Sample Metric: Occupational Exposure Limit (OEL) Attachment 1 Performance • Percent of workers exposed above the Occupational Exposure Limit Measure: (OEL) Measure • The percentage of workers within an organizational unit identified as Description: being exposed above the OEL used by this organization, including TWAs, ceiling values, STELs, and action levels. (e.g. OSHA PEL, ACGIH TLV, country standard, organization/company standard). Objective: • Identify the rate at which employees are at risk for work-related illness and disability and decreased social function. While not all employees exposed above the OEL are expected to suffer from the health effect, this metric does not wait for the effect to occur. Definitions • (# of workers exposed above OEL x 100% / # of employees in this organization)Each exposure above the OEL is counted. Example: an employee exposed above the OEL for lead and for noise is counted as "2" exposures. • Workers are counted as exposed if they are protected by PPE. Workers are not counted if the hazard has been practically eliminated by process changes or by engineering controls. The count of exposures may be segregated by the hazard to which employees are exposed. • # of workers are counted by number of positions, not by # of individuals (more than one individual in a position in one year) or full time equivalent (FTE) Target • Corporate Audience • Site management Current • None Requirements: Benefits / • Is not affected by the latency period of the illness. Values: Weaknesses / • Can put pressure on management and employees to underreport or ignore Limitations: significant exposures, which in turn can lead to employers failing to protect employees from significant exposures. • Does not measure risk, since it does not provide the relative risk of illness occurring (e.g. exposure as a percentage of the OEL). • Does not identify the relative level of the health effect expected from each exposure (e.g. death vs. disability). • The quality of this indicator depends on the rate at which worker exposures have been assessed. If the rate of work processes assessed is low, the true count of workers exposed above the action level may be higher than currently measured. Recommend also measuring the percent of work processes whose exposures have been determined for all hazards. • Hazards without an OEL are falsely excluded (e.g. ergonomics). Data Sources: • Exposure assessment results. Interpreting • The desired trend is toward decreasing the rate of exposures. Data • Decreasing numbers may indicate that: hazards have been eliminated through process changes (or total elimination of a process), hazards have been controlled through engineering controls, or hazards are being underreported. Sample Metric: Occupational Exposure Limit (OEL) Attachment 1 Performance • Percent of workers exposed above the Occupational Exposure Limit Measure: (OEL) Metric Type • lagging/outcome Organization NA Using Contributor John Seibert, email@example.com Sample Metric: Occupational Exposure Limit (OEL) Attachment 1 Metric Page Page 2 of 2 Performance • Percent of workers exposed above the Occupational Exposure Limit (OEL) Measure: 15.00% Percentage 10.00% rate of people 5.00% exposed above the OEL 0.00% 1997 1998 1999 2000 Year 1997 1998 1999 2000 rate of people exposed above the OEL 10.00% 9.09% 9.09% 8.33% # of people 200 220 220 240 # of people exposed above the OEL 20 20 20 20 Summary: Although the same number of people has been exposed for each of the last four years, our overall rate has gone down, as we have added additional personnel in key production areas where these exposures historically existed.
Pages to are hidden for
"Sample Metric"Please download to view full document