1. (60 points) Risk Assessment For each of the two primary machining activities:

1. (60 points) Risk Assessment For each of the two primary machining activities: a. Identify and describe all Task and Environmental ergonomic risk factors present. Do not speculate on the possible presence of Environmental Risk Factors such as noise, heat, etc. b. Quantify all ergonomic risk factor modifiers for each Task ERF-body segment present, to the best of your ability. Note: Some ERF Modifiers are not able to be quantified due to the absence of information/data. Please note this in your submittal. c. Identify and describe three (3) likely specific CTD’s that will develop if workplace conditions and work practices continue as described for a primary machining operator. Present the above requested information for each of the two (2) activities in a table, and then sufficiently describe the information presented in each table. A table template is located in HuskyCT Documents Folder (Module 3); submit one table for activity #1 and a 2nd table for activity #2. II. (50 points) Ergonomic Intervention: Identify specific ergonomic interventions/controls for each of the two primary machining activities evaluated in Question I. You will present a total of 12 recommended interventions (3 engineering and 3 administrative/management controls for each activity). Include photos of recommended engineering controls (Module 7 reviewed engineering controls), and clearly describe how use of each engineering control and application of each administrative control will eliminate or reduce exposure to a specific ergonomic risk factor(s), and/or ergonomic risk factor modifiers. III. (50 points) Application of the NIOSH Lifting Equation The specific task chosen is the manual lifting of 30 pound pans containing steel parts from the output of a primary machine using a hand pinch grasp, and placement of the pans on a pallet located on the shop floor. The lifting activity specifics are as follows: •Frequency of lifting pans is 2 hours/day, and an average of 2 lifts per minute occurs 8 •Average horizontal distance of pans from the operator during lifting from the machine is 18 inches •Average vertical distance the pans are moved from the machine to the pallet is 35 inches •Origin of average lift at the machine is 40 inches above the floor •Average angle of symmetry (twisting) is 30 degrees •Hand-pan coupling is poor due to absence of handles. Use the Module 8 Multiplier tables in the Documents Folder to apply the NIOSH Lifting Equation, and show all work to receive credit. Given the above data, calculate a recommended weight limit (RWL), and a lifting index (LI). Does the lifting activity present an increased risk of lower back injury? After calculating both the RWL and LI for the data presented above, recalculate both for the following changes (all other data stays the same): • Origin of average lift is 30 inches above the floor • Average vertical distance pans are moved is 25” • Average weight of pans is 25 lbs. Does the redesigned lifting activity present an increased or decreased risk of lower back injury? How much more or less risk is now present? Do you have any suggestions for further reducing the risk of injury (do not suggest lowering the weight of the pans)? IV. (50 points) Ergonomics Program In addition to addressing some immediate ergonomic needs, EDI would like to implement an ergonomics program in the future without having to call upon your very expensive services. Propose to EDI the essential elements that it needs to incorporate in an 9 ergonomics program in order to develop one that is effective and sustainable. a. Identify and thoroughly describe each of the ergonomic program essential elements, and the components of each element b. Identify and discuss process(es) for successful implementation of essential program elements c. Identify the parts of the EDI organization (production workers, shipping workers, receiving workers, supervision, management, etc.) that should be involved in program development and implementation. d. And lastly, take a mental step back and ponder EDI’s current requirement to conduct functional work capacity testing on new hires. Specifically, if EDI implements your recommended interventions: i. Is there a need for EDI to continue testing prospective new hires on their ability to frequently lift 50 lbs? If yes, why, and if not, how will the absence of having to frequently lift 50 lbs during the work shift potentially affect EDI’s ability to find qualified personnel to fill primary machining job slots, and relieve the work demands placed on the current workforce?