Process Safety Leading Indicator Luc Schoonacker Corporate Process Safety manager Europe, Asia & International LyondellBasell Benelux BV, A LyondellBasell Company Implementing Process Safety LIs To Improve HSE Performance Cefic-Brussels February 02, 2012
29
Embed
Process Safety Leading Indicator - EPSCevents/PSPI+Conference...Process Safety Leading Indicator Luc Schoonacker Corporate Process Safety manager Europe, Asia & International LyondellBasell
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Process Safety Leading Indicator
Luc Schoonacker
Corporate Process Safety manager Europe, Asia & International
LyondellBasell Benelux BV,
A LyondellBasell Company
Implementing Process Safety LIs
To Improve HSE Performance
Cefic-Brussels
February 02, 2012
| www.lyondellbasell.com | | www.lyondellbasell.com | P. Webb, Paris Dec 2009 2 2
LyondellBasell
59 plants in
18 countries
More than
14,000 employees
worldwide
Sales in
more than
100 countries
| www.lyondellbasell.com | | www.lyondellbasell.com | P. Webb, Paris Dec 2009 3 3
Diversified & vertically integrated portfolio
Technology Intermediates
& Derivatives Olefins & Polyolefins
Europe Asia & International
Olefins & Polyolefins
Americas Refining &
OxyFuels
Wellhead
Refining
Olefins
Olefin
Derivatives
2nd Level
Derivatives
Capturing
value along
the chain
Styrene
Glycols
Glycol Ethers
Butanediol
PP
Compounding
Ethylene
Oxide Acetyls
Propylene
Oxide Polybutene Oxy Fuels
Aromatics Fuels
Crude Natural Gas
Liquids
Olefins
Glycols
Glycol Ethers
Refining
Tech
no
log
y
Catalloy
Process
Resins
Polypropylene Polyethylene
Olefins
Crackers
| www.lyondellbasell.com | | www.lyondellbasell.com | P. Webb, Paris Dec 2009 4
Global rated capacity rank*
Presentation title to go here if required 4
Polyolefin Licensing
Polyolefin Catalysts
Polypropylene
Polypropylene Compounds
Oxyfuels
1 Nr.
Propylene Oxide
Polyethylene
Refining Capacity
373,000
barrels per day
Nr.
2
Nr.
3
Nr.
4 Ethylene Propylene
*Sources: CMAI, Chemical Market Resources, DeWitt and LyondellBasell AF’s internal data. Note: Capacities and worldwide capacity position are as of December 31, 2009, except for Technology worldwide capacity position, which is as of
December 31, 2008, and include our pro rata share of joint ventures.
| www.lyondellbasell.com | | www.lyondellbasell.com | P. Webb, Paris Dec 2009 5 Presentation title to go here if required 5
Process Safety Performance
Indicators
Navigating to HSE Success
And GoalZero
| www.lyondellbasell.com | | www.lyondellbasell.com | P. Webb, Paris Dec 2009 6 6
Fundamental Concept
• How well are we managing process safety.
• Why process safety performance indicators can help us manage
process safety better.
| www.lyondellbasell.com | | www.lyondellbasell.com | P. Webb, Paris Dec 2009 7
Are we managing risk adequately?
• TRR is falling
• Plant reliability is rising
• Quality performance is increasing
• …… and accruals for HSE bonuses have been increased
• So why should we worry?
Presentation title to go here if required 7
| www.lyondellbasell.com | | www.lyondellbasell.com | P. Webb, Paris Dec 2009 8
What are the trends
• We know that incidents are happen
– Texas City
– ConocoPhillips Humberside
– Buncefield
– Etc
• But if TRR is improving, the benefits must be cascading to major
accident hazards as well ….. mustn’t they ….?
Presentation title to go here if required 8
| www.lyondellbasell.com | | www.lyondellbasell.com | P. Webb, Paris Dec 2009 9 9
Leading or lagging?
Fire and ExplosionLPG in Sphere
control of Corrosion Under Insulation
Mitigation Arrangements
No. of
Inspections vs
schedule
No. of cases of
corrosion under
insulation (no
leak)
No. of
small leaks
No. of
big leaks &
fires
Measures
of safety
activity
Failures
revealed by
safety activity
Failures in
use
Hopkins A. (2009), Thinking about process safety indicators. Safety Science 47 460-465
| www.lyondellbasell.com | | www.lyondellbasell.com | P. Webb, Paris Dec 2009 10
Why Process Safety ?
• Inevitable Important
• Numerous consequences when getting it wrong:
– Asset damage
– Business Interruption
– Environmental impact
– Harm to workers
– Etc.
• A common pitfall:
– “Seeing process safety as identical of occupational and see the latter
as an indicator of General Safety”
• Most obvious measures of process safety are:
– Loss of containment
– Other process safety incidents
Presentation title to go here if required 10
“lagging Indicators” (reactive Measure)
| www.lyondellbasell.com | | www.lyondellbasell.com | P. Webb, Paris Dec 2009 11
Why Leading Indicators ?
• To be more proactive
• To use indicators that reflect activities which are positively
impacting on process safety
Presentation title to go here if required 11
Tier 1
Tier 2
Tier 3
Tier 4
Operating Discipline & Management System
Performance Indicators
Leadin
g In
dic
ato
rs
Laggin
g In
dic
ato
rs
LOPC Events of
Greater Consequence
LOPC Events of
Lesser Consequence
Challenges to Safety Systems
Tier 1
Tier 2
Tier 3
Tier 4
Operating Discipline & Management System
Performance Indicators
Leadin
g In
dic
ato
rs
Laggin
g In
dic
ato
rs
LOPC Events of
Greater Consequence
LOPC Events of
Lesser Consequence
Challenges to Safety Systems
| www.lyondellbasell.com | | www.lyondellbasell.com | P. Webb, Paris Dec 2009 12
Why Leading Indicators (2)?
• Give confidence and assurance
– “process safety is not only under control but also subject to
continuous improvement”
• Good performance in Leading Indicators feeds forward to good
performance in Lagging Indicators.
• Continuous improvement equates to continuous risk reduction
Presentation title to go here if required 12
| www.lyondellbasell.com | | www.lyondellbasell.com | P. Webb, Paris Dec 2009 13
Learning By Example
• The most common found indicators are:
– Mechanical Integrity
• % of inspections done vs schedule
– Action Item follow up
• PHA actions completed
• Audit actions completed
• Process near misses actions completed
– Training/Competence
• % op people successfully trained (tests)
• How complete roles in process safety are defined and assigned.
Presentation title to go here if required 13
| www.lyondellbasell.com | | www.lyondellbasell.com | P. Webb, Paris Dec 2009 14
The Journey Towards Implementation
• Process safety indicators shall not be seen as a solely safety
technical exercise
• Winning management commitment and engaging the workforce is
absolutely essential
• Implementation is not an overnight activity (typically requires 3-5
year)
• It is presumed the company has policies, procedures and
practices in place
• The system will need a proper level of resources, both in setting
up and in data collection
• Choice between being prescriptive or allow sites to choose their
own relevant Leading Indicators.
Presentation title to go here if required 14
| www.lyondellbasell.com | | www.lyondellbasell.com | P. Webb, Paris Dec 2009 15
The Bow Tie
Presentation title to go here if required 15
Leading Lagging
| www.lyondellbasell.com | | www.lyondellbasell.com | P. Webb, Paris Dec 2009 16
Which Indicators to Select?
• Selected indicators need to be meaningful and reflecting the true
risk by identifying the hazards
• The organization should use the keywords:
– “what could lead to a loss of containment” to identify a vulnerability
profile
• Process safety risk found throughout the operations
– Linked to measuring the function of critical safety systems or
procedures. E.g. Management of Change, Process Hazardous
Analysis, Permit to Work, etc.
Presentation title to go here if required 16
| www.lyondellbasell.com | | www.lyondellbasell.com | P. Webb, Paris Dec 2009 17
Which Indicators to Select (2)?
• It is important to select indicators that directly show how well the
systems are working in practice
• Leading indicators are typically linked to measuring the
functioning of critical systems or procedures
• For generic barriers it is conceivable to consider indicators that
are measuring the completeness of a program
• Data for certain indicators may be obtained by reviewing on a
sample basis the execution of critical tasks
• Incident causes and which indicators could have signalled the
need for timely intervention
Presentation title to go here if required 17
| www.lyondellbasell.com | | www.lyondellbasell.com | P. Webb, Paris Dec 2009 18
Learning By Experience (EPSC-members)
• Don’t try to measure everything: “start with a pilot”
• It’s not about the quantity of indicators but about the quality of the
information given by them and how you use it
• Legal compliance indicators are not recommended
• Leading indicators originate at plant level where the hazards are
• As with any reporting, it will appear that performances becoming
worse before it improves. “on reporting, the submerged parts are becoming
visible”
• Review the validity of leading indicators
Presentation title to go here if required 18
| www.lyondellbasell.com | | www.lyondellbasell.com | P. Webb, Paris Dec 2009 19
Further Remarks
• Leading indicators are one of the key success factors to good
process safety performance
• The process around leading indicators can be more valuable than
the numbers themselves,
– “No measurement without recording, no recording without analysis
and no analysis without action”
Presentation title to go here if required 19
| www.lyondellbasell.com | | www.lyondellbasell.com | P. Webb, Paris Dec 2009 20 20
Three types of process safety metrics in LyondellBasell
Failures in use
& Failures
revealed by
safety activity
• Defined in incident
reporting standard
• 6 Levels defined
by consequence
• Review and
analysis by sites
and corporate
Standard
Measures of
safety activity
• Measure
compliance with,
and effectiveness
of Operational
Excellence
Processes
• Definitions are
fixed
Locally Chosen
Measures of
safety activity
• Drive continual
improvement
• Definitions
reviewed and
revised by the site
to keep driving
improvement
| www.lyondellbasell.com | | www.lyondellbasell.com | P. Webb, Paris Dec 2009 22 22
Three types of process safety metric
Failures in use
& Failures
revealed by
safety activity
• Defined in incident
reporting standard
• 6 Levels defined
by consequence
• Review and
analysis by sites
and corporate
Standard
Measures of
safety activity
• Measure
compliance with
and effectiveness
of Operational
Excellence
Processes
• Definitions are
fixed
Locally Chosen
Measures of
safety activity
• Drive continual
improvement
• Definitions
reviewed and
revised by the site
to keep driving
improvement
Been applying these since 2003 with
only minor adjustments
| www.lyondellbasell.com | | www.lyondellbasell.com | P. Webb, Paris Dec 2009 23 23
Failures in Use and Failures Revealed by Safety Activity
Level 0
Level 1
Level 2
Level 3
Level 4
Level 5
Near misses
Smaller actual events
Larger losses of containment & fires
Larger losses of containment & fires
Larger losses of containment & fires
Larger losses of containment & fires
Analogous to first
aid injuries
Analogous to
recordable injuries
| www.lyondellbasell.com | | www.lyondellbasell.com | P. Webb, Paris Dec 2009 24 24
Level 1 Process Safety Metrics
1. Loss of Primary Containment (LOPC) resulting in:
An outdoor release of 50 Kg to 500 Kg of a flammable or 2.5 Kg to 25 Kg of an acute toxic.
An indoor release of 5 Kg to 50 Kg of a flammable or 1 Kg to 2.5 Kg of an acute toxic.
2. Explosion or Fire with a direct cost of less than $25,000
3. Electrical Fault
4. Safety Related Protective System Called Into Operation
5. Safety Related Protective System Found Inoperative
6. Safety Related Unplanned Shutdown by Manual Intervention
7. Safety Critical Variable Limit Exceedance
8. Auto-Refrigeration Event
| www.lyondellbasell.com | | www.lyondellbasell.com | P. Webb, Paris Dec 2009 25 25
Three types of process safety metric
Failures in use
& Failures
revealed by
safety activity
• Defined in incident
reporting standard
• 6 Levels defined
by consequence
• Review and
analysis by sites
and corporate
Standard
Measures of
safety activity
• Measure
compliance with
and effectiveness
of Operational
Excellence
Processes
• Definitions are
fixed
Locally Chosen
Measures of
safety activity
• Drive continual
improvement
• Definitions
reviewed and
revised by the site
to keep driving
improvement
Work in progress
| www.lyondellbasell.com | | www.lyondellbasell.com | P. Webb, Paris Dec 2009 26 26
Standard measures of safety activity
Operational Excellence Processes
Contractor Safety Relationship
Work Permitting
Operation Certification and Recertification
Asset Integrity - Deficiency Management
Asset Integrity - Preventative Maintenance and Inspection Compliance
Safety Critical Variables and Equipment
Environmental Management
PHA and Process Risk Management
Facility and Building Siting
Emergency Response
Management of Change
Incident Reporting and Classification
Investigation
Alarm and Controller Management
Self assessment
Overdue A and B Priority Risks
Past Due Scheduled PHAs
Past Due PHA Action Items
A Priority Risk Count
B Priority Risk Count
Count of Controllers in Manual
Alarms/Hour/Operator
Standing Alarms/Operator
Peak Alarm Rate/10 min/Operator
Each process has metrics defined, for example …
| www.lyondellbasell.com | | www.lyondellbasell.com | P. Webb, Paris Dec 2009 27 27
Three types of process safety metric
Failures in use
& Failures
revealed by
safety activity
• Defined in incident
reporting standard
• 6 Levels defined
by consequence
• Review and
analysis by sites
and corporate
Standard
Measures of
safety activity
• Measure
compliance with
and effectiveness
of Operational
Excellence
Processes
• Definitions are
fixed
Locally Chosen
Measures of
safety activity
• Drive continual
improvement
• Definitions
reviewed and
revised by the site
to keep driving
improvement
Been applying these since 2006 with
only minor adjustments
| www.lyondellbasell.com | | www.lyondellbasell.com | P. Webb, Paris Dec 2009 28 28
Locally Chosen measures of safety activity
• Each site required to select 5 of their own
• Required attributes of the metrics:
– Support continual improvement
– Drive appropriate behaviour
– Emphasise achievements rather than failures
– Be precise and accurate
– Be difficult to manipulate
– Be owned and accepted by the people involved in related work activities and
those using the metrics
– Be easily understood
– Be cost-effective in terms of data collection
• Monitoring arrangements in the site need to be defined
• Sites should periodically review and revise
All these things are auditable.
| www.lyondellbasell.com | | www.lyondellbasell.com | P. Webb, Paris Dec 2009 29 29
Conclusions
It’s not about measuring. It’s about managing.
A successful PSPI programme is one which creates a simple tool
that senior managers use
to constructively engage in process safety.
Thank you.
| www.lyondellbasell.com | | www.lyondellbasell.com | P. Webb, Paris Dec 2009 30 30
Disclaimer
• All information (“Information”) contained herein is provided without
compensation and is intended to be general in nature. You should
not rely on it in making any decision. LyondellBasell accepts no
responsibility for results obtained by the application of this
Information, and disclaims liability for all damages, including
without limitation, direct, indirect, incidental, consequential,
special, exemplary or punitive damages, alleged to have been
caused by or in connection with the use of this Information.
LyondellBasell disclaims all warranties, including, but not limited
to, the implied warranties of merchantability and fitness for a
particular purpose, that might arise in connection with this