欢迎来到麦多课文档分享! | 帮助中心 海量文档,免费浏览,给你所需,享你所想!
麦多课文档分享
全部分类
  • 标准规范>
  • 教学课件>
  • 考试资料>
  • 办公文档>
  • 学术论文>
  • 行业资料>
  • 易语言源码>
  • ImageVerifierCode 换一换
    首页 麦多课文档分享 > 资源分类 > PDF文档下载
    分享到微信 分享到微博 分享到QQ空间

    REG NASA-LLIS-1375--2002 Lessons Learned Demand and Ensure High-Quality Safety Performance from all Contractors.pdf

    • 资源ID:1019014       资源大小:17.15KB        全文页数:4页
    • 资源格式: PDF        下载积分:10000积分
    快捷下载 游客一键下载
    账号登录下载
    微信登录下载
    二维码
    微信扫一扫登录
    下载资源需要10000积分(如需开发票,请勿充值!)
    邮箱/手机:
    温馨提示:
    如需开发票,请勿充值!快捷下载时,用户名和密码都是您填写的邮箱或者手机号,方便查询和重复下载(系统自动生成)。
    如需开发票,请勿充值!如填写123,账号就是123,密码也是123。
    支付方式: 支付宝扫码支付    微信扫码支付   
    验证码:   换一换

    加入VIP,交流精品资源
     
    账号:
    密码:
    验证码:   换一换
      忘记密码?
        
    友情提示
    2、PDF文件下载后,可能会被浏览器默认打开,此种情况可以点击浏览器菜单,保存网页到桌面,就可以正常下载了。
    3、本站不支持迅雷下载,请使用电脑自带的IE浏览器,或者360浏览器、谷歌浏览器下载即可。
    4、本站资源下载后的文档和图纸-无水印,预览文档经过压缩,下载后原文更清晰。
    5、试题试卷类文档,如果标题没有明确说明有答案则都视为没有答案,请知晓。

    REG NASA-LLIS-1375--2002 Lessons Learned Demand and Ensure High-Quality Safety Performance from all Contractors.pdf

    1、Lessons Learned Entry: 1375Lesson Info:a71 Lesson Number: 1375a71 Lesson Date: 2002-08-29a71 Submitting Organization: JSCa71 Submitted by: Ronald A. MontagueSubject: Demand and Ensure High-Quality Safety Performance from all Contractors Abstract: The companys failure to implement and enforce their c

    2、ompany safety program, as defined in their Safety & Health plan submitted to NASA, resulted in a lax safety culture. This lax safety culture supported the deceased, a journeyman electrician, in feeling comfortable working on an energized electrical circuit without the proper PPE (personal protective

    3、 equipment), which he ultimately contacted resulting in his electrocution. Specifically, procedures were not followed when the deceased and his apprentice did not stop work and isolate the circuit or seek a “hot work permit“ upon discovering the circuit was still energized.The subsequent investigati

    4、on revealed three central themes involved in the mishap: 1. Implementation and Verification of Lockout / Tagout Procedures,2. Accurate Drawings of Facility Systems as a Prerequisite to Project Implementation, and3. Demand and Ensure High-Quality Safety Performance from all Contractors (the subject o

    5、f this lesson).Each theme is published as a separate lesson. (A fourth lesson underscores the successful implementation of the preliminary investigation, which was critical to performing a successful, formal mishap investigation.) Description of Driving Event: Following is an excerpt from the Mishap

    6、 investigation report: Finding A: Construction contractors are treated as “transient“ employees for the purpose of meeting safety requirements. Provided by IHSNot for ResaleNo reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS-,-,-1. They are not required to participate in the NASA Close

    7、Call system.2. They are not required to provide safety metrics.3. They are not required to participate in training required for onsite, permanent employees, e.g., Safety Through Everyones Participation (STEP), Hazards Communication, etc.4. There is no “closed loop“ tracking of observed safety defici

    8、encies. Specifically,(4a) There is no provision for “real time“ feedback to contractor management of safety violations. (4b) Formal written evaluation of firm fixed price construction contractors is only provided at job completion.Finding B: NASA and NASA-delegated oversight and “quality and safety“

    9、 inspection processes lack rigor to assure contract provisions are being adhered to. The following evidence supports this finding: 1. Contractors failure to submit required submittals did not stop the job.2. NASA/JSC did not conduct or require the contractor to conduct mandatory safety inspection po

    10、ints to assure through independent verification that systems had been de-energized.3. Insufficient number of NASA/JSC delegated safety inspectors performing random inspections to assure contractor compliance with contract provisions.4. No “task readiness review“, outlining work to be performed, was

    11、conducted.5. NASA/JSC did not take adverse action against this contractor even though they had a history of violating non-electrical safety policies and procedures (procedures for adverse action are in the contract).Lesson(s) Learned: Construction contractors (and any type of non-resident contractor

    12、) doing work at NASA centers should be held to the same standard as on site support services contractors with respect to safety training, tracking of issues/violations, and regular feedback on safety and quality of work.Recommendation(s): 1. Immediate feedback should be provided by NASA to contracto

    13、r senior management for all safety violations.2. 3. NASA should establish a “closed loop“ tracking and reporting system for safety violations to assure and document that contractor management has been notified.4. Construction contractors should be made “part of the NASA team“, not treated as transie

    14、nts. They should be required to participate in the NASA Close Call system, included in trending data, etc.5. NASA should implement a rigorous randon safety inspection process to assure contractors are complying with their approved Safety & Health Plans.6. Adverse action provisions in contracts shoul

    15、d be enforced for gross or repeated safety Provided by IHSNot for ResaleNo reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS-,-,-violations, including warnings when appropriate.7. NASA/JSC should assess the on-site inspection responsibilities and determine if changes are necessary to mak

    16、e the process more robust.8. If changes are deemed necessary, augmented duties should be clarified to all safety and quality inspectors.9. NASA should institute Mandatory Safety Inspection Points (MSIP) prior to work on electrical circuits and other energized systems to assure, by independent verifi

    17、cation, that they have been properly de-energized. A contractor or the Government could conduct the independent confirmation of systems de-energized status.10. NASA should require Pre-Project Safety Reviews prior to construction start. (This should be more comprehensive than pre-construction meeting

    18、s with a format analogous to an Operational Readiness Inspection (ORI), Test Readiness Review (TRR), etc.)Evidence of Recurrence Control Effectiveness: PendingDocuments Related to Lesson: JPG 1700.1, “JSC Safety and Health Handbook,“ Chapter 11.2, Safety and health requirements for services or const

    19、ruction contractsMission Directorate(s): a71 Exploration Systemsa71 Sciencea71 Space Operationsa71 Aeronautics ResearchAdditional Key Phrase(s): a71 Configuration Managementa71 Energya71 External Relationsa71 Facilitiesa71 Human Factorsa71 Human Resources & Educationa71 Industrial Operationsa71 Pers

    20、onal Protective Equipmenta71 Policy & Planninga71 Procurement Small Business & Industrial Relationsa71 Program and Project ManagementProvided by IHSNot for ResaleNo reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS-,-,-a71 Risk Management/Assessmenta71 Safety & Mission Assurancea71 Test & VerificationAdditional Info: Approval Info: a71 Approval Date: 2004-01-08a71 Approval Name: Ron Montaguea71 Approval Organization: JSCa71 Approval Phone Number: 281-483-8576Provided by IHSNot for ResaleNo reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS-,-,-


    注意事项

    本文(REG NASA-LLIS-1375--2002 Lessons Learned Demand and Ensure High-Quality Safety Performance from all Contractors.pdf)为本站会员(inwarn120)主动上传,麦多课文档分享仅提供信息存储空间,仅对用户上传内容的表现方式做保护处理,对上载内容本身不做任何修改或编辑。 若此文所含内容侵犯了您的版权或隐私,请立即通知麦多课文档分享(点击联系客服),我们立即给予删除!




    关于我们 - 网站声明 - 网站地图 - 资源地图 - 友情链接 - 网站客服 - 联系我们

    copyright@ 2008-2019 麦多课文库(www.mydoc123.com)网站版权所有
    备案/许可证编号:苏ICP备17064731号-1 

    收起
    展开