Title: Centre for Radiation, Chemical and Environmental Hazards Radiation Protection Division
1Second EUTERP WorkshopSummary of presentations
Richard Paynter Radiation Protection Division,
Health Protection Agency, UK
Centre for Radiation, Chemical and Environmental
Hazards Radiation Protection Division formerly
the National Radiological Protection Board
21st Workshop Desired outcomes
- Definitions of roles of QE and RPO
- Development of core competencies
- Mutual recognition based on harmonised
recognition requirements - Development of common accreditation systems and
infrastructures - Standardised qualifications and training for RSO,
QE, workers - Mandatory requirements for length and depth of
courses - Flexible approach to harmonisation/mutual
recognition each countrys approach assessed on
a case by case basis - Need for specialised training courses for RPOs
3Preferred European approach
- EU standardised approach
- Italy, Finland, Romania, Poland, Latvia, Germany,
Spain - Flexible approach
- UK, Sweden, Belgium
- Harmonisation rather than standardisation
- Bottom up approach rather than detailed Directive
requirements
4Topics to be covered
- National views on the proposals for definitions
and competence requirements for RPEs, RPOs, as
well as their roles, duties and responsibilities. - Requirements for training and education of RWs.
- National views on the impacts of the
implementation of the proposals.
5Medical Physics Expert
- Agreement over role and training!
- Can act as RPE in medical sector, subject to
national legislation and RPE arrangments - Not the primary focus of EUTERP!
6Definitions and competence requirements for RPEs,
RPOs, roles, duties and responsibilities.
- Czech Republic - currently have RPOs that fit the
definition of RPEs. Use of supervision persons.
RPEs should be regulated. - Finland - Broad agreement with definitions. Add
risk assessment to RPE duties. Currently license
training providers. - France - Supportive of approach. Current rigorous
approach to Competent Persons. Mandatory RPE,
RPOs? - Greece - has equivalent posts to RPE and RPO. MPE
acts as QE. - Latvia - Similar structure. Proposed definitions
very useful.
7- Italy 3 levels of QE. Proposed RPE is a high
level professional training/experience. Would
like the word Qualified to be used. No
equivalence to RPO. Interaction between RPE and
RPO should be clarified. - Netherlands Existing system for RPEs, currently
introducing a registration system. National
Workshop RPE definition an improvement. Would
like RPE to be assigned technical responsibility
for the tasks of radiation protection of workers
and members of the public. - RPE add emergency arrangements. Must be able to
speak and write language. - RPO definition clarity needed over the level of
post.
8- Portugal Currently developing a system similar
to RPE/RPO proposals. - Romania New definitions clearer. Some issues
with medical exposure. RPE recognition should be
linked to area of expertise. RPO designation
should be linked to controlled areas. Specify
where RPO is mandatory. - Switzerland Radiation Protection Specialist
similar to RPO. No defined RPE equivalent. - UK Agree with definitions. Developing an RPE
recognition process for waste management.
Concern over excessive competency requirements
and recognition of RPO. - CONCLUSION General agreement to approach but
details very different in each country. Still
some uncertainty over RPE/RPO roles, and
advisory/responsibility functions. Further
guidance on the role and education of the RPO
needed. - Possibility of common core competencies.
9Requirements for training and education of RWs.
- Finland -competencies and training of RWs should
also be defined. - Czech Republic licensing of supervision
persons, detailed requirements. - Training organisations should be approved
- Italy Must be suitably trained. No specific
requirements. - Latvia Regulatory requirements for further
education in radiation safety. Well established
training arrangements.
10- Bulgaria not possible to control the
qualification of all persons license training
organisations, who issue qualification. License
specifies training criteria. State monitors
training quality. - Netherlands Development of training programmes
will be required. - Romania General training requirements.
- Switzerland -
- UK not specified goal based approach.
- CONCLUSION Very different approaches to the
specification of education and training make
common agreement to detailed RW training very
difficult.
11National views on the impacts of the
implementation of the proposals.
- Bulgaria - ?
- Czech Republic - ?
- Finland - 5 y renewal of RPE recognition
challenging, Passbook? - France Implementation of RPE will require
significant changes to training requirements.
Disagree with training durations. Support formal
recognition requirements. RPO possible in some
areas. Compromises needed. - Greece Generally able to implement.
Inconvenient to implement where MPE carries out
RPE functions. - Italy Possible details need to be worked out.
12- Latvia - could be readily implemented. Similar
requirements already applied. Will introduce
greater clarity. - Netherlands Potential increase in
administrative burden. - Portugal Proposals can be implemented with
current developments. - Romania Similarities in definitions make
implementation relatively straightforward. - Switzerland Implementation of RPE proposals
could be problematic. - UK Current system closely reflects RPE
proposals. Difficulty with recognition of RPOs. - CONCLUSION Possibility of implementation, but
differences in existing systems could be
problematical, and some requirements (e.g.
recognition of RPOs) could result in significant
administrative burden and expense.
13Key questions
- Roles and competencies of QE, RPO?
- Would introduction of RPO into Directive
introduce unnecessary administrative burden? - Licensing of training providers?
- Extent of regulation?
- Boundaries
- Core competence
14What can we achieve?
- Agreed definition and role of RPE
- Guidance on functions of RPE
- Baseline competencies for recognition of RPE
(function of regulators?) - Guidelines on education and training for RPE and
RPO.
15Evolution not revolution!
16(No Transcript)