Nuclear Gauge Supervisor Licence Conditions in Qatar
October 7, 2026
11 min read
DITEC Experts, Radiation Protection Team, ALDuha Institute for Training and Environmental Consulting
The entry that opens the nuclear gauges group
One point before anything else. Meeting the conditions in the Decision is what you can prepare for. Whether a licence is granted, and when, is a decision of the competent authority alone, and nothing in this explanation and nothing in any course is a commitment that a licence will be issued or that it will be issued within a given period. What this article does is set out the condition as the instrument states it and point to the training that bears on it.
A nuclear gauge directs a beam from a sealed source through the material it measures. It sits on a pipe measuring density, on a tank measuring level, on a conveyor measuring thickness, or in a case carried to a site to measure the wet density and the moisture content of soil. A fixed installation works with its beam on, and its shutter is closed, and the closure established by measurement, when someone has to enter the beam path or work at the gauge; a portable instrument lowers a source rod into the material and retracts it to a shielded position between readings. A gauge is undramatic to look at and routine to use, and the licence file is the part of it that most often turns out to be incomplete.
The Qatari framework licenses this practice in four separate entries, and they are items 7, 8, 9 and 10 of the industrial applications in the schedule attached to Decision 4 of 2007: the supervisor, the operator of portable gauges, the operator of fixed gauges, and the operator of devices for calibrating gauges. This article reads the first of them. One point of orientation before the conditions themselves: they are in the schedule attached to the Decision rather than in the body of it: the preamble records that it was issued having regard to the Executive Regulation and in particular to Article 25 of it, and on the recommendation of the Radiation Protection Committee, and the issuing article does one thing only: the conditions for licences to work in the fields of radiation work, attached to this Decision, shall apply. So a reader who opens the Decision and reads the article that issues it finds a referral and no conditions.
Item 7 is short, it sets five conditions, and three features of its wording are worth isolating before it is read as a whole, because each of the three is a place where a file is commonly assembled against a requirement the item does not impose, or where a candidate is excused from one it does. Its academic condition is written without the phrase at minimum. Its nuclear gauges course is named with nothing said about where the course is to come from. And its experience condition names a number of years and no field at all.
The opening formula, and the five conditions
Item 7 opens with the formula that opens each of the four gauges entries: the following conditions must be present in the person who is granted a licence to work as a nuclear gauge supervisor. The formula attaches the conditions to a person and not to an employer, requires them cumulatively, and ties the licence to a named function. A company does not hold a supervisor licence for its gauges, and a maintenance engineer who signs the gauge register is not a supervisor because the plant organisation chart calls him one.
Then come five conditions. The academic condition is that he hold the first university degree in engineering or sciences. The first training condition is that he pass a training course in the field of nuclear gauges. The second is that he pass a training course in radiation protection in industrial applications from an approved centre. The experience condition is that he have practical experience of not less than two years. And the fifth is that he pass the prescribed medical examination.
Take the academic condition first. The field is fixed to engineering or sciences and the level is a first university degree, and the phrase at minimum does not appear in it. The supervisor entry in the well logging group, item 4, writes the same certificate in the same two fields and adds that phrase: that he hold the first university degree in engineering or sciences, at minimum. We record the difference in wording between the two entries and we do not read a rule into it. We will not tell you that item 7 therefore excludes a higher degree, and we will not tell you that it does not: the item names a level and says nothing about what sits above it, and how a particular qualification is placed against that level, and how equivalence is treated, is for the competent authority. Put the question in the words of the item.
Two courses, described differently in the same item
The two training conditions in item 7 are the part of the entry that repays the closest reading, because the item treats the two courses differently in one respect and a file assembled quickly will not notice. Both are training courses. Their subjects differ: one is in the field of nuclear gauges, the other is radiation protection in industrial applications. And the second carries a description of where it is to come from, from an approved centre, while the first carries no such description at all.
The portable gauge entry below it, item 8, writes its nuclear gauges condition as that he pass a training course in the field of nuclear gauges from an approved centre, that is, with the description present. So inside the gauges group the same course subject appears once with that description and once without it. We record that and we build nothing on it. What we will not do is the thing a reader is tempted to do here, which is to conclude that the supervisor may therefore take his gauges course from anybody. The item is silent, and silence in an instrument is not permission: it is a question for the Ministry, and it is a question worth putting in writing before a course is paid for rather than after a certificate is in a file.
The practical consequence of the two conditions being two is simpler and it is the finding that recurs most often in our reviews. One certificate cannot answer both. A nuclear gauges course that contains a module on radiation safety does not discharge the protection condition, and a radiation protection course that uses a gauge as its worked example does not discharge the gauges condition. The subjects are named separately in the item and they are evidenced separately in the file. A file that offers one combined certificate against both of them evidences four of the five conditions of item 7 and looks complete.
The fifth condition, the medical examination, says that the examination is the prescribed one, and item 7 does not set out its content. Ask the Ministry which examination is prescribed, by what standard and at what interval, and keep the answer in writing with the licence file. The prescribed medical examination is a fitness condition for the licence. It is not a protective measure, it does not stand in for any course the item names, and it does not stand in for anything in operational protection.
Two years of experience, in nothing in particular
The experience condition in item 7 is the shortest in the entry and the one we spend the most time on with clients, because of what it does not contain. It reads that he have practical experience of not less than two years. It gives a number of years, it describes the experience as practical, and it names no field. The portable gauge entry below it is written the same way: that he have practical experience of not less than one year, again with no field named.
Set that against item 4, the well logging supervisor entry this series read in its previous batch, where the same condition is tied to a field. Item 4 reads that he have practical experience in well logging of not less than five years. The words that do the tying, naming the practice, are present there and absent here. That is a difference in the wording of the instrument between two entries of the same schedule, and we record it and read no rule into it.
What we tell a client to do with that is narrow and it is not a reading of the item. Do not build a file on the assumption that any two years will be accepted, and do not build one on the assumption that only two years with gauges will be. Document what you actually have, in the terms the item uses and then in terms of the practice: the dates, the employer, that the experience was practical rather than academic, and separately what the work involved and whether it involved gauges or sources at all. Then put the condition to the Ministry as it is written, with that record attached, and ask whether it is satisfied. A record that says what happened can be read against whatever answer comes back. A record built on a guess about the answer cannot.
The four gauges entries compared
The table compares items 7, 8, 9 and 10 of the industrial applications. It is a reading of those four items, all four of which are quoted in full on the Arabic version of these four articles, and nothing is added to it. Reading them side by side is the fastest way to see that the four entries are not four grades of one licence: they differ in the number of conditions, not only in their level.
Items 7 to 10 of the industrial applications
| Condition | Supervisor, item 7 | Portable, item 8 | Fixed, item 9 | Calibration devices, item 10 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Academic level | First university degree in engineering or sciences, with the phrase at minimum not used | General secondary certificate or its equivalent, with the phrase at minimum not used | The general secondary certificate, at minimum, and the words or its equivalent do not appear | Diploma in a branch of engineering or a second field whose word is in doubt, two years after general secondary, at minimum |
| Nuclear gauges course | Required, with nothing said about its source | Required, from an approved centre | Not named in the item | Required, with nothing said about its source |
| Industrial radiation protection course | Required, from an approved centre | Required, from an approved centre | Required, from an approved centre | Required, from an approved centre |
| Experience | Practical, not less than two years, with no field named | Practical, not less than one year, with no field named | No experience condition in the item | No experience condition in the item |
| Prescribed medical examination | Required | Required | Required | Required |
| Number of conditions in the item | Five | Five | Three | Four |
What to settle before the file is assembled
The condition is one thing and the file that demonstrates it is another. Below is the order we use when a client asks us to look at a gauge supervisor file before it is submitted. It is the Institute's own working practice, and the items set out in this explanation impose no form of file.
Preparing a gauge supervisor file
Buy the two courses as two courses
- The gauges condition and the protection condition are two of the five conditions of item 7, with different subjects. A single combined certificate answers one of them and leaves the other without evidence, so a file with five conditions evidences four and reads as complete.
- If budget forces an order, note that the protection course is the one this item describes as coming from an approved centre and the gauges course is the one it leaves undescribed. That is a reason to settle the gauges course in writing first, not a reason to delay either.
Ask about the undescribed course before you book it
- The item names the gauges course and says nothing about its source, where it describes the protection course as from an approved centre in the same item. Silence is not permission and it is not a prohibition. The useful step is a written enquiry that names your course and your provider, quotes the condition, and asks whether it is satisfied.
Document the two years as what they were, not as what you hope counts
- The condition names a number and describes the experience as practical, and it names no field. So record the dates, the employer and the nature of the work, and record separately whether gauges or sources were involved. Then ask. A record of what happened survives whichever way the answer goes.
- If the two years are being gained now, create the records while they are being gained. They cannot be reconstructed later from a shift roster.
Settle the medical examination once for the whole site
- The condition that he pass the prescribed medical examination is identical in all four gauges entries, so one written answer from the Ministry about which examination is prescribed and at what interval serves every licence holder on the site.
- The examination itself is a condition on an individual, so one person's examination does not stand in for another's and each licence holder keeps his own record.
Questions we are asked about this item
Does item 7 require the gauges course to come from a particular kind of provider?
The condition names the course and says nothing about where it is to come from, while the protection condition in the same item describes its source. We record that difference and we do not read either a permission or a restriction into the silence, because the item does not supply one. The portable gauge entry below it writes the same course subject with that description present, which is a further reason to settle the question in writing rather than by inference. Name your course and your provider, quote the condition, and ask the Ministry.
I have twelve years on rotating equipment and none with gauges. Does that count?
The condition asks for practical experience of not less than two years and it names no field, so on its wording it does not require the years to have been with gauges and it does not say that years in another discipline satisfy it either. That is a question the Ministry answers and we will not answer it for it. What we advise is to put the record of what you actually did in front of the question rather than behind it: dates, employer, the practical nature of the work, and a separate statement of whether it involved gauges or sources.
Can one supervisor licence cover all the gauges on a plant?
The wording attaches the conditions to a person: they must be present in the one who is granted a licence to work as a nuclear gauge supervisor. So the licence is personal and is not a corporate permission over a population of gauges. How many licensed persons a given plant needs, and what the authority attaches as a condition when it grants the licence, are matters for the Ministry and for the conditions of the facility licence, read together rather than from this item alone.
I have the degree and the courses but not the two years. Is there a route?
The third part of the schedule provides for exactly that situation: a licence to practise radiation work as a trainee is granted to a person in whom the conditions of the licence sought are present with the exception of the experience condition, and then in that case he may not practise radiation work except under the supervision of a licensed person. So the exception is for the experience condition and for that condition only. The degree, both courses and the medical examination all still have to be present, and the practice is under supervision.
Our gauges are a type the four entries do not describe. What then?
The third part of the schedule provides for that too: licence applications for the specialities that are not stated in these instructions are referred to the Radiation Protection Committee to decide on them, and the Committee shall be guided by international instructions and standards, in particular those issued by the International Atomic Energy Agency. So the route is referral and the decision is the Committee's, and the guidance it is directed to is named in the provision. The provision does not give you the alternative of applying the conditions of the nearest listed entry to yourself, and in our practice that assumption is the error we see: in this group it usually means taking the fixed gauge entry to govern because it asks for least.
A technical note: the licence is not the protection
A technical note, and it is the most important passage on this page. The conditions in this Decision are licensing conditions, not site work instructions. Meeting them, and any licence that may follow, replaces nothing in operational protection, and no course makes anyone safe by itself. One rule governs every judgement about where a source is: it is settled by measurement, never by inference.
The measurement is made by the licensee, through a person qualified to make it, and the instrument has to respond to the radiation actually present and at the energies present. For a gamma source that means a gamma survey meter within its calibration validity and response-checked before work starts. Where the equipment also carries a source for measuring moisture content, the instrument has to respond to neutrons as well, because a gamma-only meter can read clean standing beside an unshielded neutron source.
What does not count is an inference. Not a mechanical indicator, not a position switch, not a painted mark, and not the fact that the work went as planned. And if the measurement does not establish that the source is shielded, the work stops where it is, no one approaches the equipment, and the licensee acts on his own emergency arrangements and notifies the Ministry. These are obligations on the licensee under the Law, the Regulation and the conditions of his own licence, and their place is not this Decision.
This entry supervises both kinds of installation, so both resting states matter. A fixed gauge is not a sealed box that nobody touches: it is subject to periodic leak testing, shutter function checks, inspection of the source holder and the mounting, and checks that its labels are still legible, and its source has a finite working life and a defined return route at the end of it. The high dose potential in that practice is not the running gauge; it is entry into the beam path, work or scaffolding at the gauge, and removal during pipework change, and the shutter is closed and the closure established by measurement before any of them. A portable instrument has no shutter in that sense: its safe state is the source rod fully retracted and latched in its shielded position, and that too is established by measurement. The supervisor who accepts an indicator in place of a measurement, in either case, has accepted the one thing this note exists to refuse.
How the Institute can help
Two findings recur on gauge supervisor files. The first is one combined certificate offered against both training conditions, so a file with five conditions evidences four while appearing complete, and the certificate that is usually folded into the other is the protection one. The second is two years of experience documented as a job title and a date range, against a condition that describes the experience as practical and names no field, which leaves the file unable to answer whichever way the authority reads it.
The Institute delivers radiation protection training for industrial applications, reviews a licence file against item 7 condition by condition, drafts the enquiry to the Ministry about the standing of a named gauges course at a named provider and about the prescribed medical examination, and advises on the written records that let two years of practical experience be read against whatever the authority asks for. The nuclear gauges training the Decision names is a separate qualification obtained from a provider that offers it, and the Institute does not issue it. What the Institute delivers is the radiation protection course in industrial applications that all four of these items name as a subject; whether a particular course at a particular centre satisfies the approved-centre limb of the condition is for the Ministry to say.
Scope of what the Institute does: training and consulting. Field radiation surveys are carried out through specialist partners. The Institute does not carry out laboratory analysis, instrument calibration or equipment testing.
A note on the source of a course in these four items. All four of them ask for the radiation protection course in industrial applications to come from a centre that the Decision describes with an Arabic word this explanation renders as approved. The nuclear gauges course is treated differently between the items: in the portable gauge entry it is to come from a centre described with that same word, and in the supervisor entry and the calibration devices entry the condition names the course and says nothing at all about where it is to come from. The items set out in this explanation do not define the term, do not say who gives that approval, and do not say whether it is a general status or given for a particular course. Where the description does appear, it qualifies the provider of the training and no other party. The English word is a rendering chosen for this explanation and is not a term of art: our practical reading is to ask in the Arabic wording of the item, naming the specific course and the specific provider, and to keep the answer in writing, because what the instrument leaves open the authority settles. The Institute is a licensed training provider and describes itself that way and no other way.
A note on the authority named in the text. The word the Decision uses for the authority is the Council. It is the word of a 2007 instrument whose preamble refers to the Executive Regulation issued by decision of the President of the Supreme Council for the Environment and Natural Reserves, number 4 of 2003. The body that word names no longer exists. Competence today sits with the Ministry of Environment and Climate Change, and the unit concerned is named in the organisational decisions as the Radiation Protection Department. The word Council is kept only where this explanation renders what the instrument itself says, because that is the instrument's own word; in the Institute's own advice it is written as the Ministry. Read Council as the Ministry throughout.
This explanation is published for awareness by the radiation protection team at ALDuha Institute for Training and Environmental Consulting. The English text is an explanation, not a certified translation: the Arabic text published in the Official Gazette governs in case of any difference, and the official Arabic wording of every condition discussed here is quoted in full on the Arabic version of this article. This explanation is introductory. It is not a legal opinion, it does not replace the conditions of your own licence, and it does not replace review by the regulator. Last updated 7 October 2026.