RSSO REPORT TEMSC Andrea Musso Virginia Prieto Hermosilla

RSSO REPORT TE-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 suggestions Our 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

Summary • Scope of the report • CERN rules • Persons interviewed • Findings • Common points: • What can be improved (RP) • What can be improved (MSC) • Conclusions April 2014 TE-MSC RSSO's & Safety Link Person 2

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. April 2014 TE-MSC RSSO's & Safety Link Person 3

ALARA Overview and References GROUP I: Dose Criteria Individual dose equi. 100 μSv Level I Collective dose equi. 1 m. Sv Level II 500 μSv Level III 5 m. Sv Activities falling in ALARA Level III must be approved by the CERN ALARA Committee 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 SOME REFERENCES • ALARA Review Working Group (ARWG (2013) (edms. 1244380 v. 2) • TE Department ALARA Procedure (edms. 1281764) • LS 1 IMPACT Specific meetings with TE Tech. Resp. (edms. 1269365) • LS 1 RP Recommendations (edms. 1261302) April 2014 TE-MSC RSSO's & Safety Link Person

2013: IMPACT DATA • 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 1024 DIMR lancés 861 DIMR enregistrés 256 123 64 16 12 4 1 DIMR III TE-MSC RSSO's & Safety Link Person IMPACT safety working group 5

MSC VSC ABT DIMR 2/3 ALARA 2 ALARA 3 20 2 18 5 18 0 2013 -14: TE&MSC IMPACT DATA TE and MSC IMPACT activities (except cancelled or rejected) during the period 2013 -2014 (16 months) TE-MSC RSSO's & Safety Link Person 6

2013 -14: TE GROUPS IMPACT DATA April 2014 TE-MSC RSSO's & Safety Link Person 7

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 April 2014 TE-MSC RSSO's & Safety Link Person 8

Findings During 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 LS 1? ) April 2014 TE-MSC RSSO's & Safety Link Person 9

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 April 2014 TE-MSC RSSO's & Safety Link Person 10

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 requests April 2014 TE-MSC RSSO's & Safety Link Person 11

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. April 2014 TE-MSC RSSO's & Safety Link Person 12

Thank s for your atten tion… April 2014 TE-MSC RSSO's & Safety Link Person 13