preface - petroleumpetroleum.statedevelopment.sa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0019/...preface in...

Preface

In June 2006, a number of regulators for the onshore petroleum industry in Australia released a discussion paper1 for industry comment on the need for a self assessment framework for assessing and demonstrating HSE compliance, primarily focussed on the onshore drilling sector. The outcome of this consultation delivered the self-assessment framework detailed in this document. The objective of this framework is to assist operator companies and contractors to self-assess the level of effectiveness of their systems in delivering acceptable HSE performance. It also seeks to clarify regulatory expectations to industry for such systems and assist companies and contractors in identifying components of their management systems that may need to be improved to deliver greater overall system effectiveness. The adoption of such a tool by both industry and regulators is believed will greatly assist in delivering greater consistency in regulatory expectations and requirements for HSE compliance for the industry Australia wide.

This is not a mandatory tool, but is provided to assist individual companies and contractors in self-assessing and the continuous improvement of the effectiveness of their HSE management systems. As commented by the National Offshore Petroleum Safety Authority (NOPSA) when consulted in the development of this tool and a strong supporter for such a tool:

“NOPSA commends the Designated Authorities and drilling industry for taking this initiative to review the effectiveness of safety management systems. Legislation for health and safety in the offshore petroleum industry has made the quality of a safety management system vital to the acceptance of an operator’s safety case. We find that the effective application, auditing and continuous improvement of these systems is a characteristic of operators which have a genuine commitment to health and safety.”

Background

Since the early nineties, predominately under the influence of the findings of the Lord Cullen inquiry into the 1988 Piper Alpha Disaster in the UK, the health, safety and environment (HSE) regulation of the oil and gas industry underwent a shift from the traditional prescriptive regulatory regimes to performance/objective based regimes such as Safety Case legislation.

The key feature of such regimes has been the requirement for operators to:

Assess and identify the HSE risks associated with their activities and operations.

Develop the necessary policies, objectives and standards to address those risks.

Implement systems and controls to mitigate the risks to acceptable levels.

Ensure their workforce:

is aware of these risks

has the necessary capability (competencies and motivation) to implement the systems and controls to manage these risks

achieve the required HSE results and behaviour.

These features are common to all jurisdictional regulatory requirements in Australia, onshore and offshore. The key challenge facing regulators and industry is to ascertain the effectiveness of the HSE management systems implemented in achieving the desired industry behaviour. Therefore the objective of a self assessment framework such as the one proposed here is to assist both regulatory bodies and industry in meeting this challenge.

•

•

•

•

a)

b)

c)

1 DISCUSSION PAPER, June 2006, Framework for Assessing and Demonstrating HSE Compliance, Prepared by Upstream Petroleum Industry Regulators for consultation with Oil and Gas Industry.

ENSIGN ENERGY SERVICES INC.

Purpose

This chart is not intended as a full audit but rather as a guide in self -assess-

ment. The chart is a tool intended for use by an individual, a work group,

a team or a company. Ultimately, a formal audit is conducted to verify

the implementation of the Health Safety and Environment Management

System (HSEMS).

Its primary purpose is to conduct a quick check where the development of

the HSEMS has reached and where the gaps exist so that they can be

addressed. Aggregating the results of different work groups across a com-

pany can provide a measure of overall progress but more importantly, it can

identify common weaknesses requiring action and/or assistance.

The goal is system improvement – therefore complete honesty in self-

assessing is required. The chart is divided into the seven elements of the

HSEMS, which are then broken down into 25 sub-elements.

The four statements under each sub element characterise the different

levels that can be reached. Level 1 is the most basic with minimal systems

or understanding of the requirements. Level 4 indicates that the system is

fully implemented and supervisors and personnel are looking for ways to

improve the system and performance.

Assessing the Health, Safety and Environment Management System

4

3

2

1

HSE in the heart

HSE in the head

HSE on paper

Division/site recognized as a leader in the particular aspect of the management system

This particular aspect of the management system is being addressed systematically. Reaching the respective targets. Integration with otheractivities initiated.

Performance and results inconsistent. System being implemented but generally at minimum levels. Plan – Do – Check -Act process understoodbut not put into practice.

Overall, performance is poor. Awareness may be there, but the implementation of this particular aspect of the management system is haphazard or not in evidence.

Completing the Assessment

• Define which area, facility or work group is being assessed.

• If a team is doing the assessment, select members from a broad cross

section of employees including line managers. Team members need to be

familiar with the operations of the site being assessed, and well versed in the

principles and application of inspections and the HSE Management System.

The team leader should be trained or have experience in auditing.

• Assess the site, grading the various elements against the level statements.

The assessment may require support from site documentation and

interviews to confirm the level that has been achieved.

• Take each statement one at a time. Start with Level 1 and mark off the box

when all aspects of the description are met everywhere in the area under

consideration. Move up to the next level and do the same until a level is

reached where the description does not represent what is happening. Then

stop and leave that box clear. Make a note of the particular area(s) that

prevents achievement of that level.

• By studying the results, the assessor and/or assessing team should be able

to define the HSEMS gaps and the appropriate actions required to achieve

the level desired by management.

• The resulting recommendations should be agreed on by line management

and implemented through an action plan with defined responsibilities and

timelines. The assessment should be repeated at appropriate intervals to

confirm that the recommendations have been completed and that the imple-

mentation and effectiveness of the HSE management system are improving.

Level Assessment Criteria

4

3

21

High standard of control requiring no additional management attention

A sufficiently high standard of control for improvements to be handled by the normal management involvement

Essential controls are in place, but deficiencies require focused management intervention

Essential controls are missing or ineffective. Prompt management action is essential.

Level Action Criteria

Results (levels achieved)

1. Commitment and Leadership

1.1 Commitment 1

1.2 Leadership 2

2. Policies and Objectives

2.1 Policies 3

2.2 Objectives 4

3. Organization, Resources and Documentation

3.1 Organizational Responsibilities 5

3.2 Training and Competence 6

3.3 Sub-contractor Management 7

3.4 Communication 8

3.5 Documents and Standards 9

4. Risk Evaluation and Management

4.1 Identification of Hazards and Effects 10

4.2 Risk Evaluation 11

4.3 Recording of Hazards and Effects 12

4.4 Risk Reduction Measures 13

5. Planning

5.1 HSE Planning 14

5.2 Asset Integrity 15

5.3 Procedures and Work Procedures 16

5.4 Management of Change 17

5.6 Emergency Response 18

6. Implementation, Recording and Monitoring

6.1 Inspections 19

6.2 Records 20

6.3 Performance Monitoring 21

6.4 Non-compliance and Corrective Action 22

6.5 Incident Reporting and Follow-up 23

7. Audit and Review

7.1 Audits 24

7.2 Reviews 25

Assessing the Health, Safety and Environment Management System

1.1 Commitment

Senior managers visiblyinvolved in HSE activities, initiatives and reviews. The importance of HSE iscommunicated in businessdecisions. Employee’s actively participate. Adequateresources provided forachievement of HSE objectives

Managers are fully aware ofthe high priority areas forimprovement and status ofaction plans. Investment isHSE seen as good businesssense. Resources generallyavailable.

Management settingobjectives and structure in

place. Very much a top-downapproach. Resources limitedto specific HSE objectives.

HSE given less than equal priority. Seen as incompatibleto achieving operations, production and other business objectives. HSEresources scarce.

1.2 Leadership

Senior managers encourage a culture of belief, motivation,individual responsibility and participation in HSEimprovement. HSE cultureaccepted throughout theorganization. Employeesinvolved at all levels. Personal involvement veryvisible.

Managers and supervisorsactively participate in HSEactivities, set a good personalexample and jointly developboth HSE "result" and "Activity"targets with employees andcontractors. General acceptance of HSE culture.Most employees involved inHSE issues.

Senior managers discuss andreview progress towards specific "results" and "activi-ties" HSE targets, not active indevelopment of objectives.Employees not convinced that HSE is a core value butparticipated in process. HSEculture not widespread.

Management not visible inHSE process. Leaders communicate HSE expecta-tions but do not use or refer toSafety Management System.Poor HSE culture. Employeesdo not feel they are involved.

2.1 Policies

Policies clearly defined andimplemented consistent withcorporate parent. Process inplace to revise policies. Work force fully aware of allpolicies.

Good awareness and sensibleapplication of all policies.

HSE policy explained atinduction training. No cleardirection on other policies.Generally only managementaware of policies.

HSE policy posted but notgenerally explained or understood. HSE policy is the only one posted. Limitedawareness of policies.

2.2 Objectives

Senior managers, site andindividuals set challengingobjectives for continuousimprovement. Performanceobjectives clearly identifiedand communicated to all concerned. Personnel at alllevels are assessed onachieving these objectives.

Coordinated objectives setand reviewed quarterly.Objectives on target. Allemployees and most otherparties aware of objectives.

Objectives set. Not well coordinated or reviewed regularly. Action plans notfocused on objectives. Levelsnot realistic. Patchy level ofachievement. Incompletecommunication of objectivesto interested parties.

Objectives not set for siteand/or individuals. Not seenas a priority or tool.Objectives not adequatelycommunicated to employeesinvolved or subcontractors.

AssessmentCriteria

LEVEL 4Division/site recognized as a leader in the particular aspect of themanagement system

LEVEL 3This particular aspect ofthe management system is being addressed systematically. Reachingthe respective targets.Integration with otheractivities initiated

LEVEL 2Performance and resultsinconsistent. Systembeing implemented butgenerally at minimum levels. Plan – Do – Check -Act process understoodbut not put into practice.

LEVEL 1Overall, performance is poor. Awareness may be there, but theimplementation of thisparticular aspect of themanagement system is haphazard or not in evidence.

1 Commitment and Leadership

Management shall provide strong visible commitment, leadershipand personal involvement in Health Safety and the Environment.Management shall make available the resources necessary toachieve our HSE objectives

2 Policies and Objectives

Develop and communicate policies demonstrating a commitmentto HS&E that is consistent with, and at least equal to other business aims. Supporting objectives shall be defined, deployedand maintained at all organizational levels.

focused on objectives. Levels

3.1 OrganizationalResponsibilities

HSE responsibilities accepted and acted upon byall line managers throughoutevery management level. Job descriptions prepared,match actual responsibilitiesand clearly communicated toall employees. Clear, practicaland unambiguous structure

General acceptance of HSE responsibility at all management levels. Jobdescriptions in place for most employees, and employ-ees are clear on their responsibilities. No gaps inresponsibilities. Structure welldefined and coordinated withresponsibilities

Senior line managers takingtheir technical responsibilitiesseriously and some HSE respon-sibilities. Other managerial lev-els not totally committed to HSE.Some job descriptions defined.Structure defined on paper butuntried in practice. Several greyareas owing to lack of detail

Management not taking personal responsibility forHSE. Personnel working asindividuals and not as a coordinated team. Jobdescriptions and interrelation-ships for function not in place.HSE seen as a matter for theHSE personnel.

3.2 Training andCompetence

Competency requirements ofall HSE critical positionsreviewed and up to date. Well-balanced, experiencedstaff and labour with activetraining program. Recordsused to effectively managetraining program. Trainingplans rigorously implemented

Majority of qualifiedstaff/workers given operational training. Trainingrecords in place. All instructors qualified.Competencies understood for most positions. Employeestraining plan up to date.

Recruitment criteria definedbut not followed. Some training given. Records poor.Some instructors formallyqualified. Competencerequirements not well understood. All employeeshave a training plan andrecords.

No recruitment criteriadefined. No active trainingschedule apart from generalinduction. Instructors not formally qualified.Competence requirements not defined for job positions.Not all employees have atraining plan and records.

3.3 Sub ContractorManagement

All major subcontractors pre-qualified and audited.Contractor's managementtaking active interest in HSEmanagement system. Minorcontractors fully integratedinto site HSE managementsystem and involved in reviewprocess.

All major subcontractor's pre-qualified and some auditing. Only on-site interestby contractor management.All minor contractors integrated into site HSE management system.

Few major subcontractorspre-qualified. HSE require-ments defined in bid request.Some auditing. Few minorcontractors integrated into site HSE managementsystem.

No prequalification of majorsubcontractors. HSE requirements not detailed inbid request or considered inselection. No system in placewhen minor contractors areemployed.

3.4 Communication

HSE is given equal priority atall meetings. All employeesaware of key HSE informationand expectations. Good twoway flow of information andaction through controlledseries of meetings. Documentsconsidered live and useful,recommendations for revisions submitted.

Regular pre-job and HSEmeetings. Active participationby all personnel including subcontractors. Notice boardscurrent. Good awareness at alllevels. All documents availableand consulted on occasion asrequired by line managers.

Internal and external communications haphazard.Some pre-job meetings held;no flow of information up anddown chain of command.Spread of signs and posters.Documentation available butnot up to date. Limited aware-ness. Use negligible.

Some structured meetingsheld. Documentation not complete and not easily available. No procedures forhandling communications toemployees, subcontractors orstakeholders. . No posting ofHS&E information. Languageissues.

3.5 Documents andStandards

HSEMS documents are controlled and maintainedand subject to continuousimprovement. Versions areavailable where they areneeded. Regulatory, companyand client procedures andstandards adhered to.

HSEMS documents are sub-stantially complete. Processin place to monitor compli-ance. Compliance with moststandards to an acceptabledegree. Positive approach toimproving standards. Generalawareness of company standards. HS&E require-ments systematically includedin specs for critical equipment

Awareness of company andoperating procedures andstandards limited to managersonly. Current versions notalways available. HS&Erequirements included inspecifications for HS&E critical equipment/products

Poor awareness of internalstandards at lower levels.Poor knowledge of legal orclient standards except athigh level. Versions not readily available or not current. HSE requirements notincluded in specifications forcritical equipment.

3 Organisation, Resources, and Documentation

Define, document, and communicate the roles, responsibilities, and accountabilities to enable every individual tofulfill their role in improving Health, Safety and Environmental performance.

AssessmentCriteria





needed. Regulatory, company

ee. Positive approach toimproving standards. General

ents systematically includedin specs for critical equipment

limited to managers

ements notincluded in specifications for

4.1 Identification ofHazards and Effects

All HSE definitions known andwell understood at all levels.A process exists for updatingthe hazards and effectsinventory due to changes tothe operation or learning’sfrom inspections or incidentanalysis. Appropriate personal at all levels involvedin process.

Basic HSE definitions knownand understood at all levels.Appropriate techniques used on all operations. Acomprehensive inventory of HSE hazards and effectshas been documented for all units in the company.

Basic HSE definitions knownand understood by manage-ment. Techniques for hazardsand effects identification aredocumented but mostly a top down process.

Basic HSE definitions hardlyknown. Techniques for hazardand effects identification notdocumented.

4.2 Risk Evaluation

Screening techniques used toassess the risk (likelihood andconsequence) with each hazard and effect associatedfor people, the environmentand assets. Assessments keptup to date and modified whencircumstances change (projects, acquisitions, majormodifications).

Assessments compiled andreviewed by involved personsin bottom-up approach. Allmajor hazards identified. Riskor significance of these havebeen classified using the riskmatrix or equivalent.

Standard techniques known.Not all major risks evaluated.Mostly top-down process.

Haphazard assessment of riskmostly in reactive mode. Nosystematic assessment ofrisk.

4.3 Recording ofHazards and Effects

Results of evaluation recordedtogether with data sourcesand assumptions used.Records used by operationspersonnel to develop proce-dures and work instructions.Hazard records reviewed byinvolved personnel as a hazardcommunication tool. Statutoryrequirements and codes appli-cable to HSE are documented.

Records compiled and usedby involved personnel at alllevels. Major hazards andrisks recorded.

Structure defined and some data captured. Not recognized and consistentlyused in the organization.

Poor knowledge of regulatoryrequirements. No structuredprocess for recording.

4 Risk Evaluation and Management

To continually evaluate the HS&E risks to the workforce, customers and the environment. Continuously evaluateprocesses and activities for hazards, assess potentials, record and control the subsequent risk to a tolerable level.

4.4 Risk Reduction Measures –Recovery

Integral part of operation. Risk associatedwith all relevant hazards minimized throughsystematic application of effective preven-tion and mitigation measures. All personalprotective equipment (PPE) issuesaddressed, work instructions and rulesclearly defined and always respected.Permit To Work (PTW) applied systemati-cally and effectively. Control and mitigationimproved as the result of drills and experi-ence from within and outside the company.

Risk associated with major hazards minimized through proactive applicationof prevention and mitigation measuresthat meet local requirements.Requirements understood by all. PPErules clearly defined with few violations.PTW in place for critical operations.Personnel familiar with their roles in control and recovery procedures.

Generic prevention and mitigation measures applied for major risks.Controlled supply of PPE, some unsuitable for conditions. Some traininggiven. Broad respect for PPE rules. PTW system known: application inconsistent. Procedures exist for drillsbut few exercises conducted.

Haphazard application of generic prevention and mitigation measures.Nominal supply of Personal ProtectiveEquipment (PPE) with no formal assess-ment of requirements and little follow-upon compliance. Permit To Work (PTW)system not known or used. Drills sporadic, incomplete records.

AssessmentCriteria





needed. Regulatory, company

ee. Positive approach toimproving standards. General

ents systematically includedin specs for critical equipment

limited to managers

ements notincluded in specifications for

4.1 Identification ofHazards and Effects

All HSE definitions known andwell understood at all levels.A process exists for updatingthe hazards and effectsinventory due to changes tothe operation or learning’sfrom inspections or incidentanalysis. Appropriate personal at all levels involvedin process.

Basic HSE definitions knownand understood at all levels.Appropriate techniques used on all operations. Acomprehensive inventory of HSE hazards and effectshas been documented for all units in the company.

Basic HSE definitions knownand understood by manage-ment. Techniques for hazardsand effects identification aredocumented but mostly a top down process.

Basic HSE definitions hardlyknown. Techniques for hazardand effects identification notdocumented.

4.2 Risk Evaluation

Screening techniques used toassess the risk (likelihood andconsequence) with each hazard and effect associatedfor people, the environmentand assets. Assessments keptup to date and modified whencircumstances change (projects, acquisitions, majormodifications).

Assessments compiled andreviewed by involved personsin bottom-up approach. Allmajor hazards identified. Riskor significance of these havebeen classified using the riskmatrix or equivalent.

Standard techniques known.Not all major risks evaluated.Mostly top-down process.

Haphazard assessment of riskmostly in reactive mode. Nosystematic assessment ofrisk.

4.3 Recording ofHazards and Effects

Results of evaluation recordedtogether with data sourcesand assumptions used.Records used by operationspersonnel to develop proce-dures and work instructions.Hazard records reviewed byinvolved personnel as a hazardcommunication tool. Statutoryrequirements and codes appli-cable to HSE are documented.

Records compiled and usedby involved personnel at alllevels. Major hazards andrisks recorded.

Structure defined and some data captured. Not recognized and consistentlyused in the organization.

Poor knowledge of regulatoryrequirements. No structuredprocess for recording.

4 Risk Evaluation and Management

To continually evaluate the HS&E risks to the workforce, customers and the environment. Continuously evaluateprocesses and activities for hazards, assess potentials, record and control the subsequent risk to a tolerable level.

4.4 Risk Reduction Measures –Recovery

Integral part of operation. Risk associatedwith all relevant hazards minimized throughsystematic application of effective preven-tion and mitigation measures. All personalprotective equipment (PPE) issuesaddressed, work instructions and rulesclearly defined and always respected.Permit To Work (PTW) applied systemati-cally and effectively. Control and mitigationimproved as the result of drills and experi-ence from within and outside the company.

Risk associated with major hazards minimized through proactive applicationof prevention and mitigation measuresthat meet local requirements.Requirements understood by all. PPErules clearly defined with few violations.PTW in place for critical operations.Personnel familiar with their roles in control and recovery procedures.

Generic prevention and mitigation measures applied for major risks.Controlled supply of PPE, some unsuitable for conditions. Some traininggiven. Broad respect for PPE rules. PTW system known: application inconsistent. Procedures exist for drillsbut few exercises conducted.

Haphazard application of generic prevention and mitigation measures.Nominal supply of Personal ProtectiveEquipment (PPE) with no formal assess-ment of requirements and little follow-upon compliance. Permit To Work (PTW)system not known or used. Drills sporadic, incomplete records.

AssessmentCriteria





AssessmentCriteria




LEVEL 1Overall, performance ispoor. Awareness may be there, but the implementation of thisparticular aspect of themanagement system ishaphazard or not in evidence.

5.1 HSE Planning

Plans in place to address allassessed health, safety,environmental and securityrisks. HSE plans written, communicated as appropriateand reviewed on a regularbasis. HSE requirements systematically included inearly stage of operationalplans. Targets are publishedannually

Most health, safety, environment and securityissues addressed in plans.Most employees aware ofappropriate plans. HSErequirements systematicallyincluded in most operationalplans. Effective and systematic pre-job meetings.

Some plans developed.Mostly copied from previousversions and not adapted tonew conditions. Little informa-tion communicated outsidemanagement or HSE function.Pre-job meetings routine. HSErequirement occasionallyincluded in operational plans,usually as afterthought.

No plans developed for healthsafety, environmental securityissues. HSE requirements notincluded in operational plans.No performance targets. Pre-job meetings driven byexternal demand.

5.2 Asset Integrity

All HSE issues related to facilities and equipment clearly identified, understoodand communicated to concerned parties.Modifications to equipmentcontrolled. Effective bottom-up process in place toupgrade design and maintenance programs.

Effective maintenance programs in place, focused onHSE-critical requirements.HSE integral part of facilityand equipment or develop-ment. Facilities, equipmentand products fit for purposeand comply with their designspecifications.

Maintenance programdefined, not fully implemented. Not all equipment and products comply with specifications.

HSE issues not fully evaluatedor addressed at design or purchasing stage. No proac-tive maintenance program inplace. Equipment routinelyused with HSE deficiencies.

5.3 Procedures andWork Instructions

All critical activities identified,documented and reviewed toassess HSE implications. Fullunderstanding of potentialimpact of simultaneous oper-ations and controls in place.All operations conducted toreduce risks at all times. HSErisks clearly communicated toall staff involved in operation.Operations personnel initiatedocument modifications.

HSE implications of most critical processes understoodand controlled. Work practicesconsider most HSE risks. Goodcommunication of HSE risks tostaff. Simultaneous operationsunderstood and some controlsin place. Defined processexists for development andreview of standards.

Critical processed requiring written procedures not wellunderstood. Work practices notwell aligned with operationalrisk reduction. Local proceduresnot documented or updated. Notall staff aware of HSE issues.Little understanding of impact ofsimultaneous processes andfew controls in place.

Critical activities requiringwritten procedures not identified or understood.Some procedures/instructionsexist and are known to super-visors. Inconsistently usedand enforced. Documentswritten by HSE personnel withno employee input.

5.4 Management ofChange

Analysis and documentation ofHSE impacts due to changes inlegislation, personnel, equip-ment, process, procedures oracquisitions are an integral partof all change control procedures.Analysis and documentationcompleted for both implementingthe change and the impact of theimplemented change.Amendments made to HSEMSso that these changes do notprejudice HSE performance.

Change control proceduresexist documenting evaluation,approval and the responsibili-ties and competencies ofthose involved.

There is a change control procedure but its scope is notclearly described and its application is not consistent.

Changes to approved plans(cost, time, resources) areapproved one level up andonly formally documented andapproved when required byfinancial controls.

5.5 Emergency Response

All Emergency ResponsePlans (ERPs) in place. Drillsheld and plans tested on regular basis. Improvementsare incorporated andchecked. Minutes availablefrom debriefings.

All ERP,s in place includingspill contingency. Not regularly drilled or tested.Roles understood by responsible persons.

Some ERPs in place.Regulatory emergencyresponse requirements aremet. Medevac access tested.

Only Medevac in place.Emergency Response Plans(ERPs) only explained in briefings and courses, nottested or drilled.

5 Planning

HS&E considerations shall be integral to all aspects of business planning or changes in the design,development, and delivery of our products and services.

• Take each statement one at a time. Start with Level 1 and mark off the box when all aspects of the description are met everywhere in the area under

consideration. Move up to the next level and do the same until a level is reached where the description does not represent what is happening.

Then stop and leave that box clear. Make a note of the particular area(s) that prevents achievement of that level.

AssessmentCriteria





5.1 HSE Planning





5.2 Asset Integrity




















5 Planning





AssessmentCriteria





5.1 HSE Planning





5.2 Asset Integrity




















5 Planning





AssessmentCriteria





met. Medevac access tested.

6.1 Inspections

Continual development andrevision of checklists andschedule to meet changingrequirements. Importance ofinspections fully accepted atall levels of management.Effective schedule targeted atcritical areas.

Full complement of customchecklists with publishedinspection schedule. Crossdepartment inspections.Significant deficiencies handled by action plantracked to closure. High level of compliance.

Broad spread of inspections.Mainly internal. Follow-up onimmediate remedial actiononly.

Some inspections conductedwith no structure. No follow-up. Many deficiencies.

6.2 Records

Records for HSE measure-ments are available on locations and trends areopenly discussed as part ofthe improvement process.Proactive approach to simplify records as much as possible.

Systematic collection of data with few minor omis-sions. Some review of data to check trends and createuseful statistics.

Some collection of data withmajor omissions. Difficult to access and no analysisconducted.

Monitoring system for HSEperformance not fullydescribed and driven by legislation. Poor and incomplete records kept.

6.3 PerformanceMonitoring

Numerical performance indicators and target are usedto measure the implementa-tion of the elements andexpectations of the HSEMS.HSE performance frequentlyreviewed internally and resultsfed back to work force andused as input to continuousimprovement process. HSEMSimplementation included inemployee appraisal.

Good presentation of data in an accumulative and comparative way, allowinganalysis of trends and concerns. Some data basedon perception. Data analysis isinput into HSE objectives andwork plans.

Reactive performance measurements are collectedbut not for HSEMS activities.No analysis of results.Locations have completedtheir first review assessmentof their HSEMS.

Health Safety andEnvironmental ManagementSystem (HSEMS) being implemented but measure-ments that show that activitiesare being performed satisfac-torily are not yet available

6.4 Non-compliance andCorrective Action

Employees anticipate anypotential need to deviate fromstandards and proceduresallowing sufficient time toconsider alternatives.Appropriate authorizationsare obtained for the variance.

There is a documented system for control of HSE critical procedures and standards known by thoseresponsible for followingthose procedures or standards. Records of variances and correct actionsexist.

Few instances of non-compli-ance are recorded and theprocedure for approving variance is poorly defined orimpractical. Few revisions toprocedures and standards to prevent recurrence.

Procedures describing whatmust be done in the event on non-compliance with procedures, standards or legislation are known but notdocumented.

6.5 Incident Reportingand Follow Up

Line management activelyleads at all levels incidentreporting, investigation andreview. All reports entered indatabase. Alerts issued.Accountabilities assigned andtracked to closure. Employeessuggest improvements to theprocess.

Reporting and investigationprocess is well understoodand applied to high potentialnear misses. Supervisorstrained in and direct incidentinvestigations. Employeeinvolvement. Lessons are disseminated.

Procedures for reporting andinvestigating incidents. HSEpersonnel and supervisorsundertake investigations butlimited employee involvement.Causal analysis incomplete.Near hit reporting poor. Aprocess is documented forrecommendation tracking butmany are outstanding

Only major incidents arereported and investigated.HSE personnel only conduct investigations. No line management involvement.Findings disseminated poorly,mostly local, no remedialaction tracking

6 Implementation, Recording and Monitoring

Do what you said you would do, determine and record whether those actions are effective. Activities shall be conducted in accordance with definedstandards, and continuous improvement shall be promoted and monitored through active employee participation.

7

Is the Management System achieving results and fulfilling policy intent? Audits and reviews shallbe conducted to verify the implementation and effectiveness of the HS&E Management System.

AssessmentCriteria





met. Medevac access tested.

6.1 Inspections

Continual development andrevision of checklists andschedule to meet changingrequirements. Importance ofinspections fully accepted atall levels of management.Effective schedule targeted atcritical areas.

Full complement of customchecklists with publishedinspection schedule. Crossdepartment inspections.Significant deficiencies handled by action plantracked to closure. High level of compliance.

Broad spread of inspections.Mainly internal. Follow-up onimmediate remedial actiononly.

Some inspections conductedwith no structure. No follow-up. Many deficiencies.

6.2 Records

Records for HSE measure-ments are available on locations and trends areopenly discussed as part ofthe improvement process.Proactive approach to simplify records as much as possible.

Systematic collection of data with few minor omis-sions. Some review of data to check trends and createuseful statistics.

Some collection of data withmajor omissions. Difficult to access and no analysisconducted.

Monitoring system for HSEperformance not fullydescribed and driven by legislation. Poor and incomplete records kept.

6.3 PerformanceMonitoring

Numerical performance indicators and target are usedto measure the implementa-tion of the elements andexpectations of the HSEMS.HSE performance frequentlyreviewed internally and resultsfed back to work force andused as input to continuousimprovement process. HSEMSimplementation included inemployee appraisal.

Good presentation of data in an accumulative and comparative way, allowinganalysis of trends and concerns. Some data basedon perception. Data analysis isinput into HSE objectives andwork plans.

Reactive performance measurements are collectedbut not for HSEMS activities.No analysis of results.Locations have completedtheir first review assessmentof their HSEMS.

Health Safety andEnvironmental ManagementSystem (HSEMS) being implemented but measure-ments that show that activitiesare being performed satisfac-torily are not yet available

6.4 Non-compliance andCorrective Action

Employees anticipate anypotential need to deviate fromstandards and proceduresallowing sufficient time toconsider alternatives.Appropriate authorizationsare obtained for the variance.

There is a documented system for control of HSE critical procedures and standards known by thoseresponsible for followingthose procedures or standards. Records of variances and correct actionsexist.

Few instances of non-compli-ance are recorded and theprocedure for approving variance is poorly defined orimpractical. Few revisions toprocedures and standards to prevent recurrence.

Procedures describing whatmust be done in the event on non-compliance with procedures, standards or legislation are known but notdocumented.

6.5 Incident Reportingand Follow Up

Line management activelyleads at all levels incidentreporting, investigation andreview. All reports entered indatabase. Alerts issued.Accountabilities assigned andtracked to closure. Employeessuggest improvements to theprocess.

Reporting and investigationprocess is well understoodand applied to high potentialnear misses. Supervisorstrained in and direct incidentinvestigations. Employeeinvolvement. Lessons are disseminated.

Procedures for reporting andinvestigating incidents. HSEpersonnel and supervisorsundertake investigations butlimited employee involvement.Causal analysis incomplete.Near hit reporting poor. Aprocess is documented forrecommendation tracking butmany are outstanding

Only major incidents arereported and investigated.HSE personnel only conduct investigations. No line management involvement.Findings disseminated poorly,mostly local, no remedialaction tracking

6 Implementation, Recording and Monitoring

Do what you said you would do, determine and record whether those actions are effective. Activities shall be conducted in accordance with definedstandards, and continuous improvement shall be promoted and monitored through active employee participation.

7


AssessmentCriteria





5


Accountabilities assigned andtracked to closure. Employees

limited employee involvement.

recommendation tracking but

,

7.1 Audits

Annual audit process fullyimplemented. Significantpoints acted upon on a regular basis. Obviousimprovement brought aboutby audit process.Management, supervisorsand HSE personnel fullyinvolved in process.

Audit process is defined andimplemented. Managers andSupervisors take ownershipof the audit process.Recommendations driveaction plan. Audit recommen-dations are documented andtracked to closure within allocated time frame.

Audit conducted. Audit tracking system not functioning effectively.Recommendations not followed up.

No formal management system audit conducted inlast year. HSE personnel conduct audits focusing onhardware and housekeeping.

7.2 Reviews

Senior management reviewthe effectiveness of theSafety Management Systemfollowing a defined processand implement the conclusions. There is impacton corporate systems andprocedures based on riskexposure, stakeholders andthe business environment.

There is a defined process forformal and regular review ofthe Safety ManagementSystem effectiveness andHS&E performance

Reviews conducted inresponse to external pressure. Senior managementinitiates HSEMS modificationsdue to incidents or failure tomeet regulatory requirements.

No scheduled formal reviewstaking place.

7 Audit and Review (Assessment and Continuous Improvement)


Version 1, 2005

AssessmentCriteria





5


Accountabilities assigned andtracked to closure. Employees

limited employee involvement.

recommendation tracking but

,

7.1 Audits

Annual audit process fullyimplemented. Significantpoints acted upon on a regular basis. Obviousimprovement brought aboutby audit process.Management, supervisorsand HSE personnel fullyinvolved in process.

Audit process is defined andimplemented. Managers andSupervisors take ownershipof the audit process.Recommendations driveaction plan. Audit recommen-dations are documented andtracked to closure within allocated time frame.

Audit conducted. Audit tracking system not functioning effectively.Recommendations not followed up.

No formal management system audit conducted inlast year. HSE personnel conduct audits focusing onhardware and housekeeping.

7.2 Reviews

Senior management reviewthe effectiveness of theSafety Management Systemfollowing a defined processand implement the conclusions. There is impacton corporate systems andprocedures based on riskexposure, stakeholders andthe business environment.

There is a defined process forformal and regular review ofthe Safety ManagementSystem effectiveness andHS&E performance

Reviews conducted inresponse to external pressure. Senior managementinitiates HSEMS modificationsdue to incidents or failure tomeet regulatory requirements.

No scheduled formal reviewstaking place.

7 Audit and Review (Assessment and Continuous Improvement)


Version 1, 2005