Project reviews

Carl A Schiappa/ B S Ch E / Proce.ss Engineering Associate, Michigan Division Engineering, The Dow Chemical Company Member, AIChE and CCPS. (Project Reviews and Pro-cedure.s)... 

Process Safety Analysis This part treats the analysis of a process or project from the standpoint of hazards, risks, procedures for making potential damage estimates, and project reviews and audits. It can be helpful to management in assessing risks in a project. It consists of the following ... 

Guidelines for Estimating Damage Project Reviews and Procedures... 

To distinguish between a review and an audit, some definitions will be provided. A review is a critical examination or evaluation of any operation, procedure, condition, event, or equipment item. Reviews can take many forms and be identified as project reviews, design reviews, safety reviews, pre-start-up reviews, and so on. The following discussion of the review process will deal with project reviews associated with capital projects and focus on the area of process safety. 

The following sections will describe the project review and audit processes separately, addressing the why, when, and how for each process. 

The project review process involves multiple steps that should be definea in management gmdelines (CCPS, 1993, pp. 57-61). The steps include (1) review pohcy, (2) review scheduling, (3) reviewtech-nique, (4) review team representation, (5) review documentation, (6) review follow-up, (7) review follow-up verification, and (8) review procedures change management. These steps define how a review, whether it be a safety review, environmental review, pre-start-up review, or whatever, is conducted and how closure of review aclion items is achieved. 

Review Scheduling A review scheduhng procedure should be estabhshed that documents who is responsible for initiating the review and when the review(s) should occur during the project. The scheduling needs to balance availability of process information, review technique used, and the impact of potential review action items on project costs (i.e., early enough to minimize the cost of any potential changes to the process). The aclual amount of time needed for the review should also be stated in the procedure. On the basis of the number of project reviews required and the estimated time needed for each review, the project cost estimate should include the cost for project reviews as part of the total cost for the project. 

Review Documentation The project review team leader has the ultimate responsibility for documenting the results of the project review. This responsibility may be delegated to a team scribe or secretary to record trie review minutes and issue a summary report with listed action items. The action items could address exceptions to company or industiy standards and government regulations, review team recommendations based on experience and knowledge, and further issues for study that could not be resolved during the review session. 

On rare occasions, the resolution of project review concerns or action items is a point of contention between review team and project team members. In such a case, a management structure must be in place to arbitrate such disputes. 

The project review or a quality assurance audit will verify that all required records and drawings are accounted for, filed, and stored as prescribed. 

Reporting product realization measurements to management (clause 4.2.4.2) Conducting project reviews (clause 4.2.4.3)... 

The intent of this requirement is to provide a means for assuring management of performance and alerting them to potential and actual problems. Management need to know whether projects are proceeding on course and hence periodic reporting is necessary to provide management with factual data on which to make decisions. The results of these measurement should be reported at the planned project reviews as required by clause 4.2.4.3. 

Appropriate stages in this case means that the measurements should be performed so that the results are available at the planned project reviews. 

The precise staging of the reviews will depend on the nature of the project. However, the principle is to hold a review prior to a major decision that dictates the direction of the project or at a stage in a project where the nature of work changes (see Figure 2.7). Alternatively, reviews can be held monthly, providing a project review precedes the change in phase of work. 

Project reviews are not design reviews. Project reviews assess performance of the project and take into account timing, costs, organization, work assignments, subcontracts, etc. Design reviews look back at the technical aspects of design and look forward to the technical aspects of the design tasks ahead. 

Establish project reviews as separate reviews from design reviews. 

Capital Project Review and Design Procedures (for new or existing plants, expansions, and acquisitions) Appropriation request procedures Risk assessment for investment purposes Hazards review (including worst credible cases)... 

Remember as you set priorities that you and your team must consider the expected benefit to the company, division, or unit as a whole, rather than simply addressing a single gap. Obviously, any specific immediate risk you identify in the course of your assessment must be dealt with quickly and responsibly however, be careful not to let anomalous findings skew your perspective on broader priorities. For example, the absence of a capital project review process is a significant gap. However, if there is only one project per year this gap may have lower priority than an existing but seriously deficient operator training program. 

In addition to considering those elements that interrelate, you should pay particular attention to those that affect your operations most directly. For example, if your company has a major expansion program underway, you would assign the capital project review and design procedures element a higher priority than if your company has deferred all major capital projects. 

Next, consider employees in categories that describe their interaction with the PSM system. For example, engineering staff (along with R D and business unit staff) need to understand the requirements of the capital project review system. Training on these interactions can complement the "universal" modules. 

Capital project review and design procedures Reviews of major equipment acquisition apply... 

As is true in PSM implementation in the United States, it is not practical to try to do everything at once you must establish priorities for PSM design, development, and installation. The priorities that were appropriate in your U.S. effort may not apply directly to international locations. For example, in some international locations, plants are required to submit risk analyses to the government before undertaking major capital projects. This existing practice may make the capital project review element of PSM a less uigent priority. 

Equipment integrity is primarily achieved by good design and installation and the proper consideration of human factors should be an integral part of the design phases (see Section 8.2.2 on Capital Project Review and Design Procedures and the earlier sections of this chapter. 

Capital Project Review Community Outreach Contractor Program Crisis Management Emergency Planning Emergency Devices/Alarms... 

Once the plan is complete, you will almost certainly need to submit it for final approval. Your company probably has well established approval processes. Make sure to understand these and adequately brief anyone who may present your project to project review committees or board meetings on your behalf. When preparing your plan for approval, it is important to briefly reiterate the history of the project. Although you have thoroughly prepared senior management through your various communication and consultation exercises, they will not recall all of the relevant background. 

Conduct project review with upper management. 0 18. Declare the project complete. 

---