Zamzama Phase 2 Development: Preparation of JSA's

Zamzama Phase 2 Development
Preparation of JSA’s
Preparation of JSA’s
 Issues and Considerations

 Responsibilities
 Execution
 HSE team
 Participants
 Supervisor
 Team members
 HSE
 Techniques
 Visit site
 Visualise in office
 Make the time
 CAREFUL REVIEW
Zamzama Phase 2 – Civil Contract Slide No. 2

ICAM Categories and Factors Chart
Summary of Investigation Outcomes leading up to event
Organisational Task/environmental Individual /team Absent/failed
Outcomes
Factors conditions Actions defences
Supervisor believed
Pressure applied by
OK to work on Working at heights
Management (BHPB Work front is behind
unapproved procedure was not
and Descon) to project schedule
scaffolding as work followed
complete job quickly
required was minor
Failure to implement
Planning of Many activities had
actions as required
simultaneous work to occur Area HSEC advice
by local HSEC and
activities in same simultaneously was not followed
Scaffolding
area according to plan
inspector
Failure to follow
Perceived pressure working at height
Only one BHPB Scaffold Inspector protocols in
to commence work
approved scaffold requirements were switchroom
activities due to work
inspector is on site not followed
teams sitting idle
waiting for scaffold
to be inspected
Site supervisors
have not been fully
instilled with ‘Zero
Harm’ as a key
measure of success
(Primaryfactors
(Primary factorshighlighted
highlightedin
inred)
red)

Preventative and Corrective Actions
Organisational Factors Follow up Action Action By
Pressure applied by Management Focus to be provided by Descon and BHPB Management/supervision BHPB/DEL
(BHPB and Descon) to complete job at all levels that safety will be a better measure of success than
quickly schedule
Planning of simultaneous work activities Daily planning to better consider simultaneous operations and DEL
in same area congestion of work activities – particularly in Switch room area. Time
required for inspection and potentially rework associated with
scaffolding installations should also be factored in.
Only one BHPB approved scaffold BHPB to evaluate Descon nominated candidate as Scaffolding BHPB
inspector is on site Inspector in limited supporting role.
Some field supervisors have not been Specific ‘Realignment meeting’ to be presented to all field supervisors DEL
fully instilled with ‘Zero Harm’ as a key to reinforce that Safety is the primary measure of success on this
measure of success project.
Task/environmental conditions Follow up Action Action By
Work front is behind project schedule A review of current schedule for Switch room area and revision if BHPB/DEL
and possibly unrealistic deemed unrealistic.
Many activities had to occur Schedule review to consider reducing simultaneous operations where DEL
simultaneously according to plan SIMOPS issues are potentially more hazardous.
Perceived pressure to commence work Planning to assess potential contingency activities where unforeseen DEL
activities due to work teams sitting idle delays occur in preparatory works (egg scaffolding).
waiting for scaffold to be inspected

Preventative and Corrective Actions
Individual /team Actions Follow up Action Action By
Supervisor believed OK to work Specific ‘Realignment meeting’ to be presented to all field supervisors DEL
on unapproved scaffolding as to reinforce all mandatory safety requirements on the project.
work required was minor Company’s ‘Zero Tolerance’ policy to be reinforced to all senior field
supervisors.
Failure to implement actions as Specific ‘Realignment meeting’ to be presented to all field supervisors DEL
required by local HSEC and to reinforce that failure to follow up on advice from Descon field
Scaffolding inspector HSEC team will not be tolerated.
Absent/Failed defences Follow up Action Action By
Working at heights procedure Specific ‘Realignment meeting’ to be presented to all field supervisors DEL
was not followed of mandatory nature of all working at height procedures to be
emphasised.
Area HSEC advice was not Specific ‘Realignment meeting’ to be presented to all field supervisors DEL
followed to reinforce that failure to follow up on advice from Descon field
HSEC team will not be tolerated.
Pre-Start ‘Take Five’ sessions to be conducted for all activities – DEL
involving HSEC member. All issue identified to be addressed prior to
commencing work
Scaffold inspector requirements Specific ‘Realignment meeting’ to be presented to all field supervisors DEL
were not followed to reinforce that disregarding tagging procedures is a dismissible
offence and will not be tolerated.

Event Outcomes
 Summary and Root Cause Outcomes

 Key root cause outcomes identified relate to the following:
 A lack of appreciation by field supervisors of Safety as the primary
measure of success in completing work activities
 Setting of possibly unrealistic goals for completion of work packages
 A willingness expressed by field supervisors to break Mandatory working
at height procedures and protocols where risk is considered ‘low’ and
exposure to delays in completing scheduled activities is ‘high’.
 Actions from this mini-ICAM will be inserted into the Project Actions Register
and close tracked on a continuous basis.

Zamzama Phase 2 Development: Preparation of JSA's

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Zamzama Phase 2 Development: Preparation of JSA's

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Zamzama Phase 2 Development: Preparation of JSA's

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Zamzama Phase 2 Development

 Issues and Considerations

Zamzama Phase 2 – Civil Contract Slide No. 2

Zamzama Phase 2 – Civil Contract Slide No. 3

Zamzama Phase 2 – Civil Contract Slide No. 4

Zamzama Phase 2 – Civil Contract Slide No. 5

 Summary and Root Cause Outcomes

Zamzama Phase 2 – Civil Contract Slide No. 6

You might also like