Competence

Assurance for HSE-

critical Activities

EP 95-0120

HSE
MANUAL
EP HSE Manual Amendment Record Sheet

Section Number: EP 95-0120

Section Title: Competence Assurance for HSE-critical Activities

Rev Chapter Description of amendment Date Amended

Nos. by
No. dd/mm/yy

0 All Original hard copy and CD-ROM issue 16/10/95 EPO/65

 Contents

CONTENTS
Acknowledgement iii

1 Background to the Guideline 1

1.1 Objective of This Document 1
1.2 What is 'Competence'? 2
1.3 What is Competence Assurance in HSE
Management? 3
1.4 Scope and Application 5
1.5 Approach 7
1.6 Responsibilities in Competence Assurance 8
1.6.1 Opco 8
1.6.2 Personnel Director or equivalent 8
1.6.3 Line management 8
1.6.4 Functional departments or equivalent 9

2 Implementing the Guideline 11

2.1 Framework for Competence Standards 11
2.2 Defining Standards of Competence 12
2.3 Carrying out Assessments 12
2.4 Controls 14
2.5 Reference Documentation 15

Appendices
I Requirements for Contractor Competence
Assurance 17
II Categorisation of HSE Roles 19
III Definitions 21
IV 'Not Yet Competent' Procedure 25
V Example Checklist for Approval of
Competence Standards 29
VI Assessment Processes 31
VII Audit of Competence Assurance 35
VIII Sample Competence Assessment Form 39

Glossary 41

References 43

EP 95-0120 Revision 0 16 October 1995 i

HSE Manual EP95-0120 Competence Assurance for HSE-critical Activities

This page intentionally left blank

ii EP 95-0120 Revision 0 16 October 1995

 Acknowledgement

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
This document is prepared as a guideline for EP Opcos to assist them in the development of a
competence assurance system for HSE-critical activities. Competence assurance is an essential
element of any management system. As HSE management systems are developed it is implicit that the
associated suite of competences must be resident in the workforce and that line management must
assure that the competences are relevant and verified.
Much of this document has been assimilated from work done by and with the approval of Shell
EXPRO.

EP 95-0120 Revision 0 16 October 1995 iii

HSE Manual EP-0120 Competence Assurance for HSE-critical Activities

This page intentionally left blank

iv EP 95-0120 Revision 0 16 October 1995

 1 Background to the Guideline

1 BACKGROUND TO THE GUIDELINE

1.1 Objective of This Document

This document forms an integral part of the Exploration and Production Competence Management
System and is covered by the corporate guideline on competence management developed by HRTH/5,
the process owner. The system is based on the quality process and is conceptually shown in the
schematic diagram below.

Figure 1.1 Competence Management: a quality process

EXPLORATION & PRODUCTION

Skill development
in the workplace.
Do Practice & coaching,
Competence
local training courses
Assurance of
HSE-critical
Group Training Guide Activities
1995
Exploration and Production EP 95-0120

Training Templates Staff

Plan Annual
MITRE
Review
HSE
Manual
Local standards
set for
Discipline the workplace
Skills Check &
(Competence) Feedback
Portfolios
COMPETENCE
IN
SHELL

One of Shell's objectives is to have a competence-assured workforce. It is the policy and objective of
Management to ensure that all staff performing HSE-critical roles are competent, in accordance with
the competency standards and assessment criteria for each role or activity. This needs to be
demonstrated in accordance with the agreed HSE Case for each installation.
The objective of this document is to provide guidelines that will enable Opcos to establish to the
satisfaction of their stakeholders that valid and reliable controls are in place to ensure personnel are
competent to discharge their HSE-critical responsibilities in a safe and effective manner. These
stakeholders could include shareholders, management, staff, venture partners, and regulatory
authorities.

EP 95-0120 Revision 0 16 October 1995 1

HSE Manual EP 95-0120 Competence Assurance for HSE-critical Activities

1.2 What is 'Competence'?

In this document all references to competence mean:
'The ability in terms of skill, knowledge, and awareness to perform activities within an
occupation or function to specified standards'.
The element of 'attitude' that is sometimes included in the definition of competence is dealt with in
staff appraisals and will not be addressed in this competence assurance process.
The definition appears deceptively simple but it is quite specific in what must be assessed. It means
looking at what people produce in the course of performing their work (not what they put into it) and
it also means that what they produce is assessed against a standard.
The key aspects about the definition are:
 the emphasis on performing work (not knowledge or skills for their own sake)
 the words 'to specified standards' (so that assessment can be objective and not subjective).
The definition implies a more formal, objective process of assessing performance than most past
practices and is concerned with being clear about what is being assessed and how it is assessed.
Knowledge and understanding underpin competent performance. Competent behaviour usually means
selecting the right knowledge from a wider base, and applying it to suit the situation at hand. No
matter how much knowledge or intellectual understanding people have, if they cannot apply it
appropriately at work, they cannot be considered to be competent.
In most routine situations, essential knowledge should be clearly defined within the standard of
competence. Where it is difficult to predict exact situations (eg in emergencies or circumstances
requiring diagnosis and deduction), people have to apply skills such as problem analysis and decision
making, and call on a wide base of knowledge and understanding. In these cases, guidance on
assessment must take account of the practical problems of simulating unusual situations. It may
include tests of knowledge and understanding to supplement performance assessment.

2 EP 95-0120 Revision 0 16 October 1995

 1 Background to the Guideline

1.3 What is Competence Assurance in HSE Management?

Competence assurance is a necessary ingredient of an effective HSE Management System (HSE MS)
and is needed to ensure, through rigorous appraisal, that people have the required levels of skills,
knowledge, and awareness to perform their roles adequately and safely in a particular context.
The competence assurance process is used to verify the attainment of the threshold of performance
which people must meet before they are allowed to perform their work unsupervised, and which they
must then continue to maintain or exceed. It is an instrument of management control.
Competence assurance involves:
 defining critical roles and the work (critical activities) to be performed by the critical-role holder
 establishing minimum standards of performance for critical roles and activities
 development of assessment criteria for each critical role and activity
 identification of and training of competence assessors
 assessing against specified standards the abilities of individuals to perform the critical roles
safely and effectively
 formally verifying the level of competence that is demonstrated
 recording the results of assessments
 feeding back variance to the assessed individual and to line management, and notifying
management of successful appraisals.
Refer to Figure 1.2.
The definitions of critical roles should relate directly to the hazards and the potential risks that are
identified in the installation or activity HSE Cases.
Competence assurance is associated with other personnel management activities (eg Staff Annual
Review), some of which contribute to providing a competent workforce but do not in themselves
assure competence. It is one of the Check and Feedback components of the quality system for the
management of competence. Other related parts of the system would include:
 a strategy/policy document
 staff planning
 professional staff development
 training (development of knowledge and awareness - courses, seminars, etc)
 skill development (hands-on practice with coaching)
 staff assessment.

EP 95-0120 Revision 0 16 October 1995 3

HSE Manual EP 95-0120 Competence Assurance for HSE-critical Activities

Figure 1.2 Competence assurance process

Identify the HSE-critical roles

Define the key competence
elements to perform role

Set competence standards and

performance criteria for the key
competence elements

Set assessment criteria

Identify competence assessors

and train/accredit

Carry out assessments 'Not Yet Competent'

Assessment procedure procedure
(see Figure 2.1) (see Figure IV.1)

Record results

Feedback variances in
performance to management
& to the development process

4 EP 95-0120 Revision 0 16 October 1995

 1 Background to the Guideline

1.4 Scope and Application

This document describes the general process that should be followed to ensure that people in the
workforce have the skills and knowledge within the HSE context to perform adequately and safely. It
does not cover the specifics of job descriptions, recruitment and selection, staff appraisal, assessment
of potential, training and development, reward and recognition, or vocational certifications. These are
recognised as essential elements of the management of competence and are dealt with separately by
human resources and training departments.
While the focus of this guideline is on HSE-critical and HSE-related competence, the methods and
processes herein described are relevant to and could be used for all competences. For the HSE-critical
competences the assurance process assesses demonstrated performance against specified criteria and
failure to meet the standards implies that the individual is not yet capable of fulfilling the role in
question at that time.
Technical and managerial competence is assessed by line supervision against corporate standards and
the outcome is recorded in the employee's annual staff appraisal review.
The concepts of this guideline are applicable to all roles identified under the HSE Management
System regardless of whether they are carried out by employees of Shell, contractors (see Appendix
I), vendors, representatives or service companies.
To aid priority setting, to contain bureaucracy, and to make the competence assurance process
manageable, the roles under the HSE Management System have been divided into two levels:

Level 1: HSE-critical roles

These include key accountabilities for activities where incompetent actions by an individual could
lead directly to serious injury, occupational illness, fatality, significant loss, or major damage, either
to the assets or the environment. These activities are normally associated with the Control or
Recovery elements of the Hazards and Effects Management Process (HEMP).

Level 2: HSE-related roles

All other roles identified under the HSE Management System (ie those that contain only the
Identification and the Assessment elements of the HEMP) are considered as Level 2.
NB: the aggregate of Level 1 and Level 2 roles comprise all competences found in the HSE-critical
activities.
The above classification provides an opportunity to identify and prioritise (on the basis of the
criticality of the type of work being performed) a manageable portion of the workforce, on which to
initiate the development and implementation of a competence assurance system.
Individuals should not be allowed to fill Level 1 roles until they have been assessed and found
competent in HSE-critical abilities, except during the initial period of implementation of a
competence assurance system.
During the initial implementation period of the competence assurance system, Line and Function
representatives should establish an implementation schedule for each Level 1 role. This should
include dates after which individuals would not normally be allowed to continue alone in the role,
regardless of their previous experience, unless they have been assessed and found competent.
Before the agreed date of implementation, individuals who are already filling Level 1 roles are
deemed competent unless they have been assessed and found 'not yet competent'. After the agreed
date, all unassessed candidates for Level 1 roles must be closely supervised (by an already-competent
individual) whilst performing any of the associated activities.
Candidates for Level 1 roles are assessed regarding their competence in relevant HSE-critical
activities against established standards. In general, the overall competence of employees in both Level

EP 95-0120 Revision 0 16 October 1995 5

HSE Manual EP 95-0120 Competence Assurance for HSE-critical Activities

1 and Level 2 roles are reviewed and evaluated by line supervision through the existing staff appraisal
process and the outcome recorded in the annual staff appraisal report.
Appendix II describes the categorisation and provides some examples of Level 1 roles.

6 EP 95-0120 Revision 0 16 October 1995

 1 Background to the Guideline

1.5 Approach
To achieve the guideline objective, Shell follows an approach in which:
 competence requirements are analysed and prioritised
 it is ensured that contractor systems are compatible with the Shell system
 standards of competence are defined for all Level 1 roles
 assessment methods are based on performance at work or on realistic simulation of the work to
be performed
 assessment is carried out by approved assessors (eg competent line supervisors)
 assessment standards are monitored to ensure consistency of application
 a record is kept of the competence achieved by each person and the information is available to
the supervisor and the individual at the workplace.
The following premises are observed:
 there will be consistent use of the terms as defined in Appendix III
 there will be common standards used for assessment
 the process will be congruent with industry/national standards where applicable
 there will be a clear audit trail and improvement loop within the process.
Specific guidelines for treatment of candidates for Level 1 roles who are found to be 'not yet
competent' are given in the Not Yet Competent Procedure in Appendix IV.
Figure 1.1 indicates the key elements of Competence Assurance, their sequence and the links with the
procedures for Competence Assessment and 'Not Yet Competent.'

EP 95-0120 Revision 0 16 October 1995 7

HSE Manual EP 95-0120 Competence Assurance for HSE-critical Activities

1.6 Responsibilities in Competence Assurance

1.6.1 Opco
The Opco is responsible for ensuring that Competence Assurance requirements are being fulfilled, by
implementing internal audits with the support of line management and functional departments.

1.6.2 Personnel Director or equivalent

The Personnel Director is responsible for:
 design, implementation and maintenance of the Competence Assurance System
 developing and agreeing an implementation plan with line management and functional
departments and reporting progress against it
 maintaining the central competence recording system
 acting as audit sponsor and presenting recommendations for improvements of the Competence
Assurance System to senior managers
 maintaining the Competence Assurance Manual
 ensuring that line managers have access to complete records of competent persons.

1.6.3 Line management

Line management (including the line management of contractors, vendors and service companies) is
responsible for:
 planning and controlling work so that it may be performed without continuous direct
supervision, only by people who have been assessed and found competent
 ensuring that competence assessment systems are correctly implemented and completed in
accordance with an agreed implementation plan
 the suitability, for their particular circumstance, of standards used for assessment,
 appointing competent assessors
 retaining documents associated with assessment of candidates for Level 1 roles
 submitting information to a central competence recording system and personal files, as required
 ensuring that each installation or activity workplace has access to a complete record of
competent persons
 ensuring that contract sponsors include (in any prequalification exercise) an assessment of
contractor competence assurance systems
 requiring that external organisations appointed to carry out competence assurance activities are
able to demonstrate that they have valid and reliable systems for competence assurance
 monitoring the provision of suitably competent personnel by contractors, vendors and service
companies.
The responsibilities of contractors are more fully described in the Requirements for Contractor
Competence Assurance in Appendix I.

8 EP 95-0120 Revision 0 16 October 1995

 1 Background to the Guideline

1.6.4 Functional departments or equivalent

The functional departments (eg Drilling, Exploration, Production, etc) are the discipline
heads and senior advisers that supply support direct to the Line.
These people are responsible for:
 adopting, setting and maintaining standards of competence which, as a minimum, satisfy
legislative requirements for Shell employees and provide guidance on assessment
 providing assurance that the standards adopted by key contractors are acceptable and approved
 confirming, where appropriate, that a system is in place which ensures that all individuals have
been deemed competent by means of a valid and reliable process.

EP 95-0120 Revision 0 16 October 1995 9

HSE Manual EP 95-0120 Competence Assurance for HSE-critical Activities

This page intentionally left blank

10 EP 95-0120 Revision 0 16 October 1995

 2 Implementing the Guideline

2 IMPLEMENTING THE GUIDELINE

2.1 Framework for Competence Standards

A framework is needed to analyse and prioritise competence requirements. This framework is used to:
 determine which are the HSE-critical competences and prioritise them
 develop sets of competence profiles for identified roles
 develop detailed competence standards using a consistent format
 avoid gaps in coverage, or overlap and duplication.
The process begins by 'mapping' the competences required in an activity or for a facility using a 'top-
down' approach starting with a key purpose statement of the business, analysing the human functions
needed to fulfil that purpose, and working down until obvious individual activities start to emerge.
These activities, are then linked to actual roles, tasks, and responsibilities so that meaningful,
assessable standards can be developed. The Exploration and Production Business Model (EPBM) and
the THESIS HSE Case software are tools that can facilitate and simplify this process. Where HSE
Cases are in place the activity lists will already exist and need only to be sorted for the Level 1 roles.
The emphasis should be to identify competences that can be applied across a range of situations and
roles. The purpose of this is to keep the framework simple, providing consistent assessment models,
avoiding repetition and confusion. For example, operating almost any type of equipment means being
able to start-up and shutdown, to monitor, control and deal with unexpected events. Therefore, the
description of the competence to operate pumps or compressors or fired heaters could have the same
structural framework, ie start-up, shut down, monitor, etc.
Competences in place for some activities may imply some ability at a lower level as well.
For example:
 competence to authorise permits as a system custodian implies competence as a worksite permit
supervisor
 competence in a fire-team leader must include some ability to carry out the duties of fire-team
members
 competence to carry out high voltage isolation implies the ability to carry out low voltage
isolation.
Most skilled jobs are likely to consist of about 10 to 15 activities, only some of which will be HSE-
critical. In excess of 20 activities for a job usually suggests that the analysis may have gone into too
much detail too early or that there may be something unusual about the organisational structure.
Note: If the HSE Case is in place, the critical roles and tasks should already have been identified.

Setting priorities
The roles under the HSE management system have been divided into two levels as identified in 1.4.
Representatives of line management and functional departments should review the positions,
categorise them and have them endorsed at the senior management level.
Appendix II describes the process of categorisation of Level 1 and 2 roles. Based on the HSE Case
philosophy, Level 1 roles for each installation or activity are also described in the related HSE Cases.

Contractors, subcontractors and agency staff

Some Level 1 and 2 roles may be filled by employees of contractor companies. Contractors have the
responsibility to establish and maintain their own competence assurance system. This is more fully
described in the Requirements for Contractor Competence Assurance in Appendix I.

EP 95-0120 Revision 0 16 October 1995 11

HSE Manual EP 95-0120 Competence Assurance for HSE-critical Activities

2.2 Defining Standards of Competence

A standard of competence is a performance specification that describes what is expected of a person
performing a particular work activity. These standards are organised in modules (see Appendix II) of
related information. An effective module of competence will:
 describe a distinct work activity
 describe the work outputs expected, not what is put into the work
 describe outputs that can be demonstrated and assessed at work
 include clear, precise performance criteria
 state clearly what is within the scope of the standard
 guide assessors on how to assess against the standard.
A wide range of industry standards is already in existence. Before starting to write new standards,
checks should be made to see whether it is possible to import and adopt these. Where industry
standards are available, they can, if necessary, be modified to meet local requirements and adopted.
An example of a checklist that can be used for approval of competence standards is included as
Appendix V.

2.3 Carrying out Assessments

The basic steps in the assessment process are:
 planning to collect evidence (identifying candidate and competence elements)
 choosing the sources of evidence (eg performance at work, specially set exercises, etc)
 assigning an assessor
 collecting and judging evidence (comparing performance with standards, validating HSE-critical
elements)
 feedback and recording
 maintaining competence (determining re-assessment requirements).
Figure 2.1 provides a summary of the assessment process.

12 EP 95-0120 Revision 0 16 October 1995

 2 Implementing the Guideline

Figure 2.1 Competence assessment process for HSE-critical roles

Competence Assurance Process

for HSE-Critical Roles

Candidate & Competence

Element(s) Identified

Assessor
Assigned

Check
Data Base Check
NO
Inform Individual
Pre-requisites & Supervisor
Check Valid
Individual’s YES
Log Book
Assess Against
Element Standards

NO
Standards Inform Individual
Met & Supervisor

YES
Role
Competences
Reviewed

All NO
HSE-critical
Record in Elements
Data Base Valid
YES
Record in
Individual’s
Log Book Inform Invoke
Management ‘Not-Yet-Competent’
Procedures

Management
Deem Individual
As Competent

EP 95-0120 Revision 0 16 October 1995 13

HSE Manual EP 95-0120 Competence Assurance for HSE-critical Activities

There are three requirements for a quality competence assessment process:

Validity: It must assess the competences really required.
A written test may be a valid method of testing ability to read and write, or describe concepts,
however, it is unlikely to be a complete test of the ability to cook, weld pipes, or carry out an incident
investigation.
Reliability: It must produce consistent results each time.
There may be some assessment methods where results vary depending on external factors or the
extent to which individuals have been briefed beforehand.
Practicality: It must not place an unreasonable burden on the Line or the system.
Systems which are valid and reliable in theory will lack effectiveness if they are not easily
implemented.
Appendix VI provides further details of the assessment process.

2.4 Controls
The competence assessment process needs to be quality assured, ie to confirm that assessment results
of different individuals, at different times and places, using different assessment methods, are
comparable. The quality check affirms the reliability of the assessment process as well as the
competence assurance procedures before, during and after assessment.

Audit of competence assurance

As well as day-to-day verification (and contract monitoring) the competence assurance system should
be audited routinely, to provide an independent assessment of its validity and reliability.
The aim is to provide information to senior managers on whether the system is working, and if it is fit,
to deliver against the following design principles:
 clear policy and responsibilities
 clear standards of competence, and assessment guides
 valid and reliable assessment by competent assessors
 verification of standards across different assessors
 procedures for audit and review
 people accept and understand the system
 all HSE-critical roles are covered.
To achieve most benefit from the process, audits should be conducted by competent people
independent of the area being audited. This can be accomplished either by using external consultants
or by using staff from different divisions to audit their colleagues.
The Competence Audit Questionnaire in Appendix VII provides a useful structure and more detail
regarding the elements to be considered in such an audit.

Review by management
The Competence Assurance System should be reviewed by management at intervals not exceeding
three years to:
 assess the degree of compliance with the standards
 identify gaps in the system

14 EP 95-0120 Revision 0 16 October 1995

 2 Implementing the Guideline

 assess achievement of the objectives

 look at trends, in the company and outside
 plan action for improvement.
The Personnel Director is the system custodian, responsible for controlling policy and procedures,
collating verification and audit data, and making recommendations for improvement.

Keeping records
Actual evidence may vary widely. Written tests are easy to record and store, but performance
evidence and oral questioning require effort by assessors to describe what happened and why they
made a judgement. This need not be complicated. It could be as simple as 'I observed him/her
performing the task under normal operating conditions on (date); all performance criteria were met.'
For those assessed in HSE-critical Level 1 roles, and deemed 'Competent' after the first assessment,
the following minimum information should be copied to the individual's personal file, on a
standardised assessment sheet or a summary sheet specifying:
 the staff number
 date of assessment
 reference to the standards applied
 the type of evidence used
 the name of the assessor.
This record will remain permanently on file for reference purposes. Certain additional or supporting
evidence of competence generated during assessment may, with the agreement of the relevant
function, be retained by the individual.
For those deemed Not Yet Competent after the first assessment, the summary sheet, along with
additional documents, will be required. Detailed notes which support the assessment of Not Yet
Competent, eg assessor notes, must be retained on file. These details should remain on file as long as
the individual is deemed Not Yet Competent and the Not Yet Competent Procedure is being applied.
If the individual is therefore subsequently assessed as Competent after the initial assessment of Not
Yet Competent the original supporting evidence of Not Yet Competent will be removed from his/her
file.

2.5 Reference Documentation

Other documents that reference the competence requirements of the business include:
 HSE Management System Manual
 Statement of Policy on Health, Safety and the Environment
 Discipline Skills Portfolios
 Guidance Notes - Staff Appraisal
 Personnel Policy and Practice Manual.
 Drug and Alcohol Abuse Employment Guidelines

EP 95-0120 Revision 0 16 October 1995 15

HSE Manual EP 95-0120 Competence Assurance for HSE-critical Activities

This page intentionally left blank

16 EP 95-0120 Revision 0 16 October 1995

 Appendix I Requirements for Contractor Competence Assurance

APPENDIX I
REQUIREMENTS FOR CONTRACTOR COMPETENCE
ASSURANCE
The following applies to contractor organisations providing staff in Level 1 and Level 2 roles as
described below.
Level 1 shall refer to roles where individuals have accountability for HSE-critical
activities. 'HSE-critical' implies that incompetent actions by an individual
could lead directly to serious injury, fatality, loss of containment or major
damage to the assets or environment.
Level 2 shall refer to the remaining roles with HSE-related accountabilities under the
Shell HSE MS.

 contractors are required to have in place a scheme for assuring the competence of their staff.
Such schemes shall be capable of internal verification and third party audit. A Contractor may
elect to use Shell, Industry or other standards
 in all cases, however, the nominated standards shall be compatible with Shell's standards, as
determined by the relevant function and accepted by the appropriate Line Personnel
 agreement and acceptance of standards should be obtained as part of the ongoing dialogue
between Shell and Contractors in accordance with HSE Case requirements
 where contract staff are responsible for assessing, the following information must be submitted
to the relevant Line department following successful completion of assessment:
(a) Unit or module of competence
(b) Reference to actual standard used
(c) Restriction (if any) of qualification
(d) Name of competent person
 evidence that a competence assurance system is in place to ensure that contract staff are
competent in their job and furthermore competent to carry out the activities associated with
his/her accountabilities (described in the HSE MS), will be submitted at the prequalification
stage and evaluated by the appropriate personnel in the line or function
 where, and for whatever reason, the evidence shows that a system is in place but is not of
sufficient quality or quantity to infer competence of an individual, further details may be
requested and submitted at this prequalification appraisal. If these are not produced within a
reasonable time period, or still do not meet the requirements, the tender for work may be
rejected
 after a date specified by the Opco, contract organisations with competence assurance systems
not acceptable to Shell will not normally be considered for work on Shell installations or
premises.

EP 95-0120 Revision 0 16 October 1995 17

HSE Manual EP 95-0120 Competence Assurance for HSE-critical Activities

Responsibilities

Contractor
 guidelines for defining, assessing, verifying and recording role-related competence will be held
in the Contractor's Competence Assurance Manual along with the framework of competences
required for any Level 1 role and the list of Level 2 roles normally resourced by the contract
organisation
 in most cases, Contractors will normally be responsible for assessing their staff against the
standards and, further be responsible for providing verifiers to ensure that uniformity of
assessment takes place where more than one assessor is involved
 where Contractors are responsible for assessing staff they will be responsible for maintaining
the assessment evidence
 the Contractor is responsible for advising each candidate, with appropriate notice, if and when
any reassessment is necessary
 it is the responsibility of the contractor to supply experienced staff, who are competent to fulfil
each of the roles designated in their contract to the required standard
 it is the responsibility of the Contractor to undertake a regular review of the competence of their
staff

Line (Shell)
The line are responsible for:
 ensuring contractor management can demonstrate they have valid and reliable internal systems
in place to carry out competence assurance activities before contractor staff are appointed
 ensuring that contract sponsors include in any prequalification exercises an assessment of the
contractor's competence assurance system
 ensuring that contract documents reflect need for the contractor to implement such systems over
the course of the contract and to provide appropriately competent personnel
 maintaining the assessment evidence and submitting the appropriate details to the Competence
Register for Contractor staff, when designated to do so
 monitoring Contractor provision of suitably competent personnel.

Function
It is the responsibility of the Functions, in conjunction with the Line, to satisfy themselves that the
standards adopted by the Contractor are acceptable and approved. The Functions will retain copies of
the relevant documents for Level 1 roles.

18 EP 95-0120 Revision 0 16 October 1995

 Appendix II Categorisation of HSE Roles

APPENDIX II
CATEGORISATION OF HSE ROLES
The first stage of the competence assurance process is to identify key work roles to be covered. This
identification should be based on an assessment of the relative risks (safety, environmental, health or
business) that are relevant to the activities of the role being evaluated.
Level 1: HSE-critical roles (full competence assurance policy to apply).
These include key accountabilities for an HSE-critical role. The term 'HSE-critical' implies that
incompetent actions by an individual could lead directly to serious injury, occupational illness fatality,
significant loss, or major damage either to the assets or the environment. These activities are normally
associated with the Control or Recovery elements of the Hazards and Effects Management Process
(HEMP)..
Another way of identifying a Level 1 role is that the associated competence is the last barrier that
prevents the hazardous event from occurring and that if an incompetent action is undertaken there is
no other barrier to intercede.
Staff in these positions are formally and rigorously assessed against defined standards and would be
referenced in Part 2 of the HSE Cases.
Level 2: HSE-related roles (to be assessed via the Staff Appraisal Review)
Other roles which may be identified in the HSE Cases but do not appear on the list of agreed HSE-
critical roles are Level 2: HSE-related roles. They are a part of HSE-critical activities but are indirect
in their effect.
Notwithstanding the need for competence in all aspects of the business, these roles have HSE
accountabilities but these are arguably not regarded as being directly HSE-critical. These roles contain
the identification and assessment elements of the HEMP but not elements of control or recovery when
dealing with HSE hazards. In this respect they may not initially warrant the rigorous assessment
process defined for the Level 1 roles.
The following list (not all-inclusive) is an example of some Level 1 roles. Opcos would be expected
to review the roles associated with their business and identify those which are HSE-critical. The list
of safety and environmentally sensitive roles in Appendix C of the SIPC document, 'Drugs and
Alcohol Abuse Employment Guidelines' (Ref. 1) provides additional examples of roles that should be
reviewed for applicability as Level 1 HSE-critical roles. This document is available through HRAL/4
in SIPC.

Level 1 roles
Operations
Offshore Installation Manager Control Room Operator
Inspection Engineer Operations Supervisor
Process Unit Operator Production Operator
Area Accountable Technician Crane Operator
Crane Maintainer Systems Supervisor
Gas Tester Discipline/Maintenance Technician
Resident Engineers Emergency Response Team Leader
Fire Squad Leader

EP 95-0120 Revision 0 16 October 1995 19

HSE Manual EP 95-0120 Competence Assurance for HSE-critical Activities

PTW Authorised Signatories: Validator, Issuer,

Permit Co-ordinator

Well Engineering
Drilling Supervisor Well Services Supervisor
Toolpusher Driller

Services
Helicopter Landing Officer Muster and Evacuation Co-ordinator
Responsible Person Electrical

Seismic
Party Chief Boat Driver
Vessel Master Aircraft Pilot
Chainsaw Operator Aircraft Maintenance Engineer

HSE
Medic (remote location) First Aider

Construction
Company Site Representative Scaffolder
Crane operator Rigger

Transportation
General vehicle driver HGV driver
Bus driver Vehicle mechanic

20 EP 95-0120 Revision 0 16 October 1995

 Appendix III Definitions

APPENDIX III
DEFINITIONS

Competence
the ability in terms of skill, knowledge, and awareness to perform activities within an occupation or
function to specified standards. To be competent implies that a person possesses the essential skills,
knowledge, and awareness, and can apply them appropriately in a particular working environment.
Competence represents the threshold of performance which people must cross before being allowed to
perform the associated work unsupervised.

Standard of competence
a performance specification describing what is expected of a person performing a particular work
activity. It is expressed in elements of work together with performance criteria.

Critical role
an identified function in the company performed by one or more individuals who have the direct
responsibility for activities where incompetent actions by the individual could lead to serious injury,
occupational illness, fatality, or major damage to the business, the installation, or the environment.
A sample listing (not all-inclusive) of HSE-critical roles is shown in Appendix II.

Competence module
an aggregation of the knowledge and of the tasks which reflect what a competent person in a
particular role should be able to perform, eg Permit-to-Work competence module.
The competence modules should include guidance for assessors pertinent to the related standards.

HSE-critical competence element

a discrete task or part of a task that has application in one or more critical roles and involves one or
more of the aspects of Identification, Assessment, Control of or Recovery from HSE hazards. These
tasks should be capable of being demonstrated and assessed, eg for the Permit-to-Work an HSE-
critical element could be 'Process all new and existing permits to work and associated documents'.
(see Appendix VIII)

Prerequisite
a pre-condition that must exist relative to a specific activity before a person may be assessed for
competence in regard to that activity. Prerequisites might include specific educational certificates,
training courses, and/or terms of practical experience.

Performance criteria
descriptions of the critical results or outcomes of practical work that are essential evidence of
competent performance. They answer the question 'How is it known that someone is competent in ...?'
They are precise descriptions which are used to structure assessment. In the example of Permit-to-
Work, performance criteria might include:
 The associated hazard analysis takes account of human and organisational factors as well as
hardware.

EP 95-0120 Revision 0 16 October 1995 21

HSE Manual EP 95-0120 Competence Assurance for HSE-critical Activities

 Hazard data is complete, recorded on the PTW according to Opco procedures, and discussed
with the permittees.
(see Appendix VIII)

Assessment guidance
a set of procedures for those involved in assessment, setting out:
 the evidence required for each unit
 how and when and how often assessment takes place
 who assesses the evidence
 method of verification
 how the assessment is recorded.

Assessment of competence
the means by which evidence of performance is collected, compared with a standard, and a judgement
about acceptable performance is made and formally recorded. The person is either competent or not
competent. There is no rank order, no grades or banding. People's abilities are compared with the
standard, not with each other.

Verification
the checks and balances in the assessment system to ensure that what should happen when people are
assessed, does happen. Its primary purpose is quality assurance, confirming that people in different
places are assessed in the same way, with a common interpretation of the standards.

Skill
the practised ability, dexterity, fluency or co-ordination in the execution of learned physical or mental
tasks.

Knowledge
the condition of possessing a specific understanding through instruction, study, or experience in
regard to particular subject matter. Knowledge enables a person to safely and effectively adapt or
adjust to varying conditions during the performance of work.

Awareness
having a general understanding or a broad perception of particular subject matter. Awareness of a
subject alone normally requires consultation with a knowledgeable person when variances in
conditions arise. Without awareness the need for consultation may not be recognised.

22 EP 95-0120 Revision 0 16 October 1995

 Appendix III Definitions

This page left intentionally blank

EP 95-0120 Revision 0 16 October 1995 23

HSE Manual EP 95-0120 Competence Assurance for HSE-critical Activities

APPENDIX IV
'NOT YET COMPETENT' PROCEDURE

Introduction
The Company wishes to ensure the consequences of finding an individual to be 'not yet competent' are
managed in a fair and consistent manner.

First Assessment
From the First Assessment, two outcomes are possible: the individual is either assessed as Competent
or Not Yet Competent.

Competent
No further action under this procedure is required.

Not yet competent

Anyone in a Level 1 role who is assessed as being Not Yet Competent will only be permitted to
continue to perform in that role provided he/she is able to work under the close supervision of a
person who has experience of and is competent to be engaged in such operations. Line Management
are accountable for the correct application of this process and written authorisation for such decisions
is required. Where a person is unable to remain in their normal work role as a consequence of close
supervision not being practicable, they will need to be reassigned to other duties pending plans for
reassessment.
The employee should be interviewed by the immediate line supervisor and advised that, following a
first assessment against the Opco's agreed standards, he/she has been found to be Not Yet Competent.
The discussion should clearly indicate areas where performance was below the defined standard and
include an agreed plan for improvement of the individual's competence. It should also specify the date
of the second assessment, ensuring adequate time and provision for completion of competence
development targets and training where necessary.
After the interview, the individual should be given a formal note which includes all of the above
points, copied to his/her personal file.

Second Assessment
If after a second assessment an individual is assessed as Not Yet Competent, options would include
further training and development towards a third and final assessment, or redeployment (including
agreed redeployment to a job suitable for the competence level achieved).
A further interview should be held between employee and line supervisor, and the individual advised
that as the required standard has not been met, he or she is still considered Not Yet Competent. The
employee should be further advised that if he/she is still assessed as Not Yet Competent following a
third assessment (for which a date should be specified), and no redeployment opportunities exist, the
Opco may give the employee contractual notice of termination of employment on grounds of
incapability.
After the interview, the individual should be given a formal note from the Company which includes
all of the above points, copied to the individual's personal file.

24 EP 95-0120 Revision 0 16 October 1995

 Appendix IV Not Yet Competent Procedure

Third Assessment
If the outcome of the third assessment is that the employee is found as being Not Yet Competent and
no redeployment options have been identified alternate courses of action may be necessary.
It is recognised that there may be cases where both line management and the employee agree not to
complete any stage of this procedure, and forego the opportunities for further assessment. In
exceptional cases, where there is genuine agreement and acceptance by both parties that nothing is to
be gained by further training and assessment, reassignment to other duties or another position may be
considered. Alternatively, termination of employment may be a necessary course of action.

Appeals
If the employee wishes to appeal at any stage of this procedure he or she may do so in accordance
with the Opco Grievance Procedure.

EP 95-0120 Revision 0 16 October 1995 25

HSE Manual EP 95-0120 Competence Assurance for HSE-critical Activities

Figure IV.1 Flowchart for 'Not Yet Competent' Procedure

26 EP 95-0120 Revision 0 16 October 1995

 Appendix IV Not Yet Competent Procedure

First competence
assessment

Yes Candidate meets No

standards ?

No further immediate action. Interview with supervisor.

Revert to normal Agree plan to fill gaps and
competence maintenance improve performance or
redeploy to other duties

Second competence
assessment

Yes Candidate meets No

standards ?

Interview with supervisor.

Agree plan prior to third
assessment or redeploy to
other duties

Third competence
assessment

Yes Candidate meets No

standards ?

Interview with supervisor.

Redeploy to other duties or
consider possible
termination

EP 95-0120 Revision 0 16 October 1995 27

HSE Manual EP 95-0120 Competence Assurance for HSE-critical Activities

This page intentionally left blank

28 EP 95-0120 Revision 0 16 October 1995

 Appendix V Example Checklist for Approval of Competence Standards

APPENDIX V
EXAMPLE CHECKLIST FOR APPROVAL OF COMPETENCE
STANDARDS
Questions for: Module _____________________ YES NO

1. Do the elements adequately describe what a candidate must do to complete this

module?

2. Are the following easy to understand?

(a) Performance criteria

(b) Guidance for assessors

(c) Evidence requirements

3. See performance criteria:

Are you satisfied that the performance criteria describe activities for (specified
role)?

4. See guidance for assessors:

Is it clear what the assessor is required to do?

5. See evidence requirements:

Is it clear what the candidate is required to provide?

6. If you are less than satisfied with any part of this unit, please give your reasons and provide
suggestions on the changes you would like made.

EP 95-0120 Revision 0 16 October 1995 29

HSE Manual EP 95-0120 Competence Assurance for HSE-critical Activities

This page intentionally left blank

30 EP 95-0120 Revision 0 16 October 1995

 Appendix VI Assessment Processes

APPENDIX VI
ASSESSMENT PROCESSES
Particular care should be exercised over the treatment of candidates for Level 1 roles to ensure that:
 candidates who are already in Level 1 roles are provided with all relevant standards,
performance criteria and the Not Yet Competent Procedure. They should be briefed on
assessment methods and all possible outcomes within a pre-defined time before their assessment
(if practicable)
 candidates who are not yet in Level 1 roles receive training and development such that
assessment of their competence becomes a validative rather than an investigative process. They
should also be provided with the information in (1) above as early as possible during their
development.

Planning to collect evidence

It is essential to be clear how each competence will be assessed. The process must ensure that:
 assessors are aware of what is expected of them
 all assessors apply the assessment principles in the same way
 assessment records are kept and readily available.

Sources of evidence
There are four basic sources of evidence which demonstrate competence:
1. Performance at work
Performance in the workplace is usually the most convincing evidence, especially if it is drawn from
direct observation.
Performance at work is normally assessed by a workplace supervisor. Self-assessment may be
appropriate as part of the process, as is peer assessment, but both need careful handling. A higher
authority should provide the final approval for the worker to perform the role independent of direct
supervision.
For jobs in a service role, customer feedback is an essential ingredient.
2. Specially set exercises
Performance evaluated on specially set exercises should cover assignments, projects, skill tests,
simulations, etc. These will be essential in some cases where it is impossible to assess at work and has
the added benefit of allowing standardisation and the use of expert assessors. Low realism can
however undermine their usefulness and 'assessment nerves' may lead to under-performance in some
individuals.
In some circumstances (eg well control training) simulators are used to provide for assessment under
realistic conditions without endangering the individuals or the assets.
Performance on specially set exercises can provide valid evidence in a controlled environment,
provided they are designed carefully and are relevant to the abilities to be assessed. They are essential
for emergency response competences. Candidates being assessed should be conversant with the nature
of the set exercises.
3. Questioning
Questioning may be by interview, written examination, or computer-based. It is quick, and extremely
useful for determining knowledge and understanding, however, knowing what should be done is not
the same as being able to do it under the pressure of real work situations.

EP 95-0120 Revision 0 16 October 1995 31

HSE Manual EP 95-0120 Competence Assurance for HSE-critical Activities

Questioning produces valuable additional evidence of competence, provided it is used skilfully. On its
own, questioning is rarely sufficient to prove competence.
4. Historical
Historical evidence includes qualifications, reports, portfolios of previous work and references from
previous employers. It can save time and may be essential for assessment of people on transfer or
secondment from other Group companies. It has weaknesses, however. Competence may erode over
time and the competence standards, in use may not be consistent with the assets, or equipment of the
day.
Judging historical evidence needs skilled, experienced assessors, who can sort out useful data from
the irrelevant or unreliable. Regulatory authorities often demand formal qualifications but may be
suspicious of any other historical evidence.
A comprehensive assessment plan will use all four sources, however, it is hard to make a convincing
case for overall competence without evidence from performance, either at work or realistic
simulation.
The right blend of assessment methods depends on the competence to be assessed, the criticality, and
the hard facts of the situation.
It is senseless to expose people or the assets to additional risks in order to assess competence. On the
other hand, merely asking 'What would you do if...' may not provide sufficiently valid information
about the person's ability to respond quickly and correctly to multiple signals during stress conditions.
This highlights the need for the assessor to have a high level of competence in the area being assessed.
A fit-for-purpose assessment plan will set out:
 the sources of evidence to be used
 how evidence will be produced and collected
 when assessment (and reassessment) must take place
 who will assess each part of the evidence
 who exactly will make the final judgement on competence
 how the competence of assessors will be assured
 how the assessment will be recorded.

Collecting and judging evidence

Going on a course is not a valid performance criterion. It reflects what people are taught, not what
they learn, and certainly not what they apply at work. Training courses should only be considered as
prerequisites to the development of skill or contributors to levels of awareness and knowledge in a
particular area of interest. The skills that are evidence of true competence must be fully developed on
the job, or where not practical, to a tested and certified level in a comprehensive simulation of the
work environment (eg Rounds I and II Drilling Engineering training, examination, and certification).
No fine distinctions are required for assessing competence. A person either meets the standard or does
not. The person is either competent or not yet competent.
This differs from ranking, where people are compared with each other, rather than with a standard.
Even with clear standards, however, there is still scope for assessors to make mistakes. This raises the
issue of assessor competence.
Assessing performance at work requires close technical knowledge of the work itself and some basic
assessor competence. Assessing historical evidence needs sophisticated skills and knowledge in the
process of assessment but less detailed knowledge of the work technicalities.

32 EP 95-0120 Revision 0 16 October 1995

 Appendix VI Assessment Processes

It is also important to consider some of the common mistakes for assessors to avoid:
 stereotyping people
 comparing people with themselves at the same stage
 assuming one performance means all others will be similar
 comparing people with one another rather than the standard
 going by first impressions
 giving the benefit of the doubt to people who have tried hard.

Feedback and recording

All candidates should be provided with detailed feedback based on the performance criteria achieved
(or not achieved) as soon as possible after their assessment. They should be invited to participate
throughout the process with the goal of reaching consensus about the judgement.
A certain amount of paperwork is inevitable with competence assurance, just like any other quality
system. The purpose is twofold:
1. To provide management information on individual competence for work planning
2. To provide an evidence trail for verification, audit and review.
An excess of paperwork and record keeping usually indicates weakness in the system. The emphasis
should be on sufficient information to achieve the purpose.
The assessed competence of all individuals filling Level 1 roles should be recorded in a Competence
Register.
Whichever organisation (Shell or contractor) is responsible for making the assessment decision, is
also responsible for maintaining the records of assessment evidence. Auditable, up-to-date records
should be available containing at least the following information:
 unique identification of the candidate (eg staff or passport number)
 date of assessment
 reference to the standards applied and a definition of the specific competence certified
 type of evidence used
 name of the assessor.

Maintaining competence through re-assessment

The requirements for re-assessment will depend on the standard and the opportunities to demonstrate
competence during normal work activities. The assessment guidance for the relevant standard should
describe the appropriate procedure and time interval.

EP 95-0120 Revision 0 16 October 1995 33

HSE Manual EP 95-0120 Competence Assurance for HSE-critical Activities

APPENDIX VII
AUDIT OF COMPETENCE ASSURANCE
In order to provide quality assurance for competence assurance the processes should be audited for
consistency of approach and content. Some regulatory jurisdictions define 'audit' in a very legal sense
and 'verification' is often used to avoid conflicts of understanding.
During assessment, audit procedures may include:
 using more than one assessor ('panels', etc)
 use of independent, expert assessors
 having two levels of assessment
 exchange of evidence between assessors
 someone else observing assessments on a sampling basis.
After assessment, controls may include:
 sampling of evidence by an auditor
 statistical monitoring of results from different assessors
 audit by an independent party.
Auditors may need access to more detailed information including:
 the actual standards and assessment guidance used by assessors
 record of appointment of appointed assessors
 records of actual evidence used in assessment.
The relevant functions appoint verifiers:
 to provide advice and support to assessors
 to maintain records
 to monitor assessor performance
 to arrange external audit.
The auditors should be able to meet with assessors and other verifiers to review assessments, explore
technical or administrative difficulties that have arisen, or provide guidance.

Competence Assessment Audit Questionnaire

The questionnaire shown in Table VII.1 is an audit guide designed to help assess the current approach
to competence and identify areas for improvement. It can also be used to help assess the ability of
contractors to deliver competent people.
It takes the form of a checklist of questions, with suggested performance criteria which provide a
standard of good practice.
The criteria describe outputs of an effective system, not the methods used to achieve them. The Opco
(or its Contractors) can achieve the standard but still retain an individual system to suit its own
particular operation or culture.

34 EP 95-0120 Revision 0 16 October 1995

 Appendix VII Audit of Competence Assurance

The questionnaire may be used initially as part of a high level overview. Used this way, it will take
very little time to form an impression of how close the Opco is to the standard.
If there are only a few areas of weakness, it can then be used as the basis of a remedial action plan.
If the overview reveals major weaknesses, a more detailed review of the Opco's arrangements on
competence may need to be undertaken.

Table VII.1 Competence Assessment Audit Questionnaire

Checklist questions Performance criteria
1. What is the Opco's policy on competence  a policy exists, is documented, and controlled
assurance?
 it includes assessment of what people do at
work
 it covers every one who performs HSE-critical
tasks, including contractors and subcontractors
2. How widely is the policy available understood,  managers have an awareness of the policy
implemented, and maintained?
 supervisors can describe the policy objectives
and procedures

3. Who has the responsibility and authority to  responsibilities are clearly defined and
control the key parts of the competence documented
system?
 those with responsibility state that they have
adequate authorities

4. What standards of competence are used when  key roles are defined and documented
assessing people in key roles?
 competence standards are defined,
documented
 the standards used relate clearly to what
people actually do at work

5. What methods of assessment are used to  assessment methods are appropriate to the
determine whether individuals are competent? competence being assessed
 work performance is tested where possible

 tests, simulations, etc are used appropriately

6. Are assessors adequately trained?  those assessed have been briefed in the
system
 assessors can describe the process of
assessment as well as the procedures
 newcomers to the system are briefed

7. What verification or internal audit requirements  procedures exist to co-ordinate standards

have been identified? across different assessors
 there is a regular programme of internal audit

EP 95-0120 Revision 0 16 October 1995 35

HSE Manual EP 95-0120 Competence Assurance for HSE-critical Activities

Table VII.1 Competence Assessment Audit Questionnaire (continued)

Checklist questions Performance criteria

8. Who co-ordinates and monitors assessment  people are identified to verify assessment
practice?
 standards exist for internal verifiers and
auditors

9. Who else reviews and audits competence  auditors have been identified who are
assurance other than the people directly independent of the Unit management structure
responsible?

10. What is the procedure for logging corrective  a procedure exists

action?
 there is evidence of compliance with it

11. Which member of the senior management  there is single-point responsibility for
team is responsible for maintaining and competence at senior management team level
improving the competence assurance system?
 the manager accepts the responsibility
unreservedly

12. How frequently and how regularly is the  there is regular review by senior management
effectiveness of the system reviewed by senior
management?  the review is at least every two years

13. What records are kept of competence and  documentation is clear, simple, fit for purpose
verification?
 it is accessible to those who need access

 it is on a retention cycle and is auditable

14. What detailed procedures are there in place  procedures exist for standard setting,
and how are they controlled? assessment

 procedures have a recognised central source

 changes to procedures are authorised and

communicated appropriately
 procedures are subject to regular
review/update

36 EP 95-0120 Revision 0 16 October 1995

 Appendix VII Audit of Competence Assurance

This page intentionally left blank

EP 95-0120 Revision 0 16 October 1995 37

HSE Manual EP 95-0120 Competence Assurance for HSE-critical Activities

APPENDIX VIII
SAMPLE COMPETENCE ASSESSMENT FORM
Role Person Assessed Competence Module Prerequisites

Lead Operator Joe Bloggs Permit-to-Work PTW Training Course

Elements Performance Criteria A/K/S Assessor Date

(awareness Surname &
knowledge Signature
skill)

1. Process all new All errors, omissions, & K

and existing inconsistencies identified ............................ ...............................
permits to work .........................................
and associated
documents.
All conflicts introduced by a new K
permit or by changes to an .............................. ...............................
existing permit are identified .........................................

Incorrect permits or permits that S

introduce conflicts are returned ................................ ...............................
un-approved and discussed with .........................................
the originator

Preparations or reinstatement S
work is authorised only when .................................. ...............................
there are no conflicts, .........................................
inconsistencies or omissions.

2. Maintain Permit information is accurately K

information recorded, displayed and stored .................................... ...............................
systems according to status. .........................................

PTW system information is up to K

date ...................................... ...............................
.........................................

Sheets summarising audit findings A

and implementation of remedial .................................... ...............................
actions are filed and correspond .........................................
with the audit programme

Access to information is available K

to those who need it and is ............................ ...............................
subject to appropriate security .........................................
control.

38 EP 95-0120 Revision 0 16 October 1995

 Appendix VIII Sample Competence Assessment Form

This sample represents only one of possibly 2 or 3 pages of a complete assessment form that would
pertain to the assessment of the Lead Operator role relative to the Permit to Work. The form should be
supplemented with notes of guidance for the assessors that assist them to interpret the intent of each
of the performance elements to be assessed. Some companies choose to include these notes as part of
the assessment form; others provide notes of assessment guidance in a separate document.

EP 95-0120 Revision 0 16 October 1995 39

HSE Manual EP 95-0120 Competence Assurance for HSE-critical Activities

GLOSSARY
A glossary of commonly used terms in HSE is given in both EP 95-0100 HSE Management Systems
and EP 95-0300 Overview Hazards and Effects Management Process.

40 EP 95-0120 Revision 0 16 October 1995

 Glossary

This page intentionally left blank

EP 95-0120 Revision 0 16 October 1995 41

HSE Manual EP 95-0120 Competence Assurance for HSE-critical Activities

REFERENCES
1. Drugs and Alcohol Abuse Employment Guidelines, SIPC, 1993.

42 EP 95-0120 Revision 0 16 October 1995