Transcript Operational Readiness Review

Readiness Review
Course
Screening or Scoping Meeting (ORR vs RA, Authorization
Authority (AA) Defined, Startup Notification Report (SNR)
Discussed, Schedule)
Contractor Plan of Action (CPOA)
Prepared
DOE Plan of Action (POA)
Prepared by DOE Line Mgr
AA Reviews and Approves
CPOA and POA
Startup Notification Report Prepared and
Submitted
Contractor RR Implementation Plan (IP)
prepared by Contractor RR Team and
approved by CTL
AA Approves SNR and
Nominates DOE Team Leader
(TL)
DOE TL Pre-Assessment Preparation and Planning
(Team Selected
Initial Team Mtg
Pre-Site Visit, IP Drafted)
Prerequisites met (MSA)
Readiness Review Process Begins
Contractors RR and
Final Report
DOE RR IP approved by TL
Corrective Action Plan (CAP)
Submitted and Approved
DOE RR and Final Report
Prestart Findings Closed
CAP Submitted and
Approved
Contractor Issues Readiness to Proceed
(RTP)
Prestart Findings Closed
DOE Endorsement of RTP and
MSA
AA Authorizes
Startup
AA Authorizes Start of RR to RR
TL
Plan of Action – Mod 5
1
Nov 2006
Learning Objectives
Describe the purpose, timing, and content
of the Plans of Action . . .
Describe who generates and approves the
Plan of Action . . .
2
Nov 2006
Readiness Review Process
Screening or Scoping Meeting (ORR vs
RA, Authorization Authority (AA)
Defined, Startup Notification Report
(SNR) Discussed, Schedule)
Contractor Plan of
Action (CPOA)
Prepared
DOE Plan of Action
(POA) Prepared by
DOE Line Mgr
AA Reviews and Approves
CPOA and POA
1 Year
Prior to
RR
Startup Notification Report
Prepared and Submitted
AA Approves SNR and
Nominates DOE Team
Leader (TL)
Contractor RR
Implementation Plan (IP)
prepared by Contractor RR
Team and approved by CTL
DOE TL Pre-Assessment
Preparation and Planning
(Team Selected
Initial Team Mtg
Pre-Site Visit, IP Drafted)
Prerequisites met (MSA)
Readiness Review
Process Begins
Contractors RR
and Final Report
DOE RR IP approved by TL
Corrective Action Plan
(CAP) Submitted and
Approved
DOE RR and Final
Report
Prestart Findings
Closed
Contractor Issues Readiness
to Proceed (RTP)
DOE Endorsement of
RTP and MSA
3
AA Authorizes Start of
RR to RR TL
Nov 2006
CAP Submitted and
Approved
Prestart Findings Closed
AA Authorizes
Startup
6 Months
Prior to
RR
Plan of Action Purpose
Documents the “Breadth” of the Readiness
Review
Defining the “Breadth” includes defining the:
– Scope of the Review
– Minimal Core Requirements to be reviewed
It’s the basis for the Implementation Plan;
Should Identify the Team Leader;
Specifies prerequisites, must address each core
requirement
Proposed start dates
4
Nov 2006
Plan of Action Purpose (cont)
By defining the Scope, you define the:
– Geographical and physical boundaries of the review;
Which facilities are involved?
Which systems (process & support) are involved?
– Administrative boundaries of the ORR
What Safety Management Programs/Procedures
are involved?
Which Personnel groups? Support groups?
5
Nov 2006
Plan of Action
Defining the Scope of the ORR
ORR
Implementation Plan
Defines Depth
Plan of Action Defines ORR Breadth
6
ORR Scope
Nov 2006
POA Content
Recommended Format Defined in Order and DOESTD-3006-2000. . .
Cover page
Signature page
Table of Contents
– Introduction
– Facility Information (Responsible Contractor Organization, Mission, History)
– NNSA Organizational interfaces and Approvals (NNSA ORR Official
Reviews and Approvals, Designation of Action – Startup, Proposed ORR
Team Leader, Requirement for Senior Technical Advisor)
– Proposed Breadth of the ORR (Scope, ISM Guiding Principles, ORR
Minimal Core Requirements (MCRs), DOE NNSA MCRS)
– ORR Prerequisites (NNSA, Site Office, Contractor)
– Schedule and Duration of the ORR
– NNSA ORR Findings and Disposition
– Document Distribution
EXAMPLE
– Appendices - Acronyms
7
Nov 2006
POA Content
ORR Addresses all MCRs
– MCRs excluded must be justified (i.e., recent,
technically adequate, independent review, subjects
that are not applicable, etc.);
“Graded Approach” used in defining the Breadth
(applicable MCRs);
Presents “Content Scope” of Review:
–Safety Management Programs interface discussion
...
POA EXAMPLE
–MCR Depth Discussion
8
Nov 2006
Graded Approach
Reference DOE-STD-3006-2000, Appendix 1, Application of the
Graded Approach, The graded approach is commensurate
with:
The relative importance to safety, safeguards, and security;
The magnitude of any hazard involved;
The life cycle stage of a facility;
The programmatic mission of a facility;
The particular characteristics of a facility;
The cause and circumstances of the facility shutdown;
Complexity of the weapons-related or research activity; and
Other relevant factors.
9
Nov 2006
Graded Approach
The following factors and their implications should be
considered in preparation of the plan-of-action and
should be considered in developing the depth of the
ORR:
Physical modifications to the facility;
Procedural changes;
Personnel changes;
Length of shutdown;
Overall hazard characteristics of the facility;
The complexity of the activity;
10
Nov 2006
Graded Approach
Continued….
A new process or facility versus the restart of an existing
activity;
The programmatic significance of the subsequent
operations;
Introduction of new hazards;
Increase in existing hazards or risk;
Operating history of the facility;
Confidence in site-wide issues;
Issues raised through other internal or external reviews;
Lessons Learned
11
Nov 2006
MCR Depth and Discussion Example:
MCR 1 - Line management has established programs to ensure safe accomplishment of
work (the authorization authority should identify in the plan of action those specific
infrastructure programs of interest for the startup or restart). Personnel exhibit an
awareness of public and worker safety, health, and environmental protection
requirements and, through their actions, demonstrate a high-priority commitment to
comply with these requirements.
Performance Objectives:
Line management has established programs to ensure safe accomplishment of work.
Personnel exhibit an awareness of public and worker safety, health, and
environmental protection requirements.
Line management and personnel, through their actions, demonstrate a high-priority
commitment to comply with these requirements.
Infrastructure programs for the startup or restart are to be defined within the POA, as part
of the breadth of the review, and/or defined by the AA by formal correspondence.
12
Nov 2006
MCR Depth and Discussion Example (Cont)
MCR 1 - Line management has established programs to ensure safe accomplishment
of work. Personnel exhibit an awareness of public and worker safety, health, and
environmental protection requirements and, through their actions, demonstrate a
high-priority commitment to comply with these requirements.
The NNSA ORR Team will confirm that ESA-TSE line management has established the
following programs, and personnel can demonstrate a commitment to comply with
programmatic requirements. The review will focus on contractual agreements between
NNSA and LANL, and the implementation of site-specific documentation to verify that this
MCR has been met.
–
–
–
–
–
–
13
Conduct of Operations
Configuration Management
Emergency Management
Environmental Compliance
Fire Protection
Maintenance Management
POA Depth EXAMPLE
Nov 2006
MCR Depth and Discussion Exercise
How Many Performance Objectives can you identify
within MCR 2?
MCR 2 - Functions, assignments, responsibilities, and
reporting relationships are clearly defined, understood,
and effectively implemented with line management
responsibility for control of safety.
14
Nov 2006
MCR Depth and Discussion Exercise (Cont)
MCR 2 - Functions, assignments, responsibilities, and reporting relationships are clearly defined,
understood, and effectively implemented with line management responsibility for control of safety.
Performance Objectives:
Functions are clearly defined with line management responsibility for control of safety.
Functions are clearly understood with line management responsibility for control of safety.
Functions are effectively implemented with line management responsibility for control of safety.
Assignments are clearly defined with line management responsibility for control of safety.
Assignments are clearly understood with line management responsibility for control of safety.
Assignments are effectively implemented with line management responsibility for control of safety.
Responsibilities are clearly defined with line management responsibility for control of safety.
Responsibilities are clearly understood with line management responsibility for control of safety.
Responsibilities are effectively implemented with line management responsibility for control of
safety.
Reporting relationships are clearly defined with line management responsibility for control of
safety.
Reporting relationships are clearly understood with line management responsibility for control of
safety.
Reporting relationships are effectively implemented with line management responsibility for control
of safety.
MCR PO Examples
15
Nov 2006
POA Preparation and Approval
Line management develops it;
DOE/NNSA and Contractor ORR/RA require a
separate POA (Both POAs should agree in Scope
and Breadth!);
Both Contractor and DOE POA receive approval from
Authorization Authority . . . designated in the
approved SNR . . .;
Recommendations/endorsements from appropriate
subordinate offices and activities . . . ;
Copy to EH for comment .
16
Nov 2006
POA Timing
The Earlier the better - 6 Months Prior to major ORR/RA is
Recommended!
Allows for:
– Proper Planning
– Reviews and Input from Stakeholders . . .
– Allows for Thorough Review Preparation:
Implementation Plan;
Team Preparations.
17
Nov 2006
Questions
18
Nov 2006
Readiness Review
Course
Screening or Scoping Meeting (ORR vs RA, Authorization
Authority (AA) Defined, Startup Notification Report (SNR)
Discussed, Schedule)
Contractor Plan of Action (CPOA)
Prepared
DOE Plan of Action (POA)
Prepared by DOE Line Mgr
AA Reviews and Approves
CPOA and POA
Startup Notification Report Prepared and
Submitted
Contractor RR Implementation Plan (IP)
prepared by Contractor RR Team and
approved by CTL
AA Approves SNR and
Nominates DOE Team Leader
(TL)
DOE TL Pre-Assessment Preparation and Planning
(Team Selected
Initial Team Mtg
Pre-Site Visit, IP Drafted)
Prerequisites met (MSA)
Readiness Review Process Begins
Contractors RR and
Final Report
DOE RR IP approved by TL
Corrective Action Plan (CAP)
Submitted and Approved
DOE RR and Final Report
Prestart Findings Closed
CAP Submitted and
Approved
Contractor Issues Readiness to Proceed
(RTP)
Prestart Findings Closed
DOE Endorsement of RTP and
MSA
AA Authorizes
Startup
AA Authorizes Start of RR to RR
TL
Plan of Action – Mod 5
19
Nov 2006
Learning Objectives
Describe the purpose, timing, and content
of the Plans of Action . . .
Describe who generates and approves the
Plan of Action . . .
20
Nov 2006
Readiness Review Process
Screening or Scoping Meeting (ORR vs
RA, Authorization Authority (AA)
Defined, Startup Notification Report
(SNR) Discussed, Schedule)
Contractor Plan of
Action (CPOA)
Prepared
DOE Plan of Action
(POA) Prepared by
DOE Line Mgr
AA Reviews and Approves
CPOA and POA
1 Year
Prior to
RR
Startup Notification Report
Prepared and Submitted
AA Approves SNR and
Nominates DOE Team
Leader (TL)
Contractor RR
Implementation Plan (IP)
prepared by Contractor RR
Team and approved by CTL
DOE TL Pre-Assessment
Preparation and Planning
(Team Selected
Initial Team Mtg
Pre-Site Visit, IP Drafted)
Prerequisites met (MSA)
Readiness Review
Process Begins
Contractors RR
and Final Report
DOE RR IP approved by TL
Corrective Action Plan
(CAP) Submitted and
Approved
DOE RR and Final
Report
Prestart Findings
Closed
Contractor Issues Readiness
to Proceed (RTP)
DOE Endorsement of
RTP and MSA
21
AA Authorizes Start of
RR to RR TL
Nov 2006
CAP Submitted and
Approved
Prestart Findings Closed
AA Authorizes
Startup
6 Months
Prior to
RR
Plan of Action Purpose
Documents the “Breadth” of the Readiness
Review
Defining the “Breadth” includes defining the:
– Scope of the Review
– Minimal Core Requirements to be reviewed
It’s the basis for the Implementation Plan;
Should Identify the Team Leader;
Specifies prerequisites, must address each core
requirement
Proposed start dates
22
Nov 2006
Plan of Action Purpose (cont)
By defining the Scope, you define the:
– Geographical and physical boundaries of the review;
Which facilities are involved?
Which systems (process & support) are involved?
– Administrative boundaries of the ORR
What Safety Management Programs/Procedures
are involved?
Which Personnel groups? Support groups?
23
Nov 2006
Plan of Action
Defining the Scope of the ORR
ORR
Implementation Plan
Defines Depth
Plan of Action Defines ORR Breadth
24
ORR Scope
Nov 2006
POA Content
Recommended Format Defined in Order and DOESTD-3006-2000. . .
Cover page
Signature page
Table of Contents
– Introduction
– Facility Information (Responsible Contractor Organization, Mission, History)
– NNSA Organizational interfaces and Approvals (NNSA ORR Official
Reviews and Approvals, Designation of Action – Startup, Proposed ORR
Team Leader, Requirement for Senior Technical Advisor)
– Proposed Breadth of the ORR (Scope, ISM Guiding Principles, ORR
Minimal Core Requirements (MCRs), DOE NNSA MCRS)
– ORR Prerequisites (NNSA, Site Office, Contractor)
– Schedule and Duration of the ORR
– NNSA ORR Findings and Disposition
– Document Distribution
EXAMPLE
– Appendices - Acronyms
25
Nov 2006
POA Content
ORR Addresses all MCRs
– MCRs excluded must be justified (i.e., recent,
technically adequate, independent review, subjects
that are not applicable, etc.);
“Graded Approach” used in defining the Breadth
(applicable MCRs);
Presents “Content Scope” of Review:
–Safety Management Programs interface discussion
...
POA EXAMPLE
–MCR Depth Discussion
26
Nov 2006
Graded Approach
Reference DOE-STD-3006-2000, Appendix 1, Application of the
Graded Approach, The graded approach is commensurate
with:
The relative importance to safety, safeguards, and security;
The magnitude of any hazard involved;
The life cycle stage of a facility;
The programmatic mission of a facility;
The particular characteristics of a facility;
The cause and circumstances of the facility shutdown;
Complexity of the weapons-related or research activity; and
Other relevant factors.
27
Nov 2006
Graded Approach
The following factors and their implications should be
considered in preparation of the plan-of-action and
should be considered in developing the depth of the
ORR:
Physical modifications to the facility;
Procedural changes;
Personnel changes;
Length of shutdown;
Overall hazard characteristics of the facility;
The complexity of the activity;
28
Nov 2006
Graded Approach
Continued….
A new process or facility versus the restart of an existing
activity;
The programmatic significance of the subsequent
operations;
Introduction of new hazards;
Increase in existing hazards or risk;
Operating history of the facility;
Confidence in site-wide issues;
Issues raised through other internal or external reviews;
Lessons Learned
29
Nov 2006
MCR Depth and Discussion Example:
MCR 1 - Line management has established programs to ensure safe accomplishment of
work (the authorization authority should identify in the plan of action those specific
infrastructure programs of interest for the startup or restart). Personnel exhibit an
awareness of public and worker safety, health, and environmental protection
requirements and, through their actions, demonstrate a high-priority commitment to
comply with these requirements.
Performance Objectives:
Line management has established programs to ensure safe accomplishment of work.
Personnel exhibit an awareness of public and worker safety, health, and
environmental protection requirements.
Line management and personnel, through their actions, demonstrate a high-priority
commitment to comply with these requirements.
Infrastructure programs for the startup or restart are to be defined within the POA, as part
of the breadth of the review, and/or defined by the AA by formal correspondence.
30
Nov 2006
MCR Depth and Discussion Example (Cont)
MCR 1 - Line management has established programs to ensure safe accomplishment
of work. Personnel exhibit an awareness of public and worker safety, health, and
environmental protection requirements and, through their actions, demonstrate a
high-priority commitment to comply with these requirements.
The NNSA ORR Team will confirm that ESA-TSE line management has established the
following programs, and personnel can demonstrate a commitment to comply with
programmatic requirements. The review will focus on contractual agreements between
NNSA and LANL, and the implementation of site-specific documentation to verify that this
MCR has been met.
–
–
–
–
–
–
31
Conduct of Operations
Configuration Management
Emergency Management
Environmental Compliance
Fire Protection
Maintenance Management
POA Depth EXAMPLE
Nov 2006
MCR Depth and Discussion Exercise
How Many Performance Objectives can you identify
within MCR 2?
MCR 2 - Functions, assignments, responsibilities, and
reporting relationships are clearly defined, understood,
and effectively implemented with line management
responsibility for control of safety.
32
Nov 2006
MCR Depth and Discussion Exercise (Cont)
MCR 2 - Functions, assignments, responsibilities, and reporting relationships are clearly defined,
understood, and effectively implemented with line management responsibility for control of safety.
Performance Objectives:
Functions are clearly defined with line management responsibility for control of safety.
Functions are clearly understood with line management responsibility for control of safety.
Functions are effectively implemented with line management responsibility for control of safety.
Assignments are clearly defined with line management responsibility for control of safety.
Assignments are clearly understood with line management responsibility for control of safety.
Assignments are effectively implemented with line management responsibility for control of safety.
Responsibilities are clearly defined with line management responsibility for control of safety.
Responsibilities are clearly understood with line management responsibility for control of safety.
Responsibilities are effectively implemented with line management responsibility for control of
safety.
Reporting relationships are clearly defined with line management responsibility for control of
safety.
Reporting relationships are clearly understood with line management responsibility for control of
safety.
Reporting relationships are effectively implemented with line management responsibility for control
of safety.
MCR PO Examples
33
Nov 2006
POA Preparation and Approval
Line management develops it;
DOE/NNSA and Contractor ORR/RA require a
separate POA (Both POAs should agree in Scope
and Breadth!);
Both Contractor and DOE POA receive approval from
Authorization Authority . . . designated in the
approved SNR . . .;
Recommendations/endorsements from appropriate
subordinate offices and activities . . . ;
Copy to EH for comment .
34
Nov 2006
POA Timing
The Earlier the better - 6 Months Prior to major ORR/RA is
Recommended!
Allows for:
– Proper Planning
– Reviews and Input from Stakeholders . . .
– Allows for Thorough Review Preparation:
Implementation Plan;
Team Preparations.
35
Nov 2006
Questions
36
Nov 2006