1993-Fall-CURRENT PROJECTS
Cleanup Worker Safety and Health During environmental Restoration
and Waste Management Activities
Program activities continue under EH-30's Environmental Restoration and Waste
Management (ERWM) Baseline Program. As part of the technical assistance
effort, EH-30 continued supporting EM's Office of Facility Transition and
Management (EM-60) in the planning of the deactivation of Hanford's Plutonium
Recovery and Extraction (PUREX) and Uranium Trioxide (UO3) Plants. EH-30
assisted EH-60 in the development of the worker safety strategy as an integral
part of the overall safety strategy for the deactivation process. EM-60 plans
to deactivate the PUREX and UO3 Plants in 3 years.
Visits to Cleanup Sites
Fernald
The team visited the Fernald Environmental Management Project on June 28
and 29, 1993, to observe ongoing cleanup activities and discuss the worker
safety and health programs at the site. Both EH and EM staff participated in
the team visit and were also part of the D&D lessons learned effort. The team
reviewed the evolution and development of the Fernald Environmental
Restoration and Waste Management Corporation's (FERMCO) contracting, planning,
budgeting, training, and requirements identification, including their current
needs and lessons learned.
Among the points of interest during the observation visit was a FERMCO
software package that documents and encodes individual training on worker
badges. This information, along with area access information, screens
individuals from entering radiological and other hazardous areas if they do
not have the required training and qualifications. Other points of interest
are identified in the team's trip report.
EH and FERMCO recognize that most DOE Orders apply primarily to
operational activities and that clear guidance and assistance will be needed
from EM and EH to establish and interpret guidelines for deactivation,
decommissioning, and remediation activities.
Three Mile Island (TMI)
On July 13, 1993, EH-30 sponsored a visit to the Three Mile Island (TMI)
Nuclear Power Plant in Harrisburg, PA, to gain lessons learned from the safety
program instituted by GPU Nuclear Corporation after the severe accident
occurred at the TMI Unit 2 Plant on March 28, 1979. The safety program was
instituted to protect workers from both radiological and nonradiological
hazards. Staff from both the Office of Environment, Safety and Health and the
Office of Environmental Restoration and Waste Management (EM) participated in
the site visits as part of the effort to learn more about decontamination and
decommissioning (D&D) activities.
Following the accident, GPU was faced with failed fuel, difficult access
to confined spaces, nearly a million gallons of radioactive water, and limited
cleanup experience. The cleanup workforce peaked at more than 1,000 and has
expended over 8 million worker hours in the 14 years since the accident.
GPU's worker safety program has resulted in no fatalities or serious injuries
in that time. The success of the worker protection program is shown by the
OSHA reportable lost-time accident rate as being only about 20 percent of the
national average for facility dismantlement workers.
The DOE team observed many notable practices at TMI and found that
several aspects of the GPU safety and health program may be compatible with
DOE efforts. The team recommended that DOE review for applicability GPU's
heat stress mitigation program. This program involves robotic devices to
perform hazardous cleanup work, personnel cooling techniques to alleviate heat
stress, an "as-low-as-reasonably-achievable" (ALARA) engineering group to
support cleanup, and specific procedures including lockout/tagout, confined
space entry, heat stress, and scaffolding.
GPU also adapted the E.I. Du Pont Corporation's "Du Pont Stop" program
to ensure that worker safety remained at the forefront of cleanup operations.
The "Du Pont Stop" program involves the issuance of tickets for safety
violations to workers who commit safety violations, as well as to their
management. The team recommended that DOE also contact the E.I. Du Pont
Corporation for information on the program and how it may be adapted for use
by DOE sites. In addition, the team recommended that DOE review its lost-time
accident and injury data to determine whether segregating data by job
classification would make problem areas more readily identifiable.
For more information on the teams' visits or for a copy of the trip
reports, contact Tony Eng (EH-33.1) at (301) 903-4210.
Outreach Meetings Continue
The series of outreach meetings with organizations from outside the DOE
community continues. The meetings, sponsored by EH-30, are designed to enable
DOE to take advantage of the experiences of other government and industry
cleanup activities. Three outreach meetings were held in June 1993, and an
additional session took place in July.
In the first meeting, joint EPA/Labor Superfund Task Force discussed
lessons learned in the areas of worker safety and health during Superfund site
cleanup. The need for good medical recordkeeping on hazardous waste workers
was among the specific topics aired.
DOE hosted the Army Corps of Engineers in the second meeting. The major
thrust of the gathering involved the importance of integrating OSH principles
into all Corps activities. Safety and health expert involvement in all phases
of project planning and execution was seen as essential.
In the final June meeting, Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff
discussed radiological criteria for D&D of nuclear facilities. The primary
topic of discussion was NRC's precedent-setting rulemaking regarding
decommissioning of its facilities. NRC is working with EPA which has agreed
to produce a broad rulemaking for a broad D&D standard that would apply to DOE
sites.
The July outreach meeting hosted three participants in recent D&D
endeavors at nuclear facilities: Three Mile Island-2 Recovery Program, the
United Nuclear Company Naval Products Plant, and the Berkeley Research
Reactor. Each D&D action faced a special set of challenges and concerns, and
yielded valuable information which may be applied to DOE D&D activities.
Worker and public safety were major concerns at each site.
The series continues with additional outreach meetings to be held each
month, beginning in September 1993. Additional information on these meetings
can be obtained from Tony Eng (EH-33-2) at (301) 903-4210.
National Conference On Ergonomics, Safety, and Health In Construction
by Don W. Barksdale
Overview
The National Conference on Ergonomics, Safety, and Health in Construction was
held July 18-22, 1993, in Washington, DC. It was the first conference of its
kind to bring together unions, employers, government, public health advocates,
construction owners, and insurance experts specifically to address issues
relevant to construction safety and health. Cosponsors of the Conference were
NIOSH; OSHA; DOE, which is the largest construction employer in the U.S.; the
American Federation of Labor-Congress of Industrial organizations (AFL-CIO);
and the Union Labor Life Insurance Company. The Conference provided a forum
for more than 800 representatives from all sectors of the construction
industry across North America and Europe. Participants expressed a diversity
of viewpoints, but shared common concerns.
o The issue of construction safety is significant.
Knut Ringen, Director, Center to Protect Workers' Rights, indicated that
eight workers are killed and 4,000 are hurt on the job every day in the
U.S. construction industry alone.
According to Irvin Etter, Executive Vice-President and Chief Operating
Officer for NSC, construction was tied with the service industry in
having the most fatalities in 1992, and government had the greatest
impact on construction. He added that the costs for accidents and
fatalities in the U.S. were $8.7 billion in 1992.
John Moran, Director of OSH for the Laborers' Health and Safety Fund of
North America, stated that "construction is the most hazardous industry
in the country." He said that while 5 percent of the workforce in the
U.S. is in construction, construction accounts for 20 percent of on-the-
job deaths. He added that one in seven construction workers will be
injured this year, and one in 14 will be injured severely enough to be
out of work for 22 days. According to Mr. Moran, the average age of
death for construction workers in the U.S. is 10 years younger than the
general population.
o Construction safety and health can be improved with proper
measures.
Riley Bechtel, President and Chief Executive Officer of Bechtel Group,
Inc., said all accidents are preventable and revealed that Bechtel has
adopted a "zero-accidents" philosophy. He noted that 83 percent of
Bechtel projects experience no accidents, but "that is not enough." He
suggested the construction industry would benefit from the following
actions:
o Streamline the process by which safety and health standards
are set.
o Set up partnerships involving management, labor, and OSHA.
Promote safety and health by rewarding safe work.
According to John Moran, the safety culture in the U.S. would be
improved by better training, elimination of superficial target slogans and
quotas, development of work groups that allow workers to participate, and
holding management responsible for safety and health. Further, he called for
putting "real teeth" in regulations, appropriating sufficient resources for
regulatory agencies, requiring safety and health management plans for
construction owners, and establishing a national uniform standard for
construction statistics.
James P. Huckaby, Director, Worker's Health and Safety Division, Texas
Workers' Compensation Commission, described how Texas has reversed a $550
million deficit in the state's workers' compensation program to a $330 million
payback since passage of a 1989 reform bill. The aggressive, multifaceted
program overhaul included identification of "extra-hazardous" industries,
inspections, consultations, and audits of service provided by insurance
companies approved to offer workers' compensation insurance in Texas.
Providing the "owner's viewpoint" on the issue of enforcement
strategies, James Conery, Safety Administrator from Boeing Corporation, said
communication is the key to an effective safety and health program. He
explained that good management should insist on the following:
o Contractor safety program--a preparatory meeting before each major
phase of the work.
o Job safety program--site-specific analysis.
o Safety networking--sharing good ideas among labor, contractors,
subcontractors, and owners.
o Safety statistics--if statistics indicate issues need attention,
take action. This allows "managing by fact, not opinion."
Communication is critical, according to Wayne Rice, Vice President and
Manager of Safety Services, Bechtel Construction Company. He said special
hazards need to be identified and formally addressed and joint labor-
management committees need to work together. "Labor can't do it alone," he
said. "Neither can contractors, owners, or OSHA."
DOE's New Vision
Thomas P. Grumbly, Assistant Secretary for Environmental Restoration and
Waste Management (EM-1), described "DOE's New Vision" for safety and health.
He reiterated that DOE is the largest construction employer in the U.S. and is
about to become the largest in the world. He also said DOE's agenda in the
coming decades is the greatest set of construction projects the nation has
ever experienced.
Regarding DOE's involvement in construction now and in the future, Mr.
Grumbly said, "DOE has no higher priority than worker safety." He added that
DOE intends to serve as a model for the construction industry and will achieve
that status by working with unions and all the other interest involved. While
in the past, DOE was isolated from the safety and health mainstream, said Mr.
Grumbly, now it is open. He said DOE wants to be treated like any other
employer and welcomes OSHA oversight when it comes.
Mr. Grumbly listed three major worker safety issues within DOE:
o Senior management is not giving worker safety all the attention it
needs.
o The Environmental Management Program does not have all the
resources it requires, especially quality managers.
o DOE must instill in contractors a sense of safety and health in
the workplace from the top down.
Workshops
The Conference held 15 workshops on such diverse topics as Shoring and
Trenching; Slips, Trips, and Falls; Solvents and Other Chemicals: Lead and
Other Metals; Dusts; Noise and Vibration; Lifting; Managing Site Safety and
Health; and The Role of Workers' Compensation in Prevention. Two special
sessions were held on Workers' Compensation and Research Needs.
Summary
Certain predominant messages ran throughout the Conference. Among them
were the following:
o Accident and illness rates among construction workers are
disproportionately high.
o Construction safety has not received the attention it requires.
o Accidents are preventable.
o Any effective approach to improving construction safety must
involve government regulators, owners, contractors, unions,
workers, and others who are affected, as well as personnel at all
levels.
o Communication involving everyone is essential.
ES&H TIS: Information At Your Fingertips
The Office of Environment, Safety and Health will introduce its new ES&H
Technical Information Services (ES&H TIS) at DOE's Second Annual Occupational
Safety Conference in Chicago, IL, on October 5, 1993 (see Conference article
on page 32). An initial release of ES&H TIS will undergo testing by attendees
at the workshop. The new information system is an easy to use state-of-the-
art computer system designed to assist ES&H professionals in making accurate,
job-specific decisions by providing up-to-date information and comprehensive
resources. The system will revolutionize the way DOE accesses information
systems by connecting users to an intelligent network of integrated databases
located at multiple sites using a graphical interface. Access to the system
will be through modem or Internet. Some of the features of the ES&H TIS
follow:
o Windows that allow users to do multiple tasks at one time (through
Microsoft Windows or Macintosh operating systems).
o Graphic icons that make it easy to select functions.
o Access to multiple databases that can be searched with a single
query.
o Ability to operate on IBM PC of Apple Macintosh platforms.
Why ES&H TIS?
In November 1978, the Safety Performance Measurement System (SPMS) was
initiated. A self-assessment performed in 1991 indicated that users felt SPMS
was difficult to use, information was not always timely, and additional
technical information was needed. ES&H TIS is being developed to replace SPMS
and will use the latest technology and software, which allows it to answer the
needs for ease of use and timely, reliable information. ES&H TIS will be
implemented in a modular fashion over the next 2 years. However, until ES&H
TIS is fully on line, SPMS will remain in use; and users will be able to
access both systems. As ES&H TIS functions come on line, the matching
functions in SPMS will be deactivated. [Note: ES&H TIS will have no impact
on the Occurrence Reporting and Processing System (ORPS).]
What Can ES&H TIS Do for Me?
The initial system, which will be available at the ES&H TIS Workshop on
October 5, 1993, will provide three services: (1) information retrieval, (2)
bulletin boards, and (3) mail service.
Information Retrieval
ES&H TIS Information Retrieval lets you search various technical
databases. Initially, the Code of Federal Regulations for OSHA (29 CFR) and
DOE interpretations to the OSHA standards will be available. Additional
databases will be added over time to meet users' needs. To run a search,
simply type the subject name and press the ENTER key. You can specify the
data set(s) to be searched, such as 29 CFR. ES&H TIS will search the data
sets and display the titles of the documents it finds. Documents are ranked
by how well they match the criteria you stated as the subject. You will be
able to view any or all of the documents and decide to print or save them.
Bulletin Boards
ES&H TIS will let you access current ES&H information, such as
conference dates and safety bulletins. You will even be able to access other
bulletin boards at research centers and universities worldwide. Just make the
item you want from the list, and ES&H TIS will display it. After you view a
document, even one from a university bulletin board, you will be able to print
it or save it to disk by selecting PRINT or SAVE.
Mail Service
With ES&H TIS Mail Service, you will be able to send messages to individuals
or groups at DOE Headquarters, Operations Offices, contractors, and many other
places. You will be able to send, view, save, and print messages and reply to
incoming messages. Each user has a specific mail address; all you will need
to know to get started is the address of the person to whom you wish to send a
message.
New ES&H TIS users will receive users' guides when they sign up for the
system. For those users who cannot resist exploring the fine details of the
various software packages that comprise ES&H TIS, these manuals will be
included as part of the online package. You will be able to access and print
these manuals easily by opening the "ES&H TIS Manuals" folder, selecting the
one you want, and selecting PRINT.
How to Become an ES&H TIS User
Two hundred users at the ES&H TIS Workshop in Chicago, IL, on October 5,
1993, will get the first chance to use the new system. The workshop attendees
will evaluate and test the ES&H TIS software, and they will provide input to
enhance the ES&H TIS product. Once these enhancements are incorporated, ES&H
TIS will be released in January 1994 to active, registered SPMS users as well
as the general DOE community.
However, you will not have to receive formal training to use ES&H TIS.
The ES&H TIS User's Guide and installation disk that will be provided when you
register to use the system are easy to understand. If you need assistance,
you can call the ES&H TIS Hot Line. The Hot Line number will be included with
your installation information. For information on training courses or to sign
up as a user, call Carla Cavaiani, Idaho National Engineering Laboratory
(INEL), at (800) 473-4375.
Occupational Safety and Health Assistance Visits: Lending a Helping Hand
Assistance visits were initiated in November 1991 as a constructive followup
to the many assessments that had been conducted by Headquarters staff. EH and
the cognizant line office (CSO or Operations Office) worked together to
empower the contractors to enhance OSH program management and address issues
raised in past assessments. This is being accomplished through instruction,
advice, and hands-on experience rendered at informal, on-site sessions.
Assessment activity is rigorously excluded. EH acts as a facilitator along
with the line offices, and the empowered contractors who take the necessary
actions to address and correct the problems. While originally conceived as a
follow-on to ES&H Progress Assessments, recent assistance visits have been
requested by the Department's line offices in proactive efforts to enhance
their OSH programs.
Flexibility is key to meeting the sites' needs. Site participation is
actively sought beforehand to tailor the content of the visits to most benefit
the site. Assistance visit themes have varied, emphasizing management
involvement in the safety and health program, hazard recognition skills for
the line workforce, and the priority accorded OSH programs.
To date, assistance visits have been conducted at Fernald, DOE Oak Ridge
Operations Office (OR), the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, the Portsmouth and
Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plants, the Naval Petroleum and Oil Shale Reserves
(California and Wyoming), and the National Institute for Petroleum and Energy
Research (Bartlesville, OK). Feedback on results, which are routinely sought
by the safety offices at each site, indicates that assistance efforts are well
received and beneficial.
Recently, assistance visits were conducted to prepare the Paducah and
Portsmouth plants for what to expect and how to operate under the oversight of
OSHA. This particular program has an important role to play throughout all of
DOE in anticipation of the Department's transition to OSHA jurisdiction and
oversight. Assistance visits are also expected to provide valuable assistance
in the future to the Department's Environmental Restoration and Waste
Management (ERWM) programs by helping to instruct and empower managers to
carry out activities with an emphasis on worker safety.
Suspect/Counterfeit Bolts: Headmark Lists
An industry practice was made a legal requirement by the passage of the
Fastener Quality Act of 1990. This act requires manufacturers to put a mark
on the head of each bolt to identify it as their product, along with any
symbols indicating particular industry standards that the bolt is represented
as meeting. A list of headmarks that the U.S. Customs Service uses in
interdicting illegal imports is contained in DOE Safety Bulletin, DOE Quality
Alert, DOE/EH-0266, Issue No. 92-4, dated August 1992. To receive a copy of
this and other safety publications, call (615) 576-7548.
Listed bolts with headmarks were imported either before or despite the
Custom Service's interdiction efforts and are known not to be manufactured to
the standards falsely indicated by the symbols they bear. Most retail
hardware outlets carry these foreign bolts, which are sold as common ungraded
bolts despite the symbols of compliance to industry standards implied by their
headmarks.
A foreign bolt that has been manufactured to no recognized standard but
which is marked as having properties it does not possess can be very
dangerous. DOE is attempting to rid its facilities of these and other suspect
parts and materials to the greatest practical degree. DOE contractors are
being asked to remove these foreign bolts when found during maintenance and
not to purchase them, even if they are offered at a very cheap price.
In addition to foreign manufacturers using symbols of compliance to
industry standards on inferior bolts, domestic counterfeiters are stamping
inferior bolts with undeserved compliance symbols and also with the headmarks
of reputable manufacturers. To guard against these counterfeits, it is
necessary to establish that any alloy or heat-treated fasteners bought for a
DOE facility can be reliably traced by lot number to its manufacturer.
Some DOE procurement operations have stopped purchases of any bolts
having particular domestic headmarks, based upon a small sample of bolts that
have failed to pass acceptance tests. Because of the presence of
counterfeited headmarking and certificates of compliance in the marketplace,
such practices may unduly restrict the sources available for procurement.
Only headmarks indicated in the DOE Bulletin or registered to companies
appearing in the General Services Administration's disbarment list should be
assumed inferior without trial. Vendors attempting to defraud DOE may be
prosecuted by the Justice Department at the request of DOE's General Counsel.
No individual case has yet involved a sufficiently large dollar value to
provoke such action. It is important, however, that all attempts be reported
and documented so that evidence of persistent fraud can be accumulated. For
more information about suspect/counterfeit parts, contact Fred Fiege (EH-32.2)
at (301) 903-6909.
DOE's Technical Standards Program Covers Safety
Standardization documents for DOE are developed and maintained through the
Technical Standards Program, managed by the Office of Nuclear Safety Policy
and Standards. The Office, formerly in the Office of Nuclear Energy, now
reports to EH-1.
The program meets the requirements of DOE Order 1300.2A, Department of
Energy Technical Standards Program, which was revised in May 1992 to put
greater emphasis on safety and on the use of technical standards in the full
life cycle of DOE facilities and activities. The Order requires each DOE
program, Operations Office, and M&O contractor to assign a standards manager
who is responsible for the development, maintenance, and consistent use of
technical standards.
Standardization Documents
When possible, the program and project managers use nongovernment
standards developed by organizations like the American Nuclear Society (ANS),
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM), and the American Society of
mechanical Engineers (ASME). When a nongovernment standard is unavailable or
unsuitable to DOE needs, a DOE standardization document must be developed.
There are four types of standardization documents:
(1) Standards contain requirements and recommendations.
(2) Handbooks contain good practices and lessons learned.
(3) Specifications contain procurement needs.
(4) Technical Standards Lists contain data and other information.
In the document hierarchy (see figure below), DOE policy provides the
generic guidance, which is implemented through the requirements of DOE Orders
and Rules. Safety and implementation guides provide a bridge from the
requirements to the way DOE conducts business as defined in DOE and
nongovernment technical standards.
Program Activities
The Program's Lead Standardization Activity (LSA) is part of the
Performance Assurance Project Office at Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL).
To assist all DOE standards managers, the LSA develops program administration
documents, tracks standards development and maintenance projects, conducts
training and workshops, and provides for document publishing and distribution.
The Need for Standards
Although DOE has a long history of document standardization programs in
nuclear activities and in some OSH areas, facilities have often developed and
followed diverse standards and procedures. In some cases, auditors have found
that DOE elements have used standards without proper traceability or without a
firm definition of the underlying requirements for a standard. In other
cases, DOE facilities simply did not know that appropriate nongovernment
standards were available for the tasks at hand.
The Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB) found, for example,
that DOE has not clearly documented the use of standards in selecting methods
to design, construct, operate, and decommission its facilities. This finding
translated into recommendations (91-1, "Strengthening the Nuclear Safety
Standards Program for DOE's Defense Nuclear Facilities," March 13, 1991; and
93-1, "Standards Utilization in Defense Nuclear Facilities," January 28, 1993)
that DOE significantly broaden its emphasis on standards used to enhance
public and occupational safety.
Safety-Related Documents
Recent Technical Standards Program projects reflect the focus on safety.
Completed documents include the following:
- Guidelines for Use of Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Curves at DOE
Sites, DOE-STD-1024-92
- Licensed Reactor Nuclear Safety Criteria Potentially Applicable to
DOE Reactors, DOE/NE-0100T
- Compilation of Nuclear Safety Criteria for Potential Application
to DOE Nonreactor Nuclear Facilities, DOE-STD-101-92
- Guidance on Preliminary Hazard Classification and Accident
Analysis Techniques for Compliance with DOE Order 5480.23, Safety
Analysis Reports, DOE-STD-1027-92
- DOE Guide to Good Practices for Lockouts and Tagouts, DOE-STD-
1030-92
Other standards completed or in development cover topics with
significant OSH dimensions, such as maintenance practices, training, shipping
and transport, and hoisting and rigging.
The handbook series contains background information also useful to
safety personnel. Examples include the Fundamentals Handbook, Classic Physics
(DOE-HDBK-1010-92) and the Fundamentals Handbook, Electrical Science, Volumes
1-4 (DOE-HDBK-1011-92).
The Technical Standards Program seeks input from DOE and contractor
personnel to its standards development projects. Currently in development are
three guidelines on natural phenomena hazards, Author: V. Gopinath at (301)
903-4849, and one on "Definitions and Criteria for Accident Analysis," Author:
Dae Chung at (301) 903-3968.
For Further Information
If you have questions about standards, contact the Lead Standardization
Activity at the following address:
Performance Assurance Project Office
Oak Ridge National Laboratory
P.O. Box 2009
Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37831-8065
Phone: (615) 574-7886, FAX: (615) 574-0382
To participate in the development of new standards or in their
coordination, call the document author. Lists of documents and authors appear
in the Technical Standards Program quarterly newsletter, The Standards Forum;
in the monthly updates sent to all DOE standards managers; and in the DOE
Technical Standards program section of the TRADE On-Line system. Call Paul
VanOver (ORISE) at (615) 576-7286 for information on accessing the system.
Copies of completed standards may be requested from the Office of Scientific
and Technical Information, P.O. Box 62, Oak Ridge, TN 37831-0062, Phone (615)
576-8401.