Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Table of Contents
1. PURPOSE ....................................................................................................................... 3 2. APPLICABLE CODES AND STANDARDS...................................................................... 3 3. HAZOP STUDY TEAM COMPOSITION .......................................................................... 3 4. TECHNICAL INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................ 4 5. REFERENCE DOCUMENTS .......................................................................................... 6 6. ANALYSIS PROCEDURE ............................................................................................... 6 7. RISK CHARACTERIZATION ......................................................................................... 11 8. FORMS USED .............................................................................................................. 13 9. SCHEDULE AND LOCATION ....................................................................................... 14 ATTACHMENT : SAMPLE OF HAZOP WORKSHEET
Of these personnel, several are often only part-time participants but remain on call for assistance. 4. TECHNICAL INTRODUCTION 4.1 The HAZOP Study will be performed during the process plants detailed design or during operating the existing process plant. There are two principal advantages of using the HAZOP Study during the process plants detailed design.
4.2
(1) It can identify potential hazards and operability problems at a time when they can be corrected at minimal cost and disruption. (2) It can help the development team identify and/or develop operating guidelines that can be used throughout the life of process. 4.3 The HAZOP Study shall be performed based on the following sequence.
(1) The Piping and Instrument Diagrams (P&IDs) for HAZOP Study will contain all requirements for Start-up, S/D, catalyst regeneration, Vendor, APC, LIMS, all modes of operation and so on. (2) P&IDs will be reviewed by COMPANY, CONTRACTOR, Licensors (if applicable) (3) The comments of P&IDs review will be incorporated in the P&IDs. (4) The HAZOP Study will be performed for these P&IDs, which are incorporated the comments of P&IDs review, and necessary changes incorporated in the detailed design. 4.4 This is a simple, structured methodology for hazard identification. It is an investigation technique that is designed to inspire imaginative thinking (or brainstorming) by a team of experts to identify hazards and operational problems while examining a process or system in a thorough and systematic manner.
4.6
4.7
4.8
4.9
4.10 A related premise for the HAZOP study is that the safety / environmental rules and regulations are followed by operating and maintenance personnel. This means that the facility safety features are not bypassed, or process guarantee are not exceeded and maintenance is not performed without proper administrative controls so that the facility does not endanger anyone. It also means that the equipment is tested, inspected, and maintained according to approved policies and that the operators are trained to operate the unit in accordance with approved written operating procedures.
6. ANALYSIS PROCEDURE The sequence of activities followed during a HAZOP Study is as follows. 6.1 Introduce Team Members : A short biographical sketch by each team member that identifies the skills and experience that each brings to meet the expectations of the study. Conduct HAZOP Orientation
6.2
6.2.1 HAZOP Methodology A presentation is made by the team leader of the methodology to be used in the HAZOP Study. This establishes a common starting basis for the team that is necessary to conduct an effective HAZOP Study. This is done by guiding the team members through an example or two of a typical HAZOP session.
9. Identify and record safeguards or protection provided to reduce likelihood or severity of consequences. 10. Evaluate and record frequency of cause and consequences (see likelihood table) 11. Record risk level (see risk ranking matrix table). 12. Record the recommendation to mitigate and prevent the consequences, if risk rank is 1 or 2. 13. Repeat for each guideword applicable to parameter. 14. Repeat for each parameter for study node. 15. Mark study node completed on P&ID when all appropriate parameters considered. 16. Repeat for each study node. 17. Repeat for each P&ID.
No flow
Higher Lower Vacuum pressure pressure Higher Lower Temperature temperatu temperatu re re Excessive Poor Mixing No mixing Foaming mixing mixing Higher Lower Level No level level level Higher Lower No Reverse Incomplet Side Reaction reaction reaction reaction reaction e reaction reactions rate rate Time Too long Too short
Wrong reaction
Wrong time Part of Extra Wrong Step too Step too Step left Step Sequence step left action action late early out backwards out included taken Other parameters : Hardware Failure ; pH ; heat capacity ; number of phases ; flash point ; viscosity ; static charge ; specific concentration ; etc. 7. RISK CHARACTERIZATION 7.1 Risk Ranking During the initial stages of the HAZOP study, Team leader establishes a riskranking matrix with severity rankings and frequency rankings to allow for a qualitative assessment of the consequences of each hazard. This matrix allows the HAZOP team to screen each identified hazard and to assign a ranking and recommend suitable measures to eliminate/mitigate high ranked hazards. To accomplish this qualitative assessment of risk, each hazard event is ranked through a team consensus judgment in two ways : first, deciding the severity of the consequences of the event, and second, deciding the expected frequency or likelihood of the scenario resulting in the consequences identified for the hazard.
Table 3. Assignment of Severity and Likelihood Categories Consequence Severity Category Public Worker Property A Major release of AHM Loss of life Major fire or explosion and/or loss of production B Moderate release of AHM Severe injury or Moderate fire or explosion disability and/or loss of production C Small release or AHM Loss time injury but Small equipment damage or no disability loss of production D Very small release of AHM First aid injury but no Minor equipment damage or with no significant offsite disability minor loss of production impact E Not a significant hazard Not a significant Not a significant hazard hazard AHM : Acutely Hazardous Material Consequence Likelihood Category 1 Likely; may occur as often as once in an operating year in any similar plant 2 May occur; frequency between once a year and once in 10 operating years or at least once in 10 similar plants operated for 1 year 3 Not likely; frequency between once in 10 years and once in 30 operating years or at least once in 30 similar plants operated for 1 year 4 Very unlikely; frequency of less than once in 30 year or less than once a year in 30 similar plants operated for 1 year 5 Not probable
5 NP NP NP NP NH
Increasing
Risk Decision Criteria Risk Rank 1 2 3 4 Recommendation Unacceptable - should be mitigated to risk rank 3 or lower as soon as possible Undesirable - should be mitigated to risk rank 3 or lower within reasonable period Acceptable with controls - verify that procedures, controls, and safeguards are in place Acceptable as is - no action is necessary
7.3
Recommendation HAZOP Study team shall recommend addition, deletion or modification to be made in plant for mitigating or eliminating the consequences of hazard events identified during the HAZOP Study.
8. FORMS USED 8.1 Microsoft Excel program will be used for recording and documenting the HAZOP Worksheets. HAZOP Study information is recorded onto Worksheets (a sample Worksheet is attached), showing the deviations resulting from the combinations of guide words and process parameters, causes and any resulting consequences, risk ranking, and suggested actions to prevent or mitigate the consequences. Each Worksheet has a banner at the top that identifies the company, facility, date of the review session, the node and parameter reviewed, and the design intention of the
8.2
8.3
The HAZOP team shall identify possible means of reducing the severity or likelihood associated with a deviation, or a possible plant improvement. In addition, the team indicates the organization or group that shall be responsible for implementing the recommendation in the By column. The Recommendation column is also used to identify additional information needed for completing the review of a particular deviation. Wherever applicable, consequences of a particular deviation are worded such that obtaining the information would confirm the scenario. The Comments column is used to record drawing corrections that are required for evaluation of the node and to document any assumptions made by the team in developing the HAZOP scenarios.
8.4
8.5
9. SCHEDULE AND LOCATION The HAZOP Study will be performed on all P&IDs at CONTRACTORs offices, Seoul, Korea. The schedule of HAZOP Study is as follow: HAZOP for Utility & Offsite : May 17, 2004 ~ May 21, 2004 Wrap up meeting for Utility & Offsite : May 24, 2004 HAZOP for Process 1 & 2 : May 31, 2004 ~ June 11, 2004 Wrap up meeting for Process : June 14 ~ 15, 2004
L 4 3
SAMPLE
4 3
3 4
3 4
Less Flow (Pilot) PCV-001 malfunctions or Possible pilot flameout. misoperated or manual valve Heater shutdown. or strainer plugging or XV-001/070 fails closed.
Loss of main burners. Heater shutdown. Possible backflow of nitrogen to fuel gas drum. Upset in entire fuel gas system.
C PALL-057. BAL-001A-C. Start-up procedure. PDI-138. Valve position indicator for XV-001/070. C Valve position indicator.
2 3
Consider locating vent downwind of ignition sources. Also consider a hydrocarbon detector. Consider a low pressure alarm on PI-067.
LGEN
LGEN
3 4
LGEN