Level 2 Assurance: Terms of References (ToR)

Audit Title: Incident investigation, PIM Action close out and lessons learnt.
Audit Date: Days Month Year Auditee:
Audit location: Audit Coordinator:
 CP-122: 6.1 Incident Provide assurance of adequate structures,
nonconformity &
Corrective Action
Scope: processes, and managing of Incident
investigation and PIM Action close out.
 CP-122: 6.2 Improvement
processes
 PR-1969 PIM enter
Documents to be reviewed:  LFI Process
 SP-1157 - HSE Training
 PR-1418 - Incident
 …………………………….
Notification, Reporting Audit Team:  ………………………………
and Follow-up Procedure  ……………………………….
 Records & reports of
previous incidents.
Contractor Representative:
Compliance mandatory:  Yes  No Personal Targeted  Yes  No
Select Location(discipline):
□ Operations □ Contractor □------------- □ Commissioning □ Maintenance □ Exploration
□ Project □ Well services □-------------- □ North □ South □ Infrastructure
□ Gas □ Engineering □-------------- □ Logistic □------------- □ ------------------
Personnel Selected for Interview:
□ Contract Holder □ Contract Site Rep. □ Contract Manager □ Cont. Rep. □ Journey Manager □ IVMS focal point □ Authorizing Person □ Drivers, □ Vehicle
maintenance technicians and management.

# Audit Topic Status Source of evidence

A formal HSE incident investigation process (IIP) in place &
aligned with PR-1418 which covers incident:
□ Document Inspection □ Record Analysis □ Process
1. □Yes □No
Witnessed □ Site Interview
Reporting. Recording. Classifying, investigating methodology
(ICAM) and implementing corrective actions & lessons learnt.
Incidents investigated by HSE competent investigators who □ Document Inspection □ Record Analysis □ Process
2. □Yes □No
have been trained in incident & investigation methodologies. Witnessed □ Site Interview

All employees (including subcontractors/hired) made formally □ Document Inspection □ Record Analysis □ Process
3. □Yes □No
Witnessed □ Site Interview
aware to identify & report HSE incidents.
Reported HSE incidents are investigated & correctly
recorded* with agreed timeline. (including corrective
actions). □ Document Inspection □ Record Analysis □ Process
4. □Yes □No
Witnessed □ Site Interview

*recorded = All PDO incidents/investigation and corrective actions, including

contractors/subcontractors recorded in PDO incident management tool (PIM).
Investigation reports are submitted in an agreed format
and quality checked by relevant parties.
□ Document Inspection □ Record Analysis □ Process
5. □Yes □No
Witnessed □ Site Interview
(Relevant parties depends on potential severity and can range from incident
investigation head, technical safety team, HSE manager, industrial hygienist,
environmentalist, HSEA..etc.)
Incidents are investigated as a team effort with involvement
of management & workers. Involvement level determined
by: potential consequences and likelihood of incident
recurring. □ Document Inspection □ Record Analysis □ Process
6. □Yes □No
Witnessed □ Site Interview
(i .e. Low potential with i nvolvement of supervisor/line manager, Medium
potenital with involvement of supervisor/line manager/ department
ma nager, SME & HSE Advi sor, High potential with involvement of all above
wi th s upervision of Senior ma nagement / directors).

1
 A formal incident review committee in place & includes
senior management/directors where all predefined incident
□ Document Inspection □ Record Analysis □ Process
7. categories are officially reviewed/accepted. □Yes □No
Witnessed □ Site Interview

(Predefined categories can be: High/Med risk, Hi-Po, High value learning..etc)
Records of corrective actions exist which adequately*
addresses root causes and acted upon in timely manner &
□ Document Inspection □ Record Analysis □ Process
8. verified. □Yes □No
Witnessed □ Site Interview

*efforts taken to reduce risk with hierarchy of controls(Elimination, substitution, Engineering

control, administrative control, PPE)
Corrective action close out process involves post action
approver at sufficient level*. Post action approver evidently:
Reviews action required. Actual action performed.
9.
Determines if evidence provided satisfies the required action. □Yes □No
□ Document Inspection □ Record Analysis □ Process
Witnessed □ Site Interview
Rejects action with justification. Collects further data from
site (as required) before approving close out.

*(understands/verifies the action required)

Requirement of communicating information on incident
□ Document Inspection □ Record Analysis □ Process
10. causation and corrective actions to all relevant parties □Yes □No
Witnessed □ Site Interview
implemented. (both internal and external)
Each incident has been assigned to appropriate incident
□ Document Inspection □ Record Analysis □ Process
11. owner. Incident owner manages Incident investigation □Yes □No
Witnessed □ Site Interview
process. (from recording to accurate closeout)
Asset or section within organization (being audited)
periodically analysis incident reports to determined common □ Document Inspection □ Record Analysis □ Process
12. □Yes □No
Witnessed □ Site Interview
causes, priorities and trends. Set’s strategic action plan for
continues improvement accordingly.
Learnings from historic incidents are considered , when:
reviewing risk assessment,
Drafting HSE plan,
□ Document Inspection □ Record Analysis □ Process
13. planning/evaluating Training/competency, □Yes □No
Witnessed □ Site Interview
Operating,
assurance plan (inspections/audits), &
Correcting any gaps found.

Audit Report.
1. Summary of Audit
This report presents the findings and recommendations of the Level 2 audit of the Incident investigation , PIM Action close
out and lessons learnt carried out on the ---/---- / 202x. The scope of the audit included (Operations/contract/project) and
covers PDO, contractors and sub-contractors of the project. This audit was part of the (Directorate (XX)) HSE assurance plan
assisted by the corporate HSE. The audit is in support to the PDO efforts and actions to fully implement and effectively sustain
Incident investigation, PIM Action close out and lessons learnt across PDO Operations. The implementation and quality of the
Incident management system within the operations/Projects was compared with the incident management documentations
(Historical incident records/reports or other relevant reference).There were evidence of the Incident management system
implementation across the (XX operations) and there were positive evidence identified as listed below in section 2 of this report.
This audit has also identified some areas where gaps exist which require preventative actions as listed in section 3 of this report.

2
The identified gaps were pertaining to the implementation/quality/availability/records of tracking / planning / Competency
/assurance/review as evidenced by the findings. In order to ensure that these gaps are closed expeditiously and sustained,
close monitoring of the actions by the leadership need to continue.

2. The Positive Observations

- ------
- ------
- ------

3. Audit findings & actions

Audit
Finding Actions A. Party Target date PIM #
Topic #

Auditor/Reference Indicator Date: Counter Sign Auditee / Representative