human factors and competence - step change in safety june hf... · x bow ties x technical safety...

Human Factors and Competence 11th June 2015

Emily Taylor

SPONSORED BY

MR. MANOJ KUMAR NHS

SPONSORED BY

• Mr. Kumar has requested that his slides are omitted from distribution due to confidentiality issues. Please contact Emily [email protected] if you would like further information

mailto:[email protected]

GEORGE PETRIE ALLAN ERRINGTON

TOTAL & ESS

SPONSORED BY

© Marc Roussel / Total

UNDERSTANDING PRECURSORS TO MAJOR ACCIDENT HAZARD

EVENTS USING SAFETY CRITICAL TASK ANALYSIS

TOTAL E&P APPROACH TO HUMAN FACTORS

STEP CHANGE IN SAFETY - PERSPECTIVE EVENT

JUNE 2015

George Petrie, MSc, CErgHF, CMIOSH, RSP, MIIRSM

Lead Human Factors Engineer, Consulting on behalf of Total E&P UK Ltd

INTRODUCTION

Why are TOTAL E&P UK taking this approach?

How are we doing it?

How far are we on the journey?

Challenges along the way.

TOTAL E&P UK future plans

TOTAL E&P UK – OVERVIEW

● Onshore

• St Fergus, built in 1977

• Shetland Gas Plant (SGP), new gas plant

still under construction.

● Offshore

• Alwyn (1987) and Dunbar (1994)

• Elgin (2001), Franklin (1999) - new

platform at West Franklin (2014).

APPROACH FROM TOTAL E&P UK

• TOTAL E&P UK follow the HSE Human Factor roadmap

approach and alignment with step change HF topics.

MAJOR ACCIDENT HAZARD SCENARIOS

TEPUK Service Order 4200058937.

C Ramsay: D:\13C-Proj\C-13-279-TEP-SCT\Graphics\TEPUK-Wshop-MAH-SCT-Alignment-v05.vsd

Step 1.1 - Compile and Review MAH Data Sources

Step 1.2 - Identify Major Accident Hazards (MAH)Step 1.5 - Compile and Review

SCT Data Sources

Step 1.3 - Identify Gaps in Initial MAH List

Step 1.8 - Map the SCTs to the Barriers and

their Performance Standards

Initial

MAH List

Expanded

MAH List

Step 1.6 - Identify Safety Critical Tasks (SCTs)

Step 1.7 - Identify Gaps in Initial SCT List

Initial

SCT List

Expanded

SCT List

Step 1.9 - Categorise the Safety Critical Tasks (by Potential Impact on Barriers)

· Category 1 (Higher Impact): SCTs affecting MAH Prevention Barriers

· Category 2 (Medium Impact): SCTs affecting MAH Control & Mitigation Barriers

· Category 3 (Lower Impact): SCTs affecting MAH Escalation Control & Mitigation Barriers.

Barrier Data

· Nature of barrier.

· Performance standards.

Hazard-Initiating Events

· Nature of risk sources.

Existing Source Data for MAHs

· COMAH / OSCR Safety Case

· Bow Ties

· Technical Safety Studies (HAZID, PHA, FERA, EERA, HAZOP, SIL, SimOps, ComOps)

· L3 Operations Manual (design HAZOP)

· Procedures & TOI (Temporary Operating Instructions)

· SCE-MAH Matrix

· PFDs, P&IDs, Isometrics

· QRA (use of OGP QRA HF Process)

· Incidents and Lessons Learned (in-company, sector and cross-industry)

· Other sources.

Quality of Source Data?

· Are data current/ as-built/ as-modified?

· Are data comprehensive and consistent?

· Are assumptions clear and valid?

Existing Source Data for SCTs

· Operations

· List of L4 Procedures (operations and interventions)

· Lists from other sites’ Safety Critical Task Analyses (SCTA)

· Inspection, Testing & Maintenance

· List of L4 Procedures and SWI

· List of Main Work Activities in SAP

· Lists from other sites’ Safety Critical Task Analyses (SCTA)

· Performance Standards

· Other sources.

Processes to Identify MAH Gaps

· Systematic logical processes

· Creative lateral processes (eg ‘Rumsfeld’ Matrix on Levels of Knowledge Awareness)

Check for Missing SCTs

against All Installation-Related Activities having a

Human Component (physical or mental), such as:

· Activities (Tasks & Procedures) for maintaining a safe operating envelope (in normal, abnormal, upset and emergency conditions).

· Activities requiring breaching of the normal pressure-containment envelope (eg receiving a pig; eg well intervention).

· Activities involving Inspection, Testing, Maintenance & Repair.

· Activities involving safety critical communications (eg shift handover; eg well handover, eg combined operations).

· Activities for emergency preparedness and response.

· Activities for identifying, storing and communicating safety-critical information.

· Activities for change management (including organisational change, such as manning levels and reporting lines).

· Activities to assure a safe working environment (including avoidance of fatigue).

· Activities for managing risk across interfaces.

· Activities for management of competency.

· Other relevant activities, especially those by Management (eg to avoid Management or Organisational failure).

Step1.4 - Define & Describe the MAH Scenarios

11

STREAMLINING THE

ANALYSIS AND ENGAGING

WORKFORCE

• Process reduced from

approx (19-24) days to (8

1/2 – 11) days

• Workforce actively engaged

at each step in the process

and across all 5 shifts

• Analysis carried out by

internal HF support,

External consultants are

now minimised.

• Approx 55 L4 procedures

have been removed from

CMS as no longer required.

• The process has identified

MAH scenarios that were

previously not understood

as well as possible MATTEs

and business impacts.

Phase 2 – Old Process

Op

era

tors

/

Te

ch

nic

ian

s

Ex

tern

al H

F

Co

ns

ult

an

t

Inte

rna

l

En

gin

ee

rin

g

Su

pp

ort

Screening

Workshop run by

external

consultants

1 day 3 days 15 – 20 days

Phase 2 – New Process

Inte

rna

l H

um

an

Fa

cto

rs S

up

po

rt

Inte

rna

l

En

gin

ee

rin

g

Su

pp

ort

Workshop run by external consultants

Short HF briefing

Task Analysis

Human Error

Analysis

Site walk-through carried out for Performance Influencing Factors (PIF) with External/

Internal HF support

Revision of procedures, carried out by central operations resource and sent to

operators /Technicians for review

Final update carried out by central resource

Step 2.1 – Operators and technicians trained in Safety Critical Task Analysis (SCTA) process.

Step 2.2 – Operators, technicians and internal engineering support involved in screening process.

3 days ½ - 1 day 5 – 7 days

Step 2.3 – Allocated procedure is copied to worksheet and reviewed/commented on by operators/ technicians to ensure it is aligned to current site process.

Step 2.3 – Task sheet is reviewed by internal HF support and comments and/or questions added prior to workshop.

Step 2.4 – Workshop run by internal HF support.

Task Analysis carried out with allocated shift.

Human Error Analysis.

Step 2.5 – Actions identified.

Step 2.6 – Site walk-through for Performance Influencing Factors (PIF).

Step 2.7 – Allocated procedure is updated by operators/ technicians and sent to other shifts for review. Final update is completed by allocated shift. Any simple actions are carried out by that shift (e.g. valve tags).

Step 2.8 – Review of training and competency carried out with reference to updated procedure.

Ex

tern

al H

F

Co

ns

ult

an

t

Op

era

tors

/

Te

ch

nic

ian

s

Inte

rna

l H

um

an

Fa

cto

rs S

up

po

rt

12

2015 HUMAN FACTORS STATUS

Asset Total SCT High Medium Low

St Fergus

(operations)

(Maintenance and inspection)

161

126

35

67

38

29

58

52

6

36

36

NNS 67 32 27 8

CGA

(operations)


80 49

37

12

30

15

15

19

SGP

(operations)


20

6

14

6

14

St Fergus Operations - Current focus on Safety Critical Tasks

14

EXAMPLES OF NEW PROCEDURES

STOP /HOLD PIONTS SHE&I NOTES

St Fergus Maintenance - Current focus on Safety

Critical Tasks

Current focus for

Maintenance

Maintenance Task Notes Criticality rating

Internal inspection activities on pig

receiver

High

Remove, maintain and reinstate

PSVs

High

Routine maintenance of BDVs High

Corrective maintenance of BDVs Not instruments High

Maintenance and inspection of

vessels

High

Isolate and maintain standby

generator and ancillary equipment

High

Maintain pumps High

Test & Calibrate HIPPS/OPPS

transmitters and valves

High

Maintenance and testing of safety

critical instrument loops

High

Maintain fire pumps High

Naked flame work onsite 3rd party

contractor

High

St Fergus Maintenance – Example of tasks analysis for instruments

AS FOUND FLAME OUT TEST

Step Activity IT CR

On the DCS & PSS confirm the detector status is

displayed as healthy. O O

Ensure input function under test is inhibited at the

logic input on the PSS before proceeding. □ □ Request operations to close the burner valve

associated with the detector. Verify loop flame

amplifier has operated and verify alarm/change of

status on DCS & PSS at the time the burner valve

has been closed. If alarm/status change does not

occur, record ‘As Found’ Fail. Record ‘As Found’ Pass / Fail result in results table:

□ □

STOP HOLD POINT:

Failure to carry out this step correctly could result in a Major

Accident Hazard. If not tested correctly, the UV detector may

not detect flame out in operation, leading to gas build up

within the furnace.

RESULTS Identification of critical tasks for

operations, maintenance and

vendors

Risk reduction MAH, MATTE,

Business Continuity

Efficiency

Reduction in procedures, limit non value work and downtime

Critical barriers and recovery

systems identified and improving

Alignment of checking and

audit functions to MAH scenarios

KEY LEARNING PIONTS

● Key learning points are;

Organisations need to be intelligent customers

Have a clear Human and Organisational Factors

strategy and a common methodology for

implementation

Focus on the Major Accident Hazards

Close the loop (from MAH scenarios right through to

training & competency)

Actively involve the workforce

CHALLENGES ALONG THE WAY

Integrate Human Factors into out day to day business

Ensure the workforce and management have sufficient

knowledge of Human Factors to contribute to the

process – step change toolkit used to reinforce HF

training

Actively involve employees (not just with consultants)

Must be fully integrated into projects and modifications.

Limited access to offshore locations- POB limitations

Onshore and offshore regulatory apparent

misalignment of priorities

STEP CHANGE HF TOOLKIT

Step change toolkit is integrated into the TEPUK

Human Factors program in the following areas;

Procedures, following the HF awareness training the

team can then review and score their current process

and can reinforce the plans to improve the updating of

procedures following SCTA.

Benchmarking, scores from offshore are benchmarked

against scores from other installations and also from

onshore – what “we in the office” think is in place vs

what the crews offshore understand is in place.

STEP CHANGE HF TOOLKIT

Screen shot taken at the start of the process for

procedures, entry from 79 people

TOTAL E&P – THE WAY FORWARD

Ongoing HF courses and awareness sessions planned in 2015, driven mainly by requests.

MAH scenario workshops planned for all the sites

Continue analysis of high risk tasks for onshore and offshore assets

Incorporate Environmental tasks i.e. MATTE, IPPC permit breaches.

Human Factor review of the Company Safety Management procedures (Barrier and Recovery).

Integration of HF into projects and Modifications, starting with Project concept/Select phases.

HF audits on “high risk” vendors from the SCTA e.g. PSVs.

23

Projects & Modifications

STILL ROOM FOR IMPROVEMENT

Operator

is 6ft 3

Impossible

to remove

filters without

cutting frame

Operations and maintenance employees intervened very quickly from a basis

of knowledge and highlighted all these issues..

Human Factors Online Toolkit

Conceive

Develop

Test

Implement

Analyze

ESS & Step Change in Safety – Why?

• Active member organisation within Step Change • Playing our part in development, communication

and adoption of common standards and good practice

• Mutually beneficial relationship for both ESS & Step Change in Safety

• Step Change tools an integral part of ESS HSEQ 3 Year Strategy

• Improved Workforce Engagement

Q1 Human Factors Toolkit As part of our annual activity calendar, utilisation of the Human Factors Toolkit plays a huge part in our strive for improved workforce engagement. The results from the questionnaires are analysed, with the findings forming a plan of action for focus and further development. This in turn will be reflected within the ongoing HSEQ strategy plans going forward. The following two slides show the key findings from Q1 Human Factors activities, Training & Competence and Procedures questionnaires.

Training & Competence – 72 respondents

40

53

14

51

32

19

58

15

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Have You ReceivedHuman Factors

Training?

Do you receive Trainingthat is well structured?

Have you ever beenasked to do something

you do not feelcompetent to do?

Does your trainingcover infrequentlyperformed tasks?

Yes No

• 44% of workfiorce have not received Human Factors training

• 19% of workforce have been asked to carry out a task without the competence to do so

• Focus required for infrequently performed tasks

Procedures – 44 respondents

32

24

12

20

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Do you have input to the procedures you areinvolved with?

Have you received training in how to write goodprocedures?

Yes No

• 45% of workforce have not received training in procedure writing

• 27% of workforce feel they have no input into the procedures they are involved with

Focus on Action & Improvement The following points are the headline topics drawn from the Human Factors questionnaire results for Q1. Once fully reviewed, all learnings will be incorporated within our strategy plans and ongoing activity calendars.

Training & Competence • Requirement for further Human Factors training – Managers &

Workforce • Review the structure of the training and the training delivery method • Re enforcement of Stop the Job protocols, evidence of employees

being asked to carry out tasks they do not feel competent enough to carry out.

• Focus on tasks performed infrequently

Procedures • Engagement required from all team members when following or

reviewing procedures • Procedural training a focus area for both managers and frontline staff

Q&A

George Petrie Allan Errington Paraic Faherty

Please be ready for the next session at 1030

Coffee Break

SPONSORED BY

DAVID WESTON Maggie Braid Associates

SPONSORED BY

Human Factors and Competence Management Systems

The Strongest and Weakest Link in the Chain

Human Factors

Raising Situational Awareness

“If you think adventure is dangerous, try routine; it is lethal” Paulo Coelho, author

The strongest and the weakest link

We are all Rule Breakers!

Source Speed Awareness Courses CII New Generation Underwriting Group November 2012 (Chartered Insurance Institute (CII))

Driver caught speeding

Over limit by between 10% of limit + 2 mph and 10% of Limit +

9mph

No Action Taken Fixed penalty notice

as minimum Driving offence

Fixed Penalty Notice ££ Fine and Points

Driving offence

Speed Awareness course ££ course costs No points

No driving offence

Over limit by <10% of limit +2 mph

Over limit by > 10% of limit + 9 mph

CMS

Organisation

Individual

Stakeholder

Regulator CMS

3rd Floor Regent Centre Regent Road Aberdeen AB11 5NS

01224 564999

www.maggiebraidassociates.com

DEREK HART IADC

SPONSORED BY

11th June 2015

GUIDANCE ON THE MANAGEMENT

OF 3rd PARTY COMPETENCE FOR

SAFETY CRITICAL POSITIONS

OFFSHORE

GUIDANCE ON THE MANAGEMENT OF 3rd PARTY

COMPETENCE FOR SAFETY CRITICAL POSITIONS OFFSHORE

• reduce the risk of incidents offshore

• verify that in addition to Drilling Contractor (DC) personnel all non-DC personnel onboard IADC NSC members’ rigs are also competent to carry out their assigned work task or tasks

• to assist IADC NSC members in their “Management of Third Party Competence for Safety Critical Roles” (as defined by the HSE’s HID Offshore Inspection Guide - Wells Personnel Competency Management System Inspection Guide).

Note: IADC NSC are only verifying competence that should already be ensured by the providing employer

Objectives:-



• verify as far as is reasonably practicable that Third Party personnel involved in safety critical positions provided to support offshore operations are competent to carry out the tasks and responsibilities required of them; and

• simplify and reduce the workload being placed on offshore OIM’s and other senior supervisors in the task of reviewing the competence of Third Party personnel attending members drilling units; and

• provide a consistent approach within our sector of the industry to ensure all Third Party employers and suppliers are aware of the Drilling Contractor’s requirements with respect to the competence of personnel they supply to support the offshore drilling operation

Drivers behind developing the guidance:-



we can extend this process to non-drilling safety critical

positions i.e. software engineers, towmasters etc.

Application :-

we can extend this process to non-drilling safety critical positions i.e. software engineers, towmasters etc.



• Rig Manager / Operations Manager – ensure this procedure is followed within their rig team including onshore support members of management and offshore supervisors.

• OIM – ensure this procedure is followed on board their rig.

• Hiring Manager / HR Manager / Personnel Manager (either DC or Client) - for initiating this process when deciding on mobilising agency or contractor personnel to work on board.

• Drilling Manager / Well Construction Manager (Client) - ensuring responsible management personnel within the client organisation complete the relevant sections of the Contractor Competence Review Form

Responsibilities:-



• Drilling Contractor Agency Personnel

• Drilling Contractor Service Personnel

• Client Personnel

• Client Contractors

Categories of personnel covered:-



• Contractor competence Review Form

• Onboard induction competence checklist

Paperwork involved:-

IAN BARTON Petrofac Training

SPONSORED BY

Introducing efficiencies to the training and competency

function

Presented by: Ian Barton

Training and Competency Project Manager

In an economic downturn, it is vital that we drive efficiencies without

compromising on critical safety or operational maintenance

• When was the last time you reviewed and evaluated the effectiveness of what you have in place?

• How can you ensure that you are managing your CMS effectively?

• How can you embrace innovation to drive efficiencies? • How might you achieve this?

Continue to provide the right level of training and competence

assurance

Allowing our people to

remain safe

And maintaining high levels of efficiency and productivity

By embracing innovation to

drive efficiencies

1. Ensure clarity of information and drive efficiencies through

training rationalisation

• Define clear objectives and KPI’s

• Heighten awareness of industry requirements

• Rationalise your training matrices

• Combine training solutions

• Consolidate spend by the integration of a TMS

• Carry out On the Job Training

• Deploy Mobile Trainers

2. Embrace new technologies and smart processes to

deliver efficiencies to your CMS

Software Based Solutions for your CMS

• Provide a transparent overview

• Monitor workforce competencies

• Manage the assessment process

• Track skill gap closure

• Forecast training needs

Visual understanding of real-time workforce competence

• Monitor the training budget

• Provide look ahead alerts

• Support course bookings

• Facilitate compliance audits

• Facilitate Talent Management

• Manage succession planning

• Facilitate dashboard reporting

• Reduce training costs

(Travel/Accommodation/Trainer)

• Easily accessible in almost any location.

• Engaging learning delivery

• High rates of retention

• Can be used as a blended learning solution

eLearning Solutions

• Repeatable

• Access is available 24/7/365

• Consistent, high quality training for all staff

• Easily managed from an LMS

eLearning Solutions

Other Technology Solutions

• Webinars

• On line tutorials

3. Ensure that your CMS meets the criteria against which you will

be measured

Have you had your CMS independently evaluated against

industry requirements?

How do you identify training

requirements?

Is your CMS endorsed by

senior management?

Do you have sufficient

qualified Assessors and

Verifiers?

Do standards cover all safety

critical roles?

Criteria might include…

Thank You

Ian Barton Project Manager Competency Solutions Petrofac Training Services [email protected]

PAULA SALISBURY Maersk Oil

SPONSORED BY

COMPETENCE MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK

Competence is fundamental to the protection

of people, assets and the environment

We need a ‘common’ industry wide approach to management & assurance of competence to ensure that we have the right knowledge, skills and experience across our industry

HASAWA 1974: employers duty to provide “information instruction, training and supervision as is necessary to ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable, the health and safety at work of his employees”

Intent of the competence management framework is to offer some guiding principles and standard definitions to establish and continuously improve a competence management system

Competence Management Framework

1

2

3

4

The Starting Point

• Alignment on what competence means ….

KNOWLEDGE SKILL

BEHAVIOUR

COMPETENCE

Key Principle #1 Competence = consistent demonstration and application of current, knowledge, skills and behaviour against a defined performance standard

Who is involved……

A Competency Management system aligns organisational needs with development needs of individuals within the organisation – a fundamental requirement in a high risk-high consequence industry

Key Principle #2 To succeed we need alignment across the industry and all levels of our organisations must be actively involved in the competence assurance process

Industry requirement to demonstrate competence to protect our people, our assets and the environment

Organisations must adopt competence management systems to provide the basis for safe, reliable operations

Individuals must commit to developing the required competence for their position

The Competence Assurance Process

Assessment of Capability

Ongoing Verification

Professional Assessment

Initial Assessment

Key Principle #3 To ensure competence remains current a reassessment process must be in place to take account of changes to people, processes or equipment

Perform & Verify Hiring Training

Assessed by Functional Expert

Assessed by Line Manager

Assessed by competent assessor (line manager/ technical expert) Verified by qualified and functionally-knowledgeable expert

CMS Components

Policy Setting & Objectives

Planning, Targets & Responsibilities

Standards, Procedures &

Implementation

Performance Review & Audit

Management Review

Key Principle #4 An effective competency management system is an integral part of any business management system and links closely to audit and assurance, HSE, business performance, human resources and daily operations

How effective is

your CMS?

Are standards/ procedures applied

consistently?

Do you have leadership support for your CMS?

Are responsibilities clear? Is there sufficient

resource?

What standards will you use? What procedures will

be included?

Competence Management

System

Feedback and Next Steps

Benefits of the Competence Management Framework:

• Ensures consistency across the industry

• Helps new organizations with initial induction to CMS

• StepChange recognizes the need for Competency

• Standardize competency across the industry, some companies are experts and invest heavily, others only pay lip service ….

• Not enough contractors taking Competency seriously.

• Worthwhile exercise ….. could be executed swiftly and shared

• Competency needs to recognised in the same breath as Safety

Suggestions for next steps:

Collect & share knowledge on Competency Systems

from across the industry - good points and bad

points / lessons learned

Develop a cross industry approach to safety critical

tasks

Identify and improve the competency requirements for those in safety critical roles undertaking safety

critical tasks

Q&A

George Petrie Allan Errington Paraic Faherty

Thank you for playing your part

SPONSORED BY

human factors and competence - step change in safety june hf... · x bow ties x technical safety...

Documents