accelerator readiness review - fermilab

Accelerator Readiness Review

Fermilab Accelerator Science and Technology (FAST/IOTA) Electron Injector

September 14-15, 2017

IOTA/FAST Electron Injector Accelerator Readiness Review September 14-15, 2017

Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory 2

CONTENTS

1 Executive Summary 3

2 Charge to the Review Committee 3

3 ARR Review Team 4

3.1 Review Committee 5

3.2 Observer 5

3.3 ARR Facilitators 5

4 ARR Process and Plan 5

5 ARR Results 5

5.1 Safety Assessment Document (SAD) 6

5.2 Accelerator Safety Envelope (ASE) 6

5.3 Accelerator Safety and the Fermilab Contractor Assurance System (CAS) 6

5.4 Safety Configuration Management (SCM) 7

5.5 Accelerator Operator FAST Training and Qualification Program 7

5.6 Accelerator Operations Procedures for IOTA/FAST 7

5.7 Work Planning and Control Related to Accelerator Safety 8

5.8 Credited Controls (CC) 8

6 Summary of Findings 9

6.1 Pre-Start Findings 9

6.2 Post-Start Findings 9

7 Comments 9

8 Noteworthy Practices 9

9 Charge to the Committee and Committee Responses 9

10 Appendix A – ARR Schedule 11

11 Appendix B – CRADs & LOIs 12



1 Executive Summary

The review committee met with Fermilab Accelerator Science and Technology (FAST) personnel on

September 14-15, 2017 to conduct this Accelerator Readiness Review (ARR) for the IOTA/FAST electron

injector. The presentations to the committee were clear, informative, and showed the expertise and sense

of ownership of the FAST personnel. Several noteworthy practices by FAST and Environmental, Safety,

Health and Quality (ESH&Q) were observed by the committee. The committee is pleased to report

affirmative answers to the three ARR charge questions (see below). Following completion of the

preparation for operations already in progress, noted as three Pre-Start Findings, the committee

concluded that FAST is well-prepared to commission and operate the electron injector within the scope of

the Fermilab Accelerator Safety Envelope (ASE) revision dated August 28, 2017 that has been submitted

to the Department of Energy Fermi Site Office (DOE-FSO) for approval.

2 Charge to the Review Committee

Fermilab has made a significant investment in constructing a world-class infrastructure for Superconducting

RF technology in recent years. The ‘crown jewel’ of these efforts is to have an on-site particle accelerator

based on this technology. The Fermilab Accelerator Science and Technology (FAST) Electron Injector is to be

such an instrument.

FAST is conceived to be an Advanced Accelerator R&D (AARD) facility to be constructed and brought into

operation in phases. Electrons are produced by impinging UItraviolet laser light onto the cathode of the

normal-conducting Photoinjector Gun. The next step in accelerating the electron beam to an energy of up to

300 MeV uses two single-cavity superconducting RF cryomodules to obtain a beam energy of up to 55 MeV,

followed by an 8-cavity SRF cryomodule, and a beam transport line to deliver these electrons to the high-

energy beam absorber (HEA). The Committee is requested to conduct a readiness review of the FAST

Injectorto assess if the hardware, personnel, and administrative systems and programs are ready forbeam

commissioning and electron operation at energies up to 300 MeV.

Electron operation to the 55 MeV low-energy absorber (LEA) is now routine. The laser system, gun, and 2

single-cavity cryomodules have achieved nominal operating specifications. In recent months, the beam

transport line beyond the 2 single-cavity cryomodules has been installed to the 8-cavity SRF cryomodule, as

well as the line from the SRF cryomodule to the HEA and the absorber itself. Installation has reached a point

where it is possible accelerate electrons beyond the LEA and commission the line to the HEA. Future work

will extend the beam line to the Integrable Optics Test Accelerator (IOTA) ring and add a 2.7 MeV proton

injector to the IOTA ring.



To support operation of the FAST Injector, a Shielding Assessment for same was developed. A Safety

Assessment Document (SAD) Chapter for the FAST Injector was developed for the Fermilab SAD and the

Fermilab ASE was revised based on the shielding assessments and SAD chapter. The shielding assessments,

SAD Chapter, and ASE have been reviewed in accordance with Fermilab policies and approved by the

laboratory.

In performance of the readiness assessment of FAST Injector and the identification of potential issues, the

committee is asked to address the following charge questions. Finally, the committee should present findings,

opportunities for improvement, noteworthy practices, and specific answers to the charge questions at a

closeout meeting with Fermilab’s management. A final written report is requested within two weeks after the

review.

ARR Charge Questions

1. Are the necessary safety program elements of the Contractor Requirements Document for DOE O420.2C,

Safety of Accelerator Facilities, in place?

a. A Facility Configuration Management Program that is related to accelerator safety; and

b. Credited controls and appropriate administrative processes related to accelerator safety (e.g. training,

procedures, etc.).

2. Has the laboratory developed a process for ensuring safe operations?

3. Are the necessary credited controls, accelerator hardware, beamline controls and monitoring systems,

trained personnel, and administrative processes in place and adequate to support commissioning of the FAST

Injector?

3 ARR Review Team

Fermilab assembled an ARR committee comprised of subject matter experts with various expertise in

accelerator operations and accelerator safety from within the laboratory. The committee consisted of

three members from Fermilab and a DOE Fermi Site Office (FSO) observer who monitored the review

process.

Facilitators from Fermilab coordinated the review, developed Criteria, Review, and Approach

Documents (CRADs), Lines of Inquiry (LOIs), compiled documentation, and arranged for the logistics of

the ARR Committee. The ARR review team included the following:



3.1 Review Committee

Don Cossairt, Chair ESH&Q, Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory

Bruce Baller ND, Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory

Mary Convery AD, Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory

3.2 Observer

Rachel Zeman DOE Fermi Site Office

3.3 ARR Facilitators

John Anderson Jr. ESH&Q, Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory

Daniel Broemmelsiek AD, Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory

4 ARR Process and Plan

The ARR was structured to be a performance based review consisting of document reviews, plenary

sessions, and field visits. The Plenary sessions provided an overview of the process and plan for the

ARR, an overview of the FAST facility, and current status of the Fermilab shielding assessment, SAD and

ASE. Three performance-based technical breakout sessions were conducted, including discussion of

operations procedures, training, and the commissioning plan, Safety Configuration Management and

Credited Controls, and work planning and control related to accelerator safety. The committee was also

given a detailed tour of the facility.

The detailed schedule of activities and the CRADs and LOIs used for the review are included in

Appendices A and B respectively.

5 ARR Results

The committee chose to categorize its observations as Pre-Start and Post-Start Findingsi1, Comments, and

Noteworthy practices. Pre-Start Findings require documentation of completion prior to commissioning

and operations. Three Pre-Start Findings were identified. Post-Start Findings need to be addressed in a

reasonable timeframe after commencement of operations. No Post-Start Findings were identified. The

1 On Monday, September 18, 2017, the ESH&Q Section Quality Assurance and Training Group announced the

retirement of the usage of the term “Finding” replacing it with the equivalent term “Non-Conformance” using the definitions of Fermilab Quality Assurance Manual (QAM) Chapter 12030. For this report, the term “Finding” will be retained.



committee made two Comments: suggestions and other notes that might be helpful to FAST.

Noteworthy practices are observations viewed by the committee as being exemplary and ones that likely

merit continuation in the future. Four Noteworthy Practices were identified.

The ARR itself, its observations, and the completion of the corrective actions to the Findings shall be

entered into Fermilab’s iTrack system. Prior to the commencement of commissioning, closure of the Pre-

Start Findings shall be documented in iTrack and forwarded to the Chair of the ARR. While it is

anticipated that the closure of the Pre-Start Findings will be satisfactory, the Chair of the ARR retains the

authority to reconvene the ARR committee to resolve any remaining issues.

5.1 Safety Assessment Document (SAD)

The Safety Assessment Document has been updated to include the IOTA/FAST electron injector and was

reviewed by the SAD Review Subcommittee. It includes a summary of the Shielding Assessment for the

FAST facility that has been approved by the Shielding Assessment Review Subcommittee. The SAD has

been approved by the Fermilab Director and sent to the DOE FSO manager for concurrence.

Findings:

1. (Pre-start) The SAD requires concurrence and the ASE requires approval by the DOE FSO.

5.2 Accelerator Safety Envelope (ASE)

The Fermilab ASE was revised based on the updated SAD, reviewed by the SAD Review Subcommittee,

approved by the Fermilab Director and sent to the DOE FSO manager for approval.

Findings:

1. (Pre-start) The SAD requires concurrence and the ASE requires approval by the DOE FSO.

5.3 Accelerator Safety and the Fermilab Contractor Assurance System (CAS)

The Fermilab Contractor Assurance System was comprehensively reviewed in the recent Muon Campus

/ g-2 ARR and this committee has no new findings.

Findings: None



5.4 Safety Configuration Management (SCM)

Procedures for testing and for requesting modification of a radiation safety interlock system (RSIS), and

configuration management of shielding and radiation fences were discussed. A configuration control log

is used to track unlocking and locking off critical devices and the reasons why, which improves

communication between Radiation Safety Officers. The unreviewed safety issue (USI) process was

explained, although it was not in use at the time preparations began for FAST. Document management

was presented.

Noteworthy practices:

• The upgraded configuration management log is of significant benefit.

Findings:

2. (Pre-start) The planned required radiological postings, the interlock system, and the required

elements of configuration management must be completed.

5.5 Accelerator Operator FAST Training and Qualification Program

FAST facility “qualified operators” and AD Operations Department personnel in the Main Control Room

(MCR) share responsibilities for operating the FAST facilities. All of the MCR operators and crew chiefs

were given a tour of the upgraded FAST facilities and are in the process of being trained to search and

secure the beamline enclosure. Personnel previously trained as qualified operators to run 50 MeV beam

to the low-energy absorber will have to requalify after being trained in procedures for operating the 300

MeV beamline.


• The decision to rescind all existing operating training at both FAST and MCR is laudable and will

clarify operational procedures.

• The standardization resulting from the shared operational responsibilities at FAST and MCR is

beneficial to the Accelerator Division.

Findings: None

5.6 Accelerator Operations Procedures for IOTA/FAST

IOTA/FAST procedures are in place for the laser and electron beamline as well as LOTO, administrative

procedures, and more. Personnel follow procedure ADDP-FF-0003 “FAST Control Room On-The-Job

Training” to become “qualified operators”. Access into the FAST beamline enclosure is controlled by the



MCR and standard procedures are followed. A commissioning plan for the IOTA/FAST electron injector

has been developed.

Comments:

• Attention should be paid to ensure that development of procedures and training is done in a timely

manner as sub-systems are commissioned.

Findings: None

5.7 Work Planning and Control Related to Accelerator Safety

FAST personnel attend a weekly scheduling meeting. A liaison also reports on FAST at the AD Friday

9:00 operations meeting and then reports back relevant news to FAST personnel. FAST Operations

Experts coordinate accesses with the MCR.

Comments:

• Search and secure of the laser room is performed by personnel at FAST, not the MCR.


• The laser safety program at FAST continues to be excellent.

Findings: None

5.8 Credited Controls (CC)

Shielding of the beamline enclosure was described. The standard Radiation Safety Interlock System is

employed, making use of chipmunks to disable beam quickly if predetermined levels of radiation are

exceeded; the chipmunks are in the process of being installed. Beam permits specify the operating and

ASE limits, while run conditions list the operating modes, operating limits, ASE operating limits, critical

devices and other requirements such as interlocked instrument locations. The IOTA/FAST Electron

Injector enclosure has been assessed for intensities not to exceed 1.96x1017 electrons/hr at energies up to

300 MeV. Accelerator start-up sign-off documents will certify that all necessary shielding is in place prior

to start-up.

Findings:

2. (Pre-start) The planned required radiological postings, the interlock system, and the required

elements of configuration management must be completed.

3. (Pre-start) The beam permit and the running conditions must be drafted and ready for approval.



6 Summary of Findings

6.1 Pre-Start Findings

Review Finding(s)

1. The SAD requires concurrence and the ASE requires approval by the DOE FSO.

2. The planned required radiological postings, the interlock system, and the required elements of

configuration management must be completed.

3. The beam permit and the running conditions must be drafted and ready for approval.

6.2 Post-Start Findings

The committee had no Post-Start Findings.

7 Comments

Reviewer Comments

Attention should be paid to ensure that development of procedures and training is done in a timely manner as

sub-systems are commissioned.

Search and secure of the laser room is performed by personnel at FAST, not the MCR.

8 Noteworthy Practices

Noteworthy Practices

The laser safety program at FAST continues to be excellent.

The decision to rescind all existing operating training at both FAST and MCR is laudable and will clarify

operational procedures.

The standardization of the shared operational responsibilities at FAST and MCR is beneficial to Accelerator

Division.

The upgraded configuration management log is of significant benefit.

9 Charge to the Committee and Committee Responses

1. Are the necessary safety program elements of the Contractor Requirements Document for DOE

O420.2C, Safety of Accelerator Facilities, in place?

a. A Contractor Assurance System that maintains an internal assessment process;

b. A Facility Configuration Management Program that is related to accelerator safety; and

c. Credited controls and appropriate administrative processes related to accelerator safety (e.g.

training, procedures, etc.).



Committee Response: Yes

2. Has the laboratory developed a process for ensuring safe operations?

Committee Response: Yes

3. Are the necessary credited controls, accelerator hardware, beamline controls and monitoring

systems, trained personnel, and administrative processes in place and adequate to support

commissioning of the FAST Injector?

Committee Response: Yes, conditional on completion of the Pre-Start Findings.



10 Appendix A – ARR Schedule



11 Appendix B – CRADs & LOIs

Fermilab Advanced Superconducting Test Accelerator (IOTA/FAST)

Electron Injector

Accelerator Readiness Review Plan

List of CRAD/LOI Documents

1. Plenary Session Topics

1. Welcome, Introductions, Accelerator Readiness Review Process and Plan

J. Anderson Jr.

2. IOTA/FAST Electron Injector Overview

D. Broemmelsiek

3. SA, SAD, & ASE Document Status and Credited Controls

J. Anderson Jr.

4. Tour of IOTA/FAST Facility

2. Required Documentation

1. Safety Assessment Document (SAD)

2. Accelerator Safety Envelope (ASE)

3. Accelerator Safety and the Fermilab Contractor Assurance System (CAS)

4. Safety Configuration Management (SCM)

3. Accelerator Systems

1. Accelerator Operator IOTA/FAST Training and Qualification Program

2. Accelerator Operations Procedures for IOTA/FAST

3. Work Planning and Control Related to Accelerator Safety

4. Credited Controls (CC)



2.0 Required Documentation

2.1 Safety Assessment Document (SAD)

Objective:

Determine if the Fermilab SAD provides an adequate description of facility and an analysis of

hazards associated with facility operation to ensure that operational hazards are understood,

necessary controls are identified and in place, and the requirements for effective and safe operation

are fully understood. Determine whether the SAD provides an acceptable basis for the facility

ASE under planned operational conditions. Determine if the safety analysis process has been

effectively used to identify the needed credited controls.

Criteria:

DOE O 420.2C requires that the SAD:

Identify hazards and associated onsite and offsite impacts to workers, the public, and the

environment from the facility for both normal operation and credible accidents.

Contain sufficient descriptive information and analytical results pertaining to specific

hazards and risks identified during the safety analysis process to provide an understanding

of risks of proposed operations.

Provide detailed descriptions of engineered controls (e.g., interlocks and physical barriers)

and administrative measures (e.g., procedures) put in place to eliminate, control, or mitigate

hazards from operation.

Include or reference a description of facility function, location, and management

organization in addition to details of major facility components and their operation.

Approach

Document Reviews: Review the safety analysis used to support development of the IOTA/FAST

Injector SAD Chapter. Review the facility SAD and reference information to determine if the SAD

fulfills DOE O 420.2C requirements. Determine the adequacy of the review process supporting

SAD approval.

Staff/Management Interviews: Interview selected staff involved in SAD preparation and

approval to review knowledge of accelerator operations and understanding of SAD requirements.

Performance Review: Interview selected staff/management involved in facility management and

operations to assess awareness of SAD requirements.



Criterion 2.1: Safety Assessment Document

Lines of Inquiry, Status and Evidence for Each Criterion

LOI Status/Evidence ARR Reviewer Notes

1. Interview selected

management /staff

involved in SAD

development.

- Determine knowledge of SAD requirements.

Shielding Review Subcommittee

SAD Review Subcommittee

Radiation Safety Subcommittee

2. Determine adequacy

of safety analysis

performed to support

SAD.

- Identify accelerator hazards, potential impacts,

necessary controls, etc.

3. Determine if SAD

meets DOE O 420.2C

requirements.

- Reference DOE G 420.2C information.

4. Determine if SAD

provides adequate

technical basis for

ASE.

- Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory Safety

Assessment Document, Revision 14, August 28, 2017.


of process to review

and approve SAD.

- Type of review, review committee structure, and

approval process


management /staff to

determine knowledge

of SAD requirements.

- Interview those who must operate under SAD

requirements, Control Room Staffing, Beam Permits,

Running Condition, Beam Delivery Authorization, and

ORC Process.


of SAD to support

operations

- Basis for decision



2.2 Accelerator Safety Envelope (ASE)

Objective:

Determine if the ASE provides a high-level safety document that defines the physical and

administrative accelerator bounding conditions and controls to ensure safe operations. Determine

if the ASE provides acceptable documentation of the FSO/Fermilab agreed-upon requirements for

operations.

Criteria:

DOE O 420.2C requires that the ASE:

Identifies controls and operating limits considered essential to safe operations as defined

in the safety analysis referenced in the Fermilab SAD;

Includes operational requirements based upon the safety analysis referenced in the SAD.

Approach

Document Reviews: Review the Fermilab SAD safety analysis to ensure that the ASE reflects the

controls and limits necessary for safe operations. Review the ASE to determine if the ASE includes

facility operational requirements.

Interviews: Interview selected staff/management involved in ASE preparation and approval to

review knowledge of controls, operational requirements, and operating limits.

Performance Review: Interview selected staff/management involved in facility management and

operations to determine understanding of accelerator controls, operational requirements, and

operating limits. Determine if an adequate process exists for updating the ASE to reflect

operational changes.



Criterion 2.2: Accelerator Safety Envelope




management/staff involved in

ASE preparation.

- Review ASE preparation process.

- Determine if process exists to modify ASE

to reflect operational changes.

5. Determine if ASE addresses

required controls and

operating limits.

- Review accelerator controls, operational

requirements, and operating limits.

6. Determine if ASE meets DOE

O 420.2C requirements.

- Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory

SAD, Appendix A, Accelerator Safety

Envelope, Revision 8, August 28, 2017.

Pending FSO Approval.

7. Determine adequacy of process

to review and approve ASE.

- Type of review, committee structure, and

approval process.


management/operational staff.

- Interview those who must operate under

ASE requirements, Control Room Staffing,

Beam Permits, Running Condition, Beam

Delivery Authorization, and ORC Process.

9. Determine adequacy of ASE to

support operations.




2.3 Accelerator Safety and the Fermilab Contractor Assurance System (CAS)

Objective:

Verify that concerning topics directly related to accelerator safety, Fermilab has implemented an

effective CAS program consistent with DOE O 420.2C. Verify that the CAS program effectively

combines DOE and laboratory operational and safety oversight activities into a system that

promotes safe and effective accelerator operation.

Criteria:

Fermilab’s CAS provides a comprehensive internal assessment process to ensure that operational

and safety programs to protect workers, public, and the environment are effectively implemented.

The accelerator operations and safety programs, particularly the credited controls identified in the

ASE, are effectively implemented, managed, and continuously improved.

Approach: Document Review: Review the operational and safety program plans, approval letters,

procedures, assessments, and other related documents.

Staff/Management Interviews: Interview selected operations, safety, and ESH&Q personnel to

assess their management and/or understanding of CAS processes (e.g., procedures,

communications, independent verification) in the performance of their duties.

Performance Review: Review staff/management performance of selected CAS processes (e.g.

procedures, communications, independent verification, etc.) related to Accelerator Safety to

determine program effectiveness.



Criterion 2.3: Accelerator Safety and the Fermilab Contractor Assurance System (CAS)



1. Determine if CAS

provides a

comprehensive internal

assessment process.

FY 2017 Integrated Assessment Schedule

FESHM, FRCM, QA Manuals

FESHCom Subcommittees related to accelerator

safety

Interview selected operations and safety staff

management to assess CAS understanding.

Review previous CAS program assessments and

outcomes.

FermiDash Metrics

HPI Implementation

iTrack

Lessons Learned

ORPS Reporting

2. Determine if the CAS

Program uses external

assessment: employs

peer reviews and

assessments that include

accelerator subject

matter experts from

other accelerator

facilities.

External Tritium Management Assessment

ARR, October 2013

OHSAS 18001 and ISO 14001 implementation

Triennial Assessments

Triennial Rad Protection Program Review

3. Determine CAS

program adequacy to

support operations.




2.4 Safety Configuration Management (SCM)

Objective: Verify that there is a configuration management program that is related to accelerator

safety. Verify that the configuration management of Credited Controls and supporting documented

processes, procedures, and records are consistent with the Accelerator Facility Safety

Implementation Guide for DOE O 420.2C, Safety of Accelerator Facilities.

Criteria:

Determine that there is a documented configuration management processes applied to safety

related administrative and engineered Credited Controls, the management of safety-related

procedures and training, and management of records. Configuration management is applied on a

graded approach to defense-in-depth controls.

Approach

Record Reviews: Review installation drawings, test procedures, interlock change request

documents, interlock approval documents, and records for Credited Controls. Review records and

procedures associated with the maintenance, operations, and function of Credited Controls.

Interviews: Interview Fermilab Accelerator Division Interlock Group Staff and ESH&Q Section

Interlock Liaison regarding the application of configuration management requirements for

Credited Controls.

Performance Demonstrations: Observe the configuration of Credited Controls and compare to

test procedures and system drawings.



Criterion 2.4: Safety Configuration Management



1. Determine if the

configuration of

Credited Controls

are properly

managed during

accelerator operation

and maintenance.

- Interlock system access controls

- Interlock Change Request

- Interlock log book

- Interlock System Bypass procedures

- MCR Hot Item Book

- JULIE Permit System

- FESHM 7030 Excavation restrictions near radiological

areas

- Moveable Shielding Database

- Beam Permits, Run Conditions, and Startup

2. Determine if the

accelerator controls

system is protected

against un-

authorized access.

- MCR and IOTA/FAST console controls

- Procedures and practices

3. Determine if

configuration

management is

applied to defense-in-

depth controls on a

graded approach.

- IOTA/FAST Run Conditions

- Bypass log

- Shift turnover

4. Determine if the

configuration

management

program is adequate

to support

operations.




3.0 Accelerator Systems

3.1 Accelerator Operator IOTA/FAST Training and Qualification Program

Objective:

Determine that Fermilab implements an effective training program consistent with DOE O 420.2C

requirements. Determine that the Fermilab training program effectively combines both contractor

and DOE operational and safety requirements into a single comprehensive site training program

that promotes safe and effective operation.

Criteria:

DOE O 420.2C requires that the site training program provide:

a. a description of the site-wide programs in controlled documents that summarizes the

overall features of the programs;

b. training and qualification for all individuals who work in and around the accelerator facility

to include site safety programs, site hazards, and emergency procedures;

c. specific training and qualification for operations, maintenance, support personnel, and

experimenters to include job-specific procedures and controls; and

d. ongoing monitoring of personnel training program to assess overall effectiveness and

support continuous improvement.

Approach:

Document Review: Review the site-wide training documentation. Review selected training

procedures related to the Fermilab site-wide program. Review selected personnel training and

qualification documentation to assess program effectiveness.

Staff/Management Interviews: Interview the Fermilab training manager on features of the

Fermilab training program. Interview selected administrative and technical personnel regarding

their experience with the training and qualification program.

Performance Review: Attend selected training modules provided for administrative, operations

or experimental staff. Interview selected personnel during training-specific job assignments to

assess training effectiveness.



Criterion 3.1: Accelerator Operations Training and Qualification Program



1. Review Fermilab site

training program

documentation and

procedures.

- Review tailored approach to individual responsibilities

regarding SAD, ASE, USI and routine/emergency

procedures.

2. Interview AD

Operations

Department training

manager regarding

program.

- Discuss the Operations Department training program

- Review Operations Department IOTA/FAST specific

training.

- Operations qualification programs, OP 1, OP2, Crew

Chief, and Operations Specialists.


Fermilab personnel

regarding training.

- Laboratory training programs for accelerator specific

and industrial safety.

- Individual Training Needs Assessment (ITNA)

process.

4. Observe selected job

assignments and

compare with job-

specific training.

- Key logger database verifies training prior to issuing

an enclosure entry key.

- Key logger rules assigned by the AD SSO and AD

Operations RSO.


of training program

to support

operations.




3.2 Accelerator Operations Procedures for IOTA/FAST

Objective:

Determine that Fermilab has an effective accelerator operational procedures program consistent

with DOE and contractor requirements. Determine that

the Fermilab operational procedures program addresses the accelerator operations with safety

significance. Determine that Fermilab procedures are controlled complete with processes for

regular updates and revisions. Determine that procedural updates and revisions are effectively

communicated consistent with the Fermilab configuration management program.

Criteria:

The operational procedures program for operations of safety significance should:

a. provide specific directions to ensure safe operations during routine, non-routine and

emergency situations;

b. provide sufficient detail commensurate with the level of hazard and complexity of

operation;

c. reflect available operational experience written in a format readily usable to operational

staff;

d. incorporate lessons learned from past operations in order to improve the procedure and

identify potential need for other procedures; and

e. require procedures to be controlled documents with specific attention to those procedures

that reflect ASE requirements.

Approach:

Document Review: Review Fermilab procedures program documentation. Review selected

operational procedures with safety significance.

Staff/Management Interviews: Interview Fermilab staff on the Laboratory, Divisional, and

Departmental procedures program. Interview selected Fermilab management/staff on their use of

specific procedures and the mechanisms to contribute to the program.

Performance Review: Attend selected operations/maintenance activities performed under

specific operational procedures. Interview the operations/maintenance staff regarding their

opportunity to modify, update or revise procedures.



Criterion 3.2: Accelerator Operations Procedures



1. Review Fermilab

procedure program

documentation.

- Review process to develop, document, control, update,

and revise Fermilab operational procedures.

2. Interview Fermilab

staff regarding

procedures program.

- Discuss process for procedures management including

managing updates/revisions particularly those

supporting ASE requirements.


management/staff on

their role in the

Fermilab operational

procedure program.

- Discuss with management process of ensuring that

procedure creation, updates and revisions are effectively

communicated.

Discuss with staff process of identifying new procedures

and ability to provide feedback on those procedures.

4. Review selected

operating procedures

controlling approval

for startup, beam

authorization, and

safety significant

controls.

- Discuss use and adequacy of the specific procedure(s)

as well as mechanisms to provide feedback on the

procedure content, any updates, or procedure revisions.

- Beam Permit, Run Conditions, and Accelerator Startup

procedure.

- Response to potential violations of the accelerator

safety envelope procedure.

- Search and Secure Procedures

- Enclosure LOTO Procedures

5. Review AD

Operations

Department

emergency response

documentation and

procedures.

- Review tailored approach to individual responsibilities

regarding routine/emergency procedures.

6. Interview Fermilab

AD Operations

Department staff on

emergency response

procedures.

- Interview the Operations Department and IOTA/FAST

staff on Emergency Response procedures.

- Walk through an emergency response procedure.


Fermilab emergency

response personnel.

- Interview selected emergency response personnel on

response preplanning and Operations Department and

IOTA/FAST group response.


of procedure

program to support

operations.




3.3 Work Controls Program Related to Accelerator Safety

Objective:

Determine that Fermilab has an effective work controls program consistent with both DOE and

contractor requirements. Determine that Fermilab work controls are managed as part of a

controlled system complete with processes for regular update and revision. Determine that work

controls, updates and revisions are effectively communicated as part of the Fermilab configuration

management program.

Criteria:

The Fermilab work control program should include:

a. Pre-approved work plans for proposed work particularly those systems with safety

significance;

b. review of proposed work and management approval before starting work or the return of

equipment to service;

c. work assignments only for qualified and authorized personnel;

d. management validation of work for completeness and functionality;

e. document control of the program, periodic updates and revisions as necessary; and

f. effective communication of information on controlled work scope.

Approach:

Document Review: Review the Fermilab work control program. Review selected work control

procedures on those accelerator systems associated with engineered controls.

Staff/Management Interviews: Interview Fermilab management/staff with responsibility for the

work control program. Interview selected Fermilab operations and maintenance on their

experience with the Fermilab work control program.

Performance Review: Attend selected operations/maintenance activities performed under

specific work controls. Interview operations/maintenance staff regarding the process to update or

revise procedures. Assess process for communicating work status, completion and any

modifications to work controls.



Criterion 3.3: Work Controls Program Related to Accelerator Safety



1. Review Fermilab

work control

program

documentation.

- Review the FESHM chapters addressing work controls

as they pertain to accelerator safety.

FESHM 2060, 7010, 7020

- FESHCom Subcommittees IIP & S3 assigned to

update work control documents.


management/staff on

their role in the work

control program.

- Discuss Accelerator Shutdown Electronic Work List

database, HA Database, Work Permit Database,

Electrical Hazard Analysis Work List database.

- Discuss how IOTA/FAST maintenance activities are

conducted in conjunction with accelerator operations.

- Attend the 9:00 am accelerator operations meetings.

- Discuss accelerator shutdown meetings.

3. Observe selected job

assignments with job-

specific work

controls.

- Discuss use and adequacy of selected work controls

and mechanisms to provide feedback, updates, or

revisions.

- ALARA Plans, Shutdown radiological dose

projections, SRSO approval for high dose work

activities.


of work controls to

support operations.




3.4 Credited Controls (CC)

Objective:

Verify that the Credited Controls identified in the Accelerator Safety Envelope (ASE), necessary

for the respective operations phase or operations, are effectively in place (installed, operational,

managed, etc.). Verify that defense-in-depth controls are managed in a similar manner but using a

graded approach. Verify that the configuration of Credited Controls, their system interfaces, and

the supporting processes, procedures, and records are managed consistent with the Accelerator

Facility Safety Implementation Guide for DOE O 420.2C, Safety of Accelerator Facilities.

Criteria:

Credited Controls identified in the Accelerator Safety Envelope (ASE), necessary for IOTA/FAST

Injector operations are effectively in place (installed, operational, managed, etc.). The

configuration of the Credited Controls and any related procedures, processes, training, records,

etc. are managed. Configuration Management is applied to Credited Controls and defense-in-depth

controls on a graded approach.

Approach: Record Reviews: Review installation records, test procedures, operations records for Credited

Controls where applicable. Review records and procedures associated with the maintenance,

operations, and function of Credited Controls.

Interviews: Interview Fermilab AD Interlock Group, AD Radiation Protection Group, and AD

Operations Department staff regarding the installation, maintenance, and operation of

configuration management of Credited Controls.

Performance Demonstrations: Physically observe Credited Controls installed in the workplace.

Where possible, observe the function/actuation (or the result of actuation) of Credited Controls.



Criteria 3.4: Credited Controls (CC)

Lines of Inquiry, Status/Evidence and ARR Notes


1. Verify that Credited Passive,

Active, and Administrative

Controls in the ASE are installed

and operational.

Observation of Credited Controls

installed for IOTA/FAST Injector

operations

Observation of function/actuation of

selected Credited Controls

Review Interlock System test records

2. Verify that Credited Passive,

Active, and Administrative

Controls in the ASE are properly

managed.

Observe Accelerator Operators and

IOTA/FAST staff interaction with Safety

System (actuate and verify)

Discuss how off-normal conditions are

managed

Review Interlock System test records

Discuss operations interaction with the

RSO and Interlock Group

3. Verify that defense-in-depth

controls also have Configuration

Management applied on a graded

approach.

- Review Run Conditions to identify safety

significant systems

4. Determine adequacy of Credited

Controls to support operations.
