Career Path > Radiation Safety
15 Skills Power Plants Look for on Contract RP Tech Resumes
UncaBuffalo:
--- Quote from: Eric_Bartlett on Dec 04, 2013, 04:51 ---Remember when someone is reviewing your resume for a position, be it a vendor company or a utility supervisor, they have to be conservative with what they can allocate you because if they get too liberal their in-house QA dept, the NRC, and others will come down on them so hard they will have wished they never heard of nuclear power.
So if you don't spell it out you will short change yourself. I see it all the time with duties. I get 8-10 yr SHP that send in updates such as “Rx” or “S/G” or “Refuel” – just one word – now they know what the one word stands for and most vendors and utility personnel know what comes with that one word, but unless its spelled out they cannot assume and I've seen it cost very qualified individuals highly sought after positions.
The big thing on a resume is don't get lazy or complacent, spell it out in detail. I'm not saying every time an HP goes to a job he/she has to put “performed routine radiation/contamination surveys”. What I am saying is make sure that you convey what type of area or project you were assigned to, did you do any coverage, did you do anything out of the ordinary, list exact dates, don't short sell yourself.
Unlike the non nuclear world where the shorter the better for a resume, the nuke industry needs details, so don't worry if your resume goes 4, 5 or more pages you can always trim the repetitive stuff later in your career.
Eric
--- End quote ---
So what is the minimum I can get away with?
I usually go with "Provided radiological support for refueling floor." - or something similar. Does that work, or...?
I used to have all the 'extras' about jet pumps, LPRMs, etc, on every job going back umpteen years, but decided that it wasn't adding anything useful because:
1. The technology of how to do the job has changed, so the fact that I covered it umpteen years ago doesn't mean that the coverage would be the same now.
...and...
2. The odds of me remembering all the details of some job umpteen years ago are fairly slim. I would much rather they looked at my multiple years of experience and realize that they can probably get me up to speed on whatever work they have going on this outage.
So, the question: What is the minimum that will make it by most QA/NRC/audits?
Thanks!
Rennhack:
--- Quote from: UncaBuffalo on Dec 30, 2013, 01:09 ---So what is the minimum I can get away with?
So, the question: What is the minimum that will make it by most QA/NRC/audits?
--- End quote ---
Please see the first post.
--- Quote from: Rennhack on Mar 23, 2013, 01:25 ---15 Skills Power Plants Look for on RP Resumes
When RP departments look at the past job history on your resume prior to an outage, they are looking for the following 15 skills, so that they can give you quals based on your prior work history. If these skills are not specifically listed on your resume, you will not be granted the qual for that skill. Of course, don’t put anything on your resume that you haven’t done, but don’t forget to take credit for what you have done.
1. Operation of Survey Instruments, and Count Rate Meters (List instruments such as: Ion Chambers, Geiger-Mueller, Extendable Probe instruments, Friskers)
2. Performance of Radiation and Contamination Surveys
3. Performance of Airborne Radioactivity Surveys
4. Radioactive Material Movement and Storage on Owner-Controlled Property
5. Radiological Posting/De-posting
6. Responded to Radiological Alarms
7. Operated Continuous Air Monitors
8. Provided Radiological Job Coverage
9. Provided High Risk Job Coverage (e.g. >1R/hr, >500k dpm/100cm2, >5 DAC)
10. Directed/Performed Area and Equipment Decontamination
11. Surveyed Material for Unconditional Release
12. Performed Personnel Decontamination
13. Monitored and Coached Workers in the RCA Including Their Ingress and Egress
14. Operated HEPA Vacuum and/or Ventilation Equipment
15. Performed Remote Radiological Monitoring
An example of how it might look on your resume:
Start Date (MM/DD/YYYY) – End Date (MM/DD/YYYY)
Plant Name, Plant Location (Contact Company)
Senior Radiological Protection Technician
Operated survey instruments, count rate meters, Continuous Air Monitors, as well as HEPA equipment (RO20, RSO50, L144/44-9). Performed radiation and contamination surveys, unconditional release surveys, airborne radioactivity surveys, radiological posting/de-posting, radiological job coverage to include high risk job coverage of steam generator work (>10R/hr., >500 mRAD smearable), remote radiological monitoring, area and equipment decontamination, as well as personnel decontamination. Supported radioactive material movement, responded to radiological alarms and monitored and coached workers in the RCA including their Ingress and Egress.
--- End quote ---
UncaBuffalo:
--- Quote from: Rennhack on Dec 30, 2013, 02:17 ---
Please see the first post.
--- End quote ---
Unfortunately (fortunately?) my detailed resume is already 7 pages, just doing the "provided radiological support for X" routine... Do employers REALLY need me to make it 15 pages by adding all the applicable points from that list? Or can an auditor get what they need from my current verbiage?
I understand that a person who is borderline 18.1, 3.1, or whatever will need to provide more detail to ensure their experience is accepted. I'm just looking for the absolute minimum acceptable to make it past 95% of the auditors.
Thanks!
Eric_Bartlett:
--- Quote from: UncaBuffalo on Dec 30, 2013, 01:09 ---So what is the minimum I can get away with?
I usually go with "Provided radiological support for refueling floor." - or something similar. Does that work, or...?
--- End quote ---
For someone that has been in the business for umpteen years, that is fine – you may want to elaborate just a little and state what work activities on the refuel floor you provided support for, if all, then state that "Provided radiological support for all work activities on the refueling floor." If not “all” then something along the line of “Provided radiological support for various work activities on the refueling floor to include X, Y & Z."
What we as recruiters and what the clients are looking for is that specialty coverage/support you gave, i.e. providing coverage for an Alloy 600 project, or providing coverage for pre-outage fuel receipt, or providing RP support for dry cask storage project, etc…
--- Quote from: UncaBuffalo on Dec 30, 2013, 01:09 ---I used to have all the 'extras' about jet pumps, LPRMs, etc, on every job going back umpteen years, but decided that it wasn't adding anything useful because:
1. The technology of how to do the job has changed, so the fact that I covered it umpteen years ago doesn't mean that the coverage would be the same now.
...and...
2. The odds of me remembering all the details of some job umpteen years ago are fairly slim. I would much rather they looked at my multiple years of experience and realize that they can probably get me up to speed on whatever work they have going on this outage.
--- End quote ---
Again, someone that has been in the business as a SHP for years can get away with a pretty general description of duties. The newer SHP’s 18.1, 3.1’s less than 5 years, recent transfers from Navy or DOE should try to go into some detail so that when it comes down to the site having to pick tech A or tech B, they normally go with the tech that has the experience in the area that they need covered and when both show they have experience in the area then they go a little deeper to see which activities in that area.
Note - in both the distant and recent past I have had sites “not approve” resumes based on inadequate duties – now don't get me wrong the resumes were not “rejected” they were just put on the back burner as backup as the site really couldn’t tell what the individuals were actually skilled in. There were a lot of the standard duties without detail i.e.” Assigned to steam generators” (Assigned to do what???), and “Aux. building Rover” (what did you do as the rover???) and “Yard HP” (again they said what they were, not what they did).
I agree that going back retroactively 10-20 years and trying to reconstruct a resume is a waste of time, go with what you have. The newer entries, say within the past 2-3 years should be the entries you want to stand out as those will be the ones that will sell you to the Supv reviewing resumes for approval and disapproval.
--- Quote from: UncaBuffalo on Dec 30, 2013, 01:09 ---So, the question: What is the minimum that will make it by most QA/NRC/audits?
Thanks!
--- End quote ---
As far as an Audit goes those remarks were more geared to how individuals capture their dates as I spelled out in the prior post.
Now if all you do is routines and never get assigned to anything that would be considered High Rad, High Profile, High Risk, Critical, or Specialty work then writing up a standard routine resume may be all that you can do.
The 3 things I recommend for all individuals from the most inexperienced to those that have been doing this since the rods were pulled on the sun are as follows…
1. List exact dates both start and end
2. Be accurate with your duties, if you did something more than the routine refuel and maintenance duties list it
3. If you provided HP “Coverage”, say so – remember “Provided HP support” is not the same as “Provided HP coverage”
4. List what you DID, not what you were i.e. “Assigned to provide HP coverage for primary steam generator, eddy current, tube plugging and nozzle dam installation and removal” vs. S/G RP.
--- Quote from: UncaBuffalo on Dec 30, 2013, 02:49 ---Unfortunately (fortunately?) my detailed resume is already 7 pages, just doing the "provided radiological support for X" routine... Do employers REALLY need me to make it 15 pages by adding all the applicable points from that list? Or can an auditor get what they need from my current verbiage?
I understand that a person who is borderline 18.1, 3.1, or whatever will need to provide more detail to ensure their experience is accepted. I'm just looking for the absolute minimum acceptable to make it past 95% of the auditors.
Thanks!
--- End quote ---
--- Quote from: SCMasterchef on Dec 30, 2013, 03:14 ---Rennhack is correct about the things they look for as an RP but it becomes a little more complicated when you get into the so called "professional" positions. All of you out there reading this DO NOT TAKE THIS TO SAY THAT RP TECHS ARE NOT PROFESSIONAL. What I am saying is that recruiters have a way of classifying jobs by certain terms. Anyway I have been a contractor/house mouse for over 40 years and still do not understand why when a resume is submitted for a position, the person reviewing the position almost always says "Well what exactly did you do at this site?" 10/20/30 years prior. Really does it really matter if you have pretty much been doing the same thing over and over and over. You try to reduce paper and save the environment but they just sometimes can't figure it out. So what goes on a resume, your guess is as good as mine. So I continue to add the pages.
--- End quote ---
When we get into the so-called professional arena (Mgt, ALARA, RadEng, Procedure Writing, Training, etc...) the reviewers, both vendor and utility will want extreme detail due to that if they are going to be paying $45, $55, $60/hr they want to make sure they have the right individual with the right skill set. As far as being a "regular meter swinging Joe" you can be counted as one of the masses or make yourself stand out by adding that little bit of detail. As far as trying to save the environment, most resumes are submitted and reviewed electronically nowadays so 7 pages vs 13 pages - no difference or i should say all the difference in the world as to who gets the position.
I truly hope I've helped more than hindered.
I hope y'all have a safe, productive and prosperous New Year!
As always,
Eric
UncaBuffalo:
--- Quote from: Jr8black3 on Jan 01, 2014, 08:31 ---So now according to Eric we are just meter swinging joes,,,good for him I welcome him into my boots any day of the week, I bet he don't show up.
Eric I had a lot of respect for you till you said that. We are the grunts out there making your money, simply horrible, I almost thought about going back to work with ya'll, but after that comment NO..
--- End quote ---
I don't think he meant it as an insult...I certainly didn't take it as such. He was replying to me using the same informal language I'd used with the 'umpteen' and such... I apologize if I should have kept it more formal.
Some of us have grown disillusioned with the 'professional arena' and are happy to be regular meter swingin' joes.
:)
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[*] Previous page
Go to full version