Quick Reference Guide

The NRC’s Guidelines for Risk Communication

Quick Reference Guide

As the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) integrates risk analysis into its

regulatory activities, the “agency” must improve risk communication with both

internal and external stakeholders to ensure management excellence and openness in the agency’s regulatory processes. Risk communication is the essential link

between risk analysis, risk management, and the public. In addition, risk analysis and

risk management are two essential elements in the NRC’s decision-making process.

A primary challenge to effective risk communication is the difference between how

the NRC and the public define or perceive risk. The NRC’s assessment of risk balances the likelihood of an occurrence against its possible consequences. The

public’s perception of risk, however, is based on the probability that something bad

will happen, compounded by aspects of the situation that they find upsetting. Using

risk information appropriately to reach defensible decisions requires that those involved must have a common

understanding of risk-related topics. Even within the agency, however, there are different levels of understanding of

risk concepts.

Develop a shared understanding

Creating a shared understanding through meaningful dialogue can bridge the gap

between different definitions and perceptions of risk. Skillfully applying

consistent, well-planned risk communication practices will help the NRC discuss risk

information constructively both inside and outside the agency. The following lists

summarize strategic and interpersonal actions for the NRC and its staff to take:

Strategic Level Interpersonal Level

• Long-term planning • Empathetic and active listening

• Coordinated communication efforts • Caring about the health and safety of others

• Strategic partnerships • Building trust and credibility

• Collaborative problem solving • Establishing long-term relationships

• Consistent messages • Managing conflict

• Appropriate communication tools • Effectively delivering messages

• Common understanding of risk terms • Sharing expertise and insights

Know your stakeholders and their concerns

The foundation of effective risk communication involves understanding both the people and the issues. Identifying

your stakeholders and understanding their perspectives are essential steps in making effective use of risk communication resources and developing a risk communication strategy. The NRC’s external stakeholders include the

media, other government agencies, advocacy groups, elected officials, the regulated community, and individual

citizens outside the agency. The interests and concerns of these external stakeholders vary widely. Stakeholders

internal to the NRC are grouped into three broad categories of technical, non-technical, and management

employees. The interests and concerns of these internal stakeholders are influenced by their roles and responsibilities within the agency, experience with risk information, familiarity with statistics, and technical area of expertise

(engineer, health physicist, etc.).

Build the credibility of risk information

Stakeholders’ opinions are influenced by trust in the credibility of the available risk information. Competence and

expertise are important for building trust and credibility with external stakeholders, but empathy, honesty, and

commitment are equally important. Be organized and prepared, communicate openly and honestly, coordinate

and collaborate with other credible sources, and follow through on commitments. For internal risk communication,

trust and credibility are based on understanding and accepting the risk assessment, and the data and assumptions

that go into it. Talk about the strengths and limitations of risk information in terms of potential implications for use.

Explain how you concluded that something is not a concern. Provide examples of data sources and assumptions,

especially in your stakeholders’ areas of expertise.

Stakeholders Staff

Risk

Communication

Shared

Understanding

Decision-Makers
Develop key messages

• Determine your purpose—to educate, change perceptions, gain consensus, raise awareness, etc.

• Settle on three or four key messages, backed by two to four supporting facts.

• Tailor the language to the audience’s level of education, concerns about the issue, experience with risks, and

understanding of the underlying science.

• Begin by explaining the important conclusions and summarizing their impacts. Explore the details after you

provide the summary statement.

• Provide qualitative assumptions underlying the analysis and reasons for the results, not just the numbers.

• Be up-front about the uncertainties, weaknesses, or data gaps in the risk assessment.

• Provide the context to help the stakeholder(s) evaluate a risk in terms of the big picture.

• Internally, explore various risk decision-making options, discuss the implications of each option, and provide

information that will help management explain decisions.

• Internally, relate the risk assessment and outcomes to the agency’s strategic goals.

• Externally, highlight the NRC’s principles of regulation and our role in ensuring nuclear safety.

Communicate technical information in a manner that is understandable and relevant

• Don’t use technical terms that dehumanize people. Distant, abstract, and

unfeeling language about death, injury, and illness sends the message that

you don’t care about people as individuals.

• Transform scientific notation into familiar units of measure.

• Use simple, focused graphics to reinforce your key messages.

• Use analogies and stories to illustrate technical information.

• Use comparisons to put risks in perspective, but be careful. It may appear

manipulative to compare the risks of living near a nuclear power plant to

lifestyle choices or other risks that the public voluntarily assumes.

• Be prepared for skepticism. People are naturally uncomfortable with new approaches to safety evaluation

using risk information.

• Present the results in relation to some established standard or typical result.

• Decide on the appropriate level of detail to present.

• Explain key assumptions behind the model and how those assumptions affect results in both directions.

• Explain how the data from different disciplines fit into the risk assessment, as well as how the expertise from those

disciplines is considered as input into the final result.

• Ask your audience to examine the model to test whether it accurately reflects their knowledge and experience.

Implement effective two-way communication to anticipate and deal with controversy

• Listen. Uncovering the concerns and feelings of others can be instrumental in creating solutions that are acceptable to everyone involved.

• Admit the problem. It’s difficult to identify solutions if people deny that

a conflict exists.

• Acknowledge the frustration of people who express high levels of

concern, and be sure to remain respectful at all times.

• Remain calm and do not respond to verbal attacks with

emotional retorts.

• Refute misinformation succinctly and without becoming confrontational.

Avoid negative language.

• If necessary, delegate meeting leadership to a third-party facilitator.

• Arrange a time and place to discuss the issue. This can be an informal

conversation or a group meeting.

Do not rely on electronic communication to resolve the conflict.

• Allow adequate time to talk through the issue.

• Include everyone who is involved, interested, or likely to be affected. Leaving a person or group “out of the loop”

may create additional conflict.

• Be flexible and open to new ideas and ready to suggest possible solutions.

NUREG/BR-0318, Supplement 1

Responding to Difficult Questions

• Allow ventilation.

• Determine the underlying

concern.

• Express empathy.

• Deliver your conclusion.

• Provide supporting facts.

• Repeat your conclusion.

• Propose future action.