Machine safety and layers of protection

Another study confirms the relationship between tasks performed and injuries and fatalities. Don't risk assessments find such relationships? Recognizing layers of protection can help.

07/19/2013


Wow, have we come full circle? Another study confirms that there’s a relationship between “tasks performed” and “injuries/fatalities.” Isn’t that a main purpose of conducting a risk assessment?

Professional Safety (Journal of the American Society of Safety Engineers) in its July issue has a featured article, Fatality Prevention – Findings From the 2012 Forum. This Forum evaluated and developed three central points as discussed in the article:

  1. A new measure, the Fatalities and Serious Injuries (FSI) potential rate, is being used to measure an organization's risk for having FSIs
  2. Organizations can reduce FSIs by identifying, understanding and controlling the precursors of all incidents that have the potential to cause FSIs
  3. And, management of risk associated with FSI precursors must occur at the task level. 

Their answer – Layers of Protection (LOP).

In my opinion, apparently the approach for manufacturers is to establish a practice of measuring and reporting an organizations risk level for having FSI’s on a task by task basis. Then, based on an appropriate scoring system, apply one or more LOP measure(s) to further reduce the risk of an FSI incident. One of the bases behind this additional practice comes from evaluating over 300 sampled injuries. Apparently the FSI sub-level of events was at least partly the result of intentional and unintentional behavior. I assume their understanding is that after applying the required risk mitigation steps (including the Five Hierarchy of Measures) to achieve “acceptable” risk – some risk of an FSI incident still remains due to human behaviors. 

Therefore, additional mitigation guidelines are included in three layers of protection. Their LOP measures are broken into three groups: 1) Administrative LOPs, 2) Warning device LOPs and 3) Safety devices LOPs. Each of these groups includes multiple unranked measures. 

I endorse any and all measures that can effectively reduce injury incidents in manufacturing. In my opinion, companies should seriously consider learning about this best practice and how it might benefit their employee safety program and their business. 

Has this presented you with any new perspectives? Add your comments or thoughts to the discussion by submitting your ideas, experiences, and challenges in the comments section below. 

J.B. Titus, CFSE

Related articles:

ASSE – Professional Safety Journal - Fatality Prevention – Findings From the 2012 Forum

ASSE - Professional Safety Journal - Near-Miss Reporting, May 2013

OSHA – search for near miss

Machine Guarding & The Hierarchy of Measures for Hazard Mitigation

Contact: http://www.jbtitus.com for “Solutions for Machine Safety”.



No comments
Consulting-Specifying Engineer's Product of the Year (POY) contest is the premier award for new products in the HVAC, fire, electrical, and...
Consulting-Specifying Engineer magazine is dedicated to encouraging and recognizing the most talented young individuals...
The MEP Giants program lists the top mechanical, electrical, plumbing, and fire protection engineering firms in the United States.
2014 Product of the Year finalists: Vote now; Boiler systems; Indirect cooling; Integrating lighting, HVAC
High-performance buildings; Building envelope and integration; Electrical, HVAC system integration; Smoke control systems; Using BAS for M&V
Pressure piping systems: Designing with ASME; Lab ventilation; Lighting controls; Reduce energy use with VFDs
Case Study Database

Case Study Database

Get more exposure for your case study by uploading it to the Consulting-Specifying Engineer case study database, where end-users can identify relevant solutions and explore what the experts are doing to effectively implement a variety of technology and productivity related projects.

These case studies provide examples of how knowledgeable solution providers have used technology, processes and people to create effective and successful implementations in real-world situations. Case studies can be completed by filling out a simple online form where you can outline the project title, abstract, and full story in 1500 words or less; upload photos, videos and a logo.

Click here to visit the Case Study Database and upload your case study.

Protecting standby generators for mission critical facilities; Selecting energy-efficient transformers; Integrating power monitoring systems; Mitigating harmonics in electrical systems
Commissioning electrical systems in mission critical facilities; Anticipating the Smart Grid; Mitigating arc flash hazards in medium-voltage switchgear; Comparing generator sizing software
Integrating BAS, electrical systems; Electrical system flexibility; Hospital electrical distribution; Electrical system grounding
As brand protection manager for Eaton’s Electrical Sector, Tom Grace oversees counterfeit awareness...
Amara Rozgus is chief editor and content manager of Consulting-Specifier Engineer magazine.
IEEE power industry experts bring their combined experience in the electrical power industry...
Michael Heinsdorf, P.E., LEED AP, CDT is an Engineering Specification Writer at ARCOM MasterSpec.