 DCP's webinar on the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's approach to safety culture. I'm happy to be here this morning. Presentation should take about 35 to 40 minutes, and then we have 15 minutes available after we're finished for questions. If you would, please use the chat. It's a dropdown menu on More at the top, and you can put your questions in as the presentation is being given, and then I'll take a look at those at the end. If any of you need to message me personally or feel like it's just a question you'd rather just ask me, I'm going to give all of you my email address right now so that you can do any follow-up that you'd like to. It's simply dianne.siraki at nrc.com. nrc.gov, I'm sorry. All right, so we're ready to go. Today I wanna talk with you just very briefly about the NRC's safety culture history, our role in safety culture, in particular the safety culture policy statement. We'll just touch on safety culture in the React oversight process, talk a little bit about enforcement and the alternative dispute resolution program. Then I'll move over to the agency's safety culture. I'll talk about our leadership model, our differing views programs, and how we assess safety culture. And finally, end up with a discussion on the international safety culture activities that have been ongoing in the recent past that are applicable to us here in the US and in which the NRC has played a major role. So our mission statement, to license and regulate the nation's civilian use of by-product source and special nuclear materials to ensure adequate protection of public health and safety, promote the common defense and security, and protect the environment. So let's look at how we got into this area of safety culture. The first time that safety culture was really the term was coined was during the Chernobyl incident in 1986. For us in the US and in particular at the NRC, we began talking about safety culture as far back as 1989. We had a reactor facility in which operators were inattentive and were displaying unprofessional behaviors. Our commission directed us to take a look at conduct in the operations area in the control room and we issued our first policy statement that talked about behaviors and making safety first. And that policy statement, conduct nuclear power plant operations was issued in 1989. It's applicable to the reactor community. And I should say now that a policy statement is not a regulation, it is expectations on the part of the NRC. So moving ahead to 1996, we had workers retaliated against for whistleblowing. This was at our Millstone facility and some of you, if you're old enough, will remember that this hit the cover of Time Magazine. It was the second time that we were directed by our commission to take a look at a policy statement. And this time, freedom for raising concerns without fear of retaliation. Really the safety conscious work environment that most of us as ECP professionals are concerned with uppermost. This policy statement applies to all of our licensees and certificate holders. So it's not just applicable to the reactors. This is one, if you're not familiar with it, I would suggest that you take a look at it on the NRC webpage because it does have a lot of pertinent information for ECP professionals. In 2002, we had the Davis-Bessie head degradation event. That facility was shut down for a couple of years. And our commission gave us direction at the time to look at safety culture more fully in that reactor oversight process. So we came up with 13 safety culture components that we put into three cross cutting bins at the time. And that was applicable just to the reactors since it was under the reactor oversight process. Moving forward into 2008, the commission directed us to look at safety culture that would apply to all of our licensees, not just the reactors. So over a three-year effort, we ended up issuing our final safety culture policy statement at the Federal Register in June of 2011. So the safety culture policy statement, as I mentioned, policy statements set forth expectations. They're not regulations. With input from our licensees at a large public workshop, we decided on one policy statement covering both safety and security. And because safety and security are the primary pillars of the NRC's regulatory program, and you just saw those as a part of our mission, there is a very robust discussion of security in the statement of policy itself. We also added a preamble to the traits in the safety culture policy statement, which reference the interface of safety and security. This is the definition that you will find in the safety culture policy statement. And the process from the commission direction to issuance of a policy statement took three years. A major activity was a three-day workshop held with representatives of 16 regulated communities, including power plants, fuel cycle facilities, gauge manufacturers, hospitals, and included our agreement states and many others. The NRC facilitated this event and the methods used to bring our regulated communities together to successfully assist in developing this important policy statement have become a model for the NRC. The participants were instrumental in developing a definition and traits of a positive safety culture that all could agree on and developing the definition and traits in this manner built buy-in and ownership. After this important three-day workshop, the NRC staff conducted significant outreach through additional workshops and public comment periods to gain input from a wide variety of licensees and certificate holders, which is minor changes made by the staff. The definition you see here and the safety culture traits which you will see on an upcoming slide were developed at the three-day workshop and are included in the final safety culture policy statement. This is the preamble that I alluded to previously related to the, starts the discussion on the importance of security. Last sentence, consequently consideration of both safety and security issues, commensurate with their significance is an underlying principle of a statement of policy. And again, a robust discussion in the statement of policy itself. These are the nine traits that are in the safety culture policy statement. The first eight were developed at the three-day workshop with the regulated communities. Again, with the one page or one sentence descriptors and the NRC staff when we looked at the information that was developed by that working group, if you will, at the time, we decided to pull out questioning attitude as a separate trait. The group had not done that because they felt this questioning attitude was part of all the rest of the traits. We felt it was important enough to bring it out on its own. So those are the nine traits in the policy statement. Environment for raising concerns, which is one that are squee environment, which is one that we really focus on as any ECP and ECP professionals is just one of the safety culture traits. And I'd like to just say here that you really can't have a positive and healthy environment for raising concerns if you don't have a pretty positive and healthy safety culture. They're all interdependent. If you look at raising concerns, you have to have leadership commitment. You have to have personal accountability, a respectful work environment, a questioning attitude. There has to be communication in the organization. These don't just happen on their own if you only focus on raising concerns. Each really needs to be focused on their own so that you can create and inculcate the behaviors you need in your organization. But it is important to note that environment for raising concerns is not out there all on its own. Now throughout this initiative, the overriding direction from the commission was to educate and inform our licensees and external stakeholders about the importance of developing and maintaining a positive safety culture. The NRC staff has done that by speaking at various stakeholder forums and conferences as well as developing numerous educational tools. We have a safety culture advisory committee consisting of senior level managers from each of our program offices. And these are the offices that have ownership of regulated communities such as reactors and materials. And this group of senior managers was formed during the development of the safety culture policy statement and they remain in place to oversee outreach and education. We also have a staff level committee which supports the senior level committee. Each of these committees meet annually. We've been developing educational tools since the policy statement was issued in 2011. And some of these tools that are available for your use on our publicly available webpage include brochures, posters, pop-ups. We have examples of presentations that nine trade talks, case studies, a journeys document, a paper on safety culture and decommissioning and the educational resource workbook that you see on this slide. One of the first tools we developed was the safety culture trade talk. And the intent of this publication was to better understand the safety culture traits in the policy statement. We published an issue for each of the nine traits. Each trade talk discusses why that particular trade is important. It describes the attributes and examples for each trait. And some of these behaviors can be found in new grade 2165. It's a publication that if you haven't seen it, I would also recommend taking a look at it. It gives a number of behavioral examples that you will see if a safety culture trait is present in your organization. That document was put together with the reactor community in a series of workshops that we had to come to common language with the reactor community through the Institute of Nuclear Power Operations. We changed our 13 components that I mentioned previously when we put those together when Davis-Bessie was down and we were looking at putting safety culture into the ROP. We changed those components to the traits in the safety culture policy statement and IMPO has done that as well, changed their principles to the traits. So we now are speaking in a common language. Each trait also includes a fictional scenario showing the importance of the trait by discussing a safety event in which the traits were not present. We've developed several case studies, four of them at the present time, to showcase the traits. Three of the case studies represented an event in which safety culture traits were clearly missing and one study showcased what happens when you have safety culture traits visible and inculcated into the organization and its members. So in other words, a positive safety culture case. We took the case study concept step further by engaging with one of our case study organizations, the Metro System in Washington, DC, to discuss actions that organization took to address their safety culture weaknesses. They had had an accident and we use that as one of the case studies. So we did a follow-up with the Metro Area Transportation Authority. So the document that we did based on what we gleaned from them on actions that they took is called the journey document and it's a journey for a reason because you can't take your eye off of safety culture. You never arrive at a positive safety culture as it takes constant focus. And this organization, the Metro Organization or the Area Transit Authority is a great example because they still have problems and the actions they took helped them to make progress but they've still not arrived. So this educational resource workbook that you see on the screen contains the nine trade talks, the Metro case study, the Metro journey and the entire safety culture policy statement from the Federal Register. It's a comprehensive tool to really understand safety culture and the traits. There's a series of questions after each trade and sprinkle throw up the workbook so that you can use it to learn in your organization. So our approach to safety culture at the NRC is that the licensees vary the primary responsibility. That's why it's not a regulation and we use our safety culture policy statement for our expectations. NRC considers safety culture within the reactor oversight process for nuclear power reactors. And we NRC assessment of safety cultures primarily as a result of an event or degradation in performance using our performance matrix. And there are different levels of inspection activity based on NRC's overall assessment of license state performance. So as performance degrades for reactors it's possible for us NRC staff to actually get into that organization and perform a safety culture assessment under two inspection procedures, 95002 and 95003. Again, all of this is publicly available. We have allegations and enforcement programs which are applicable to all of our regulated communities so not just the reactors. And in addition to addressing violations of NRC regulations and potential wrongdoing these programs address discrimination against licensee employees for raising safety related concerns and the potential resulting chilling effect on the employee or coworkers. The allegations and enforcement programs address safety culture through the use of chilling effect letters and confirmatory orders. Chilling effect letters are issued when the NRC has concluded that the work environment is chilled. In other words, workers perceive that the licensee is suppressing or discouraging the raising of safety concerns or is not addressing such concerns when they are raised. The number in nature of allegations received at the NRC including allegations related to discrimination for raising safety related concerns helped to inform the NRC's decision on whether to send a chilling effect letter. The NRC's allegation program includes guidance on the agency's squee policy and issuance of chilling effect letters and is available on the NRC's webpage. The NRC issues a confirmatory order as part of the enforcement alternative dispute resolution program. Both the enforcement program and the alternative dispute resolution program are available to view on the website as well. The enforcement program includes information on sanctions for discrimination against employees who raise concerns. So when an employee, when the licensee has performance issues and we have reason to believe that they have safety culture issues, for instance, a substantiated retaliation exam allegation and that licensee agrees to engage in the alternative dispute resolution process, we can ultimately agree with that licensee to include actions to address safety culture concerns in a confirmatory order. Confirmatory orders become a part of the licensing basis for that particular licensee and therefore become a requirement for that particular licensee. So that means it's no longer an expectation but rather a requirement and something that we can go back and inspect. This has occurred with fuel cycle facilities, suppliers, material licensees, including medical licensees, as well as others. They now have commitments to develop and maintain a positive safety culture. Now let's talk about our agency's safety culture. So I'm not gonna read the whole slide but this slide discusses the fact that our organizational culture includes our safety culture as an important part. And the definition that we use at the NRC of safety culture is nearly identical to the one found in the safety culture policy statement. And that is safety culture consists of the core values and behaviors resulting from a collective commitment by its leaders and individuals to emphasize safety to ensure the protection of people and the environment. At the NRC we are all responsible and accountable for exhibiting behaviors and actions that support a healthy safety culture. The efforts to improve our NRC's organizational culture which included development of an explicit leadership model have contributed to the advancement of the agency's safety culture. The NRC leadership model is a roadmap to communicate in one place how we individually and collectively demonstrate leadership in fulfilling the NRC mission. Model complements the agency mission vision and values. They work together to help explain our organizational culture. And in general and organizations, mission, vision and values concisely define its function, purpose and direction. The mission presents what we do. The vision is what we strive to be as we carry out the mission and the values are how we treat one another and others while fulfilling our mission. Collectively the mission, vision and values guide why we do things and why we do them in a certain way and allow us to gauge individual work activities against a common benchmark. Our behaviors, demonstration of values and practice of leadership form a foundation for building agency programs and activities that enable us to fulfill our mission and achieve our vision. At the NRC, we use several formal and informal programs and activities. And as we conduct these programs and activities, it's very important to practice the behaviors of the NRC leadership model and to share an understanding of why we do a particular program and activity and why we do it in a particular way. The NRC leadership model is based on the premise that everyone at the NRC, regardless of position, is a leader. The model identifies fundamental leadership characteristics and observable behaviors we ask all NRC employees to demonstrate in order to build upon and strengthen our organizational culture which includes our safety culture. The leadership model focuses on six characteristics. They spell out the acronym Predict and they are participative decision-making, receptivity to new ideas and thinking, empowerment and shared leadership, diversity and thought, innovation and risk tolerance and finally collaboration and teamwork. The appendix of the leadership model includes 12 specific NRC programs and activities that contribute to the model. Safety culture is included as one of these activities. The safety culture policy statement was developed for our licensees but because of the universal nature of the definition and traits of the policy statement, its tenants can also be used as a model for the NRC safety culture. The policy statement has nine traits and the NRC has decided to add the 10th trait that the reactor community has added as well and that is the trait of decision-making. Behavioral examples for each of the NRC's safety culture traits were developed from both Nuregg 2165 which I mentioned before which is the document that resulted from the common language effort between the reactor community through IMPO and the NRC and resulted in the revision of our reactor oversight process from safety culture components to safety culture traits. So they were developed, so the traits that we use at the NRC were developed from both that document and the NRC's behavior matters initiatives. These were cafe style meetings that we did over the last couple of years to get input from our staff as well as our leaders to develop really behaviors that would be best to accomplish our mission and to ensure that we have a healthy and strong safety culture within our overall organizational culture. All NRC employees are expected to exhibit behaviors and actions that support the values and traits of a healthy safety culture on a daily basis. And in addition, NRC mechanisms for expressing and resolving differing views are available to all employees whenever they need them. So very similar to the program that we support here, the employee concerns program, we also at the NRC have programs for individuals to raise concerns. So those programs include not just, let's see, I'm sorry, just give me a moment here. Okay, we have a, in addition to the programs that you see here, a three tiered approach, the open door policy, non-concurrents policy, and differing professional opinions program. We also have, we've developed a program at the NRC where in addition to the open door program, we're very much encouraged through other mechanisms. We have town halls, we have all kinds of other individual department meetings where we can raise concerns as well so that we don't need to go through these formal processes, but rather we can use the informal processes that are across the organization to help us to raise concerns. So assessing safety culture at the NRC. We do surveys with safety culture and climate survey is put out by our office of the inspector general. It is put out every three years and it does have specific questions related to safety culture. And then we do a federal employees viewpoint survey which is done annually. The FEVS is a survey that's given across the government. So all agencies and departments conduct that survey and we take both of those survey results and put those together so that we get a more holistic picture of what's going on at the agency. They help us to inform action planning done in response to these surveys. And the NRC also uses a contractor to support post-survey activities which can include interviews, focus groups or other tools as appropriate to better understand employee responses to certain questions and then to assist the agency to address the emerging areas of concern identified in the surveys. So we do have follow-up activities that we do as well and we also do action planning both by the program office level as well as the agency level. We do assessments of the programs that I mentioned before the non-concurrents program and the differing views programs that is built the requirement for an assessment is actually built right into the management directive for those programs. And so that has to be done on a periodic basis. We also initiated a differing view program improvement project in 2018. And the assessments of the individual programs along with that improvement project found that the processes are sound and valuable assets to decision-making but they also identified areas for improvement and corresponding action plans aimed at creating effective lasting improvement to the processes and we will continue on with those actions that will create a better efficiency and effectiveness in those programs. In fact, both of them the non-concurrents as well as the differing professional opinions program are in the process of revision this year and we're hoping to have both of them revised with input and in particular from that improvement process that we went through. So how do we focus on safety culture at the NRC for our staff other than the leadership program, leadership model? We took the speed of trust initiative and it took, we determined that this would be a vehicle that would help us to create trust between and among our staff and our supervisors and leaders and across organizations and that that was a foundation that we needed to really beef up in order to ensure that the behaviors that we're looking for at the agency can be displayed and inculcated into each person and into the organization. So that initiative took place over the past couple of years. It was a phased approach to provide training to both supervisors and employees. We ended up with nearly 100% of our management supervisors and above going through that course and we're probably close to 90% on staff. Staff was not mandatory, it was voluntary but there was a lot of interest really because management pushed it as well which was very good for the agency. The workshop was designed to provide opportunities for strengthening that mutual trust and we continue to provide these one day classroom sessions that are ongoing. We have a couple more left this year. In addition and we have training and development classes that are offered throughout the year that support our safety culture. We recently updated a course that we called organizational values. It includes the safety culture program I mentioned that is in our leadership model and the new course was piloted in August of 2019 and we have continued sessions that are being offered. I believe there are four this year. In addition, NRC has embarked on a comprehensive effort in the areas of innovation and transformation to enable us to focus on the future. This is huge at the NRC. We have staff that has dedicated just to innovation and transformation so pulled off of their regular jobs to be on teams and working groups to move us forward. We have a dedicated webpage and a SharePoint. We've done chat rooms, all kinds of interactive activities to get the input from the staff that we find so important. Your staff has ideas and it's important to use those and not just have leadership provide the direction but really get it from the bottom up as well. So that's a big initiative and ongoing at the NRC. Now I would like to move over to international activities and the importance of those activities especially with NRC's involvement. So over the past four years, many participants from member countries around the world have acceded in developing a common safety culture framework for global nuclear use through the efforts of IMPO, WANO, which is the World Association and the NRC and other member country participants as well. We have a new global safety culture framework that uses our safety culture policy statement, traits as the basis. So this is really big for us because now we've got a common language for global use. Some of the other countries had already been using the safety culture policy statement traits and now it will be a more global use with a new framework. This document is an IAEA working document and is now published on the website. This means that the IAEA can utilize this final version. It's called a harmonized safety culture model and it will become a part of the updated document IAEA safety standard series GSG 31, which is the application of the management system for facilities and activities. And this is a document that is in support of the IAEA safety standard series GSR part two, which is leadership and management for safety. That leadership and management for safety document is a requirements document. It's the first time that we've really talked about leadership's role in developing and maintaining a positive safety culture within their organizations. So this supporting document that we're working on has been in work in the working group for a couple of years already. We have two final meetings scheduled for the end of this year and barring anything that will preclude us from completing those that we should be finished with that document at the end of 2020. So we can use the harmonized safety culture model in that document to support leadership and management for safety. So this is really a pretty big deal. Training course for medical licensees. We have also been working with the IAEA on a training course that uses the safety culture policy statement traits as well. And now that we've got those in the harmonized safety culture framework, you will see those in more and more documents. I just wanted to mention before I talk a little bit more about the training course, I'm going to read off the 10 traits that are in there in the harmonized document and you'll see how closely they resemble the traits. They are individual responsibility, questioning attitude, communication, leader responsibility, decision making, in work environment, continuous learning, problem identification and resolution, raising concerns and work planning. So they're very similar to the safety culture policy statements. They needed some tweaks, some of the language didn't transfer to some of the national cultures as easily. There is a really good introduction to that document as well. And I do have a link to this further on in the presentation. So you'll be able to get up the document. So back to the training course using the safety culture policy traits as well. It is a workshop that has a workbook similar to the educational resource workbook which was used as a basis for that for the development of that training module by the IAEA. It will be published this year and will be available for use in the US. The scenarios that are used are very specific for medical licenses, but I always like to say that a scenario that showcases safety culture traits, you can always look at it and ask yourself whether or not it could happen in your organization, what you have in place that it couldn't happen, et cetera. They're all good for discussion. I'm actually a certified instructor for that course. So I will be able to share that workbook when it's published. We're also working on documents related to the interface between safety and security because many of the IAEA member countries separate the two and the US has included both in our safety culture policy statement, as I mentioned, with respect to culture. Meaning for that project have been canceled due to the current COVID situation and we may not have these rescheduled until after the first of the year, but that will be a technical document that will also relate to the management and leadership for safety document. Another area in the international community that we have had some connection with and we believe is important for the US as well is with the Nuclear Energy Agency. We formed a working group on safety culture with the agency about two and a half years ago and the first tasks that we took on have now been completed and the report was just approved in June for publication. So the report includes methods for the regulators to assess their own safety culture because we found that that's something that's lacking across the world as well as how to develop safety culture competencies for regulatory staff. So we conducted the work through a formal questionnaire sent out to all the member countries and we synthesized the responses into categories to assist other member countries in developing their own safety culture assessment activities as well as actions to consider to develop competencies necessary to focus on and inculcate desired behaviors. And although training is a part of this, there are other methods that you would see in this document such as role-playing, mentoring, et cetera. It's a very large document. I think we're probably close to 200 pages because nearly every method submitted has been put in with some detail and an appendix. When that is issued, that is also one that I would recommend taking a look at. It has some great information, again, on self-assessment and training. Even though it's geared towards regulators, you can use what's in there for the licensees as well for your own organizations. So this working group on safety culture is going to be continuing their work under their current mandate with new tasks to be determined at our fall meeting. We're looking specifically at leadership's role in safety culture. There's been a lot of interest in the leadership model that we've done at the NRC. So that is a potential topic. Another one is to more fully develop methods for the regulator to affect their regulated communities' safety culture. And a third is a potential task related to safety culture during times of significant working at home or other events such as the current pandemic when things are not normal. So there's a real need for that. We recognized it on our own at the NRC and we have focused a lot of attention on our staff as we have all been out of the office for several months. We have many materials. It was difficult in the beginning, especially with internet and some of the bandwidth and some of the things that we tried to do with having meetings. We've come past that and now we have really focused on how do we train people while we're often at home and we have several new methods of doing that. We have many resources that are available online, really just focusing on our staff, things like how to deal with stress, how to deal with working at home when there's children, how to stay involved with your coworkers when you're not seeing them. So we realized that there is, we need to do focus on that. So I'm hoping that's one that the international community picks up to really focus on as well. Our top leadership at the NRC has really been focusing on communication. The safety culture policy treatments need to still maintain focus, even when you're in a different situation like this. Communication is key. People feel just, they feel like they're at home and all alone and they don't know what's going on. So communication has been a key. Our top leaders, including our executive director does a weekly newsletter and updates. We've instituted weekly work group meetings within our own departments and work groups so that we can do Skype meetings and see each other and we continuously involve our staff. So I think it's really important to focus on those safety culture traits and your culture itself, even while you're in a situation that's not quote unquote normal. So I mentioned that I was going to have some links for that harmonization of safety culture at the international level. The first one that you see on this slide will get you to the page that talks about independent assessments because they'll be using that model as a cultural framework for an assessment. There's a link to it on the right hand side of the page. The second link here is from their news center from the International Atomic Energy Agency's news center explaining the model and it's a really good article. So if you have some time, you can take a look at that as well. So in summary, the NRC communicates our safety culture expectations through the policy statement. Again, not a regulation and we continue outreach and education. We have a wonderful safety culture webpage that has a wealth of information on it. Don't reinvent the wheel. We utilize our reactor oversight process for our reactors in having our safety culture traits been within the safety culture areas within the ROP. We have our enforcement alternative dispute resolution processes to get into safety culture. An NRC safety culture includes our NRC leadership model which includes the safety culture components right in it. And again, we have some training related to that module and our organizational values. Our differing views programs consist of the three tier approach that I mentioned, the open door policy, the non-concurrents process, and the differing professional opinions program. Assessments are done through surveys and the program reviews. For more information, I have the safety culture webpage right on the slide here. Information on the open door policy and any of those programs for raising concerns are also found on our values page that is listed there. I have both the brochure and the full report on the leadership model if you're interested. And then at the bottom is an email that comes directly to my office, the office of enforcement. And we have safety culture staff that routinely monitor that. So if there's something you need by way of looking at the safety culture webpage and you think you need some educational tools or explanation, you can always contact us through there. And previously I gave you my email address. Again, it's dianne.siraki at nrc.gov. I will now open it up for questions. Again, please use the dropdown menu in the more area and use the chat. And I will begin answering questions as they come in. And you can feel free again to contact me outside of this or ask questions now. I don't see anything in the chat. I'm just going to ask Sam if I'm reading this right. Are there any questions, Sam, that you have in the chat? Hi, Diane, there is a question in the chat. It says what document was just mentioned. Okay, it says what document was just mentioned. I'm going to assume that's the harmonization of safety culture. And that's the International Atomic Energy Agency model for safety culture. That's on the, let me back up here. Maybe I can bring up on, that's on this slide. You can get to that from the first link there. And if the question was on other documents, the screen that you see now has the leadership model as well as the two webpages that we have that are publicly available to look at any of the other documents. If there's further questions or I didn't answer that, please continue to ask through chat. Okay, why was decision making? Okay, I do have a question from Shiloh. And it is why was decision making not included in the original version of the traits? When we did the three day workshop, it was back in 2010 with the 16 regulated communities all together, I was actually a part of that workshop on the other side of the fence. I was representing the reactors. And so I was very involved in putting together the definition and the traits. I can say that the discussion on both decision making and questioning attitude, we kept seeing it in all of the bins. And so we felt that it could be more fully described under some of the other traits and included in those such as leadership safety values and behaviors in the work processes and in some of the other areas. And so it ended up that when I came over to the NRC directly after that workshop and took responsibility for the policy statement and the staff decided to include questioning attitude as the ninth trait and then decision making was put in when we had our common language sessions with info and the reactor community just a bit later. And I will say here also that even though the reactor community added decision making, we are not going to update the safety culture policy statement. Those nine treats you see there are applicable to all of our organizations. Some may resonate for one organization more than another. They're not all inclusive. You can certainly add and I would expect that medical licensees for example probably have patient safety. So you can feel free to work with those. We just felt that those were the nine that would be present in most organizations but you do need to look at your own organization. What's best there? Just like the reactors did with adding decision making. Okay, I have another question from Andy Balmastic. One that's really kind of nice for me. It's good to hear your voice and thanks for the update. Steve Trill question. How has the NRC gone above the normal processes to promote your safety culture while working from home? I think I'm going to really focus there on some of the things that I mentioned. And that is communication being one that we really focus on. I think having the individual, getting the communication, let me back up, getting the communication from the top down has been very good because they keep us informed on exactly what's happening with respect to reopening, everything that we're doing and we get that information routinely through several sources. So that's very important to stay engaged and know what's going on. Having our individual working group meetings and getting together through Skype to actually see each other. Our managers, supervisors, managers are encouraging us to still question what's going on, to use the processes that are out there, to get engaged in innovation and transformation so that if there are things that aren't working and we can do better, we do that. We're also watching the tone of emails and some of those kind of things that when people get a bit disenfranchised or discouraged or feeling alone, sometimes tones come across in emails and communications that maybe we're not looking for. So then we have communication, a lot of Skype meetings. We use Skype routinely. And I can tell you that my phone rings, I call it my phone now, several times a day just through Skype so that you can see the person you're talking to rather than communicating by email but actually getting through some of that. So I would say we've got a ways to go but that's how we're trying to promote safety culture while we're working at home. NAACP administration to everyone. Let's see, that would be for me, I guess. Would it be possible to see what the speed of trust initiative training looks like? I will have to find out on that. I know that we had it, there is a speed of trust that's Franklin Cubby product and we had it modified for NRC. I'm a certified instructor for the safety culture, for the speed of trust for the NRC. So let me find out if I'm able to actually provide that outside of the organization. And we will find a way so that I can provide that answer to all of you online today. I have a question from someone that does not have a name but the question is, what advice would you give to companies trying to take safety culture to the next level to become even more self-critical? Any new ideas, systems in place that you have found to be very useful? I don't know that I wanna say that there's something new that we can use that's new and useful. What I can say is, what I've said previously, you can't take your eye off the ball. This is something that you have to constantly focus on. You need to talk about it. You need to talk about safety culture. Be it through communications at meetings with your staff, whatever the case may be. You have to make sure that people understand what safety culture is. And the only way to do that is to educate them. So you can use the tools that we've provided to educate. You can use your peers, other reactors. Some of the reactor community has some great tools that you're using, some training platforms that they've used. So you need to make sure that your folks understand what safety culture is because you're going to hold them accountable to those behaviors and you can't do that if they don't know what they need to be held accountable to. And when you do your assessments so that you can see where you're at and so that you can make adjustments if you need to. And that's your review process. That's your effectiveness review link. So you need to do that piece as well. And that's where you get into making some action plans to maybe refocus on, maybe it's questioning attitude. You find that people are just talking among themselves and not bringing it to their supervisors, whatever it is. But you'll get that through your assessment processes. So that's all I have at this point. Steve Tillman, can you share the survey questions used by NRC to gauge nuclear safety culture? I cannot because they're proprietary. They are provided by an outside company through our office of Inspector General. And we can't even change those questions. We can provide suggestions. I shouldn't say that. The FEBS is the one that we can't really change the questions on. Safety Culture and Climate Survey, we can, but that is an outside organization and that is proprietary. So we can't actually share the survey questions. The staff, however, does get, we get reports. We get reports that are at the agency level. We get them at the program office level and at the department level. For instance, my own organization has just 32 people in. We're divided between a couple of branches. Those results are down to the branch level. And that makes it really nice to be able to focus on what kind of actions we need to take to move the agency along. So from NAACP admin again, let's see. All right, I think that's really not a question. All right, we just have probably five minutes left. I don't see any more questions. Let me move down here a bit. Okay, anything else that anyone has? Okay, not seeing anything. I'm going to thank you for your attention. It was too bad that we couldn't actually be talking to each other, but again, you feel free to reach out and contact me at any time, always available. And of course, I'm a part of the NAACP. So as soon as we can get back together, I'm hoping to see many of you, maybe virtually in the fall, but we'll continue to do what we have to do. So thank you very much.