An article in the Telegraph mentions that "Tony Hayward, whose leadership during the catastrophe has come under fire, insisted that his success at shaving $4bn off BP's costs last year had not contributed to lower safety standards.
"We have let people down in our defence of the shore, and we are going to redouble our efforts," he said, adding that cuts did "not have anything to do" with the accident". Read more in this link
May 27, 2010
Process Safety – Reacting after an incident?
Why do organizations react only after incidents occur? Are they missing the signals coming loud and clear before a major incident happens? My understanding of the situation is that as long as nothing happens, process safety is assumed to be working. If anything does happen and there is major incident, all hell breaks loose and quick fix solutions – like becoming World Class in Safety are immediately thought of. What top management in many organizations are missing out is that there are enough warnings in the form of external and internal audit reports, incident reports and near miss reports that sound alarm bells before a major incident occurs. These signals are not picked up by the top management in time. While becoming World Class by adopting a best in class organizations’ practices is good, there is one important difference between copying a system and copying culture. A system can be copied quickly but culture cannot. In Indian conditions, it is very difficult to change culture quickly. It is a 24 by 7 job that has to be done by top management with unwavering support in times of resource crunches also. While a quarter on quarter growth in profits is demanded by the shareholders, why is not a quarter on quarter growth in safety performance also not demanded? I’m perplexed!!!
May 25, 2010
Confined spaces
Good handbook by MOEF and others in this link. Please share with all your personnel. Big file, be patient!
May 24, 2010
Blowout Preventer
What is a blowout preventer? In the Deepwater Horizon oil rig disaster, it is suspected that the blowout preventer failed. Please see Wikepedia's explanation given below:
BOPs come in a variety of styles, sizes and pressure ratings, and usually several individual units comprise a BOP stack. Blind rams are designed to close an open wellbore. Pipe rams seal around tubular components in the well (drill pipe, casing, tubing, or coiled tubing). Shear-seal BOPs are fitted with hardened steel shearing surfaces that can actually cut through drill pipe and tool strings, if all other barriers fail. Since BOPs are important for the safety of the crew, as well as the drilling rig and the wellbore itself, BOPs are regularly inspected, tested and refurbished. Tests vary from daily test of functions of critical wells to monthly or less frequent testing of wells with low likelihood of control problems.Any of these BOPs may be installed underwater, normally with two hydraulic actuators.
Deepwater Horizon blowout
After the Deepwater Horizon drilling rig explosion on April 20, 2010, the blowout preventer should have activated itself automatically to avoid an oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. Underwater robots were sent to manually activate the mechanism's switch, to no avail. As of May 2010[update] it is unknown why it failed.BP representatives suggested that the preventer could have suffered a hydraulic leak. Gamma-ray imaging of the preventer conducted on May 12 and May 13, 2010 showed that the preventer's internal valves were partially closed and were restricting the flow of oil. Whether the valves closed automatically during the explosion or were shut manually by ROV is unknown.
Please see this link for a pdf version powerpoint presentation of BOP (large file-be patient!).
BOPs come in a variety of styles, sizes and pressure ratings, and usually several individual units comprise a BOP stack. Blind rams are designed to close an open wellbore. Pipe rams seal around tubular components in the well (drill pipe, casing, tubing, or coiled tubing). Shear-seal BOPs are fitted with hardened steel shearing surfaces that can actually cut through drill pipe and tool strings, if all other barriers fail. Since BOPs are important for the safety of the crew, as well as the drilling rig and the wellbore itself, BOPs are regularly inspected, tested and refurbished. Tests vary from daily test of functions of critical wells to monthly or less frequent testing of wells with low likelihood of control problems.Any of these BOPs may be installed underwater, normally with two hydraulic actuators.
Deepwater Horizon blowout
After the Deepwater Horizon drilling rig explosion on April 20, 2010, the blowout preventer should have activated itself automatically to avoid an oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. Underwater robots were sent to manually activate the mechanism's switch, to no avail. As of May 2010[update] it is unknown why it failed.BP representatives suggested that the preventer could have suffered a hydraulic leak. Gamma-ray imaging of the preventer conducted on May 12 and May 13, 2010 showed that the preventer's internal valves were partially closed and were restricting the flow of oil. Whether the valves closed automatically during the explosion or were shut manually by ROV is unknown.
Please see this link for a pdf version powerpoint presentation of BOP (large file-be patient!).
Organisational culture and Process Safety
I always keep wondering why companies spend so much money on implementing behaviour based safety systems when in real life, what is actually required is the behaviour of top management towards process safety! If top management are able to track and recognize the process safety issues that need attending to, then the organizational culture will be conducive for the success of PSM. A walk around by top management to every nook and corner of their plant once in 6 months is adequate for them to understand the PSM issues!Organizational safety culture must come from the top and it is free to implement!
A recent OSHA report mentions the following:
Since the BP Texas City explosion in 2005, OSHA has counted over 20 serious incidents in refineries across the country.
Last year, OSHA completed an investigation of a naphtha piping failure and release, in which the resulting explosion and fire seriously injured three workers; two other workers, relatively young at 49 and 53 years old, died. One of these two workers was killed in the explosion; the other struggled for 13 days in the hospital before dying from severe burns. Within the unit where this rupture occurred, OSHA discovered multiple pipes that were operating below their retirement wall thickness. In fact, the very line that ruptured had previously ruptured and had to be replaced a decade earlier. As this tragedy makes clear, this type of breakdown maintenance is simply unacceptable. Good mechanical integrity programs are absolutely essential to safe refinery operation.
In 2007, water freezing in liquid propane piping resulted in a jet fire and a rapid evacuation of the entire refinery. Three workers, aged 33, 35, and 42 were seriously burned and hospitalized. Investigators found that a Process Hazard Analysis team had recommended installing remotely operable shut-off valves, yet the recommendation was improperly closed as "complete" by the previous owner. In fact, the valves had not been installed at all. The lack of these shut-off valves impeded workers' ability to control the propane release before it ignited. The refinery learned a hard lesson: It is essential to rigorously follow up on PHA findings to ensure that hazards are adequately controlled. Failure to abate serious hazards can have deadly consequences.
In 2008, at another facility, an explosion in a hydrocracking unit blew the head off a process water filter. The debris struck and killed a foreman; he was 53 and had been with the company for 30 years. OSHA's investigation revealed that an inadequate start-up procedure had allowed hydrogen gas and air to accumulate in the top of the filter where it was likely ignited by pyrophoric deposits. OSHA learned that some operators had recognized the hazard and used an undocumented alternate approach that was actually safer, but the procedure had never been updated to incorporate the safer practice. The result of following the faulty procedure was a violent explosion and the needless death of a refinery worker ? and a reminder that having safe, complete, and accurate operating procedures is essential to safe operations in process units.
A recent OSHA report mentions the following:
Since the BP Texas City explosion in 2005, OSHA has counted over 20 serious incidents in refineries across the country.
Last year, OSHA completed an investigation of a naphtha piping failure and release, in which the resulting explosion and fire seriously injured three workers; two other workers, relatively young at 49 and 53 years old, died. One of these two workers was killed in the explosion; the other struggled for 13 days in the hospital before dying from severe burns. Within the unit where this rupture occurred, OSHA discovered multiple pipes that were operating below their retirement wall thickness. In fact, the very line that ruptured had previously ruptured and had to be replaced a decade earlier. As this tragedy makes clear, this type of breakdown maintenance is simply unacceptable. Good mechanical integrity programs are absolutely essential to safe refinery operation.
In 2007, water freezing in liquid propane piping resulted in a jet fire and a rapid evacuation of the entire refinery. Three workers, aged 33, 35, and 42 were seriously burned and hospitalized. Investigators found that a Process Hazard Analysis team had recommended installing remotely operable shut-off valves, yet the recommendation was improperly closed as "complete" by the previous owner. In fact, the valves had not been installed at all. The lack of these shut-off valves impeded workers' ability to control the propane release before it ignited. The refinery learned a hard lesson: It is essential to rigorously follow up on PHA findings to ensure that hazards are adequately controlled. Failure to abate serious hazards can have deadly consequences.
In 2008, at another facility, an explosion in a hydrocracking unit blew the head off a process water filter. The debris struck and killed a foreman; he was 53 and had been with the company for 30 years. OSHA's investigation revealed that an inadequate start-up procedure had allowed hydrogen gas and air to accumulate in the top of the filter where it was likely ignited by pyrophoric deposits. OSHA learned that some operators had recognized the hazard and used an undocumented alternate approach that was actually safer, but the procedure had never been updated to incorporate the safer practice. The result of following the faulty procedure was a violent explosion and the needless death of a refinery worker ? and a reminder that having safe, complete, and accurate operating procedures is essential to safe operations in process units.
May 22, 2010
Facility siting and hazardous chemicals
Greenpeace has sent a blimp over a chemical plant in Delaware, as part of a worldwide campaign to eliminate toxic chemicals. Their focus is on toxic chemicals that could spread in an airborne plume if released suddenly by an accident or terrorist attack. The article mentions that "Federal risk management reports indicate that up to 660,000 people live in potential “downwind” areas at risk in the event of a sudden, complete release from one of the 90-ton chlorine tank cars routinely parked at Edge Moor in east Wilmington.A similar accident at the Chambers Works operation, near the Delaware Memorial Bridge, could endanger 2 million people, by federal estimates".
In India, the problem is more acute.Residential dwellings are allowed to come up in the no man zone surrounding hazardous chemical factories.
Read the full article in this link
In India, the problem is more acute.Residential dwellings are allowed to come up in the no man zone surrounding hazardous chemical factories.
Read the full article in this link
May 21, 2010
Cyclone Laila and Headcount procedures
Today's Times of India carries an article mentioning that cyclone Laila uprooted one of the anchors of the ONGC oil rig Sagar Vijay in the Bay of Bengal, thus destabilising the rig. The article also mentions that ONGC could not give the exact number of people on board at the time of the incident.How robust are your headcount procedures? Test them in surprise tests. During mock drills everything is hunky dory but when an emergency strikes, are your systems telling you the exact number of personnel inside your facility? A proper head count system prevents body counts.
When I worked in the Middle East, I was also a volunteer firefighter for the plant firefighting team. We had an elaborate head count system for firefighters also, to ensure that all firefighters are accounted for. It is better to plan for the worst.It does not cost much but can save lives!
When I worked in the Middle East, I was also a volunteer firefighter for the plant firefighting team. We had an elaborate head count system for firefighters also, to ensure that all firefighters are accounted for. It is better to plan for the worst.It does not cost much but can save lives!
Dust explosions and vacuum cleaners
The CSB has been doing a great service by increasing awareness about dust explosions. Dust explosions can occur in sugar, sawdust, coal, and in fact anything that is combustible including combustible metals. Housekeeping plays a very important part in eliminating dust in the work area. Industrial vacuum cleaners are available to do the job safely. One such cleaner is given in this youtube link. I am not endorsing their product but I thought that the video was a good one!
Hydrogen incidents
Click here for the site. This site is a useful site for incidents connected with hydrogen. For those of you dealing with this dangerous gas, these incidents will help you understand its dangers. Hydrogen is handled in refineries,ammonia plants and chlor alkali industries.
May 20, 2010
Blowing of natural gas lines
Finally the CSB has released a statement about natural gas blowing of pipelines. A survey has been conducted by CSB. "According to the survey, using natural gas to clean pipes remains the most common single practice in industry, employed by 37% of respondents. The other respondents reported using nitrogen, which is nonflammable, or inherently safer alternatives such as air, steam, or cleaning pigs. On February 25, 2010, eighteen days after the explosion at Kleen Energy, the CSB stated that natural gas blows were “inherently unsafe” and urged industry to seek alternatives".
Even last week, I had warned a natural gas user to prevent the blowing of lines with natural gas itself instead of using nitrogen. Read more of the CSB statement in this link.
Read my earlier post on the topic in this link.
Even last week, I had warned a natural gas user to prevent the blowing of lines with natural gas itself instead of using nitrogen. Read more of the CSB statement in this link.
Read my earlier post on the topic in this link.
May 19, 2010
Confined spaces are deadly
Time and again, we realize how deadly a confined space can be but lives continue to be lost. The number of deaths we have read in newspapers involving conservancy workers entering sewers and asphyxiated by hydrogen sulfide are countless. In chemical plants,refineries,food industry, transportation industry, power generation, pulp, paper and other industries, deadly gases can accumulate inside confined spaces. No wonder they are called silent killers. CO, H2S, CO2,CH4, Ammonia, paint,thinners, solvents, nitrogen are all deadly inside a confined space. Reactions that take place inside confined spaces including fermentation can make the confined spaces deadly.
Treat your confined spaces with respect. Have a proper confined space entry permit that is enforced.Read some of the accidents in confined spaces in this link
The CSB video on hazards of nitrogen in confined spaces can be viewed in this link.
Read an interesting article on confined space threats to farmers in this link!
Treat your confined spaces with respect. Have a proper confined space entry permit that is enforced.Read some of the accidents in confined spaces in this link
The CSB video on hazards of nitrogen in confined spaces can be viewed in this link.
Read an interesting article on confined space threats to farmers in this link!
May 17, 2010
Oleum release incident - CSB findings
The CSB has released its final report on the uncontrolled oleum release from INDSPEC Chemical Corporation in Petrolia, Pennsylvania, which forced the evacuation of three surrounding towns in October 2008.Oleum was released when a tank transfer operation was left unattended during weekend operations and an oleum storage tank overflowed.
The CSB investigation has determined that the normal power supply for the three oleum transfer pumps was equipped with a safety interlock, which would automatically shut off the flow of oleum when the receiving tank was full, thus preventing a dangerous overflow. However, the oleum storage building also had an auxiliary or 'emergency' power supply that had been installed in the late 1970s. It was originally intended as a temporary measure to keep the pumps functioning during interruptions of the normal power supply but eventually the emergency power supply became a permanent fixture. Facility management never installed interlocks for the emergency power and written operating procedures did not address how or when the emergency power supply should be used.
The CSB case study report identifies four key safety lessons for companies:
- In the 1980s, the facility changed the structure of the emergency power supply from temporary wiring to permanent conduit. The facility did not evaluate the significance of this change.
- The facility installed the emergency power supply without the engineering controls that already existed on the normal power supply.
-The facility's storage system design required operators to transfer oleum on the weekend to ensure operations were unaffected during the week. Operators used a work practice developed years earlier to transfer oleum using two pumps concurrently. This work practice was never recorded in written operating procedures.Management must remain vigilant in evaluating how work is actually performed.
- The facility never included information on the emergency power supply in piping and instrumentation diagrams and written operating procedures. Personnel hazard assessment (PHA) teams were therefore unable to evaluate the consequences of emergency power supply use.
Read the report in this link
The CSB investigation has determined that the normal power supply for the three oleum transfer pumps was equipped with a safety interlock, which would automatically shut off the flow of oleum when the receiving tank was full, thus preventing a dangerous overflow. However, the oleum storage building also had an auxiliary or 'emergency' power supply that had been installed in the late 1970s. It was originally intended as a temporary measure to keep the pumps functioning during interruptions of the normal power supply but eventually the emergency power supply became a permanent fixture. Facility management never installed interlocks for the emergency power and written operating procedures did not address how or when the emergency power supply should be used.
The CSB case study report identifies four key safety lessons for companies:
- In the 1980s, the facility changed the structure of the emergency power supply from temporary wiring to permanent conduit. The facility did not evaluate the significance of this change.
- The facility installed the emergency power supply without the engineering controls that already existed on the normal power supply.
-The facility's storage system design required operators to transfer oleum on the weekend to ensure operations were unaffected during the week. Operators used a work practice developed years earlier to transfer oleum using two pumps concurrently. This work practice was never recorded in written operating procedures.Management must remain vigilant in evaluating how work is actually performed.
- The facility never included information on the emergency power supply in piping and instrumentation diagrams and written operating procedures. Personnel hazard assessment (PHA) teams were therefore unable to evaluate the consequences of emergency power supply use.
Read the report in this link
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)