HSSE Auditing & HSSE Performance
This Bulletin provides an update on Bulletin 32 – HSSEMS and also contains an analysis of the HSSE data collected during 2010 and the first half of 2011.
Bulletin 32 update
Bulletin 32 required three separate actions, of which one was to implement an external auditing process.
Organisations are required to have an external audit performed by a suitably qualified HSSE Auditor at least once every three years. Following the release of Bulletin 32, the JIG Guarantor Members completed an evaluation of the benefits of identifying a pool of trained HSSE Auditors. The decision was taken that a rotating programme of audits similar to the existing programme of JIG International QC Inspections would not be established.
As a result of this decision there are two remaining options available in order to satisfy this auditing requirement. The JV Board or Management Committee should decide whether the auditor will be provided by:
1) One of the participant companies.
2) A third party consultant.
This decision should be recorded in the minutes of a JV Board/Management Committee Meeting.
Auditing ensures the effective monitoring of the HSSEMS and focuses on continually improving HSSE performance. Therefore, audit reports should be reviewed by the JV Board/Management Committee.
HSSE analysis
The level of compliance with the HSSE website reporting requirement has increased since Bulletin 29 was issued in December 2009. However, monthly statistics reports are still only being received consistently from approximately 75% of JIG airport JVs which means that the following analysis does not reflect the total performance of all locations.
The information in the following tables can be used to benchmark your Organisation’s HSSE performance. The key performance indicators (KPI’s) listed in Table 6 should be used by each Organisation to continually monitor performance against the total for all JIG JVs.
Table 1 shows that the number of LTI’s (Lost Time Injuries) and the number of All Injuries (Fatalities, LTI’s, RWI’s, Medical Treatment & First Aid cases) reported in 2010 was substantially higher than in previous years. However, the level of reporting has improved and the hours worked in 2010 was more than double the previous high reported in 2008.
Table 1 – LTI, All Injuries numbers and hours worked
To allow for the effect of increased reporting, Table 2 looks at two key performance indicators (KPI’s) which use the hours worked to calculate rates per million hours worked. The table shows that for the data reported via the JIG website, 2010 was the worst performing year for both KPI’s since 2005. There has been a worsening trend for both KPI’s since 2007.
The JIG reporting tool does not yet have the capability to assess the severity of each LTI (i.e. the total number of working days lost for each injury) or the circumstances surrounding every incident so no further analysis is possible. However, the JIG HSSE Committee would like to develop this capability in the future. In the meantime it is essential that JVs conduct a thorough and timely investigation of injuries and other incidents to identify root causes and take steps to prevent reoccurrence. Injury and incident investigations should be reviewed by the JV Board/Management Committee.
Table 2 – LTI & All Injuries KPI’s
Whereas there has been a worsening trend in the occupational health and safety data in recent years, spill rates have generally improved over the last six years as can be seen in Table 3. However, the rates did increase in 2010 and looking at the performance in the first 6 months of 2011 (Table 6) it looks as if the rates are continuing to rise.
82% of the spills reported by into-plane operations in 2011 are in the 5-20 litre category.
Table 3 – Spill rates (into-plane operations)
Table 4 shows an increase in the number of spills which appears to be due to the overall increased level of reporting.
Table 4 – Numbers of spills and fuelling operations
Table 5 shows that the number of fuelling vehicle incidents and aircraft incidents has been steadily increasing since 2008. The rate of fuelling incidents/aircraft incidents per million fuellings is following the same trend.
Table 5 – Fuelling vehicle and aircraft incidents
Table 6 compares the KPI’s from 2010 compared against the KPI’s for the first 6 months of 2011. It can be seen that the personal injury rates have improved since last year but the spill rates and fuelling vehicle/ aircraft incident rates have worsened.
Key Performance Indicator / 2010 Total / 2011 Jan-June TotalLTI/million hours / 9.3 / 4.5
All injuries/mil hours / 20.5 / 13.6
First Aid/mil hours / Not Reviewed / 5.8
Into-plane spills/million hours / 21.4 / 30.7
Into-plane spills/million fuellings / 32.8 / 47.4
Spills(including ac)/million fuellings / 91.9 / 129.1
Fuelling vehicle incidents/million fuellings / 39.6 / 51.2
Aircraft incidents(damage to ac)/million fuellings / 6.0 / 10.7
Near Miss Reports/million hours / Not Reviewed / 765
Table 6 – Comparison of 2010 versus first 6 months of 2011
JIG has introduced two additional KPI’s this year relating to first aid and near misses and will begin to monitor these along with the other indicators over the coming years. The performance against these KPI’s will be used to set the strategy and objectives of the JIG HSSE committee.
This document is intended for the guidance of Members of the Joint Inspection Group (JIG) and companies affiliated with Members of JIG, and does not preclude the use of any other operating procedures, equipment or inspection procedures. Neither JIG, its Members, the companies affiliated with its Members nor the International Air Transport Association (IATA) accepts responsibility for the adoption of this document or compliance with this document. Any party using this document in any way shall do so at its own risk.
Page 1/5 www.jointinspectiongroup.org