Upload
others
View
2
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
1
Administering CHRA
Activities Effectively –
A PETRONAS Case Study
© MIHA 2005MIHA Training Series 2
CHRA Case Study
ContentsPresentation Objective
Background
PFK’s CHRA
Information on PFK
PFK CHRA Introduction
CHRA Process Flow
Operationalising CHRA
Expectation on CHRA exercise
Findings
Challenges
Advantages / Disadvantages
2
© MIHA 2005MIHA Training Series 3
CHRA Case Study
Presentation Objective
To share the experience of PETRONAS in
administering / carrying out CHRA in one of the
PETRONAS plant
© MIHA 2005MIHA Training Series 4
CHRA Case Study
All of PETRONAS OPUs have carried out CHRA to a certain extent either by:
PETRONAS in-house resources
Consultants
The OPUs compliance to the USECHH Regulations 2000, in particular, CHRA was assessed through:
• CHSE Noise & USECHH Legal Compliance Assessment carried out in 2002 – 2003
• CHSE Tier-3 HSE Assurance
One of the main findings was quality of CHRA reports varied fromone OPU to another (some was incomplete/insufficient)
Background
3
© MIHA 2005MIHA Training Series 5
CHRA Case Study
Background
What Are the Common Issues ?
Mistakes in categorizing work unit
Incorrect Hazard Rating for mixture of chemicals
Imprecise description of tasks
Selection of Duration Rating (DR)/ Frequency Rating (FR)
Subjective assessment of Magnitude Rating (MR)
Poor assessment on the adequacy of existing control
Recommendations (e.g. LEV, PPE, Chemical Exposure Monitoring, Health Surveillance) are too general
Variation in the format of CHRA Report
No mechanism to amend or updating the CHRA report
© MIHA 2005MIHA Training Series 6
CHRA Case Study
Background
What Has Been Done by PETRONAS ?
PETRONAS Industrial Hygienists have reviewed existing CHRA reports from various Operating Units (OPUs)
Debated and compiled the strengths and weaknesses of the finding
Developed common methodology and approach to carry out CHRA to ensure high quality of CHRA across PETRONAS
Identified one OPU (PFK SB) as a pilot project to implement PETRONAS CHRA common methodology and approach
Conducted CHRA Enhancement Training to all PETRONAS CHRA assessor/ focal person
Implemented CHRA standardization across the group
4
© MIHA 2005MIHA Training Series 7
CHRA Case Study
PF(K)SB’s CHRA
© MIHA 2005MIHA Training Series 8
CHRA Case Study
Information on PFK
PETRONAS Fertilizer (Kedah) Sdn. Bhd. is a wholly owned subsidiary of PETRONAS
It is the second PETRONAS fertilizer complex, Commercial operation started in 1999 in Gurun, Kedah
The daily production capacity of the complex is:
Urea - 2000 MT
Ammonia - 1125 MT
Methanol - 200 MT
Formaldehyde - 17 MT
Supporting facilities include:• Steam distribution and generation system
• Cooling water
• Instrument air
• Nitrogen
• Waste water treatment plant
5
© MIHA 2005MIHA Training Series 9
CHRA Case Study
PFK Plant
Urea & Ammonia Plant Urea Export Terminal
© MIHA 2005MIHA Training Series 10
CHRA Case Study
PFK CHRA Introduction
CHRA was carried out and reviewed between October –November 2004
Basic hazards and risk identification data was available prior to CHRA
It was carried out by PETRONAS in-house resources, utilizing PFK staff with assistance from Corporate HSE
CHSE apply standardize methodology to carry out CHRA in ensuring high quality CHRA reports are established in PETRONAS
The methodology used is as per the “Assessment of the Health Risks Arising from the Use of Hazardous Chemicals in the Workplace Manual” (DOSH, 2000)
6
© MIHA 2005MIHA Training Series 11
CHRA Case Study
Awareness on the USECHH requirement
Staff attended the 1st CHRA training organized by CHSE
Appointment of CHRA Task Force members,
endorsed by HSE Steering Committee
Some of CHRA Task Force members
attended NIOSH CHRA Training
Conducted a series of CHRA Awareness training to staff
Task Force members carry out CHRA
Briefing to PFK MC on CHRA Plan
Review of CHRA findings and CHRA exercise
Presentation of CHRA findings to PFK Management
Submission of CHRA Report to DOSH
Final preparation of CHRA Report
HSE
HSE
HSE
HSE SC
CHRA Task Force
HSE
CHRA Task Force
CHSE/CHRA Task Force
HSE/CHSE
HSE/CHSE
HSE
CHRA Process Flow
© MIHA 2005MIHA Training Series 12
CHRA Case Study
Operationalising CHRA
Members of the task force were selected from areas where
chemicals are used/stored in PFK; and from specific discipline
Task Force
Custodian
CHRA assessor
Urea
Utility
OHD
AmmoniaLab Warehouse
Engineering
Hygiene Tech.
Co-ordinator
Facilitator
7
© MIHA 2005MIHA Training Series 13
CHRA Case Study
Expectation on CHRA Exercise
CHRA to cover the whole company
Task force members to meet weekly on Friday
To collect data from:
Available CSDS and from suppliers
Hazard register and hazard rating
Chemical spills incident report
Accident reports
Health complaints/surveys
Job safety analysis
Timely report submission to DOSH
© MIHA 2005MIHA Training Series 14
CHRA Case Study
Findings
Clear direction and advice from CHSE made Task Force members more committed
A comprehensive assessment on the use of chemicals in the Laboratory
280 chemicals were assessed
The interactions between chemicals were also considered
Detailed description of tasks were developed, enabling the assessor to identify steps that require special attention
Two options used to fill up Form C (Workplace Assessment):
By “chemical” – traditional method
By “task” – new method
8
© MIHA 2005MIHA Training Series 15
CHRA Case Study
Findings
Non-routine tasks were assessed through table top exercises, staff feedback and actual site survey
Shutdown activities were covered during the exercise, eg.:
Catalyst change-out
Chemical cleaning
Critical plant activities (non-routine jobs) were identified and evaluated during the exercise:
Breakdown of syngas compressors
Welding activities on a life ammonia reactor
© MIHA 2005MIHA Training Series 16
CHRA Case Study
Findings
Monitoring of chemical exposure were specified based on the exposure and adequacy of control measures as well as the availability of monitoring and analysis protocol:
• Welding fume exposure
• IAQ in laboratory
Thorough review of CHRA findings by ROHA enabled specific tests/ methods to carry out Health Surveillance, Medical Surveillance and Biological Monitoring were proposed:
• Eg. Visual assessment (fundoscopy) was proposed for Lab technicians performing Methanol product sampling
• Eg. Spirometry and chest x-ray was specified for MIG/TIG welders
9
© MIHA 2005MIHA Training Series 17
CHRA Case Study
Findings
Format of “Summary Report of CHRA” (for DOSH submission) were modified:
• Expanding “Recommendation” column to specifically to PPE, Exposure Monitoring, Health Surveillance, and Biological Monitoring
• This will allow various sections to pick up actions required by their sides to close the CHRA gaps identified
Format of “Final CHRA Report” were proposed and has been accepted by PETRONAS to be standard format to be used across PETRONAS OPUs
The integration of CHRA with the Hazard and Effect Register as per the HEMP (Hazard and Effect Management Process) Procedure
© MIHA 2005MIHA Training Series 18
CHRA Case Study
Challenges
Availability of task force members:
Most of the team members were line people, whose core functions are non-HSE
CHRA was not included as part of their KPI
Transfer of trained assessor(s) from PFK
Lack of training/experience of team members; Some has not attended CHRA training
Poor planning which delayed the CHRA report submission to DOSH
Incomplete information (eg. CSDS to determine hazard rating)
To carry out table top exercise for non-routine jobs
10
© MIHA 2005MIHA Training Series 19
CHRA Case Study
Advantages and Disadvantages of Using Internal
Resources
The advantages were:Cost savings
Better understanding of work processes
Ownership
Hands on experience on conducting CHRA
The disadvantages were:Time consuming, resulted in delayed project
Limited expertise to conduct CHRA
© MIHA 2005MIHA Training Series 20
CHRA Case Study