Contractor reviews requirements

Contractor programs are administered in one of two ways hands on or hands off. Both methods incorporate varying degrees of the following recommendations. Whichever approach is chosen, consistent application and thorough documentation are necessary. Each of these approaches requires an equal amount of initial paperwork. The first things that must be reviewed are the contract and the safety qualifications of the prospective contractor, otherwise known as contractor qualifications. Three sources of information provide ways for an employer to evaluate the probable safety performance of a prospective contractor. Review... 

An up-to-date safety policy statement, which specifies the means used to audit and monitor the policy and activities on site, and the means of showing compliance with the Management Regulations 1999. For most contractors, this requires recording of the arrangements made to effectively plan, organise, control, monitor and review the preventive and protective measures... 

Kerridge has provided an excellent article on the interface betw een the operating company and the contractor to define all requirements in complete and standardized detail. This includes who is responsible for every deliverable. The operating company and contractor must work as a team. An example of one area that needs to be reviewed often with the contractor is the provision of secondary systems as packages, perhaps from a third party. Such systems can easily become orphans. This problem is discussed in the Process Definition section of Chapter 16. 

Regardless of the approach your company selects, what s important is the assurance that contract personnel, by whatever means, are as conversant as your own employees with those aspects of your PSM system with which they interact. For this reason, you may wish to consider meeting with your key contractors to discuss the system and how it may affect their persoimel. As part of this discussion, you will want to review whatever training the contractor provides to determine if it meets your needs and is appropriate for the PSM system. If the system requires additional contractor training, you can then work out (either as a global policy or on a case-by-case basis) how best to provide it. 

The project manager should coordinate the acceptance test with installation contractors and appropriate facility personnel. The project manager should develop the testing protocol and the expected results. A review of the testing protocol and requirements should be shared with the groups involved in the testing. 

Some contract laboratories and professional consultants (e.g., veterinary ophthalmologists and pathologists), may not be familiar with the GLP regulations. In such cases, mere notification of a requirement to provide GLP-compl3dng services may not be sufficient. It is advisable to spend time with contractors and professional consultants to review in detail the GLP requirements that will apply to the work they will perform. It is especially important to review with them the GLP requirements for documentation and document retention. 

As with most of a company s information where proprietary, trade secrets, or a facilities security may be involved, process hazard analysis reports may be considered confidential information. Release outside the company should be discussed with the legal staff or by the contractor agreements made with outside personnel participating in the study. A suitable distinction should be applied to the cover of any review produced documents whenever the confidentiality requirement is required. 

Proeessing or data review workstations, either the IT department or contractors working on their behalf (typieally, with an operating system conhgured to corporate requirements)... 

Preparation of final, optimized layouts is a time-consuming process requiring participation of many experienced people. On the other hand, conceptual layout adequate to meet the above objectives can be easily prepared by a process or project engineer. The ensuing guidelines will be useful for doing so. They should also be useful for reviewing layout work done by the contractor. 

Some owners only have general specifications and rely on engineering contractors to provide their own detailed project specifications. When the engineering is done in-house, they would use the specifications from some recent project in the same location. In that case, it is the Project Manager s responsibility to review and update them and, above all, make sure that they provide quality and safety consistent with the project requirements without unnecessary gold plating. 

The review of the contractor s execution plan and schedule is a very important milestone. It is the last real opportunity to make corrections in the execution plan and, if required, revise the schedule forecast so that the financial plans can be adjusted to meet the new scenario. 

Purely experimental batches do not require QA approval. All approval must be based on a thorough QA review of the adequacy of the facility, its procedures, methods, records, inspections, and test results, prior to batch release. This applies to both internally manufactured batches and those made by contractors. 

The project was engineered by three major contractors in the USA and others 1n New Zealand. Portions of the plant were preassembled in Japan and shipped in large complete segments to New Zealand. The plant was designed and built to strict environmental requirements which were reviewed and approved in accordance with the laws of New Zealand. The coordination and cooperation between the many entities involved in the project presented some unique challenges in project management. 

The EFCOG/DOE CSTC CUSHR Team conducted a limited review of how DOE sites address compressed gases. Results showed that at these sites, only 50-70% of requirements were addressed in site documentation of chemical-related safety and health requirements. These results confirmed the view that while all DOE contractors who engage in the same work activities must follow the same requirements, many either do not know which requirements apply to their work or are confused by them. The Team concluded that this was likely due to the fact that multiple requirements from many varied sources frequently overlap, covering the same points in slightly different and sometimes conflicting ways. 

Functional or facility audits (such as contractors or shipyards) include reviews of policies, procedures, and practices to confirm compliance with the SUBSAFE program requirements, the health of processes, and the capability of producing certifiable hardware or design products. 

Based on Section B.4 on Review Procedure, BTP-14 of SRP Chapter 7, document reviews are required to ensure that the software of GE and his sub-contractors meets the acceptance criteria as defined in Section B.3 Acceptance Criteria, BTP-14 of SRP Chapter 7. 

Once a contract has been signed but before the contractor begins work, facility representatives should meet with contractor representatives to discuss details of how the contractor s HSE program will be implemented. Depending on the scope of the work, this meeting might include a review of the work site to increase the contractor s familiarization with location, personnel, site HSE requirements, and emergency action procedures. 

Accident/incident data summaries Environmental compliance and sensitivity Results of HSE reviews and audits Timeliness of hazard mitigation Integration of HSE protection in job preplanning Compliance with procedures and permit-required systems Availability and use of proper HSE equipment Adequacy of emergency planning and response procedures Commitment of contractor s management to HSE protection Adequacy of HSE training (level of detail and documentation)... 

Off-the-shelf item An item determined by a material acquisition decision process review (DoD, Military Component, or subordinate organization as appropriate) to be available for acquisition to satisfy an approved material requirement with no expenditure of funds for development, modification, or improvement (e.g., commercial products, material developed by other Government agencies, or materiel developed by other countries). This item may be procured by the contractor or furnished to the contractor as Government-furnished equipment (GFE) or Government-furnished property (GFP) (MIL-STD-882B). 

---