Safety Metrics and LPS Protection

8/9/2019 Safety Metrics and LPS Protection

1/35

NSROC Safety Performance Measurements

1 NSROC to utilize leading indicators and statistical methodology to assist in safety

2 Goal is to use leading indicators and correlated data as a tool to reduce incidents and continue keeping OSHA case rate very low

3 Performance indicators and lessons learned are part of NSROCs Safety Program:

a. Indicators about Lesson Learned activities

b. Lessons Learned as a result of indicators

c. Indicators as a result of Lessons Learned

d. Indicators tend to be quantitative, Lessons Learned qualitative

e. Both are sources of data for NSROC management decision-making concerning safety at NSROC4 Intent is to focus on doing the right things right

5 Leading indicators provide insight and focus for leaders

6 With leading indicators and lessons learned, management and employees can focus forward toward prevention

7 Move from standardized annual safety inspections to monthly sampling inspections that address all areas over a period of a year

8

NSROC Safety has identified 9 objectives for performance measurements

Hazard analysis and risk assessment

Written work procedures in place for critical/ hazardous activities

Provision of safe place of work

Employees working safely

Incident reporting and implementation remedial measuresSafe and competent employees

Improve safety awareness

Employee sentiment

Improve safety culture

Measurements and inspections will be scored to eventually establish a balanced scorecard that can be used to track trends of theannual safety climate and improve the safety culture


2/35

Job Hazard Analysis & Risk Assessment

Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb

Risk assessment scheduled # 32 23 46 20 22

Risk assessment complete % 100% 100%

Control measures implemented 100% 100%

Discipline assessed Machinist JHA E. Tech VS Tech Env. Tech Welding Tech

# activities in JHA 32 23 46 20 22

Indicator: Risk assessment

Oct

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Job Hazard An


3/35

Objective 1

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

alysis & Risk Assessment

Risk assessmentcomplete %

Control measuresimplemented %

Risk assessmentscheduled #


4/35

Written work procedures in place for critical/ hazardous activities

Indicator: Work procedures

Qty. New/Revised %

Baseline 251 251 251New Haz Ops 5 0.0180% 254 259 276Revised Haz Ops 13 0.0460% 253 255 255

Aug Sept Oct

Aug Sept Oct

250

255

260

265

270

275

280

285

254

259

276

253

255 255

Written Work Procedures in Plfor Critical/Hazardous Activiti


5/35

251 251

281

268

Nov Dec

0

ov Dec

281

268

251

aceies

Row 7

Row 8

Row 6


6/35

Provisions of safe place of work

Indicator: Work place inspection target across whole site on a monthly basis each with specific area. Workplace

Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb

% Scheduled inspections/audits complete 100% 100%% Actions arising complete 0% 0%

% Visibility/ Inspection Tours complete 0% 0%

Forklifts/Crane Inspection X X X X X

Eyewash Station Inspections X X X X X

Compressed Air Inspection X X

Machine Shop Audit X

Stockroom Audit X

Electrical Assy Audit X

ACS Audit X

Ground Station Audit X

Evironmental Lab Audit XM-area Audit X

WSMR Audit X

ESD Audit X X X X

Oxygen Monitor Inspection X X X X

FOM Building Audit X X

Hazardous Waste/Material Inspection X X X X

PPE Audit X

Oct

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%


7/35

visibility tour by managers in their work area

Nov Dec Jan Feb

Provisions of Safe Place of WorkVisibility tours by Supervisors has not started yet.

% Scheduledinspections/auditscomplete

% Actions arisingcomplete

% Visibility/ InspectionTours complete


8/35

Employees working safely

Indicator: Behavior based observations by selected disciplines

Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb

% Employees working safely 100% 100%

% PPE compliance 93% 100%

# Employees observed 15 11

# Employees working safely 15 11

Discipline observed Machine Shop Electrical Shop ACS/GNC Vehicle Systems Env. Lab

PPE violations 1 0

No gloves

Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb

60%

65%

70%

75%

80%

85%

90%

95%

100%

Employees Working Safely

% Employees workinsafely

% PPE compliance


9/35

g


10/35

Incident reporting and implementation remedial measures

Indicators: Timeliness of reporting. Incident investigation effectiveness. Log of corrective actions

Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec

% Incidents reported within 24 hours 100% 100% 0% 0%

% Near miss incidents 0% 67% 0% 0%% Incident investigation complete on time 100% 100% 100% 100%

% Corrective actions implemented 100% 100% 100% 100%

% Non-recordable injuries 100% 100% 100% 100%

TCIR/DARCIR (Incident rates)


TCIR 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

DARCIR 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

BLS DARCIR NAIC 3364 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1

BLS TCIR NAIC 3364 4.1 4.1 4.1 4.1 4.1

Aug Sept

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%Incident Repo

Aug Sept

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0OSHA Recordable Incident Rates

TCIR

DARCIR

BLS DARCIR NAIC3364

BLS TCIR NAIC 3364


11/35

Oct Nov Dec

rting and Implementation Remedial Measures

% Incidents reportedwithin 24 hours

% Near missincidents

% Incidentinvestigation completeon time

% Corrective actionsimplemented

% Non-recordableinjuries


12/35

Safe and competent employees

Indicator: Training needs identification. Training records


Training scheduled # 0

% Scheduled training complete 0%Total # Training Received (schedule 34 15 16 17


0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Safe and Competent EmployeesFormal training schedule is work in pr

expect release of 2007 schedule in D


13/35

gressc 06

% Scheduled trainingcomplete

Training scheduled #

Total # TrainingReceived (scheduled& nonscheduled)


14/35


0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Improve Safety AwarenessWork in Progress - Toolbox talks to begin in 2007

% Tool BoxTalks completeby Dept.

% Employeesattending

% Actionsarising complete

June Aug Oc

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

Safety CouncAug meeting w

Next meetin

Council

10

Management/Non-MaOcto


15/35


16/35

Employee sentiment

Indicators: Safety concerns and survey responses


0% Employee survey participation 0%

# Employees reporting incidents,

suggestions, ideas


0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Employee SentimentSurvey under construction - expect to complete by 12/31/06

% Employee surveyparticipation

# Employeesreporting incidents,suggestions, ideas


17/35

RED, YELLOW, GREEN

Decision Color

Stable

Level is Acceptable Green

Yellow

Trend

Adverse Red

Improving Green

Control ChartResult

LeadershipAction

Stay theCourse

Level is notAcceptable

ImproveSystem

CorrectiveAction

Reinforce -Stay the Course


18/35

Beamformer Antenna HERPFor Roll Symmetric 15 Deg Beam at 2279.5 MHz

Range (m) 0.36 metersRange (cm) 36.00

Transmitter Peak Power (W) 24.83 Watts(actual measured)

Max Duty Cycle 1.00

Transmitter Average Power (W) 24.83

Transmitter Average Power (dBm) 43.95

Transmit Passive Loss (dB) -2 dB

Transmit Power at Antenna (dBm) 41.95

Transmit Power at Antenna (mW) 15667.3

Pi 3.14159265359

Antenna Beamwidth (deg) 15.0 degrees

Antenna Beamwidth (rad) 0.26180

Beam Area at Range (sq cm) 2156.43Power Density at Range (mW/sq 7.27 mW/cm*2

Per Terry Potterton the formula for personnel hazard

is Freq(MHz)/300 =mW/cm*2

For 2279.5 MHz, the power density mu 7.6 mW/cm*2

Therefore, 0.36 meters(14.2 inches) is the minimum HERP dis


19/35

ance


20/35

Date Flow

1/1/2006 6.0

1/2/2006 11.0

1/3/2006 8.8

1/4/2006 8.9 Min & Max Data Series1/5/2006 3.1 Date Flow

1/6/2006 4.2 Min 1/1/06 1.6

1/7/2006 3.3 Max 1/29/06 38746.0

1/8/2006 3.9

1/9/2006 6.5

1/10/2006 6.0

1/11/2006 4.2

1/12/2006 7.8

1/13/2006 8.8

1/14/2006 2.0

1/15/2006 3.2

1/16/2006 5.21/17/2006 3.7

1/18/2006 3.8

1/19/2006 4.7

1/20/2006 3.5

1/21/2006 7.0

1/22/2006 1.6

1/23/2006 5.2

1/24/2006 6.7

1/25/2006 9.3

1/26/2006 9.8

1/27/2006 7.9

1/28/2006 33.01/29/2006 5.6

1/30/2006 9.1

1/31/2006 2.5

1/1 1/8 1/15 1/22

0

10

20

30

40

2

Flow - January, 2006

Flow

-mgd

' =INDEX($A$2:$B$32,MATC

Cch


21/35

1/29

33

H(Min($B2:$B32),$B2:$B32,),1)

ange Min & Max values in data table,art will automatically update


22/35

Lightning Protection - Grounded Metal Bodie

h

D = .6n

Main TableItem Value Description

D = 2.96 ft Calculated Bonding Distance

h = 40ft Vertical Distance (ft)

n = 2.25

1

Isolated (Nongrounded) Metalic BodiesIf a + b < D, Then A shall be Bonded to B

If a + b > D, Then Bonds shall not be required.

a = 5 ft

b = 5 ft

Bonded? Bonds are not required

Calculation Iterations

D = 3.33 ft D = 5.00 ft D = 1.48 ft D =

h = 30.00 ft h = 30.00 ft h = 20.00 ft h =n = 1.50 n = 1.00 n = 2.25 n =

1.00 1.00 1.00

x (Km)

Number of Down conductors (1 = 1, 2= 1.5, 3 or >= 2.25)K

m = 1 = Thru Air /0.5 Thru Dense mat'l

Km =

Km =

Km =

Km =


23/35

s

2.96 ft Calculated Bonding Distance

40.00 ft Vertical Distance (ft)2.25

1.00

Number of Down conductors (1 = 1, 2= 1.5, 3 or >= 2.25)

1 = Thru Air /0.5 Thru Dense mat'l


24/35


25/35


26/35


27/35


28/35


29/35


30/35


31/35


32/35


33/35


34/35


35/35

Documents

Safety Metrics and LPS Protection