Social Scientists in an Adversarial Environment: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Organizational Factors Research

References

• “Hearings Before the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy—Congress of the United States, 91st Congress, Second Session on Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program, March 19 and 20, 1970,” pp. 31, 107–108, U.S. Government Printing Office (1970).
   Google Scholar
• J. STUSTER, The Human Factors and Ergonomics Society: Stories from the First 50 Years, pp. 56–57, Human Factors and Ergonomics Society (2006).
   Google Scholar
• V. BARNES (US NRC, ret.), Personal Communication (Oct. 15, 2019).
   Google Scholar
• T. R. WELLOCK, Safe Enough? A History of Nuclear Power and Accident Risk, University of California Press, Berkeley (2021).
   Google Scholar
• T. R. WELLOCK, “Engineering Uncertainty and Bureaucratic Crisis at the Atomic Energy Commission, 1964–1973,” Technol. Culture, 53, 4, 846 (Oct. 2012); https://doi.org/10.1353/tech.2012.0144.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• T. R. WELLOCK, “A Figure of Merit: Quantifying the Probability of a Nuclear Reactor Accident,” Techno. Culture, 58, 3, 678 (June 2017); https://doi.org/10.1353/tech.2017.0078.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• R. G. HEWLETT and O. E. ANDERSON, The New World, 1939–1946: Volume 1, the History of the United States Atomic Energy Commission, Pennsylvania State University Press, University Park, Pennsylvania (1962).
   Google Scholar
• R. G. HEWLETT and F. DUNCAN, Atomic Shield, 1947–1952: Volume 2, The History of the United States Atomic Energy Commission, Pennsylvania State University Press, University Park, Pennsylvania (1969).
   Google Scholar
• G. T. MAZUZAN and J. S. WALKER, Controlling the Atom: The Beginnings of Nuclear Regulation, 1946–1962, University of California Press, Berkeley (1984).
   Google Scholar
• J. S. WALKER, Containing the Atom: Nuclear Regulation in a Changing Environment, 1963–1971, University of California Press, Berkeley (1992).
   Google Scholar
• J. S. WALKER, Permissible Dose: A History of Radiation Protection in the Twentieth Century, University of California Press, Berkeley (2000).
   Google Scholar
• J. S. WALKER, Three Mile Island: A Nuclear Crisis in Historical Perspective, University of California Press, Berkeley (2004).
   Google Scholar
• J. S. WALKER, The Road to Yucca Mountain: The Development of Radioactive Waste Policy in the United States, University of California Press, Berkeley (2009).
   Google Scholar
• J. L. SEMINARS, W. R. GONZALEZ, and S. O. PARSONS, “Human Factors Review of Nuclear Power Plant Control Room Design,” EPRI NP-309, pp. 2-1 to 2-5, 20-1 to 20-5, 20-12 to 20-25, 21-2, Lockheed Missiles and Space Company (Nov. 1976).
   Google Scholar
• N. O. FINLAYSON et al., “Human Engineering of Nuclear Power Plant Control Rooms and Its Effects on Operator Performance,” ATR-77, pp. 6-1 to 7-16, Aerospace Corporation (Feb. 1977).
   Google Scholar
• “Evaluation of Incidents of Primary Coolant Release from Operating Boiling Water Reactors,” ML17151A684, U.S. Atomic Energy Commission (Oct. 30, 1972).
   Google Scholar
• “Reactor Safety Study,” NUREG-75/014, Main Report, pp. 162–163, Appendix III, pp. III-59 to III-69, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (Oct. 1975).
   Google Scholar
• “Plan for Research to Improve the Safety of Light-Water Nuclear Power Plants, A Report to Congress of the United States of America,” NUREG-0438, pp. 23–24, 42, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (Apr. 12, 1978).
   Google Scholar
• J. STUSTER, The Human Factors and Ergonomics Society: Stories from the First 50 Years, p. 45, Human Factors and Ergonomics Society (2006).
   Google Scholar
• B. A. TURNER, “The Organizational and Interorganizational Development of Disasters,” Administrative Sci. Q., 21, 3, 378 (Sep. 1976); https://doi.org/10.2307/2391850.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Turner, Man-Made Disasters, Wykeham (1998).
   Google Scholar
• J. KEMENY, “Report of the President’s Commission on the Accident at Three Mile Island,” pp. 63, U.S. Government Printing Office (1979).
   Google Scholar
• “Three Mile Island: A Report to the Commissioners and to the Public,” NUREG/CR-1250, Vol. 2, pp. 920, 1227, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (1979).
   Google Scholar
• “Guidelines for Utility Management Structure and Technical Resources,” SECY-80-440, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (Sep. 19, 1980).
   Google Scholar
• R. W. JURGENSEN, American Electric Power Service Corp., to Harold Denton, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 8012120504 (Dec. 8, 1980); S. H. HOWELL, Atomic Industrial Forum, to Harold R. Denton, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 8012020363, (Nov. 20, 1980); E. E. UTLEY, Power Supply and Engineering and Construction Co., to Harold Denton, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 8011250362 (Nov. 20, 1980); P. CRANE, Pacific Gas and Electric Co., to Harold R. Denton, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 8012150149 (Dec. 8, 1980).
   Google Scholar
• “Critical Human Factors Issues in Nuclear Power Regulation and a Recommended Comprehensive Human Factors Long-Range Plan,” NUREG/CR-2833, Vol. 3, pp. 193, 194–195, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (Aug. 1982).
   Google Scholar
• M. V. NADEL, “Analysis of Processes Used in Evaluating Utility Management and Organization for an NRC Operating License,” BHARC-400/82/018, pp. iv–v, 1, 10, Battelle Human Affairs Research Center (June 1982).
   Google Scholar
• “Management and Organizational Assessments: A Review of Selected Organizations,” NUREG/CR-3601, pp. 4, 28–29, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (Feb. 1984).
   Google Scholar
• “Organizational Analysis and Safety for Utilities with Nuclear Power Plants,” NUREG/CR-3125, Vol. 1, p. 8, Vol. 2, p. 7, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (Aug. 1983).
   Google Scholar
• “An Initial Empirical Analysis of Nuclear Power Plant Organization and Its Effect on Safety Performance,” NUREG/CR-3737, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (Nov. 1984).
   Google Scholar
• “Organization and Safety in Nuclear Power Plants,” NUREG.CR-5437, p. 9, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (May 1990).
   Google Scholar
• “Organizational Analysis and Safety for Utilities with Nuclear Power Plants,” NUREG/CR-3125, Vol. 1, pp. 4–6, 13, Vol. 2, pp 1-1 and 1-4, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (Aug. 1983).
   Google Scholar
• “Organizational Analysis and Safety for Utilities with Nuclear Power Plants,” NUREG/CR-3215, Vol. 2, p. 7, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (Aug. 1983).
   Google Scholar
• “Organizational Analysis and Safety for Utilities with Nuclear Power Plants,” NUREG/CR-3215, Vol. 1, pp. 13 and 38, and Vol. 2, pp. 1-4 and 1-5, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (Aug. 1983).
   Google Scholar
• “An Initial Empirical Analysis of Nuclear Power Plant Organization and Its Effect on Safety Performance,” NUREG/CR-3737, pp. viii–ix, A-4, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (Nov. 1984).
   Google Scholar
• “A Guide to Literature Relevant to the Organization and Administration of Nuclear Power Plants,” NUREG/CR-3645, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (Dec. 1983).
   Google Scholar
• “Organizational Analysis and Safety for Utilities with Nuclear Power Plants,” NUREG/CR-3215, Vol. 2, pp. 1, 1–6, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (Aug. 1983).
   Google Scholar
• “Nuclear Regulatory Commission Meeting, Briefing on Human Factors Program Plan,” 8212230393, pp. 89, 94, U.S Nuclear Regulatory Commission (Dec. 14, 1982).
   Google Scholar
• “Revised Program Element: Management and Organization, for the Human Factors Program Plan,” SECY-82-462A, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (Jan. 7, 1983).
   Google Scholar
• “Safety Culture: A Survey of the State-of-the-Art,” U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, NUREG-1756, p. 27–32 (Jan. 2002).
   Google Scholar
• “Celebrating 25 Years of NRC’s Principles of Good Regulation,” ML16048A579, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (Jan. 19, 2016).
   Google Scholar
• “Implications of the Accident at Chernobyl for Safety Regulation of Commercial Nuclear Power Plants in the United States,” U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, NUREG-1251, Vol. 1, pp. 1-21 and 1-23 (Apr. 1989).
   Google Scholar
• “Loss of Main and Auxiliary Feedwater Event at the Davis-Besse Plant on June 9, 1985,” U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, NUREG-1154 (July 1985).
   Google Scholar
• M. WALD, “The Peach Bottom Syndrome,” New York Times, Sec. 3, p. 1 (Mar. 27, 1988).
   Google Scholar
• “Wake Me if It’s a Meltdown,” Time (Apr. 13, 1987).
   Google Scholar
• V. STELLO, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, to J. C. Everett, III, Philadelphia Electric Co., “Order Suspending Power Operation and Order to Show Cause (Effective Immediately)–Peach Bottom,” ML021580019, ADAMS (Mar. 31, 1987).
   Google Scholar
• “U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Annual Report 1987,” NUREG-1145, Vol. 4, pp. 10, 201–10, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (1988).
   Google Scholar
• “The Regulatory Craft: An Interview with Commissioner Stephen Burns,” U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (2019); https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uAbz9B78tNA&feature=youtu.be ( current as of Mar. 3, 2020).
   Google Scholar
• T. MURLEY (US NRC, Ret.), Personal Communication (Oct. 29, 2019).
   Google Scholar
• “An Overview of the Evolution of Human Reliability Analysis in the Context of Probabilistic Risk Assessment,” SAND2008-5085, p. 10, Sandia National Laboratories (2009).
   Google Scholar
• J. REES, Hostages of Each Other: The Transformation of Nuclear Safety Since Three Mile Island, University of Chicago Press (1996).
   Google Scholar
• “Nuclear Regulatory Commission Meeting, Briefing on Human Factors Program and NRC Views of NAS Recommendations,” ML15132A550, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (May 19, 1988).
   Google Scholar
• “Nuclear Regulatory Commission Policy Statement on the Conduct of Nuclear Power Plant Operations,” Fed. Regist., 54, 3224 (Jan. 24, 1989).
   Google Scholar
• “NRC’s Human Factors Programs and Initiatives,” SECY-89-183, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (June 16, 1989).
   Google Scholar
• N. P. MORAY and B. M. HUEY, Human Factors Research and Nuclear Safety, pp. 7, 13–18, 21, 80–88, National Academy Press (1988).
   Google Scholar
• N. MORAY, “The Good, the Bad, and the Future: On the Archaeology of Ergonomics,” Hum. Factors, 50, 3, 415 (June 2008); https://doi.org/10.1518/001872008X288439.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• N. MORAY, “The Human Factors of Complex Systems: A Personal View,” Human Factors Issues in Complex Systems, pp. 11–40, G. R. J. HOCKEY, P. NICKEL, and K. A. BROOKHUIS, Eds., Shaker Publishing (2007).
   Google Scholar
• “335th General Meeting,” 8803170286, pp. 22, 111, Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (Mar. 10, 1988).
   Google Scholar
• N. P. MORAY and B. M. HUEY, Human Factors Research and Nuclear Safety, pp. 7, 80–88, National Academy Press (1988).
   Google Scholar
• C. PERROW, Normal Accidents: Living with High-Risk Technologies, Basic Books (1984).
   Google Scholar
• T. R. LaPORTE, K. ROBERTS, and G. I. ROCHLIN, “Aircraft Carrier Operations at Sea: The Challenges of High Reliability Performance. Final Report,” University of California, Berkeley (July 15, 1988).
   Google Scholar
• T. R. LaPORTE and P. M. CONSOLINI, “Working in Practice But Not in Theory: Theoretical Challenges of ‘High-Reliability Organizations’,” J. Public Administration Res. Theory, 1, 1, 19 (Jan. 1991); https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.jpart.a037070.
   Google Scholar
• K. E. WEICK, “Organizational Culture as a Source of High Reliability,” California Manage. Rev., 29, 2, 112 ( Winter 1987); https://doi.org/10.2307/41165243.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• P. E. BIERLY III and J. C. SPENDER, “Culture and High Reliability Organizations: The Case of the Nuclear Submarine,” J. Manage., 21, 4, 639 (1995); https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639502100403.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• R. A. COOKE and D. M. ROUSSEAU, “Behavioral Norms and Expectations: A Quantitative Approach to the Assessment of Organizational Culture,” Group Organizational Stud., 13, 3, 245 (Sep. 1988); https://doi.org/10.1177/105960118801300302.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• W. R. FREUDENBURG, “Perceived Risk, Real Risk: Social Science and the Art of Probabilistic Risk Assessment,” Science, 242, 4875, 44 (Oct. 7, 1988); https://doi.org/10.1126/science.3175635.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• “Nuclear Regulatory Commission Meeting, Briefing on Human Factors Program and NRC Views of NAS Recommendations,” ML15132A550, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (May 19, 1988).
   Google Scholar
• “ASCOT Guidelines,” IAEA-TECDOC-743, pp. 12, 14, International Atomic Energy Agency (1994).
   Google Scholar
• “Use of Probabilistic Risk Assessment Methods in Nuclear Regulatory Activities, Final Policy Statement,” Fed. Regist., 60, 42622 (Aug. 16, 1995).
   Google Scholar
• “Nuclear-Power-Plant Severe-Accident Research Plant,” NUREG-0900, Chap. 2 and 3, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (Jan. 1983).
   Google Scholar
• WELLOCK, “A Figure of Merit,” p. 678.
   Google Scholar
• G. E. APOSTOLAKIS, J. H. BICKEL, and S. KAPLAN, “Probabilistic Risk Assessment in the Nuclear Power Utility Industry,” Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf., 24, 2, 91 (1989); https://doi.org/10.1016/0951-8320(89)90086-0.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• G. E. APOSTOLAKIS (U.S. NRC, ret.), Personal Communication (Oct. 28, 2019).
   Google Scholar
• S. B. HABER, J. N. O’BRIEN, and T. RYAN, “Model Development for the Determination of the Influence of Management on Plant Risk,” Proc. of 1988 IEEE Fourth Conf. on Human Factors and Power Plants, Monterey, California, June 5–9, 1988, p. 349 (1988).
   Google Scholar
• S. B. HABER, D. S. METLAY, and D. A. CROUCH, “Influence of Organizational Factors on Safety,” BNL-NUREG-44849; https://www.osti.gov/biblio/6663000 (Aug. 6, 1990).
   Google Scholar
• “Influence of Organizational Factors on Performance Reliability,” NUREG/CR-5538, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (Dec. 1991).
   Google Scholar
• S. B. HABER et al., “The Nuclear Organization and Management Analysis Concept Methodology: Four Years Later,” BNL-NUREG-47667, presented at the Conf. Human Factors and Power Plants: Power Generation—The Next Decade and Beyond, Monterey, California, June 7–11, 1992; https://www.osti.gov/biblio/7046559-nuclear-organization-management-analysis-concept-methodology-four-years-later (current as of Mar. 3, 2020).
   Google Scholar
• “Organizational Factors Research Progress Report,” SECY-90-349, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (Oct. 9, 1990).
   Google Scholar
• “NRC Regulatory Information Conference, Washington, DC, April 18–20, 1989,” NUREG/CP-0102, p. 1, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (Sep. 1989).
   Google Scholar
• “Diagnostic Evaluation Team Report for McGuire Nuclear Station,” 8804130299, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (Mar. 8, 1988).
   Google Scholar
• “Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Briefing on Effectiveness of the Diagnostic Evaluations,” ML15139A402, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (Nov. 23, 1988).
   Google Scholar
• J. NELSON, “NRC Scores Commonwealth Edison for Operating Problems at Zion,” Nucleonics Week, p. 8 (Sep. 13, 1990).
   Google Scholar
• R. ZUERCHER, “NYPA Slow to Correct Fitzpatrick Deficiencies, NRC Diagnostic Report Says,” p. 3, Inside NRC (Dec. 30, 1991).
   Google Scholar
• D. STELLFOX, “South Texas Project 12th Plant to Get NRC’s Diagnostic Evaluation,” pp. 1, 11–13, Inside NRC (Apr. 5, 1993).
   Google Scholar
• D. STELLFOX, “Nuclear Plant Management Ills Prompt NYPA Chief Brons’ Departure,” Nucleonics Week, p. 6 (June 10, 1993).
   Google Scholar
• S. R. RUBIN, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, to R. P. La Rhette, 9407190351, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (June 1, 1995).
   Google Scholar
• B. HAAGENSEN, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Personal Communication (Oct. 22, 2019).
   Google Scholar
• T. G. RYAN, “Organizational Factors Research Lessons Learned and Findings (1991),” ML090710627, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (Sep. 1991).
   Google Scholar
• J. J. KRAMER and S. B. HABER, “Organizational Performance Research at the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission—Past Present and Future,” Proc. of the Int. Topl. Mtg. on Safety Culture in Nuclear Installations, Vienna, Austria, April 24–28, 1995, p. 385, American Nuclear Society (1995).
   Google Scholar
• “Review of Organizational Factors Research,” SECY-93-020, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (Feb. 1, 1993).
   Google Scholar
• TOWERS PERRIN, “Nuclear Regulatory Review Study: Final Report,” Cover Memo, pp. 3, 10, 29, 56, and Exhibit III-3 (Oct. 1994).
   Google Scholar
• E. POOLEY, “Nuclear Warriors,” Time, p. 56 (Mar. 4, 1996).
   Google Scholar
• P. V. DOMENICI, A Brighter Tomorrow: Fulfilling the Promise of Nuclear Energy, Rowman & Littlefield, Lanham, Maryland (2004).
   Google Scholar
• “Request to Discontinue the Diagnostic Evaluation Program,” COMSECY-00-0033, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (Oct. 4, 2000).
   Google Scholar
• “ROP Framework,” US Nuclear Regulatory Commission; https://www.nrc.gov/reactors/operating/oversight/rop-description.html ( current as of Apr. 20, 2020).
   Google Scholar
• N. PIDGEON, “Safety Culture: Key Theoretical Issues,” Work Stress, 12, 3, 202 (1998); https://doi.org/10.1080/02678379808256862.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• G. APOSTOLAKIS, “How Useful Is Quantitative Risk Assessment?,” Risk Anal., 24, 3, 517 (2004); https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0272-4332.2004.00455.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• “Proposed Options for Assessing the Performance and Competency of Licensee Management,” SECY-98-059, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (Mar. 26, 1998).
   Google Scholar
• “Staff Requirements: SECY-98-059,” U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (June 29, 1998).
   Google Scholar
• “Reactor Oversight Process,” Handbook 8.13, Part I, p. 4, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (Jun. 19, 2002).
   Google Scholar
• S. B. HABER and M. T. BARRIERE, Development of a Regulatory Organizational and Management Review Method,” AECB Project No. 2.341.2, Atomic Energy Control Board (Jan. 20, 1998).
   Google Scholar
• “Special Expert Group on Human and Organisational Factors (SEGHOF) State-of-the-Art Report on Systematic Approaches to Safety Management,” NEA/CSNI/R(2006)1, pp. 65, Appendix 3.b, Nuclear Energy Agency, Committee on the Safety of Nuclear Installations (Mar. 16, 2006).
   Google Scholar
• N. DURBIN, “Review of International Oversight of Safety Culture in Nuclear Facilities,” Idaho National Laboratory, Battelle Energy Alliance (Mar. 2006).
   Google Scholar
• “Management of Operational Safety in Nuclear Power Plants,” INSAG-13, International Nuclear Safety Advisory Group, International Atomic Energy Agency (1999).
   Google Scholar
• “Degradation of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Reactor Pressure Vessel Head Lessons Learned Report,” U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission; https://www.nrc.gov/reactors/operating/ops-experience/vessel-head-degradation/lessons-learned/lltf-report.html (accessed Sep. 30, 2002).
   Google Scholar
• M. B. BEZILLA, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Personal Communication to J. L. Caldwell, “Resubmittal of Redacted Organizational Safety Culture and Safety Conscious Work Environment Independent Assessment Report and Actions Plans for the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station,” ML050660425, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (Mar. 4, 2005).
   Google Scholar
• P. GUNTER and D. LOCHBAUM, “Anatomy of a Flawed Decision: NRC Has a Brain, but No Spine,” ML031110514, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (Nov. 15, 2002).
   Google Scholar
• “Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Clean Air, Climate Change, and Nuclear Safety of the Committee on Environment and Public Works. 108th Congress, 2nd Session. May 20, 2004,” p. 25, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, District of Columbia (2006).
   Google Scholar
• “Historical Review and Observations of Defense in Depth,” NUREG/KM-0009, pp. 4–12 and 4–30, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (Apr. 2016).
   Google Scholar
• “Staff Requirements—SECY-11-0005—Proposed Final Safety Culture Policy Statement,” ML110660547, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (Mar. 7, 2011).
   Google Scholar
• “Final Safety Culture Policy Statement,” Fed. Regist., 76, 114, 34773 (June 14, 2011).
   Google Scholar
• S. PETERS et al., “Organizational Factors in PRA: Twisting Knobs and Beyond,” Proc. 2019 Intl. Topl. Mtg. Probabilistic Safety Assessment and Analysis, Charleston, South Carolina, April 28–May 3, 2019 (2019).
   Google Scholar
• S. T. GHOSH and G. E. APOSTOLAKIS, “Organizational Contributions to Nuclear Power Plant Safety,” Nucl. Eng. Technol., 37, 3, 207 (June 2005).
   Google Scholar
• “Effectiveness Review of Cross-Cutting Issues,” ML14099A171, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (Apr. 23, 2014).
   Google Scholar
• S. L. MORROW, G. K. KOVES, and V. E. BARNES, “Exploring the Relationship Between Safety Culture, and Safety Performance in U.S. Nuclear Power Operations,” Saf. Sci., 69, 37 (2014); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2014.02.022.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• G. GROTE, “Social Science for Safety: Steps Towards Establishing a Culture of Interdisciplinary Appreciation,” Proc. Human and Organizational Aspects of Assuring Nuclear Safety—Exploring 30 Years of Safety Culture, Vienna, Austria, February 22–26, 2016, p. 101, International Atomic Energy Agency (2019).
   Google Scholar
• “NRC Inspection Manual: Guidance for Conducting an Independent NRC Safety Culture Assessment,” IP 95003.02, ML19066A376, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (Apr. 1, 2019).
   Google Scholar
• “Safety Culture Common Language,” NUREG-2165, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (Mar. 2014).
   Google Scholar
• “Safety Culture in the ROP,” ML18095A029, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (Apr. 5, 2018).
   Google Scholar
• “Traits of a Healthy Nuclear Safety Culture,” INPO 12–012, Institute of Nuclear Power Operations (Dec. 2012).
   Google Scholar
• “Traits of a Healthy Nuclear Safety Culture,” WANO PL 2013-1, World Association of Nuclear Operators (May 2013).
   Google Scholar
• S. B. HABER, “From Safety Culture to a Culture for Safety: What Is It that We Still Have Not Learned?” Proc. On the Human and Organizational Aspects of Assuring Nuclear Safety—Exploring 30 Years of Safety Culture, Vienna, Austria, February 22–26, 2016, p. 219, International Atomic Energy Agency (2019).
   Google Scholar