=Method offers Process Safety Consultancy to support our clients in carrying out Hazard and Risk Assessment (H&RA).
HazOp is a systematic technique for reviewing a process design to understand the hazards present and identify appropriate control measures.
Layer of Protection Analysis (LOPA) is a semi-quantitative method of risk assessment. It is used to analyse “high severity” scenarios identified during HazOp in more detail. (These are usually the events that could potentially cause a fatality or another incident of equivalent severity.)
LOPA is often used for “SIL Determination”, where a SIS Safety Instrumented System is required. In other words, LOPA is used to decide the reliability (SIL Safety Intergrity Level ) required from the SIF Safety Instrumented Function . Read more about LOPA.
Because Hazard & Risk Assessment is one of the lifecycle phases of the functional safety standard IEC 61511, the H&RA must be “verified” as part of compliance with the standard. The purpose of verification is to check that the work has been done correctly.
All work done to deliver the lifecycle phases should be “assessed”. The purpose of Functional Safety Assessment is to check that suitably competent people were selected to carry out the work, and that it has been done in accordance with the relevant procedures and plans.
Read more about Functional Safety Assessments at Method Functional Safety
Developing Functional Safety Management procedures for a downstream oil industry client. The need for FSM improvements were identified by an earlier Functional Safety Audit (P-2736).
Following several inspections by the UK Competent Authority (HSE), a project to deliver an alarm review process for several UK sites. The project comprised: Phase 1 – Undertake an Alarm Review. The outputs being a provisional master alarm database, a draft alarm response manual and a proposed action list, (these documents to be finalised in phase 2). Phase 2 – Actions Close Out and Update. Phase 1 generated several actions to be resolved, by the software owner (how alarms actually activate, what executive actions they have). Phase 2 also updated the master alarm database and alarm response manual. Phase 3 – KPI Introduction. Began measuring the KPIs required and instigated regular alarm review sessions for the site, as defined by the Alarm Handling Policy, Phase 4 – Introduction of Alarm updates. Defined and began the process, set priority levels, deleted unneeded alarms and implemented wider changes to bring the BPCS in line with the new policy.
Authoring Process Safety Procedures and Risk Matrix
FSA 1 of chemical process (project not completed)
E: support@methodprosafe.com. T: 44 (0)1462 713313. W: www.methodprosafe.com