Our Project –
Modification of Wind Sock
Structure
3 Sep 2007
Team Details
Team Name: Maintenance Team
Team Members:
Facilitator Mr Yeo Soo Hock
HSE Manager
Leader
Mr Rajandran
Senior Machinery Technician
Members
Mr Cheng Swee Guan Tong Hoi Site Manager
Mr Jagan Penta
Tong Hoi Site Supervisor
Mr Kalaivanan K
HSE Officer
Mr Foo Seck Ket
Lead Technician
Team Meetings
Team Participation
% of Attendance
100%
90%
100%
100%
100%
80%
100%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Oct-06
Nov-06
Dec-06
Jan-07
Feb-07
Project Schedule
Project Selection –
Brainstorming Session

Total 13 suggestions were contributed; only three were
qualified to be safety & health related project.

Three suggestions or safety concerns were as follows:
–
Problems/ Risks Involved When Changing of Wind
Sock.
–
Problems/ Risks Involved Using Emergency Chlorine
Shut-Off Valve.
–
Risks Involved Without Proper Access platform for
operating valves
Project Selection Matrix –
Risk Assessment
Safety & Health Problems/ Risks
No of
Potential
Hazards
Problems/ Risks Involved When
Changing of Wind Sock
Risk Level
10
Medium
Risk
Problems/ Risks Involved Using
Emergency Chlorine Shut-Off Valve.
6
Medium
Risk
Risks Involved Without Proper
Access Platform for Operating
Valves
3
Low Risk
SELECTED
Risk Assessment – Before Implementation
Infineum Singapore Risk Assessment
Rev 2 Jun 06
Job/Tasks:
Changing of Wind Socks
on Top of Tank Tops
Conducted by:
Rajandran, Cheng, Jagan,
Foo SK, Kalai
Reviewed
by:
Yeo Soo Hock – HSE
Manager
Date of
Conduct:
25 Oct 06
Remote
A
Occa
B
Freq
C
Major 1
Med risk
Hi risk
Hi risk
Mod’ 2
Low risk
Med risk
Hi risk
Minor 3
Low risk
Low risk
Med risk
Facilitator
S/N
1
(MOM Risk Matrix)
Hazard Identification
Man fall from height
Existing Control Measures
Risk Level
Use safety harness
Use man-cage with proper locking device
Use crane (after verifying its safe for use)
Ensure crane operator, lifting supervisor, rigger and fitters are competent for the
job.
Adhere to lifting procedures in HSE manual.
Adhere to Permit-To-Work System
Low Risk, A3
Supervisor at site to advise labourers and reduce the number of re-occurrences.
Medium Risk, C3
Take breaks in-between.
Take lots of water before and during work
Try to reduce wasting time or delays.
Low Risk, A3
Verify safe for use before commencement.
Adhere to lifting procedures in HSE manual.
Adhere to Permit-To-Work System
Ensure ground is firm for lifting
Medium Risk, B2
Verify safe for use before use
Low Risk, A2
2
Manual handling (pull, push, stretching)
3
Excessive Exhaustion –Long hours (fatigue)
4.
Crane failure – Crane topple
5.
Lifting gear failure- load fall from height
6
Labourer not understanding hazard.
Most of the
Hazards were
Due to Crane
Operation
Ensure workers are aware of hazards and competent for the work.
Supervision at site is enforced
Medium Risk, C3
7
Trip and fall
Ensure only essential materials are brought up tank top. Ensure housekeeping.
Low Risk, A2
8
Oil leak from crane
Ensure oil is contained if any spill
Low Risk, A2
9
Inhalation of vapour from tank hatch
Stop work and inform Shift Superintendent.
Low Risk, A2
10
Inclement weather
Stop work if there is risk of lightning and strong wind.
Low Risk, A3
Implementation
Steps of Operation BEFORE Implementing Selected Solution.
Step 1: Preparation
Prepare manpower, accessories
and crane service.
Step 2: Administration
Apply permits (cold work, lifting, road
closure permits). Conduct tool box
briefing. Inform control/guard room.
Validate document
Step 3: Site Inspection & LMRA
Cordon off to prevent unnecessary entry.
Conduct inspection with checklist
Conduct LMRA (Last Minute Risk
Assessment)
Step 4: Trial Lift
(w/o load)
Ensure all measures
taken prior to actual lift
Step 5: Lifting and
Change Wind Sock
Commence lift and
change wind sock
Step 6. Completion
Complete work and
finish off all
administrative work.
Location of Windsocks –
Before Implementation
Above Pipe Rack
Blending Process Unit
Illustration of
Changing Wind SockBefore
Implementation
Analytical Techniques –
Root Cause Analysis
Man
Method
5 wind sock
locations.
Apply PTW (crane,
road clearance
and lifting permit).
Barricading of
road
Machine
High cost
1 crane driver,
Set-up of crane
Long hours
for labour Use of
1 lifting sup,
and prep for
1 rigger &
Fatigue
Manual man-cage
operation.
2 fitters
handling
Lifting gear
Fall from
Potential crane
Too many
(pull push failure
height
topple
stretching)
procedures
High cost for
Fear of working at
Use of
Excessive equipment
to be
edge
of
tank
crane
coordination
adhered to.
Potential
Crane
Trip and fall
failure
risks/problems
Transport
excessive tools
and accessories
to the tank top.
Wind sock
comes in
different
sizes
Housekeeping
Windy
Change of
bearing
Fall from
height
Materials
Vapour
smell from
the tank
hatch
Lightning
risk
Oil leak from
crane
Exhaust from
crane
Environment
when changing
wind sock
Analytical Techniques
To reduce
all problems
by75%
75%
To reduce
all factors by
Safety
5
4.5
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
Method
Time
Human
Cost
Proposed Solutions

Proposal 1 - Telescopic Structure:
–
–
–
–

Proposal 2 - Pulley System:
–
–
–
–

Simple and effective idea
Not practical; Corrodes easily and flimsy.
Expose to inclement weather; possibility of the wind sock structure to
topple.
Expose to caught in between hazard while adjusting the telescopic pole
Not effective.
Design not suitable for strong wind condition.
Rope can get entangled with wind sock and pulley.
Pulley requires maintenance
Proposal 3 - Two-Section Structure
–
–
–
Safe, effective and strong
Easy to implement.
Minimum maintenance was required.
Proposed Solutions –
Selection
Proposed
Solution
Safety & Installation Cost Effectiveness
Within
Health
Cost
Saving & Efficiency
Team’s
Rating
Rating
Rating
Rating
Capability
Rating
Total
score
(Higher
the
score
the
better)
1.
Telescopic
Solution
6
8
7
7
9
37
2. Pulley
System
6
8
6
6
9
35
3. TwoSection
Structure
9
8
7
9
9
42
Selection Criteria Rating

Safety and Health - 1 is high (high risk) and 10 is low (0 hazard)

Installation Cost - 1 is high cost (>S$ 20, 000) and 10 is low
cost (<S$ 1000)

Cost savings - 1 is less savings (<S$ 1000) and 10 is high
savings (>S$ 20, 000)

Effectiveness and Efficiency - 1 is low (Less effective and
efficient) and 10 is high (Very Less effective and efficient)

Within Team Capability - 1 is low (take more than> 12 months
to implement proposal & and 10 is high (take less than 3
months to implement proposal )
Finalizing Selection

Selection of Proposal. Based on the ranking
score and comparison made in the evaluation of
proposed solutions, the team selected the “Two
Section Structure” solution.

Management Presentation.
– Short presentation of the study was tabled for the
management’s endorsement.
– Team was commended for its efforts and the
proposed solution was endorsed for
implementation.
Risk Assessment – After Implementation
Infineum Singapore Risk Assessment
Rev 2 Jun 06
Job/Tasks:
Changing of Wind Socks
on top of tank tops
Conducted by:
Rajandran, Cheng, Jagan,
Foo SK, Kalai
Reviewed
by:
Yeo Soo Hock – HSE
Manager
Date of
Conduct:
15 Jan 07
S/No
Facilitator
Hazard Identification
1
Man fall from height -There is no
longer a requirement to work using a
man-cage.
Remote
A
Occa
B
Freq
C
Major 1
Med risk
Hi risk
Hi risk
Mod’ 2
Low risk
Med risk
Hi risk
Minor 3
Low risk
Low risk
Med risk
(MOM Risk Matrix)
Existing Control Measures
(MOM Risk Matrix)
Risk Level
No hazards.
-
From
Minimal exposure to manual handling.medium to
low risk
No hazards.
2
Manual handling (pull, push, stretching)
3
No exhaustion – Each wind sock take no
longer than 30min to be fitted
4.
No usage of crane
No hazards.
5.
No usage of lifting gear
No hazards.
6
Labourer not understanding hazard.
Work is now simplified and straight forward. However, Last
Minute Risk Assessment (LMRA) is still enforced.
Low Risk, A2
7
Trip and fall
Labourer only needs to bring an extra wind sock up to the tank
top. Less materials on tank top. However, proper housekeeping
must be enforced at all times.
Low Risk, B3
8
Oil leak from crane- No usage of crane
No hazards.
9
Inhalation of vapour from tank hatch
Stop work and inform Shift Superintendent.
Low Risk, A2
10
Inclement weather
Stop work if there is risk of lightning and strong wind.
Low Risk, A3
From
medium to
low risk
Low Risk, B3
-
-
-
Implementation
Steps of Operation AFTER Implementing Selected Solution.
Step 1: Preparation
Standby man and spare wind sock
Step 2: Administration
Apply cold work permit only
Conduct LMRA (Last Minute Risk
Assessment)
Reduce/less
Step 3: Change wind sock
Change wind sock
•Steps
•Admin work
•Coordination
=> Leads to reduction in time => Less exposure to
HAZARDS
Re-Location of Windsocks –
After Implementation
Relocate all to
Tank/Roof-Top.
For better
accessibility and
proper/stable
platform
Illustration of
Changing
Wind SockAfter Implementation
Illustration of Changing
Wind Sock- After Implementation
Removing
Securing Pin
Replacing
Wind Sock
Fixing Back Wind
Sock Structure
Lowering Upper Section
Total Cost for
Implementation &
Installation
 Each
location: S$600/-Structure”
solution.
 Five
Locations: One-time Cost of
S$3,000/- only
Results Achieved –
Tangible Results
Cost Savings
Before
Implementation
After
Implementation
Crane Service
$300
$0
Labour Charge
$1000 (5 Men)
$200 (OMO)
Service bearing
$100
$0
For 5 locations:
$1400 x 5= $7000
$200 x 5 = $1000
P.E. Certification (one-time)
$500
$0
Total
$7500
$1000
Items
Annual Cost reduction by: 86%
Results Achieved –
Tangible Results
Save Time
 Before implementation :

–
Operation used to take two to three hours per location
–
For five locations: Approx: 15hrs
After Implementation:
Time reduction by (every year): 83%
–
–
Operation now takes 30min per location
The above calculations are done according to yearly maintenance
schedule. However, there are instances where ad-hoc maintenance
Formay
fivebelocations:
Approx: 2.5Hrs
required. Therefore,
further reductions can be expected.
Time Reduction by: 83%
Results Achieved –
Intangible Results

Safe operation and very minimum hazard exposure.

Reduce work steps (no machinery used, less man/ materials
utilized and minimum administration)

Increase productivity and morale of workers.

Enhance efficiency and maintenance effectiveness.

Less time waste (no need to wait for crane and applying
permit)

No possibility of environmental issues.

Confidence in our team’s ability to address and overcome
problems has been enhanced.

Teamwork, sense of team identity and team morale has
improved.
Variation of Results
Between Results & Initial Target:
Safety
5
4.5
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
Method
Human
1.5
1
0.5
0
Time
Cost
Risk Reduction
In Summary
Before Implementation
After Implementation
Number of
Hazards
10
5
Risk level
Medium Risk
Low Risk
Crane & man cage
(inherent high risk)
Crane/ man cage not
required.
Human Factor
5 men
OMO
Exposure
(Duration)
15Hrs
2.5 Hrs
(Reduce by 83%)
System/
Procedure
Need to comply with
many procedures/
requirements
Simplified/ reduction
in procedures to
enhance safety
Equipment
Standardization
Documentation

Management was kept abreast of the success.

Updated procedures.

Amended JSA was endorsed by the management

JSA maintained in accordance with WSH (Risk
Assessment) Regulations.
Review & Sustenance
Review for Future Improvement

No negative feedback but only positive on the implementation

Receptive to new ideas and future improvements

Continuous improvements to the existing projects
Team’s Next Project.

Working on with the second project under the project prioritization; i.e
“Problems/ Risks Involved Using Emergency Chlorine Shut-Off Valve”.
Review & Sustenance
Self Examination.

Team made up of committed colleagues and contractors.

Great success of this project reflects on the positive participation and
co-operation of the team members.

Project has given the team greater confidence and morale.

It has also revealed that with good team work and overwhelming
management support anything can be achieved.
Conclusion

Infineum Maintenance Team has always believed in making our plant
a safe working environment for our colleagues, contractors and
visitors.

The Maintenance Team looks forward for more challenges and
opportunity to enhance the safety and health in Infineum

Lastly, we all know that lifting equipment is the second highest
contributor of workplace deaths in 2006 and it has always been in
the area of safety concern.

Safety as a Culture in Infineum, we have taken steps to prevent
such occurrences in the plant and at the same time contributing to a
healthier nationwide safety statistics
The Maintenance
Team
Thanks you
Question
Time