HAZOP accreditation

[25362]

I've a friend that has quite succesfully participated in HAZOP teams as chairman for a few years now, based on his wide and long experience as process engineer.

Somebody told me that nowadays such a person would need accreditation by a recognized authority to act as chairman of a HAZOP committee.

Question: is this request optional or actually a new directive by ie, an official American or EU body ?

 

[cheute79]

For the USA< there is an official interpretation letter from OSHA (you can look up all the interpretation letters on the OSHA web site) that states that there is no requirement (by OSHA) for any certification. The standard states that the facilitator must be familiar with the method. Since the PSM standard is a performance standard, even a so-called "accredited" or "certified" facilitator could be determined to be unfamiliar and therefore inadequate. Having some form of documentation may be an advantage. That documentation might include a long record of facilitating PHAs using the method. The EU, and individual state, or other jurisdiction may have more stringent requirements.

 

[HamishMcTavish]

For the UK there are various training consultancy type organisations that offer training but i believe that it's not accredited. Mostly when i look i check out the individual's experience - this is far more useful than a piece of paper stating they've done a week's (or however long) course.

I don't know which statutory or professional organisation would accredit the training. The IChemE maybe?

Regards, HM

No more things should be presumed to exist than are absolutely necessary - William of Occam

 

[dcasto]

in the US under OSHA PSM, each company must state a HAZOP teams credentials. the wording is lose

1910.119(e)(4)
The process hazard analysis shall be performed by a team with expertise in engineering and process operations, and the team shall include at least one employee who has experience and knowledge specific to the process being evaluated. Also, one member of the team must be knowledgeable in the specific process hazard analysis methodology being used.

knowlegeable is vague. I've seen a lot of policies that define this term. But I suggest that sitting on at 3 PHA's is a minimum.

 

[HamishMcTavish]

dcasto,

I think that for TEAM members that is absolutely accurate - what is the point of having someone who has no knowledge participate in the HAZOP.

For the FACILITATIORS of the HAZOP - ie the chairperson and the secretary surely all they need is experience of the HAZOP process itself (and enough diplomacy to keep people on track...)

regards, HM

No more things should be presumed to exist than are absolutely necessary - William of Occam

 

[moltenmetal]

"I think that for TEAM members that is absolutely accurate - what is the point of having someone who has no knowledge participate in the HAZOP"

Obviously you need SOME knowledge to participate in a meaningful way. But one of the key functions of a HAZOP in my opinion is to transfer some of the knowledge and thought process of the designers to the people who will later be operating the unit, as well as to get practical feedback from the operations staff into the design before it's too late. It therefore IS an educational exercise on both sides.

If it gets taken as merely a hazards evaluation and review, and is attended only by specialists, that's an opportunity missed.

The facilitator needs special skills indeed. These things can very easily get off track, wasting large amounts of valuable time- an expenditure of time which is difficult to even question, given the safety focus of the process.

 

[cheute79]

McTavish,

I agree that the OSHA standard only requires that the Facilitator be familiar with the methodology being used, but in my experience, unless the balance of the team is very familiar with the process, PSM in general (with all it's nuances) and the PHA methodology, a Facilitator who is also familiar with the process(es) in general (not an expert), he can ask leading questions that make the PHA much more thorough and valuable. Way too often I find client facilities who have hired a trained facilitator who had little or no experience in plant operations, maintenance, or process design, and it really shows. The PHAs are often (if not usually, in those cases) "shallow", in that they addressed or considered the more obvious things. Even firms that specialise in Process Safety Management have a large stable of recent grads who have been through a few months of intense training, but no in-plant or design experience, so that they can charge less of the work and win more "lowest cost" contracts. A facilitator who has extensive plant and design experience provides a host of benefits.

Molten:

I always suggest to any owner/plant manager that participating in or at least observing a PHA is about the best possible training for how their process(es) work. Those people also often ask the best questions.

Well, off to a PHA study ....

 

[HamishMcTavish]

cheute79
i agree that some familiarity with the plant / process / industry norms etc is valuable, however the converse of what you say is also true. If you have a chairperson with no HAZOP or HAZID experience but lots of subject knowledge then bias can enter the meeting and also the written record. It's a fine line!

moltenmetal,
HAZOP IS a two-way street and i agree that it must have representatives from operations / maintenance otherwise the exercise is pointless. It should ideally be carried out at both concept design and detailed design stages. Otherwise you get the designers "telling" the operators why something is the way it is.

Cheers all, HM

No more things should be presumed to exist than are absolutely necessary - William of Occam

 

[shahyar]

Sort of off topic, but in recent APEGGA newsletter (regulating body in Alberta) they do not need a Hazop facilitator to be even professional engineer. Having enough knowledge is enough.

 

[unclesyd]

Here is one training organization that I've heard mentioned a few times. You might want to take one of their HAZOP team leader courses.
Early one I was in some real winners as no one knew the right direction and the guidelines given were not much help. I would have to compare the meetings as a debate based on the how many angles can stand on the head of a pin format. I saying 5 five, but no one would listen.

http://acutechconsulting.com/images/ATI - PHA TL Training.pdf