RSSO REPORTTE-MSC

Andrea Musso – Virginia Prieto Hermosilla (RSSO’s)Acknowledgments - We wish to thanks:Michele Modena (Safety Link Person TE-MSC) for his help and valuable remarks and suggestionsOur colleagues from MSC, RP and TE for their precious information which allowed us to compile this report.Davide Tommasini (TE-MSC-MNC) for his interesting input.

MSC-Technical meeting

April 2014 TE-MSC RSSO's & Safety Link Person

Summary• Scope of the report• CERN rules• Persons interviewed• Findings• Common points:

• What can be improved (RP)• What can be improved (MSC)

• Conclusions

2

April 2014 TE-MSC RSSO's & Safety Link Person

Scope of the report

• TE-MSC RSSO’s and Safety Link Person were requested to perform a survey between people involved in:

• Activities in radioactive environment• Activities on activated equipment's• IMPACT and Working Dose Plans (WDP) creation

Disclaimer: Following the several interviews, we summarize the points that were

suggested as being the most important; this report cannot be exhaustive for all the issues pointed out during the interviews by individuals.

3

April 2014 TE-MSC RSSO's & Safety Link Person

ALARA Overview and References

Activities falling in ALARA Level III must be approved by the CERN ALARA Committee

SOME REFERENCES • ALARA Review Working Group (ARWG (2013) (edms. 1244380 v.2)• TE Department ALARA Procedure (edms.1281764)• LS1 IMPACT Specific meetings with TE Tech.Resp.(edms. 1269365)• LS1 RP Recommendations (edms. 1261302)

Individual dose equi.

Level I

100 μSv

Level II

1 mSv

Level III

Collective dose equi. 500 μSv 5 mSv

GROUP I: Dose Criteria

SOME VOCABULARY• WDP: Working Dose Planning• DIMR/RWP: Dossier d'Intervention en Milieu Radioactif/Radiological Work Permit.• IMPACT: Tool to implement the interventions in Radioactive Environment. Still under development. It

includes the activities and associated documents

2013: IMPACT DATA

IMPACT safety working group

5

DIMR I DIMR II DIMR III1

4

16

64

256

1024DIMR lancésDIMR enregistrésAct. estimées sans DIMR

861

123

12

• 1301 activities approved by RP• 1013 activities with analysis of radiological

hazards and dosimetry estimations• 208 registered DIMR• 68 DIMR launched in approval• 207 activities with dosimetric

reassessment• 7 DIMR III unapproved via IMPACT but

approved by the ALARA Committee

TE-MSC RSSO's & Safety Link Person

2013-14: TE&MSC IMPACT DATA

6TE-MSC RSSO's & Safety Link Person

DIMR 2/3ALARA 2 ALARA 3

MSC 20 2VSC 18 5ABT 18 0

TE and MSC IMPACT activities (except cancelled or rejected) during the period 2013-2014 (16 months)

April 2014 TE-MSC RSSO's & Safety Link Person

Interviews

During the last weeks we had interesting and constructive discussions with the following persons:

• 4 Activity responsible (TE-MSC-MNC)• Deputy DSO TE Department• RSO TE Department• 3 RP representatives• 3 RSSO

7

April 2014 TE-MSC RSSO's & Safety Link Person

FindingsDuring the interviews we found some common points:

• The WDP granularity is not uniform, and can vary by respect to the RP representative in charge of the request

• Since some months the workload to prepare the interventions is higher by respect to the past

• The reasons of some questions asked by RP colleagues are not always explained; this might cause misunderstanding and a feeling of over-control

• IMPACT approvals appear sometime too long

• Doses are not always correctly estimated

• The activities are (mostly) performed without a written and approved procedure

• Intervention times sometime are not correctly estimated (maybe too conservative)

• The limits of splitting big activities in sub-activities are not well defined (We were asked, for example: can we create one single IMPACT for the whole LS1?)

8

April 2014 TE-MSC RSSO's & Safety Link Person

Possible improvements (Actions => DGS-RP)

• Normalization of WDP granularity• Improve communication between RP and MSC:

• When asking questions, do not hesitate to explain the reasons: some issues related to time, distance, necessary time to decay etc. might be trivial for experts but sometime hard to be understood if not well explained.

• IMPACT approvals delay: • Agree common rules• Following a discussion with RP colleagues we propose:

- DIMR I => 48 hours max.- DIMR II => 2 weeks max.- DIMR III (ALARA committee) => 6 weeks min.

• Try to better estimate the doses

9

April 2014 TE-MSC RSSO's & Safety Link Person

Possible improvements (Actions => TE-MSC)

• Procedures:• Systematic activities are rarely supported by written and approved

procedures• Intervention simulations (mock up or spare magnets in workshop) could

be organized to prepare specific tasks in particular environments

• Recall responsible about their duties in terms of intervener’ safety (personnel annual dose) => Action launched, in progress

• Prepare intervention plans in due time• Improve communication between MSC and RP:

• Do not hesitate to explain the reasons of the intervention, the choice of the technique and the tooling

• Respect (define?) delays rules for IMPACT requests10

April 2014 TE-MSC RSSO's & Safety Link Person

Conclusions

• It would be useful to have written and approved procedures for the most common activities. An approach similar to SMACC project could be developed; this might appear time consuming in the beginning, but it will simplify the preparation of work and the quality in the next future

• Communication between RP and MSC is not always optimized. We suggest joint meeting in order to approach the issues as a unique team

• RP approach for the analysis of IMPACT’s and WDP’s is not homogeneous and shall be normalized (granularity,…)

• Time delays for approvals (IMPACT, WDP) shall be agreed between RP and MSC (partially done)

• The (administrative) preparation workload is higher by respect to the past, however, the availability of procedures (or templates of the WDP) and advanced planning could shorten the time needed.

11

April 2014 TE-MSC RSSO's & Safety Link Person

Thanks for your attention…

12