Comparing PHA Review Techniques: A Case History on Review Meeting Dynamics and Missed Hazards

摘要

Complete, thorough, and correct process safety management depends to a large extent onrncomplete, thorough, and correct process hazard identification. Not enough attention is given inrnthe industry to the failure to identify hazards at process hazard analysis (PHA) review meetings.rnFindings from the examination of incidents and disasters in industry indicate that not all processrnhazards are recognized during PHA reviews, and yet a ―check the box‖ mentality persists. Thisrnis unacceptable: We cannot manage a hazard if we don’t know that it exists. Lives and propertyrndepend on managing all the hazards, not just the ones we happened to find on a particular day.rnHazOp is widely recognized as the standard for conducting thorough PHA reviews. But does itrnalways work? If not, why not? And what can we do to improve our odds of identifying all thernhazards that exist in a given process facility?rnIn this case study, outcomes of actual HazOp reviews in the oil & gas industry are categorizedrnand compared with the results of a ―cold eyes‖ structured what-if examination method.rnDifferences in the success rate of methodologies to identify process hazards are quantified andrndiscussed with the aim of improving the industry success rate in identifying process hazardsrnduring PHA reviews in a cost-effective manner.