Audit preparation

Several months prior to the audit, the lead auditor and a location coordinator should be identified. These two individuals should begin coordinating activities, office space, transportation and expectations. The location coordinator should forward to the auditor copies of all plant procedures (classification procedures, design standards, list of all Safety Instrumented Functions with assigned SIL, control room locations, management-of-change procedures, testing procedures, etc.). 

The location coordinator should also forward to the lead auditor, an organization chart that is used to identify personnel the auditors may wish to interview. About two to three weeks prior to the audit, the lead auditor should identify all plant personnel they wish to interview. Once the location coordinator obtains this list of interviewees, they should begin setting up an interview schedule. It is best to interview management first, followed by first-line supervision, engineering, and then finally, maintenance and 

No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS 

Several days prior to the beginning of the audit, the plant management should issue a NOTE-to all 

The lead auditor should prepare a list of questions pertinent to the scope of the audit. ISA-TR84.00.04-1 Annex D.4 Functional Safety Assessment provides example checklists that could be addressed during the audit. In addition, refer to the COPS book, Guidelines for Auditing Process Safety Management Systems, 2011. 

---

Prepare Specific Workplan and Checklists. Each team member should prepare his or her own specific workplan and checklists, depending on the nature of the activities to be audited. Preparing workplan and checklists would enable auditors to focus on key activities to be audited and collect all necessary information for those processes and activities. Some understanding of the processes would be required to prepare the workplan and checklists. 

Saying goes, forewarned is forearmed. Do anything, we will succeed by considering the preparation beforehand, otherwise you will fail. Safety audition preparation was essential to the audit goal. It s mainly focused on the following aspects. 

Security audit units should do a good job the following audit preparation work establish security audit service types clear security audit objectives and scope determine the safety audit staff and the organization of work develop safety audit program. 

The resource intensive nature of surveillance, and the lengtlty time required for audit preparation, are established facts. 

Please keep the foUowing reasons in mind when employees question the need to audit Auditing prepares safe work areas for people. Failure to properly audit places people at risk. In a nutshell, audits are the right thing to do. 

Should the facility be notified of the audit Showing up at a warehouse for an unannounced safety audit could pose a problem. There may be conditions present that make it difficult to complete an audit at that time. Many safety professionals prefer to let the management at the facility know that an audit will be conducted on a certain date. The grading of elements such as housekeeping, overall appearance, and audit preparation can be more rigid if the audit is preannounced. 

The second aspect of quahty documentation is to detail how the work processes referred to in the manual are performed. The QA unit is often the organization responsible for issuing a set of procedures designed to assure conformance to the appropriate standards or to company poHcy. The procedures, often called standard operation procedures (SOP) or quahty operating procedures (QOP), should include such topics as customer complaints, audit protocols, stabihty testing, preparation of COAs, test method vahdation, etc. 

Phase I Preassessment. (/) Audit focus and preparation. (2) Identify unit operations and processes. (J) Prepare process flow diagrams. 

Postaudit Process The postaudit process consists of preparation of a draft report, preparation of a final report, development of artion plans, and follow-up. A draft report of the audit findings should be prepared shortly after the completion of the on-site audit. The draft report usually undergoes review and comment by facility personnel involved with the audit, experienced auditors not involved with the subject audit, functional specialists, and attorneys. The review of the draft report is done to assure that a clear, concise, and accurate report is issued, and not to modify or change the findings. Once this review procedure is completed, a final report can be issued and distributed based on a distribution list provided by the facility personnel. The final audit report should be issued in a timely manner and meet the time requirement specified in the audit plan. 

Step 1.1 Getting Ready. A thorough preparation for a P2 audit is a prerequisite for an efficient and cost-effective evaluation. Gaining support for the assessment from top-level management, and for the implementation of results, is particularly important. Otherwise, there will be no real action on recommendations. Early in the process, management needs to accept that, at a bare minimum, the audit is a worthwhile exercise and that resources - human and financial - should be diverted from other activities to the task of auditing. 

Step 1.4 Select the Subject Facility. It is important to decide on the focus of your audit during the preparation stage. You may wish to audit a complete process or you may want to concentrate on a selection of unit operations within a unit process. 

Now you can reconsider the material balance equations by adding those additional factors identified in the previous step. If necessary, estimates of unaccountable losses will have to be calculated. Note that, in the case of a relatively simple manufacturing plant, preparation of a preliminary material-balance system and its refinement (Steps 14 and 15) can usefully be combined. For more-complex P2 assessments, however, two separate steps are likely to be more appropriate. An important rule to remember is that the inputs should ideally equal the outputs - but in practice this will rarely be the case. Some judgment will be required to determine what level of accuracy is acceptable, and we should have an idea as to what the unlikely sources of errors are (e.g., evaporative losses from outside holding ponds may be a materials loss we cannot accurately account for). In the case of high concentrations of hazardous wastes, accurate measurements are needed to develop cost-effective waste-reduction options. It is possible that the material balance for a number of unit operations will need to be repeated. Again, continue to review, refine, and, where necessary, expand your database. The compilation of accurate and comprehensive data is essential for a successful P2 audit and subsequent waste-reduction action plan. Remember - you can t reduce what you don t know is therel... 

Phases I and II have eovered planning and undertaking a P2 audit, resulting in the preparation of a material balance for each unit operation. Phase III represents the interpretation of the material balance, to identify process areas or components of concern. 

Employers certify compliance with 29CFR1910,119 every three years. The compliance audit is conducted by one or more persons knowledgeable in the process. A report of the audit findings is prepared. The employer documents the response to each of the findings and their correction. The wn niost reccni compliance audits are retained. 

Such audits may therefore be useful as a method of increasing safety awareness and management commitment to safety as part of a more general attempt to reduce accidents. They should be treated as first steps and management must be prepared to do more than just carry out a safety audit. The authors of safety audits must be prepared to provide guidance on the next steps in error reduction once the problems have been identified. 

Following the audit we mapped the processes onto organization charts and prepared fiowcharts for each process... 

If reviewers of completed forms are not the preparer, they need to be trained in procedures to audit the quality of the collected information and documentation files. This training may include means to check the completeness and credibility of the collected data by cross checking the data against other reference files, such as maintenance files or operating logs. 

Following the review, audit, and acceptance process, the preparer needs to be notified of data acceptance or rejection. With this feedback, the preparer can make necessary corrections to provide higher quality data in the future. 

Pyrido[2,3-c]furoxan (4-azabenzofuroxan, 31) is prepared by pyrolysis of the nitropyridotetrazole (30) (concerning its tauto-merism, see Section I1I,C). Some derivatives of 31 are also known (see Table I). Unsuccessful attempts to make pyrido[3,4-c]furoxan audits A -oxide have been reported, although its 7-nitro and 6,7-benzo (16) derivatives have been prepared. Hydrazine and 3,4-diaroylfuroxans give the diarylpyridazinofuroxans (32). ... 

---