A requirement arose during decommissioning work at a UK Magnox Nuclear Power Station to identify the hazards involved in removing High Dose Rate Items from a Cartridge Cooling Pond. The power station has shifted from an operational phase in its life-cycle to a decommissioning phase, and as such the risks, and procedures to deal with them, have become more novel and uncertain. This raises an important question. Are the hazard identification methods that have proven useful in one phase of the system lifecycle just as useful in another, and if not, could CWA be useful? An opportunity arose at this site to put this question to a direct test. Two methods were used, one practitioner focussed and in widespread use during the plant’s operational phase (the Structured What-If method) the other was CWA. This Chapter presents the outcomes of applying both methods to a real-world hazard identification task and the views of practitioners having done so.
|Title of host publication||Cognitive work analysis|
|Subtitle of host publication||Applications, extensions and future directions,|
|Editors||Neville Stanton, Paul Salmon, Guy Walker, Daniel Jenkins|
|Number of pages||24|
|Publication status||Accepted/In press - 2017|
Walker, G. H., Thompson, P., & Cooper, M. (Accepted/In press). CWA vs SWIFT in a nuclear decommissioning case study. In N. Stanton, P. Salmon, G. Walker, & D. Jenkins (Eds.), Cognitive work analysis: Applications, extensions and future directions, (pp. 363-386). CRC Press.