etc...
3. Have all of your radiological postings the same format and color.  
4. Add an addtional posting insert such as "Contact RP Before Entry". Put
this on the doors where conditions have changed per your criteria or areas
that have the potential to change. 
5. By keeping radiological posting programs simple and easy to 
understand, then you will actually have a better position to hold  people
accountable for not complying with them. 
6. It's kind of interesting, but if you keep your program really  simple
then rad workers will often times provide clarifications to their lesser
experienced coworkers to help them comply and keep them out of trouble. 
If the communications are complex, then there is room for
mis-interpretation and dissemination of improper information between
coworkers.  Inexperienced rad workers working together will often times
look to the most experienced guy when it comes down to how to work
properly in a rad environment.  If the program is simple, then they will
all "Monkey see, Monkey do" the correct way and the leader of the crew
gets to feel like the "leader of the crew".
7. We tell all rad workers that they are responsible for asking for
clarifications before taking actions and it is our responsibility to
provide those clarifications. 
8. Your posting program should be so simple that any person in the RP
department could follow the procedures without question.  If not, then you
need to continue to strive to write that perfect procedure.  We're
probably not quite there yet but we're getting there.  I would welcome the
opportunity to be able to review the procedures of others for possible
good ideas.
     Glen Vickers
     brzgv@ccmail.ceco.com

There are some good ideas here, but the general tone of other responses
(and Mr. Vickers above) is that plain vanilla signing with careful
attention by workers is all that is needed.

Since the regulators control the appearance and content of signs one must
proceed carefully if changes are to be made, even if they are of a
supplementary nature.

The fundamental question is "do workers carefully read every sign they
encounter?".  Seem like a good question that could be easily tested as a
research project, e.g., add a note "before any entry call xxxx".  Are the
documented failures of signing effectiveness simply the acceptable failure
rate or should some of Mr.
Readinger's ideas be implemented?

Just food for thought.  No intent to start another string of messages.

-- 
the above are the personal musing of the author,
and do not represent any past, current, or future
position of NIST, the U.S. Government, or anyone else
who might think that they are in a position of authority.
NBSR Health Physics
NIST
Gaithersburg, MD 20899
301 975-5810
-----------------------------------------------------------
Lester.Slaback@nist.gov
-----------------------------------------------------------