1 / 22

Safety and Health Management Systems Peer Review Partnership 2010 13 - 19 March hosted by MIT

Safety and Health Management Systems Peer Review Partnership 2010 13 - 19 March hosted by MIT 19 – 23 April hosted by NUS. Objectives. To provide an independent assessment of functionality and performance of each University’s SHMS.

ayla
Download Presentation

Safety and Health Management Systems Peer Review Partnership 2010 13 - 19 March hosted by MIT

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Safety and Health Management Systems Peer Review Partnership 2010 13 - 19 March hosted by MIT 19 – 23 April hosted by NUS

  2. Objectives • To provide an independent assessment of functionality and performance of each University’s SHMS. • To provide a platform for the sharing of best safety and health practices and systems across the two Universities. • To harmonize safety and health systems of the two Universities, and therefore supporting existing strategic University research initiatives eg. Singapore MIT Alliance for Research and Technology (SMART). • To facilitate the development of an international safety and health management system that can be adopted by leading Universities

  3. Safety Management In Universities • Core EHS Programmes • Fire & Life Safety • Construction Safety • Physical Safety • Chemical Safety • Radiation Safety • Biosafety • Occupational Health Programme • Hazardous Waste Management • Environmental Programme • Typical Risk Sectors In the University • Laboratories & Workshops • Construction • Facilities Management • Housing • Sports Facilities • Theaters • Field Work • Collaborations • Student Events

  4. Scope & Reference Standards • Scope • MIT’s Safety & Health Management System • References • OSHE, NUS & EHS, MIT • “Safety and Health Management Systems For Institutes of Higher Learning - Requirements “ • OHSAS 18001:2007 • “Occupational Safety and Health Standard” • UK HSE 65 • “Successful health and safety management” • CSHEMA • “Complete Environmental Health & Safety Program”

  5. Peer Review Philosophy • Not a fault finding exercise • Systematic Issues • Approach & Deployment • Benchmarking against best practices & systems in safety & health management • Findings are based on audit sampling

  6. Peer Review Schedule • Mar 15-19, 2010: • NUS Team (OSHE + EPH + FOE) to MIT • April 19-23, 2010 • MIT (EHS Office) to NUS

  7. Overview • MIT has implemented a comprehensive SHM system to drive continual improvement in safety and health performance: • Strong senior management commitment and ownership to safety and health management • Comprehensive safety and health training system • Robust multi–tiered system of laboratory inspections • Extensive operational documentation that provides sufficient and relevant guidance for safety management in laboratories.

  8. EHS Office • EHS office has been instrumental in executing MIT’s EHS philosophy of central oversight and local control: • Active engagement of all relevant stake holders • Strong core technical team, high level of professionalism and mission driven • IT infrastructure supports and strengthen the implementation of MIT safety and health program. • PI Space Registration System • Ensuring “nodes” of safety oversight throughout the organization structure • EHS coordinators in DLC • EHS representatives in Laboratories • Quantifying the output and value of MIT safety programs

  9. EHS, MIT & OSHE, NUS - Enabling Research Excellence for SMART • Harmonization of safety expectations and procedures of two institutions • Occupational Health requirements • Necessary medical examinations be done by the parent institution only • Training requirements • Harmonization of training programs / syllabus • Approval of research protocols • Reciprocal approval of research protocols • Accidental / incident reporting • Channeling of accidents and incidents notifications

  10. System Element: Hazard Identification & Risk Assessment • Expanding Universe of MIT laboratories, focused on inter-disciplinary & cross- institutional research • Review risk assessment requirements for current trends in research (see next slide) • Risk assessment of protocols should incorporate a quantitative factor • Facilitate risk profiling of laboratories

  11. System Element: Hazard Identification & Risk Assessment • B. Possible increased regulatory requirements for chemical use, handling & storage • GHS for chemical labeling • Recent high profile chemical incidents in laboratories • Resulting in increased central oversight of chemical management • Tighter inventory control & procurement management • Standardization of labeling of DLC laboratories, waste areas • Operational management of hazardous waste management • Transportation of chemicals • Approach to risk assessment of chemicals in laboratories • Greater role for Committee on Toxic Chemicals

  12. System Element: Operational Control • C. Facilitate continuous safety performance • Establishment of institutional committee/s to have oversight of • Construction & Renovation Safety • “Design for Safety” • Infrastructure Safety • Fire & Life Safety • Emergency Preparedness and Response • Greater oversight of safety management in areas managed by contractors • MAA & SAA should be subjected to safety risk assessment

  13. System Element: Measurement & Monitoring • C. Opportunities to capitalize on existing information to drive safety performance • Study correlations between inspections findings, risk assessment, accident/incident and training records • Establishing benchmarks for certain processes .e.g. closure of inspection II findings.

  14. Summary of Actions • Reaffirm EHS Policy (4/01) • Chemical Hazard Assessment • Safety Committee • Contractor Oversight • Data Analysis & Trending • Off Site Locations & People • Hazardous Waste Facilty

  15. MIT ASSESSORS • Lou DiBerardinis • Director, EHS Office • Claudia Mickelson • Deputy Director, Biosafety • Andrew Kalil • Industrial Hygiene Officer

  16. Notable Strengths • Beautiful campus and country • Staff enthusiasm and dedication

  17. Notable Strengths • Strong senior management commitment and ownership to safety and health management • Safety Promotions • CeLS—Facility wide safety collaborative effort • Development of iORC

  18. Notable Strengths • Construction safety committee and management system • LSDS development looks very promising • Email blast system of communication • Compliance with complex and challenging regulations • Staff Development Program

  19. Observations • Relationship of IACUC, OSHE, PI and CMC not clear • Role of IBC in animal biosafety not clear • Training very time intensive—more web-based training needed • Lack of central purchasing presents a challenge • LSDS potential—Need to see • Chemistry ‘program’ and website looks strong • Chemistry facility needs upgrade

  20. Recommendations • Assess manpower needs and use of current staff • Review current outsourcing and consider bringing in-house • Evaluate and strengthen consistency of risk assessments across jobs • Establish closer relationship with Sustainability and Emergency Management to leverage resources

  21. Recommendations • Evaluate current Chemistry building to determine if it meets current standards and best practices • OSHE work to be better integrated into building design and review process: design /review team • Develop process maps for OSHE responsibilities ( e.g., Institutional Committees, PIs, Comparative Medicine, Design and Process, Training and Animal Purchasing) • Examine the operation of all Institutional Committees supported by OSHE

  22. Recommendations • OSHE might consider working with granting agencies to promote pre- and post-grant institutional approval (IBC, IACUC,ILSC, etc.) • Evaluate FSHO reporting lines • Develop control database for NUS people who wish to study and work off-campus • Evaluate and strengthen consistency of risk assessments between research units • PIs be required to attend LOH/SMS training

More Related