Safety management processes independent assessment

The EU Risk Assessment ( Council Regulation [EEC] 793/93 of 23 March 1993 )39 is well recognized as being the leading independent, transparent, and science-based system for assessing chemicals and substances in everyday use.40 The Consumer Products Safety Quality (CPS Q) Unit, formerly known as European Chemicals Bureau (ECB), is part of the Institute for Health and Consumer Protection (IHCP), which is one of the seven scientific institutes in the European Commission s Joint Research Center (JRC).41 The CPS Q is responsible for managing the risk assessment process. As will be discussed in further detail in Section 22.2.2.4.4, the EU Risk Assessment process was revoked on June 1, 2008 and replaced by the REACH Directive. 

The process to assess the safety culture is to determine the collective attitudes (perception) about safety. (Safety perception surveys are discussed in Chapter 17.) Confidential interviews are conducted with all levels of employees and management (see the discussion of independent reviews in Chapter 17). A strategic action plan model is developed where a new course is charted for instilling safety into the organization. The point is to design a new culture that is consistent with management and employees perception of the safety objectives [3]. 

Most safety arguments eontain a set of assertions about processes and the eompe-tence of people with safety management responsibilities. The evidenee to support this type of argument comes fi om safety assessment/audit. A review takes place, independently of the day to day ineumbent, of the effectiveness and efficiency of the safety management system. It is an inherent feature of most systems that they are developed and improved within the scope of experience of a discrete set of professionals, and that it is easy for the working practices to have weaknesses which are difficult for the embedded staff to detect. 

Safety planning Systematic processes and good practice Configuration management Records Independent professional review Risk Assessment Fundamentals... 

Establish an effective safety management system/process. Nominate key roles/ responsibilities. Define approval signatories - especially for safety reports. Establish independent verification/audit to reduce chance of undetected error. Establish a workforce-wide commitment to product integrity. Learn from previous mistakes. Initiate a documentary audit trail (identify, log and track all hazards). Airworthiness and safety must be foremost in the minds of the entire organisation. Furthermore, as many legal cases turn on documentation, it is essential that risk assessment activities and choices are documented and that records are kept. ... 

William R. Rhyne received a B.S. in nuclear engineering from the University of Tennessee and M.S. and D.Sc. degrees in nuclear engineering from the University of Virginia. Dr. Rhyne is currently an independent consultant and earlier cofounded H R Technical Associates, Inc., where he remains a member of the board of directors. He has extensive experience in risk and safety analyses associated with nuclear and chemical processes and with the transport of hazardous nuclear materials and chemicals. From 1984 to 1987, he was the project manager and principal investigator for a probabilistic accident analysis of transporting obsolete chemical munitions. Dr. Rhyne has authored or coauthored numerous publications and reports in nuclear and chemical safety and risk analysis areas and is author of the book Hazardous Materials Transportation Risk Analysis Quantitative Approaches for Truck and Train. He is a former member of the NRC Transportation Research Board Hazardous Materials Committee, the Society for Risk Assessment, the American Nuclear... 

All documents created for a project should be reviewed by an independent person from the creator of the document. At certain stages of the lifecycle, the standard recommends that a functional safety assessment be performed by an assessment team that contains at least one senior, independent, competent person. This independent person can be an employee of the company or a contracted third-party, as long as the reviewer understands the process hazards, the company s management system, the full SIS lifecycle, and the fundamentals of appropriate design, installation, operation, maintenance, testing, and reliability. This person should not be part of the project team, report to project team management or plant operations, and should have the authority to prevent the project from proceeding if deviations are not addressed. 

All Risk Provide independent review and technical assessment of all aspects of analysis, design, construction, operation, licensing, maintenance, and management that impact process safety and challenge and require verification of aU claims, decisions, and regulations. 

---