Change in the World Wide Nuclear

Industry –

Leadership from a Regulator‟s

Perspective

By

Dr Mike Weightman

HM Chief Inspector of Nuclear Installations

Head of Nuclear Directorate, HSE

World Nuclear University – Summer Institute 2009

• Background World Scene

Europe

UK

• Change

• Leading Change from a Regulatory Perspective: Building a UK nuclear regulatory body fit for the 21st century

• Lessons for Leading Change?

• A Question for You

• Your Questions

CONTENTS

The Global Scene

• Climate Change and Energy Security moving to top of

Political Agenda

• Over 50 nations with no NPPs asking IAEA for assistance

to develop Nuclear Power capability

• Nuclear Power capability predictions (OECD’s NEA):

June 2008 439 reactors operating – 372 GW

2050: Worlds nuclear power capacity could increase by between

150 – 380%

Equivalent to new build of 23 to 54 reactors worldwide a year

between 2030 and 2050

(Source: OECD NEA report – Nuclear Energy Outlook)

The Global Scene – Nuclear Safety

Working with the IAEA and OECD‟s NEA

• Understanding responsibilities:

• IAEA – Governing Board, INSAG, CSS

• OECD – NEA SC, CNRA, CSNI

• Building and improving the infrastructure

• Ensuring Nuclear standards are maintained and

improved – IAEA Safety Standards, IRRS,

• The need for Industry groups and others to contribute -

WANO

The Global Scene – Nuclear Safety

The IAEA Fundamental Principles:

New: Leadership and Management For Safety

Not of Safety but for Safety:

• high standards of L&M lead to sustained operational

excellence

• Delivers high standards of nuclear safety and reliable

operation

• Safety is not an add-on but integral to success

The Global Scene – The Challenges

• Nuclear Safety

• Waste Management and Disposal

• Non-proliferation and security

• Cost

• Building the capacity:

• IAEA advice – around 10 years to build the administrative and industrial

infrastructure

• 10 years to build a plant from scratch

• Building the people and supply base

• Nuclear Energy and Society

(Source: OECD NEA report – Nuclear Energy Outlook)

The Global Scene – Nuclear Energy &

Society

• The need to gain confidence by the public

• The need to address legacy plants

• The need to control Waste issues

The European Scene

• 148 reactors spread over 15 member states

• All reactor types – generation 1 to 3

• Generate about a 1/3 of all electricity energy in EU

• Fuel fabrication, enrichment, reprocessing, research,

• EC actively promoting further use of nuclear energy

for electricity

The European Scene – Nuclear

Regulation and Safety

Enhanced Co-operation of Nuclear Regulators• WENRA

• ENSREG

EC Directive On Nuclear Safety• Establishes a community framework

• National arrangements for a high level of nuclear safety

• Gives legal force under European legislation – international

conventions and IAEA safety principles

The European Scene – Nuclear

Regulation and Safety

Directive on Nuclear Safety

• Applies to any civilian nuclear installation

• National Framework – Nuclear safety

• Independent regulatory authority

• The Licensee - prime responsibility for

nuclear safety, finance and human resources

The European Scene – Nuclear

Regulation and Safety

Directive on Nuclear Safety

• Member states - develop expertise and skills

• Requires information to be provided to workers and

the general public on regulation – Greater

Transparency to build Greater Public Confidence

• Periodic review and reporting of the national

framework

The UK Scene

• Decline of UK nuclear industry 2000 – 2008

• Market share of Nuclear Generated Electricity dropping: 1997-27%, 2007-15%

• But Switch round in Government Policy – Energy White Paper January 2008• Market Driver

• Up to 30% electricity generation by nuclear power ?

• Planned NDA spend – Over £70b

• Potential of up to £60b investment in nuclear new build

• Investment in keeping the existing NPPs running

• Planned spend £2.65b over 3 years in MOD – rate similar to reactor build

• Continuing new build of Submarines and improved refuelling facilities

WHERE ARE THE UK NUCLEAR SITES?

thro

ughContinuous Impro

vemen

t

Reg

ulatory Excellence

CIVIL NUCLEAR POWER PLANT

Sizewell B & Sizewell A Power Stations

Operating Decommissioning

NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE

FACILITIES

•

Sellafield

NUCLEAR SUBMARINE MAINTENANCE

FACILITIES

Devonport Nuclear Submarine Base

REGULATORY FRAMEWORK TO

ENSURE NUCLEAR SAFETY (1)

• Legal basis: HSW Act – Nuclear Installations Act, need

Site Licence for Activities

• Goal-setting, Stringent, Rigorous and Robust but flexible

• Control by same standard 36 conditions attached to each

site licence for all types of plants

• Assess changes against our Safety Assessment

Principles

• Fundamental concept: Reducing risks so far as is

reasonably practicable – Tolerability of Risks

Unacceptable Region

Risk cannot be justified

except in extraordinary

circumstances

The 'as low as reasonably practicable' or Tolerability Region

(Risk is undertaken only if a benefit is desired)

Tolerability of Risk

Tolerable only if risk reduction

is not practicable or its cost

is grossly disproportionate

to the improvement gained

Tolerable if cost of reduction

would exceed the improvement

gained

Necessary to maintain

assurance that risk stays at

this level

Negligible Risk

Broadly Acceptable Region

(No need for detailed working

to demonstrate that the risk

is as low as reasonably practicable)

Society does not accept nuclear risk rather it tolerates it

because of the benefits

REGULATORY FRAMEWORK TO

ENSURE NUCLEAR SAFETY (2)

• Site Licence Granted on Basis of:• Design• Siting• Organisation

• Provides for a Living Safety Case

• Independent of Political or Commercial Pressure

• HM CI Signs Licence and Attaches Conditions thinks fit

• A Through Life Approach

LIFETIME REGULATION

• 5 Phases - design, construction, commissioning, operation, decommissioning

• For Each Phase – assess, inspect, investigate, enforce, permission

• Control Change through site licence conditions–plant, people, processes, organisation

• Continuing Operation – inspection & monitoring, periodic safety reviews: improvements where

reasonably practicable.

IMPLICATIONS OF UK GOAL SETTING

REGIME AND THE WAY NII OPERATES

• Small but highly qualified and very experienced workforce (1/10 of US

NRC – 178 nuclear safety inspectors at present)

• Able to accommodate new technologies easily

• Quick response as we do not need prescriptive regulations

• But difficult for small or new players – no detailed regulations to follow

& they need capability to be “intelligent customer”, own safety case, etc

• Effectiveness? - IAEA Led Peer Review of 2006: “…Long established

and well regarded nuclear regulatory agency … mature and

transparent, with highly trained and experienced inspectors…”

• Increasing pace of change in industry

• Structure of Industry fragmenting

• New players and organisations involved

• Ageing plant, facilities & people

• Changes in society – openness and transparency

• Economic and investment pressures, industrial innovation

UK ENVIRONMENT

• Response to Environment – Darwinian: need to change to survive

• Some change planned, some creeps up on you, some is thrust on you, some is dramatic and results in a seismic shift:

modifications to plant

many years of lack of investment in assets or people

new European legislation

Societal, industrial, political change

• At various levels: macro – world wide nuclear industry, global players

fragmentation, competition, contractorisation, new players

micro – change of shift patterns on a plant

• Need it to avoid “meta-stable excellence” & complacency

• Shift is Happening Around You – How to Respond?

SHIFT HAPPENS

The 5% of the population in China

of the UK

7%

They have more gifted & talented

students, than we have students

UK

According to former US

Secretary of Education

Richard Riley…

Great Britain…in 1900

What will it take for us to

be a world leader in

nuclear regulation?

It is estimated that aweek‟s worth of The Times…

For students starting a

three-year university degree,

this means that . . .

half of what they learn in their first

year of study will be outdated

by the end of their studies.

£500

Projected spend

on keeping civilian legacy plant

is greater than

£70 billion

safe and decommissioned

MoD's rate of spend

to maintain capability at

AWE sites equates to

building a new

nuclear reactor

Interest in

Nuclear

continues to grow ...

231 freedom of information

requests

into ND since January 2005

... and around

50nuclear related

press enquires

each month

In March 2000 the Guardian

claimed that nuclear power

in Britain was

melting down citing

„the great

experiment is over‟

On 15th July 2009 Government

announced £15 million capital

investment to establish

Nuclear Advanced

Manufacturing

Research Centre

In 2010 the NII

will be 50 years old

343 people currently work

in the Nuclear Directorate

16 nuclear inspectors

are

over 60

Over the next 2 to 3

Years this rises to

40 inspectors

During a recent

recruitment campaign

over 300people applied

to join us

In less than 9 months time

the Nuclear Directorate

plans to be ready for

shadow working

as a new independent

Nuclear regulatory

body

We are investing £4.5m of in building

Our new organisation

society is changing fast, we are passionate in driving

to be a world leading

nuclear regulator

why we need to change,

are you with us?

Why Change? – Now you Know!

• Society and industry Is Going through a Dramatic Shift – not

gradual change

• Leaders need to respond

• UK Nuclear Policy has Shifted Dramatically

• Nuclear Regulators in UK need to change faster:

Need to be more accountable and transparent

Need for better regulation

Present Status as Civil Servants not flexible enough

Changing the UK Nuclear Safety

Regulatory Body – NII into NSC (2005-9)

Vision: a world leading integrated nuclear

regulatory body fit for future• An Integrated Nuclear Regulator – Safety/Security/Safeguards/ ….

• Clear Common Purpose

• A new approach and focus - Built on Outcomes not just processes

• Simple compliance not enough – need continuous improvement

• Impact or leverage of our approach - Influencing as well as

Regulating

• Preparing for Nuclear New Build taking account of a changing

society – earning trust and confidence

• Creating and Grasping Opportunities – A More Independent

Nuclear Regulatory Body in 2010?

• Going from Good to Great

Creating and Grasping the

Opportunities

An integrated Nuclear Regulatory Body:

• 2005 onwards – built up relationships with Nuclear Security Regulator and UK Safeguards Office

• They had issues with independence and Budgetary pressures

• Government Agenda for Better Themed Regulation

• April 2007 – Nuclear Security Regulator (OCNS) and UKSO joined NII (Nuclear Directorate of HSE)

Protecting People and Society

- from the hazards of nuclear industry

A clear Common Purpose ….

Protecting Society is a simple statement

but a complex idea …

• Not just the simple accumulation of harm to individuals as in

mathematical treatments of societal risk

• Its also about protecting the very Fabric of Society which

binds us together

• Means that regulatory judgements take impact on fabric of

society into account, e.g. electricity supplies

Protecting Society …

Revised Approach: Regulating &

Influencing Safety of Existing Plants

Regulatory

Leverage

Events

Patterns

Systems

Mind map

Vision

Plant/

Operations

Processes

Structures

Safety

Cultures

Regulate Influence

Organisational

Learning

Reality &

Compliance

PublicConfidence

Regulators influence safety culture for better or worse,

whether they intend to or not and it can have far greater

impact – need to with others.

The Power of Influencing Networks

Julius Caesar

Q - How did Cassius

get Caesar

to face his death

despite the omens?

A - Used Decius to

convince Caesar‟s wife

to persuade Caesar all

was well.

The Strength of Influence and

Working Together

• Joint Interface protocol with industryCommon Vision – Sustained Excellence in Operation

Common Behaviours - Clear Expectations, No surprises, Co-ordinated plans

Already paying dividends in more effective and efficient regulation

• Engagement with all stakeholders - Listening to Their

Feedback

• Communicating Effectively

• Earning Respect, Trust and Confidence

REVISED APPROACH: REGULATION

OF POTENTIAL NEW NUCLEAR BUILD

Proposed New Two stage Nuclear Licensing Process in 2005:

• PHASE 1: Generic Pre-licensing Assessment “Generic Design Acceptance“ using generic site characteristics

(around three and half years)

Basis for building a fleet (or 2) of identical reactors

• PHASE 2: Specific Nuclear Site Licensing site specific and

operator specific assessment

(six to twelve months)

PHASE 1 IS A 4 STEP GENERIC

DESIGN ACCEPTANCE PROCESS

Preparation

Fundamental

Overview

Overall Design

Safety

Review

Detailed Design

Assessment

Time

Level of scru

tiny 4 Steps with

increasing levels of

scrutiny

Step 1

Step 2

Step 3

Step 4

MAIN PREPARATIONS FOR

REGULATING POTENTIAL NEW BUILD

• Processes – guidance published

• Effectiveness/Credibility – IAEA Peer Review,

governance

• Organisation – Progressively build up new Division, NII &

OCNS in ND

• Efficiency/Working with environment regulators

• Resourcing – HSE & government, external support,

international

• “Standards” – revised Safety Assessment Principles

POSITION IN MARCH 2008

STEP 2 COMPLETED

March 2008

• Completed summary reports on all 4 designs

• Completed 42 supporting reports

• Received report by Independent Review Board

• Concluded for all 4 designs that, in principle,

based on claims made no shortfalls to

prevent being constructed in UK

OPENNESS AND PUBLIC

INVOLVEMENT (1)

We arranged:

• Designs on vendors web sites

• Web links to designs

• Published summary, supporting and independent reports

• Vendors announcement in national press

• Announcements on HSE & EA web sites

• E-bulletin for GDA

• Leaflets (50,000) for all public libraries in GB

• Wrote to Members of Parliament Members, etc

OPENNESS AND PUBLIC

INVOLVEMENT (2)

• Total of 80,000 web hits in 6 months

• 3,000 – 6,000 per month on each design

• 5,000 hits per month on our web site

• “new build” e-bulletin – over 1650 members

• Over 100 Requests for CDs of the designs

• 37 comments received:25 on the designs (reflected in Step 2 reports)

12 general comments on the GDA process

Outcome:

REGULATING POTENTIAL NEW

NUCLEAR BUILD – Present Position

AECL ACR1000 EDF/AREVA UK EPR

WESTINGHOUSE AP1000GE HITACHI ESBWR

Withdrawn

Suspended

REGULATING POTENTIAL NEW

NUCLEAR BUILD – Present Position

• Step 3 well on the way – End with Report in

November 2009

• Resource build up going well – 90% there

• Early identification of Major Issues – Segregation of

Reactor Control and Instrumentation systems in EPR

• On track to finish GDA (Step 4) in June 2011

• Any Exclusions Depends on Designs Sufficiently

Complete and Resolved Issues

Building a Nuclear Regulatory Body Fit

for the Future - An opportunity arises?

• Shift Change of nuclear policy in UK – January 2008

• Stone Review of Nuclear Regulation – January 2009

• Nuclear New Build needs a robust well resourced

respected independent regulator

• Need to ensure present plants continue to operate at

high standards of safety

• Need to deal with the legacy of the last 50 years

Grasping the opportunity

Government response to Stone Review:

“Consultation on the Restructuring of the HSE’s Nuclear Directorate” 30 June to 22 September 2009

• Create ND as Nuclear Statutory Corporation (NSC) in 2010

• A new sector-specific (nuclear) independent regulator

• All present ND functions but add regulation of radioactive transport currently in Department of Transport

Creating more integrated independent

modern nuclear regulatory body

Creating a Nuclear Regulatory

Body Fit for the Future

• Advent of NSC – fantastic opportunity to accelerate change

• Not just Transition but importantly Transformation

• Building on being strong, independent, highly effective and respected regulator (IAEA Peer Review)

but be more:

• Modern, dynamic, open, listening, responsive,

forward looking, integrated

Creating more integrated independent

modern nuclear regulatory body

Nuclear Statutory Corporation, proposals:

• Public Sector Body outside civil service

• Own independent Board

• Post of Chief Inspector to be defined in legislation

• Much increased flexibility, e.g. to set salaries, pay

structures, etc

• Enhanced transparency and accountability

• Enhanced confidence of all stakeholders & wider

public visibility

General Lessons on Leading Change?

Assess the Strategic Environment:

• Is your view of the world out of date?

• How has it changed?

• How will it change?

• How quick?

Assess Where you are:

• Face up to the Brutal Facts as others see your organisation, your function, you

• Compare your organisation with others, with humility seeking to learn

• Assess yourself, your team, the task

Assess where you need to be and want to be:

• What do you have to do?

• What can you be best in the world at?

• What are you passionate about?

Determine your Purpose and Vision

General Lessons on Leading Change?

Decide the strategy:

• Determine the strength of the obstacles and how to get over or round them

• Build Allies- know them

• Build influencing networks and commitments

• Build on your strengths and reinforce your weaknesses

• Create and Grasp Opportunities

Decide how you are going to get there:

• What do you need to do?

• What enablers do you need?

• What resources?

• How do you get the right people on the train for the journey?

• Are they in the right seats?

• How is the change going to be managed?

• Who is driving the train?

• How do you generate followship

• Communicate, communicate, communicate

Know & Grip Self, then the Team, and only then

the Task and then Do it!

Implications of SHIFT HAPPENS

for Leaders?

Leader has to be a life-long learner

“Mental habits that support life-long learning:

• Risk Taking – Willingness to push oneself out of comfort zones

• Humble Self-Reflection – Honest assessment of successes and failures, especially the latter

• Solicitation of opinions – Aggressive collection of information and ideas from others

• Careful listening – Propensity to listen to others

• Openness to new ideas - Willingness to view life with an open mind”

John P. Knotter – “Leading Change”

Other Lessons for Nuclear Leaders?

“As a leader, one must sometimes take actions that are

unpopular, or whose results will not be known for years to

come. There are victories whose glory lies only in the fact

that they are known to those who win them. This is

particularly true of prison, where you find consolation in

being true to your ideals, even if no one else knows of it.”

Nelson Mandela – Long Walk to Freedom.

“Level 5 Leadership is about having great ambition

- great ambition for the organisation and its purpose, not for

yourself.” (Leadership is about we not me.)

Jim Collins – From Good to Great

Other Lessons for Nuclear Leaders?

50 years ago leaders across the world started on a great journey

– building a civil nuclear industry.

Today there is an opportunity take that journey into new and

richer pastures, an exciting journey, one that will have many

pitfalls along the way, one that will be hard and tiring, one that

demands a commitment to:

Highest Standards of Safety, Security, Safeguards and

Environment Protection;

Openness and Transparency as the basis for earning trust

and confidence;

Sustained Excellence in Leadership of all;

but one that will be very worthwhile.

As Future Leaders are You going to Grasp

the Opportunities to Change the World

Together for the better?

Any Questions?