Contents |
|
v | |
|
|
xi | |
|
|
xiii | |
Acronyms and Abbreviations |
|
xv | |
Glossary |
|
xix | |
Acknowledgements |
|
xxxi | |
Preface |
|
xxxiii | |
Introduction |
|
35 | (12) |
|
1.1 History of Approaches to Process Safety Management |
|
|
35 | (1) |
|
1.2 The Paradigm of Risk-Based Process Safety Management |
|
|
36 | (4) |
|
1.2.1 Risk Based Process Safety (RBPS) Management |
|
|
36 | (3) |
|
1.2.2 Risk Decisions Characteristics |
|
|
39 | (1) |
|
1.3 A Risk Decision Making Method |
|
|
40 | (1) |
|
1.4 Road Map and Relationship of this Book with Other Material |
|
|
41 | (2) |
|
1.5 Risk Decisions during Process Life Cycle |
|
|
43 | (1) |
|
|
44 | (1) |
|
|
44 | (3) |
|
Key Concepts in Risk Management |
|
|
47 | (16) |
|
2.1 Risk Management Process |
|
|
47 | (1) |
|
2.2 Risk Identification - Risk Scenario |
|
|
47 | (2) |
|
2.2.1 Risk Identification |
|
|
49 | (1) |
|
2.3 Risk Analysis - Consequences and Frequency |
|
|
49 | (7) |
|
2.3.1 Consequences and Impacts |
|
|
50 | (1) |
|
|
50 | (1) |
|
|
51 | (5) |
|
|
56 | (6) |
|
|
56 | (3) |
|
2.4.2 Qualitative, Semi-Quantitative and Quantitative Risk Criteria |
|
|
59 | (2) |
|
2.4.3 Risk Reduction Factor |
|
|
61 | (1) |
|
|
62 | (1) |
|
Understanding Process Hazards, Consequences and Risks |
|
|
63 | (16) |
|
|
63 | (10) |
|
|
63 | (4) |
|
3.1.2 Flammability and Explosivity |
|
|
67 | (3) |
|
3.1.3 Chemical Reactivity |
|
|
70 | (2) |
|
3.1.4 Significant or Large Environmental Release Hazards |
|
|
72 | (1) |
|
3.1.5 Other Process Hazards |
|
|
72 | (1) |
|
|
73 | (1) |
|
3.3 Consequences and Impacts |
|
|
73 | (1) |
|
|
74 | (2) |
|
|
76 | (3) |
|
Risk Decisions and Strategies |
|
|
79 | (16) |
|
4.1 Objectives and attributes |
|
|
79 | (2) |
|
|
79 | (1) |
|
|
79 | (2) |
|
4.2 Process Life Cycle and Alternatives |
|
|
81 | (1) |
|
|
82 | (2) |
|
|
82 | (1) |
|
4.3.2 Evaluate the Baseline Risk |
|
|
83 | (1) |
|
4.3.3 Identify the Alternatives |
|
|
83 | (1) |
|
4.3.4 Screen the Alternatives |
|
|
84 | (1) |
|
|
84 | (1) |
|
4.4 Objectives and Outcomes |
|
|
84 | (1) |
|
|
85 | (2) |
|
|
87 | (3) |
|
|
90 | (1) |
|
|
91 | (1) |
|
|
92 | (3) |
|
|
95 | (22) |
|
5.1 Defining the Decision Problem |
|
|
95 | (2) |
|
|
95 | (2) |
|
5.2 Selecting a Decision Tool |
|
|
97 | (4) |
|
5.2.1 Progression of Risk Analysis Tools |
|
|
97 | (1) |
|
5.2.2 Factors in Decision Tool Selection |
|
|
98 | (3) |
|
5.3 Assembling the Appropriate Assessment Resources |
|
|
101 | (4) |
|
|
101 | (3) |
|
|
104 | (1) |
|
|
104 | (1) |
|
|
105 | (1) |
|
5.4 Define decision criteria |
|
|
105 | (2) |
|
5.4.1 Process Safety Risk Criteria |
|
|
105 | (2) |
|
|
107 | (1) |
|
|
107 | (7) |
|
5.5.1 Characteristics of Decision Aids |
|
|
107 | (1) |
|
5.5.2 Appling the Decision Tools, Aids, and Criteria |
|
|
108 | (3) |
|
5.5.3 Recognizing and Dealing with Uncertainties |
|
|
111 | (2) |
|
5.5.4 Recognizing the Need to Escalate the Decision |
|
|
113 | (1) |
|
5.6 Finalizing decision and the approval process |
|
|
114 | (1) |
|
5.7 Communicating, Documenting, and implementing the Decision |
|
|
114 | (2) |
|
|
116 | (1) |
|
|
117 | (14) |
|
|
117 | (1) |
|
|
117 | (2) |
|
6.2.1 Anchoring Trap Example, Titanic |
|
|
118 | (1) |
|
6.2.2 Countering the Anchoring Trap |
|
|
118 | (1) |
|
|
119 | (1) |
|
6.3.1 Status Quo Examples |
|
|
119 | (1) |
|
6.3.2 Countering the Status-Quo Trap |
|
|
120 | (1) |
|
6.4 Sunk-cost and escalation of commitment trap |
|
|
120 | (1) |
|
6.4.1 Countering the Sunk-Cost Trap |
|
|
121 | (1) |
|
6.5 Confirming-Evidence Trap |
|
|
121 | (1) |
|
6.5.1 Countering the Confirming Evidence Trap |
|
|
122 | (1) |
|
|
122 | (1) |
|
|
123 | (1) |
|
6.6.2 Countering the Framing Trap |
|
|
123 | (1) |
|
6.7 Estimating and Forecasting Trap |
|
|
123 | (5) |
|
|
123 | (3) |
|
|
126 | (1) |
|
|
127 | (1) |
|
6.7.4 Countering Estimating and Forecasting Traps |
|
|
127 | (1) |
|
|
128 | (1) |
|
6.8.1 Groupthink Example, Flixborough, UK Explosion |
|
|
128 | (1) |
|
6.8.2 Countering the Groupthink Trap |
|
|
128 | (1) |
|
|
129 | (2) |
|
|
131 | (8) |
|
7.1 Introduction to inherently safer design |
|
|
131 | (1) |
|
7.2 Inherently Safer Design Strategies |
|
|
131 | (1) |
|
7.3 Hierarchy of Risk Management Controls |
|
|
132 | (1) |
|
7.4 ISD examples to illustrate decision Process |
|
|
133 | (5) |
|
7.4.1 Example with minimization |
|
|
135 | (1) |
|
7.4.2 Example with moderation |
|
|
136 | (1) |
|
7.4.3 Example with simplification |
|
|
137 | (1) |
|
|
137 | (1) |
|
|
138 | (1) |
|
|
138 | (1) |
|
|
138 | (1) |
|
|
139 | (12) |
|
|
139 | (4) |
|
8.2 Decision Approval level |
|
|
143 | (1) |
|
8.3 Examples of Decision Process Applied to Changes |
|
|
144 | (6) |
|
|
144 | (1) |
|
|
145 | (1) |
|
8.3.3 Process Parameter Change |
|
|
146 | (1) |
|
8.3.4 Organizational Change |
|
|
147 | (1) |
|
8.3.5 Raw Material Change |
|
|
148 | (1) |
|
|
149 | (1) |
|
|
150 | (1) |
|
Using LOPA and Risk Matrices in Risk Decisions |
|
|
151 | (22) |
|
|
151 | (1) |
|
|
151 | (4) |
|
|
152 | (3) |
|
9.3 Layer of Protection Analysis |
|
|
155 | (4) |
|
9.3.1 Independent Protection Layers |
|
|
158 | (1) |
|
|
159 | (1) |
|
9.4 Phosgene Handling Process for Risk Decision Example |
|
|
159 | (5) |
|
|
159 | (2) |
|
9.4.2 Risk Matrix for Phosgene Handling Example |
|
|
161 | (3) |
|
9.5 Phosgene Example Decision Process Using Risk Matrix |
|
|
164 | (1) |
|
9.6 Decision Process for Phosgene Example Using LOPA |
|
|
165 | (7) |
|
|
172 | (1) |
|
Using QRA and Safety Risk Criteria in Risk Decisions |
|
|
173 | (24) |
|
10.1 Introduction to CPQRA |
|
|
173 | (6) |
|
10.1.1 Calculate Frequencies |
|
|
173 | (5) |
|
10.1.2 Calculate Consequences |
|
|
178 | (1) |
|
10.1.3 Quantitative Risk Analysis (QRA) |
|
|
179 | (1) |
|
10.2 Safety Risk Criteria |
|
|
179 | (6) |
|
10.2.1 Scope of Risk Criteria |
|
|
179 | (1) |
|
10.2.2 Individual and Societal Risk |
|
|
180 | (4) |
|
10.2.3 Continual Improvement |
|
|
184 | (1) |
|
10.3 High Consequence Low Probability (HCLP) Events |
|
|
185 | (3) |
|
|
188 | (7) |
|
10.4.1 Comparing Design Options: Bromine Handling Facility |
|
|
188 | (4) |
|
10.4.2 Compliance and Continual Improvement: Organic Acid Vent System |
|
|
192 | (1) |
|
10.4.3 Special Case: The Domino Effect |
|
|
193 | (2) |
|
|
195 | (2) |
|
|
197 | (6) |
|
|
197 | (1) |
|
|
197 | (1) |
|
|
197 | (3) |
|
11.3.1 Importance of a decision document |
|
|
197 | (1) |
|
11.3.2 Writing recommendations |
|
|
197 | (1) |
|
11.3.3 Advice of legal counsel |
|
|
198 | (1) |
|
11.3.4 Contents of the decision document |
|
|
199 | (1) |
|
11.3.5 Retention of the decision document |
|
|
199 | (1) |
|
|
200 | (1) |
|
|
200 | (1) |
|
|
200 | (1) |
|
|
201 | (2) |
|
|
203 | (8) |
|
|
203 | (1) |
|
12.2 Case Studies in Risk: Decision Making Failures |
|
|
203 | (4) |
|
12.2.1 Failure to Define the Problem |
|
|
203 | (1) |
|
12.2.2 Failure to Establish Baseline Risk and Identify Alternatives |
|
|
204 | (1) |
|
12.2.3 Make the Decision - Failure to consider tradeoffs |
|
|
205 | (1) |
|
12.2.4 Make the Decision - Failure to understand uncertainty |
|
|
206 | (1) |
|
12.2.5 Make the Decision - Failure to do risk identification and Failure to probe risk tolerance |
|
|
206 | (1) |
|
12.2.6 Make the Decision - Failure to recognize linked decisions |
|
|
207 | (1) |
|
|
207 | (4) |
References |
|
211 | (8) |
Index |
|
219 | |