The Advanced Nuclear NY Summit is dedicated to shaping the future of advanced nuclear energy economic development, supply chain initiatives, and workforce opportunities across New York State.
Earlier this month, I had the privilege of representing PSM at the two-day 2025 Advanced Nuclear NY Summit in Syracuse, New York. This high-level gathering brought together leaders and experts dedicated to shaping the future of advanced nuclear energy economic development, supply chain initiatives, and workforce opportunities across New York State.
The Summit Experience
The summit featured two full days of expert panels, interactive Q&A sessions, and invaluable networking opportunities with industry professionals. Between the formal presentations, I spent time connecting with fellow attendees, learning about their interests in advanced nuclear energy, sharing PSM’s mission at the summit, and exploring potential collaboration opportunities with various organizations in attendance.
An Unexpected Conversation
During one of our breaks, I found myself in a fascinating discussion at my table about the critical importance of human-factored procedures. As I explained the challenges associated with creating truly “good” procedures, I walked through several potential error traps using real-world examples to illustrate my points.
One gentleman at the table—a lawyer who works with various nuclear companies—became particularly engaged in the conversation. He was especially intrigued by one specific error trap: the use of negatives in action steps. He admitted that he had never really considered how incorporating negative phrasing in procedural steps could actually lead to operational errors.
The Comment That Changed My Perspective
As our break ended and we prepared for the next panel, this lawyer shared a final thought that has stayed with me ever since.
He reflected on his litigation experience and said that, in general, he had handled numerous cases where—had the company implemented a “good” procedure like the ones we had just discussed—there might never have been a need for litigation in the first place.
His comment struck a chord with me. I’ve always thought of human-factored and technically correct procedures as providing companies and workers with crucial defense against accidents, injuries, lost time, production delays, and even major catastrophic events. But I hadn’t fully considered their role as an actual legal defense during litigation proceedings.
A Broader Value Proposition
This conversation opened my eyes to an additional layer of value that technically correct, human-factored procedures provide to organizations. Beyond their operational and safety benefits, well-designed procedures can also serve as protection from—or during—potential legal proceedings.
When procedures are clear, technically accurate, and designed with human factors in mind, they demonstrate that a company has taken reasonable and thoughtful steps to prevent errors and incidents. This documentation can be invaluable in a legal context.
The Takeaway
It’s always enlightening to gain a fresh perspective on familiar concepts. What I’ve long viewed primarily as operational and safety tools, I now see in a more comprehensive light. Investing in quality, human-factored procedures isn’t just about preventing incidents—it’s about protecting your organization on multiple fronts, including legal liability.
As we continue advancing nuclear energy technologies and expanding workforce development in this critical sector, let’s remember that attention to procedural quality pays dividends far beyond the operational floor. It’s an investment in safety, efficiency, and organizational resilience at every level.
Have you encountered situations where well-designed procedures made a critical difference? I’d love to hear your experiences and perspectives.
By Charles Schronick, Training Consultant
