The purpose of the HAZOP study is to check deviation from the design intent.
HAZOP is an essential Technique to identify, Risk assess and are properly manage Process Hazards .
Using systematic structured way HAZOPing your process design by CNETRCA HAZOP team leader will ensure adequate and reliable design and provide inputs to subsequent Process Hazards Analysis Studies and detailed Risk assessment studies ( Semi quantitative / Quantitative Risk Assessment)
A well structured examination of the process design for a new of existing facilities aims to identify and assess all the hazards relating to an installation and all practicable methods to prevent, control or mitigate potential consequences to personnel /environment or assets.
With the aid of a good HAZID study recommendations, Implementation of the these recommendation will help the facilities to demonstrate that risks have been reduced to a level that is tolerable and As Low As Reasonably Practicable (ALARP).
HAZID Study is a good opportunity to consider the application of inherently safer design (ISD) principles to the design of the facilities under review.
CENTRCA consultants will help you to develop adequate combined HAZID and ISD study.
The Safety Case report provides the technical and operational information about major hazards and their associated risks that may lead to a major accident at the major hazard facility (MHF)
The safety case report include methods to prevent or mitigate those major accident hazards and risks.
In the Safety Case report, the MHF operator justifies the control measures has taken to ensure the facility's safe operation.
The justification should be based on managing and reducing the risk associated with the MHF down to tolerable levels or As Low As Reasonably Practicable (ALARP) as per risk tolerance criteria.
The Safety Case approach is a systematic process for identifying, evaluating, and documenting major accident hazards (MAHs) and the associated risk level. It is a written document that helps to review and demonstrate to top management, workforce, regulators, local population/communities, shareholders, etc., that the major accident hazards and associated risks are properly identified and adequately controlled.
The Safety Case report intends to state the MHF ‘case’ that the facility will operate safely so that the facility can grant a license to operate from EGPC
CENTRCA Subject Matter experts will help the MHF to develop the Safety Case report and that an effective technical review and quality check system is in place and shall also review, validate, and verify the technical content, suitability, sufficiency, quality, and correctness of the Safety Case report and associated safety studies
The main components of the ALARP Demonstration and Assessment process as the main objective of COMPANIES' Safety Cases.
The fundamental principle of risk management is that while risks cannot always be eliminated, it should be possible to reduce them to a level that is ALARP so that they are tolerable because all reasonably practicable RRMs have been implemented.
The ALARP must be demonstrated in the petroleum industry where there is a potential for Major Accident Hazards (MAHs).
The ALARP Demonstration shows legal, others requirements and Good Practices also give justification for unimplemented Risk Reduction Measures due to being disproportionate to the risk reduction achieved, if implemented.
CENTRCA will conduct technical review of all the design consideration and adds on engineering controls part of the ALRAP demonstration study which will review, validate, and verify the technical content, suitability, sufficiency, quality, and correctness of the Safety Case report and associated safety studies.
CENTRCA will develop, maintain and implement ORA process that guarantee a systematic and effective approach to operational risk management such that:
A thorough assessment of Major Accident Hazards associated with SCE impairment or other abnormal operational situations.
Operational Risks are identified and evaluated; effective risk control and mitigation measures to manage risks arising from impaired SCE are properly identified, documented, implemented, and monitored.
Steps are taken to ensure that interdependent SCE or other control measures associated with or affected by the ORA are adequate, available, and fully functional or being managed/controlled under a separate ORA.
Awareness of the abnormal conditions and changes arising from an ORA is maintained and monitored until permanent remediation/ restoration of SCE performance is completed.
A reliable basis / good reasoning for operational control and decision-making.
Recovery of impaired SCE are identified, prioritized, and tracked to closure in an appropriate time scale.
All ORAs is presented and reflected in the facility cumulative barriers health model.
The cumulative risk profile process provides an overview of the overall operational risk that results from the combined impairments to more than one barrier at the facility. The objective of the cumulative risk profile is to provide a means to assess the ongoing effectiveness of the barriers, their systems and equipment, and the increase in the baseline level of risk resulting from failed, defective, or untested barriers.
Determining if the barriers can perform according to their performance standards is based on information gathered from maintenance, inspection and testing, independent verification activities, periodic safety case/process hazard reviews, and a knowledge of other activities affecting the barriers, such as inhibits or overrides.
Barriers' integrity is assured based on three key elements:
1- Design and build integrity.
2- Sustain integrity.
3- Operate with integrity.
CENTRCA will examine each Barriers' integrity elements to determine the overall effectiveness of the barriers.
Barriers Management Tool - SafeGuard (SG) – Under Development – Release date : 27/1/ 2024
The scope of Facility Siting Study (FSS) includes siting and layout study for Greenfield, Brownfield, and Extensions/Modifications of an existing plant. This guideline covers facilities such as oil & gas plants, refineries, petrochemical, chemical plants, and fuel or chemical storage sites where hazardous materials are stored, handled, or processed.
FSS is performed in the early FEED phase for all new projects (Greenfield and Brownfield). Then, the FSS should be reviewed and updated in late FEED before moving to EPC, and all FSS recommendations should be closed before moving from FEED to EPC. The FSS shall be reviewed in EPC in case of significant changes to the facility design and/or layout.
For Brownfield Projects, the impact of the new facilities on the existing facilities shall be assessed in the FSS, and the existing FSS (if available) shall be updated to incorporate the new hazards.
CENTRCA will develop Proposed facility layout after the technical review of Greenfield and Brownfield , and Extensions/Modifications of an existing plant Projects scope.
Area classification aims to avoid ignition of those releases that may occur from time to time in the normal operation of facilities handling flammable fluids.
The approach is to reduce the probability of coincidence of an explosive atmosphere and electrical or other sources of ignition. It is not the aim of area classification to prevent the ignition of major accidental releases of flammable materials that could extend to large distances from the release source.
Larger accidental releases, which may result from major or catastrophic failure of process or storage equipment, should be dealt with by risk assessment and other procedures or processes, including relevant legislation requirements.
CENTRCA can assist to provide comprehensive information for guidance in the classification of areas and to set out principles, definitions, explanations of terms used for area classifications throughout facilities the develop the HAC drawings.
The QRA activities are closely integrated with the design processes and are in many respects considered as recommended routine. QRA is a formal and systematic approach to estimate the likelihood and consequences of hazardous events, and expressing the results quantitatively as risk to people, the environment or your business. It also assesses the robustness and validity of quantitative results, by identifying critical assumptions and risk driving elements.
Both on-site and off-site major accident hazards can be evaluated and compared with different risk acceptance criteria. The Quantitative risk criteria standards used to translate numerical risk estimates, as produced by a Quantitative Risk Assessment (QRA), into value judgments such as ‘negligible risk’(e.g., the risk value is lower than 10-6, which means lower than one fatality every 1 million years), that can then be set against other value judgments such as high economic benefit’ in the decision-making process.
The consequences of a potential explosion, fire or toxic release will be assessed using appropriate techniques and data. The consequence analysis will include the following:
1- Estimation of blast waves, overpressure effects in the case of an explosion.
2- Estimation of thermal radiation in the case of a fire.
3- Estimation of concentration of hazardous substance in air in the case of toxic substance release including lethal dose concertation as measure of acute toxicity if applicable.
The Risk analysis step will take into account the number of ways in which each accidental scenario can occur at a range of weather conditions predetermined by the client.
The consequences of a potential explosion, fire or toxic release shall be assessed using appropriate techniques and data.
Each accidental scenario will have a brief description that includes:
1- A list of probable leak / spill points.
2- The scale each spill and leak of the process equipment under assessment.
3- The locations of the above-mentioned sources on the isometric / layout of the facility.
In order to get a balanced perspective of the risks associated with client operations, risks shall be evaluated from two perspectives:
1- The risk to individuals (individual risk)
2- The risk to groups of people (societal risk)
A Fire and Explosion Risk Assessment (FERA) aims to identify and quantitatively evaluate all fire and explosion events associated with flammable inventories that could have an impact on personnel, buildings and industrial facility.
The FERA will be presented to the client in a form of written reports. The report will be fully auditable. All references will be listed, including document numbers and revisions.
The study consider all safety and environmental critical elements (SECEs) which are considered to be any structure, plant, equipment, system (including computer software) whose failure could cause or substantially contribute to, or which are intended to prevent or limit the effects, of a major accident hazard (MAH).
CENTRCA uses staged approach to develop the study. The key aspect of the staged approach is the intention to deliver a clear and methodological structure whereby key risks are identified to form a logical progression of critical elements identification then facilitate failure modes description, performance standards development and maintenance inspection and testing plans which will be developed later in subsequent risk management studies.
For all the SECEs identified, CENTRCA will develop performance standards. Performance standards would be expressed in qualitative and / or quantitative terms and establish the performance requirements of the SECEs on the basis for managing the hazard. The performance standards will specify Boundary, Description, Functionality of the systems also, in other case will determine the Availability / Reliability required, Survivability and system Interactions.
PSM topics requires a specific level of competency. These topics relate to PSM elements, technical safety/ safety. The PSM competency requirements must be assessed for any new role as part of the recruitment process for new employees.
CENTRCA assessment system’s of technical contents, including training material and questions is used by the PSM subject matter expert (PSM SME) to evaluate the level of competency against the predetermined level of competence for job holder.
Develop an online assessment method instead of a paper-based assessment method. The Skill and Mastery/Expert proficiency levels assessment should be conducted via face-to-face interviews by PSM SME, PSM competency topic custodian, and HR. In special cases where an expert for a specific competency topic is unavailable within the COMPANY.
CENTRCA conduct the PSM competency assessment in the presence of the PSM SME, PSM competency topic custodian, and HR.