RESEARCH REPORT 086 - Health and Safety Executive

1 HSE Health & Safety Executive Competence assessment for the hazardous industries Prepared by greenstreet Berman Ltd for the Health and Safety Executive 2003 RESEARCH REPORT 086 HSE Health & Safety Executive Competence assessment for the hazardous industries Michael Wright, David Turner and Caroline Horbury greenstreet Berman Ltd First Base Gillette Way Reading Berkshire RG2 0BS COMAH duty holders recognise the importance of experienced and competent staff. With the implementation of the Control of Major Accident Hazard Regulations 1999 (COMAH) on April 1st 1999, it is no longer acceptable to make untested assumptions about staff competence.

2 The Health and Safety Executive have developed Safety REPORT assessment guidance that asks for a competence assurance system that includes the setting of appropriate competence standards, assessment and reassessment of competence. The HSE also ask that there be a specific link between identified Safety critical tasks and a targeted comprehensive management system. This REPORT provides (1) a review of current practice, (2) a view of what comprises good practice in the field of competence assessment in relation to major accident prevention, and (3) a body of advice, checklists and examples of assessment.

3 The REPORT has drawn together experience, standards and lessons learnt from a number of high hazard industries, particularly chemicals, offshore, nuclear and aviation. It has also given due regard to the guidance on competence assessment laid out by personnel specialists, national certification bodies and institutes. This REPORT and the work it describes were funded by the HSE. Its contents, including any opinions and/or conclusions expressed, are those of the authors alone and do not necessarily reflect HSE policy. HSE BOOKS Crown copyright 2003 First published 2003 ISBN 0 7176 2167 7 All rights reserved.

4 No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means (electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise) without the prior written permission of the copyright owner. Applications for reproduction should be made in writing to: Licensing Division, Her Majesty's Stationery Office, St Clements House, 2-16 Colegate, Norwich NR3 1BQ or by e-mail to ii CONTENTS Executive vii - xvi1 COMAH AND COMPETENCE ASSESSMENT ..1 Lessons learnt from past COMAH requirements ..2 The role of competence assessment.

5 3 HSE feedback on current OVERVIEW OF THIS REPORT ..5 2 A REVIEW OF CURRENT WHAT IS COMPETENCE ASSESSMENT?..7 HUMAN RESOURCES General principles of competence assessment ..9 The role of national 14 Safety RELATED COMPET ENCE Case Studies .. 16 Competence assessment in other high-hazard 19 Comparison of Safety and general HR practices .. 22 Areas for improvement .. 23 3 COMPETENCE ASSESSMEN T FOR MAJOR ACCIDENT PREVENTION .. 25 AIMS OF COMPETENCE OVERVIEW OF MANAGING COMPETENCE ASSESSMENT ..30 IDENTIFICATION OF Safety CRITICAL TASKS / What is a Safety critical task?

6 32 To what extent is this task or job Safety critical?.. 32 Identifying Safety critical 33 COMPETENCE STANDARDS AND ASSESSMENT CRITERI Format of competence standard and assessment criteria .. 34 Task and knowledge 34 iii Identifying and defining key 35 Setting the standard and assessment criteria .. 38 Examples of competence standards and assessment 41 National standards and 43 SELECTING THE METHOD OF ASSESSMENT / FORM OF Overview .. 45 Key 45 Assessor 49 ONGOING ASSESSMENT ..50 RESPONDING TO SUB-STANDARD EXAMPLE OF COMPETENCE ASSESSMENT 4 SELF-ASSESSMENT CHEC 55 5 COMPETENCE ASSESSMEN T EXAMPLES.

7 61 PROCESS PLANT MAINTENANCE Identify Safety Critical Task .. 61 Task 61 Types of Competencies .. 62 Competence Standards and Assessment 62 Assessment Method .. 63 Ongoing 64 EMERGENCY RESPONSE Identify Safety critical task .. 64 Task 65 Types of competencies .. 65 Competence 66 Assessment Method .. 67 Ongoing 69 OPERATIONS TEAM Identify a Safety critical task .. 70 Task 70 Types of Competencies .. 70 Competence Standards and 72 Assessment Method .. 72 Ongoing 74 iv FIELD Identification of Safety critical tasks for assessment.

8 75 Task 75 Types of competencies .. 75 Competence Standards and Assessment 76 Assessment 76 Ongoing 78 6 CONCLUSIONS .. 79 7 REFERENCES .. 81 APPENDIX A CASE STUDY SUMMARIES v vi Executive SUMMARY Background - why competence assessment? Why is competence assessment considered important? Firstly, review of past major incidents (such as the Longford explosion summarised below) indicates that the lack of certain skills or knowledge has led to errors that contributed to the incident. In each case, it had been assumed that an individual with a certain level of experience or training would be competent and/ or that the dissemination of a procedure would be sufficient.

9 In addition, the concern about competence is further increased by the move towards multi-skilling, delayering and downsizing. Staff are increasingly expected to take on a wider range of responsibilities with less supervision. This increases the need to check competence. The Longford explosion The most recent example entails the Esso Gas Plant explosion in Longford, Australia, wherein the loss of oil circulation resulted in the plant getting colder followed by the rupture of a heat exchanger on restart due to cold metal embrittlement. The inquiry concluded that there was ample evidence that operators did not appreciate the dangers of cold metal embrittlement despite being trained about it.

10 The inquiry reports that operators were tested during training modules and that in the event of incorrect answers further coaching was provided. However, after coaching the re-assessment comprised asking the operator if they now understood the matter. If the operator indicated they understood the matter it was ticked off. According to operators it took courage to say you did not understand the re-explanation. The Commission found, during questioning, that operators still did not see what was wrong with their answers. In addition, the inquiry found that operators gave answers without actually understanding them.