tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4170623839736191950.post5993797849724036777..comments2022-12-03T19:22:46.911-08:00Comments on Safetymatters: Safety culture information, analysis and management: Congressional Panel Slices and Dices Culture in Report on DOE/NNSABob Cudlinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08502712287881656493noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4170623839736191950.post-32503686394724312302015-02-16T16:19:11.939-08:002015-02-16T16:19:11.939-08:00Having read many such reports from within the DOE ...Having read many such reports from within the DOE and DOD plus GAO domains during the past 25 years, I have become inured to the amount of verbiage created to obscure or highlight the central message.<br /><br />Thus for example while there is all the diverse reference to various forms of culture one can find the preeminent intent in this regard in the appendix on draft changes to statutory language. Here we find the following section:<br /><br />"Where appropriate, the Director will rely on national and international consensus standards for achieving these objectives, with the understanding that that goal is to improve performance while reducing inefficient transaction-centered regulation. The orders and directives should account for unique nuclear and high-hazard conditions that may require special considerations (such as in the use of beryllium); and they should establish performance-based, risk-informed guidelines.<br /><br />• Within one year, the Director shall provide the cognizant Committees a report on its plan to transition from compliance-based transactional regulation and oversight of the weapons complex to the adoption of industrial standards with expert validation of performance-based approaches and results."<br /><br />Herein is found the specific intention of this effort and the various interested stakeholders who promoted it into existence. We might term this the "death to the DNFSB oversight" provision. Of course for those familiar with the details of DOE's safety regulation by contract process, it is also a death knell for the provisions of results-based Integrated Safety Management.<br /><br />Generally, this represents a long standing effort to return the management of the Nuclear Weapons enterprise to the "expert system" days of "the scientists know best." The other standard was, The Mission (as defined by DOD) always comes first. Effectively the regulatory reforms of 1988 might appear to be in jeopardy of reversal.<br /><br />As we are no longer at the raging height of the Cold War it is difficult to predict just how much enthusiasm there is, even in the Republican Congress for giving carte blanche to those National Lab Scientists and their Bechtel, et. al. corporate administrators. What seems clear though from any distance is that the work of NNSA is grindingly difficult under the limits of the decision not to test weapons by live fire. <br /><br />What is actually rather laughable is the notion that there is such as thing as "transaction-centered regulation" - this is a real mish-mash of wishful thinking for a return to the heady days of 1980 - I wouldn't count on that happening.Bill Mullinsnoreply@blogger.com