OSH Advisory Council

Dec. 3, 2004
Minutes

Members: Staff members:

Eric Ajax Debbie Caswell

Melanie Isabell Allen Clayton Handt
Carol Bufton Ken Hickey
Eugene Harmer Alden Hoffman
Pat McGovern James Krueger
Scott Metcalf Ed LaFavor
Ed Raine Patricia Todd
Daryl Tindle Roslyn Wade
Nancy Zentgraf
Members excused:
Visitors:
Harvey Burski
Michael Hawthorne Kerry Berbetti, Progress Casting Group
Scott Richter Therese Berkenski, Wyornot Consultants
Lois Klobuchar, Consultant
Tim Knoll, International Paper
Tim Kobernat, Federal OSHA
Roxanne Pawielski, Ainsworth, Bemidji
Pamela Smith, Ainsworth, Bemidji, OSB
Gary Thaden, MMCA/NECA
Bill Weiss, International Paper
Dawn M. Westin, Unisys

The meeting was called to order at 10:06 a.m. by chairperson Carol Bufton.
Members and guests introduced themselves.

II. Announcements

Assistant Commissioner Roslyn Wade asked for approval of the minutes from the
June 25 and Sept. 10, 2004, meetings. Eric Ajax made a motion to approve both sets
of minutes. Scott Metcalf seconded the motion. Discussion occurred and Wade noted
the sound system was not working properly during these two meetings, so the
Department of Labor and Industry (DLI) staff members did their best to produce a
summary. She asked that members direct any corrections to Deb Caswell. All voted in
favor of the motion.

The agenda was approved as presented.

Wade pointed out information packets about the Art McCauley award in the
members' meeting packets. It is time to solicit input to recognize a safety professional.
OSHA Advisory Council -2- December 3, 2004
Minutes

The nomination forms are due by March 1, 2005. Wade noted that outstanding
individuals had been recognized for their contributions to safety and health in the past
three or four years; she would like to see that continue. She invited members and visitors
to take an information packet and asked them to take the time to think of safety
professionals who have made significant contributions, to give DLI the opportunity to
consider someone to be recognized at the Minnesota Safety Council conference, which
will be in May 2005. She asked that everyone pass the nomination forms out within their
organizations and get as many nominations to the department as soon as possible.

Wade reported about recent activities at the agency. They are preparing for the
coming legislative session, which will begin shortly after the new year. She said it will be
an exciting year and noted this is a budget year, so she expected the entire session to be
dominated by budget discussions. The state is projecting an even greater deficit than was
originally anticipated in the forecast that was released a couple of days ago. Wade did not
know what the full implications would be for DLI, but she did not expect it to have a
direct impact on the MNOSHA program, because its funding does not come out of the
general fund. DLI has positioned itself well, in anticipation of a deficit; however, the
projected deficit is greater than what was anticipated. In the Workplace Services
Division, the Code Administration and Inspection Services and Labor Standards units
may be affected, because they receive a general fund appropriation. Wade will inform the
OSH Advisory Council (OAC) as she gets more specific details about the budget.

Wade expected the legislative agenda to be lean this year because it is a budget
year. Any proposals would be exactly as proposed last year. Some of those proposals did
get discussion, but none were approved last year. The only item that was directly related
to the MNOSHA program is the agency proposal to amend the statute to recognize
NAICS instead of SIC codes. A revisor's copy of that statute was distributed. This bill has
been approved.

Eugene Harmer referred to the notes from the most recent meeting about the two
temporary employees hired by MNOSHA to help catch up. He asked if the budget would
allow for extra help in the coming year. Patricia Todd said the temporary employees
helped with redacted files requested through Freedom of Information Act requests. These
temporary employees redacted 197 of the 212 files that needed to be redacted. MNOSHA
maintains a list of projects for interns, either paid or unpaid. MNOSHA continually
monitors its budget and, if dollars are available and they have projects where they can
hire a temporary person, they will pursue that. She hopes to continue using interns
because this has been successful for MNOSHA.

VI. Federal OSHA update

Tim Kobernat, the federal area director for the Eau Claire Area OSHA office gave
a federal OSHA update. He said they are in between action in Washington, D.C., and his
report would be short.
OSHA Advisory Council -3- December 3, 2004
Minutes

Kobernat reported that the federal OSHA fiscal-year ended Sept. 30. It exceeded
its goal of 37,700 inspections, but that was about 650 inspections fewer than in fiscal-
year 2003. He said serious violations were up 3 percent; willful violations were up 14
percent. He attributed this to better targeting. Kobernat noted he has been with federal
OSHA for 33 years and it seems to get better each year about targeting the "bad actors,"
or the places it should be inspecting. OSHA does that with several different programs.
Site specific targeting (SST) is used for companies that are having higher accident rates
than normal. OSHA also does that with local emphasis programs (LEPs), where an
industry that is having a really high accident-rate is focused on. For example, in
Wisconsin there is the concrete industry, the canning industry, several other industries
and construction is always in the mix.

Kobernat reported the fatality rate continues to go down, but the actual number
was up slightly last year: there were 5,559 fatalities. That sounds like a lot, but when
OSHA first started, there were 12,000 to 13,000 fatalities. It is better, but it is far from
being ideal. He said last year was the first year the Hispanic fatality rate went down. They
have had a major emphasis within federal OSHA to focus on the Hispanic population,
because the accident rates and fatality rates, especially for Hispanics, were much higher
than the general population. They have been putting a lot of effort into that in outreach,
etc., so it was nice to see this went down a little bit last year as well.

Kobernat reported the federal OSHA budget was passed. They are waiting for a
signature from President Bush. In fiscal-year 2004, they had $458 million. They
requested a slight increase of $461 and got $468 million for fiscal-year 2005 – higher
than they asked for. That is a 2.6 percent increase from fiscal-year 2004. Kobernat's
region has been on a hiring freeze for quite some time and they have quite a few
vacancies in Eau Claire and also Minneapolis. That is the bad news. The rest of the bad
new is it is official that as of Dec. 1, the Minneapolis federal OSHA office will close. All
state-plan monitoring and federal activity in Minnesota will come out of the Eau Claire
office now. It is quite expensive to maintain the office in Minneapolis and they are down
to one person there, so the regional office could not justify maintaining both offices.
Kobernat did not anticipate any drop in service to the state of Minnesota. They will
continue to do what they have been doing lately. They work closely with MNOSHA and
Kobernat said he does not even consider it to be a monitoring activity any more. It is
more of a partnership and he did not think there would be a problem.

Kobernat said he read that the National Institute of Occupational Safety and
Health (NIOSH) and the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) are seeking comments
regarding policies, training and other issues for violence in the workplace. They are going
to send about 40,000 surveys. The reason for that is the fatality rate has been decreasing,
but the actual homicide rate has been increasing, so there is more violence in the
workplace. NIOSH and BLS want to see why that is happening and what the good
companies are doing to prevent violence. He noted MNOSHA has been doing quite a bit
in this area and they had Vikki Sanders from the Workplace Safety Consultation unit
speak to Kobernat's group and help them out in other areas.
OSHA Advisory Council -4- December 3, 2004
Minutes

Kobernat reported whistleblower complaints are up. He noted the paper recently
had an article about the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, which is the whistleblower law for
corporate and criminal fraud accountability. That has gone up from a handful to about
180 last year. They have had a few of them in the Eau Claire office. Some of them are
quite substantial. To give a historical perspective, Kobernat noted OSHA, at one time,
basically did 11C, which is people complaining about safety in the workplace, which
Todd's unit still does, and 405s, which are surface transportation and truck drivers
complaining about unsafe vehicles. That is what they started out with. Now they have 14
acts they are working under, including the Nuclear Regulatory Act and the Sarbanes-
Oxley Act, and some of those that do not really seem to fit in with OSHA, but they have
them.

Pat McGovern asked about the survey of work-related violence, whether the
survey was of employers and whether it was for all industries. Kobernat said it was. He
thinks they are trying to get a compilation of best practices and training to try to get that
out to more companies so we can pass on the best practices. McGovern asked for contact
information for the person who was in charge of this project. Kobernat agreed to give her
the information after the meeting. McGovern noted there is a lot of research going on
here, at the School of Public Health, about work-related violence.

McGovern noted there was some discussion during the most recent legislative
session about possibly criminalizing when workplace homicides happen. She thought it
was Sen. Corzine, N.J. She asked Kobernat what the status of this issue was and whether
he thought it would come up again about toughening the penalties. Kobernat said that
because there was no standard for workplace violence with federal OSHA, it has to be
cited under the general duty clause, 5A1, that makes it very difficult to get a criminal
sanction. He said it is a lot easier to get it for a specific standard, but 5A1 criminals are
very difficult to prosecute. It is still possible, if that happens. As far as a legislative
change, he has not heard any "buzz" about that at all.

Melanie Allen noted Kobernat said the federal activity was more focused on "bad
actors," or outliers, in terms of outcomes. She asked if they have found any
underreporting or whether they have any activities in place to counteract underreporting
because it might reveal "bad actors." Kobernat said that was a good question. They are
very vigorous in citing underreporting when they find it and they issue high penalties.
They just had one that is going through the court system in Ohio. A large auto
manufacturer was issued some fairly substantial citations on a definition of MSDs for
ergonomics cases. The company said those cases were really not work-related and OSHA
said they were. OSHA issued willful violations of approximately $150,000 on those
cases. When they find underreporting, they are very vigorous. The other thing they have
is a nonreporting inspection. They sent a survey and the companies are supposed to send
back their results. If they do not send it back, OSHA actually goes out to the facility to
find out why they did not send it in. They do some activity in that area, but it is tough.

Ajax asked about the Hispanic employees having a higher rate of fatalities and
whether there was a reason for that. Kobernat said there was not a specific study, but they
OSHA Advisory Council -5- December 3, 2004
Minutes

have found a lot of the fatalities are happening in the south and a lot of them are new
immigrants from Mexico and South America, willing to take riskier jobs. Several of
them, lately, have been trenching fatalities and different occupations that are a higher risk
than normal. Kobernat thought that was part of the reason they have identified that. They
have even tried to do outreach for day laborers in nontraditional occupations to try to
reach those groups. He said most of the publications are in Spanish and they have done a
lot of partnerships with Hispanic groups and associations.

Ed Raine said in construction they are finding there are some companies that
work in the southern states with Hispanics and one of their big problems is
communication and getting the idea of safety through to them. Ryan Construction is very
strict and they solved this problem by making sure there is an interpreter on every job
where there are Spanish-speaking workers. The only thing you can do right now is
educate them about safety, because they come from a different culture, so they educate
them about the importance of safety. They found one of the big things is you have to get
their family involved. The Hispanics do not really think about themselves, but if you tell
them what will happen to their family if they are injured or killed, that is how you start to
get through to them. With those kinds of programs, they have been able to really cut the
injuries down considerably. He recommended facilitating communication and getting
them educated.

Kobernat commented about education. He met with NAFTA last year in Mexico
City about a construction safety activity. One interesting thing he found was that Mexico
spends about 1/100th per employee of what we spend on safety education and outreach,
etc. They are improving. Many things we take for granted in the states are just not there.
As Raine said, the safety culture is just not there in other countries.

McGovern offered to send Wade information about a seminar that will be at the
university in February about reaching the hard-to-reach populations, such as minority
groups where communication issues are problematic. Dr. Rosemary Sorus, who is an
occupational and environmental physician at the University of Illinois and has done a lot
of work with groups in the Chicago area, suggested the information be communicated to
OAC members by e-mail.

Dawn Weston commented that at the national level, the American Society of
Safety Engineers also has a focus on a section mainly for Hispanic employees and
employers. That might be another resource. They are a very dedicated group with
extensive resources.

VII. Staff reports

Compliance

Patricia Todd gave a MNOSHA Compliance update. She pointed out the
annual report for 2004 was in the members' folders and went through some important
highlights. In fiscal-year 2004, MNOSHA visited 2,662 establishments and identified
more than 4,800 hazards. They have developed and signed a new partnership with the
OSHA Advisory Council -6- December 3, 2004
Minutes

Minnesota Machine Guarding Program that has to do with metal-fabricating industries.

They hope to get some additional employers involved.

The average number of days from the opening conference to a citation issue for
safety is about 25 in MNOSHA's program versus the national average of about 46.
Within the health area, it is approximately 55 days in Minnesota compared to a national
average of 61 days.

When someone contests a citation, it takes MNOSHA 135 days, versus the federal
average of about 184 days, to resolve those issues.

Todd pointed out a couple of appendices in the annual report. Appendix B

explains some of the outreach presentations they have done. Jim Krueger's unit and the
entire group have worked diligently on outreach programs and have done 42
presentations during 2001 through 2003, with an average attendance rate of 41
participants. She noted Appendix D explains a work-skill analysis they performed to look
at what the training needs were for MNOSHA staff members. They identified those needs
and will be working on identifying core training for some of those requirements this year.

Todd reported the management team continues to strive to improve. Appendix F

contains information about what MNOSHA staff members would like management to do
regarding communication. A summary of that input is attached, as well as a management
performance survey that was conducted to see areas where managers could continue to
improve.

Todd pointed out the GRASSROOTS Workplace Protection publication in

members’ packets. This publication is done in conjunction with federal OSHA and
OSHSPA, an organization of state-plan states, of which Minnesota is a member. This
explains areas where state-funded programs are different from federal OSHA. It is a great
resource to see the new and innovative things that are being done in other states,
compared to Minnesota and federal OSHA. Todd noted one of the true advantages of a
state plan is the ability to be able to implement change more easily. She announced DLI
would be assuming responsibly for the GRASSROOTS publication, starting with federal-
fiscal-year 2005 and into 2006.

Wade pointed out that the GRASSROOTS publication is the only document that
actually gives a comparative analysis of the state-plan states. When new opportunities are
explored or come to the attention of MNOSHA, this is the document she often uses as a
resource guide to get a glance at how other state-plan states are responding to issues.
There is not much information out there that compares the states. There is a clear
comparison between federal-plan states and state-plan states in a collective sense, but this
document details state-specific statutes, or standards in other states, so this can be a very
good resource tool for your organization, constituents or customers, or corporate
headquarters in other states. Wade said she constantly reviews past editions when
MNOSHA is challenged. She urged OAC members to get familiar with the document.
OSHA Advisory Council -7- December 3, 2004
Minutes

Todd gave an update about MNOSHA staff members and introduced two recently
hired supervisors. Nancy Zentgraf is the metro general industry supervisor. She has a
bachelor's of science degree, with a major in industrial safety and a minor in fire science.
She has worked with MNOSHA for more than 11 years and has conducted at least 400
informal and 150 on-site inspections. Prior to that, she worked for five years in the
insurance industry, specializing in ergonomics. Clayton Handt is the metro health
supervisor. He has a bachelor’s of art degree in applied science and a master’s degree in
industrial safety. He worked as a compliance coordinator for two years at an Iowa
Community College and for worked for 10 years at the University of Minnesota as an
environmental health specialist and supervisor.

Todd said they reviewed the Washington state computer system. Because
MNOSHA receives 50 percent of its funding from federal OSHA, it needs to provide its
information directly to federal OSHA through its computer system, called IMIS. It is an
outdated system and they are looking for other options. Washington decided to develop
its own computer system, rather than waiting for federal OSHA's computer system. Todd
hopes to be able to put together a proposal for a computer system for DLI's Cabinet to
evaluate to, perhaps, get something more up-to-date than the current outdated system.

Todd reminded everyone the Construction Breakfast sessions are posted online.
They had 102 participants at the most recent one, in November. She also noted Safety
Lines is available online and encouraged people to read it. MNOSHA also has various
surveys available online.

Todd said they are continuing to work on their federal-fiscal-year 2005 plan. The
performance plan for 2005 is available online and they are starting to identify key areas
within that plan.

Harmer referred to the annual report and complimented Todd about the favorable
results, generally, from last year to this year and compared to national data goals. Harmer
referred to the fourth item on page 19. He said that was the only place he saw where the
results were not as favorable and asked Todd to comment about the percent of employee
complaints completed within 90 days. Todd said one thing they noticed within the
discrimination area, which Kobernat also mentioned, is that typically, if the economy gets
a little bit worse, they tend to have an increase in the number of discrimination
complaints they have. They also had an entire turnover in their discrimination staff.
Therefore, they have been working for the past two years to improve their performance
with regard to responding to discrimination complaints. It has been transferred to Jim
Krueger's unit. They now have three investigators involved in the discrimination process
to help improve the timeliness. They plan to do an analysis about the process this year to
be able to determine if there are ways they can continue to improve. They are working
with a new computer system called Perfect Law to simplify the process. This is a key
area that has needed to be improved upon in the past three years. They plan to continue
working on that area this year.
OSHA Advisory Council -8- December 3, 2004
Minutes

Raine asked for information about where the CHASE program is standing. Todd
reported the CHASE program is an exemption partnership they presently have with AGC,
similar to what they have with the Minnesota machine program. At present, they have
eight companies that have received the white level of exemption. It is a red, white and
blue program. It has been very successful in their eyes and AGC has been a great member
in this partnership. Todd noted Doug Swanson won the Art McCauley award last year,
partly due to his dedication and effort with the overall CHASE program. They will do an
annual review of it in February. They will continue to work with AGC to improve some
nuances that have occurred. Raine noted there is no blue level at this time, but he
understood Ryan was about to start a random drug-testing program, which is the one
thing holding them up from being blue level. He said that should happen very early next
year; they will probably be the first blue-level company. Todd stated that after they
receive a blue-level award, the company becomes exempt from programmed inspections,
so the requirements to get to the blue level are high. She confirmed no one has reached
the blue level at this time, but there are other white-level participants that are also
working toward that level.

Ajax commented he was impressed with the number of outreach presentations the
MNOSHA Compliance unit continues to do. That was his first introduction to MNOSHA
Workplace Safety Consultation more than 15 years ago. He thinks it is a powerful tool
and it has worked well for his company. Ajax asked about the Minnesota Machine
Guarding Program with Dr. David Parker. He said we clearly need some help with that
and he applauded efforts to partner. He noted one their challenges has been a lack of
participation by metal forming companies, such as his company. They are clearly one of
those industries Kobernat is talking about that is a high-hazard industry and has its share
of amputations and serious injuries. Ajax asked, because Compliance is partnering,
whether businesses would get a "get out of jail free" card if they were able to identify
some challenges in their workplace and make corrections and then not be fined. Krueger
was instrumental in implementing this program, along with Dr. David Parker, and Todd
asked him to come forward to respond. Krueger said that in going through the partnership
it is obviously a high-hazard industry and that was the incentive for MNOSHA to partner.
As part of the incentive, it is similar to MNOSHA offering exemptions if the company
can get to that level. He stressed that the bar is high. The beginning level requirements
are a lot less than that and that is the incentive for us to partner with them to get those
types of industries on board and get them moving in the right direction. That is what they
really want to do. Examples of things they are trying to help with the partnership are:
when they do citations, as part of their settlement agreements, they are having discussions
with them to see if they can get them into this partnership. They work cooperatively with
them to get them headed in the right direction through different sources, such as outreach.
Ajax said that sounds very positive and that is great. Krueger added they continue to hope
that they will see more involvement. That is a long process, but they are hearing more
and more conversation.

Kobernat asked whether everyone knows where to get the GRASSROOTS

publication. There is a link on federal OSHA’s Web site at
www.osha.gov/fso/osp/oshspa/annualreport.html.
OSHA Advisory Council -9- December 3, 2004
Minutes

Workplace Safety Consultation

Ken Hickey gave an update about the Workplace Safety Consultation (WSC) unit
in Jim Collins' absence. He noted WSC met or exceeded most of its goals last year. Its
first goal was to reduce occupational hazards through direct intervention. The overall
goal of the unit was to conduct 1,240 visits in various industries. They conducted 1,636
visits, which was 132 percent of the projected goal. Hickey reported the second goal was
to promote a safety and health culture through consultation assistance, cooperative
programs and sharing leadership. It projected 415 training and assistance visits and
interventions. It conducted 748, which was 180 percent of the projected goal.

Hickey said WSC has a five-year goal to certify 20 new MNSHARP participants.
In the first of the five years, five new companies have been certified into the program. It
currently has 13 MNSHARP certified participants. He noted the goal for the MNSHARP
deferral program was to bring in four new participants. Six new deferral participants
have been brought in and WSC is currently working with eight MNSHARP deferral
participants.

Hickey noted WSC’s goal was to sign two new alliance agreements; five alliance
agreements were signed during federal-fiscal-year 2004.

Hickey announced WSC also met its goals with its special programs. The Safety
Grant Program has expanded; they added training tied to equipment and tuition
reimbursement. They added these new options for employers for safety grants. While
they are doing this, the grant program monies have gone down a little bit, but the options
are wider for what they can use the monies for. The LogSafe, Workplace Violence
Prevention, Ergonomics and Labor Management Safety Committee programs also all met
projected goals.

Harmer expressed appreciation for the individuals who sign up to partner for the
audits. Greg Rindal from Minnesota Power came to their facility as part of the audit. He
brought a special skill-set and did an excellent job. He said that is a good tool WSC is
using and he commended them for it. Hickey clarified that Harmer was referring to
WSC's Special Government Employees they have with the MNSTAR program. He
agreed Rindal was very beneficial on that task and they appreciated his assistance.

Ajax referred to the outreach presentations discussed earlier. He said he thought

WSC has been doing a terrific job with that as well. About two-and-a-half years ago,
Todd Haglin came to speak to his trade association, the Precision Metal Forming
Association, about the MNSHARP program. He believed one of the most recent
recipients of a MNSHARP award, Morrissey, Bloomington, Minn., was a direct result of
WSC’s outreach and they are an important member of their trade organization. He
thanked WSC for bringing that message to them. Ajax thought they had two MNSHARP
companies in their organization so far.
OSHA Advisory Council -10- December 3, 2004
Minutes

Harmer asked if Phil Jacobs works for Workplace Safety Consultation and
whether they were planning to offer training at individual employer's locations to work
with technical staff. Hickey said they would offer training at individual employers and
will try to set it up for what is requested.

IX. New business

Companies using behavioral safety models

Assistant Commissioner Wade welcomed representatives from International

Paper and the Sartell Mill who were present to give a presentation about behavior safety
models used by their companies.

Tim Knoll, the hourly safety coordinator at the International Paper and the Sartell
Mill provided a PowerPoint presentation. Safety Manager Bill Weihs assisted with the
presentation. A handout of the presentation was distributed.

Knoll reviewed the mill's history and then talked about behavioral safety.

The workers at the mill are represented by the PACE Local Union 7-274. Knoll
reported their total incident rate (TIR) was more than 2.8 a few years ago and they
decided they wanted to go the next step to drive that rate down. They negotiated with the
union about the possibility of bringing in a behavior-based safety process and the union
supported that proposal. Knoll coordinated and implemented the behavior-based safety
process at the Sartell Mill.

Knoll stated they believe behaviors are an observable activity. They trained the
entire workforce in about five months. They trained people about the proper etiquette of
doing an observation and, more importantly, the importance of observations and what
they represent. An observation lasts three to five minutes and may be at the beginning,
the end or in the middle of a task. The observers are encouraged to change that up, so
they look at anything and everything that is going on out on the floor. If behaviors are an
observable activity, then observations become pictures of what safety actually looks like
on the floor. Knoll compared the number of observations with the pixels that are used to
make up a picture. The more observations they are able to obtain, the clearer that picture
becomes of what safety looks like on the floor at the Sartell Mill.

Knoll reported 48 of the 530 employees who were trained at Sartell volunteered to
do observations. These observers set up an opportunity to come by to do an observation
with the employees who are on the floor and ask their permission to do a safety
observation at that time. They use a standard checklist with 29 behaviors and a catch-all,
or special item, area. If items continue to come up in the special-item category, that
becomes a behavior.

Knoll said they named their process Safety Through Employee Participation
(S.T.E.P.). They have a steering committee that meets twice a month with eight members;
five are union members and three are salaried members. The committee must always
OSHA Advisory Council -11- December 3, 2004
Minutes

consist of more employees than managers for the employees to maintain ownership of the
process. Knoll conducts monthly observer meetings to maintain the vitally important
contact with all of the observers to communicate any changes coming up and, most
importantly, to receive the observers' feedback about how everything is going on the
floor and what can be changed to make it more user-friendly for the employees. Knoll
also reports quarterly to the joint leadership team consisting of their middle manager and
all of the department managers, as well as reporting at the union leadership team monthly
meeting.

Knoll noted Sartell generates charts using NuDatum software, which was
developed for recording and tracking safety observations. He said it does a very good job
of initiating a lot of reports and allowing you to proactively manage safety. He updates
the "Quick S.T.E.P." statistics weekly, which are on an Excel spreadsheet. The reason
they are called "Quick S.T.E.P." is because you can take a look at the statistics quickly
and understand where your department is and determine whether you need to focus more
on observations or if you are on target. These statistics are provided to the steering
committee and all the mill departments with the NuDatum statistics and the “Quick
S.T.E.P.” statistics every Monday morning.

Knoll said they have been able to successfully record and track the observation
process. After you have the "picture," you have to make sure you track it and use it for
your benefit. They find if they are doing an observation of their mill workers, they are
99.5 percent safe, which is great. During this process of implementing a behavior-based
safety process, there is a time where you have to gain the trust of the employees and
make them very comfortable with the process. You have to continue to make sure the
employees are aware that you are not gathering any data that could be used to make
things difficult for the employee later. It is a nonpunitive process, so it does take a while
to get your entire workforce warmed up to that process and to make them feel
comfortable. Knoll speculated their employees are 75 percent to 85 percent comfortable
with that. He said you will always have a certain percentage of employees who will never
be comfortable with the process, but you cannot focus on them. You need to focus on the
ones who are aware that safety matters.

Knoll said they believe the S.T.E.P. process has contributed to establishing their
current TIR of 1.13 percent. If everything continues as it has been, by the end of the year
they will end up with a TIR of close to 1.0, which he said was "world class." The process
got them off a plateau and helped them drive down the TIR. They have implemented
other things into their safety format, but they believe doing observations makes a big
difference. Knoll noted they would refresh the safety training for employees and
management.

Knoll distributed a copy of a chart generated by their NuDatum software. They

refer to it as the "Visine Chart," because the objective is to "get the red out." The less red
that shows on that report, the safer you have been working. They are expecting their
employees to revert back to some old habits and they will proactively manage and
educate the employees about what is taking place. Knoll also distributed a sample copy of
OSHA Advisory Council -12- December 3, 2004
Minutes

the Quick S.T.E.P. statistics. They were developed on an Excel spreadsheet; he sends the
report to the line managers to show them where their departments are among the totals
for the month and the total number of observations.

Hickey introduced Pamela Smith from Ainsworth Bemidji OSB. He noted

International Paper is a union company and Ainsworth is not a union company, so you
get two slightly different perspectives. Smith gave a PowerPoint presentation about the
company's behavioral safety model. She noted Ainsworth bought out Potlatch in
September and she reviewed the company's history and background. They employ 240
employees and produce 1 million to 1.2 million board feet a day. They have two lines,
running with four shifts, that rotate on 12-hour shifts.

Smith said they have had behavioral safety since 1995 and are well into it. They
have seen lots of ups and downs, and that is the information she covered in her
presentation. They chose the program Bapp Track for their database. It stresses it is
employee-driven and is the main key for their behavioral safety process. They developed
their observation sheet based on their prior incidents. They took a three-year sample and
looked at every single thing about the root cause: what happened, whether it was
behavior and how to get it divided down to record on their observation sheet. Their
original sheet had about 20 different behaviors; they went deeper and more in-depth and
have close to 30 now. They also developed advice statements, such as “when you are
blowing down, wear your respirator to avoid inhalation of dust,” so people know what to
recommend at the end of the observation. They also give clear definitions; those are very
difficult to come up with, because they do not want to be safety cops. That is not what an
observation is and they do not want to point fingers at everybody. They want to
encourage people and train people of how to work safely.

Smith reported their process is known as the WISE process, which stands for
"Workers Investing in a Safety Environment." They use their ABC analysis to look at the
antecedent. It is the trigger and is why they do the behavior. For example, if the telephone
rings, our behavior is the actual behavior being analyzed: you answer the phone. The
consequences are what could happen if we do that behavior, such as: talk to the caller or,
perhaps, they hang up every time you answer the phone. What it points out is your
consequence is going to affect your behavior. If the person hangs up every time, you
probably are not going to pick up that phone again.

Smith outlined the categories they use to figure out which behavior an action goes
under and noted they added ergonomics about three years ago, which has been really
good for them. Besides noticing behavior, they ask why the employee did it that way, so
they can find out what the barriers to safety are. After you get rid of the barriers, people
can work safely. They found they have had seven of them, including training and habits,
that are high ones. When people come on and somebody trains them, it might not be the
safest way to do it, which gets carried on throughout the next time they train somebody,
and all of a sudden everybody is doing it. Other barriers include rewards, equipment –
where the machine itself is the main problem, and a disagreement of safe practices, which
they do not see that much anymore. That is when somebody says they know it is probably
OSHA Advisory Council -13- December 3, 2004
Minutes

the safer way, but will not do it that way. Personal factors and personal choice also are
discussed with the worker.

Smith noted that when they started, Bapp Track told them to just do a volunteer
system and do as many people who want to be trained as possible. They had 60 percent of
people wanting to do it. Of that 60 percent, Bapp Tracks suggested they only have 10
percent active each quarter. That way, they can get out there and people know who is
doing observations and they can get to know them. They rotate off, so they do not get
burned out. They changed that and now train all employees, so they know the observation
process and are not scared. The observation time is a risk-free time zone and there are no
names on their documents; everybody has a number and Smith is the only person who
knows which numbers go to which names. She said you have a choice to be observed, but
that is a bit misleading. The employee can always say they do not want to be observed
right now and they will not observe that person. They do not have to ask to do an
observation; you can just start an observation, but if that person turns around and says
they do not want to be observed right now, they will not observe that person. They found
out, through years of experience, if they always come up to somebody and say, "I want to
observe you," that person will change their behavior immediately and you do not see the
true picture. If somebody just comes by and stands next to you for a couple of minutes,
you might not notice them or see the clipboard right away and the observer will get a real
picture of what is happening right then and there. Smith noted participation is not
mandatory and they do not make people do observations. This is a change and they are on
a downslide with their behavioral process. At the very beginning, they saw the
observations were great and the incident rate was going down. Everybody was working
safer. They thought if they had everybody do an observation, then their numbers would
go down even more and everybody would be totally safe. It did not work that way.
People were kicking and screaming and said, "you cannot make me do this." Those are
some of the problems they have had.

Smith said they have a WISE steering team with representation from all of the
crews and departments, so they can bring forth any ideas or problems they have had.
They meet monthly and ask the members of the team to always be active observers who
are always there and willing to help employees with questions about training somebody
about observations or coaching them if they have not done them in awhile.

Smith said they put out monthly reports very similar to what Sartell does. They
used to do weekly reports, but their numbers of observations have gone down and it was
not feasible to report every week any more. They also do yearly reviews and monitor the
behaviors through incidents, about what they are affecting and the cause. They look at all
of the behaviors and observations. They use Decision Matrix to pick out what they need
to set for their goals for next year. They always work with management. Above all, you
need good communication and teamwork. The steering team members are each
responsible for a bulletin board on the floor, where they update all of the data regularly.
They are there for all pre-shift meetings, so they can speak up about anything. If
something came during the weekend, they can let everybody else know about it.
OSHA Advisory Council -14- December 3, 2004
Minutes

Smith reviewed their WISE data-flow chart and noted they were currently having
some difficulties. They had some management leave during the past year. They also had
the union come in and they did not succeed at their mill. She said a lot of people at that
time, even with their buy out, "have blinders on" right now and tell themselves they are
just going to do their job and cannot think beyond that box right now. They need to
overcome that and let the employees know that the work is going to be there, you can do
observations and just look at the brighter picture here.

Discussion followed the presentations, members and visitors asked questions

about both companies.

A visitor asked what sort of items land in the "other" or special category. Smith
responded that things such as long hair not being put up in the hardhat. Knoll said their
other category was where they catch their work orders. If you take a look at the behaviors
the observers are putting in there, they typically fit into one of the other 29 behaviors.
The work order can be important, such as lighting. You have to try to isolate the
behavior-based safety process from being a fix-it shop, but every once in a while
something will come up and you need to address it; it adds credibility to the behavior-
based safety process by addressing it, especially if it is an important issue, such as
lighting, that affects every employee. They take advantage of those opportunities to add
to the credibility of the process.

Lois Klobuchar asked Knoll if they worked with the union first to get them to buy
in. Knoll said, "absolutely." Management and union sat down with the joint leadership
team and began to implant the idea of coming on board with a behavior-based safety
process. Weihs noted they actually started in 1990 with the union, early in the process, to
try to get the union to warm up to the idea that they were going to do observations. It was
difficult at first. Klobuchar asked if that was difficult and Weihs said it was. They tried
many times during the years and during any contract negotiations, they were finally
successful this last time around. He stressed that trust has to be there before you ever get
into this with the union. Discipline was an issue; Smith mentioned no names or clock
numbers are associated with anything, because there is no discipline during an
observation. That was the biggest fear the union had. They thought that if he watches
during an observation and sees someone doing something wrong, he would turn them in
and they will get disciplined for it. Weihs stated they have not had one discipline case at
Sartell; Smith said they never have either. Weihs said they figured they would fail right
away if there was even one case of discipline and they would never get the program back.

Allen asked whether Sartell has been able to reap the benefits of increased trust
between labor and management as a result of the integrity of the behavior-based process.
Knoll said they have always had a very good level of trust between management and
labor at his mill. He noted they went through a difficult time in the ‘90s, with a contract
and arbitration, and it took some time to heal after that. The joint leadership team does
that and they get together on a monthly basis; there is a very good trust factor between
those two parties that definitely helps. He speculated the behavior-based process has
probably, if anything, enhanced that. Allen asked if they were at the point of predicting
OSHA Advisory Council -15- December 3, 2004
Minutes

an accident. She said, in her previous experience, they found that after collecting some
history of behavior-based observations, if they saw a dip in the number of observations,
they could predict an accident was coming. She asked if they were at that point and
whether it had been their experience. Knoll said they are aware of that and they are also
aware of the fact that 97 percent has typically been the benchmark on that. Anything
below that point, you start setting yourself up for some serious incidents. So far, they
have not had anyone get below that 97 percent safe. They are not gathering as much data
as they would like and they need to gather more data so that becomes more definitive.
Smith reported their data has shown they have hit a low point this year and have had an
increase in injuries.

McGovern gave both companies a lot of credit and said these looked like
sophisticated, well-thought-out programs that have taken a lot of time to develop and
implement. She asked about some literature about injury epidemiology. There is a
tendency to think that if a company is too focused on a training program, management
would not consider engineering solutions. There is a tendency to keep saying “if you
would only do your job better, then the injuries would go away.” She asked if they see
any tendency for people to take the focus off of fixing the process or machines or that
kind of thing. Smith said they did and they had to do more training about that, because
instead of asking why, a lot of people will say, "I just did it that way." You need to ask
why they do that. People were not asking enough "whys" to figure out that the machinery
is the main problem and is why the person does things a certain way. A lot of people said
it was personal choice and it was getting back that they needed to retrain their observers
to know what to ask and how to put down the right barrier, so they knew what it was.
Roxanne Pawielski noted she has only been at Ainsworth for 30 days. She added she has
been doing observations herself and talking to people, and what the big problem with the
system right now is that almost all root causes are people problems and behavior
problems. They have really gotten away from just looking at safety as a system, instead
of looking at it just as behavior based. She thinks they need to get back to a safety system
with communication, controls, management support, etc. There are many parts of the
system and they all need to be there. Behavior is just one of those. Knoll said Sartell is a
MNSTAR site; they tell everyone in their training that they have engineered the
safeguards into their process as much as possible. If there are one or two they missed,
they can be brought to their attention and they will address them. If they were to make it
any safer, the only other option would be to hit the kill switch and walk away from it and
that is not an option, because they need to make paper. You have to consider that 93.7
percent of all injuries that take place in the workforce are behavior related, so behavior
becomes a very instrumental part of the safety process on the floor. You need to pay
attention to what you are doing and how you approach each task. Sometimes the wrong
decisions are made. It might be because of a lack of education, because the employee
panicked or because the employee was not trained correctly. During the observation
process, they are able to identify that and come back into the departments to proactively
address that.

Ajax asked if their companies are sharing any of their workers' compensation
savings they are probably seeing as a result of their program, with the rank and file
OSHA Advisory Council -16- December 3, 2004
Minutes

employees. Bill Weiss from Sartell Mill said they had a 12.0 TIR in 1990. Today they are
at a 1.0 TIR. They had six reportable injuries this year and their workers' compensation
budget has been cut by 300 percent. He said behavior-based safety is not a "silver bullet,"
but they have definitely seen a savings in workers' compensation costs. He shares the
information with employees about the costs of workers' compensation at the crew
meetings and the safety meetings. They are not providing a cash safety bonus to the
employees. An OAC member noted the company remains competitive, is a stable
employer and the employee shares in those benefits indirectly, as opposed to receiving a
check. Smith and Pawielski said they do not deal with workers' compensation and could
not answer that question.

Metcalf noted Smith said their management was not willing to meet with her, or
put her off to the side, and asked if it was like that before they were taken over or whether
that was just recently with the new management. Smith said that is something they have
been battling for quite a few years where, for example, a line went down and people have
to go out there and the meeting does not happen because everybody is gone. They
understand the lines should be kept running, but many times there are excuses such as "I
am too busy" or "something else came up," even though they give plenty of advance
notice of a meeting time. Metcalf said they had a problem at their facility with the same
thing about four or five years ago. They started with the union, and labor and
management and found out that the more labor and management work together, the more
they showed management how they could save money and increase their profits, when
you do not have people out. He said the sick leave average was about 20 hours a week
and they are now down to about eight hours a week or fewer. Sick leave, overtime and
workers' compensation are all down. There have been no complaints in two years. Wade
and Todd have attended some of their meetings. According to studies they have done, if
management does not get on board, it is a failing process. He did not know how they
could change that. Pawielski said the new management is on board at her company and
that is why she was hired. That was their first step. Management has attended the safety
committee meetings she has been at. They have conducted crew meetings with the mill
manager, herself and the shift coordinator. It is mandatory they are at all crew meetings.
She is working hard at getting leadership on board with some of her thoughts about
where they need help. She thinks they are on the right track now and thinks the problem
was the previous management.

Daryl Tindle said one of the things he found very useful was just common sense.
Get away from the workplace to neutral territory for negotiations or safety meetings and
have everybody shut off their cell phones. You can get a meeting in instead of running
out to fix the line.

Ed LaFavor noted that both of the organizations are international corporations

with various plants around the world. He asked if their programs were site specific or
whether their programs existed throughout the whole organization. Knoll said their
programs were site specific. He said they chose to do it in-house and it is more successful
with the process if you train to your culture at the mill. They gathered some information
from other IP facilities, as well as other facilities outside of IP. When it came down to the
OSHA Advisory Council -17- December 3, 2004
Minutes

"nuts and bolts of the process," they put something together specifically for their mill, so
they could train to the culture they feel they have in their mill.

Smith said their program was site specific, although the company encourages
behavior processes throughout all of its mills. Each site was able to do what they wanted
to do.

Discussion items for 2005 meetings

Bufton reminded OAC members of the meeting dates for next year. They are
March 4, June 24, Sept. 9 and Dec. 2. There was a handout for visitors as well. She
announced they want to focus on a specific topic at each meeting in 2005, as well as
doing the OAC's administrative business, and asked for ideas about the topics OAC
members would like to see covered at those meetings. Bufton mentioned they talked
earlier this year about what the OAC and visitors would like to do to help MNOSHA to
become stronger and to continue the very positive strides they have made in helping
everyone control injuries on the job in the past. They are looking at those topics that will
help MNOSHA move ahead and help them as an advisory council to do their jobs better.
She asked for ideas.

Wade noted that at the June 25, 2004 meeting, the OAC came up with about 20
areas to consider or recommendations that were made to the agency. DLI consolidated a
few of those recommendations. It is the intent of Wade, Todd and Collins to work
through those recommendations. They intend to provide specific feedback about how the
agency has addressed the recommendations that have been made. Two of those
recommendations have not been explored with the OAC: the use of surveys and
"building your own brand." Wade questioned whether the surveys were getting to the
heart of the matter. Currently, they have employee and employer surveys online. Wade
said they have not received the participation they would like. They prefer to stay with an
electronic survey. With shrinking resources available, it is easier to track the data,
compile it and analyze it, and they are moving toward using electronic technology. They
are not interested in going back to a paper product; the results are not comparable. They
would like to dedicate a portion of the meeting time in the first of two meetings to talk
about whether the surveys are "getting to the heart of the matter." She asked OAC
members and the visitors to take that back to their constituents and encourage employers
and employees to use that to provide feedback to MNOSHA. Wade noted "building your
own brand" was a recommendation that came from Bufton and she agreed to lead that
discussion.

Wade did not know whether the survey topic is going to take the full discussion
time; therefore, there is additional room on the next agenda for an open discussion item.
She asked OAC members to advance any additional discussion items they would like this
group to explore today or think about it and, as we complete our current list, be prepared
to continue to provide feedback about items that come up that they think warrant a
detailed discussion by the OAC.
OSHA Advisory Council -18- December 3, 2004
Minutes

Bufton noted time at the June 2004 meeting was spent looking at strategic
discussion about what the OAC is and how it could be more useful to the agency. She
asked whether an annual review of discussion items would be useful to OSHA. Wade
said it was too early to tell whether there was a need to exam this on an annual basis, but
she did not think they have enough information yet. She said the discussions within this
group were maturing and they were getting more specific feedback from the OAC; she
also encouraged participation from the audience. She intends to provide the OAC
members with very specific feedback about the agency's response to each
recommendation. Any recommendations that have been addressed are not necessarily
closed items. She will rely on the OAC to consider the agency's feedback. If we would
benefit from more discussion about it, there will still be that time. She said OAC
members could expect a written response about these recommendations at the next
meeting. It was decided the March meeting would be about the use of surveys and how to
get more people involved, whether we are asking the right questions and what is the use
of the information that is being gathered. Wade said the June 24 meeting would be
dedicated to "building out own brand."

Harmer asked if the list of recommendations included the recommendations made

by the Ergonomics Task-force. Wade said the list does include an ergonomics discussion
point. The recommendation from the council was to move ergonomics ahead. There has
been a presentation to bring the council up to date about the agency's efforts. It does not
include the total recommendations that were made by the Ergonomics Task-force. Those
recommendations are being considered. DLI used those recommendations as its
motivator to add specific staff members dedicated to ergonomics. Those staff members
continue to use the recommendations to guide their work, so that continues to be a work
in progress. DLI provided feedback about the department's ergonomics efforts at a past
meeting.

Allen asked whether the OAC would play a role in the legislative agenda
development process and how they should be participating. Wade clarified the OAC is
different than the Workers' Compensation Advisory Council. That group has a legislative
mandate to vet any proposed legislation before it lands at the capitol. That is not the
charge of the OAC, which is to provide direct feedback to the agency. Each OAC
member is very carefully chosen, based on their profession, their constituent groups and
so forth. It is the OAC's charge to bring concerns to DLI from the industry. It is the OAC
member’s choice to participate in the legislative process. The majority of OSHA
legislation, as far as standards are concerned, is driven by federal OSHA. So DLI's need
for legislation is limited.

Most often, the agency is in a more reactive state when there are proposals – for
example – to turn the program back to federal OSHA. That was highly unusual. It came
at a time when there was misinformation suggesting that by turning the program back, the
state of Minnesota would actually save money for purposes of addressing the budget
deficit. People were educated and then recognized the value of MNOSHA to Minnesota
businesses and then a different decision was made. Wade does not expect that MNOSHA,
from that perspective, will get the kind of attention it got in 2003. However, there are
OSHA Advisory Council -19- December 3, 2004
Minutes

always bills introduced, whether it is to increase penalties or do something else very

specific. Wade said it was up to the OAC members what level they want to participate in
the legislative process. Because the OAC only meets on a quarterly basis, the agency
does not always have the opportunity to keep the members informed on the day-to-day
occurrences. After the session starts, Wade said she probably spends up to 50 percent of
her time educating legislators, participating, presenting to different committees and so
forth. She told members it was "their call" and noted she did not expect specific
legislation. Wade said she knew this group has expressed interest in being more active
and they have that right. If there is anything that is on the table that the agency is aware
of in March, they can bring it to the OAC members' attention if they need additional input
or additional support. They are certainly able to contact members outside the meeting
schedule. But as far as just proposing legislation, the standards themselves are generally
driven by federal OSHA, so they just do have the same opportunity or need for that to be
the focus of this group as they do in some of the other advisory councils.

Allen stated that if there comes a point where DLI needs support for – for
example – the bill that was handed out earlier or at a hearing, or if testimony is needed,
DLI could let OAC members know and maybe they could come in support of what DLI is
trying to get pushed through the session. Wade thanked her.

Ajax said he would second Allen's suggestion. He thought that was critically
important and supported any way this group could affect some public policy for
MNOSHA. The OAC would be a very powerful voice with labor and industry, education
and meeting with legislators to encourage them to do something or not do something. He
would certainly volunteer to support in any way he possibly could.

Harmer noted that at one time the OAC had a legislative subcommittee that got to
be inactive, to a degree, and it was disbanded for lack of commitment and people not
wanting to get involved. He agreed with Wade that meeting on a quarterly basis did not
allow the OAC to really interact and influence the development of legislation, as opposed
to responding and endorsing something.

Wade responded that if it was the pleasure of the group to reactivate that
subcommittee, the agency was very open to that. A reactivation of the subcommittee may
be a better approach than waiting for the quarterly update to the whole group. Maybe that
is a better way to get individuals who want to be more involved. She asked if there was
an interest from this group to reactivate the legislative subcommittee.

Tindle said labor has always had a strong history of backing not only Minnesota
OSHA, but any type of safety involvement. They still have a little bit of legislative
encouragement they could "bring to task" if they need to, so he would be interested in
participating in something like that.

Harmer requested that forming a legislative subcommittee be put on the agenda

for the next meeting. He noted they were missing quite a few members and, perhaps,
others would have an opinion about this issue.
OSHA Advisory Council -20- December 3, 2004
Minutes

Bufton suggested that since the OAC does not meet again until March that maybe
they could have an electronic discussion, because by March we are halfway through the
session. Wade agreed to do that.

Bufton asked members to be thinking about topics for the September and
December meetings. They would like to get those out early, so that members can begin to
prepare, so staff could help them to prepare and so that people who are planning to visit
the OAC meetings could get that on their schedule. They will also be talking about where
and when we will move one meeting a year outside the metro. Wade suggested
September, because that seemed to work well for everyone, so "put your thinking cap on"
about where would be a good place to move to.

Ajax made a motion to adjourn. McGovern seconded the motion. All voted in
favor of the motion.

Respectfully submitted,
Deb Caswell
Executive Secretary

dc/s