Transcript Slide 1

Process Safety Management:
Some Lessons from Recent Incidents
Presentation to the
Introduction to Environmental,
Health & Safety Workshop
CSChE 2008 Conference
Ottawa, ON, October 21, 2008
Graham Creedy, P.Eng, FCIC, FEIC
Senior Manager, Responsible Care®
Canadian Chemical Producers’ Association
(613) 237-6215, [email protected]
Origins of this Workshop
• Why Process Safety Management?
• Knowing (and meeting) the regulations is
important; but is not enough – especially in
Canada
• Need to Know:
– How to spot the hazards
– Why and How defences fail
– How to communicate
2
Personal safety hazards can sometimes be
easy to spot; but major hazards are often not
obvious
• Keep an open mind about hazards – do not assume
that if it is important, someone else would have noted it
• Know the basic hazard identification & risk assessment
techniques and when to use them
• If using a contractor for this, know enough to watch for
competence
3
Why and How Defences Fail
• People often assume systems work as
intended, despite warning signs
• Examples of good performance are cited as
representing the whole, while poor ones are
overlooked or soon forgotten
• Failure modes and effects analysis (FMEA)
should include human and organizational
aspects as well as equipment, physical and IT
systems
4
Avonmouth, UK 1996
• Although not recent, it is a classic
example of a latent failure
• Hazard of material known, but lack of
awareness of potential system failure
mode leads to defective procedure
design
5
Ghent, WV 2007
• Hazards well-known and supposedly
covered by equipment and procedure
design
• Latent errors in procedure execution
allow actual practice to deviate from
assumed
6
Danvers, MA 2006
• Hazards known, but defences
compromised by apparently benign
change
• Latent error in procedure design
creates vulnerability to likely execution
error
7
Port Wentworth, GA 2007
• Hazard of material not obvious (despite
history)
• Latent error allowed dust to accumulate,
creating conditions for subsequent
events
8
James Reason’s “Cheese Model”
shows how the layers of protection intended to control
hazards are not perfect, but are subject to holes that can
increase over time if not monitored carefully. Eventually
the holes are such that enough defences fail, leading to a
major incident
9
The Process Safety Management Guide
• Summarizes CCPS
approach in handy, short
booklet
• Available as free download
from CSChE’s PSM division
website, in English and
French (or as booklet, for
nominal fee)
• Website:
http://psm.chemeng.ca
10
Self-assessment of Current Status
Process Safety Management
Requirements to Achieve the ESSENTIAL Level
For each survey question, indicate the level of awareness and use at the site by marking the appropriate box, based
on the following:
A page from the
“HISAT” Site SelfAssessment Tool,
available on the PSM
Division website
http://psm.chemeng.ca
A
Widespread and comprehensive use wherever significant hazard potential exists.
B
Moderate use, but coverage is uneven from unit to unit or not comprehensive in view of potential
hazards.
C
Appropriate personnel are aware of this item and its application, but little or no actual use.
D
Little awareness or use of this item.
Mark the box labeled "Help" if this is an item where you are in urgent need of guidance. We’ll have a team member
contact you with advice on how and where to get the information or help.
1.
(b) Is there a system for control of contractor operations?
(b) Is there current comprehensive documentation covering the process
operating basis, including both normal and abnormal conditions?
   

   

   

   

   


   
   

   
11
   
   
Process Safety Review Procedures for Capital Projects
(a) Are all project proposals for new or modified facilities subjected to
documented hazard reviews before approval to proceed?
(b) Are systems established to ensure that the facility is built as designed?
(c) Is there an effective link between design modifications and operating
procedures?
4.

Process Knowledge and Documentation
(a) Are the safety, health and environmental hazards of materials on site
clearly defined?
3.
Current Status
A
B
C
D
Accountability: Objectives and Goals
(a) Are responsibilities clearly defined and communicated, with those
responsible held accountable?
2.
Want
Help
Process Risk Management
(a) Is there a system, conducted by competent personnel, to identify and
assess the process hazards from materials present at this site?
(b) Are corrective actions defined and implementation followed up?
(c) Are the above items formally documented?


Understanding and sizing up the hazards
• The US Chemical Safety Board
website www.csb.gov has case
studies and videos – great for
understanding and “Could it happen
here?”
• Center for Chemical Process Safety
(CCPS) guide
– Easy to use
– Describes hazard evaluation
procedures
– Explains when and how to use them
www.aiche.org/ccps
12
Percent
adoption
When communicating, remember
the New Product Introduction Curve
• Categories differ by ability and more importantly, motivation
• Where is your org, and your boss, on this curve?
13
Dealing with a Safety (or Engineering) Problem
•
Finding out who you’re dealing with
– Where is the organization on the curve? (generally, and re the specific issue or
problem)
– Where are the people you’re dealing with on the curve? (generally, and re the issue
or problem)
•
Finding out what to do
– “Benchmark” – don’t try to reinvent the wheel unless you’re sure there isn’t one
already (or you’ve time and it’s fun to do so)
– Find out what others are doing about it
– Read the instructions
– Identify/define the issue
– If it’s likely to be regulated, check with government agencies, trade associations,
web, internet
– If not regulated but likely good industry practice, check suppliers, other users of
same material or item, other users of similar items, other industry contacts – but
test the info!!! (cross-check, ask if it makes sense)
– Check standard reference works,(Lees, CCPS, etc)
•
Doing it
– Try to think of all situations that are likely to occur (process, eqpt, people)
– “KISS”, keep it user-friendly, show basis for decisions if practical to do so
– Follow up afterwards to see how it’s working
14
Questions?
15