1. M. Scharfenstein - ES&H Coordinator 8 June 2009
Construction Safety
M. Scharfenstein - ES&H Coordinator
8 June 2009

2. Project ISM Process & Implementation
Civil Construction
Technical Systems Installations
Lab shops, subcontractors and collaborators
Commissioning w/ transition to Operations = ARR’s
Safety Assessment Document
Accelerator Safety Envelope
Experience
Overall and detail statistics
Construction and Installation experience
Lessons Learned
Direct subcontractor management
Detailed work planning
Previous Review Recommendations
Discussion of overall Project ISM, including ARR’s and preparations for Users. Talk will focus on civil construction.
The GC managed work has resulted in recordable injuries (TRCs) that have for the most part become DARTs. This is where our cause of concern lies and will be discussed in this presentation.
On a positive note all CF and Technical Systems managed work has been performed w/o injury. Yes, there have been issues – but when immediately addressed positive outcome is achieved. We are working diligently to preserve this record.

3. Project-specific ISEMS Implementation
SLAC Integrated Safety Management Plan
SLAC Work Planning and Control
Formerly LCLS Work Authorization Procedure
Scope / Hazard & Control documentation / Authorization & Release
SLAC ES&H Manual
Formerly LCLS Project ES&H Plan
GC/sub Site Specific Safety Plan
Job Safety Analysis
Daily Tailgate Safety Meetings
PM/UTR manages each subcontract
CF-5 / Continuous Improvement / Lessons Learned
Management Walkthrough Process
Formerly LCLS Safe Performance Observation Process
Focused walkthru to note & promote safe behavior
ISMS Plan provides overarching direction with regard to safety expectations.
Work Authorization Procedure – Provides specific direction regarding work planning
PO driven / similar to other Lab processes
Goal is to ensure that CF1 thru CF5 incorporated into work planning
LCLS Project ES&H Plan
Sub produces site safety plan which we review to assure they recognize the hazards (CF1 & 2)
JSA & Tailgate are further refinements of the analysis process (CF3 & 4)
PM/UTRs monitor the entire process (CF4 & 5)
TCCo
Supposed to follow the same management model used by LCLS

4. PROJECT SAFETY EXPERIENCE Through April 2009
DART Rate
Total Project Hours
2.19 M Hours worked
DART Rate 1.03
SubContractors
599 K Hours worked
DART Rate 3.01 (9 Incidents)
TRC Rate (3 Incidents)
LCLS Collaboration
1,589 K Hours worked
DART Rate 0.25 (2 Incidents)
Injury rates based on 200 K hours (100 man years) of effort. DOE/SC Goal is a Reportable Case (TRC) rate of < 0.25 and a Days Away, Restricted, or Transferred (DART) rate < per 100 FTEs.

6. CF & Technical Systems Stewardship
Excellent Safety Record
120K+ hours w/o injury (TRC or DART)
S20, MMF, Injector, Linac TSI, S522, LTU
Project Managers / UTRs / Installation Managers
Direct management of subcontractors
Communicate ES&H Expectations
Guide them to success
Enforcement when needed
Thorough Work Planning and Control
Aggressive ISM management
Issues identified and addressed immediately
Positive Results
Ownership of safety
Our challenge to ourselves is to maintain Zero!

7. CF CMGC Stewardship
October ’06 thru April ’07 Ramp Up to Full Production : Procedural Violations
Stand Down of Construction Activities : All Hands Meeting
Review of Work Planning Process for field work – JSA process inadequate
PMT changes
Deficiency Notices
May ’07 thru November ’07 Full Production : DARTs
Multi-day Stand Down of Construction Activities : Corrective Action Plan
Paperwork ineffectively utilized by CM/GC and trade contractors
Deficiency Notices & Fines
Communication with Corporate TCCo
Safety Stewardship Committee Established
Full time on-site medic (+30hr OSHA)
UTRs added
December ’07 thru April ’08 : Some progress, then…
Two DARTs associated with one sub
PM removed
Work stopped
May ’08 thru December ’08 : No DARTs
Effective work planning & execution sought
Plan for joint observation developed
Attendance at daily morning work planning meetings
JSA review with workers throughout the day
Identification / monitoring of specific trades or tasks for safe work practices
Must communicate with the worker

8. Lessons Learned CM/GC and/or subcontractor selection criteria
Assessment of EMR and competencies of the PMT
DOE Environment
Help the contractor understand how OSHA is enforced
A CM/GC must closely monitor subcontractor means and methods
Project Safety Standards
Clearly define standards that will apply
Contract clause re most recent standard rev
Initial Work Execution Evaluation
Initial work packages are owner reviewed and executed with owner ‘participation’
Partnering and committees
Partnering process at onset of project
Safety Stewardship
Conflict Resolution Forum

9. Previous Review Recommendations
Continue to support Turner with LCLS resources to reduce the risk of additional safety violations and personnel injuries through the completion of the Turner construction scope.
Done – 270 days w/o DART, 184 days w/o TRC
LCLS should take the lead in establishing the safety culture the Laboratory Director has targeted for the Laboratory as a whole.
Done – Developed Construction ES&H Plan, Work Planning & Control Process, Management Walkthrough Process
SLAC safety violations identified during LCLS reviews should be addressed and promptly corrected whether specific to the LCLS project, or SLAC generic.
Done – Three specific issues and process in general
Track and report the precursors to lost time injuries in order to take corrective actions in time to prevent them. DART statistics are not sufficient if zero lost time injuries is the goal, and it is.
Done – had been happening all along project but not communicated
The DOE Lessons Learned database should be utilized as a tool to improve JSA preparation. Further, do not underestimate the time required to prepare safety related documentation and the time it takes for the approval process.
Agreed, still a challenge

10. Integrated Safety and Environmental Management
Conclusion
Integrated Safety and Environmental Management
Following SLAC ISEMS Process
SLAC ES&H Manual
Work Planning and Control
Following LCLS ES&H management practices
LCLS Requirement, Specification and Interface Documents
Reviews, Authorizations, Continuous Improvement
Experience and Lessons Learned
Understanding the National Laboratory Environment
Partnering for Success
Recommendations valued & all adopted…almost
Reversing the order from slide 2
Goal is Zero!