1. Michael Scharfenstein FAC Reviewscharf@slac.stanford.edu June 17, 2008 1 ES&H Status of Construction and Technical System Installations Michael Scharfenstein Project ES&H Coordinator

2. Michael Scharfenstein FAC Reviewscharf@slac.stanford.edu June 17, 2008 2 Subcontracted Work Goals GC managed Injury rate concern Project responsibility 90 days of field work remaining The goal is Zero future incidents CF & Technical Systems Installation Maintaining exemplary safety record Direct subcontractor management Detailed work planning

3. Michael Scharfenstein FAC Reviewscharf@slac.stanford.edu June 17, 2008 3 Project-specific ISEMS Implementation LCLS Directorate Integrated Safety Management Plan LCLS Work Authorization Procedure LCLS Project ES&H Plan Job Safety Analysis Daily Tailgate Safety Meetings PM/UTR manages each subcontract Leads to success TCCO Project Health and Safety Plan Job Safety Analysis Daily Pre-Task Planning Meeting Pre-Task Checklist Superintendents assigned geographically

4. Michael Scharfenstein FAC Reviewscharf@slac.stanford.edu June 17, 2008 4 Total Project Hours 1.8 M Hours worked SubContractors 484 K Hours worked DART Rate 3.7 (9 Incidents) TRC Rate 4.6 (2 Incidents) LCLS Collaboration 1,300 K Hours worked DART Rate 0.3 (2 Incidents) DART Rate 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 < 0.65 per 100 FTEs. PROJECT SAFETY EXPERIENCE Through April 2008

5. Michael Scharfenstein FAC Reviewscharf@slac.stanford.edu June 17, 2008 5 Project Safety ( Contractor/Technical Systems/Collaboration)

6. Michael Scharfenstein FAC Reviewscharf@slac.stanford.edu June 17, 2008 6 TCCo Incident Distribution

7. Michael Scharfenstein FAC Reviewscharf@slac.stanford.edu June 17, 2008 7 TCCo 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 Check/correction of existing documentation PMT changes Deficiency Notices May ’07 thru November ’07 Full Production : Injuries Multi-day Stand Down of Construction Activities : Corrective Action Plan Procedural violations transition to injures Paperwork ineffectively utilized by CM/GC and trade contractors PE changes Deficiency Notices & Fines Communication with Corporate TCCo Safety Stewardship Committee Established Full time on-site medic (+30hr OSHA) UTRs added – focus on safety

8. Michael Scharfenstein FAC Reviewscharf@slac.stanford.edu June 17, 2008 8 TCCo Stewardship cont’d December ’07 thru April ’08 : Injuries continue Two incident associated with one sub PM removed Work stopped 90 Days (to the end of field work) Focus on 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 The goal is Zero!

9. Michael Scharfenstein FAC Reviewscharf@slac.stanford.edu June 17, 2008 9 CF & Technical Systems Stewardship Excellent Safety Record 100K+ hours w/o injury S20, MMF, Injector, BC 1 & 2 Issues addressed immediately Positive Results 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 Ownership of safety a condition of employment The goal is to maintain Zero!

10. Michael Scharfenstein FAC Reviewscharf@slac.stanford.edu June 17, 2008 10 Conclusion Past TCCo safety performance is not acceptable LCLS providing more prescriptive direction Past 2 months = acceptable performance Maintain CF & Technical System direct managed work performance The goal is Zero!

11. Michael Scharfenstein FAC Reviewscharf@slac.stanford.edu June 17, 2008 11 end of presentation