A 2013 IAEA conference focused on the concept of Defense in Depth (DID) and its implementation at nuclear facilities. It was a large-scale event with almost 50 presentations and papers. The published proceedings* run over 350 pages. This post focuses on the treatment of safety culture (SC) by the authors and presenters. The proceedings started off well: SC was explicitly mentioned as a cross-cutting issue in the implementation of DID. (p. 1) In addition, the conference itself was predicated on Fukushima lessons learned which, as everyone now knows, included SC shortcomings in both licensee and government organizations.
But on the
whole the treatment of SC was something of a disappointment. The presentations from Argentina, Pakistan
and Vietnam mentioned SC in passing. The
presentation from Egypt discussed the regulator’s role in SC oversight at
length. (pp. 302-304) Only the following
three presentations gave SC a featured role.
SC in WANO
The World
Association of Nuclear Operators (WANO) presenter said this about SC: “Safety
supposes that no operator feels isolated, or refuses openness and permanent
self-questioning; it requests as well for WANO to ensure that cultural and
sometimes political barriers do not hinder safety culture . . . . In WANO, we
believe that management system and practices are at the centre of safety
culture, and a full involvement of top management (CEOs) of our members is
absolutely requested.”**
SC in Indonesia
Two papers discussed SC at different nuclear facilities in Indonesia. Desirable SC characteristics at both
facilities were based on INSAG-4.
The Experimental Fuel Element
Installation (EFEI)
The
abstract of this paper*** highlighted SC’s role at this facility. “The application of safety culture in a
nuclear facility is one way of DID implementation. Safety culture aims at the performance of safe
works, the prevention of deviation, and the accomplishment of quality
operation. It is in accordance with the
first level of DID concept which is the prevention of abnormal operation and
failures that is done through conservative design and high quality in
construction and operation. . . The objective of safety culture implementation
in the EFEI is to encourage workers to have a stronger sense of responsibility
on safety and to contribute actively for its development” The paper presented a laundry list of
strategies used to strengthen SC including briefings, workshops, training, senior
management visits, integration of safety into work processes, self-assessments,
open reporting on safety incidents, open and timely reporting to the regulator,
evaluation of safety performance indicators and an annual SC questionnaire.
The authors
displayed a bit of realism when they said “Leaders cannot completely control
safety culture, but they may influence it.” (p. 179) They also said their questionnaire results
indicated that EFEI SC is at Stage 2 (from IAEA-TECDOC-1329) where “Safety
becomes an organizational goal.” They
want SC to evolve to Stage 3 where the organization believes “Safety can always
be improved.” (pp. 187-188)
Kartini Research Reactor
This paper****
reported the findings of a SC self-assessment.
The method consisted of questionnaire responses reviewed by
experts. The assessment identified
several good current practices in maintaining the safety status of Kartini
reactor. As supporting evidence, the
authors noted the number of inspection/audit findings from the regulator went
down while reactor utilization and operating hours increased over the past
several years. One opportunity for
improvement was the need for more frequent dialogues between employees and
managers.
Our Perspective
There is
not much SC substance here. The
recitations on SC repeated familiar stuff you’ve seen in lots of places. In other words, zero new information or
insight. The single page WANO
presentation indicates their lowest common denominator audience is even lower
than IAEA’s. Perhaps there were
technical issues discussed at the conference that are of interest to you. Otherwise, don’t invest your coffee break in
going through this lengthy document.
* IAEA, International Conference on TopicalIssues in Nuclear Installation Safety: Defence in Depth — Advances andChallenges for Nuclear Installation Safety, Oct. 21-24, 2013 ConferenceProceedings, IAEA-TECDOC-CD-1749 (Vienna, 2014). We are grateful to Madalina Tronea for
publicizing this material. Dr. Tronea is
the founder and moderator of the LinkedIn Nuclear Safety Culture forum.
** J. Regaldo, “WANO Actions to Reinforce the Operators’
Safety Culture Worldwide,” p. 147.
*** H. Hardiyanti, B. Herutomo and G. K.
Suryaman, “Safety Culture as a Pillar of Defense-in-Depth Implementation at the
Experimental Fuel Element Installation, Batan, Indonesia,” pp. 173-188.
**** S. Syarip, “Safety Management and Safety
Culture Self Assessment of Kartini Research Reactor,” pp. 321-326.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thanks for your comment. We read them all. The moderator will publish comments that are related to our content.