gpg14 revision pete burgess. history irr 1985 – instruments shall be appropriately tested how –...

11
GPG14 Revision Pete Burgess

Upload: lauren-lambert

Post on 13-Dec-2015

219 views

Category:

Documents


1 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: GPG14 Revision Pete Burgess. History IRR 1985 – instruments shall be appropriately tested How – nothing said First attempt – a document for BNFL Sellafield

GPG14 Revision

Pete Burgess

Page 2: GPG14 Revision Pete Burgess. History IRR 1985 – instruments shall be appropriately tested How – nothing said First attempt – a document for BNFL Sellafield

History

• IRR 1985 – instruments shall be appropriately tested• How – nothing said• First attempt – a document for BNFL Sellafield

addressing their portable kit and circumstances

Page 3: GPG14 Revision Pete Burgess. History IRR 1985 – instruments shall be appropriately tested How – nothing said First attempt – a document for BNFL Sellafield

Next Stage

• HSE commissioned guidance – HS(G)49• Based on a very expanded version of the Sellafield

document.

Page 4: GPG14 Revision Pete Burgess. History IRR 1985 – instruments shall be appropriately tested How – nothing said First attempt – a document for BNFL Sellafield

GPG14

• HSE withdrew prescriptive guidance.• Asked the IRMF to take on provision• GPG14 – a fairly

broad revision of HS(G)49• Very successful, used round the world• Lead on to GPG29, 30 etc

Page 5: GPG14 Revision Pete Burgess. History IRR 1985 – instruments shall be appropriately tested How – nothing said First attempt – a document for BNFL Sellafield

Now time for revision

• Comments received –

- advice on interpolation for photon contam monitor responses

- development of the contiguous portions method.

- updating for the IRR 1999 regs

- QP was a legal appointment,

now it isn’t

Page 6: GPG14 Revision Pete Burgess. History IRR 1985 – instruments shall be appropriately tested How – nothing said First attempt – a document for BNFL Sellafield

More revision

• Smart probes and interchangeability• Light leakage for dose rate scints• The problem of tying type test data to observed

responses• Dose rate instruments with energy responses which can

show variation in the 100 – 250 keV range

Page 7: GPG14 Revision Pete Burgess. History IRR 1985 – instruments shall be appropriately tested How – nothing said First attempt – a document for BNFL Sellafield

Even more

• More encouragement in the use of point sources for linearity testing

• Auto-ranging instruments – do we need to test each decade? Are there relays which we don’t know about?

• Energy response confirmation for high dose rate detectors

• More guidance on testing after repair such as refoiling

Page 8: GPG14 Revision Pete Burgess. History IRR 1985 – instruments shall be appropriately tested How – nothing said First attempt – a document for BNFL Sellafield

And more

• Bring references up to date, especially IEC• Much more guidance on dealing with non-uniform

contam sources• Dealing with dose rate monitors with really low

responses at 900 but which are generally OK at slightly smaller angles – enrgy comp end window GMs

Page 9: GPG14 Revision Pete Burgess. History IRR 1985 – instruments shall be appropriately tested How – nothing said First attempt – a document for BNFL Sellafield

More

• QP training and competence – the statement in IRR99• “Qps have to be fully conversant with, and have

knowledge and understanding of, currently accepted testing standards and relevant technical guidance.”

• How do we ensure this?

Page 10: GPG14 Revision Pete Burgess. History IRR 1985 – instruments shall be appropriately tested How – nothing said First attempt – a document for BNFL Sellafield

Summary

• Lots to do• NPL will:

– Review all the suggestions– Incorporate those which are well supported and

clearly a good idea– Circulate those where there is a need for discussion– Produce a draft for comment

Page 11: GPG14 Revision Pete Burgess. History IRR 1985 – instruments shall be appropriately tested How – nothing said First attempt – a document for BNFL Sellafield

When?

• Draft before the next meeting.