Attributes of Effective Review and Audit

DOE-STD-1128-98

3.8.5

Attributes of Effective Review and Audit

Evaluation of the effectiveness of an ALARA program requires both reviews and

auditing. The reviews will include detailed examination of the written ALARA

program plan and the records of ALARA activities. The objectives in such reviews

are to find if the written plan is being followed, and what is working or not working

well. Such reviews can be performed adequately by either a knowledgeable

member of the facility staff or an equally knowledgeable outsider. The written

report of a review should be directed to a member of management who is

responsible for implementation of the ALARA program.

Audits are best performed by an outside health physicist who is sufficiently

knowledgeable about work with plutonium and its radiological characteristics that

he/she knows where to look for problems and can make appropriate evaluations

and recommendations. He should not only examine the ALARA program plan and

records, but should also visit the working areas and laboratories in the facility, with

a knowledgeable escort who can answer questions about activities and conditions

in the facility.

There is nothing really unique in ALARA programs at plutonium facilities,

compared with facilities handling other kinds of radioactive materials. However,

the radioactivity of plutonium, its potential for criticality, and its relatively high

radiotoxicity require somewhat more meticulous surveillance and control than

many other radionuclides. Therefore, the detail in ALARA programs for plutonium

facilities is likely to be somewhat greater than would be found in ALARA

programs for many other facilities.

In any plutonium facility, it is highly desirable to have well-structured ALARA

teams in each building or subunit of the facility. Facility goals are to be developed

by the facility ALARA teams. Each facility ALARA team chairperson meets with

the facility team, and together they develop the calendar-year ALARA goals for

their facility. The team chairperson prepares the draft goal report for review by the

facility ALARA team and the ALARA Program Office (APO) of the facility. After

the draft goals are reviewed, they are returned to the facility team chairperson. The

final goal report is then submitted to the facility manager for signature. The signed

copy is submitted to the APO to be included in the annual ALARA goal report to

DOE. All facility-specific goals should be categorized and reported using the

facility-specified format and should include the following:

Exposure Reduction. Goals listed under exposure reduction may reflect

occupational or nonoccupational exposure reduction. Exposure to radiological

hazards or nonradiological hazards are relevant. Specific jobs for which

exposure reduction plans have been developed should be covered in this

section. Exposure may be reduced by reducing other hazards that contribute to

the difficulty of performing work in radiological areas. For example, reducing

noise, reducing heat stress conditions, or improving lighting may facilitate the

completion and accuracy of work performed in radiological areas and, thus,

reduce exposure. Such opportunities for exposure reduction should be carefully

evaluated and appropriate ALARA goals established to make the most of these

opportunities.

3-30