Appendix E:
Past Experience Using Selected Strategy Elements in ROHSEI

 

Case Study Validation 1: MSDS Software Case

The ROHSEI case study determined the value of implementing MSDS software for the purpose of authoring, maintaining and distributing MSDSs in the work place. There were three possible scenarios:

  1. Industry accepted software run internally
  2. Federal sector software run internally
  3. Outsourced solution

The MSDS program incorporated six elements with defined costs for each step. The value of an MSDS program includes the financial benefits associated with reduction of risk and improvement of the business process. Incorporating these elements enabled a full accounting of how the investment in running an internal MSDS program could improve the business process.

The case study used “Design and Engineering Personnel Time” to calculate total operating costs within the data element “design and engineering” in the quantitative tool.

The case study used “EHS Personnel Time” to calculate what would be considered the total operating costs within the data element “IH and safety staff time spent on managing the risk” and within the data element “process/steps/motion” in the quantitative tool.

The case study used “EHS Supplies” to calculate total operating costs within the data element “IH Supplies” and “Maintenance costs” in the quantitative tool.

The case study used “Operational Personnel Time” to calculate total operating costs within the data element “Operational Personnel Time” in the quantitative tool.

The case study used “Training” to calculate total operating costs within the data elements “training and meetings” in the quantitative tool.

The company used “Vendors, Consultants and Contract Labor” to calculate total operating costs within the data elements “Vendors, Consultants and Contract Labor” in the quantitative tool.

The MSDS software case study indicated:

  • The users had access to the data.
  • The users understood the elements.
  • The users understood the elements over time.
  • Different users understood the elements.
  • The users were able to calculate the value associated with the various project scenarios.

 

Case Study Validation 2: Integrated Health

The ROHSEI case study determined the value of implementing onsite occupational health clinics at every site for the purpose of decreasing off-site doctors’ office visits and reducing the cost of medical management of Workers’ Compensation and Short-Term Disability cases. The investment was intended to increase the overall productivity of employees and improve overall health.

The integrated health program incorporated three elements with defined costs for each step. The value of an integrated health program includes the financial benefits associated with reduction of risk, improvement of the business process and improved employee health. The incorporation of these elements enabled a full accounting of how investment in an internal integrated health care management program could improve the business process.

The case study used “Medical Costs and Insurance” to calculate the total cost of occupational illnesses and injuries within the data element “Average medical costs of occupational injury/illness cases associated with the hazard(s)” in the quantitative tool. Reduction in these costs was equated to improved employee health.

The case study used “Other Personnel Time” to calculate total operating costs within the data element “other personnel time spent on managing the risk” in the quantitative tool.

The case study used “Operational Personnel Time” to calculate the total operating costs within the data element “operational Personnel Time” in the quantitative tool.

The company used “Vendors, Consultants and Contract Labor” to calculate total operating costs within the data elements “Vendors, Consultants and Contract Labor” in the quantitative tool.

The Integrated Health case study indicated:

  • The users had access to the data.
  • The users understood the elements.
  • The users understood the elements over time.
  • Different users understood the elements.
  • The users were able to calculate the value associated with the various project scenarios.

 

Case Study Validation 3: Noise Reduction

The ROHSEI case study determined the value of investment in engineering controls to reduce noise levels. By installing line braces and reinforcement structures, the company was able to minimize vibration and ultimately reduce noise levels. The noise reduction program incorporated 18 elements with defined costs for each step. The value of a noise reduction program includes the financial benefits associated with reduction of risk, improvement of the business process and improved employee health. The incorporation of these elements enabled a full accounting of the costs of investment in risk reduction and the resulting improvement in the business process to be included as part of the value calculation. The company took into account the following elements in the ROHSEI analysis:

  1. Business Interruption Insurance
  2. Design and Engineering Personnel Time
  3. EHS Personnel Time
  4. EHS Supplies
  5. Emergency Response
  6. Fines and Penalties
  7. Legal Fees, Workers Comp & Settlements
  8. Loss of Raw Materials, Product
  9. Material Recovery
  10. Material Substitution
  11. Medical Costs and Insurance
  12. Noise Reduction- Lost Sales
  13. Operational Personnel Time
  14. Operations and Maintenance
  15. Other Personnel Time
  16. Production Downtime
  17. Property Damage Insurance
  18. Vendors, Consultants and Contract Labor

 

The case study used EHS Personnel Time to calculate total operating costs within the data elements IH and safety staff time spent on managing the risk and process/steps/motion in the quantitative tool.

The case study used “Design and Engineering Personnel Time” to calculate total operating costs within the data element “design and engineering” in the quantitative tool.

The case study used “Legal Fees, Workers’ Compensation & Settlements” to calculate what would be considered the total non-medical costs of incidents within the data element “Internal and external legal fees, workers’ compensation and settlements” in the quantitative tool.

The case study used “Medical Costs and Insurance” to calculate total cost of occupational illnesses and injuries within the data element “Average medical costs of occupational injury/illness cases associated with the hazard(s)” in the quantitative tool.

The Noise Reduction case study indicated:

  • The users had access to the data.
  • The users understood the elements.
  • The users understood the elements over time.
  • Different users understood the elements.
  • The users were able to calculate the value associated with the various project scenarios.

 

Case Study Validation 4: In-House Versus Contract Manufacturing

The ROHSEI case study examined the costs associated with two scenarios of manufacturing a new product in house versus using a contract manufacturer. The material to be manufactured had significant toxicity and would require specialized handling at either an internal or contract facility. The three scenarios considered were:

  1. Manufacture in-house with PPE for operator protection
  2. Manufacture in-house with engineering controls for operator protection
  3. Manufacture at a third party contract manufacturing location

 

The analysis utilized seven elements to define the costs and benefits associated with each of the scenarios.

To manufacture in house, specialized equipment was required to be purchased and installed in order to contain the hazardous product and ensure an adequate level of employee protection. “Equipment Purchase” was the parameter used to account for the cost of the equipment. The company also captured the “Equipment Installation” to account for the cost of preparing the equipment for operation.

Once the equipment was ready for operation the company would conduct manufacturing trials where product was manufactured in the new process and validated as meeting acceptable quality standards. The cost of conducting the validation trials with its associated labor and material impacts was captured as Internal Manufacturing Runs.

Manufacturing conducted at a third party location would also require validation trials for which the company would be financially responsible. These costs were captured in the parameter “3rd Party Manufacturing Runs”.

The company also accounted for the additional cost of “Personal Protective Equipment” under the scenario that allowed for in-house manufacturing but with a less contained process, thus allowing higher levels of airborne exposure to employees.

In the contract manufacturing scenario the intermediate product would be manufactured offsite but would be shipped back to the owner for further processing. The company captured these costs as “Shipping” expenses.

The in-house versus contracting case study indicated:

  • The user had or was able to develop or collect the data.
  • The user understood or was able to create the data elements.
  • The user understood the elements during the course of the study.
  • Different project team participants understood the elements.
  • The project team was able to calculate the value associated with the various project
    scenarios.

 

Case Study Validation 5: Need for Machine Replacement

The ROHSEI case evaluated the options associated with keeping, repairing or purchasing a type of production equipment. The study looked at the cost of the options but also considered the potential reduction in injuries associated with the existing equipment as a potential benefit associated with the final decision. Three scenarios were considered:

  1. Continue to use the existing machines
  2. Upgrade the existing equipment
  3. Purchase new replacement equipment

 

The company identified the Average Incident Cost associated with accidents which had occurred on or around the existing equipment. They also estimated the potential reduction in the number of incidents associated with each of the three scenarios.

The new machines require fewer employees to operate the equipment and the company captured the associated employee costs as “Direct Labor”. Likewise each equipment scenario requires additional levels of maintenance and other support which the company calculated as “Indirect Labor”.

The reliability and maintainability of the equipment also varies by scenario. The case study used “Production Downtime” to capture the costs associated with the product activity that was lost due to the equipment being unavailable due to maintenance and repair.

The equipment in each scenario had differing rates of generating scrap. The case study used “Scrap Costs” to capture the cost of the amount of wasted product from the machines in each scenario.

Because of the accidents that have occurred on the equipment, the company has had to resort to using “Temporary Labor” to replace injured workers.

The Machine Replacement case study indicated:

  • The users had access or were able to obtain or develop the necessary data.
  • The users understood the data elements.
  • The users understood the elements over time.
  • The different members of the protect team understood the elements.
  • The users were able to calculate the value of the elements associated with the various project scenarios.

 

Case Study Validation 6: Personal Protective Equipment versus Containment

The ROHSEI case study determined the value of using alternative means of containment compared to the use of personal protective equipment. There were three possible scenarios evaluated to ensure employee protection:

  1. 1. Continue the use of Personal Protective Equipment
  2. Invest in a Flexible Containment System
  3. Invest in Local Exhaust Ventilation

 

The company identified the elimination of the “Cost of Personal Protective Equipment” as a potential benefit of investment in engineering controls. The investment would result in both an improved business process and a reduced level of risk.

As part of the analysis of possible process changes, alternative methods of managing dust associated with potent compounds were evaluated. The parameters “Continuous Liner” and“Standard Drum Bag” were associated with operational steps in the various scenarios which described improvements in the business process.

By considering alternatives to the current operation, the study showed it would be possible to eliminate or significantly reduce the parameter “Cleaning Labor” which would result in an improvement in the business process.

A parameter “Flexible Enclosure” described the cost of the equipment associated with one scenario. It was designed to improve the business process.

The company identified that additional “Maintenance” was required by the containment projects. This cost was incorporated into the overall calculation of the investment required to implement the alternative.

The personal protective equipment versus containment case study indicated:

  • The users had access or could acquire the data.
  • The users understood the data elements.
  • The users understood the data elements over time.
  • Different users on the project team understood the elements.
  • The project team was able to calculate the value contributed by the data elements.

 

Case Study Validation 7: Tyvek Recycling

The ROHSEI case study determined the value of recycling the company’s Tyvek suits and booties after use rather than outsourcing their destruction through incineration.


The Tyvek Recycling program incorporated two new elements with defined costs for each step. The value of a Tyvek recycling program includes the financial benefits associated with reduction of risk and improvement of the business process.


The case study used “Recycling” to calculate total operating costs within the data element“waste collection, disposal and recycling cost” in the quantitative tool.


The case study used “Waste Disposal” to calculate total operating costs within the data
elements “Environmental Emissions” or “Hazardous waste management and treatment costs” or “waste collection, disposal and recycling costs” in the quantitative tool.

The Tyvek Recycling case study indicated:

  • The users had access to the data.
  • The users understood the elements.
  • The users understood the elements over time.
  • Different users understood the elements.
  • The users were able to calculate the value associated with the various project scenarios.

 

Case Study Validation 8: Pharmaceutical Handling

The ROHSEI case study determined the value of installing material handling equipment in a pharmacy for the purpose of reducing the number of injuries and increasing productivity.

The Material Handling Program incorporated six elements with defined costs for each step. The value of a Material Handling Program includes the financial benefits associated with reduction of risk and improvement of the business process. The incorporation of these elements enabled a full accounting of the effect of investment in risk reduction on operating costs and the resulting improvement in the business process to be included as part of the value calculation.

The case study used “Legal Fees, Workers’ Compensation & Settlements” to calculate the total non-medical costs of incidents within the data element “Internal and external legal fees, workers’ compensation and settlements” in the quantitative tool.

The company used “EHS Personnel Time” to calculate what would be considered the total operating costs within the data element “IH and safety staff time spent on managing the risk” and within the data element “process/steps/motion” in the quantitative tool.

The company used “Lost Work (Sick) Time” to calculate total non-medical cost of incidents within the data element “Labor” in the quantitative tool.

The company used “Medical Costs and Insurance” to calculate total cost of occupational illnesses and injuries within the data element “Average medical costs of occupational injury/illness cases associated with the hazard(s)” in the quantitative tool.

The company used “Production Downtime” to calculate total operating costs within the data elements “Delay Time” in the quantitative tool.

The company used “Productivity” to calculate total operating costs within the data elements “Process Flow” in the quantitative tool. The incorporation of these elements showed how the business process could be improved with installation of material handling equipment.

The Pharmaceutical Handling case study indicated:

  • The users had access to the data.
  • The users understood the elements.
  • The users understood the elements over time.
  • Different users understood the elements.
  • The users were able to calculate the value associated with the various project scenarios.

 

Case Study Validation 9: Emergency Spill Team

The ROHSEI case study determined the value of outsourcing labor rather than keeping an inhouse team for the purpose of improving the company’s spill response within their manufacturing operations and laboratory activities. There were three possible scenarios:

  1. Reducing the team to eight employees to cover the day shift only.
  2. Reducing the team to four employees (a minimum of two employees required and two back-ups).
  3. Outsourcing.

The analysis for the first two scenarios was completed in two ways - with in-house labor and outsourced labor.

The Emergency Spill Team Program incorporated eight elements with defined costs for each step. The value of the program includes the financial benefits associated with reduction of risk and improvement of the business process.

The case study used “Spill Response Labor” and “Payment for Spill Response” to calculate total non-medical cost of incidents within the data element “emergency response” in the quantitative tool.

The case study used “Hydrostatic Testing” to calculate total operating costs within the data elements “Operations and Maintenance Costs” and “Cost of ongoing preventive maintenance for IH purposes” in the quantitative tool.

The case study used “SCBA Air Switch Out” and “Spill Equipment Supplies” to calculate
total operating costs within the data element “IH Supplies” and “Maintenance costs” in the quantitative tool.

The case study used “Medical Exam” to calculate total operating costs within the data
element “Medical Surveillance Costs” in the quantitative tool.

The case study used “Training” to calculate total operating costs within the data elements “training and meetings” in the quantitative tool.

The MSDS Software case study indicated:

  • The users had access to the data.
  • The users understood the elements.
  • The users understood the elements over time.
  • Different users understood the elements.
  • The users were able to calculate the value associated with the various project scenarios.

 

Case Study Validation 10: Bottled Water

The ROHSEI case study determined the value of implementing a program for bottling water for emergency use in a shipyard for the purpose of reducing costs associated with purchasing bottled water. There were three possible scenarios:

  1. Purchase bottled water
  2. Bottle company water in building
  3. Bottle company water in trailer

The Bottled Water Program incorporated seven elements with defined costs for each step. The value of the program includes the financial benefits associated with reduction of risk and improvement of the business process.

The company used “Bottled Water” to calculate total non-medical cost of incidents within the data element “Loss of Raw Materials or Product” in the quantitative tool.

The company used “Bottling Materials” and “Packaging Supplies” to calculate total
operating costs within the data element “Maintenance Costs” in the quantitative tool.

The company used “Sanitation Supplies” to calculate total operating costs within the data element “IH Supplies” and “Maintenance costs” in the quantitative tool.

The company used “Trailer Rent” and “Trailer Setup” to calculate total capital costs within the data element “Equipment” in the quantitative tool.

The company used “Utilities and Piping” to calculate what would be considered the total capital costs within the data elements “Installation” in the quantitative tool.

The Bottled Water case study indicated:

  • The users had access to the data.
  • The users understood the elements.
  • The users understood the elements over time.
  • Different users understood the elements.
  • The users were able to calculate the value associated with the various project scenarios.

 

Table E-1. AIHA Value of the Profession Data Element Analysis Matrix.