Performance safety

The objective of the review of safety performance is to determine the safety performance of the nuclear power plant and its trends from records of operating experience. 

The radiation related risk resulting from normal nuclear power plant operation and anticipated operational occurrences is also an important element of plant safety performance. Relevant indicators include data on 

---

British Standards National standards involving lest methods, specifications for quality, safety, performance, etc., and codes of practice. Standards are prepared by the British Standards Institution. Ref. British Standards Year Book. 

At point A, despite full management commitment to safety performance, with low employee commitment to safety, the number of accidents remains high employees only follow procedures laid out because they feel they have to. At the other extreme, point B, when employee commitment is high, the number of accidents reduces dramatically employees feel responsible for their own safety as well as that of their colleagues. Employee commitment to safety is an attitude of mind rather than a taught discipline, and can be enhanced by training and (less effectively) incentive schemes. 

Equipment inspec- Reevaluate and possibly reset inspection intervals tion may provide a when equipment is used for handling different poor prediction of chemistry equipment safety, Perform management of change review due to change of material handled or change in process chemistry over the life of equipment. ... 

API RP 2220, Improving Owner and Contractor Safety Performance, 1st ed., September 1991... 

Are records of safety performance maintained, analyzed and communicated to all employees ... 

The company should have set standards for all employees to indicate the quality/safety performance expected of them. The quality manual, improvement plan and performance standards should be available to be seen by all employees. Check that this is the case... 

Another way of interpreting absolute risk estimates is through the use of benchmarks or goals. Consider a company that operates 50 chemical process facilities. It is determined (through other, purely qualitative means) that Plant A has exhibited acceptable safety performance over the years. A QRA is performed on Plant A, and the absolute estimates are established as calibration points, or benchmarks, for the rest of the firm s facilities. Over the years, QRAs are performed on other facilities to aid in making decisions about safety maintenance and improvement. As these studies are completed, the results are carefully scrutinized against the benchmark facility. The frequency/consequence estimates are not the only results compared—the lists of major risk contributors, the statistical risk importance of safety systems, and other types of QRA results are also compared. As more and more facility results are accumulated, resources are allocated to any plant areas that are out of line with respect to the benchmark facility. 

To make sure that all contractors and subcontractors maintain a minimum level of safety performance, the client, or general or main contractor, should establish standards for compliance. During the project planning stage, affected prime contractors should have an opportunity to provide input and resolve differences. Cross-cut committees are encouraged to allow prime contractors to standardize or normalize such essential elements as procedures, permit systems, and training. 

We must not forget the client. The client review is an excellent tool that can be used to get the client s first impression of safety performance. This has been shown to be especially effective when conducted on a formal basis after a phase of the project, or the entire project, has been completed. The PM and the SM should arrange to meet the client represen-tative(s) in a face-to-face meeting to discuss safety performance and possibly other parameters of the recently completed job, or phase of job. The information obtained from the review is immediately analyzed. Once analyzed, it can be used to prevent recurrences of identified problems, to publicize good practices and innovative approaches to problem solving, and to perform work more safely and efficiently. 

A failure modes and effects analysis is a systematic analytical technique for identifying potential failures in a design or a process, assessing the probability of occurrence and likely effect, and determining the measures needed to eliminate, contain, or control the effects. Action taken on the basis of an FMEA will improve safety, performance, reliability, maintainability and reduce costs. The outputs are essential to balanced and effective quality plans for both development and production as it will help focus the controls upon those products, processes, and characteristics that are at risk. It is not the intention here to give a full appreciation of the FMEA technique and readers are advised to consult other texts. 

Frame PSM in terms of their interests. People pay more attention to information that is relevant to them, than to items of general or academic interest. For example, "PSM provides a cost-effective means of improving our company s safety performance" addresses two senior executive concerns corporate earnings and exposure to liability. The discussion is framed in terms of the listener s interest it also focuses on results. 

PSM improves overaii safety performance by organizing safety-reiated activities in a consistent manner that promotes continuous improvement. 

The ultimate goal of PSM is improved safety performance. In addition, over and above the mandatory compliance with OSHA standards, there are potentially significant business benefits to implementing PSM, including improved efficiency, cost savings, and competitive advantages. 

PSM is a cost-effective means of improving safety performance while ... 

PSM improves overall safety performance by organizing safety-related activities in a corrsistent matmer that assures and promotes continuous improvement. PSM improves efficiency and reliability, reducing downtime, rework, and waste. 

By organizing and systematizing our safety activities, we can improve our overall safety performance, and, in the process ... 

In setting priorities for action, you must aiso consider avaiiabie resources. You may identify an action step that produces the single largest improvement in process safety, and discover that it requires all of your available resources. Alternatively, you may be able to spread your efforts among a number of lower priority actions that together have a greater impact on overall safety performance. 

Where an effective informal system exists and is followed, the issue is one of style, not substance. A facility or unit may have a strong safety culture and sound safety practices, but its managers lack the habit of form documentation, or simply don t think it is important. Assuming that safety performance meets applicable standards, you will probably assign cases like these a relatively low priority, compared with other noncompliance situations. Cases like these are also often the easiest to fix since the fundamentals are already in place, what s required is simply to formalize the informal system by preparing and implementing documentation procedures. 

As this example illustrates, there is no single right answer. The key determinant must be your judgment as to the most effective allocation of resources (time and energy) against the goal of improving overall safety performance. 

The shortest distance between A and B is not always a straight line. Keep in mind as you consider intangible factors that you must influence behavior in order to improve companywide safety performance. Achieving this may require a combination of skills and tactics, some of which may not be directly related to explicit PSM requirements. 

As part of developing the PSM implementation plan (Chapter 5), you and the team identified benefits unique to the approach you selected, using them to help win management s approval. For example, your plan may focus on priority elements because the assessment you conducted suggests that this method will yield the greatest overall improvement in safety performance. And, as part of the pilot test described in this chapter, you focused on facility-specific benefits to enlist the support of local management and staff. 

As with previous, similar exercises, encourage your team to be creative. Like any sound management system, your PSM system probably creates unexpected side benefits over and above those related spedfically to safety performance. For example, the pilot test may have demonstrated that a new system, once installed, enabled the facility to reduce unplanned downtime with better planning and use of preventive maintenance. Or perhaps the pilot test process itself may have helped improve relations between the facility and corporate staff. 

Modem behavior-modification programs rely on the identification and reinforcement of safe behaviors. Considerable improvements in measures of safety performance have been attributed to the introduction of these approaches (see McSween, 1993, for a petrochemical example). However, other studies have indicated that performance may return to its original level if the programs are withdrawn. It is therefore important to maintain a continuing program to ensure that the initial levels of improvements are maintained. Also, the benefits of behavior modification programs have mainly been demonstrated in the context of work activities where there is a high level of... 

Make sure your proposal fits the corporate style and culture. Make sure your expectations for senior management are consistent with your company s operating style. For example, a CEO who is accustomed to delegating most decisions is unlikely to accept a role that seems to take away divisional authority, while a facility manager with little functional autonomy will probably be leery of taking a highly visible role without approval from a superior. Of course, the CEO retains overall accountability for environmental and safety performance—that cannot be del ated ... 

Procedures for monitoring compliance with the policy and the safety performance. 

At the electrochemical performance level, these novel natural graphite-based materials surpass mesophase carbon s characteristics as related to cell/battery safety performance, low irreversible capacity loss, and good rate capability even at high current densities. 

---