|
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
Process Safety Metrics: Taking PSM to the Next Level |
|
|
These questions become more important as our experience in auditing these programs grows, and the need to view process safety from the perspective of how hazards are reduced, not just asking questions that are drawn strictly from regulatory requirements. It is quite possible that not all the right questions have been asked and that in order to continuously improve safety, we must look outside the regulatory box. Process Safety Metrics are (1) performance indicators that measure how well a plant or corporation has done to improve safety (e.g., the number of upset conditions and incidents) and (2) the underlying qualities that enable a facility or corporation to reach their safety goals (e.g., timely follow up to recommendations). Different indicators are intended to describe past performance, predict future performance, and encourage behavior change. In total they are an attempt at reaching beyond what is required, and addresses the specific measures that, if improved, would lead to measurable progress on safety. One example of a tool that incorporates performance indicators is ProSmart, developed by the American Institute of Chemical Engineers (AIChE) Center for Chemical Process Safety (CCPS). ProSmart uses real-time readings of key, measurable variables of performance to develop an index of system effectiveness. It defines the data to be collected, provides the computer interface and calculates a numerical value of PSM System performance for each element of PSM. This means that PSM performance is constantly being measured and not at timed intervals. This software should be available sometime by the middle of 2001. We caught up with Bob G. Perry, Staff Consultant for CCPS, and asked him to take a few moments to talk about the ProSmart software and how it will benefit industry.
Could you tell us a little bit about ProSmart's development and how it performs process safety metrics? CCPS developed over the past 10 years with the sponsors what we refer to as a PSM management system, which is based on 12 elements. It includes the standard things: process hazard review, process risk management factors, accountability, management of change, process equipment integrity, incident investigation, etc. These elements track with the ones present under OSHA PSM. The concept behind ProSmart started in 1993. The software operates in three tiers or levels. The first is what we refer to as program design. There are a series of statements related to how the process safety management system is designed. We believe the program design is more or less generic. The questions about do you have a written procedure for MOC and and do you have a procedure for process equipment integrity are more or less the same kind of questions. But there are questions that a user inputs data to in regard to program design. The second tier becomes much more specific. If you have a written program then the important thing is how do you implement it. So there are a series of indicator statements that describe and measure the effectiveness of program implementation. [An effort was made] to keep it generic because otherwise you get 100,000 questions that takes someone on a plant site half a month to do. There is a third level [or tier] called product evaluation indicators. Those are element-specific indicators that measure a specific PSM element. The software is like other software in that you enter the data from the bottom up. The software is an expert system. We have used our technical management subcommittee to go through these things and the software basically has got built-in a total noncompliance; a location that is doing basically nothing. So that the scores of this, and these are numerical scores, would be a zero. Now I am simplifying this somewhat for purposes of trying to explain it. We have also said that in the other extreme that if you are doing everything perfectly, you have got a score of 100. As an expert system, we have said, "ok, what would a reference plant look like," [and the technical committee members measure sites that they are familiar]. We have gone through and answered all the questions in terms of a numerical score. From this, what basically happens is, and the software has algorithms in it and literally we are developing a curve for the plant. Within the software is a curve that has a slope of how well you are implementing MOC and it gets into the idea that if you have an extremely good written program , but you are doing a lousy job of implementing it at the site, for whatever the reason might be, the scoring weighs the implementation of the program more heavily than the written program. A user inputs his estimate as to how his plant is doing and he comes up with a relative score based on what we believe an excellent plant would be and what a poor plant would be. There is quite a bit of subjectivity built into it as to what your assessment of your plant is. You can clearly tell if your plant is improving or not improving because you are doing the ratings each time and you are going to use the same criteria. In addition to measuring a plant for the effectiveness of its PSM program, I am convinced you can use this software to play what-if games as to the resources that you have within your facility. If you said I want to improve, you can take the software and say "if I apply resources here versus there, which will give me the better score." You can play what-if games as to where you want to deploy your resources to get the the maximum improvement of your dollars and time.
What are the key ways that this software is beneficial to industry? I believe that on two or three levels it is useful. I believe that just as a benchmark of how complete and how thorough your process safety management system is, it is an excellent benchmark. If you did no more than get it and go through all this stuff, you will see things that you never thought about.
How would you compare its role to a PSM compliance audit? I don't think it can replace a PSM compliance audit. The federal agencies are going to require compliance audits. But it is better than a compliance audit because it's more thorough. An audit is also a spot check.
How long will it take to implement the software at the average facility? Let's say in a fairly sophisticated plant with maybe 500 employees that has a mature, well-developed process safety management system with a PSM coordinator or someone who has been responsible for this and is familiar with the data. He knows how many MOCs they are processing a month and that sort of thing. We think it will take him a full, solid two man weeks to populate the database for the initial time. Once he develops some familiarity with that and keeps it up-to-date, it will take about two days a month. The frequency in which updates are done, monthly, quarterly, will depend on the situation at the plant and how much time you want to put into them and how valuable you think it is. But it would not be a one shot thing. It is a real-time measurement; it is not an audit. It is a real-time measurement of how well your systems are performing
When will the software be completed? It is CCPS' intention to select 3 beta test sites in December 20000. Then the software would be available in the first half of 2001. All 12 elements are complete, all the ratings, all the indicator statement, all the numerical ratings have been done. Right now guidance statements are being prepared so that the questions created by the technical management committee are understood by those using the program.
AcuSafe is a presentation of AcuTech Consulting, ©2002, All Rights Reserved
|
