????%20HSE%20MS%20Audit

1
???? HSE MS Audit ??? 2001
SIEP EP-HSE
2
Agenda

• Team introduction
• Background
• Terms of Reference for the Audit
• Audit methodology
• Reporting
• Schedule

3
Team Members

• ???? SIEP EP-HSE (Audit Leader)

4
Group HSE Policy
Every Shell company

• has a systematic approach to HSE management,
  designed to ensure compliance with the law and to
  achieve continuous performance improvement
• sets targets for improvement and measures,
  appraises and reports on performance
• requires contractors to manage HSE in line with
  this policy
• requires joint ventures under its operational
  control to apply this policy, and uses its
  influence to promote it in its other ventures
• includes HSE performance in the appraisal of all
  staff and rewards accordingly.

5
HSE Performance

• There must always be a gap between aspirations
  and performance But a gap between policy and
  performance is unacceptable
• Phil Watts - Shell EP HSE Conference 22
  September 1997

6
Terms of Reference

• Objective
• To appraise the quality and completeness of the
  HSE MS in ???? and the adequacy and effectiveness
  of its implementation
• ScopeHSE MS implementation activities for all
  ???? Bus, and their contractors.Special
  attention will be given to
• Adherence to Group and Company HSE policies
• Adherence to Group Minimum Environmental
  Expectations
• Processes for the identification of HSE-related
  legislative requirements, their dissemination,
  and for confirming adherence to them

7
Audit scope

• Scope continued
• Identification of roles, responsibilities and
  competency requirements for HSE critical
  activities
• Implementation of HSE training programmes to
  close competency gaps for those carrying out of
  HSE critical activities
• Effectiveness in HSE data and document management
  and HSE performance monitoring
• Availability and effectiveness procedures for the
  identification, assessment and control of all
  significant hazards and effects including the
  demonstration of ALARP
• Adequacy of emergency response and contingency
  plans
• Confirmation that findings from audits,
  inspections and incident investigations have been
  satisfactorily addressed
• Adequacy of the process for preparation and
  validation of the HSE Annual Letter submitted to
  the ExCom

8
Standards

• The Audit will be conducted against the following
  standards
• Laws and regulations of ????
• ???? policies and procedures
• EP 95-0000
• The Audit may also include comments on any
  shortfall in the above in relation to generally
  accepted Shell and industry standards

Audit will be conducted in accordance with
methodology in EP95 0130 (December 1999)
9
HEMP
Leadership and Commitment
ASSESS
IDENTIFY
HEMP
RECOVER
CONTROL
HSE Management System
Hazard and Effects Management Process
10
HSE MANAGEMENT
Barriers or Controls
Hazard/ Risk
WORK
Undesirable outcome
11
SIEP-led Audit Focus
HAZARD
1 verification that structured risk assessment
has been applied to the key (HSE) risk elements
of the facility or activity
2 sample whether these risks have been
appropriately assessed and the correct controls
have been identified
3 Sample whether these controls are adequately
implemented and complied with
12
Classification of Findings

• Each Finding is categorised as follows
• 1. Category
• People (P) Assets (A) Environment (E) or
  Reputation (R)
• 2. Severity level (from Weakness Classification
  Matrix)
• Serious (S) High (H) Medium (M) or Low (L)
• 3. Each Finding is assigned to one HSE MS element
• 4. A Finding is accompanied by the Significance
  and one or more recommendations to address the gap

13
Weakness Classification Matrix
A
B
C
D
E
Environ- ment
Repu- tation
Happens several times a year in the audited OU
Happens several times a year in the audited
facility
People
Assets
Severity
Never heard of in EP industry
Has occurred in EP industry
Has occurred in the audited OU
No injury
No damage
No effect
No impact
0

• 123

Low
Slight impact
Slight injury
Slight damage
Slight effect
1
Minor injury
Minor damage
Minor effect
Minor impact
2
Medium
Consider- able impact
Major injury
Local damage
Localised effect
3
High
Single fatality
Major damage
Major effect
National impact
4
Serious
Inter- national impact
Extensive damage
Multiple fatalities
Massive effect
5
14
Audit Assessment
Level of concern Specific No follow-up required
by auditees function head (IAC member) Level of
concern Overall scope for enhancement In
addition to following up correction of any High
or Medium weaknesses the function head should
encourage general improvement in controls
awareness
Good
Fair
15
Audit Assessment
Level of concern Overall cause for concern In
addition to following up correction of any
Serious, High or Medium weaknesses the function
head should take affirmative action to ensure
that control standards in this area are raised
Level of concern Overall cause for grave
concern In addition to following up correction of
any Serious, High or Medium weaknesses the
function head should satisfy the senior
management team concerning affirmative action to
raise control standards in this area
UnsatisfactoryPoor
Unacceptable
16
Revised Audit Opinion
Key F few lt20 My many gt40
Findings Most Favourable Opinion S H
M HM Unacc. Unsat. Fair Good
/ Poor
0 0 0/F - ? 0 0
My - ? 0 F
F - ? 0 F F/My My
? 1-2 - - - ? 0
My - - ? gt2 - -
- ?
17
HSE MS Self Assessment Questionnaire
18
HSE-MS Sub Element Assessment
System sustained and supported by an ongoing
improvement process and essentially all elements
satisfied. System functioning and being
verified, results being measured, key system
procedures documented. System is documented,
approved, resourced and being implemented with
priority objectives satisfied and the majority of
objectives being met. System is under
development and partially implemented.
4
3
2
1
19
EP-HSE Audit Method

• Audit of HSE MS, fully covering H, S and E
• Sampling Process
• Questionnaire based

20
Structure of Questionnaires

• Generic Questionnaire (common to all HSE Audits)
• Leadership Commitment
• Policy Strategic Objectives
• Organisation, Responsibilities, Resources,
  Contractor Management.
• Communications, HSE-MS Documentation,
  Standards Change Control
• Hazards and Effects Management
• Planning Procedures
• Implementation Monitoring
• Audit
• Management Review

Subsidiary Questionnaire Facilities
Subsidiary Questionnaire Facilities
Subsidiary Questionnaire Drilling
Subsidiary Questionnaire Seismic
Subsidiary Questionnaire Start-Up
Subsidiary Questionnaire Environment
Subsidiary Questionnaire Health
21
EP-HSE Audit Method

• Focus on Risk
• OU Staff involved
• Based on OU / Contractor standards
• Bottom up Approach
• Significance breadth of findings
• Assessment of the 33 HSE MS sub elements of the
  HSE MS Self Assessment Questionnaire (levels 1-4)
• Follow up OU responsibility

• Audit of HSE MS, fully covering H, S and
• Sampling Process
• Questionnaire based

22
Audit Process
Familiarisation
Review Testing
Reporting
23
HSE Audit Overview

• Auditors will
• operate in pairs (sometimes three)
• make an appointment to see you
• no surprise visits
• try to make it as easy as possible
• be only interested in facts, not speculation
• (interested in your view in how to improve)
• possibly use a questionnaire in the interview
• ask open ended questions
• like How .., In what way
• interview a vertical slice of the organization
• look for the good as well as the less than
  adequate

24
Report Index

• 1 Introduction
• 2 Executive Summary
• Audit opinion and justification
• HSE MS element summary
• 3 Audit Findings and Recommendations
• HSE Management System (Tables)
• Subsection for each of HSE-MS sub elements
• Appendices
• Definitions of Audit opinion and classification
• Classified recommended actions
• Terms of Reference
• Abbreviations
• HSE MS sub element assessment

25
Report Principles

• Report is SIEP advice under TSA
• OU remains owner of EP report
• Report is collective view of team
• no reference to sources
• whole team review whole report
• facts reported are as agreed by all the team
• judgements are by consensus as far as practicable
• wording agreed to as to intended meaning
• Audit leader has casting vote in case of
  disagreement
• where possible, root causes identified
• Final draft report before team disbands
• no later changes, only minor (punctuation,
  grammar) editing in CO
• final report within two weeks

26
Audit Schedule
27
End Opening Briefing