Transcript Document
Construction Safety
M. Scharfenstein - ES&H Coordinator 8 June 2009
Construction Safety FAC Status Review of the LCLS Project
1
1 Mike Scharfenstein [email protected]
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
Construction Safety FAC Status Review of the LCLS Project
2
2 Mike Scharfenstein [email protected]
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
Construction Safety FAC Status Review of the LCLS Project
3
3 Mike Scharfenstein [email protected]
PROJECT SAFETY EXPERIENCE Through April 2009
DART Rate 4
Total Project Hours 2.19 M Hours worked DART Rate 1.03
3 3.2
3
SubContractors 599 K Hours worked DART Rate 3.01 (9 Incidents) TRC Rate 4.01 (3 Incidents)
2 1
LCLS Collaboration 1,589 K Hours worked DART Rate 0.25 (2 Incidents)
0 0.3
1 Construction Industry LCLS Contractors LCLS Collaboration Total Project Injury rates based on 200 K hours (100 man years) of effort
.
Restricted, or Transferred (DART) rate < 0.65 per 100 FTEs.
DOE/SC Goal is a Reportable Case (TRC) rate of < 0.25 and a Days Away, Construction Safety FAC Status Review of the LCLS Project
4
4 Mike Scharfenstein [email protected]
TCCo 477K Hrs DART = 3.8
TRC = 5.0
April 2009 DART Rate Distribution
LCLS Subs 122K Hrs DART = 0 TRC = 0
Construction Safety FAC Status Review of the LCLS Project
5
5
LCLS 1.589M Hrs DART = 0.25
TRC = 0.25
Mike Scharfenstein [email protected]
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
Construction Safety FAC Status Review of the LCLS Project
6
6 Mike Scharfenstein [email protected]
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 PMT changes 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
Construction Safety FAC Status Review of the LCLS Project
7
7 Mike Scharfenstein [email protected]
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
Construction Safety FAC Status Review of the LCLS Project
8
8 Mike Scharfenstein [email protected]
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
Construction Safety FAC Status Review of the LCLS Project
9
9 Mike Scharfenstein [email protected]
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
Construction Safety FAC Status Review of the LCLS Project
10
10 Mike Scharfenstein [email protected]