three types of occupational safety and health management systems

  

choose one of three types of occupational safety and health management systems

Review three types of management systems that could be used for occupational safety and health at a facility with which you are familiar. Reflect on which of the management systems you believe would be the most effective for providing a healthy, safe workplace. Support your opinion with your reasoning for the choice.

three types of occupational safety and health management systems:

1. The ANSI/ASSP Z10.0 OSH management

2. ISO 45001 Occupational health and safety

3. OSHA Voluntary Protection Program

Your journal entry must be at least 200 words in length.

Reference

1. Fuller, T. P. (2015). Essentials of industrial hygiene. Itasca, IL: National Safety Council. ( chapter 3)

2. ANSI / AIHA / ASSE Z10-2012.

Safety Management
Peer-Reviewed

Z10-2012
An Overview of the Occupational Health
& Safety Management Systems Standard

By Fred A. Manuele

On July 25, 2005, ANSI approved a newstandard titled Occupational Health andSafety Management Systems (OHSMS). Its
designation was ANSI/AIHA ZlO-2005. That was a
major development. For the first fime in the U.S.,
a national consensus standard was issued for a

I N B R I E F
•The 2012 version of Z1Ü encourages
employers to integrate safety-related
systems within all other business
processes.
•While management commitment
is stressed, the standard places
particular emphasis on employee par-
ticipation and the importance of thei

r

feedhack for improvement in systems
and processes.
•A significant “shall” addition to the
standard requires that top management
have systems in place to assess risk.
•Safety issues to he recognized,
prioritized and resolved are defined
as hazards, risks and management
system deficiencies.

safefy and health management
system applicable to organiza-
tions of all sizes and types.

Per ANSI requirements, stan-
dards are reviewed every 5 years
to be revised or reaffirmed.
AIHA, then-secretariat, formed
a commiftee to review ZIO.
The outcome of its work was a
revised standard approved on
June 27, 2012. Its designafion
was ANSI/AIHA ZlO-2012.
Shortly after approval, secre-
tariat was transferred to ASSE.

All persons who give coun-
sel on occupational safety and
health management systems
should own a copy of this
standard and be thoroughly
famuiar with its content. The
2012 version refiects significant

changes and contains valuable support informafion
in the advisory column and the appendixes.

• Fred A. Manuele, P.E., CSP, is president of Hazards Ltd., the company he formed after retiring from
• Marsh & McLennan where he was a managing director and manager of M&M Protection Consultants.
I His safetv’ experience spans several decades. Manuele’s books Advanced Safety Management: Focusing on
” ZIO and Serious Injury Prevention, and On the Practice of Safety have been adopted for several graduate

and undergraduate safety degree programs. He is also author of Innovations in Safety Management: Ad-
dressing Career Knotuledge Needs and Heinrich Revisited: Truisms or Myths and coeditor of Safety Through
Design. He was chair of the committee that developed ANSI/ASSE Z590.3, Standard for Prevention
Through Design—Guidelines for Addressing Occupational Hazards and Risks in Design and Redesign
Processes. Manuele is an ASSE Fellow and received the Distinguished Service to Safety Award from
NSC. He has served on the hoard of directors for ASSE, NSC and BCSP, which he also served as presi-
dent. In June 2013, BCSP honored Manuele with a Lifetime Achievement Award.

4 4 ProfessionalSafety

APRIL 2014 www.asse.org

The standard provides senior management with
a well-conceived concept and action outline for
a safety and health management system. As em-
ployers make changes to meet fhe standard’s re-
quirements, it can be expected that occupational
injuries and illnesses will be reduced.

To identify differences and to develop a pri-
oritized improvement plan, SH&E professionals
should conduct a gap analysis to compare the el-
ements in existing safety programs, processes or
systems with the requirements in ZIO. That com-
parison should be followed by a priorifized acfion
plan for confinual improvemenf.

Participation: Consensus
More than 40 safety professionals served on the

committee that crafted the 2012 version of ZIO.
They represented indusfry, labor, government,
business associations, professional organizations,
academe and persons of interest.

The ZIO committee adhered strictly to the due
diligence requirements applicable to development
of an ANSI standard. A balance of stakeholders
provided input and open discussion, which resulted
in the group vetfing each issue that was raised to an
agreed-upon conclusion.

In crafting the current version of ZIO, the intent
was to present management system requirements
that when effecfively implemented would not only

achieve significant safety and
health benefits, but also have a fa-
vorable effect on productivity, fi-
nancial performance, quality and
other business goals. The stan-
dard is built on the well-known
plan-do-check-act (PDCA) pro-
cess for continual improvement.

Many companies have issued
safety policy statements in which
they indicate their intent to com-

I Figure 1

I Plan-Do-Check-Act Concept
ply with or exceed all relative laws and standards.
Those employers, particularly, will want to imple-
ment the ZIO provisions that are not part of their
current safety and health management systems.

A Major Theme
Throughout all sections of ZIO, from man-

agement leadership and employee participation
through the management review provisions, a key
theme is prominent: Processes for continual im-
provement are to be in place and implemented to
ensure that:

•hazards are identified and evaluated;
•risks are assessed and prioritized;
•management system deficiencies and opportu-

nities for improvement are identified and addressed;
•risk elimination, reduction or control measures

are taken to ensure that acceptable risk levels are
attained.

In relation to this theme, the following terms as
defined by the standard are particularly applicable.

•Hazard: A condition, set of circumstances or
inherent property that can cause injury, illness or
death.
•Exposure: Contact with or proximity to a haz-
ard, taking into account duration and intensity.
•Risk: An estimate of the combination of likeli-
hood of an occurrence of a hazardous event or
exposure(s) and severity of injury or Illness that
may be caused by the event or exposures.
•Probability: The likelihood of a hazard causing
an incident or exposure that could result in harm
or damage for a selected unit of time, events,
population, items or activity being considered.
•Severity: The extent of harm or damage that
could result from a hazard-related incident or
exposure.
•Risk assessment: Process(es) used to evalu-
ate the level of risk associated with hazards and
system issues. (ANSI/AIHA/ASSE, 2012)

The definitions are repeated in Appendix E, which
provides guidance on risk assessment. Although ac-
ceptabie risk is not a term included in the standard’s
definitions, it is made clear in several places that the
goal is to achieve acceptable risk levels. Eor exam-
ple. Section 6.4, Corrective and Prevention Actions,
clearly states that an organization is to have process-
es in place to ensure that acceptable risk levels are
achieved and maintained. Appendix F states, “The
goal of the risk assessment process including the
steps taken to reduce risk is to achieve safe working
conditions with an acceptable level of risk.”

ZIO Is a Management System Standard
ZIO is a management system standard, not a

specification standard. What is the difference? A
management system standard provides process and
system guidelines for a provision without specifying
the details on how the provision is to be carried out.
A specificafion standard contains those details.

ZIO Section 5.2B illustrates the difference:
Section 5.2: Education, Training, Awareness
and Competence. The organization shall estab-
lish processes to:

Improve
employee H&S

productivity
satisfaction

Continual I
Improvement

Reduce
hazards

risks
incidents

comp costs
lost time

3.0 Policy Management
Leadership & Employee
Participation

B. Ensure through appropriate education,
training or ether methods that employees and
contractors are aware of applicable OHSMS re-
quirements and their importance are competent
to carry out their responsibilities as defined in the
OHSMS. (ANSI/AIHA/ASSE, 2012)

That is the extent of the “shall” requirements for
Section 5.2B. The explanatory part of the standard
contains comments on subjects for which training
should be given, such as safety design, incident in-
vestigafion, hazard identificadon, good safety prac-
tices and the use of PPE. However, those comments
are advisory and not a part of the standard.

If ZIO were written as a specificadon standard,
requirements comparable to the following might
be extensions of 5.2B.

a) At least 12 hours of training shall be given ini-
tially to engineers and safety professionals in safety
through design, to be followed annually with a
minimum of 6 hours of refresher materials.

b) All employees shall be given a minimum of
3 hours training annually in hazard identification.

c) All employees shall be given a minimum of
4 hours draining annually in the use of PPE.

d) All training activities conducted as a part of
this provision shall be documented and records
shall be retained for a minimum of 5 years.

Compatibility & Harmonization
One goal of the ZIO committee was to ensure that

it could be easily integrated into any management
system an organization has in place. That goal was
met. As to structure, the standard is compadble and
harmonized with quality and environmental man-
agement system standards—the ISO 9000 and ISO
14000 series at the time of the approval of ZIO.

Employment Implications
A brief verbal survey of safety degree program

professors was conducted to determine what quali-
fications were being stressed by human relations
personnel when they visited campuses to recruit.
The survey found that they want candidates who are
equipped with the knowledge and skill to give coun-
sel on many of the provisions in ZIO. In that respect,
safety professionals should give particular attention
to certain provisions. Those provisions are in sec-
tions: 4.0, Planning; 5.0, Implementadon and Op-
eradons; and 6.0, Evaluadon and Corrective Action.

The Z10-2012
standard is built
on the well-known
plan-do-check-act
process for con-
tinual improvement.
It provides senior
management with
a well-conceived
concept and action
outline for a safety
and health manage-
ment system.

www.asse.org APRIL 2014 ProfessionalSafety 4 5

4 6 ProfessionalSafety

In summary, those sections state that employers
shall establish and implement processes to:

•Identify and control hazards in the design pro-
cess and when changes are made in operations.
This requires safety design reviews for new and
altered facilities and equipment.

•Have an effective management of change sys-
tem in place through which hazards and risks are
identified and evaluated in the change process.

•Assess the level of risk for identified hazards for
which knowledge of risk assessment methods will
be necessary.

•Utilize a prescribed hierarchy of conh-ols in
dealing with hazards to achieve acceptable risk lev-
els for which the first step is to attempt to design
out or otherwise eliminate the hazard.

•Avoid bringing hazards into the workplace by
incorporating design and material specifications
into procurement contracts for facilifies, equip-
menf and materials.

Certification impiications
Provisions in ZIO have a direct relationship to

the content of the CSP examinafions. Those exami-
nations are reviewed about every 5 years to ensure
that they are current with respect to what safety
professionals actually do. In that review process,
safety professionals are asked fo describe the con-
tent of their work at the time the survey is made.

The author compared the content of the Com-
prehensive Practice Examination Guide issued by
BCSP in 2011 with that issued in 2006. Substan-
tial changes were made in the later edifion, many
of which relate to principle requirements of ZIO.
For example, a domain in fhe sixth edition is de-
voted entirely to hazard identification and analy-
sis and risk assessment. It is the centerpiece of the
examination. Knowledge requirements for safety
through design and management of change are
more extensive as well.

ZIO represents sound, current practice. Having
knowledge of and experience with its provisions is
required to pass the CSP examination.

Continuai improvement: The PDCA Concept
ZIO is built on the well-known PDCA process

for continual improvement. Understanding this
process is necessary to effecfively implement the
standard. The introducfion to ZIO includes a chart
based on the PDCA concept that emphasizes con-
tinual improvement.

Throughout the standard, the words process, pro-
cesses, systems and continual improvement are often
repeated. ZIO emphasizes a continual improvement
approach. As noted, the standard outlines the pro-
cesses to be put in place to have an effecfive safety
and health management system, not the specifics.
Each organization must determine process specifics
based on its unique hazards and risks.

A Review of the Standard’s Provisions
Brief comments are made here to provide an

overview of the standard’s major sections. With
respect to these remarks, keep in mind that ZIO is

APRIL 2014 www.asse.org

presented in two columns. The standard is in the
left column; the explanatory and advisory material
is in the right column—the E column.

As is common in ANSI standards, requirements
are identified by the word shall. An organization
that chooses to conform to the standard is expected
to fulfill the shall requirements. The word should is
used to describe recommended practices or give an
explanation of the requirements.

Numerous recommended practices and advisory
comments are included in the E column and in the
appendices to assist in the implementation of the
standard; they are not requirements.

Section 1.0 Scope, Purpose & Application
Section 1.1 Scope defines the minimum require-

ments for OHSMS. According to the advisory data
for the scope, the intent is to provide a systems ap-
proach for continual improvement in safety and
health management, and to avoid specifications.
Furthermore, the writers recognized the unique-
ness of the culture and organizational structures
of individual organizations and the need for each
entity to “define its own specific measures of per-
formance.”

Section 1.2 Purpose indicafes the primary pur-
pose of the standard: To provide a management
tool to reduce the risk of occupational injuries, ill-
nesses and fatalities.

Section 1.3 Application states that the standard
is applicable to organizations of all sizes and fypes.
ZIO contains no limitations or exclusions by indus-
try, business type or number of employees. The
introduction and advisory column comments op-
posite Section 1.3 state that the standard’s structure
allows integration with quality and environmental
management systems. Doing so is a good idea.

Section 2.0 Definitions
As is typical in ANSI standards, certain terms are

defined as used in the standard. Safety profession-
als should become familiar with them.

Section 3.0 Management Leadership
& Employee Participation

Section 3.0 is the standard’s most important sec-
tion. Safety professionals will surely agree with
the premise that top management leadership and
effective employee participation are crucial for
OHSMS success. Top managemenf leadership is
vital. An organization’s safefy culture derives from
decisions made at that level. And, continual im-
provement cannot be achieved without effective
direction from management. Key statements in the
shall column of the standard follow:

3.1.1 Top management shall direct the organi-
zation to establish, implement and maintain an
OHSMS.
3.1.2 The organization’s top management shall
establish a documented occupational health and
safety polioy.
3.1.3 Top management shall provide leadership
and assume overall responsibility.

3.2 The organization shali esfablisii a process to
ensure effective participation in the OiHSMS by
its employees at aii ieveis.

As management provides direction and leader-
ship, assumes responsibility for the OHSMS and
ensures effecfive employee participation, it is im-
portant to keep the standard’s purpose in mind: To
reduce the risk of occupational injuries, illnesses and
fatalities. That will be best accomplished if person-
nel understand that achieving acceptable risk levels
is the desired outcome of every safety and health
management process. Appendixes A, B and C pro-
vide supporting data on policy statements, roles
and responsibilities, and employee participation.

Section 4.0 Planning
In the PDCA process, planning is the first step.

As would be expected. Section 4.0 Planning sets
forth the planning process to implement the stan-
dard and to establish improvement plans. The goal
is to identify and prioritize issues within a safefy
managemenf system that need improvement.
Those issues are defined as hazards, risks and
management system deficiencies. Throughout, the
standard emphasizes having systems and process-
es in place to identify hazards and assess their ac-
companying risk and to identify the management
deficiencies related to them.

In the confinual improvement process, informa-
tion that defines opportunities for furfher improve-
menf in the OHSMS and, thereby, risk reduction,
is fed back into the planning process for additional
consideration.

Section 4.1 requires that a company conduct a
comprehensive review to identify the differences
between existing systems and the requirements of
the standard. The review shall encompass: business
and operational processes that are relative to the
standard’s requirements; operational issues men-
tioned in the planning section (hazards, risks and
management system deficiencies); and allocation
of the resources necessary to achieve and maintain
an acceptable risk level; applicable regulafions and
standards; content of risk assessmenfs made; man-
agement system audits; and, as emphasized in the
standard, the means established for employee par-
ticipation and contribution.

Section 4.2 sets forth the requirements for as-
sessment and prioritization.

The organization shaii establish a process to as-
sess and prioritize OHSMS issues on an ongoing
basis. The process shali:

A) Assess the impact on health and safety
of OHSMS issues, and assess the ievel of risk
for identified hazards;

B) Estabiish priorities based on factors such
as the level of risk, pofenfiai for system im-
provement, standards, regulations, feasibiiity
and potenfiai business consequences;

C) identify underlying causes and other con-
tributing factors related to system deficiencies
that lead to hazards and risks.

Eollowing are excerpts from selected explanatory
notes in sections 4.2A and 4.2B.

At E4.2A, the standard’s writers offer advice on
risk assessments and the factors that they should
include, such as potential hazards and exposures;
frequency of exposure; human behavior; controls
in place and their effectiveness; and the potential
severity of hazards (emphasis added for the last
point).

At E4.2B, it is made clear the business results
that may relate to fhe standard’s application may
include either increased or decreased productivity,
sales, net income or public image.

Thus, employers need processes to identify and
analyze hazards, assess the risks deriving from
those hazards, and establish mifigation priorifies
which, when acted on, will attain acceptable risk
levels. Appendix D provides guidance on assess-
ment and priorifizafion.

4.3 Objecfives, says: “The organizafion shall
establish a process to set documented objectives,
quantified where practicable, based on issues that
offer the greatest opportunity for OSHMS im-
provemenf and risk reduction.”

4.4 Implementation Plans and Allocation of Re-
sources follows logically in accord with a sound
problem-solving procedure. After hazards, risks
and shortcomings in safety managemenf systems
have been idenfified and objectives have been out-
lined, a documented plan must be established and
implemented to achieve the objectives.

Item B in Section 4.4 says that an employer must
assign adequate resources to achieve the objectives
outlined in the implementation plans. It is an ab-
solute fhat if adequate resources are not provided,
acceptable risk levels cannot be maintained.

Section 5.0 Implementation & Operation
This section defines the operational elements

that are required for implementation of an effective
OHSMS. These elements provide the backbone of
an OHSMS and the means to pursue the objectives
from the planning process. Note the phrase “the
backbone of an OHSMS.”

5.1 OHSMS Operafional Elements are to be in-
tegrated into the management system. A new and
important addifion to ZIO appears in this section.

Section 5.1.1 Risk Assessment
“The organization shall establish and implement

a risk assessment process (es) appropriate to the
nature of hazards and level of risk.”

Adding this shall provision reflects a worldwide
trend emphasizing the importance of risk assess-
ments. Appendix E provides a six-page overview
of risk assessment and includes data on several
techniques. Having knowledge of preliminary haz-
ards analysis, what-if/checklist analysis, and failure
modes and effecfs analysis and how they are ap-
plied will satisfy most needs of safety professionals
as they give counsel on risk assessment.

In applying hazard analysis and risk assessment
techniques, SH&E professionals may use qualita-
tive and quantitative methods. Mathematical cal-
culafions required will not be extensive.

Appendix E also gives an example of a risk as-
www.asse.org APRIL 2014

The standard
emphasizes
having
systems
and process-
es in place
to identify
hazards and
assess their
accompany-
ing risk and
to identify the
management
deficiencies
related to
them.

ProfessionalSafety 4 7

sessment matrix. Most risk assessment matrixes
set forth incident probability categories, severity of
harm or damage ranges, and resulfing risk levels.
Such a matrix can serve as a valuable instrument
when working with decision makers to set risk lev-
els and prioritize corrective actions. Variations in
published risk assessment matrixes are substantial.
A safety professional should customize the matrix
to the organization’s needs.

Section 5.1.2 Hierarchy of Controls
Provisions for the use of a specifically defined

hierarchy of controls are outlined. The organiza-
tion shall apply the methods of risk reducfion in
the order prescribed. This is how the standard and
the explanatory comments read.

The organization shali establish a process for
achieving feasibie risk reduction based upon the
following preferred order of controis:

A) elimination;
B) substitution of less hazardous materials,
processes, operations or equipment;
C) engineering controls;
D) warnings;
E) administrative controis;
F) personal protective equipment.

Sound l-nanagement principles shall be applied
as decisions are made with respect to the hierar-
chy of controls. Decision makers should consider
the nature of the hazards and their accompanying
risks; scope of risk reduction that must be achieved;
necessity to adhere to applicable standards and
regulations, both external and internal; what is
considered good practice in the industry; available
technology; and cost effectiveness.

A hierarchy is a sysfem of persons or things ranked
one above the other. The hierarchy of confrols in
ZIO provides a systematic way of considering sfeps
in a ranked and sequential order to select the most
effective means of eliminafing or reducing hazards
and their risks. Acknowledging the premise that risk
reducfion measures should be considered and taken
in a prescribed order represents an important step in
the evolution of the practice of safety.

Appendix G provides a pictorial and verbal dis-
play of the hierarchy of controls listed in 5.1.1 with
application examples for each elemenf.

Secfion 5.1.3 Design Review
& Management of Change

The following excerpts indicate what ZIO requires
for design reviews and managemenf of change. To
repeaf for emphasis, these are shall provisions.

The organization shall establish a process to
identify, and take appropriate steps to prevent
or otherwise control hazards at the design and
redesign stages, and for situations requiring
management of change to reduce potential risks
fo an acceptable level. The process for design
and redesign and management of change shali
include:

A) identification of tasks and related health
and safefy hazards;

B) recognition of hazards associated with hu-

4 8 ProfessionalSafety APRIL 2014 www.asse.org

man factors including human errors caused by
design deficiencies;

C) review of applicabie regulations, codes,
standards, and internal and external recognized
guidelines;

D) application of controi measures (hierarchy
of controls. Section 5.1.2);

E) a determination of the appropriate scope
and degree of fhe design review and manage-
ment of change;

F) employee participation.

The Design Process
The aufhor and others have long professed fhat

fhe mosf effective and economical way to achieve
acceptable risk levels is to have the hazards from
which the risks derive addressed in the design pro-
cess. That is what this standard requires. It is an
exceptionally important element in this standard.
Impact of its application can be immense.

Management of Change
Employers must have processes in place to identi-

fy and prevent or otherwise control hazards and re-
duce the potential risks associated with them when
existing operations, products, services or suppliers
change. Getting effective management of change
procedures in place is not easy.

The author’s research shows that for all occupa-
fions many incidents that result in serious injury
occur when out-of-the-ordinary situations arise,
particularly when unusual and nonroufine work is
being performed and when sources of high energy
are present (Manuele, 2008, p. 51; 2012, p. 166).
Safety professionals should sfudy thoroughly the
standard’s management of change requirements
to determine how they might promote the culture
change necessary for their implementation. Apply-
ing change management methods will be iiecessary.

Note that sections 5.1.3.1 and 5.1.3.2 are exten-
sions of 5.1.3 Design Review and Managemenf of
Change.

Section 5.1.3.1 Applicable Life Cycle Phases
The provision in Section 5.1.3.1 says that an or-

ganization must consider the entirety of the life
cycle of the subject being designed or redesigned.

At E5.1.3.1, the standard’s writers advise that
the design process may apply in all or some of
the following: concept stages; preliminary design;
detailed design; build or purchase process; com-
missioning, installing and debugging processes;
production and maintenance operations; and de-
commissioning activity.

Section 5.1.3.2 Process Verification
The organization shall have processes in place
fo verify that changes in faciiities, documenta-
tion, personnei and operations are evaluated
and managed to ensure safety and healfh risks
arising from these changes are controlled.

Section 5.1.4 Procurement
Although the requirements for procurement are

plainly stated and easily understood, they are brief

in relation to the enormity of what will be required
to implement them. An interpretafion of the re-
quirements could be: “Safefy practitioners, you are
assigned the responsibilify to convince manage-
ment and purchasing agents that, in the long term,
it can be very expensive to buy cheap.” This is how
the standard and fhe explanafory dafa read.

The organization shaii estabiish and implement
processes to:

A) Identity and evaluate the potential health
and safety risks associated with purchased
products, raw materiais, and other goods and
reiated services before introduction into the work
environment;

B) Estabiish requirements for suppiies, equip-
ment, raw materiais, and other goods and re-
iated services purchased by the organization to
control potentiai heaith and safety risks;

C) Ensure that purchased products, raw ma-
teriais, and other goods and related services
conform to the organization’s health and safety
requirements.

Appendix I provides guidance on the procure-
ment process. Adding an element to an OHSMS
designed to prevent bringing hazards into the
workplace could have startling positive results in
reducing the frequency and severify of hazardous
incidents and exposures.

Section 5.1.5 Contractors
Section 5.1.5 Contractors requires that an orga-

nization have processes in place to avoid injury and
illness to its employees from activities of contrac-
tors and to the contractor’s employees from the
organization’s operations. Many enfities have such
procedures in place.

One of the shall provisions indicates that the
process is to include “contractor health and safety
performance criteria.” That implies, among other
things, vetfing a contractor with respect to its previ-
ous safety performance before awarding a contract.

Section 5.1.6 Emergency Preparedness
To meet the requirements of the provision in sec-

fion 5.1.6, an organizafion must have processes in
place to “to idenfify, prevent, prepare for and/or re-
spond to emergencies.” Also, an employer should
conduct periodic drills to test the emergency plans,
which are then updated.

Section 5.2 Education, Training,
Awareness & Competence

An organizafion is required to determine the
knowledge needed to achieve competence; en-
sure that employees are aware of the OHSMS re-
quirements; remove any barriers to participafion
in education; ensure that training is ongoing and
is delivered in a language trainees understand;
and ensure that trainers are competent. This sec-
fion has six alpha-designated provisions, three of
which contain the words competence or competent.
Thus, competence is emphasized. Employees and
contractors are to be competent to fulfill their re-
sponsibilifies. Trainers are to be competent to train.

These provisions are also applicable to contrac-
tors. Interesfingly, both safety design and procure-
ment are mentioned in the examples of training
that should be given. This is how item E5.2A reads.

E5.2A: Training in OHSMS responsibilities should
include, for example, training for: engineers in
safety design (e.g., hazard recognition, risk as-
sessment, mitigation, etc.); those conducting
incident investigations and audits for identifying
underiying OHSMS nonconformances; procure-
ment personnel on impact of purchasing deci-
sions; and others invoived with the identification
of OHSMS issues, methods of prioritization and
controis.

Section 5.3 Communication
An organizafion is to insfitute processes to: com-

municate informafion about the progress being
made on its implementation plan; ensure prompt
reporfing of incidents, hazards and risks; promote
employee involvement so that they make recom-
mendations on hazards and risks; inform con-
tractors and relevant external interested parties of
changes made fhaf affect them; and remove barri-
ers to all of the foregoing. With respect to contrac-
tors, item E5.3D provides guidance as follows:

E5.3D: The work activities of contractors can
pose additional hazards for both employees and
others in the workpiace. Processes estabiished
for consultation with contractors shouid ensure
risks will be appropriateiy addressed using good
OHS practices. This consuitation shouid include
discussion and resoiution ot issues of mutual
concern.

Section 5.4 Document & Record Control Process
The standard specifies documentation require-

ments for certain systems in several places. Tliese
processes should fit the requirements of the
OHSMS in place. The advice given in the infor-
mafional column at E5.4 is that the documentation
procedures put in place should be commensurate
with the size of an organization as represented by
the number of employees, the complexity of opera-
fions and its inherent hazards and risks.

Documents shall be updated as needed, legible,
adequately protected against damage or loss, and
retained as necessary.

Section 6.0 Evaluation & Corrective Action
This section outlines the requirements for pro-

cesses to evaluate the performance of the safety
management system, to take corrective action
when shortcomings are found and to provide feed-
back to the planning and management review pro-
cesses. Communicafions on lessons learned are to
be fed back into the planning process. The expecta-
fion is that new objectives and acfion plans will be
written in relafion to what has been experienced.

Section 6.1 Monitoring, Measurement
& Assessment

The organization shaii estabiish and impiement
a process to monitor and evaiuate hazards.

The most
effective and
economi-
cal way to
achieve
acceptable
risk levels is
to have the
hazards from
which the
risks derive
addressed
in the design
process.
That is what
this standard
requires.

www.asse.org APRIL 2014 ProfessionalSafety 4 9

r

I
I

ZlO-2012

Table of Contents

The ZlO-2012 table of contents provides a base for review and
comparison with the safety management systems with which
safety practitioners are faiTiiliar.

Table of Contents

Foreword

1.0 Scope, Purpose & Application
1.1 Scope
1.2 Purpose
1.3 Application

2.0 Definitions
3.0 Management Leadership & Employee Participation

3.1 Management Leadership
3.1.1 Occupational Health and Safety Management System
3.1.2 Policy
3.1.3 Responsibility and Authority

3.2 Employee Participation
4.0 Planning

4.1 Initial and Ongoing Reviews
4.2 Assessment and Prioritization
4.3 Objectives
4.4 Implementation Plans and Allocation of Resources

5.0 Implementation & Operation
5.1 OHSMS Operational Elements

5.1.1 Risk Assessment
5.1.2 Hierarchy of Oontrols
5.1.3 Design Review and Management of Change
5.1.4 Procurement
5.1.5 Contractors
5.1.6 Emergency Preparedness

5.2 Education, Training, Awareness and Competence
5.3 Communication
5.4 Document and Record Control Process

6.0 Evaluation & Corrective Action
6.1 Monitoring, Measurement and Assessment
6.2 Incident Investigation
6.3 Audits
6.4 Corrective and Preventive Actions
6.5 Eeedback to the Planning Process

7.0 Management Review
7.1 Management Review Process
7.2 Management Review Outcomes and Follow Up

Appendixes
A) Policy Statements (Section 3.1.2)
B) Roles and Responsibilities (Section 3.1.3)
C) Encouraging Employee Participation (Section 3.2)
D) Planning-Identification, Assessment and Pricritization (Section 4.0)
E) Objectives/Implementation Plans (Section 4.3 and 4.4)
F) Risk Assessment (Section 4.1 and 5.1.1)
C) Hierarchy of Control (Section 5.1.2)
H) Management of Change (Section 5.1.3)
I) Procurement (Section 5.1.4)
J) Contractor Safety and Health (Section 5.1.5)
K) Incident Investigation Guidelines (Section 6.2)
L) Audit (Section 6.3)
M) Management Review Process (Section 7.1 and 7.2)
N) Management System Standard Comparison (Introduction)
O) Bibliography and

References

New appendixes in the 2012 version are: E) Risk Assessment;
I) Procurement; J) Contractor Safety and Health; M) Management
of Change; N) Management System Standard Comparison. While
the appendixes are not part of the standard, they can be helpful to
those with implementadon responsibility.

risks and their controls to assess OHSMS per-
formance. These processes shall include some
or all of the following methods, depending on
the nature and extent of identified hazards and
risks: workplace inspections and testing; as-
sessments of exposures; incident tracking; mea-
suring performance in relation to legal or other
requirements; or other methods selected by the
organization. Results of the monitoring process-
es shall be communicated as appropriate.

Section 6.2 Incident Investigation
The standard says:

The organization shall establish a process to re-
port, investigate and analyze incidents in order
to address OHSMS nonconformances and other
factors that may be causing or contributing to
the occurrence of incidents. The investigations
shall be performed in a timely manner.

One advisory comment highlights the value in
feeding lessons learned from invesdgations into the
planning and corrective action processes.

Section 6.3 Audits
An organizadon shall:

Have audits made periodically with respect to
application of the provisions in the OHSMS; en-
sure that audits are made by competent persons
not attached to the location being audited; doc-
ument and communicate the results; have audi-
tors communicate immediately on potentials for
serious injuries or illnesses and fatalities sc that
swift corrective action can be taken.

Audits are to measure the organizadon’s ef-
fecdveness in implemendng the OHSMS ele-
ments. Thus, audits are to determine whether the
management systems in place effectively identify
hazards and control risks. Although many safety
professionals are familiar with safety audit pro-
cesses, they should review what the standard re-
quires and determine whether it will be beneficial
to revise their audit systems. Appendix E is helpful
in this respect; it contains a sample audit protocol
that matches all of the secdons of̂ ZlO.

In the advisory column, the standard’s writers
make clear that audits are to be system oriented
rather than compliance oriented.

Also, and importantly, E6.3B comments on the
independence of auditors. Whue it says that “au-
dits should be conducted by individuals indepen-
dent of the acdvities being audited,” it also says
that “this does not mean that audits must be con-
ducted by individuals external to the organization.”

Section 6.4 Corrective & Preventive Actions
Revisions made in the 2012 version of ZIO are

substandal in this secdon. It defines what the or-
ganizadon shall do to fulfill the provisions of this
secdon.

The organization shall establish and implement
corrective and preventive action processes to:

A) Address nonconformances and hazards
that are not being controlled to an acceptable
level of risk.

5 0 ProfessionalSafety APRIL 2014 www.asse.org

B) Identify and address new and residual haz-
ards associated with corrective and preventive
actions that are not being controlled to an ac-
ceptable level of risk.

C) Expedite action on high-risk hazards (those
that could result in fatality or serious injury/ill-
ness) that are not being controlled to an accept-
able level of risk;

D) Review and ensure effectiveness of correc-
tive and preventive actions taken.

It is made clear that organizations must identify
hazards, risks and shortcomings in management
systems, and take corrective action to achieve ac-
ceptable risk levels. Furthermore, the standard says
that organizations are to expedite appropriate ac-
tions on high-risk hazards.

Section 6.5 Feedback to fhe Planning Process
Section 6.5 is a communication provision pertain-

ing to all shortcomings in the safefy management
system. Its purpose is to provide a base for revision
in the planning process. The standard says that the
communication process established shall ensure
a proper flow of fhe information developed in fhe
monitoring and measurement systems, audits, in-
cident investigations and in the corrective actions
taken to those involved in the planning process to
achieve continual improvement endeavors.

Section 7.0 Management Review
This section requires that OHSMS performance

be reviewed periodically and fhat management take
appropriate actions in response. The management
review section and extensive advisory comments
pertaining to it are must reads. As noted, the Man-
agement Leadership and Employee Participation
section is the most important in ZIO. The section on
management review is a close second. Periodically
reviewing management system effectiveness is an
important part of the PDCA process.

Section 7.1 Management Review Process
The organization shall establish and implement
a process for top management tc review the
OHSMS at least annually, and to recommend
improvements to ensure its continued suitability,
adequacy and effectiveness.

E7.1: Management reviews are a critical part
of the continual improvement of the OHSMS.

Some subjects must be reviewed at least annually:
progress in reducing risk; effectiveness of processes
fo identify, assess and prioritize risk and system de-
ficiencies; effectiveness in addressing underlying
causes of risks and system deficiencies; the extent to
which objectives have been met; and performance
of the OFISMS in relation to expectations.

Section 7.2 Management Review
Outcomes & Follow-Up

Section 7.2 requires that management determine
whether changes need to be made in “the orga-
nization’s policy, priorities, objectives, resources
or other OHSMS elements to establish the future
direction of the OHSMS.”

In accord with good man-
agement procedures, se-
nior management is expected
to give direction to imple-
ment the changes needed
in OHSMS and processes to
continually reduce risks. The
standard requires that “results
and action items from the
management reviews shall be
documented and communi-
cated to affected individuals,
and tracked fo completion.”
This provision gives the needed importance to the
management review process. Action items are to be
recorded, communicated to those affected, and fol-
lowed through to a proper conclusion.

Advisory Content & Appendices
ZIO provides exceptionally valuable explanatory

and supportive data in the advisory column and in
the appendixes. Alpha-numerical pages 1 through
29 pertain to the standard’s requirements and the
advisory material. Pages 30 through 88 are devoted
to the appendixes. That is about a 65% increase in
the space devoted to appendixes compared to the
2005 version. A safety professional musf have a copy
of the standard to appreciate the value of the guid-
ance material and the appendixes.

Conciusion
This revision to ZIO is important work. Prudent

safety professionals will sfudy the standard’s re-
quirements to determine whether additional skills
and capabilities are needed and take steps to ac-
quire those skills. Having done so, they will be
equipped to guide on implementing safety man-
agement system elements that may not exist in the
organizations to which they give counsel. PS

References

ANSI/AIHA/ASSE. (20f 2). Americim national stan-
dard for occupational health and safety management
systems (ANSI/AIHA/ASSE ZlO-2012). Fairfax, VA:
AfHA; Des Plaines, fL: ASSE.

ANSI/ISO/American Society for Quality (ASQ).
(2000). American national standard for quality manage-
ment systems—requirements (ANSI/ISO/ASQ Q9001-
2000). Milwaukee, Wf: American Society For Quality.

BCSP. (2011, Apdl). Tlie comprehensive practice exami-
nation guide (6th ed.). Champaign, fL: BCSP.

Christensen, W.C. & Manuele, F.A. (Eds.). (1999).
Safety tiiroiigh design. Itasca, IL: NSC.

International Organization for Standardization
(ISO). (2004). Environmental management systems—
requirements with guidance for use (ISO 14001:2004).
Ceneva, Switzerland: Author.

Manuele, F.A. (2008). Advanced safety management:
Focusing on ZIO and serious injury prevention. Hoboken, ^
NJ: John Wiley & Sons.

Manuele, F.A. (2012). On the practice of safety (4th
ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.

OSHA. (1992). Process safety management of highly
hazardous chemicals (29 CFR 1910.119). Washington,
DC: U.S. Department of Labor, Author.

ANSI/AIHA/ASSE
ZlO-2012
Occupational Health and Safety
Management Systems

ASSE is secretariat of the ZlO-201:
standard. Learn more at www
.asse.org/shoponline/products/
Z10_2005.php.

www.asse.org APRIL 2014 5 1

Copyright of Professional Safety is the property of American Society of Safety Engineers and
its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the
copyright holder’s express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email
articles for individual use.