I have highlighted some important points made by Judith Hackitt, HSE Chair in a speech tilted "Applying effective leadership and enhancing competency improvement in hazardous industries:
"Everywhere I go there seems to be a growing level of interest and stated commitment to process safety, but sadly this does not always translate into consistent measurable improvement in performance. For example, in Great Britain where we require major hazards industries to report loss of containment to HSE, in the last year alone there have been over 100 loss of containment incidents, more than half of which were considered to be precursor events for a potential major accident. That equates to an average of two loss of containment incidents every week, one of which had the clear potential to develop into a major catastrophe. I use these statistics to illustrate the magnitude of the problem which we all face, I am not suggesting that there is a greater problem in Great Britain than elsewhere but it does highlight why we should all be concerned. Sooner or later one of those "potential" catastrophes will become a real one, somewhere. Our luck is going to run out.
Automation and process control has brought many benefits but has also increased the remoteness of the process itself and the hardware from the vast majority of people. Process operators now monitor and control processes via computer screens and increasingly complex process control systems which run the process much more steadily and reliably also can create a false sense that the computer wouldn't let things go wrong.
Contribute to the surviving victims of Bhopal by buying my book "Practical Process Safety Management"
"Everywhere I go there seems to be a growing level of interest and stated commitment to process safety, but sadly this does not always translate into consistent measurable improvement in performance. For example, in Great Britain where we require major hazards industries to report loss of containment to HSE, in the last year alone there have been over 100 loss of containment incidents, more than half of which were considered to be precursor events for a potential major accident. That equates to an average of two loss of containment incidents every week, one of which had the clear potential to develop into a major catastrophe. I use these statistics to illustrate the magnitude of the problem which we all face, I am not suggesting that there is a greater problem in Great Britain than elsewhere but it does highlight why we should all be concerned. Sooner or later one of those "potential" catastrophes will become a real one, somewhere. Our luck is going to run out.
Automation and process control has brought many benefits but has also increased the remoteness of the process itself and the hardware from the vast majority of people. Process operators now monitor and control processes via computer screens and increasingly complex process control systems which run the process much more steadily and reliably also can create a false sense that the computer wouldn't let things go wrong.
- Smoother running can also have an impact upon the level of attention which is afforded to engineering knowledge and concerns. Pressures to deliver reduced costs and better returns have placed requests for inspection and maintenance in the "problem" box. Shutting down a process to carry out inspection is resisted and schedules are pushed out. In many cases the value of preventive maintenance which we all learned a long time ago when Kaizen and Total Quality Management were very high on everyone's agendas has been replaced by a drift back to "If it isn't broke then we don't need to stop to fix it". And even when it is broke - let's just patch it up.
- Economic variations can also lead to assumptions being made which turn out to be wide of the mark. In the case of the UK's North Sea oil and gas operations, back in the 1990s with oil prices at a low level it was widely assumed that assets were coming to the end of their operating life and maintenance was therefore cut back, but those neglected assets are now being called on to operate again at high levels and well into the foreseeable future. Catching up on poorly maintained assets is by no means easy – it is costly and it takes a long time to rebuild integrity - and confidence.
- Failure to understand the true role of those who are charged with managing safety can also be a factor, especially by senior managers and leaders. Those whose job title is "safety management" are there to ensure that everyone else is playing their part in managing safety as an integral part of every person's job. It is not to do it for them and most certainly it is not possible for senior managers to delegate the leadership of safety to one director or individual. Acting as the conscience or the champion of safety within an organisation is one thing, fragmentation of functions to the extent that senior managers believe that safety responsibility belongs with someone else is another.
- Change in ownership and contractorisation or outsourcing of activities has been a widespread feature of many parts of the process industries for some years now. Contractorisation leads to the potential for further diffusion and possible confusion about who is responsible for what, including safety. Change of ownership is an increasing cause for concern, in that it is unclear what documentation and knowledge about critical issues such as basic design principles are passed on when assets change hands.
- Advances in technology. I have already mentioned that modern plant that incorporates state of the art equipment has brought with it great benefits in terms of increased reliability, less excursions from normal operating conditions and so on. But the trade off to this can be a growing sense of complacency that the sorts of problems which had happened in the past could not happen again and that they have been fixed. Over time the corporate memory of what can go wrong and the consequences of things going wrong and how important it is to avoid such catastrophic events can fade for everyone – senior managers and operators - resulting in a growing lack of understanding and appreciation of the importance of process safety, especially at the most senior levels. Ultimately, this can lead to a situation where the right questions are not being asked by the leaders of an organisation because they didn't even realise or understand what needs to be asked."
Contribute to the surviving victims of Bhopal by buying my book "Practical Process Safety Management"
No comments:
Post a Comment