EHSS Safety Walkaround Program

Executive Summary For the FY 2012 Self-Assessment, the Environmental Health Safety Security (EHSS) Division management identified three focus areas of hazards to review and assess; 1) RSIGuard Ergonomic Software, 2) Sustainable Practices, and 3) the EHSS Safety Walkaround Program. The focus areas were chosen based on their potential impact on the safety of employees, the public and the protection of the environment. This report covers focus area 3, the EHSS Safety Walkaround Program.

The scope of this assessment was to determine the effectiveness of the Safety Walkaround program in the EHSS Division. Interviews were conducted with both supervisors and work leads in sub-groups of the EHSS Division. In addition, the assessment team reviewed completed safety walkaround checklists including the electronic Division-wide checklist form, the Radiation Protection Group Google Document spreadsheet, and print-based walkaround forms that were scanned and published to the EHSS Division’s G Drive. Finally, the team reviewed the walkaround programs of three outside Divisions (Engineering, Joint Genome Institute (JGI), and Life Sciences).

In general, EHSS is implementing the Safety Walkaround program within the scope and context of the Lab’s guidance; however, several improvements can be made. These include increasing participation amongst supervisors/work leads in performing and documenting walkarounds, analyzing and trending the data, and communicating the importance of safety walkarounds.

Introduction The EHSS Division’s mission is to help keep the LBNL community and environment safe and secure as the Lab explores the frontiers of science. We partner with scientists and stakeholders to achieve high levels of safety consciousness and performance by providing effective advice, processes, and tools. All employees are accountable for the safe conduct of work for which they are responsible. EHSS staff is expected to define work, identify hazards and adverse environmental impacts, implement controls, perform work safely, and provide feedback and continuous improvements as appropriate. The Division’s self-assessment for Environment, Safety, and Health (ES&H) is a continuous process that evaluates EHSS Division worker safety and the implementation and effectiveness of Integrated Safety Management (ISM) within the Division. The EHSS Division Self-Assessment uses a tailored, risk based approach for assessing worker-safety program effectiveness. For FY2012, the EHSS Self-Assessment Plan identifies three focus areas of concern; 1) RSIGuard Ergonomic Software, 2) Sustainable Practices, and 3) the EHSS Safety Walkaround Program. This report details the findings of the EHSS Safety Walkaround Program assessment.

Focus Area Description Safety walkaround inspections are an integral part of the EHSS management safe work responsibility to help ensure worker safety by inspecting workspace, worker, or work activity once a quarter. The EHSS Self-Assessment Report for FY12 (September 28, 2012); Focus Area #3 Assessment of EHSS Safety Walkaround Program

Safety Walkaround focus area team was appointed to evaluate the effectiveness and vitality of the EHSS Division Walkaround Safety Program. The EHSS Division self-assessment team (1) reviewed completed safety walkaround checklists from the most recent twelve-month period, (2) conducted interviews with both supervisors and work leads in sub-groups of the EHSS Division, and (3) assessed outside division’s safety walkaround programs, as a point of comparison, to help determine the effectiveness of the EHSS Safety Walkaround Program.

Current Requirements The Safety Walkaround program is a Division requirement presented in PUB 3000, and the Division ISM Plan. The team reviewed these policy documents to understand the basis of the requirements:

 LBNL/PUB-3000, LBNL Health and Safety Manual, Chapter 1, General Policy & Responsibilities  The EHSS Division ISM Plan (April, 2012, rev.12)

Assessment Scope The scope of this assessment was to evaluate the effectiveness and vitality of the Walkaround Safety Program in the EHSS Division over the previous twelve-month period (August 2011 – August 2012). This was accomplished via review of objective data, interviews with supervisors/work leads, and review of three outside Divisions walkaround safety programs.

Assessment Methodology To evaluate the effectiveness of the EHSS Division Safety Walkaround program, the team used the following assessment methods:  Reviewed completed Safety Walkaround checklists  Conduct interviews with EHSS Division Supervisors and Work Leads  Review of Safety Walkaround programs in other divisions. Review of documented completions allowed the team to identify the extent to which walkarounds are documented; interviews allowed the team to gather insights from supervisors and work leads who conducted walkarounds; and reviewing walkaround programs in other divisions allowed a point of comparison.

Assessment Results This evaluation covered the most recent twelve-month period, which spans August 2011 to August 2012, and included thirty four active supervisors and work leads within EHSS Division. NOTE: We used a current list of EHSS Division supervisors and work leads. We recognize that these roles have changed over the course of the last twelve months which means (1) that the individuals may not have been in this role the entire year, and (2) some may have started as a supervisor/work lead earlier in the year and are no longer in that role.

3

EHSS Self-Assessment Report for FY12 (September 28, 2012); Focus Area #3 Assessment of EHSS Safety Walkaround Program

1. Review of completed Safety Walkaround checklists

The results are:  35% had completed at least one Safety Walkaround  35% had completed two or more Safety Walkarounds  20% had completed three or more Safety Walkarounds  10% had completed four or more Safety Walkarounds

2. Work lead and supervisor interviews Following is a summary of the results based on the lines of inquiry (Appendix A contains actual responses from interviewees):

How do supervisors and work leads understand the purpose and requirements of safety walkarounds?

Based on interviews, we discovered that a majority of supervisors and work leads had a good understanding of the purpose of performing walkarounds. Examples of responses include:

 Walkarounds are a cooperative discussion to identify unsafe work conditions and discuss ways to correct these.  A proactive measure to stay on top of workplace safety before issues arise  Make sure facility is safe to do work and for everyone to do tasks in a safe manner  To identify safety issues

However, there was a wide variation in understanding the frequency for which they are to be performed. Reponses ranged from everyday, weekly, quarterly, and annually.

What percentage of supervisors/work leads document safety walkarounds?

We evaluated the number of documented safety walkarounds by reviewing the following walkaround checklists:  EHSS Division Walkaround checklist (Google spreadsheet)  Radiation Protection Group (Google spreadsheet),  EHSS Division (paper-based) walkaround checklists that had been scanned and submitted.

How can the information gathered during a safety walkaround be used? From interviews, we noted several suggestions for how information gathered in walkarounds could be used more effectively. Overall, the consensus was that the data should be trended to identify safety environment and performance issues (improvements). In addition, respondents suggested that there would be value in further communicating the most relevant information to EHSS Division staff

4

EHSS Self-Assessment Report for FY12 (September 28, 2012); Focus Area #3 Assessment of EHSS Safety Walkaround Program members, to bring about greater awareness and to help prevent recurrence. The following are representative of the ideas regarding communication:  Sharing summarized, salient, information at EHSS All-Hands Meetings  Communicating via flow down to department management  Posting on a Division Website  Discussing in staff meetings

How can the safety walkaround process and checklist be improved?

From interviews, we were given several suggestions for how the safety walkarounds could be improved. We grouped these by process improvement and checklist improvement.

Process Improvement:  Improve accountability  Provide more guidance and training  Make more visible from leadership team

Checklist Improvements:  Not easy to complete online form  Not straight forward to go from electronic and into database  Need greater flexibility: o Checklist doesn’t always provide items that relate to group needs, and their unique issues. o Checklist is too limiting and does not adequately cover employee hazards  Provide hard copy checklist option to use in the field

3. How do other Lab organizations implement their walkaround programs? The team reviewed the safety walkaround programs in the following three LBNL organizations (Engineering, JGI, Life Sciences) as points of comparison to help evaluate the effectiveness of the EHSS Safety Walkaround Program. (Appendix B contains summarized responses from each of the other entities). Overall, each of the organizations approaches Safety Walkarounds in vastly different fashions. This approach is allowed for by LBNL guiding documents, based on variable needs, and also reflects the management and safety cultures of each group and its needs. As expected, there is also considerable variability compared to the EHSS program. The Team’s interpretation is that there are elements of other programs that could be incorporated into the EHSS Safety Walkaround Program in order to enhance its rigor and effectiveness. Refer to the Opportunities for Improvement and Recommendations sections for details.

5

EHSS Self-Assessment Report for FY12 (September 28, 2012); Focus Area #3 Assessment of EHSS Safety Walkaround Program

Opportunities for Improvement

The EHSS Division Safety Walkaround Program is meeting the minimum requirements as outlined in the Lab’s ISM Plan; however our evaluation, consisting of interviews, data analysis of documented completions, and the review of other division’s walkaround programs, indicate there are opportunities for the following program improvements to the EHSS Safety Walkaround Program:

 Increase participation amongst supervisors and work leads in the level of performing and documenting safety walkarounds  Analyze and trend walkaround data  Provide a downloadable checklist as a complement to the electronic form  Communicate the importance of safety walkarounds  Share trending data with supervisors/work leads, and perhaps all Division employees. Additional consideration should be given for further distribution to other Lab employees, if serious items are identified (such as the use of Lessons Learned Briefing process).

Recommendations

Increase Participation

To increase participation amongst supervisors and work leads, the team recommends the following options:

1. Leadership team to model and communicate the purpose, value, and expectations of conducting safety walkarounds. 2. Provide reminders to responsible supervisors/work leads on a quarterly basis via email, Division newsletter, or other. Trend Data In order to make active use of the data collected in the division walkaround safety Google spreadsheet, the team recommends that resource be allocated to periodically analyze and trend the results. The recommendations are: 1. Trend results on a semi-annual basis 2. Provide a digest of the trended results to supervisors/work leads

Based on the FY2012 Self-Assessment trend data, the Division may want to consider having one central walkaround safety spreadsheet that contains minimum elements (such as is used in JGI). This would make it easier to trend. However, it is a trade off; the more uniform the walkaround form is, the less flexible it is to meeting the unique requirements of different groups.

6

EHSS Self-Assessment Report for FY12 (September 28, 2012); Focus Area #3 Assessment of EHSS Safety Walkaround Program

Provide downloadable checklist In addition to having the electronic form (Google spreadsheet), the team recommends that there be a downloadable (print-friendly) version for use in the field which would provide convenience and guidance. The results would then be entered into the electronic form. As mobile options increase in the future, personnel may have less need for a print-based form.

Communicate the importance of safety walkarounds

The team recommends that the importance of performing safety walkarounds be communicated more broadly so that employees have a clear understanding of their importance as part of the Division’s safety culture.

Options include:

 Communicating at All-Hands meetings  Provide flow down of information through management  Post on website  Include in EHSS Division newsletter, or with an article (perhaps using the Divisions communications specialist).  Discuss in staff meetings

Share trending data with supervisors/work leads, and perhaps all Division employees

In addition to communicating the importance of the walkaround safety program, the team recommends that the walkaround data (trend reports) be shared with supervisors/work leads, and perhaps all Division employees.

Options to consider include:  An email digest and take-away information; based on trends  Rollup in the EHSS Division newsletter  Website availability

Conclusions In conclusion, the EHSS Division Safety Walkaround appears to be meeting the minimum requirements as outlined in the Laboratory’s requirements. However, significant improvements can be made. In regard to the EHSS Division’s ISM Plan, there is objective information that the program has identified and there are a number of issues. There also appears to be some gaps with full implementation. These include: knowledge of structure and implementation of the complete Safety Walkaround Program (among the supervisors and work leads), oversight and review by Division management, and in two cases, staff were delegated the responsibility of completing the safety 7

EHSS Self-Assessment Report for FY12 (September 28, 2012); Focus Area #3 Assessment of EHSS Safety Walkaround Program walkaround. This is inconsistent with the EHSS Division ISM Plan which states that the supervisor/work leads are responsible for completing the safety walkarounds for their employees.

8

EHSS Self-Assessment Report for FY12 (September 28, 2012); Focus Area #3 Assessment of EHSS Safety Walkaround Program

Appendix A Responses to interview questions from EHSS supervisors and work leads

1. What is the purpose of a safety walkaround? o Keep an eye and a tab on the environment and circumstances that a particular employee works in. It is a proactive measure to stay on top of things before they become issues. Engage with the employee – It is a dialogue that takes place on an ongoing basis. o Ensure people are doing their job safely for themselves and the people around them o Verify that those you supervise are working safely. o It is a cooperative discussion used to identify unsafe work conditions and discuss ways to correct these issues. It is a learning tool as well. o To understand the safety conditions of the work that those who we manage do, and to engage them in safety dialogue. o It is to understand the conditions of work to help ensure safety, and to prevent any conditions or actions that may affect safety. o A cooperative discussion to identify unsafe work conditions and discuss ways to correct these o A proactive measure to stay on top of workplace safety before issues arise o To understand the safety conditions of work and have a discussion about how to improve safe work conditions as well as correct any concerns o Engage with staff members (both work and working conditions) o Make sure all areas are safe. Group evaluation in motion – aches and pains o Make sure there are no obstruction and everyone knows where the emergency exits are o Make sure facility is safe to do work and for everyone to do tasks in a safe manner o Part of the assurance process and getting it implemented if issues need to be addressed

2. Have you performed a safety walk around in the last 12 months? o Four times o Three times o Three times o Had performed and documented walkaround o Previously, but not in current position o Thirty one in previous position, but not in current position o None o None o Conducted on behalf of supervisor

3. How do you prepare for a walkaround safety inspection? o Ad hoc. Asked supervisor to do these Quarterly o We used to get pinged by Richard’s group (Ruggieri), and that was a helpful reminder to do them. o Remembers that the program was being put on hold about a year ago to evaluate efficacy. We realized we are collecting these walkaround forms but not doing anything with them. o I am very familiar with what my team is doing so don’t need to do background research 9

EHSS Self-Assessment Report for FY12 (September 28, 2012); Focus Area #3 Assessment of EHSS Safety Walkaround Program

about their jobs. That said; I do contact them in advance to schedule time and explain the purpose of the meeting. o It is dependent on who the person is. If I am going into the field I get information about the area and type of issues associated with the work so that I am aware of the safety controls, work environment. This allows me to engage in conversation with the individual(s) from a standpoint of knowing about the work fully. o Group-level supervisors and work leads interviewed responded that it was a line management and leadership responsibility o One person did not know that supervisors and work leads performed walkarounds

4. Have you completed Walkaround Safety Training? o Yes o Have not taken o Remembers that there were briefings that went over what particular area you should be looking at and an overview of the forms. o Yes o Yes o Quarterly o Quarterly o Regularly o Not sure - quarterly o Weekly and at a minimum couple/month o Minimum once/year

5. Who is responsible for performing a Safety Walk Around? o Supervisors o Leadership team should be involved because it creates a different focus/value if leaders are involved. o By your boss. Explained that this was a quarterly responsibility o Managers or supervisors o Line management o They get information about the employee and work area in advance (as needed) o Get up and walk areas randomly o Take blank sheets and either schedule or show up and report/summarize results to supervisor o Prepared by somebody else o Supervisors/work leads or line management

6. How often do you perform a walkaround? o I have my supervisors perform these quarterly. o Quarterly as a minimum, but don’t document as readily as I perform these. o I try to do these monthly but at least quarterly so that I have the chance to get to everyone. o Quarterly is the goal. o Every day o N/A o Quarterly 10

EHSS Self-Assessment Report for FY12 (September 28, 2012); Focus Area #3 Assessment of EHSS Safety Walkaround Program

o Tentatively weekly; at a minimum couple/month o N/A

7. Did you identify other issues not on the checklist, if so what were they, how did you deal with those? o Taken original checklist MS Word, and created an excel spreadsheet and divided it by quarter. And required all supervisors to use when they did the walkarounds. o When we switched off to the spreadsheet we lost focus on it. o Our list has several areas where we can put other comments and that is how I do this o I add these observations in the comments section. o Used the checklist a number of times, and haven’t identified issues outside of the areas represented. o Most issues were resolved on the spot and CATS was opened if unable to solve immediately o CATS is not user friendly – issues fixed on the spot or put in work request o N/A o All issues fixed on the spot. No CATS items o Correct immediately and enter into CATS if it cannot be corrected immediately

8. Did you enter findings into CATS, and when would you do this based on your observations? o In my case, most observations I came across could be fixed on the spot. In some cases things liked file cabinets needed to be secured I put in a work order. o I have not yet. I’m not sure. The first step would be discuss this with my supervisor, to determine if that is the right approach o I have entered items into CATS if I can’t solve it myself immediately, and need more formal help. In some cases even in situations where I can solve the issue immediately it s entered as instantly corrected. This allows them to be noted and the data useful. o Findings have been scarce. Those not immediately corrected are entered into CATS o Electronic version is most useful o Printed hard copy checklist o Completed hard copy checklist and filled in electronically afterwards because no WiFi areas in some areas o N/A o Hard copy because of comments section. Electronic is not easy to find and locate on G Drive and not obvious o Electronic version

9. What is more useful to you when performing a walkaround o A printed (hard copy) checklist o An electronic checklist o Practical list on an iPhone – electronic tap into the mobile technology. o I don’t use a checklist when I perform the walk around. o I don’t carry a checklist when I perform a walk around. I enter the data into the online electronic form when I return to my desk. o I like using the electronic form. It allows me to enter the data once which is convenient. o Leadership involvement is important, data could be trended and put to use to help prevent recurrence and mobile version would be useful 11

EHSS Self-Assessment Report for FY12 (September 28, 2012); Focus Area #3 Assessment of EHSS Safety Walkaround Program

o Not straight forward to go from electronic and into database o Needs to be more clear for groups o Process needs more flexibility and understanding of various groups and their unique issues o More guidance and training o Worked well as long as there is a comment section o Not easy to complete online

10. How can the safety walkaround process be improved? o More mobile features, such as a WiFi interface o To target the audience. The checklist is less applicable to some groups (Administrative) so have it more narrowly applicable would be better. o By using the data to improve safety. Performing a higher-level analysis of trends as a way to help prevent recurrence and as a way to communicate to others in the Division who could benefit from this. o More senior management involvement, and actually observing work activities instead of just looking at, or focusing on office conditions related to safety, for example. o Data could be trended and communicated as a way to help improve safety performance and prevent recurrence (shared learning) o Share info at all hands meeting, flow down to department, post on website, article with Arthur Patterson and safety culture o Discuss in staff meeting, feedback to staff, identify needs o Identify trends o Process needs to be more flexibility and understanding of the various groups and their unique issues

11. How can the safety walkaround checklist be improved? o More mobile options o To target the audience. The checklist is less applicable to some groups (Administrative) so have it more narrowly applicable would be better. o It has a lot of questions that don’t pertain to what my people do. Will propose changes to supervisor to simplify this o Do see potential for using an iPad o Checklist could be more streamlined so that it’s easier to navigate. o Install WiFi in all areas of lab to better utilize electronic version o Works well as long as there is a comments section

12. How can the information gathered during a safety walk around be used? o Standardization. Have the ability to tweak and gather information but you lose the ability to have flexibility for the uniqueness of each work area. o Looking for trends. o A useful measure to tally the end results of these forms and discuss it at a gathering (all hands) or Group-level meetings to identify trends o The information is not trended as well as it could be so that we could provide feedback for common areas of concern to prevent recurrence. o I think this would have value, if we identified trends and then communicated effectively to help prevent recurrence. 12

EHSS Self-Assessment Report for FY12 (September 28, 2012); Focus Area #3 Assessment of EHSS Safety Walkaround Program

Appendix B Summary of reviews of other LBNL Organizations’ Safety Walkaround Programs

Engineering Division:

Engineering Division has a website for Walkaround safety that consists of training materials, a safety walkaround video, and informational resources to help guide supervisors in understanding their safety expectations and responsibilities. There is also a link to the EHSS safety walkaround checklist, and a link to the “LBL – Safety Walk Through Management System” which can be used to record walkaround observations.

Engineering Division requires all Supervisors to complete EHS0027; “Performing an Effective Safety Walkaround.” In addition, in a document titled: “What are my ES&H responsibilities as a manager, supervisor, and/or PI,” it states “personally perform walkarounds with appropriate frequency.”

Walkarounds are discussed in the Division ISM Plan which states:

“Supervisors are responsible for formulating their own walkaround plans and schedules and discussing these plans, reviews, and results with their respective supervisor and direct reports. Supervisors are encouraged to document their observations in the Engineering walkaround database (or elsewhere) and to share walkaround observations and findings with their peers during safety meetings to increase knowledge and promote improvement.”

Engineering Division’s walkaround program consists of the following:

 Dedicated website and resources for supervisors, work leads and PIs to help the management chain understand the importance of walkarounds, and how to conduct these effectively.  A requirement for all supervisors to complete EHS0027 Performing an Effective Safety Walkaround  That supervisors are responsible for formulating their own walkaround plans and schedules  That supervisors are encouraged to document their observations in the Engineering database or elsewhere

Joint Genome Institute (JGI):

In support of better establishing and understanding a baseline reference of the LBNL Safety Walkaround Program, the team contacted and discussed the JGI program with the assigned Division Safety Coordinator. This effort revealed a number of things about their current Walkthrough Program. Though there is not a lot of discussion of the program in the JGI ISM Plan, the process is well defined via the level of detail provided in the program documentation, such as the Google Docs Walkthrough forms.

13

EHSS Self-Assessment Report for FY12 (September 28, 2012); Focus Area #3 Assessment of EHSS Safety Walkaround Program

The basics of the program are that every supervisor, work lead, and manager is required to perform a quarterly walkthrough, and document it via the Google Docs program. The forms are extensive and require written responses describing observations, not simply a checklist (e.g., with a “yes” or “no” response). Indeed, the form is set up in such a way that line management performing the walkarounds are required to “confirm a safe condition.” This aspect helps assure full Line Management engagement in the walkaround process. For the most recent quarter, there is a 100% rate of compliance among the JGI line management.

The JGI program provides many elements of rigor that are not present in the current EHSS Walkaround Program. For example, the entire program and the related data are maintained in one computerized system. This allows tracking and trending that can be difficult with multiple approaches to data acquisition and storage.

The JGI Safety Coordinator volunteered to help our Division (or any other Division) to develop and implement a similar electronic system.

Life Sciences:

As Safety Coordinator for LSD, Scott Taylor is responsible for nine Buildings (Potter Street, Donner, 55, 55A, 56, 64, 83, 84, and 86). He walks his random lab spaces once/week, walks all spaces once/month, and twice/year walks and covers all spaces with Gary Karpen. He also does a walkaround at least once if not more per month with Chan Ho Yi at Potter Street.

He no longer uses the standard Safety Walkaround Checklist, but instead has opted to interview his generators to cover work scope and ISM. Scott has a checklist which he has developed and uses as a reminder checklist to remind himself of what to cover. Most of the action items discovered are corrected “on-the-spot,” so very few deficiencies are entered into CATS. He finds that CATS is not user-friendly because CATS requires you to have a corrective action entered even if you don’t have one, otherwise you are unable to enter it into the CATS system.

Scott has implemented a program for LSD which if somebody has an issue or sees an unsafe practice; Scott receives a call from that person and conducts a spontaneous walkthrough. LSD has taken the proactive approach rather than a reactionary approach by conducting spontaneous walkthroughs (rather than formal walkthroughs) which are more ISM-based than checklist-based. Scott finds this approach more effective, as the inspections are not “expected” to get a better representation of issues which may be occurring.

14