|
|
Minimize risk for more predictable future
June 1, 2008 By: Carl R. Metzgar, CSP Pit & QuarryThere were 2,102 fatal and non-fatal days-lost injuries in stone in 2006. Nine of the 2,102 injuries were fatalities. One of every 233 days-lost injuries, four-tenths of 1 percent, was a fatality. Future injuries, destined to be fatalities, cannot be predicted in particular. In general, we know what is likely to happen, but we don't know when, where or to whom. For example, there has not been a lattice boom crane tear down fatality for a while. We still have lattice boom cranes in the industry. There will be a fatality. When and where are unknown.
 Safety tip |
Particular prediction may be impossible, but there are ways to minimize the risk of errors. First, a good look at industry past experience will show the general areas to examine. For example, Mine Safety and Health Administration's IR 1335 (informational report available on the MSHA web site) screams out that overexertion, which contributes to back strains and strains, is the single, largest producer of non-fatal injuries. Overexertion is the body working against an object. The single, largest category of fatalities is the body being hit by large mechanical forces (read energy). Individual plant experience might not show the same causes because single plant experience is severely limited. Limited experience is a poor predictor. However, good near-hit investigation can enlarge the sample.
A second way to anticipate risk is a routine or technique called "what if." The search for energy exchanges is the key to "what if." Where are the uncontrolled opportunities for miners to be exposed to mechanical, chemical, electrical, thermal or radiation energy and in what quantities? It takes time, effort and hard work to tease out how management and miners can get into hazardous situations in advance.
The response
If engineering changes can't be made to eliminate or reduce energy exchanges, then rules and procedures are a logical response to the discovery of potential hazards or hazardous practices. Yes, the rules and procedures have to be rational, protective and productive. Close analysis of the facts and the situation that generated them is most important. Failure to analyze failed procedures and conditions demonstrates sloppy thinking and incomplete inquiry and review.
Procedure example
Lockout, which is the predecessor term for zero energy state, is an example of a successful procedure. The dawn of lockout is lost in the beginning of the industrial revolution, but recent improvements can be tracked in photographs in the back issues of the safety magazines. The jump to zero energy state is even more recent. Zero energy state includes all of the old, obvious disconnects of power sources, blanking of steam lines, emptying of chemical systems but extends to blocking unbalanced loads that could shift hazardously before and during lifts with a crane.
Rule example
The no-smoking rule around fuel storage tanks was easily arrived at, is easy to understand and has proven to be practical and enforceable. It has protected miners and property for years.
Follow-up
The simplest tool for loss-control results is follow-up. It starts as a procedure or technique, but once established it becomes a productive and protective rule for any supervisor. And what a safety rule it has turned out to be. Clear instructions with follow-up are protective and productive. It doesn't take a lot of loss control to be effective. It takes a little bit all the time. Follow-up makes certain that rules and procedures keep working.
Every time
Ominously unspoken but sometimes still present is a miner's request: "Just go away; let me take the shortcut."
The command has an answer: "Asking me to overlook a simple safety violation would be asking me to compromise my entire attitude toward the value of your life."
Carl R. Metzgar, CSP, has more than 30 years of safety and health experience in the pit and quarry industries. He was formerly a safety and health director for Lone Star Industries, and Mideast Division safety director for Vulcan Materials. He currently offers consulting services with a specialization in program evaluation, training, compliance and loss control. Based in Winston-Salem, N.C., he can be reached at 336-766-8264; Fax: 336-766-1218; E-mail: cmetz46840@aol.com.
Please send any technical comments or questions to our webmaster.