Welcomes & Introductions

1. Aundra Richards – DOE BSO Manager Paul Alivisatos – Deputy Lab Director Buck Koonce – UC Welcomes & Introductions

2. Howard Hatayama Site Orientation

3. Organization – Jim Krupnick ISM Implementation – Howard Hatayama Current Status Metrics re: ISM Site-Wide Overviews

4. Today’s Agenda • 8:30 amSite-Wide Overviews Organization & Status Jim Krupnick ISM Implementation Howard Hatayama • 9:15 am Work Planning and Control John Seabury • 9:45 am Break • 10:00 am Chemical Management Paul Blodgett • 10:30 am Feedback and Improvement John Chernowski • 11:00 am Division Overviews (Working Lunch) • Advanced Light Source Division Jim Floyd • Chemical Science Division Wayne Lukens • Life Sciences Division Joe Gray • Physical Bio-Sciences Division Paul Adams • Facilities Division Steve Black • 1:30 pm Q&A, Logistics

5. Berkeley Lab Overview Jim Krupnick, Chief Operating Officer January 6, 2009

6. Founded in 1931 on Berkeley CampusMoved to Current Site in 1940

7. A National Laboratory Next to a University Campus Berkeley Lab UC Berkeley

8. Space Statistics 390k ASF lab and lab support 126k ASF shop and shop support 504k ASF office and conference 97k ASF other 1.117M ASF Total 70% of LBNL buildings built before 1970

9. Hayward Fault

10. Seismic Probability Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Source U.S. Geologic Survey

11. Predicted 7.0+ Magnitude EQ on Hayward Fault 1906 San Francisco EQBerkeley, CAMagnitude 7.9Epicenter: Point Reyes 1989 Loma Prieta EQBerkeley, CAMagnitude 6.9Epicenter: Santa Cruz Past Ground Accelerations http://www.abag.ca.gov/

12. UC Seismic Safety Program GOALTo achieve Life Safety for our building occupants in the event of the Maximum Credible Event. RATING SYSTEM • Good Some structural and non-structural damage, life safety not significantly jeopardized • Fair Structural and non-structural damage represent low life hazards • Poor Significant structural and non-structural damage represent appreciable life hazards. All buildings occupants are briefed of the seismic hazards if a building is rated Poor • Very PoorExtensive structural and non-structural damage represent high life hazards. A seismic Risk Mitigation Plan (RMP) is developed and implemented for buildings rated Very Poor

13. Current LBNL Building Condition 13

14. Berkeley Lab Mission • Solve the most pressing and profound scientific problems facing humankind • Basic science for a secure energy future • Understand living systems to improve the environment, health, and energy supply • Understand matter and energy in the universe • Build and safely operate leading scientific facilities for the nation • Train the next generation of scientists and engineers

15. Nanoscale Materials and Synthesis Berkeley Lab’s Scientific Strengths Earth and Environmental Science Energy Science and Technology Quantitative Biology X-Ray Science and Accelerators Particle Physics and Nuclear Science Scientific Computing

16. FY 2008 Costs: $589M Biological and Environmental Research ($106M) Basic Energy Sciences ($132M) National Institutes of Health ($43M) Math and Computing Sciences ($97M) Work for Others (excluding NIH) ($65M) Other DOE ($71M) Physics/Fusion ($75M) October 2008

17. Berkeley Lab Employees: 3,690 Scientists and Engineers Faculty* PostdoctoralAssociates* 265 677 355 Graduate Students* 294 Undergraduate Students* 139 Technical Staff 1364 596 Employees: 3,690Guests: 3,227Total: 6,917 Support Staff December 2008 *Joint affiliation with UC Berkeley and other campuses

19. Luis W. Alvarez Owen Chamberlain Donald A. Glaser Steven Chu Melvin Calvin Ernest Orlando Lawrence George F. Smoot Yuan T. Lee Glenn T. Seaborg Eleven Nobel Laureates Edwin M. McMillan Emilio G. Segrè

20. Major Scientific Facilities Serving Government, Universities, and Industry Energy Sciences Network (ESnet) 88-Inch Cyclotron National Energy Research Scientific Computing Center Advanced Light Source Joint Genome Institute National Center for Electron Microscopy Molecular Foundry JBEI

21. History of ISM at Berkeley Lab • First ISM Plan submitted 1997, approved by DOE in 1998 and validated in 1999. • Self-assessment program certified by DOE in 2003 • ISM plan was updated regularly • Illness and injury statistics showed significant improvement continuously through 2004. • But 2005 was watershed year

22. History of ISM at Berkeley Lab (cont) • New Contract, new Lab Director, new Site Office Manager • Started implementation of DOE Order 226.1 • Missed FY05 DOE TRC and DART targets • Dr. Orbach’s December 2005 letter to Chairman of the UC Regents citing “dreadful performance” • BSO (CO) letter putting UC on notice re Lab performance • Initial UC response was to commission a targeted EH&S Peer review in Jan 2006 • But, DOE determined that resulting CAP was not comprehensive enough

23. History of ISM at Berkeley Lab (cont) • McCallum-Turner led full ISM Review in Sept 2006 • Corrective Action Plan submitted - May 2007 • 7 corrective actions (58 major activities) • Line Management accountability and responsibility for safety • Institutional EHS/ISMS documents • Performance Management • Corrective Action Management • Self Assessment processes • Work Planning and Control • ISM Elements of our LBNL/UCB Relationship • 10 CFR 851 implementation – May 2007

24. History of ISM at Berkeley Lab (cont) • McT CAP led to Key ISM Improvements • “Work Lead” concept • Developed and implemented new programs • Issues Management • Technical Assurance • Job Hazards Analysis • Strengthened reporting culture • Revised & clarified roles and responsibilities • Safety Liaisons • Safety Coordinators • Safety Review Committee

25. Series of events during FY07 & FY08 • Mercury release in Molecular Foundry • Series of DOE safety audits and findings • Facility hazard characterization issues • Recurring ORPS • Electrical safety • Subcontractor safety • Maintenance issues ISM Cap efforts coupled with recent events (and encouragement from BSO) has led to a deeper understanding of ISM status at LBNL.

26. Senior management’s response has been anincreased urgency in focus on safety in last 6 mos. • Annual Lab Director’s Strategic Retreat • Lab Director’s “All-Hands” presentation • Lab-wide stand-downs • “Our Safety” campaign to change the culture • Goal: long term, sustained improvement in implementation of ISM • ISM Improvement Project

29. Where is ISM at LBNL Now? • Per the annual ISM Declaration: LBNL “… believes that ISM is being effectively implemented … but noteworthy weaknesses … need to be addressed.” • Some Work Planning and Control mechanisms are new and not uniformly administered • Need more rigorous Technical Assurance assessments • Division Self-Assessments need to be more tailored • Several ES&H Program areas need improvement • New PPE policy is in implementation process

30. In closing… We welcome the HSS review, and look forward to learning from the review team as part of our ongoing Feedback and Improvement efforts.

31. Berkeley Lab Values Overarching commitment to pioneering science Highest integrity/impeccable ethics Uncompromising safety Diversity in people and thought Sense of urgency

32. ISM @ Berkeley Lab: Key Elements, Players and Metrics Howard Hatayama Director, EH&S Division January 6, 2009

33. Line Management Owns and is Responsible for Safety Laboratory Director Research Operations Division Directors Chief Operating Officer Division Directors/Dept Heads Department Heads/Group Leaders Group Leaders Supervisors/Work Leads Supervisors/Work Leads Researchers/Workers/Guests/ Students/Post-Docs Workers/Guests

34. Work Leads - A Key Element of Safety Line Management • What are Work Leads? • Oversee Workers as part of the Safety Line Management chain • May or may not be Supervisors • Can be staff, guests, post-docs, graduate students • Same safety management responsibilities as Supervisors and Managers • Why did we establish this role? • Developed in response to span of control issues identified in assessments • Reflects the way research and teaching is done

35. Division Director Administration Human Resources Finance Howard Hatayama Deputy Division Director Management Training Don Lucas Information Security & Radiation Waste Environmental Health Industrial Occupational Emergency Protection Management Services Services Hygiene Safety Operations Key Player – EH&S Division • Technical support to line organizations • Advice on identifying hazards and appropriate controls • Review of work plans and formal authorizations • Assurance of appropriate procedures and implementation • Policy and procedure development • Training • Direct services such as waste management • Institutional interface on ES&H • External regulators, DOE-BSO, UC Office of the President

36. Key Players - Coordinators and Liaisons • Division Safety Coordinators facilitate implementation of ISM in each operating Division • Owned and employed by each Division • Part time to full time depending upon Division’s needs • Moving towards increased technical competence in this role • Support the line in implementing Lab policies and procedures • Administer the Division’s ES&H program • EH&S Liaisons act as technical resources to the Divisions to assist in implementing ISM • Owned and employed by Environment, Health and Safety • Senior level ES&H professionals • Varies, but generally each Liaison ~20-30% FTE • Liaisons are first contact for Divisions in resolving ES&H issues, obtain assistance as necessary

37. Key Players - Advisory and Oversight Committees • Advisory committees exist to help Line Management discharge their safety responsibility • Safety Review Committee advises Lab Director on general safety, ISM issues • One representative from each Division • Researches and recommends policy, conducts MESH reviews • Other peer advisory/regulatory committees oversee specific technical areas • Radiation Safety Committee • Institutional Biosafety Committee • Animal Welfare and Research Committee • Human Subjects Committee • Radioactive Drug Research Committee

38. Key Players - Oversight and Assurance • Office of Contract Assurance • ES&H Self-Assessment program • Issues Management • UC Office of the President • Contract Assurance Council • Contract management and oversight • BerkeleySite Office • Contract management • Reviews and assessments • Operational awareness

39. Lab-wide Worker Involvement Laboratory Support Advisory Committee Business Managers Council Division Safety Coordinator Committee Safety Review Committee and sub-committees Rad Safety Committee Institutional Bio-safety Committee Collective Bargaining Units Division Level Worker Involvement Division safety committees Division Near Hit programs All-Hands meetings Peer reviews of safety implementation Employee concerns/suggestions/tips “Our Safety” website Key Players - The Worker

40. Worker Rights & Responsibilities Listed in PUB-3000 Section 1.3.3 Based on 10 CFR 851 Tailored for LBNL Posted lab-wide with Employment Notices Included in New Staff Orientation (EHS 10) Included in “Safety at LBNL” pamphlet

41. Flow Down of ISM Requirements DOE/LBNL Contract 31 LBNL Regulations & Procedures Manual LBNL Integrated Safety Management Plan UC Assurance Plan For LBNL • ES&H Implementation Plans • Worker Safety & Health • Chemical Hygiene & Safety • Biological Safety • Radiation Protection Plan • Environmental Management Plan • Waste Management Plan LBNL Health & Safety Manual PUB-3000 Division ISM Plans

42. Illness and Injury Rate Trend

43. 48 total recordables 48% musculoskeletal injuries due to repetitive motion No construction recordable injuries Injury Categories and Causes FY08

44. ORPS Categories Nurturing a Reporting Culture - ORPS

45. Nurturing a Reporting Culture - NTS Fiscal Year

46. Safety Concerns and Suggestions FY08 Distribution of Employee Safety Concerns • Total Number of Concerns/Suggestions FY08 = 66 • Over 100 in FY09 (Director’s All-Hands Safety Talk 10/10/08)

47. Safety Culture Survey: Some FY08 Results

48. Current Status of ISM@Berkeley Lab • We have strong Senior Management leadership and commitment to safety • Recent improvements are still taking hold • We believe ISM is being effectively implemented at LBNL and we are addressing our weaknesses through the ISM Improvement Project Plan Feedback and improvement is the key to effective ISM

49. Work Planning Control John Seabury

50. Work Planning and Control At the Activity Level John Seabury Environment, Health and Safety Division Presented to HSS Review Team January 6, 2009