 NSnet Peer Review of Kumatori Works, Nuclear Fuel Industries, Ltd. , conducted over four-day period starting January 27, 2004, was completed. A summary of the review is shown below.
We will organize and compile the results into a report and publicize it on the NSnet website.
|
1. Reviewed Establishment (location) |
|
Kumatori Works, Nuclear Fuel Industries, Ltd., located in Kumatori-cho, Sennan-gun, Osaka.
|
2. Overview of the establishment and targets of review |
|
Nuclear Fuel Industries, Ltd., as a nuclear fuel fabricator, has developed, designed and produced high-quality fuel for light water reactors (PWR and BWR) that complies with nuclear power requirements in Japan , utilizing a combination of its own technologies developed over years and techniques introduced from overseas. In addition, it promotes a wide variety of business from design and production of fuel for new type reactors and various research/test ones and design/production of fuel-related equipment s to management services of reactor cores and play a role in moving forward with the development of nuclear power in our country as a general nuclear fuel maker.
Kumatori Works processes fuel for PWR ( light water reactors ) mainly using uranium oxide powders as raw materials, and also designs and produces fuel-related equipment s and provides fuel-related engineering and electron-irradiated sterilization/material processing services.
|
3. Members of the review team and the method of review
Group A
|
: |
Chubu Electric Power Co., Inc., Hitachi Zosen Corporation
(Fields of review: organization/operation and education/training) |
| Group B |
: |
Tohoku Electric Power Co., Inc., Fuji Electric Systems Co., Ltd.
(Fields of review: operations/maintenance and radiation protection) |
| Group C |
: |
Central Research Institute of Electric Power Industry, Inc., NSnet
( Fields of review: emergency measures and Serious Accident Prevention) |
| Method of review |
: |
site inspection, interview with persons involved and examination of documents in the above areas |
|
|
Kumatori Works |
Document examination |
|
|
4. Results of this review
|
| (1) Main Conclusions |
|
• |
In summing up this review of Kumatori Works, Nuclear Fuel Industries, Ltd., we have not found any item in the nuclear safety field that would lead to a serious accident unless immediate remedies were taken. |
|
• |
Based on its management policy of “contribution to society through help to the development of the nuclear industry”, Kumatori Works defined guidelines for “environmental safety and actions with the highest priority on safety”. In addition, the formulation of a management system for occupational safety and health was declared in the “policy for occupational safety and health,” toward systematic maintenance and improvement activities for ensuring safety. Under the company-wide basic policy for safety as the first priority, the Works'manager and all staffs are making serious efforts for ensuring safety. |
|
• |
In addition, for the enhancement of engineers'moral, ethics education for its management officials and staffs is systematically conducted once a year by invited outside instructors. Furthermore, in order to create a confidential relationship with local communities, the Works is actively working on activities from various viewpoints, such as joint disaster prevention exercise publicly disclosed, organization of public visit to the Works and reception of PA visit. |
|
• |
In the future, it is desired that Kumatori Works should increase its own safety efforts toward enhanced safety culture, without accepting things as they are. |
| (2) Good Practices and Suggestions for Improvement |
| |
This Peer Review selects good practices that should be widely introduced to other NSnet members and within the nuclear power industry.On the other hand, this Peer Review makes numerous suggestions for improvement that would be useful in improving the safety culture at Kumatori Works that were the focus of the Peer Review.
A brief look at Good Practices*¹ and Suggestions for improvement*² follows below. |
|
a. Good Practices
|
Fields of review |
Summary of good practices |
Organization / Administration |
| • |
Voluntary and positive development of safety culture by “21 education committee” |
| • |
Prevention of mannerism of various activities for safety and health in line with an occupational safety and health management system |
| • |
Promotion of risk assessment activities |
| • |
Detailed classification of qualification of quality auditors |
|
Education / Training |
| • |
Qualification system based on the results of OJT |
|
Operations / maintenance |
| • |
Preparation of understandable work standards through attached pictures |
|
Serious Accident Prevention |
| • |
Enhancement of criticality safety measures in consideration for JCO accident and accountability to local communities |
| • |
Focus on a more reliable criticality control method for process and equipment |
| • |
Preparation of check manuals for earthquakes |
| • |
Ensured check control system for safety-related gauges and meters |
| • |
Indication of fire extinguishers and evacuation routes easily identified |
|
|
|
b. Suggestions for Improvement
|
Fields of review |
Summary of Suggestions for Improvement |
Organization / Administration |
| • |
Continuation of activities by “21 education committee” (following activity results) |
| • |
Active disclosure through Web site, etc. |
| • |
Rational document distribution through an electronic public disclosure system |
|
Emergency measures |
| • |
Simplified emergency communication system table and modification of the table to a card |
|
Operations / maintenance |
| • |
Promotion of revision of operations standards and others associated with legislation for introduction of quality assurance for safety activities |
|
Serious Accident Prevention |
| • |
Improvement of emergency response education for provisional access |
| • |
Review on fire response method in hood |
|
|
|
|
|
*1 : Good Practices
Information on good practices incorporating appropriate, effective, and unique methods into activities to ensure safety should be widely distributed to the members of the NSnet and the nuclear industry.
*2 : Suggestions for Improvement
After comparing the practices of Kumatori Works with the best in the nuclear industry, suggestions to improve and enhance safety activities should be implemented to achieve the highest level of nuclear safety.
Even if current activities are equal to or higher than general standards in the nuclear industry, suggestion is taken up in case there is still room for improvement.
|
|
