Perspective
ACWA Joint Powers Insurance Authority
Vol. 29 No. 4
July/August 2008
Pre-Employment Drug Test May Be Unconstitutional
A recent court decision in the
Lanier v. City of Woodburn case by
the Federal Ninth Circuit Court of
Appeal found that mandatory preemployment drug testing may be
unconstitutional for many positions.
The court held that “the need for a
suspicionless pre-employment drug
test must be much more specific and
substantial than the general existence of a societal problem”.
The following is the official legal opinion provided
by Neal Meyers and Golnar
Fozi from Daley & Heft and
Rob Greenfield from the Law
Offices of Robert Greenfield.
Please read the opinion and
seriously consider re-evaluating your district’s policy in
this area. Another red flag
item is identifying which positions are safety or security
sensitive in nature and indicating so in the job description. The opinion gives specific suggestions on to how to
make this determination.
Background
In March of 2008, the Federal
Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal, in
which California sits, held that a city
in Oregon violated the constitutional
rights of an applicant for a public
library job when it withdrew a job
offer because the applicant refused
to submit to a mandatory drug and
alcohol test.
Facts of the Case
Starting in 2002, the City of
Woodburn adopted a policy of preemployment
drug testing
for all its job
candidates regardless of the
nature of the
position. The
City’s written
policies provided for an
extensive preemployment
investigation
of an applicant’s employment and
criminal history for positions identified as “security sensitive,” which
was defined as any position that was
responsible for the supervision or
control of juveniles. All positions in
the Recreation and Parks Department and in the Library qualified as
“security sensitive.”
In 2004, Janet Lanier applied for a
part-time position as a library page
for the City of Woodburn, Oregon.
Her duties would include retrieving
books from the book drop, shelving
books, and occasionally manning
the desk in the youth and children
section of the library. The City
gave Lanier an offer of part-time
employment contingent on Lanier
passing a background check and a
pre-employment drug and alcohol
screening. Lanier refused to take the
drug test, and her contingent offer
of employment was withdrawn. She
brought suit against the City and its
Library Director, alleging that the
mandatory pre-employment drug
test violated the 4th Amendment to
the United States Constitution.
The District Court dismissed
the City’s Library Director from
the case on the ground of qualified
immunity. The District Court then
granted summary judgment in favor
of Lanier, finding that the City’s preemployment drug testing policy was
unconstitutional on its face as an unContinued on page 6
Inside This Issue ...
2 JPIA Welcomes Two New Members
2 2008 Calendar of Meeting Dates
3 When It’s Hot, It’s Hot!
4 Accident Investigations - Invest Now
or Pay Later!
5 Firefighters At Risk From Traffic
5 JPIA’s Preliminary 2008 Fall Conference
Schedule
9 Liability Claims Procedures on The JPIA’s
Web Site
7 The Finance Department Welcomes A
New Employee
11 Risk Management Staff Reaches a New
Level of Achievement
8 H.R. LaBounty Workers’ Compensation
Safety Awards
12 Lending Library Update
JPIA Welcomes Two New
Members
Sierra County Waterworks District No.1 (Calpine)
and Semitropic-Rosamond Water Bank Authority recently joined the JPIA’s Liability Program.
Sierra County Waterworks District No. 1 is located
in Calpine, California, approximately 30 miles north
of Truckee. The District was formed in the early 1950s
when Calpine’s water source was from a stream-fed reservoir. Currently the District operates two underground
wells, a 140,000-gallon water tank, and approximately
180 water hookups.
The Semitropic-Rosamond Water Bank Authority is
located in Wasco, California, and was formed in August
2007 for purposes of performing groundwater recharge.
Water is stored in aquifers during times of surplus and
either recovered during times of shortage or stored in
the ground to assist with overdraft protection. The Authority is made up of three entities, Semitropic Water
Storage District, an existing JPIA Member since 1979;
Valley Mutual Water District; and Rosamond Community Service District.
At this time, there are 290 JPIA members, of which
284 participate in the Liability Program with a combined $428 million in estimated payroll. There are 252
members participating in the Property Program with
$3.4 billion in insured assets and 152 members participating in the Workers’ Compensation Program, covering approximately 6,000 employees.
Written by: Nidia Watkins, Member Services Representative
2008 Calendar of Meeting Dates
July 29 – Finance & Audit Committee
July 29 – Liability Program Subcommittee
July 30 – Executive Committee
Sep 12 – Executive Committee
Dec 1 – Risk Management Subcommittee (fall 2008
conference – Long Beach) (tentative)
Dec 1 – Finance & Audit Committee (fall 2008
conference – Long Beach) (tentative)
Dec 1 – Executive Committee (2008 fall conference
– Long Beach)
Dec 1 – Board of Directors (2008 fall conference
– Long Beach)
ACWA /JPIA Mission Statement
The ACWA Joint Powers Insurance
Authority is dedicated to consistently
and cost effectively providing the broadest
possible affordable insurance coverages
and related services to its member
agencies.
The Perspective (ISSN 1073-5380) is published bimonthly for its membership for a fee of $10 each
by the ACWA/JPIA, 5620 Birdcage Street, Suite 200,
Citrus Heights, CA 95610-7632. Periodical postage
is paid at Citrus Heights and additional Offices.
It is produced and edited by Sylvia Robinson,
ACWA/JPIA’s Conference & Publications Coordinator. Prior written permission from the ACWA/JPIA is
required for any whole or partial reproduction of
this newsletter.
Sutter WD; Joseph Dion, Citrus Heights WD; Mary
Gibson, Mission Springs WD; Jerry Gladbach, Castaic
Lake WA; Paul Kelley, ACWA Vice President; W.D. Bill
Knutson, Yuima MWD; Lou Reinkens, Tahoe City PUD
Postmaster: Please send address changes to
Perspective C/O ACWA/JPIA, 5620 Birdcage Street,
Suite 200, Citrus Heights, CA 95610-7632.
FINANCE & AUDIT COMMITTEE: Chairperson: Eldon
Boone, Vista ID; Mark Gardner, Wheeler RidgeMaricopa WSD; Michael Grandy, El Toro WD; Suha
Kilic, Pebble Beach CSD; Dennis Michum, GlennColusa ID; Steve Ruettgers, Kern CWA; Tom Scaglione,
Vallecitos WD
PROPERTY SUBCOMMITTEE: Chairperson: Mary
Gibson, Mission Springs WD; Vice Chairperson: Tom
Cuquet, South Sutter WD; Guido Colla, Solano ID;
Jack Cunningham, Goleta WD; Ken Deck, Rowland
WD; Mark A. Gilkey, Tulare Lake Basin WSD; Ed Muzik,
Hi-Desert WD; Robert Noonan, Orchard Dale WD;
Jace Schwarm, San Dieguito WD
RISK MANAGEMENT SUBCOMMITTEE: Chairperson: Joan
C. Finnegan, MWD of Orange County; Vice Chairperson: Merle J. Aleshire, Valley Center MWD; Fred
Bockmiller, Mesa Consolidated ID; Greg Hoyle, Valley
Center MWD; Sanford Kozlen, Carmichael, WD; Bob
Kuhn, San Gabriel Basin WQA; Ulrich Luscher, Sierra
Lakes CWD; Kevin McKenny, Humboldt CSD; Charles
Muse, Helix WD
WORKERS’ COMPENSATION SUBCOMMITTEE:
Chairperson: W.D. Bill Knutson, Yuima MWD; Vice
Chairperson: Lou Reinkens, Tahoe City PUD; Steve
Curnow, Suisun Solano WA; Rick Gilmore, ByronBethany ID; William Kassis, Scotts Valley WD;
Boyd Lypka, Orange CWD; Robert Moore, South
Coast WD; Wayne Nygaard, Palm Ranch ID; Andy
Rutledge, Antelope Valley-East Kern WA
OFFICERS: President: Wes Bannister, Orange CWD;
Vice President: Joan C. Finnegan, MWD of Orange
County; Chief Executive Officer/Secretary/Treasurer:
Dan Klaff, CEO; Assistant Treasurer: Walter “Andy”
Sells, CF&OO; Auditor/Controller: Eldon Boone, Vista
ID
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE: Chairperson: Wes
Bannister, Orange CWD; Vice Chairperson: Joan
C. Finnegan, MWD of Orange County; Merle J.
Aleshire, Valley Center MWD; Tom Cuquet, South
PERSONNEL ADVISORY COMMITTEE: Chairperson: Wes
Bannister, Orange CWD; Vice Chairperson: Joan C.
Finnegan, MWD of Orange County; Mary Gibson,
Mission Springs WD; Jerry Gladbach, Castaic Lake
WA; W.D. Bill Knutson, Yuima MWD
Perspective
LIABILITY SUBCOMMITTEE: Chairperson: Jerry
Gladbach, Castaic Lake WA; Vice Chairperson:
Joseph Dion, Citrus Heights WD; Everett Ascher,
Coastside CWD; Roy Coox, Vista ID; Gary Enos,
Provident ID; Don Groundwater, Bella Vista WD;
John E. Hoagland, Rancho California WD; Bertha
Underhill, Calaveras County WD; Bob Van Wyk,
Fresno Metropolitan FCD
July/August 2008
When It’s Hot, It’s Hot!
The Cal/OSHA Heat Illness Prevention Standard regulation requires
employers to address heat-related
hazards in the same way they do
any workplace hazard and take the
actions necessary to mitigate and
eliminate them. Since heat-related
illnesses can quickly become life
threatening, the standard identifies
specific actions employers, especially those whose employees work
outdoors, must take to protect their
people.
Specific guidance for the standard is found in 8 CCR 3395 and
can be obtained from the California
Division of Occupational Safety and
Health (DOSH) web site (www.dir.
ca.gov). The following answers to
many of the questions the JPIA receives may help you understand and
apply the Heat Illness Prevention
Standard:
Question: What time of the year
and at which temperature must the
standard be applied?
Answer: There are NO specified
date or temperature triggers for applying the requirements of the standard. When the temperatures climb
into the 80s and 90s (and beyond)
the need for preventive measures
is apparent. However, with heavy
work and high humidity and/or protective clothing, temperatures in the
70s can lead to heat illnesses. Since
the Heat Illness Prevention Standard
is a “performance standard,” employers must be pro-active in their
own efforts to determine when the
standard applies. Because every job,
worker, and weather condition varies so greatly, the standard applies
when “the possibility that heat illness could occur.” (Cal/OSHA) (i.e.,
when it’s hot, it’s hot - so the standard applies.)
Question: How much water must
be provided to each employee during potential heat illness conditions?
Answer: One quart per hour of
drinking water per employee is required for the entire shift.
Question: When does shade have
to be provided?
Answer: Anytime employees
suffer from heat illness or if they
(or you) believe a preventive recovery period is needed, access shall
be given to a shaded area that is
either in open air or provided with
ventilation or cooling. Access shall
be granted for no less than five minutes.
Question: When is shade “adequate”?
Answer: “Shade” is adequate
when there is a blockage of direct
sunlight in an area with sufficient
ventilation or cooling. “Blockage”
is sufficient when an object in the
shaded area does not cast a shadow.
Question: What training must be
provided to workers?
Answer: Both employees and
supervisors must be trained on the
following topics:
• Environmental and personal risk
factors of heat illness;
• Employer’s procedures for identifying, evaluating, and controlling
environmental and personal risk
factors;
• Importance of frequent consumption of small quantities of water;
• Importance of acclimatization;
• The different types, signs, and
symptoms of heat illness;
• Importance of immediately reporting signs or symptoms of
heat illness;
• Employer’s procedures for responding to symptoms of possible heat illness;
• Procedures for contacting emergency medical services and for
transporting employees when
necessary; and
• How to provide clear and precise
directions to the work site.
Perspective
Question: Do supervisors need
any special training?
Answer: Supervisors must receive the same training as workers. In addition and prior to being
assigned to supervise employees
working in heat-producing conditions, supervisors must be provided
training on the following:
• Procedures to follow to implement the applicable provisions of
the standard; and
• Procedures to follow when an
employee exhibits heat illness
symptoms (including emergency
response procedures).
Written by: John Haaf, Senior Risk
Management Consultant
How To Reach
The JPIA
Phone:
916.535.7500 or
800.231.5742
Voice Mail:
916.535.7510 or
800.535.7899
Fax:
916. 965-6847 or
916.535.7517
E-mail:
claims@acwajpia.com
videos@acwajpia.com
training@acwajpia.com
Web Site:
www.acwajpia.com
Address:
5620 Birdcage Street
Suite 200
Citrus Heights,
CA 95610-7632
July/August 2008
Accident Investigations – Invest Now or Pay Later!
One of the most often overlooked “opportunities”
JPIA members have is the chance to learn from the accidents they experience and, by doing so, prevent similar
occurrences in the future. A well thought-out and executed accident investigation is not only required by the
State-mandated (8 CCR 3203) Injury Illness Prevention
Program (IIPP), it is a long-recognized “good business
practice” for responding to property and liability losses
as well.
While there are many methods for performing accident investigations, the ultimate purpose is to DO
SOMETHING to prevent similar losses. This includes:
a. Take steps to determine the causes contributing to
an accident.
b. Identify the factors that if removed or changed
would have prevented the accident.
c. Most important of all, TAKING ACTIONS to
keep events like the accident from happening again.
The importance of taking corrective actions cannot be
emphasized enough! This includes taking immediate action to correct hazards that contribute to losses, follow-
ing-up on long-term actions that may be needed, and
briefing staff on the findings of accident investigations
and the status of corrective actions.
Remember, the ultimate purpose for the time and energy put into an accident investigation is to prevent similar losses. One of the most overlooked steps in the investigation process is that of changing the investigation’s
focus from a narrow perspective involving a specific
loss to a broader review of how other operations, procedures, and conditions could experience the same types
of losses. Once that review occurs, actions must be taken
to ensure accidents in those areas do not occur either.
The JPIA evaluates the quality of accident investigations to get an indication of a member’s commitment
to loss prevention. The following indicators are used in
this evaluation:
a. Are accident investigation reports sent to the JPIA
whenever a workers’ compensation claim is made?
b. Do accident investigation reports show the actions
taken to prevent recurrence of the accident?
c. Do members have a procedure following-up the
Steps for Effective Accident Investigations
STEP 1 — List All Known Facts
•List the conditions and events leading to the accident.
•Arrange in chronological order.
STEP 2 — Indicate The Causes Of the Accident
•Indicate the conditions and/or actions that could
have contributed directly to each fact listed.
•Factors to consider are environment, design, procedures, human behavior.
STEP 3 — List Corrective Actions For Each Cause
•Indicate the immediate and long-term actions that
can eliminate or reduce the risk of similar events.
STEP 4 — Identify “Root Causes” Of the Accident
•Identify (highlight, circle, asterisk, etc.) the facts
which, had they not been present, would have kept the
accident from happening.
•These events form a chain-of-events, which are the
“root” of the accident.
•The causes associated with these facts are the “primary” or “root” causes.
Perspective
STEP 5 — Select The Corrective Action(s) To Be
Implemented
•Corrective actions for the root causes should take
priority.
•Also, indicate the person responsible for ensuring
each corrective action is fully implemented.
STEP 6 — Indicate The Estimated Completion Date
(ECD) Of Each Corrective Action
•Indicate the date the corrective action(s) should be
completed.
•Corrective actions for the root causes should take
priority.
•If actions are not completed by the ECD, establish a
new ECD.
STEP 7 — Follow-Up Corrective Actions Until
Completed
•Periodically review the status of all actions that are
not completed.
•Annotate the date corrective actions are completed.
July/August 2008
corrective actions until they have been completed?
Should there be problems satisfying any of these
indicators, JPIA Risk Management personnel can help
members take advantage of lessons learned from accident investigations through training and/or consultations.
Members should not wait for the JPIA to point out
the weaknesses in their loss prevention programs. If
accident reports are not being completed for every accident, if corrective actions are not being taken and annotated, or if accident investigation reports are not being
fowarded to the JPIA for review, agency practices and
procedures should undergo internal changes.
Remember, accomplishing accident investigations
and applying the lessions learned from them are not
only required by Cal/OSHA, they also make good business and operations sense. After all, if you have had
a loss, can you really afford another? So what are you
going to do to prevent them? A thorough accident investigation is a good “first step.” The accompanying “Steps
for Effective Accident Investigations” (see previous
page) can assist that process.
Written by John Haaf, Senior Risk Management Consultant
JPIA’s Preliminary 2008 Fall
Conference Schedule
Long Beach Convention Center
Monday — December 1, 2008
7:30 a.m. – Risk Management Subcommittee
8:45 a.m. meeting
9:00 a.m. – Finance & Audit Committee meeting
10:15 a.m. (Tentative)
10:30 a.m – Executive Committee meeting
11:45 a.m.
1:15 p.m. – Town Hall meeting
2:30 p.m.
3:00 p.m. – Board of Directors’ meeting
5:00 p.m.
5:00 p.m. – Board of Directors’ reception
6:00 p.m.
Firefighters At Risk From Traffic
Tuesday — December 2, 2008
According to NIOSH, each year firefighters working
at accident scenes are struck and killed by motorists.
Sometimes
drivers don’t recognize closed traffic lanes or emergency workers on
the scene. Time of
day, traffic speed
and rain may affect whether drivers are aware of
emergency personnel.
Please. Slow down and watch for emergency personnel at accident scenes.
Always move one lane to the right in order to give
firefighters room to operate and rescue the victims.
They risk their lives fighting fires but shouldn’t have
to risk their lives to rescue someone from a damaged or
wrecked vehicle.
8:30 a.m. – Rolling With the Punches:
10:30 a.m. Communication Tools For a
Pressure-Driven World!
Presenter: To be determined
10:45 a.m. – JPIA - Insurance and So Much More
11:45 a.m. Presenter: Walter “Andy” Sells,
JPIA Chief Financial & Operations
Officer
Perspective
1:30 p.m. – Sexual Harassment Prevention for
3:30 p.m. Board Members and Managers
(AB1825)
Presenter: Nancy Stangel,
JPIA Director of Administration Notice of the upcoming conference along with the conference schedule and meeting packet request form will be
mailed out in mid-August.
July/August 2008
Pre-Employment Drug Test May Be Unconstitutional
Continued from page 1
reasonable search without warrant
or suspicion, and unsupported by a
special need that would outweigh
a reasonable expectation of privacy.
The City appealed.
Legal Analysis
At issue before the Ninth Circuit was whether the City’s policy
of requiring candidates to pass a
pre-employment drug test was
constitutional on its face and as applied to this particular candidate.
The Ninth Circuit stated that
since a pre-employment drug
test is a suspicionless search, it is
constitutionally permissible only
in very limited circumstances.
In that particular case, the
City’s arguments in support of its
drug-testing policy were that drug
abuse is one of the most serious societal problems, has an adverse impact on job performance, and must
be kept away from children. The
Ninth Circuit, however, held that
the need for a suspicionless pre-employment drug test must be much
more specific and substantial than
the general existence of a societal
problem.
The City invoked the fact that the
library page may interact with children while manning the youth and
children section of the library. The
Ninth Circuit found this argument
unpersuasive. It found that while
Lanier may staff a youth services
desk for an hour or so on an asneeded basis, there was no evidence
that children’s safety or security is
entrusted to her, or that she was in a
position to exert influence over children through continuous interaction
or supervision. The Ninth Circuit
distinguished the facts of this case
from those in Knox County Education
Association v. Knox County Board of
Education (6th Cir. 1998) 158 F.3d 361,
in which the court of appeal upheld
the county’s policy of conducting
suspicionless drug tests on school
teachers and administrators due to
the fact that people in these positions acted in lieu of parents and
were charged with enforcing anti-
to California Appellate and Supreme
Court rulings. California courts have
long held that blanket pre-employment drug testing is acceptable. This
decision establishes that in Federal
Court in order for pre-employment
drug testing to be constitutional, public employers
must be able to demonThe Ninth Circuit stated
strate a special need for
that since a pre-employment
the test above and beyond
the generalized interest in
drug test is a suspicionless
screening out drug users
from employment.
search, it is constitutionally
Therefore, blanket drug
permissible only in very limited
testing of applicants for
public employment is not
circumstances.
going to pass constitutional
muster unless the employer
can demonstrate that the
drug laws in schools. Other job posi- position sought involves public
tions that the Ninth Circuit deemed
safety or poses a significant danger
sufficiently significant to public
to public safety.
safety to warrant suspicionless
Some guidance for how to meet
drug testing included railway car
the requirements of Lanier may be
operator, armed interdiction of illefound in Smith vs Fresno Irrigation
gal drugs, work in a nuclear power
District, which is a California random
facility, work involving matters of
post-employment drug test case, fonational security, work involving the cusing on the issue of safety. The
operation of natural gas and liquicourt determined that safety sensified natural gas pipelines, work in
tive positions are subject to post
the aviation industry, and work inemployment random drug testing,
volving the operation of dangerous
finding that the position of ditch
instrumentalities, such as trucks that tender qualified as a safety sensitive
weigh more than 26,000 pounds,
position. In reaching its decision, the
that are used to transport hazardous court discussed what qualifies as a
materials, or that carry more than
safety sensitive job as follows:
fourteen passengers at a time.
These cases demonstrate that it
However, in Lanier the court
is not the number of persons who
found that the library did not sufficould be injured by a drug-impaired
ciently establish that the position of
worker that determines the constilibrary page amounted to a safety or
tutional validity of random drug
security sensitive job warranting a
testing. Instead, the cases focus on
drug test in the absence of suspicion. the degree, severity and immediacy
Thus, the requirement of a pre-emof the harm posed. The “ ‘immeployment drug test for Lanier’s podiacy’ ” of the threat of injury and
sition was declared unconstitutional. the fact that a single misperformed
duty could have irremediable conseApplication
quences have been determined to be
This decision is in stark contrast
important factors in determining the
Perspective
July/August 2008
safety sensitivity of a job. Irremedifederal law applicable to California
able consequences result when an
public agencies. We recommend
employee is not able to rectify his
that the JPIA advise its members
or her mistake and the coworkers of
that a pre-employment drug test
the employee have no opportunity
for a non-safety or security related
to intervene before harm occurs.
job position without “special need”
We also reject plaintiff’s asser- may be found unconstitutional, subtion that his coworkers’
safety was adequately asWe recommend that the JPIA
sured by the fact a supervisory employee always
advise its members that a
worked in his construcpre-employment drug test
tion and maintenance
crew. Plaintiff contends
for a non-safety or security
the opportunity to scrutinize a worker in his dayrelated job position without
to-day activities is an
“special need” may be found
adequate remedy for the
District’s safety concerns.
unconstitutional, subjecting the
We disagree. As the United States Supreme Court
agency to legal exposure.
noted, a drug-impaired
individual will seldom
display any outward signs detect- jecting the agency to legal exposure.
able by the layperson.
We would recommend that pre-emThe Smith court also referenced
ployment drug testing now be conthe trial court’s reliance on Cal. Adducted only on positions which the
min. Code tit. 2, § 599.961, which
District determines are safety or sedefines “sensitive positions” in
curity sensitive in nature. In making
which drugs and alcohol could enthat determination, some objective
danger the health and safety of othguidance can be found in the Smith
ers. The regulation describes such
decision and the definitions found
positions as follows:
in 2 CCR §559.961, although there
(1) Their duties involve a
is no guarantee that a federal court
greater than normal level of trust,
will necessarily agree.
responsibility for or impact on the
We recommend that each District
health and safety of others; and
review its job descriptions in ad(2) errors in judgment, inattenvance of pre-employment testing to
tiveness or diminished coordinaidentify safety and security sensitive
tion, dexterity or composure while
positions and define them as such in
performing their duties could
their job description in advance of
clearly result in mistakes that
performing pre-employment drug
would endanger the health and
and alcohol tests.
safety of others; and
As always, a new decision which
(3) employees in these positions
impacts the human resources operawork with such independence, or,
tions of the members presents an
perform such tasks that it cannot
excellent opportunity for an annual
be safely assumed that mistakes
review of job descriptions and polisuch as those described in (2) could cies.
be prevented by a supervisor or an- This legal opinion provided by: Neal Meyers
and Golnar Fozie from Daley & Heft and Rob
other employee.
Recommendations
Greenfield from the Law Offices of Robert
Greenfield
At this point, this case is good
Perspective
The Finance
Department
Welcomes A New
Employee
The JPIA’s Finance Department
is enjoying the addition of its latest
employee. Bobbette Wells joined the
Finance Department as the Administrative Assistant reporting to the
Chief Financial and Operations Officer, Andy Sells. Bobbette comes to
the JPIA with many years of administrative support and office management experience and will be assuming many new responsibilities.
First and foremost, Bobbette will
be Andy’s new “right-arm,” working
to coordinate Andy’s many responsibilities and provide assistance to
his busy schedule. She will also be
Bobbette Wells, Administrative Assistant II in the
Finance Department.
providing support in the Finance
Department, assisting with back-up
of other key staff, performing some
accounting functions, assisting with
building management, and other duties as they surface.
Please join the JPIA in welcoming
Bobbette to its staff!
Written by: Nancy Stangel, Director of
Administration
July/August 2008
H.R. LaBounty Workers’ Compensation Safety Awards
The JPIA encourages members of
its Workers’ Compensation Program
to take part in the H.R. LaBounty
Workers’ Compensation Safety
Award program.
This program is designed to
promote safe workplace behavior
and reward those employees who
demonstrate safe behavior, take part
in recognizable proactive activity, or
participate in related actions. Employees may be nominated by their
co-workers, supervisors, or managers. Nominations should be based
on observable behavior, demonstrable activities, or participation in or
development of safety related programs. Some examples would be:
• Using appropriate personal protective equipment
• Correcting unsafe conditions
• Assisting others with safety
equipment
• Volunteering to conduct safety
training
• Seeking information for ensuring
compliance with safety programs
• Initiating safety suggestions
• Recommending safety procedures
• Designing safe work practices or
devices
• Writing safe work procedures or
practices
Awards are presented two times
a year at the spring and fall conferences.
The JPIA would like to share
some of the recent ideas and suggestions announced at the spring
conference in Monterey during the
Wrench designed by Ethan Lawrence and Ezra
Ruelas of Rancho California Water District.
Terry Hartnett of Helix Water District demonstrates the “T” handle that he designed and
fabricated to remove high-speed gate valve caps.
Driveway with the painted meter boxes.
Board of Directors meeting.
Ethan Lawrence and Ezra Ruelas, Field Service, Rancho California Water District — They suggested modifying an existing wrench
used to replace air valve assemblies
below grade. The new design accommodates both 1” and 2” air valves
more adequately than the wrench
used in the past. The new design
minimizes the risk of the wrench
slipping off the smaller air valve,
which could result in an injury.
Terry Hartnett, Valve Maintenance Technician, Helix Water District — Terry designed and fabricated a tool to remove high-speed gate
valve caps. The “T” handle will be
used to remove caps when performing shut downs or valve exercising.
The high-speed caps are heavy
Perspective
(40 lbs) and have long skirts, which
make them difficult to remove. The
“T” handle allows an employee to
lift the cap out in a vertical position.
This greatly reduces strain and exertion when compared to using a pick
axe.
Cory Whitman, Customer
Service, Crescenta Valley Water
District — Cory came up with an
alternative to a costly relocation of
a customer’s meter boxes, which
presented a hazard to the elderly
Cory Whitman of Crescenta Valley Water
District.
couple. The boxes are located in the
couple’s driveway and were a slipping hazard when wet. The woman
had already slipped on one of the
boxes and fallen. Cory suggested
painting the boxes with a version of
Continued on bottom of page 9
July/August 2008
Liability Claims Procedures on The JPIA’s Web Site
The JPIA recently refreshed its web site, which
included revisions to the Liability Claims Reporting
Procedures and forms. JPIA members can access the
Liability Claims Reporting Procedures and forms by
logging onto the site and clicking on the Coverage Programs bar then selecting Claims from the pull-down
menu. They can also access the Claims page by using
the Claims link from the blue bars, which are located
on the left side of the JPIA’s home page. The Claims
page contains links to the Liability Claims Reporting
Procedures and all the necessary forms.
The Liability Claims Reporting Procedures has four
subsections with instructions on initial reporting of
claims, subsequent reporting of claims, initial investigation, and reporting of litigation. Each of the subsections
explains how members report claims to the JPIA and includes instructions on which of the forms are necessary
for the member to complete and provide to the JPIA.
The following forms are available on the web site:
CA State DMV Traffic Accident Form
This form is commonly known as the SR1 form.
California law requires traffic accidents on California
streets, highways, or private property to be reported to
the DMV within ten days if there was an injury, death,
or property damage in excess of $750.
Claim Incident Form
Members use this form to capture loss information
on all claims that do not involve auto accidents. The
member needs only to complete the form with as much
information as they have and then fax or e-mail the
form to the JPIA. The JPIA Claims Examiner assigned to
handle the claim will do what is necessary to find any
missing information.
Claims Incident Form (Auto Only)
Members use this form to capture information on
auto accidents that involve district vehicles. The form
asks for information about the district driver and vehicle so that JPIA can confirm coverage for the loss. There
is a section that asks for information on the other party
involved in the accident and witnesses that the Claims
Examiner will use to conduct an investigation.
Driver’s Report of Accident
Drivers of district vehicles use this form to record
their recollection of how the accident occurred. It is imperative that drivers complete this form as soon as possible after the accident when their memory is fresh.
Claim Form
Members give this form to persons who want to
submit a formal claim against the district. The form can
be used for submission of any type of claim against a
California public entity. Once the person provides the
member with a completed Claim Form, the member
sends a copy to the JPIA, keeps a copy for its records,
and gives a copy back to the person who submitted the
claim. The Claims Examiner uses the information on
this form to conduct the investigation.
Small Claims Settlement Option
It details the steps necessary for a member to utilize
this benefit of the Liability Memorandum of Coverage.
Members may use this policy benefit to settle small
property damage claims and then seek reimbursement
from the JPIA for the money the member paid plus a
$100 handling fee per claim.
Monthly Small Claims Report Form
Members use this form to report their expenditures
for reimbursement under the Small Claims Settlement
Option.
Sample Letters
Members use the sample letters to accept or reject
claims filed against them. The instructions provide
guidance on which letter to send the person who submitted the claim under a variety of circumstances. This
can sometimes be confusing and members are encouraged to call the JPIA Claims Department for any clarification.
If you have any questions, please contact Dick
Damon, Liability/Property Claims Manager, or Cece
Wuchter, Senior Claims Examiner, at (800) 535-7899,
extensions 3130 or 3134.
Written by: Dick Damon, Liability/Property Claims Manager
Continued from page 8
Duraliner. The surface now contains an abrasive material and also works as a water repellent.
Hilda Bojorquez, Construction Contract Administrator, Rancho California Water District — Hilda
designed a spreadsheet to track and ensure the district’s
construction and contracts department can track insurance certificates and additional endorsements for projects. Proper risk transfer is a major issue with controlPerspective
ling losses and the JPIA Risk Management Consultants
place this as a high priority when evaluating risk management for the members.
Districts participating in the JPIA Workers’ Compensation Program may submit nominations to the JPIA at
any time of the year. Members may obtain forms from
the JPIA web site, by mail, fax, or e-mail.
Written by: Harve LaBounty, Risk Management Advisor
July/August 2008
Lending Library Update - Continued from page 12
Bloodborne Pathogens 050.05.1
(Medic First Aid) (20 minutes)
(DVD) Bloodborne Pathogens is
a video-based, instructor-guided
course meeting requirements for
training occupationally-exposed
employees. The video focuses on
bloodborne diseases, especially HIV
and Hepatitis B; the proper use of
personal protective equipment; and
the requirements of an exposure
control plan.
Safety Requirements for Electricians 160.18.1 (NFPA 70E) (20 minutes) (DVD) Every day in the United
States, at least one person dies from
electrocution on the
job. Each year, thousands of workers are
treated in emergency
rooms and burn centers. Teach electrical
engineers, electricians,
and
maintenance
crews, and anyone
exposed to electrical
hazards, the energy
control best practices
for OSHA compliance
with this DVD. You’ll
reduce injuries, liability, and operating costs by providing
expert training whenever you need
it.
Heat Stress 270.09.1 (17 Minutes)
(American Training Resources)
(DVD) Whether you work in a hot
environment or you’re outside on
one of those “dog days of summer,”
this program shows viewers how to
recognize and respond to various
heat-related problems. Featured are
several scenarios with some of the
physical symptoms and appropriate
first aid procedures for each illness.
Water System Security: SCADA
and Cyber Protection 410.20.1
(17 minutes) (AWWA) (DVD) This
Perspective
program takes an introductory look
at the many questions of computer
security for water and wastewater
utilities. A cyberspace assault could
disable a municipal water supply
without anyone physically touching
any part of the system, or it could
interfere with a water utility’s ability
to recover from a physical attack on
the infrastructure.
Water System Security: Utility
Perimeter Security 410.21.1 (17 minutes) (AWWA) (DVD) This program
provides a practical overview on
tightening utility perimeter security.
Coverage includes fencing, signs,
landscaping, razor wire, locks,
chains, hardware, alarms, television
monitors, cameras, and law enforcement and visitor identification procedures.
The Outdoorsman’s Guide to
Snake Safety 030.04.1 (20 minutes)
(Burmusic Productions) (DVD) Did
you know there are only four types
of venomous snakes in the United
States? This program will help educate the viewer on which snakes to
look out for, how to identify them,
avoidance tips, and what to do if a
venomous snake in the wild ever
bites you. This is a slithering-fun
program that provides answers to
help ensure your safety in the wild
10
and possibly even saves your life.
Back Injury Prevention 040.03.1
(15 minutes) (American Training Resources) (DVD) “Back Injury Prevention” focuses on the techniques that
can be used to avoid back injuries in
the office, shop, and field environments. The following elements are
covered in this 15-minute presentation:
• Exercises that ease discomfort
and strengthen the back;
• Lifting preparation and practices;
• Ergonomics and back posture;
• The benefit of mechanical lifting;
and
• The advantages and disadvantages of team lifting.
Back Safety 040.02.1 (12 minutes)
(National Safety Compliance) (DVD)
People tend to take their backs for
granted until they are in pain. Statistics show that such strains are the
most common among workers. Back
problems are costly. This includes
taking off precious work time. This
DVD addresses the major areas
needed to comply with the OSHA
standard, including structure of the
back, common back problems, proper lifting techniques, proper posture,
and maintaining a healthy back.
Modern Driving Hazards
150.17.1F (19 minutes) (American
Training Resources) (DVD) This video analyzes the four stages of “road
rage” and the steps drivers can take
to keep themselves from becoming
a victim of violence. The use of cellular phones and other modern devices is also reviewed.
Brush Chipper Operation and
Maintenance 320.04.1 (16 minutes)
(Tree Care Industry Association)
(VHS) The video will teach you
about the major safety issues associated with hooking up, towing,
operation, personal protective equipJuly/August 2008
ment, and maintenance. You will learn safe practices
with the drum chipper as well as hydraulic infeed disk
and drum chippers.
Cut-Off Machine Safety, Maintenance, and Operation 470.22.1 (45 minutes) (DVD) This training DVD
is not only for the new user but also for the seasoned
veteran. It is designed to help train users of all handheld
cut-off machines to properly operate the equipment in a
safe manner.
Written by: Jody Murphy, Administrative Assistant II
Risk Management Staff
Reaches a New Level of
Achievement
The Senior Risk Management Consultants are now
all Certified Safety Professionals and can proudly use
the designation, CSP. In the past year, Peter Kuchinsky II, Keith Forbes, and John Haaf have passed their
comprehensive exams and now join Lee Patton (who
attained his several years ago) as Certified Safety Professionals. In addition, R. Scott Wood, Risk Management
Consultant, passed his Associate Safety Professional
examination and will soon be taking his comprehensive
exam. The CSP is widely considered the top level of certification for the safety profession.
What does this mean? Just what describes the safety
profession? The Board of Certified Safety Professionals
best describes the safety professional.
“A safety professional is a person engaged in the
prevention of accidents, incidents, and events that harm
people, property, or the environment. They use qualitative and quantitative analysis of simple and complex
products, systems, operations, and activities to identify
hazards. They evaluate the hazards to identify what
events can occur and the likelihood of occurrence, severity of results, risk (a combination of probability and
severity), and cost. They identify what controls are appropriate and their cost and effectiveness. Safety professionals make recommendations to managers, designers,
employers, government agencies, and others. Controls
may involve administrative controls (such as plans, policies, procedures, training, etc.) and engineering controls
(such as safety features and systems, fail-safe features,
barriers, and other forms of protection). Safety professionals may manage and implement controls.
Beside knowledge of a wide range of hazards, controls, and safety assessment methods, safety professionPerspective
als must have
knowledge
of
physical, chemical,
biological,
and behavioral
sciences; mathematics; business;
training
and
educational techniques; engineering concepts; and
particular kinds
of
operations
(construction,
manufacturing,
transportation,
etc.).”
The Board of
Risk Management Consultants L/R: Lee Patton,
R. Scott Wood, Peter Kuchinsky II, John Haaf,
Certified Safety
and Keith Forbes.
Professionals is
a not-for-profit
corporation established in 1969. It operates solely as a
peer certification board with the purpose of certifying
practitioners in the safety profession. It is not a membership organization. Its functions include:
• Setting standards related to professional safety practice.
• Evaluating the academic and professional experience
qualifications of safety professionals.
• Administering examinations relating to professional
safety knowledge and skills.
• Establishing recertification standards in the Continuance of Certification (COC) program.
The Certified Safety Professional certification holds
several national accreditations and a variety of recognitions. Accreditations and some recognitions involve
evaluation against specific standards for certification
bodies.
• The CSP certification has held accreditation from the
American National Standards Institute (ANSI) since
2003.
• The CSP certification has held accreditation from
the National Commission for Certifying Agencies
(NCCA) since 1994.
The National Commission for Certifying Agencies,
which is located in Washington, DC, sets standards for
peer certifications in all fields.
The JPIA Risk Management Consultants therefore
passed a review of their education and work history.
They have spent many hours of study for the application and exam process to attain the designation Certified
Safety Professional. Well done!
Written by: Harve LaBounty, Risk Management Advisor
11
July/August 2008
Lending Library Update
JPIA has added 13 new programs
to its ever-growing Lending Library.
Members are welcome to view these
new programs; call Jody Murphy at
the JPIA, (800) 231-5742, extension
3156, or send an e-mail to videos@
acwajpia.com.
The JPIA would like to thank J.T.
Rethke from Pebble Beach Community Services District for his
recommendation to add the Cut-Off
Machine Safety, Maintenance, and Operation DVD to the Lending Library
and Ralph Turner from Tahoe City
Public Utility District for his recommendation to add the video, Brush
Chipper Operation and Maintenance.
JPIA would like to encourage other
members to make recommendations
for new videos and DVDs to add
to the Lending Library so that we
may better help you with all of your
training needs.
Water Distribution Operator Training: Hydrants 330.03.1
(AWWA) (13 minutes) (DVD) This
DVD explains the importance of
maintaining fire hydrant reliability
for fire fighting. Other uses are also
described, including distribution
pipe flushing, flow testing, and filling water tank trucks. Operators
learn why hydrant use must be monitored and controlled by water utility to maintain security and safety;
the different types of wet-barrel and
dry-barrel fire hydrants and their
operation; typical hydrant design,
hydrant part names, and breakaway
designs; use of hydrant wrenches;
correct procedure for opening and
Perspective
closing hydrants; location and use of
auxiliary valves; hydrant inspection,
pressure-and-leak testing, placement, installation, maintenance, and
repairs; hydrant color-coding, safety
and security devices, and record
keeping.
Bloodborne Pathogens 050.04.1
(American Training Resources)
(11 minutes) (DVD) Whether you
work in transportation, manufacturing, retail, government, emergency
services, or any other occupation;
one day you will have to deal with
a situation that involves potentially
infected blood. The decisions you
make and the actions you take could
literally make the difference between
life and death.
Continued on page 10
Periodical Postage Paid
ACWA Joint Powers Insurance Authority
5620 Birdcage Street, Suite 200
Citrus Heights, CA 95610-7632
Perspective
12
July/August 2008