“The views, opinions and findings contained in this report are those of the authors(s) and should not be construed as an official Department of the Army position, policy or decision, unless so designated by other official documentation.”

ESPC SAFETY

Dawn DouglasSafety Energy Manager

2

Purpose: Safety should be embedded into the contract process from beginning to end. During today’s session we will discuss using the DF system, lessons learned and changes in USACE mishap reporting.

Why:

Carefully reviewing AHA allow Safety to ensure the correct hazard controls and mitigations are embedded in the job steps associated with the DFOW. As we review these lessons learned we will begin to understand the importance of two leading indicators, inspections and observations. Leading indicators show potential gaps in what is written on paper for the submittal and what is actually taking place in the field during the safety inspection and/or observation. Closing the gap will reduce preventable accidents and injuries.

Remember: Safety is an a vital part of the PDT and working with safety to ensure submittals accurately reflect the job tasks is essential.

Feedback: If you have recommendations or ideas on how to improve safety within our PDT please contact, dawn.j.douglas@usace.army.mil

3HNC WORK REQUEST SYSTEM

BLUF:Submittals should be entered and assigned to “Douglas, Dawn.” An email notification will alert me of the request. Request will be processed within 3 days. Save submittal response(s) for CPARS.

4ROUTING SUBMITTALS

For ESPC reviews suggested POC “Douglas, Dawn”

If submittal has more than one review i.e. Engineering and Safety, use add.

5

“The lack of mishaps is not an indication of a good safety program or safe workplace”

Two Leading Indicators of a Good Safety Program Inspections As inspections increase, mishaps go down The probability of having a mishap decreases as the number & diversity of people performing

inspections increase Observations Too many safety inspections are predictive of higher injury rate Too many at-risk observations are predictive of higher injury rates

WHAT GOOD LOOKS LIKE: MAKING A CASE FOR LEADING INDICATORS

Inspections confirm that safety controls are being utilized in the field. They determine the effectiveness of the training & implementation

of the requirements

6LAGGING VS LEADING

PROACTIVEAPP/AHA

REACTIVEMISHAPS

7

LEADING INDICATORS*

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5

01.A.07 Bulletin Board

01.A.13 Inspections

01.A.12 APP – current, accepted & onsite

01.A.14 AHA

01.A.17 SSHO

01.B Indoctrination & Training

EM 385-1-1 not onsite

01.A.12 Deficiency Log

01.B.05 Safety Meetings

01.D Mishap Reporting Procedures

01.E Emergency Planning

06.B.01 HAZCOM

16 LHE

21.D Fall Protection Program

HNC SO Inspections of 4 ESPC Sites

8

9

MISHAP DISCUSSIONACTIVITY: Installing metal plates on bldg. Tool used to prepare metal sections malfunctioned. Ironworker had

To prepare the metal piece in laydown area & walk it over to scaffolding. Metal strips were cumbersomebut not heavy.

MISHAP: Worker was electrocuted when boom lift, he was in got too close to overhead power line.

Power line

Laydown area

FINDINGS: Laydown area under energized power linesNo documentation that victim was trained in JLG operationsUtilized “spotter” in previous JLF ops under power linesJLG was new on arrival & was inspected. Function test afteraccident – JLG performed perfectlyAHA didn’t have method to control exposure to power linesJLC wasn’t needed for task & was raised higher than necessary

10

ACTIVITY: HVAC Tech performing PM- changing a belt onAn AHU.

MISHAP: Hand slipped & was caught between the belt& pulley, causing lacerations to several fingers

Worker was pulling the belt with is hands to get it to “roll” ontothe sheave, the momentum of the belt forced worker’s handsbetween the belt & pulley – causing laceration.

AHA and Manufacturer’s instructions require the motor bolts to be loosened to ease the tension on thebelt.

Recurring mishap – each time workers stated it was commonpractice to “roll” the belt

Findings from several HNC investigations: Rolling the belt is general industry practice

MISHAP DISCUSSION

FINDINGS:

11

ACTIVITY: Electric shock. Employee was in the vicinity of energized conductors while working onDe-energized section of 12,470 volt gear in a substation. DroppedA lug & went to lower level to retrieve. Lower unit was not de-energized& bumped head on hot bus

MISHAP: Electric shock– Worker severely injured with burns toRight side of back and head

.

EM 385-1-1 Work AROUND energized equipment

MISHAP DISCUSSION

1 .Location of original employee work

3 .Wire lugs dropped from top and fell to bottom of equipment

4 .Location where employee was injuried after removing the panel and entering the equipment

No SSHO onsite during work (AHA) No equipment specific training for

Electrician (AHA) AHA not adequate Electrical safety equipment not in

the vicinity Working around energized equipment

FINDINGS:

12

Ladder MishapACTIVITY: Contractor on a 8 ft ladder installing conduit. The ladder buckled and a leg collapsed causing the worker to fall to the ground.

MISHAP: Worker bruised his right shoulder and right knee.

FINDINGS: Worker used a ladder that did not belong to him. Stickers were not legible (AHA) Ladder was not inspected prior to use (AHA) Train workers in ladder use & inspection (AHA)

MISHAP DISCUSSION

13

SUMMARY

IncidentLEADING INDICATORS LAGGING INDICATORS

Training, APP, AHA, InspectionsMeetings, Near Miss Reports,

Implementation of requirements

Recordable Injuries, AccidentRate, EMR

Safety seeks to be proactive and preventative!

14

SHAREPOINT

15

15

https://team.usace.army.mil/sites/HNC/safety/

Safety Spot Check Form

16

16

https://team.usace.army.mil/sites/HNC/safety/

Safety Spot Check – Wallet Card

17

NEW APPROACH

Inspection ReportsInput onto Share PointSent to PM, CT & other PDT membersTrending of leading indicators by contractor&/or contractorRepository for all actions with actions taken and can validate CPARS

Performance Indicators

Based on leading indicators Predication Prevention

InspectionsSafety Office InspectionsPDT Spot ChecksLeadership involvementPartner with Contractor Corp Safety Mtg Discuss expectations Coach, Teach, Mentor

18

END STATE 18

1

1

1

1

2

3

3

3

4

4

4

6

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

01.E.06 -COMMUNICATIONS

11.B.01 - ARC FLASH

24.B.01 - LADDERS

05.G.03 - RESP PROT. PLAN

05.01.B - EYE PROTECTION

01.A.07 - BULLETIN BOARD

01.A.13 - INSPECTIONS

03.B - FA KITS

01.A.12 - APP TO SUBS

01.A.15 - AHA FOR TASKS

12.B - HECP

01.B - INDOC TRAINING

Deficiencies*

*Results of 7 site assessments

19

Purpose: What if there is a mishap at one of my ESPC project sites? Would you know what to do? A brief overview of initial notification, reporting, investigation, preparation and submission of reports of U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) accidents will help lead you in the right direction.

Why:

It is our policy to investigate and report USACE accidents in order toprevent recurrences and to comply with OSHA, Department of Defense (DoD), Army and other regulatory requirements. All USACE accidents shall be reported (to include immediate notification), investigated, recorded and analyzed in accordance with the requirements of this regulation, 29 CFR 1960, DoDI 6055.7, AR 385-10, DA Pamphlet 385-40 and EM 385-1-1.

Remember: We all need to work together to ensure our mishaps are reported on time with clear descriptions and pictures when possible.

Feedback: If you have recommendations or ideas on how to improve mishap reporting with our PDT please contact, dawn.j.douglas@usace.army.mil

20GOVERNING REGULATIONS

DA PAM 385-40 – Army Accident Investigations & Reporting

ER 385-1-99 – Accident Investigation & Reporting

EM 385-1-1 – Safety and Health Requirements

AR 385-10 – The Army Safety Program

DoDI 6055.7 – Accident Investigation, Reporting, & Recordkeeping

21

Mishaps are the result of adverse interactions of man, machine and environment.

A mishap is rarely the result of a single mistake or failure, rather a series of active and latent failures

aligning in such a way as to result in a mishap.

22

Determine the facts and circumstances pertaining to the mishap in order to identify and describe the active (What happened) and latent (Why it happened) failures (causes) of the mishap.

PURPOSE OF INVESTIGATION

The investigator who identifies the failures and describes how each caused or contributed to the mishap is poised to develop realistic, actionable recommendations to prevent or reduce the probability of the mishap occurring again (What to do about it).

The techniques in this pamphlet are structured in such a way as to facilitate the identification of “What” happened, the description of “Why” it happened, and development of “What” to do about it.

23

A USACE accident is defined as an unplanned event, or series of events, which results in one or more of the following:

USACE ACCIDENT

OCCUPATIONAL ILLNESS TO USACE MILITARY OR CIVILIAN

PERSONNEL

INJURY TO ON-DUTY USACE CIVILIAN PERSONNEL

INJURY TO USACE MILITARY PERSONNEL ON OR OFF-DUTY

INJURY TO VOLUNTEERS DAMAGE TO USACE PROPERTY DAMAGE TO PUBLIC OR PRIVATE PROPERTY OR INJURY TO PUBLIC

INJURY OR OH ILLNESS TO ON-DUTY CONTRACTOR EMPLOYEES

SUPERVISED BY USACE PERSONNEL

INJURY / OH TO ON-DUTY CONTRACTORS + WHERE REPORTING TO USACE IS

CONTRACTUALLY REQUIRED.

INJURY OR DEATH TO MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WHO ARE

RECREATING AT USACE-OWNED / OPERATED AREAS

24ACCIDENT TYPES

RECORDABLE ACCIDENT Reportable accident that meets the minimum criteria stated in the regulation for aviation and ground Class A through D accidents.

REPORTABLE ACCIDENT All occurrences that cause injury, occupational illness, or property damage of any kind must be reported to the Soldier’s/employees/unit’s servicing/supporting SOH office.

TAKEAWAY: All accidents are reportable, but not all accidents are recordable.

25ACCIDENT CLASSIFICATIONCLASS DEFINITION – AN ARMY ACCIDENT IN WHICH:

A1) The total cost of property damage of $2,500,000 or more; 2) An Army aircraft is destroyed, missing or abandoned; 3) An injury and/or occupational illness results in a fatality or permanent total disability.

B1) The total cost of property damage of $600,000 or more, but less than $2,500,000; 2) An injury and/or occupational illness that results in permanent partial disability; or3) When 3 or more personnel are hospitalized as inpatients as the result of a single occurrence.

C1) The resulting total cost of property damage is $60,000 or more but less than $600,000; 2) A nonfatal injury or occupational illness that causes 1 or more days away from work or training beyond the day or shift on

which it occurred; or 3) Disability at any time (that does not meet the definition of Class A or Class B and is a day(s)-away-from-work case).

D

1) The resulting total cost of property damage is $25,000 or more but less than $60,000; 2) A nonfatal injury or illness results in restricted work, transfer to another job, medical treatment greater than first aid, needle stick

injuries, and cuts from sharps that are contaminated from another person’s blood or other potentially infectious material, medical removal under medical surveillance requirements of an OSHA standard, occupational hearing loss; or

3) A work-related tuberculosis case.

E Total cost of property damage is $5,000 or more but less than $25,000.

FAviation Only

1) The resulting total cost of property damage is $5,000 or more but less than $20,000. 2) Recordable incidents are confined to aircraft turbine engine damage because of unavoidable internal or external foreign

object damage, where that is the only damage (does not include installed aircraft auxiliary power units).

Recordable Public Fatality

Results in the death of one or more members of the public who are recreating at USACE-owned or operated areas where CFR Title 36, Chapter III, Part 327, "Parks, Forests, and Public Property" is applicable. These accidents are recordable and require a Accident Notification and an accident investigation report.

SIB

SIB

26WHAT TO REPORT & INVESTIGATE

27

Purpose: Discuss new ENG FORM 3394, AUG 2021 form and change in reporting incidents.

Why:

Incident reporting methods differed across USACE and different forms were used in the reporting process. To modernize and standardize USACE process for mishap reporting the ER/EP 385-1-1-99 were updated; the ENG Form 3394 is the sole form used for mishap reporting for all incidents from near misses to recordable, and all audiences, both USAC employees and Contractors.

Remember: A simpler process to report mishaps help increase efficiencies and develop better products for trend analysis.

Feedback: If you have recommendations or ideas on how to improve mishap reporting with our PDT please contact, dawn.j.douglas@usace.army.mil

28

Go to https://www.publications.usace.army.mil/USACE-Publications/Engineer-Forms/u43543q/33333934/ and download the New ENG 3394 Form now.

NEW 3394 REVIEW

29NEW 3394 REVIEW

The form is broken into the following sections:

WHO Who is reporting the mishap?Who was involved in the mishap?

WhatWhat type of injury / illness occurred?What happened?What type of property / material was involved?

When When did the mishap occur?

Where Where did the mishap occur?

Why Why did the mishap occur?

30

Used to report all accidentsand near misses

Used for Civilians and Contractors

Only signature on form isfor person reporting accident

31

Used for initial notification & final report

32

No instructions on form –utilize dropdowns

Several items are forUSACE employees only

33