 NSnet Div. 50th Peer Review of. Mitsubishi Materials Corporation, Energy Project & Technology Center, Naka Energy Research Laboratory, conducted over Three days period starting Oct. 26th, was completed. A summary of the review is shown below. |
1. Reviewed Establishment (Location) |
|
To Mitsubishi Materials Corporation located in Mukoh-yama, Naka-shi ,Ibaraki Prefecture.
|
2. Overview of the establishment and targets of review |
|
The Naka Energy Research Laboratory was established in 1984 as the Naka Nuclear Development Center in order to implement comprehensive work, such as R&D, design and engineering, etc., in the fields of the nuclear fuel cycle. After the successive expansion/integration of the R&D fields, the center was reorganized as a division laboratory of the Energy Project & Technology Center and presently engages in R&D that focuses on nuclear fuel cycle technology. |
3. Members of the review team, and the method of review
Review leader
|
: |
Japan Nuclear Technology Institute |
Group A
|
: |
Mitsui Engineering & Shipbuilding Co., Ltd., JANTI
(Fields of review: Organization/Operation and Radiation protection) |
| Group B |
: |
Shikoku Electric Power Co., Inc., JANTI
(Fields of review: Education/Training, Operations/Maintenance, Work control and Specific evaluation items) |
| Method of review |
: |
Field observation, interview with persons involved, examination of documents in the above areas.
|
|
|
Mitsubishi Materials Corporation, Energy Project & Technology Center, Naka Energy Research Laboratory
|
Document examination
|
|
4. Results of this review
|
| (1) Main Conclusions |
| |
• |
In summing up this review of, Mitsubishi Materials Corporation. we have not found any item in the nuclear safety field that would lead to a serious accident unless immediate remedies were taken.
|
|
• |
At this research laboratory they give appropriate consideration and priority to the pursuit of nuclear safety by, "prioritizing safety assurance and environmental preservation in all research activities and maximizing our efforts to protect the safety and health of our employees and all the members of the surrounding community." In addition, Mitsubishi Materials Corporation actively engages in the observance. Accordingly, at this research laboratory, they make sure that all research employees are thoroughly informed under the leadership of the laboratory director through such measures as adapting risk management to the work being carried out. |
| (2)
Good Practices, and Suggestion for Improvement. |
| |
This Peer Review selects good practices that should be widely introduced to other NSnet members and within the nuclear power industry. Meanwhile, several proposals were made that would be useful in further improving safety culture
|
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 |
| • |
Creation of "Work Procedures Manual" that reflects the knowledge gained up until now. |
|
| Special evaluation items |
| • |
Thorough risk management using "CSR Activities. |
|
|
|
b. Suggestion for Improvement
|
Fields of review |
Summary of Suggestion for Improvement |
Organization/Administration
|
| • |
Reenergizing suggestions for improvement in regards to safety. |
|
| |
| • |
Guaranteed follow up of work plans. |
| • |
Establishment of "Facility Management Procedures" for this research laboratory. |
|
|
|
|
*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 power industry.
*2 : Suggestions for Improvement
After comparing the practices of Mitsubishi Materials Corporation 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. |
|
