To HAZOP or not to HAZOP
Louise Whiting CEng MEng CFSE FSaRS MIChemE
Driving Process Safety Excellence in small to medium sized operators by improving competence, awareness, management and performance | Founder Deedah PSM and PSM Foundations | 11k+ Audience
Before you embark on arranging a HAZOP and getting all the documents together you may want to consider if a HAZOP workshop is the right tool for your issue, change or project. As you may be aware there are several tools for hazard identification and risk management in a process safety engineers toolbox. HAZOP is only one of these and although it is very useful it is not a magic wand. Questions I ask myself before I decide the methodology to examine a problem:
1. Is there a change in processing conditions (composition, temperature, pressure, throughput etc.) outside the original design intent or parameters?
2. Is there a change in routing of process or utility fluids?
3. Is there actually a change here or is this a like for like change out of equipment?
4. Is this a single discipline change or are several parties involved?
5. Does this change include significant hazards to executing parties if conducted incorrectly?
If I get a yes to question one or two I would definitely consider a HAZOP. Get in touch with a HAZOP Chair and they will be able to inform you if HAZOP is the best tool for your issue.
Question three is self-explanatory however often when you think there is a change there may not actually be one when you look in more detail and a short technical note describing ‘no change’ may be better use of time than convening a HAZOP, if required.
If the change involves more than one discipline on a processing plant this usually indicates that a HAZOP may be required. So an answer of ‘yes’ to question 4 would trigger me to get in touch with a HAZOP chair again. If it is a single discipline change which is quite significant then potentially a study associated with that discipline may be required such as a failure modes and effects analysis, electrical or controls version of HAZOP or a HAZID.
Answering ‘yes’ to question 5 will most likely mean further risk assessment is required but will not likely mean that the risk assessment method should be HAZOP. Normally this would call for a different tool to be used such as HAZID, dropped object assessment or potentially occupied building assessment.
Capability-based Programme Delivery, System Thinker, Digital Integration Planning, Operating Model Development and Optimisation
4 年At all stages but proportional to the question being asked. There is a widespread and fundamental misunderstanding of what HAZOP means and how to use it. Given what it’s short for (Hazard and Operability) perhaps the issue is understanding its purpose not when to apply?