Petroleum Development Oman Xxxxxxxxxxx (Audit Title) HSE MS Audit Xxxxxx (Period)

1. Petroleum Development Oman Xxxxxxxxxxx (Audit Title) HSE MS Audit Xxxxxx (Period)

2. Audit team Terms of reference Methodology Schedule Audit opinion Classification of findings Positives – Negatives Review of 8 HSE MS elements Audit follow-up Agenda

3. xxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxx Team Members

4. Terms of Reference 1 Objective: The objective of the audit is to assess the effectiveness of the HSE Management System andOperational Controls in the xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.

5. Terms of Reference 2 (SCOPE) • Special attention will be given to: • Adherence to PDO HSE policies • The process used for preparation and validation of the HSE Assurance Statements as part of the Annual Assurance Process • Adherence to PDO Minimum Environmental Standards • Processes for the identification of HSE-related legislative requirements, their dissemination, and for confirming adherence to them • Completeness of the identification of HSE critical activities, roles, responsibilities and competency requirements associated with HSE critical activities • Implementation of HSE training program’s to close competency gaps for those carrying out of HSE critical activities • Availability and effectiveness of required procedures for the identification and control of all significant hazards and effects including the demonstration of ALARP • Responsibilities, accountabilities and effectiveness of individual HSE tasks and targets and their contribution to continuous performance improvement

6. Terms of Reference 3 (SCOPE CONT’D) • Effectiveness in HSE data management and HSE performance monitoring • Effectiveness of HSE documentation and the processes for its dissemination • Effectiveness of controls with respect to safeguarding of asset integrity • Effectiveness of change control procedures • Requirements for contractors to have an implemented HSE policy and MS • Completeness of HSE Cases • Adequacy of emergency response procedures and contingency plans • Confirmation that findings from audits, inspections and incident investigations have been satisfactorily addressed, and closed out in an auditable process • Identification of significant gaps in the implementation of the HSE MS which have not been recognised, or for which no prioritised and resourced remediation plan is in place. • Adequacy and monitoring of the Electrical Infrastructure HSE Plan

7. Standards • The Audit was conducted against the following standards (in order of priority): • Oman laws and regulations • PDO HSE policy • PDO HSE-MS as documented in the HSE Code of Practice Manual CP-122 • PDO standards and procedures • Group and SIEP HSE policies, commitments & guidelines such as EP95 000 The audit was conducted in accordance with methodology in EP95 0130 (December 1999)

8. Areas Visited Facilities Maintenance, Operations and Construction activity taking place in xxxxxxxxxx In particular: • xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

9. Terms of reference • Audit programme • EP95-0130 StudyDocumentation Site visit Interviews Test findings ReportFinalisation PresentFindings Drafting Editing Agree findings Audit Process Familiarisation Review & Testing Reporting TODAY!

10. Objectivity • Balanced Team (Yes? Contractor!) • xxxx, xxx, • Independence • Yes, one team member involved from audited operation • Defined Process • EP 95 000 • Standard Approach • 8 HSE-MS elements • Base questionnaires • Standard evaluation sheets

11. Audit Assessment Level of concern: Specific Level of concern: Overall scope for enhancement Good Fair Level of concern: Overall cause for concern Level of concern: Overall cause for grave concern Poor Unacceptable

12. 123 Serious: Exposes OU to a major extent in terms of achievement of corporate HSE objectives or results. High: Though not serious, essential to be brought to Management attention. Includes medium weaknesses as repeat from previous reports. Medium: Could result in perceptible and undesirable effect on achievement of HSE objectives. Low: No major HSE impact at process level, correction will assure greater effectiveness/efficiency in process concerned. Weakness Classification Matrix A B C D E Environ- ment Repu- tation Happens several times a year in the audited OU Happens several times a year in the audited facility Severity People Assets Never heard of in EP industry Has occurred in EP industry Has occurred in the audited OU No injury No damage No effect No impact 0 Low Slight impact Slight injury Slight damage Slight effect 1 Minor injury Minor damage Minor effect Minor impact 2 Medium Consider- able impact Major injury Local damage Localised effect 3 High Single fatality Major damage Major effect National impact 4 Serious Inter- national impact Extensive damage Massive effect Multiple fatalities 5

13. Serious: 0 High: 2 (Reporting) Medium: 16 Low: 9 Total: 27 Audit Opinion Overall Audit Opinion: XXXX

14. Audit Opinion Key: F = few <20 My = many >40 Findings Most Favourable Opinion S H M H+M Unacc. Poor Fair Good 0 0 0/F -  0 0 My -  0 F F -  0 F F/My My  1-2 - - -  0 My - -  >2 - - - 

15. Each Finding is categorised as follows: 1. Category: People (P), Assets (A), Environment (E) or Reputation (R) 2. Severity level (from Weakness Classification Matrix): Serious (S), High (H), Medium (M) or Low (L) 3. Each Finding is assigned to one HSE MS element 4. A Finding is accompanied by the Significance and one or more Recommendations to address the gap. Classification of Findings

16. Each Finding is categorised as follows: 1. Category: People (P), Assets (A), Environment (E) or Reputation (R) 2. Severity level (from Weakness Classification Matrix): Serious (S), High (H), Medium (M) or Low (L) 3. Each Finding is assigned to one HSE MS element 4. A Finding is accompanied by the Significance and one or more Recommendations to address the gap. Classification of Findings

17. Findings Classification

18. System Integrity is being maintained at high level. Additional power requirements are being met in a timely manner Role of CFDH is being discharged well. (Authorisation of Staff, Issue of Standards and Proceedures, Technical Support to Assets Positive Findings

19. XXXXXXX XXXXXXX XXXXXXX XXXXXXX Areas of Concern

20. Positive XXXXXX XXXXXX XXXXXX Area’s for improvement XXXXXX XXXXXX 1: Leadership and Commitment

21. Positive XXXXXX Area’s for improvement XXXXXX 2: Policy & Strategic Objectives

22. 3: Organisation, Responsibilities, Resources, Standards and Documents Positive • XXXXXXX • XXXXXXX Area’s for improvement • XXXXXXX • XXXXXXX • XXXXXXX • XXXXXXX • XXXXXXX

23. 4: HEMP Positive • XXXXXXX • XXXXXXX • Area’s for improvement • XXXXXXX • XXXXXXX • XXXXXXX • XXXXXXX • XXXXXXX

24. 5: Planning and Procedures Positive • XXXXXXX • XXXXXXX • XXXXXXX • XXXXXXX Area’s for improvement • XXXXXXX

25. 6: Implementation & Monitoring Positive • XXXXXXX • XXXXXXX Area’s for improvement • XXXXXXX • XXXXXXX • XXXXXXX • XXXXXXX

26. 7: Audit Positive • XXXXXXX • XXXXXXX • XXXXXXX • Area’s for improvement • XXXXXXX • XXXXXXX

27. 8: Management Review Positive • XXXXXXX Area’s for improvement • XXXXXXX

28. Audit Follow-Up • Review findings and recommendations • Identify action parties • Agree and prioritise actions, set XXX • Resource actions • Develop implementation schedule • Set-up reporting and review programme • Monitor follow-up progress to close out XXXresponsibility!

29. The Endof the Close Out Presentation