Solution Manual for Industrial Safety and Health Management, 7th Edition

CHAPTER 1 SOLUTIONS TO END-OF-CHAPTER EXERCISES 1.1. Some standards are frequently cited because these standards cover (1) areas in which industries are having difficulty complying, or (2) areas in which enforcement agencies are giving a great deal of attention, or both. 1.2. Many aspects about the standards might be useful. The text emphasizes the importance of the “why” behind the standards that do exist. 1.3. No. It is an unattainable goal. Such a strategy fails to recognize the need for discrimination among hazards to be corrected. 1.4. (1) Hazards that are physically infeasible to correct. (2) Hazards that are physically feasible, but are economically infeasible, to correct. (3) Hazards that are physically feasible and economically feasible to correct. 1.5. (1) Causes other more serious hazards to be overlooked while reacting to less serious ones. (2) Deteriorates credibility with top management. 1.6. A safety hazard is acute, causes or threatens to cause injuries, and is usually more obvious than a health hazard. A health hazard is chronic, causes or threatens to cause illness in the long run, and is usually more subtle than a safety hazard. 1.7. Some example safety hazards: unguarded belts, pulleys, gears, saws, and punch presses; fires; explosions; open platforms; defective ladders; welding near open flammable or combustible materials; overloaded or defective cranes, hoists, or slings; ungrounded electrical equipment; exposed live electrical conductors. Some example health hazards: coal dust, cotton dust, chronic loud noise, welding fumes, asbestos, vinyl chloride, lead fumes, mercury, manganese, cadmium. 1.8. Some valid examples are spray paint, coal dust, benzene, and carbon disulfide. 1.9. Some valid examples are noise, welding, and radiation. 1.10. Health hazards are usually more subtle than safety hazards; the industrial hygienist must look for “unseen” hazards. 1.11. Safety hazards may appear more grave, but there are probably many health hazard-related illnesses and deaths which are not documented. 1.12. Work training, statistics, job placement, industrial relations. 1.13. A comprehensive safety and health program involves engineering, and placement of the function within the personnel department may restrict authority too much. 1.14. This places the Safety and Health Manager in an adversarial position with enforcement officials. 1.15. CPSC concentrates on the responsibility of the manufacturers of the machines and equipment, whereas OSHA concentrates on the responsibility of the employer who places the equipment into use in the workplace. 1.16. (NSC) National Safety Council 1.17. ANSI (American National Standards Institute) Prepares voluntary standards for occupational safety and health among other types of standards. OSHA adopted many ANSI standards early on, invoking its temporary right to promulgate “national consensus standards.” © 2019 Pearson Education, Inc., Hoboken, NJ. All rights reserved. This material is protected under all copyright laws as they currently exist. No portion of this material may be reproduced, in any form or by any means, without permission in writing from the publisher. 1.18. OSHA is concerned with hazardous exposures to workers, i.e. worker safety and health. EPA is concerned with hazardous exposures to the public, particularly as these hazards affect the earth, water, and atmosphere. Many safety and health hazards inside the plant and outside are the same, or are caused by the same chemical agents or physical factors. Thus a firm’s compliance with both EPA and OSHA regulations are often the responsibility of the same individual. 1.19. 1-800-CDC-INFO; the agency that responds is, obviously, NIOSH, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. 1.20. Passage of The Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, which created the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). 1.21. Prior to passage of the OSHA law occupational health seemed remote and not of a great deal of concern. Plant nurses were concerned with first aid and physical examinations. After OSHA, occupational disease prevention rose in importance. 1.22 The Bhopal, India disaster in which the release of methyl isocyanate gas killed 2500 civilians. This incident showed that dangerous working conditions do not just impact the workers, but everyone around a facility. 1.23 Reductions in energy consumption, for example, can lower a firm’s bottom line energy cost while decreasing its impact on the environment. 1.24 The four environmental issues addresses were global warming, green engineering, petroleum conservation, and tobacco smoke. 1.25 Green engineering is focused on the reduction of carbon fuels, which in turn directly impact global warming. 1.26 Systems Safety is considered essential in airlines, aerospace, and hospitals. These are industries in which the failure of a system can be catastrophic. 1.27 Systems Safety recognizes the benefit of such life-cycle planning and design, and the System Safety Society is one of the societies dedicated to the movement. 1.28 A chronic effect is a long-term deterioration due to prolonged exposure whereas an acute effect is a sudden reaction to a severe condition. 1.29 A safety hazard would be a sudden exposure to sound loud enough to damage hearing with one exposure. A health hazard would be continued long-term exposure to sound above the PEL which could lead to damage over a course of time. 1.30 The effects of occupational health fatalities are often delayed whereas occupational safety fatalities generally occur immediately. 1.31 The national trade associations 1.32 The primary purpose of such materials is to promote the industry products. 1.33 NIOSH 1.34 OSHA itself 1.35 ANSI and NFPA 1.36 Fear of triggering an inspection. For that reason OSHA allows questions to be posed in a hypothetical format. 1.37 The aerospace industry 1.38 The Systems Safety Society © 2019 Pearson Education, Inc., Hoboken, NJ. All rights reserved. This material is protected under all copyright laws as they currently exist. No portion of this material may be reproduced, in any form or by any means, without permission in writing from the publisher. CHAPTER 2 SOLUTIONS TO END-OF-CHAPTER EXERCISES 2.1. The achievement of worker safety lies principally in the hands of the workers themselves and their direct supervisors; thus it is principally a line function. Safety and health managers, however, are staff positions. 2.2. Acting as a facilitator in assisting, motivating, and advising the line function in achieving worker safety and health. 2.3. They too often are such emotional crusaders for the cause that they lose their credibility and with it their eligibility to be considered a “manager.” 2.4. That safety must be achieved by line personnel facilitated by the staff function. 2.5. Go to top management to re-determine its level of commitment to safety and health. 2.6. The workers compensation system is a state, not federal system. The system is nearly 100 years old; the first workers compensation laws were introduced into state legislatures in 1909. 2.7. The ostensible purpose is to protect the worker by providing statutory compensation levels to be paid by the employer for various injuries that may be incurred by the worker. An ulterior feature is immunity from additional liability for the employer, except where “gross negligence” can be proven. 2.8. Management contends that some risk is inescapable in any line of work. Therefore, their answer to the question is no. The worker bears some of the risk in return for his/her pay for the job. 2.9. The employer or the employer’s insurance carrier. 2.10. An industrial safety consultant employed by an insurance company. consultant’s objective is to keep claims low among clients of his insurance company. 2.11. A standardized recordkeeping system for industrial safety established by the National Safety Council and later superseded by OSHA’s system of recordkeeping. 2.12. Differences in recordkeeping requirements for OSHA and its predecessor Z16.1 system. Other variations in conditions, such as employment levels and recession cycles impact recordkeeping. 2.13. The “lost workdays” method would not reveal some very serious accidents, especially fatalities, that do not cause a loss of a workday. 2.14. One that is work-related and requires medical treatment. 2.15. 22 x 200,000 150 x 40 x 50 2.16. The injury/illness incidence rate computation prescribed by OSHA relates to 200,000 work-hours (roughly one year for a 100-employee firm), whereas the traditional frequency rate relates to 1,000,000 work-hours (roughly one year for a 500 employee firm). Also the OSHA injury/illness incidence rate applies to all work-related injuries/illnesses which require medical treatment, whereas the traditional frequency rate related only to “lost-time” cases. 2.17. Frequency measures the numbers of cases per standard quantity of workhours. Severity measures the total impact of cases in terms of total “lost workdays” per standard quantity of workhours. Seriousness is the ratio of severity to frequency and measures the average seriousness of all cases. All three are obsolete terms now. = The 44 = 14.67 3 © 2019 Pearson Education, Inc., Hoboken, NJ. All rights reserved. This material is protected under all copyright laws as they currently exist. No portion of this material may be reproduced, in any form or by any means, without permission in writing from the publisher. 2.18. OSHA Form 300a, the annual “Summary of Work-Related Injuries and Illnesses” must be posted on February 1 each year and remain posted until April 30. 2.19. For general records: 5 years (Chapter 5 will reveal longer retention requirements for certain records.) 2.20. Yes; they can help to discover hazards, but they can also dilute responsibility for workplace safety and health and can degenerate into spy parties. Without adequate orientation, safety and health committees can often become unreasonable. 2.21. Direct costs are the “tip of the iceberg” compared to indirect costs. 2.22. (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) Costs of wages paid for time lost by workers who were not injured. Cost of damage to material or equipment. Cost of wages paid for time lost by the injured worker. Extra cost of overtime work necessitated by the accident. Cost of wages paid supervisors for time required for activities necessitated by the accident. Wage cost caused by decreased output of injured worker after return to work. Cost of learning period of new worker. Uninsured medical cost borne by the company. Cost of time spent by higher supervision and clerical workers. Miscellaneous costs such as public liability claims, rental equipment, and lost sales. 2.23. Noninjury accidents are usually caused by the same types of conditions and practices that result in injury accidents. 2.24. First-line supervisors 2.25 A six-month work period = 1000 hours. (a) General injury/illness rate = (b) Traditional frequency rate = 2.26 Total Injury Incident Rate LWDI 2.27. 1∗200,000 200,000 15*200,000 40∗1,000 (3+1)∗200,000 = 60,000 = 3.33 30∗2,000 30∗2,000 (a) Total incidence rate = 3,000,000 40*1,000 40,000 4∗200,000 800,000 = = = 75 = 40,000 = 20 800,000 = 60,000 = 13.33 (3+1+1+1+1) x 200,000 62 x 2000 11.29 (b) (According to current OSHA recordkeeping policy, count calendar days, not just workweek days, i.e. 7 days/wk, not 5 days/wk) Number-of-lost-workdays rate (c) LWDI = = (7+7+42) x 200,000 62 x 2000 = 90.3 1 x 200,000 62 x 2000 = 1.6 (excludes illnesses and all fatalities) 2.28. The 12 first-aid cases are non-recordable. The two illnesses do not enter into the calculation of the LWDI, but the lost-time injuries would. Therefore, the LWDI would be calculated as: LWDI = 3 x 200,000 = 6.67 for the 4-month period © 2019 Pearson Education, Inc., Hoboken, NJ. All rights reserved. This material is protected under all copyright laws as they currently exist. No portion of this material may be reproduced, in any form or by any means, without permission in writing from the publisher. 135 x (4/12) x 2000 Since 6.67 > 3.6, this would indicate that improvement is needed to meet the objective. However, if no more lost time injuries occurred for the year (an unlikely outcome): LWDI = 3 x 200,000 = 300 135 x 2000 135 = 2.22 and the objective LWDI of 3.6 would easily be met. 2.29. The classification of the 12 accident files in this case study is subject to some variation due to individual judgment. This analysis will assume the following classification: Columns on the OSHA 300 Log File 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 G H I J K L M1 M2 M3 M4 M5 M6 not recordable X 14 X not recordable X 7 28 X X X X X not recordable X X X 14 X 4 3 38 X not recordable X Column Totals: 1 (a) LWDI 0 3 42 70 X X 4 2 0 1 0 1 = 3 x 200,000 = 1 = .33 900 x 2000 3 (The LWDI excludes fatalities, excludes illnesses, and includes all “lost-time” injuries, including those injuries in which the worker has “restricted work activity days,” i.e. is temporarily transferred to another job, even if there are no days away from work.) Total Injury rate = (4 – 1) x 200,000 = 3 = .33 (excluding fatalities) 900 x 2000 9 Total Illness rate = (2+0+1+1) x 200,000 = 4 = .44 900 x 2000 9 Fatality rate = 1 x 200,000 = 1 = .11 900 x 2000 9 Number-of-lost-workdays rate = (70 + 38) x 200,000 900 x 2000 = 108/9 Specific hazard incidence rate (fractures) = 12 = (1 + 1) x 200,000 900 x 2000 = 2/9 = .22 Total Incidence(including fatalities = (8∗200,000) 900 ?? 2000 = 8/9 = .89 (b) Comparing National Safety Council Statistics for 2000 (see Figure 2.2 of the text): © 2019 Pearson Education, Inc., Hoboken, NJ. All rights reserved. This material is protected under all copyright laws as they currently exist. No portion of this material may be reproduced, in any form or by any means, without permission in writing from the publisher. Total incidence (including fatalities) .89 << 6.8 therefore, much safer than the all industry average 2.30. Note to instructor, as is sometimes the case, despite the authors’ best efforts there was a change to the OSHA form 300 in the first printing of the Seventh Edition which has been subsequently changed in subsequent printings. The column K and colun L were reversed. Please share the updated Figure 2.9 below with your students when assigning this problem. To complete the table, add up the columns to get the following totals: File 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 G Empl A Empl B Empl C Empl D Empl E Empl F Empl G Empl H Empl I Column Totals: H I X X J K X L 8 56 M4 M5 M6 X X X X X 2 X X 3 M3 X X X 2 M2 14 X 1 M1 X 3 X 3 16 67 X X 4 2 2 0 0 1 (a) Injury incidence = (4 – 1) x 200,000 = 6 (excludes the fatality) 50 x 2000 (b) Illness incidence = 5 x 200,000 = 10 50 x 2000 (c) Number-of-lost-workdays rate = (67 + 16) x 200,000 50 x 2000 (counts restricted work activity days) = 83 x 200,000 100,000 = 166 (d) LWDI = 1 x 200,000 = 2 50 x 2000 © 2019 Pearson Education, Inc., Hoboken, NJ. All rights reserved. This material is protected under all copyright laws as they currently exist. No portion of this material may be reproduced, in any form or by any means, without permission in writing from the publisher. (Don't count injuries in which there were no lost workdays; also exclude fatalities) 2.31 2014 premium 2014 modifier Unadjusted premium: 2016 modifier 2016 premium: Actual savings: 2.32. $120,000 1.05 $120,000/1.05 = $114,286 .80 $114,286 x .80 = $91,429 $120,000 – $91,429 = $28,571 % savings = ($28,571/120,000) x 100% = 23.8% a. Lost Workday Cases: OSHA 300 cols H + I b. Cases Involving Days Away From Work & Deaths: OSHA 300 cols G + H c. Nonfatal Cases Without Lost Workdays: OSHA 300 col J d. Total Cases: OSHA 300 cols G + H + I + J (or the total of all of the M columns) e. Lost Workdays OSHA 300 cols K + L f. Days Away From Work OSHA 300 col L 2.33. Note to instructor, as is sometimes the case, despite the authors’ best efforts there was a change to the OSHA form 300 in the first printing of the Seventh Edition which has been subsequently changed in subsequent printings. The column K and colun L were reversed. Please share the updated Figure 2.9 below with your students when assigning this problem To complete the table, add up the columns to get the following totals: File Column totals: G 1 H 2 I 3 J 3 K 16 L 67 M1 4 M2 2 M3 2 © 2019 Pearson Education, Inc., Hoboken, NJ. All rights reserved. This material is protected under all copyright laws as they currently exist. No portion of this material may be reproduced, in any form or by any means, without permission in writing from the publisher. M4 0 M5 1 The following calculations are compared to National Safety Council (NSC) estimates reported in Injury Facts, 2016 edition (numbers reported are 2014): Cases Involving Days Away From Work & Deaths = (1+2) x 200,000 = 1.82 versus 1.8 (NSC) (cols G + H) 165 x 2000 Total recordable cases = (1+2+3+3) x 200,000 = (cols G + H + I + J) 165 x 2000 Days Away From Work (cols L) = 16 x 200,000 = 165 x 2000 5.45 vs 6.1 (NSC) 9.70 (Injury Facts, 2016 edition, reports 85,000,000 days away from work for injuries incurred in the previous year (2001). The total worker force was estimated at approximately 136,500,000. Applying the formula to the national data: Days Away From Work = 65,000,000 x 200,000 146,307,000 x 2000 = 44.43 This figure is considerably higher than the 9.70 figure calculated for the data in this problem. 2.34. Social Media has brought about increased scrutiny on companies with poor safety records and is one of the hidden costs from the tip of the iceberg. 2.35. Each year the NSC publishes updates for these estimates in Injury Facts. Students might want to check the library for the latest update. The 2016 edition shows the following estimates: fatality: $1,000,000 worker injury: $29,000 2.36. 2.37. 2.38. A shooting in a nightclub killing 49 people. Action on Smoking and Health lobbies for OSHA to promulgate a standard on Indoor Air Quality. OSHA has proposed a standard, but as of early 2018 it had not been promulgated as a Final Standard. Workplace violence 2.39. The company did preemployment drug screening tests for all applicants in a three month hiring period (750 applicants). Surprisingly, half of the 750 applicants failed the test. The test was a urinalysis designed to indicate whether drugs had been used in the preceding two or three days and was conducted by a hospital laboratory service. The test results indicated that the use of marijuana was the most prevalent. ALCOA hired 130 applicants who passed the test and reported that as a group those hired were better workers than those hired prior to the drug screening program. 2.40. The firm may face discrimination charges unless it is fair and even-handed in its policies for hiring and employee termination in cases of alcohol or drug abuse. The same rules that are applied to new employees should be applied to existing employees. 2.41. No; workplace homicide is often associated with despair over downsizing or a termination notice for some other reason. There is evidence that homicide in the workplace is committed in a methodical and selective way. 2.42. Although pre-employment testing has been shown to be effective in recruiting dependable and safer employees, the program can run afoul of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 if the testing program is discriminatory against females or racial minorities. The EEOC has published guidelines for such programs. Of particular interest is the comparative failure rates of the tests when the scores of white males is compared to those of females or racial minorities. Another consideration © 2019 Pearson Education, Inc., Hoboken, NJ. All rights reserved. This material is protected under all copyright laws as they currently exist. No portion of this material may be reproduced, in any form or by any means, without permission in writing from the publisher.