After the BP Texas disaster in 2005, the then CEO of BP Lord John Browne resigned and Mr Tony Hayward took over. An article mentions the following: 'When Mr. Hayward took over BP's leadership from John Browne three years ago this week, the company was at one of the lowest points in its history: badly run, accident-prone and accused in the aftermath of a deadly explosion at its Texas City refinery of putting profits before safety. Mr. Hayward turned BP around, boosting production, cutting costs and significantly reducing on-the-job injuries. Mr.Hayward set about radically simplifying the company and cutting costs. Senior executives were cut by a quarter. In all, 6,500 people, or just under 10% of its work force, lost their jobs. Last month, he was confident enough to talk of an irreversible "change of culture" at BP.None of that seems to matter now, as BP heads into the crisis grinder that has chewed up big names like Toyota and Goldman Sachs. And with about 5,000 barrels of oil leaking from the damaged well each day, Mr. Hayward knows it".
Read more about this interesting article in this link.
Read about the mitigation efforts in this link
May 9, 2010
Process safety information and BP incident
A number of articles are going around on the BP oil spill incident. In one of them, a whistleblower is supposed to have raised safety concerns about BP Atlantis, the world’s largest and deepest semi-submersible oil and natural gas platform. In this article it mentions the following "It was then that the whistle-blower, who was hired to oversee the company’s databases that housed documents related to its Atlantis project, discovered that the drilling platform had been operating without a majority of the engineer-approved documents it needed to run safely, leaving the platform vulnerable to a catastrophic disaster that would far surpass the massive oil spill that began last week following a deadly explosion on a BP-operated drilling rig.
BP’s own internal communications show that company officials were made aware of the issue and feared that the document shortfalls related to Atlantis “could lead to catastrophic operator error” and must be addressed.“The risk in turning over drawings that are not complete are: 1) The Operator will assume the drawings are accurate and up to date,” the email said. “This could lead to catastrophic Operator errors due to their assuming the drawing is correct,” said Duff’s email to BP officials Bill Naseman and William Broman. “Turning over incomplete drawings to the Operator for their use is a fundamental violation of basic Document control, [internal standards] and Process Safety Regulations.” Read more of this article in this link.
BP’s own internal communications show that company officials were made aware of the issue and feared that the document shortfalls related to Atlantis “could lead to catastrophic operator error” and must be addressed.“The risk in turning over drawings that are not complete are: 1) The Operator will assume the drawings are accurate and up to date,” the email said. “This could lead to catastrophic Operator errors due to their assuming the drawing is correct,” said Duff’s email to BP officials Bill Naseman and William Broman. “Turning over incomplete drawings to the Operator for their use is a fundamental violation of basic Document control, [internal standards] and Process Safety Regulations.” Read more of this article in this link.
May 2, 2010
BP Oil Spill
The latest BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico could turn out to be bigger than the Exxon Valdez spill. The President of the US himself has flown to Louisana for a first hand look. One would have thought that after the BP Texas Disaster in 2005, many checks and balances would have been put to prevent another disaster. We will have to wait and see the results of the investigation...
See photos of the spill in this link
See photos of the spill in this link
May 1, 2010
Process safety in batch operations
What goes around comes around! As far as process safety incidents in batch process go, I sometimes despair whether we will ever learn from previous incidents. Last year I had investigated some batch process incidents, the causes of which are very very familiar - incompatibility,scale up issues, heat removal issues, MSDS issues and raw material storage issues. For those of you working in the batch process industry, the UK Chemical Reaction Hazards Forum is a good place to get information on batch incidents. Share these incidents with your operating personnel and check whether it could happen in your organization. For further details go to this link.
What I learnt in Process Safety – A tribute to my senior managers at Madras Fertilizers Ltd
32 years ago, I joined the ammonia plant in Madras Fertilizers as a graduate engineer trainee and then went on to be shift in charge and assistant manager in the ammonia plant. The lessons I learnt in process safety from the senior management* are still fresh in my mind. There was no PSM system, no ISO 14001, no OHSAS 18001, but in the ten years I was there, there was no serious process safety incident!
The senior management then were all experts in plant operation and maintenance – you could not fool them! Their decisions were taken appropriate to the risk involved and clearly communicated. They also made sure that critical jobs which had a process safety issue were always supervised by them by giving clear instructions and follow up. This way we knew when we were going off track and correct ourselves before anything happened. They were true “managers” – who played the fine line between process safety and production with such a finesse, you could not but admire and learn from them.
We did take a lot of “process safety risks” when there was a situation, but it was a calculated and clearly communicated risk – with the result, we were always under control.
Cut to today – Today in many plants, there are distinct gaps between what senior management think what is going on as far as process safety is concerned and what is actually happening at the ground level. Why is this happening? My own understanding of the situation leads to the following:
1.Some of the senior management do not have an understanding of the plant – they may be qualified MBA’s but in a chemical plant, what matters most at senior management level is their conceptualization of key process safety risks!
2.Many Senior management do not want to hear “bad news” related to process safety but welcome “bad news” related to sales and profits. I compare the senior management I started my career with many of the senior management today – the difference is that “bad news related to process safety” used to be ferreted out by the senior management I worked with, even though I may think it was not necessary to tell them!
3.Many boards of directors in present chemical companies do not have a clear understanding of the difference between process safety and occupational health and safety.
4.Senior management are led astray by the numerous certifications of ISO 14001/OHSAS18001 etc. leading to a false sense of complacency.
5.Many of the reactions of management today after a process safety incident are of a knee jerk reaction. A comprehensive long term approach is lacking. Everyone wants to safeguard their remaining time with the organization!
*I pay a strong tribute to my former senior managers at MFL: (Late) Mr P.N.Arunachalam, Mr Jacob Eapen, Mr N.Gajendran and (Late) Mr S.Rangaiah
The senior management then were all experts in plant operation and maintenance – you could not fool them! Their decisions were taken appropriate to the risk involved and clearly communicated. They also made sure that critical jobs which had a process safety issue were always supervised by them by giving clear instructions and follow up. This way we knew when we were going off track and correct ourselves before anything happened. They were true “managers” – who played the fine line between process safety and production with such a finesse, you could not but admire and learn from them.
We did take a lot of “process safety risks” when there was a situation, but it was a calculated and clearly communicated risk – with the result, we were always under control.
Cut to today – Today in many plants, there are distinct gaps between what senior management think what is going on as far as process safety is concerned and what is actually happening at the ground level. Why is this happening? My own understanding of the situation leads to the following:
1.Some of the senior management do not have an understanding of the plant – they may be qualified MBA’s but in a chemical plant, what matters most at senior management level is their conceptualization of key process safety risks!
2.Many Senior management do not want to hear “bad news” related to process safety but welcome “bad news” related to sales and profits. I compare the senior management I started my career with many of the senior management today – the difference is that “bad news related to process safety” used to be ferreted out by the senior management I worked with, even though I may think it was not necessary to tell them!
3.Many boards of directors in present chemical companies do not have a clear understanding of the difference between process safety and occupational health and safety.
4.Senior management are led astray by the numerous certifications of ISO 14001/OHSAS18001 etc. leading to a false sense of complacency.
5.Many of the reactions of management today after a process safety incident are of a knee jerk reaction. A comprehensive long term approach is lacking. Everyone wants to safeguard their remaining time with the organization!
*I pay a strong tribute to my former senior managers at MFL: (Late) Mr P.N.Arunachalam, Mr Jacob Eapen, Mr N.Gajendran and (Late) Mr S.Rangaiah
Labels:
Organisational Culture