The operators' non-compliance behavior to conduct emergency operating procedures - Comparing with the work experience and the complexity of procedural steps

Reliability Engineering and System Safety

Volumn 82, Issue 2, 2003, Pages 115-131

  Park, Jinkyun ^a   Jung, Wondea ^a  

^a Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute   (South Korea)

Author keywords

Emergency operating procedures; Non compliance behavior; Nuclear power plants; The complexity of procedural steps; Work experience

Indexed keywords

NUCLEAR INDUSTRY; NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS; SIMULATORS;

WORK EXPERIENCES;

RELIABILITY;

EID: 0141682624     PISSN: 09518320     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0951-8320(03)00123-6     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Long A.B. Computerized operator decision aids. Nucl Saf. 25:(4):1984;512-524.
2. Guesnier G., Heßler C. Milestones in screen-based process control. Kerntechnik. 60:(5/6):1995;225-231.
3. Niwa Y., Hollnagel E., Green M. Guidelines for computerized presentation of emergency operating procedures. Nucl Engng Des. 167:1996;113-127.
4. Stassen H.G., Johannsen G., Moray N. Internal representation, internal model, human performance model and mental workload. Automatica. 26:(4):1990;811-820.
5. Degani A., Wiener E.L. Cockpit checklists: concepts, design and use. Hum Factors. 35:(2):1993;345-359.
6. Degani A., Wiener E.L. Procedures in complex systems: the airline cockpit. IEEE Trans Syst, Man Cybernet - Part A: Syst Hum. 27:(3):1997;302-312.
7. International Atomic Energy Agency. Good practices with respect to the development and use of nuclear power plant procedures. IAEA-TECDOC-1058; 1998.
8. US Environmental Protection Agency. New ways to prevent chemical incidents. EPA 550-B-99-012; 1999.
9. Rankin W., Hibit R., Allen J., Sargent R. Development and evaluation of the Maintenance Error Decision Aid (MEDA) process. Int J Ind Ergonomics. 26:2000;261-276.
10. Brito G. Towards a model for the study of written procedure following in dynamic environments. Reliab Engng Syst Saf. 75:2002;233-244.
11. Klopp G.T. Industry program needed for nuclear accident management. Power Engng. 1989;37-39.
12. Depond G., Resse L. Operating procedures for emergency situations in EdF PWR plants. Proceedings of IAEA International Training Course on Accident Management in Nuclear Power Plants, 22 May-16 June, Chicago, USA. 1989.
13. Dougherty E.M. Is human reliability enhanced by following procedures? Proceedings of American Nuclear Society Winter Meeting, 13-17 November, Washington, DC. 1994.
14. Vaurio J.K. Safety-related decision making at a nuclear power plant. Nucl Engng Des. 185:1998;335-345.
15. Dien Y. Safety and application of procedures, or 'how do they have to use operating procedures in nuclear power plants?'. Saf Sci. 29:1998;179-187.
16. Kondo S. Lessons learned for PSA from the SGTR incident at Mihama, unit 2, in 1991. Reliab Engng Syst Saf. 45:1994;57-65.
17. US Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Steam generator tube failures. NUREG/CR-6365. Washington, DC; 1996.
18. US Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Indian point 2 steam generator tube failure lessons-learned report. Final report. TAC No. MA9163. Washington, DC; 2000.
19. US Federal Aviation Administration. The use and design of flightcrew checklists and manuals. DOT/FAA/AM-91/7. Washington, DC; 1991.
20. O'Hare D., Wiggins M., Batt R., Morrison D. Cognitive failure analysis for aircraft accident investigation. Ergonomics. 37:(11):1994;1855-1869.
21. US National Transport Safety Board. A review of flightcrew-involved major accidents of US Air Carriers, 1978-1990. NTSB/SS-94/01. Washington, DC; 1994.
22. Joos D.W., Sabri Z.A., Husseiny A.A. Analysis of gross error rates in operating of commercial nuclear power stations. Nucl Engng Des. 52:1979;265-300.
23. US Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Development of a checklist for evaluating emergency operating procedures used in nuclear power plants. NUREG/CR-1970. Washington, DC; 1981.
24. Institute of Nuclear Power Operations. An analysis of root causes in 1983 and 1984 significant event reports. INPO 85-027. Atlanta, GA; 1985.
25. Marsden P. Procedures in the nuclear industry. Stanton N. Human factors in nuclear safety. 1996;Taylor & Francis, London.
26. Furuta K., Sasou K., Kubota R., Ujita H., Shuto Y., Yagi E. Human factor analysis of JCO criticality accident. Cognit, Technol Work. 2:2000;182-203.
27. Hirotsu Y., Suzuki K., Kojima M., Takano K. Multivariate analysis of human error incidents occurring at nuclear power plants: several occurrence patterns of observed human errors. Cognit, Technol Work. 3:2001;82-91.
28. US Nuclear Regulatory Commission. The human performance evaluation process: a resources for reviewing the identification and resolution of human performance problem. NUREG/CR-6753. Washington, DC; 2002.
29. Park J., Jung W., Ha J. Development of the step complexity measure for emergency operating procedures using entropy concepts. Reliab Engng Syst Saf. 71:(2):2001;115-130.
30. Park J., Jung W., Kim J., Ha J., Shin Y. The step complexity measure for emergency operating procedures - comparing with simulation data. Reliab Engng Syst Saf. 74:(1):2001;63-74.
31. Park J., Jung W., Ha J., Park C. The step complexity measure for emergency operating procedures - measure verification. Reliab Engng Syst Saf. 77:(1):2002;45-59.
32. Fullwood R.R., Hall R.E. Probabilistic risk assessment in the nuclear power industry: fundamentals and applications. 1988;Pergamon Press, Oxford.
33. Dien Y, Montmayeul R. Contribution of the ergonomic analysis to the improvement of the design of operating procedures in nuclear power plants. Electricite de France, EdF-93NB00043; 1992.
34. Marsden P., Green M. Optimizing procedures in manufacturing systems. Int J Ind Ergonomics. 17:1996;43-51.
35. US Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Review of findings for human performance contribution to risk in operating events. NUREG/CR-6753. Washington, DC; 2002.
36. US Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Evaluation of emergency operating procedures for nuclear power plants. NUREG/CR-1875. Washington, DC; 1981.
37. US Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Guidelines for the preparation of emergency operating procedures. NUREG/CR-0899. Washington, DC; 1982.
38. US Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Checklist for evaluating emergency operating procedure used in nuclear power plants. NUREG/CR-2005. Washington, DC; 1983.
39. Kontogiannis T. Applying information technology to the presentation of emergency operating procedures: implications for usability criteria. Behav Inf Technol. 18:(4):1999;261-276.
40. Husseiny A.A., Sabri Z.A., Packer D., Holmes J.W., Adams S.K., Rodriguez R.J. Operating procedure automation to enhance safety of nuclear power plants. Nucl Engng Des. 110:1989;277-297.
41. Macwan A., Mosleh A. A methodology for modeling operator errors of commission in probabilistic risk assessment. Reliab Engng Syst. 45:1994;139-157.
42. Moray N. Advanced displays, cultural stereotypes and organizational characteristics of a control room. Misumi J., Wilpert B., Miller R. Nuclear safety: a human factors perspective. 1999;Taylor & Francis, London.
43. US Department of Defense. DOD dictionary of military and associated terms; 2001. Available at http://www.dtic.mil/doctrine/jel/doddict/data/c/01086.html .
44. US Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Handbook of human reliability analysis with emphasis on nuclear power plant applications. NUREG/CR-1278. Washington, DC; 1982.
45. Maurino D.E., Reason J., Johnston N., Lee R.B. Beyond aviation human factors - safety in high technology systems. 1995;Ashgate Publishing Company, Aldershot, UK.
46. Heinrich H.W., Petersen D., Roos N. Industrial accident prevention: a safety management approach. 5th ed: 1980;McGraw-Hill, New York.
47. Reason J. Human error. 1990;Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
48. Park JK, Jung WD, Kim JW, Ha JJ. Step complexity measure for emergency operating procedures - determining weighting factors. Nucl Technol 2003;143(3):290-308.