Bowtie - A strong link between Asset Integrity & Process safety

Focusing on asset integrity management helps organisations reduce major incident risks. In contrast to occupational injuries, large losses are typically the result of the failure of multiple safety barriers, often within complex scenarios.

As we all know, and as per the definition mentioned in IOGP Report 415, the major incident is an unplanned event with escalation potential for multiple fatalities and/or serious damage, possibly beyond the asset itself. Typically, these are hazardous releases, but also include major structural failure or loss of stability that could put the whole asset at risk.

Therefore, Asset integrity barriers defined in the earlier project stages should be implemented, continuously monitored and maintained. Subsequent changes to asset design, operating limits or maintenance frequencies should be subject to change control and review by a competent technical authority. This is also the time for operating limits to come into play, including control of system over-rides. Barrier performance should be tested regularly and deficiencies appropriately addressed.

Here comes the need for top level management understanding of major accident risks and how these are managed safely with specific barriers. This helps senior managers understand the importance of ongoing support activities to manage the barriers and their degradation controls effectively.

Bowties are excellent way to visualise and determine the need for barriers. This indicates how barriers can both reduce the threats from a hazard and limit consequences if the hazard is realised.

Barriers and degradation control management should form part of the overall process safety management system. Barrier and degradation control management can be integrated into the facility integrity system.

The flowchart in the figure (CCPS bowties concept book) shows some key feedback loops where the bow tie structure or barrier monitoring intervals may need updating. The same process can be applied to degradation controls.

The barrier management program should become an element of the overall process safety management program to monitor deterioration of specific barriers and to direct attention to returning these to their desired standard.

This program will also support the barriers performance cycle mentioned in the IOGP Report 415 and shown in the figure.

These links and intersections of processes and standards illustrates how process safety management and asset integrity management are strongly interconnected through barriers.

In other words, keeping your barriers effective will manage the risk of major incidents, thereby reducing the chance that all of the holes ‘line up’ and the worst-case event is realised. 

Note: I was trying through the information mentioned above to link between asset integrity and process safety through the barriers management; therefore, your comments and suggestions are most welcome and appreciated.

References:

1. IOGP Report 415, Asset integrity – the key to managing major incident risks, December 2018.
2. IOGP Report 544, Standardization of barrier definitions, April 2016.
3. CCPS in association with the Energy Institute, BOW TIES IN RISK MANAGEMENT - A Concept Book for Process Safety, 2018.