Div. of WSA Inc., 11772 Sorrento Valley Road
San Diego, California 92121 (714) 755-9359
Report No. 411F
Evaluation of an Injury Reporting
and information System (IRIS)
for the Solid Waste Management Industry
Final Report
Performed for
Office of Solid Waste Management Programs
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Under Contract No. 68-03 0231
April 1978
-------
DJv. of WSA Inc., 11772 Sorrento Valley Road
San Diego, California 92121 (714) 755-9359
Report No. 411F
Evaluation of an Injury Reporting
and Information System (IRIS)
for the Solid Waste Management Industry
Final Report
Performed for
Office of Solid Waste Management Programs
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Under Contract No. 68-03-0231
April 1978
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY vi
I. INTRODUCTION 1-1
1.1 Background 1-2
1.2 Pilot Study 1-2
1.3 Field Test 1-6
1.4 Need for Continuation of Injury
Reporting and Information System 1-9
II. DEVELOPMENT OF IRIS 2-1
2.1 Selection of IRIS Users 2-1
2.2 Data Collection 2-9
2.2.1 Start-Up Data Collection 2-10
2.2.2 Injury and Time Lost and Direct
Cost Data Collection 2-15
2.2.3 Employee Data Collection 2-21
2.2.4 Equipment Data Collection 2-23
2.3 Developing Computer Analyses 2-23
2.3.1 Insuring Consistency in Data .... 2-24
2.3.2 Preparing for Increased Data
Base 2-25
2.3.3 Maximizing Efficiency 2-26
2.4.3 Determining Programming Needs . . . . 2-28
2.4 Field Test Data 2-34
III. CONCLUSION 3-1
3.1 Future Uses of IRIS Data 3-4
3.1.1 Unperformed Data Analyses Avail-
able with present Data Base 3-5
3.1.2 Availability of IRIS Reports to
the Solid Waste Industry and
Other Interested Persons 3-8
3.2 Limitations of IRIS Data 3-9
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued^
Page
3.2.1 Evaluating Two Personal Pro-
tective Equipment'in Depth . . . . • 3-10
3.2.2 Collecting "Fleet Accidents" . . . • 3-11
3.2.3 Analyzing Injury Rates by
Activity - 3-12
3.2.4 Analyzing Injury Rates by the
Tons Collected Per Man 3-13
3.2.5 Analyzing Injury Rates by the
Accident Site 3-14
3.3 Improving IRIS Data and Analyses ...... 3-14
3.3.1 Updating Equipment Data 3-15
3.3.2 Further Developing the "Master"
Program 3-16
3.4 Obtaining Additional Data on the Solid
Waste Industry Independent of IRIS Data . . 3-17
3.4.1 Performing Study of Solid Waste
Fatalities with State Worker's
Compensation Data 3-17
3.4.2 Obtaining "Success Stories" From
the Solid Waste Industry 3-19
3.5 Visits to the Continuing IRIS Users .... 3-20
BIBLIOGRAPHY
11
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE 1
FIGURE 2
FIGURE 3
FIGURE 4
FIGURE. 5
FIGURE 6
FIGURE 7
FIGURE 8
FIGURE 9
Page
Distribution of IRIS Users by
Employment Size 2-5
Geographical Distribution of IRIS
Users
2-5
Map of IRIS Users 2-6
Distribution of IRIS Users by Type
of Solid Waste Organization 2-7
Distribution of Divisions of IRIS
Users
2-7
Distribution of IRIS Users by Point
of Collection 2-8
Distribution of IRIS Users by Crew
Size
2-8
Distribution of Type of Shift of
IRIS Users 2-9
Eight Factor "Profile" 2-31
111
-------
LIST OF EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT 1
EXHIBIT 2
EXHIBIT 3
EXHIBIT 4
EXHIBIT 5
EXHIBIT 6
EXHIBIT 7
EXHIBIT 8
EXHIBIT 9
EXHIBIT 10
EXHIBIT 11
EXHIBIT 12
EXHIBIT 13
EXHIBIT 14
EXHIBIT 15
EXHIBIT 16
EXHIBIT 17
EXHIBIT 18
Page
Employee Information Form E-l
Instructions for Employee Information
Form E-2
Equipment/Vehicle Information Form
E-8
Instructions for Equipment/Vehicle
Information Form E-9
Background Information Form ........ E-16
Workmen's Compensation and Leave
Policy Form E-32
Job Title by Organizational Unit
Matrix
User Code and Standard Job Class Code
Match List
E-41
E-42
List of Standard Job Classification
Codes E-43
Employee Data Update List E-46
Job Class Basing Data E-47
Lists of Equipment Type, Make, Types
of Use and Maintenance Schedule Codes . . . E-48
Crew Type Basing Data E-53
Protective Clothing Basing Data E-55
Instructions for Phoning-in Injuries
to IRIS E-56
List of Types of Information to
Report E-57
Field Test Injury Report Form E-59
Field Test Costs and Lost Time Data .... E-67
IV
-------
LIST OF EXHIBITS (Continued)
EXHIBIT 19
EXHIBIT 20
EXHIBIT 21
EXHIBIT 22
EXHIBIT 23
Page
Injury Log E-70
Workdays Lost and Direct Costs
Data Sheet E-71
Injury Coding System E-73
Injury Coding Form E-134
IRIS Users Wage Continuation Benefits
for On-the-Job Injuries ..... E-135
EXHIBIT 24
IRIS Equipment Data Update List E-139
-------
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This Final Report on Contract No. 68-03-0231 describes
the successful operation of IRIS, the Injury Reporting and In-
formation System for the solid waste management industry- IRIS
is a continuation of an expanded full scale operation of the
injury reporting system tested during the Field Test of this
contract.
The need for comparable data in this high risk indus-
try was demonstrated in the Pilot Study which concluded that no
data was available which could be used to set priorities for
injury reduction measures or to monitor their success. A con-
cept was developed for a study in which data would be collected
on injuries as they happen and employees during their employment.
Its feasibility was proven in the Field Test of the injury re-
porting system with 15 participants.
IRIS was then put into full scale operation. Its goal
was to get 100 users on-line reporting injuries by October 1976
and to have them on-line for a full year. Since December 1975
IRIS users have been reporting injuries (and associated time
lost and direct costs, employee and equipment data) as the number
of users increased from month-to-month until the goal of 100
users was met. During the period of December 1975 to September
1977 the data base compiled by IRIS totaled 10,000 solid waste
collection and disposal injuries, 60 thousand days lost and
VI
-------
$3.5 million in direct costs. The exposure hours, or actual
hours worked, represented 40 million man-hours of exposure and
1,515 user months of reporting.
The forms and procedures for IRIS were developed
such that the IRIS users could complete the start-up and up-
dating forms and could report data on injuries without on-site
training by contractor staff. The forms and procedures used
in IRIS are outlined in Section 2.2 of the Final Report.
A novel method of reporting injuries was used by
IRIS. The IRIS users phoned-in their injuries to a central
office. This method was highly successful and crucial in the
immediate editing of the data as it comes in and in maintaining
day-to-day contact with the users.
IRIS was developed to be a self-supporting system
(beyond EPA support) that provided a needed safety service to
its users. The IRIS users receive routine feedback in the form
of individualized Quarterly Safety Management Reports (QSMR's).
They provide each user with an analysis of their quarterly in-
jury experience, comparing it with previous quarters and with
other users. Their injury experience is also discussed in de-
tail, highlighting their high and low injury areas, monitoring
their progress and suggesting ways to help reduce their high
injury areas. Familiarity with the operations and safey im-
provements in use at over 100 solid waste organizations is
partly used in suggesting countermeasures that have proven to
be effective in accident reduction. Once an accident reduction
VI1
-------
measure has been identified by IRIS, the safety professional
is given aid to justify it to management in terms of accident
reduction potential and cost effectiveness of implementation.
Upon implementation, its actual accident reduction effectiveness
can be monitored from quarter to quarter, and alterations to
the countermeasure effected if necessary.
With a large data base, IRIS was able to make stat-
istically valid comparisons of the different collection methods
as well as determine overall accident trends for the solid waste
industry. In addition to the QSMR's, IRIS presents industry
news and findings in the form of four separate publications:
• Quarterly Accident Trends reports. A special
safety topic is addressed each issue (e.g.,
container handling accidents, slips and falls,
equipment related accidents, caught in packer
accidents, etc.), and the data from all IRIS
users are analyzed and discussed. Prevention
methods are suggested for specific injury prob-
lems. One section of the Accident Trends report
also deals with the industry trends for the
quarter, as shown by IRIS data. However, with
the introduction of the IRIS News and IRIS News-
flash, the Accident Trends discussion topics
will be incorporated into these publications.
• Monthly IRIS News. These articles provide users
with news of interest to the industry (e.g.,
proposed California refuse collection standards,
what is the ANSI Z245.1-1975 standard on refuse
collection equipment, incentive programs in use,
a survey of the personal protective equipment
IRIS users provide their employees, etc., and
a calendar of solid waste events). In addition,
the IRIS News is used to discuss industry safety
findings in specific areas, developed from analy-
zing the IRIS data (e.g., injury rates by crew
type, size and type of shift, analyses of injury
reduction potential of several types of personal
protective equipment, caught in packer accidents,
VI11
-------
etc.). It was first introduced April 1977 to
present the findings to the IRIS users in a
more timely manner and to allow more issues to
present the findings.
• IRIS Newsflashes (at least four a year). They
were developed to immediately notify users of
serious accidents (e.g., an employee opening
the tailgate of a container delivery truck at
the landfill was struck by the tailgate and
became a quadraplegic) in order to forewarn them.
Suggested preventative measures are also given.
In addition, if an alarming accident trend is
noted in the incoming injuries (e.g., users that
allow employees to pick up from both sides of
the street at a time have a higher incidence of
employees being struck by private vehicles),
users are notified to take steps to prevent it
at their organization. It was first introduced
January 1977-to notify users of these severe
accidents and alarming accident trends as soon
as possible.
• Five Special Reports. In addition to the eight
Accident Trends reports published within the con-
tract period, five Special Reports on the effects
of detailed operational differences (e.g., in
equipment type, in crew type, in work force, in
wage continuation policies, and in personal pro-
tective equipment worn by the employees) on in-
jury rates were written to be distributed by EPA.
The findings on the solid waste industry's injury prob-
lems and their countermeasures are also supplied to national
groups responsible for setting standards for equipment and work
practices in the solid waste management industry and to EPA, to
enable the agency to set priorities for and monitor programs of
injury control as related to productivity and work practices.
The demand for the findings on this industry was amply illustrated
by the continual data requests from solid waste safety profes-
sionals and other interested groups.
IX
-------
The safety issues for the solid waste management
industry have not been fully resolved either because of time
limitations or data limitations and are described in Section III
of this Report.
IRIS has already proven its effectiveness and desir-
ability in that it is continuing on a reduced level for an addi-
tional year of injury reporting (October 1977 to September 1978)
with the IRIS users paying for the bulk of the fee.* The ten
continuing IRIS users represent 20% of the man-hours from the
period of full EPA funding, and it is anticipated that an addi-
tional 2,000 injuries will be collected during this reporting
period. With an additional year of IRIS publications, twelve
additional issues of the IRIS News will allow the examination
of twelve safety issues in the solid waste industry.
The recruiting of potential IRIS users continues.
SAFETY SCIENCES personnel give speeches at national safety con-
ferences for the solid waste industry concerning IRIS, and
articles on IRIS are published in journals for the industry.
Inquiries about IRIS are generated by the articles and are fol-
lowed up by correspondence and contact by phone and in person.
*EPA awarded SAFETY SCIENCES partial funding for IRIS under
Contract No. 68-01-4747 on'January 1978.
x
-------
I. INTRODUCTION
This is the Final Report on the continuation of
Contract No. 68-03-0231, "Full Scale Operation and Use of an
Injury Reporting and Analysis System for the Solid Waste Man-
agement Industry". Work on the contract started in mid-1975
and was performed by the SAFETY SCIENCES Division of WSA Inc.
Project Officers for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
were Mr. Sidney Wener and Ms. Martha Madison.
This report covers in Section I a brief discussion
of the previous work by SAFETY SCIENCES leading to the Full
Scale Operation and Use phase of the contract renamed IRIS,
the Injury Reporting and Information System for the solid waste
management industry- Section II reviews the procedures used
in IRIS, including problems encountered and modifications effec-
ted, and Section III reviews the results of IRIS and concludes
that IRIS is a cost-effective service in demand by the solid
waste management industry.
Two other volumes accompany this Final Report. One,
the Publications, contains all of the quarterly Accident Trends
reports, a sample Quarterly Safety Management Report, the
monthly IRIS News, the IRIS Newsflash, and the Special Reports.
The second, the Data Analyses, presents the findings of the
entire reporting period for injury rates and tabulations by
various operational, employee, and accident characteristics.
1-1
-------
1.1 BACKGROUND
There is abundant evidence that both the frequency
and severity of injuries are very high in the solid waste man-
agement industry. The Bureau of Labor Statistics publishes
annual tabulations of Injury Rates by Industry. For 1970, the
last year in which municipal workers were included in this
tabulation, the category "local government, refuse collection
and disposal" had a higher injury frequency rate than any
other industry shown. The most recent National Safety Council
data, for 1975, show municipal refuse collection workers to
have an injury frequency approximately eight times that of the
national average for all industry. The economic cost of in-
juries is also large, with typical worker's compensation insur-
ance rates being 10-20% of payroll for refuse collectors. In
California, for example, the premium rate is $17-20/$100.00 of
wages for refuse collection according to the Manual for Rules,
Classification & Rates for Workmen's Compensation Insurance.
This placed refuse collection in the high-medium range of occu-
pations. Roofing, for example, has one of the highest rates at
$21.23/$100.00, while office workers have the lowest rate of
$.41/$100.00.
1.2 PILOT STUDY
Recognizing the need for information on the injury
problem that could be used as a basis for action, a contract
1-2
-------
(CPE-70-114) was funded to perform "A Pilot Study in the Field
of Occupational Health in the Solid Waste Management Industry"
(referred to hereafter as the Pilot Study).
The Pilot Study was performed during the period June
1970 through June 1972. A final report* was submitted in 1973.
The objective of the Pilot Study was to examine the feasibility
of two approaches to an eventual larger scale study: (a) a
retrospective approach in which existing records held by solid
waste agencies on injuries that had occurred, and personnel
that had been employed/ in previous years would be used to give
useful data on injuries; and (b) a prospective approach, in
which a data collection system would be devised, and information
on injuries would be collected during their employment. In
order to cover a range of agency characteristics, the Pilot
Study was conducted in six cities: Washington, B.C.; San Diego,
California; Des Moines, Iowa; Birmingham, Alabama; Brookline,
Massachusetts; and Inglewood, California. In addition to the
six main municipal solid waste agencies studied, two private
agencies were studied in detail and six others in less detail.
An examination of 3,500 injury records and 3,000 per-
sonnel files in the six cities was performed, and the conclu-
sions reached were that:
*A Pilot Study in the Field of Occupational Health in the Solid
Waste Management Industry. Final Report on Contract CPE-70-114,
ENVIRO-MED, Inc., succeeded by SAFETY SCIENCES Division of WSA
Inc., San Diego, California.
1-3
-------
There was no standard injury recording format
consistent with the needs of accident preven-
tion. The rationale and design of the injury
reporting system were aimed at meeting legal
and fiscal requirements, especially those for
the administration of Worker's Compensation
benefits, rather than to elicit information on
the causes of injuries. Little attention was
given in these records to the cause of the
injury, because "fault" was not an issue in
determining eligibility for Worker's Compensa-
tion. For similar reasons, there was no incen-
tive for monitoring the reliability of records
except to insure that the employee and the
benefits were properly identified.
Because the entire structure of the injury re-
cording system was designed for purposes in-
consistent for use in determining the causes
of injuries, the available records could not
be easily or reliably adapted for this use.
Primary data on such essential injury factors as
lost time, injury costs, and the exact nature of
the injury were often never recorded or were
recorded and stored in a multitude of offices
and in such a piece-meal fashion as to make the
data virtually unretrievable, even to those
immediately involved.
There was no means to compare the injury exper-
ience from agency to agency. The wide variety
in what constituted an injury, in the time loss
allowed, in the injury wage continuation policies,
in the random choices made of which injuries and
what data to record, and in other factors made
comparisons of questionable value.
The inadequate recording of injury data, the
isolation of management from the records that
were available, the lack of standardization re-
quired to make valid multi-city comparisons, and
the lack of analyses of available records (espec-
ially those on cost data), meant that all but a
few in solid waste management were unaware of the
magnitude of their injury problem. It was common
for management to hold the unsubstantiated view
that their injury rate was not high, was compar-
able with other cities, and was essentially un-
avoidable.
1-4
-------
It should be noted that these conclusions were reach-
ed in 1972 and based upon a review of records from 1971 and
previous years, at which time OSHA regulations on recording
injuries were not in effect. However, the conclusions are
still, in general, valid, because most establishments use a
surrogate, or Worker's Compensation form, in place of the OSHA
101 (Supplementary Record of Occupational Injuries and Illnesses),
and the OSHA 101 itself is generally not completed in a way that
can be compared from one establishment to another. One very
useful feature of the OSHA regulations, however, is the OSHA
100 Log of Occupational Injuries and Illnesses that does now
provide a simple way of determining the amount of time lost for
each injury, for those establishments that are subject to OSHA
regulations.
The injury records were also used to identify a list
of factors related to injuries that could be used as the basis
for an injury reporting and analysis system. The selection of
factors was based upon the extent to which collecting informa-
tion about the factor was expected to throw light on the causa-
tion of injury or on preventive measures, the availability of
data on that factor, and the precision with which information
on the factor could be recorded. After a process of trial and
error, approximately 50 factors concerning each injury, and
approximately 40 factors for each employee were selected.
The Pilot Study concluded that, while a retrospec-
tive study using existing records would not be feasible, a
1-5
-------
prospective system, in which solid waste agencies record and
report data on injuries as they happen, would be feasible.
1.3 FIELD TEST
The Field Test had as its purpose to further define
the concept of a study in which data would be collected on in-
juries as they happen and on employees during their employment
and to translate the concept into a workable injury reporting
and analysis system. The goals of the system were defined as
supplying data (a) to line managements of solid waste agencies
that would enable them to improve their safety awareness by
providing valid comparisons with the performance of other agen-
cies, and to identify, set priorities for, and evaluate injury
reduction programs; (b) to national groups responsible for set-
ting standards for equipment and work practices in the solid
waste management industry; and (c) to EPA, to enable the agency
to set priorities for and monitor programs of injury control as
related to productivity and work practices. These goals requir-
ed the development of a system in which solid waste management
agencies, referred to as participants, feed information into a
central office which analyzed the information and sent reports
back to the participants. The need for a common system, using
a central office, arose from the need to accumulate a sufficient
volume of data for statistically valid conclusions to be drawn,
and from the need to obtain data that was comparable from one
1-6
-------
solid waste agency to another, using consistent definitions
and methods.
The system developed had several novel features:
• the injuries were analyzed in terms of factors
specifically applicable to the solid waste
management industry
• the factors selected allowed the identification
of the relative hazards of various aspects of
the work environment
• in order to compare various aspects of the work
environment, exposure data (also referred to as
basing data) were collected. These data included
the man-hours at risk for various employee fac-
tors. For example, it is not enough to know
what fraction of the injuries happened to col-
lectors under age 20. It was also necessary to
know how many man-hours were spent by collectors
under age 20. The injury risk (injury rate per
man-hour) could then be computed and used, for
example, to compare the injury experience of
different solid waste agencies for collectors in
this same age group.
In order to collect this data, the system provided for
acquiring data in three time frames. The first was at the time
that a participant joined the system, when data was collected
on all existing employees, all equipment, and certain key work
practices (e.g., crew size, collection methods). The second
was at a periodic updating of this data (monthly for employee
information). The third was on each injury, as it occurred.
Only the details of the injury needed to be collected, since
data on the injured employee's age, experience, job class, etc.
was already on file.
The Field Test of this system involved 15 participants.
Initially, much of the data needed for start-up was collected
1-7
-------
through visits to participants by contractor staff. Visits
were also paid to train participant staff in methods required
for data collection and reporting. As the Field Test contin-
ued, forms and procedures were developed by which participants
could collect start-up data without on-site visits by contractor
personnel/ and could report data on injuries without on-site
training by contractor staff.
The forms and procedures developed in the Field Test
were designed to meet the requirements of an Injury Reporting
and Information System for the solid waste management industry
(IRIS).
A variation in which injury information was telephoned
to the central office, rather than sent on an Injury Report Form,
was developed and tested with one participant. This variation
proved to be highly successful, and was used in IRIS.
During the Field Test it was found that there was
ample evidence of high demand for the type of information that
could be provided by IRIS, since many types of organizations
requested information from the contractor.
Successful operation of the system to provide analyzed
data was demonstrated. Because the Field Test was primarily
directed towards examining feasibility, it was not possible to
generate a large amount of analyzed data that was immediately
applicable. However, some significant findings were made.
The injury reporting period covered August 1973 through June
1975 and collected over 2,000 injuries.
1-8
-------
The conclusion reached as a result of the Field Test
was that an injury reporting and analysis system was feasible
and that there was a need for the information that would be
generated.
1.4 NEED FOR CONTINUATION OF INJURY REPORTING AND INFOR-
MATION SYSTEM
Once the feasibility of a nation-wide, centralized
reporting system was established and that consistent and accu-
rate injury, employee, equipment, and basing data were obtain-
able, the need for an expanded data base was self-evident. A
large number of injuries and a variety of collection systems
was necessary in order to perform in-depth analyses of the in-
jury problems in the solid waste management industry that would
be statistically valid.
With the expanding data base, IRIS could serve:
• To provide a service to its "users" in identify-
ing their problem areas, comparing them with
other users, and making recommendations for
injury reduction measures. This would be effec-
ted in the form of Quarterly Safety Management
Reports (QSMR's).
• To provide the industry with answers to safety
questions that are not possible without a large
data base (e.g., the effect on injury rates for
various crew sizes, types of shift, types of
equipment, types of collection, etc.). This
would be effected in the form of quarterly Acci-
dent Trends reports and 5 Special Reports.
• To provide data to the Office of Solid Waste
Management Programs to use in setting priorities
for action, monitoring and evaluating progress
in injury control, and relating recommendations
on injury control to productivity and work
practices.
1-9
-------
• To provide data to individuals, solid waste
organizations, state agencies, and national
groups concerned with safety research and
standards development for the solid waste
industry.
IRIS would also be a cost effective service to its
users such that it will be self-supporting and in demand by
the solid waste management industry at the end of EPA funding
(September 1977) .
1-10
-------
II. DEVELOPMENT OF IRIS
This section of the report describes the processes
used in IRIS to refine and formalize the procedures and con-
cepts developed during the Field Test for starting up, obtain-
ing and analyzing the data (includes injury, time lost and
direct cost, employee, equipment, exposure hours and background
data).
2.1 Selection of IRIS Users
A maximum of 100 users was decided to be optimum use
of IRIS, in representing the various solid waste agency types
and functions, in obtaining a large data base, in being small
enough for SAFETY SCIENCES to provide individualized attention,
and in keeping the operating costs feasible for EPA.
IRIS was fully operational, after improvements to
the Field Test collection and analyses methods, in December
1975 at which time there were 11 users reporting injuries. An
interim period of nearly a year was allowed to recruit the 100
users. To solicit and bring on line the 100 users by October,
1976 (in order to have a 12 month, maximum user input), EPA's
Project Officers as well as SAFETY SCIENCES personnel contacted
individual solid waste.agencies, made presentations on IRIS at
regional and national solid waste conferences, and published
2-1
-------
articles on the availability and usefulness of IRIS in solid
waste magazines. A listing of the speeches and articles on
IRIS appear in the Bibliography following Section III of this
report.
The goal of obtaining 100 users who intended to come
"on-line" was met by the beginning of October, when the number
of IRIS users nearly doubled from the previous quarter. Prior
to October, the number of IRIS users was also increasing from
month to month. However, by the end of 1976, only 89 users
actually were on line, and they represented nearly 20,000 em-
ployees. For a number of users, the reason they did not follow
through on their intention to begin reporting injuries to IRIS
was that they had personnel changes and were too disorganized
to retrain the new personnel on the IRIS reporting procedures.
(The users that were on line included six of the Field Test
participants who rejoined IRIS once funding resumed.)
Total IRIS participation spanned 1,515 user months,
including the Field Test, and 11,000 injuries were gathered.
The total man-hours of exposure exceeded 40 million for just
the continuation phase of IRIS from December 1975 through
September 1977. In addition, the time lost and direct costs of
the injury data base collected by IRIS exceeded 60 thousand
days lost and $3.5 million. The participation periods of the
IRIS users are given in the Bibliography at the end of Sec-
tion III.
2-2
-------
The IRIS users were fairly well distributed as to
size of organization, geographic location, type of collection
system, etc. FIGURES 1-8 give the summaries of the distribu-
tion of the IRIS users by the various operational factors for
the number of users in each category and their percentage of
man-hours of exposure, which account for how long they were
on-line as well as how many employees they had. There was no
attempt to "exclude" solid waste organizations whose operational
factors were well represented by other users already on-line.
This would have been awkward to effect, and besides, recruiting
the users proved to be more difficult than anticipated.
Employment size (FIGURE 1). The best represented
size group was the "201-500 employees" group, which had 20
users and included 42% of the total man-hours of exposure (from
December 1975 to September 1977). The other size groups were
also well represented for either number of establishments or
percentage of man-hours of exposure.
Geographical distribution (FIGURE 2). The South had
twice as many man-hours as other locations (43%) , although the
Midwest contained the most IRIS users (25). FIGURE 3 gives a
dot gram of the geographical locations of the IRIS users. Four
geographical sectors were distinguished: the West, Midwest,
South and Northeast.
Type (FIGURE. 4). The private sector only contributed
2% of the total man-hours, even though 8 of the IRIS users were
2-3
-------
private solid waste organizations. The private organizations
tended to be small commercial operations.
Division (FIGURE 5). All functions of solid waste
collection and disposal were included in IRIS, including the
divisions of administration, street cleaning, and equipment
maintenance. However, the residential collection division
contained by far the greatest man-hours of exposure (57%), as
would be expected. Thirteen separate functions were identi-
fied by IRIS.
Point of Collection (FIGURE 6). The majority of
the man-hours of exposure (64%) fell under "curbside and alley".
Backyard collection only represented 14% of the residential
collection crew man-hours. This reflects the collection trends
of the nation, since several IRIS users converted to curbside
collection while they were in IRIS. Another 22% of the man-
hours represented the residential collection crews that pro-
vided a combination of points of collection for each crew (e.g.
backyard and alley).
Crew size (FIGURE 7). The crew sizes ranged from
one to five man crews, including the driver, and three man crews
were the most common (52%).
Type of shift (FIGURE 8). The task, or incentive,
shift system was more frequent among the IRIS users (68%) than
the hourly shift (32%). In addition, a particular user may have
both task and hourly employees. For instance, their street
cleaning employees may have been on an hourly shift while their
collectors were on a task shift.
2-4
-------
FIGURE 1
DISTRIBUTION OF IRIS USERS
BY BMPLOYEMENI SIZE
Man-Hours of Percent of
Employment Size No. Exposure Total Man-Hours
1-50 EMPLOYEES 27 2,001,152 5%
51-100 EMPLOYEES 21 2,737,719 7%
101-200 EMPLOYEES 14 4,434,060 11%
.201-500 EMPLOYEES 20 16,659,497 42%
>500 EMPLOYEES 7 13,586,244 34%
FIGURE 2
GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION
OF IRIS USERS
Man-Hours of Percent of
Location No. Exposure Total Man-Hours
West 22 6,884,572 17%
Northwest 4 1,634,531 4%
Midwest 25 7,089,965 18%
South 22 17,008,018 43%
Northeast 16 6,801,596 17%
2-5
-------
FIGURE 3
MAP OF IRIS USERS
-------
FIGURE 4
DISTRIBUTION OF IRIS USERS
TYPE OF SOLID WASTE ORGANIZATION
Man-Hours of Percent of
Type No. Exposure Total Man-Hours
Private 8 596,691 2%
Municipal 81 38,821,981 98%
FIGURE 5
DISTRIBUTION OF DIVISIONS
OF IRIS USERS
Man-Hours of Percent of
Division Exposure Total Man-Hours
Residential Collection 21,417,024 57%
Residential & Commercial
Collection 6,667,339 18%
Commercial Collection 1,248,705 3%
Disposal 2,682,993 7%
Landfill 1,726,114 5%
Incinerator 736,342 2%
Transfer Station 220,537 <1%
Administration 1,477,503 4%
Street Cleaning 2,755,468 7%
Weed & Litter Control 423,373 1%
Equipment Maintenance 722,494 2%
Container Maintenance 17,002 <1%
Miscellaneous Services 215,151 <1%
Recyling Operations 8,991 <1%
2-7
-------
FIGURE 6
DISTRIBUTION OF IRIS USERS
BY POINT OF COLLECTION
Curbside and Alley
Backyard without Inter-
mediate Container
Backyard with Tub
Backyard with Wheeled
Cart
Backyard with Tub/
Backyard with
Wheeled Cart
Other Combinations
Man-Hours of
Exposure
9,974,156
376,107
287,724
•1,374,140
117,530
3,513,724
Percent of
Total Man-Hours
64%
2%
2%
9%
22%
FIGURE 7
DISTRIBUTION OF IRIS USERS
BY CREW SIZE
Crew Size
One Man
Two Man
Three Man
Four Man
Five Man
Man-Hours of
Exposure
1,659,080
3,630,080
9,604,900
2,039,830
1,552,140
Percent of
Total Man-Hours
19%
52%
11%
8%
2-8
-------
FIGURE 8
DISTRIBUTION OF TYPE OF SHIFT
OF IRIS USERS
Man-Hours of Percent of
No.* Exposure Total Man-Hours
Task 64 12,760,100 68%
Hourly 34 5,887,920 32%
*A user can have both hourly and task collection em-
ployees .
2.2 Data Collection
A number of detailed information was gathered by
IRIS, and they were of two types, descriptive (e.g., injury,
time lost and direct cost, employee data, equipment data) and
"basing data" or man-hours of exposure data (e.g., job class
basing data, crew type basing data, equipment basing data).
It was obtained in two phases. The start-up phase included
obtaining background information on the user and data on all
their employees on the payroll and equipment in use at the time
of starting to report injuries. The user was also given in-
structions on how to report an injury and what types of infor-
mation to include in the injury description. The on-line phase
included periodically updating the employee, equipment, time
lost and direct cost, and background information received pre-
viously and the daily reporting of injuries. As in the Field
Test, the data was identified by means of numerical user codes
to keep IRIS user identities confidential in reports.
2-9
-------
2.2.1 Start-up Data Collection
Upon an organization sending a "letter of intent",
they were assigned an IRIS user number of three digits randomly.
Data stored in the computer and in files were organized by
user numbers. (However, a recent poll taken by IRIS at the
request of some users to reveal their identities received
affirmatives from 75% of the users. A list of users that
responded "yes" and their corresponding IRIS numbers were sent
to users. However, user identities are still not revealed in
any reports unless by express permission.)
A package of forms had to be completed by a new
IRIS user before their injuries can be entered on the computer.
Four types of data were requested:
1. Employee Information Forms (EIF's) to be com-
pleted for each employee included in IRIS. For
instance, an organization may decide to only
include their residential collection division.
Information requested included date of birth,
date of hire, job classification, height, weight,
education, employment status, division and dis-
trict (EXHIBIT 1). An instructional sheet was
included in the package to recommend several
methods of completion (e.g., completed by
personnel department from personnel folders,
by employees, or obtained from available com-
puter printouts) (EXHIBIT 2).
2-10
-------
2. Equipment/Vehicle Information, Forms (EVIF's) to
be completed on each piece of vehicle or equip-
ment in use by the divisions included in IRIS.
Equipment information requested included equip-
ment number (assigned consecutive numbers if
none), type, chassis description, packer de-
scription, date of purchase, maintenance schedule
and usage (EXHIBIT 3). An instructional sheet
accompanied the forms (EXHIBIT 4).
3. Background Information Form on how their sanita-
tion department was organized in terms of IRIS
contact persons, organizational make-up, collec-
tion and disposal operations, job class descrip-
tions, safety program, and size and names of
divisions included in IRIS (EXHIBIT 5).
4. Workmen's Compensation and Injury Leave Policy
form to describe their wage continuation benefits
for on-the-job injuries (EXHIBIT 6).
When the EIF's from a user were received, they were checked for
consistency and completeness. A Job Title by Organizational
Unit Matrix form (EXHIBIT 7) and a User Code and Standard Job
Class Code Match List (EXHIBIT 8) were completed to denote the
user's organizational structure and index their job class titles
with IRIS standard job. class titles. IRIS standard job class
titles (EXHIBIT 9) were developed to correlate the identical
tasks of employees at all users in spite of their different
2-11
-------
job class titles. In many instances, numerous calls were
made to clarify the job classes. In cases where the employees
completed their EIF's, the data given was often incomplete and
inconsistent since they often did not know their actual job
titles or date of hire. Missing data were followed up on until
they were obtained. Once the EIF data was entered, an Employee
Data Update List (EXHIBIT 10) was sent immediately to the user
to correct and update for the rest of the quarter.
Once the Job Title by Organizational Unit Matrix was
completed on a user, a completed Job Class Basing Data Form
was needed for each job class in each division (EXHIBIT 11).
They were sent out to the users to obtain man-hours of exposure
by individual IRIS user job classifications.
The EVIF's were checked and coded for type of equip-
ment make, type of use and maintenance schedule. (See EXHIBIT
12 for list of codes.) Because of the amount of detail request-
ed on these forms and an organization's often inadequate vehicle
information files, they were often incomplete and were returned
to IRIS after a longer period of time than other forms.
Crew type basing data was also obtained at the be-
ginning of a user's participation by means of the telephone.
The trained SAFETY SCIENCES personnel usually interviewed a
foreman to obtain the data. The Crew Type Basing Data form
(EXHIBIT 13) was completed by the interviewer simultaneously
with the call. The form, however, was not used until October,
1976, when the majority of the users came on line, and, therefore,
2-12
-------
crew type man-hours of exposure were not computed for previous
time periods. The updating system was recently developed to
accomodate changes in the number of crews as well as the size
and type of collection. Again, this was obtained by tele-
phone. However, plans for the future are to obtain it quar-
terly by mail.
The Protective Clothing Basing Data (EXHIBIT 14)
was another piece of background data that was obtained from
the users by telephoning. It was felt that to obtain every-
thing through the mail would overwhelm the users with paper-
work. Therefore, some data was obtained by telephoning, and
the information requested paced such that they did not receive
all data requests at once.
Once a user set a start-up date for reporting in-
juries (the first of a month), the designated IRIS Coordinator
at the organization was sent a number of Instructions for
Phoning-In Injuries to IRIS sheets (EXHIBIT 15) and List of
Types of Information to Report forms CEXHIBIT 16) to prepare
the person(s) reporting injuries. The person(s) was also con-
tacted by telephone to insure that the reporting procedure was
understood. In the majority of the users, the person reporting
injuries at the organization was a personnel clerk either in
the personnel or safety department. They were urged to report
the injuries as soon after occurrence as possible. More useful
information came from the users who had their safety person or
foremen phone in the injuries because they often had first-hand
2-13
-------
knowledge of the injury and could answer questions #24 and 25,
which dealt with accident causation and preventative measures
taken. However, with users that had the supervisors or fore-
men phone in the injuries, often there was a discepancy in
numbers when the IRIS quarterly injury totals were compared
with the user's quarterly injury totals.
In order to allow the users to come "on-line", or
reporting injuries, as soon as possible, the users were not
required to complete the start-up data before the start-up
date. This was possible because it was expedient but not
essential that the data be entered and analyzed before the end
of the reporting quarter. Therefore, for a user that had not
returned their employee or equipment data, injuries could be
reported and coded, but not entered until their start-up data
was entered. (The injury file in the computer was set up such
that an injury could not be entered unless the employee data
was on file already. The equipment numbers were also linked
in this manner originally but was found to be too cumbersome.)
Unlike the Field Test, IRIS was set up to require no
personal visits in order to reduce operating costs as well as
SAFETY SCIENCES' personnel time. Procedures for the start-up
data collection during the Field Test required a minimum of
two visits to the organization. The first visit was to con-
vince the organization to participate and to get an overall
view of their organizational structure in order to estimate
the best procedure to obtain the data the time required. The
2-14
-------
forms to be completed were then individualized for each organ-
ization at the SAFETY SCIENCES office. The second trip required
a SAFETY SCIENCES staff person to arrive and complete the re-
quired forms. Local temporary help was usually obtained for
larger organizations. The SAFETY SCIENCES staff person also
interviewed the appropriate person(s) to obtain specific back-
ground data (no forms were used). The injury reports were
then individualized for each organization before an organiza-
tion came "on-line".
2.2.2 Injury and Time Lost and Direct Cost Data Collection
IRIS was specially equipped to receive injuries. Two
telephone lines at SAFETY SCIENCES were set aside to solely
receive injuries. Two other telephone lines were also installed
for IRIS personnel to make out-going calls and for users to
call back on. Personnel shift hours were also rearranged so
that two trained persons were always available to receive in-
juries between the hours of 7 a.m. and 5 p.m. (An average of
30 injuries a day were received, and often, both injury receiv-
ing lines were in use.) Also, although only two telephone
recorders were used, a minimum of three persons in the office
were trained to receive injuries, to allow for a back-up per-
son. Training IRIS personnel to receive injuries included
having them listen to actual injury interviews and providing
detailed explanations of the forms used in the injury coding
system. Feedback on how well they received injuries was
2-15
-------
effected through the coder who has to transform the tapes into
numerical codes that can be entered into the computer. He
informed them when data was missing.
Only IRIS personnel answer the injury incoming tele-
phone lines. This allows immediate contact between the user
and IRIS in order to shorten the length of time for reporting
injuries, especially since the users were required to finance
the long-distance injury calls. A delaying problem encountered
previous to this arrangement was the SAFETY SCIENCES reception-
ist obtaining the caller's purpose and putting the person on
hold until an appropriate IRIS person was located and informed
of the caller's intention. The four IRIS telephone lines were
answered with, "IRIS Central Office".
SAFETY SCIENCES personnel hours were also shifted to
allow for inputting at night and on weekends, thus optimally
using the available computer time. This freed the computer
for data analyses and editing during the day and allowed print-
outs to be run at night. Some programs that required lengthy
computations were run on "background" or at night when more
computer lines were available.
The injury reporting during the majority of the
Field Test period involved multiple-choice forms that were
individualized for each user (EXHIBIT 17). A unique number
for each injury report form was stamped on every page at IRIS,
and a log kept of the sequence numbers in use. Again, organi-
zations were given code-identifying numbers. Each organization
2-16
-------
was sent an initial number of injury report forms (proportional
to their size) when they started reporting injuries. Additional
forms were furnished upon request. As the forms were completed,
they were mailed to IRIS and logged in as being received. Train-
ed IRIS personnel reviewed the forms for completeness and under-
standability, correcting where necessary. Each injury report
form also contained a section for the completer to give a
written description of the accident. If questions arose, the
person who completed the form was contacted by telephone. Upon
receiving the injury report form, the injuried employee's name,
his social security number, and the date of the injury was
entered on the Costs and Lost Time Data form and sent to the
organization for completion (EXHIBIT 18).
The present telephonic injury reporting system was
conceived and tested with a user at the close of the Field
Test and found to be very effective in terms of obtaining com-
plete and detailed injury descriptions. However, the first
method tried was not feasible because the length of time re-
quired for the trained operator to ask the questions and to
code the forms at the same time was too lengthy and involved.
The other alternative rejected was having the coder enter the
data directly into a video screened computer terminal during the
question-and-answer injury reporting interview. This again
required too much time., approximately 10 minutes per injury.
In addition, it required the operator to be able to recall
the injury data codes instantaneously and accurately. Therefore,
2-17
-------
the final solution chosen was to tape record the injury inter-
views and require SAFETY SCIENCES personnel to complete minimal
data, allowing them to concentrate on the completeness and
consistency of the injury descriptions. This method reduced
the injury reporting time to approximately two minutes per
injury. Since the IRIS users had to pay for the telephone
costs for reporting injuries, it was vital to reduce the time
to a minimum.
Upon receiving an injury call, the tape recorder was
turned on immediately- The trained IRIS operator, as well as
the contact person reporting injuries, looked at the List of
Types of Information to Report (EXHIBIT 15) during the injury
interview to insure that all necessary injury data were given.
The only form the IRIS operator completed was the injury log
(EXHIBIT 19) for keeping track of incoming injuries. This log
was deemed necessary for the occasional problems that arose
(e.g., tape garbled) after the calls.
The logs from the two tape recorders were used to
keep a daily count of the number of injuries reported and to
transfer the name, social security number and date of injury
onto Workdays Lost and Direct Costs Data Sheets (EXHIBIT 20).
The logs were also used to verify the taped injuries, as they
were being translated into numerical codes onto the injury
coding forms.
The injury description coding system (EXHIBIT 21)
was reviewed at the end of the Field Test. The narrative
2-18
-------
descriptions were evaluated for adding new codes to reduce
information coded as "other", for ease of data access (e.g.,
multiple levels of descriptive detail, for causal factor re-
lationships (e.g., expanding accident type categories to in-
clude some accident sequences such as "slipped and struck
against vehicle"), and for adding additional data requests
(e.g., detailed crew type descriptions).
The coded injury forms also had the narrative de-
scriptions of the injuries on them, which were reviewed to
check for coding consistency and errors (EXHIBIT 22). Injury
trends and serious injuries were also flagged in this manner
for the IRIS Newsflash publications.
Another form of injury editing was using a program
which prints each injury description along with time lost and
direct costs. This was reviewed for injury descriptions that
"don't make sense". A computer edit program could pinpoint
these errors since the numerical answers may be valid numbers.
This printout could also be used for checking unusually large
time lost or direct costs.
The injury recordkeeping systems at IRIS, because
of the increased number of users, had to be reorganized. Con-
firming the number of injuries called in for the quarter was
deemed necessary on a quarterly basis (by letter) to insure
that all the user's injuries were phoned into IRIS. A list
of names, social security numbers and dates of injury accom-
pany the letter to facilitate this. A system also had to be
2-19
-------
devised to keep various stages of work separate at IRIS. A
series of files were developed for each of the pieces of data,
labelled with the stage of work. For instance, the injury
files' bins were labelled "to be coded", "to be reviewed",
"to be entered" and "to be filed".
Another area of confusion was keeping track of the
time lost and direct costs data. The forms for the open cases
as well as the newly opened cases were at first both being
sent at the end of the quarter. As the quarters progressed,
the volume of paperwork for users and IRIS personnel increased
due to the increasing number of open cases. Therefore, sending
them at staggered times was effected. The open cases from
previous quarters were sent during mid-quarter while the cases
that occurred during the quarter were sent at the end of the
quarter. Any injuries for a quarter that were phoned-in after
the end of the quarter were sent to the user immediately.
Confusion arose because not all cases for one quar-
ter were sent at the same time, to expedite the user receiving
the forms to complete. Therefore, sometimes the completers
would add a few injuries (phoned in after the end of the quar-
ter) onto the sheets sent to them, without informing IRIS.
Also, the users were not sending all of the sheets back at the
same time. To regulate these instances, a systematic procedure
of separating open cases and newly opened cases was effected by
color-coding the open cases with the appropriate quarter's color
(e.g., yellow for first quarter, green for second, salmon for
2-20
-------
third, and blue for fourth) as well as numbering and xeroxing
each page for the IRIS files. A special stamp was ordered to
use on the pages. It allowed spaces for entering the dates
of completion of the stages of processing of the time lost and
direct cost sheets (e.g., date sent, date received).
The Workdays Lost and Direct Cost Data Sheets were
requested to be sent back within a month, but due to the poor
injury time lost and direct cost recordkeeping systems at IRIS
users and the shortness of time available for receiving the
direct costs, many users required an additional month to com-
plete the forms. This of course delayed the computer analyses,
in which the severity and direct costs contribute a prominent
role. Some users waited to complete the sheets until they
received computer printouts from their insurance carriers. Once
IRIS received them, they were reviewed, called on and corrected
before they could be entered. The IRIS Users Wage Continuation
Policies chart (EXHIBIT 23) was used to confirm their policies.
2.2.3 Employee Data Collection
Since the man-hours of exposure for a user was com-
puted on the basis of the number of active employees for a
given time period, the employee data files necessarily had
to be up-to-date and accurate.
As discussed in the "Start-Up Data Collection"
(Section 2.2.1), once the employee data was collected, the
2-21
-------
users only needed to update the data. Updating the employee
data required the use of two methods. EIF's were completed
for newly-hired employees for which IRIS had no record. Up-
dating of the data on file in the computer was accomplished
by updating the Employee Data Update List (EXHIBIT 10). The
update list was sent to the user assigned person each quarter.
The completer used it to indicate a termination by crossing
out the name and entering the termination date in the space
provided. Job class changes, retirements, transfers, etc.
were indicated in the same manner.
The person supplying "the employee data kept track
of it on a daily basis and sent the completed EIF's at least
on a monthly basis to IRIS, but update lists were sent quar-
terly. They were sent two copies of the new update lists each
quarter, one to make changes on during the quarter and the
other to use during the interim period between sending the
corrected update list to IRIS and receiving the new update
list. Upon receiving the new update list, they transfered
the information from the temporary list. New update lists
were sent to them two weeks after IRIS received their altered
list.
Several users developed legal problems with IRIS
keeping names and social security numbers on file because of
the Privacy Act. ^ Therefore, their employees were instead
l' Public Law 93-579 (Privacy Act of 1974), December 31,
1974.
2-22
-------
identified by assigned numbers only, by converting the employee
data on file, and the employees' identifications became totally
unidentifiable in IRIS.
2.2.4 Equipment Data Collection
Equipment data is updated on a semi-annual basis,
at which time each designated person received a computer gen-
erated Equipment Data Update List (EXHIBIT 24). They also
received blank EVIF's (EXHIBIT 3) to complete for equipment
numbers not listed on the update list. The update list was
used to indicate when a piece of equipment was no longer in
use by crossing out the equipment and entering a termination
date.
2. 3 Developing Computer Analyses of Data
The method of data analysis was altered from that of
the Field Test to make the system more interactive. The Field
Test used the ANSI-COBOL programming language that required
keypunch cards. The keypunch cards were sent out to be key-
punched, as this was quicker and cheaper. However, the volume
of cards (16 per injury) and the lack of a means to monitor
errors easily made this system burdensome.
The present system is BASIC language using a Hewlett-
Packard 2000F computer, on a time sharing basis. Access to the
computer is immediate by means of computer terminals (e.g.,
CRT, printer) available at IRIS. The terminals are linked
2-23
-------
directly to the computer with special lines which eliminated
the static being received over normal telephone lines. It
does not require the use of keypunch cards. The data inputter
has direct interaction with the computer, since the programs
are written with a series of questions corresponding to ques-
tions on coding forms. The data can be modified as it is being
entered.
2.3.1 Insuring Consistency in Data
Three means were developed to screen errors and
two were performed by the computer. As discussed in the pre-
vious section, the first means was the manual checking of the
data after it had been coded. In particular, the injury de-
scriptions were carefully monitored for the consistent categor-
ization of accident types and activities.
The second means of editing occurred as the data was
being entered into the computer. Simple errors such as the
number of digits for an entry was too large or too small, the
numerical value was unacceptable (e.g., 24 for "last year of
school completed"), a letter instead of number was entered,
etc. could be immediately caught by the computer program, which
simply rejects the entry. This form of editing was .very useful
for typographical errors but was limited in scope.
A series of "editing programs" were developed to iden-
tify conceptual as well as entry errors. For instance, the
injury data editing program performed the data editing on two
2-24
-------
levels. The simpler level matched the entered codes against
the "acceptable" codes on a separate file that contained all
code numbers and their meanings. If a code that had been
entered couldn't be found in the translation file, an error
statement was printed. All error statements contained the
IRIS user number, the employee identification number and the
injury date, to facilitate locating the original form for
correction. This level of editing could also have been per-
formed as the data was being entered, but it would have in-
creased the time required to enter the data.
The second level of error monitoring that the edit-
ing programs perform was to use "logic statements". They were
written into the programs to check for very specific logic
errors. For example, the injury data editing program checked
that for the accident type of "overexertion", the nature of
injury was "sprain/strain" and if a "slip" accident occurred,
the nature was also "sprain/strain". Other editing programs
check the entry and logic errors for the time lost and direct
costs data, the employee data, and the equipment data.
2.3.2 Preparing for Increased Data Base
With the continually increasing data base, the orig-
inal injury data files that were set up for the 11 users that
began on December 1975 became inadequate. To handle a larger
date base, the data files had to be converted into smaller
units (i.e., the injury data files were reduced from quarterly
2-25
-------
to monthly files) because the time required for data entry
also lengthened with increased file space. For instance, when
an injury was entered into the computer, it was placed in date
order on the monthly injury file (average of 1,000 injuries for
the same months). If the file was long, it took more time for
the computer to read through the file to the right position,
particularly if the injury occurred at the end of the month.
The data analysis programs previously were only set
up to compute numbers and injury rates by a given quarter for
the QSMR's. However, it was also useful to compute them by
more than one quarter and by more than one year. Therefore,
all the data analysis programs had to be converted to be able
to accept any beginning and end quarter time frame. In addi-
tion, upon the Field Test injuries being receded and entered,
the programs were further modified.
With the number of injuries, days lost, direct costs,
and man-hours continually increasing, the maximum digits allowed
for the totals on the printouts had to be expanded, particularly
for computing more than one year's worth of data.
2.3.3 Maximizing Efficiency
The data entering, sorting and analyses programs were
evaluated periodically to insure that they were optimally effic-
ient. For instance, when the number of participants receiving
the quarterly individualized reports doubled, the data analysis
programs were converted to run continuously from one user to
2-26
-------
the next automatically by means of "data statements" contain-
ing the user numbers and to "log off" the system once the
program finished. Before, each computer printout had to be
recalled manually, therefore unnecessarily wasting personnel
man-hours. With this improved method, computer printouts
could be left to run all night, thus utilizing all available
computer time as well as not tieing up the terminal during the
day time. This was especially vital when running the individ-
ualized QSMR printouts which ranged from 800-1,300 printouts
a quarter, depending on the number of users on-line for the
quarter. Developing a self-generating system of printouts
was also time consuming because of problems encountered in
making it produce consistent margins on the top and bottom of
the printouts (e.g., prints the title on the same line of the
printout on each page, taking into account that for larger IRIS
users, a second page may be required). Other computer printouts
that this principle was applied to included the division and
crew type programs where the divisions and crew type combina-
tions that needed analyzing were put onto "data statements",
and they could be generated continuously with the correct titles
and precise margins.
To use the computer time more efficiently, the slow
programs for computing man-hours of exposure arid the data edit-
ing programs were converted to be able to compute on "back-
ground" , or not tieing up a computer terminal that could
otherwise be utilized to print or enter data. The editing
2-27
-------
programs, which need to print error statements, printed them
onto a "scratch file" that was killed automatically when
printed.
For programs that require man-hours of exposure
computations (e.g., all programs that provide injury rates),
the man-hours were computed by a separate program and placed
in quarterly files. Therefore, they were always available for
computing injury rates by any time frame. Separate exposure
hours files were kept for the injury rates factors of division,
job class, age, experience, height, weight, crew type, etc.
2.3.4 Determining Programming Needs
To fully utilize the injury, employee, and equipment
data available, a multi-faceted data analysis system was devel-
oped that contained over 80 programs. The data analysis pro-
grams tabulate as well as compute injury rates by single and
by multiple factors.
in achieving the goal of tabulating the frequency,
days lost and direct costs for unlimited multiple factor com-
binations of the injury, employee and equipment data, a "master"
program was developed. It required several stages of complex-
ity. The injury, employee and equipment data specific to each
injury was linked together into quarterly data files to be used
by the program in order to shorten the data analyses time
required.
2-28
-------
In developing the "master" program, several con-
ceptual and implemental problems had to be resolved:
• How to request a specific analysis. The
procedure devised requires two parameters
to be input/ 1) the data group to be examined
(e.g., all back strains that occurred to rear-
end loader crews) and 2) the information to be
printed in which order and with what connecting
words. Each coded piece of injury, employee
and equipment data can be requested.
• Sentence flow. The printout, in order to be
coherent, needed the stringing together of the
factors to be in "profile", or sentence form.
This required alterations to the phraseology
of the injury description coding system that
were handled in two ways. First, the activity
and accident type (injury description factors)
and their subsets were worded as continuous
phrases, eliminating the need for inputting
connecting words. For instance, an accident
type could be retrieved at three levels of
detail, depending on the depth of analysis
required. Each level was phrased such that the
phrase flow was consistent and complete inter-
nally:
1st level
Overexertion
2nd level
Overexertion involving container
Overexertion involving waste
Overexertion involving object
Overexertion involving vehicle part
3rd level
Overexertion involving/32 gal. container/which
was unusually heavy (wet waste)
The third level of detail actually represented
three factors (separated by slashes), the acci-
dent type and two subsets that describe the
container (or object, or waste, or vehicle part)
and the container condition without the use of
connecting words.
2-29
-------
Secondly, standard connecting phrases (e.g./
"employee was", "and" etc.) could be inserted
between the injury description factors. For
instance, an eight-factor tabulation (given
below) is generally requested for detailed
injury descriptions of the IRIS user's quar-
terly injuries, to aid in analyzing their
injury problems (standard printout for Section
I of the QSMR). Other IRIS reports, depending
on the industry problems addressed, may require
much more detail.
The example given is only utilizing the injury
data, but employee data (e.g., age, height, ex-
perience, job class) as well as equipment data
(e.g., type of equipment, sill, height, make
of body, etc.) could have been requested, also.
• Allowing for exclusion. Another refinement of
the program made it able to exclude certain
injuries that satisfied one requirement but not
another. For instance, it was possible to tabu-
late by the accident types that occurred to
employees dumping a container into the hopper
on a two man crew and exclude the accident types
of "insect stings" and "animal bites". There-
fore, it was possible to single out more rele-
vant risk factors for the accident patterns
being examined.
The "master" program was in essence developed to be
self-programmable and as such can be used to test out ideas on
causal factors. For instance, if one theorized that the major-
ity of the back strains may occur while dumping into the hopper
of a Heil rear loader, it could be tested immediately. (Due to
the length of the file being read by the program and the number
of factors being sorted, each printout could take 1 to 8 hours.)
Virtually an unlimited number of safety issues could be resolved
in this manner without having a computer programmer write a
specific program for each test case. Only very structured four
factor analyses (activity, accident type, part of body and nature
2-30
-------
FIGURE 9
EIGHT FACTOR PROFILE
N)
EMPLOYEE
Connecting
^ Phrase
WHILE
Connecting
Phrase
(1)
Accident
Type
STRUCK SELF
WITH
(^
Activity
i
i
LIFTING TO
DUMP
^Object
of Accidents
30-32 GAL,
CONTAINER
(6)0bject
of Activity
i
i
1
30-32 GAL,
CONTAINER
0)
1st Condition of
Object of Accident
(4)
2nd Condition of
Object of, Accident
I
WHICH WAS HEAVY (ROCKS) AND ON WHICH THE HANDLE BROKE
Nature
of Injury
RESULTING IN FRACTURE
(8)
Connecting
Phrase
TO
Connecting
Phrase
Part of
Body
FOOT
-------
of injury) were available during the Field Test.
The program was also modified to perform simple
totalling (by any number of factors) at a faster rate. This
was effected by bypassing its normal routine of setting up a
separate scratch file to read from and programming it to only
read the combined quarterly data files for the totals. With
this method, simple totalling (e.g., number of "struck by
objects ejected from the hopper" injuries) could be performed
in one hour as opposed to six.
Concurrent with the development of the "master" pro-
gram was the development of simple tabulation programs of sev-
eral injury description factors:
• activity
• accident type
• part of body
• nature of injury
• accident site
They tabulated the number of OSHA recordable injuries, days
lost and direct costs and ordered the factor categories from
the highest to the lowest percentages. These were deemed
necessary as standard features of the QSMR (later activity
and accident type were only included) for identifying high risk
accident patterns. These were written as separate programs not
only because they were useful programs to have while MASTER was
being developed but also because of limitations of the printouts
from the "master" program.
2-32
-------
Because of the already quite complex nature of the
"master" program, it was decided that it would be mainly used
as a tool in identifying very detailed risk factors rather
than produce a perfect printout. (Besides, it would lengthen
the analyses time required.) The numbers generated from the
"master" printouts were generally transformed onto charts or
tables or utilized in countermeasures discussions. What the
program did not do, and which some individualized programs
have been specifically written to compute, was:
• order the categories from the highest to the
lowest number of injuries (all, OSHA record-
able, or lost workday cases), days lost or
direct costs
• compute percentages of the total
• compute injury rates
• give four quarter comparisons of accident type
and activity category percentages and injury
rates. Separate programs were written for this.
• compare individual user categories with those
of the average for all users for accident type
and activity. Separate programs were written
for this.
Computing injury rates required the computation of
man-hours of exposure (or basing data) by a specific factor or
combination of factors. Two separate files were developed to
contain basing hours for different employee, equipment and
operational factors. One, the job class basing data file, which
links the job class exposure hours to the employee data file,
was used to compute man-hours of exposure by:
2-33
-------
• age
• experience
• height
• weight
• user job classification (e.g., laborer)
• IRIS standard job classification (e.g., resi-
dential collector non-driver)
• division (e.g., commercial collection)
Secondly.- the crew type basing data file was used to compute
injury rates for any combination of the five components that
made up the crew type:
1. type of collection (e.g., residential, brush)
2. point of collection (e.g., curbside, backyard
with tub)
3. crew size
4. type of shift (e.g., task, fixed hour)
5. type of container (e.g., manual, bulk, etc.)
In addition, the crew type basing data file also contained the
equipment type used by the crew.
The crew type and job class basing data files could
not be combined into one file because the monitoring required
to keep track of which employees were in which crews on a daily
basis would be extremely time consuming.
2.4 Field Test Data
The coding systems for the injury as well as the em-
ployee data in IRIS were much more evolved than that of the
2-34
-------
Field Test. In addition, the data was stored on computer
tapes in a different programming language. Therefore, in
order not to lose the valuable comparative data source of
approximately 2,200 injuries gathered during the Field Test,
they were recoded under the IRIS coding system for injury and
time lost and direct cost data. However, it was not possible
to correlate the employee or basing data that was obtained in
the Field Test with the IRIS system because of the great im-
provement in the categorization of job classifications and
crew types.
2-35
-------
III. CONCLUSION
In the nearly five years of compilation of injury
data (including 3 years of the Field Test) on the solid waste
industry, IRIS (the Injury Reporting and Information System
for the solid waste management industry) has met its fourfold
goals of:
• Building a large data base of reliable, con-
sistent, and detailed solid waste industry data.
Since the Field Test began gathering injury data
in 1973, 1,515 user months has produced a data
base of over 11,000 injuries, 60,000 days lost,
and $3.5 million in direct costs,in solid waste
collection and disposal. The data include not
only injury descriptions and respective time
lost and direct cost incurred but also such
standardized basing, or man-hours of exposure,
data as employee, equipment, crew type, and job
classification. The total exposure hours col-
lected exceeded 40 million.
• Providing routine feedback to its users. In
the form of individually written Quarterly Safety
Management Reports, IRIS has been able to routine-
ly evaluate accident patterns at individual solid
waste organizations. Each user's data is eval-
uated for quarterly injury trends, compared with
the overall average, and compared with only users
that have similar operations. Specific injury
reduction measures are suggested for injury areas
that IRIS has determined to be exceptionally
higher than the average. The suggested injury
reduction measures are chosen for their applica-
bility and cost effective potential for the user,
as proven by IRIS data or by the actual use of
an injury reduction measure by a user. Line
management is also given supportive data as to
potential cost savings in implementing these
measures. IRIS can serve the additional function
of monitoring the progress of any operational
changes that are implemented.
• Answering industry-wide safety questions. Be-
cause the IRIS data base is large and detailed
3-1
-------
it is able to provide comparative data on such
solid waste industry safety issues as the effect
on injury rates of equipment type, Worker's
Compensation benefits, various collection sys-
tems, and personal protective equipment (in
Special Reports) that have been only speculation
in the past because of lack of data. In addi-
tion, this valuable source of data has not been
fully utilized.
In addition to providing OSWMP with decision-
making data, IRIS also routinely provides data
to national groups involved with solid waste
management and safety:
- National Solid Waste Management Association
- American Public Works Association
- Governmental Refuse Collection & Disposal
Association
- International City Management Association
- National Safety Council
- American Federation of State & County Muni-
cipal Employees
The IRIS findings and data base have also been
instrumental in providing information to other
organizations who requested aid in resolving
solid waste safety questions:
- Non-user solid waste organizations asked to
be on the mailing list for the quarterly
Accident Trends reports as well as the "IRIS
News" and "IRIS Newsflash". Some organizations
requested in depth questions which required
special computer printouts (e.g., objects
ejected from hopper accidents).
- Other solid waste research organizations such
as university extention programs and private
conculting firms (e.g., SCS Engineers) request-
ed the IRIS publications.
- State governmental agencies requested data.
For instance, the Educational Research Division
in the State of Washington was interested in
any data on training guidelines, as they wanted
to set up a training program for the collectors.
The California State Standards Board also re-
quested data on the seriousness of the injury
problem, as they were evaluating their refuse
collection standards.
3-2
-------
- Equipment manufacturers were interested in
equipment related injuries and equipment
modifications adopted by the IRIS users.
- Participating in a User Requirements Com-
mittee set up under a National Science Foun-
dation contract directed towards the develop-
ment of equipment standards for refuse col-
lection.
- The development of a safety manual for the
solid waste industry by SAFETY SCIENCES under
a contract from the National Science Founda-
tion.
- In the evaluation of a series of training films
being developed on solid waste safety.
• Providing a cost-effective safety service to
potential and continuing IRIS users. The oper-
ating cost of IRIS is approximately $3,000* per
average user per year (200 employees). Based
on IRIS data, the average direct cost per man-
year is $169; thus a user with 200 employees
spends an average of $33,800 in direct costs per
year for on-the-job injuries. A reduction of
only 15% in their injury rates, as a result of
IRIS suggestions, would more than pay for the
annual fee of IRIS. In fact ten IRIS users are
continuing with IRIS, regardless of EPA funding.
They represent over 20% of the peak of IRIS
participation.
H.owever, IRIS still requires evaluation. There are
several immediately apparent data analyses needs and improve-
ments to the system that should be considered. In addition,
several ideas for how IRIS can further benefit the industry
and its users are presented in this section.
*Approximately $1,000 more for starting up. These figures do
not take into account OSWMP partially funding IRIS.
3-3
-------
3.1 FUTURE USES OF IRIS DATA
One invaluable use of the IRIS data and the user con-
tacts fostered has already been performed in the development
of a comprehensive, hazards-linked-to-countermeasures safety
manual for the solid waste industry. This was funded by the
National Science Foundation under Contract No. NSF-C76-19132
and took two years to complete. Several IRIS users as well
as OSWMP and national solid waste organizations were on the
advisory committee for evaluating the safety manual.
The development of the safety manual could not have
been possible without the preliminary research undergone by
IRIS in identifying high risk factors involved in solid waste
injuries and their corresponding injury reduction measures.
In addition, the training guides, equipment modifications,
container regulations, personal protective clothing effective-
ness, and operational procedural alterations identified by
IRIS as to their injury reduction potentials were extensively
relied upon.
Several other vital services to the industry that
can be accomplished through the existing IRIS data and publica-
tions include:
• Performing additional unresolved data analyses
with the present data base of 11,000 injuries
(will increase by an additional 2,000 injuries
by the end of September 1978). Limitations of
the present data base in performing certain
analyses will be discussed in Section 4.2.
• Providing access to IRIS reports, past and
future, to all interested solid waste organiza-
tions. Involves advertising in the mail.
3-4
-------
3.1.1 Unperformed Data Analyses Available with Present
Data Base
The existing data base contains detailed injury,
employee, and equipment data. Many injury description factors
and employee characteristics have been examined in the IRIS
reports. (See accompanying Data Analyses and Publications
volumes.) However, there are aslo several individual injury
description factors and combinations of the injury, employee
and equipment factors that have been identified by IRIS as
worth pursuing. They were not performed within this contract
because of time limitations and because some of them were
identified after the completion of other data analyses. A
few of the safety questions that can be answered with the
existing programs or with the completion of new programs include
obtaining injury rates for:
• Day of the week. The information was collected
on each injury and the hours of exposure was
collected as part of the crew type basing data.
However/ it would require the setting up of
extensive monthly hours of exposure files for
the day of the week (available from October
1976) and developing the computer program.
• Hour of the day. This analysis is identical to
that of "day of the week" in development.
• Hours worked prior to accident. Again, the
analysisfor this undergoesthe same steps as
"day of the week".
• Overexertions (back strains) by hours worked
prior. Once the hours worked prior exposure
hours files are set up, to obtain this analysis
would only require the writing of the computer
program for a two factor injury rates analysis.
3-5
-------
Task/fixed hour slips and falls. This would
require the alteration of the crew type analy-
sis programs to sort by accident type.
Container weight limits vs. overexertions in-
volving container"! This analysis would be
performed manually since subjective evaluation
is required to compare various weight limits
as well as how well the weight limits are en-
forced. Existing programs can be used.
Overexertions (back strains) by age and job
classification (e.g., collector non-driver age
25-29 years). This would require complicated
computations of man-hours of exposure and to
be able to sort by three different factors.
Safety shoe requirement vs. slips and falls.
The "master" program can be used to provide
the injury descriptions and numbers, but it
again requires subjective evaluation as to the
various groups of IRIS users (e.g., ones that
require safety shoes, ones that recommend, and
ones that have no safety shoe policies).
Type of equipment and crew size (e.g., two man
side loader crew vs. one man side loader crew)
for equipment related injuries.This is already
obtainable with existing computer programs but
requires extensive computer runs and hand compu-
tations for the injury rates.
Key accident types (e.g., struck by object eject-
ed from the hopper) by the type of equipment.
This is also available with existing programs.
Experience of the employee vs. the activity being
performed at the time of injury. This analysis
would be of great aid in developing employee
training programs since it would direct the
emphasis towards accidents that frequently happen
to inexperienced employees. In addition, needed
retraining areas will be revealed for the exper-
ienced employees. The experience programs al-
ready sort by the accident type; therefore, minor
alterations to the programs will make them sort
by the activity, instead.
Overexertions while handling containers or waste
vs. the height and weight of the employees. This
3-6
-------
was previously performed in a. Special Report
with only the height or weight but not by all
three combinations. It would require develop-
ing some computer programs for sorting the
man-hours of exposure as well as the number of
injuries, days lost and direct costs by the
height and weight cross groupings.
• A discussion of vehicle malfunction accidents.
This would be handled in the manner of an
Accident Trends report, with mostly narrative.
Since these accidents do not code well for all
of the accident circumstances, the original
injury description will be examined rather than
the coded information. No additional computer
program development is required.
• A discussion of the caught in packer injuries
that occurred during the Field Test. Because
of this accident type's severity, these injuries
are of major interest and concern to the indus-
try. Although this topic was already discussed
in the first quarter 1977 Accident Trends report
for the post Field Test data, it is felt that
discussing all of these serious injuries in
depth is necessary in understanding and prevent-
ing these injuries. Also, the original injury
descriptions need to be referred to for addi-
tional detail. Another insight that can be
gained from this report is in comparing the Field
Test caught in packer injuries with the post
Field Test injuries. Technological developments
since 1973 may be a factor in their frequency.
It should be mentioned that eight additional issues
of the monthly IRIS News and two additional issues of the IRIS
Newsflash have been published since the end of the reporting
period (September 1977). Their safety topics were not included
on this list, and only four issues of the IRIS News and two
issues of the IRIS Newsflash are left to be published before
the completion of Contract No. 68-01-4747, in which EPA is
funding the "core support" of IRIS for fiscal year 1978.
3-7
-------
Therefore, to perform the outlined data analyses would require
the continuation of IRIS beyond fiscal year 1978.
3.1.2 Availability of IRIS Reports to the Solid Waste
Industry and Other Interested Persons
The wealth of already analyzed solid waste collection
and disposal injury data published by IRIS (eight Accident
Trends reports, six IRIS News, four IRIS Newsflashes, and five
Special Reports during this contract period and an additional
12 issues of the IRIS News and four IRIS Newsflashes from the
partial EPA funding phase, fiscal 1978) is only presently avail-
able to IRIS users, national solid waste organizations and EPA.
The majority of solid waste organizations do not have access
to the reports 1) because they were unaware of their existence
even though IRIS has been discussed in solid waste magazines
and at conferences and 2) because only the IRIS users were
"priviledged" since by providing data to IRIS, they received
the reports free as part of their feedback for participating.
However, the interesting and important findings as
a result of IRIS should be available to the whole solid waste
management industry, to provide maximum impact of the findings
on the industry. EPA is only presently considering making the
five special reports available to the industry, but the other
IRIS reports also are of interest to the industry.
The most effective advertising of the IRIS publica-
tions, past and upcoming, is to mail out a brochure to all
3-8
-------
solid waste organizations that lists the topics of the various
reports and describes some of the interesting findings. Space
limitations in the length of magazine articles will restrict
what is said concerning the IRIS publications and makes adver-
tising in the solid waste magazines an inferior alternative
means.
This task can be performed with minimum funding from
EPA, since the solid waste organizations wishing to obtain
the reports will pay for the cost of their reproduction and
handling. Therefore, the only cost to EPA would be the devel-
opment of the brochure, the compilation of the mailing list
and the mailing of the brochures. The mailing list could be
compiled from the mailing lists of solid waste magazines and
other municipal organizations such as ICMA.
The benefits that could develop from such an effort
would not only include informing solid waste organizations of
the existence of detailed safety information for their indus-
try but also:
• To provide high visibility in pioneering safety
research in the solid waste industry for EPA1s
Office of Solid Waste Management Programs, and
• It can be a means to widely solicit additional
IRIS users, therefore enlarging the data base.
3.2 LIMITATIONS OF IRIS DATA
In re-evaluating IRIS, in light of the analyses that
has been performed and the analyses that has yet to be completed,
3-9
-------
there still emerges certain "gaps" in the understanding of
solid waste injuries. These gaps were either not originally
anticipated or were ommitted because of time limitations:
• Evaluating two personal protective equipment
in depth
• Collecting "fleet accidents"
• Analyzing injury rates by activity
• Analyzing injury rates by the tons collected
per man
• Analyzing injury rates by the accident site
All of these, however, cannot be performed retro-
spectively since the data is not available. They would require
building an additional data base. With the present number of
continuing users (ten users that represent 20% of the man-hours
of the 89 users), another year of data can provide a minimum
of an additional 2,000 injuries. This number would even be
greater with the addition of the fleet accidents.
3.2.1 Evaluating Two Personal Protective Equipment in
Depth
In analyzing the cost effectiveness and injury re-
duction potential of personal protective equipment as a Special
Report, it was discovered that the IRIS data on two pieces of
personal protective equipment was inadequate and sho'uld be
revised in order to obtain more meaningful analyses.
For gloves, the material (e.g., canvas, suede, leath-
er) and the length would need to be obtained in order to
3-10
-------
compare their injury reduction potential (e.g., leather
gloves may result in 25% less cuts and punctures to the hands).
The present injury reporting system only asks for whether or
not gloves were worn. Injury reduction potential is linked
directly to cost effectiveness. Therefore, to convince solid
waste organizations to provide suede instead of the cheaper
canvas gloves, or even to provide gloves at all, requires con-
crete data.
Safety shoes was another personal protective equip-
ment that had a wide variety of types. In particular, the
safety features that should be identified with the injury are
ankle protection, steel toe, puncture protection, and metatar-
sal guard. (Slip resistance is a safety feature that is touted
by the manufacturers, but no data are given to support the
claims. Besides, a great variety of shoe sole materials and
patterns abound that would be needed to be reported since they
affect slip resistance as well as the degree of wear on the
shoe sole.)
For both pieces of personal protective equipment, the
hours of exposure data necessarily has to be kept up-to-date
and in detail for the qualities identified.
3.2.2 Collecting "Fleet Accidents"
"Fleet accidents" are traffic accidents that result.
in property damage only. IRIS only accepted injuries, which
3-11
-------
limited the scope and, therefore, the costs of the study.
However, the solid waste collection industry has a serious
problem with fleet accidents, and to provide IRIS users with
a more comprehensive analysis of their solid waste accidents,
these costly property damage accidents should also be incor-
porated into IRIS.
This would entail modifications to the whole system
of reporting, coding, entering and analysis, since these
accidents will require specific vehicle movement questions
such as the speed of the vehicle, whether it was making a turn,
etc. In addition, IRIS will need to acquire some "typical"
fleet accidents to test the system alterations before it becomes
functional.
3.2.3 Analyzing Injury Rates by Activity
Activity, or task the employee was performing at the
time of injury, can be based. The approximate number of times
a certain activity (e.g., carrying container) is performed
during the day and the relative time it takes can be estimated.
The other accident description factors, for example accident
type, cannot be based as to how many hours of exposure to a
slip or a fall occurs in a day, since the same exposure hours
can apply to an overexertion accident or an object in eye
accident. The exposure hours for such factors as accident
type, nature of injury and part of body are constant for each
category.
3-12
-------
Therefore, the unique feature in obtaining the ex-
posure hours for individual activities is that specific employee
training needs can be identified, since employee training is
correlated directly to specific tasks such as lifting the con-
tainer, operating the packing mechanism, etc. In addition,
unusually high or low injury rates among users in a particular
activity can aid in pinpointing causal factors such as opera-
tional differences.
However, obtaining the exposure hours by task is
very lengthy and involved. Therefore, it necessarily has to
be obtained by telephoning. In addition, collection system
changes will require updating the activity basing data.
3.2.4 Analyzing Injury Rates by the Tons Collected Per Man
The majority of solid waste organizations maintain
records on the tons collected per truck per day since the
trucks are weighed and recorded when entering the disposal
sites. Therefore, obtaining average tons collected per man per
truck can be estimated relatively easily by knowing whether the
employee only collects, only drives or drives and collects.
The tonnage, however, varies from season to season and should
be updated on a monthly basis.
The tons collected per man has a bearing on such
accidents as overexertions and most likely increases fatigue.
An analysis of the side loader crews indicated that their
injury rates were much higher than rear loader crews, which
3-13
-------
are less productive, and the injury rates may be a reflection
on tonnage.
3.2.5 Analyzing Injury Rates by the Accident Site
When obtaining the exposure hours data for activity,
the exposure hours data for accident site would also become
available. For example, in obtaining the exposure hours for
the activity category of "driving", the data on how many times
he goes to and from the landfill and how long it takes is ob-
tained. This can be used for the accident site of "on roadway-
to or from disposal site".
This analysis will locate IRIS users who have high
injury rates for injuries that occur at a particular site.
For example, an IRIS user, when analyzing their two man task
collection crews' injury rates appeared to have low injury
rates. However, when just their "on collection route" injury
rates are singled out, they were actually high because they
spent a great deal of time going to and from the disposal site,
which was located at the other end of town.
3.3 IMPROVING IRIS DATA AND ANALYSES
Unlike the data analyses discussed in the previous
section, there is one area of IRIS data that can be "back
tracked" on because it is presently unknown in the IRIS data
base, the equipment data. The equipment number was obtained
as part of the telephoned injury description.
3-14
-------
In addition, the data analyses for specialized com-
puter printouts that require the "master" program would be
greatly aided if the program could be altered to be more
specialized, and therefore, not require hand computations.
3.3.1 Updating Equipment Data
One major project in updating the "unknowns" in the
IRIS data base is to systematically obtain the equipment data.
Because of the complexity of the form and the large turnover
in equipment, the IRIS users tended to not complete the equip-
ment data. The data was considered to not be vital in per-
forming the routine analyses on their injury data, and the
users were not pressed to turn them in. (Otherwise, the re-
ports would even be later in being produced if the equipment
data was a condition in their receiving their QSMR, as the
injury, time lost and direct cost, and employee data are.)
Consequently, nearly half the equipment numbers on the reported
injuries do not have their equipment data on file.
The equipment data would most readily be obtainable
by telephoning, since this relieves the burden of the non-
continuing IRIS users of completing the forms and is quicker
because the foremen generally know what kind of make the equip-
ment is by memory. The other data on the form such as "type
of use" and "average miles per day" can be applied to a whole
block of equipment that are used for the same purpose.
3-15
-------
This is not as large a project as it may seem be-
cause only the equipment related accidents (e.g., struck against
step, fell when getting out of cab, etc.) need to have the
data on the equipment involved. Detailed equipment man-hours
is impossible to obtain because it requires the almost daily
keeping track of the equipment in use, and with the average
solid waste organization this is difficult because of equip-
ment failure or "down time" that would greatly affect the
equipment in use at any one time.
Data analyses that can be performed with the equip-
ment data obtained can include what equipment body makes
(e.g., Heil Mark II) have frequent overexertion accidents and
objects ejected from the hopper accidents, but injury rates
are not obtainable.
3.3.2 Further Developing the "Master" Program
As outlined in Section 2.3.3, the "master" program
has certain limitations that necessitates hand calculations
as well as developing tables rather than being able to use
the printout "as is":
• It does not order the categories from the
highest to the lowest number of injuries,
days lost or direct costs.
• It does not compute percentages of the total.
• It does not compute injury rates.
3-16
-------
The modifications of the program to include more
functions would greatly reduce the analysis time required
and increase the range of possible analyses.
3.4 OBTAINING ADDITIONAL DATA ON THE SOLID WASTE INDUS-
TRY INDEPENDENT OF IRIS DATA
Certain safety information do not require consistent
and detailed reporting and can therefore be gathered from non-
users. The advantage to gathering data from a larger number
of solid waste organizations for such items as successful
countermeasures implemented is apparent. In addition, such
serious injuries as fatalities and permanent disabilities are
of particular interest, but the IRIS data yields only a small
amount of these because of their rarity.
3.4.1 Performing Study of Solid Waste Fatalities With State
Worker's Compensation Data
Fatalities are relatively rare occurrences. Of the
11,000 IRIS injuries, only 3 were fatalities. They are rare,
and, therefore, patterns in their accident causations are not
apparent with the limited IRIS data. Because of their high
cost settlements, not to mention the human anguish incurred,
they are of serious concern to the solid waste manager.
The major source of fatality data for the solid
waste industry is the State Worker's Compensation First Reports
of Injury. Often, reports on fatalities are also accompanied
3-17
-------
by investigations, which make this group of accidents rela-
tively detailed. The individual injury reports would have
to be compiled, copied, and analyzed.
In addition, with the present ten continuing users,
the IRIS Newsflash has too small of a data source to be effec-
tive in announcing serious accidents and alarming accident
trends noted. Therefore, other severe injuries, such as per-
manent disabilities, can also be obtained at the same time as
the fatalities and be used for several issues of the IRIS
Newsflash (or a Special Report).
Relatively few states need to be sampled since it
is not a study of all solid waste fatalities, and a populous
state's data for one year will be more than that of IRIS. The
states should be chosen for:
• population
• accessibility of the original injury report
(e.g., filed by SIC code or date of injury)
• accessibility of direct costs
• different geographic locations because of vary-
ing collection systems
The time period researched should be no sooner than a year and
a half ago, to obtain final direct cost settlements on the
fatalities, and a minimum of 100 fatalities should be obtained
for a reasonable sample size.
3-18
-------
3.4.2 Obtaining "Success Stories" from the Solid Waste
Industry
Presently, there is no systematic means of catalogu-
ing and relating injury reduction "success stories". The same
mailing list developed for mailing the brochure on the IRIS
publications to the industry can be used to obtain and inform the
solid waste management industry of successful injury reduction
measures that organizations have implemented. The injury re-
duction measures could include:
• Specific equipment modifications (e.g., hopper
flaps)
• Unique incentive programs (e.g., sending flowers
to the employee's wife when he drives for 10,000
miles without an accident)
• Specific employee training techniques (e.g.,
obstacle course for drivers)
• Personal protective equipment tried (e.g., a
certain type of safety shoe provided better
traction on snow)
• Injury reduction successes when new equipment
are provided (e.g., installing container lift
mechanisms that attach to the hopper sill re-
duced an organization's overexertions by two-
thirds).
These "success stories", although they abound, are
rarely written about. The general success stories found in
the solid waste magazines emphasize success in terms of pro-
ductivity and cost savings, instead. Therefore, there is a
need to catalog and distribute this vital safety resource for
the solid waste industry-
3-19
-------
This survey would require developing a detailed
questionnaire that would be accompanied by examples of success
stories from the IRIS users. The organizations would be asked
to give brief descriptions of their injury reduction measures
followed with a detailed telephone interview with IRIS person-
nel to obtain more specifics. Pictures, if helpful, would also
be requested.
These "success stories" would best be presented to
the industry in monthly newsletter form, perhaps as a part of
the IRIS News, rather than in one volume. A gradual release
of the stories would encourage more organizations to send in
their stories, also. Organizations who contributed "success
stories" may also receive the IRIS publications free of charge.
3.5 VISITS TO THE CONTINUING IRIS USERS
Because of reducing the costs of IRIS, actual visits
to the users were not part of the procedure. However, IRIS
has found that with the users that have been on-line reporting
injuries and receiving data analyses for the past two years,
visits to the continuing IRIS users become necessary to provide
a follow-up to the Quarterly Safety Management Reports. The
visits can be used to:
• develop a working knowledge of their individual
safety problems that can provide better insight
into their injuries
3-20
-------
perform a structured, in-depth interview with
the user to ascertain whether' they are utiliz-
ing the IRIS data, whether they find the data
useful, whether they would like to see addi-
tional analyses performed, etc.
aid them in implementing actual countermeasures.
For instance, IRIS expertise can be used to aid
them in developing a complete injury reporting
form, in revising their recordkeeping system,
in developing safe work practices, in putting
on safety training sessions, etc.
3-21
-------
EXHIBITS
-------
USER No,
EXHIBIT 1
EMPLOYEE INFORMATION FORM
Please Print
1, EMPLOYEE NAME
2, SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER
Last Name
Isc. mid.
Initials
3, DATE OF BIRTH
5,
6,
7,
8,
9 .
10,
11,
12,
13.
CURRENT HEIGHT
CURRENT WEIGHT
LAST YEAR OF SCHOOL COMPLETED
DATE HIRED
Month Year
Feet Inches
Pounds
Years
Month
Day
Year
TYPE OF EMPLOYMENT
STATUS
DEPT/DIV/SECTION, ETC, IN WHICH
THE EMPLOYEE CURRENTLY WORKS
(l,E,, RESIDENTIAL COLLECTION,
COMMERCIAL COLLECT ION, NLANDF I LL,
BRUSH COLLECTION, ETC,)
CURRENT JOB CLASS TITLE (TRUCK
DRIVER, COLLECTOR, LEADMAN,
ETC,)
DISTRICT WHICH THE EMPLOYEE
NORMALLY WORKS OUT OF
IF EQUIPMENT OPERATOR, ENTER
TYPES OF EQUIPMENT OPERATED AND
ANY OTHER INFORMATION THAT WILL -
AID IN CLARIFYING THE JOB TITLES
Permanent
Full-Time
Temporary
Part-Time
E-l
-------
EXHIBIT 2
EMPLOYEE INFORMATION
E-2
-------
EXPLANATION OF EACH TYPE OF EMPLOYEE DATA REQUIRED
1. Employee Name
The employee's last name should be entered first.
The employee's initials should be entered first initial
in the first box and middle initial in the second box provided.
The initials should be entered only in the spaces provided for
initials and not in the space provided for the last name. If
the employee has more than two initials, enter the first two
only and omit the others.
The employee's name is used only for updating the employee
data update list which is sent to you each month. This provides
you a list of all employees included in IRIS. It will also be
used to cross out terminated employees and enter job class
changes. All names are held in the utmost confidentiality.
The employee's name is never listed on any analysis of injuries.
2. Social Security Number
It is absolutely essential that the Social Security Number
be entered on each EIF and that it be entered correctly. If
the Social Security Number is entered incorrectly, the computer
will either be unable to match the injury report data you phone
in later to the employee data or it will match it to the wrong
employee.
If Social Security Numbers are not available, another em-
ployee ID number must be used instead. For example, if your
organization uses an identification code for each employee,
this number must be used instead. If you do not have either
a Social Number or employee ID number for each employee, assign
a unique number to each employee. Again, it is essential that
this number be entered correctly in order to correctly match
employee data with injury data.
3. Date of Birth
Self-explanatory.
4, &
5. Current Height/Weight
Self-explanatory- This information should be obtained
through employee questionnaires, if possible., as old records
on this information (especially weight) are often outdated.
E-3
-------
6. Last Year of School Completed
For college or other education beyond High school, add 12
to the number of years beyond high school. For example, 5 years
of college would be entered as 17 (i.e., 12 + 5).
7. Date Hired by Current Employer
This is the date that the employee was most recently hired
by your organization, if he has been hired several times.
8. Type of Employment
Indicate whether the employee is permanent or temporary.
Enter all special works (i.e., students, welfare employees,
OEO employees, etc.) as temporary.
9. Status
Indicate whether the employee works full-time or part-time
according to your organization's definitions. Full-time may
not necessarily mean 40 hours a week, in your organization; for
example, employees who work on a task system would probably be
considered full-tiine by most employees even though they work a
3-hhour week, perhaps.
10. Department/Division/Section
Enter the department/division/section that the employee is
permanently assigned to in terms of your organizational structure,
Be complete; include all information on the organizational unit
which the employee works out of. Include the type of unit (i.e.,
whether it is a bureau, division, department, branch, unit, etc.)
as well as the exact name(s) of the division.
11. Current Job Title
The current job title should be the official job title.
For example, "Sanitation Crewman" may be the official title
for "Garbageman." Be complete and exact.
12. District
Name of the District that the employee normally works out of.
13. Crew Type
If the employee works on a crew, indicate the name of type
of crew he normally works on, e.g., brush crew, bulky waste crew,
paper crew, etc.
IF YOU REQUIRE FURTHER EXPLANATION CONCERNING EMPLOYEE DATA,
CONSULT THE IRIS CENTRAL OFFICE.
E-4
-------
TO PROVIDE EMPLOYEE DATA TO IRIS
BY HAVING YOUR EMPLOYEES COMPLETE A QUESTIONNAIRE,
FOLLOW THIS PROCEDURE:
1. Enclosed in this package is a set of blank employee informa-
tion forms (EIFs) which have been developed by IRIS for your
organization to use as questionnaires and have places to
enter each of the types of information listed above. There
should be one copy of the form for each of the employees
who are going to complete a questionnaire.
2. Also enclosed is an explanation of each of the types of
employee data required by IRIS. If you have any doubts
about the meaning of any of the information shown on the
EIF please consult this explanation or contact the IRIS
Central Office.
3. Prepare or obtain a list of the names of all current current
employees who are to be included in IRIS.
4. At a meeting of your foremen, explain the purpose of the
EIFs and how they are to be completed. It is usually a
good idea to have the foremen complete their own EIF at
this meeting as this gets them familiar with the form.
5. Have each foreman distribute an EIF to the employees working
under them, and HAVE THE EMPLOYEES COMPLETE AND RETURN THE
EIFs WHILE THEY ARE STANDING IN FRONT OF THE FOREMAN. This
might be done at a tailgate meeting when the employees pick
up their checks, or route slips, etc. IT IS USUALLY A
MISTAKE TO GIVE THE EMPLOYEE THE EIF AND LET HIM RETURN
IT AT HIS OWN TIME. This is because it is very difficult
to track down each employee who hasn't returned his EIF,
and it can take weeks to get them all in. If you have
the employees complete them "while you wait," the opera-
tion is over in about 15 minutes. Moreover, you can help
employees who are having difficulty in completing the EIF.
6. Obtain all the completed EIFs. Using the list-you prepared
in Step 3, check off the name of each employee who returned
an EIF.
7. Identify the employees who have not completed at EIF (e.g.,
those who were absent on the day they were distributed.
E-5
-------
8. Contact these employees and get them to complete an EIF.
9. Review all completed EIFs and make sure that all are
legible and complete. Contact the employee in cases
of doubt.
10. Send the EIFs and the list you prepared in Step 3 to the
IRIS Central Office.
E-6
-------
PL e
Month Year
(f> __ T*
EMPLOYEE INFORMATION FflRM
Please Print
1, EMPLOYEE NAME
2, SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER
3, DATE OF BIRTH
L\, CURRENT HEIGHT
5, CURRENT WEIGHT
6, LAST YEAR OF SCHOOL COMPLETED
7, DATE HIRED
8, TYPE OF EMPLOYMENT
9, STATUS
10, EEPT/DIV/SECTION, ETC, IN WHICH
Last Name
£Tx-V- / / *•*" /
5Sl - bL- 5 y 0
7
, J.
1st. mid.
Initials
Feet Inches
Pounds
Years
SO
7>3
Month Day Year
^Permanent
&XX
Full-Time
Temporary
Part-Time
dT £& /) / TA // O ^ ,
11.
12,
13,
CURRENT JOB CLASS TITLE (ENTER
THE COMPLETE AND EXACT FORMAL
TITLE),
DISTRICT WHICH THE EMPLOYEE
NORMALLY WORKS OUT OF
TYPE OF CREW WHICH THE EMPLOYEE
NORMALLY WORKS ON (IF WORKING
IN CREW)
5 f
/J / + f /
lA/ASfc
SS-IRIS(EM)-Rev. 3-9/75
> 7
-------
Us*r No.
User Name
EQUIPMENT/VEHICLE INFORMATION FOHH
. _— PS-
of
TYPES OF USE_r.i)l)ES
II Kesldentl.il Collection
12 Commercial Collection
31 Street Cleaning
21 Landfill Operations
'ii Incinerator Operators
23 Transfer Station Operations
26 Recycling Operations
41 Office & Tnrd Use
51 Garage Use
EQUIPMENT HO.
(use yo«r
numbers)
EQUIPMENT
OR VEHICLE
TTPE (e.g..
rear-end loader]
CHASSIS DESCRIPTION
MAKE
MODEL (for
equip, only, not veh.)
YEAR
PACKER DESCRIPTION
HAKE
MODEL
YEAR
CAPA-
CITY
(cb.yds.)
SILL
HOT.
(inches)
DATE
OF
PURCHASE
(mo/yr)
TYPE
OF
USE
(see codes)
HOW OFTEN
EQUIPMENT
MAINTAINED?
(e.g., weekly)
AVERAGE USAGE
HRS.
DAY
DAYS
WEEK
EEKS
YEAR
ONS
DAY
ILES
DAY
I
CO
W
X
a
H
w
H
OJ
-------
EXHIBIT 4
EQUIPMENT INFORMATION
E-9
-------
TO PROVIDE EQUIPMENT DATA TO IRIS
BY COMPLETING AN IRIS
EQUIPMENT/VEHICLE INFORMATION FORM
FOLLOW THIS PROCEDURE:
1. Enclosed in this package is a set of blank Equipment/
Vehicle Information Forms (EVIFs) which have been
developed by IRIS for your organization and which
provide places to enter each of the types of required
information.
2. Also enclosed is an explanation of each of the types of
equipment data required by IRIS on the EVIF. If you
have any doubts about the meaning of any of the informa-
tion shown on the EVIF please consult this explanation
or contact the IRIS Central Office.
3. Complete the EVIF by listing the equipment or vehicle
number of ALL pieces of equipment included in IRIS in
the left hand column (i.e., column headed Equipment No.)
and filling in the correct information corresponding to
each piece of equipment in the columns to the right of
the equipment no. Use the explanation sheet if you have
any questions. You may need to make an estimate for
certain types of equipment information, e.g., sill
height, average usage. For sill height you might wish
to measure several packers and use the average as an
estimate. In amking your estimate, be certain to
consider the effect of different tire sizes on sill
height.
4. The EVIF is designed so that you can list the pieces
of equipment having the same characteristic more easily.
This is done by entering each of the equipment numbers
of all pieces of equipment that are the same in rows
right under each other, completing the columns for one
equipment number, and showing "dittos" for the other
pieces of equipment which are exactly the same. The
attached completed EVIF gives an example of how to do
this. If you use ditto's, be certain that all the pieces
of equipment are exactly the same. Notice that the
example has dittos except for a piece of equipment that
has a different characteristic.
E-10
-------
5. Return the completed EVIFs to the IRIS Central
Office.
E-ll
-------
EXPLANATION OF TYPES OF
EQUIPMENT DATA COVERED BY IRIS
The following is a brief explanation of each of the columns
on the IRIS Equipment/Vehicle Information Form. You are to
supply this information on each piece of equipment or vehicle
included in IRIS, e.g., packers, automobiles, bulldozers,
etc. Please contact the IRIS Central Office if you need any
further explanation on equipment information.
EQUIPMENT NO.
Use your organization's equipment or vehicle number. If
you do not have equipment numbers, designate a different
number to each piece of equipment or vehicle.
EQUIPMENT OR VEHICLE TYPE
This is a description of the type of equipment which is
associated with the vehicle. The following is a list of possible
equipment types: (this list is given to help make it clear
what is meant by equipment type; your organization may have
types of equipment which are not on this list, in which case
you should enter the other type(s) your organization has):
Rear-end loader
Front-end loader
Side loader
Load lugger
Roll-off
Container Delivery Truck
Trailer (transfer truck)
Cushman scooter
Overhead crane (incinerator)
Equipment service truck
Street sweeper
Tow truck
Snow plow
Crew truck
Open body dump truck
Open bed truck
Pickup truck
E-12
-------
Automobile
Tractor
Bulldozer
Earthmover
Scraper/grader
Forklift
Dragline
Disker
Tilt frame
Highlift
Crane
Compactor
Landfill spray truck
Water pump truck
Bobcat
CHASSIS DESCRIPTION
The description of the equipment is divided into "chassis
description" and "packer description". For packers fill
in both descriptions; for ether types of equipment fill
in only the chassis description.
Make
Self-explanatory
Model
Complete this for equipment only. (It is not necessary to
show the model for automobiles.)
Year
Self-explanatory
PACKER DESCRIPTION
Make
Example: Heil, Leach, Garwood, etc.
Model
Example: 2R (for Leach 2R)
Year
Self-explanatory
E-13
-------
Capacity
Indicate the capacity of the packer in cubic yards (e.g.,
25 yd.).
Sill Height
This is an important piece of information as the height of the
sill may be related to back injuries occurring while dumping.
It is recognized that you may not know the sill height of
each packer and that it may vary from packer to packer depending
on tire size. However, because of the importance of this
information, IRIS encourages you to make an estimate. It may
be advisable to make some measurements on a few packers. For
consistency, in all cases measure from the ground to the "lip"
of the sill, even for side loaders.
DATE OF PURCHASE
This data is used to indicate how long the equipment or vehicle
has been used by your organization, recognizing that for many
packers the year in which they were made is not an indication
of this. Indicate month and year.
TYPE OF USE
Use the codes shown at the top of the form.
MAINTENANCE SCHEDULE
Indicate how often the piece of equipment is regularly main-
tained, e.g., daily, weekly, etc. Enter "as needed" if there
is no regular maintenance.
AVERAGE USAGE
This information is collected in order to measure the hours of
exposure for each piece of equipment. These hours are added
to obtain the total hours of use (exposure) for each equip-
ment characteristic (e.g., total hours of exposure for rear-
end loaders) which is used in computing the injury rates by
equipment characteristic.
In most cases you will need to use averages and to make estimate
If^a piece of equipment is usually used as a "space", indicate
this by showing reduced days per week of usage (you may use
fractions).
E-14
-------
U..r H«.
U.er Na»c
E.QUlPHEHT/Vf.lllCI.E INFORMATION FORM
US./I- rr / ,r
TYPES (if ust OIDES
11 Kcsldenll.il Collection
12 Commercial Collection
31 Street Cleaning
21 Landfill Operations
II Incinerator Operators
23 Transfer Station Operations
24 Recycling Operations
41 Office i Yard Use
51 Garage Use
EQUIPMENT HO.
(use your
nunberO
/o/
(OQ
/03
BUI
E/12
9 00 1
q$0^
QO03
i
'Q005
3 60 In
fy(Y)*7
Q00£
EQUIPMENT
OR VEHICLE
TYPE (e.g.,
rear-end loader]
•Sofe -laxk
\
\
%Mfre.h
\
V
f] L 1 ' 1
Hti -7) /"Owl 1
*
IVtft'fetUilJsod
\s
CHASSIS DESCRIPTION
MAKF.
MAC*,
1
^
ttltt1
N|
1
I
/'
•r* Js/!
*
^
MODEL (for
equip. only, not veh.)
/OQ
j
>l
^hh /07
kmfoMl 1(T1
i '
I
1
^
YEAR
'!<
\
I
lot
7y
'(?>
PACKER DESCRIPTION
HAKE
Zhiif
i&ri.
\
f
MODEL
}a k • 1 00
\
i
£fc
\
\
V
YEAR
]/
"//
7^
/?
CATA-
cirr
(cb.ydo.)
'JO yd
i
I
farf
\
SILL
HOT.
(Inches)
v?';
1
i
2J
7
VI
DAYS
per
WEEK
7
L/.
5
N
^
WEEKS
per
YEAR
67'
i,
(2-
$0
\
/
2.
L
TONS
per
DAT
K
?
^
6
\
/
1ILE5
per
DAY
/Vf
7
it
%/
V
w
I
h-1
ui
-------
EXHIBIT 5
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
(Please Print)
IDENTIFICATION
1. Name of organization or
department
Director (name & title)
Address: Room No.
Street
City, State, ZIP
Phone Number (include Area
Code & Ext.)
PERSONS FOR CONTACT:
IRIS Coordinator
Name
Title
Department
Address: Room No.
Street
City, State, ZIP
Phone Number
Person to contact for Time Lost & Cost Data on injuries (e.g., Workmen's
Compensation insurance officer)
Name
Title
Department
Address: Room.No.
Street
City, State, ZIP
Phone Number
E-16
-------
Person(s) to contact for Employee Information (e.g., payroll clerk for
the sanitation department). If there is more than one person handling
personnel for sanitation employees, list each person and the division
or section they handle.
Name
Title
Division or Section
Address: Room No.
Street
City, State, ZIP
Phone Number
Name
Title
Division or Section
Address: Room No.
Street
City, State, ZIP
Phone Number
Person to contact about Equipment Information
Name
Title
Department :_
Address: Room No.
Street
City, State, ZIP
Phone Number
Company or City-Wide Safety Officer (or person responsible for Safety)
Name
Title
Department :
Address: Room No.
Street
City, State, ZIP
Phone Number
E-17
-------
3. PERSON (S) TO BE SENT QUARTERLY SAFETI MANAGEMENT REPORTS (QSMRs)
Name
Title
Department .
Address: Room No.
Street .
City, State, ZIP
Phone Number
Name
Title
Department
Address: Room No.
Street
City, State, ZIP
Phone Number
Name
Title
Department
Address: Room No.
Street
City, State, ZIP
Phone Number
E-18
-------
OPERATIONS INFORMATION
1. Is your organization a
(Check one)
private solid waste company
municipal solid waste agency
other. Please describe
2.
3.
Do you perform
For residential collection, please
check all of the following that apply
Does your organization use inter-
mediate containers (i.e., "tubs,"
"carts," or other type of container
into which refuse is dumped from
residential containers and carried
to the packer). If so, please de-
scribe it:
residential collection only
commercial collection only
or some of each
curbside collection
backyard collection
alley collection
mechanical collection
(e.g., "Godzilla;" not
bulk container collection)
no
yes, on all routes
yes, on some routes
If so, does the intermediate container
have wheels?
Do your organization's collection
crews work on a
no
Yes, on all inter, containers
yes, on some inter, container
task system basis only
fixed-hour (e.g., 8-hour
day) basis only
some task and some fixed-houi
E-19
-------
(Check one)
Indicate frequency of residential
collection:
Do you use
Does your organization use scooters
(e.g., 3-wheel Cushmans) in its
collection service
Check all collection crew size(s) at
your organization. Include the driver.
once-a-week
twice-a-week
other. Please describe
bulk containers only
manual container collectij
only
both bulk and manual
no
some routes
all routes
Check which types of collection equip-
ment are used at your organization:
List other types of collection equip-
ment used at your organization.
(Check all those that apply)
1-man crew
2-man crew
3-man crew
4-man crew
5-man crew
Front-end Loader
Rear-end Loader
Side Loader
Roll-Off
Load Lugger
Container Delivery Truck
Trailer
E-20
-------
ORGANIZATION "CHART"
Please list (draw) or attach a list (drawing) of all the sections of your
organization. If your organization is a private solid waste company, this
would be the organization chart for the whole company. In a municipality,
this would be an organization chart for the sanitation department. Give the
exact name of each section and indicate whether it is a section, unit, division,
bureau, etc.
E-21
-------
(See Section 1.3.2 of the Background
SECTIONS YOU WANT INCLUDED IN IRIS information instructional manual)
The following are basic "sections" of a solid waste firm or sanitation department.
Indicate which sections of your organization you plan to include in IRIS, the naae
your organization gives to these sections and the number of employees in these
sections. If you do not have a section at your organization, or do not wish to
include it in IRIS, circle "Not Included."
(Circle Approximate
one) No. of
Employees
Are ALL employees of your organization or sanitation Yes
department going to be included in IRIS? No
Residential Collection
Your organization's UAME FOR THIS SECTION.
(Indicate whether it is a department, divi-
sion, section, unit, bureau, etc., e.g.,
Residential Services Division.)
Included
Not Included
Name
Commercial Collection Included
Name Not Included
Disposal
Name Included
Indicate the number of disposal facilities Not Deluded
your organization is including in IRIS.
No. of:
Landfill(s)
Incinerator(s)
Transfer Station(s)
Recycling Facility(s)
Other. Please describe
Dead Animal Collection Included
Name Not Included
Street Cleaning Included
Name Not Included
E-22
-------
(Circle Approximate
one) No. of
Employees
Weed & Litter Control Included
Name Not Included
Equipment Maintenance Included
Name Not Included
Administration (including clerical personnel) Included
Name Not Included
Other Section(s) Included
Name ( s)
TOTAL NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES INCLUDED IN IRIS TOT
E-23
-------
CURRENT INJURY REPORTING SYSTEM (iF MUNICIPAL ORGANIZATION, REFER
ONLY TO THE SANITATION DEPARTMENT)
Describe briefly what happens when an injury occurs:
1. How does an injured employee on a route notify the office
of the accident?
2. Are all injured employees required to visit a doctor or Yes
medical facility? ..
MO
3. Does your organization have a set of doctors that the in- _Yes
jured employee must use? „
4. Do you have a first aid station? Yes
No
5. Who now completes the injury reports at your organization?
Give name(s) and title(s).
6. How strong is the effort to have all injuries reported?
Are injury reports normally completed on "first-aid" Yes
7. What investigations are made of injuries? By whom? For
what types of injuries?
8. Who REGULARLY reviews completed injury reports? Give
name(s) and title(s).
9. What types of injury statistics are currently being compiled
by your organization? By whom? Who reviews them?
(Include statistics compiled by the city-wide safety office,
if your organization is a municipality or by the head office
if a private company.)
E-24
-------
SAFETY PROGRAM (FOR SANITATION DEPARTMENT ONLY)
1. How many personnel does your organization have assigned
to solid waste safety?
full-time as a part of their job
no. no.
2. a. Who is in charge of your safety program? (Give name & title)
b. What does it include?
c. Does your safety program include movies
pamphlets
posters
demonstratior
tail gate
meetings
3. a. Do you have a safety committee? Yes
No
b. At what level is it organized? (e.g., departmental,
by district, etc.)
E-25
-------
c. Who are its members? How are they chosen?
d. Is it mandatory to attend? Yes
No
e. How often does the committee meet?
f. What is the committee's purpose and activities?
g. Does the committee have punitive power (e.g., can Yes
it recommend suspension of employees)? Please
describe. °
4. Estimate how much money per year your organization spends
on safety. (NOT including the cost of injuries.)
Include the salaries of safety personnel and the salaries
for the time that regular employees and foremen spend on
safety.
5. a. Do you have any complaints about your collection
equipment from the standpoint of safety? What
•3f~A •f-T-»^1T?
are they?
What procedure would you follow to get a safety
specification added?
What kinds of safety devices do you currently have
on your packer trucks? Have you made any special
adaptations for the sake of safety? Please des-
cribe in detail.
_Yes
No
b. Do you have difficulties getting the safety speci— Yes
fications you want included in your equipment bids? "
No
E-26
-------
Have you made any adaptations to other equipment
(e.g., intermediate container)? Please describe.
Jes
No
What special changes, other than equipment, have you made
to combat injury problems?
7- Do your employees belong to a union? What role does the
union play in safety?
_Yes
No
8.
What types of container rules does your
organization come under?
For Container type? (e.g., no oil drums)
For Container size?
For Container weight?
For Container condition?
For Container location?
If you are a private firm, are these municipal
regulations or simply rules which your organization
uses?
How well are these rules enforced?
jriunicipal
regulations
jorganization
rules
9. What are the injury rates at your organization? (if you know them)
OSHA Incidence Rate
or ANSI Frequency Rate
ANSI Severity Rate
If you do not know the rates, estimate the number of
injuries your organization had last year.
_in juries
Are these lost time cases only?
_Yes
No
E-27
-------
10. Do you think the number of injuries at your organi- greater
zation is greater than or less than the number of .
injuries at other organizations in the solid waste
management industry?
On what do you base this decision?
11. What do you think might be the special causes of injuries
at your organization? List any special features about
your region, your employees, your operational methods,
etc.
12. Do you think that with sufficient time and money, any- Yes
thing could be done to reduce accidents at your organi-
zation? No
could be done?
13. Do you have any plans for improving safety at your or- Yes
ganization in the near future? Please describe.
No
E-28
-------
HIRING S TRAINING
1. a. Do you have any hiring qualifications that are related Yes
to safety?
3 No
What are these?
b. Do you hire only experienced personnel? Yes
No
Try to
c. Do you give pre-employment physicals before hiring? Yes
No
What do they include?
2. a. What type of training do you provide a new hire?
Does it include more than teaching him the routes? Yes
No
b. What aspects of safety are included in the training?
c. Are there any instructions on how to lift? Yes
How is this instruction given? No
d. How much time is spent on training a new employee?
e. Is there any follow-up training for employees who Yes
have been at your organization for a period of time? „
What type of training? How much time is spent?
3. Estimate how many dollars per year your organization spends $_
on training. (Include the salaries for the new employees
and the trainers while in training.)
E-29
-------
YOUR ORGANIZATION'S IDENTIFICATION SYSTEM
1. Does your organization have an identification number Yes
for each major piece of equipment? „
2. Do you have a list of equipment (computerized or Yes
otherwise) .. If so, please attach and send with
this package.
3. Do all of your employees have some number that Yes
could be used as an identifying number? (e.g.,
Social Security number, work I.D. number, etc.)
4. For those employees that you want included in Yes
IRIS, do you have a list (computerized or other-
wise) giving names, and identification numbers? °
If so, please attach:and sent with this package.
5. Are your organization's operations divided into Yes
more than one district?
No
Does each district have a number? Yes
No
6. Do you have more than one office? Yes
No
Is there an office in each district? Yes
No
7. Do you have more than one sanitation garage? Yes
. No
Does each garage have a number? Yes
No
E-30
-------
MATERIALS TO ATTACH
1. A JOB CLASS LIST (WITH ACCOMPANYING JOB DESCRIPTIONS IF YOU HAVE THEM),
SHOWING JOB CLASSES TO BE INCLUDED IN IRIS. (VERY IMPORTANT - IRIS MUST
HAVE THIS INFORMATION.)
2. A copy of the injury report form which your organization currently uses.
3. A copy of any recent injury statistics you have compiled.
4. Any materials on your safety or training programs.
5. Any written work rules which you give to your new employees.
6. City container regulations.
7. Any pictures or diagrams you have showing adaptations made to your
equipment, intermediate containers, etc.
PLEASE REMEMBER TO ATTACH
• YOUR ORGANIZATION "CHART," IF YOU DIDN'T SHOW IT IN THIS FORM,
• YOUR LIST OF EQUIPMENT (IF AVAILABLE) ,
o YOUR LIST OF EMPLOYEES TO BE INCLUDED IN IRIS (IF AVAILABLE) .
E-31
-------
O.M.B. No. 158R 0111
EXHIBIT 6
WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION
AND LEAVE POLICY
(Please Print)
INSURANCE TYPE AND PREMIUM
1. Is your organization insured by an insurance
company or self-insured for Workmen's
Compensation?
2. If your organization is insured by an in-
surance company:
a. What is its:
Name
JEnsurance Co.
Self-Insured
Address
Phone(include Area Code)
Agent's Name (if known)
Agent's Title
b. What is the Workmen's Compensation In-
surance Premium rate at your organiza-
tion (rate per $100 wages to nearest
cent)?
c. If your organization is a municipality,
is the premium rate separately figured
for refuse collection and disposal em-
ployees, or is it part of the rate for
all municipal employees?
d. Is your organization's premium rate
"experience-rated"?
3. Are all your employees covered by Workmen's
Compensation?
_Sanitation separate
_0ne Rate for all
city employees
Jes
_No
Jes
No
SS-IRIS(WC)-Rev. 4 (8/75)
E-32
-------
AVAILABILITY OF TIME LOST & COST DATA
GO TO QUESTION 3 IF YOUR ORGANIZATION IS SELF-INSURED.
1. How often does your insurance company
normally send you the current cost
figures (i.e., medical expenses and
Workmen's Compensation benefits) on
each injury?
jnonthly
_quarterly
_s emi-annually
_yearly
_as requested
other. Please describe
If you gave any answer other than
"monthly" or "quarterly":
2. Can you arrange to obtain from your
insurance company the current cost data
on each injury on a monthly basis?
On a quarterly basis?
_Yes
_No
_Yes
No
3. Do you feel that your organization will
have difficulty for any reason in pro-
viding IRIS with prompt (i.e., preferably
monthly but at least quarterly) time lost
or cost data on each injury? Please
describe the difficulties that might
arise.
_Yes
No
NOTE: If your organization will be unable to provide time lost and cost data
on each injury on at least a quarterly basis, a special arrangement will need
to be made with your organization to obtain this data. You will be contacted
about the arrangements if they appear necessary from the answers you have
given above.
E-33
-------
WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION TEMPORARY DISABILITY
1. How is the Workmen's Compensation Temporary % of wages
Disability rate figured according to the ,,. m~vi,,~~-\,
c Y TrlgX/ WcSK
state rules under which your organization
falls? Include the maximum and minimum $ min/week
weekly rates and time and amount limits ... , . .
/ on*/ e ' *. c max, time limit
(e.g., 80/4 of wages up to a maximum of
$85/week; minimum of $20/week) . Include $ total amount U
any special requirements (e.g., about
dependents).
2. What is the Workmen's Compensation Temporary days
Disability "waiting period"? (i.e., how
many days after the injury can Workmen's
Compensation Temporary Disability payments
begin?)
3. What is the retroactive period? (e.g., in
some states the Temporary Disability normally
begins after a 3 day "waiting period" but, if
the employee eventually loses 7 weeks or
more, he is paid for the first 3 days. The
7 weeks is called a retroactive period.)
E-34
-------
SICK -LEAVE (USE FOR ON-fHE-JOB INJURIES)
1. How many days of Sick Leave per year is an Days
employee allowed? Describe how Sick Leave
days are accrued (e.g., 1 day a month).
2. Are employees allowed to use Sick Leave for Yes
on-the-job injuries?
No
IF SO, ANSWER THE FOLLOWING:
Are there any special eligibility require- Yes
ments for obtaining Sick Leave pay for an N
on-the-job injury? Please describe or attach
a Policy Statement if one is available.
Can accrued Sick Leave be carried over from Yes
year to year, or does it start over at certain „
points (e.g., the end of the year). If the
accrued Sick Leave cannot be carried over,
describe the "start-over" period.
5. When an employee leaves your employment is Yes
he paid for the Sick Leave he has accrued?
If so, describe payment system:
6. If an employee is using Sick Leave for an on-
the-job injury:
a. Does he get only his accrued Sick Leave Yes
days for the injury? „
b. If not, how many Sick Leave days is he
allowed per injury?
c. What percentage of his wages is covered
by Sick Leave for an injury (e.g. , 80% of
his regular daily pay)?
E-35
-------
INJURY LEAVE
1. Does your organization allow Injury Leave? Yes
(Injury Leave is a type of payment, OTHER „
THAN Workmen's Compensation or Sick Leave,
which is only provided for on-the-job in-
juries. It normally provides for all or
part of an employee's wages lost due to an
on-the-job injury.)
IF SO, ANSWER THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS:
2. What is your organization's Injury Leave
called?
3. What is the maximum amount of time allowed for
Injury Leave per injury?
4. How is the amount of the Injury Leave figured?
(e.g., 80% of wages.) Please describe and include
any changes in pay over time, e.g., "100% of wages
for first 6 months, 50% next six months." (Attach
a Policy Statement if you wish.)
5. What are the eligibility requirements for Injury
Leave? (Attach a Policy Statement if you wish.)
E-36
-------
OTHER "TEMPORARY" LEAVES THAN CAN BE USED FOR ON-THE-JOB INJURIES
1. Can your employees use vacation pay for lost Yes
time due to an on-the-job injury? „
No
If so,
a. How much vacation time is allowed per year
for your average collection employees?
Describe how it is accrued (e.g., employees
have to work six months before eligible
for 1/2 year's vacation).
b. Can accrued vacation time be carried over Yes
from year to year, or does it start over „
at certain points (e.g., the end of the
year)? If not, describe the cut-off
period.
c. When an employee leaves your employment is Yes
he paid for the Vacation Leave he has
accrued? If so, describe the payment
system.
2. Are there any other types of leave allowed by your Yes
organization which an employee could use as payment N
for lost time due to an on-the-job injury?
If so, please describe. Include the amount of leave
allowed per year.
3. Is the amount of Workmen's Compensation Temporary Taken out
Disability payment taken out of the amount paid for „ „
Sick Leave or Injury Leave (or other types of leave)
so that the total of the benefits does not exceed the
employee's wages? Or, is it added "on top of" these
leaves?
E-37
-------
PERMANENT DISABILITY BENEFITS
1. How are Workmen's Compensation Permanent
Disability payments figured according to the
State rules under which your organization
is covered? (give maximum and minimum
payments, periods, etc.) Attach policy
if you have one.
Permanent Total
_% of wages
max/week
min/week
jnax. time limit
total amount limit
Permanent Partial
Death (Widow and Dependent Benefits)
Widow
Widow
with
Children
I
max/wk
$ min/wk
_max. period
max, amount $
2. Does your organization provide any other
type of permanent disability benefits besides
Workmen's Compensation? Give name and
describe or attach Policy Statement.
Yes
No
E-38
-------
SALARIES (OPTIONAL!
List or attach the average salary (or salary range) of each of your job
classifications included in IRIS. Indicate whether the rates are per hour,
per day, per week, etc.
E-39
-------
MATERIALS TO ATTACH
If you have any of the following materials readily available to attach to
this form, it would greatly improve IRIS1 understanding of your organiza-
tion's insurance system.
1. A copy of the form(s) on which you keep track of the time lost and
costs for injuries.
2. A copy of a recent list sent to you from your insurance company
showing the time lost and costs of your injuries.
3. A copy of any recent report analyzing injuries provided to you by
your insurance company.
4. A copy of your organization's policy on Sick Leave, Injury Leave,
Workmen's Compensation and other benefits available for injured
employees.
E-40
-------
JOB TITLE BY ORGANIZATIONAL UNIT MATRIX
User No.
Name
pg,
of
to
0)
H
•P
•H
EH
A
O
Q)
^d
o
u
-w-
Organ. Unit Name
Code
S-IRIS(JOM)-Rev. 1-9/75
-------
USER CODE & STANDARD JOB CLASS CODE MATCH LIST
User No.
Name
pg,
of
USER ORGAN. UNIT & JOB CLASS
NAME
Organiz . Unit
Class
CODE
Org.
Class
STANDARD JOB CLASS
CODE
NAME
Division
Class
1
w
X
tc
H
w
CD
-------
EXHIBIT 9
LIST OF STANDARD JOB CLASSIFICATION CODES
1 SUPERINTENDENT
2 ASST*SUPERINTENDENT
3 DISTRICT MANAGER
4 FOREMAN
5 COLLECTOR (NON-DRIVER)
6 PACKER TR.DRIVER (NON-COLD
7 COLLECTOR/DRIVER
8 LOAD-LUGGER DRIVER
9 ROLL-OFF DRIVER
10 CONTAINER DELIVERY TRUCK DRIVER
11 MULTIPLE EQUIPMENT DRIVER
12 OPEN BODY TRUCK DRIVER
13 TRAILER DRIVER
14 BULKY ITEM CRANE TR»DRIVER
15 CREW TRUCK DRIVER
16 DEAD ANIMAL COLLECTOR/DRIVER
17 DRIVER/OPERATOR
18 HEAVY EQUIP*OPERATOR
19 MECHANICAL SWEEPER OPERATOR
20 OPERATOR
21 OVERHEAD CRANE OPERATOR
23 MANUAL SWEEPER OPERATOR
24 FEE COLLECTOR/SCALEMAN
25 SPOTTER
26 STOKER
27 MAINTENANCE REPAIRMAN
28 MAINT. MECHANIC
29 MAINT* ELECTRICIAN
30 WELDER-
SI LABORER
32 SAN, ENFORCEMENT / CUSTOMER SERVICE OFFICER
33 DISPATCHER
34 SALESMAN
35 WATCHMAN/GUARD
36 CUSTODIAN
37 STORES CLERK
38 SAFETY/TRAINING DIRECTOR
39 ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT
41 CLERICAL PERSONNEL
42 INSPECTOR
43 SURVEYOR
44 SUPERVISOR
45 COMMISSIONER
46 ASST»COMMISSIONER
47 ENGINEER
48 SKILLED LABORER
51 PAINTER
52 DRIVER
53 DEAD ANIMAL COLLECTOR
54 DEAD ANIMAL DRIVER
55 DOG WARDEN
56 EXTERMINATOR
57 BULKY ITEM CRANE TR.LABORER
58 BULKY ITEM COLLECTOR
59 BULKY ITEM CREW FOREMAN
60 CARPENTER
1101 SUPERINTENDENT
1102 ASSISTANT SUPERINTENDENT
E-43
-------
1103 DISTRICT MANAGER
1131 LABORER
1132 SAN, ENFORCEMENT / CUSTOMER SERVICE OFFICER
1133 DISPATCHER
1134 SALESMAN
1135 WATCHMAN/GUARD
1136 CUSTODIAN
1137 STORES CLERK
1138 SAFETY/TRAINING DIRECTOR
1139 ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT
1141 CLERICAL PERSONNEL
1142 INSPECTOR
1144 SUPERVISOR
2004 RESID,/COMM, COLL. FOREMAN
2005 RESID,/COMM, COLL* REFUSE COLLECTOR
-------
3135 LANDFILL WATCHMAN/GUARD
3152 LANDFILL TRUCK DRIVER
3204 INCINERATOR FOREMEN
3218 INCINERATOR HEAVY EQUIPMENT OPERATOR
3220 INCINERATOR OPERATOR
3221 INCINERATOR OVERHEAD CRANE OPERATOR
3224 INCINERATOR FEE COLLECTOR/SCALEMAN
3225 INCINERATOR SPOTTER
3226 INCINERATOR STOKER
3227 INCINERATOR MAINTENANCE REPAIRMAN
3228 INCINERATOR MECHANIC
3229 INCINERATOR ELECTRICIAN
3231 INCINERATOR LABORER
3304 TRANSFER STATION FOREMAN
3313 TRANSFER STATION TRAILER DRIVER
3318 TRANSFER STATION HEAVY EQUIPMENT OPERATOR
3324 TRANSFER STATION SCALEMAN
3325 TRANSFER STATION SPOTTER
3331 TRANSFER STATION LABORER
3404 RECYCLING OPERATIONS FOREMAN
3420 RECYCLING OPERATIONS OPERATOR
3431 RECYCLING OPERATIONS LABORER
4104 STREET CLEANING FOREMAN
4105 STREET CLEANING (NON-DRIVER)
4112 STREET CLEANING OPEN BODY TRUCK DRIVER
4119 MECHANICAL STREET SWEEPER OPERATOR
4123 MANUAL STREET SWEEPER
4131 STREET CLEANING LABORER
5104 WEED AND LITTER CONTROL FOREMAN
5112 WEED AND LITTER CONTROL OPEN BODY TRUCK DRIVER
5115 WEED AND LITTER CONTROL CREW TRUCK DRIVER
5131 WEED AND LITTER CONTROL LABORER
5142 WEED AND LITTER INSPECTOR
6104 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE FOREMAN
6128 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE MECHANIC
6129 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE ELECTRICIAN
6130 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE WELDER
6131 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE LABORER
6148 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE SKILLED LABORER
6151 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE PAINTER
6152 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE DRIVER
7104 MISCELLANEOUS SERVICES FOREMAN
7105 MISCELLANEOUS SERVICES COLLECTOR (NON-DRIVER)
7107 MISCELLANEOUS SERVICES COLLECTOR/DRIVER
7117 MISCELLANEOUS SERVICES OPERATOR/DRIVER
7131 MISCELLANEOUS SERVICES LABORER
8104 CONTAINER MAINTENANCE FOREMAN
8110 CONTAINER MAINTENANCE CONT. DELIVERY TRUCK DRIVER
8128 CONTAINER MAINTENANCE MECHANIC
8130 CONTAINER MAINTENANCE WELDER
8131 CONTAINER MAINTENANCE LABORER
E-45
-------
EXHIBIT 10
IRIS
EMPLOYEE DATA UPDATE LIST
DATE: SEPTEMBER ir 1977
RETURN ON: SEPTEMBER 30r 1977
IRIS USER: BROOKLINETMA - 102
ORGANIZATIONAL JOB PERM/ FULL-TIME/ DATE
UNIT TITLE TEMP PART-TIME OF CHAN|
BAKERfP* 555-88-9999 DISTRICT 4
RESIDENTIAL COLL* LABORER PERM FULL-TIME
DOEfE. 111-22-4567 DISTRICT 4
COMMERCIAL COLL, DRIVER PERM FULL-TIME ,
JEFFERSON*H. 222-33-4444 DISTRICT 4
RESIDENTIAL COLL, LABORER PERM FULL-TIME ;
LOPEZrJ. 777-99-8888 DISTRICT 987
COMMERCIAL COLL. DRIVER PERM FULL-TIME i
NELSONfV. 888-44-1234 DISTRICT 4
RESIDENTIAL COLL. LABORER PERM FULL-TIME 1
SMITHS. 444-33-2222 DISTRICT 7
COMMERCIAL COLL. DRIVER PERM FULL-TIME <
E-46
-------
EXHIBIT 11
JOB CLASS BASING DATA
USER:
JOB CLASS
NAME
NUMBER_
TITLE
CODE
TASK SYSTEM? YES
NO
TIMES AND HOURS WORKED
EACH DAY OF WEEK
SUN
MON
TUES
WED
THURS
FRI
SAT
TO
TO
TO
TO
TO
TO
TO
APPROX. OVER TIME HRS./WEEK
VACATION: WORKDAYS/YR
HOLIDAY/YR NOT MADE UP
ESTIMATED OTHER LEAVE
(SICK LEAVE, PERSONAL ETC.)"
TOTAL =.
HOURS/VACATION OR
LEAVE DAY =
HRS
TOTAL HOURS
LEAVE/VAC
HRS
SUBTOTAL =
TOTAL =
HRS/YR
NOT COUNTING
LEAVE/VACATION
ETC.
TOTAL HOURS WORKED/YR (A-B)
E-47
-------
EXHIBIT 12
TYPES OF EQUIPMENT
CODE DESCRIPTION
1 REAR-END LOADER
2 FRONT-END LOADER
3 SIDE LOADER
4 LOAD LUGGER
5 ROLL-OFF
6 CONTAINER DELIVERY TRUCK
7 TRAILER(TRANSFER TRUCK)
8 SCOOTER
9 OVERHEAD CRANE(INCINERATOR)
10 EQUIPMENT SERVICE TRUCK
11 STREET SWEEPER
12 TOW TRUCK
13 SNOW PLOW
14 CREW TRUCK
15 OPEN BODY DUMP TRUCK
16 OPEN BED TRUCK
17 PICKUP TRUCK
18 AUTOMOBILE
19 TRACTOR
20 BULLDOZER
21 EARTHMQVER
22 SCRAPER/GRADER
23 FORKLIFT
24 DRAGLINE
25 DISKER
26 TILT FRAME
27 HIGHLIFT
28 CRANE
29 COMPACTOR
30 SPRAY TRUCK
31 WATER PUMP TRUCK
32 BOB CAT
33 RIDING MOWER
34 JEEP
35 FIRE TRUCK
36 COLLECTION TRAILER TRAIN
37 BULKY ITEM CRANE TRUCK
38 TRACTOR & OPEN BED TRAILER
40 OPEN BODY TR W/ HYDR LOADER/CRANE
41 TRACTOR W/ HYDRAULIC LOADER
42 LOWBOY TRUCK
43 LOW BOY TRAILER
44 UTILITY
45 PULL SCRAPPER
46 BACK HOE
47 PANEL .TRUCK
48 TRAILER W/CRANE
49 CHIPPER
50 VACUUM COLLECTOR
51 GODZILLA
52 CATERPILLAR
53 TANK TRUCK „ .
-------
TYPES OF EQUIPMENT (Continued)
CODE DESCRIPTION
55 LOADER
56 AIR COMPRESSOR
57 TANDEM DUMP
58 DUMPSTER DUMP
59 DUMP MASTER
60 FLUSHER
61 COMPACTION TRAILER
62 SALT SPREADER
63 CLOSED BODY DUMP TRUCK
64 OPEN BODY TR W/ HYDRAULIC TAILGATE
65 MECH. SIDE LOADER (E.G.RAPID RAIL)
66 CAB
67 MECH FRONT-END LDR (E»G.GODZILLA)
68 MECH* REAR-END LOADER (E.G.COBEY)
99 OTHER
E-49
-------
EQUIPMENT MAKES
CODE DESCRIPTION
1 CHEVROLET
2 FORD
3 DODGE
4 CMC
5 INTERNATIONAL HARVESTER
6 MACK
7 ALLIS-CHALMERS
8 LEACH
9 HEIL
10 EASY PAC
11 CUSHMAN
12 GARWOOD
13 WHITE
14 MASTER
15 WISCONSIN
16 DEITZ
17 MOBIL
18 WAYNE
19 PELICAN
20 ELGIN
21 HYSTER
22 DIAMOND REO
23 HELIX
24 MAXON
25 PAK MOR
26 DEMPSTER
27 MASSEY-FERGUSQN
28 STUDEBAKER
29 SEGRAVES
30 FWD
31 JOHN DEERE
32 WILLYS
33 PLYMOUTH
34 AMC
35 DORSEY
36 WHEELHORSE
37 BAKER
38 LAM
39 EVO
40 MAZDA
41 PETERBILT
42 BEMARS
43 CAT
44 AUSTIN WESTERN
45 FRUZHAUF
46 POCLAIN
48 COBEY
49 DEMPSEY
50 HYDE PAK
51 CHIP MOR
52 GIANT VAC
53 WHIRL-WIND
54 TRANSIT
E-50
-------
CODE DESCRIPTION
55 COLBY
56 EZ PACK
57 TRUXMORE
58 LOAD MASTER
59 TRUCK EQUIP.
60 LO BOYE
61 HARDEE
62 MILLER TILT
63 RAY GO
64 CRAWLER CRANE
66 BRONCO
67 LODAL
68 SCOUT
69 JEEP
70 KUKA SHARK
71 BALDWIN LIMA
72 RAY-GO-WAGNER
73 TILTSER
74 FASTPAK
75 ARMY SURPLUS
76 GALION
77 AUTOCAR
78 DRESSEL
79 MADSEN
80 ASPLUNDH
81 WESTERN
82 WABCO
83 TYMCO AIR SWEEPER
84 RANGER
85 LOADPACKER
86 CURTIS
87 HOBBS
88 CASKINS
89 PEABODY
90 LE TOURNEAU
91 HOLT
92 HAUL-ALL
93 INGRAHAM
94 KOEHRING
95 SAVAGE
96 INGERSOL
97 PEMCO
98 GALBRAITH
99 OTHER
-------
TYPES OF USE
CODE DESCRIPTION
10 RESIDENTIAL S COMMERCIAL
11 RESIDENTIAL COLLECTION
12 COMMERCIAL COLLECTION
21 LANDFILL OPERATIONS
22 INCINERATOR OPERATIONS
23 TRANSFER STATION OPERATIONS
24 RECYCLING OPERATIONS
25 RES/COMM.COLL.& TRANS*OPERATIONS
31 STREET CLEANING
32 STREET CLEANING&TRANS.OPERATIONS
•41 OFFICE 8 YARD USE
51 GARAGE USE
61 SNOW REMOVAL
71 WEED & LITTER CONTROL
MAINTENANCE SCHEDULE
CODE DESCRIPTION
1 ONCE A DAY - TO TWICE/WEEK
2 LESS THAN ONCE/WEEK
3 LESS THAN TWICE/WEEK
4 AS NEEJDED—NONE
5 LESS THAN ONCE A MONTH
15 EVERY 1500 MILES
30 EVERY 3000 MILES
E-52
-------
EXHIBIT 13
CREW TYPE BASING DATA
USER: NAME
NUMBER
CREW TYPE: (check one only under each factor describing crew)
RESID./COMM
Residential
Commercial
Res. & Comm.
(on same day)
Other
(list)
CONTAINER USED
Manual
Bulk Container
Manual & Bulk
Bag
Not Applicable (e.g.,
brush crew)
Other
(list)
EQUIPMENT TYPE
Rear-end Loader
Rear-end Loader & Scooter
Front-end Loader
Front-end Loader & Scooter
Side Loader
Train (e.g.,EVO's)
Train & Scooter
Mechanical Loader (e.g., rapid rail)
Open Bed
Open Bed & Scooter
Open Bed w/Crane
Load Lugger
Roll-Off
Other
(Tiit}
TYPE
Brush
Bulky Item
Paper
Dead Animal
Chemical
Glass
Regular Collection
Other
(list)
PT. OF COLLECTION
Curbside
Alley
Curbside & Alley
Backyard w/o
intermediate can
Backyard with tub
Backyard with cart
Mechanical
Not Applicable (e.g.,
commercial)
Other ___^
(list)
CREW SIZE
(include driver)
E-53
For Office Use Only
Std. Crew Type
Std. Equip. Type
-------
(A)
AVERAGE NO. OF CREWS OF THIS TYPE AT THIS TIME
Does this no. vary greatly during year? YES
NO
TASK SYSTEM? YES NO
SHIFT #
TIMES AND HOURS WORKED
HRS
EACH DAY OF WEEK
SUN :
MON :
TUES :
WED :
THURS :
FRI :
SAT :
TO
TO
TO
TO
TO
TO
TO
(B)
TOTAL
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY
(C)
TOTAL CREW HRS PER WEEK (A x B)
(D)
TOTAL MAN-HOURS ON THIS CREW PER WEEK
(crew size x C)
E-54
-------
User No.
PROTECTIVE CLOTHING BASING DATA
Crew Type Code
Job Class Titles _. , _
^ standard code Job clasg Titles Standard Code Job Class Titles Standard Code
2. A-
1.
-3 2- 2'
-1. 3' 3-
4. 4.
Type
W
Ln
C/1
Brand Name
Mandatory
Y/N
City Supplies
Y/N
Discount
All Job Classes?
Replacement
Time
Other
- [uj
X
ffi
H
CD
•fc.
-------
EXHIBIT 15
INSTRUCTIONS FOR PHONING-IN INJURIES TO IRIS
INTRODUCTION
Attached are some copies of a List of Types of Information to
Report. This List shows you the types of information that
IRIS will require on each injury when you phone-in an injury
report. We have found that injury reports that closely follow
the list take less time and include all necessary data. Usually
the telephone call will take less than three minutes per injury.
SPECIFIC PROCEDURES
1. Make sure you have ready all the types of information
shown on the List of Types of Information to Report for
the injury you are going to report. You may do this by:
a) adding the information to your organization's regular
injury report form.
b) making notes on a copy of the List of Types of Infor-
mation to Report.
2. Dial this number:
(714) 755-0274
(714) 755-0275
(San Diego, Calif.)
3. When the IRIS staff member comes on the line:
a) give your organization's name
b) give your IRIS User No.
Your IRIS User No.
Is
The IRIS staff member will ask you:
a) for the identification information regarding the
injury (no.'s 1-5 on the List).
b) to describe the injury in your own words.
c) any specific questions on types of information on
which clarification is needed.
E-56
-------
EXHIBIT 16
REVISED
LIST OF TYPES OF INFORMATION TO REPORT
(for phoning-in injury reports to IRIS)
.OR
Injury Reporting
Phone Numbers
(711) 755-0274
755-0275°
1. Your IRIS User No.
2. Injured Employee I.P.:
a- Name (give spelling)
b. Social Security #
3. Date of accident;
a. Month day year _
b. Day of week
c. Time of day AM / PM
d. Hours worked prior to injury
4. District which the employee normally works out of . .
(Must correspond to District List)
5. Equipment # (all equipment involved).
a. Was the equipment damaged or malfunctioning before the accident? Yes / No
b. Which part?
c. If equipment moving, direction and speed
6. Describe how the accident happened (in sufficient detail to enable all signifi-
cant factors to be recorded)
7. What was the employee doing (be exact - include description of anything
handled or in use by employee)
8. Part of body injured (e.g., eye)
9. Nature of injury (e.g., cut, sprain, bruise)
0. General Accident Site (e.g., on collection route, landfill, enroute, transfer
station)
Exact site (e.g., at rear of truck, in vehicle cab, on running board, in
customer's yard, at dump area) _.
E-57
-------
II. Description of container in use r type (e.g., plastic bag)
size (standard = 32 gal.) , weight
condition (e.g., heavy, sharp edges)
T2. Characteristics of waste (e.g., glass, shrubbery, furniture, rocks, paper)
13. Protective clothing being worn (e.g., gloves, include all uniform required)
14. Crew Type
a. Brush, residential, commercial, street cleaning, (combinations)
b. Does crew use bulk container? Is this manual pickup?
c. Collection point (e.g., backyard, curbside, alley combinations)^
d. Crew size (include driver)
15. Employee was
a. Working on task system/hourly ?
b. In training/supervising ? Regular job
16. Heather at time of accident (e.g., rain, snow, very hot, very cold)
17. Environmental conditions (e.g., excessive noise, glare, exhaust fumes,
darkness)
18. Surface conditions (e.g., wet, icy, objects on ground, change in level)
19. Accident involved:
Interaction between employees Alcohol, drugs
(e.g., coworker helping employee Scavenging
to lift) Attempt to catch or avoid
Horseplay Fatigue
Hurry, speed, haste Distraction
20. Was the packer operating at the time of accident? Yes / No
Something ejected? Yes / No
21. If other employees injured in this accident, how many?
22. What do you think was the cause of the accident?
23. What steps are you taking to prevent this from happening again?
E-58
6.3.77
-------
Safety Sciences
ivislon of WSA Inc.
1772 Sorrento Valley Road
an Diego, California
2121
f14) 755-9359
EXHIBIT 17
O. M. B. No. 158R 0111
Approval Expires August 1975
ELGIN-WAYNE
DISPOSAL COMPANY
INJURY REPORT FORM
FOR THE INJURY REPORTING AND ANALYSIS SYSTEM
OF THE SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT INDUSTRY
Sponsored Under Contract #68-03-0231
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Solid Waste Management Programs
Name of Injured Employee
Name of Person Completing This Form
Date of Injury
Injured Employee's Immediate
Supervisor
Injury Number
Elgin Wayne Disposal No.
SS-IRAS- Rev. EW2 (7/31/74)
E-59
Title
Date
Names of witnesses to the accident
who were not injured:
-------
INSTRUCTIONS
1. This Injury Report Form is designed to describe an injury by dividing
the description into parts. Each section covers a particular part of
the injury. When completing a section, only give information relevant
to the part of the injury being covered in that section. There are ten
sections to this Injury Report Form.
• General Information
• Part of Body Injured
• Injury Description (e. g. , cut, fracture, etc.)
• Protective Clothing Being Worn
• Accident Description (e. g. , fall, insect bite, etc.)
• Activity Description (i.e., what the injured employee was doing
when he was injured)
• Traffic Accident Information
• Outdoor Conditions (at the time of the injury)
• Characteristics of the Waste (i.e., that's being handled^
• Written Description
2. Be as specific in your answers as possible.
3. Most questions refer only to the injured employee and only to the time
at which he was injured.
4. For all questions
EITHER: Check the box next to the best provided answer.
OR: Give the numerical answer requested in the boxes provided.
5. For the questions which ask for numerical answers, complete all
boxes. If there are more boxes than required for your answer, place
(zero)es in front of your answer. Example: September = |0|9], not[9| J
6. Disregard the numbers in the top left hand-corner. These numbers
are used for processing only.
7. The directions to the individual questions or sections of the Injury
Report Form indicate whether one, or more than one, answer is
permissible. DO NOT check more than one box unless you are
specifically instructed that this is permissible.
8. Please read the directions on each page carefully.
E-60
-------
GENERAL INFORMATION
•I. Date of Injury
2. Injured Employee's
Social Security Number
3. Time of the Injury
4. Day of Week (Mon = 1.
Tues a 2, etc.)
5. Number of hours on
job prior to the injury
(on day of accident)
6. Type of accident cite:
7.-Collection Route No.
(if applicable)
8. Type of collection site:
(if applicable)
9. Did the accident occur
in an-alley?
10. Crew .ize at time ot
injury (if applicable)
11. Was the injured
employee working
in/on:
mmm
mo day yr
or nun
pm
D
m
Oi«t in 1/2 hour
increment*)
R«»Wentlal Route
I I Commercial Route
PI Roll Off Rout*
D
I I Clean-op Truck Route
Q Office
F"l Office Yard
PI Other
(plexae lilt)
m
i I Houie *e Apartment.
I I Builnen
{"I Public Institution*
|~| Hoipital/Doctor'i Oaice
(~) Other.
(pleaie ll*t)
D Ye.
D No
D
L_J Adminiitratioa
| I Clean-up Truck
[~1 Roll-Off Truck
P~l Bulldozer
| | Container Crew
| j Load Lugger Crew
| | Rear-end Loader Crew
j] Garage Crew
f~| Other
(pleaie lift)
12. Was the injured employee work- I J Ye.
ing at his regular job at the time PI NO
of the injury?
If not. describe temporary job.
13. Did the accident occur while the
injured employee was scavenging
material from waste?
14. Was the Injured employee known
to be under the influence of
alcohol or drugs at the time of
the injury?
15. Was the injured employee in-
volved in horseplay at the time
of the injury?
16. Did the injury involve the com-
bined actions of more than one
worker? (e. g., two employees
lifting a container together; a
driver accelerates as helper
tries to mount step, etc.
17. Did the accident occur while the
employee was trying to get out
of the way of a sudden danger?
18. Was the injured employee acting
in a supervisory capacity at the
time of the injury?
19. Was the injured employee being
trained at the time of the injury?
20. Was the packing mechanism
operating at the time of the
injury?
21. If other employees were In-
jured in this accident, please
lict their Injury Numbers.
22. List identification codes for all
equipment and vehicles that In-
jured the employee or were in
use at the time of the accident.
23. Was the injured employee
casual laborer?
(pl«ai« Hit)
PI Ye.
D No
LJ Unknown/Uncertain
D Ye.
D No
11 Unknown/Uncertain
D
D No
Fj Unknown/Uncertain
D
D
D
D No
D Ye.
D No
D Y*.
D
D No
Q Not Applicable
L~) Unknown
rrm
rrrn
cm
n
Unknown
E-61
-------
PART OF BODY INJURED
Check one and only one box
•which best describes the
part of the body injured.
INJURY DESCRIPTION
Check one and only one box
which best describes the in-
jury sustained.
PROTECTIVE CLO
BEING WORN AT
TIME OF INJURY
Check as many boxes a«
necessary to describe thj
protective clothing
worn.
HEAD
O Scalp
Q Skull
Q Brala
Fac.
D
(~"| mouth, lip, teeth
I1 forehead
II no**
D
•««
oth«
(pleace list)
|)NECK
[^"| UPPER EXTREMITIES
| | Shoulder
| j Arm (upper/lower)
I I Elbow
F~l Wrl»t
(I Finger*
I I Fingernail*
D Other
. . (pleas* lilt)
| I TRUNK
|~1 Back
| | Abdomen
{"I Chest (Rib*)
D Hip.
r~l Buttock*
i""} GeaitalU, Groin
PI Other
D
(please list)
LOWER EXTREMITIES
1 I Lei (upp«r/lower)
Q Knee
Q Ankl«
CD Foot
D To..
f~) ToenaU.
f") Other,
D
D
(please list)
MULTIPLE PARTS INJURED
OTHER
(please list)
a
D
a
n
a
a
D
D
D
D
D
D
\ |
Amputation, Avulsion
Asphyxia, Strangulation,
Drowning
Bite from. Animal
Bite (Sting) from Insect
Bruise, Contusion, Crushing
Burn or Scald from Heat
Burn from Chemical
Concussion
ConUglout, Infectious Disease
Cut, Laceration, Puncture
Dental Injury
Dermatitlc, Rash
Dislocation
Electric Shock
Foreign Object in Eye
Fracture
Freezing, Frostbite, Other Low
Temperature Effects
Hearing Loss or Impairment
Hernia, Rupture
Infection
Inflammation of Joints, Tendon*
and Muscle.
Nosebleed
Poisoning, Blood Poisoning
Scratches (Superficial),
Abrasion*
Sprain. Strain
Sunburn
Sunstroke. Heat Cramps, Heat
Exhaustion
Systemic Disorder
(e.g.. Allergy)
Traumatic Shock
Multiple Types of Injury
Other .
(please llat)
{\ Hardhat
( | "Bump" Cap
J I Glove*
{ j Safety Shoo.
| | Heavy Shoo.6"
j | Heavy Shoe.9"
I I Goggle,.
[ j Safety Glasres
f~1 Ear Muff.
LI Uniform (Issued clothinj)
I I Cold Weather Gear
I I R»ln Gear
j j Other
(pleas* list)
-------
ACCIDENT DESCRIPTION
"WTiat type of accident occurred?
Look at-the left half of the page. For injuries involving two accident types: In Col. A, First Accident, check
the accident type which was the first event in the accident. In Col. B, Accident Inflicting Injury, check the
accident which inflicted the injury. (Example: employee fell from step and hit head on pavement. Check "Fall
to & Different Level" in Col. A, and "Struck Against Object" in Col. B). For injuries involving only one accident
type (e. g., insect bite): cHeck the same accident type in both Columns A and B.
The right half of the page contains questions about the red-lettered accident types. If you have checked a red-lettered
accident type see the section with tfie number indicated. Answer all questions in this section. DO NOT answer ques-
tions outside of this section.
1-
2
3
4
5
6
A
B
Accident
InfUetlnu
Accident Injury
^
•^••e*.
•••awa
Foreign Object In Eye
Hurt by Object* Being Handled
Struck by Object (Except Vehicle)
Struck Agilntt Object (Except
Vehicle)
Struck By Vehicle
Struck Against Vehicle
Caught In Something
Caught Between Two Object*
Fall to the Same Level
Stumble. Trip, Slip, Lot* of
BaUnce (I. e. , Without Falling)
Fall to a Different Level
Exploilon or Fir*
Overaxtrtlon (e.g. , Accident
Occurred While Lifting)
Dermatlti* (e.g.. Skin. Rath)
lDJ*ct Bite, Sting
Animal Bite, Scratch (Dog,
Cat, fttc.)
Rodent Bite, Scratch
Stepped on Sharp Object
(NaU*. *te.)
Inhile, Swallow or Come In
Contact with Toxic Sabatance
(PUa*e ll«t *ub*tuce If known)
Burn from Chemical
(Pl.a.e ll>t chemical If known)
Barn from Fly Aih
Reialt of Atfreiilve Act (e.g.,
being deliberately punched by
tomeone)
Cavtltt
Unknown
No Specific or Single Event Can
be Identified a* the Cause of
the Injury (e.g., back (train
that developed gradually)
Other
(pita a e U*t)
1
(I
I
r
((
1
^ FOREIGN ODJECT IN EYE
— I HURT BY ODJECTS BEING
— 1 HANDLED
— > STRUCK BY OBJECT (Except
— 1 Veblcle)
D STRUCK AOA1NST OBJECT
(Except Vehicle)
Whut W«« The Oblect? (Check one)
Container
Bulk container (1-6 yd)
Bulk container (20-30 yd)
Bulk container (35-40 yd)
Bulk container lid
OUdrum
Fellow worker
(unintentionally)
Gang* door
Fcncee. gmtei, etc.
Walli. b*ame, etc.
Loj, lumber, etc.
Shrubbery
Flying or falling debrU
Glat*
Hypodermic needle*
Fluoreicent bulb*
Other (harp object
Furniture, appliance*
Hand tool*
Heavy equipment
Noxloua liquid*
Pavement, ground
rvh»»
(please llet)
*'«• The Ofa|*et Exacted Frem The
Ho.
'!!
pper?
Ye*
No
Unknown
Net applicable
^) STRUCK BT VEHICLE
] STRUCK AGAINST VEHICLE
Which Part? (Check one)
-
-
W
EflUr* vehicle
VladiUeU
Cab ef vehicle
Cab door
Sid* ef v -ilcl*
Back of vehicle
Truck hood
Edge of hopper
Elad* of packer
Reardoor ef packer
Step ef packer
Other
(pleaee Hit)
» The Vehicle: (Check one)
Moring forward at curb (peed
Moving forward at refular ipeed
Morlat forward at highway ipeed
Backing
Not moving
oil
31I
D
1
—
-
CAUGHT IN
CAUGHT nETWEEPC
Packing mechanltm
Bulk eonUlner It wall or rehlcl*
Edge ef hopper fc centalner
Two container*
Truck door
Wall er fence V vehicle
Two vehicle*
Other
(pleaee llet)
-1!
'
"^ FALL ON THE SAKE LEVEL
D STUMBLE, TRIP, SLIP, LOSS OF
BALANCE (without falling)
re* The Fall! (Chack all that apply)
—
—
Oa a allpperr rurfme*
Oa aa mj>e»on mrtaee (e. f. , hot* U
fttnat
Orer £9J«eU ea grwind
Orer »bj*ct* prefcrodlnc froen f round
Other
(pi.
U-catiefl Of Fall (Cheek i
—
—
—
LaadfU
Alley
Street
Drireway
Reildertial yard
Employer'* efllce
Employer'* ga.rate
Employer'* yard
Other
M*« Ult)
(pie*** ll»q
Did The Fall Ocean
aiadoer*
Ovtfeer*
5 Q FALL TO A DIFFERENT LEVEL
ieeatJea Of Fall
6
Frcm T6
Cab
SUp(efWdcU)- ~
Curb
Stair*
Dock
Otinr
(*l*e.e* llet)
tH3 The Fall Pecan
Btodocr*
Ovtdooi*
If The Fall Wa* Frem A
Vehicle: (Check one)
^ Orwuri
[ Floer
Dcwn •mbaakment
Otfto OYTThiraed
container
Otibar
(pleae* 11*4
Veklcl*. We* The
Uertat forward at curb *p**3
Merlag forward at r>rular ip**4
Mtrrlm forward at highway lpe*d
Racklnc
Mot monn£
^j EXPLOSION OR FIRE
Vher* Wa* TV* Hr»T (Ctock rme)
P
1 In cert* In* »
la packer truck
At landfill
Othar
(pU»«e li«l|
u-faj
-------
ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION
delnf »t
wn Inlur«d7
Thli page U divided Into 11 »«eUon*. Each ..etlon ha* one or more actlvitlei which are lilted In red. Mo.l i.cllon*
"have auciUont which apply only to th* actlvltle* la the eectlon. Follow theic ilcp. to complete thl* p*g«l
1. Check ONE AND ONLY ONE red-l*ttcr*d activity, which BEST deicrlbei what lh« lnjor«d *mploye* w*« doing.
2. Anawcr all of the qiuitlou In th* icctloa which contain* the activity you cho** In itcp en*.
3. DO NOT eh*ckmorethtBO»* activity. DO NOT answercjuctUoB* outtldeofthe *eetloncontalnlagth«ae«lvltyyouel»oae.
BE EXACT. Tor e«*mpl«. If the Injured employee wa« "Carrying," the, correct activity would b« "Carrying," net
D
D
CARRYING
MANUAL DUMPING OF CAN INTO
CHEATING IIOri'EP.
D MANUAL DUMPING OF CAN INTO
NON-OPKn.\TlNU HOPPER
Q DUMPING INTO BULK CONTAINER
|~") THROWING
Q CATCHING
Q PUSHING/POLLmO
Q LIFTING
What w»r a»Uig e»rrl«rf, dumped, thrown.
«tj.T
eouteUor (1 te i yd»)
SttodAra onttlnjr (30 (ale)
Uerc thac ecc ce«t>la«r
PUttis b«t(.)
55 gaL oU dnua
thut ab«r«)
Eu-uttcry -
S&rubb«rr-
Otkcr
a« majy a»
Onnrelfht
Or*r«ia*d
CUppery. w«t
Protrudng with «a*t«
Ona wlti ra({*4 *df •«
On* witt brokcA or roUcija(
rro»u U
FxOl of wcter
A pl«f tie caa
Not applicable
(pi**.** lilt)
Wai a eo-worV*r helping th* Infnred
«mplor«t to carry, dump, throw, etc.?
B
Yet
No
f | CONNECTING BULK CONTAINER
[~j DISCONNECTING BULK CONTAINER
To wtiat w^r the bulk container being con-
nactad or diicorvA«cted? (Chgck onej
To r*ar-*nd loader
To winch boUt
To roll-off
To conUlncr delivery hol*t
To container delivery truck b*d
To load-lug xer bol*t
To load-lwiger twd
To lUtlonary compactor
Other
(pl«a»e U*t)
DRIVING
Q nmiNG
Q MOUNTING
Q DISMOUNTING
\Vh.it %»•••>« bgIng driven, rUMon, rtc. '
Front-end loader
Rear-end loader
Roll'Cff
Load-lugfcr
Container delivery truck
Hifhlift
Pickup
Aotonwbllc
Scraper
Compactor
Bulldozer
Other
(plaa«* llit)
Vhat pirt of the vehicle or equipment wa»
bring drlvrp, rlddy n. etc. ? (Check ont)
Cab
Step
"Track*"
R«nnla( board
Truck t»d
Other
(pleat* U»t)
Wae the T«hlele or Xjulpment; (Check ent)
Moving forward at curb epevd
Moving forward at regular >peed
Moving forward at highway >pe*d
Backing
Not movine,
Wae any part of the vehicle broken or
B
Yee
No
If Y««« what part?
(pleaee lilt)
D PUSHING DOWN WASTE INTO A CAN
OR BULK CONTAINER (Not Dumping)
D PUSHING BACK WASTE INTO HOP-
PER BED (Not Dumping)
y»e the hopper operating at the time th»
wxete w>» pueh*d back?
B
Ye*
No
WASHING
CLEANING AND CLEARING
DISINFECTING
wag being washedj cleaned, or dl»-
(Chcck one)
Vehicle or equipment
Bulk container
Walkway*
Driveway*
Hopper bed
Truck bed
Other _^_^_____
E-64
lUt)
DOPKRAllNG KtACIUNERY OR
EXIUU'VIKNT
Vhat nvtchlng nr pl»f» of rqulpntant m
(Chech unefr
~ Rear-cmf packing mcehanUm
Front-end llftl*s rrv^cK»al«m
Rear-end lifting nxcht alim
Overhead bolit
Load-lucFf r boltt
CenUIncr delivery Kolrt
Roll-off mechanism
Other
(pl*t.«c Hit)
Vai any part of the «qu!pment or
machinery broken or maliunetlenlnc?
B
No
If -ret, what partT
(plactc lilt)
USING HAND TOOLS
EMPTYING AT LANDFILL
(Not Duraping)
What wai bel«t
(Ch«cV em)
R»*T-*Txd loader
Front-end loader
Bulk contalser (20 ydi)
BuQ; container (30 ydi)
Bolk coobalncr (35 yd«)
Balk cont«.ln«r (40 ydi)
Oti*r
(pl*a>c
COMPLETING OPERATOR. CHECK
VEHICLE
Deo:
or
D SCHEDULED MAINTENANCE AW)
REPAIR
D UNSCHEDULED MAINTENANCE
AND REPAIR
What pert of th* vehlcl* w»i beinf chccfc
d, or repaired? (Ch«ck onij
Chaitlt
Enjlne
Tir«»
Packlnf C
Holit aad pulley mechanltra
OtKer
(pleaie Hit)
j—I
MISCELLANEOUS SITE WORK
(Other Than Above)
CLERICAL/OFFICE WORK
D
GUIDING OR DIRECTING VEHICLE
OR EQUIPMENT
D
STA::DING OR WALKING or:LY
(1. *. . when not doing on* of th*
Q OTHER
(pica** lilt)
-------
TRAFFIC ACCIDENT INFORMATION
COMPLETE THIS SECTION OF THE FORM ONLY IF THE INJURY RESULTED
FROM A TRAFFIC ACCIDENT.*
1. Did the accident in-
volve an employ er-
owned vehicle(s)?
If yes, list the
equipment numbers:
2. The accident
involved:
3. The accident
occurred:
4. How many pedestri-
ans were injured:
5. Did an employee-
driven vehicle strike
the pedestrian(s)?
6. At the time of the
accident, the in-
jured employee was
located:
D
D NO
| 1 Unknown
LI
One Vehicle
| J More Than One Vehicle
D Other
I J On a. Highway
( | On a Street
Q In an Alley
| 1 Other
I I Employees
| J Other Than Employees
D Ye.
D No
| | Unknown
f~l Not Applicable
DOn the curb nearest
the vehicle being used
DOn the curb opposite
the vehicle being used
Din the street but next
to the curb
In the middle of the
street
D
I I In employer's yard
| ) In the city yard
| 1 In cab of vehicle
I I In truck bed of vehicle
II On step of vehicle
D Other
(please list)
ANSWER THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS
REGARDING THE EMPLOYER-OWNED
VEHICLE ONLY:
7- Was the vehicle
on a collection
route at the time
of the accident?
8. Was the vehicle
on a hill at the
time of the ac-
cident?
9. Was the vehicle:
D
D
f | Unknown
D Ye.
D No
I I Unknown
11 Making Right Turn
[]]] Making Left Turn
I ] Changing Lane.
I J Passing
D Pulling Out
| 1 Backing
Q Making a "U" Turn
() Going Straight Ahead
|~1 Parked at Curb
D
Stopped In Middle of
Street - No Car in
Front
D Stopped In Traffic -
Car in Front
| j Slowing or Stopping
("1 Other
(please list)
10. Were there any
witnesses to the
accident?
D Ye.
D No
| 1 Unknown
*A traffic accident is any accident, resulting in injury to an employee(s), which
involves a vehicle or wheeled piece of equipment hitting or being hit by;
(1) another vehicle or wheeled piece of equipment; (2) a pedestrian; (3) a wall,
post or other object.
E-65
-------
OUTDOOR CONDITIONS
Check as many boxes as necessary to
describe the outdoor conditions at the
time of the injury.
None
D Uneven Surface*/
Hole in the Ground
t | Slippery Surface*
(""} VetGra**
D Mud
D Object* on the
Ground
D Object* Protruding
from Ground
Hot Weather
ColdVr*ath«r
D Animal*
(Dog*. Cat*, etc.)
Ia»«ct*
Rod*nU
D
["")
( ]
(~~j
| 1
D
I )
| 1
D
I j
Po.U, Fence*. Wall*.
Gate*
Shrubbery
Polion Ivy. PoUon Oak
Dutt, Athe* In Air
Cxhauit Fume*, Vapor*
Wire*. Cable*
Waihline*
Exc***lv* Noil*
Glare
Snow
Shrubbery
Icy Surface*
Gravel, Slag, etc., oa
Surface
Fraexlng Rala
Other
(plea** ll*t)
CHARACTERISTICS OF WASTE
Check as many boxes as necessary
to describe the type of waste being
handled at the time of the injury.
[~] Hypodermic Needle*
D
Sharp Object* (Except Hypodermic
Needle*)
Wet, Waler«oaked
| j Aeroaol Can*
|~"1 Rat*. Ho»til« Creature*
| | Rock*, Concrete Chunk*, etc.
Q Noxlou* Liquid*
LJ -Fluorcicent Bulb*
\ J Cla** (Other thaa Fluor«*eent Bulb*)
I ] Thorn*, Shrubbery
Q KotA.he*
j_J Duct. Athei, Foreign Particle*
Q Protruding Object* , Uoxpsclfied
Q D**d Animal*
Q Normal/Dry
Q Frocen (Wa.te)
Q Other _
(plcaie lt*t)
IN YOUR OWN WORDS, DESCRIBE THE ACCIDENT IN DETAIL. BE SURE TO INCLUDE:
(1) Any Information about the accident which you could not Include elsewhere In this form;
(2) The events immediately preceding the injury and those following;
(3) How the accident occurred and what injuries were sustained;
(4) What the injured employee was doing at the time he was injured; and,
(5) Any special factors which you think contributed to the injury.
E-66
-------
1234
567
EXHIBIT 18
COSTS AND LOST TIME DATA
1. Date this section of the form completed.
89 10 11 12 13
mo
day
yr
Is this injury case closed? (i. e. , all
costs and days lost for this injury are
now known)
14
Yes
No
FIRST AID INJURY
3. Was this a first aid injury? (i. e. , no
medical costs or lost time) If yes, do
not complete the remainder of this form.
15
Yes
No
MEDICAL COSTS
(All associated medical costs as of the date
this form completed)
16 17 18 19
4. Medical costs to the nearest dollar.
-------
LOST TIME INJURY
Days Lost/Cost Data
(All associated days lost and costs as of the date
this form completed)
1. Total number of days lost (calendar days)
20 21
2. Total number of work days lost
3. Number of days lost without compensation
4. Number of days lost charged to Workmen's
Compensation
5. Workmen's Compensation payments
6. Number of days lost charged to Injury Leave
7. Payments charged to Injury Leave
8. Number of days lost charged to Sick Leave
9. Payments charged to Sick Leave
10. Number of days lost charged to Vacation Leave
11. Payments charged to Vacation Leave
E-68
28 29 30 31
32 33
34 35 36 37
38 39
40 41 42 43
44 45
46 47 48 49
-------
LOST TIME INJURY (Contirmc.d)
Return to Work Data
1. Return to work date (to regular job
classification only)
50 51 52 53 54 55
mo
day
yr
Light Duty
2. Did the injured employee return to his
regular job classification?
If not, to what classification did he
return?
(please list)
Date returned to non-regular job das'
sification (if applicable)
56
Yes
No
57 58
(please leave blank)
59 60 61 62 63 64
mo
Permanent Job Change
Did the injury require a permanent
change of job classification or perma-
nent termination?
6. If yes, to what classification?
65
2
Yes
No
66 67
(please leave blank)
(please list)
E-69
73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80
I
N
J
U
17
.U. tt
Y
o
o
-------
DATE.
TAPE SIDE
USER
H
I
-j
o
DATE
SS#
NAME
DIST.
-------
WORKDAYS LOST R DIRECT COSTS DATA SHFFT
IF YOU HAVE THIS DATA ON YOUR OWN FORM OR PRINTOUT, SIMPLY ATTACH. DIRECTIONS; Enter the final costs and actual workdays lost, if
you know them. If you do not know them,enter the costs and workdays lost KNOWN TO DATE. Indicate whether the costs and workdays
lost you've given for an injury are final in Col. 21. Use codes shown below. See directions below for leave benefits. Attach
comments if necessary.
User Name: User No. Quarter: Person Completing This Sheet: Phone:
Name and Social
Security No. of
Injured Enployee
(1)
*M
°fc
01 3
u -n
35
(2)
01
01
•M 01 (u
°~4:
tS&»7
01 3 01 0
U 1-1 -O rH
« B 0 01
M -H 0 ft
«v
p Medical Costsl
-=a
8'
C o ^
3.*- • «H
U . rt ••
s-ss
(7)
Temporary
g dis. bene-
fits paid
Injury Leave
u
to
o -o
tH 01
00
n fc
>, a ••
« X 0
a u u
(9)
>C"
<« H
01 -a <
to K
aj •/> M
X pu
u n
u u
01 01 01
HOC
< O tH
(21)
nearest whole dollar. More
e may be Involved, e.g., an employee may receive no compensa-
days and a combination of Worker's Comp. and Injury Leave pay
8. Therefore, days lost may be entered twice (e.g., a day may
rker's Compensation and Injury Leave) but DO NOT DUPLICATE
r's Compensation costs are deducted from Injury Leave pay-
tlon separately).
M
I
-o
H
ro
H
t-o
o
-------
A " FIRST AID IHJURY - an injury requiring no medical treat-
ment or only one-time treatment and subsequent observation
of minor scratches, cuts, burns, splinters, atnd so forth,
which do not ordinarily require medical care even though
provided by a physician or registered professional personnel.
B ~- NONFATAL CASE WITHOUT LOST WORKDAYS - an injury that REQUIRED
medical treatment administered by a physician or by a regis-
tered professional personnel under standing orders of a phy-
sician, but did not result in lost workdays, permanent dis-
ability or a fatality.
C ~ LOST WORKDAYS CASE - an injury that results in one or more
workdays lost not including the day of the injury or day of
return,"but did not result in a permanent disability or a
fatality.
Cl " IF THIS INJURY, AT ANY TIME DURING THE ACCIDENT
OR THE EMPLOYEE'S RECOVERY, RESULTED IN A LOSS i
CONSCIOUSNESS (EVEN IF THE LOSS OF CONSCIOUSNESS
OR THE EMPLOYEE'S RECOVERY, RESULTED IN A LOSS OF
CONSCIOUSNESS (EVEN IF THE LOSS OF CONSCIOUSNESS ,
WAS TEMPORARY AND DID NOT RESULT IN LOST WORKDAYS)
C2 ' IF THIS INJURY, AT ANY TIME DURING THE ACCIDENT
OR THE EMPLOYEE'S RECOVERY, RESULTED IN RESTRICTION
OF WORK OR MOTION (EVEN IF THE RESTRICTION OF
WORK OR MOTION WAS TEMPORARY AND DID NOT RESULT
IN LOST WORKDAYS)
D • PERMANENT PARTIAL DISABILITY - an inj.ury or combination of
injuries, sustained in one accident, which results in one
or more of the following: (1) Amputation of all or part of:
a finger, thumb, hand, toe, foot, ankle, arm, or leg;
(2) Permanent impairment of function resulting in loss of
sight in one or both eyes, loss of hearing in one or both
ears, or an unrepaired hernia.
E ' PERMANENT TOTAL DISABILITY - an injury or combination of in-
juries, sustained in one accident, which results in one or
more of the following: (1) permanently and totally incapaci-
tating the injured employee from following any gainful occu-
pation; or (2) the loss of or loss of use of, both hands,
both arms, both legs, both feet, both eyes, or the loss of
any two of these (e.g., an eye and a foot).
F " FATALITY - an occupational injury or combination of injuries,
sustained in one accident, resulting in death regardless of
the length of time between the injury and the death.
E-72
-------
EXHIBIT 21
INJURY CODING SYSTEM
ACCIDENT TYPE PHRASES
1. WAS INJURED IN VEHICLE COLLISION - 10
2. WAS INJURED DUE TO VEHICLE MOVEMENT - 20
3. WAS STRUCK BY VEHICLE PART - 31
4. WAS STRUCK BY OBJECT - 32
5. WAS STRUCK BY CONTAINER - 33
6. WAS STRUCK BY WASTE - 34
7. STRUCK SELF WITH VEHICLE PART - 41
8. STRUCK SELF WITH OBJECT - 42
9. STRUCK SELF WITH CONTAINER - 43
10. STRUCK SELF WITH WASTE - 44
11. STRUCK AGAINST VEHICLE PART - 51
12. STRUCK AGAINST OBJECT - 52
13. STRUCK AGAINST CONTAINER - 53
14. STRUCK AGAINST WASTE - 54
15. WAS HURT BY HANDLING VEHICLE PART - 61
16. WAS HURT BY HANDLING OBJECT - 62
17. WAS HURT BY HANDLING CONTAINER - 63
18. WAS HURT BY HANDLING WASTE - 64
19. GOT AIRBORNE PARTICLES IN EYE - 72-0-0-0
20. GOT WASTE PARTICLES IN EYE - 74-0-0-0
21. FELL TO A DIFFERENT LEVEL - 80
22. FELL ON SAME LEVEL - 90
23. FELL AGAINST VEHICLE - 101
24. FELL AGAINST OBJECT - 102
25. FELL AGAINST CONTAINER - 103
26. FELL AGAINST WASTE - 104
27. SLIPPED TO A DIFFERENT LEVEL - 110
28. SLIPPED ON SAME LEVEL - 120
29. SLIPPED AND STRUCK AGAINST VEHICLE - 131
30. SLIPPED AND STRUCK AGAINST OBJECT - 132
31. SLIPPED AND STRUCK AGAINST CONTAINER - 133
32. SLIPPED AND STRUCK AGAINST WASTE - 134
33. MADE SUDDEN MOVEMENT - 140-0-0-0
34. MADE SUDDEN MOVEMENT WHILE CATCHING VEHICLE - 151-0-0-0
35. MADE SUDDEN MOVEMENT WHILE CATCHING OBJECT - 152
36. MADE SUDDEN MOVEMENT WHILE CATCHING CONTAINER - 153
37. MADE SUDDEN MOVEMENT WHILE CATCHING WASTE - 154
38. MADE SUDDEN MOVEMENT WHILE AVOIDING VEHICLE - 161-0-0-0
39. MADE SUDDEN MOVEMENT WHILE AVOIDING OBJECT - 162
40. MADE SUDDEN MOVEMENT WHILE AVOIDING CONTAINER - 163
41. MADE SUDDEN MOVEMENT WHILE AVOIDING WASTE - 164
42. OVEREXERTED SELF - 170-0-0-0
43. OVEREXERTED SELF WITH VEHICLE PART - 172
44. OVEREXERTED SELF WITH OBJECT - 173
45. OVEREXERTED SELF WITH CONTAINER - 174
46. OVEREXERTED SELF WITH WASTE
47. WAS CAUGHT BETWEEN OBJECTS - 180
48. CONTACTED ELECTRIC CURRENT - 190-0-0-0
49- CONTACTED CAUSTIC OR TOXIC SUBSTANCE - 205
50. CONTACTED CAUSTIC OR TOXIC WASTE - 204
51. CONTACTED ALLERGENIC SUBSTANCE - 215
E-73
-------
ACCIDENT TYPE PHRASES (continued)
52. CONTACTED ALLERGENIC WASTE - 214
53. INJURED DUE TO WEATHER EXTREMES - 220-0-0-0
54. CONTACTED HOT VEHICLE PART - 231
55. CONTACTED HOT OBJECT - 232
56. CONTACTED HOT SUBSTANCE - 235
57. WAS STUNG BY INSECT - 240-0-0-0
58. WAS BIT BY ANIMAL - 250-0-0-0
59. STEPPED ON SHARP OBJECT - 262
60. STEPPED ON SHARP WASTE - 264
61. WAS INJURED FROM AGGRESSIVE ACT - 270-0-0-0
62. SUSTAINED FLASHBURN - 280-0-0-0
63. DEVELOPED INJURY OVER TIME - 970-0-0-0
64. WAS INJURED IN UNKNOWN ACCIDENT - 980-0-0-0
65. WAS INJURED IN OTHER TYPE OF ACCIDENT - 990-0-0-0
E-74
-------
ACCIDENT TYPE CODING LIST
(Answer all three subsets)
1. WAS INJURED IN VEHICLE ACCIDENT - 10
subset one
was struck by veh - 201
was injured when veh was hit by another veh - 202
was injured when veh hit curbing - 204
was injured when veh hit rock - 205
was injured when veh collided with object - 206
was caught between moving veh and obj - 207
was injured when moving veh hit another veh - 208
was injured in unk vehicle accident - 298
was injured in other vehicle accident - 200
subset two
N/A - 0
and fell off - 1601
and struck against veh - 1602
and he slipped - 1603
and he made a sudden movement - 1604
subset three - 0
2. WAS INJURED DUE TO VEHICLE MOVEMENT - 20
subset one
when veh overturned - 1401
when veh made sudden stop - 1402
when veh made sudden start - 1403
when veh made sudden turn - 1404
when veh went over a bump or depression - 1405
when veh became out of control - 1406
when veh went over rough terrain - 1407
when veh jacknifed - 1408
when veh jerked suddenly - 1499
subset two
N/A - 0
and fell off - 1601
and struck against veh - 1602
and he slipped - 1.603
and he made a sudden movement - 1604
subset three - 0
E-75
-------
ACCIDENT TYPE CODING LIST (Continued)
3. WAS STRUCK BY VEHICLE PART - 31
blade of veh - 102,0,0
cab door - 104,0,0
handle of veh - 108,0,0
hood of veh - 109,0,0
packing mechanism lever - 111,0,0
radiator cap - 112,0,0
tailgate - 118,0,0
tongue of trailer - 119,0,0
trailer ramp - 123,0,0
boom controls - 124,0,0
lift gate - 126,0,0
turnbuckle - 127,0,0
cable - 128,0,0
emptying lever - 129,0,0
mechanism arm - 131,0,0
rear access door - 132
safety door - 133
dragboard - 135
unk veh part - 198,0,0
other veh part - 199,0,0
4. WAS STRUCK BY OBJECT - 32
cable - 302,0,0
coworker (unintentionally) - 303,0,0
equipment part - 305,0,0
garage door - 307,0,0
gate - 309,0,0
hand tool - 322,0,0
obj thrown up by moving equip - 326,0,0
obj handled by coworker - 314,0,0
shrubbery - 317,0,0
water hose - 327,0,0
unk obj - 398,0,0
other obj - 399,0,0
5. WAS STRUCK BY CONTAINER - 33
standard metal cont - 401,0,0
nonstandard metal cont - 402,0,0
container lid - 403,0,0
container handled by coworker - 404,0,0
tote barrel - 419,0,0
wheeled cart - 405,0,0
bulk container (1-10 yd) - 406,0,0
bulk container (11-25 yd) - 407,0,0
bulk container (over 25 yd) - 408,0,0
bulk container lid - 409,0,0
bulk container handled by coworker - 410,0,0
E-76
-------
ACCIDENT TYPE CODING LIST (Continued)
300 gal plastic cont - 411,0,0
plastic can - 412,0,0
oil drum - 413,0,0
cardboard box - 414,0,0
crate - 415,0,0
cardboard barrel - 416,0,0
plastic bag - 417,0,0
compressed waste bag - 418,0,0
litter can - 420,0,0
unk container - 498,0,0
other container type - 499,0,0
WAS STRUCK BY WASTE - 34
subset one
acid - 501
aerosol can - 502
aerosol spray - 503
appliance - 504
bleach - 505
board with nail - 506
bottle - 528
ammonia - 532
dead animal - 531
equipment part - 533
cardboard slats - 507
ceramic waste - 529
fiberglass - 508
flourescent bulb - 509
furniture - 510
glass - 511
grass/weeds/leaves - 512
hypodermic needle - 513
mattress - 514
nail - 530
noxious chemical - 515
other sharp obj - 516
palm fronds - 517
particles in waste - 518
piece of metal - 519
poison ivy/oak - 520
printed matter - 521
rocks/concrete/dirt - 522
rug - 523
shrubbery-bundled - 524
shrubbery-unbundled- - 525
waste handled by coworker - 526
wood - 527
unk waste - 598
other waste - 599
Er-77
-------
ACCIDENT TYPE CODING LIST (Continued)
6. subset two
which was ejected from veh - 1001
which was swinging around in hopper - 1002
which fell out of veh - 1003
which fell out of top of cont - 1004
which broke against veh - 1005
which was protruding from veh - 1006
which fell out of bottom of cont - 1007
N/A - 0
subset three = 0
7. STRUCK SELF WITH VEHICLE PART - 41
accelerator pedal - 125,0,0
boom controls - 124,0,0
turnbuckle - 127,0,0
cable - 128,0,0
cab door - 104,0,0
handle of veh - 108,0,0
hood of veh - 109,0,0
inside of cab - 110,0,0
packing mechanism lever - 111,0,0
steering wheel - 116,0,0
tailgate - 118,0,0
tongue of trailer - 119,0,0
cab of veh - 121,0,0
trailer ramp - 123,0,0
lift gate - 126,0,0
emptying lever - 129,0,0
mechanical arm - 131,0,0
rear access door - 132,0,0
safety door - 133,0,0
gears - 136,0,0
unk veh part - 198,0,0
other veh part - 199,0,0
8. STRUCK SELF WITH OBJECT - 42
cable - 302,0,0
equipment part - 305,0,0
garage door - 307,0,0
gate - 309,0,0
hand tool - 322,0,0
saw - 324,0,0
shovel/fork - 316,0,0
wrench - 321,0,0
hammer - 311,0,0
water hose - 327,0,0
unk obj - 398,0,0
other obj - 399,0,0
E-78
-------
ACCIDENT TYPE CODING LIST (Continued)
9. STRUCK SELF WITH CONTAINER - 43
subset one
standard metal cont - 401
nonstandard metal cont - 402
container lid - 403
tote barrel - 419
wheeled cart - 405
bulk container (1-10 yd) - 406
bulk container (11-25 yd) - 407
bulk container (over 25 yd) - 408
bulk container lid - 409
300 gal plastic cont - 411
plastic can - 412
oil drum - 413
cardboard box - 414
crate - 415
cardboard barrel - 416
plastic bag - 417
compressed waste bag - 418
litter can - 420
unk container - 498
other container type - 499
subset two
which was full - 1
which was empty - 2
which was unusually heavy - 3
which was heavy due to being full of rocks - 4
which was heavy due to being water filled - 5
which was heavy due to being tightly packed - 6
which was heavy due to being full of yard clippings - 7
which was heavy due to being full of paper - 8
which was heavy due to being full of wood - 9
which had protruding waste - 10
which had protruding glass - 11
which had a protruding hypodermic needle - 12
which had protruding shrubbery - 13
which had protruding nail - 25
which was heavy due to frozen waste - 16
N/A - 0
subset three
and was unusually large - 17
and was slippery (wet) - 18
and had sharp edges - 19
and had missing handles - 20
and on which the handle broke - 21
E-79
-------
ACCIDENT TYPE CODING LIST (Continued)
subset three (continued)
9. and was being handled with other cont - 22
and had a rat or other creature in it - 24
and had protruding waste - 10
and had protruding glass - 11
and had a protruding hypodermic needle - 12
and had a protruding nail - 25
and had protruding shrubbery - 13
and had slipped from his hands - 27
N/A - 0
and cont was handled with coworker - 31
10. STRUCK SELF WITH WASTE -44
subset one
aerosol can - 502
appliance - 504
board with nail - 506
bottle - 528
cardboard slats - 507
ceramic waste - 529
fluorescent bulb - 509
furniture - 510
animal - 531
equipment part - 533
glass - 511
mattress - 514
other sharp obj - 516
palm fronds - 517
piece of metal - 519
printed matter - 521
rocks/concrete/dirt - 522
rug - 523
shrubbery-bundled - 524
shrubbery-unbundled - 525
wood - 527
unk waste - 598
other waste - 598
subset two
which was handled with coworker - 1031
which had slipped from his hands - 1027
N/A - 0
subset three - 0
E-80
-------
ACCIDENT TYPE CODING LIST (Continued)
11. STRUCK AGAINST VEHICLE PART - 51
back of veh - 101,0,0
blade of vehicle - 102,0,0
brakes - 103,0,0
cab door - 104,0,0
edge of hopper - 105,0,0
exhaust pipe - 106,0,0
front of veh - 107,0,0
handle of veh - 108,0,0
hood of veh - 109,0,0
inside of cab - 110,0,0
packing mechanism lever - 111,0,0
radiator cap - 112,0,0
running board - 113,0,0
side of hopper - 114,0,0
side of veh - 115,0,0
steering wheel - 116,0,0
boom controls - 124,0,0
lift gate - 126,0,0
turnbuckle - 127,0,0
cable/chain - 128,0,0
emptying lever - 129,0,0
engine - 130,0,0
mechanical arm - 131,0,0
access door - 132,0,0
safety door - 133,0,0
fender - 134,0,0
dragboard - 135,0,0
gears - 136,0,0
step of veh - 117,0,0
tailgate - 118,0,0
tire - 122,0,0
tongue of trailer - 119,0,0
windshield - 120,0,0
cab of veh - 121,0,0
trailer ramp - 123,0,0
unk veh part - 198,0,0
other veh part - 199,0,0
12. STRUCK AGAINST OBJECT - 52
cable - 302,0,0
equipment part - 305,0,0
fence - 306,0,0
garage door - 307,0,0
garbage can rack - 308,0,0
gate - 309,0,0
ground - 310,0,0
hand tool - 322,0,0
E-81
-------
ACCIDENT TYPE CODING LIST (Continued)
12. obj handled by coworker - 314,0,0
obj protruding from ground - 325,0,0
post - 315,0,0
saw - 324,0,0
shovel/fork - 316,0,0
shrubbery - 317,0,0
wall - 319,0,0
wrench - 321,0,0
hammer - 311,0,0
unk obj - 398,0,0
other obj - 399,0,0
13. STRUCK AGAINST CONTAINER -53
standard metal cont - 401,0,0
nonstandard metal cont - 402,0,0
container lid - 403 , 0,0
container handled by coworker - 404,0,0
tote barrel - 419,0,0
wheeled cart - 405,0,0
bulk container (1-10 yd) - 406,0,0
bulk container (11-25 yd) - 407,0,0
bulk container (over 25 yd) - 408,0,0
bulk container lid - 409,0,0
bulk container handled by coworker - 410,0,0
300 gal plastic cont - 411,0,0
plastic can - 412,0,0
oil drum - 413,0,0
cardboard box - 414,0,0
crate - 415,0,0
cardboard barrel - 416,0,0
plastic bag - 417,0,0
compressed waste bag - 418,0,0
litter can - 420,0,0
unk container - 498,0,0
other container type - 499,0,0
14. STRUCK AGAINST WASTE - 54
subset one
appliance - 504
board with nail - 506
carboard slats - 507
ceramic waste - 529
furniture - 510
mattress - 514
palm fronds - 517
piece of metal - 519
printed matter - 521
E-82
-------
ACCIDENT TYPE CODING LIST (Continued)
subset one (continued)
14. rocks/concrete/dirt - 522
rug - 523
shrubbery-bundled - 524
shrubbery-unbundled - 525
waste handled by coworker - 526
wood - 527
unk waste - 598
other waste - 599
dead animal - 531
equipment part - 533
subset two
which fell out of veh - 1003
which fell out of top of cont - 1004
which fell out of bottom of cont - 1007
which broke against veh - 1005
which was protruding from veh - 1006
N/A - 0
15. WAS HURT BY HANDLING VEHICLE PART - 61
cab door - 104,0,0
handle of veh - 108,0,0
packing mechanism lever - 111,0,0
steering wheel - 116,0,0
tailgate - 118,0,0
trailer ramp - 123,0,0
boom controls - 124,0,0
lift gate - 126,0,0
turnbuckle - 127,0,0
cable - 128,0,0
emptying lever - 129,0,0
engine - 130,0,0
mechanical arm - 131,0,0
access door - 132,0,0
safety door - 133,0,0
dragboard - 135,0,0
gears - 136,070
unk veh part - 198,0,0
other veh part - 199,0,0
subset three - 0
E-83
-------
ACCIDENT TYPE CODING LIST (Continued)
16. WAS HURT BY HANDLING OBJECT -62
cable - 302,0,0
equipment part - 305,070
fence - 306,0,0
garage door - 307,0,0
garbage can rack - 308,0/0
gate - 309,0,0
hand tool - 322,0,0
post - 315,0,0
saw - 324,0,0
shovel/fork - 316,0,0
wood - 320,0,0
wrench - 321,0,0
hammer - 311,0,0
unk obj - 398,0,0
other obj - 399,0,0
17. WAS HURT BY HANDLING CONTAINER - 63
subset one
standard metal cont - 401
nonstandard metal cont - 402
container lid - 403
tote barrel - 419
wheeled cart - 405
bulk container (1-10 yd) - 406
bulk container (11-25 yd) - 407
bulk container (over 25 yd) - 408
bulk container lid - 409
300 gal plastic cont - 411
plastic can - 412
oil drum - 413
cardboard box - 414
crate - 415
cardboard barrel - 416
plastic bag - 417
compressed waste bag - 418
litter can - 420
unk container - 498
other container type - 499
subset two
which was full - 1
which was empty - 2
which had protruding waste - 10
which had protruding glass - 11
which had a protruding hypodermic needle - 12
which had protruding shrubbery - 13
which had protruding nail - 25
N/A - 0
E-84
-------
ACCIDENT TYPE CODING LIST (Continued)
17. subset three
and had sharp edges -19
and had missing handles - 20
N/A - 0
18. WAS HURT BY HANDLING WASTE - 64
aerosol can - 502,0,0 other sharp obj - 516,0,0
appliance - 504,0,0 palm fronds - 517,0,0
board with nail - 506,0,0 equipment part - 533,0,0
bottle - 528,0,0 piece of metal - 519,0,0
cardboard slats - 507,0,0 printed matter - 521,0,0
ceramic waste - 529,0,0 rocks/concrete/dirt - 522,0,0
fiberglass - 508,0,0 rug - 523,0,0
fluorescent bulb - 509,0,0 shrubbery-bundled - 524,0,0
furniture - 510,0,0 shrubbery-unbundled - 525,0,0
glass - 511,0,0 wood - 527,0,0
grass/weeds/leaves - 512,0,0 unk waste - 598,0,0
hypodermic needle - 513,0,0 other waste - 599,0,0
mattress - 514,0,0
19. GOT AIRBORNE PARTICLES IN EYE - 72,0,0,0
20. GOT WASTE PARTICLES IN EYE - 74,0,0,0
21. FELL TO A DIFFERENT LEVEL - 80
subset one - condition of surface slipped off of
wet - 601
icy - 602
oily - 603
rocky - 604
uneven - 605
collapsing - 606
otherwise slippery - 607
other condition - 699
N/A or unk - 0
subset two - surface slipped off of
cab - 925
chair - 902
curb - 903
grass - 906
gravel - 907
ground - 908
hopper - 926
inclined grass - 909 - no subset three
tailgate - 928
trailer - 929
E-85
-------
ACCIDENT TYPE CODING LIST (Continued)
21. subset two (continued)
inclined ground - 910 - no subset three
inclined ramp - 911 - no subset three
inclined pavement - 912 - no subset three
ladder - 913
loading dock - 914
running board - 918
stairs - 919 - no subset three
step of veh - 920
truck bed - 921
vehicle - 922
unk surface - 998
other surface - 999
subset three - surface fell onto
onto brick walkway - 1301
into depression - 1304
onto floor - 1305
onto grass - 1306
onto gravel - 1307
onto ground - 1308
into incinerator pit - 1327
onto inclined grass - 1309
onto inclined ground - 1310
onto inclined ramp - 1311
onto inclined pavement - 1312
onto loading dock - 1314
onto meter - 1324
onto pavement - 1317
onto unk surface - 1398
onto other surface - 1399
22. FELL ON SAME LEVEL - 90
subset one
wet - 601
icy - 602
oily - 603
rocky - 604
uneven - 605
collapsing - 606
otherwise slippery - 607
other condition - 699
N/A/unk - 0
subset two
brick walkway - 901
depression - 904
floor - 905
grass - 906
E-86
-------
ACCIDENT TYPE CODING LIST (Continued)
22. subset two (continued)
gravel - 907
ground - 908
hopper - 926
incinerator pit - 927
tailgate - 928
trailer - 929
loading dock - 914
meter - 924
obj on ground - 915
obj protruding from ground - 916
pavement - 917
truck bed - 921
waste on ground - 923
unk surface - 998
other surface - 999
subset three - Change in level
while stepping down - 901
while stepping up - 902
N/A - 0
23. FELL AGAINST VEHICLE - 101
subset one - condition of surface slipped on
wet - 601
icy - 602
oily - 603
rocky - 604
uneven - 605
collapsing - 606
otherwise slippery - 607
other condition - 699
N/A or unk - 0
subset two - surface fell while on
brick walkway - 901
cab - 925
chair - 902 tailgate - 928
curb - 903 trailer - 929
depression - 904
floor - 905
grass - 906
gravel - 907
.E-87
-------
ACCIDENT TYPE CODING LIST (Continued)
23. subset two (continued)
ground - 908
hopper - 926
inclined grass - 909
inclined ground - 910
inclined ramp - 911
inclined pavement - 912
ladder - 913
loading dock - 914
meter - 924
obj on ground - 915
obj protruding from ground - 916
pavement - 917
running board - 918
step of veh - 920
truck bed - 921
vehicle - 922
waste on ground - 923
unk surface - 998
other surface - 999
subset three
and struck against back of veh - 101
and struck against blade of veh - 102
and struck against cab door - 104
and struck against edge of hopper - 105
and struck against exhaust pipe - 106
and struck against radiator cap - 112
and struck against front of veh - 107
and struck against handle of veh - 108
and struck against hood of veh - 109
and struck against inside of cab - 110
and struck against packing mechanism lever - 111
and struck against running board - 113
and struck against side of hopper - 114
and struck against side of veh - 115
and struck against steering wheel - 116
and struck against step of veh - 117
and struck against tailgate - 118
and struck against tongue of trailer - 119
and struck against windshield - 120
and struck against lift gate - 126
and struck against turnbuckle - 127
and struck against cable - 128
and struck against trailer ramp - 123
and struck against emptying lever - 129
and struck against mechanical arm - 131
and struck against access door - 132
and struck against safety door - 133
and struck against fender - 134
and struck against boom controls - 124
E-83
-------
ACCIDENT TYPE CODING LIST (Continued)
23. subset three (continued)
and struck against dragboard - 135
and struck against gears - 136
and struck against unk veh part - 198
and struck against other veh part - 199
24. FELL AGAINST OBJECT - 102
subset one - condition of surface slipped on
wet ~ 601
icy - 602
oily - 603
rocky - 604
uneven - 605
collapsing - 606
otherwise slippery - 607
other condition - 699
N/A/unk - 0
subset two - surface fell while on
brick walkway - 901
cab - 925 incinerator pit - 927
chair - 902 tailgate - 928
curb - 903
depression - 904
floor - 905
grass - 906
gravel - 907
ground - 908
hopper - 926
inclined grass - 909
inclined ground - 910
inclined ramp - 911
inclined pavement - 912
ladder - 913
loading dock - 914
meter - 924
obj on ground - 915
obj protruding from ground - 916
pavement - 917
running board - 918
stairs - 919
step of veh - 920
truck bed - 921
vehicle - 922
waste on ground - 923
unk surface - 998
other surface - 999
E-89
-------
ACCIDENT TYPE CODING LIST (Continued)
subset three
and struck against fence - 306
and struck against garage door - 307
and struck against garbage can rack - 308
and struck against gate - 309
and struck against post - 315
and struck against shrubbery - 317
and struck against wall - 319
and struck against wood - 320
and struck against unk obj - 398
and struck against other obj - 399
25. FELL AGAINST CONTAINER - 103
subset one - condition of surface slipped on
wet - 601
icy - 602
oily - 603
rocky - 604
uneven - 605
collapsing - 606
otherwise slippery - 607
other condition - 699
N/A/unk - 0
subset two - surface fell while on
brick walkway - 901
curb - 903
depression - 904
floor - 905
grass - 906
gravel - 907
ground - 908
inclined grass - 909
inclined ground - 910
inclined ramp - 911
inclined pavement - 912
loading dock - 914
meter - 924
obj on ground - 915
obj protruding from ground - 916
pavement - 917
running board - 918
stairs - 919
step of veh - 920
truck bed - 921
waste on ground - 923
unk surface - 998
other surface - 999
E-90
-------
ACCIDENT TYPE CODING LIST (Continued)
25. subset three
and struck against std metal container - 401
and struck against nonstd metal container - 402
and struck against container lid - 403
and struck against wheeled cart - 405
and struck against tote barrel - 419
and struck against bulk cont (1-10 yd) - 406
and struck against bulk cont (11-25 yd) - 407
and struck against bulk cont (over 25 yd) - 408
and struck against bulk cont lid - 409
and struck against 300 gal plastic cont - 411
and struck against plastic can - 412
and struck against oil drum - 413
and struck against cardboard box - 414
and struck against crate - 415
and struck against cardboard barrel - 416
and struck against plastic bag - 417
and struck against compressed waste bag - 418
and struck against litter can - 420
and struck against unk cont - 498
and struck against other cont - 499
26. FELL AGAINST WASTE - 104
subset one - condition of surface slipped on
wet - 601
icy - 602
oily - 603
rocky - 604
uneven - 605
collapsing - 606
otherwise slippery - 607
other condition - 699
N/A/unk - 0
subset two - surface fell while on
brick walkway - 901
cab - 925
chair - 902
curb - 903
depression - 904
floor - 905
grass - 906
gravel - 907
ground - 908
hopper - 926
inclined grass - 909
inclined ground - 910
inclined ramp - 911
inclined pavement - 912
ladder - 913
loading dock - 914
meter - 924
obj on ground - 195
obj protruding from ground
pavement - 917
running board - 918
stairs - 919
step of vehicle - 920
truck bed - 921
vehicle - 922
waste on ground - 923
unk surface - 998
other surface - 999
- 91
E-91
-------
ACCIDENT TYPE CODING LIST (Continued)
subset three
NA - 0
furniture - 510
mattress - 514
piece of metal - 519
equipment - 533
shrubbery - bundled - 524
shrubbery - unbundled - 525
rocks/concrete/dirt - 522
wood - 527
27. SLIPPED TO A DIFFERENT LEVEL - 110
subset one - condition of surface slipped on
wet - 601
icy - 602
oily - 603
rocky - 604
uneven - 605
collapsing - 606
otherwise slippery - 607
other condition - 699
N/A/unk - 0
subset two - surface slipped on
cab - 925
chair - 902
curb - 903
grass - 906
gravel - 907
ground - 908
hopper - 926
inclined grass - 909 "j
inclined ground - 910 / tailgate - 928
inclined ramp - 911 /subset 3=0 trailer - 929
inclined pavement - 912\
ladder - 913 /
loading dock - 914
running board - 918
stairs - 919
step of veh - 920
truck bed - 921
vehicle - 911
unk surface - 998
other surface - 999
E-92
-------
ACCIDENT TYPE CODING LIST (Continued)
27. subset three - surface landed on
onto curb - 90.3
onto brick walkway - 1301
into depression - 9304
onto floor - 1305
onto grass - 1306
onto gravel - 1307
onto ground - 1308
into incinerator pit - 1327
onto loading dock - 1314
onto meter - 1324
onto pavement - 1317
onto unk surface - 1398
onto other surface - 1399
N/A - 0
28. SLIPPED ON SAME LEVEL - 120
subset one - condition of surface slipped on
wet - 601
icy - 602
oily - 603
rocky - 604
uneven - 605
collapsing - 606
otherwise slippery - 607
other condition - 699
N/A/unk•- 0
subset two - surface slipped on
brick walkway - 901
cab - 925
chair - 902
curb - 903
depression - 904
floor - 905
grass - 906
gravel - 907
ground - 908
hopper - 926
inclined grass - 909
inclined ground - 910
inclined ramp - 911
inclined pavement - 912
ladder - 913
loading dock - 914
meter - 924
E-93
incinerator pit - 927
tailgate - 928
-------
ACCIDENT TYPE CODING LIST (Continued)
28. subset tv;o (continued)
obj on ground - 915
obj protruding from ground - 916
pavement - 917
running board - 918
stairs - 919
step of veh - 920
truck bed - 921
vehicle - 922
waste on ground - 923
unk surface - 998
other surface - 999
subset three
while stepping down - 901
N/A - 0
while stepping up - 902
29. SLIPPED AND STRUCK AGAINST VEHICLE - 131
subset one - condition of surface slipped on
wet - 601
icy - 602
oily - 603
rocky - 604
uneven - 605
collapsing - 606
otherwise slippery - 607
other condition - 699
N/A/unk - 0
subset two - surface slipped on
brick walkway - 901
cab - 925
curb - 903
depression - 904 traiff^® ~Q9Q28
grass - 906 traxler - 929
gravel - 907
ground - 908
hopper - 926
inclined grass - 909
inclined ground - 910
inclined ramp - 911
inclined pavement - 912
ladder - 913
loading dock - 914
meter - 924
E-94
-------
ACCIDENT TYPE CODING LIST (Continued)
29 - subset two (continued)
obj on ground - 915
obj protruding from ground - 916
pavement - 917
running board - 918
step of veh - 920
truck bed - 921
vehicle - 922
waste on ground - 923
unk surface - 998
other surface - 999
subset three
and struck against back of veh - 101
and struck against blade of veh- 102
and struck against cab door - 104
and struck against edge of hopper - 105
and struck against exhaust pipe - 106
and struck against front of veh - 107
and struck against handle of veh - 108
and struck against hood of veh - 109
and struck against inside of cab - 110
and struck against packing mechanism lever - 111
and struck against radiator cap - 112
and struck against running board - 113
and struck against side of hopper - 114
and struck against side of veh - 115
and struck against steering wheel - 116
and struck against step of veh - 117
and struck against tailgate - 118
and struck against tongue of trailer - 119
and struck against windshield - 120
and struck against trailer ramp - 123
and struck against boom controls - 124
and struck against lift gate - 126
and struck against turnbuckle - 127
and struck against cable - 128
and struck against emptying lever - 129
and struck against mechanical arm - 131
and struck against access door - 132
and struck against safety door - 133
and struck against fender - 134
and struck against dragboard - 135
and struck against gears - 136
and struck against unk veh part - 198
and struck against other veh part - 199
E-95
-------
ACCIDENT TYPE CODING LIST (Continued)
30. SLIPPED AND STRUCK AGAINST OBJECT - 132
subset one - condition of surface slipped on
wet - 601
icy - 602
oily - 603
rocky - 604
uneven - 605
collapsing - 606
otherwise slippery - 607
other condition - 699
N/A/unk - 0
subset two - surface slipped on
brick walkway - 901
chair - 902
curb - 903
depression - 904
floor - 905
grass - 906
gravel - 907
ground - 908
inclined grass - 909
inclined ground - 910
inclined ramp - 911
inclined pavement - 912
ladder - 913
cab - 925
hopper - 926
loading dock - 914
meter - 924
obj on -ground - 915
obj protruding from ground - 916
pavement - 917
running board - 918
stairs - 919
step of veh - 920
truck bed - 921
vehicle - 922
waste on ground - 923
unk surface - 998
other surface - 999
E-96
-------
ACCIDENT TYPE CODING LIST (Continued)
30. subset three
and struck against cable - 302
and struck against equipment part - 303
and struck against fence - 306
and struck against garage door - 307
and struck against garbage can rack - 308
and struck against gate - 309
and struck against handtool - 322
and struck against machine part - 310
and struck against nail - 313
and struck against obj handled by coworker - 314
and struck against post - 315
and struck against shovel - 316
and struck against shrubbery - 317
and struck against wall - 319
and struck against wood - 320
and struck against wrench - 321
and struck against unk obj - 398
and struck against other obj - 399
31. SLIPPED AND STRUCK AGAINST CONTAINER - 133
subset one - condition of surface slipped on
wet - 601
icy - 602
oily - 603
rocky - 604
uneven - 605
collapsing - 606
otherwise slippery - 607
other condition - 699
N/A/unk - 0
31. subset two - surface slipped on
brick walkway - 901
cab - 925
chair - 902
curb - 903
depression - 904
floor - 905
grass - 906
gravel - 907
ground - 908
hopper - 926
inclined grass - 909
inclined ground - 910
inclined ramp - 911
inclined pavement - 912
ladder - 913
loading dock - 914
meter - 924
E-97
-------
ACCIDENT TYPE CODING LIST (Continued)
31. subset tv7O (continued)
obj on ground - 915
obj protruding from ground - 916
pavement - 917
running board - 918
stairs - 919
step of veh - 920
truck bed - 921
vehicle - 922
waste on ground - 923
incinerator pit - 927
tailgate - 928
trailer - 929
unk surface - 998
other surface - 999
subset three
and struck against std metal container - 401
and struck against nonstd metal container - 402
and struck against container lid - 403
and struck against container handled by coworker - 404
and struck against wheeled cart - 405
and struck against tote barrel - 419
and struck against bulk cont (1-10 yd). - 406
and struck against bulk cont (11-25 yd) - 407
and struck against bulk cont (over 25 yd) - 408
and struck against bulk cont lid - 409
and struck against bulk cont handled by coworker - 410
and struck against 300 gal plastic cont - 411
and struck against plastic can - 412
and struck against oil drum - 413
and struck against cardboard box - 414
and struck against crate - 415
and struck against cardboard barrel - 416
and struck against plastic bag - 417
and struck against compressed waste bag -'418
and struck against litter can - 420
and struck against unk cont - 498
and struck against other cont - 499
E-98
-------
ACCIDENT TYPE CODING LIST (Continued)
32. SLIPPED AND STRUCK AGAINST WASTE - 134
subset one - condition of surface slipped on
wet - 601
icy - 602
oily - 603
rocky - 604
uneven - 605
collapsing - 606
otherwise slippery - 607
other condition - 699
N/A or unk - 0
subset two - surface slipped on
brick walkv;ay - 901
cab - 925
chair - 902 incinerator pit - 927
curb - 903 tailgate - 928
depression - 904 trailer - 929
floor - 905
grass - 906
gravel - 907
ground - 908
hopper - 926
inclined grass - 909
inclined ground - 910
inclined rarnp - 911
inclined pavement - 912
ladder - 913
loading dock - 914
meter - 924
obj on ground - 915
obj protruding from ground - 916
pavement - 917
running board - 918
stairs - 919
step of veh - 920
truck bed - 921
vehicle - 922
waste on ground - 923
unk surface - 998
other surface - 999
subset three
and struck against appliance - 504
and struck against board with nail - 506
and struck against cardboard slats - 507
and struck against furniture - 510
and struck against glass - 511
and struck against hypodermic needle - 513
and struck against other sharp obj - 516
E-99
-------
ACCIDENT TYPE CODING LIST (Continued)
32. subset three (continued)
and struck against palm fronds - 517
and struck against piece of metal - 519
and struck against shrubbery-bundled - 523
and struck against shrubbery-unbundled - 524
and struck against waste handled by coworker - 525
and struck against wood - 527
and struck against unk waste - 598
and struck against other waste - 599
33. MADE SUDDEN MOVEMENT - 140
subset one
while stepping down - 901
while stepping up - 902
subsets 2 and 3=0
34. MADE SUDDEN MOVEMENT WHILE CATCHING VEHICLE - 151,0,0,0
35. MADE SUDDEN MOVEMENT WHILE CATCHING OBJECT - 152
equipment part - 305,0,0
garage door - 307,0,0
gate - 309,0,0
hand tool - 322,0,0
machine part - 312,0,0
saw - 324,0,0
shovel/fork - 316,0,0
wood - 320,0,0
wrench - 321,0,0
hammer - 311,0,0
unk obj - 398,0,0
other obj - 399,0,0
36. MADE SUDDEN MOVEMENT WHILE CATCHING CONTAINER - 153
subset one
standard metal cont - 401
nonstandard metal cont - 402
container lid - 403
container handled by coworker - 404
tote barrel - 419
wheeled cart - 405
bulk container (1-10 yd) - 406
bulk container (11-25 yd) - 407
bulk container (over 25 yd) - 408
bulk container lid - 409
bulk container handled by coworker - 410
E-100
-------
ACCIDENT TYPE CODING LIST (Continued)
36. subset one (continued)
300 gal plastic cont - 411
plastic can - 412
oil drum - 413
cardboard box - 414
crate - 415
cardboard barrel - 416
plastic bag - 417
compressed waste bag - 418
litter can - 420
unk container - 498
other container type - 499
subset two
which was full - 1
which was empty - 2
which was unusually heavy - 3
which was heavy due to being full of rocks - 4
which was heavy due to being water filled - 5
which was heavy due to being tightly packed - 6
which was heavy due to being full of yard clippings - 7
which was heavy due to being full of paper - 8
which was heavy due to being full of wood - 9
which had the bottom fall out - 15
which was heavy due to frozen waste - 16
N/A - 0
subset three
and was unusually large - 17
and was slippery (wet) - 18
and had missing handles - 20
and on which the handle broke - 21
and was being handled with other cont - 22
and had the bottom fall out - 15
and had slipped from his hands - 27
and had bounced back from hopper - 29
N/A - 0
and in which the weight shifted - 30
and which was handled with coworker - 31
E-101
-------
ACCIDENT TYPE CODING LIST (Continued)
37. MADE SUDDEN MOVEMENT WHILE CATCHING WASTE - 154
subset one
38
39
dead animal - 531
equipment part - 533
aerosol can - 502
appliance - 504
bottle - 528
cardboard slats - 507
ceramic waste - 529
fiberglass - 508
fluorescent bulb - 509
furniture - 510
mattress - 514
palm fronds - 517
printed matter - 521
rug - 523
shrubbery-bundled - 524
shrubbery-unbundled - 525
wood - 527
unk waste - 598
other waste - 599
subset two
which was ejected from veh - 1001
which was swinging around in hopper - 1002
which fell out of veh - 1003
which fell out of top of cont - 1004
which broke against veh - 1005
which was protruding from veh - 1006
which fell out of bottom of cont - 1007
which had slipped from his hands - 1027
N/A - 0
subset three = 0
MADE SUDDEN MOVEMENT WHILE AVOIDING VEHICLE - 161,0,0,0
MADE SUDDEN MOVEMENT WHILE AVOIDING OBJECT - 162
animal - 301,0,0
cable - 302,0,0
garage door - 307,0,0
gate - 309,0,0
hand tool - 322,0,0
obj handled by coworker - 314,0,0
saw - 324,0,0
shovel/fork - 316,0,0
shrubbery - 317,0,0
sudden noise - 318,0,0
wrench - 321,0,0
hammer - 311,0,0
unk obj - 398,0,0
other obj - 399,0,0
obj thrown up by moving equipment - 326,0,0
E-102
-------
ACCIDENT TYPE CODING LIST (Continued)
40. MADE SUDDEN MOVEMENT WHILE AVOIDING CONTAINER - 163
subset one
standard metal cont - 401
nonstandard metal cont - 402
container lid - 403,0,0
container handled by coworker - 404
tote barrel - 419
wheeled cart - 405
bulk container (1-10 yd) - 406
bulk container (11-25 yd) - 407
bulk container (over 25 yd) - 408
bulk container lid - 409
bulk container handled by coworker - 410
300 gal plastic cont - 411
plastic can - 412
oil drum - 413
cardboard box - 414
crate - 415
cardboard barrel - 416
plastic bag - 417,0,0
compressed waste bag -r 418
litter can - 420
unk container - 498
other container type - 499
subset two
which was full - 1
which was empty - 2
which as unusually heavy - 3
which was heavy due to being full of rocks - 4
which was heavy due to being water filled - 5
which was heavy due to being tightly packed - 6
which as heavy due to being full of yard clippings - 7
which was heavy due to being full of paper - 8
which was heavy due to being full of wood - 9
which had the bottom fall out - 15
which was heavy due to frozen waste - 16
which had protruding shrubbery - 13
subset three
and which was handled with coworker - 31
and had slipped from his hands - 27
41. MADE SUDDEN MOVEMENT WHILE AVOIDING WASTE - 164
subset one
acid - 501 hypodermic needle - 513
aerosol can - 502 mattress - 514
aerosol spray - 503 nail - 530
appliance - 504 noxious chemical - 515
bleach - 505 other sharp obj - 516
bottle - 528 palm fronds - 517
cardboard slats - 507 particles in waste - 518
ceramic waste - 529 piece of metal - 519
fiberglass - 508 poison ivy/oak - 520
fluorescent bulb - 509 printed matter - 521
furniture - 510 ammonia - 532
glass - 511 dea
-------
ACCIDENT TYPE CODING LIST (Continued)
41. subset one (continued)
rocks/concrete/dirt - 522
rug - 523
shrubbery-bundled - 524
shrubbery-unbundled - 525
waste handled by coworker - 526
wood - 527
unk waste - 598
other waste - 599
subset two
which was ejected from veh - 1001
which was swinging around in hopper - 1002
which fell out of veh - 1003
which fell out of top of cont - 1004
which fell out of bottom of cont - 1007
which broke against veh - 1005
which was protruding from veh - 1006
which had slipped from his hands - 1027
N/A - 0
subset three ~ 0
42. OVEREXERTED SELF - 170,0,0,0
43. OVEREXERTED SELF WITH VEHICLE PART - 171
brakes - 103,0,0
cab door - 104,0,0
handle of veh - 108,0,0
hood of veh - 109,0,0
packing mechanism lever - 111,0,0
radiator cap - 112,0,0
steering wheel - 116,0,0 accelerator pedal - 125,0
tailgate - 118,0,0 boom controls - 124,0,0
tire - 122,0,0 lift gate - 126,0,0
tongue of trailer - 119,0,0 cable - 128,0,0
cab of veh - 121,0,0 emptying lever - 129,0,0
trailer ramp - 123,0,0
access door - 132,0,0
turnbuckle - 127,0,0
dragboard - 135,0,0
gears - 136,0,0
unk veh part - 198,0,0
other veh part - 199,0,0
E-104
-------
ACCIDENT TYPE CODING LIST (Continued)
44. OVEREXERTED SELF WITH OBJECT - 172
cable - 302,0,0
equipment part - 305,0,0
garage door - 307,0,0
gate - 309,0,0
hand tool - 322,0,0
machine part - 312,0,0
saw - 324,0,0
shovel/fork - 316,0,0
wrench - 321,0,0
hammer - 311,0,0
unk obj - 398,0,0
other obj - 399,0,0
45. OVEREXERTED SELF WITH CONTAINER - 173
subset one
standard metal cont - 401
nonstandard metal cont - 402
container lid - 403
tote barrel - 419
wheeled cart - 405
bulk container (1-10 yd) - 406
bulk container (11-25 yd) - 407
bulk container (over 25 yd) - 408
bulk container lid - 409
300 gal plastic cont - 411
plastic can - 412
oil drum - 413
cardboard box - 414
crate - 415
cardboard barrel - 416
plastic bag - 417
compressed waste bag - 418
litter can - 420
unk container - 498
other container type - 499
subset two
which was full - 1
which was empty - 2
which was unusually heavy - 3
which was heavy due to being full of rocks - 4
which was heavy due to being water filled - 5
which was heavy due to being tightly packed - 6
which was heavy due to being full of yard clippings - 7
which was heavy due to being full of paper - 8
which was heavy due to being full of wood - 9
which was stuck or frozen to the ground - 14
which was heavy due to frozen waste - 16
N/A - 0
E-105
-------
ACCIDENT TYPE CODING LIST (Continued)
45. subset three
and was unusually large - 17
and was slippery (wet) - 18
and had missing handles - 20
and was being handled with other cont - 22
and was recessed - 23
and was stuck or frozen to the ground - 14
and became stuck - 28
and was being handled with coworker - 31
N/A - 0
46. OVEREXERTED SELF WITH WASTE - 174
subset one
appliance - 504
cardboard slat - 507
ceramic waste - 592
furniture - 529
grass/weeds/leaves - 512
mattress - 514
palm fronds - 517
printed matter - 521
rocks/concrete/dirt - 522
rug - 523
shrubbery-bundled - 524
shrubbery-unbundled - 525
wood - 527
dead animal - 531
equipment part - 533
unk waste - 598
other waste - 599
subset two
which was being handled with coworker - 1031
N/A - 0
subset three - 0
E-106
-------
ACCIDENT TYPE CODING LIST (Continued)
47. WAS CAUGHT BETWEEN OBJECTS - 180
subset one
in steering wheel - 716
in packer blade - 701
in tailgate - 702
in cab door - 703
in packing mechanism lever - 704
in veh handle - 705
between container and wall - .706
between container and veh - 707
between container and edge of hopper - 708
between container and lid - 709
between bulk container and wall - 710
between bulk container and veh - 711
between bulk container and edge of hopper - 712
between bulk container and lid - 713
in hood of veh - 714
in handle of cont - 715
in access door - 717
in safety door - 718
between two objects - 799
in bulk container handle - 719
subset two
N/A - 0
cont was unusually heavy - 1503
cont was heavy (rocks) - 1504
cont was heavy (water) - 1505
1 cont was heavy, (tightly packed) - 1506
cont was heavy (yard clippings) - 1507
cont was heavy (paper) - 1508
cont was heavy (wood) - 1509
cont was heavy (frozen waste) - 1516
cont was unusually large - 1517
cont was wet - 1518
cont handle broke - 1521
cont had the bottom fall out - 1515
cont was falling - 1527
cont had bounced back from hopper - 1529
cont weight shifted - 1530
subset three = 0
E-107
-------
ACCIDENT TYPE CODING LIST (Continued)
48. CONTACTED ELECTRIC CURRENT - 190,0,0,0
49. CONTACTED CAUSTIC OR TOXIC SUBSTANCE - 205
battery acid - 1101,0,0
exhaust fumes - 1102,0,0
gasoline - 1103,0,0
grease - 1104,0,0
hydraulic fluid - 1106,0,0
detergent - 1107,0,0
weed killer - 1109,0,0
smoke/fire - 1110,0,0
unk substance - 1198,0,0
other substance - 1199,0,0
50. CONTACTED CAUSTIC OR TOXIC WASTE - 204
acid - 501,0,0
aerosol spray - 503,0,0
bleach - 505,0,0
noxious chemical - 515,0,0
ammonia - 532,0,0
unk waste - 598,0,0
other waste - 599,0,0
51. CONTACTED ALLERGENIC SUBSTANCE - 215
work substance - 1198,0,0
other substance - 1199,0,0
52. CONTACTED ALLERGENIC WASTE - 214
aerosol spray - 503,0,0
noxious chemical - 515,0,0
poison ivy/oak - 520,0,0
unk waste - 598,0,0
other waste - 599,0,0
53. INJURED DUE TO WEATHER EXTREMES - 220,0,0,0
54. CONTACTED HOT VEHICLE PART - 231
exhaust pipe - 106,0,0
radiator cap - 112,0,0 . ,->rt n n
unk veh parl - 198V,0 englne ~ 13°'°'°
other veh part - 199,0,0
55. CONTACTED HOT OBJECT - 232
water hose - 327,0,0
equipment part - 305,0,0
hand tool - 322,0,0
saw - 324,0,0
unk object - 398,0,0
other object - 399,0,0
E-108
-------
ACCIDENT TYPE CODING LIST (Continued)
56. CONTACTED HOT SUBSTANCE - 235
oil - 1104,0,0
water - 1105,0,0
hydraulic fluid - 1106,0,0
steam - 1108,0,0
unk substance - 1198,0,0
other substance - 1199,0,0
57. WAS STUNG BY INSECT - 240,0,0,0
58. WAS BIT BY ANIMAL - 250,0,0,0
59. STEPPED ON SHARP OBJECT - 262
nail - 313,0,0
glass - 323,0,0
unk object - 398,0,0
other object - 399,0-,0
60. STEPPED ON SHARP WASTE - 264
nail - 530,0,0
glass - 511,0,0
board with nail - 506,0,0
piece of metal -.519,0,0
other sharp object - 516,0,0
unk waste - 598,0,0
other waste - 599,0,0
61. WAS INJURED FROiM AGGRESSIVE ACT - 270,0,0,0
62. SUSTAINED FLASHBURN - 280,0,0,0
63. DEVELOPED INJURY OVER TIME - 970,0,0,0
64. WAS INJURED IN UNKNOWN ACCIDENT - 980,0,0,0
65. WAS INJURED IN OTHER TYPE OF ACCIDENT - 990,0,0,0
E-109
-------
ACTIVITY
1. CARRYING CONTAINER - 13
2. CARRYING WASTE - 14
3. CARRYING OBJECT - 12
4. PUSHING OR PULLING A CONTAINER - 23
5. PUSHING OR PULLING WASTE - 24
6. PUSHING OR UPLLING OBJECT - 22
7. PUSING OR PULLING VEHICLE PART - 21
8. LIFTING TO DUMP CONTAINER - 33
9. LIFTING TO DUMP WASTE - 34
10. LIFTING CONTAINER - 53
11. LIFTING WASTE - 54
12. LIFTING VEHICLE PART - 51
13. LIFTING OBJECT - 52
14. DUMPING CONTAINER - 63
15. DUMPING WASTE - 64
16. DUMPING OBJECT - 62
17. DISLODGING WASTE FROM VEHICLE - 41,0,0
18. DISLODGING WASTE FROM CONTAINER - 43,0,0
19. SHAKING AND DUMPING CONTAINER - 73
20. CATCHING CONTAINER - 83 (IF THROWN BY COWORKER)
21. CATCHING WASTE - 84 (OF FALLING OUT OF HOPPER)
22. ARRANGING LOAD - 90,0,0
23. UNLOADING WASTE - 364
24. COMPACTING WASTE IN VEHICLE - 101
25. COMPACTING WASTE IN CONTAINER - 103
26. DRIVING EQUIPMENT - 111,0,0
27. RIDING ON EQUIPMENT - 121
28. RIDING ON CONTAINER - 123
29. GETTING ON EQUIPMENT - 131
30. GETTING OFF EQUIPMENT - 141
31. OPERATING CONTROLS - 151
32. HOOKING OR UNHOOKING EQUIPMENT - 161
33. HOOKING OR UNHOOKING CONTAINER - 163
34. EMPTYING EQUIPMENT - 171,0,0
35. OPENING EQUIPMENT PART - 181
36. CLOSING EQUIPMENT PART - 191
37. WASHING EQUIPMENT - 201,0,0
38. WASHING CONTAINER - 203
39. DISINFECTING CONTAINER - 273
40. PICKING UP LOOSE WASTE - 214,0,0
41. TRIMMING SHRUBBERY - 224,0,0
42. CLEARING WASTE WITH HANDTOOL - 234,0,0
43. REPAIRING EQUIPMENT WITH HANDTOOL - 241,0,0
44. REPAIRING CONTAINER WITH HANDTOOL - 243,0,0
45. CHECKING EQUIPMENT MALFUNCTION - 251,0,0
46. REFUELING VEHICLE OR ROUTINE MAINTENANCE - 261,0,0
47. DIRECTING VEHICLE - 281,0,0
48. STANDING OR WALKING - 290,0,0
49. DOING OFFICE WORK"- 300,0,0
50. DOING JANITORIAL WORK - 310,0,0
51. FIGHTING - 320,0,0
52. DOING HORSEPLAY - 330,0,0
53. RUNNING - 340,0,0
54. MOWING - 350,0,0
55. DOING REPETITIOUS WORK - 960,0,0
56. DOING NO ONE ACTIVITY - 970,0,0
57. DOING UNKNOWN ACTIVITY - 980,0,0
58. DOING OTHER TYPE OF ACTIVITY - 990 ft"
E-110
-------
ACTIVITY CODING LIST
(Answer both subsets)
1. Carrying container - 13
std. metal cont. - 401
nonstd. metal cont. - 402
cont. lid - 403
cont. hndld by cowrkr - 404
wheeled cart - 405
bulk cont (1-10 yd) - 406
bulk cont (11-25 yd) - 407
bulk cont (>25 yd) - 408
bulk cont lid - 409
bulk cont hndld by cowrkr - 410
300 gal plastic cont - 411
plastic can - 412
oil drum - 413
cardbd box - 414
crate - 415
cardbd barrel - 416
plastic bag - 417
comprsd waste bag - 418
tote barrel - 419
litter can - 420
unk cont type - 498
other cont type - 499
2. Carrying waste - 14
acid -. 501
aerosol can - 502
aerosol spray - 503 ammonia - 532
appliance - 504
bleach - 505
board with nail - 506
cardbd slats - 507 dead animal - 531
fiberglass - 508
fluorescent bulb - 509
furniture - 510
glass - 511
bottle - 528
yard clippings - 512
hypodermic needle - 513
mattress - 514
noxious chemical - 515
sharp obj - 516
palm fronds - 517
particles in waste - 518
piece of metal - 519
E-lll
-------
ACTIVITY CODING LIST (Continued)
2. poison ivy/oak - 520
printed matter - 521
rocks/concrete-dirt - 522
rug - 523
shrubbery-bundled - 524
shrubbery-unbundled - 525
waste hndld by cowrkr - 526
wood - 527
ceramic waste - 529
nail - 530
unknown waste - 598
other waste - 599
3. Carrying object - 12
equip part - 305 water hose-327
hammer - 311
shovel/fork - 316
wrench - 321
handtool - 322
saw - 324
unk object - 398
other object - 399
4. Pushing or pulling container - 23
std metal cont - 401
nonstd metal cont - 402
cont lid - 403
cont hndld by cowrkr - 404
wheeled cart - 405
bulk cont (1-10 yd) - 406
bulk cont (11-25 yd) - 407
bulk cont (>25 yd) - 408
bulk cont lid - 409
bulk cont hndld by cowrkr - 410
300 gal plastic cont - 411
plastic can - 412
oil drum - 413
cardbd box - 414
crate - 415
cardbd barrel - 416
plastic bag - 417
comprsd waste bag - 418
tote barrel - 419
litter can - 420
unk cont type - 498
other cont type - 499
E-112
-------
ACTIVITY CODING LIST (Continued)
5. Pushing or pulling waste - 24
acid - 501
aerosol can - 502
aerosol spray - 503 ammonia - 532
appliance - 504
bleach - 505
board with nail - 506
cardbd slats - 507 dead animal - 531
fiberglass - 508
fluorescent bulb - 509
furniture - 510
glass - 511
bottle - 528
yard clippings - 512
hypodermic needle - 513
mattress - 514
noxious chemical - 515
sharp obj - 516
palm fronds - 517
particles in waste - 518
piece of metal - 519
poison ivy/oak - 520
printed matter - 521
rocks-concrete/dirt - 522
rug - 523
shrubbery-bundled - 524
shrubbery-unbundled - 525
waste hndld by cowrkr - 526
wood - 527
ceramic waste - 529
nail - 530
unknown waste - 598
other waste - 599
6. Pushing or pulling object - 22
equip part - 305
hammer - 311
shovel/fork - 316
wrench - 321
handtool - 322
saw - 324
unk object - 398
other object - 399
7. Pushing or Pulling Vehicle pt - 21
tongue of trailer - 119
cab of veh - 121
trailer ramp - 123
cable - 128
dragboard - 135
unknown veh part - 198
other veh. part - 199
E-113
-------
ACTIVITY CODING LIST
(Answer both subsets)
1. Carrying container - 13
std. metal cont. - 401
nonstd. metal cont. - 402
cont. lid - 403
cont. hndld by cowrkr - 404
wheeled cart - 405
bulk cont (1-10 yd) - 406
bulk cont (11-25 yd) •- 407
bulk cont (>25 yd) - 408
bulk cont lid - 409
bulk cont hndld by cowrkr - 410
300 gal plastic cont - 411
plastic can - 412
oil drum - 413
cardbd box - 414
crate - 415
cardbd barrel - 416
plastic bag - 417
comprsd waste bag - 418
tote barrel - 419
litter can - 420
unk cont type - 498
other cont type - 499
2. Carrying waste - 14
acid - 501
aerosol can - 502
aerosol spray - 503 ammonia - 532
appliance - 504
bleach - 505
board with nail - 506
cardbd slats - 507 dead animal _ 531
fiberglass - 508
fluorescent bulb - 509
furniture - 510
glass - 511
bottle - 528
yard clippings - 512
hypodermic needle- - 513
mattress - 514
noxious chemical - 515
sharp obj - 516
palm fronds - 517
particles in waste - 518
piece of metal - 519
E-114
-------
ACTIVITY CODING LIST (Continued)
rug - 523
shrubbery-bundled - 524
shrubbery-unbundled - 525
waste handled by co-worker - 526
wood - 527
unk waste - 598
other waste - 599
10. Lifting container - 53
std metal cont - 401
nonstd metal cont - 402
cont lid - 403
cont hndld by cowrkr - 404
wheeled cart - 405
bulk cont (1-10 yd) - 406
bulk cont (11-25 yd) - 407
bulk cont (>25 yd) - 408
bulk cont lid - 409
bulk cont hndld by cowrkr - 410
300 gal plastic cont - 411
plastic can - 412
oil drum - 413
cardbd box - 414
crate - 415
cardbd barrel - 416
plastic bag - 417
comprsd waste bag - 418
tote barrel - 419
litter can - 420
unk cont type - 498
other cont type - 499
11. Lifting waste - 54
acid - 501
aerosol can - 502
aerosol spray - 503 ammonia - 532
appliance - 504
bleach - 505
board with nail - 506
cardbd slats - 507 dea(j animal - 531
fiberglass - 508
fluorescent bulb - 509
furniture - 510
glass - 511
bottle - 528
yard clippings - 512
hypodermic needle - 513
mattress - 514
noxious chemical - 515
E-115
-------
ACTIVITY CODING LIST (Continuedi
sharp obj - 516
palm fronds - 517
particles in waste - 518
piece of metal - 519
poison ivy/oak - 520
printed matter - 521
rocks/concrete/dirt - 522
rug - 523
shrubbery-bundled - 524
shrubbery-unbundled - 525
waste hndld by cowrkr - 526
wood - 527
ceramic waste - 529
nail - 530
unknown waste - 598
other waste - 599
12. Lifting Vehicle part - 51
dragboard - 135 unknown veh. part - 198
cable - 128 other veh. part - 199
trailer ramp - 123
13. Lifting object - 52
equip part - 305
hammer - 311
shovel/fork - 316
wrench - 321
handtool - 322
saw - 324
unk object - 398
other object - 399
14. Dumping container - 63
std metal cont - 401
nonstd metal cont - 402
cont lid - 403
cont hndld by cowrkr - 404
wheeled cart - 405
bulk cont (1-10 yd) - 406
bulk cont (11-25 yd) - 407
bulk cont (>25 yd) - 408
bulk cont lid - 409
bulk cont hndld by cowrkr - 410
300 gal plastic cont - 411
plastic can - 412
oil drum - 413
cardbd box - 414
crate - 415
cardbd barrel - 416
plastic bag - 417
cbmprsd waste bag - 418
tote barrel - 419
litter can - 420
unk cont type - 498
other cont type - 499
E-116
-------
ACTIVITIES CODING LIST (Continued)
15. Dumping waste - 64
acid - 501
aerosol can - 502
aerosol spray - 503 . coo
appliance - 504 ammonia - 532
bleach - 505
board with nail - 506
cardbd slats - 507 dead animal - 531
fiberglass - 508
fluorescent bulb - 509
furniture - 510
glass - 511
bottle - 528
yard clippings - 512.
hypodermic needle - 513
mattress - 514
noxious chemical - 515
sharp obj - 516
palm fronds - 517
particles in waste - 518
piece of metal - 519
poison ivy/oak - 520
printed matter - 521
rocks/concrete/dirt - 522
rug - 523
shrubbery-bundled - 524
shrubbery-unbundled - 525
waste hndld by cowrkr - 526
wood - 527
ceramic waste - 529
nail - 530
unknown waste - 598
other waste - 599
16. Dumping object - 62
equip part - 305
hammer - 311
shovel/fork - 316
wrench - 321
handtool - 322
saw - 324
unk object - 398
other object - 399
E-117
-------
ACTIVITY CODING LIST (Continued)
17. Dislodging waste from vehicle- 41,0,0
18. Dislodging waste from cont - 43,0,0
19 r Shaking while dumping container - 73
std metal cont - 401
nonstd metal cont - 402
cont lid - 403
cont hndld by cowrkr - 404
wheeled cart - 405
bulk cont (1-10 yd) - 406
bulk cont (11-25 yd) - 407
bulk cont (>25 yd) - 408
bulk cont lid - 409
bulk cont hndld by cowrkr - 410
300 gal plastic cont - 411
plastic can - 412
oil drum - 413
cardbd box - 414
crate - 415
cardbd barrel - 416
plastic bag - 417
comprsd waste bag - 418
tote barrel - 419
litter can - 420
unk cont type - 498
other cont type - 499
20. Catching container - 83 (if thrown by co-worker)
standard metal cont - 401
nonstandard metal cont - 402
container lid - 403
container handled by coworker - 404
tote barrel - 419
wheeled cart - 405
bulk container (1-10 yd) - 406
bulk container (11-25 yd) - 407
bulk container (over 25 yd) - 408
bulk container lid - 409
bulk container handled by coworker - 410
plastic can - 412 300 gal plastic cont
oil drum - 413
cardboard box - 414
crate - 415
cardboard barrel - 416
plastic bag - 417
compressed waste bag - 418
litter can - 420
unk container - 498
other container type - 499
E-118
-------
ACTIVITY CODING LIST (Continued)
21. Catching waste - 84 (.if falling out of hopper)
acid - 501
aerosol can - 502 -
aerosol spray - 503 . ___
appliance - 504 ammonia - 532
bleach - 505
board with nail - 506
cardbd slats - 507 , , .
fiberglass - 508 dead anl*al - 531
fluorescent bulb - 509
furniture - 510
glass - 511
bottle - 528
yard clippings - 512
hypodermic needle - 513
mattress - 514
noxious chemical - 515
sharp obj - 516
palm fronds - 517
particles in waste - 518
piece of metal - 519
poison ivy/oak - 520
printed matter - 521
rocks/concrete/dirt - 522
rug - 523
shrubbery-bundled - 524
shrubbery-unbundled - 525
waste hndld by cowrkr - 526
wood - 527
ceramic waste - 529
nail - 530
unknown waste - 598
other waste - 599
22. Arranging load - 90,0,0
23. Unloading waste - 364
acid - 501
aerosol can - 502
aerosol spray - 503
ammonia - 532
appliance - 504
bleach - 505
board with nail - 506
cardbd slats - 507
dead animal - 531
fiberglass - 508
fluorescent bulb - 509
furniture - 510
E-119
-------
ACTIVITY CODING LIST (Continued)
glass - 511
bottle - 528
yard clippings - 512
hypodermic needle - 513
mattress - 514
noxious chemicals - 515
sharp obj - 516
palm fronds - 517
particles in waste - 518
piece of metal - 519
poison ivy/oak - 520
printed matter - 521
rocks/concrete/dirt - 522
rug - 523
shrubbery-bundled - 524
shrubbery-unbundled - 525
waste hndld by cowrkr - 526
wood - 527
ceramic waste - 529
nail - 530
unknown waste - 598
other waste - 599
24. Compacting waste in veh. 101
truck bed - 921
hopper - 926
trailer - 929
work surface - 998
other surface - 999
25. Compacting waste in container - 103
std metal cont - 401
nonstd metal cont - 402
cont lid - 403
cont hndld by cowrkr - 404
wheeled cart - 405
bulk cont (1-10 yd) - 406
bulk cont (11-25 yd) - 407
bulk cont (>25 yd) - 408
bulk cont lid - 409
bulk cont hndld by cowrkr - 410
300 gal plastic cont - 411
plastic can - 412
oil drum - 413
cardbd box - 414
crate - 415
cardbd barrel - 416
plastic bag - 417
comprsd waste bag - 418
tote barrel - 419
litter can - 420
unk cont type - 498
other cont type - 499 E-120
-------
ACTIVITY CODING LIST (Continued)
26. Driving equipment - 111 ,0,0
27, Riding on equipment - 121
running board - 918
step of veh -920
truck bed - 921
vehicle - 922
cab of veh - 925
hopper -926 .., nnn
unk surface - 998 tailg*te - 928
other surface - 999
28. Riding on container - 123
bulk container (1-10 yd) - 406
bulk container (11-25 yd) - 407
bulk container (over 25 yd) - 408
300 gal plastic cont - 411
unk container - 498
other container - 499
29. Getting on equipment - 131
running boax'd - 918
step of veh - 920
truck bed - 921
vehicle - 922
cab of veh - 925
hopper - 926 t-ailcrai-p
unk surface - 998 taiiSate
other surface - 999
30 » Getting off equipment - 141
running board - 918
step of veh - 920
truck bed - 921
vehicle - 922
cab of veh - 925
hopper - 926 taileate
unk surface - 998 taiigate
other surface - 999
lift gate - 126
fender - 134
E-121
-------
ACTIVITY CODING LIST (Continued)
31. Operating controls - 151
packing mech lever - 111
boom controls - 124
unk veh part - 198
other veh part - 199
gears - 136
lift gate - 126
emptying lever - 129
32, Hooking or unhooking equipment - 161
cable - 128
tongue of trailer - 119
trailer ramp - 123
unk veh part - 198
other veh part - 199
33. Hooking or unhooking container - 163
bulk container (1-10 yd) - 406
bulk container (11-25 yd) - 407
bulk container (over 25 yd) - 408 . .
unk container - 498 30° Sal plastic cont - 411
other container - 499
34. Emptying equipment - 171,0,0
35. Opening equipment part - 181
cab door - 104
hood of veh - 109
tailgate - 118
tongue of trailer - 119
cab of veh - 121
unk veh part - 198
other veh part - 199
access door - 132
turnbuckle - 127
safety door - 133
unknown equip, part - 198
other equip, part - 199
E-122
-------
ACTIVITY CODING LIST (Continued)
36. Closing equipment part - 191
cab door - 104 Unknown equipment part - 198
hood of veh - 109. other equipment part - 199
taxlgate - 118
tongue of trailer - 119
cab of veh - 121
unk veh part - 198
other veh part - 199
access door - 132
turnbuckle - 127
safety door - 133
37. Washing equipment - 201,0,0
38. Washing container - 203
std metal cont - 401
nonstd metal cont - 402
cont lid - 403
cont hndld by cowrkr - 404
wheeled cart - 405
bulk cont (1-10 yd) - 406
bulk cont (11-25 yd) - 407
bulk cont (>25 yd) - 408
bulk cont lid - 409
bulk cont hndld by cowrkr - 410
300 gal plastic cont - 411
plastic can - 412
oil drum - 413
cardbd box - 414
crate - 415
cardbd barrel - 416
plastic bag - 417
comprsd waste bag - 418
tote barrel - 419
litter can - 420
unk cont type - 498
other cont type - 499
39- Disinfecting container - 273
std metal cont - 401
nonstd metal cont - 402
cont lid - 403
cont hndld by cowrkr - 404
wheeled cart - 405
bulk cont (1-10 yd) - 406
bulk cont (11-25 yd) - 407
bulk cont (>25 yd) - 408
bulk cont lid - 409
bulk cont hndld by cowrkr - 410
E-123
-------
ACTIVITY CODING LIST (Continued)
39. 300 gal plastic cont - 411
plastic can - 412
oil drum - 413
cardbd box - 414
crate - 415
cardbd barrel - 416
plastic bag - 417
comprsd waste bag - 418
tote barrel - 419
litter can - 420
unk coht type - 498
other cont type - 499
40. Picking up loose waste - 214-0-0
41. Trimming shrubbery - 224-0-0
42. Clearing waste with handtool - 234-0-0
43. Repairing equipment with handtool - 241-0-0
44. Repairing container with handtool - 243-0-0
45. Checking equipment malfunction - 521-0-0
46. Refueling vehicle or routine maintenance - 261-0-0
47. Directing vehicle - 481-0-0
48. Standing or walking - 290-0-0
49. Doing office work - 300-0-0
50. Doing janitorial work - 310-0-0
51. Fighting - 320-0-0
52. Doing horseplay - 330-0-0
53. Running - 340-0-0
54. Mowing - 350-0-0
55. Doing repetitious work - 960-0-0
56. Doing no one activity - 970-0-0
57. Doing unknown activity - 980-0-0
58. Doing other type of activity - 990-0-0
E-124
-------
BODY POSITION
BENT OVER - 1
JUMPING DOWN - 2
TURNING/TWISTING - 3
LOOKING UP - 4
REACHING - 5
JUMPING OVER - 6
REACHING OVER OBJECT - 7
STEPPING UP - 8
STEPPING DOWN - 9
STEPPING/JUMPING BACK - 10
CATCHING FALLING OBJECT - 11
JUMPING UP - 12
THROWING - 13
UNDER VEHICLE - 14
KICKING - 15
E-125
-------
DAY OF WEEK
TIME OF DAY
HOURS PRIOR
DISTRICT
EQUIPMENT *1
EQUIPMENT *2
PART OF VEHICLE BROKEN
0 N/A
1 ENGINE OVERHEATED
2 STEP OF VEH BROKE
3 PACKING MECHANISM MALFUNCTIONED
4 STEERING MECHANISM MALFUNCTIONED
5 HANDLE ON VEH BROKE
6 BRAKES MALFUNCTIONED
7 HYDRAULIC HOSE BROKE
8 GEAR SLIPPED
9 CAB DOOR BROKE
10 PACKING MECH LEVER STUCK
11 TIRE BLEW OUT
12 ACCELERATOR STUCK
13 CHAIN BROKE
14 EXHAUST SYSTEM MALFUNCTION
15 TAILGATE BROKE
16 ELECTRICAL FIRE
17 LIFT GATE MALFUNCTIONED
18 DRIVE SHAFT BROKE
19 EMPTYING LEVER STUCK
20 LATCH BROKE
21 MECHANICAL ARM BROKE
98 UNK VEH MALFUNCTION
99 OTHER VEH MALFUNCTION
22 ENGINE ON FIRE
23 TAILGATE MALFUNCTIONED
E-126
-------
VEH MOVEMENT
0
1 VEH MOVING FORWARD AT CURB
2 VEH MOVING FORWARD IN ST
3 VEH MOVING FORWARD ON HIGHWAY
4 VEH BACKING
5 VEH NOT MOVING
6 VEH STOPPED SUDDENLY
9 NA
7 VEH MADE SUDDEN START
CREW TYPE
0
1 RESIDENTIAL COLLECTION CREW
2 COMMERCIAL COLLECTION CREW
3 BRUSH CREW
4 DEAD ANIMAL COLLECTION CREW
5 PAPER COLLECTION CREW
6 BULKY WASTE CREW
7 CHEMICAL WASTE COLLECTION CREW
8 ST CLEANING CREW
9 TRANSFER STATION CREW
10 LITTER CREW
11 RES AND COMMERCIAL COMBINED COLLECTION CREW
12 MANUAL SWEEPER CREW
13 LITTER CAN PICKUP CREW
14 BRUSH S BULKY WASTE CREW
98 UNK COLL CREW TYPE
99 OTHER COLL CREW TYPE
CONTAINERS USED
0
1 BULK CONT COLL
2 MANUAL CONT COLL
3 BULK S MANUAL CONT COLL
4 PLASTIC BAG COLL
8 UNK CONT COLL
9 OTHER CONT COLL
COLLECTION PT
0
1 BKYD W/0 INT CONT
2 BKYD W TUB
3 BKYD W WHEELED CART
4 BKYD U SCOOTER
5 CURBSIDE
6 ALLEY
7 MECHANIZED
8 ALLEY S CURBSIDE
o
19 CS 8 BY W TUB
11 CS/BY/BY U TUB/ALLEY
12 BY U TUB/BY W CART
13 CS/ALLEY/BY W TUB
14 CS/BY
15 ALLEY/BY W CART
16 CS/ALLEY/BY W TUB/BY W CART
98 UNK COLL PT
92 OTHER COLL PT E
-------
CREW SIZE
HOURLY/TASK
1 HOURLY
2 TASK
9 UNKNOWN
0 NOT APPLICABLE
REGULAR JOB
1 YES
2 NO
9 UNKNOWN
0 NOT APPLICABLE
IN TRAINING/SUPERVISING
0 NOT APPLICABLE
1 IN TRAINING
2 SUPERVISING
3 NEITHER
9 UNKNOWN
PART OF BODY
11 SCALP
12 SKULL
13 BRAIN
20 FACE
21 JAW
22 CHEEK
23 MOUTH
24 FOREHEAD
25 NOSE
26 EARS
27 EYES
30 NECK
41 SHOULDER
42 ARM
43 ELBOW
44 WRIST
45 HAND
46 FINGERS
47 THUMB
50 TRUNK
51 BACK
52 ABDOMEN
53 CHEST
54 HIPS
55 BUTTOCKS
56 GROIN
61 LEG
62 KNEE
63 ANKLE
64 FOOT
65 TOES
70 INTERNAL ORGANS
71 MULTIPLE BODY PARTS
98 UNK BODY PART
99 OTHER BODY PART
E-128
-------
NATURE OF INJ
1 AMPUTATION
2 ASPHYXIATION OR DROWNING
3 AVULSION
4
5 STING
6 BLINDNESS IN 1 EYE
7 BLINDNESS IN BOTH EYES
8 BRUISE
9 BURN FROM HEAT
10 CHEMICAL BURN
11 CONCUSSION
12 INFECTION
13 CUT / PUNCTURE
14 DENTAL INJURY
15 DERMATITIS
16 DISLOCATION
17 ELECTRIC SHOCK
IS OBJECT IN EYE
19 FRACTURE
20 FROSTBITE OR OTHER LOU TEMP EFFECT
21 HEARING IMPAIRMENT
22 HEARING LOSS IN 1 EAR
23 HEARING LOSS IN BOTH EARS
24 HERNIA
25 INFECTION
26 INFLAMMATION OF THE JOINTS
27 NOSEBLEED
28 BLOOD POISONING
29 ABRASIONS
30 SPRAIN OR STRAIN
31 SUNBURN
32 HEAT STROKE*EXHAUSTION OR CRAMPS
33 POISONING OR ALLERGIC REACTION
34
35 MULTIPLE INJURIES
36 HEART ATTACK
37 TORN CARTILAGE
93 UNKNOWN TYPE OF INJURY
99 OTHER TYPE OF INJURY
E-129
-------
WEATHER
0
1 UNUS HOT
2 UNUS COLD
3 RAINING
4 SNOWING
5 HAILING
6 WINDY
98 UNK WEATHER
99 OTHER WEATHER CONDITION
ENVIRONMENT
0
1 EXC NOISE
2 EXC GLARE
3 EXC DUST/ASHES
A EXC VIBR
5 EXC FUMES
6 POOR LIGHT/DARKNESS
7
8 FIRE/SMOKE
98 UNK ENVIR CONDITION
99 OTHER ENVIR CONDITION
SURFACE
0
1 WET/MUDDY
2 ICY
3 OILY/GREASY
4 LOOSE OBJ ON GRND
5 OBJ PROTRD FRM GRND
6 LOOSE GRAVEL/SLAG
7 SLIPPERY
8 CHANGE IN LEVEL
9 INCLINE
10 DEPRESSION
11 UNEVEN
12 WASTE ON GRND
98 UNK SURFACE CONDITION
99 OTHER SURFACE CONDITION
30 HARD HAT
1 YES
2 NO/UNKNOWN/NOT APPLICABLE
31 BUMP CAP
1 YES
2 NO/UNKNOWN/NOT APPLICABLE
E-130
-------
EXACT SITE
1. ON COLLECTION ROUTE - 100
inside cab - 112
on step - 113
on running board - 115
on vehicle - 111
on truck bed - 116
in midstreet - 121
in street at curb - 122
in street at back of truck - 123
in street at front of truck - 124
in midalley - 131
in alley at curb - 132
in alley at back of truck - 133
in alley at front of truck - 134
em sidewalk - 144
in customer's yard - 141
in customer's driveway - 142
in customer's residence - 143
2. ENROUTE - 200
inside cab - 212
on step - 213
on running board - 215
on truck bed - 216
on veh - 211
3. LANDFILL - 300
in office/gatehouse - 351
in shop/garage - 352
in yard - 360
inside cab - 312
on step - 313
on running board - 315
.on truck bed - 316
on veh - 311
next to veh - 314
inside cab enroute to dump site - 382
on running board enroute to dump site - 385
on step enroute to dump site - 383
on truck bed enroute to dump site - 386
enroute to dump site - 380
inside cab at dump site - 372
on running board at dump site - 375
on step at dump site - 373
on truck bed at dump site - 376
at dump site - 370
next to veh at dump site - 374
E-131
-------
4. AT INCINERATOR - 400
in office/gatehouse - 451
in shop/garage - 452
in yard - 460
inside cab - 412
on running board - 415
on step - 413
on truck bed - 416
next to veh - 414
on veh - 411
inside cab at dumping floor - 482
on running board at dumping floor - 485
on step at dumping floor - 483
on truck bed at dumping floor - 486
next to veh at dumping floor - 484
on veh at dumping floor - 481
at dumping floor - 480
in plant - 490
5. AT TRANSFER STATION - 500
inside cab - 512
on truck bed - 516
on step - 513
on running bo"ard - 515
on veh - 511
next to veh - 514
in yard - 560
6. AT RECYCLING STATION - 600
in office/gatehouse - 651
in shop/garage - 652
in yard - 660
inside cab - 612
on running board - 615
on step - 613
on truck bed - 616
on veh - 611
next to veh - 614
inside cab at dumping area — 682
on running board at dumping area - 685
on step at dumping area - 683
on truck bed at dumping area - 686
on veh at dumping area - 681
next to veh at dumping area - 684
at dumping area - 680
in plant - 690
E-132
-------
7. AT HEADQUARTERS - 700
in office - 751
in shop/garage - 752
in yard/parking lot - 760
inside cab - 712
on running board - 715
on step - 713
on truck bed - 716
on veh - 711
next to veh - 714
at washrack - 761
at refueling station - 762
8. IN ROADWAY/FIELD - 800
9. UNKNOWN SITE - 000
10.OTHER SITE - 900
E-133
-------
INJURY CODING FORM
TAPE
SIDE
DATE
Jfi.
Jl
fi^fi
1k.
T^r
F1TT
Poor
KTKrf
1
Wr
IJrJ,
Wo
Or.
I
M
U)
TAPE
SIDE
DATE
TAPE
SIDE
MTE
U
ft/r
FT
z:
3; ™Vr
•=9T
JC.
ID
-Ksns1
H
15-
^^r
IS"
Ih
e^nb
IT
^
K«ns
I-T
m;
T,
IftSlPoor
KIT?
1
Wr
10
'M
J51
w
tx)
N)
-------
IRIS USERS WAGE CONTINUATION BENEFITS
FOR ON-THE-JOB INJURIES
User
No.
101
103
109
111
113
115
125
133
136
140
146
148
149
152
157
161
170
171
172
178
179
181
WORKER'S COMPENSATION
Waiting
Period
0
3 days
3 days
3 days
3 days
7 days
0
3 days
7 days
7 days
7 days
7 days
8 days
7 days
7 days
7 days
-
7 days
7 days
7 days
7 days
Retroactive
Period
0
14 days
3 days
21 days
14 days
14 days
0
15 days
28 days
21 days
15 days
14 days
8 days
7 days
14 days
7 days
-
13 days
28 days
14 days
7 days
% of
Salary
0%
80%
67%
67%
67%
60%
67%
80%
67%
67%
60%
67%
67%
67%
67%
67%
-
67%
67%
67%
67%
Receives
Supplement
Yes or No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
No
No
No
INJURY LEAVE
% Of
Salary
100%
100%
100%
100%
-
-
-
-
100%
-
-
-
80%
100%
100%
100%(a)
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
Number of Days
Inj .Leave/
W.C. Supplement
unlimited
250/0
250/0
250/0
-
-
-
0/90
90/0
0/250
0/accrued S.L.
-/unlimited
250/0
7/125
7/250
(a)
unlimited
7/250
90/0
125/0
60/0
SICK
LEAVE
Yes
or No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
VACATION
LEAVE
Yes
or No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
M
I
H
U)
Ul
(a)Can go to 50% after 6 months.
-------
IRIS USERS WAGE CONTINUATION BENEFITS
FOR ON-THE-JOB INJURIES
User
No.
182
183
186
191
197
201
204
207
210
211
215
217
221
226
235
236
237
242
244
260
265
272
WORKER'S COMPENSATION
Waiting
Period
5 days
5 days
7 days
7 days
7 days
7 days
7 days
3 days
3 days
3 days
7 days
7 days
0
7 days
7 days
7 days
3 days
7 days
3 days
3 days
3 days
7 days
Retroactive
Period
5 days
5 days
42 days
42 days
7 days
7 days
14 days
21 days
21 days
3 days
21 days
28 days
0
49 days
28 days
28 days
10 days
21 days
21 days
21 days
21 days
14 days
% of
Salary
67%
67%
67%
67%
67%
67%
67%
67%
67%
67%
67%
67%
90%
85%
67%
67%
67%
67%
67%
67%
67%
67%
Receives
Supplement
Yes or No
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
No
No
Yes
No
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
INJURY LEAVE
% of
Salary
-
100%
100%
-
100%
-
-
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
-
-
100%
-
100%
100%
100%
100%
-
—
Number of Days
Inj .Leave/
W.Co Supplement
-
125/0
5/0
-
5/0
0/accrued S.L.
0/accrued S.L.
250/0
60/0
3/0
7/30
90/0
-
0/accrued S.L.
125/0
-
3/unlimited
250/0
unlimited
250/accrued SL
-
-
SICK
LEAVE
Yes
or No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
VACATION
LEAVE
Yes
or No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
-------
IRIS USERS WAGE CONTINUATION BENEFITS
FOR ON-THE-JOB INJURIES
User
No.
275
283
286
292
295
296
299
316
318
323
324
325
326
328
329
330
331
333
336
337-
339
340
WORKER'S COMPENSATION
Waiting
Period
7 days
7 days
3 days
0
7 days
3 days
5 days
0
7 days
6 days
3 days
3 days
7 days
7 days
3 days
7 days
3 days
2 days
3 days
-
7 days
Retroactive
Period
7 days
90 days
21 days
0
7 days
21 days
5 days
0
7 days
6 days
14 days
-
14 days
7 days
21 days
28 days
3 days
2 days
5 days
-
7 days
% of
Salary
67%
70%
67%
75%
67%
67%
67%
75%
67%
67%
50%
67%
67%
67%
67%
67%
67%
60%
67%
-
67%
Receives
Supplement
Yes or No
Yes
5%
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
8%
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
INJURY LEAVE
% Of
Salary
-
-
-
-
100%
100%
-
-
-
-
-
100%
100%
100%
-
100%
100%
-
-
100%
100%
Number of Days
Inj .Leave/
W.C. Supplement
0/accrued S.L.
0/5 yr.
-
0/unlimited
250/500 weeks
125/0
0/accrued S.L.
0/accrued S.L.
-
0/accrued S.L.
-
3/accrued S.L.
7/120
7/120
-
7/0
3/30
0/accrued S.L.
-
unlimited
250/0
SICK
LEAVE
Yes
or No
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
VACATION
LEAVE
Yes
or No
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
I
H
U>
-------
IRIS USERS WAGE CONTINUATION BENEFITS
FOR ON-THE-JOB INJURIES
User
No.
341
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
358
359
361
362
363
WORKER'S COMPENSATION
Waiting
Period
3 days
3 days
7 days
7 days
7 days
7 days
3 days
3 days
3 days
3 days
7 days
3 days
7 days
3 days
-
3 days
3 days
7 days
7 days
Retroactive
Period
21 days
21 days
14 days
14 days
21 days
13 days
21 days
14 days
21 days
21 days
21 days
7 days
28 days
3 days
-
28 days
-
14 days
14 days
% of
Salary
67%
67%
67%
67%
67%
67%
67%
67%
67%
67%
67%
75%
66%
50%
-
67%
67%
60%
60%
Receives
Supplement
Yes or No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
INJURY LEAVE
% Of
Salary
-
-
-
100%
-
100%
100%
-
-
50%
-
100%
100%
-
100%
-
100%
100%
Number of Days
Inj .Leave/
W.C. Supplement
0/60
-
0/125
5/accrued S.L.
0/7 accr. S.L.
60/0
3/unlimited
-
-
3/0
-
3/unlimited
7/unlimited
-
unlimited
-
3/accrued S.L.
0/accrued S.L.
7/0
SICK
LEAVE
Yes
or No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
VACATION
LEAVE
Yes
or No
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes(b)
M
I
h-
U)
00
-------
EXHIBIT 24
IRIS
EQUIPMENT DATA UPDATE LIST
HATEJ SEPTEMBER 1, 1977
IRIS USER: FOX VALLEY DISP.» - us
EQUIPMENT TYPE OF USE
NUMBER
HRS/ DAYS/ UN'S/ TONS/ MI/ DATE
DAY WEEK YEAR DAY DAY OF CHANGI
33
36
37
38
39
4
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
5
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
'57
58
6
GARAGE USE
RESIDENTIAL COLLECTION
RESIDENTIAL COLLECTION
COMMERCIAL COLLECTION
COMMERCIAL COLLECTION
OFFICE & YARD USE
COMMERCIAL COLLECTION
RESIDENTIAL COLLECTION
RESIDENTIAL COLLECTION
COMMERCIAL COLLECTION
COMMERCIAL COLLECTION
RESIDENTIAL COLLECTION
RESIDENTIAL COLLECTION
COMMERCIAL COLLECTION
COMMERCIAL COLLECTION
COMMERCIAL COLLECTION
GARAGE USE
COMMERCIAL COLLECTION
RESIDENTIAL COLLECTION
COMMERCIAL COLLECTION
COMMERCIAL COLLECTION
GARAGE USE
COMMERCIAL COLLECTION
COMMERCIAL COLLECTION
RESIDENTIAL COLLECTION
RESIDENTIAL COLLECTION
GARAGE USE
«J
<=•
c;
i
i
vj
c;
vJ
er
>J
e-
,J
cr
wl
cr
U<£
c-O
ETO
CTO
r> —
J-\J
"7A
/u
1 AA _ __
H AA _
JL v v
•4 f\f\
1 \J
-------
BIBLIOGRAPHY
-------
SPEECHES ON IRIS AND
SOLID WASTE SAFETY
1. Ms. King spoke at the National Safety Council Congress for
the Refuse Collection & Disposal Division, Chicago, Illi-
nois, October 1974.
2. Ms. King spoke at both the Northern and Sourthern Confer-
ence of the New Jersey Safety Council on solid waste
safety, Middlesex and Cherry Hill, New Jersey, February
1975.
3. Ms. King spoke at the American Public Works Association
Annual Congress for the Solid Waste Institute in New
Orleans, June 1975.
4. Ms. King spoke at a meeting of the California City Safety
Management Association on solid waste safety, Los Angeles,
June 1975.
5. Speaker at a 4-hour seminar on how to develop and use
accident statistics, for the California Correctional
System, Modesto, June 1975.
6. Ms. King was the key speaker at a safety seminar sponsored
by Environmental Protection Agency and the National League
of Cities, August 1975.
7. Ms. King spoke at the National Safety Council Congress for
the Refuse Collection & Disposal Division, Chicago, Illi-
nois, October 1975.
8. Ms. King spoke at the Governmental Refuse Collection and
Disposal Association Annual Meeting, Los Angeles, 1975.
9. Speaker on "Current Research in Safety" before the entire
National Safety Congress, October 1976.
10. Ms. King spoke at the Tenth Annual Risk Management Seminar
sponsored by University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona, Febru-
ary 1977.
11. Dr. Dobson spoke at the Western Safety Conference sponsored
by GRCDA, Anaheim, California, May 1977.
12. Ms. Reiley spoke at the Los Angeles Regional Forum on Solid
Waste Management, Long Beach, CA, May 1977.
-------
13. Ms. King spoke at the University of Wisconsin Extension's
Safety in Solid Waste Collection, Milwaukee, Wisconsin,
June 1977.
14. Ms. Reiley conducted three solid waste accident preven-
tion work shops in St. Petersburg, FL, Buffalo, NY, and
Des Moines, IA which were attended by solid waste safety
personnel in June 1977.
15. Ms. King spoke at the 1977 International Public Works
Congress and Equipment Show, Chicago, Illinois, September
1977.
16. Ms. King and Ms. Reiley spoke at the National Safety Con-
gress for the Refuse Collection and Disposal Division,
Chicago, Illinois, October 1977.
17. Ms. King spoke on "Solid Waste Collection Safety" before
the University of Wisconsin Extension, Madison, Wisconsin,
December 1977.
18. Ms. King spoke at the Southwest Safety Congress & Expo-
sition in Phoenix, Arizona, April 1978.
19. Ms. Reiley spoke on "How to Keep and Analyze Injury
Statistics" for Oklahoma State University sponsored by
NSC and GRCDA, Oklahoma City, April 1978.
-------
IRIS USER PARTICIPATION
101
102
103
104
106
108
109
110
111
113
114
115
116
118
119
125
129
133
136
140
146
148
149
152
157
161
170
171
172
178
179
181
182
183
186
191
197
201
204
207
210
211
212
215
217
Start Up
10/01/73
8/01/73
8/01/73
1/01/74
10/01/73
9/01/73
8/01/73
9/01/73
9/01/73
1/01/74
7/01/73
10/01/73
9/01/73
9/01/73
1/01/74
1/01/76
1/01/76
11/01/76
12/01/75
2/01/76
1/01/76
5/01/76
10/01/76
10/01/76
10/01/76
12/01/75
10/01/76
1/01/76
1/01/76
10/01/76
9/01/76
1/01/76
10/01/76
10/01/76
2/01/76
1/01/76
7/01/76
10/01/76
1/01/76
12/01/75
12/01/75
12/01/75
12/01/75
1/01/76
4/01/76
Drop Out
4/30/75
6/30/75
2/28/75
12/31/75
9/30/74
6/30/74
8/31/74
9/30/74
5/31/75
12/31/74
6/30/74
9/30/74
8/31/74
3/31/75
12/31/74
continuing
3/31/76
9/30/77
9/30/76
6/30/76
continuing
9/30/77
9/30/77
9/30/77
3/31/77
3/31/77
9/30/77
9/30/77
continuing
3/31/77
9/30/77
continuing
9/30/77
9/30/77
9/30/77
9/30/77
9/30/77
9/30/77
3/31/77
12/31/77
9/30/77
9/30/77
6/30/76
9/30/77
9/30/77
Start Up
12/01/75
10/01/76
12/01/75
12/01/75
10/01/76
10/01/76
Drop Out
9/30/77
continuing
9/30/77
continuing
9/30/77
3/31/77
-------
Start Up
Drop Out
Start Up
Drop Out
221
226
235
236
237
242
244
260
261
265
272
275
283
285
286
292
295
296
299
316
318
323
324
325
326
328
329
330
331
333
336
337
338
339
340
341
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
9/01/76
10/01/76
3/01/76
12/01/75
3/01/76
1/01/76
2/01/76
1/01/76
12/01/75
1/01/76
2/01/76
6/01/76
3/01/76
3/01/76
2/01/76
3/01/76
2/01/76
3/01/76
10/01/76
5/01/76
7/01/76
10/01/76
4/01/76
5/01/76
8/01/76
10/01/76
6/01/76
6/01/76
7/01/76
8/01/76
10/01/76
8/01/76
8/01/76
8/01/76
10/01/76
8/01/76
8/01/76
10/01/76
10/01/76
10/01/76
10/00/76
10/01/76
10/01/76
10/01/76
10/01/76
1/01/77
10/01/76
10/01/76
continuing
3/31/77
6/30/77
9/30/77
9/30/77
3/31/77
9/30/77
3/31/77
12/31/76
9/30/77
9/30/77
9/30/77
3/31/77
6/30/76
9/30/77
9/30/77
12/31/76
9/30/77
9/30/77
continuing
9/30/77
3/31/77
9/30/77
9/30/77
9/30/77
9/30/77
9/30/77
9/30/77
9/30/77
9/30/77
9/30/77
continuing
continuing
continuing
3/31/77
9/30/77
9/30/77
9/30/77
9/30/77
3/31/77
9/30/77
9/30/77
9/30/77
9/30/77
9/30/77
3/31/77
9/30/77
9/30/77
-------
Start Up Drop Out Start Up Drop Out
355 10/01/76 9/30/77
358 10/01/76 9/30/77
359 10/01/76 12/31/76
361 10/01/76 3/31/77
362 10/01/76 9/30/77
363 11/01/76 9/30/77
-------
entity I heir Safety Problems
By KELLY KING, Safety Sciences, San Diego, California
Once again we are pleased to have Ms. Kelly King,
Safety Sciences, San Diego, California to write for our
column. Her article describes the purpose of the IRIS
(Injury Reporting Information System) program which
Safety Sciences is operating under the auspices of
the EPA Office of Solid Waste Management Pro-
grams. It describes briefly the background of the field
test program, the further development of the program
which will include 100 new users by 1976, its purpose
and some of the information developed to date. Any
WASTE AGE readers interested in knowing more
about the program should refer to the address listed
in the article.-Jerry Van Beek
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is
now offering a new safety management tool to
interested private and municipal solid waste agencies.
Known as IRIS, the Injury Reporting and Information
System for solid waste management, the tool provides
computer analyzed data on injury rates and risks in a
form directly useful to management. IRIS users (solid
waste agencies) supply data on their injuries to a
national office (operated under contract from EPA by
SAFETY SCIENCES of San Diego). The national
office analyzes this data and returns to each user an
individualized Quarterly Safety Management Report
which includes a detailed comparison of the injury
experience of that user with other users, identification
of key injury problem areas for each user, and
recommendations for countermeasures. IRIS was
developed during a two year field test in which 15
solid waste agencies used the system and partici-
pated in its development. The field testing has now
been completed. EPA plans to include 100 new users
by June 1976; already 40 new municipal and private
solid waste agencies have joined IRIS.
The Need for IRIS
IRIS grew out of a need based on the very high
injury rate in the solid waste management industry
and the lack of useful injury statistics which could
identify the causal factors associated with this rate. In
the last few years there has been increased aware-
ness of the injury problem in the solid waste man-
agement industry. Many are aware of National Safety
Council data showing that the injury frequency rate for
refuse collection is at least 7 times the average for
industry as a whole, and that the severity rate is more
than 4 times higher than the average. However, mere
awareness of the high injury rate, without an under-
standing of the factors involved, often leads to a
sense of inevitability about the injury problem. Many
solid waste workers have grown to think of injuries as
a necessary part of doing business. Others doubt the
validity of injury statistics. Certainly, it is justifiable to
question the usefulness of injury statistics that simply
confirm that there is a high injury rate.
What many fail to recognize is that the injury rate is
not consistently high throughout the solid waste
industry. Some organizations have managed to lower
their overall injury rate, and others have managed to
reduce or eliminate particular types of injuries. What is
needed is information on injuries that will do more
than merely confirm a high injury rate or just count the
number of cut fingers, falls, etc. What is needed is an
information system that will help identify what are the
differences—in operational characteristics or in safety
programs—between solid waste agencies with high
32
WASTE AGE is printed on paper containing recycled secondary fibers
-------
injury rates and those with low injury rates, so that the
successful methods of the low injury rate agencies
can be applied by others.
To do this requires: 1) detailed injury data from
many solid waste agencies; 2) comparisons between
agencies, not merely in overall injury rates but by
identifying the particular types of accidents for which
some agencies have managed to achieve lower injury
rates than others; 3) evaluation to determine what the
agencies did (or perhaps just what circumstances
existed) that resulted in the lower numbers of certain
types of accidents; and 4) exchange of this informa-
tion about optimal operational characteristics and
successful safety programs between solid waste
agencies.
IRIS was designed to meet these needs. The
purpose of IRIS is, in part, to answer major industry-
wide safety questions, such as how do types of
equipment, operational methods, point of collection
(e.g., backyard vs curbside), crew size, shift (task
system or 8-hr, day), and other factors compare, from
the standpoint of safety. However, IRIS was also
designed to be a service for the individual solid waste
agency by helping each agency to identify the specific
areas in which its injury rate is higher than average,
and by providing information on the methods used by
other IRIS users to combat the injury problem in these
areas.
Features of IRIS
Many of the characteristics of IRIS are unique to
this system and are not provided by any other
available injury information system. There are four
important and unique features of IRIS: 1) it provides
detailed data specifically related to the solid waste
industry; 2) it provides comparisons between IRIS
users, not only for overall injury rates but for specific
types of accidents; 3) it provides detailed cost data
enabling cost effectiveness evaluation of prevention
efforts; 4) EPA is providing a technical assistance
officer to aid solid waste agencies in implementing the
countermeasures suggested by the IRIS data for their
agency.
IRIS is specifically designed for the solid waste
management industry including both refuse collection
and disposal. Unlike other injury data systems, IRIS
relates injuries to detailed factors of special impor-
tance to this industry alone. For example, the Quar-
terly Safety Management Report sent to each IRIS
user covers the effect of crew size, backyard vs
curbside collection, type of equipment, type of collec-
tion and disposal sites, etc.
IRIS provides data for most of these factors in the
form of rates (injuries per man-hour or per event). This
enables comparisons to be made between agencies
with different exposures to a factor. For example,
during the field test, comparisons were made of the
injury rate for certain activities. FIGURE 1 shows the
460
194
44
B
E
FIGURE 1
INJURY RATES FOR MOUNTING AND DISMOUNTING THE STEP
injury rates for 5 of the field test participants for the
activity "mounting and dismounting the step" (of a
refuse collection truck). Effects due to the fact that
some of these users mount and dismount the step
more often than others (e.g., this is the case with
curbside collectors compared to backyard collectors)
were cancelled out by using rates. As can be seen
City D has Vioth the injury rate for this activity of Cities
B, C and E. This is because of an effective step and
handhold modification program performed by City D.
City B was able to identify "falls" as an area in
which its injury rate was exceptionally high by the
comparison with other IRIS users shown in FIGURE
2. Prior to this comparison City B had been forced to
20.7
1.7
6.7
3.3
4.7
B
D
FIGURE 2
INJURY RATES FOR FALLS TO SAME LEVEL
assume that it had an "average" number of falls, and
had been unable to identify this as a key injury
problem for their sanitation employees.
Many people distrust comparisons because they
feel their organization is not similar enough to other
organizations to allow meaningful comparisons. IRIS
overcomes this problem by making comparisons using
specific factors (such as those described above), and
(Continued on Page 34)
DECEMBER, 1975
-------
GERALD VAN BEEK . . .
(Continued from Page 33)
by comparing similar systems, such as organizations
with similar disposal sites, crew sizes, points of
collection, etc. FIGURE 3 compares the injury rate at
131
39
14
29
A B C E
FIGURE 3
INJURY RATES FOR INJURIES OCCURRING AT LANDFILL
the landfill for 4 cities in the field test using landfills. In
this case it is City E that has the most severe injury
problem, indicating that the next step is to determine
what it is about City E's landfill operations that results
in such a high injury rate.
IRIS also provides detailed cost data by individual
type of injury. For example, the average direct cost of
each injury, including first aid cases, occurring while
mounting and dismounting from the step was found in
Does all your 'big jofcs easily-
yet cuts maintenance costs, too!
Whether it's glass or can reclaiming, or metal recovery, trie TCI C2B Is
the inside-outside wheel loader to cut lour costs. 2000 pound working
load capacity. Special buckets available tor large volume, lighter loads.
Fast. Maneuverable. True sell-levelling bucket. 10-loot lift height. Low,
Ion maintenance. Get the tacts. See your TCI dealer.
;yiJ*»«s'"V» /.,•>: "".,';, vp^-S
Bdb^tS-^'a^'-sv.-sii • .a-. •*:•>
the field test to be $396. Knowledge of the cost of this
type of accident makes it possible to justify the costs
of modifications to equipment or other countermea-
sures.
EPA plans to provide a technical assistance officer
to aid in the implementation of the results found from
IRIS. This officer will visit IRIS -users to review the
results shown in their Quarterly Safety'Management'
Reports and to aid them in developing countermea-
sures to reduce injuries in their key problem areas.
How IRIS Works
As indicated above, IRIS is a service by which
individual IRIS users supply their injury data to a
national office which analyzes their injuries, compares
them with other IRIS users to identify their key injury
problem areas, and returns these results in the form of
a Quarterly Safety Management Report. In addition,
another report called Accident Trends provides the
overall results from IRIS for the industry as a whole.
There is at present NO CHARGE for the analyses,
recommendations, and comparisons provided by the
national office, but each user must be willing to
support IRIS by supplying detailed data on each
injury, and background data on the types of work
performed, equipment used, work force and other
factors related to injuries which are needed to com-
pute injury rates.
The background data is supplied to IRIS through
the completion of four packages which are sent to a
new IRIS user when he joins the IRIS program. To
help IRIS users supply the detailed injury data
required, IRIS has developed a new quick-reporting
system for injury data. Users make a two-minute
phone call to a trained operator who puts the
information directly into the computer. This method
cuts down the paper work and makes it simple to
provide the detailed information required on each
injury without requiring a complicated form. Phone
calls are made to the IRIS Central Office in San
Diego, California. This method for reporting injury data
has been tested; the phone call costs amount to $.75
to $1.30 for a typical injury.
To Learn More About IRIS
If you decide that injuries are a problem at your
sanitation department and you would like to partici-
pate in, or learn more about, IRIS, contact EPA at the
address below. Because of limited resources only 100
users will be accepted.
IRIS Program
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Solid Waste Management Programs
Systems Management Division (AW-464)
Washington, D.C. 20460
202/755-9125 Q
24
For more informolion circle reader service cord 323
WASTE AGE is printed on paper containing recycled secondary fibers
-------
GRCDA awarded EPA grant to help
"market" IRIS program to cities
The GRCDA will play an official role
in implementing the IRIS solid waste acci-
dent reporting system in public agencies
throughout the country, as a result of a
grant the Association has just received
from the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency's Office of Solid Waste Manage-
ment Programs.
Working with Robert Colonna, direc-
tor of systems management for the EPA's
solid waste group, the GRCDA proposed
a "marketing" program to utilize the
growing membership and interest in the
Association and in public sector solid
waste management to communicate the
details and benefits of IRIS program to
municipalities and other governmental
solid waste operations.
IRIS — Injury Reporting and Infor-
mation System — is a computer-based
accident reporting system for the solid
waste field designed to help establish a
common base for accident reporting and
improve reliability of statistics. Major
objectives are to help public solid waste
operations pinpoint causes of their re-
lated injury accidents, find remedies and,
at the same time, compare their safety
scores with like agencies throughout the
country. (See accompanying story).
IRIS was developed'for the EPA by
Safety Sciences, Inc. of San Diego, Calif.
which remains the central clearinghouse
for IRIS participants and information.
The GRCDA will not be involved in the
mechanics of the system itself, but will
help implement the program in as many as
public agencies as possible — tentative
goal is 70 to 100 — in order to broaden
the accident data base and make the
results more meaningful to participants
and non-participants alike.
An advisory committee of GRCDA
members from established chapters and
from the growing list of at-large members
throughout the U.S. is now being organ-
ized, with Don Rice, safety officer for the
City of Long Beach, Calif, serving as
chairman.
A number of specific activities are
underway, with some already completed.
These include a briefing for Utah public
and private solid waste officials at a
meeting in Salt Lake City on May 19, a
special presentation during the Texas
Public Works Association's Annual Con-
ference in Amarillo on May 20, and an
IRIS report as part of a solid waste safety
workshop during the Western Safety Con-
gress May 27 in Anaheim, Calif.
Similar activities are scheduled for
the International Refuse Conference and
Equipment Show sponsored by the
National Solid Wastes Management
Association in Chicago, June 3-6. Others
will be announced as they are firmed up.
IRIS to help cities compare safety records,
pinpoint their problems and find answers
IRIS — the Injury Reporting System
and Information System for solid waste
management, is designed to help control
the field's injury rate which is several
times the national rate for work injuries in
manufacturing and the worst among
municipal or related activities, excluding
police and fire departments.
After development, the system was field
tested by 15 solid waste agencies (11 pub-
lic and 4 private); in the past several
months about 60 public and private agen-
cies solid waste operations have signaled
their intent to participate. (See accom-
panying list).
IRIS is a method for collecting and ana-
lyzing data on factors related to injuries to
solid waste workers. The data is supplied
g SOLID WASTE SYSTEMS APRIL/MAY. 1976
-------
HANDS OFF. WE HOPE NOT. Hands in way of packer blade when it's on the way down
is just one ol the injury-causing practices that IRIS hopes to eliminate. Photos on front
cover show others.
by participating solid waste organi-
zations, both public agencies and private
firms, and analyzed by a national office.
Each user is sent an individualized
quarterly report that provides detailed
information on its injuries. The infor-
mation enables management to select
priority areas for injury reduction pro-
grams and to justify these programs in
terms of their costs, benefits, and
effectiveness as demonstrated by other
IRIS users.
Users contribute data to a national
office, supported by the Office of Solid
Waste Management Programs, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency. This
data is used to provide answers impor-
tant to the solid waste industry as a whole,
such as effect on injury rates of the task
system, crew size, and curbside vs back-
yard collection, questions which cannot
be answered by a single solid waste
agency.
Pooling injury data enables each IRIS
user to compare its injury experience with
other users. These comparisons are
provided quarterly to each IRIS user and
show what can be done in each area of the
work environment. Where the injury
experience of the user is very high, some
other user may have found and demon-
strated a workable solution. IRIS
computes detailed injury rates for indi-
vidual aspects of the work environment,
such as equipment, crew size, etc. These
detailed injury rates enable realistic
comparisons to be made between dif-
ferent organizations, whereas a compari-
son of the overall injury rate between two
organizations does not have much
meaning if they differ in type of work per-
formed, e.g., residential vs commercial
collection.
To join IRIS, an organization must
have either refuse collection (residential or
commercial) or refuse disposal operations
or both, and can be either a public agency
or a private firm. The organization must
also be willing to supply detailed data on
each injury, and background data on the
Sign-ups to date
for IRIS program
These are the cities and private solid
waste contractors who have indicated
their intent to participate in the IRIS pro-
gram. A number of these are already "on
line," reporting their injury accidents to
the central IRIS data center. Updates on
progress and results of the program will
be carried in future issues of Solid Waste
Systems.
Sacramento, Ca San Diego, Ca
St. Petersburg, Fl Scottsdale, Az
Little Rock, Ar San Bernardino, Ca
Milwaukee, Wi St. Louis, Mo
Long Beach, Ca Gainesville, Fl
Oceanside, Ca Portsmouth, Va
Houston, Tx Savannah, Ga
Lubbock, Tx. Norfolk, Va
Manhattan Beach, Ca Phoenix, Az
Virginia Beach, Va
Columbus, Oh
Tyler, Tx
New Orleans, La -
Beaumont,.Tx
Freeport, Ny
San Leandro, Ca
Toledo, Oh
Beverly, Ma
Fresno, Ca
Fort Madison, la
Dallas, Tx
County of Sacramento, Ca
Birmingham, Al
Thcta Systems, Inc., II
Lompoc, Ca
Chicago, II
Lafayette, La
Merced, Ca
Fox Valley Disp.(WM), II
Huntington, Ny
Durham, Nc
Greenwich, Ct
Fairfax County, Va
Oxnard, Ca
Garland, Tx
Lawrence, Ka
Evanston, II
Calgary, Canada
West A His, Wi
Los Angeles, Ca
Mchenry & Woodstock Disp. Co. II
Newark, Nj
Anchorage, Al
Toronto, Canada
Orlando, Fl
Syracuse, Ny
Cherry Hill, Nj
Great Falls, Mt
Homestead, Fl
Berkeley, Mi
Davis Waste Removal Co.
Oklahoma City, Ok
Roswell, Nm
APRIL/MAY, 1976 SOLID WASTE SYSTEMS 7
-------
Solid waste injury record improves,
but figures may be misleading
Recent figures issued by the National Safety Council indicate a decrease in
both frequency and severity of injury rates among solid waste workers since an
all-time high in 1972 of 109.95 injuries per million man hours worked and 3388
hours lost time per million man hours worked. The figures for 1974, for example,
show a drop to 78.01 accidents per million man hours and drop in lost time acci-
dents to 2529 for the same work output.
Possibly throwing some suspicion on these figures is that although helpful, data
gathered by the National Safety Council and by the Bureau of Labor Statistics,
which also monitors injury accidents, are based on formulas sometimes described
as of doubtful reliability. This is because of the small number of responses to
data-gathering efforts and because the systems do not match in terms of types of
accidents, treatment, costs, lost time, etc.
IRIS was conceived and developed specifically to eliminate these short-
comings by first, developing a system in which participants would report on an
identical basis and, second, involving toward a larger number of reporting
agencies.
types of work performed, equipment used,
work force, and other factors related to
injuries. The method of data collection
will be custom-designed for each user.
IRIS has developed a new quick-report-
ing system for injury data, via a two
minute phone call to a trained operator,
who puts the information directly into a
computer. This cuts paper work and
makes it easy to provide detailed
information a complicated form.
Each user receives an individualized
Quarterly Safety Management Report.
This includes a detailed comparison
(about 25 key factors) of injury experience
organization should be giving special
consideration are flagged and recom-
mendations made for improvements.
Examples of computer analyses include:
• Crew size and crew type (e.g.,
residential manual collection, bulk
container route)
• Characteristics of equipment (e.g.,
type, make, model, year)
• Employee Characteristics (e.g.,
height, weight, experience on job)
• Container characteristics
• Characteristics of refuse (e.g., hypo-
dermic needles)
• Activity at time of injury (broken
down into primary activities such as
carrying and again into detailed
activities such as carrying plastic
bags)
• Time on shift prior to injury, and time
of day
• "Profiles," that describe the most
frequent accident types as well stand-
ard analysis by part of body injured,
accident type (e.g., fall) and nature of
injury. Each computer analysis includes a
listing of number of injuries, injury rates,
time lost, and direct cost. These analyses
can be used to identify serious problems,
determine whether other users have been
able to control similar problems, and
measure effects of injury control
programs. Two specific examples from
early field tests:
Example I. One participant identified
mounting and dismounting as a serious
problem (overall, getting on and off the
step of a packer truck and in and out of
the cab is responsible for about 7-8% of all
injuries, days lost, and cost). Working
with collection crews and maintenance
department, this participant redesigned
the step of the packer truck. As a result,
the rate for injuries associated with this
activity is now less than one tenth that of
three other major participants.
Example 2. Another participant had a
very high overall injury rate. Analysis
showed many associated with falls while
carrying containers — 44 injuries of this
type in a one-year period. The accident
incidence rate for "carrying" was 297
compared to an average of 67 for all
participants. This participant performs
backyard collection, using a tub-out
method, but another agency in the same
region, performing backyard collection
with a wheeled intermediate container,
had an incidence rate for "carrying" of
only 35.
This suggests that the participant
should consider use of a wheeled inter-
mediate container, if it continues
providing backyard collection. If the
participant can reduce the injury rate
associated with "carrying" to the average,
the number of accidents will be reduced
from 44 to 10 per year. Since the average
"carrying" accident costs this participant
$630, the total direct cost savings per year
will be about 521,500.
Sanitation divisions of municipalities
and private solid waste firms interested in
joining the IRIS service should contact
EPA or the IRIS contractor:
Ms. Martha Madison
U.S. EPA/Office of Solid Waste
Management Programs
AW-564
Washington, D.C. 20460
202-755-9125
or
SAFETY SCIENCES (Attention: Ms
Kelly King)
11772 Sorrento Valley Road
San Diego, California 92121
714-755-9359 0
8 SOLID WASTE SYSTEMS APRIL/MAY. 1976
-------
a ON-THE-JOB INJURIES have
long been a problem for municipali-
ties. The National Safety Council
(NSC) estimates that the . average in-
jury rate for.employees of municipali-
ties and other, public agencies is over
three times that for all industry.
In a typical city, a major source of
this injury problem is the sanitation
department. Although the injury rates
for fire and police departments are
high, the sanitation department has
traditionally had one of the poorest
injury records. Sanitation employees
suffer three times the number of in-
juries of the average municipal em-
ployee or nearly ten times that for
employees in all industry (Work In-
jury Rates, NSC, 1974).
Alarmed by these statistics, the
Office of Solid Waste Management
Programs of the Environmental Pro-
tection Agency contracted with Safety
Sciences, Inc., of San Diego, Calif., to
develop a data retrieval system that
would be capable of reducing injuries
to solid waste workers. Figure 1 shows
some of the highlights from the devel-
opment and field testing of the Injury
Reporting and Information System,
known as IRIS.
The EPA study also highlighted
some of the causes of the high injury
rates by comparing them with the as-
pects of the work environment and
work practices. By collecting detailed
data on these work aspects, the study
was able to make comparisons be-
tween solid waste agencies and show
which aspects of the work were more
hazardous.
Previously, available data was very
limited, and it was only possible at
best to compare overall injury rates
of one solid waste agency with
another. Such comparisons were often
meaningless, since one agency was
performing an entirely different mix of
work with a different mix of em-
ployees. The study also enabled the
comparisons to be made not only in
terms of injury rates but in terms of
direct costs.
The cost data are particularly strik-
ing. The average direct cost of injuries
for each sanitation employee (all em-
ployees, not just those injured) was
found to be $240 per year. This direct
cost does not include the insurance
administrative costs (that is, the cost
above what is paid out to employees
that the insurance carrier charges for
administering claims). Also extra are
the indirect costs such as extra super-
vision, down-time, retraining, substitu-
tion of employees, equipment replace-
ment, the lost time of employee wit-
nesses, employees giving aid to the
Rgure 1
SOME HIGHLIGHTS OF THE
DATA COLLECTED DURING
THE FIELD TESTING OF IRIS -
• On the average, every year, 4 out of
10 solid waste workers are injured
... not induing first aid injuries.
One participant averaged more than
one injury per person per year.
• 66% of these injuries resulted in
lost workdays ... this is twice the
percentage for the average
manufacturing industry.
• 11.7 workdays are lost, on the
average, for each lost workday case.
• The average direct cost per injury
(including first aid injuries) is $440.
This direct cost includes only wage
continuation, medical payments,
death and disability benefits . . .
indirect costs are not included.
• Every year the average direct costs
of injuries amount to $240 for every
person on the payroll. Among the 15
participants, this amount ranged
from $102 to $762 per person.
• On the average, every solid waste
worker loses 3 workdays per year
from injuries.
• The average solid waste worker has
a 9% chance of suffering an
amputation during a 25-year work
life.
• Younger workers have a higher
injury rate than older workers, but
older workers lose more workdays
per injury. The average number of
days lost per year is similar for all
age groups.
• Inexperienced Workers (on the job
less than 6 months) have a much
higher injury rate, three times that
of workers on the job more than
2 years.
injured employee, reporting time, etc.
NSC estimates that the indirect
costs are five times the direct costs.
Using these average figures a city of
100 sanitation workers will incur di-
rect injury costs of $24,000 a year and
total costs (including indirect) of
$144,000 per year.
Variations in injury rates and direct
costs per sanitation employee per year
for the five largest cities in the field
test are shown in Figure 2. Each of
the five agencies is identified by a
code (City A, B, C, D, E). The "worst"
of these five cities had an injury rate
four times higher than the "best," and
a cost per man-year seven and a half
times higher than the "best."
The figures given are injury rates,
that is, the number of injuries per 100
full-time men in a one-year period.
Continued on page 30
28
CITIES • SEFTEMkfR 1975
-------
28
78
56
29
A BCD E
Figure 2a
OSHA incidence rates for number of
non first-aid injuries per 100 employees
per year
$762
$731
$138
$381
$102
A B C : ... D E --
Figure 2b
Direct costs of injuries per sanitation
employee per year (averaged over all
employees, not just those injured)
450
194
439
460
44
A B C D E
Figure 6a
OSHA incidence rate for mounting/dis-
mounting
How Five Cities Stack Up
In Collection Injury Rates
56
57
32
A- .•]
Figure <
OSHA in
1.7
40.
2 '-
B C • D
>b •. •" •--•:'.' ,v '••
cidence rate for riding
"20.7 '/-:'; '•';••'$'•
3.3
6.7
E
4.7
49
78
33 .
143
A B C D E
Figure 7". -••
OSHA incidence rate for falls to same
level
297
62
B
Figure 3a
OSHA incidence rate for injuries on col-
lection route •_ .
131
143
54
35
39
29
14
A B C D
Figure 8
OSHA incidence rate for carrying
B
Figure 3b
OSHA incidence rate for injuries ocr
curring at landfill
NATION
-------
Continued from page 28
Rates are used in order to show the
number of injuries as a factor of man-
hours on the job. By using man-hours
of exposure, IRIS permits a true com-
parison between cities with similar sys-
tems. Figure 3 A shows that City B pre-
sents a much higher degree of risk to
its collection crew on the route than
any of the other cities. In figure 3B,
there is an alarming risk to the collec-
tion crews of City E while at the land-
fill. (City D is missing from figure 3B
because its refuse is taken to a transfer
station, and therefore, its system could
not be included in this comparison.)
An excellent example of how better
information helped City D to solve
a nagging injury problem is shown in
the data collected during the field test.
Refuse collectors commonly travel
from stop to stop on their routes by
riding on "steps" attached to the rear
of packer trucks. Injuries associated
with mounting/dismounting and rid-
ing these steps were found to account
for 13 per cent of the total injuries of
the 15 solid waste agencies being
tested on IRIS, 13 per cent of the total
work days lost, and 17.5 per cent
of the total direct costs. The man-
agement of many solid waste agen-
cies appears to be unaware of the
importance of injuries of this type,
judging by the often poor state of re-
pair of steps and handholds.
City D is now aware of this prob-
lem. It has modified its trucks to
provide safer steps and hand-holds
(at right), and has emphasized train-
ing in their proper use (at right).
The EPA study computed injury
rates per man-hour spent mounting/
dismounting and riding, and Figure 6
shows a comparison between the five
cities. The differences are truly re-
markable. City D which had made the
modification in step design had re-
duced its rate for mounting/ dismount-
ing injuries to less than one-tenth that
of City E and for riding injuries to
less than one-thirtieth of City E.
The impact of costs is also remark-
able. City D, with approximately 420
employees on collection routes, now
has a total direct cost for injuries as-
sociated with mounting/dismounting
and riding of $1,753 per year, com-
pared with 531,750 for City E with
120 employees on its collection routes.
The problem of insufficient infor-
mation and how it may be misinter-
preted can be shown by another ex-
ample. The management of the sanita-
tion agency at City B had felt, prior
to the study, that its overall injury
rate was "about average." As can be
seen from Figure 2, the agency's rate
was considerably higher than that of
the other cities. Awareness of this
finding led management to place great-
er emphasis on the injury problem.
It was found that injuries due to
falls comprised a large portion of their
total number of injuries, but that over-
exertion comprised an even larger por-
tion, 28%. However, when the injury
rates of City B were compared to the
rates from other IRIS cities, it was
found that the rate for fall injuries
(falls to same level, Figure 7) was
much higher than for any other city
while the rate of overexertion was not
higher.
Pursuing the comparison further,
the injury rate for lifting and carrying
was computed; and as Figure 8 shows
City B had a higher injury rate for this
activity too. Looking for possible rea-
sons for the wide variation in rates
an analysis of the type of service per-
formed was done.
City B showed that backyard col-
lection was provided, using a "tub-out"
method, in which solid waste was
Rear step in
dumped into an intermediate contain-
er which was then carried out to the
truck. One of the other participants,
City D, located in the same region of
the country, also has backyard collec-
tion with a tub-out method, but with
wheels. As can be seen in the histo-
gram the injury rate for carrying in
City D is significantly lower than in
City B. This suggests that City B
should consider using wheeled con-
tainers if it intends to continue per-
forming backyard collection.
Examining the category of "carry-
ing" for City B, falls were found to
be the major reason for that activity
having such a relatively high incidence
rate. If City B could cut its injury rate
for "carrying" from its present rate to
the average found for the participants
in the study, the actual number of in-
juries would drop from 44 to 10 carry-
ing injuries per year.
The study showed that the average
carrying injury for City B had a direct
Riding the right way
j
Pin permits step adjustment
Riding the wrong way
30 NATION'S CITIES • SEPTEMBER 1975
-------
cost of $630. Saving 34 carry-injuries
would thus lead to a direct cost savings
of about $21,500 per year. It is thus
possible to estimate whether changes in
operating methods would yield worth-
while savings in injury costs.
In the example above the point is,
if City B had not had the advantage
of comparable figures, it would have
assumed overexertion to be the major
problem when in fact it was falls. City
B would have spent its resources on
injuries in a category that it could not
impact on as well.
It should be pointed out here that
changing one part of the operation to
reduce injuries may cause some new
problems not encountered before. In-
juries occurred because of pushing
and pulling the wheeled tubs men-
tioned in city D's operation, but the
incidence rate was about the same as
its low carrying rate and the cost per
injury was $164, the net effect being
a less costly injury.
How Does Your City Stand?
How about your city? What is the
injury rate for your sanitation depart-
ment?
Most cities compile their statistics
using the American National Stan-
dards Institute (ANSI) rates; but, the
latter trend is toward the Occupa-
tional Safety and Health Administra-
tion (OSHA) rates.
Which one you use does not matter.
The averages for the solid waste in-
dustry are as follows: 107 for the
ANSI or 39 for OSHA. If your rate is
anywhere near these figures, you have
a problem. In this case being average
is not good, because the average is
extremely high when compared to
other municipal workers.
A layman's translation of these rates
is as follows. If more than 2 per cent
of your sanitation department em-
ployees lost time from work last year,
they were average for all industry. If
20 per cent of your employees lost
IRIS—A NEW OFFICE OF SOLID WASTE
MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS FOR CITIES
IRIS is currently being used by 15
solid waste agencies which have been
involved in the development and field
testing of the system. The field testing
has now been completed and the sys-
tem is available for interested private
and municipal users. Users supply their
injury data to a national office (oper-
ated under contract from EPA by
SAFETY SCIENCES, INC.). The national
office analyzes this data and returns to
the user an individualized Quarterly
Safety Management Report. This in-
cludes a detailed comparison of the city
with other users (identified only by
codes). Areas to which the user should
be giving special attention are flagged,
and recommendations are given on
countermeasures. There is at present
NO CHARGE for the analyses, recom-
mendations, and comparisons provided
by the national office, but each user
must be willing to support IRIS by sup-
plying detailed data on each injury, and
background data on the types of work
performed, equipment used, work force
and other factors related to injuries
which are needed to compute injury
rates. The method of collection will be
custom-designed for each user.
IRIS has developed a new quick-re-
porting system for injury data. Users
make a two-minute phone call to a
trained operator who puts the informa-
tion directly into the computer. This
method cuts down the paper work and
makes it simple to provide the detailed
information required on each injury
without requiring a complicated form.
If using the written injury report is
better for the agency, that can be ar-
ranged.
To determine whether your city
needs IRIS, you need to know how your
city's sanitation department stands. As
indicated above, many cities will not
have the information to do this. A few
guides have been provided for helping
you decide whether your Sanitation De-
partment has an injury problem. Con-
tact your sanitation head or your city
safety or workmen's compensation
office. Ask them how sanitation com-
pares with the rest of the city for in-
juries. Ask them what the injury rate
is, or if this is not available ask them
how many injuries sanitation had last
year. Ask what injuries to this depart-
ment cost in your city last year.
If you decide that injuries are a
problem at your sanitation department
and you would like to participate in,
or learn more about, IRIS, contact the
OSWMP of the EPA. Because of limited
resources only 100 cities will be ac-
cepted.
IRIS Program
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Solid Waste Management
Programs
Systems Management Division (AW-
564)
Washington, D.C. 20460
202/755-9125
time due to injuries last year, they are
average waste employees. But can you
afford "average" sanitation workers?
"How much does that department
spend a year on injuries?", would be
a good question to ask your work-
man's compensation staff. Keep in
mind that up to five times the direct
costs are involved in total cost to a
solid waste organization.
Finally, how do you stand com-
pared to other cities? The EPA study
showed very large differences between
solid waste agencies in both injury
rate and cost. Not all cities had a high
sanitation injury rate and cost, and
some cities managed to "solve" certain
injury problems. This finding is very
important because it indicates that in-
juries are not a necessary or inevitable
part of sanitation operations. The
lower rates in'some cities indicate that
something can be done about these
injuries.
The results obtained during the field
test were limited but even the pre-
liminary findings are of considerable
interest. In the future, with the pool-
ing of nationwide data from more
IRIS users, key issues can be tackled,
such as what the effect of different
crew sizes has on injury rates of:
• crew size
• point of pickup (backyard vs.' curb-
side)
• height of dump station
• hours worked per day (fixed day vs.
task system)
If anything is to be done about the
suspected injuries to solid waste work-
ers, there must be a coordinated and
conscious effort. The term "suspected"
is used because the data available is
not really sufficient for its implica-
tions to be completely credible, and
the "tip of the iceberg" is the only
sign of what may be a larger problem.
Before the solid waste industry can
establish effective injury reduction
programs, it must know where it
stands and what directions to take.
IRIS can be a tremendous help in
establishing the magnitude of the in-
jury problem. Once the problem is
defined, the interaction among IRIS
users will stimulate good workable
solutions, which will ultimately save
a great deal of money and human
suffering. •
SIDNEY D. WENER is a program ana-
lyst with the Office of Solid Waste
Management Programs, in the Envi-
ronmental Protection Agency, Wash-
ington, D.C. Mr. Wener previously
owned and operated a private solid
waste collection firm.
NATION'S C
-------
Div. of WSA Inc., 11772 Sorrento Valley Road
San Diego, California 92121 (714) 755-9359
Report No. 411F
Evaluation of an Injury Reporting
and Information System (IRIS)
for the Solid Waste Management Industry
Final Report: Data Analyses
Performed for
Office of Solid Waste Management Programs
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Under Contract No. 68-03-0231
April 1978
------- |