PROCESS HAZARD ANALYSIS

ERPG (Emergency Response Planning Guidelines)

A system of guidelines, developed by a committee of the American Industrial Hygiene
Association, which are intended to provide estimates of concentration ranges where one
might reasonably anticipate observing adverse effects as described in the definitions for
ERPG-I, ERPG-2, and ERPG-3, as a consequence of exposure to a specific toxic
substance.

ERPG I
The maximum airborne concentration below which it is believed that nearly all
individuals could be exposed for up to I hour without experiencing other than mild
transient adverse health effects or perceiving a clearly defined objectionable odor.

ERPG 2
The maximum airborne concentration below which it is believed that nearly all
individuals could be exposed for up to 1 hour without experiencing or developing
irreversible or other serious health effects or symptoms that could impair their abilities to
take protective action.

ERPG 3
The maximum airborne concentration below which it is believed that nearly all
individuals could be exposed for up to I hour without experiencing or developing life-
threatening health effects.

Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA)

A qualitative hazard evaluation method in which all of the known failure modes of
components or features in a system or process are analyzed in turn for undesired
outcomes

Fault Tree Analysis

A methodology for developing a logical model (i.e., the fault tree) of the various
combinations of basic events (e.g., system or component failures) that can result in a
particular outcome (e.g., a major accident), known as the top event. Through the use of
Boolean algebra, the model can be quantitatively evaluated to determine the estimated
frequency of the top event.

Hazard and Operability Analysis (HAZOP)

A systematic, qualitative technique to identify process hazards and potential operating
problems using a series of guide words to study deviations of relevant process
parameters.
PHA Requirements

1. EPCL will develop a process which includes:

Annual PHA planning of every post and unit.
Conduct PHA (including consequence analysis), documentation and
follow up.
2. Process Hazard Analysis must be conducted for new project facilities, existing
facilities (cyclical PHAs), mothballing or dismantling of process facilities or any
significant change in process technology requiring a management of change
authorization e.g., Sub SOC etc.
3. Process Hazard Review (PHR) shall be conducted using a multi disciplined team
and one of following 04 methodologies. For details see Process Hazard Review.
What If / Checklist
Hazard and Operability Study (HAZOP)
Fault Tree Analysis (FTA)
Failure Mode and Effect Analysis (FMEA)
4. In case of new facility the responsibility of PHA lies under the duties of UNIT
MANAGER operations
5. Engineering Standards to be utilized for conducting PHA may be based on Exxon
Basic Practices, Engineering Standards / RAGAGEP (Recognized and Generally
Accepted Good Engineering Practices). In the design and engineering of new or
modified facilities, these standards will be complied with unless otherwise
approved by SOC Chairman. Deviation from these standards should be fully
informed, understood, and authorized.
6. A PHA Follow up Coordinator (Safety Advisor) is assigned who is also a member
of SOC.
7. A Cyclic PHA is a revalidation PHA and is based on review of the baseline PHA
and subsequent PHAs. The cyclic PHA must include a review of the
recommendations to make sure that the previous considerations and conclusions
still apply and are accurate.
8. For new facilities with significant changes during start-up that could affect
process safety, a revalidation of the baseline PHA shall be done within one year of
start-up.
9. The site Safety Advisor is responsible for follow up risk analysis reviews related
to Emergency Preparedness.
10. PHA of HHP is mandatory as per OSHA/EPA guidelines
11. Combustible dust is also a part of HHP
12. A safety or environmental consequence with a risk score of I or II must have
recommendations and shall be included in the final PHA report.
13. PHA of HHPs must be conducted at a maximum interval of 5 years
14. PHA of LHOs should be done at a maximum interval of 10 years
15. The PSI package must be correct and up-to-date before the PHA is begun.
16. PHA team charter should be issued at least two weeks before start of PHA
17. PHA team must conduct the field tour of the facility being studied
18. To mothball or dismantle a process facility in a safe manner, a PHA is
recommended.
 19. What/If checklist method is one of the foundation method of conducting PHA
20. FMEA focuses on the failure of each component in the system
21. The PHA team should address the human factor if process is HHP
22. In final report development all low risk assessments should be dropped
23. All recommendations should be checked against the Qualitative Risk Assessment
Protocol
24. PHA recommendations should not give specific design solution
25. Recommendations requiring engineering evaluation would fall under category of
engineering jobs and would have to go through control of change protocol
26. Any recommendations, which can be complied with by doing routine
maintenance, or a minor job, which does not require engineering, fall under this
category.
27. All the jobs, which cannot be handled on a running plant and can only be worked
in during a Shutdown or Turnaround, are covered in turnaround jobs.
28. Maximum time limit for conducting simple job is four months
29. Recommendations from PHA must be reviewed by Sub SOC (P)
30. Sub SOC (P) may suggest some key recommendations / findings to be reviewed
in SOC due to higher risks, immediate actions required or cost impacts are higher.
31. The PHA is not considered COMPLETE, until the report is approved by the
PHA leader.
32. Final report of a baseline PHA should be issued after two to three months of
activity
33. PHA leader is responsible for communicating analysis of all emergency squad
members
34. Copies of the PHA report should be distributed to:
Sub SOC (P) Chairman and its Members
Safety Advisor
Unit Managers / Section Heads who Operate & Maintain the facility
Process Engineering Unit Manager
Each member of the PHA team
PHA files of the Unit

Team Selection

1. Sub SOC (P) chairman selects the PHA team leader with the help of area Unit
Manager and site Safety Advisor. The operations Unit Manager of that specific
unit and Safety Advisor are responsible for ensuring that the Team Leader is
qualified to lead a PHA.
2. PHA team leader then helps Sub SOC (P) chairman / area Unit Manager in
selecting team members, and their PHA training.
3. Area Unit Manager and Sub SOC (P) chairman shall adjust assignment priorities
to provide adequate resources and time for the study.
4. The selection of the team members must be based on the skills needed for planned
studies.
Full Time Members

1. PHA team leader (qualified in PHA technique).

2. Operations Engineer
3. Process Engineer
4. Project Engineer
5. DCS and Area assistant engineer(s)
6. Maintenance Engineer
7. Safety Engineer (Only in case the PHA leader is a non Safety Resource)

Part Time Members (As per requirement)

1. Inspection Engineer
2. I&E Engineer
3. Machinery Engineer

Consequence Analysis

1. The first scenario to be analyzed in consequence analysis is in worst case

2. The consequence analysis is also used in developing the site emergency plan.
3. While conducting a consequence analysis if the effects are confined to the site
than there is no need of quantitative analysis of hazardous effects.