Safety capabilities that support efficiency and reduced lifecycle costs Supporting Conference theme

1
Safety capabilities that support efficiency and
reduced life-cycle costsSupporting Conference
theme (2) Define Capability-Driven Requirements
ResourcingMay 7, 2008

• Mark Geiger, MS, CIH, CSP
• Chief of Naval Operations, Code N09FB
• Safety Liaison Office

2
Early Integration Makes Sense
Program Life Cycle
Decisions made here...
RD
lock in 80-90 of costs here...
Procurement
OM
Requirements...
and determine mission impacts here
M
33
65
Early integration is the least expensive and most
effective way to minimize the downstream cost,
schedule, and performance impacts of any weapon
system.
3
Outline

• Overview- Human Engineering and process
  efficiency and safety
• Materials handling examples
• Requirements and guidelines for human systems
  integration and ergonomics, safety in
  capabilities requirements documents
• Common focus areas
• Common support equipment
• Noise control and communication
• Heat stress
• Chemical risk management
• Whole body motions shock vibration motions
  affecting balance and effectiveness

4
Human Factors Engineering Benefit

• The U.S. Naval Research Advisory Committee (NRAC)
  estimated that including human elements in the
  initial design phases of ships and equipment
  could
• Improve their effectiveness and availability by
  30,
• Increase survivability by 15
• Reduce the number of casualties by 10
• Reduce personnel by 20.
• Potential for creating significant life cycle
  cost savings for the Navy

5
Definitions- with significant overlap

• Human Engineering (HE).
• The application of knowledge
• about human capabilities and
• limitations to system(s) or
• equipment design and
• development to achieve
• efficient, effective, and safe
• system performance at
• minimum cost and manpower,
• skill, and training demands.

• Ergonomics
• The field of of study that involves the
  application of knowledge about physiological,
  psychological and biomechanical capabilities and
  limits of the human body (OPNAVINST 5100.23
  NAVOSH Shore Safety Program Manual, Chapter 23
  Ergonomics Programs)

6
ERGONOMICS AFFECTS THE NAVYOther Services Likely
to be Similarly Impacted
FECA FY99

• Ergonomic injuries and illnesses
• Represent the single largest source of claims and
  costs to the Navy
• Roughly 90 million annually or one-third of all
  recent claims
• If left unchecked, the Navys annual cost is
• Projected to increase to 111 million by FY 2009.
• Analyzing the Navys Safety Data by CNA,
  December 2001

7
How can early definition of safety and health
requirements reduce life cycle costs and risk?

• Initial analysis-what manpower intensive tasks
  and safety-health risks drive later costs?
• Movement of equipment and supplies
• Management of chemical materials (and related
  safety, health and environmental measures
• Excessive maintenance demands
• Environmental conditions that reduce efficiency,
  comfort and safety

8
Movement of materials

• Movement of materials should be considered as an
  aspect of process management. Labor intensive
  activities may be identified for improved support
  systems and equipment

Acquisition SafetyHuman Factors Engineering
(HFE) and Ergonomics www.safetycenter.navy.mil
9
Issue type Material HandlingSpace arrangements
and traffic flow
Present route from freezer (below decks) to thaw
refrigerator (in galley) 8 person manual chain
from package conveyor through passageway via
galley 8 persons x 2-3 hours/day gt 1 man year
Package conveyor
Galley
Refrigerator
Potential alternative 2 Refrigerator and
freezer aligned one deck above the other Package
conveyer inside freezer (Could save even more
manpower) Don Goddard US Army CHPPM
Potential alternative 1 for newer ships
Refrigerator with two doors (Could save ½ man
year) Ron Casto Port Engineer LHD-7
10

• Example Excessive Load Carriage
• Heavy Army Field Infantry Load

Excessive Extrinsic Load - Load Carriage - Head
Supported Mass
1FL Fighting Load 3EAML Emergency Approach
March Load
Soldiers Expected to Carry Heavy Equipment
Load Example provided by Don Goddard, US Army
Center for Health Promotion and Preventive
Medicine
11
Question How could improved requirements
influence these designs?Answer Design as a
system for usersPossible JCIDS language per
OPNAVINST 5100.24B

• Human factors engineering will be employed
  during systems engineering over the life of the
  program to provide for effective human-machine
  interfaces, enhance personnel performance, ensure
  that systems and equipment are designed for the
  physical dimensions, capabilities and limitations
  of the user population(s) and to meet HSI,
  maintenance, safety and communications
  requirements.
• Designs will be consistent with human factors
  engineering criteria per references () or
  equivalent standards.
• User population is defined in CJCSI 3170.01
• As appropriate to the system designed

12
How could improved requirements influence these
designs?Make it easy for the users!Possible
JCIDS language per OPNAVINST 5100.24B

• System designs shall minimize or eliminate system
  characteristics that require excessive cognitive,
  physical, or sensory skills entail extensive
  training or workload-intensive tasks result in
  mission-critical errors or produce safety or
  health hazards.
• Designs will be consistent with human factors
  engineering criteria per references () or
  equivalent standards.
• User population is defined in CJCSI 3170.01
• As appropriate to the system designed

13
Human Systems Integration

• Definition
• A systems engineering
• approach that considers
• the human a critical
• component of the system
• throughout the systems
• life cycle and strives to
• ensure the integration of
• humans in a variety of
• applications, systems, and
• environments.

• DODI 5000.2 Elements
• Human Factors Engineering
• Personnel- the human performance characteristics
  of the user population
• Habitability
• Manpower
• Training
• Environment, Safety and Occupational Health
  (ESOH)
• Survivability
• Operation of the Defense Acquisition System

14
Navy System Safety Policy

• OPNAVINST 5100.24B, Navy System Safety Program
  Policy, provides policy for the implementation of
  system safety in the Department of the Navy.
• The objectives of the system safety policy are to
  eliminate or reduce associated mishap risks and
  thereby improve operational readiness, reduce
  life cycle cost, and increase environmental and
  safety and occupational health for all
  acquisition programs, over the entire program
  life cycle.
• The instruction supports all phases of the Joint
  Capabilities Integration and Development System
  (JCIDS) and the Department of Defense acquisition
  process.

15
Requirements for human systems integration

• PMs are required to apply human systems
  integration (HSI) to improve total system
  performance and reduce life cycle costs by
  lowering or eliminating mishap risk through a
  design process that integrates the seven domains
  of HSI manpower, personnel, training, human
  factors engineering, environmental, safety and
  occupational health (ESOH), habitability, and
  survivability (system safety interacts with all
  of the domains).
• DOD Instruction 5000.2, Operation of Defense
  Acquisition System, of 12 May 03
• NAVSEAINST 3900.08A, Human Systems Integration
  (HSI) Policy in Acquisition and Modernization of
  20 May 05

16
The acquisition and Technology Programs Task
Force will develop a process to provide the DoD
Joint Capabilities Integration and Development
system with recommendations that have the
potential to cost-effectively prevent accidents.
These inputs should include all aspects of the
Mil Std 882 System Safety Process
17
Consider support systems in capabilities
requirements documents

• Common language
• The system will use existing support equipment

• Suggested alternative language
• The safety and efficiency of existing support
  systems and equipment will be evaluated. Life
  cycle cost and risk will be managed human systems
  integration (HSI) to improve total system
  performance and reduce life cycle costs by
  lowering or eliminating mishap risk through a
  design process

18
Common Support Systems and Equipment

• Arent as exciting as new weapons systems
• May lack a technical owner and fiscal sponsor.
  Past examples include
• The aviation cranial support helmet
• Shipboard fall protection harness
• Fall protection systems for aviation maintenance
• Gloves currently in the supply system described
  as anti-vibration gloves
• May require cooperation between different
  programs and technical authorities and a champion
  to gain funding and maintain currency
• Army approach to common soldier systems may
  provide an methodology relevant to Navy systems
  and equipment

19
Real-World Hearing Protectionthe Aviation
Cranial as a Case StudySurvey of 301 Flight Deck
Personnel

• Cranial provides 21 dB protection (without
  earplugs)
• when correctly fit, worn, and maintained
• Leaks between earcup head reduce protection
  3-15 dB
• by letting noise in the earcups

20
Global Sustainment
JSF MAINTAINER Hearing Protection March
,2006 Jim Janousek/Jim DAndrade
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY // REL TO USA, GBR MOD, ITA
MOD, NLD MOD, TUR MND, CAN DND, AUS DOD, DNK MOD,
and NOR MOD
F-35 JSF Team Information, Non-Technical Data for
ITAR
20
21
JSF Maintainer Hearing Protection Speech
Intelligibility

• JORD
• 5.3.5. (U) Noise Level. F-35 must
  minimize noise hazards to aircrew in the
• cockpit and personnel working around
  aircraft with running engines.

• Joint Contract Specification
• 3.2.1.1.1.4.5. The JSF Air System shall provide
  communication and non-communication Hearing
  Protection Devices (HPDs) for maintainers
  (including ground and ship deck personnel) that
  meet the noise attenuation (communication and
  non-communication devices) and communication
  (communication devices only) performances as
  defined in Appendix C.

DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public
release distribution is unlimited.
22
JASCS

• 3.2.1.1.1.3. Pilot - Air System Interfaces
• 3.2.1.1.1.3.1. The JSF Air System shall
  accommodate full operation by the JSF pilot
  population as defined
• in Appendix C. (JMS00050)
• 3.2.1.1.1.3.2. The JSF Air System shall not
  expose the pilot, wearing JSF Air System
  protective equipment, in the cockpit to noise
  levels at their ears that exceed a Total Daily
  Exposure (TDE) of one (1.0), as defined
• in Appendix C (JMS00060)
• NOT INCLUDED
• 3.2.1.1.1.4.5 The JSF Air System shall not
  expose maintainers, (including ground and ship
  personnel), wearing JSF Air System protective
  equipment, to noise levels at their ears that
  exceed a Total Daily Exposure (TDE) of one (1.0),
  as defined in appendix C (JMS 000180)

23
New Hearing Protection Comm Tech
Deep Insert Custom Earplugs (Joint with the Air
Force)
Cranial Prototypes
24
Hearing Loss Degrades Combat Performance - Word
Intelligibility
GOOD POOR HEARING HEARING
SOURCE Tank Gunner Performance and Hearing
Impairment (Garinther Peters, Army RDA
Bulletin 1990, Jan-Feb 1-5)
25
Addressing noise control as a capability
(OPNAVINST 5100.24B)

• The system will minimize noise and vibration
  hazards to crews and support personnel working
  near the system or its supporting infrastructure
  through engineering controls (objective) or a
  combination of engineering, administrative
  procedures and protective equipment (threshold)
  to ensure personnel exposures are below 84 and
  maximum segmental and whole body vibration below
  the criteria provided by reference ().
• The system will be designed so that effective
  communications are not disrupted by system or
  ambient noise and habitability standards will be
  met.
• Cite references and/or related criteria, as
  appropriate to the system under consideration.

26
Addressing noise control as a capability
(OPNAVINST 5100.24B)

• Reduced hearing loss and long-term disability
• Improved communication and operational safety
• Additional advantages
• Reduced signal detection
• Reduced environmental impact and related cost for
  base access
• Improved productivity and comfort
• Competitiveness (foreign sales)

27
Other Safety and Manpower Considerations for
Military Capabilities

• Hazardous materials management
• Heat and cold stress
• Control of whole body shock and vibration
• Control of vehicle-vessel motions versus motion
  sickness
• Specialized seating relatively cheap and
  effective
• Design for maintenance

28
Hazardous Process and Materials

• 80 of DoD hazardous materials and associated
  waste products are used or generated in
  association with maintenance/sustainment of
  defense systems.
• Proactive management of hazardous material and
  process is essential to mitigate safety and
  environmental mishap risks and related life cycle
  costs.
• In certain cases, hazardous materials or
  processes pose high risks to human life and
  environmental impacts
• Use of these materials should be prohibited.
• Possible examples may include toxic material such
  as beryllium, cadmium or acutely toxic products.

29
Hazardous Process and Materials

• Just specifying regulatory compliance buys little
• All contracts specify regulatory compliance
• Does not help manage process or identify risk
• Still need to keep a list of all materials used
• Process evaluation can reduce risk and cost
• Identify least hazardous materials and process
  suitable for mission
• Evaluate methods for safe and economical disposal
• Reduce costs of disposal, storage and use
• Avoid expensive surprises

30
Manpower Costs of ManagingHazardous Process and
Materials

• Protective equipment
• Related training and medical monitoring costs
• Inefficiency of users wearing equipment
• Regulatory precautions and recordkeeping
• Inventory management
• The waste generator owns the waste forever
• Just renting space in a hazardous waste landfill
• Related facility and process management costs

31
Hazardous Process and Materials

• Suggested language
• Development of the system and design of support
  processes and materials will identify mishap
  risks associated with hazardous materials and
  minimize human health, safety and environmental
  impacts through selection of alternatives
  consistent with operational requirements, cost,
  and efficiency.
• Hazardous material usage will be managed through
  application of National Aerospace Standard (NAS)
  411 or equivalent methods.
• Consider a requirement for a common information
  tracking system
• Many materials are introduced by sub-contractors

32
Whole body and segmental motion and vibration

• Extrinsic Mechanical Energy Exposure
• Hand Arm Vibration (HAV)
• Whole Body Vibration (WBV)
• Jolt

• www.osha.gov/.../ hot_work_welding.html

33
Permissible heat exposure threshold limit values
for heat acclimatized and un-acclimatized workers
34
Heat and Cold Stress

• Consider control of indoor temperature a
  systems requirement
• Ventilation and climate control systems first
  priority
• Alternatives when the space cant be cooled
• Remote monitoring
• Control stations climate controlled
• Local spot heating or cooling

• Reduced efficiency
• Work-rest/recovery cycles may be required
• People arent working while they are resting
• Mental acuity and emergency response suffer first
• Protective equipment reduces comfort and
  efficiency

Resource Naval Safety Center website addressing
heat stress control http//www.safetycenter.navy.m
il/acquisition/heatstress/default.htm
35
Deficiency type Maintenance
Filter size
space
No space to remove filter
Questions 1. How often does this filter actually
get changed? 2. How much additional work is
involved? 3. Whats the real extra manpower cost
when emergency maintenance is needed because the
filter hasnt been changed?
36
Courtesy of Rich Borcicky Navy Aviation Depot,
Cherry Point
37
Courtesy of Rich Borcicky Navy Aviation Depot,
Cherry Point
38
Capability for Safe and Efficient Maintenance is
a Manpower Asset

• Capabilities documents should contain
  requirements for
• Process analysis to identify efficiency and
  safety
• Consider achievable goals for maintenance
  manpower
• Example of aviation maintenance time to flight
  hours
• Evaluation in the Test and Evaluation Master Plan
• Consider contract mechanisms to incentivize
  contractors and designers
• Some intrinsic incentives if the builder also
  provides some maintenance
• Realistic evaluation of proposals re life-cycle
  costs
• Current incentives favor underbidding and later
  cost escalation

39
Joint Weapon Safety Tech Advisory Panel
JCIDS Process
Overarching Policy Joint Vision
Functional Area Functional Concept Integrated
Architecture
Joint Capstone Policy
Functional Area Analysis
Advise DDFP that appropriate weapon safety
attributes are included in capabilities documents
J-8/DDFP Endorse Weapon Safety Capability
D O TM L P F
Analysis of Materiel Approaches
Materiel Process
Feedback
ICD/CDD/CPD
DOTMLPF Changes
Weapon Safety Attributes
JROC
ICD
CDD
CPD
Acquisition Process
MS C
MS A
MS A
MS B
DAB
JROC
DAB
JROC
DAB
JROC
AoA
CD
Concept Refinement
Technology Development
Demo
Demo
Noise Cost Assessment Calculator?
HSI-Ergonomics evaluation of process efficiency?
Demo
40
Summary

• Overview- Human engineering and process
  efficiency and safety has major manpower benefits
• Materials handling examples
• Requirements and guidelines for human systems
  integration and ergonomics, safety should be in
  capabilities requirements documents
• Common focus areas
• Common support equipment
• Noise control and communication
• Heat and cold stress
• Chemical risk management
• Whole body motions shock vibration motions
  affecting balance and effectiveness
• Design for safe and efficient maintenance
• Designs that maximize human performance
  capabilities and avoid or minimize stressors that
  impair safety and efficiency also maximize use of
  manpower (and support comfort, productivity and
  long-term retention).

41
Resources and References

• DODI 5000.2 Operation of the Defense Acquisition
  System
• SECNAVINST 5000.2C Implementation and Operation
  of the Defense Acquisition System and Joint
  Capabilities Integration and Development System
• OPNAVINST 5100,24B Navy System Safety Program
• CJCSI/M 3170.01 Joint Capabilities Integration
  and Development System

42
Resources and References

• Defense Acquisition Guidebook
• https//akss.dau.mil/dag/DoD5000.asp?viewdocument
  rfGuideBook\IG_c4.4.10.asp
• Defense Acquisition OSD ATL Website
• http//www.acq.osd.mil/index.html
• OSD Installations and Environment (Safety)
• http//www.acq.osd.mil/ie/safety.shtml
• Defense Acquisition Community Connection
  https//acc.dau.mil/CommunityBrowser.aspx
• Environmental safety and health
  https//acc.dau.mil/esoh

43
Resources

• Naval Safety Center acquisition safety website
• www.safetycenter.navy.mil/acquisition
• Naval Safety Center ergonomics website
• http//www.safetycenter.navy.mil/osh/ergonomics/de
  fault.htm
• Navy Success Stories (about half ergonomics)
• http//safetycenter.navy.mil/success/default.htm
• American Society of Naval Engineers
• www.navalengineers.org
• American Bureau of Shipping, Guidance Notes for
  the Application of Ergonomics to Marine Systems
  www.eagle.org
• American Society for Testing and Materials, ASTM
  F1166-95 (Re-approved 2000) Standard Practice for
  Human Engineering Design for Marine Systems,
  Equipment and Facilities.
• DoD Military Standard on Human Engineering
• Mil-STD 1472F. This handbook provides human
  engineering design guidelines and reference data
  for design of military systems, equipment, and
  facilities.

44
Resources

• DoD Handbook for Human Engineering Design
  Guidelines
• Mil-HDBK 759C. This handbook provides human
  engineering design guidelines and reference data
  (not a requirements document) for design of
  military systems, equipment, and facilities.
• OSHA eTools for Ergonomics - OSHA has a
  four-pronged comprehensive approach to ergonomics
  designed to quickly and effectively address
  workplace musculoskeletal disorders (WMSDs).
• The Human Factors Design Standard HF-STD -001
  Federal Aviation Administration
  http//hf.tc.faa.gov/hfds

45
Service Ergonomics Programs

• DOD Ergonomics Working Group http//www.ergoworkin
  ggroup.org/
• Air Force Occupational and Ergonomics Program
• http//www.brooks.af.mil/afioh/Health20Programs/e
  rgonomics_links.htm
• Crew System Ergonomics Information Analysis
  Center
• http//cseriac.flight.wpafb.af.mil/
• Navy- Acquisition Website
• www.safetycenter.navy.mil/acquisition
• http//www.safetycenter.navy.mil/presentations/osh
  /previewimages/ergonomics4.gif
• Ergonomics program
• OPNAVINST5100.23 Chapter 23 Ergonomics
• NAVSEAINST 3900.08A Date 20 May 2005 Subject
  HUMAN SYSTEMS INTEGRATION (HSI) POLICY IN
  ACQUISITION AND MODERNIZATION

46
Back-ups
47
Conclusion

• Need DAS support for the proposed concept before
  proceeding further
• Detailed ATL policy memo into staffing NLT Dec
  07
• Each Component will control how process to be
  implemented
• ATP TF to develop training materials to support
  Component ESOH personnel

BOTTOM LINE Potential benefits of establishing
ESOH requirements that drive system development
versus resource impacts
48
DoD EC Web Sites
Public Site___https//www.denix.osd.mil/denix/Publ
ic/Library/MERIT/merit.html
DoD Site___http//intranet.dodmeritinfo.net
49
21 Nov 06 USD(ATL) Tasker

• Memo Title "Reducing Preventable Accidents"
• Focus "...influence the entire life cycle of
  systems"
• Joint Capabilities Integration and Development
  System (JCIDS) systems requirements
• System development process to meet JCIDS
  requirements
• Must address each High and Serious ESOH risk and
  applicable safety technology requirements in
  program reviews
• Fielded systems where ESOH problems manifested
• Class A B mishap reports must include System
  Program Office hazard analysis and materiel
  mitigation measure recommendations