1. “Then, Now and Next” June 24, 2015 HEP Division ISM Seminar Roby Enge Director, ESQ Division

2. Then  Changes in safety policy, law and procedures within DOE closely paralleled changes taking place in the nuclear safety and radiological controls areas.  March 28, 1979 – Three Mile Island sends a shudder throughout the nuclear power plants in the United States. –NRC ramps up its rigor. Aspects of Admiral Rickover’s nuclear propulsion program are adopted. “Rigor in Operations” and “verbatim compliance” are evident. –DOE, up to this point, remained unscathed with defense nuclear activities remaining, for the moment, somewhat protected due to the classified nature of many activities. 2

3. Then (cont’d) Chernobyl: April 26, 1986  Shook the world  29 deaths (firefighters)  Thousands exposed to elevated radiation levels  Need for information and assurance that such events wouldn’t happen here  DOE did not escape review this time 3

4. Then (cont’d) Tiger Teams  1989-1993  Admiral James D. Watkins – Secretary of Energy (Rickover protége)  Reviewed “rigor” of safety and operations across DOE  Found “expert based” systems in place rather than “process based” systems 4

5. Then (cont’d)  Lack of rigor: Improvement needed – now! –Formality of operations –Assessment driven –Leadership involvement in all phases –Quality assurance programs –Corrective action programs  Results: Regulations issued by DOE –10CFR830 – Nuclear Safety –10CFR835 – Radiation Protection –10CFR708 – Whistle Blower –10CFR851 – Worker Safety & Health –10CFR824 – Security –DEAR Clause (ISM) 5

6. Impact on National Labs  Public awareness and scrutiny  Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Review Board  Freedom of Information Act  DOE no longer “behind the curtain” 6

7. Impact on National Labs  1994: PNNL receives a letter from DOE – Improve Ops.!  1997-1998: Brookhaven loses contract  1999-2000: Los Alamos Security and Safety events stop many operations  2000: Incumbent contractor at Oak Ridge loses to Battelle  2003: SLAC electrical shock accident – shuts down LINAC for months  2007: Nuclear Facility Footprint Reduction at Argonne following Bldg. 205 review  2013: Bldg. 205 work paused for ~8 months 7

8. Integrated Safety Management (ISM)  In mid 1990’s the ISM concept was prepared and accepted by DOE  Labs implemented ISM in late 1990’s and early 2000’s (DEAR Clause in M&O Contracts)  Roots in Quality management – Plan, Do, Check, Act  Process over Expert Based System  Safety Performance improved fairly uniformly across DOE - 2000-2007 8  Focus –Understand scope of work –Hazard analysis –Controls –Perform work within controls –Feedback and Improvement  Wrap the right safety envelope around the work in a formal way using a formal process

9. Now  We have implemented ISM  Work Planning & Control (WPC) is in the primary ISM tool  Rely on line management to drive effective use of the tool (ISM Guiding Principle #1 – Line Management is Responsible for Safety) Issues:  Skill of the worker/researcher  Use of WPC (e.g. Lift table) – Is WPC a “momentum killer” for R&D innovation?  Comparison to Industrial R&D (DOW & Dupont) –Many years of safety culture – driven by significant past safety events –“Safety is NOT Negotiable” –“Safety is a condition of employment” –“If you are not convinced it can be done safely, don’t do it” –“Spend the first dollar on Safety” –Safety has to be integrated, part of the way we do research, not bolted on –Line managers are accountable for safety, ESH is primarily a resource provider (systems, processes, tools and services) 9

10. Next: ISM → IM or Integrated RISK Management 10 Risk Management SafetyFinanceSecurityReputationMission Regional Politics

11. 11 Proposal Stage Mission Reputation Safety Security Politics Waste Forecast Plan/Perform Work (WPC) Safety Envelope Security Financial Schedule Project Close Out Orphan Chemicals Orphan Equipment Residual Material/Hold-up Waste Disposal Safety Security Reputation Project Life Cycle PROJECT LIFE CYCLE

12. Where are we? We can demonstrate rigor in safety with WPC at the plan/perform work stage Likely have schedule, security and finance covered at this stage as well 12 PROJECT LIFE CYCLE

13. Competition: When??  DOE selects contractor – they own the site  Science and operations excellence (PEMP Reviews) (Innovative Lab Management)  Violations, HSS findings  Third party validations (e.g. the ISO standards) are noted – especially if absent!  Lab management systems rigor/Integrated Management  Events/ORPS/NTS reports  Safety Performance  Financial Performance  Security Performance  HR Performance  Facilities Construction/Management  One Argonne (Consistency counts)  Reputation as R&D Site Operator 13

14. Questions? 14

15. Thank you for your time! Please – always feel free to call, write, stop by, or ask me over to talk about your ideas, concerns, or requests. Roby Enge Building 201, Room 229 2-1581 renge@anl.gov 15