Comparison and Critical Review of Process Hazard Analysis Methods for Risk Management Plans at Flammable Fuel Storage Facilities

摘要

This paper describes Risk Management Plans (RMPs) implemented at three liquefied natural gas (LNG) facilities in Northern California, with a focus on the process hazard analysis (PHA) performed at each of the three facilities. For the first facility, the PHA was conducted with the hazard and operability (HAZOP) analysis method, a guide word stimulated method that produces a very thorough analysis of the hazards and operability of a process. Subsequent PHAs at the other two facilities were performed using "What-if", a brainstorming method, and Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA), a structured assessment of facility failure modes and relative consequences. This paper focuses on comparison of the different PHA methods used for each of the LNG facilities. The case studies describe the PHA methods used for the purposes of defining potential hazards, which in turn were used to address worker/public safety in facility engineering as well the release analyses for the offsite consequence analyses. Through the PHA and RMP development process at these facilities, process improvements were implemented in the installed facility configurations. A critical review and benefits of each method are discussed relative to the associated costs, and observations made that may assist in future decisions as to selection of method and levels of effort to expend in RMP PHAs. The first facility described in this paper was funded in part by Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) from the California Energy Commission (CEC) through a competitive process to fund a demonstration project for cost-effective production and end use of clean fuels. The two subsequent facilities were fully funded by PG&E as part of PG&E's Clean Air Transportation program vision. PG&E believes that these processes can be implemented anywhere for a cost-effective and safe production or distribution of LNG or CNG for clean fuel vehicle fleets.