Safety improvements

Control of Crushers Lower-grade raw materials, higher energy costs, larger-scale operations, and more complex, capital-intensive plants make automatic control of size-reduction equipment more important (Suominen, 21st International Symposium—Applications of Computers and Operations Research in the Mineral Industry, 1011-1018). Benefits are increased productivity, process stability and safety, improved recoveiy of mineral values, and reduced costs [Horst and Enochs, Engineering Mining J., 181(6), 69-171 (1980)]. 

Similar as to quality, management should demonstrate indeed more than arm s length support for safety and safety improvement leading to the highest possible safety standards. Involved leadership and constancy of purpose is critical. 

When used judiciously, the advantages of QRA can outweigh the associated problems and costs. Companies that prudently commission QRAs and conscientiously act on the resulting recommendations are better off for two reasons (1) they have a better base of information to make decisions and (2) their judicious use of QRA technology represents another demonstration of responsible concern for the health and safety of workers and the public. However, companies should resist the indiscriminate use of QRA as a means to solve all problems since this strategy could waste safety improvement resources, diverting attention from other essential safety activities. Once executives are able to interpret and use QRA results, they will appreciate that the quality of their decisions rests largely on their ability to understand the salient analysis assumptions and the limitations of the results. 

Qualitative answers to one or more of these questions are often sufficient for making good decisions about the allocation of resources for safety improvements. But, as managers seek quantitative cost/benefit information upon which to base their decisions, they increasingly turn their attention to the use of quantitative risk analysis (QRA). 

During regular operations to identify potential improvements for the next plant. Process improvement studies can then demonstrate the feasibility of inherent safety improvements so they can easily be incorporated into the design of the next plant or in major revamps of existing facilities. 

A number of risk importance measures have been defined for the interpretation of PSAs and for use in prioritization of operational and safety improvements. Some of these measures are similar to sensitivity defined as the total derivative (equation 2.8-1). 

After developing questions, the PrHA team considers each to determine possible accident effects and list safety levels for prevention, mitigation, or containing the accident. The significance of each accident is determined and safety improvements to be recommended. This is repeated for each process step or area outside of team meetings for later team review... 

The safety improvements use redundancy and diversity to prevent and mitigate lents. The safety injection system (SIS) and emergency feedwater system (EFWS) are dedicated four train systems. Containment spray and safety injection pumps take water from the in-containment water storage tank (IRWST), thus, eliminating the need to switch from an external source and provide a. semi-closed system with continuous recirculation. Emergency core coolant flows direc nto the... 

Prioritize Safety Improvements. This uses the detailed analysis (2) to identify items having high risk importance. Engineering analysis identifies and costs candidate improvements which are selected on the bn. o of risk reduction for a given cost. ... 

Columns labeled "a" are the assessed exceedance probabilities before safety improvements, Cnlumns labeled "b" are the assessed exceedance probabilities after safety improvements... 

The HAZOP took 3 calendar months to complete. However, preliminaty recommendations tor system safety improvements were available after the second HAZOP meeting. The HAZOP required about 2 staff-months of effort. In addition, the HAZOP leader and scribe spent another 3. staff-months in preparation and documentation. 

The QRA was conducted by risk sts and design innel to determine the probability of explosive releases of the chemical. Fault tree analysis identified several combinations of equipment failures and operator errors that could cause the top event (reactor explosion), Failure data were obtained from plant ex ice and industry da%.ui,/uoes to quantify the fault trees to estimate the frequency of reactor explosions. The fault trees suggested several safety improv-... 

Are there specific priorities for safety improvement for this site ... 

Remember that installing your PSM system will not happen overnight, and it probably won t happen perfectly. Try not to become impatient your hard work will pay off if you encourage feedback and recognize the need for continuous reinforcement—at all levels—of the importance of safety improvement. 

Unocal Chemicals (Ref. 3) Safety Improvement Process 10% reduction in recordable incidents in first year... 

Measurement of performance. Quality Management requires that measures of performance be established for every activity. These measures include end-of-pipe measurement, such as amounts of material released into the environment or injury rates, and in-process measures of how efficiently you are managing, such as time to review safety improvement proposals or total resources expended on PSM. Each team should be required to identify potential performance measures for the processes they are developing and the activities these processes manage. Many of the end-of-pipe measures will already exist these should be critically examined to ensure that they truly measure performance and are not unduly influenced by other factors. For example, the number of accidents in a fleet of road vehicles is almost directly dependent on the number of miles driven with no improvement in performance, a reduction in miles driven would reduce the number of accidents. 

A successful project is defined as one that meets its stated objectives (safety, improved reliability, increased liquid yield, reduced maintenance costs, etc.) on or under-budget and is completed on or ahead of schedule. Some of the helpful criteria that ensure a successful project are as follows ... 

With all the technology found in the modern hospital today, the lack of coordination between other parts of health care, the pharmaceutical industry, and the agencies is outdated. A network that connects these parts together will improve patient safety, improve care, speed the development of new treatments, and support new medical breakthroughs. 

Deciding which risk-reduction method to use maybe difficult. In many instances, appropriate decisions can be made without resorting to quantitative techniques. However, in some cases, particularly when the options are costly, quantitative risk analysis (QRA) and risk-based decision-making approaches may be an effective basis for measuring the improvement in safety arising from the proposed options. These approaches can also be used in prioritizing safety improvements and balancing cost and production issues. 

The critical results of a PrHA are a list of action items. Action items are written by the PrHA team any time additional effort is warranted to further analyze a specific accident scenario, eliminate the hazard, or reduce risks. Action items are not usually specific corrective actions. Rather, they alert management to potential problems that require action. Sometimes, action items suggest alternatives or recommend safety improvements. However, if a problem is simple, if a PrHA team is quite experienced, or if there is only one solution, an action item may recommend a specific corrective action. 

If the PrHA team is quite experienced, they may rank the action items according to the anticipated time and resources needed to implement changes. Or the team may make safety improvement and implementation recommendations. Ranking of action items or safety improvement recommendations may be valuable to management in several ways. It shows the significance that the PrHA team places on each item. It also allows management to prioritize the immediate efforts of corrective action and resolution. If resources are scarce, the ranking may affect the implementation schedule. 

The checklist should be included in the PrHA report. The PrHA team should summarize the deficiencies noted during the walkthroughs and/or meetings. Understanding these deficiencies usually leads to the development of a list of possible safety improvement alternatives for managers to consider, or a list of identified hazards and a set of suggested actions. 

Activities documenting and tracking implementation of corrective actions or safety improvements are not part of a PrHA report. However, the PSM Rule requires a documented, integrated system for managing and monitoring action items. This system must assure that action items and recommendations are addressed and documented in a timely manner. Implementation schedules for corrective actions or safety improvements must be tracked. Finally, the system must assure that all affected operating and maintenance personnel and other affected employees are notified of planned actions. 

Management can use a variety of criteria to select and prioritize corrective actions and safety improvements. They include costs, other competing priorities, implementation schedules, the effectiveness of risk reduction, and technical feasibility. These criteria, as well as management decisions about corrective actions, must be documented. If after evaluating an action item, management chooses to take no further action, that decision must also be documented. In addition to requiring documentation of management decisions, the PSM Rule requires a system to track implementation of corrective actions to be made. 

Management review of the action items from a PrHA of a large or complex process may result in many corrective actions and safety improvement activities. These actions should be prioritized to facilitate timely implementation. 

Because all corrective actions and safety improvements are management decisions, they should be implemented according to DOE Order 5480.19, "Conduct of Operations Requirements for DOE Facilities."... 

Miscellaneous design features are additional safety design methods that are usually included in the early design phases of new projects and are often the basis for safety improvements in existing plants. 

The informal safety review is used for small changes to existing processes and for small bench-scale or laboratory processes. The informal safety review procedure usually involves just two or three people. It includes the individual responsible for the process and one or two others not directly associated with the process but experienced with proper safety procedures. The idea is to provide a lively dialogue where ideas can be exchanged and safety improvements can be developed. 

---