As the environmental health and safety EHS Center of Excellence the Ca - PDF document

1 As the environmental, health and safety
As the environmental, health and safety (EHS) Center of Excellence, the Campbell Institute at the National Safety Council collaborates with world - class performers in EHS across industry sectors and regions of the world. A pplicants are to submit the requested information in sections 1 – 4; this information will be reviewed by the Campbell Institute Participation subcommittee. Each application is viewed in its entirety, and a specific area of weakness does not automatically preclude a successful applic ation. Certain information request ed is not typi cally made publicly available; i n these cases, applicants are asked to carefully consider and provide such information voluntarily to the extent possible without breech ing confidentiality agreements. All Campbell Institute membership applications are held confidential. Please complete the following sections. Questions may be directed to campbellinstitute@nsc.org . 1. Provide the requested information in the data report form . 2. Answer the open - ended questions with as much detail as possible. 3. Create a 20 minute PowerPoint that will be presented to the Participation subcommittee. 4. Use the contact form to record contact information. 2 Organizational Information Name of organization United States Steel Corporation Scope of application (e.g., s pecific c ountry/ r egion / g lobal o perations ) North America / Europe 2016 gross revenue 10.26 Billion Industry Representation – Please list the top industries your organization represents along with the appropriate North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code(s). NAICS c ode Estimated p ercent o

2 f total o rganization Iron and Stee
f total o rganization Iron and Steel Mills and Ferroalloy Manufacturing 33 11 100% 100% Employees 2017 2016 2015 2014 Total recordable case rate per 200,000 hours worked (100 full - time equivalent workers) 1.04 0.94 0.76 0.88 Cases with days away from work rate per 200,000 hours worked – DART / DAFW 0.67 / 0.17 0.61 / 0.15 0.52 / 0.13 0.57 / 0.11 BLS industry average based on the primary NAICS code cited - TRIR NA 2.6 3.5 2.7 BLS industry average based on the primary NAICS code cited – DART / DAFW NA 1.5 / 0.7 2.0 / 1.0 1.5 / 0.6 3 Contractors (i f applicable) 2017 2016 2015 2014 Total recordable case rate per 200,000 hours worked (100 full - time equivalent workers) 0.70 0.52 0.77 0.80 Cases with days away from work rate per 200,000 hours worked (100 full - time equivalent workers) 0.16 0.10 0.14 0.14 Fatalities (If applicable) 2017 2016 2015 2014 Fatalities (Employees and Contractors) 4 3 2 4 Fatalities (Employees Only) 1 2 1 3 Environmental – Provide at least two lagging metrics and one leading indicators. If no leading indicators are used, please explain in section 2. 2017 2016 2015 2014 Air Exceedances Section 2 Water Exceedances Reportable Releases Leading Indicator s – Provide at least two . If none are used, please explain in section 2. 2017 2016 2015 2014 Hazard Identification & Risk Assessment section 2 Employee Engagement Activities Fatality Prevention Auditing 4 1. K ey strengths of your EHS approach that you expect to

3 share and that may prove useful to o
share and that may prove useful to other m embers as they continue to drive improvement. U. S. Steel has been a forerunner in safety processes and strategy since we were formed in 1901, and we are continuing to add to that legacy today. The phrase “Safety First” – such a part of the American industrial lexicon for decades – was coined by our company in 1912. The Gary Principles, a set of business principles penned by our company’s first chairman, Judge Elbert H. Gary around 1909 – cited equitable and humane treatment of employees as a cornerstone for any industry’s potential success. These p rinciples are still in use by our company today and form the basis of our Code of Ethical Business Conduct. U. S. Steel was also a founding member of the National Safety Council in 1912 as well as former founding member of the Campbell Institute (left due to financial reasons) A “Safety First” mindset is as essential to our success as the tools and technologies we rely on to do business every day. In our view, there is no clearer sign of moral and operational fitness and no better strategy f or business success than an uncompromising commitment to safety. The logic behind our approach is simple: Placing human capital first leads to everything else – productivity, quality, reliability, financial performance and more – falling into place. We f irmly believe that h ow you manage the business overall starts with how you protect and treat your people because every injury has a face, every face has a name, and every name has family and friends. U. S. Steel stands as a leader in safety performance an d processes today because safety remains our company’s top priority and key core

4 value at all times. Over these years,
value at all times. Over these years, the domestic steel industry, and by extension our company has experienced some extremely challenging conditions due to the highly cyclic al nature of our business. Throughout these cycles, however, U. S. Steel remained firmly committed to our values, including safety, and worked hard to foster additional improvements in our company’s safety standards and processes while also working to kee p employees focused on safety despite the distractions inherent in and related to business and economic conditions. Over time, w e have transformed safety from a top - down directive to a value that fosters personal responsibility with a focus on creating a “Culture of Caring” – all in pursuit of our ultimate – and attainable – goal of zero incidents and injuries across our company. While we are pleased with our company’s progress in recent years and the results achieved, we recognize that there is still r oom for improvement. We remain focused on achieving our ultimate goal of zero incidents and injuries across our entire company because we owe it to ourselves, our co - workers and our families to settle for nothing less. 5 2. A reas of opportunity of your EH S approach that you expect to continue to drive improve ment in through the expertise of other m embers. Although we are very proud of our historical and current safety performance, we also recognize that in order to attain our ultimate goal of zero injurie s , we must never stop learning or finding ways to produce steel safely. There are several areas where we are extremely anxious to leverage the Campbell Institute member’s experiences is in building the most effective and efficient Safet

5 y Management System that is fully integ
y Management System that is fully integrated into the overall business. While we have made great strides in this area, we recognize that there is a significant way to go before we can say we have fully engaged workforce working on common goals that drive value in safety as we ll as the business. We have also recently established a Safety & Industrial Hygiene Center of Excellence (COE). The COE is comprised of our most senior Safety and Industrial Hygiene professionals with a mission to shift the organizations focus from heavi ly reactive to prominently proactive. This recent change has introduced a matrix based organization model that is new to U. S. Steel’s overall safety process. While we believe that there is extreme value in this model, we are looking for benchmarking oppor tunities that with companies that have successfully demonstrated ability to deliver value through this type of model. As noted several times, employee engagement is critical to our success. While there are approximately 30,000 employees within the U. S. Steel enterprise, we recognize that we have much work to do to fully engage the entire workforce and utilize their knowledge as well as their risk identification and elimination capabilities to prevent every injur y and incident. We have been working on thi s for many years and a great number of our Safety Performance Indicators and initiatives are geared towards engaging the workforce. However, with such a critical piece of our overall safety philosophy, we believe that the combined kno wledge and proven capa bilities within the Campbell Institute members will assist in achieving this goal. 3. Y our specific one and three - year goals (metric and otherwise) relative to improvemen

6 t in EHS. S hort term goals (1 year)
t in EHS. S hort term goals (1 year):  F ully resource our Safety & IH organization to fully support a successful development and rollout of our Safety Management System and fully deploy our Safety & Industrial Hygiene Center of Excellence.  Continue to deliver value added services to the operations through our Safety Management System, effe ctive communications, timely elimination or reduction of hazards, tracking and trending of safety data and evaluating effectiveness of our deployed tools.  Continue to identify and benchmark companies with proven track record s of positive safety culture, robust management systems, and world class performance. L ong term (3 - 5 years): 6  Embed a sustainable zero injury / zero hard culture with the organization focusing on our Culture of Caring initiative.  Improve workplace safety a nd health for all employees, as evidenced by the elimination of hazards and exposures resulting in a reduction of injuries.  Develop a highly skilled and technology driven workforce that is able to thoroughly assess and eliminate / reduce hazards and risks within the workplace. 4. If there were fatalities in the past four years, describe the circumstances surrounding the event(s). Although we are committed to a robust safety process at U. S. Steel and have made significant and steady progress over the years , we have unfortunately experienced serious incidents, including ones involving fatalities. These tragic events strike at the very heart of our company, our employees and their loved ones. These incidents remind us that our work related to the safety of ev eryone entering our facilities is never complete and our commi

7 tment to our ultimate goal of zero inju
tment to our ultimate goal of zero injuries must remain firm. As you have seen in section 1 above, U. S. Steel has experienced 13 fatalities since the beginning of 2014, 7 of which involved con tractors working in our facilities. While each of these tragic events have root causes specific to the circumstances, every one of them was preventable in that there was either an existing policy or standard that addressed the issue or somebody could have stopped the work when a change condition of hazard presented itself. Our crusade to prevent fatalities starts with the engagement of each and every person that walks into our operations. We must be vigilant of our own personal safety as well as those worki ng around us, every moment of every day. In 2015, we established and rolled out a global audit process specifically dedicated to fatality prevention. This process, called Fatality Prevention Audits, involves a joint effort by the company and United Steelw orkers with the goal of engaging as many individual employees as possible. In 2017 and 2018, the Fatality Prevention Audit was formally established as a mandatory Safety Performance Indicator across the company. The FPA is designed to identify, prevent an d/or control fatality hazards before they result in a fatality. The FPA process field - tests the effectiveness of Safety / IH programs that address fatality hazards and focusses primarily on issues that are visible, readily determined, and “Clear and Present Danger”. Its purpose is to identi fy problems that need to be addressed at the S&IH program and/or Safety & IH Management System (SMS) level. The focus of this audit is program failure (how and why) and ultimately SMS failure, not people failure. Entities aud

8 ited are required to provide causal an
ited are required to provide causal analysis of the findings and implement appropriate programmatic and SMS solutions. Currently there are 11 assessment modules that cover or Life - Threatening Programs which include Energy Control, Fall Prevention, Gas Hazards, In Plant Railroad Operat ions, Mobile Equipment, Molten Metal (Iron, Steel, Coating), EOT Operations & Maintenance, and Confined Space Entry. Attached at the end of the PowerPoint presentation provided for review, we have attached a summary of each fatality referenced above. 7 5. If you were unable to provide information about environmental indicators in section 1, please explain. Environmental stewardship is a core value of our company. As a responsible corporate citizen, we strive to reduce the environmental impact of our product s throughout their value chain, from raw material extraction through scrap recycling. At our plant locations, we have and continue to use lagging environmental performance indicators including but not limited to air and water exceedances and reportable releases. Recognizing the importance of tracking these indicators and having Executive s upport for projects resulting in continuous improvement, in 2018, we began reporting these plant level environmental performance indicators to Executive Leadership on a monthly basis. In 2019, corporate level lagging indicator metrics will be established. We are now in the process of evaluating various leading environmental indicators to determine which are the most appropriate for our company and will result in continuous improvement to the environment. 6. If you were unable to provide information about le ading indicators in section 1, please explain. While U. S. Steel

9 has long used lagging safety performance
has long used lagging safety performance indicators, we began to utilize leading indicators , known as Safety Performance Indicators (SPIs), in 2008 to ensure we proactively engage our workforce in the safety process with a goal of preventing injuries and incidents before they happen. After years of various levels of weighting at both enterprise and personal goal plan level , USS transitioned t o 100% Leading indicators in 2017. During the early implementation and development of SPIs, the organization was very prescriptive of which SPI would be used as well as how they would be tracked and measured. One of the many learnings from these early ef forts was that each facility had varying levels of process capabilities, incident trends and local culture. While prescriptive, corporate facing SPIs were yielding successful completion rates, our outcomes (lagging indicators) were not been impacted nor wa s the workforce becoming engaged at the levels we expected. It was recognized that the SPIs must be developed and implemented at the plant level to ensure effective buy in and impact on local issues and culture. In 2016, along with corporate oversight, eac h operating facility now has responsibility to establish, implement, continuously evaluate effectiveness and modify as necessary SPI plans. Common SPIs include Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment, Hazard Elimination, Employee Engagement Activities ( Safety Conversations, Employee Safety Meeting Attendance, Employee Safety Meeting Effectiveness Audits), and Fatality Prevention Auditing. While we feel this method is most effective means to ensure SPIs positively impact our injuries and safety culture , it does not give us clean corporate level data that cou

10 ld be used to complete the question in
ld be used to complete the question in section 1. However, each Commercial Entity (Business Unit) leader is required to routinely track SPI performance and effectiveness. Attached as an appendix is a sample of the 8 “Bowling Chart” methodology we employ to track SPI performance at each facility . These check points occur every 1 to 2 weeks per Commercial Entity. Prepare a PowerPoint that will be present ed to the Participation subcommittee. Requirements include that a minimum of o ne slide per each of the following six heading topic is addressed. P resentation s are limited to 20 minutes ; t herefore, applicants are not expected to address every bullet point in this presentation and should select their preferred attributes to highlight. Time will be scheduled for the applicant to present this information to the Participation sub committee via W ebEx, including questions and answers as appropriate. 1. Leadership commitment to world - class EHS Campbell Institute members drive EHS excellence at all levels of their organizations, including the C - suite. Prospective applicants will have:  C - suite commitme nt to achieve and sustain world - class EHS excellence  An executive - level EHS leader with extensive experience and knowledge to champion this effort  Visible methods of demonstrating the value of EHS performance to the entire organization  Strong, forward - thin king strategies and goals to continue improvement and sustain EHS excellence  Motivation to benchmark, network and share best practices  Robust line management responsibility and accountability for EHS 2. Integration of EHS and business management Campbell

11 Ins titute members integrate EHS and bu
Ins titute members integrate EHS and business processes in a seamless fashion. Prospective applicants will have: 9  C - suite level commitment to an organizational structure promoting the integration of EHS with business operations  A process for making EHS decision s on par with business decisions  A process that considers EHS risk in an integrated fashion with business decisions  EHS accountability goals at the executive and management level  An integrated organization structure for EHS 3. Strong performing EHS metrics Campbell Institute members outperform the majority of their peers in traditional safety metrics and use leading indicators to drive performance. Prospective applicants will demonstrate:  Performance in one or more traditional safety metrics (OSHA Recordable Incident Rate/DART rate or similar international metrics) substantially better than industry average for at least four consecutive years  A minimal amount of regulatory body violations, as well as a history free of willful violations  A number of leading in dicators used as key performance indicators (KPIs) to measure EHS and business quality and performance  Leading indicators that encompass employee engagement measures, process management measures and/or system - based measures  Active benchmarking efforts with peer organizations 4. Willingness to share successes and lessons learned Campbell Institute members share best practices, successes and lessons learned with one another and the world at large. Prospective applicants will have:  Demonstrated formal and inform al recognition of EHS best practices, programs and performance both internally and externally  A

12 willingness to share organizational bes
willingness to share organizational best practices, policies and procedures through the Campbell Institute Library and with fellow members  A willingness to acti vely participate in Campbell Institute research projects to advance the state of the science of EHS  A willingness to actively participate in Campbell Institute subcommittees and/or workgroups 5. Strong environmental performance and understanding of sustainab ility In addition to safety and health, Campbell Institute members excel in environmental performance; they embrace sustainability as a competitive advantage. Prospective applicants will have:  Leading environmental performance (measured by indicators including the management and reduction of toxins, emissions, energy, waste and water use) and the ability to convey the business benefits for these actions 10  A minimal amount of regulatory body violations, as well as a recent history free of major violations  An understanding of sustainability that includes a balanced, holistic approach to the integration of environmental, health and safety elements  A transparent process for internal and external stakeholders to convey the benefits of the sustainability effort s that are passed on to them  Programs to improve the health and wellness of employees as well as the people and communities in which they operate 6. Robust continuous improvement process Campbell Institute members understand that EHS excellence is a journey rather than a destination and embrace robust continuous improvement in EHS. Prospective applicants will have:  A process for continuous improvement integrated into business decision - making  An understanding of how to use leadi

13 ng indicators to generate the ch anges n
ng indicators to generate the ch anges necessary for continuous improvement  An effective process in which lessons learned from EHS violations, incidents, injuries or fatalities are used to correct and prevent future events from occurring  Continuous improvement in key EHS indicators/KPIs o ver a three - year period 11 Headquarter Address: 600 Grant Street Street Address Pittsburgh PA 15219 City State/Providence Zip Code Primary Contact (general communication): Bob Rudge First Name Last Name General Manager – Global Safety, Security & Fire Protection Title 412 - 433 - 2955 RCRudge@uss.com Phone Number Email Address 12 Exec utive - Level Contact : David Burritt First Name Last Name President & Chief Executive Officer Title 412 - 433 - 1130 DBBurritt@uss.com Phone Number Email Address Financial Contact (accounting communication): Colleen Darragh First Name Last Name Vice President & Controller Title 412 - 433 - 5394 DMDarragh@uss.com Phone Number Email Address Marketing Contact (branding and social media contact): Meghan Cox First Name Last Name Supervisor, External Communications - Public Affairs Title 412 - 433 - 6777 MMCox@uss.com Phone Number Email Address