Objective To preliminarily compare ⁶LiF-⁷LiF and CR39 in individual neutron dose monitoring, and to provide a reference for improving individual neutron dose monitoring. Methods According to the GBZ 128-2019, 26 radiation workers from 7 institutions received individual neutron dose monitoring with ⁶LiF-⁷LiF and CR39 at the same time. The monitoring results were analyzed. Results For most of the workers, the personal neutron dose equivalent H_p(10) was less than the minimum detectable level. The results with the two monitoring methods differed in 6 of 26 workers. Conclusion Both ⁶LiF-⁷LiF and CR39 monitoring methods can be used for individual neutron dose monitoring for radiation workers, but the difference between ⁶LiF-⁷LiF and CR39 (in threshold energy, energy response, etc.) should be considered so that different types of radiation workers receive appropriate individual neutron dose monitoring.

Objective To analyze the process of intercomparison of national personal dose monitoring, evaluate the ability of personal dose monitoring, and ensure the accuracy and reliability of monitoring results in our laboratory. Methods In accordance with the intercomparison protocol for 2019—2021, an energy-discriminant thermoluminescence dosimeter was used for measurement at different doses. The uncertainty of measurement was evaluated and compared with the reference value. Results H_p(10) was measured for intercomparison in 2019—2021. In 2019, the single group performance difference was −0.02 to 0.02 and the comprehensive performance was 0.02. These values were 0.02-0.10 and 0.05 in 2020, and −0.02 to 0.02 and 0.01 in 2021. The intercomparison results were rated as excellent in the three consecutive years. Conclusion The personal dose monitoring system in our laboratory was in good condition, and the monitoring results were accurate and reliable. Improving the knowledge of personnel and cultivating a serious working attitude are important for intercomparison and personal dose monitoring.