Document vVB54rx6Y9Yo4eY21YXjgX0rm

ft-10 *CC *50*30 Monsanto no- inuii locaiiohi^^ w. Latimer - Texas City, Tx. (0-13) '*' December 8, 1983 uj<o MfEltNCt SHAC Minutes from Meeting of December 7, 1983 TO R. Baca H. Conrad R. M. Fritz R. T. Hammann W. G. Howe PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT G. L. Tromblee D. Treleaven J. H. Cross R. M. Fritz discussed recommendations for next year's annual inspec tion. SHAC agreed to certain changes and R. M. Fritz will issue a report as appropriate. Baca reviewed the proposed contractor safety program, copy attached. He will review at the next PMSB meeting on December 21. Conrad reported that in general the status of the 1983 incident investigation action plans are up to date and are progressing as required. Old Business Hammann stated that the noise area sign installation and EMT training is progressing as necessary. New Business SHAC recommends that one unannounced inspection be held next year a quarterly inspection. Conrad will bring up at the PMSB meeting for approval. /mt Attachment -------- W. W. Latimer SC 001140 LAM002340 +Cc Monsanto UQm 'N1m( 4 lOCATiONl OAK sutler lEHUNCf TO R. C. Baca - Texas City_____________________________________________________ December 5, 1983 Contractor Safety Program A. H. Conrad - 0-6A cc SHAC G. W. Bostick - 0-18 H. M. Lacy - 0-6 B. C. Lancaster - CED M. A. Riddle - 0-22 R.V. Sharp - 0-4 File The following are recommendations that our subcommittee have developed concerning the safety orientation of contractors working in the Texas City Plant. Before an action plan is developed to implement the rec ommendations approval frem PMSB is requested. The Texas City site policy for contractors compare favorably to other Monsanto locations and has been working fairly well thus far. However, the following recccnnendations, if Implemented, will formalize our existing policy and strengthen areas that need improvement. RECOMMENDATIONS A written procedure outlining contractor orientation and respon sibilities of Monsanto representatives, including: Method of Identifying contractors who have received safety orientation feedback of contractor safety performance to Purchasing method of keeping updates current appropriate follcw-up orientation in operating areas Program must be consistent to minimize our current credibility problem. Enforcement of this policy will probably lead to the Issuing and collecting of personal safety equipment at the gate. Short orientation, similar to Chocolate Bayou's, for drop-in contractors. (Truck drivers, vendors, visitors, service personnel, etc.) Stiffening of enforcement of safety rules concerning Marine person nel. This problem is complex and unique to Material Handling. Further Investigating by Material Handling is recommended before policy changes are Initiated in this department. SC 001141 iA^00234l Our subcommittee will await PMSP's reply before further action is taken. Attached is the Initial Texas City site study concerning contractor safety which was prepared in August, 1983. Subccrrmi ttee: Rufus Baca G. W. Bostick H. M. Lacy B. C. Lancastei M. A. Riddle R. V. Sharp /Is Attachment Riifus Baca Subcommittee Chairman LAM002342 2 SC 001142 CURRENT MONSANTO TEXAS CITY SITE POLICY CONCERNING CONTRACTOR SAFETY SCOPE: The Safety and Housekeeping Action Committee has been requested to review the current practice and site policy concerning contractor safety at the Texas City location. This study also incorporates contractor use of Monsanto facilities and our current practice of dealing with outside personnel such as truck drivers, service personnel, ship personnel, and salespersons. Data in this study reflects documented procedures, established practices, and under standings of current site policy from selected personal interviews. OBJECTIVE: The Intent of this study is to review the current site policy concerning contractor safety for the Texas City plant and recorrmend policy changes that will improve contractor safety. Current Contractor Safety Orientation: Currently there is no written procedure outlining the responsibil ities of Monsanto representatives bringing contract personnel into the plant. It is generally understood that the Monsanto represen tative is responsible for the contractor's safety orientation. The contractor safety orientation is scheduled through the Security Dept, and presented by the Loss Prevention S Safety Dept, via a video tape and safety discussion. Prior to entering the plant. Purchasing sends the contractor the Master Maintenance Contract along with Exhibit "B" outlining the conditions of the working procedures required by Monsanto Company for the Texas City Plant. Comparison of Texas C1ty Contractor Safety Orientation to Other Monsanto Locat1ons: J. F. Queeny: Video tape and safety discussion for contractors No written procedure for dealing with contractors but each new Monsanto employee, including foremen, attend a 6 week training program. Pensacola: Contractor receives a booklet containing safety rules, procedures, and general information (enclosed). Does not use a video tape A Monsanto representative reviews the safety rules/procedures at the job site with the contractor before starting work Large jobs are assigned a safety technician SC 001143 l LAM002343 W. G. Krurmrich: Contractors are issued a booklet entitled "Safety Guides for Contractor Personnel While Working at the Monsanto W. G. Krummrich Plant. Have a written guideline for implementing the above guide for contractor personnel. Use a video tape and safety discussion plus the contractor gets a hard hat sticker saying "I SAW IT". This helps to enforce the safety policies since Monsanto employees can identify contractors who have received their safety orientation. Contractor Use of Monsanto Faci1ities: The Texas City site policy concerning contractor use of Monsanto facil ities is somewhat flexible. Generally speaking, contractors are not allowed to use the Cafeteria although some outside service personnel currently do. Monsanto personnel in charge of the Cafeteria voice no objection as long as the situation does not get out of hand. On large jobs drinking water, trash cans, change rooms, and restroom facilities are provided for by the contractor, but normally on small jobs, arrange ments are made for the contractor to use Monsanto facilities. Monsanto personnel in charge of the job make the decision on which is more productive. Current Safety Orientation & Procedure for Service Personnel, Truck Drivers, Ship Personnel, S Salespersons Forementioned personnel bringing vehicles into the plant are given a card outlining vehicle operation and safety rules. Material Handling (assuming it's their vehicle) will hold a safety discussion with the driver 5 identify facilities the driver may need during his stay in the plant. Truck drivers, ship personnel, 6 service personnel are all encouraged to wear safety glasses hard hats but are not forced to do so. Guards at the gate do not check for personal safety equipment and also does not supply and issue hard hats and safety glasses. The program of issuing hats and glasses at the gate was tried some years ago but was stopped due to problems in getting people to wear the equipment. Interviewing Monsanto personnel In charge of Security 5 Material Handling indicate that we have more of a credibility problem than we do a real safety hazard. Our employees ask "why me not him?" or "can't we make those people comply?" In the enclosed memo from Dan A. Samford to G. W. Bostick, Mr. Samford states that from a legal perspective we can't force a person to wear a hard hat or safety glasses if the indi vidual has not obligated himself to comply. Salespersons walking into the plant are only required to sign a security agreement. If they drive into the plant, they received verbal in structions and the safety card at the gate. LAM002344 2 SC 001144 Comparison to Other Monsanto Locations: J. F. Queeny: Truck drivers service personnel are. given verbal instructions at the gate and are required to wear hard hats, safety glasses, 5 sleeves. If the driver does not have this safety equipment, it is issued at the gate and returned when leaving. This policy is Inforced through an active STOP Program. The driver either wears the protective equipment when in the plant or is required to leave Pensacola: Truck drivers receive verbal instructions and a safety card at the gate outlining safety rules. Hard hats and safety glasses are not required in the loading dock area. W. G. Krurmrich: Truck drivers and service personnel receive verbal instructions from the guard at the gate. Drivers are required to wear hard hat safety glasses which are issued and returned at the gate. Chocolate Bayou: All outside personnel entering the plant must view a short video tape and then receive a sticker for their hard hat. Hard hats and safety glasses are required and are issued and returned at the gate. Surma ry: The Texas City site policy for contractor safety compares favorably to other Monsanto locations, but some aspects of our program may need to be reviewed. Currently we have no written procedure for Monsanto represen tatives bringing contract personnel into the plant. Guidelines for implementation of our contractor safety program should be considered. Our policy for contractor use of Monsanto facilities is and probably should remain flexible. Currently Monsanto personnel makes decisions on contractor's use of facilities based on job efficiency. Texas City current practice of dealing with truck drivers, service personnel, ship personnel is complex. Aside from a possible "credibility problem", we appear to encounter no major safety hazards with cur current way of business. We seem to be riding a fine line of acceptabi1ity between minor and major contractor safety infractions. We tend to tolerate stubbornness on the part of truck drivers, ship person nel, and railroad personnel who refuse to wear hard hats and safety glasses in order to continue "smooth" operations. On the other hand, as soon as any outside personnel appears to coimit an unsafe act endanger ing his or Monsanto's personal safety, we step in and correct the situation using whatever means necessary. Before any change is recom mended in the current practice of dealing with service personnel, truck 3 Sr LAM002345 oiUs drivers and ship personnel, the departments involved in this matter should thoroughly review any recommended changes. August 1983 Rufus Baca For SHAC SC 001146 4 t>W\002346