Integrated Safety Management System for LCLS Project

1. ES&H for the LCLSIan Evans, SSRLApril 24, 2002 • ISMS at SLAC & Integration of “ES&H” into LCLS project • Existing Environmental Conditions for the proposed LCLS • Potential Non Radiological Issues for LCLS during construction and operation • Radiological considerations for the LCLS Ian Evans, SSRL

2. ES&H for the LCLS • What is safety? • An organized and managed process that: • Identifies and appraises hazardous conditions and practices • Develops hazard control methods, practices and programs to mitigate risk • Communicates hazard control information through training and education • Measures the effectiveness of the controls employed and fine tunes as necessary • The role of safety is not to remove the symptom but to find out what is wrong with the system Ian Evans, SSRL

3. ES&H for the LCLS • Why do we need ES&H • To reduce and prevent incidents that have an adverse effect on personnel and the environment • To promote good morale through commitment from management • It saves: • Resources • Time • Money Ian Evans, SSRL

4. ES&H for the LCLS • Projected Staffing • 1 ES&H FTE (0.5 during FY2003) • 1 Radiation Physicist FTE (0.5 during FY2003) • Appropriate dollars($) for environmental planning, sampling, analysis and clean up, permits, etc. Ian Evans, SSRL

5. Integrated Safety Management System (ISMS) • Integrated Safety Management System (ISMS) at SLAC • Achieving the scientific mission is based on: 1. Maintaining a respectful workplace which promotes and supports the value of each individual. 2. Maintaining excellence in matters of environmental concern and providing for the safety and health (ES&H) of the SLAC staff, users and the general public Ian Evans, SSRL

6. Integrated Safety Management System (ISMS) • Integrated Safety Management System (ISMS) at SLAC Ian Evans, SSRL

7. Integrated Safety Management System (ISMS) • Guiding Principles: • “A comprehensive set of best management practices, fundamental to developing, maintaining and promoting a viable scientific program” Ian Evans, SSRL

8. Integrated Safety Management System (ISMS) • Everyone (employee, user, subcontractor) is responsible and accountable for the safe conduct of their own activities. • There are clear roles and lines of responsibility, authority and accountability at all levels of the organization. Everyone has the right to tell someone to stop a potentially dangerous or environmental threatening activity. • Everyone in the workforce has the experience, knowledge, skills and abilities to perform their work safely and competently. • Management allocates resources (money, time, effort) to ensure work can be performed safely. • Hazards shall be evaluated and appropriately controlled before work is performed to provide adequate protection to employees, the public and the environment. • Engineered or administrative controls shall be in place to mitigate to acceptable levels work associated hazards. • No work will be performed unless it can be done safely. Ian Evans, SSRL

9. Integrated Safety Management System (ISMS) • Core Functions: • “Provide the day to day tools used to translate policies into something we can all understand” Ian Evans, SSRL

10. Integrated Safety Management System (ISMS) • Define the Scope of Work – What is the job? Supervisors/Managers/Responsible Persons define what work needs to be done to achieve the mission of the lab. Within this they set expectations, prioritize tasks and allocate resources. • Analyze the Hazard – What safety hazards are present or possible? During this step the hazards associated with a particular job, task or project are identified and analyzed to determine regulatory and compliance needs. • Develop and Implement Hazard Controls – How can this job be performed safely?After identifying the standards or regulations pertaining to a hazard or category of hazards, solutions are proposed to minimize risks, allowing for a safe and healthful work place. Implementation of the safety controls that mitigate or reduce hazards to acceptable levels are employed and the safety envelope is established. • Perform Work within Controls – Don’t take chances, cut corners or rush to finish a job. Confirm the readiness of the safety controls to do their job (such as shielding for radiation, or providing eye protection in a machine shop) and perform the work safely. • Provide for Feedback and Continuous Improvement – Make a note if the job could have been done in a better way or more safely, and make the change happen. Ian Evans, SSRL

11. ES&H for the LCLS • Applying ES&H to the LCLS • Needs to be: • Consistent with present SLAC policies and procedures • Integrated into management structure at top level and throughout LCLS project team • Supported by project and ES&H division staff Ian Evans, SSRL

12. ES&H for the LCLS • Achieved by: • Independent review of projects (and subsystems) by peer groups, directed via the Safety Overview Committee. (Earthquake,Ionizing Radiation, Electrical, Environmental, Fire, Hoisting and Rigging, Hazardous Experiment & Equipment,Non-Ionizing Radiation, ALARA, Hoisting & Rigging, Pressure & Vacuum) • Completion of DOE mandated requirements: Environmental Assessment, Safety Analysis Document, Accelerator Readiness Review. • Utilizing on-site ES&H support as needed. • Safety Health & Assurance • Environmental Protection & Restoration • Waste Management • Radiation Physics • Operation Health Physics Ian Evans, SSRL

13. ES&H for the LCLS • A dedicated LCLS ES&H person that can facilitate: • Identification and analysis of hazards • Propose methods of controlling or mitigating hazards • Communicate to project and divisional staff how controls will employed and define required levels of training • Measure whether the system is working according to managements goals – are policies being implemented, are performance based criteria (inspections etc.) being met, do the mitigating controls work • Assure accountability – no measurement = no accountability • Taking advantage of the strong safety culture (systems & personnel) and the mature programs already developed and used at SLAC Ian Evans, SSRL

14. ES&H for the LCLS • Where are we now? • Conceptual Design Report – ES&H Chapter and Radiation Considerations Section complete • A draft Environmental Assessment is complete • No show stoppers identified • Preliminary Hazards Assessment is complete • Hazards are consistent with those already identified in the Work Smart Standards set and are routinely encountered at SLAC. • One exception – tunnel safety • Will seek expert guidance, utilize lessons learned from FERMI. Ian Evans, SSRL

15. ES&H for the LCLS • Next step • Staff LCLS ES&H position • Propose LCLS project to SLAC Safety Overview Committee for internal safety review • Coordinates and Assigns reviews of new experiments/projects or facility modifications to relevant “expert” citizen safety committees. • Issue FONSI for NEPA • Commence: • Safety Analysis Document • Construction Safety Plan • Fire Hazards Analysis • Integrate Accelerator Readiness Review into life or project Ian Evans, SSRL

16. ES&H for the LCLS • Concerns • Ensure ISMS is fully integrated into the project and that the management structure supports ES&H • Multi laboratory involvement • That SLAC ES&H structure can support a project of this magnitude without endangering other programs or projects • Early involvement Ian Evans, SSRL

17. ES&H for the LCLS • Conclusion • The process to identify, analyze and mitigate hazards at SLAC is firmly in place • SLAC, SSRL and LCLS have provided resources and commitment for a strong ES&H program • Outside of ES&H issues related to the tunneling aspect of the project, early analysis leads us to conclude that during the design, fabrication, installation, testing and operation of the LCLS, no new hazards will be introduced to the SLAC site. Ian Evans, SSRL

18. Ian Evans, SSRL