Peer review teams

Additionally process safety requires teams. Teams are often brought together to perform PHAs or hazard identifications, PSSRs, or to review MOC plans. Teams are sometimes used to write and/or review operating procedures. Teams facilitate bringing together the SMEs assigned to a task. Here SMEs can interact to be sure all aspects of the task are addressed. Further peer review teams may be used to ensure that nothing important is overlooked, misinterpreted, or miscalculated. These team activities are consistent with a matrix structure. 

Improve constantly and forever, every process for planning, production, and service. Seek continuous improvement in policies and procedures utilizing employees as well as management as peer review team members. Identify ways to reduce costs and maintain appropriate health and safety measures. 

You should consider obtaining internal and external quality assurance reviews of the study (to ferret out errors in modeling, data, etc.). Independent peer reviews of the QRA results can be helpful by presenting alternate viewpoints, and you should include outside experts (either consultants or personnel from another plant) on the QRA review panel. You should also set up a mechanism wherein disputes between QRA team members (e.g., technical arguments about safety issues) can be voiced and reconciled. All of these factors play an essential role in producing a defendable, high-quality QRA. Once the QRA is complete, you must formally document your response to the project team s final report and any recommendations it contains. 

The teaching unit consisted of four sections, which were optimised and peer reviewed within the LON project team and were published on the project website. All the sections had similar stmctures with regard to the representational triplet (Table 13.2). 

The team members must represent the various scientific disciplines that are associated with the experimental processes of Interest. The methodology requires the design team to meet several times over a period of several weeks to carry out a set of formal agendas described below and to conclude Its efforts with a formal document. The document will contain either a detailed experimental design that meets the constraints of the envisioned test program, or the document will show that an acceptable experimental design does not exist and the envisioned experiment should not be Implemented. In either case, the detailed documentation permits subsequent peer review. 

A joint Russian and American team of physicists created two new super heavy elements—115 and 113—that provide more support for the island of stability concept. The experiments were conducted between July 14 and August 10 in 2003, but the results of the experiments were not published until February 2004. The experiments were conducted in the Joint Institute of Nuclear Research (JINR) in Dubna, Russia, and also involved the scientists of the Lawrence Berkely National Laboratory located at Berkeley, California. Only four atoms of two isotopes of ununpentium (element 115) were produced, and the results were published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal. Following is the nuclear reaction that produced these four atoms ... 

Internal peer reviews can enhance quality—Team members with relevant knowledge of the analysis process are better prepared to review each other s work and provide constructive critique. 

The NEA-TDB Phase 11 Review Teams, comprising internationally recognised experts in the field of chemical thermodymanics, exercise their scientific judgement in an independent way during the preparation of the review reports. The work of these Review Teams has also been subjected to further independent peer review. 

III) Encoding and Testing Peer review (overall check) Team development (team check against itself) Use of approved standards (format like modules alike) Various code and data flow... 

At sites in the St. Louis area where cleanup efforts are well underway the work Is being carried out under hazard mitigation plans developed and peer reviewed as team efforts by the agencies and firms mentioned previously(l)These plans list as key components ... 

The virtual instrument shown in Figure 57.7 has been designed to easily acquire and compile performance information with respect to institution-wide competencies. It has been created to allow every member of a team or department to participate in the evaluation of a co-worker (360 peer review). Upon... 

To this end, audits are a peer review. A typical audit team consists of twenty to thirty people with approximately 80 percent of the team coming from various SUBSAFE facilities around the country and the remaining 20 percent coming from NAVSEA headquarters. An audit is considered a team effort—the facility being audited is expected to help the audit team make the audit report as accurate and meaningful as possible. 

As part of the analysis process it was required that all analyses were peer reviewed and then updated to take account of the comments raised in the review. The Czech team leaders undertook an additional review of each analysis and die analysis report in particular to confirm that it met the required technical standard. All work was countersigned to indicate that such a review has taken place and found to be acceptable. 

Assessment of a testing laboratory to the ISO 17025 standard is conducted against a schedule, which is a matrix of sample types tested, determinants measured, and the methods used. The laboratory may perform a much wider range of tests than those for which it seeks accreditation, but these will not be included in the assessment. The assessment team will include experienced analysts to ensure that the latest or most appropriate methods of test are used, that method validation studies have been made and recorded, and that appropriate QC is being conducted, including participation in proficiency-testing schemes where available. They also ensure that instruments are used and calibrated to meet the demands of the test methods. Another peer review aspect is the witnessing by assessors of a selection of the tests from the schedule. The assessors also ensure, of course, that all the other requirements of ISO 17025 are met (Table 1). 

Reporting results is best achieved using the sensory maps with recommendations and avoiding the use of means tables unless there is a specific need. Unlike a peer reviewed article, such details can be confusing to the non-scientist looking for a specific course of action. To be effective, it is often helpful to have a project team sample the products with scorecard and definitions in hand as the results are displayed. An example of a sensory map is shown in Fig. 2.5. 

---