Meeting Minutes - May 21, 1998
Construction Safety Advisory Committee
US Department of Energy
Las Vegas, Nevada
Pat Finn, Department of Energy - Headquarters (DOE-HQ)
EH-51, called the meeting of the DOE Construction
Safety Advisory Committee (CSAC) to order.
Mr. Finn welcomed attendees
and introductions were made (See Attachment 1, List
of Attendees). Mr. Finn expressed, on the part of
the CSAC, appreciation to Mr. Russ Baumeister, DOE-Yucca
Mountain Project, for arranging the tour of the Yucca
Mountain Site and for his assistance in making arrangements
for the committee meeting in Las Vegas.
1. Mr. Finn discussed
the following events and issues that have occurred
or developed since the last meeting:
- Public Law 104-113 "National Technology Transfer
and Advancement Act" and OMB A119 "Federal Participation
in the Development and Use of Voluntary Standards"
mandates DOE and other federal agencies to interact
with national consensus standards committees and
other government regulatory agencies in rule making
efforts. The DOE Technical Standards Organization
is chartered to ensure DOE meets the intent of OMB
A119 and to ensure DOE has organizations in place
to interact with the various rulemaking organizations
such as the Occupational Safety and Health Administration
(OSHA) and the American National Standards Institute
(ANSI) for their ongoing public rulemaking efforts
. The newly approved CSAC charter was issued to
committee members and now formally charters the
CSAC to participate in the DOE Technical Standards
program as the "topical committee" for construction
safety issues. The old CSAC charter's primary focus
was the development of the DOE Construction Safety
Order 5480.9A, now replaced by the construction
safety provisions of DOE Order 440.1 "Worker Protection
Management for Federal and Contractor Employees."
Mr. Finn noted that when construction issues arise
other than public rulemaking efforts, the committee
still has the flexibility to pursue these actions.
- Due to an internal reorganization, the DOE Occupational
Safety and Health Standards Interpretations Response
Line, which used to be under the direction of Mr.
Finn, is now led by Mr. Ron Eimer, EH-51. Mr. Finn
will continue to be the primary author of all new
interpretations pertaining to construction safety
and hoisting & rigging. Copies of all construction
related responses provided by the Response Line
since the last CSAC meeting in Chicago (October
1997) were issued to the committee, (Attachment
- DOE Order 440.1"Worker Protection Management for
Federal and Contractor Employees," which consolidated
all the past DOE occupational safety and health
worker safety orders into one order, was recently
revised. Most of the revisions were editorial in
nature. A "crosswalk" of these changes was distributed
to the committee, (Attachment 3). Mr. Finn discussed
the following primary changes:
a. National Fire Protection
Association ( NFPA) 70, "National Electrical Code"
was spelled out to ensure proper application of this
code to DOE activities.
b. NFPA 70E "National
Electrical Safety Requirements for Employee Workplaces,"
was spelled out to ensure proper application of this
code to DOE activities.
c. An accidental death
at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory's K-25 Site has
brought about some revisions concerning fire watches.
One of the corrective actions that resulted from the
accident investigation was an internal task assigned
to EH-5 to review existing national consensus standards
applicable to fire watches that go beyond OSHA's standards.
This resulted in invoking ANSI Z49.1 "Safety in Welding
and Cutting" and expanding the provisions of NFPA
51.B "Welding, Cutting and Allied Processes," to include
worker safety as well as facility safety to the responsibilities
of the fire watch.
d. The Hanford Site
initiated a change that now mandates all exemptions,
exceptions, and variances to mandatory worker protection
requirements contained in DOE Order 440.1A be reviewed
and forwarded to DOE-HQ. The annual review of the
status of all exemptions to the requirements contained
in the Order would ensure that the circumstances requiring
the need for relief have not changed and that instituted
controls are still implemented and appropriate.
e. 440.1A now establishes
safety policies and procedures to ensure pressure
systems are designed, fabricated, tested, inspected,
maintained, repaired and operated by trained and qualified
personnel in accordance with applicable and sound
- Mr. Finn discussed and asked for feedback on the
possibilities for the next CSAC meeting of having
the Crosby Company, a manufacturer and distributor
of wire rope, wire rope clips, shackles, blocks
and other hoisting equipment, present a free full
day workshop on hoisting and rigging equipment.
Mr. Ray Pope, Fluor Daniel Northwest, a member of
the DOE Hoisting and Rigging Committee used the
Crosby Company to provide a workshops for the Hanford
Hoisting and Rigging Committee and highly recommends
the workshops. The workshop would be held in conjunction
with both the CSAC and the DOE Hoisting and Rigging
committee meetings. Schedule could be for example,
CSAC meeting on Tuesday, Crosby workshop on Wednesday
and the DOE Hoisting and Rigging Committee meeting
on Thursday. Mr. Finn ask the committee to express
their opinions on having the Crosby Company provide
a workshop as apposed to scheduling the next committee
meeting in conjunction with the National Safety
council (NSC) annual meeting. As noted at last years
CSAC meeting in Chicago, which was held in conjunction
with the NSC annual meeting, most people could not
participate in NSC activities because of the logistics
of the meetings or the fact the there is too many
other things going on.
Ms. Eva Bryson, DOE
Rocky Flats Field Office, noted that the DOE Hoisting
and Rigging Committee had discussed the option of
only meeting annually for a day and a half or two
days because it would provide more time to review
motions that are presented for changes to the DOE
Hoisting and Rigging Standard. Complicated motions
could be reviewed and discussed in the evening before
a final vote is taken on the second day. As it is
now, motions are presented to the committee and there
is not enough time to discuss the issues in a one
day meeting and the motion is either postponed until
the next committee meeting or it goes to a letter
ballot vote. The letter ballot process does not always
work well on complicated issues. Mr. Finn noted that
the CSAC differs from Hoisting and Rigging Committee
in that it has an obligation to maintain a DOE Technical
Standard. The DOE Hoisting and Rigging Standard will
only be formally revised on an annual basis, thereby
supporting the notion of an annual meeting. The committee
would handle other issues that arise during the year
on an electronic bases.
2. Mr. Gerald Meyers,
EH-53 made a presentation on "Explosive Demolition
of Structures." Mr. Meyers started out his presentation
by stating the reason for his attendance at the CSAC
was to ask for the committees assistance in working
with the Explosive Safety Committee in areas where
both committees have jurisdiction; explosive demolitions
and construction blasting. Mr. Meyers stated that
at this time there are two areas where the DOE Explosive
Safety Manual applies to all explosive operations
on site. Those areas are locating explosive storage
magazines and the transportation of explosives. The
DOE Explosive Safety Manual is more restrictive than
consensus standards in the requirements for locating
explosive storage magazines. The stricter criteria
has been established for the protection of people
off site from fragmentation if the magazine detonates.
Mr. Meyers indicated that the Explosive Safety committee
is not going foreword at this time with mandatory
requirements to be added to the Explosive Safety Manual.
Their main emphasis is on conducting an educational
campaign. A major revision to a primary explosives
industry publication, "The Blaster's Handbook" (formally
the "Dupont Blaster's Handbook" has just been completed.
The new handbook has not yet been reviewed by the
Explosive Safety committee but is generally regarded
as the closest thing to a consensus standard that
is widely available. The Explosive Safety committee
is planning to review the new handbook and hopes to
be able to use it as a consensus standard document
for explosive safety operations within DOE. The Explosive
Safety committee will be issuing some technical documents
that are strictly educational. One such document is
a Handbook called "Safe Explosive Demolition of Structures."
It is strictly a Handbook and is not a mandatory requirements
document. It provides guidelines and answers for questions
that could arise during the planning of an explosive
demolition projects. It provides the guidelines for
a disciplined approach to managing an explosive demolition
project when using subcontractors to perform the work.
Mr. Meyers stated that the Explosive Safety committee
has registered a project to write a non-mandatory
DOE Technical Standard for Explosive Safety. This
is being done in conjunction with DOE Environmental
Management (EM) who has a number of explosive demolition
projects scheduled. Additionally, the Explosive Safety
Committee is working with EM in the development of
"model contract language" for use in the procurement
process of explosive demolition projects. Mr. Meyers
closed his presentation by stating that if any site
is performing construction blasting or explosive demolition
and they are in need of technical assistance feel
to contact him. The Explosive Safety committee has
expertise in all phases of explosive safety. For technical
assistance or if you have any questions on information
that was presented by Mr. Meyers you can contact him
at (301) 903-3190.
3. Mr. Gary Griess,
DP-45 provided a "Behavior Based Safety" update (Attachment
4). If you have any questions relating to Mr. Griess's
presentation you can contact him at (301) 903-7767.
4. Mr. Craig Schumann,
DOE Argonne Group Office made a presentation on "Recent
Accidents at Fermi Lab, Argonne, and Ames Laboratories,"
(Attachment 5). During Mr. Schumann's presentation
a number of the committee members indicated they were
interested in accessing the accident reports being
discussed. The reports dealing with the electrical
arc blast accident at Fermi Lab and the rotating shaft
accident at the Ames Lab can be found on the DOE Accident
Investigation Internet Homepage.
The Internet address is:
The accident investigation
of the microwave tower accident at Argonne was not
a Type B investigation but can be found in the ORPS
data base at:
If you have any questions
relating to Mr. Schumann's presentation, you can contact
him at (630) 252-9176.
5. Mr. Finn reported
on the April meeting of OSHA's Advisory Committee
on Construction Safety and Health (ACCSH). Mr. Finn
presented a brief history of ACCSH. As a group, ACCSH
was established in 1969 by the Contract Work Hours
and Safety Standards Act to assist the Department
of Labor in developing policies to debar unsafe contractors
from doing construction for federal agencies. In 1971,
OSHA came into in existence and the ACCSH committee's
charter was revised to provide broad input into OSHA's
regulatory agenda and compliance policy. At this time,
fifty percent of the ACCSH committee membership is
re-seated every two years and the current membership
of the committee is spread fairly evenly between employee
representatives (organized labor), employer representatives
(mainly large construction companies), state representatives
(mainly from state OSHA programs), public representatives
(National Safety Council), and federal representation
(which has consistently been represented by National
Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH)).
ACCSH has established
"working groups" in a variety of areas to develop
recommendations that can be submitted to OSHA for
future rulemaking. These include:
- The "Safety Recognition Programs" group, chartered
to come up with recommendations to institute programs
similar to OSHA's Voluntary Protection Program (VPP)
into the construction industry.
- The "Safety Management, Training, and Confined
Space" group. These three topics are grouped together
by ACCSH largely because they are grouped this way
in OSHA's Construction Standard, 29 CFR 1926 under
Subpart C, General Safety and Health Provisions.
OSHA is already actively working on the development
of its "Construction Safety Program Management"
standard, an activity which is fairly high on their
regulatory agenda. The past ACCSH committee made
specific recommendations to OSHA regarding this
effort (See letter to Mr. Gregory Watchman (Attachment
6)). Their draft of this standard is structured
a lot like the old DOE Order 5480.9A "Construction
Project Safety and Health Management."
- The "Fall Protection" group, working on issues
within 29 CFR 1926 Subpart M "Fall Protection."
There is still a lot of issues to be resolved between
the Home Building Industry and OSHA on this standard.
- The "Scaffold" group, working on issues within
29 CFR 1926 Subpart L "Scaffolding." The new standard
has requirements regarding fall protection for scaffold
erectors and scaffold users. OSHA is considering
changes in the standard to resolve these issues.
Nonmandatory draft Appendix B to Subpart L, Scaffolding,
would serve as a guide for evaluating the feasibility
of providing safe access and fall protection for
employees erecting or dismantling supported scaffolds
- The "Data Collection" group has been chartered
to improve data collection within the construction
industry. Data provided by the construction industry
is usually poor because of the relationship between
the prime contractor and any sub-tier contractors
working on the project. The lack of good data causes
problems for researchers like NIOSH as well as for
OSHA itself who cannot effectively target poor performers
in the construction industry.
Mr. Finn stated if
anyone on the CSAC is interested in becoming a member
of one of the working groups, please contact him.
Participation in such groups provides an opportunity
to be involved in the developing of rulemaking recommendations
that are presented to OSHA.
Mr. Finn stated that
he would probably stay involved in the Construction
Safety Management group and that someone from Headquarter's
VPP group work may participate in the Safety Recognition
Programs group. Also, he would try to have Janet Macon
and Glenn Florczak of EH-5 in the Data Collection
and Scaffolding Groups, respectively.
Mr. Finn provided the
following information from the last ACCSH meeting:
- Mr. Charles Jeffress, OSHA's new Administrator,
was the first speaker and provided information as
to what he thinks is important for OSHA in construction
safety. He stated, this is the first time in history
that OSHA has a strategic plan that specifically
states that OSHA wants a twenty percent reduction
in the injury and illness rates in 100,000 American
- Mr. Jeffress stated, VPP is clearly more suited
to fixed sites than to construction. He felt that
a better "excellence recognition program" was needed
for the construction industry. An article from BNA
Occupational Safety & Health Reporter entitled
"Short-Term Work Sites Now Considered Under Program
Developed for Construction," discusses a new pilot
program for construction sites of greater than a
year's duration (Attachment 8).
- The Steel Erection Negotiate Rulemaking Committee
(SENRAC) finally presented to OSHA a proposed new
standard for Steel Erection. OSHA had praise for
the negotiated rulemaking process but the Administrative
Procedures Act, which requires all proposed standards
(including those resulting from negotiated rulemaking)
to go through public comment, reportedly now has
some SENRAC committee members wondering if they
had gained anything using the negotiated rule making
process because the steel erection standard is still
not scheduled to be published by OSHA any time in
the near future.
- OSHA is considering publishing a draft Personal
Protective Equipment standard in June and having
hearings in September. The new standard will try
to establish guidelines regarding payment for the
cost of personal protective equipment (Attachment
- OSHA's Safety Management Program and Training
standard has a remaining issue concerning new employee
pre-training requirements. At issue is how previous
training an employee has received can be accredited
or recognized by a new employer. The employers want
the unions to be responsible for creating a system
to document their members prior training when they
are dispatched to the employer's work site.
- During the last two years at the ACCSH meetings
there has been a lot of discussion on rulemaking
to address women's issues in construction. The main
focus has been the work place culture issues. Some
fairly intensive research has been performed on
this subject that has discovered further issues
that need addressing. These include:
a. Personal security
and cleanliness of sanitary facilities.
b. Design and fit of
personal protective equipment.
disorders caused by having women perform certain types
of heavy construction activities.
d. Reproductive hazards
from contaminants in the construction workplace.
NIOSH and OSHA have
cosponsored the writing of a working paper on Women
in the Construction Workplace: "Providing Equitable
Safety and Health Protection" (Attachment 10). At
this time, OSHA's only rulemaking that may come out
of these issues include changes to 29 CFR 1926.51,
Sanitation and Decontamination Facilities, which would
include gender specific changing rooms as well as
sanitary conditions and proximity requirements for
toilet and washing facilities.
- OSHA's original intention of having one standard
addressing both general industry and construction
confined space entry has been changed in favor of
having a construction specific confined space standard.
The rationale provided for this decision was the
changing nature of confined spaces in construction
as well the distinctions between the construction
of sewers(where 29 CFR 1926 applies) and their maintenance
(where 29 CFR 1910 applies and methane is more of
an issue). These are the two issues that has led
OSHA to agree with ACCSH's view that there should
be separate standards for construction and general
6. Mr. Ed Blackwood,
DOE EH-3, and Mr. Mitch Kunich, DOE Nevada Operations
Office, made a presentation entitled "Integrated Safety
Management Update" (Attachment 11). The presentation
focused on the principles of Integrated Safety Management
as well as issues pertaining to upcoming ISM verification
visits. Detailed information on this topic is available
on the ISM website at:
7. Mr. Dave Vail, Safety
Manager Perini Construction Company, gave a presentation
on "Safety Management on Las Vegas Projects." (handouts
8. Mr. Charles Reaux,
Yucca Mountain Project gave a presentation on "Implementation
of OSHA's new Respirator Standard at the Yucca Mountain
Project" (Attachment 12).>
9. Mr. Finn discussed
review comments submitted to him by the CSAC on the
recent ANSI draft standards, A10.20 "Ceramic Tile,
Terrazzo, and Dimension Stones"
(Attachment 13) and
A10.21 "Proper Cleanup and Disposal of Contaminated
Work Clothing" (Attachment 14). In reference to the
A10.20 draft standard, Mr. Finn indicated that he
adopted about all comments submitted by the committee
and added some comments of his own and returned the
ballot as "approved with comment." In reference to
the A10.21 draft standard, Mr. Finn indicated that
there was some very good technical comments submitted
but he didn't feel this proposed standard fits within
the charter of the ANSI A10 committee or that is otherwise
necessary in that pertinent occupational safety and
health and environmental issues are already dealt
with in applicable OSHA General Industry (29 CFR 1910)
and Environmental Protection Agency (Title 40) regulations.
Mr. Finn submitted a "negative ballot" on A10.21 draft
10. Mr. Finn closed
out and adjourned the meeting.