Approving Deviations from Internal Requirements or How Production Can Increase Efficiency Without Compromising Safety: A Road Safety Example

Balance Between Safety and Production Continuity

Strict road safety requirements at production facilities often conflict with the realities of equipment operation. An immediate ban on using a vehicle due to a formal non-compliance leads to missed deadlines, conflicts with production departments, and financial losses. In this webinar, Dmitry Feoktistov explains in detail how transitioning from categorical bans to a managed deviation approval system allows maintaining operational efficiency without compromising safety.

Using the Irkutsk Oil Company (INK) as an example, the speaker demonstrates how implementing a flexible approach to violations helped not only reduce the injury rate by 44% but also save hundreds of machine-days by preventing unjustified equipment downtime.

Categorizing Violations: From Critical to Manageable

The foundation of the deviation system is a clear classification of defects and violations. The presentation details an approach where all non-compliances are divided into three categories:

• Critical violations (ban without exceptions). For example, issues with wheel fastening. In such cases, operation is stopped immediately, and no deviations are approved.
• Resolvable on-site. Foreign objects on the windshield or window tinting. The problem is solved on the spot, and no paperwork is required.
• Manageable deviations. Situations where immediate resolution is impossible (e.g., delayed delivery of winter tires due to complex logistics or lack of available spots in defensive driving courses), but the risk can be minimized.

Such a grading system allows road safety inspectors and contractors to work within a unified legal framework, eliminating subjectivity when making decisions about stopping transport.

Approval Mechanics and Compensatory Measures

A key element of the system, which the speaker analyzes using specific cases, is the development of risk reduction measures. A deviation is never approved just like that. For equipment with a defect (e.g., a windshield crack exceeding permissible limits, or a cab-over UAZ in the process of being phased out of the fleet) to continue working, the owner must implement compensatory measures.

For example, if tires with different treads are installed on the same axle and the delivery of new ones is delayed, operation may be temporarily permitted provided that snow chains are strictly used and a person responsible for control is appointed. If an inspector on the line discovers that compensatory measures are not being followed, it is equated to an unauthorized resumption of work and entails severe sanctions.

Transforming Work with Contractors: From Fines to Investments

Special attention in the report is given to changing the paradigm of interaction with contracting organizations. Instead of replenishing the company's budget through fines, INK recommends that partners direct these funds toward their own safety. As a result, contractors invested over 5 million rubles in equipping training classrooms, filming video briefings, and providing advanced driver training.

In addition, the deviation system allowed for the collection of a massive dataset, which showed that certain internal requirements (e.g., a strict limit on equipment age) do not have a real impact on the accident rate. This made it possible to shift them to an advisory status, reducing the financial burden on partners.

What You Will Learn from This Webinar:

• How to develop and implement a matrix of critical and permissible violations for vehicles?
• What compensatory measures allow for the safe operation of equipment until a defect is resolved?
• How to build a deviation approval process so that it does not turn into a bureaucratic barrier?
• How can contractors be motivated to invest in safety instead of paying fines?
• How to use accumulated statistics on deviations to optimize the company's internal standards?