2008 Interactive Health, Safety and Environment Report the TRW AUTOMOTIVE Health, Safety, Environment and Security Program
2
Table of Contents 4 Letters to the Stakeholders 6 Health, Safety & Environment Alignment with the Business: An Introduction 8 Health, Safety & Environment: Program Overview and Back-to-Basics Integration 11 TRW HS&E Management Systems: An Introduction 13 Safety Excellence: An Overview 16 Behavior-Based Safety: One-on-One Coaching 19 Ergonomics 21 Safety Leadership 24 Environmental Excellence: Introduction 26 Product Stewardship 29 Environmental Remediation 31 HS&E Cost Determination and Reduction (CDR) and Energy Reduction: Overview 35 Energy and Water Reduction Program 38 Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions 40 Environmental Release/Natural Resource (ERNR) Metric: Introduction 44 Select HS&E Data Tables 50 Value-Added: Global Health, Safety, Environment & Security Program
3
March 2009
Dear Stakeholders:
While the year ahead poses many challenges, the year behind us is one of accom-
plishment.
In the past, TRW has reiterated its commitment to stewardship of its own
resources and those of the environment. Two key measures of an organization’s commitment to health, safety and the environment are its employee total recordable incidence rate (TRIR) and the percent of waste it is able to reclaim and recycle. In 2008, TRW’s TRIR dropped 18 percent from 1.53 to 1.26 per 100 employees, and its waste recycling or reclamation rate increased in 9 of 11 waste categories.
This report tells the story of TRW’s health, safety and environment (HS&E)
efforts in 2008 -- but it does more than that. 2008 is one chapter in the ongoing story of TRW’s belief that it can manage its business to profitability by continually adding to the world’s broadest portfolio of active and passive safety systems. It is also a chapter in the company’s continuing effort to integrate health, safety and environmental considerations into its design, manufacturing and product retirement processes.
Please know that despite the economic downturn, TRW remains committed to
its HS&E programs. While the downturn is short-term, TRW intends to continue to protect its employees and the environment in a long-term and sustainable manner. Sincerely,
Steve Lunn Chief Operating Officer TRW Automotive
4
March 2009
Dear Stakeholders:
We are pleased to bring you good news about TRW’s health, safety, environmental
and security (HS&E) performance in 2008.
In this report, you will find descriptions of TRW’s HS&E philosophy and the
programs we have in place to help us manage our product design, manufacturing and reclamation/retirement processes. This report also describes our efforts to provide safe workplaces for employees and healthy environments for the communities in which we operate. As you read, you’ll learn more about Safety Excellence and our participation in the Back-to-Basics program, both of which engage employees in the workplace in protecting their own health and safety.
At this time, the entire management team of TRW and I would like to recognize
and thank the many thousands of employees throughout the company who have assumed leadership roles in HS&E programs. Your enthusiasm and suggestions for continuous improvement have made a positive difference in our facilities, and we look forward to your participation in the coming year.
Finally, we will not be printing the 2008 Interactive Health, Safety and Environ-
ment Report this year as both a measure of environmental responsibility and due to the need for the business to conserve expenditures. Please enjoy this new online edition, which gives us the chance to keep you up to date regarding many exciting TRW programs and accomplishments. Sincerely,
Thomas Koenig Vice President, Global HS&E TRW Automotive
5
Health, Safety & Environment Alignment with the Business: An Introduction In TRW, the business goals are simple:
all of these HS&E systems or processes
and innovative technology, the
best quality, lowest cost, global reach,
are ultimately aligned with the TRW
HS&E Strategy of “Pursuing
and innovative technology. These
business strategy.
Excellence and Building Value� is
four goals drive the TRW continuous
To support the TRW goals of
being implemented by addressing
improvement process. The Health,
best quality, lowest cost, global reach,
four strategic priorities with the
goals and the strategies to achieve them. In this report, you will find descriptions of the HS&E processes and organization
TRW Automotive Goals and Strategy HS&E Goals and Strategy HS&E Processes and Organization Critical Systems and Tools
ENABLERS
Program is well integrated with these
DRIVERS
Safety & Environment (HS&E)
and see major systems and tools that help TRW achieve both its business and HS&E goals. As shown in Figure 1,
Figure 1. It all starts with the TRW Automotive goals and strategy to drive change and ensure business integration.
6
HS&E program (see Figure 2). These strategies have been in place for several years and are anticipated to remain for the foreseeable future. These strategic priorities encompass the entire value chain and are designed to: 1. Ensure governance and assurance with HS&E laws and regulations as well as customer requirements, 2. Drive HS&E performance improvement and
1
3
Ensure HS&E Compliance
Reduce HS&ERelated Costs
HS&E Excellence
Governance and Assurance
4
2
Ensure Functional Efficiency and Drive Business Integration
Reduce HS&ERelated Risks/Impacts
risk reduction, 3. Identify emerging issues, and 4. Create sustainable HS&E
Performance Improvement
Emerging Issues and Sustainability
Figure 2. Focusing on these four strategic HS&E priorities drive TRW towards HS&E excellence.
Excellence throughout TRW’s more than 200 facilities worldwide. This drive towards excellence will help TRW continue towards reaching implementation of the triple bottom line. By focusing on the environmental
TRW Automotive Success and HS&E Performance Concept of Sustainability — Triple Bottom Line
Environment
and social aspects as well as the economic considerations of the business, the operations become more sustainable
Economy
Resource Efficiency/ Cost Reduction
Risk Minimization
Profitability
Reputation Management
(see Figure 3). During the current business
Innovation
downturn, these strategic objectives and
Employees
targets are more important and relevant than ever as we manage the business.
Social Aspects
The rest of this report highlights TRW’s Safety Excellence, Product Stewardship, Environmental Remediation and Cost & Energy Management efforts, all of
How HS&E Performance Contributes to TRW’s Automotive Success
Figure 3. The ability to sustain the business economically, socially and environmentally, the triple bottom line, is important to minimize HS&E risks, protect employees, enhance TRW’s reputation and reduce costs and resource usage objective.
which contribute to the triple bottom line and illustrate the company’s HS&E involvement.
7
Health, Safety & Environment: Program Overview and Back-to-Basics Integration TRW’s HS&E Program continues
for launching HS&E Excellence (see
employee health, employee safety, envi-
global implementation of health, safety,
Figure 4), a process that starts with the
ronment protection, and the company’s
environment, and security activities,
Chief Operating Officer and cascades
security. The risk reduction process has
and product stewardship. Increasingly,
throughout the organization down to
expanded to encompass product design,
these efforts are integrated into engineer-
first-line supervisors and employees.
material specifications and purchase and
ing, production, purchasing and quality
The Safety Excellence (SE) program
now progresses through all aspects of the
systems. In short, HS&E awareness
was developed in 2006, and implemen-
manufacturing process to finally focus
has become a way of life for TRW
tation began in 2007. The path has now
on the disposal of manufacturing wastes
employees.
broadened in 2008 to include Environ-
and retired products. However, the
Integrating HS&E activities has
mental Excellence (E2) programs.
culture of sustainability only truly begins
helped TRW operations improve their
The drive towards excellence encour-
when both employees and the company
operational efficiency. The integrated
ages a culture of sustainability that starts
respect HS&E as a core value.
approach also provides the foundation
with HS&E risk reduction that includes
Described below are the elements of both SE and E2, all of which are supported by the HS&E Management Systems (MS).
Safety Excellence
Environmental Excellence
Health
n Safety Excellence (SE). SE
has been
an evolution within TRW to bring its safety performance to a sustainable world-class level of a TRIR of one or Employee Behavior-Based Safety Ergonomics Safety Program Safety Leadership
Product Stewardship Environmental Remediation CDR & Energy Management Management System
Health Promotion Adverse Health Prevention Medical Services Work-Life Balance
less and to ensure effective prevention of the most severe injuries to employees. SE is the TRW approach for reaching sustainable world-class safety performance by fully implementing:
In Progress
Figure 4. TRW has established a continuing path toward achieving excellence, one that addresses safety of employees, environmental protection, and health of the workforce.
Implementation Started
8
• Behavior-Based Safety (BBS).
safety program elements have been
• Remediation. This program focuses
The behavior-based safety program
revisited and reinvigorated. The
on addressing the legacy environ-
has increased employee involvement
Safety Leadership program comprises
mental issues created as a result of
and improved the depth of discus-
many parts of the HS&E MS, from
100 years of manufacturing. The re-
sions with employees on safety. The
leadership to employee involvement.
mediation program is supported by
use of a BBS system is a part of the HS&E MS in HS&E 03, Employee
HS&E 06, Management of HS&E n Environmental Excellence (E2).
Involvement. • Ergonomics. The continued
Risks and in particular the specific
E2 is the TRW’s stewardship process,
requirement for the Protection of
which is demonstrated in the reduced
Soil and Groundwater.
use of natural resources (energy and • Energy and Water. The creation
implementation and refinement of
water), as well as reduced manu-
ergonomic programs has become an
facturing waste and less wastewater
of a new energy and water reduction
integral part of lean manufacturing.
generation. E2 is the TRW approach
program in late 2008 will help the
By training employees in ergonom-
for reaching sustainable world-class
company improve energy manage-
ics, from work station design to
environmental performance by fully
ment and reduce energy purchase
proper postures, the program has
implementing:
costs.
contributed to reducing employee • Product Stewardship. The Product
• Cost Determination and Reduc-
implementation of the ergonomics
Stewardship activities go beyond the
tion (CDR). This program drives
program is a part of the materials
removal of heavy metals and other
continuous improvement by using
supporting HS&E 06, Management
substances of concern; they demon-
a range of tools to eliminate wastes
of HS&E Risks.
strate a commitment to producing
in tandem with systematically
more environmentally sustainable
driving risk reduction. Both the
products. The development and
energy and water reduction program
the Chief Operating Officer and his
implementation of the Product
and the CDR program are driven
direct reports, a new level of safety
Stewardship program comprises two
by HS&E 08 and are integral to
leadership and a safety culture has
elements in the HS&E MS, HS&E
process improvement.
been established. Safety leadership is
11, HS&E and Supply Chain Man-
in the process of cascading a
agement, and HS&E 12, HS&E
Back-to-Basics
commitment to safety down to all
and Product and Process Design.
Back-to-Basics (B2B) was started in
injuries. The development and
• Safety Leadership. Starting with
the business units and the manufacturing and engineering facilities. As
2008 and is the TRW methodology for
further improving operating efficiencies
part of safety leadership, the existing
and reducing waste. The B2B program
9
Plant Communication Center: • Key plant-wide performance metrics such as HS&E, production, quality, delivery and cost • All work cell performance on a daily basis HS&E is fully integrated and part of B2B: • Work Cell and Plant Communication boards, where key HS&E metrics are recorded and reviewed as Figure 5. A B2B Communication Board is used by supervisors and managers to track HS&E performance and identify areas requiring attention.
the first measure of performance • Plant Manager Training Program,
is working to improve communication
plant level: safety, quality, delivery,
where SE is integrated into the TRW
throughout the manufacturing process,
effectiveness, waste elimination, and
training and philosophy
increase operating leanness, and better
housekeeping. To improve commu-
develop management talent. B2B
nication during the B2B reviews, the
implementation, where ergonomics
incorporates elements of:
team members present the following
are taught and integrated into all
• the TRW Operations Excellence
information and then take action on the
aspects of lean manufacturing
roadmap • plant manager development
• Lean manufacturing design and
manufacturing cell and/or plant level (see Figure 5).
In summary, the improvement in
• lean manufacturing and lean line
communications and production
design (the process to improve
Work Cell Information Boards:
efficiency driven by B2B is essential
manufacturing efficiency)
• Key performance metrics such as
during these challenging economic
• manufacturing cell information boards and plant communication centers • a layered audit process As a part of B2B, each TRW plant
HS&E, production, quality, delivery
times. Making HS&E an integral part
and cost
of B2B yields many benefits: lower
• Hourly production performance
employee injury rates, better morale,
• Trend performance
reduced absenteeism, consistent product
• Action plans
quality, and improved productivity.
conducts six fundamental reviews daily,
You can learn more about changes in
both at the cell or line level and at the
the TRW HS&E Program by visiting: http://corpnet.trw.com/hse.
10
TRW HS&E Management Systems: An Introduction The HS&E Management System (MS)
Updates to the HS&E MS
Revised Specific Requirements
is TRW’s “backbone” for managing and
Each year, the Global HS&E Team,
and Guidance:
reducing HS&E-related risks. The MS
as a learning organization, by design
• HSE03, Employee Involvement –
serves to implement the Health, Safety,
considers enhancements to the system
modified to emphasize expectations
Environment and Security Policy and
to address newly identified program
regarding the use of BBS process
is available in more than 10 languages
needs and to maintain its effective-
approaches other than the TRW-
by visiting http://corpnet.trw.com/hse.
ness and efficiency. The changes to the
sponsored BBS process
If you do not have access to the TRW
management system can originate from
Intranet, visit http://www.trwauto.com/
requirements outside the company, such
Management – changed to include
who_we_are/health_safety_environ-
as governmental regulations and cus-
a range of changes to enhance this
ment to view all HSE&S Policies. The
tomer requirements, or can be generated
requirement
Policy establishes the Company’s HSE&S
internally from the findings of the audit
• HS&E6-SR-67, Management of
Vision, Mission, Means of Execution,
program and bench-marking. The issues
Plating Systems – revised to add
and Responsibility for implementation of
are prioritized, requirements or guidance
coverage for the plasma transferred
Policy requirements (see Figure 6).
developed for the top priorities, and the
The HS&E MS empowers the busi-
changes are made. The 2008 changes
ness unit and facility management teams
to the management systems include
to incorporate their HS&E efforts by
the following:
providing the controls needed to stay on task and on target in the area of HS&E. Supporting the HS&E MS is a series of Specific Requirements and Guidance
New Specific Requirements
• HSE06-SR-65, Hazardous Materials
TRW Automotive Health, Safety, Environmental and Security Policy
Vision
Execution
The TRW Automotive HS&E system and performance will be recognized by our employees, customers, shareholders and the communities in which we operate as protecting our employees and our community while adding value to our business.
TRW Automotive will execute a World Class HS&E Management Program by:
Mission
and Guidance:
TRW Automotive will therefore manage Health, Safety and the Environment in all its operations and functions/activities as to:
• HSE06-SR-67, Chemical Plating
•
Comply with legal and regulatory requirements,
•
Comply with Customer requirements,
•
Reduce work related health & safety impacts to
documents, all of which are
Systems – establishes equipment
incorporated in the TRW Business Policy
requirements and operating
•
Reduce HS&E impacts for the entire value chain,
•
Consider the life-cycle HS&E impacts when design-
procedures
•
Manual. These documents are published on the internal HS&E website. If you
employees, •
Reduce adverse environmental impacts,
•
Achieve operating conditions that minimise costs and HS&E risks
ing its products, Continually Improve and Measure its HS&E Systems and Performance,
• HSE06-G-71, Ergonomics –
have access to the TRW Intranet visit
formally links ergonomics to the
the HSE&S Management Systems at
MS and provides the structure for
http://corpnet.trw.com/hse.
the ergonomic process
11
•
Maintain the Security of its Employees and Facilities
•
Developing & Implementing an Integrated HS&E Management System,
•
Engaging and supporting all our employees in achieving our vision,
•
Ensuring Management Ownership and Accountability,
•
Establishing meaningful HS&E metrics and targets for performance, and
•
Sharing global resources, knowledge, best practices and lessons learned.
We will measure progress, are committed to deploying Six Sigma and living the TRW Automotive Behaviors.
Responsibility Management, at all levels, is responsible for the implementation of this policy within their areas of control. Managers are expected to take ownership and ensure that HS&E is integrated into the management of their business. The management of the company takes overall responsibility for this policy. Authority for leading and measuring its implementation is delegated to the HS&E executive of TRW Automotive.
HSE&S Policy Version 1.0 August 1, 2003
Figure 6. TRW’s Health, Safety, Environment & Security Policy established that the company is committed to employee well-being, a healthy environment and secure facilities.
arc (PTA) process and a number
at each manufacturing and engineering
tion at 92 percent. Although the MS
of revisions
facility is the primary means of measur-
implementation steadily increased, it has
ing implementation. Two – the TRW
leveled off recently as TRW has added
Chain – made content changes
Management Systems audits are
facilities and has created additional
regarding legal requirements and
completed at each manufacturing and
requirements.
the TRW restricted and prohibited
engineering facility on average once
substances list
every 3 years. Both methods utilize a
• HSE11, HS&E and Supply
• HSE12, HS&E and Products and
defined protocol to ensure consistency.
Process Design – incorporated
Results of the MS self-assessments
updates to the TRW restricted and
or the MS audits, whichever is more
prohibited substances list
recent, are utilized to determine if the implementation level meets the annual
Results and Accomplishments
target. As shown in Figure 7, the target
The HS&E MS’s benefits to the com-
level of implementation for the HS&E
pany are measured in two ways. One –
MS at the end of 2008 was 95 percent,
the self-assessment by staff twice a year
with the average level of implementa-
Percent Management Systems (MS) Implementation
100% 87%
90% 80% 70% 60%
80%
77%
75%
87% 85%
Figure 7. The progress in MS implementation continues even as the requirements of the HS&E Management System have increased over the past several years.
89% 90%
90%
95%
91%
95%
70% 60%
50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
Year MS Implementation Score
MS Implementation Objective
12
2007
2008
Safety Excellence: An Overview As the premier supplier of active and passive automotive safety systems in the world, the same philosophy of safety is apparent in TRW’s manufacturing and management systems. As shown in Figure 4 on page 8, SE is the next step in the HS&E excellence journey. SE engages all levels of employees in safety both actively (i.e., safety leadership) and passively (i.e., engineered controls). Just as TRW strives for excellence as an automotive parts supplier, it strives to ensure the safety of its workforce.
Why Pursue SE A culture of excellence supports a sustainable business model. Achieving and sustaining excellence in safety is hard work. It requires the efforts of many focused on a variety of safetyrelated factors, such as: • The influence of each individual’s values and experiences and that of TRW’s organizational culture on workplace behaviors • The risks presented by the manmachine interface, known as ergonomics
13
Results and Accomplishments
to address a work-related medical
make clear the importance and value
Pursuit of excellence in safety can be
condition. The Severity Rate is
of striving for excellence in safety
measured in many ways. The three
reported as a ratio of work-related
• The need for the active involvement
measures TRW relies on are the Total
injury/illness lost and restricted days
of all employees in ensuring their
Recordable Incident Rate (TRIR), the
per 100 employees.
own safety and that of their co-workers
Severity Rate, and the Lost Workday
The LWIR is a subset of the TRIR
Incident Rate (LWIR).
and describes only the impact that
While taking pride in past improve-
TRIR describes how frequently TRW
workplace incidents have in employee
ments, TRW recognizes the necessity
has workplace incidents that result in
days away from work to address a
of challenging the organization to
employee days away from work or medi-
work-related medical condition. The
achieve and sustain world-class perfor-
cally required work restrictions to ad-
LWIR is reported as a ratio of work-
mance. This effort is described as SE.
dress a work-related medical condition.
related injury/illness lost days per
Achieving excellence in safety requires
The number of incidents is reported as a
100 employees.
a culture where safety is considered a
ratio of work-related injury/illness cases
Figure 8 demonstrates that the efforts
value. This can only happen when
per 100 employees.
to continuously reduce the frequency
everyone is involved, at each TRW
The Severity Rate describes the
of injuries have netted real results. Over
facility, within each department, and
impact that workplace incidents have
the past nine years, the TRIR has been
in a manner that involves every
in employee days away from work or
reduced from 3.47 to 1.26 per 100
employee at all levels.
medically required work restrictions
employees, the Severity Rate has been
• The need for business leaders who
14
4.50
70.0
Continuous Improvement 2000: Launch of HS&E MS
4.00
Continuous Improvement 2007: Launch of Safety Excellence
62.1
60.0
50.1
50.0
3.00
45.5 41.0
2.50
38.6
40.0
36.1 33.0
34.3
2.00
30.0
28.6
Severity Rate
Total Recordable Incident Rate (TRIR) Lost Workday Incident Rate (LWIR)
3.50
1.50 20.0 1.00
15.6 10.0 3.04 2.35
2.57 1.88
2.12 1.57
1.67 1.28
1.64 1.23
1.72 1.34
1.53 1.21
1.26 1.06
1.04 0.85
0.00
3.47 2.5
0.50
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009 YTD
0.0
Year TRIR
LWIR
Severity Rate
reduced from 50.1 to 28.6, and the
While Figure 8 demonstrates a good
LWIR has been reduced from 2.50 to
improvement in the safety record from
1.06. These reductions have had an
2002-2004, the TRIR remained flat
obvious effect on employees and their
from 2004-2006 and the severity rate
development of a new program, safety
families. It also has a very positive effect
actually increased. To improve and
leadership. The following sections
on the business through employees
then to achieve and sustain world-class
explore these three key program areas
being more engaged in their own safety
health and safety performance, TRW
that comprise SE.
(employee involvement), higher
started the development of SE in 2006.
employee morale, lower operating costs,
SE incorporated two existing programs,
and sustainable product quality.
BBS and ergonomics, and involved the
15
Figure 8. The long-term improvement in TRIR and total LWIR shows that TRW employees are more engaged in their own safety.
Behavior-Based Safety: One-on-One Coaching The Behavior-Based Safety (BBS) pro-
ing at their facilities, but have continued
The Design of BBS
gram is the first of three key areas in SE.
to refine their skills through updated
BBS has been designed to increase
By the end of 2008, more than 60 TRW
training. In 2008, these BBS observers
employee understanding of how they
facilities in 13 countries were participat-
conducted more than 86,000 observa-
can contribute to their own and their
ing in BBS. What best demonstrates this
tions, which means they initiated on
colleagues’ safety by their behavior. In
high level of employee involvement in
average more than 300 conversations
about 90 percent of all injuries, people’s
BBS is the number of employees at these
per day regarding the safety of their
at-risk behavior has been identified as a
facilities who were involved as active
fellow employees (Figure 9).
contributing root cause. “At-risk
Figure 9. After a BBS observation, employees provide feedback to a work cell colleague.
behavior” must be understood as a
observers. More than 2,300 employees not only participated in the initial train-
neutral term that describes an action rather than criticizes or blames a person.
To further reduce injuries, at-risk
behaviors must be identified and turned into “safe” behaviors. This is achieved by a systematic study process where activities are observed and the behaviors that relate to safety are discussed in a positive, constructive, non-confrontational manner. With BBS, workers displaying at-risk behaviors are not chastised, they are motivated to correct them. Participants learn more about safe work practices, identify improvement opportunities, increase teamwork, and heighten their commitment towards safety, among other benefits. The results are empowered employees who take ownership for their own safety and develop a strong safety culture. Ongoing management commitment has helped make the BBS program a success.
16
see regarding the results of the BBS
The BBS process produces a range
process. This data helps management
of data about behaviors. Figures 10
identify improvement opportunities in
and 11 provide two examples of
the overall HS&E program, from train-
what management and employees
ing to developing new or revised work
Critical Performance Checklist (CPC) Elements
Results and Accomplishments
0
Figure 10. In 2008, the “at-risk� behaviors (hashed tips) were identified as a small minority of the total behaviors observed, and decrease as SE is implemented.
1,146 832
68,193 68,076 59,400 65,922 62,749 50,717 62,023 34,930 55,237 54,207 47,089 65,070 45,847 35,571 43,201 69,111 44,435 62,594 56,284 61,950 59,852 56,902 24,992 61,054 20,798 53,763 20,333 45,758 61,650 36,929 19,994 43,201 43,175 45,850 36,299 32,399 59,614 57,331 58,511 55,071 58,936 49,304 60,300 49,525
1.1 Eyes on Path 1.2 Eyes on Work 1.3 Stable Surface 1.4 Lifting 1.5 Overexertion 1.6 Line of Fire 1.7 Rushing/Shortcuts 1.8 Ascending/Descending 1.9 Pinch Points 1.10 Overextending 1.11 Path of Travel 1.12 Awkward/Cramped 2.1 Walking/Working Surfaces 2.2 Barricades/Warning 2.3 Obstructions 2.4 Housekeeping 2.5 Awkward/Cramped 2.6 Lighting 2.7 Ventilation 3.1 Selection 3.2 Use 3.3 Condition 3.4 Vehicle Operation 4.1 Eye and Face 4.2 Head 4.3 Hands 4.4 Fall Protection 4.5 Body Protection/Coveralls 4.6 Shoes 4.7 Hearing Protection 4.8 Respirator Protection 5.1 Pre-Job Inspection/Planning 5.2 Adequate Personnel 5.3 Communication 5.4 Complying with Lockout/Tagout 5.5 Complying with Permits 5.6 Written Procedures 6.1 Hair 6.2 Clothes 6.3 Jewelry 7.1 Floor 7.2 Equipment 7.3 Storage of Materials 7.4 Disposal of Materials
instructions and procedures.
1,655 2,124 1,763 1,426 1,426 759 1,158 1,686 1,895 2,276 1,578 1,019 3,243 6,034 1,966 2,065 2,604 652 1,023 1,828 1,223 2,074 703 1,169 537 624 893 883 698 423 716 409 475 282 654 477 618 1,913 2,724 844 2,009 1,232
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
2008 Observation Count Number of Acceptable Behaviors
17
Number of At-Risk Behaviors
70,000
80,000
TRW adapted this behavior descrip-
sidered “acceptable.” The facilities that
tion measurement from an industry-
energetically and successfully participate
standard to measure safety performance.
in BBS now show acceptable behavior
The data in Figure 10 demonstrates that
rates at above 99 percent.
about 97 percent of the total observed
behaviors across the entire company
a refinement can be made in the data to
were considered as acceptable or “safe.”
identify the top five “at-risk” behaviors.
This percent of acceptability does
Based on Figure 11, 2,276 conversations
vary among facilities. At facilities new
were initiated about Awkward/Cramped
to the BBS process, usually 90 percent
Work Spaces and how to work more
of the total observed behaviors were con-
safely in them. These conversations help
From the data shown in Figure 10,
both facilities and the HS&E determine Figure 11. Based on the 2008 data in Figure 10, the BBS process can identify the top five “at-risk” behaviors to help facilities train and work with employees.
the root cause and drive solutions.
Value-Added – BBS Strategy BBS is not a stand-alone program but is
7,000
aligned with other TRW safety programs 6,031
such as ergonomics and safety leadership. BBS helps by driving communication throughout the organization. In
5,000
some facilities, these BBS observations 4,000
have contributed to quality enhance-
3,243 3,000
2,723
2,603
ments. BBS is not a “quick fix,” but is a way to deliver long-term and sustainable
2,276 2,000
changes to employee behaviors related to safety. The result is a strong, sustainable
1,000
safety culture and a tool to help improve safety performance. oo
2.
7
Ve n
7.
til
1
at
pi ee ek us 2. 4
Ho
Fl
io n
ng
ns io ct ru st Ob
3 2.
12
Aw Cr kwa am rd pe / d
r
0
1.
Number of “At-Risk” Behaviors
6,000
Critical Performance Checklist (CPC) Elements
18
Ergonomics The Ergonomic Risk Management Process (Ergonomics) program is the second of three key areas in SE. In 2008, more than 42 TRW facilities in 10 countries were conducting ergonomics training. What best demonstrates this high level of employee involvement in ergonomics is the number of workshops and process improvements identified and made at these facilities. Since the ergonomics process was started in TRW in 2002, it has been enhanced through a wide range of efforts to apply it globally and make it a sustainable process.
• Model Ergonomics Process: This
• Ergonomic Resources Library:
process helps facilities develop and
HS&E makes available a variety of
Ergonomics – The TRW Approach
implement location-specific ergo-
multimedia, multi-language resources
Ergonomics is an enabling technology
nomics risk management processes.
via the company website.
that applies human performance principles to prevent or reduce
• Ergonomics Workshop Process:
Results and Accomplishments
muscular-skeletal disorder injuries
This process helps to drive ergonomics
In 2008, the ergonomics program gener-
in the workplace. When ergonomic
implementation through integration
ated the following accomplishments:
techniques are done well, facilities
with the lean manufacturing process.
• Existing ergonomic program elements
see a decline in operating costs as employee absenteeism and sick leave
were formally integrated into the TRW • Ergonomics Training Programs:
HS&E Management System within
drop. Optimizing ergonomics requires
Several levels of ergonomics training
Element HSE06 – Risk Management.
an integrated process that involves
programs are offered for work cell
The TRW HS&E Management
HS&E, product engineering, manu-
employees, technicians, supervi-
Systems Audit process is used to
facturing engineering, maintenance,
sors, and managers in the plant to
evaluate facility ergonomics activities.
plant management, and employee
engineers, Lean Promotions Officers
teams. TRW’s Ergonomics Risk
(LPOs), and HS&E professionals
in the number of TRIR cases and
Management program relies on:
in the office.
the severity of injuries in relation to
19
• Achieved significant reductions
the total number of lost and restricted
• Initiated an ergonomics workshop
days (see Figure 12).
performance metric, and perfor-
requirements and provided appropriate
mance indicates positive balance
tools and training courses throughout
an ergonomics improvement work-
of process improvements and
the business on ergo principles, tools
shop process that provides websites
cost reductions.
and techniques.
• Defined and successfully launched
with a structured approach to support
• Further defined training needs and
• Collected ergonomic lessons
• Increased participation in the
the company’s Operations Excellence
learned and successes from
“Ergo Hit List” (posture
Workshops by identifying, assessing,
Ergonomic Improvement Work-
recognition) training.
prioritizing and managing ergonomic
shops and shared these throughout
risks.
the business (TRW Best Practice
eLearning modules for the
Forums).
“Ergo Hit List” and “Ergo Basics
• Successfully completed 16 workshops globally that resulted
• More than doubled the number of
• Completed development of
Refresher” training courses,
in the identification of 244 process
improvement actions implemented
with online training launched
improvements and process cost
in 2008 compared to 2007 at manu-
in January 2009.
reduction opportunities of more
facturing and assembly operations;
than several hundred thousand
these actions identified and reduced
dollars.
exposures to ergonomic risks. Reduction in Number of Ergonomic-Related Total Recordable Incident Rate (TRIR) Cases Reduction in Number of Ergonomic-Related Total Recordable Incident Rate (TRIR) Cases% TRIR Cases Number of Cases
2007 Data 2008 Reduction Goal 2007 Data 2008 Data 2008 Reduction Goal Reduction 2008 Datain Number of Cases (2007 to 2008) Reduction in Number of Cases Reduction Percentage (2007 to 2008) Reduction Percentage
25% % TRIR Cases
229 Number of Cases -10% 229 156 -10% -72 156
25% 21% 21%
Value-Added – Ergonomics Risk Management Strategy Implementation of the ergonomics risk management strategy and associated improvement actions will continue to drive the long-term sustainability of the SE culture, injury reduction and productivity improvement. As the
-72 -31%
ergonomics process is further imple-
-31%
mented, sites will continue to benefit
Reduction in Severity of Ergonomic-Related Cases Total in Number of Lost & Restricted DaysCases Reduction Severity of Ergonomic-Related Total Number of Lost & Restricted Restricted Days% of Total Lost & Lost & 2007 Data 2008 Reduction Goal 2007 Data 2008 Data 2008 Reduction Goal Reduction 2008 Datain Total Lost & Restricted Days (2007 to 2008) Reduction in Total Lost & Reduction Percentage Restricted Days (2007 to 2008) Reduction Percentage
LostWorkdays & Restricted Workdays 7,247 -400 days 7,247 4,102 -400 days -3,145 days 4,102
from reduced numbers of employee injuries and lower operational costs.
Restricted % of TotalWorkdays Lost & Restricted Workdays 39% 39% 28% 28%
-3,145 days -43% -43%
20
Figure 12. The 2007-2008 ergonomics data shows a sustained reduction in both the number of ergonomics-related injuries reported and in the number of days that employees were absent from work due to these injuries.
Safety Leadership Business Unit: Safety Leadership Module 1 Workshop (1/2 Day)
Safety Leadership program is the third of the three key areas within SE. Beginning in 2007, TRW started implementation of a series of Safety Leadership Workshops. These workshops systematized TRW’s safety resources and approach,
Repeat with all leaders and employees
providing business leaders with a focused message and tool kit to address the safety process at their business units. The SE initiative engages all levels of management
Safety Leadership Workshop Model
Site Management Team: Safety Leadership Module 1 Workshop (1/2 Day)
from corporate executives to first-line Site Management Team: Safety Leadership Module 2 Workshop (1/2 Day)
Site Employees: Safety Leadership Modules 3 & 4 Workshops (2 Hours)
supervisors. At TRW, Safety Excellence is synonymous with doing work “the right way,” as shown in Figure 13.
Figure 14. At TRW, business leaders devote almost two full days to participating in Safety Leadership Workshops. Figure 13. Employees are reminded to keep safety in mind when they see this graphic on posters displayed in their workplaces.
ity of the efforts are directed towards
The Role of Leadership in Ensuring Workplace Safety
providing all levels of TRW leaders with
Safety Leadership Workshops provide
Safety Leadership Drives Sustainability
the training and support to more effec-
leaders with an understanding of the
tively lead the safety process. The result
need to pursue SE, the characteristics of
The Safety Leadership initiative is
of these endeavors will be lasting change
an organization that has achieved the ob-
focused on improving upon three core
to the organization’s culture. Today,
jective, and the leadership principles and
areas of the safety process. To drive
employee safety is measured in lost days,
actions of leaders who wish to influence
safety leadership takes the involvement
injuries and dollars lost. The goal of a
the culture of their organization. The
in leadership at all levels, the engaging
safety culture is to create this as a value
implementation of SE is based upon the
of employees in BBS, and the further
that is so basic that measurement of in-
model outlined in Figure 14.
strengthening of the HS&E MS.
juries will almost become an unnecessary
objective.
Safety Leadership Workshops involving
All three SE areas have a range of
activities on-going; however, the major-
21
In 2008, TRW conducted 200
more than 2,100 employees at more
in the workplace, increase under-
than 40 facilities. The four workshop
standing of the incident causation
modules consisted of the following:
cycle, and introduce tools for identifying strategies to change individual
• Safety Leadership for the Business
and organization behaviors that
Unit is for the Vice President and the
result in workplace injuries.
management team. It is focused on introducing the foundation principles
• Safety Leadership Modules 3 & 4 are
need by management to more
for non-supervisory employees and
effectively lead the safety effort.
introduce concepts, tools, and needed skills similar to those discussed during
• Safety Leadership Module 1 is for
management team Modules 1 & 2.
Site Management Teams and first-line
However, Modules 3 & 4 emphasize
supervisors and is focused on introduc-
the need for each employee to take
ing the foundation principles needed
action to address risks encountered in
by all supervisory employees to ef-
the workplace and to become actively
fectively lead the safety effort. Much of
involved in preventive measures, such
the discussion and workshop activities
as hazard identification and corrective
are oriented towards understanding
actions.
the current safety culture, and learning
In support of the employee-orient-
how to set the stage for moving toward
ed Safety Leadership Modules 3 & 4, a
one that leads towards sustainable
series of workshop safety posters have
excellence in safety.
been developed to raise awareness and reinforce concepts discussed during the
• Safety Leadership Module 2 Figure 15. SE posters help reinforce a safety culture at facilities.
training. Figure 15 shows some of the
continues the discussion begun
materials developed to support these
with leadership teams and centers
workshops.
on ensuring understanding of how workplace incidents and injuries
Results and Accomplishments
occur, and steps that leaders can
Since safety leadership began in 2007,
take to avoid similar problems in the
more than 225 workshops in 14 coun-
future. Discussion topics lead to
tries have been completed, as shown in
enhanced skills in identifying hazards
Figure 16. The success of these work-
22
shops is more than the large number of
Number of Workshops
workshops and the global distribution, it
Number of Attendees
is the fact these workshops engaged more than 2,000 business leaders. These leaders
Figure 16. Safety Leadership Workshops are helping to create a global Safety Culture at TRW.
were from corporate functions, many of the business units, and more than 50 manufacturing sites.
To further create sustainability,
the recent rollout of Safety Leadership Workshop modules for non-supervisory employees has helped thousands of emFigure 17. The rate of improvement in the TRIR is greater for facilities with leaders trained in SE vs. those facilities with leaders not trained in SE.
ployees to become more knowledgeable about the essential role they play in ensuring their own safety and the safety of those who work with them. As shown in Figure 17, the TRIR for the facilities that participated in SE shows improvement at facilities that have not participated in SE.
The implementation of SE leader-
ship activities will continue through 2010, resulting in all leaders at business units, engineering facilities, manufacturing, and
3 Total Recordable Incident Rate (TRIR)
a rate greater than the TRIR for those
2.5 2
2.62
1.71
1.5 1
1.53
1.27
0.5 0 2007
distribution locations becoming involved
Year
in efforts to implement and sustain the
TRIR for TRW Facilities Implementing SE
company’s excellence in safety.
TRIR for All TRW Facilities
2008
Value-Added – Safety Excellence
leaders become more effective in engag-
to workplace culture and sustainable
Achieving excellence in safety occurs
ing colleagues and employees to partici-
world-class safety performance. The goal
with leadership from all levels of man-
pate in ensuring their own safety and that
is to ensure that the company’s most
agement, from executives to first-line
of their fellow employees. If done well,
important asset, its employees, are ready
supervisors. With the help of SE initia-
this process can result in lasting changes
to safely work each and every day.
tives like Safety Leadership Workshops,
23
Environmental Excellence: Introduction Environmental Excellence (E2), as shown in Figure 18, is the second step in TRW’s HS&E excellence journey. E2 comprises Product Stewardship, Environmental Remediation, Cost Determination and Reduction (CDR), and the new Energy and Water Reduction Program.
Environmental sustainability, as
compared to the sustainability of a “safety culture,” can require quite different processes. In terms of a manufacturing company, sustainability is defined as using processes capable of being continued with minimal longterm impact on the environment. Environmental impact includes air emissions and wastewater discharges, and wastes generated from the manufacturing process.
In TRW, when it comes to environ-
mental sustainability, protection, and risk reduction, it is the HS&E management systems that are relied upon to support the E2 programs and improvements. More than Safety Excellence, E2 must engage all elements of the
24
business (e.g., engineering, purchasing) and not just the manufacturing
Safety Excellence
operations in order to support a more sustainable business model.
Environmental Excellence
Health
Product Stewardship Environmental Remediation CDR & Energy Management Management System
Health Promotion Adverse Health Prevention Medical Services Work-Life Balance
E2 – The Elements of Sustainability In late 2008, TRW initiated E2 to
Employee Behavior-Based Safety Ergonomics Safety Program Safety Leadership
achieve more efficient use of natural resources and to reduce waste, with efforts focused on:
• Education
• Waste minimization/pollution
In Progress
prevention/waste reduction/risk
Implementation Started
reduction
• Energy efficiency/greenhouse gas
Figure 18. E2 is the second step in the TRW process towards achieving HS&E Excellence.
reduction
• Continued compliance with environmental legislation and
and seek solutions. E2 asks employees
• Energy and Water Reduction
regulations
to consider the environment in their
Supporting the components of E2
everyday choices and choose to be more
are the metrics systems for calculating
company’s environmental manage-
environmentally responsible.
greenhouse gases and for recording usage
ment system and manufacturing
of energy and water and the creation of
and facility processes
ty. Even during times of severe econom-
industrial wastewater and wastes:
ic challenge, TRW is working towards
• Greenhouse Gases (GHG)
E2 is a process – not a program – that
technological innovation, enhanced
• Environmental Release and
promotes environmental stewardship.
efficiency, and increased productivity.
The underlying premise of E2 is that
The following sections explore the key
the simple choices people make every
program areas that comprise E2:
day can and do make a difference. E2
• Product Stewardship
acknowledges that every person makes
• Environmental Remediation
an impact on the environment and
• Cost Determination and
• Continuous improvement of the
encourages education to raise awareness
E2 is key to improving sustainabili-
Reduction
25
Natural Resources (ERNR)
Product Stewardship Product Stewardship (PS) is the first
As the level of legislation has increased
ronmentally sustainable products that
of the three key areas within E2. The
globally, TRW has responded with a
reduce TRW’s environmental footprint.
initiatives within PS demonstrate TRW’s
comprehensive approach that spans all
TRW product designers take into con-
commitment to innovation by produc-
products, regions, and manufacturing
sideration regulatory requirements that
ing more environmentally sustainable
processes. The TRW PS program is
might apply to, or that might impose
products. PS is not just being advocated
built upon supplier integration, prod-
design restrictions on, TRW’s products
by regulators, Non-Governmental Orga-
uct design, management support, and
in the global marketplace, including
nizations (NGOs), and consumers, but
employee engagement.
the United States, the European Union,
also by proactive businesses. PS is about
TRW’s PS initiatives span the entire
Japan, Korea, China and Canada, as
creating the products that in turn allow
product life cycle, as shown in Figure
well as emerging requirements in certain
TRW customers to develop environ-
19. These initiatives demonstrate a
states in the United States. To meet these
mentally sustainable vehicles.
commitment to producing more envi-
regulatory challenges and to create product sustainability, TRW continues to: • Remove heavy metals and other
Product Design
hazardous substances from a wide array of its products (discussed in the next section) • Design for the environment by cre-
Product End-Of-Life
Sustainability
Materials Selection & Acquisition
Product Packaging
Product Use
ating more fuel-efficient products for hybrid and alternative-fuel vehicles
Design for HS&E To ensure that TRW’s products meet current and anticipated regulatory and customer requirements, HS&E considerations have been integrated into
Manufacturing
TRW’s Global Development Product Introduction Management (GDPIM)
Figure 19. The Product Stewardship Cycle influences decisions from design and material selection through product retirement.
26
system. The goal of the Design for HS&E Program is to continue to
integrate HS&E considerations into
is to convert TRW’s entire customer base
vehicles every year. Key hybrid-enabling
GDPIM through use of the standardized
and electronic product portfolio to be-
technologies that offer fuel savings and
HS&E Product Assessment tool, which
come lead free. The Lead-Free Electron-
environmental benefits are:
is to be used by Engineering on a global
ics Team has been working collabora-
• Electrically powered steering
basis through all phases of the product
tively with customer engineering teams
• Regenerative braking systems
and process development. This approach
since 2008 to review more than 130
is consistent with the requirements of
projects and potential designs affected
Electrically Powered Steering
TRW’s Business Policy Manual A68 –
by the new ELV deadline of December
In 2008, TRW launched its belt drive
HSE12, HS&E and Customers and
31, 2010.
Electrically Powered Steering (EPS)
Products. The evidence of the Design
While there are major challenges
system for the first major vehicle manu-
for HS&E is provided in the following
to converting to a lead-free soldering
facturer in North America to use this
sections.
process, the benefits are compelling.
technology. This technology offers fuel
In particular, the switch to lead-free
savings of up to 3.5 percent compared
Removing Hazardous Substances from Products – The Lead-Free Challenge for Global Electronics
significantly reduces the generation of
with standard hydraulic powered
hazardous waste from the manufactur-
steering gears. Electric steering also is
ing process, which reduces potential
among the technologies with the greatest
TRW continues to eliminate the use of
environmental impacts and lowers waste
potential to reduce CO2 emissions and
hazardous substances in the manufacture
disposal costs. Use of lead-free solder
enable further integration with other
of many of its products. This is done
also eliminates potential exposures to
electronically controlled systems to
to minimize potential adverse human
human health from leaded solder.
enhance vehicle safety and comfort.
health and environmental effects when
EPS is a key component of vehicle manufacturers’ and TRW’s sustainability
life. The biggest challenge in 2008, one
Fuel Efficiency and Greenhouse Gas Reduction
that will continue for the next several
TRW’s product portfolio continues to
of fuel per 100 km, or about 1 mpg,
years, has been to transition to lead-free
move in the direction of more sus-
compared with the traditional hydraulic
solder in electronic applications.
tainable products: products that offer
steering system. EPS systems have
TRW continues to work closely with
increased fuel efficiency and hence a
evolved through the initial solution of
its global customers to meet the latest
reduction in greenhouse gas (GHG)
electrically powered hydraulic steering
European End-of-Life Vehicle (ELV) le-
or CO2 emissions. TRW continues to
(EPHS), a hybrid approach that com-
gal requirements pertaining to lead-free
expand its range of hybrid-enabling
bined hydraulics with electronics, to
electronics. TRW has already designed
technologies and products that meet
column drive EPS and rack drive (higher
and mass produced lead-free electronics
the challenges of vehicle manufacturers
torque) EPS. With each offering, addi-
for some customers. The challenge now
who are offering more hybrid electric
tional environmental and other benefits
these parts reach the end of their useful
27
plans, given that EPS saves 0.3 liters
have been achieved, when compared to hydraulic steering systems. One of the key benefits of electrically assisted steering is the reduction in energy use. EPHS uses only 15 percent of the power of an equivalent conventional Figure 20. TRW’s expertise in power steering now extends to a new energy-efficient electrically powered gear.
hydraulic power rack & pinion (PR&P)
systems used in hybrid vehicles.
system, while EPS uses only 10 percent.
Regenerative braking systems capture
An EPS gear is pictured in Figure 20.
the kinetic energy that would otherwise
Energy use is reduced with the EPS
be lost to heat when the brakes are ap-
Electronic Stability Control to increase
system because it relies on an electric
plied and stores this energy in electric
vehicle maneuverability on curves.
motor to drive the steering column or
batteries for future use in a hybrid
steering rack and draw energy only when
platform.
assistance is needed. In a conventional
SCB replaces traditional boosters,
Product Stewardship – The Bottom Line
hydraulic system, the engine-driven
master cylinders and vacuum pumps
Through the product stewardship
pump draws energy constantly to main-
with an electro-hydraulic control unit
process, TRW is designing, engineering,
tain the system’s pressure whether or not
and a master cylinder reservoir de-
and manufacturing products that:
the driver is turning the steering wheel.
vice. This design produces fuel savings
• Eliminate hazardous substances
EPHS utilizes an electrically driven
by requiring fewer components than
• Increase fuel efficiency and reduce
pump to provide hydraulic pressure to
competitive systems, which translates to
the steering wheel only when needed.
weight savings and thus fuel savings. Like Electrically Powered Steering,
CO2 emissions • Reduce the company’s environmental footprint
Regenerative Braking Systems
SCB and other regenerative braking
TRW’s advanced brake system technol-
systems can be integrated with other
To learn more about EPS, SCB and
ogy, called Slip Control Boost (SCB), is
vehicle systems to enhance safety. One
other TRW technologies, please visit
an integral part of regenerative braking
example is the integration of SCB with
www.trw.com.
28
Environmental Remediation Environmental Remediation is the
the environmental impact and restore
two of the many innovative remediation
second of the three key areas within
these sites, TRW’s remediation program
technologies used (see Figure 21).
E2. Some of TRW’s manufacturing
employs a wide range of technologies
sites are more than 100 years old. At
to reduce the potential environmental
these sites and drive down the associ-
the end of 2008, the company’s world-
impact of past activities. The injection
ated financial liabilities. Last year, TRW
wide portfolio of active remediation
of potassium permanganate to oxidize
completed work or “closed” nine sites,
projects (including U.S. Superfund
chlorinated solvents and land farming
while adding two new sites, resulting in
sites) consisted of 72 sites. To minimize
of petroleum-contaminated soils are just
a net decrease of seven sites. (New sites
TRW’s goal is to reach “closure” of
Figure 21. This soon to be completed, in-situ chemical oxidation (ISCO) system will be used to remediate chlorinated solvents in the groundwater.
29
Number of Remediation Sites
150
committed to protecting human health
100
92
88
and the environment. As it performs
82
77
70
63
50 12
1
0 -8
to make significant reductions in the
2 -11
-5
-7
lifecycle costs.1 TRW continues to apply -9
the Six Sigma process to the remediation
-50 2004
2005
2006
2007
remediation work, TRW also seeks ways
2008
March 2009
Year
function. Using innovative technologies and leveraging experienced service
New Remediation Sites
providers, the environmental and legal
Closed Remediation Sites
professionals work together to reduce
Existing Remediation Sites
both the costs and the risks associated with the company’s remediation efforts.
Figure 22. From 2004 to the present, TRW has been able to close out remediation projects at a steady rate.
are typically the result of recent discovery of impacts from historical opera-
Summary – Remediation
tions.) But the number of sites is not
As sites are closed and the human
the whole story. Figure 22 demonstrates
health and the environment risk
that from 2004 to the end of 2008, the
decreases, the dollar amount set aside
number of remediation projects had
in TRW’s financial reserves generally
been reduced by more than 35 percent.
decreases. At the end of 2008, the
reserves set aside to deal with remedia-
While TRW works to complete re-
mediation projects with all governments
tion were USD $45 million, a decrease
in a timely manner, the company is
of USD $8 million.
Footnote 1. To manage and report environmental remediation liabilities, TRW follows the guidelines of American Institute of Certified Public Accountants Statement of Position (SOP) 96-1. In addition, to ensure compliance with the U.S. Sarbanes-Oxley Act and to meet reporting requirements of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, TRW internal and external auditors provide significant financial oversight of the Remediation Program.
30
HS&E Cost Determination and Reduction (CDR) and Energy Reduction: Overview The third of the three key areas within E2 has two key components, the CDR program and the new Energy and Water Reduction program. CDR – which has been implemented globally – has two main benefits: • It provides HS&E professionals and others a systematic approach to identify, evaluate and reduce or eliminate HS&E-related risks and costs associated with various supply, production and disposal processes. • CDR also enables employees to continually identify and implement improvement opportunities. During the past several years, TRW’s HS&E organization has helped conduct more than 200 CDR Workshops, leading to projects that have resulted in
shops that last two to three days. A
The CDR program, with its focus
more than USD $20 million in validat-
trained practitioner leads a cross-
on continuous improvement and risk
ed savings. These cost savings can also be
functional team of six to eight team
reduction, is an integral part of the
translated into HS&E performance im-
members, including engineers, techni-
company’s HS&E Management Systems.
provements in terms of reduced waste,
cians, managers and specialists. They use
The CDR program integrates a number
air emissions, natural resources (water
Six Sigma DMAIC (Define, Measure,
of risk reduction, Six Sigma, and con-
and energy), as well as reduced risk to
Analyze, Improve, Control) and Activity
tinuous improvement tools that allow
employees and the environment.
Based Costing (ABC) methodologies to
HS&E professionals, engineers, Lean
CDR is administered through the
effectively analyze the impact and costs
Production Officers, and others to sys-
completion of highly structured work-
of vital HS&E processes.
tematically evaluate and reduce HS&E-
31
HS&E SUPPLY PROCESSES
PRODUCTION PROCESSES
HS&E DISPOSAL PROCESSES
Overall HS&E Management & HS&E Training H&S Incidents Management
H&S Related Absence Management
Water Management
Wastewater Management
Non-hazardous Materials Management
Waste Management
Hazardous Materials Management
Air Emissions Management
Energy Management
Noise Management
Non-Product Output
Resource Input
H&S Hazards Management
Packaged Product
Figure 23. The HS&E Cost Determination and Reduction (CDR) Process Model works to reduce the inputs required for the operation (left side), while minimizing the nonproduct outputs at its manufacturing facilities (right side).
related risks and costs associated with
focuses on identifying, and to the extent
the supply, production, and disposal
possible, reducing, or eliminating risks
processes used in manufacturing.
associated with HS&E processes and
In 2008, the TRW CDR Program
operations.
was recognized for its accomplishments, World Conventions & Business Forums’
E2 – Examples of Sustainability – CDR Case Studies
(WCBF) prestigious Global Six Sigma
Timisoara, Romania: Waste Minimi-
& Business Improvement Award. This
zation/Environmental Protection
award nomination was based on the
The Timisoara facility, which manufac-
wide range and depth of the continu-
tures steering wheels, implemented a
ous improvement projects generated by
project to recycle metallic packaging
the CDR program. Figure 23 illustrates
materials. Prior to this project, the
why the CDR process is successful, as it
contaminated packaging materials were
as it was one of three finalists for the
32
disposed of as waste. Now, after decon-
bricating properties and is used at lower
savings of USD $34,000. The benefit
tamination, the metal is recycled. The
concentrations. The facility reduced
to the environment includes reduced
net effect is several fold – it increases
consumption of cutting coolant by
burden on the landfill, less material and
recycling, lowers the quantity of
16,000 gallons (60,500 liters) per year,
packaging waste, and a more efficient
material to be disposed and reduces
and reduced the cost by approximately
manufacturing process.
disposal costs by USD $25,000 per year.
USD $37,000 per year. The same project was also implement-
Peterlee, UK: Energy Conservation/
Ponte de Lima, Portugal: Energy
ed at the Fowlerville, Michigan plant, a
Natural Resource Management
Conservation
sister facility, for an additional savings of
The Peterlee facility, which makes
At Ponte de Lima, an airbag facility, a
USD $26,000 per year. The combined
airbag inflators and modules, imple-
project was implemented to reduce the
annual savings for the two facilities was
mented an improved cooling system
energy consumption of metal detectors
USD $63,000 with an estimated savings
that reduced energy consumption by
used in production. In the past, the
of 25,000 gallons (94,500 liters) of cool-
95 percent. Previously, the site utilized
facility’s 36 metal detectors were left on
ant. The savings to the environment
a cooling tower that had high energy
24 hours per day, regardless of whether
include reduced chemical production,
consumption and required feedwater
airbags were being tested or not. Con-
reduced wastewater treatment, and lower
to operate. The cooling tower was
trollers were installed to turn on the
part scrap rate (due to the superior lubri-
replaced with an adiabatic blast cooler
metal detectors only when a bag is ready
cating properties).
that uses significantly less energy and no
to be tested. The result has reduced the
feedwater. The change yielded annual
“on” time of the metal detectors by 72
Reynosa, Mexico: Waste Minimiza-
savings of more than USD $80,000 and
percent, and has reduced energy cost at
tion/Environmental Protection
significantly reduced water consump-
the facility by USD $17,000 per year. In
The Reynosa facility, which manufac-
tion at the facility. The impact in water
addition, the energy saved has reduced
tures automotive switches and HVAC
savings is obvious, but less obvious is
the generation of carbon dioxide and
products, implemented a project that
the decrease in the quantity of water
other pollutants formed in the genera-
reduced the amount of grease waste gen-
treatment chemicals and the decrease
tion of electricity.
erated from its window lift and mirror
in the packaging required to hold these
processes. The facility used to purchase
chemicals.
Fenton, Michigan, USA: Material
single-use tubes of grease for these pro-
Usage/Environmental Protection
cesses, and would dispose of the empty
Value-Added – 2008 CDR Program
The Fenton facility, a manufacturer of
tubes. This project identified refillable
Results
anti-lock braking systems, changed from
grease tubes and bulk grease. The result
Through minimizing wastes, eliminating
multiple cutting coolants to a single
is more efficient use of the grease, re-
hazards, and reducing energy consump-
product. This coolant has superior lu-
duced waste disposal, and an annual cost
tion, the CDR Program has helped
33
more than 1,200 projects have been
cost savings and in the corresponding
TRW, its employees and customers, and
identified in nearly 200 workshops
reduction in wastes, etc., which can
the communities where TRW operates.
completed through 2008 worldwide.
be seen in the Environmental Release/
Not surprisingly, CDR has also contrib-
Figure 24 shows the distribution of
Natural Resource section of this report.
uted to reducing operational costs.
projects identified and savings achieved
TRW uses CDR workshops to engage
by year since the CDR program was
employees in identifying practices that
rolled out in 2003.
detract from a sustainable business.
The ability to drive continuous
Since the CDR program began in 2003,
improvements is measured both in
Figure 24. Since 2003, the validated savings from Cost Determination and Reduction (CDR) projects have increased even as the number of projects actually declined.
350
7,000
300 $4,826
250
$5,181
$5,422
5,000
$3,752
200
4,000 3,000
150 $1,514
100 50
6,000
2,000 1,000
$203
0
0 2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
Year Total CDR Projects Identified
Validated CDR Savings
34
2008
Validated Cost Determination and Reduction (CDR) Savings (USD $000’s)
Total Cost Determination and Reduction (CDR) Projects Identified
improve processes and lower risks for
Energy and Water Reduction Program Global Trends
As energy prices rise due to increased
Despite the recent drop in energy prices
demand and constrained supply, the
suppliers are unable to meet cost
as a result of the economic downturn, it
business impacts are obvious:
obligations or go bankrupt.
has been predicted that the demand for
• Reduced profits due to higher
energy resources will rise dramatically over the next 25 years: • Global demand for all energy sources is forecast to grow by 57 percent over the next 25 years.
• Disruptions in supply chains as
operating costs. • Decline of sales or higher costs of energy-using products.
Figure 25. Increases in expenditures for electricity (24 percent), natural gas and oil (23 percent) from 2006-2008 provide an opportunity for energy reduction projects.
• Loss of competitiveness in energyintensive businesses.
• U.S. demand for all types of energy
180
is expected to increase by 31 percent 150
within 25 years.
150
• By 2030, 56 percent of the world’s
130
• Electricity demand in the U.S. will grow by at least 40 percent by 2032. • New power generation equal to nearly 300 (1,000MW) power plants will be needed to meet electricity demand by 2030.
Cost (USD $000’s)
energy use will be in Asia. 120
114
90
60
• Currently, 50 percent of U.S. electrical generation relies on coal, a fossil fuel,
30
23
30
23
while 85 percent of U.S. greenhouse 5
gas emissions result from energyconsuming activities supported by
6
6
0 2006
fossil fuels.
2007
2008
Year Electricity
Natural Gas & Oil
Water
(Sources: Annual Energy Outlook [DOE/EIA-0383, 2007], International Energy Outlook 2007 [DOE/EIA-0484, 2007], Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990-2005 [April, 2007] [EPA 430-R-07-002])
35
Recent history also demonstrates that
future increases in energy prices that will
cushion the impact of future energy
catastrophic weather events, terrorism,
invariably occur.
market volatility.
and shifting economic centers are not
Since 2003, the Global HS&E Team
just events of the imagination but reali-
has been facilitating energy reduction via
ties of this life.
the CDR Program (as shown in the pre-
Energy Reduction – The Path Forward
vious section). During this time, energy
In 2008, a new cross-functional Energy
The Impact to TRW
reduction projects have been responsible
Team (ET) was formed. It is led by the
TRW spends more than USD $186
for much of the CDR savings achieved
Global HS&E Team and includes mem-
million per year for energy and water
(see Figure 26). Now the Global HS&E
bers from purchasing, finance, business
(see Figure 25), with more than 80
Team has been challenged with the
excellence /continuous improvement
percent spent on electricity. Although
task of expanding the use of the CDR
and others as needed. The ET relies on
some energy prices decreased at the end
process to conserve even more energy, to
the proven Six Sigma DMAIC (Define,
of 2008, TRW needs to be prepared for
further reduce energy costs, and to
Measure, Analyze, Improve, Control) process to help develop new energy-
Validated Cost Determination and Reduction (CDR) Energy Savings (USD $ 000’s)
$700
$661
saving methodologies and projects. Starting in 2009, TRW’s Energy
$600
Program team will:
$486
$500 $400
$362
• Catalog global energy expenditures and define goals for improving
$332
energy management.
$300
• Systematically identify and imple$211
ment energy efficiency, conservation,
$200
and cost reduction opportunities. $100
• Research and plan for future energy market volatility.
$0 2004
2005
2006 Year
2007
2008
• Develop and implement greenhouse gas reduction targets and implement
Figure 26. From 2004-2008, the cost savings from CDR energy projects increased significantly.
36
methodologies.
These objectives will help TRW be
additional energy cost savings by the end
more cost-competitive in the long-term.
of 2009. The key elements of TRW’s
In the short-term, these efforts are ex-
Sustainable Energy Program are further
pected to yield at least USD $1million in
outlined in Figure 27.
Level
Energy Supply Management
Energy Data Management
Energy Use in Facilities
Figure 27. Tracking and managing energy costs is the goal of the TRW Sustainable Energy Plan.
Equipment Efficiency
Organizational Integration
Processes
• Error Resolution • Rate Optimization • Account Management
• Accessibility • Monthly Bills • Key Performance Indicators and Benchmarking • Reporting
• Facility Walk-throughs • Benchmarking and Ranking Facilities
• Corrective Maintenance Program • Systems Control
• Awareness and Participation • Energy Manager’s Role
Programs
• Supplier Choice • Supplier Reliability and Quality
• Load Profiling • Interval Data
• Diagnostic Audits • Operating Procedures
• Preventative Maintenance Program • Lighting Upgrades • Alternative Energy
• Energy Planning • Performance and Training • Resource Management • Budget Preparation
Projects
• Demand-Supply Optimization • Risk Management
• Sub-metered Data
• Investment Grade/ Comprehensive Audits • Commissioning • On-going Monitoring
• System Upgrades • Standards • New Technology • System Measurement and Verification
• Project Approval • Results Auditing • Financial Impact and Incentives • Accountability and Review
37
Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions Two metrics systems support the
largest contributor to TRW’s global
and bunker fuel together represent a
components of E2. The first calculates
GHG emissions, followed by liquid and
relatively insignificant fraction of total
greenhouse gas (GHG) production,
natural gas (including bunker and diesel
emissions for each year.
while the second records the usage of
fuel), and purchased heat.
GHG Emissions Methodology
energy and water and the creation of industrial wastewater and wastes. To
Distribution of GHG Emissions
The methodologies for quantifying
quantify company-wide GHG emissions
As seen in Figure 30, emissions from
GHG emissions were based on best
for 2006, 2007 and 2008, TRW utilized
electricity use and bunker fuel (also
practice reporting guidelines, including
fuel usage and electricity consumption
known as No. 6 fuel oil) were relatively
the World Resources Institute and the
for all manufacturing, engineering, and
constant between the three years, while
World Business Council for Sustainable
distribution facilities worldwide. The
natural gas, diesel fuel and purchased
Development (WRI/WBCSD) Green-
objective of this work was to provide
heat had significant variation. As part of
house Gas Protocol Initiative’s guidance
a preliminary worldwide inventory of
the GHG emissions analysis, the majority
documents and calculation tools, The
GHG emissions.
of emissions are attributed to electricity
Climate Registry’s General Reporting
consumption, at 74 percent for 2008
Protocol, and American Petroleum Insti-
GHG Emission Sources
and ranging between 69 and 77 percent
tute’s 2004 Compendium of Greenhouse
The contribution to total GHG emis-
of total emissions for all three reporting
Gas Emissions Estimation Methodologies
sions by source type for each of the three
years. Natural gas contributed 20 percent
for the Oil and Gas Industry.
reporting years is shown in Figure 28
of total emissions for 2008, and between
Worldwide GHG emissions were
(2006-2008 Emissions by Source Type).
16 and 28 percent for all three years, as
estimated from aggregated fuel usage and
As shown in Figure 29, emissions from
the second largest contributor. Purchased
electricity consumption on a country-
electricity consistently are the single
heat (steam and hot water), diesel fuel,
specific basis. Total GHG emissions
Reporting Year
Direct Emissions Sources Subtotal (tons CO2e)
Indirect Energy Import Emissions Subtotal (tons CO2e)
Total Emissions (tons CO2e)
Sales (USD $1,000)
Normalized CO2e Emissions (tons CO2e/ USD $1,000)
2006
224,004
564,134
788,137
$13,144
59.96
2007
212,997
643,864
856,860
$14,700
58.29
2008
123,573
649,265
772,837
$15,000
51.52
Figure 28. The trend from 2006-2008 is a 14 percent decline in the normalized Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions, expressed as tons of CO2 equivalents.
38
estimates were calculated using methods
natural gas in all its forms will be
and emission factors from the WRI/
speciated (separated into its component
WBCSD GHG Protocol calculation
parts). Due to the wide range of
tool. Emissions of CO2, CH4, and N2O
products manufactured by TRW,
were estimated, as well as total carbon
production data was not utilized in
dioxide equivalents (CO2e).
normalizing data. Therefore trends in
74% Electricity, 593,573 tons CO2e 4% Diesel Fuel, 1,054 tons CO2e
emissions are not known (i.e., therefore
Next Steps in Measuring GHG Emissions
it is not possible to distinguish between
The GHG emission data presented in
improvements). Reductions in GHG
this report for 2006-2008 is the first
emissions will come from process changes
estimate performed by TRW. Both the
as a result of the continuation of the
energy data and the methodologies used
CDR program and the implementation
to calculate the emissions estimates will
of the TRW Sustainable Energy Plan.
2% Purchased Heat, 55,674 tons CO2e
production declines and efficiency
continue to be refined. For example,
20% Liquid and Natural Gas, 121,804 tons CO2e Figure 29. Based on 2008 data, purchased electricity comprises the greatest source of GHG emission for TRW and therefore is a focus of the company’s energy efficiency efforts.
16.00 13.35 13.22 13.29
14.00 12.30 12.06
Log (metric tons CO2e)
12.00
11.71 10.93
10.55
10.00
9.57 9.55 8.31
8.00
6.96
7.01
7.32 6.57
6.00 4.00 2.00 0.00 Liquid and Natural Gas
Diesel Fuel
Bunker Fuel
Electricity
Purchased Heat
Source 2006
2007
2008
Figure 30. While the fuel sources vary, they are all used to produce electricity for TRW facilities and all produce greenhouse gases.
39
Environmental Release/Natural Resource (ERNR) Metric: Introduction The second of the two E2 metric
• Industrial Waste Water Generation:
oils/greases, wood, and “other” waste.
systems is the system for recording usage
Wastewater that is generated by the
For each of these waste streams, the
of energy and water and the creation of
manufacturing process and directly
quantities are divided into three
industrial wastewater and wastes. Since
discharged to a sewer or an on-site/
sub-categories according to the
2005, TRW has measured and tracked
off-site treatment system.
ultimate end of the waste: • Disposal (land disposal, solidifica-
the four categories of ERNR data: • Waste Generation: Twelve different n
tion or other method of disposal
Energy: Electricity, natural gas, heating
waste streams are measured: cardboard/
where the waste is not intended to
oil and purchased heat (i.e., steam and
paper, computer/electronic waste,
be used again)
hot water).
electroplating waste, metals, nylon/
• Water Usage: Water usage including drinking, sanitary and process use.
• Incineration (a thermal process
plastics, oil-contaminated waste,
where the sole purpose is to destroy
process wastewater taken off-site for
the waste [heat recovery is not a
treatment, sludge, non-segregated
goal])
(municipal) waste, flammable liquids/
• Recovery (recycling, reuse, return
Figure 31. From 2005-2008, the normalized water usage in TRW facilities decreased by more than 20 percent.
200,835
2,500
192,931
181,211
200,000
2,000
143,667
150,000
1,500 100,000
2,836
2,155
500
2,381
1,000,
2005
2006
2007
2008
0 Year Water Use
Normalized Water Use
40
50,000 0
Normalized Water Use (liter per USD $1,000,000)
250,000
2,539
Water Use (000’s m3)
3,000
80,000 65,525
900
70,000 59,290
56,250
850
60,000 50,264 50,000
800
40,000
750
30,000 20,000
2005
2006
753
859
650
739
700 828
Industrial Waste Water Generation (000’s m3)
950
2007
10,000
Normalized Industrial Waste Water Generation (liter per USD $1,000,000 m)
Figure 32. From 2005-2008, the normalized industrial wastewater generation in TRW facilities decreased by more than 9 percent.
0
2008
Year Industrial Waste Water Generation
Normalized Industrial Waste Water Generation
to the supplier, burned for heat
waste-water generation* overall
to 295,092 metric tons). However,
recovery, etc.)
decreased 9.5 percent and 9.0 percent
when normalized, the waste generation
respectively (from 2,539,163 m3 to
(waste generation per total annual sales)
Waste and Resource Reduction – Evidence of Sustainability
2,155,007 m3 and from 828,427
increased 16.4 percent. This increase
m3 to 753,955 m3, respectively).
in the normalized waste generation is
The following sections present a
In addition, when using “normalized”
largely attributable to a range of factors:
four-year summary, 2005-2008, of
figures (water usage and wastewater
a new foundry coming on-line in 2008
ERNR data. The data includes a
generation per total annual sales), both
with more than 10,000 tons of foundry
normalization based on sales, which
parameters decreased, by 20.7 percent
sand generated, the decommissioning
best correlates with actual production
and 9.6 percent, respectively.
of a large facility with large quantities
changes. By using sales, TRW can track
of electronic waste, improved ERNR
the relationship of material usage and
Waste Generation
recordkeeping and reporting systems,
waste generation directly to its finances.
From 2005-2008, as production
and the creation of a new computer/
increased, total waste generation
electronic waste category.
(all 12 categories) increased 38.1
Figures 33 and 34 provide the mean
percent (from 213,628 metric tons
waste distribution over the four-year
Water Usage and Industrial Wastewater Generation As shown in Figures 31 and 32, from
*Wastewater generation accounts for industrial wastewater discharged via pipe. Wastewater taken off-site
2005-2008, both water usage and
via truck or lorry is accounted for in the waste category.
41
0.9% Electroplating Waste 1.0% Computer or Electronic Waste 5.5% Cardboard/Paper
49.4% Metals
10.6.% Other Waste Streams 3.4% Wood 3.3% Nylon/Plastics
1.8% Flammable Liquids/Oils Used Oils/Greases
1.7% Oil-Contaminated Waste
8.1% Trash/Municipal Waste Garbage/Non-Segregated Waste
11.7% Process Wastewater (taken off site by lorry or truck)
2.7% Sludges
Figure 33. Metals were the largest contributor to TRW’s mean waste stream distribution during the period 2005-2008.
period and the change in that distribu-
“hazardous waste” demonstrate the
tion from 2005-2008, respectively.
following trends:
A few highlights over the four-year period include (values are not normalized), as demonstrated in Figures 33 and 34, include: n
n
As expected, metals are the largest
n
Nearly all cardboard/paper (14,626 metric tons or 98.6 percent in 2008)
• Oil contaminated waste decreased
is recycled, nearly all computer/elec-
63.6 percent
tronic waste is recycled (11,257 metric
• Process wastewater taken off-site
tons or 99.8 percent in 2008) and
for treatment decreased 21.4
nearly all metal (145,423 metric tons
percent
or 99.8 percent in 2008) is recycled,
contributor to total waste (49.4
• Sludge decreased 20.9 percent
nearly all wood (8,887 metric tons or
percent). The metals category is
• Electroplating waste and flammable
95.5 percent in 2008) and nearly all
followed by process wastewater taken
liquids both increased 18.8 percent
nylon/plastic (7,973 metric tons or
off-site for treatment (11.7 percent),
and 4.7 percent, respectively
94.1 percent in 2008) is recycled.
other waste (10.6 percent) and trash
• Overall, the relative contribution
n
Recovery/recycling increased in every
(8.1 percent). The largest component
of these wastes generally regulated
waste category, except for electroplat-
of the other waste category is foundry
as hazardous waste to total waste
ing waste (-8.4 percent) and flam-
sand from the company’s two iron
generated decreased 4.6 percent
mable liquids (-1.4 percent)
foundries.
(from 19.8 percent in 2005 to
Relative contribution of the waste
15.2 percent in 2008)
streams generally considered to be
n
Recovery/recycling of the materials generally considered to be hazardous waste increased 10 percent from 2005
42
requirements, and other TRW
from country to country, this category
Value-Added – Waste Reduction and Decrease in the Use of Natural Resources
includes electroplating waste, oil con-
Efforts to continuously reduce water
sustainability, to protect the environ-
taminated waste, flammable liquids,
usage and decrease wastewater and waste
ment, and help competitiveness in the
oils, and used oils.
generation are undertaken as a result of
marketplace.
to 2008 (from 58.1 percent to 68.1 percent). Although regulations vary
continuous improvement opportunities. All of these efforts combine to improve
HS&E CDR Workshops, regulatory
Percentage of Waste in the Total Waste
Percentage Change in Generation Rate
120 100 80 60 40 20 0 -20
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
-40 -60 -80 13.1% Decrease in Cardboard/Paper 100.0% Increase in Computer or Electronic Waste 18.8% Increase in Electroplating Waste 3.5% Increase in Metals 3.4% Decrease in Nylon/Plastics 63.6% Decrease in Oil-Contaminated Waste 21.4% Decrease in Process Wastewater (taken off site by lorry or truck) 20.9% Decrease in Sludges 5.5% Decrease in Trash/Municipal Waste/Garbage/Non-Segregated Waste 4.7% Increase in Flammable Liquids/Oils/Used Oils/Greases 4.8% Decrease in Wood 5.4% Increase in Other Waste Streams
Figure 34. The change in the waste generation composition from 2005-2008 demonstrates the progress TRW facilities have made in waste minimization, waste reduction, and recycling (note computer/electronic waste recording started in 2008).
43
Select HS&E Data Tables Health and Safety Data, 2000 – 2008 Year
Total Recordable Incident Rate (TRIR)
Lost Workday Incident Rate (LWIR)
Severity Rate
HS&E Management Systems Scores 2002 – 2008 Year
HS&E Management Systems Implementation Score
2000
3.47
2.5
50.1
2001
3.04
2.35
62.1
2002
75%
2002
2.57
1.88
45.5
2003
77%
2003
2.12
1.57
38.6
2004
87%
2004
1.67
1.28
33
2005
87%
2005
1.64
1.23
36.1
2006
89%
2006
1.72
1.34
41
2007
90%
2007
1.53
1.21
34.3
2008
91%
2008
1.26
1.06
28.6
44
Select HS&E Data Tables Greenhouse Gas Emissions, 2006 – 2008 Year
Tons CO2e/year
2006
788,137
59.96
2007
788,137
59.96
2008
856,860
58.29
Normalized Tons CO2e/USD $1,000
Water Usage, 2005 – 2008 Normalized Water Usage (liters/USD $1,000)
Year
Water Usage (liters)
2005
2,539,163
200,835
2006
2,381,835
181,211
2007
2,836,091
192,931
2008
2,155,007
143,667
Industrial Wastewater Generation, 2005 – 2008 Year
Industrial Wastewater
Normalized Industrial Wastewater
Generation (liters)
Generation (liters/USD $1,000)
2005
828,427
65,525
2006
739,347
56,250
2007
870,834
59,240
2008
753,955
50,264
45
Select HS&E Data Tables 2008 Total Observations – Critical Performance Checklist Critical Performance Checklist Items
Number of Acceptable Behaviors
Number “At-Risk” Behaviors
Percentage of “At-Risk” Behaviors to Acceptable Behaviors
1.1
Eyes on Path
68,193
1,146
1.68%
1.2
Eyes on Work
68,076
832
1.22%
1.3
Stable Surface
59,400
1,655
2.79%
1.4
Lifting
65,922
2,124
3.22%
1.5
Overexertion
62,749
1,763
2.81%
1.6
Line of Fire
50,717
1,426
2.81%
1.7
Rushing/Shortcuts
62,023
1,426
2.30%
1.8
Ascending/Descending
34,930
759
2.17%
1.9
Pinch Points
55,237
1,158
2.10%
1.10
Overextending
54,207
1,686
3.11%
1.11
Path of Travel
47,089
1,895
4.02%
1.12
Awkward/Cramped
65,070
2,276
3.50%
2.1
Walking/Working Surfaces
45,847
1,578
3.44%
2.2
Barricades/Warning
35,571
1,019
2.86%
2.3
Obstructions
43,201
3,243
7.51%
2.4
Housekeeping
69,111
6,034
8.73%
2.5
Awkward/Cramped
44,435
1,966
4.42%
2.6
Lighting
62,594
2,065
3.30%
2.7
Ventilation
56,284
2,604
4.63%
3.1
Selection
61,950
652
1.05%
3.2
Use
59,852
1,023
1.71%
3.3
Condition
56,902
1,828
3.21%
3.4
Vehicle Operation
24,992
1,223
4.89%
4.1
Eye and Face
61,054
2,074
3.40%
4.2
Head
20,798
703
3.38%
4.3
Hands
53,763
1,169
2.17%
4.4
Fall Protection
20,333
537
2.64%
4.5
Body Protection/Coveralls
45,758
624
1.36%
4.6
Shoes
61,650 46
893
1.45%
1.12
Awkward/Cramped
65,070
2,276
3.50%
2.1
Walking/Working Surfaces
45,847
1,578
3.44%
2.2
Barricades/Warning
35,571
1,019
2.86%
2.3
Obstructions
43,201
3,243
7.51%
2.4
Housekeeping
69,111
6,034
8.73%
2.5
Awkward/Cramped
44,435
1,966
4.42%
2.6
Lighting
62,594
2,065
3.30%
2.7
Ventilation
56,284
2,604
4.63%
3.1
Selection
61,950
652
1.05%
3.2
Use
59,852 1,023 Checklist 1.71% 2008 Total Total Observations Critical Performance 2008 Observations –– Critical Performance Checklist (Continued)
3.3 Condition Critical Performance Items 3.4 Checklist Vehicle Operation 4.1 1.1 4.2 1.2 4.3 1.3 4.4 1.4 4.5 1.5 4.6 1.6 4.7 1.7 4.8 1.8 5.1 1.9 5.2 1.10 5.3 1.11 5.4 1.12 5.5 2.1 5.6 2.2 6.1 2.3 6.2 2.4 6.3 2.5 7.1 2.6 7.2 2.7 7.3 3.1 7.4 3.2 Total 3.3
Eye and Face Eyes on Path Head Eyes on Work Hands Stable Surface Fall Protection Lifting Body Protection/Coveralls Overexertion Shoes Line of Fire Hearing Protection Rushing/Shortcuts Respirator Protection Ascending/Descending Pre-Job Inspection/Planning Pinch Points Adequate Personnel Overextending Communication Path of Travel Complying with Lockout/Tagout Awkward/Cramped Complying with Permits Walking/Working Surfaces Written Procedures Barricades/Warning Hair Obstructions Clothes Housekeeping Jewelry Awkward/Cramped Floor Lighting Equipment Ventilation Storage of Materials Selection Disposal of Materials Use
3.4
56,902 Number of Acceptable Behaviors 24,992
1,828 Number “At-Risk” Behaviors 1,223
3.21% Percentage of “At-Risk” Behaviors to Acceptable Behaviors 4.89%
61,054 68,193 20,798 68,076 53,763 59,400 20,333 65,922 45,758 62,749 61,650 50,717 36,929 62,023 19,994 34,930 43,201 55,237 43,175 54,207 45,850 47,089 36,299 65,070 32,399 45,847 59,614 35,571 57,331 43,201 58,511 69,111 55,071 44,435 58,936 62,594 49,304 56,284 60,300 61,950 49,525 59,852 2,224,147 56,902
2,074 1,146 703 832 1,169 1,655 537 2,124 624 1,763 893 1,426 883 1,426 698 759 423 1,158 716 1,686 409 1,895 475 2,276 282 1,578 654 1,019 477 3,243 618 6,034 1,913 1,966 2,724 2,065 844 2,604 2,009 652 1,232 1,023 61,738 1,828
3.40% 1.68% 3.38% 1.22% 2.17% 2.79% 2.64% 3.22% 1.36% 2.81% 1.45% 2.81% 2.39% 2.30% 3.49% 2.17% 0.98% 2.10% 1.66% 3.11% 0.89% 4.02% 1.31% 3.50% 0.87% 3.44% 1.10% 2.86% 0.83% 7.51% 1.06% 8.73% 3.47% 4.42% 4.62% 3.30% 1.71% 4.63% 3.33% 1.05% 2.49% 1.71% 2.78% 3.21%
Vehicle Operation
24,992
1,223
4.89%
4.1
Eye and Face
61,054
2,074
3.40%
4.2
Head
20,798
703
3.38%
4.3
Hands
53,763
1,169
2.17%
4.4
Fall Protection
20,333
537
2.64%
4.5
Body Protection/Coveralls
45,758
624
1.36%
4.6
Shoes
61,650 47
893
1.45%
Condition
Select HS&E Data Tables Waste Recycling, 2005 – 2008 2005
2006
2007
2008
Change 2005 to 2008
Cardboard/Paper
77.80%
95.70%
99.80%
98.60%
20.80%
Computer/ Electronic Waste
N/A
N/A
N/A
99.80%
66.50%
Electroplating Waste
76.10%
68.70%
72.20%
67.70%
-8.40%
Metals
98.30%
98.60%
99.80%
99.80%
1.40%
Nylon/Plastics
73.30%
87.20%
90.30%
94.10%
20.80%
Oil-Contaminated Waste
33.10%
70.20%
36.30%
41.90%
8.80%
Process Wastewater (taken off site by lorry or truck)
61.90%
57.20%
37.90%
73.80%
11.90%
Sludges
54.80%
47.30%
58.80%
57.80%
3.00%
Trash/Municipal Waste/ Garbage/Non-Segregated Waste
8.40%
11.00%
12.50%
25.60%
17.30%
Flammable Liquids/Oils/ Used Oils/Greases
65.10%
49.80%
57.10%
63.80%
-1.40%
Wood
91.60%
88.20%
97.00%
95.50%
3.80%
Other Waste Streams
16.30%
20.30%
19.50%
18.10%
1.80%
48
49
Value-Added: Global Health, Safety, Environment & Security Program TRW has continued to develop a
pany produces a range of lead-free
company-wide safety culture in 2008.
electronics and aggressively pursues
This effort would not have been possible
the development of components to
without the entire management team
improve fuel efficiency for conven-
of TRW, the global Health, Safety,
tional and hybrid vehicles.
Environment and Security Program, and the many thousands of employees
n
Continuous Improvement. HS&E
throughout the company who have
and Lean Manufacturing workshops
assumed leadership roles in HS&E
have educated employees whose
programs.
observations and recommendations
The leadership, enthusiasm, dedica-
have led to savings of more than
tion, and suggestions for continuous
USD $20 million since 2002, with
improvement have made a positive
USD $5.4 million saved in 2008
difference in TRW facilities, and as
alone. Employees trained in these
shown below have contributed to the
workshops have helped the company
“triple” bottom line (economy, environ-
achieve operating conditions that
ment, social aspects) in many ways:
minimize HS&E risks and costs.
n
n
Health and Safety. Work-related
n
Energy Reduction. The new
health and safety impacts to employees
Energy Team defines goals for
decreased, as evidenced in the TRIR,
improving energy management
from 3.47 in 2000 to 1.26 per 100
and systematically identifies and
employees in 2008. This reduction
implements energy efficiency, con-
is being achieved through the imple-
servation, and cost reduction oppor-
mentation of Safety Excellence and the
tunities. In addition, the team helps
integration within Back-to-Basics.
the company plan for future energy
n
Greenhouse Gases. The GHG
market volatility and develops and
emission data presented in this
Product Stewardship. As a result of
implements greenhouse gas (GHG)
report for 2006 – 2008 is the first
Product Stewardship efforts, the com-
reduction targets.
estimate performed by TRW. Both the
50
n
Waste Reduction. The focus on reducing HS&E impacts across the entire value chain is reflected in all HS&E Programs, especially the risk reduction efforts. This progress is best evidenced by the fact that recovery/ recycling increased in 10 of 12 waste categories.
n
Security. With the economic downturn, new concerns have immerged globally in regard to a range of security risks. TRW continues to ensure the security of its employee and facilities by robust implementation of its HS&E MS.
First Safety Excellence, then Environmental Excellence and next a Health Program — the TRW roadmap for HS&E efforts is clear. The company has many successful programs in place to protect employees and is working to improve its product stewardship and reduce its energy consumption. Despite economic uncertainty, TRW is committed to these areas and expects to see additional improvements in both in 2009. While economic challenges come energy data and the methodologies used
will come from process changes
and go, TRW realizes that the need for
to calculate the emissions estimates
as a result of the CDR and Energy
health, safety and environmental
will continue to be refined. Reductions
programs.
responsibility is ongoing.
in GHG emissions
51
2008 Interactive Report
www.trwauto.com This report was prepared by the TRW Automotive Global Health, Safety and Environment Team for TRW Automotive employees and interested parties. The electronic version is available to TRW Automotive employees on the TRW intranet page, http://corpnet.trw.com/hse/. Š 2009 TRW Automotive Inc. TRW is the name and mark of TRW Automotive U.S. LLC 4/09