View
221
Download
2
Category
Tags:
Preview:
Citation preview
Panel Discussion Safety Culture
Richard Lagdon, Chief of Nuclear Safety, Office of the Under Secretary for Nuclear Security
Panel Members
Matthew Moury, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Safety, Security and Quality
Programs Office of Environmental Management
Don Nichols,Associate Administrator for Safety and HealthNational Nuclear Security Administration
Carol Sohn,Chief Nuclear Safety, Office of Science
Safety Culture Overview
Panel Members Definition Principles DNFSB Recommendation 2011-1 Recent Improvements in the Project Management
Order Considerations for Construction Projects
3
Safety Culture - Definition
An organization’s values and behaviors, modeled by its leaders, and internalized by its members, which serve to make safe performance of work the overriding priority to protect workers, the public, and the environment.
DOE Integrated Safety Management Guide
4
Safety Culture Attributes
Leadership Demonstrated safety leadership Risk-informed, conservative decision making Management engagement and time in field Staff recruitment, selection, retention, and
development Open communication and fostering an
environment free from retribution Clear expectations and accountability DOE Guide 450.1c, Integrated Safety Management Guide, Attachment 10
5
Safety Culture Attributes (Continued)
Employee/Worker Engagement Personal commitment to everyone’s safetyTeamwork and mutual respect Participation in work planning and improvement Mindful of hazards and controls
6DOE Guide 450.1c, Integrated Safety Management Guide, Attachment 10
Safety Culture Attributes (Continued)
Organizational Learning Credibility, trust and reporting errors and
problems Effective resolution of reported problems Performance monitoring through multiple
means Use of operational experience Questioning attitude
DOE Guide 450.1c, Integrated Safety Management Guide, Attachment 10
Safety Culture –2011-1
Initial concern raised by a WTP contractor employee to the DNFSB
Board issued Recommendation 2011-1, Safety Culture at the Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant
Assert Federal control at the highest level
Conduct an extent of condition review
Conduct a non-adversarial review and determine impact on Safety Culture
8
Safety Culture
S-1/S-2 Dec 5, 2011 Memo Nuclear Safety at the Department of Energy
DOE is Committed to a strong and sustained safety culture
A strong safety culture is embedded in DOE’s objective of management and operational excellence
No retaliation for raising concerns
9
Lessons Learned
Line Management must walk the talkHave a regular presence in the work place Show interest when walking the floorReward those with the courage to raise issues Follow up promptly and visibly on all issues raised
Delays in addressing raised issues undermines safety cultureDelays sends the message that line management doesn’t
care about safetyDevalues the risk that employee took in raising issue
10
New PM Order Improvements& Safety Culture
Design Reviews - Design sufficiently mature prior to CD-2 and reviewed by OECM as part of EIR
Design Maturity - Prior to CD-3 approval, the Final Design must be complete and reviewed to determine that the design is sufficiently mature to start procurement or construction.
Safety Design Strategy - Prepare SDS at CD-1 and update SDS at CD-2 and CD-3;
Code of Record - Created Requirement for definition of the body of requirements for a nuclear project
Design Authority - Defines Design Authority as the engineer who establishes design requirements; provides design control and technical adequacy
•
11
CONSIDERATIONS FOR EXISTING NUCLEAR PROJECTS
12
Business process improvements Transfer/designation of design authority Sharing of lessons learned Establishing expectations Design completion/design
margin Construction Project Reviews Standard processes for issue identification/resolution Matching skill sets with the oversight functions Establishing risk acceptance
Transition from a design/testing organization to construction/commissioning
Questions
Please comment on this…It appears our safety culture has tilted. In some instances, our
greatest nuclear safety risks are upon us – here and now – like liquid radioactive waste in aging tanks – but, we delay addressing those risks by
trying to trying to achieve perfection by minimizing the potential of future risks decades
from now.
Questions
Have we gone over the top? Has the nuclear safety culture gone too far with
respect to the amount of dollars spent on planning before we actually start
construction? Is the nuclear industry pricing themselves out of the market, and within DOE, meeting our nuclear mission
and cleanup requirements?
Questions
Are you aware of instances where the application of a graded approach to Safety has been used successfully to improve the timeliness and cost effectiveness of project
delivery? If so, can you provide some information regarding the approach?
Questions
WTP has received a lot of high-level attention with respect to safety, what fallout for this do you see for the rest
of the complex?
Questions
Do peer reviews have a positive or negative effect on the safety culture at
nuclear projects?
Questions
From a safety culture perspective, how do regulatory oversight organizations hurt or help the nuclear safety culture
in DOE?
Questions
Are there any new nuclear safety regulations coming? If so, will these improve the safety culture in DOE?
Questions
Is our safety culture on large nuclear projects real or perceived? Are there examples of “just going through the
motions” with respect to safety? Your thoughts?
Questions
Would more widespread use of a design-bid-build project delivery
method, as opposed to fast-tracking projects so that design and
construction overlap, make Nuclear Safety Management more
straightforward? In what way?
Questions
To what extent are some of our safety culture issues attributable to trying to
stretch technology too far, too fast?
Recommended