PRO662

SAFETY IN DESIGN PROCEDURE
PRO662
PRO662 - SAFETY IN DESIGN PROCEDURE
Revision Control
Responsible
Revision Date Revision Details
Officer
DRAFT 23/07/2018 Clarification of framework Hendrik Tait
Rev A 03/08/2018 Concept for internal comment Hendrik Tait
Rev B 08/08/2018 Update Executive Summary & Roles & Responsibilities Hendrik Tait
Rev C 15/08/2018 Refine Contents List & update document Hendrik Tait
Rev D 20/08/2018 Update comments received Hendrik Tait
Rev 0 29/08/2018 Issue for TEG Review and Comment Hendrik Tait
Rev 01 15/10/2018 Issue for TEG Review and Approval Hendrik Tait
Rev 02 01/11/2018 Issue for QUU use Ken Vaheesan
Document Consultation
Comments
Revision Name Position / Function Date
Received
DRAFT Alan White Project Manager Y 23/07/2018
Rev A Steve Bourke Principal Engineer, Electrical Y 03/08/2018

Alan White Project Manager
Rev B Y 08/08/2018
Steve Bourke Principal Engineer, Electrical
Rev C Y 20/08/2018
Scott Stevens Civil
Rev D Y 24/08/2018
Harald Kemmetmuller Mechanical
Rev 0 Joann Kirby External Peer Reviewer Y 29/08/2018

Jack Ziebarth QUU TEG feedback Y 17/09/2018
Internal stakeholders Workshop feedback Y 21/09/2018
Robyn Donaldson QUU Safety feedback Y 10/10/2018
Rev 01
Frank Fornasier QUU Planning feedback Y 15/10/2018
Punu Gunasinghe
Sebastian Horvath
Rev 02 Ken Vaheesan QUU TEG approval Y 01/11/2018
Ron Hyde
Kym Bancroft
Doc ID: PRO662 Ver: 02 Active date: 01/11/2018

Doc owner: Scott Stevens Page 2 of 33
Please note: Printed copies of this document should be verified for currency against online version.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION............................................................................................. 5
1.1 Purpose ............................................................................................. 5
1.2 Acronyms and Abbreviations ......................................................... 5
1.3 Reference Documents ..................................................................... 7
1.4 Applicable Standards & Regulations.............................................. 8
1.4.1 Australian Standards ........................................................................ 8
1.4.2 Acts, Regulations and Codes of Practice ...................................... 9
1.4.3 Codes of Practice (Queensland).................................................... 9
1.5 Definitions ....................................................................................... 10
1.6 The Safety in Design Methodology ............................................... 13
1.6.1 The QUU Safety in Design Framework .......................................... 13
1.6.2 Roles and Responsibilities ............................................................. 15
1.7 Hazard Studies / Safety in Design Tools........................................ 18
1.7.1 Pre-requisites .................................................................................. 19
1.7.2 The HAZID Process.......................................................................... 20
1.7.3 The HAZOP Process ........................................................................ 21
1.7.4 The CHAZOP Process ..................................................................... 23
1.7.5 The CHAIR Process ......................................................................... 25
2. PROJECT RISK ASSESSMENTS ...................................................................... 27
2.1 The Purpose .................................................................................... 27
2.2 Timing ........................................................................................... 27
2.3 Typical Input Documents............................................................... 27
2.4 Team ........................................................................................... 27
2.5 Methodology .................................................................................. 28
3. SAFETY IN DESIGN REPORT REQUIREMENTS ............................................... 29
Table of Contents ....................................................................................... 29
Executive Summary ................................................................................... 29
3.1 Introduction .................................................................................... 29
3.1.1 Purpose of the Report .................................................................... 29
3.1.2 Assumptions ................................................................................... 29
3.1.3 Amendment of Report ................................................................... 29
3.1.4 Reference Document List .............................................................. 30
3.1.5 Standards and Regulation ............................................................. 30
3.1.6 Abbreviations List ........................................................................... 30
3.2 Hazard Studies conducted............................................................ 30
3.2.1 QUU Milestone 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 & 6 – Outstanding Issues ................... 30
3.2.2 Risk reduction to ALARP ................................................................. 30
3.2.3 Residual risks to be escalated ...................................................... 30

Appendices ........................................................................................... 30
APPENDICES ........................................................................................................... 31
Appendix A Safety in Design Functional Flowchart ............................ 31
Appendix B Resources Map for Hazard Study and Risk Assessment
Workshops ......................................................................... 32
Appendix C Consequence Descriptors (normalised for SID) ............. 33

1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Purpose
This Procedure outlines the framework pertaining to SID principles and techniques applied
during the delivery phases of all QUU projects.
This Procedure has been developed to assist Contractors and internal QUU persons with the
continuous improvement of all SID processes, by:
 A more integrative approach to SID, as depicted in figure 1 below. For guidance on
implementation of early hazard prevention strategies for design, i.e. finally towards
more efficient SID delivery.
 To meet the minimum regulatory obligations relating to safe design, in terms of the
given QUU WUC requirements. For guidance on the selection of appropriate design
review techniques, towards more effective SID delivery.
NOTE that this Procedure reflects the minimum QUU expectations and that any additional
SID processes, that may be required by local legislation or practice, must also be complied
with.
1.2 Acronyms and Abbreviations
In this Procedure, the following acronyms & abbreviations apply:

Item Description
ALARP As low as reasonably practicable – Refer Section 1.5 (this Procedure) for

definition
AS Australian Standard
Construction Hazard Assessment Implication Review
CHAIR1 - is performed at the conceptual stage of a design, which is the
best opportunity to make fundamental change, even though much of the
design is still to be determined.
CHAIR
CHAIR2 - focuses on construction and demolition issues and is performed
just prior to construction, when the full detailed design is known.
CHAIR3 - focuses on maintenance and repair issues and is performed at
the same time as the CHAIR 2 study.
CHAZOP Control/Computer HAZOP studies
C&I Control and Instrumentation
CIP Capital Investment Plan
CMP Construction Management Plan
D&C Design and Construct
EI&C Electrical, Instrumentation & Control Systems
FR Feasibility Report
FS Functional Specification
GA General Arrangement drawing (equipment)
HAZID Hazard Identification
HAZOP Hazard and Operability Studies
MCPS Minor Capital Project submission
OR&ES Operational Renewals and Enhancement submission
Operational Risk Register – QUU template TEM190 or equivalent,
includes:
ORR
 Sewage Treatment Risk Management Register (STRMR), or
 Network Management Risk Register, Safety (NMRRS)
P&ID Piping and Instrumentation Diagram
PCBU Person conducting a Business or Undertaking
PCN Process Control Narrative
PFD Process Flow Diagram
PM Project Manager
PRR Project Risk Register represented by the TEM183 template
QLD Queensland
QUU Queensland Urban Utilities

RA Risk Assessment
SDR Supplier Data Register – Refer Section 1.5 (this Procedure) for definition
SDS Safety Datasheet (chemical) formerly Material Safety Datasheet (MSDS)
So far as is reasonably practicable – Refer Section 1.5 (this Procedure) for
SFAIRP
definition
SID Safety in Design
SDRL Supplier Data Requirements List – Refer PRO395 Appendix C
SLD Single line diagram
SMP Safety Management Plan
SOW Scope of work
SOP Standard Operating Procedure
STEP Site Access, Tenure, Environment and Planning
STP Sewage Treatment Plant
WHS Workplace Health & Safety
WUC Work under the contract
1.3 Reference Documents
In this Procedure, the following QUU reference documents apply:

Item Description
MP71 Electrical Safety Management Plan
PRO84 Risk and Opportunity Management Procedure
PRO125 Safety Guide – Safety Risk Assessment Procedure
PRO359 WHS Resources, Responsibility and Accountability Procedure
PRO521 Safety in Design Standard Operating Procedure
PRO370 Gateway Decision Process for Capital Works
PRO395 Queensland Urban Utilities Addendum to: SEQ Water Supply and
Sewerage Design & Construction Code (SEQ WS&S D&C Code)
STD132 WHS Resources, Responsibility and Accountability Standard
TMS1651 Machine Safety Implementation
TEM579 QUU HAZID electronic recording template
TEM580 QUU HAZOP electronic recording template
TEM581 QUU CHAZOP electronic recording template
TEM582 QUU CHAIR electronic recording template
TEM183 QUU Project Risk Register (PRR)

TEM190 QUU Operational Risk Register (typical) template
1.4 Applicable Standards & Regulations
SID processes employed, must fulfil the requirements of statutory Local, State and
Commonwealth Authorities and current applicable Australian Standards. Alternatively,
where no Australian Standard exists, work must conform to the most current and applicable
International Standard. Where conflict exists between different Codes, Standards or
Regulations, the most onerous conditions of specification must apply unless accepted
otherwise in writing by QUU.
The Contractor must not deviate from the provisions of the relevant standard without first
obtaining agreement in writing from QUU. Particular standards and regulations relevant to
the work include but are not necessarily limited to the following:
1.4.1 Australian Standards
Item Description
AS 31000 Risk Management - Principles and Guidelines
AS 4024 Safety of Machinery
AS 4801 Occupational Health and Safety Management Systems
AS 61508 Functional safety of electrical/electronic/programmable
electronic safety-related systems
AS IEC 61511 Functional safety - safety instrumented systems for the process
industry sector
AS IEC 61882 Hazards and Operability (HAZOP) studies

1.4.2 Acts, Regulations and Codes of Practice
The current Acts, Regulations and statutory requirements of the State of Queensland,
Australia, must be complied with, including:
• Queensland Building Act 1975
• Queensland Building Fire Safety Regulation 2008
• Queensland Electrical Safety Act 2002
• Queensland Electrical Safety Regulation 2013
• Queensland Environmental Protection Regulation 2008
o Environmental Protection (Air) Policy 2008
o Environmental Protection (Noise) Policy 2008
o Environmental Protection (Water) Policy 2008
• Queensland Fire Emergency Act 1990
• Queensland Registered Professional Engineers Act 2002
• Queensland Work Health and Safety Act 2011
• Queensland Work Health and Safety Regulation 2011
1.4.3 Codes of Practice (Queensland)
 National Construction Code 2016, volumes 1, 2, 3 and The Guide

 Queensland Electrical Safety Code of Practice 2013 – Managing electrical risks in the
workplace
 Queensland Electrical Safety Code of Practice 2010 - Working near overhead and
underground electric lines
 Queensland Electrical Safety Code of Practice 2010 – Works
Other Queensland Work Health and Safety related Codes of Practices for design, build,
maintain and demolition requirements
 Abrasive blasting code of practice 2013
 Concrete pumping code of practice 2005
 Confined spaces code of practice 2011
 Demolition work code of practice 2013
 Excavation work code of practice 2013
 First aid in the workplace code of practice 2014
 Formwork code of practice 2016
 Hazardous manual tasks code of practice 2011
 How to manage and control asbestos in the workplace code of practice 2011
 How to manage work health and safety risks code of practice 2011
 How to safely remove asbestos code of practice 2011
 Labelling of workplace hazardous chemicals code of practice 2011

 Managing noise and preventing hearing loss at work code of practice 2011
 Managing risks of hazardous chemicals in the workplace code of practice 2013
 Managing risks of plant in the workplace code of practice 2013
 Managing the risk of falls at workplaces code of practice 2018
 Managing the work environment and facilities code of practice 2011
 Mobile crane code of practice 2006
 Safe design of structures code of practice 2013
 Scaffolding code of practice 2009
 Steel construction code of practice 2004
 Tilt-up and pre-cast construction code of practice 2003
 Tower crane code of practice 2017
 Traffic management for construction or maintenance work code of practice 2008
 Welding processes code of practice 2013
1.5 Definitions
In this Procedure the following definitions apply, so as to provide a common basis for
understanding of the overall intent of the QUU SID framework.
Item Description
ALARP The ALARP principle is that the existing controls have reduced
the residual risk as low as reasonably practicable, to
demonstrate ALARP the cost/effort involved in reducing the risk
further would be grossly disproportionate to the benefit/risk
reduction gained.
PRO84, QUU Risk and Opportunity Management Procedure,
pg15

Code of Practice A code of practice provides practical guidance for people who
have work health and safety duties. These codes give guidance
on:
 how to achieve the standards required under the Act
 effective ways to identify and manage risks.
NOTE that from 1 July 2018 persons conducting a business or
undertaking are required to comply with an approved code of
practice under the QLD Work Health and Safety Act 2011.
Alternatively, duty holders can follow another method, such as
a technical or an industry standard, to manage hazards and
risks, as long as it provides an equivalent or higher standard of
work health and safety to the standard required in the code.
https://www.worksafe.qld.gov.au/laws-and-compliance/codes-
of-practice
Contractor / Principal The entity bound (including sub-Contractors appointed by the
Contractor Contractor) to execute the work having responsibility for
design, manufacture and supply, delivery, documentation and
other functions as further defined in the documents related to
the work.
PRO395 Addendum – Queensland Urban Utilities Addendum to
SEQ Water Supply and Sewerage Design & Construction Code
Gateway Processes Gateway decision processes are generally applied to QUU
programs or projects at key decision points. The processes
describe a series of decision gates through which a proposed
project must proceed. In terms of this guideline, SID advice is
provided to decision makers from both internal and
independent third parties, as required, to support the decision-
makers at the various gates.
Gate 1 Project Creation
Gate 2 Project Justification
Gate 3 Pre-market Submission
Gate 4 Post-market Submission
Gate 5 Project Closure and Review
Gate 6 Benefits Realisation
QUU PRO370, Gateway Decision Process for Capital Works
Project Documentation Governing technical documents for the specific items(s) for the
specific works included or referenced in the Contract

Project Milestones Point within a project where progress is verified by the

completion of a design activity or a point which marks the start
of a design activity. The Contractor must submit a complete set
of documents applicable to each milestone. The documentation
and delivery milestones, nominated in the SDRL for the project,
are typically -
Milestone 1 Investigation Work
Milestone 2 Concept Design
Milestone 3 Approvals
Milestone 4 Design Development
Milestone 5 Full Design Detail
Milestone 6 Final Approved Design
QUU Infrastructure Delivery: Project Specification, Part A -
Standard General Specifications
Reasonably Practicable Reasonably practicable means that which is, or was at a

particular time, reasonably able to be done to ensure health
and safety, taking into account and weighing up all relevant
matters including:
 the likelihood of the hazard or the event concerned
occurring the degree of harm that might result from the
hazard or
 the risk what the person concerned knows, or ought
reasonably to know, about the hazard or event, and ways of
eliminating or minimising the risk
 the availability and suitability of ways to eliminate or
minimise the risk
 after assessing the extent of the risk and the available ways
of eliminating or minimising the risk, the cost associated
with available ways of eliminating or minimising the risk,
including whether the cost is grossly disproportionate to
the risk.
https://www.worksafe.qld.gov.au/laws-and-
compliance/workplace-health-and-safety-laws/definitions
SFAIRP Safe Work Australia introduced a model Workplace Health and
Safety Act 2011. It places an obligation upon employers and
PCBU’s to reduce risks to health and safety so far as is
reasonably practicable (SFAIRP).
In conclusion, all duties under the WHS Act are qualified by the
term 'reasonably practicable' – Refer definition in this table,
above.
https://www.worksafe.qld.gov.au/laws-and-compliance
Supplier Data Register The supplier data register provides a tabular listing including
(SDR) but not limited to deliverable type code, specification
reference, and description of the deliverable type as per the
code. The document must also specify date required to submit

the deliverable, as well as identify whether the deliverable is for

mandatory approval or information only. The SDR is issued by
the Contractor to QUU on a regular periodic basis and minimum
update is fortnightly. The SDR is used by QUU to track the
status of all documentation on the project.
PRO395 Addendum – Queensland Urban Utilities Addendum to
SEQ Water Supply and Sewerage Design & Construction Code
Squad checks Is a multi-discipline engineering review by the Contractor, of all
the design documentation, done under the supervision of the
designated RPEQ’s. To ensure that the design is fit for purpose
and meets the project requirements, signed off as approved
and ready for scheduled hazard study.
1.6 The Safety in Design Methodology
Currently, the SID process is left until the design is almost complete, before conducting the
review session (so-called HAZOP etc.) resulting in many things to belatedly require fixing in
the design. The purpose of this procedure is to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of
the SID practice.
PRO521, the SID standard operating procedure, and related PRO125, General Risk
Assessment procedure, emphasises
 EARLY INTERVENTION: The aim of SID is to ensure the health and safety of persons
who may have interactions with the infrastructure being designed by considering
hazards as early as possible in the planning and design approach.
 ALL AFFECTED PARTIES: SID practices take into consideration the safety of all persons
who may interact with the infrastructure being designed. This includes those who
construct, operate, clean, maintain and demolish the infrastructure.
 LIFECYCLE: SID involves successfully balancing a wide set of design objectives (i.e.
practicality, aesthetics, cost, functionality), without compromising the health and
safety of those persons potentially affected by the infrastructure over its life.
1.6.1 The QUU Safety in Design Framework
The SID functional flowchart, depicted in Appendix A of this Procedure, outlines the extent
and boundaries of the SID application at QUU, highlighting the overall workflow pertaining
to;
1.6.1.1 Requirements
QUU, in conjunction with any likely outsourced planning function(s), starting the process off
with a well-structured internal scoping of the prospective project – making sure to identify
and highlight critical hazards and potential flaws that may have a major design impact on a
project, giving due consideration to the QUU Gateway Decision Process for Capital Works, by
 Gate 1 – Project Creation: Permission for the project to be created and enter the CIP
Stakeholder identification and engagement pertaining to download the associated ORR and
establish the initial PRR to inform amongst other, the Safety in Design requirements.

 Gate 2 – Project Justification: Permission for the project to proceed from planning
and solution identification to detailed design and delivery
i. Review initial PRR ex Gate 1
ii. Assess/options evaluation – identify risks with each option
iii. Identify project Scope that can be delivered with minimal risk – Lock in
preferred options, include risk assessment.
NOTE whilst every endeavour has been made to refer to critical Safety in Design tools, this
procedure should not restrict the Facilitator from engaging another appropriate Safety in
Design tool.
 Gate 3 – Pre-market submission: Permission to approach the market with an agreed
procurement and delivery strategy
Handover project / program to Infrastructure Delivery.
Hazards raised during planning and recorded in the project risk register template, TEM183 is
communicated in Project Documentation
 Gate 4 – Post Market Submission: approval of contracts to engage the preferred
supplier
SID track record of Contractor
 Gate 5 – Project Closure and Review
QUU PM making sure residual project risks i.e. Admin Controls and outstanding Medium or
higher risks are uploaded to the pertinent ORR.
1.6.1.2 Integrated Design
Safety consideration during design development – NOTE that, in the process of designing
projects, it will not always be possible to clearly delineate who has responsibility, and in
which circumstances, for the elimination or minimisation of hazards associated with the
project. The duties may be concurrent and overlapping.
In practical terms, success in the delivery of SID, strongly depends on whether
 it forms a key part of the Contractor’s SMP for the project.
 is integrated with all the Contractor’s design processes (including outsourced 3rd
party and/or vendor design activities)
 is fully implemented on the project, with identified risk prevention actions
satisfactorily addressed and reported on in the final report – Refer Section 3 of this
Procedure.
1.6.1.3 Due-diligence
The emphasis is on the corporate governance responsibilities. Designers must show that
they have taken reasonable steps to address all the credible hazards associated with the
design.
The tab colours legend for the hazard studies template/spreadsheet Doc Numbers. TEM579
to 582 respectively, are:
 Red - Introductory pages, which must be filled out by the Contractor in collaboration
with the designer, prior to the SID workshop and not altered during the workshop

 Green - Working pages or node sheets, which are to be used during the workshop.
 Blue - Closure pages, which are to be used by the Contractor, after the workshop,
once agreed actions have been implemented and closed.
 Grey - Template sheets. These sheets are not to be altered at any time (with the
exception of the guidewords set to be adjusted only if necessary prior to the
workshop) as the overall spreadsheet functionality is dependent on these.
1.6.1.4 Reporting
The outcomes from the SID (Hazard studies) sessions conducted are recorded in the
relevant QUU electronic template, respectively – HAZID template TEM579, HAZOP template
TEM580, CHAZOP template TEM581 and the CHAIR template TEM582 respectively. Section 3
of this Procedure describes the specific format and typical topics that the Contractor must
cover in the SID Report to be submitted to QUU, for acceptance at the specified project
milestones, as nominated in the project documentation.
The outcomes of the associated project risk workshops are recorded in the designated
project risk register (PRR, template TEM183), provided with the tender documents, which
entail
1. QUU Planning Group is responsible for pre-populating the register with project
specific risks, nominated at Gates 1 & 2.
2. The Contractor must schedule and conduct project risk workshop(s) as required
during Gates 3 & 4. The up to date PRR must be submitted to QUU on request.
3. The QUU PM is finally responsible for uploading of the residual risk items into the
pertinent ORR, at Gate 5.
1.6.2 Roles and Responsibilities
Roles and responsibilities, from a SID perspective, can be complex and it should be noted
that “some design tasks, although related, may be controlled by different parties due to the
contractual arrangements. In a design and construct or collaborative project delivery model,
the primary collaboration will be between the QUU PM and the Contractor PM, with
participation of the Designer subject to the terms of their engagement”, as depicted in Figure
2 below.

The following table highlights the key roles engaged and corresponding responsibilities for
safe design outcomes from the delivery of QUU projects.
Persons with Control Responsibility for achieving safe design outcomes

Project Manager An appropriately qualified person who has been assigned the
responsibility to manage a fixed asset design or modification
on behalf of (i) QUU or (ii) the Contractor respectively
The PM is the single point of contact, typically responsible for:
 Ensuring compliance with this procedure for their project
 Ensuring all actions are adequately completed
 Selecting suitably qualified facilitators for hazard studies
 Lessons learned are communicated to QUU stakeholders
Designer A person who conducts a business or undertaking (PCBU)
whose profession, trade or business involves:
(i) Preparing sketches, plans, drawings, documents,
directions, or advice (verbal or written) for infrastructure,
facility or equipment including variations to existing
infrastructures, facilities and equipment.
(ii) Making decisions for incorporation into a design that
may affect the health and safety of persons who construct,
use or carry out other activities in relation to the structure.
Note that a person conducting a business or undertaking who
alters a design without consulting the original designer will
assume the duties of a designer. Any changes to the design of
a structure may affect the health and safety of those who
work on or use the structure and must be considered by the

person altering or modifying a design.
Workplace Health & Safety Qld, Safe design of structures, Code of
practice [2013] and
WHS Act 2011 Section 22
Contractor The Contractor has duties to confirm that the construction
work is planned and managed in a way that eliminates or
minimises health and safety risks so far as is reasonably
practicable.
The Contractor may also be a designer if they undertake
design work or if they alter or modify a design without
consultation with the original designer. Design changes must
also be certified by RPEQ and the Contractor must confirm, in
the SID Report, that any changes they make to the design
does not create additional risks to health and safety.
Facilitator & Scribe The workshop is performed by a group of people who are
(workshop) involved in the design and construction of the project, the
composition of the team being dependent on the scope and
nature of the design under review – Refer Appendix B of this
Procedure, for a Resources Map for different SID workshops.
Note that the success of the workshop is strongly dependent
upon the ability of a facilitator to select and use the
experience and expertise of the study team to critically
evaluate the design. It is recommended that the facilitator
should have the following attributes:
 Facilitator must have an engineering qualification relevant
to the project scope;
 Facilitator must be independent and not involved or
connected with the design of the specific project, in any
way;
 An understanding of the principles of SID and construction
with, as a minimum, a broad understanding of the project;
 The ability to bring out the views of a diverse range of
people participating in the workshop to constructively
challenge the design concept;
 The ability to keep workshop on track and moving along
(issues that can’t be resolved relatively quickly should be
listed for action outside the workshop).
NOTE that the facilitator nomination must be accepted, by
the QUU PM, before a SID workshop commences.
Registered Professional All workers and Contractors performing work related to QUU
Engineer of Qld (RPEQ) assets shall comply with the Queensland Professional
Engineers Act 2002 (PE Act):
 professional engineering services for Queensland are

required to be carried out by a registered professional

engineer of Queensland (RPEQ); and
 a person can carry out professional engineering services
for Queensland whilst unregistered if they are carrying
out the services under the direct supervision of a RPEQ
who is responsible for the services.
 A professional engineering service is defined as a service
that requires, or is based on, the application of
engineering principles and data to a design, or to a
construction, production, operation or maintenance
activity, relating to engineering.
Note the requirement for RPEQ is not limited to design.
Final design documents are to include a record of the RPEQ
responsible for the work.
The Board of Professional Engineers of Queensland (BPEQ)
regulates the profession of engineering in Queensland. The
main function of BPEQ is the administration of the PE Act and
managing the RPEQ system.
The Professional Engineers Act 2002 and the Professional
Engineers Regulation 2003 can be downloaded from the BPEQ
website http://www.bpeq.qld.gov.au.
The Table, depicted in Appendix B of this Procedure, defines the minimum expertise
required for conducting SID workshops.
1.7 Hazard Studies / Safety in Design Tools
The overall intent of SID is to systematically and comprehensively identify and assess
hazards and associated risks to Health, Safety, Environment and Financial Performance and
examine whether actual and potential negative impacts can be avoided, or their magnitude
reduced, during design.
Due diligence requirements emphasise the corporate governance responsibilities of QUU

and Contractors and must demonstrate that reasonable steps were taken to:
 acquire and update their knowledge of health and safety and environmental matters
 understand the operations being carried out by the PCBU in which they are
employed, and the hazards and risks associated with the operations
 ensure that the PCBU has, and uses, appropriate resources and processes to
eliminate or minimise health and safety and environmental risks arising from work
carried out
 ensure that the PCBU has appropriate processes in place to receive and respond
promptly to information regarding incidents, hazards and risks
 ensure that the PCBU has, and uses, processes for complying with duties or
obligations under the Work Health and Safety Act 2011 (the WHS Act) and for
verifying compliance with those duties.

The purpose of this section is then to highlight the practical execution of SID, by the
assessment and elimination or control of hazards, associated with QUU projects, using
recognised technical hazard studies and SID tools, to make sure that –
 a rigorous process has been conducted to identify and analyse all possible hazards
/ adverse events that may arise
 all such adverse events / hazards are reduced to ALARP – Hierarchy of Controls
apply
o PM, Designer and Contractor are responsible until they formally pass the
prevention of the risk to QUU
o Presence and effectiveness of engineered risk preventions must be
referenced in the PRR
o The pertinent ORR must contain references to the documents and systems
which show how the residual risk is controlled
1.7.1 Pre-requisites
The pre-requisites for planning and execution of the hazard study workshops, entail
 The Contractor must appoint the Facilitator and Scribe – in accordance with
Section 1.6.2 of this Procedure. QUU will nominate the facilitator if the
Contractor’s proposed candidate is not accepted by the QUU PM.
 The Contractor must schedule and issue workshop invitations timely (i.e. minimum
notice period is 10 business days before workshop is held).
 The Contractor must compile, in conjunction with the Facilitator and Scribe, the
i. Agenda and
ii. Design documentation pack for review. The Contractor must issue design
documents, a minimum of 10 days prior to the workshop for preview by all
nominated attendees.
NOTE: QUU review period is 10 business days, unless specified otherwise in the project
documentation. QUU stakeholder review comments must be returned to the Contractor
and the SID studies based on QUU review comments being incorporated into the design.
The project schedule must make adequate allowance for design documentation review
period, followed by SID workshops.
 The Contractor must pre-populate associated register(s), done in conjunction with
the Facilitator, for presentation at the workshop session (preliminary input
information)
o The Hazard studies templates – TEM579, TEM580, TEM581 & TEM582, and,
o The project risk register – TEM183
 QUU will make available and monitor key resources required for each workshop
session. Where QUU does not provide the independent faculty engineer(s), the
Contractor must provide independent engineers, acceptable to the QUU PM.
NOTE every nominated team member must delegate a suitable responsible person with
decision making authority to attend in place thereof.

 Note that QUU review comments to the design documentation must be returned
to the Contractor before the SID workshop is held. The SID workshop must be
based on the QUU review comments being actioned or addressed in the design
documentation.
 Where 3D model is specified for the Project, the model must be reviewed and
accepted by the stakeholders.
1.7.2 The HAZID Process
1.7.2.1 The Purpose

Support the design activity by the identification of significant hazards associated with the
design for a project and to develop adequate safeguards to control any imposed risks.
Furthermore, the HAZID must consider early constructability and commissioning so design
can allow for these phases to be efficiently completed and de-risk the project.
1.7.2.2 Timing
Contractor must undertake the HAZID during the concept design Gate – generally done at
30% design progress, usually during the project milestone 2 Gate. The Project
Documentation will define milestone when HAZID must be done.
1.7.2.3 Typical Input Documents for HAZID
 Equipment GAs – mandatory
 Site Layouts and Elevations – mandatory
Where 3D model is specified for the Project, the model must be provided showing
access, egress and layout of all equipment items including location of operator
control facilities.
 Existing Process Flow Diagram (PFD) for any brownfields Projects.
 The Contractor pre-populates the electronic HAZID template for validation and
update during the HAZID workshop – Refer TEM579 for standard HAZID template.
1.7.2.4 Team
The team composition must be agreed between the QUU PM and the Contractor PM. It
normally, as a minimum, includes:
 Independent Facilitator supported by Scribe
 Project Manager(s) – QUU and Contractor
 Designer (e.g. electrical, mechanical, civil/structural, process engineers)
 Independent technical specialists, as required (e.g. electrical mechanical,
civil/structural, process engineers)
 QUU Operations representation (site)
 QUU Maintenance representation (site)
 QUU Health & Safety representative
 A competent 3D operator (if 3D model is applicable)
Refer Appendix B - Resources Map for Hazards and Risk Assessment workshops.

1.7.2.5 Methodology
Practically, it is a guideword driven process, similar to HAZOP, to review preliminary hazards
associated with a project, which amounts to in brief:
 Confirm session is duly represented (establish a quorum – Attendance register
signed)
 “Breakdown Structure” defined in the AGENDA – Refer TEM579 for electronic
template details
 Outline design intent and allow time for clarification questions.
o Where 3D model is specified for the Project – walk thru the model to
familiarise stakeholders
o Where 3D model is not specified for the Project – provide photos of existing
site and equipment.
 Review previous actions and update any progress to date (as applicable)
 Apply custom HAZID guidewords, embedded in template TEM579, to stimulate
discussions regarding potential hazardous events and their associated
consequences. Refer list of HAZID guidewords in TEM579.
 The Scribe records significant hazard outcomes in the HAZID record, TEM579, for
Contractor distribution to all involved parties.
1.7.2.6 Post workshop activities
The actioned parties undertake appropriate risk prevention activities before final closure
and sign-off of actions noted. Done by Contractor in collaboration with QUU persons at the
workshop.
1.7.3 The HAZOP Process
1.7.3.1 The Purpose

To review the detailed design and/or procedures to identify hazards and significant
operability problems, in particular, due to abnormal modes of operation.
1.7.3.2 Timing
Required for projects involving the process operations, at all QUU sites. The HAZOP
workshop is generally done at milestone 2 and outstanding items revisited at milestone 4
design completion. The Project Documentation will define the milestone when HAZOP must
be done.
1.7.3.3 Input Documents for HAZOP
 Piping & Instrumentation Diagram (P&ID) – mandatory
 Process flow diagrams (PFD) – optional
 Process Control Narrative (PCN) – mandatory
 Functional Specification (FS) – optional
 Instrument loop diagrams – optional
 Single line diagrams (SLD) – optional

 Plant layout drawing and equipment general arrangement (GA) – mandatory

 Isolation / pressure relief philosophy – mandatory
 Commissioning plans and procedures – optional
 Safety Data sheets (formerly MSDS) – mandatory
 The Contractor pre-populates the electronic HAZOP template for validation and
update during the HAZOP workshop – Refer TEM580 for standard HAZOP template.
1.7.3.4 Team
The team composition must be agreed between the QUU PM and the Contractor PM. It
normally, as a minimum, includes:
 Independent Facilitator supported by the Scribe
 Designer (e.g. process, mechanical and C&I engineers)
Note: civil/structural and electrical engineers are not required at HAZOP, unless
specified otherwise by QUU
 Independent technical specialist, as required (e.g. process, mechanical and controls
& instrument engineers)
 QUU Maintenance representation (site)
 Depending on the type of process to be reviewed, attendance by others may be
required, e.g. QUU Health & Safety, Environment. The QUU PM will determine if
required.
1.7.3.5 Methodology
HAZOP studies are conducted in general accordance with AS IEC 61882, which amounts to in
brief:
signed)
 The Designer outlines the design intent and allow time for clarification questions by
o Explaining the design and its representation.
o Explaining how a defined deviation can occur and the corresponding system
response
o Explaining the operational context within which the element under study
will operate, the operational consequences of a deviation and the extent to
which deviations may be hazardous
 Specialist(s) – provide expertise relevant to the system and the study. May be called
upon for limited participation with the role revolving amongst different individuals
 Review previous actions and update any progress to date (as applicable)

 So-called NODES defined in the AGENDA and highlighted on master P&ID’s – The
detailed “Node by Node” study commences at this point. Apply HAZOP guidewords,
embedded in template TEM580, to stimulate discussions regarding deviations from
the design intent for adequate understanding of potential causes/consequences and
associated safeguards provided in the design.
 If, in the opinion of the team, the combination of the consequences and the
likelihood of occurrence are sufficient to warrant action, as the existing safeguards
are not deemed adequate, then additional risk prevention action(s) is required.
 The Scribe, as instructed by the Facilitator, must record significant hazard outcomes
in the HAZOP record TEM580 and reach consensus on matters arising.
and sign-off of actions noted. Note that for major risk areas, a situation may require more
quantitative assessment – to be done off-line by the Contractor
1.7.4 The CHAZOP Process
1.7.4.1 Purpose
The importance of electrical, electronic and programmable electronic systems in safety
related applications, is steadily growing. If the control system is sufficiently complex for the
facility, it may be useful to consider this system in a separate HAZOP (sometimes referred as
a CHAZOP; the ‘C’ prefix used to indicate computer based – both control and protective) or
as a discrete component of a more general HAZOP.
CHAZOP must be looked at as three distinctly different, but consecutively run Gates. Each
Gate involves a systematic and critical review using guidewords similar to those used in
HAZOP.
 System CHAZOP
 Loop CHAZOP
 Sequence CHAZOP
All projects with control systems components must have a CHAZOP unless specified
otherwise in the Project Documentation.
1.7.4.2 Timing
Starting the CHAZOP typically requires that the control system design meets the
requirements set out in the control system functional specification and that
(i) the HAZID is completed and
(ii) a design review and process HAZOP has been completed and all outstanding items
are actioned.
 The System CHAZOP is undertaken prior to ordering the Automation / Control /
Protection system equipment.
 The Loop CHAZOP is undertaken when any critical instrument loops have been
configured and certainly before all loops design are completed. This will identify the
requirements for the entire system and set standards for further design.

 The sequence CHAZOP is undertaken, similar to Loops, once any sequences within a
system have been documented in the functional specification. This will identify
particular requirements of the system and set standards for further design.
The Project Documentation will define milestone when CHAZOP must be done.
1.7.4.3 Typical Input Documents for CHAZOP
 Piping & Instrumentation Diagram (P&ID) – mandatory
 Process Control Narrative (PCN) – mandatory
 Functional Specification (FS) – mandatory
 Instrument loop diagrams – mandatory
 Single line diagrams (SLD) – optional
 Commissioning plans and procedures – mandatory
 The Contractor pre-populates the electronic CHAZOP template for validation and
update during the CHAZOP workshop – Refer TEM581 for standard CHAZOP
template.
1.7.4.4 Team
The team composition must be agreed between the QUU PM and Contractor PM and must
include the following resources:
 Independent Facilitator supported by the Scribe
 Designer (e.g. process and controls & instrument engineers)
Note: electrical engineers only required during electrical protection system review,
unless specified otherwise by QUU
 Independent technical specialist, as required (e.g. process and controls & instrument
engineers)
 QUU Control System maintenance representation
1.7.4.5 Methodology
Considered where the process demands a control system with high reliability and
complexity. All QUU projects with Control and Instrumentation scope require a CHAZOP. In
such cases, a CHAZOP study entail, in brief:
signed)
 The “breakdown structure” must be defined in the AGENDA – Refer TEM581 for
electronic template details.
 Outline applicable Gate of the design System/Loop/Sequence and allow time for
clarification questions

 Review previous actions from SID workshops and update any progress to date with
required control system, process control functionality
 The detailed study commences at this point. Apply applicable CHAZOP guidewords,
embedded in template TEM581, to stimulate discussions regarding deviations from
the design intent for adequate understanding of potential causes/consequences and
associated safeguards provided in the design.
 If, in the opinion of the team, the combination of the consequences and the
likelihood of occurrence are sufficient to warrant action, as the existing safeguards
are not deemed adequate, then additional risk prevention action(s) is
recommended.
 The Scribe, as instructed by the Facilitator, must record significant hazard outcomes
in the CHAZOP record and refer to TEM581 and reach consensus on matters arising.
and sign-off of actions noted. Note that for major risk areas, a situation may require more
quantitative assessment – to be done off-line by the Contractor.
1.7.5 The CHAIR Process
1.7.5.1 The Purpose

Construction hazard assessment implication review (CHAIR) is a tool to assist designers,
constructors, QUU and other key stakeholders to come together to reduce construction,
maintenance, repair and demolition project risks.
1.7.5.2 Timing
The CHAIR workshop must occur before 100% design is issue. It typically occurs around 80%
design at milestone 5 completion with the CHAIR2 part focusing on construction and
demolition issues and is performed just prior to construction, when the full detailed design is
known. The CHAIR3 part focuses on maintenance and repair issues and is performed at the
same time as the CHAIR2. The Project Documentation will define the milestone when CHAIR
must be done.
1.7.5.3 Typical Input Documents for CHAIR
 Equipment GAs, installation details, site plans showing laydown areas and access
ways etc. – mandatory
Note that, where 3D model is specified for the Project, the model must be complete,
before the CHAIR workshop commences.
 Construction methodology – mandatory
 Commissioning plans and procedures – mandatory
 The Contractor pre-populates the electronic CHAIR template for validation and
update during the CHAIR workshop – Refer TEM582 for standard CHAIR template.
1.7.5.4 Team
Performed by a group of people who are involved in the design and construction of the
project, the composition of the team being dependent on the scope and nature of the

design under review. The team composition must be agreed with the QUU PM. It normally,
as a minimum, must include:
 Independent Facilitator supported by a Scribe
 Project Manager(s) – (QUU and Contractor)
 Designers (e.g. electrical, mechanical, civil/structural engineers)
Note: process and C&I engineers are optional
 Site construction Contractor and representatives
 Commissioning representation (QUU Manager and Contractor engineer)
 Operations representation (site)
 Maintenance representation (site)
 A competent 3D model operator (if 3D model is applicable)
1.7.5.5 Methodology
A CHAIR provides a structured forum to ensure there is opportunity to foresee construction,
maintenance, repair and demolition hazards, so the hazards can be eliminated or reduced to
ALARP, as part of the design process.
signed)
 Outline the construction process and partition CHAIR into logical blocks of
appropriate size, in the AGENDA – Refer TEM582 for electronic template details.
 Review previous actions from SID workshops and update any progress to date (as
applicable).
 Walk through the 3D model, where 3D model is specified in the Project
Documentation.
 The detailed study commences at this point. For each logical block, use various
guidewords, embedded in template TEM582, to assist with the identification of
safety aspects/issues. Assess whether the proposed risk controls (i.e. expected
safeguards, etc.) are appropriate and conform the risk SFAIRP.
 The Contractor must record significant constructability outcomes in the electronic
record, TEM582 and reach consensus on matters arising.
 The Scribe records significant hazard outcomes in the CHAIR record on display, for
Contractor distribution to all involved parties at completion of the workshops.
The Contractor undertakes appropriate risk prevention activities before 100% design
documentation is issued for review.

2. PROJECT RISK ASSESSMENTS

PRO84 QUU Risk and Opportunity Management Procedure outlines the QUU risk and
opportunity management framework, which is a business wide risk management process
with a governance structure and processes that are based on AS/NZS ISO 31000 Risk
Management – Principles and Guidelines.
Risk assessment is a collaborative process between the contractor (designer) and QUU. QUU
stakeholders must participate in the project risk workshop and the contractor must get QUU
stakeholder acceptance of the proposed controls and residual risk levels.
The Contractor must include in the CMP a detailed risk analysis of every aspect of WUC, that
presents potential risks to the project. This includes but is not limited to anything that could
cause delays, develop into unsafe work practices, cause an environmental incident or place
the installation of the equipment and other works in jeopardy.
2.1 The Purpose
The risk analysis must document the policies and processes used by the Contractor to
manage the project risks in accordance with the principles of AS/NZS/ISO 31000.
2.2 Timing
Project risk and opportunity workshops must be conducted on a regular basis, in accordance
with the project delivery schedule. Done at the end of each SID workshop as a minimum.
2.3 Typical Input Documents
The project risk register (PRR) template, TEM183, is provided with the tender documents
issued by QUU to the Contractor, which must contain important project specific risks
nominated in Gate 1 and 2.
2.4 Team
The team composition must be agreed between the QUU PM and the Contractor PM and
may include the following resources:
 Facilitator supported by the Scribe
 Designer (e.g. civil/structural, mechanical, electrical, C&I, process engineers)
 Independent Engineer (e.g. civil/structural, mechanical, electrical, C&I, process
engineers)
 QUU Operations representative
 QUU Maintenance representative
 QUU Health & Safety representative
 QUU Environmental representative
 Contractor site supervisor
Refer Appendix B for mandatory participants at a project risk assessment workshop.
Note: QUU performs RA without contractor present and especially in early Gates 1, 2 3 and
on ad hoc projects that are not capital works.

2.5 Methodology
 Gates 1, 2 & 3: Infrastructure Services (Planning) and Portfolio Investment (Planning)
must collate all existing ORR entries pertinent to scoping of a project. An internal risk
assessment must be conducted and ensure important project specific risks are
incorporated into the project SOW.
 Gates 4 and 5: The Contractor must schedule and conduct project risk workshop(s)
as required, which must assess Consequence Category, as a minimum: Health,
Safety, Environment, Financial Performance, using the Consequence Descriptors
(normalised for SID), cited in Appendix C of this Procedure. Minutes of these risk
workshops and the PRR must be maintained and updated regularly, by QUU PM, as
required throughout the phases of project delivery. This up to date PRR must be
submitted on request by the Contractor, at any stage of the Project delivery.
 The QUU PM updates the PRR items at Gate 6 to the pertinent ORR. Only items that
need to be managed by Operations get uploaded to the ORR. Note that all identified
risks get recorded in the PRR, including validating preventions and precautions for
risk reduction, to ALARP.
 Note that only Medium and above risks are uploaded to the pertinent ORR.

3. SAFETY IN DESIGN REPORT REQUIREMENTS

[Replace the blue text with]
The Contractor must provide a SID Report and submit the report and updated PRR within 10
business days of the SID workshop completion.
The following sections describe the specific format and typical topics that the Contractor
must cover in the SID reports submitted to QUU at each project milestone.
Table of Contents
This section must list all the sub section numbers and page numbers in the SID Report.
Executive Summary
Summary of SID processes to date. The summary must highlight (i) level of hazard reduction
by design and (ii) any higher than LOW risks recorded in the PRR that are likely to require
significant scope changes or control measures with significant associated costs.
3.1 Introduction
This section must provide a concise summary of

Background details of the project
Scope of the project and applicable Design and/or Construct Gates
The Contractor’s SID processes and methodology adopted for the project
3.1.1 Purpose of the Report
The purpose of the report is to provide a record of the hazard identification activities
undertaken and findings. The intent of the hazard studies is to provide the evidence that the
appropriate reliable hazard identification activities have been carried out in accordance with
the relevant process standard.
3.1.2 Assumptions
This section lists and discusses all assumptions made in undertaking the SID delivery on the
project
3.1.3 Amendment of Report
The SID report must be written by the Contractor, for final review by the Facilitator, before
being issued to QUU.
The Contractor must provide QUU with an approved management of change (MOC)
methodology pertaining to any amendment to SID workshop reports and/or any design
modifications and/or additions resulting.

3.1.4 Reference Document List
This section contains a table listing all documents by QUU number and revision number that
are referred to in compiling the SID Report. Where no QUU document number(s) exist, the
Contractor must consult QUU to generate new document numbers.
3.1.5 Standards and Regulation
All Australian and International standards (where relevant) to the report must be listed in a
table in this section. The version and title must be indicated. All documents such as hazard
study registers are included in the Appendix of the SID report, for future reference.
3.1.6 Abbreviations List
This section contains a table indicating all abbreviations and acronyms used throughout the
report – Refer Table in Section 1.2 of this Procedure.
3.2 Hazard Studies conducted
This section highlights the HAZID, HAZOP, CHAZOP, CHAIR workshop outcome report(s), with
particular reference to design evidence pertaining to Action Closure and Sign-off records.
This SID report must be prepared and maintained as a live document during the design and
construction phase of the project. Separate section required for each workshop.
3.2.1 QUU Milestone 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 & 6 – Outstanding Issues
The PRR contains notes and references that support Close Out of risk items - highlight any
outstanding issues.
3.2.2 Risk reduction to ALARP
This section details risks that have been reduced, but still need to be managed by the
Contractor during construction and by the Operations Manager according to a documented
SOP.
3.2.3 Residual risks to be escalated
Details risks that were neither eliminated or able to be reduced to LOW risk, by changes to
the design, as per QUU risk criteria, cited in Appendix C of this procedure.
Appendices
List the project SDR by Doc No and Title

PRO 662 - SAFETY IN DESIGN PROCEDURE
APPENDICES
Appendix A Safety in Design Functional Flowchart

Doc owner: Scott Stevens Author: Hendrik Tait Review date: Reviewer: Ken Vaheesan Page 31 of 33
Appendix B Resources Map for Hazard Study and Risk Assessment Workshops
SID Workshop
Team Member Project Risk
HAZID HAZOP CHAZOP CHAIR
Assessment
Project Manager – QUU and Contractor M M M M M
Facilitator M M M M M
Scribe M M M M M
Designer – faculty list below
Process M M TBA TBA TBA
Civil/Structural M NR NR M TBA
Mechanical M M NR M TBA
Electrical M TBA TBA M TBA
Instrumentation and Control System TBA M M TBA TBA
Independent Technical Specialists
Process M M TBA TBA TBA
Civil/Structural M NR NR M TBA
Mechanical M M NR M TBA
Electrical M TBA TBA M TBA
Instrumentation and Control System TBA M M TBA TBA
Operations representative (QUU) M M M M M
Maintenance representative (electrical / mechanical) M M TBA M M
Health & Safety representative (QUU) M TBA TBA TBA TBA
Site supervisor (Contractor) NR NR NR M TBA
Commissioning engineers (QUU & Contractor) TBA TBA TBA M TBA
Environmental representative (QUU) TBA TBA TBA TBA TBA
M mandatory attendance at SID workshop
TBA to be advised by QUU PM, depending on Project Scope
NR not required

Appendix C Consequence Descriptors (normalised for SID)

Extracted from PRO84 Section 8 Risk Criteria, for Safety in Design application
Health & Safety Environment Financial Performance
Employees, contractors & public are Further guidance on consequence ratings of Financial losses or
impacted in terms of injury, illness environmental impacts, please see Environmental unplanned expenditure
Aspects and impacts Guide (PRO249) is incurred by QUU
Catastrophic Fatality and/or amputation of a
Long term (>5 years) impact to the natural
limb/appendage.
environment; and Widespread impact and public
Long term/terminal illness resulting in
concern. >50% of project budget
a lost time injury greater than 1
month
There is a duty to notify the Regulator of this event.
Permanent disability.
Major Medium to long-term (1-5 years) impact to the natural
Serious/hospitalisation injury resulting
environment; and localised (catchment or suburb)
in a lost time injury greater than 2 >30% to ≤50% of project
impact and a high level of public concern.
days budget
Long term disability.
Moderate Illness < 4 days resulting in a lost time
Temporary (1 month to 1 year) impact to the natural
injury of 1 to 2 days.
environment; and Controlled site impact with a
Near miss relating to high risk activity. >20% to ≤30% of project
moderate level of public concern.
Short term disability / suitable duties budget
injuries
Medical Treatment Injury
Minor First Aid Transient (< 1month) impact to the natural
Near miss relating to non-high risk environment; and Controlled site, single local impact
>10% to ≤20% of project
activities, including manual handing with low level of public concern.
budget
near miss
Short term illness There is a duty to notify the Regulator of this event.
Insignificant No impact or potential impact.
No public concern.
Other Near miss events. <10% of project budget
No offence.
There is no duty to notify the Regulator of this event.


PRO662

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

PRO662

Uploaded by

Document Information

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

PRO662

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

SAFETY IN DESIGN PROCEDURE

Rev A Steve Bourke Principal Engineer, Electrical Y 03/08/2018

Rev 0 Joann Kirby External Peer Reviewer Y 29/08/2018

Doc ID: PRO662 Ver: 02 Active date: 01/11/2018

Doc ID: PRO662 Ver: 02 Active date: 01/11/2018

Doc ID: PRO662 Ver: 02 Active date: 01/11/2018

1.2 Acronyms and Abbreviations

In this Procedure, the following acronyms & abbreviations apply:

Doc ID: PRO662 Ver: 02 Active date: 01/11/2018

Doc ID: PRO662 Ver: 02 Active date: 01/11/2018

1.3 Reference Documents

In this Procedure, the following QUU reference documents apply:

Doc ID: PRO662 Ver: 02 Active date: 01/11/2018

TEM190 QUU Operational Risk Register (typical) template

1.4 Applicable Standards & Regulations

1.4.1 Australian Standards

Doc ID: PRO662 Ver: 02 Active date: 01/11/2018

1.4.2 Acts, Regulations and Codes of Practice

1.4.3 Codes of Practice (Queensland)

 National Construction Code 2016, volumes 1, 2, 3 and The Guide

 Labelling of workplace hazardous chemicals code of practice 2011

Doc ID: PRO662 Ver: 02 Active date: 01/11/2018

Doc ID: PRO662 Ver: 02 Active date: 01/11/2018

Project Milestones Point within a project where progress is verified by the

Reasonably Practicable Reasonably practicable means that which is, or was at a

Doc ID: PRO662 Ver: 02 Active date: 01/11/2018

the deliverable, as well as identify whether the deliverable is for

1.6 The Safety in Design Methodology

1.6.1 The QUU Safety in Design Framework

Doc ID: PRO662 Ver: 02 Active date: 01/11/2018

Doc ID: PRO662 Ver: 02 Active date: 01/11/2018

1.6.2 Roles and Responsibilities

Doc ID: PRO662 Ver: 02 Active date: 01/11/2018

Persons with Control Responsibility for achieving safe design outcomes

work on or use the structure and must be considered by the

Doc ID: PRO662 Ver: 02 Active date: 01/11/2018

required to be carried out by a registered professional

Due diligence requirements emphasise the corporate governance responsibilities of QUU

Doc ID: PRO662 Ver: 02 Active date: 01/11/2018

Doc ID: PRO662 Ver: 02 Active date: 01/11/2018

1.7.2 The HAZID Process

1.7.2.1 The Purpose

Doc ID: PRO662 Ver: 02 Active date: 01/11/2018

1.7.3 The HAZOP Process

1.7.3.1 The Purpose

Doc ID: PRO662 Ver: 02 Active date: 01/11/2018

 Plant layout drawing and equipment general arrangement (GA) – mandatory

Doc ID: PRO662 Ver: 02 Active date: 01/11/2018

1.7.4 The CHAZOP Process

Doc ID: PRO662 Ver: 02 Active date: 01/11/2018

Doc ID: PRO662 Ver: 02 Active date: 01/11/2018

1.7.5 The CHAIR Process

1.7.5.1 The Purpose

Doc ID: PRO662 Ver: 02 Active date: 01/11/2018

Doc ID: PRO662 Ver: 02 Active date: 01/11/2018

2. PROJECT RISK ASSESSMENTS

Doc ID: PRO662 Ver: 02 Active date: 01/11/2018

Doc ID: PRO662 Ver: 02 Active date: 01/11/2018

3. SAFETY IN DESIGN REPORT REQUIREMENTS

This section must provide a concise summary of