Page 223 - Pipeline Risk Management Manual Ideas, Techniques, and Resources

9/200Additional Risk Modules
Table 9.2 Example adjustments to incorrect Operations Index for the three positive indicator categories
Point change from previously calculated Percent change applied to previously
Condition Inc Ops Score calculated Inc Ops Score
Presence of any Category I positive indicators +I2 +I5
Presence of any Category 11 positive indicators +8 +IO
Presence of any two Category I11 positive indicators +6 i5
Combined maximum +20 +25

High stress -20 pts or -25% reduces the incorrect operations index by 7 points in considera-
Neutral 0 pts tion ofthese conditions.
Low stress +20 pts or +25%
The following example scoring scenarios use the point Example 9.3: Lower stress conditions
adjustment option (rather than percentage adjustment) from the
previous adjustment tables. At this site, the evaluator finds an unusual openness and
communication level among the employees. Reporting rela-
Example 9.1: Neutral stress conditions tionships seem to be informal and cordial. Almost everyone at a
meeting participates enthusiastically; there seems to be no
In the work environment being scored, the evaluator sees a reluctance to speak freely. A strong sense of teamwork and
few indications of overall high stress. Specifically, she cooperation is evidenced by posters, bulletin boards, and direct
observes an increase in accident/error rate in the last 6 months, observation of employees. There appears to be a high level of
perhaps due to a high workload recently and loss of some expertise and professionalism in all levels, as shown in the audit
employees through termination. On the other hand, she for other risk items. Absenteeism is very low; the unit has been
observes a high sense of teamwork and cooperation, an overall accident free for 9 years-a noteworthy achievement consider-
high motivation level, and low absenteeism. Although the acci- ing thz amount of vehicle driving, hands-on maintenance, and
dent rate must be carefully monitored the presence of positive other exposures of the work group.
as well as negative indicators does not support a situation The evaluator identifies Category I, 11, and 111 items,
unusual enough to warrant point adjustments for stress assesses this as an unusually low stress situation, and adds 18
conditions. points to the incorrect operations index. The full score of 20
points is not applied because the evaluator is not as familiar
with the work group as she could be and therefore decides that
Example 9.2: Higher stress conditions an element ofuncertainty exists.
In this workplace being scored, the evaluator assesses condi-
tions at a major pumping station and control room. There are
some indications that a higher than normal level of stress II. Sabotage module
exists. In the last year, many organizational changes have
occurred, including the dismissal of some employees. This is The threat of vandalism, sabotage, and other wanton acts of
not a normal occurrence in this company. Job security con- mischiefare addressed to a limited degree in various sections of
cerns seem to be widespread, leading to some competitive this risk assessment such as the third-party dumuge and design
pressures within work teams. Upper management reported indexes. This potential threat may need to be more fully consid-
many employee complaints regarding supervisors at these ered when the pipeline is in areas ofpolitical instability or pub-
sites during the last 6 months. There is no formal suggestion lic unrest. When more consideration is warranted, the results of
system in place--employees have taken it on themselves to this module be incorporated into the risk assessment. For pur-
report dissatisfactions. In light ofjob security issues, the eval- poses here, the term sabotage will be used to encompass all
uator feels that this is an important fact. Records show that in intentional acts designed to upset the pipeline operation.
the last 6 months, absenteeism has risen by 5% (even after Sabotage is primarily considered to be a direct attack against
adjusting for seasonalityta figure that, taken alone, is not the pipeline owner. Because ofthe strategic value of pipelines and
statistically significant. The evaluator performs informal, ran- their vulnerable locations, pipelines are also attacked for other
dom interviews of three employees. After allowing for an reasons. Secondary motivations may include pipeline sabotage as
expected amount of negative feedback, along with a reluctance
to “tell all” in such interviews, the evaluator nonetheless An indirect attack against a government that supports the
feels that an undercurrent of unusually high stress presently pipeline
exists. Accident frequencies in the last year have not increased, A means of drawing attention to an unrelated cause
however. A protest for political, social, or environmental reasons
The evaluator identifies no Category I items, possibly one A way to demoralize the public by undermining public confi-
Category I1 item (the uncertain absenteeism number), and two dence in its government’s ability to provide basic services
Category I11 items (general negativity, high complaints). He and security.