Class Assignment 1

SCENARIO
You have a dual role as an experienced and respected Process Operator and a representative
of workers at a large, high hazard site, run by an international chemical manufacturing
organisation.
The organisation has a reputation for having a world-class health and safety culture, with many
other industries using them as a benchmark. It is a legally compliant organisation that sets clear
objectives and checks that they are met. It employs and retains motivated workers who are
aware of their clearly defined and documented responsibilities and want to continuously improve
in their roles. Absence and sickness rates are low. The organisation listens to workers when
they raise concerns and responds professionally to external customer complaints. The
organisation also takes pride in recording low accident and incident rates and investigating any
near misses to learn lessons and prevent more serious outcomes. Across the organisation there
are clear lines of internal and external communication. This allows effective resolution of
complaints. The organisation is fully insured even though the premium is high. The organisation
conducts frequent internal audits and is also externally audited.
The process you operate is running at a reduced production rate, due to a technical problem
with a large storage tank containing a highly toxic product. You have an idea what the problem
is, but knowing the limits of your authority, you feel the issue should be escalated to someone
more senior. Local site managers, engineers, supervisors and operators meet to discuss the
situation. They conclude that the tank has an internal blockage, that would normally require a
complete process shutdown to clear. However, the planned maintenance shutdown is 12-
months away. They decide to seek advice from the corporate management team to explore
whether there is a different solution that would resolve the blockage problem, but keep
production going.
The local site and corporate management teams meet by video conference. The corporate
management team includes a very experienced senior engineer with 25-years’ company
service. This engineer has overseen process plant modifications, at many international sites,
with zero lost time incidents. They all agreed that modifications could safely be made to the
tank, without the need to shut it down, and that the necessary resources would be made
available for this work.
The senior engineer is sent to the site to advise on, and manage, the changes that are needed
to the tank; and on the day of arrival presents a solution to you. You are unfamiliar with the
technology to be used for the modification and your reaction is one of disbelief, and you politely
ask if the engineer is serious. The engineer invites you to a meeting to conduct a systematic
and detailed risk assessment of the tank modification task. The Health and Safety Adviser,
worker representatives and Plant Manager will also be at the meeting.
At the meeting, the engineer introduces the proposed tank modification and leads the risk
assessment exercise. The risk assessment includes consideration of the highly toxic chemical,
the release of which would be catastrophic for workers, as well as people in adjacent
businesses, residential houses and schools. The engineer confirms that this proposed
modification method is a safe and widely used solution where the safety improvements are
worth the cost. The risk assessment then continues with discussion and agreement on risk
evaluation, existing control measures and any additional control measures necessary. Some of
these control measures include safe systems of work, a permit-to-work system, supplementary
emergency arrangements and suitable induction training for all contractors. Collectively, these
precautions and control measures reduce high risk to low risk.
A summary of the risk assessment is circulated to all workers likely to be affected by the
proposed modification. The full version of the risk assessment will be made available on
request.
Prior to commencing the work, a permit-to-work is issued to the contractors carrying out the tank
modification. The permit-to-work includes an explanation about the associated risk assessment
and how the plant has been safely prepared for this non-routine modification. The contract
workers accept the permit-to-work with the necessary precautions, including wearing of
specified personal protective equipment. Precautions listed on the permit-to-work are also
communicated to all IG1_IGC1-0002-ENG-OBE-QP-V1 Oct20 © NEBOSH 2020 page 3 of 5
contractors and other plant workers who may be affected. The permit-to-work explains that
precautions will be enforced, along with any other site rules, by active monitoring. This will be
done while you carry out routine plant checks and simultaneously check on the progress of the
modification.
To confirm safe working and clarify overall expectations, you, along with an independent site
contact have been nominated to monitor and liaise with the contractors. The independent site
contact will also actively monitor and check additional expectations, such as contractor site
entry and exit control, resolution of any queries and the supervision standard. You and the
independent site contact will check to see whether the modification work is being controlled and
is progressing as planned. This is consistent with the organisation’s safe system of work based
on the findings of the risk assessment and the method statement provided by the contractor, the
aim being to complete the job safely without incident.
Findings from inspections form part of the overall health and safety performance review. The
performance review enables an overall assessment of opportunities for continuous improvement within
the site and reveals any need for change.

Question:

Discussing moral reasons for managing health and safety

Note: You should support your answer where applicable, using relevant information from the
scenario.