Businesses look to Environmental (HS) professionals to set up the
company's International (and this applies to Domestic as well) Environmental
(HS) programs that are compliant with the multitude of regulations.
A question arises in my mind as to why look to a non-lawyer to
establish a program designed to defend a company against legal complaints or
violations? The answer is simple as the E (HS) person works on the
practical side of working with these regulations. Typically the regulation is civil in nature,
but there is a criminal side as well.
The difference is essentially based upon intent.
Example: A company has a
hazardous waste drum of methyl ethyl death that it is transporting to a
hazardous waste disposal facility. As it
is being moved within the warehouse of the company it falls over and
spills. This was probably an avoidable
error, but there was no intent. So it is
civil. Versus the same company taking
the drum to the creek in the back of the company property and dumping the
contents.
There are many E (HS) professionals who understand the
regulations, and how to implement an E (HS) program to defend against fines,
and penalties. In fact the way most companies still design, or want to
have designed, their E (HS) programs is around regulations, based upon the
strategy of 'Defense'. And so this is how the common E (HS) professional
is trained in establishing and implementing a program, from the defensive mode.
The predominate goal and question is "what needs to be done to meet
the requirements of the regulations"?
The problem with this strategy is that the company is always
chasing a ghost, and blaming the ghost for being difficult to be caught.
What does this mean? Minimum requirements are more difficult to
attain because these tend to be moving targets. Regulations, laws, and
the like are in a constant ebb and flow of change. The regulator has
their own view of what the regulations say it is all quite variable.
We need to go back to the basic of regulations (aka laws, rules,
etc) to understand how to design a Environmental (HS) Management.
Regulations are the guidelines, or parameters, of how society
operates. Without boundaries there would be anarchy, or people going
wild. There are two primary thoughts on the implementation of EHS
regulations:
1) Strict - The interpretation of the regulation is based on
exact wording, with no ability to modify based upon the circumstance.
2) Intent - The interpretation of the regulation is based on
what the drafters intended to address, this gives the ability to adjust based
on the particular circumstances.
Pros and Cons on each thought, but there is always a middle
ground.
In the USA, in the Environmental world the regulators are moving
towards risk based, which is along the lines of 'intent' as described under
implementation. The Health & Safety world exists mainly in mood of
strict, so that each element is prescribed in the regulation.
This is why the typical approach of most companies to 'chase
ghosts' simply does not work, and frustrates all involved. So how to
determine how to build your EHS program knowing that there are wide variance in
variables?
Before any EHS program can begin there needs to be a meeting of
the minds. Senior decision makers must decide what are the no BS EHS
priorities of the company. This can be defined in the mission statement.
But also needs to be defined in policy. If senior decision makers
are not 100% behind this endeavor, then it is destined to fail before it ever
begins.
If the company’s Senior decision makers are not supportive of EHS,
a professional EHS person has a choice to make; either continue on with the
good fight hoping that management changes its mind (aka Change Maker
Extraordinary), or leave for a company that is proactive and in tuned with
having a world class EHS program. The Change Maker Extraordinary has to
be ready for the frustration of being blamed when penalties, violations, and
perhaps even injury or deaths occur, even though they tried to make a corrective
change. This means having to keep a file of memos documenting each
corrective action denied in the event they have to defend themselves in court.
As long as the Senior decision makers are supportive, being a
normal Change Maker is easy. A normal Change Maker is one that works to
change the employee mind set regarding EHS.
Still not a easy task, but doable.
This involves following the steps outlined here.
So now let us assume the Senior decision makers have blessed the
establishment of your world class EHS program. Now what?
When I learned to fire a hand-gun as a police officer the
instructor taught me not to focus on the sights, but to look through the sights with both eyes open to the target. Bring the target into focus and align the out of focus sights
with it. This is the same strategy.
In order to determine that you need to know how far is the target,
what is the windage, etc. Now this leads to the first item on your to do list. Define your target or goal. It can't be to be compliant with regulations, or zero-accidents, these are measurements of how well you are doing. The goal has to be built around the business and its particular operation. It encompasses operation's goal. This seems easy, so try it. Oh by the way, it is impossible to do without input from operations, and senior management.
THINK SMART
Let's move on to the next step.
This is the Baseline Risk Assessment (BRA). The BRA gives you your target parameters. It also gives you the risk priorities. From this a firing solution, also known as solutions to the risks, can be designed based on company priorities.
THINK SMART
- Specific, Clear and Understandable
- Measurable, Verifiable, and Results Oriented
- Attainable
- Relevant to the Operation
- Time-Bound with a Schedule and Milestones
Let's move on to the next step.
This is the Baseline Risk Assessment (BRA). The BRA gives you your target parameters. It also gives you the risk priorities. From this a firing solution, also known as solutions to the risks, can be designed based on company priorities.
The BRA is a no-harm no-foul assessment of a facility. The
results are never to be used to penalize anyone no matter what the issues
maybe, except if there are serious life threatening items. The BRA provides the user with a clear
understanding of the current state of affairs for a facility. It cannot be overstated the results of a BRA
can never be used against the facility management. Otherwise the likely hood of getting a real
picture of the facility is slim to none.
On the Internet there are many examples of what a risk assessment
should look like. Which one to use? Not anyone of these examples will match your
facility. So now what?
The EHS manager must take time to learn about the facility, the
staff, and the operations, usually a week depending on size; Preliminary Phase. From this information they will then devise a
BRA that is broken down into the various media to be evaluated; commonly called
multi-media. Depending on the operation
and size the evaluation maybe first divided according to location. If the facility has a warehouse, a
manufacturing area, a maintenance shop, and administration office. Each area would then have the media
associated with it assigned such as warehouse may have haz/non-haz waste
storage, forklift, noise, lighting, etc.
The manufacturing area may have electrical, mechanical, LOTO, noise,
haz/non-haz waste handling, ergonomics, etc.
And on and on. Each area will
have its media defined in advance of the BRA which should be as all
encompassing as possible.
The BRA is then conducted unannounced by the EHS
manager. There should be no time for
preparation. The objective is to get a
real picture of the facility. I remember
many inspections being conducted to look at how operations really look, but
these inspections would be scheduled. The managers would all run around cleaning up, making sure
everyone’s desk were clear, and we were dressed appropriately. Once the inspection was over, everything when
back to normal. Nothing is accomplished,
except wasting everyone’s time.
The attitude of the EHS assessor should be cordial, open, and overall cooperative. Dress should be no better than the shop level manager. The goal is to be relatable. Speak slowly, and never use EHS jargon or acronyms; think Clear, Concise, Communication. In fact the less you talk the better. The assessor's primary tools are eyes and ears.
Assessors should conduct the assessments alone. This way they are not navigated, and there is less distractions. All questions will be written down and brought up after the walk through.
END OF PART 1