APPLICATION OF THE IAEA SAFETY STANDARDS ON MANAGEMENT SYSTEM OR FACILITIES AND ACTIVITIES Vincze, P. International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Vienna, Austria 1. Introduction The IAEA developed a new set of Safety Standards that establishes requirements and provide guidance for applying an integrated Management System for facilities and activities. The new standards replace the IAEA 50-C-Q Code on Quality Assurance for Safety in Nuclear Power Plants and other Nuclear Installations, as well as the related 14 Safety Guides contained in the Safety Series No.50-C/SG-Q (1996) [1]. Figure 1 Relationship between the previous and the new set of safety standards The main objective of Management System requirements and guidance established in the Safety Standards is to ensure that safety is not compromised by considering the implications of all actions with regard to safety as a whole and not in separate Management Systems. An integrated Management System approach focuses on satisfying the totality of the organization s requirements and goals is essential to compete and survive in the current global environment, while maintaining and enhancing safety and business performance. This Management System results in considerable savings in developing and maintaining integrated organizational activities instead of maintaining a number of separate activities, their reviews & upkeep, etc. The underlying fundamental principle for the Management System in the new Safety Standard is to maintain and enhance nuclear safety in order to protect the workers, the public and the environment from undue radiation hazards. The presentation will describe the rationale of revisions of the current standards on Quality Assurance, the basic principles of integrated management systems and benefits associated with application of the integrated management concept. 2. Integrated Management System NPPs worldwide are showing continuous improvements in their performance and availability. This applies to overall plant safety as well. However, serious events have been observed over
the past recent years. [2] These events may, however, not be of a purely technical nature but in most of the cases have factors present in the management system of the NPP concerned. The use of existing knowledge could have prevented some recent events, showing that integrated approach to management system, knowledge management and application of lessons learned has not been done sufficiently. Such aspects lie within the management system of a NPP. By evaluating of common aspects of the known events, one can conclude that the initiating technical issue was rarely the root cause of the resulting problem. That is, each technical issue was relatively well understood (at least in some segments of the industry) and frequently had been experienced to some degree at other NPPs. What complicated each issue and was at the root of most, was some shortcoming in the facilities management system. This analysis motivated the IAEA to move from the traditional QA approach towards the integrated management system approach and revise the Safety Code on QA. The table below shows some common shortcomings in management systems and indicates what can occur if these shortcomings are evident to a significant degree. Table 1 Shortcomings of Management Systems Cause 1 Management becomes over confident or complacent. 2 Ineffective corrective action programme. 3 Ineffective evaluation and use of operating experience. 4 Findings of external auditors, inspectors, or regulators are not implemented or even accepted. 5. Management becomes over focused on production, sometimes at the expense of safety Description This can occur when plants run reliably for long periods of time. Programmes and processes may not be continuously improved to incorporate best industry practices. Benchmarking other good facilities may not occur. Minor problems may be overlooked or not evaluated for adverse trends. Workers are not encouraged to find and fix problems. Based on managements reaction to problems identified, workers may stop bringing problems to management s attention. Minor problems are not critically assessed for possible consequences and therefore lessons learned are not developed and incorporated into similar programmes and processes. Issues or events at other NPPs are not adequately evaluated and lessons learned are not effectively incorporated into the facility s processes and programmes. Management may believe that external sources findings are not as significant as the evaluator s depict. There may be a sense that the evaluators are biased in their findings. Incremental short cuts for efficiency gains may be taken to improve production without an adequate review of the increase in risk. The synergistic effects of these incremental changes in risk may not be well evaluated, understood, or fully appreciated. 2.1 The traditional QA approach
Quality Assurance was identified as one of the five areas of the Safety Standard program for the development of Safety Standards. The IAEA Advisory Committee on Safety Standards (now Commission of Safety Standards) decided in its first meeting (18-20 March, 1996) to include quality assurance under the category of General Safety (along with governmental organization and emergency response) recognizing the relevance of the quality assurance Standards in the four areas of nuclear, radiation, waste and transport safety. The IAEA top documents on the subject are the Safety Standards on Quality Assurance, issued as Safety Series No. 50/C/SG-Q (1966), which includes a Code and 14 Safety Guides. The IAEA revised the above mentioned requirement and guidance in the subject area of Quality Assurance contained within the Safety Series 50-C/SG-Q (1996) into a new Safety Standards on The Management System Facilities and Activities, planned to be published in 2006. The term Management System has been adopted in the revised series of documents instead of the term Quality Assurance/Quality Assurance Programme. This development integrates all aspects of managing a nuclear facility, including the Safety, Health, Environment and Quality Assurance requirements into one coherent system. 2.2 Integrated management system approach The management developments to achieve the number of different objectives pursued by any organization have to adjust to changes over time. The aim of any organization is to deliver products and/or services that comply with all applicable requirements and satisfy all stakeholders. There are requirements, for example regarding safety in the nuclear field, that are paramount, and cannot be compromised. The achievement of all requirements and satisfaction of all the stakeholders is necessary for the survival of an organization. Organization models, concepts and tools have developed to include human factors and culture issues and more integrated management approaches that complement the old traditional classical approach to achieving results that were based on inspection and verification checks. Products must be made and activities must be carried out in a safe manner, however it is recognized that all organizations only remain in business if they make a profit. 2.3 From traditional QA towards integrated management systems The technological innovations have radically altered the relationship between systems and humans and therefore the way to manage the whole organization. The issues related with complex activities and multiple objectives involve people operating at different levels in the organization. The operating processes are modified by the introduction of new management practices and new requirements. The daily practices and the results achieved by the organization, the organizational culture and the management processes are deeply interrelated. The way to manage the organization has had to evolve accordingly to accommodate these changes and to ensure that the employees understand what has to be done to meet all requirements. The model illustrated below [3] tries to represent the evolution over the last century regarding the approaches applied by organizations in order to achieve good safety standards and performance. The reality is undoubtedly more detailed and complex. Many initiatives have often been introduced in parallel and new initiatives have co-existed with former initiatives. The important message that the model delivers is that the activity of managing an organization and surviving has been evolving to continually strive for higher
levels of performance and safety and that this trend is ongoing. The model marks only some of the key management approaches: Evolution to Management Systems Safety & Performance Quality Control Quality Assurance (Total) Quality Management (Integrated) Management Systems Time Figure 2 Evolution to management systems Quality Control sorted the conforming products from the non-conforming at the end of the process. Mostly consisted of some type of inspections/measurements for yes or not acceptance. Quality Assurance took measures to systematically prevent non-conformances by using established procedures and documentation to demonstrate that quality was implemented throughout the production process. The Quality Assurance approach has also evolved from a compliance approach to one of a more performance based focus. Quality Management introduced the consideration of everyone involved within the process and the concept of internal customer and supplier. This was a relevant development bringing attention to organization being essentially about people and recognition of the organizational culture issue. Business excellence models appeared. Management System integration was the development where the organizations became increasingly aware that other stakeholders, apart form just their customers and employees, had to be addressed while conducting their business. Organizations put increasing attention on issues such as the safety, health, quality, environment, finance, security, human resources, cultural aspects, etc, and aimed to manage the totality by using an integrated Management System aimed at meeting the totality of their objectives. Integrating the Management System leads to a coherent, harmonious and optimal way of delivering the vision of top management and the goals and objectives of the organization. The model also suggests that an integrated Management System is not the final solution in the evolution. The continuing path and need for higher levels of performance and safety will further evolve. It is therefore important to remain flexible in order to be able to dynamically adjust to the increasing changing and challenging demands. An idealized end point could be envisaged; where a full recognition that the human being is the ultimate source of quality and safety. This ideal end point might then be described in a single and short statement: Do the things right the first time, and apply continual improvement afterwards. 2.4 Revision of the IAEA QA Safety Standards The new set of Safety Standards directed to establish requirements and provide guidance for implementing Management Systems that integrate safety, health, security, environmental and quality objectives. The new standards will replace the IAEA 50-C-Q Code on Quality
Assurance for Safety in Nuclear Power Plants and other Nuclear Installations, as well as the related 14 Safety Guides contained in the Safety Series No.50-C/SG-Q (1996). The IAEA Code 50-C-Q (1996) and developments within the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) ISO 9001:2000 [4] and ISO14001: 1996 [5] publications are considered in developing this comprehensive, integrated set of Management System requirements. Member States experience in developing, implementing and improving Management Systems is also taken into account. The aim of the new set of Safety Standards is to provide requirements and guidance for implementing an effective Management System that: 1. Integrates all aspect of managing nuclear installations and activities including the safety, health, quality and environmental requirements in a coherent manner, 2. Promotes continual improvement, 3. Describes the planned and systematic actions necessary to provide adequate confidence that all these requirements can be satisfied, and 4. Supports the enhancement and improvement of safety and organizational culture. Figure 3 Transfer of requirements and guidance from QA Code and guides to the new standards The integration aims to ensure that economic, environmental, health, security and quality matters are not considered separately to safety matters, to avoid any potential negative impact on safety. The three main elements of the management system safety standards are: 1. Safety Requirements GS-R-3 [6] specifies the Management System requirements for all nuclear installations and activities that are based on the Code 50-C-Q and other relevant international standards. It will be published in 2006. 2. The Safety Guide GS-G-3.1 [7] provides thematic guidance for each of the requirements contained in GS-R-3 and applicable to all nuclear facilities and activities. GS-G-3.1 will include all of the relevant guidance material that is contained in current Safety Guides 50-SG-Q1 to Q7 as well as new material. It will be published in 2006. 3. Draft Safety Guide (DS349) [8] will provide specific guidance for Management Systems for nuclear facilities. It will include all of the relevant guidance material that is contained in current Safety Guides 50-SG-Q8- Q14 as well as new material. The expected publication is 2007 3. Conclusion The new IAEA Safety Standards on Management Systems promotes the application of the integrated management system approach that will benefit in:
Improvement of safety consciousness and safety/organizational culture Easier compliance, less violations, greater staff participation and ownership leading to stress reduction and better utilization of creativity Integrated vision and strategy of the organization Alignment in the organization to deliver the overall goals and objectives Implementation of continuous process improvement in all areas Simplification through reduction of procedures Faster reaction to change and challenges from outside or stakeholders Removal of barriers between organizational units Better one house culture throughout the organization The IAEA has developed a set of services aimed at assisting its Member States in establishing, implementing, assessing and continually improving an integrated management system based on best international practices and standards, including the IAEA Safety Standards, and other relevant IAEA guidance documents. 4. References [1] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Quality Assurance for Safety in Nuclear Power Plants and other Nuclear Installations, Code and Safety Guides Q1 Q14, Safety Series No. 50-C/SG-Q, IAEA, Vienna (1996). [2] Material Degradation and Related Managerial Issues of Nuclear Power Plants. Proceedings of a technical meeting held in Vienna, Austria, 15-18 February 2005 [3] Marijke Korteweg/Ian Dalling, Integrated Management, the next evolutionary step? The Institute of Quality Assurance, IQA (www.iqa.org) [4] INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR STANDARDIZATION, Quality Management Systems: Requirements, ISO 9001:2000, ISO, Geneva (2000). [5] INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR STANDARDIZATION, Environmental Management Systems: Specification with Guidance for Use, ISO14001:1996, ISO, Geneva (1996). [6] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, The Management System for Facilities and Activities, IAEA Safety Standards Series No. GS-R-3, IAEA, Vienna (2006). [7] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Application of the Management System for Facilities and Activities, IAEA Safety Standards Series No. GS-G-3.1, IAEA, Vienna (2006). [8] INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Application of the Management System for Nuclear Facilities, IAEA Draft Safety Standard