Skip to main content

When is a Human Factors Review Appropriate? Development of a Human Factors Screening Tool for Nuclear Regulatory Commission Project Managers

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Advances in Human Factors in Energy: Oil, Gas, Nuclear and Electric Power Industries (AHFE 2017)

Part of the book series: Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing ((AISC,volume 599))

Included in the following conference series:

  • 770 Accesses

Abstract

Human factors experts in many industries experience challenges communicating the importance of human performance issues with people from outside the human factors community. Human factors staff at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) are addressing this situation by conducting outreach activities to ensure that NRC project managers understand the scope of human factors activities. Human factors principles were used to create a decision-support tool to help NRC project managers promptly and accurately identify human factors issues in license applications. Since the rollout and implementation of the tool, there has been a noticeable increase in prompt and accurate routing of licensing actions to the human factors experts. A description of the process used to create the desk guide and a summary of outreach activities is included in the hopes that other organizations may achieve similar results.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    The NRC did not conduct human factors reviews prior to the Three Mile Island accident of 1979. So, although this was an event caused, in part, by human factors considerations, this would not be a relevant example to the current discussion because the review process at the time was not comparable to the process used today.

  2. 2.

    Increasing sensitivity (or d’) would be indicative of increasing the ability of the project manager to distinguish human factor issues from non-human factors issues (noise). We would expect the number of hits to increase (and misses to decrease) with a minimal effect on the number of false alarms.

  3. 3.

    Increasing the response bias (or beta) would increase the probably of the project manager saying “yes, a human factors review is necessary”. We would expect both the number of hits and false alarms to increase. Misses would also decrease, but an additional cost is incurred as false alarms increase.

References

  1. Green, D.M., Swets, J.A.: Signal Detection Theory and Psychophysics. Wiley, New York (1966)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Macmillan, N.A., Creelman, C.D.: Detection Theory – A User’s Guide, 2nd edn. Lawerence Erlbaum Associates, New York (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Green, B.D.: When is a Human Factors Review Appropriate? A Desk-Guide. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC. ADAMS Accession No. ML16020A423 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Nuclear Regulatory Commission: Standard Review Plan, Chapter 18: Human Factors Engineering (NUREG-0800, Chapter 18, Revision 2). U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  5. O’Hara, J.M., Higgins, J.C., Fleger, S.A., Pieringer, P.A.: Human Factors Engineering Program Review Model (NUREG-0711 Revision 3). U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  6. O’Hara, J.M., Brown, W.S., Lewis, P.M., Persensky, J.J.: Human-System Interface Design Review Guidelines (NUREG-0700 Revision 2). U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Higgins, J.C., O’Hara, J.M., Lewis, P.M., Persensky, J.J., Bongarra, J.P., Cooper, S.E., Parry, G.W.: Guidance for the Review of Changes to Human Actions (NUREG-1764 Revision 1). U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. https://www.nrc.gov/about-nrc.html

  9. Executive Order No. 13707: Using Behavioral Science Insights to Better Serve the American People. 3 C.F.R. 56365-56367 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The positions described in this paper are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission or the U.S. Government. Special thanks to Joe Giitter, Sam Lee, Sunil Weerakkody, Aida Rivera-Varona, George Lapinsky, Steven Lynch, and Niav Hughes for your support and for reviewing and improving the desk guide.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Brian D. Green .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG (outside the USA)

About this paper

Cite this paper

Green, B.D. (2018). When is a Human Factors Review Appropriate? Development of a Human Factors Screening Tool for Nuclear Regulatory Commission Project Managers. In: Fechtelkotter, P., Legatt, M. (eds) Advances in Human Factors in Energy: Oil, Gas, Nuclear and Electric Power Industries. AHFE 2017. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, vol 599. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-60204-2_1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-60204-2_1

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-60203-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-60204-2

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics