An operator's view of the institutionalized exchange of experience

The problems encountered in the exchange of experience at Kernkraftwerk Goesgen-Daeniken (KKG), a single unit utility dedicated solely to the operation and maintenance of the unit, are described in the paper. These problems have led to a restriction in the exchange with similar units of the same supplier. However, personal contacts between the responsible specialists have been established. The erratic performance and incomplete nature of this kind of exchange of experience has been partially offset by the creation of some simple institutions which, together with their drawbacks, are briefly described. Up till the end of 1987, KKG had some exchange of experience with the Institute of Nuclear Power Operations (INPO), which is considered to have been a positive approach as opposed to the present form of the UNIPEDE Significant Events Reporting System (USERS), which has been of little help to date. Reports on incidents in nuclear power plants can only be evaluated if a thorough knowledge of the systems, controls and dynamic behaviour of the reporting plant is known to the evaluator. At an operating organization, this knowledge is only available for similar plants of the same supplier. Some pre-evaluation and discrimination by an organization like INPO is thus necessary. Owing to differences in the age, supplier and design, the exchange of experience between Swiss nuclear stations is limited, in spite of the small distances between the plant sites. It is felt that the institutionalized exchange of experience up to now has been too much an affair between various utility headquarters. Some of the systems have placed too much emphasis on the speed of the exchange, which might be necessary for public relations purposes, but not for the operator. The operator should be provided with background information and the countermeasures planned at the same time as he is informed about an event. (author)