1. 1 DOE Corporate Safety Performance Indicators ISM Best Practices Workshop Patrice Bubar Office of Corporate Safety Analysis

2. 22 What is the basis for DOE to utilize Corporate Safety Performance Indicators? A review of industry practices shows that successful industries use corporate indicators. They are also using them as management tools to reward good performance. Businesses know what business lines they manage and therefore know what they have to control and measure. This includes operations and safety. DOE can do this as well but must overcome some complexities.

3. 33 Proposal for Consideration The Department would benefit at a site level and corporately from having a more predictable set of corporate safety indicators Define a base set of “Unacceptable Outcomes” as Corporate Safety Performance Indicators Progress towards avoiding these outcomes can be measured by using a predictable set of leading indicators Predictability not only benefits DOE management but aids its contractors in meeting its customer’s needs. (While this meets the Department’s needs overall, it also fulfills the requirements of DOE P 450.7)

4. 44 “Unacceptable Outcomes” Those events that must be avoided. DOE Corporate safety performance is defined in terms of the DOE’s ability to avoid such outcomes. Poor performance in preventing these outcomes would likely indicate serious systemic failures and impact the Department’s success.

5. 55 Proposed “Unacceptable Outcomes” Significant Offsite Loss of Control of Radiological or Contaminated Material Significant Offsite Environmental or Public Impact (non-radiological) Inadvertent Criticality Deaths/Serious Injuries Serious Radiation or IH Exposure to Workers Serious Unplanned Fire or Explosion Loss of Control of SNM Loss of Control of Critical/Sensitive Information Mission Failures

6. 66 Reporting Results Status Report A one point determination (quarterly) of overall performance against an Unacceptable Outcome. Performance is expressed in terms of “Green (Good)”, “Yellow (Average)” and “Red (Poor)”. Trend Report A measure of the quarterly change in performance compared over a rolling 24 month period. Performance is expressed in terms of “Acceptable Trend” and “Unfavorable Trend”.

7. 77 Corporate Indicator Process Normalize Hours worked Rates of occurrence Number of events Normalized Leading Indicator Weighting Factor Relevance of Indicator to outcome Size of data set Quality and depth of data Total Result Weighted Normalized Events x Number of events Score of Leading Indicator Unacceptable Outcome Leading Indicators Establish performance, benchmarked against 2 yrs. DOE Experience commercial industry management expectations Sum of all scored Leading Indicators Others Deaths and Serious Injuries Inadvertent Criticality Significant Offsite Loss of Cont. of Rad Site AGGYGGY Site BYYGGGG Site CGGYGGG Site DGRGGYG Site EGYGGRY OthersYGYGYG Significant Offsite Env. Or Public Imp. Unacceptable Outcomes Sites Serious Rad or IH Exposure To Workers Legend: Acceptable Trend Unfavorable Trend Significant Weakness Requires Immediate Attention

8. 88 Path Forward Proposal for Corporate Indicators to be discussed with ISM Champions at September Meeting. Concept being tested with actual results (from earlier quarters) to determine it’s predictive capability. Begin reporting in 1 st Quarter FY07.

9. 99 Appendix LEADING INDICATORS Draft indicators are being reviewed against data availability, amount, accessibility, quality and relevancy criteria

10. 10 Initial Data Sources for Leading Indicators Report-TypeNumber in 2004-2005Comment ORPS3528 reportsMost real time. Initial reports may not be complete because of 48 hour reporting criteria. Numerous searchable fields. CAIRS4348 total recordable cases 250 reporting entities Each entity reports quarterly, maybe multiple entities per site. Includes normalized TRC and DART data and narrative incident reports REMS101 reporting entitiesEach entity reports individual exposure data annually. CAIRS data is used to normalize and ORPS data is used to correlate significant events. Accident Investigations13 reports (5 type-A, 8 type-B)Very detailed information for specific major events. Death or serious injury is the most common subject of an AI. Contamination incidents and fires have also been investigated. “Type-B like” investigations have been preformed for some incidents and those reports may be available. SSA ES&H Evaluations 17 reports (several in two volumes)Very detailed assessments at a site or program level PAAA17 Enforcement actions 10 Enforcement letters Formal notifications of results of PAAA investigations with either fines or forbearance. NTS451 reportsIncludes site self disclosures and staff identified issues. DNFSBWeekly Staff reports (7 sites) Staff Issue reports (35 @ 9 sites) Technical reports (3 complex wide) DNFSB provides real time (weekly reports) and issue oriented technical reports for sites. Complex wide technical issue reports are issued by the Board. OtherEnvironmental Annual Reports Beryllium Registry Potential sources of confirmatory information. Annual reports may not be timely. Beryllium Registry is relatively new.

11. 11 Precursors (Leading Indicators) for “Significant Offsite Loss of Control of Radiological and Contaminated Material” NormalizationSource Where Is It Reasonable Performance Measures Factor Data Comes From and Relevant ? Offsite Loss of Control of * ORPS Group 6A(1- 3) Radioactive Materials or Spread Work Hours & 6B(1) Yes of Contamination Keywords: 2A, 9B Transportation Incidents involving * Radiological and Contaminated Number per YearORPS Group 8(1- 4) Yes MaterialKeywords: 10A, 10D, 10E Events Related to Excessed * Number per YearORPS Group N/A Yes EquipmentKeywords: 11K Onsite Loss of Control of Radioactive Materials or Spread ORPS Group 6A(2- 3) of Contamination Work Hours & 6B(2- 4) Yes Keywords: 2A, 6B, 9B Personnel Radiation Exposure ORPS Group 6C(1- 4) and/or ContaminationWork Hours & 6D(1- 3) Yes Keywords: 6A, 6C, 6F, 6G

12. 12 Precursors (Leading Indicators) for “Significant Offsite Environmental or Public Impact (non-radiological)” NormalizationSource Where Is It Reasonable Performance Measures Factor Data Comes From and Relevant? ♦ OSHA Reportable Exposures * Work Hours ORPS Group 2A(4, 5) Yes Keywords: 8C Transportation Incidents involving * Hazardous Material (Non-Rad)Number per Year ORPS Group 8(1- 4) Yes Keywords: 10A, 10E Noncompliance Notification * Number per Year ORPS Group 9(1, 2) Yes Keywords: 2C, 10D Onsite or Offsite Reportable Environmental ReleaseNumber per Year ORPS Group 5A(1- 4) Yes Keywords: 2A, 2E

13. 13 Precursors (Leading Indicators) for “Inadvertent Criticality” NormalizationSource Where Is It Reasonable Performance Measures FactorData Comes From and Relevant? Loss of Criticality Control Events * Number per Year ORPS Group 3C(1, 2) Yes Keywords: 1J TSR Violations Related to Criticality * Number per YearORPS Group 3A(1- 3) Yes Keywords: 1J, 4B, 12L ♦ Inadvertent Transfer Number per YearORPS Group 4B(5) Yes Keywords: 1E

14. 14 Precursors (Leading Indicators) for “Deaths/Serious Injuries” NormalizationSource Where Is It Reasonable Performance Measures Factor Data Comes From and Relevant? Deaths due to DOE Operations * N/AAccident Investigations ORPS Group 2A(1) Yes Keywords: 8E Serious Injuries or Exposures Accident Investigations (Individuals & Multiple Persons) * Work Hours ORPS Group 2A(2- 6) Yes Keywords: 8(A-D) CAIRS Violations of Hazardous Energy Control Process (electrical and/or * Work Hours ORPS Group 2C(1, 2) mechanical) and Electrical Keywords: 1(K, L, M ) Yes Safety8(A, J), 12(C & I) Near Misses Work Hours ORPS Group 10(3) Yes Keywords: 12K, 8J, 8K__ TRC & DART (with Filter) Work Hours CAIRS Data Yes _____________

15. 15 Precursors (Leading Indicators) for “Serious Radiation or IH Exposure” NormalizationSource Where Is It Reasonable Performance Measures Factor Data Comes From and Relevant? OSHA Reportable Exposures * Work HoursORPS Group 2A(4, 5) Yes Keywords: 8C CAIRS Personnel Radiation Exposure ORPS Group 6C(1- 4) and/or Contamination * Work Hours & 6D(1-3) Yes Keywords: 6A, 6C, 6F, 6G Ventilation System Equipment FailuresNumber per YearKeywords: 5C, 5G Yes

16. 16 Precursors (Leading Indicators) for “Fire or Explosion” Normalization Source Where Is It Reasonable Performance Measures Factor Data Comes From and Relevant? Explosion Number per Year ORPS Group 2B(1- 3), 7 Yes Keywords: 3C, 3D, 11A, 11C Onsite Fires Number per Year ORPS Group 2B(1- 3) Yes Keywords: 3(A-E) Offsite Fires Number per Year ORPS Group 2B(4) Yes Keywords: 3C