Improved nuclear power plant operations and safety through performance-based safety regulation

Golay, Michael W.

doi:10.1016/s0304-3894(99)00080-1

Cited by 11 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The traditional regulatory approach has been the use of prescriptive regulations governing licensing and operation of nuclear power plants that one expert characterizes as “a long, fragmented checklist of requirements that safety‐related systems in a plant must satisfy” for which “[t]he consistency of this checklist and its ability to promote uniform levels of safety among different power stations is questionable” (Golay 2000, p. 221). That approach is being transformed with what the NRC labels as risk‐informed regulation as a basis for setting priorities for regulatory standards and activities.…”

Section: Experiences With Newer Regulatory Regimesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The NRC risk‐informed approach shifts the emphasis in accountability from bureaucratic accountability involving detailed inspections of nuclear power plants to greater emphasis on professional accountability of plant operators for adequate safety systems as overseen by NRC inspectors and staff. Under traditional, prescriptive approaches the long checklist of safety requirements and the thousands of hours of monitoring individual plants leads to power plant owners, according to one experienced nuclear engineering expert, to “commonly treat satisfaction of the NRC’s requirements as being a sufficient effort for accident prevention and mitigation” (Golay 2000, p. 221) thereby placing emphasis on NRC bureaucratic controls in determining the adequacy of safety. The risk‐informed approach attempts to shift this balance toward greater responsibility of nuclear power plant operators for identifying potential safety issues and for NRC inspectors to focus on noteworthy potential risks.…”

Section: Experiences With Newer Regulatory Regimesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Regulatory regimes and accountability

May

2007

Regulation & Governance

171

129

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This research considers accountability issues for new forms of regulation that shift the emphasis from prescribing actions to regulating systems or regulating for results. Shortfalls at various levels of accountability are identified from experiences with these regimes in the regulation of building and fire safety, food safety and nuclear power plant safety. These experiences illustrate how accountability shortfalls can undermine regulatory performance and introduce a potential for subtle forms of regulatory capture. These concerns underscore the importance of finding the right fit between regulatory circumstances and the design of regulatory regimes.

show abstract

Section: Experiences With Newer Regulatory Regimesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Experiences With Newer Regulatory Regimesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Regulatory regimes and accountability

May

2007

Regulation & Governance

171

129

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In addition, we looked at the methods for questioning experts used in these different approaches: LCM (Life Cycle Management) [9], TRIZ-AFD (for Anticipatory Failure Determination, as well as for identifying solutions and design-support) [10,11], RIPBR (Risk-Informed, Performance-Based Regulation in nuclear safety and maintenance support) [12],…”

Section: Tools and Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Anticipating aging failure using feedback data and expert judgment

Pérès

Bouzaïene

Bocquet

et al. 2007

Reliability Engineering & System Safety

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents a methodology for anticipating failures in a component up to the end of its life cycle. Often, feedback data is not sufficient and must be complemented by the analysis of expert judgment. The methodology developed aims at anticipating the degradation mechanisms responsible for aging, and evaluating their relevance and related uncertainties. This is necessary information for risk analysis related to the operating of a component up to the end of its life cycle. Lastly, the methodology is applied to a nuclear component.

show abstract

“…The shortcomings of prescriptive-based regulation, particularly in the safety of nuclear industry, have been studied extensively in the US. Findings by the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) (as cited by Golay, 2000) have pointed to several issues with the prescriptive method, four of which include:…”

Section: The Balance Between Prescriptive-and Performance-based Regulmentioning

confidence: 99%

Industry Best Practice for Airport Construction Safety and Phasing Plans (CSPPs)

Horst

Murray

2014

T&DI Congress 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A Construction Safety and Phasing Plan (CSPP) is a necessary document for any airport construction project that could have an impact on normal airport operations. The basic intent of every CSPP is to minimize risk and maintain safe airport operations while construction activities proceed. However, the requirements for such documents vary significantly around the world.Currently there is no readily available source of information that identifies the differences in CSPP requirements between ICAO contracting States. This can pose a challenge for consultancies and engineering firms breaking away from domestic markets or participating in overseas projects for the first time. Consequently it may be a challenge for many firms to implement a best practice approach to CSPP development where there is very little documentation of what is best practice.In this regard, this paper will present research that identifies some of the key differences that exist in the published requirements and practical development of airport CSPPs throughout many ICAO States. The paper will also identify, at the fundamental level, what can be argued as the existing industry best practice for CSPP development. This will be supported by empirical research and guiding principles found in project management research and the study of human factors. This paper will conclude with an identification of best practices for CSPP development and put forth recommendations concerning future CSPP regulation.

show abstract

Improved nuclear power plant operations and safety through performance-based safety regulation

Cited by 11 publications

References 2 publications

Regulatory regimes and accountability

Regulatory regimes and accountability

Anticipating aging failure using feedback data and expert judgment

Industry Best Practice for Airport Construction Safety and Phasing Plans (CSPPs)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About