bcuc 1 003 02 06 attachment06 - bchydro.com filebc hydro completed audit protocol #1092 engineering...

BC HydroCompleted Audit Protocol

#1092 Engineering 24 of

Contact Information

Name Doug Bryson Title Manager, Generation ProjectsPhone (604) - 528 - 2488 FaxEmail Location Edmonds A-03

Auditee Information

Name Glen Smyrl Title Vice President, EngineeringPhone (604) - 528 - 2086 FaxEmail Location Edmonds A-01

Scope of Audit

Start Date 2003/05/15Audit Area Five out of the 7 main divisions in Engineering Services were included in this Safety

Audit. Two divisions (Human Resources and Finance) were not included, due to theirrelatively low OSH risk profile in comparison to that of the 5 main Engineeringdivisions. Staff from the 5 main Engineering divisions participated in Audit Interviewswhere they were asked questions reflecting the implementation of safety and safetymanagement in their respective work areas, as per the BC Hydro OSH 100 series ofStandards. In addition to site Interviews at Edmonds complex, two major Contracts &Construction Management Projects: Seven Mile Dam - Dam Safety Project and the2L33 Cable Replacement Project were visited. Staff at these locations participated inAudit Interviews and OSH documentation from these Projects reflected theinteraction between BC Hydro, and several external contractors doing work on theelectrical system. All available Key Safety Representatives (KSR's) that sit on theEngineering main OSH Committee, and the 3 sub-Committees (Office; Field;Construction) were Interviewed as part of this Safety Audit.

Headquarters Edmonds complex, 6911 Southpoint Drive, Burnaby, BC, V3N 4X8Audit Team Members Peter T. Ficzycz (Lead Auditor), Andrew Merrill, Dave Watts (Consultant)

Facilities Audited Notes

The Engineering Services Organization of BC Hydro consists of 7 main divisions: Generation Projects(D.Bryson), Generation Dam Safety & Green Energy (D. Moore), Transmission Projects & Distribution (P.Toom), Transmission & Generation Services (R.Grout), Contracts & Construction Management (W.Udell),Human Resources (R.Barron) and Finance (C.Alberti). All divisions of Engineering Services were included inthis Safety Audit except Human Resources and Finance. Approximately 575 employees make up theEngineering Services organization. A total of 73 participants were interviewed during this Audit: 14 were line,middle or senior managers; 47 were workers and 12 were Key Safety Reps (members of the main EngineeringOSH Committee as well as the 3 sub-Committees: Office, Field and Construction).

Lead Auditor Information

Name Peter T. FiczyczPhone (604) 528 - 2027 Fax (604) - 528 - 3465Email [email protected] Location Edmonds E - 12



Interview Info

Total Number of Employees in Business Unit 575

Number of Employees in Audit Scope 575

Minimum Number of Interviewees Required 69

TotalEmployees

Employees inScope

RequiredInterviewees

InterviewsCompleted

Auditee 1 0 0

Manager 49 14 14

Supervisor 0 0 0

Worker 504 47 47

KSR 21 12 12

Total 575 73 73



A. Policy

A.01. What are your responsibilities for maintaining the OSH program in your area asdetailed in OSH Standard 101?

Int : 5 / 5

Strength This Audit question is directed at Managers. In Engineering Services, all managers (14 /14) responded very positively to this Question.

A.02. What are your workers responsibilities as defined by this standard? Int : 5 / 5

Opportunity While this Question met the 80 % verification Audit Business Rule, and points wereawarded, worker feedback to this Question was weaker than Manager feedback (29 / 39workers were positive; 14 / 14 Managers were positive).

A.03. Are the Occupational Safety and Health (OSH) Standards and the WCB OH&SRegulation readily available to workers at this location?

Int : 3 / 3Obs : 2 / 2Total : 5 / 5

General Comments All (workers, Managers and KSR's) were aware of where OSH's and WCB Regs werelocated, as well as how to obtain suitable supporting materials.

A.04. Do you review new or revised applicable OSH Standards with your workers? Doc : 0 / 2Int : 0 / 3Total : 0 / 5

Key Opportunity Out of 54 Interviewees (consisting of workers and Managers), only 56 % of respondentscould verify that this was being done. This is an area of improvement.

Section Total

Total Possible 20

Total NA 0

Total Applicable 20

Total Score 15

Percent 75%



B. Planning & Review

B.01. Do you provide Corporate Safety with your current written plan to address health &safety at this location as per OSH Standard 102 Planning & Review?

Doc : 5 / 5

General Comments Generally, Safety Plans were provided, both in electronic form as well as hard copy, tothe Audit Team. A good level of effort was provided in assembling Safety Plans for thisAudit.

B.02. Do you provide documentation confirming your OSH program accounts for:changes in the workplace, new regulatory requirements, Corporate Policies orStandards, or recommendations from incident summaries, audits, perception surveys,safety program evaluations and inspections?

Doc : 5 / 5

General Comments There is evidence of these requirements being met, although this aspect of a SafetyProgram could benefit from some improvements.

B.03. Have you planned the annual OSH plan for this facility/area with your workers? Int : 0 / 5

General Comments While Managers (12 Positive : 2 Negative) felt that they had planned the OSH Plan withworker input, workers (23 Positive : 19 Negative) felt that they were not involved orconsulted with the development of the Safety Plan.

Key Opportunity There are some locations within Engineering where employees were involved with thedevelopment of their local Safety Plan. However, there are work groups who doexperience higher risk exposures, and they did not play a part in the development oftheir local safety program. Ensure that all safety programs in Engineering are developedwith the involvement of employees.

B.04. Is your annual improvement plan based on an evaluation and ranking of health andsafety issues at this headquarters?

Leadership : Yes

General Comments The general concensus was that this requirement was being met, although not in aformal, documented manner.

B.05. Do you conduct annual and regular reviews of the Occupational Safety & Healthplan to confirm all activities have been completed on schedule?

Doc : 2 / 2Int : 3 / 3Total : 5 / 5

Key Opportunity This requirement just met the 80 % verification Audit Business Rule criteria. While pointswere scored in this Audit, this is a Key Opportunity for improvement.

Section Total

Total Possible 20

Total NA 0

Total Applicable 20

Total Score 15

Percent 75%

Leadership 1 / 1



C. Safe Work Procedures

C.01. Do you perform hazard and risk analyses of work practices and conditions of workactivities?

Doc : 3 / 3Int : 0 / 2Total : 3 / 5

General Comments Interview feedback indicated that 23 of 63 respondents (38 %) were Negative to thisAudit criteria. Of the 23 Negatives, 22 were workers and 1 was a Manager.

Key Strength The Transmission Construction Management group has a strong Hazard Id and RiskAssessment process in place. This can represent a key learning for the balance of theEngineering Services organization.

Key Opportunity Hazard Id and Risk assessments are being performed adequately for office environmentexposures. However, some higher risk-exposed employees have not performed hazardand risk analyses of their work practices or conditions of work activites in their fieldwork. Some examples are: Instrumentation and Surveilance, Photogrametry andSurvey, and Stations and Generation Maintenance.

C.02. Have you developed written safe work procedures where significant risk(s) havebeen identified?

Doc : 3 / 3Int : 0 / 2Total : 3 / 5

General Comments Out of 55 respondents to this Audit criteria only 36 (65 %) answered Positive.

Key Opportunity Some higher risk-exposed employees do not perceive that their work requires writtensafe work procedures for some of their work activites. Some examples are: workingfrom heights that requires fall protection; confined space entry procedures; etc...

C.03. Do you review supplementary instructions with your workers to ensure theyunderstand them?

Doc : 0 / 3Int : 0 / 2Total : 0 / 5

Key Opportunity Out of 51 respondents to this Audit criteria only 32 (63 %) answered Positive. This is aKey Opportunity in that tasks that require the development of supplementary instructions(ie: higher "Risk - profile" functions), also require that those instructions be reviewedwith workers to confirm they understand the instructions.

C.04. Have new or transferred workers been made aware of hazardous conditions,unusual work and emergency procedures?

Doc : 4 / 4Int : 1 / 1Total : 5 / 5

Key Strength The T&D Engineering Occupational Health & Safety Field Orientation Check Sheetrepresents a "best-practice" document in Engineering Services. Consideration should begiven to using this document as a "standard" in Engineering Services. NOTE: there area variety of documents and methods for capturing OSH criteria for new or transferredworkers. Engineering Services may wish to identify those documents and methodsbeing used in Engineering, and then standardize on a common approach.



Section Total

Total Possible 20

Total NA 0

Total Applicable 20

Total Score 11

Percent 55%



D. Instruction & Training

D.01. Have you received formal safety management training to enable you to fullyunderstand and execute your safety responsibilities?

Doc : 3 / 3Int : 2 / 2Total : 5 / 5

Key Opportunity There is a growing number of Managers who have not yet received Safety Leadershiptraining. Ensure that those individuals participate in Safety Leadership training.

D.02. What have you done to ensure that your workers have received sufficientinstruction and training to perform their jobs in a safe manner?

Doc : 3 / 3Int : 2 / 2Total : 5 / 5

D.03. Do you maintain up-to-date records for each worker at this location identifying theOSH instruction or education/training received and the date it was provided?

Doc : 0 / 3Int : 2 / 2Total : 2 / 5

General Comments While Managers indicated that they were doing this, there was insufficeintdocumentation to support this. The Audit score for this Question reflects this finding.

Key Opportunity Individual training records are not readily accessible by workers. Training recordmanagement was identified as an area that requires improvement.

D.04. Have you conducted emergency preparedness training with appropriate drills inthe past 12 months?

Doc : 2 / 2Int : 3 / 3Total : 5 / 5

General Comments Responses to this Audit Question were very mixed. While the Audit Team felt that theAudit criteria had been met, there still exists confusion with office employees, as to whatthe expectation is on them for annual emergency preparedness and training.

D.05. Do your workers understand their duties and responsibilities in the event of anemergency?

Int : 5 / 5

General Comments For this Audit criteria 53 / 53 (100 %) answered Positive.

D.06. Is there a safety orientation program for all new or transferred workers? Doc : 2 / 2Int : 3 / 3Total : 5 / 5

General Comments Respondents indicated that the formality surrounding this Audit criteria could use someimprovement; many recall a process or method, but few are able to recount specifics.

Section Total

Total Possible 30

Total NA 0

Total Applicable 30

Total Score 27

Percent 90%



E. Supervision

E.01. Do you have Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) related to quality of effort towardsimproving safety in the workplace through site visits, workplace inspections andproactive safety discussions?

Leadership : Yes

Key Opportunity While 12 out of 14 Managers (86 %) answered this Question Positive, there is confusionsurrounding what exactly was the KPI. For example, Question feedback definedrespective KPI's as: Zero Accidents; or 6 Audits of crew members per year; or 1workplace inspection per month. In Construction Contracts Management, it wasacknowledged that there was a strong Audit component to their interaction withContractors.

E.02. Do your workers with supervisory responsibilities understand their responsibilitieswith respect to the local Occupational Safety and Health program?

Doc : 2 / 2Int : 3 / 3Total : 5 / 5

E.03. Do you attend local safety related meetings? Doc : 3 / 3Int : 2 / 2Total : 5 / 5

Key Strength This Question demonstrated a very strong response: 65 out of 65 respondents (100 %)consisting of 14 Managers and 51 workers and KSR's were supportive that theManager(s) is / are present at OSH meetings.

E.04. Do you participate in safety education and training? Doc : 3 / 3Int : 2 / 2Total : 5 / 5

Key Opportunity This Question did not demonstrate as strong a response as Question E - 03. Forexample, 55 out of 65 respondents (85 %) stated that the Manager(s) is / are presentat safety education and training. While the 80 % Audit verification criteria had been met,this area can be improved upon.

E.05. Do you intervene whenever you observe or receive a report of an unsafe act orcondition?

Doc : 3 / 3Int : 2 / 2Total : 5 / 5

Key Strength Very strong, positive support for Manager intervention (55 out of 55 InterviewRespondents (100 %) were Positive).

E.06. Do your supervisors (sub-foreman/workleader) intervene whenever they observeor receive a report of an unsafe act or condition?

Doc : 0 / 2Int : 0 / 3Total : 0 / 5

Key Opportunity For higher risk-exposed workers, consideration has to be given to the method by whichthose workers are supervised. Interview respondents indicate that 20 out of 33respondents (61 %) felt that this Question had been met. However, there does existsome confusion surrounding the concept of "supervisor". Many workers who haveaccess to the field, are not governed by a formal supervisor relationship. Hence, it is notclear as to "who" supervises work being performed in the field.



E.07. Is there a process in place to encourage workers to intervene when they observean unsafe work condition or act?

Int : 5 / 5

General Comments Generally, very positive strong support for this (48 out of 51 Interview respondents (94%) were positive in this area).

E.08. Is safety performance, focusing on safety activities, a component of the managersperformance contract and reviewed at each level of the management hierarchy?

Leadership : Yes

General Comments Generally, very positive strong support for this (14 out of 14 Manager Interviews (100%) were positive in this area).

E.09. Have KPIs been established which define the activities that managers willundertake to drive their organization toward meeting their safety improvement?

Leadership : Yes

Key Opportunity Responses from managers during the Audit Interviews indicated that there was someconfusion as to specific KPI's that defined the activities that managers would undertaketo drive their organization toward meeting their safety improvement. Only 11 out of 14Manager Interview respondents (79 %) were positive in this area. This needs to beclearly defined and communicated to all managers in Engineering Services.

E.10. Do you know your LoBs annual set of safety improvement indicators? Leadership : No

Key Opportunity Responses from managers during the Audit Interviews indicated that there wasconfusion as to specific Engineering Services safety improvement indicators. Only 9 outof 14 Manager Interview respondents (64 %) were positive in this area.This needs to beclearly defined and communicated to all managers in Engineering Services.

E.11. Do you use leading indicators to communicate safety performance within yourbusiness unit?

Leadership : No

Key Opportunity Responses from managers during the Audit Interviews indicated that there wasconfusion as to specific Engineering Services leading indicators. Only 10 out of 14Manager Interview respondents (71 %) were positive in this area. Leading Indicators arenot well understood or communicated at all levels of management within EngineeringServices. This needs to be clearly defined and communicated to all managers inEngineering Services.

E.12. Would your workers support the statement...that you are visibly active andsupportive of safety... at this site?

Leadership : Yes


E.13. Are the sub-foremen/workleaders that report to you familiar with the hazards of thetasks associated with the work at this headquarters?

Obs : 2 / 2Int : 3 / 3Total : 5 / 5




E.14. Do you understand the practices used to safe guard against hazards associatedwith the work done by your crews?

Int : 5 / 5

Strength Generally, very positive strong support for this (12 out of 12 Interview respondents (100%) were positive in this area). Feedback from managers during the Audit Interviewsindicated that they rely heavily on the service time, experience and seniority of theirworkers.

Section Total

Total Possible 40

Total NA 0

Total Applicable 40

Total Score 35

Percent 87%

Leadership 4 / 6



F. Inspections

F.01. Do you conduct monthly inspections of work to confirm that safe work practices arebeing applied and safe work conditions are maintained?

Doc : 1 / 1Obs : 1 / 1Int : 3 / 3Total : 5 / 5

F.02. Are site physical plant inspections performed as required by the local safety planand regulations?

Doc : 3 / 3

F.03. Are deficiencies identified during inspections documented? Doc : 3 / 3

F.04. Do you discuss the findings of your safe work inspections with workers, positivelyrecognizing good work practices or correcting deficiencies?

Doc : 1 / 1Int : 4 / 4Total : 5 / 5

General Comments Generally, very positive strong support for this (43 out of 43 Interview respondents (100%) were positive in this area). This demonstrates a perception of open lines ofcommunication between workers and managers.

F.05. Are deficiencies identified during inspections addressed? Doc : 3 / 3Int : 2 / 2Total : 5 / 5


F.06. Are WCB inspection reports managed in accordance with OSH Standard 106Section 2.7?

Doc : 0 / 2Int : 0 / 1Total : 0 / 3

Key Opportunity Only 9 out of 13 Interview respondents (69 %) were positive in this area.This requiementneeds to be clearly defined and communicated to all in Engineering Services. Inparticular, communication of WCB Inspection criteria between the main EngineeringOSH Committee and the three Engineering OSH sub-Committees (Office, Field andConstruction) requires improvement. Other Interview respondents expressed a desire toknow more about WCB Inspection reports: what had been writtein up; against whom;what was the required follow up?

Section Total

Total Possible 24

Total NA 0

Total Applicable 24

Total Score 21

Percent 87%



G. Hazardous Materials

G.01. Do you have a current inventory of all hazardous materials at each work site? Doc : 0 / 2Obs : 0 / 2Int : 0 / 1Total : 0 / 5

Key Opportunity Only 16 out of 41 Interview respondents (39 %) were positive in this area. Conduct anevaluation of all hazardous materials that are used throughout Engineering Services,and ensure that a current inventory of hazardous materials is established.

G.02. Are the MSDSs or technical data sheets for the hazardous materials at this siteavailable to workers?

Doc : 0 / 2Obs : 0 / 2Int : 0 / 1Total : 0 / 5

Key Opportunity While workers referred to the on-line MSDS process, workers did not demonstrate anability to track down or obtain MSDS for hazardous materials that they thought were intheir inventory. NOTE: this Question builds upon question G - 01. If an inventory is notreadily available, applicable MSDS's and supporting documentation are not readilyavailable.

G.03. Have you done a risk analysis of the hazardous materials handled and stored atthis work site?

Doc : 0 / 3Obs : 0 / 1Int : 0 / 1Total : 0 / 5

Key Opportunity Workers and Managers are generally not clear about this requirement. This expectationis held for contractors doing Project work for BC Hydro. However, this same expectationhas not been explored for employees of the Engineering Services Organization.Conduct an evaluation of all hazardous materials used throughout EngineeringServices, and ensure that hazardous materials are evaluated for the risk that they poseto workers.

G.04. Do you have safe working procedures in place for storage, handling and use ofhazardous materials?

Doc : 0 / 1Obs : 0 / 2Int : 0 / 2Total : 0 / 5

Key Opportunity Workers and Managers are generally not clear about this requirement. This expectationis held for contractors doing Project work for BC Hydro. However, this same expectationhas not been explored for employees of the Engineering Services Organization.Conduct an evaluation of all hazardous materials used throughout EngineeringServices, and ensure that hazardous materials are evaluated for the risk that they poseto workers.

Section Total

Total Possible 20

Total NA 0

Total Applicable 20

Total Score 0

Percent 0%



H. Monitoring the Work Environment

H.01. Have you completed a risk analysis of the chemical, biological, physical hazards atlocations where your workers conduct their work?

Doc : 0 / 2Obs : 0 / 1Int : 0 / 2Total : 0 / 5

Key Opportunity Workers and Managers are generally not clear about this requirement. Only 28 out of 41Interview respondents (68 %) were positive in this area. While there was a positiveresponse to issues such as hearing conservation (workers issued custom moldedhearing protection), and some minor reviews of biological / pest-related exposures(ticks, animals, bears, etc...) Interview respondents all seemed to agree that the reviewswere very informal, and not a structured risk analysis. Investigate the potential forworkers in Engineering Services to be exposed to chemical, biological or physicalhazards in areas where they conduct their work.

H.02. Does your risk analysis of the biological, chemical and physical hazards determinewhat controls are required to protect workers?

Doc : 0 / 3Obs : 0 / 1Int : 0 / 1Total : 0 / 5

Opportunity See Key Opportunity in H-01 above.

H.03. Have you implemented the necessary controls to protect workers from safety andhealth risks identified in Question H.2?

Doc : 0 / 2Obs : 0 / 2Int : 0 / 1Total : 0 / 5


H.04. Have you explained the results of your risk analysis of the biological, chemical andphysical hazard(s) to your workers?

Doc : 0 / 2Int : 0 / 3Total : 0 / 5


Section Total

Total Possible 20

Total NA 0

Total Applicable 20

Total Score 0

Percent 0%



I. First Aid

I.01. Do the first aid services and equipment meet the basic requirements of WCB OHSRPart 33.2 and OSH Standard 109. - First Aid?

Doc : 1 / 1Obs : 3 / 3Int : 1 / 1Total : 5 / 5

General Comments Generally, strong positive support for this Audit Question.

I.02. Is there a ten year history of occupational injuries or illnesses, reported or treated,on file at this headquarters?

NA

General Comments This Question is Not Applicable to this Audit, mainly because of the diversity of worklocations. Workers who travel to the field, are instructed to enter first aid criteria in FirstAid books located in the field. Others would enter first aid criteria in First Aid books atEdmonds.

I.03. Have you reviewed the first aid records with the Safety Committee or KSRs duringthe past 12 months?

Doc : 3 / 3Int : 2 / 2Total : 5 / 5

Key Strength Construction Contracts Management has recently initiated a process of capturing FirstAid incidents from various contractors doing work for BC Hydro. The expectation is thatcontractors will file a "Monthly Incident Report" with the respective ConstructionContracts staff at various BC Hydro construction projects. It is presently unclear how thiscontractor first aid record data will be used. However, as the data accumulates, it maybe able to enhance the overall Engineering Services Safety Program by providingadditional information around hazardous, higher-risk work activity.

I.04. Are there clear instructions for obtaining first aid treatment at this headquarters? Obs : 3 / 3Int : 2 / 2Total : 5 / 5

Section Total

Total Possible 18

Total NA 3

Total Applicable 15

Total Score 15

Percent 100%



J. Incident Management System

J.01. What responsibilities do you have with respect to Level 1 and Level 2 incidents? Int : 5 / 5

Key Opportunity Generally, the support for this Question was not universal amongst EngineeringManagers (10 out of 12 Manager Interview respondents (83 %) were positive in thisarea).The Engineering Services group should follow up with all engineering managers,by delivering a presentation on the roles and responsibilities of these managers in theIncident Management System (IMS).

J.02. Do you ensure that all Level 1 and Level 2 incidents that occur at job sites underyour authority are investigated?

Doc : 2 / 2Int : 3 / 3Total : 5 / 5

Key Opportunity During the Audit Interviews of managers and workers, it was apparent that OSH 110and the IMS require additional formal roll-out and training in Engineering Services inorder for all to understand their roles and responsibilities.

J.03. Do you implement corrective actions based on results of your incidentinvestigations?

Doc : 3 / 3Int : 2 / 2Total : 5 / 5

J.04. Do you ensure that relevant lessons learned from an investigation are shared withthe rest of the organization?

Doc : 3 / 3Int : 2 / 2Total : 5 / 5

Section Total

Total Possible 20

Total NA 0

Total Applicable 20

Total Score 20

Percent 100%



K. Occupational Health & Safety Committee

K.01. Does your health and safety committee structure reflect the standards of your Line-Of-Business?

Doc : 2 / 2Int : 1 / 1Total : 3 / 3

K.02. If there is a Health & Safety Committee at this location/facility, does it meetmonthly?

Doc : 0 / 3Int : 2 / 2Total : 2 / 5

Key Opportunity Since the main Engineering OSH committee was only established in Sept. '02, therehave not been any OSH meeting minutes on a monthly basis from April '02 until Sept.'02. The Terms of Reference for the main Engineering OSH Committee stipulates thatthe committee will meet on a monthly basis.

K.03. Are the minutes of the joint health and safety committee circulated or posted? Obs/Int : 0 / 3

Key Opportunity There was weak support for this Audit Question (44 out of 64 Interview respondents (69%) were positive in this area). Communication of the main Engineering OSH Committeemeeting minutes as well as the three sub-Committee meeting minutes to workers inEngineering Services needs improvement.

K.04. Have members of your OSH committee or Key Safety Representatives receivedtraining on the purpose, operation and responsibilities of a safety committee?

Doc : 1 / 1Int : 2 / 2Total : 3 / 3

Key Opportunity There were several recent examples provided to the Audit Team, demonstrating thatOSH committee and Key Safety Reps have been receiving training on OSH committees.However, there are still several members who require this level of training. Ensure thatthey receive the required training.

Section Total

Total Possible 14

Total NA 0

Total Applicable 14

Total Score 8

Percent 57%



L. Records & Statistics

L.01. Do you keep safety records on site that comply with OSH Standard 112 - Recordsand Statistics?

Doc : 0 / 5

Key Opportunity Refer to OSH Standard 112 for a complete list of applicable OSH Records and Statisticsthat are required in support of the Occupational Safety and Health Program.

L.02. Do you review incident statistics with your OSH Committee at least annually toidentify possible trends that relate to the work-site under your authority?

Doc : 4 / 4Int : 1 / 1Total : 5 / 5

L.03. Do you make use of regionally or locally produced safety records and statistics inthe development of your annual safety plan?

Doc : 4 / 4Int : 1 / 1Total : 5 / 5

Key Strength Contrary to the Business Rules applicable to Audit scoring (14 out of 19 Interviewrespondents (74%) were Positive), points were awarded for this Question on the basisof examples provided during the Audit. For example, Audit Interview feedback indicatesthat good effort is spent obtaining statistics specifically applicable to the EngineeringServices group. Examples are: construction-related statistics from WCB (M.Raymer),AMEC Americas benchmarking (D.Bryson), the weekly Dashboard report, and 2Quarterly Reports (3rd Quarter and 4th Quarter fiscal 2002/03).

L.04. Does the site/facility/process have established, known improvement targets ininjury rate?

Leadership : Yes

Key Opportunity Audit Interview participants could not clearly reiterate their site/facility/processimprovement targets in injury rate. Communication regarding improvement targetsneeds improvement.

L.05. Does the Line-Of-Business/Corporation have established, known improvementtargets in injury rate?

Leadership : Yes

Key Opportunity Not all Audit Interview participants (Managers) could clearly reiterate theirsite/facility/process improvement targets in injury rate. Communication to EngineeringServices Managers, regarding improvement targets needs improvement.

L.06. Can site personnel describe how their work group, facility, or process is performingin safety, and how they compare to others in and outside BC Hydro?

Leadership : No

Key Opportunity Generally, very weak support for this (30 out of 63 Interview respondents (48 %) werepositive in this area) Audit Question. Audit Interview participants at all levels in theEngineering Services organization (Managers, workers, KSR's) could not describe howtheir work group, facility or process was performing in safety. Communication regardingsafety performance at all levels in the Engineering Services organization requiresimprovement.

L.07. Have medical aid injury rates, or all injury rates, been made available to yourbusiness unit and have they been raised to the same importance as disabling injuryrates?

Leadership : No

Key Opportunity Communication regarding medical aid injury rates, all injury rates and disabling injuryrates requires clarification and recommunication to all in Engineering Services. It may besuitable to include this reporting in the weekly Dashboard report.



Section Total

Total Possible 15

Total NA 0

Total Applicable 15

Total Score 10

Percent 66%

Leadership 2 / 4



M. Safety Recognition

M.01. Is there a safety recognition program in place at this facility? Int : 0 / 3

Key Opportunity This Audit Question did not receive very strong support (33 out of 55 Interviewrespondents (60 %) were positive in this area). Audit Interview particpants had mixedreactions to the implementation of the safety recognition program in EngineeringServices. It is recommended that Engineering Services investigate and adopt anappropriate safety recognition program, suitable to the risk exposures of employees.OSH 113 can be used as a guideline in establishing a safety recognition program.

Section Total

Total Possible 3

Total NA 0

Total Applicable 3

Total Score 0

Percent 0%



N. Job Planning & Instruction

N.01. Have there been pre-job conferences with your workers and/or contractors overthe past year?

Doc : 2 / 2Int : 1 / 1Total : 3 / 3

N.02. Do these pre-job conferences include a review of site-specific hazards, emergencyprocedures and worker safety concerns?

Doc : 3 / 3Int : 2 / 2Total : 5 / 5

N.03. Do you or your delegate participate in pre-job conferences with the representativeworkers involved in the job?

Doc : 3 / 3Int : 2 / 2Total : 5 / 5

N.04. Do workers conduct tailboard meetings prior to commencing work? (Evidence tobe provided through either documentation or interviews.)

Doc/Int : 5 / 5

Key Strength Generally, very positive strong support for this (45 out of 47 Interview respondents (96%) were positive in this area).

N.05. Have your workers received training and instruction in conducting effectivetailboard meetings?

Doc : 0 / 2Int : 0 / 3Total : 0 / 5

Key Opportunity Generally, very weak support for this (22 out of 37 Interview respondents (59 %) werepositive in this area) Audit Question. In spite of the tailboards that are currently beingconducted throughout Engineering Services, Audit Interview feedback indicated thatthere is a need for tailboard standardization and documentation. Tailboards are notbeing conducted in a consistent manner, and they are not always being documented.

Section Total

Total Possible 23

Total NA 0

Total Applicable 23

Total Score 18

Percent 78%



O. Contractor Safety Management

O.01. Have you ensured that your site is free from all reasonably foreseeable health &safety hazards or that sufficient barriers are in place for all non-BC Hydro personscoming to your site?

Obs : 3 / 3

Key Strength Construction Contracts Management Projects visited (Seven Mile Dam Project; 2L33Cable Project) demonstrated very solid job site control. Once Project(s) has beenawarded, Construction Contracts Management requires successful bidder to completeand file a detailed site-specific safety plan. This will form a significant portion of the jobsite control documentation.

O.02. Have you ensured that all known hazards are communicated to non-BC Hydropersons before they are allowed to access the site?

Doc : 3 / 3Int : 2 / 2Total : 5 / 5

Strength Generally, very positive strong support for this (9 out of 9 Interview respondents (100 %)were positive in this area). Contract management while it does not apply to all locationsin Engineering Services, did apply very solidly in specific areas. In those areas where itapplied, it was very well managed.

O.03. For all persons or contractors not considered independent, do you ensure they areproperly trained and supervised?

Int : 3 / 3

O.04. If you have a supplier(s), do you ensure the supplier(s) have a program or processin place to meet and maintain their responsibilities as set out in Sub-section 2.1.7?

Doc : 3 / 3Int : 2 / 2Total : 5 / 5

O.05. If BC Hydro acts a prime contractor, do you ensure site safety coordination for allworkers in the defined multiple-employer workplace?

Doc : 3 / 3Int : 2 / 2Total : 5 / 5

O.06. If an independent contractor is the assigned PC, do you ensure that the itemsrequired in Sub-section 2.2.3 are completed?

Doc : 2 / 2Int : 3 / 3Total : 5 / 5

Section Total

Total Possible 26

Total NA 0

Total Applicable 26

Total Score 26

Percent 100%



P. Protection of Workers From Violence

P.01. Do you assess the risk for violence to workers at every place of work under yourauthority?

Doc : 2 / 2Int : 1 / 1Total : 3 / 3

General Comments Generally, strong support for this (11 out of 13 Interview respondents (85 %) werepositive in this area) Audit Question.

P.02. Do assessments of risk for violence in the workplace involve members of thesafety and health committee, key safety representatives and/or workers familiar with thework?

Doc : 0 / 2Int : 0 / 1Total : 0 / 3

Key Opportunity Generally, very weak support for this (30 out of 63 Interview respondents (48 %) werepositive in this area) Audit Question. Audit Interview feedback indicated that theperception of workers is that the workers, KSR's and/or safety committee were notinvolved with the assessment of risk to violence in the workplace. Involve workers,KSR's and safety committee reps in the assessment of risk for violence in theworkplace.

P.03. Have violence in the workplace assessments been reviewed by you and workersunder your authority within the last year?

Doc : 0 / 1Int : 0 / 2Total : 0 / 3

Opportunity Generally, very weak support for this (31 out of 63 Interview respondents (49 %) werepositive in this area) Audit Question. Audit Interview feedback indicated that theperception of workers is that the workers, KSR's and/or safety committee are notinvolved with updating the assessment of risk to violence in the workplace on an annualbasis.

P.04. Have you informed workers about violence in-the-workplace risks associated withthe work they perform and trained them in how to deal with these risks?

Doc : 0 / 3Int : 0 / 2Total : 0 / 5

P.05. Do you know what the protocol is to address violence in the workplace at this jobsite?

Doc : 0 / 2Int : 0 / 1Total : 0 / 3

General Comments Generally, very weak support for this (35 out of 63 Interview respondents (56 %) werepositive in this area) Audit Question.

Section Total

Total Possible 17

Total NA 0

Total Applicable 17

Total Score 3

Percent 17%



Q. Workers Working Alone

Q.01. Have you identified all categories of work involving hazardous job activities whereworkers are working alone?

Doc : 4 / 4Int : 1 / 1Total : 5 / 5

General Comments Generally, there is positive support for this Audit Question (52 out of 64 InterviewRespondents (81 %) were Positive).

Q.02. Do you have documented procedures in place to address employees workingalone?

Doc : 4 / 4Int : 1 / 1Total : 5 / 5

General Comments Generally, there is positive support for this Audit Question (46 out of 56 InterviewRespondents (82 %) were Positive).

Key Opportunity Several different forms and methods were provided to the Audit Team during this Audit.They consisted of: Field Trip Travel Contingency Plan spreadsheet complete withinstructions on how to use it; Field Check-In Procedures (13 Sept. 2001); Engineering -Field Work: Safety Information and Checklist one page document (1 May, 2003); andField Check-In Procedures flow chart (13 Sept. 2001). Engineering Services may wishto streamline their documented procedures and standardize on the "best practice"documentation that exists throughout their organization.

Q.03. For hazardous jobs, have you developed established contacts for workers workingalone?

Doc : 3 / 3Int : 2 / 2Total : 5 / 5

General Comments Generally, there is positive support for this Audit Question (44 out of 50 InterviewRespondents (88 %) were Positive). Engineering Services may wish to streamline theirdocumented procedures and standardize on the "best practice" documentation thatexists throughout their organization.

Section Total

Total Possible 15

Total NA 0

Total Applicable 15

Total Score 15

Percent 100%



Overall Audit Total

Total Possible 345

Total NA 3

Total Applicable 342

Total Score 239

Percent 70%

Leadership 7 / 11

bcuc 1 003 02 06 attachment06 - bchydro.com filebc hydro completed audit protocol #1092 engineering...

Documents