Nordisk kernesikkerhedsforskning Norrænar kjarnöryggisrannsóknir Pohjoismainen ydinturvallisuustutkimus Nordisk kjernesikkerhetsforskning Nordisk kärnsäkerhetsforskning Nordic nuclear safety research NKS-239 ISBN 978-87-7893-311-9 Nuclear Safety Culture in Finland and Sweden – Developments and Challenges Teemu Reiman (1) Ulf Kahlbom (2) Elina Pietikäinen (1) Carl Rollenhagen (3) 1 VTT, Finland 2 RiskPilot AB, Sweden 3 KTH, Sweden February 2011 Abstract The project aimed at studying the concept of nuclear safety culture and the Nor- dic nuclear branch safety culture. The project also aimed at looking how the power companies and the regulators view the current responsibilities and role of subcontractors in the Nordic nuclear safety culture as well as to inspect the spe- cial demands for safety culture in subcontracting chains. Interview data was col- lected in Sweden (n = 14) and Finland (n = 16) during 2009. Interviewees repre- sented the major actors in the nuclear field (regulators, power companies, expert organizations, waste management organizations). Results gave insight into the nature and evaluation of safety culture in the nuclear industry. Results illustrated that there is a wide variety of views on matters that are considered important for nuclear safety within the Nordic nuclear community. However, the interviewees considered quite uniformly such psychological states as motivation, mindfulness, sense of control, understanding of hazards and sense of responsibility as impor- tant for nuclear safety. Results also gave insight into the characteristics of Nordic nuclear culture. Various differences in safety cultures in Finland and Sweden were uncovered. In addition to the differences, historical reasons for the devel- opment of the nuclear safety cultures in Finland and Sweden were pointed out. Finally, results gave implications that on the one hand subcontractors can bring new ideas and improvements to the plants’ practices, but on the other hand the assurance of necessary safety attitudes and competence of the subcontracting companies and their employees is considered as a challenge. The report con- cludes that a good safety culture requires a deep and wide understanding of nu- clear safety including the various accident mechanisms of the power plants as well as a willingness to continuously develop one’s competence and understand- ing. An effective and resilient nuclear safety culture has to foster a constant sense of unease that prevents complacency yet at the same time it has to foster a certain professional pride and a feeling of accomplishment to maintain work motivation and healthy occupational identity. The report gives several recom- mendations for further developing nuclear safety culture in Finland and Sweden. Key words Safety culture, human and organizational factors, safety management, contrac- tors, evaluation NKS-239 ISBN 978-87-7893-311-9 Electronic report, February 2011 NKS Secretariat NKS-776 P.O. Box 49 DK - 4000 Roskilde, Denmark Phone +45 4677 4045 Fax +45 4677 4046 www.nks.org e-mail [email protected] Nuclear Safety Culture in Finland and Sweden – Developments and Challenges Teemu Reiman (VTT) Ulf Kahlbom (RiskPilot AB) Elina Pietikäinen (VTT) Carl Rollenhagen (KTH) Nuclear Safety Culture in Finland and Sweden – Developments and Challenges Teemu Reiman, Ulf Kahlbom, Elina Pietikäinen and Carl Rollenhagen Acknowledgements..............................................................................................................................2 1. Introduction......................................................................................................................................3 2. Methods............................................................................................................................................5 3. Nuclear power in the Nordic countries ............................................................................................7 3.1 The early days ............................................................................................................................7 3.2 International development during 1965-1999............................................................................7 3.3 Nordic development...................................................................................................................9 3.4 Recent developments ...............................................................................................................11 3.5 Incidents at the Nordic nuclear power plants...........................................................................14 4. Model of safety culture ..................................................................................................................16 4.1 Defining and evaluating nuclear safety....................................................................................16 4.2 Psychological elements of safety culture.................................................................................19 4.3 The human factors dilemmas in nuclear safety........................................................................23 5. Similarities and differences between Swedish and Finnish nuclear branch cultures.....................25 5.1 What things are shared in the Nordic nuclear branch? ............................................................25 5.2 What differences exist?............................................................................................................27 5.3 National culture as one of the differentiating variables? .........................................................30 6. Key content issues in the Nordic nuclear branch culture...............................................................32 6.1. The roles of the various players ..............................................................................................32 6.2 Information transfer institutions in the Nordic nuclear branch................................................34 6.3 Development of the Nordic nuclear safety field ......................................................................36 6.4 Current challenges in the Nordic nuclear field ........................................................................38 7. Contractors’ role in the Nordic nuclear industry ...........................................................................43 7.1 Contractors in the Nordic nuclear field....................................................................................43 7.2 Major roles for contractors.......................................................................................................45 7.3 Requirements for a good contractor safety culture ..................................................................47 8. Conclusions and discussion ...........................................................................................................50 8.1 Safety culture ...........................................................................................................................50 8.2 Assuring safety culture among contractors..............................................................................52 8.3 Emerging issues .......................................................................................................................53 9. Utilization of the report and recommendations..............................................................................55 References..........................................................................................................................................57 Appendix A: The interview questions ...............................................................................................60 1 Acknowledgements The report sums up work that has been carried out within the NKS-R/MOSACA-project during 2008-2010. The report is a revised and updated version of the intermediate report published in 2009 by the same authors (Safety Culture in the Finnish and Swedish Nuclear Industries – History and Present, NKS-213). The goal of the project in 2010 was to deepen the results concerning especially the role of contractors in the Nordic nuclear safety culture. Major revision has been done for all the original chapters included in the 2009 report and results from the new analyses have been integrated into the existing findings. The only part of the report that has been left largely unaltered is the Section 5 on the similarities and differences between the Swedish and Finnish nuclear branches. A new chapter focusing on contractors has also been added to the report (Section 7 “Contractors’ role in the Nordic nuclear industry“). The work has been funded by the Nordic Nuclear Safety Research (NKS). Additional funding has been provided by the Finnish Research Programme on Nuclear Power Plant Safety SAFIR2010, and VTT. The authors wish to thank all the interviewees for their time and their insights on the difficult issues of safety culture and nuclear safety. 2 1. Introduction The International Atomic Energy Agency IAEA (1991) defines safety culture as follows: “Safety culture is that assembly of characteristics and attitudes in organisations and individuals which establishes that, as an overriding priority, nuclear plant safety issues receive the attention warranted by their significance” (IAEA, 1991, p. 1). The concept of safety culture was coined in the aftermath of the Chernobyl nuclear meltdown in 1986 (IAEA, 1986, 1991) in an attempt to develop a concept for gaining an overview and an indicator of the