HAZOP Study

Data required for conducting HAZOP study

1. P&I Diagrams of the process.
2. Process Flow Diagrams.
3. Process Description.
4. Interlock Details process control narratives.
5. Equipment Datasheets.
6. Equipment design and operating specification with lines
7. Relief Valves data sheets
8. MSDS of all process materials.
9. Reaction exotherms (Max pressure and temperature) at adiabatic conditions

Definitions

Intention How the “process” sections are expected to operate

Section/Node Study reference used to organize the study into manageable segments

Cause Reasons why Deviations may occur (possible Causes)

Consequence Results of the unique Cause – an event causing damage, injury or other loss
(potential Consequences)

Safeguard Design and operating features that reduce the frequency or mitigate the
Consequences (existing systems and procedures)

Recommendation Recommendations for design or operating changes, or further study

HAZOP Methodology
The main objectives of this study is to identify any shortfalls in the design and to ensure that the
processes are designed to operate safely.

The method involves several repetitive steps:

i) Identify a Steps/node of the process on the P&IDs.
ii) Define the design intent and normal operating conditions of the node.
iii) Identify a deviation from the intent or operating condition by applying guidewords on the
process parameters based on the BS - IEC 61882 lists of guidewords.
iv) Identify possible causes of the deviation within the node.
v) Develop ultimate potential Consequences (severity) as if there are no safeguards.
Consequences inside and outside the section need to be considered.
 vi) Assess the likelihood by taking the existing safeguards into account
vii) The HAZOP methodology is identifying causes within the node and consequences anywhere
(upstream/downstream/elsewhere)
viii) A deviation can be considered "meaningful" if it has a credible cause and can result in harmful
consequences.
ix) Identify safeguards, if any. Safeguards should be able to detect the deviation and either to
prevent the cause/deviation or mitigate the consequence of deviation.
x) Identify recommendations and action parties, if no safeguard is provided or safeguards are
insufficient.
The following guide-words / deviations can used in this study:

Guide-word Parameters

More Flow
No/ Less Pressure
Other than Temperature
Reverse Level
High Composition
Low Reaction
As Well As Time
Early Step
Late Agitation
Before Static
After Sampling
Start-up/Shut-down
Loss of Containment Due to Leakage
Corrosion/ Erosion
Engineering Issues/ Drawing Errors
Others

A node is a logical section of the process based on the material handled and design/operating
conditions. The HAZOP study is performed by considering each of the nodes and in turn by generating
questions in a structured, yet creative manner to identify deviations from the intended design. It also
assumes that neither a hazard nor an operational problem will exist if the system is operated as
designed.

The questions posed at each step are a list of carefully pre-selected guidewords for each part of the
system. These are posed by the HAZOP chairman to an inter-disciplinary team of experienced
personnel (ranging from design engineers to operational staff) who then consider the guidewords and
identify all deviations from normal operating conditions. As each deviation and its potential causes
are identified, its possible consequences on the system as a whole are considered and recorded by
the HAZOP scribe. In this manner, all possible hazards and operational difficulties are assessed.

Once a hazard or problem has been identified, the team is able to decide whether to recommend a
solution from within the range of expertise of the team, or to refer the problem for further study
outside the HAZOP session. The agreed course of action is recorded, providing an auditable record of
the decisions taken and facilitates follow-up to confirm completion at a later date. If a condition is
found whereby a specific deviation or event could occur and give rise to a significant consequence, it
will be noted on the HAZOP study worksheets. In cases where there are no possible causes of deviation
and when no events give rise to significant consequences, then the words “No Foreseen Hazard” (NFH)
will be recorded on the worksheet respectively.

Certain guidewords may not be applied to nodes where deviations could not occur (e.g. level
deviations when the node contains no vessels).

Following points shall be considered while carrying out HAZOP

i) In principle, only single failure results in hazard – Simultaneous Process Deviation (double
jeopardy) shall not be considered.

ii) Plant is well maintained and operated in accordance with acceptable standards.

iii) Mechanical protection devices (PSV’s, rupture discs) are expected to work unless known
failure modes or reliability issues exists.

iv) No design work / quantitative analysis shall be performed during HAZOP meeting.

v) Equipment is deemed suitable for the specified design conditions.

vi) Sparing for Maintenance shall not be discussed.

vii) The following items shall not be considered:

 Failure of safeguard cannot be considered as a cause.

 Operator's negligence (except common human error)

 Natural calamity (e.g. flood, earthquake)

 Objects falling from sky

 Sabotage

viii) The following is deemed as protection/safeguard (subjected to reliability and independence

of it)

 Interlock / shutdown system / trip

 Alarm system for operator action

 Mechanical protection device

Risk Ranking
In order to identify the Risk of an incident/deviation, Risk ranking can be conducted for a given cause consequence pair. The
Risk ranking can be done using a standard 5x5 Risk Matrix based on Severity of consequence and Likelihood of event. For
this Severity & Likelihood Criteria shall be defined.
The X axis represents Likelihood of the event which can be assessed using Annual Frequency or Probability of Failure on
Demand (increases in the order of 10 from left to right.) or it can be assessed qualitatively based on Past experiences.
The Y axis represents Severity of consequences in terms of People (Health), Asset, Environment, Company reputation.
Severity decreases from top to bottom.
Risk = Severity Rating X Likelihood Rating
Risk III (Red) – High Risk which is unacceptable where current safeguards provided are inadequate and further risk reduction
needs to be achieved by providing additional safeguards. The Risk should be brought to Risk I (Green).
Risk II (Yellow) – Moderate Risk which is undesired where current safeguards provided are still inadequate and further risk
reduction should be achieved by providing additional safeguards. The Risk should be brought to Risk I (Green).
Risk III (Green) – Low Risk which is considered Tolerable as is. Additional risk reduction is not necessary.

Worldwide Benchmark:
Generally it is acceptable that the likelihood of potential for multiple fatality (Severity 5) should be less than 10-6/year and
likelihood of Potential for Single fatality (Severity 4) should be less than 10-5/year.
 Risk I High/ Unacceptable – Further Risk Reduction required. Never heard of Has occurred Has occurred Happened
Happened
this occurring within industry, before in Several times per
Likelihood Several times per
within your but not within operating year in operating
year in Location
Risk II Moderate/ Undesirable – Risk Reduction required unless ALARP industry company company company

Annual
0.00001>-
Risk III Low/ Acceptable – Further risk reduction not required Frequency/ 0.0001>-<=0.001 0.001>-<=0.01 0.01>-<=0.1 >0.1
<=0.0001
PFD
Company
Severity People Assets Environment Ratings 1 2 3 4 5
Reputation
Multiple
fatalities or
Extensive International
Catastrophic several
damage
Massive effect
impact
5 II III III III III
permanent
disabilities
1 or 2 fatalities
or 10 or more
Major National
Severe injuries or
damage
Major effect
impact
4 II II III III III
permanent
total disability
Permanent
Disability or
Local Localized Considerable
Critical Severe Non-
damage effect impact
3 I II II III III
permanent
injuries
Single/Multiple
recordable
Minor
Marginal injuries
damage
Minor effect Minor impact 2 I I II II II
requiring 24 hrs
hospitalization

Slight injury or
health effects Very slight Very slight Very slight
Negligible
due to damage effect impact
1 I I I I II
exposure