首页> 外文会议>Institution of chemical engineers symposium on hazards >DETERMINING PROCESS SAFETY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS FOR MAJOR ACCIDENT HAZARDS USING SITE PROCESS HAZARD INFORMATION
【24h】

DETERMINING PROCESS SAFETY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS FOR MAJOR ACCIDENT HAZARDS USING SITE PROCESS HAZARD INFORMATION

机译:使用现场过程危险信息确定主要事故危险的过程安全性能指标

获取原文

摘要

Historically process plant key performance indicators (KPI) for safety have been developed through the experience of the site safety/operations personnel and considering information which was easily available. The information mainly included the records of compliant and non-compliant maintenance/inspection/testing routines and the historic incidentear miss data.Such performance indicators are mostly retrospective, or lagging, as they are based on data relating to how the plant had been operated. Although this is a good record of the historic performance, such indicators do not predict the future performance or trends of the assets. To do this leading performance indicators are required which can help to improve the safety/environment performance of the assets, by showing where there are potential weaknesses in the systems which need addressing before an incident occurs.The UK Health and Safety Executive (HSE) are in the process of addressing this discrepancy through the roll out of the implementation and follow-up to HSG 254 - Process Safety Performance Indicators (PSPI). The guidance is based on how safety and environmental performance measurement is related to major hazards associated with the process and site. The guidance, and HSE's associated training package, enables operators to determine relevant leading and lagging indicators based on a systematic review of the hazards of the site.High hazard process sites in the UK have identified major hazard scenarios in order to comply with COMAH regulations, and most other non-COMAH sites have some form of hazard identification record.This paper describes how the systematic development of PSPIs can be managed with the minimum of additional work, by using data from existing hazard identification studies (for example those developed for COMAH compliance). The methodology defines/selects leading and lagging PSPI to address the highest safety and environmental risks identified which ensures that relevant information is used to drive the performance improvements for the assets.This paper also addresses how PSPI can be developed, using slightly modified hazard identification techniques, where asset hazard identification documentation is not readily available.
机译:历史上,过程安全的关键工厂绩效指标(KPI)是根据现场安全/运营人员的经验并考虑易于获得的信息而制定的。这些信息主要包括合规和不合规的维护/检查/测试程序记录以及历史事件/附近未命中数据。此类性能指标大多是追溯性的或落后的,因为它们是基于与工厂运行方式有关的数据经营。尽管这是历史业绩的良好记录,但此类指标无法预测资产的未来表现或趋势。为此,需要领先的绩效指标,通过显示事件发生之前需要解决的系统中潜在的弱点,从而有助于改善资产的安全/环境绩效。英国健康与安全执行官(HSE)通过实施和后续实施HSG 254-过程安全绩效指标(PSPI)来解决这一差异。该指南基于安全性和环境绩效测量与过程和现场相关的主要危害之间的关系。该指南以及HSE的相关培训包,使操作员能够根据对现场危险的系统评价来确定相关的领先指标和滞后指标。英国的高危险过程现场已经确定了主要的危险场景,以符合COMAH法规,本文描述了如何利用现有的危害识别研究数据(例如为符合COMAH要求而开发的数据)以最少的额外工作就能管理PSPI的系统开发)。该方法定义/选择了领先和落后的PSPI以解决所识别的最高安全和环境风险,从而确保使用相关信息来推动资产的性能改善。本文还介绍了如何使用经过轻微修改的危害识别技术开发PSPI。 ,其中尚不存在资产危害识别文档。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号