Skip to main content

Assessment of Safety Culture

Image
By scooby
Assessment of Safety Culture Sustainment Processes at U.S. Department of Energy Sites" June 2020

https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2020/06/f76/Safety%20Culture%20Sustainment%20Assessment%20Report.pdf
7/26/2020 9:07 AM

Comments

Anonymous said…
"The team found through interviews that there is a widely shared perception among DOE and contractor officials that safety culture is not an overarching contractual requirement, and that formal oversight is limited to contractual requirements. Over the course of this assessment, there has been some progress toward incorporating safety culture into contract requirements."

As such, employees that worked with DOE in good faith to resolve acts of contractor retaliation, were unwillingly brought into a DOE OHA fraudulent process to resolve such matters. Congress needs to resolve this because DOE won't.
7/26/2020 5:54 PM
Anonymous said…
Ironic that most of the best practices are from CNS, yet NNSA is canning them for a timecard fraud issue at Pantex that CNS discovered and self-reported.
7/27/2020 4:18 AM
Anonymous said…
Zero safety culture at LANL.
7/28/2020 8:35 PM
Anonymous said…
but....but......people on this blog and the media say our safety culture sucks.
7/29/2020 3:04 PM
Anonymous said…
Most people on this blog think everything related to LLNL/LANL sucks.
7/29/2020 7:52 PM
Anonymous said…
8:35, care to elaborate? You know, using data and facts?
7/30/2020 7:14 AM
Anonymous said…
7/30/2020 7:14 AM

Case rates, crit issues, the number of nuclear facilities "paused" over the past 5 years (TA-55, WETF, TA-54, etc.), the number of nuclear facilities understaffed with Cog Systems Engineers, RPs, etc. and the list goes on and on. I have worked at 5 DOE facilities over 30 years. LANL nuclear safety culture is poor. I have tried speaking up here and nobody in OPS cares. This isn't cowboy scientists. In fact, except for putting interns in some bad spots a few times the scientists are fairly safe. Its the OPS and maintenance divisions that are unsafe.
7/30/2020 4:58 PM
Anonymous said…
Data and facts? You're on the wrong blog.
7/30/2020 5:44 PM
Anonymous said…
7/30/2020 4:58 PM

I have worked at 5 DOE facilities over 30 years.

So chronic complainer, not able to hold a job, fired often. Got it.
7/31/2020 5:47 PM
Anonymous said…
"Its the OPS and maintenance divisions that are unsafe."

At LANL we all know that nothing can be done about this for political reasons, nothing.
7/31/2020 10:16 PM
Anonymous said…
"So chronic complainer, not able to hold a job, fired often. Got it."

So DOE Labs with chronic safety culture failures fire "complainers",
hire new employees, and repeat. All on the taxpayers dime. Got it.
8/01/2020 1:14 PM
Anonymous said…
7/31/2020 5:47 PM

More like an Engineer with a particular skill set in weapons that has been promoted throughout the complex. Unlike a generational hanger on who has been at the same lab for 30 years and contributed little. Thin skinned too apparently.
8/01/2020 6:53 PM
Anonymous said…
I wonder when people are going to realize that with complex hazardous operations where people are involved with many rules and regulations, there is going to be risk. The key is to minimize the risk through administrative processes and programs combined with engineered controls. When there is an incident or near miss, 99.99% of the time, there is an organizational latent weakness that can be assigned. Rarely will you see incidents where a person intentionally or maliciously ignores a rule.

If DOE guy above with 30 years of experience wants to start firing workers and managers for making mistakes, then you will drive reporting underground. The incidents you read about from your office arm chair are from people actually reporting, which leads to fact findings. Results from fact findings are published and this is when the "non-experts" think they know everything and make judgemental comments. If you are serious about improving the safety culture, I invite you to apply for many of the open managerial positions that have operations in PF-4. Jobs that we can't retain or attract qualified people for because its crap work, high stress, with all the accountability and no authority. My guess is you wouldn't last 2 years.

8/05/2020 11:47 AM
Anonymous said…
8/05/2020 11:47 AM

There are accidents, and there are worker errors, and there are equipment malfunctions. None of these necessarily involve lack of "administrative processes and programs combined with engineered controls." Safety isn't a management function. There will never be 100% safety, but situational awareness and careful operation will mitigate risk to a substantial degree.
8/06/2020 6:17 PM
Anonymous said…
More like an Engineer with a particular skill set in weapons that has been promoted throughout the complex. Unlike a generational hanger on who has been at the same lab for 30 years and contributed little. Thin skinned too apparently.

8/01/2020 6:53 PM


That is one way of putting it. The other is someone with little skills but a bad attitude that everyone wants to get rid of hence the reason they have moved to five different labs. I don't know your exact story but we have all meet a few people like that in the system. One thing they all have in common is that they have a very high opinion of themselves which is not shared by anyone they work for.

The dead giveaway is that the person looks down on people who have been at the same lab for 30 years yet the most talented and I would say the most important that I have meet over the years are the ones that have been at the same lab 30 or 40 years. Now sure there are some people who have switched labs that are very talented but most who have been in 4 or more different places are usually problematic people. Judging from the the tone of the poster one can get a good idea which category they fall.
8/07/2020 1:07 PM
Anonymous said…
Safety isn't a management function. There will never be 100% safety, but situational awareness and careful operation will mitigate risk to a substantial degree.
11:47am

I, the 30 year Engineer, agree. This is my primary concern. The people actually doing the work are not sufficiently situationally aware, do not understand the consequence of their actions, and the support staff around them is thin at best. This IS high risk work and we need the right people with the right knowledge and mindset doing it. Management and administration is a fools error in this case. Culture, culture, culture.

8/07/2020 1:27 PM
Anonymous said…
That is one way of putting it. The other is someone with little skills but a bad attitude that everyone wants to get rid of hence the reason they have moved to five different labs. I don't know your exact story but we have all meet a few people like that in the system. One thing they all have in common is that they have a very high opinion of themselves which is not shared by anyone they work for.

The dead giveaway is that the person looks down on people who have been at the same lab for 30 years yet the most talented and I would say the most important that I have meet over the years are the ones that have been at the same lab 30 or 40 years. Now sure there are some people who have switched labs that are very talented but most who have been in 4 or more different places are usually problematic people. Judging from the the tone of the poster one can get a good idea which category they fall.

8/07/2020 1:07 PM

I don't look "down" on anyone. Just trading barbs with someone who apparently looks "down" on people that haven't been at LANL for 30 years and can offer a broader perspective on Nuclear Safety Quality Culture from other labs and production facilities. I'm glad you feel that doing the same thing for 30 years is the grade of "talent" but you are sorely mistaken. Why don't you just try to address the actual topic instead of deflecting from the actual issue.
8/07/2020 1:38 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Plutonium Shots on NIF.

By scooby
Tri-Valley Cares needs to be on this if they aren't already. We need to make sure that NNSA and LLNL does not make good on promises to pursue such stupid ideas as doing Plutonium experiments on NIF. The stupidity arises from the fact that a huge population is placed at risk in the short and long term. Why do this kind of experiment in a heavily populated area? Only a moron would push that kind of imbecile area. Do it somewhere else in the god forsaken hills of Los Alamos. Why should the communities in the Bay Area be subjected to such increased risk just because the lab's NIF has failed twice and is trying the Hail Mary pass of doing an SNM experiment just to justify their existence? Those Laser EoS techniques and the people analyzing the raw data are all just BAD anyways. You know what comes next after they do the experiment. They'll figure out that they need larger samples. More risk for the local population. Stop this imbecilic pursuit. They wan...
155 comments
Read more

Trump is to gut the labs.

By scooby
The budget has a 20% decrease to DOE office of science, 20% cut to NIH. NASA also gets a cut. This will  have a huge negative effect on the lab. Crazy, juts crazy. He also wants to cut NEA and PBS, this may not seem like  a big deal but they get very little money and do great things.
124 comments
Read more

LLNL un-diversity

By scooby
Actual post from Dec. 15 from one of the streams. This is a real topic. As far as promoting women and minorities even if their qualifications are not as good as the white male scientists, I am all for it. We need diversity at the lab and if that is what it takes, so be it.  Quit your whining. Look around the lab, what do you see? White male geezers. How many African Americans do you see at the lab? Virtually none. LLNL is one of the MOST undiverse places you will see. Face it folks, LLNL is an institution of white male privilege and they don't want to give up their privileged positions. California, a state of majority Hispanics has the "crown jewel" LLNL nestled in the middle of it with very FEW Hispanics at all!
79 comments
Read more