Abstract
In the nuclear industry, throughout the lifecycle of a nuclear plant or facility, operations vary in the degree of their tractability. Commissioned facilities should be relatively predictable in their operations, whereas decommissioning operations by their nature tend to be less predictable because they are a transition from one state to another, where safety systems, structures, components, and people serving safety may all change. Of course, different operations or states will have different characteristics and varying safety requirements. In this paper, we argue that by accounting for operations according to their relative tractability for their given phase in the lifecycle of a facility, a more targeted approach to managing safety is possible—one that recognises that the less tractable operation relies on human adaptation and resilience to a greater degree than the more tractable operation. From the outset, the safety of a decommissioning operation may therefore require a thorough account of the human and organisational factors that will support or impair human adaptation and resilience. High Reliability Organisation theory may provide a useful framework to consider how to engineer resilience in decommissioning and other operations of a less tractable nature.



Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.References
Baker DP, Day R, Salas E (2006) Teamwork as an essential component of high-reliability organizations. Health Serv Res 41(4, Part II):1576–1598
Benn J, Healey AN, Hollnagel E (2007) Improving performance reliability in surgical systems. Cogn Tech Work 10(4):323–333
Burke CS, Wilson KA, Salas E (2005) The use of a team-based strategy for organizational transformation: guidance for moving toward a high reliability organization. Theor Issue Ergon Sci 6(6):509–530
Chadwick C, Hunter LW, Walston SL (2004) Effects of downsizing practice on the performance of hospitals. Strateg Manag J 25(2):405–427
Davey E (2005) Incorporating human factors in decommissioning projects—opportunities for adapting application
Eurocontrol (2009) A white paper on resilience engineering for air traffic management (ATM)
Guardian (2009) Sizewell nuclear disaster averted by dirty laundry, says official report Mark Gould. http://www.guardian.co.uk. Accessed 20 Apr 2011
Heinrich HW (1931) Industrial accident prevention. McGraw-Hill, New York
Hofmann DA, Jacobs RR, Landy F (1995) High reliability process industries: individual, micro, and macro organizational influences on safety performance. J Saf Res 26(3):131–149
Hollnagel E, Woods DD, Leveson N (2006) Resilience engineering: concepts and precepts. Ashgate, Aldershot
HSE (2000) Technical assessment guide: fault analysis. T/AST/044 issue 1, p 2
IAEA (2004) Technical report series no. 420, Transition from operation to decommissioning of nuclear installations, STI/DOC/010/420
La-Porte R (1996) High reliability organizations: unlikely, demanding and at risk. J Conting Crisis Manag 4(2):60
La Porte T, Consolini P (1991) Working in practice but not in theory: theoretical challenges of “high-reliability organizations”. J Public Adm Res Theory 1(1):19–47
La Porte T, Consolini P (1998) Theoretical and operational challenges of “high-reliability organizations”: air-traffic control and aircraft carriers. Int J Public Adm 21(6–8):847–852
Leveson N (2004) A new accident model for engineering safer systems. Saf Sci 42(4):237–270
McKinley W, Sanchez CM, Schick AG (1995) Organizational downsizing: constraining, cloning, learning. Acad Manag Executive 9(3):32–44
New Energy Focus (2009) Magnox fined over 14-year leak at Bradwell nuclear site. http://www.NewEnergyFocus.com. Accessed 20 Apr 2011
ONR (2006) Safety assessment principles for nuclear facilities. Revision 1
Reason J (1990) Human error. Cambridge University Press, New York
Roberts KH (1990a) Managing high-reliability organizations. Calif Manag Rev 32(4):101–113
Roberts KH (1990b) Some characteristics of one type of high reliability organization. Organ Sci 1(2):160–176
Roberts KH, Rousseau DM (1989) Research in nearly failure-free, high-reliability organizations—having the bubble. IEEE Trans Eng Manag 36(2):132–139
Rochlin GI (1993) Defining “high reliability” organizations in practice: a taxonomic prologue. In: Roberts K (ed) New challenges to understanding organizations. Macmillan, New York, pp 11–32
Rochlin GI (1996) Reliable organizations: present research and future directions. J Conting Crisis Manag 4(2):55
Rouse WB, Cannon-Bowers JA, Salas E (1992) The role of mental models in team performance in complex systems. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern A Syst Hum 22:1296–1308
Sasou K, Reason J (1999) Team errors: definition and taxonomy. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 65:1–9
Sinclair MA (2007) Ergonomic issues in future systems. Ergonomics 50(12):1957–1986
The (Baker et al.) (2007) Report of the BP US Refineries Independent Safety Review Panel http://www.safetyreviewpanel.com
Weick KE, Sutcliffe KM (2001) Managing the unexpected: assuring high performance in an age of complexity. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Owen, C., Healey, A.N. & Benn, J. Widening the scope of human factors safety assessment for decommissioning. Cogn Tech Work 15, 59–66 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-012-0219-6
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-012-0219-6