For more than fifty years, Total Recordable Incident Rate (TRIR) has been the primary way of checking safety performance across professional industries. Pre Qualifications for contractors and annual performance incentives have been based on TRIR, which has recently been found to have detrimental limitations on long-term improvements. Because the safety community has yet to agree on the leading indicators, it’s difficult for companies across the same industry to have comparable numbers.

There is a shift from TRIR to a new method of monitoring safety performance that aligns with current safety performance tests – High-energy Control Assessment (HECA). HECA was created based on the idea that life-threatening high-energy hazards should have sufficient safeguards. It’s hard for other assessments to compete against HECA because of the volume of data it collects to drive improved decision-making in safety industries.

The Qualities of a Strong Metric: TRIR Versus HECA

Objective, validity, predictability, clear, actionable, and important are the six qualities that make up a strong metric. After empirically and logistically evaluating TRIR based on these six criteria, these are the results taken away:

  1. Objective. Because TRIR is based on recordable injuries over time, it is a direct observation and, therefore, considered objective.
  2. Valid. Typically businesses use TRIR to make direct comparisons over a short time, which causes it not to be statistically stable and not valid.
  3. Predictive. TRIR is far from predictive because it’s based on past fatalities, which cannot be used to predict future occurrences.
  4. Clear. It is clear because it’s easy to communicate and understand.
  5. Actionable. TRIR is not actionable because it doesn’t support strategic decision-making or proactive behaviors.
  6. Important. It isn’t important because it’s not aligned with emergent safety principles or the focus on Serious Injuries and Fatalities (SIF).

Now, evaluating HECA based on the same principles, here are the results:

  1. Objective. Guided by strict definitions, it is objective and based purely on empirical observation.
  2. Valid. HECA can be continuously monitored with sufficient volume to provide statistically sound observation, making it valid.
  3. Predictive. It still needs to be tested before labeling it predictive.
  4. Clear. Although HECA requires significant training, it is comprehensible and clear.
  5. Actionable. Because it monitors variables and supports proactive decisions, HECA is considered actionable.
  6. Important. HECA aligns with emergent safety principles with a laser focus on SIF, making it beyond important compared to TRIR.

The Steps to Measure HECA and High-Energy Hazards

HECA is a percentage of high-energy hazards with a correlation to direct control and is binary because all observations rest on a success or exposure metric structure.

The HECA formula is Total = Success + Exposure

Success is the number of high-energy hazards with direct control, while exposure is for high-energy hazards without direct control. The equation is simple, but it can be challenging to implement it repeatedly over a long period.

The first step in HECA is to establish what all of the high-energy hazards are in their workplace. A high-energy hazard is considered a hazard that produces more energy and causes more severe injuries compared to other types of hazards. A perfect example is that a heavier object that falls from a higher height will cause more damage than a heavy object falling at a shorter height. A hazard that produces 1,500 joules or more of physical energy is classified as a high-energy hazard as it may cause severe injury or death. HECA uses high energy as a massive component in its assessment because it focuses on SIF prevention.

Here are thirteen high-energy hazards that make up approximately 85% of all primary causes of SIF:

  1. Suspended load
  2. Mobile equipment/traffic with laborers on foot
  3. Heavy equipment that rotates
  4. Steam
  5. Explosions
  6. Electrical contact of 50 volts or more
  7. High doses of toxic radiation or chemicals
  8. Falls from elevations of four feet
  9. Motor vehicle incidents at 30 mph
  10. High temperatures of 150 degrees Fahrenheit
  11. Fires with sustained fuel sources
  12. Excavation or trench pressure of five feet
  13. Arc Flash

Step two in HECA measuring deals with whether direct control exists for the high-energy hazards listed on the worksite. Direct control, in HECA terms, meets the minimum standards of the Edison Electric Institute. A direct control must meet three criteria:

  • Target a high-energy hazard.
  • Effectively lessen the effects of a high-energy hazard when appropriately used.
  • Be considered adequate even if there’s an accidental human error during the work.

Once the direct control has been determined to meet the criteria, it is held up to HECA evaluation.

The Elements of a Hazardous Energy Control Program

A hazardous energy control program consists of these elements:

  1. Identify hazardous energy sources in workplaces
  2. Assess sources of hazardous energy
  3. Implement controls and procedures surrounding energy
  4. Provide training on high-energy hazards
  5. Inspect and audit the program and its controls

A New Age of Assessing Safety Performance

The new monitoring method of HECA is neither leading nor lagging and should be used to improve and learn. Future work is still required before HECA becomes fully operational. As we learn from the studies of HECA, industries will come to new heights by aligning safety metrics to safety principles.

Sources:

Erkal, E.D., & Hallowell, M.R., Moving Beyond Measuring and Monitoring With High-Energy Control High-Energy Hazards. Professional Safety (PSJ) Safety Metrics Peer-Reviewed
https://www.assp.org/docs/default-source/psj-articles/f1hallowell_0523.pdf?sfvrsn=45416846_0
Health and Safety Programs – Hazardous Energy Control Programs, Canadian Centre for Occupational Health and Safety https://www.ccohs.ca/oshanswers/hsprograms/hazardous_energy.html