Safety and Reactive Maintenance

Christer Idhammar, IDCON INC

Reactive maintenance is here defined as all maintenance work that was scheduled less than 20 hours before it was executed.

It makes sense that there is a strong correlation between safety incidents, injuries and reactive maintenance. In a reactive situation you might not take the time you should to plan and think before you take action. The urgency also call out the so common hero in maintenance crafts people and they take risks they should not take.

During Pima’s conference in New York June 2003 a speaker referred to a study done by one of the major Pulp and Paper companies; they had concluded that it was 28% more likely to have an incident when maintenance work was reactive versus planned and scheduled before execution.

Because of the strong correlation between reactive maintenance and safety incidents and injuries I suggest that organizations use this as a key performance indicator. To measure it will drive down both safety incidents and the volume of reactive maintenance. This in turn will result in increased quality production throughput and consequently lower maintenance costs.

Reference IDCON Safety/Reactive maintenance Survey as of 2004-01-15

In mid January the results shows that 66% of all respondents estimated that more than 60% of all safety incidents occurred when a maintenance job was executed as reactive. This data include respondents from many industries. Pulp and Paper Industry represented 36% of all respondents.

It is a well known phenomenon that many maintenance improvement initiatives are too short lived to generate the substantial results that are possible. One of the major reasons for this is the mobility of top management and the new initiatives that then follow. This disrupts and confuses organizations and after many repetitions of the above people loses faith in the longevity of the initiative and will only pretend to implement improvements.

According to the Pulp and Paper Safety Association, the Total Case Incident Rate per 100 employees and year (TCIR) have gone down from 8.92 in 1990 to 3.05 in 2002, and if we go back twenty years the results are more impressive.

Why have the industry produced these results? It is not through better planning and scheduling of maintenance, because that is still not being done much better than 1990. I think the answer is that safety has had a long term focus without constant changes even when top management changes. Another important reason is that it is being measured and there is a positive or negative consequence depending on the results.

My message is that to go the next step in reducing TCIR an important tool is much improved planning and scheduling of maintenance. It is too important to ignore and it does not cost much money to improve.

To help me do a better job at addressing the right things in this column I welcome input from the readers, please send ideas to [email protected] attention Christer Idhammar.

Christer Idhammar

Christer Idhammar started his career in operations and maintenance 1961. Shortly after, in 1985, he founded IDCON INC in Raleigh North Carolina, USA. IDCON INC is now a TRM company. Today he is a frequent key note and presenter at conferences around the world. Several hundred successful companies around the world have engaged Mr. Idhammar in their reliability improvement initiatives.

Awards:

• He received the coveted EUROMAINTENANCE Incentive 2002 award during the biannual EUROMAINTENANCE 2002 conference in Helsinki in June 2002. Among 19 member European countries he was nominated and received the award from EFNMS – European Federation of National Maintenance Societies – for outstanding achievement and worldwide accomplishments in the field of reliability and maintenance.

• In 2008 he received the Salvetti Foundation Best Speaker all categories award among 154 speakers at Euromaintenance 2008 in Brussels, Belgium

• In 2013 he received the “Best presentation award” among 120 speakers at Reliability 2.0 conference in Las Vegas.

All About Eye Protection

On the job accidents and injuries are most often a result of negligence and unsafe working conditions. In an effort to protect workers, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), created standards 1910.132 and 1910.133, to address requirements for providing Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) and eye protection in the workplace. However, most employers find it hard to sort through the standards to get to the heart of what they really mean in everyday life.

Arc Flash/Arc Blast Review with Safety Suggestions for Design & Maintenance

Significant engineering and test efforts have been undertaken in the last few years into the area of arc flash/blast hazards in electrical equipment. The result has been a better understanding of arcing faults and how to prevent and/or minimize the hazards to personnel and equipment. This paper highlights some of the findings that may help in safety management and equipment selection. This paper concludes with some design considerations that will help reduce the hazards of arcing faults.

CSA Launches First Confined Spaces Standard in Canada

A confined space is defined as a workspace that is fully or partially enclosed, is not designed or intended for continuous human occupancy and has limited or restricted access, exiting or an internal configuration that can complicate provisions of first aid, evacuation, rescue or other emergency response services. Confined spaces can be found in almost all industries in Canada, which include tunnels, mines, grain silos, hydro vaults, shipping compartments, pump stations, boilers, chemical tanks and more. Every confined space is considered to be hazardous unless deemed not so by a competent person through a hazard identification and risk assessment.

Do You Need NFPA 70E?

One of the hot topics in electrical and mechanical training classes is the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 70E. Students question what 70E is and how it relates to the National Electrical Code (NEC), if 70E is a new regulation and if not why are they just now hearing about it, and if companies are required to comply with 70E. This article will take some of the mystery out of 70E.

Electrical Hazards

There are three basic electrical hazards that cause injury and death: shock, arc-flash, and arc-blast. Following these safety principles can result in a safer work environment and prevent injuries or even death.

Eye Injuries are a Serious Threat to American Workers

In 2001, close to 100,000 people were treated in U.S. Hospital emergency rooms for eye injuries related to the workplace, yet this figure actually only represents a small portion of the total number of injuries. According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, each day, as many as 2,000 workers incur eye injuries related to their jobs. According to Prevent Blindness America (PBA), 90% of these injuries are preventable.

Fluid Power Safety Alert

In this advisory, we are going to demonstrate how hazardous, documented, service, repair, and troubleshooting recommendations have proliferated the fluid power industry, leaving unsuspecting persons vulnerable to possible injury or death. Unsafe service, repair, and troubleshooting recommendations are running rampant throughout the fluid power industry - and there is no end in sight!

Safety and Reactive Maintenance