Safety in LS1 Thomas Otto, TE DSO

Contents Thomas Otto, TE DSO2 Safety Performance in LS1 (few stats) What has worked well ? What could be improved ? Summary

What worked well: Preparation Thomas Otto, TE DSO3 Technical preparation of critical projects: Procedures incl. Safety measures Conformity of mechanical equipment Pre-LS1 Training on the job ALARA approach for radiation protection LS1-specific training: LS1 sensibilisation on SIR 2-level RP training (e-learning for most LS1 participants) Technical solutions: IMPACT for activity planning TREC for equipment from radiation areas Automatisation of operational dosimetry

What worked well: Flexibility Thomas Otto, TE DSO4 Safe solutions for unforeseen issues Relax hard-hat and Self Rescue Mask rules at fixed workstations Introduce bump-caps under clearly defined conditions Ad-Hoc decisions with Safety Relevance Ventilation speed for geometers Work-arounds to failing LHC lifts (means of evacuation) What to do when a “safe area” is temporarily unavailable ? Co-activities during equipment check-out

What worked well: Management Thomas Otto, TE DSO5 Project Coordination 16 persons fully employed in coordination activities (of which 6 Safety coordinators) Fire Safety: control over max. personnel in tunnel sector Safety officer cooperation Sharing of tasks Similar solutions for similar problems Communication with Project Management Presence of Safety Officers in restricted and public committees All Project / Sub-Project Managers had an open door

What could be improved: Preparation Thomas Otto, TE DSO6 Observation: Most LS1 accidents were suffered on the surface, where no specific prevention measures were taken Recommendation: Preparation of procedures with accident prevention measures for all sub-projects A model can be made available from the SMACC project

What could be improved: Training Thomas Otto, TE DSO7 Observation: The major positive reforms (LS1, RP) were implemented in the last minute (February 2013) Recommendation: Freeze Safety Training several months before LS to allow all persons to conform To make it happen: Assess Safety training needs for the project Based on early risk assessment

What could be improved: Training (2) Thomas Otto, TE DSO8 Observation: Language barrier in Electrical Safety training for electricians (PJAS / COAS) Recommendations: Develop CERN-specific electrical safety training also for electricians Accept foreign safety training status of electricians

What could be improved (3) ? Thomas Otto, TE DSO 9 Observation: Last-minute Safety measures, after budgets have been allocated. (Special vacuum cleaners) Recommendation: Freeze all Safety measures well before LS Allows consideration in budget allocation And inclusion in contractual documents Observation: Increase of the number of co-activities towards the end of LS1: Last minute jobs Recommendation Properly plan all interventions Allow co-activity / last minute jobs only under well-justified circumstances

Safety Summary whatI - keepII - improveIII – change List the different aspects in the management of the work carried out during the LS1 Define what should be kept and was an added value during the LS1 Define what you propose to improve in order to better manage the LS2 Define what was a bottleneck to carry out the work during the LS1 and needs to be changed for LS2 Safety TrainingLS specific safety training Training targeted to risk profile of person Freeze access and training req’s early Assess training needs electrical training for electricians Safety training centre Safety RulesFreeze well before LS Procedures & Accident prevention Extend to all subprojects ALARA approachWorked wellTake preparatory work into account (radioactive) waste & material Better disciplineStorage space (in progress) Radioactive work areas Need to be identified and (temporarily) classified (in progress) Coordination Keep at similar level Last minute jobs Only with serious justification Thomas Otto, TE DSO10