An Integrating Tool For ISM Automated Job Hazards Analysis DOE – ISM Champions Conference Aurora, Colorado September 11 – 12, 2006 Tony Umek Vice President,

An Integrating Tool For ISM

Automated Job Hazards Analysis

DOE – ISM Champions ConferenceAurora, Colorado

September 11 – 12, 2006

Tony UmekVice President, Safety & Health

Fluor Hanford, Inc.

2Automated Job Hazard AnalysisAJHA

Development History

Fluor’s Vision – Create a Tool People Can Use Implements the Core Functions of ISM

Consistently Applied at the “Activity Level” Hazard Controls Integrated into Work Steps Uses Feedback to Get Continuous Improvement

Based on Recognized Standards & Best Practices Single Integrated Approach, Automated to Improve

Consistency Received 2003 VPP Innovation Award


Complex Wide WeaknessesAddressed by AJHA

Unsystematic Hazard Analysis Workers Not Always Involved Subject Matter Experts Not Always Involved Little Coordination Between SMEs Identification of Controls Hit and Miss Controls Not Always Added to Work Steps JHA Records Inconsistent Little Evidence of Feedback & Improvement


AJHA As An Integrating Process/Tool

Early and Continued Worker Involvement Integrates ESH&Q and Work Management – Work

Planning Teams Integrates Hazard Identification, Analysis, and Control

with Work Management Integrates Requirements – In a Graded Approach AJHA Output – Included in Work Package Execution AJHA Post-Job Review – Documents “Feedback”


Automated Job Hazard Analysis

Automated Job Hazard AnalysisAJHA


Define the Scope of Work (Task Information)

Identify and Analyze Hazards (Identify Hazards)

Select Controls (Select Controls)

Perform Work to Controls (Reports and Permits)

Feedback / Continuous Improvement (Feedback Database)

Web Based Hazard Analysis

ISM Core Function AJHA Screen

Innovation Award

2003


The job title and detailed description are entered at the ‘Task Information’ screen.

The Job is also broken down into logical tasks, or phases. The tasks will be important later in the hazard analysis process so the hazard mitigating controls can be applied where they are meaningful.

The status of the hazard analysis is automatically displayed at the bottom of the information screen.

Automated Job Hazard Analysis (AJHA)

Define the Scope


HASP

OSHA

DSA

Work Requestfor

One JobAJHA

SafetyProcedures

DOEOrders

Perform the Work to Controls

Work InstructionsPermits


The main hazards associated with each task are selected by clicking on OPEN. If OPEN is selected, additional and more specific questions may be answered.

If the main hazard does not apply for this job, just click N/A. In that case, the more specific questions in that hazard class do not need to be checked.

AJHA Hazard Identification


YES


Hazard Tree questions are written with

“LEVELS” of detail.

Each job is evaluated during a ”walk-down” of the jobsite to identify possible hazards. Hazard statements are arranged in the AJHA with levels of detail.

When there isis a potential for a type of hazard to exist, the user can open the “hazard topic” and display more specific hazard questions for that hazard topic.

When selected, these more specific hazard statements will trigger controls tailored uniquely for characteristics of that condition.

Identify Potential Job Hazards


The red shadow always reminds you where you are in the

JHA process.


Each hazard question is supported with a “Mini Help” text box.

This information further defines the hazard. It helps the user understand the context of the hazard as it was intended by OSHA and their company.

Hazard Mini Help Information



Comments can be added to identify the specific characteristics of the hazards for a particular job task.

The comments are displayed on the data entry screen right under the hazard question, and the comment button is highlighted.

These comments are also included in the hard copy reports.

Specific Hazard Information


The user can add comments to specify details about each

hazard for that job.


Detailed “Help” screens are available for each hazard question. Click on the “Help” button next to the hazard question. Detailed requirements, definitions, explanatory information, guidance on Hazard Controls, and Facility Specific Information will be displayed for that hazard.

Links to relevant Web sites like OSHA or your company procedures can also be added to the help screens.


Detailed Help Information On-LineJust click on “Help” to display useful information about the

hazard topic.


• Craft Representatives

• Industria

l Hygienist

• Facility Waste Coordinator

• Electrical Safety

• Industria

l Safety

• Environmental Compliance

Officer

Expert Involvement Online


Job hazards can be analyzed in planning meetings where the subject matter experts (SMEs), planners, craft, and managers collaborate on the job details while AJHA is online and displayed during the meeting.

SME reviews and approval authorities can be triggered as required by the hazards that apply.

Tables in AJHA list the Qualified SMEs for each facility by their area of expertise. Assigning individuals to perform the reviews and capturing the results of their involvement is done online. Other JHA participants are also entered from the keyboard.


Each control is designated by its intended use (i.e., work controls, PPE, subject matter expert analysis, or administrative actions such as notifications).

This way the controls are added to appropriate sections of the hard copy report. This makes it easy to give workers the “work controls” and let managers handle administrative actions like training and notifications.

Controls are added to sections in the final report according to their intended purpose (Training, Staffing, Notifications, Prerequisites, Special

Analysis, Worker Controls, and PPE).

The Right Controls for the Right People



Includes Hazard Questions

Lists the Participants

Associated Controls for Each Hazard

Printed Reports


AJHA provides a variety of convenient hard copy outputs for inclusion in work package records.


Benefits

Integrates ISMS and “VPP Principles” Reduces Opportunity for Unexpected Hazards/Surprises Reduces Risk of Personal Injury Creates Participant “Ownership” Improves Communications Minimizes Potential for Work Stoppage and Delays Decreases Cycle Time – Increases Productivity Provides Consistency in the Hazards Analysis Process


Results – OSHA Recordable Case Rates

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

Fluor Hanford OSHA Recordable Case Rate(Cases per 200,000 hours)

Before Fluor Hanford = 5.3Calendar Year 2005 = 0.85

An 84% Reduction


Results – FH Occurrence Reports

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Oct-

99

De

c-9

9

Feb-0

0

Ap

r-00

Jun

-00

Au

g-0

0

Oct-

00

De

c-0

0

Feb-0

1

Ap

r-01

Jun

-01

Au

g-0

1

Oct-

01

De

c-0

1

Feb-0

2

Ap

r-02

Jun

-02

Au

g-0

2

Oct-

02

De

c-0

2

Feb-0

3

Ap

r-03

Jun

-03

Au

g-0

3

Oct-

03

De

c-0

3

Feb-0

4

Ap

r-04

Jun

-04

Au

g-0

4

Oct-

04

De

c-0

4

Feb-0

5

Ap

r-05

Jun

-05

Au

g-0

5

Oct-

05

De

c-0

5

Feb-0

6

Ap

r-06

Jun

-06

Month (based upon Categorization Date)

Nu

mb

er

of

Occu

rren

ce R

ep

ort

s p

er

Mo

nth

ORPS Redesign November 2003

Avg = 17(Oct 99 - Oct 01)

Avg = 10(Nov 03 - Jul 04)


Results – Personnel Contamination Events

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

Month (based upon Categorization Date)Nu

mb

er o

f P

erso

nn

el C

on

tam

inat

ion

Occ

urr

en

ce

Rep

ort

s p

er M

on

th

Avg = 4.0(Jul 95 - Jan 97)

Avg = 2.6(Feb 97 - Oct 98)

Avg = 1.5(Nov 98 - Sep 99)

Avg = 2.5(Jun 01 - Dec 02)

Avg = 0.4(Sep 04 - Apr 05)

UCL

RL-PHMC Occurrence Reports for Personnel Contamination


0

5

10

15

20

25

Oct-

99

Jan-0

0

Apr-

00

Jul-00

Oct-

00

Jan-0

1

Apr-

01

Jul-01

Oct-

01

Jan-0

2

Apr-

02

Jul-02

Oct-

02

Jan-0

3

Apr-

03

Jul-03

Oct-

03

Jan-0

4

Apr-

04

Jul-04

Oct-

04

Jan-0

5

Apr-

05

Jul-05

Oct-

05

Jan-0

6

Apr-

06

Jul-06

Nu

mb

er

of

Safe

ty R

ela

ted

Co

ncern

s S

ub

mit

ted DOE Cases

FH + Subs Cases

UCL for Total Number of Reports

Total number of concerns raised.

Average Total Reports = 2.6

(Jan 00 - Aug 00)


(Oct 00 - Jan 02)

Avg Total Reports = 6.7

(Oct 96 - Feb 98)


(Nov 03 - Aug 04)

Note: In June 2005, 4 workers submitted the same four concerns to DOE. This was counted as one report, and four concerns, rather than 4 reports and 16 concerns.


(Oct 04 - Sep 05) Average Total

Reports = 1.7

(Nov 05 - Apr 06)

Results – Employee Safety Concerns

Number of Safety Related Employee Concerns Reported to DOE, FH and Sub Contractors


FH’s AJHA Process Available

For DOE and Contractors Miles Jaeger (509) 372-3576 or (509) 376-2257 [email protected]

For Non-DOE Companies Fluor Corporate Entity “Work Safe” website -

www.ajhaweb.net Mark Hermanson (509) 430-8820 or (509) 947-3686 [email protected]


QuestionsQuestions??