ASSE PTD Web Symposium, February 2013 How to Develop Standard PtD Criteria for Your Organization Carolyn Jones, CIH, MPH San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC) Health and Safety Program Manager [email protected] 2/18/2013 1 Presentation Goal: How to create PtD criteria or guidelines for your organization, based on our agency’s example. • • • • • • Background on PtD approach at agency Our Safe Design Guidelines document How to Get Started Best Communication Strategies Creating a PtD document Challenges and Lessons learned 2/18/2013 2 Safety, blah, blah, OSHA regulations, blah, blah, blah… What does she mean??? How do I design for safety? “The Great Communications Divide” 2/18/2013 3 1 Effective Communication is Key! = Tool For Parents PtD Guidelines Document Safety = Tool for Safety, Engineers, Operations Engineers Operations 2/18/2013 4 Background: SFPUC Overview • Water & wastewater agency for San Francisco, regional water provider • 2300 employees • Water system - 160 miles, from Yosemite National Park to San Francisco, serves 2.5 million people in region • System construction began after 1906 SF earthquake 2/18/2013 5 System Facilities • Water Transmission – reservoirs, dams, pipelines, tunnels, valve vaults, pump stations • Treatment Plants – water and wastewater • Water Distribution – tanks & reservoirs, pump stations • Wastewater Collection System • Hydroelectric Power Plants 2/18/2013 6 2 History: Why Did We Get Involved With Safe Design? • Many old facilities w/safety problems • Many newer facilities w/safety problems – Engineers kept repeating same (unsafe) designs – Little feedback from Operations to Engineering – No safety review 2/18/2013 7 Facility Design Results: • Hard to operate • Hard to maintain • Lack of safe access • Injuries likely Hard to Operate 2/18/2013 8 Rumble for Change • Several early champions in Operations for safer facility, equipment design • Workshops w/H&S, Operations, Engineers • “Show & Tell” photos • Difficult for everyone to speak the same “language” around safety and risk • Difficult to communicate across organization 2/18/2013 9 3 Catalyst for Change → $4.4 Billion Capital Improvement Program • Many projects to be designed and built on a tight schedule • Engineering staff had to develop standard procedures for – – Standard design elements – design process – review process • Engineering Manager wanted Safety input but didn’t want us to slow down design timeline w/many design changes 2/18/2013 10 Operations: “Get rid of stupid hazards!” H&S: “More Safety!” Opportunity to change “business as usual” PtD Approach! Engineering: “Be specific” 2/18/2013 11 Goal to Establish “PtD” Approach 1. SFPUC Safe Design Guidelines 2. Safety included in formal Design Review Process 2/18/2013 12 4 Safe Design Guidelines - First Attempt • Hired a consultant 1 2 3 • They wrote a long report • Nobody liked it 2/18/2013 13 Safe Design Guidelines Second Attempt 1 2 • Had consultant create checklist • Better, but still not great as a pro-active tool • Had a flash of inspiration 3 2/18/2013 14 “Engineering” Language? • Doing a lot of freehand sketches for engineers • Industry examples of design guidelines • “Designer’s Guide to OSHA”* • We needed a graphics-based, safe design guide for engineers to translate our safety information into “engineering” language. *Designer’s Guide to OSHA – A Practical Design Guide to the Occupational Safety and Health Act for Architects, Engineers, and Builders”, Peter S. Hopf, McGraw-Hill , 1982 2/18/2013 15 5 SFPUC Safe Design Guidelines Document - Engineering look & feel to info. -Provide helpful notes, OSHA regulation citations as appropriate, links to web sites -Standard design document 2/18/2013 16 “SFPUC Safe Design Guidelines” Sample page • Targeted OSHA information • Other standards ANSI, NFPA • Agency recommended practices 2/18/2013 17 How to Develop This Type of Tool for Your Organization? 1. Getting Started 2. Content Development 3. Creating the Document 2/18/2013 18 6 Step 1: Getting Started – What are your concerns? ¾Do you? ¾design a lot of similar structures or processes? ¾have certain repeat problems? ¾have a good PtD strategy that you need to convey to many different groups? ¾have a big, complex project? ¾have areas of confusion for engineers? ¾want to implement measures above & beyond minimum standards? 2/18/2013 19 What are your concerns? (continued) • • • • • Identify key concerns to include Focus on critical problems - prioritize Start manageable, can expand later Create list or library Formal vs. informal process? – Risk analysis (hazops) – Review existing data – Depends on your organization, resources • 2/18/2013 20 Should You Include Information from Regulations and Standards? • Yes, when regulations require explanation, implementation guidance • Yes, when information comes from multiple sources – OSHA, ANSI, NFPA, Bldg. Codes, Industry Stds. • No, when just repeating the regulation 2/18/2013 21 7 Our SFPUC PtD Identification Process • • • • • Workshops w/H&S, Operations, Engineers “Show & Tell” photos Historical experience Areas with many design questions Injury data • Informal, empirical process 2/18/2013 22 Safety Concerns @ Water/Wastewater Facilities • Confined Spaces – access, ventilation, retrieval • Fall Protection – railings, anchor points, ladder extensions, ladders vs. stairs • Chemical Handling - emergency eyewash/showers, chemical off-loading stations, ventilation • Work Access - platforms/ working level to equipment, clearance to operate equipment, valve placement, nonslip surfaces • Ergonomics – work station adjustability, equipment operation 2/18/2013 23 Step 2: Content Development Best Communication Strategies? • • • • • • Pictures (drawings, photos) Pictures and Text Flowcharts Tables Text Checklists 2/18/2013 24 8 Think about your audience and what information you are trying to convey Detailed regulatory or legal requirements Process information Spatial information (size, shape, etc.) Reference information Relational information (if/then) 2/18/2013 25 Who is your PtD audience? Engineering Operations Management 2/18/2013 26 Pictures (with or without Text ) • Good for spatial information (size, shape, layout) • Good for equipment information • Good for engineering information • Good for engineers and operations audiences 2/18/2013 27 9 Flowcharts • Good for PtD process information • Good for PtD decisionmaking • Good for sorting through multiple regulations 2/18/2013 28 Tables • Good for reference information • Good for relational information (if this, then that) 2/18/2013 29 What about written information? • Text – Good for regulations – Difficult for conveying complex PtD content information – Best for notes, clarifications – Keep it simple 2/18/2013 • Checklists – Good for PtD review documents – Good for yes/no information – Difficult for conveying PtD content information 30 10 Step 3 – Creating your PtD document • Graphics (low tech): – Create template page – Gather information, pictures, manufacturer’s websites, Google images, etc. – Sketch out design – Layout draft pages - keep layout simple, lots of white space – Draw with CAD program – Review and finalize 2/18/2013 31 Template Page • Standard layout • Engineering look and feel • Space for regulations information 2/18/2013 32 Rough Sketches • “Whiteboard” Approach – i.e., brainstorming on paper • Pencil, eraser, ruler • Aides – photos, field sketches, Google Images, engineering drawings • Can use copier to change size, redo • Cut, paste, white-out 2/18/2013 33 11 Layout on Template Page, Add Notes • Add notes for clarity • Aim for clear, unambiguous information • Review information with Engineering, Operations 2/18/2013 34 Drafting Team creates CAD version • We used AutoCAD • Review, Proofread Carefully • Core Team of Reviewers 2/18/2013 35 Final Page Create PDF document with all pages 2/18/2013 36 12 People? 2/18/2013 37 Title, Index, Abbreviations, General Notes 2/18/2013 38 Outreach • SFPUC Safe Design Guidelines document became part of Engineering design SOP • Available on H&S Intranet site and Engineering site • Outreach presentations to Engineering, Safety Committee • Newsletter articles • Listed as standard criteria in Conceptual Engineering Reports • Solicited feedback from users 2/18/2013 39 13 Regular Meetings to discuss & strategize to make it work • H&S works with Engineering and Operations to resolve questions, challenges, conflicting requirements • Look for solutions that increase safety 2/18/2013 40 What works and doesn’t work? • YES! • NO… – Slow but steady paradigm shift – Safe Design Guidelines are now standard, official reference – Review process is functioning – Engineers call H&S to discuss problems – Hard to compare current project $’s with future operational $’s (difficult business case for public agencies) – Hard to reach new engineers, outside designers 2/18/2013 41 Lessons Learned • Operations staff has to part of the process • Requirements must be clear to engineers • Even w/clear requirements, it still takes follow-up problem solving • When design is done by outside consultants, must communicate to them also • Must provide engineers with resources, links to sources for items • Commitment of staff resources to process 2/18/2013 42 14 Lessons Learned cont’d • Need a robust review process – – – – Including H&S, field employees Design team must make this happen Not everyone can read drawings, visualize 3-D space Small projects slip through the cracks • Standardize on specific equipment – ex., fall arrest systems, retrieval devices • Other constraints: value engineering, public perception, historic look 2/18/2013 43 Conclusions • Organizational PtD Guidelines are a good communications tool • Having the official document gives credibility to safety requirements • Every safety feature that can be designed in, reduces employee safety risk • For SFPUC, PtD today = safety benefit for the next 100 years 2/18/2013 44 Questions? 2/18/2013 45 15
© Copyright 2024