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