Ul101915.

xm1 Page 1 of I
LosAamos
NATIONAL LAaORATORY
ESt 1943
Official Correspondence Form
Name :
U1101915
Title:
SO:32CK-374635: LANL Improving Nuclear Safety and Operations
C
....
....
0
Date
....
10/13/2011
Received: \0
....
01
Addressee
C. McMillan
Name:
Originator:
K. Smith, LASO
Action Item
Provide LASO a comprehensive report by 11/30/2011
Descri ption:
~ c t i o n Due
Date:
11/30/2011
Responsible
for Action: Search Anderson. Charles E
Responsible
PADOP
Office:
Distribution:
Charles F. McMillan
Richard A. Marquez
Isaac E. Richardson III
ICarl Beard
Steve K. Shook
Roland B. Knapp
Matthew W. Hardy
IRM-RMMSO
Charles E. Anderson
Joseph M. Ortega
Chris Cantwell
Inez Valdez I
Donna L. Bailey
Christopher A. James
1
A
c
T
I
0
N
R
E
Q
u
I
R
E
0
0.
o
o
~
10/13/2011 bttp:lI1ocatessp.lanl.gov/ _layouts/PrinlFormSe/Ver.aspx
UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
National Nuclear Security Administration
Los Alamos Si te Office
memorandum
Los Alamos, New Mexico 81544
DATE: SEP 1 6 201'
REPLY TO
ATTN OF: Kevin W. Smith
SUBJECT: Los Alamos National Laboratory - Improving Nuclear Safety and Operations
TO: Charles F. McMillan, Director, Los Alamos National Security, LLC, MS-A I 00
Reference:
1. Contract Number DE-AC52-06NA25396, Los Alamos National Security, LLC and
the Department ofEnergy, National Nuclear Security Administration
2. Contract Number DE-AC52-06NA25396, Los Alamos National Security, LLC and
tue Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA),
Section I, "Contract Clauses", Clause H- I, "Redefining the Federal/Contractor
Relationship to Improve Management and Performance"
3. Contract Nwnber DE-AC52-06NA2S396, Los Alamos National Security, LLC and
the Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA),
Section I, "Contract Clauses", Clause H-2, "Performance Direction"
Los Alamos Site Office (LASO) acknowledges the rigorous and self-critical nature of
two recent Los Alamos National Security, LLC, (LANS) assessments: one involves the
Waste Disposition Project (WDP) nuclear operations; the other involves the Plutonium
Facility (PF-4) criticality safety program. These assessments, along with input from
multiple other sources, helped to codify LASO's view on the need to address a number of
reoccurring issues now and improve the laboratory's nuclear safety and operations. They
are:
The PF-4 criticality safety, conduct of operations, and configuration management
safety programs are either incompletely implemented or ineffectively implemented so
lhat they can be sustained. Also, a few operations in PF-4 have less criticality safety
margin lhan other operations and are highly reliant on mature, effective conduct of
operations to ensure worker safety.
WDP has deficiencies in credited safety management programs and safety systems.
LANS has attempted to address these deficiencies several times in the past, but the
fixes have not been pennanent .
These two sets of facility-specific issues indicate problems that continue to occur and that
warrant near-tenn actions and a sustained improvement plan. Examples of such
problems that LASO has observed include: lOadequate processes for self-identifying and
sustainably addressing issues; inadequate work package planning; not identifying all job
hazards; inadequate closure of issues; lack of system, engineering processes, and safety
basis knowledge; inability to execute procedures as wri tt en; workers accepting
NNSNDOE
Lat AIaInoI SR. 0/Iloo
1741"'tMJ_Road
IAI AI--,IN u!>-22tt
IINSIJOOE
"""",,/IaJ'!
t C r o ~ ~ $ W
WulUngton, DC 2IIUS- I1it
- 2
SEP 1 6 2DIf
inadequate procedures or not following procedures; and managementJsupervisory actions
that rationalize the status quo rather than identifying root causes and fixing the problems.
Collectively, these problems indicate that the level-or-maturity of both the Laboratory' s
contractor assurance system (CAS) and its nuclear safety culture does not yet consistently
meet expectations. The special and unique aspects of the Laboratory's mission and its
nuclear operations require a q\.,cstioning attitude to be cultivated, nuclear safety to be
continuously examined, self discovery to be valued, and organizational learning to be
embraced. These key elements of a strong nuclear safety culture are not consjstently
present Competency in integrated safely management also needs to be improved.
Therefore, J direct you to take the fonowing inunediate and longer term actions :
Immediate actions:
Evaluate the adequacy and implementation of criticality safety controls for the PF-4
operations that have less-than-typical safety margin, identified by federal staff
review; report to LASO within 7 days of receipt of this letter of the additional actions
that bave been taken to either secure or fully ensure the safety of these operations.
Evaluate the WDP safety system operability issues identified in recent federal reports;
take appropriate actions, including critiquing and reporting.
Assess whether PF-4 and WDP safety management programs are adequate to meet
the intent of the safety bases for continued operations without compensatory
measures.
Provide LASO a status report on the above within three weeks of receipt of this
memorandum
Longer term, sustainable, actions:
Evaluate, in detail, the PF4 and WDP issues identified in thls leller and from other
internal and external sources, including assessments, occurrence reports, technical
safety requirement violations, FCA reports, CAS metrics, and lessons learned.
Detennine deficiencies, causal factors, extent-of-condition across the site, and
develop a comprehensive corrective action plan and provide it to LASO.
Provide LASO specifLc commitments for improving nuclear safety and operations in
Fiscal Year 2012
Establish a suite of perfonnance (CAS) metrics and leading indicators that can be
joi ntl y used by LASO and LANS to track Ule improvements in the quality of nuclear
operatioIlS
Provi de LASO a comprehensive report on planned actions and the suite of
perfonnance tracking metTles by November )0, 2011.
If the Contractor beli eves the Performance Direction vio)ates Contract No. DE-AC52
06NAJS3% Cause H-2 enlltled "Perfoonance Direction," the Contractor shall suspend
implementati on of the Performance Di rection and promptly nOli fy the Los A lamos Site
O ffi ce (LASO) Contracting Officer of il s reasons for believing thai the Performance
- J
SP 1 6 201:
DirectIOn '!iolates this clause. Oral notl[lC;allorl (0 tile COnlrar;tlng Office, shall be
confirmed 111 writing within ten calenda r days of the Oidl notification To contact th<:;
LASO Contract Office, call (505) 606-024 9
Chuck Keilers will be readily available; ifli1.tre questions or needed cl arifications.

Kev i n \V. Smltil

4 .
SEP 1 f, ZOU
cc:
! . Rjchardson, DD LR. , LA. ' S, MS-A 00
C. Beard , PADOPS , LANS , \1S -A
P Henry, PADCAP, LANS, MS-A i \3
P.WWP , LANS, MS-A
A Bishop PADSTE, LANS . )\1S -B 2 I (j
T. Wallace, PADGS, '.,ANS MS- J-.U5
Records Cente r, LASO
Off:cia'l Contract Fib LAS'.
SO 32CK-174G35