Challenges in performing technical safety reviews of modifications – A case study

The aim of the present study, is to identify strengths and weaknesses of the technical safety review process at a Swedish Nuclear Power Plant (NPP). In this context, the function of safety reviews are understood as expert judgements on proposals for design modifications1 and redesign of technical systems (i.e. commercial nuclear reactors), supported by formalised safety review processes. The chosen methodology is using two complementary methods: interviews of personnel performing safety reviews, and analysis of safety review reports from 2005 to 2009.The study shows that personal integrity is a trademark of the review staff and there are sufficient support systems to ensure high quality. The partition between primary and independent review is positive, having different focus and staff with different skills and perspectives making the reviews, which implies supplementary roles. The process contributes to “getting the right things done the right way”. The study also shows that though efficient communication, feedback, processes for continuous improvement, and “learning organizations” are well known success factors in academia, it is not that simple to implement and accomplish in real life.It is argued that future applications of safety review processes should focus more on communicating and clarifying the process and its adherent requirements, and improve the feedback system within the process.

► The study has identified a tendency to put too much resource on smaller assignments.
► A clearer prioritization would improve focus on the most critical projects.
► Structured experience feedback must be integrated in the safety review process.
► There is a need for improved guidance and direction for how to structure the work.
► It is recommended that the NPPs create introductory training for new reviewers.