Process hazard analysis (PHA) studies provide large databases of information on what can go wrong in processes and the measures that have been taken to prevent incidents. Many companies view PHA studies simply as a means to identify hazard scenarios to comply with regulations and help ensure necessary risk reduction measures have been taken. 

With more companies instituting competency management programs, greater scrutiny is being placed on the selection of PHA/LOPA facilitators, regardless of whether they are third-party or internal resources. As companies see the value of conducting high quality PHA studies, more emphasis is being placed on finding a facilitator who is thoroughly competent to perform a top notch study. But how do companies assure the competency of potential PHA/LOPA facilitators? Simply finding someone who has some knowledge of the process being reviewed isn’t enough. Neither is a reference check or two. 

Combustible dust fires and explosions have resulted in many process safety incidents that have caused multiple fatalities and injuries together with considerable property damage. According to the US Chemical Safety Board (CSB), 386 major incidents occurred from 1980 to 2017. They killed 178 people and injured 1021 people. The incidents came from a wide variety of industries. 

In everyday life, people learn from their own and others’ experiences, mistakes, and daily activities. But what about learning when attending a training course? Remembering everything covered during a course and putting it into practice is a challenge. There is simply too much information to process in a short time and to retrieve from memory when necessary.

Preparation is key prior to starting any task. Buildings are not constructed without blue prints. Projects are not started without first knowing you have all required items to complete tasks successfully. Performing process hazard analysis (PHA) studies shouldn't be any different. Protocols should be used to ensure all necessary information is available.

Every three years, companies in the process industries must perform a compliance audit for their Process Safety Management (PSM) systems and Risk Management Programs (RMP). Many companies turn to third parties for assistance in conducting their PSM / RMP compliance audits in order to gain an outside perspective regarding implementation of PSM and RMP practices at their facility. However, companies often focus on the wrong factors in making a decision on selecting a third-party auditor. 

Process hazard analysis (PHA) studies identify hazard scenarios in order to determine whether or not existing safeguards need to be enhanced or new safeguards installed. Consequently, recommendations to reduce hazard scenario risks by mitigating the severity of their consequences or reducing their likelihood must be developed.

When outdoor air temperatures drop, it is important for process plants to be prepared for safety challenges posed by cold weather. Low temperatures may affect piping, other equipment, and instrumentation. Cold weather vulnerabilities may result in process safety incidents.

The US Chemical Safety Board’s (CSB’s) Safety Digest, Preparing Equipment and Instrumentation for Cold Weather Operations, addresses this topic.

One of the most important aspects of a sound PSM program is having a high-quality process hazard analysis (PHA) completed for your covered processes. Many companies turn to third parties for assistance in leading and facilitating their PHAs due to the specialized nature of facilitating PHAs. However, companies may not consider the most important factors when selecting a third-party PHA facilitator. 

In conducting a PHA for an existing process, it is good practice for the PHA team to conduct a field tour of the process being reviewed. However, the PHA team leader may encounter resistance from team members, especially for a PHA being conducted for an older process for which previous PHAs have been conducted. Team leaders need to be prepared to deal with such resistance and be able to provide guidance to the team on what to look for during a field tour.