64 | Issue One 2006 | PPRROOCCEESSSSWest

FFor owner-operators of oil & gas facili-ties, understanding and predictingindustrial hazards and their accompa-

nying safeguards is not only responsiblebusiness it is a competitive advantage.

The world is increasingly sensitive to thedangers and the potential for disasters thatare possible in this industry. Catastrophiclosses happen. The media showcases indus-trial disasters such as BP Texas City (2005)and Hub Oil Calgary (2001) to a worldwideaudience. The losses can be staggering, andthey are much more than short-term eco-nomic losses. Even though the average dollarloss to a facility can easily be greater than$100 million per catastrophic incident, sim-ple production stoppages can cost millions ofdollars per day. The stakes can be high andCNN is watching.

Accordingly, a growing group of proactiveoperators of oil & gas facilities in westernCanada are upgrading their critical control &safety systems including safety instrumentedsystems (SIS), emergency shut downs (ESD),and instrument-trip systems. These systemskeep the plant's revenue flowing, increasethe safety of the facility and protect the envi-ronment. The direct benefits includeimproved facility uptime by avoidingunscheduled downtime, managed processrisk through identifying hazards and build-ing safeguard systems, and compliance withglobally accepted standards and best-prac-tices.

In contrast, some owner-operators havenot upgraded the critical control & safetysystems of their facilities, choosing instead tospend significantly on upgrades to DCS andBPCS systems alone, ignoring the recom-mendations embedded in international stan-dards such as IEC 61511.

Why? Reviewing the justification forDCS/BPCS systems is illustrative. The justi-fication for DCS and BPCS systems is essen-tially to increase control over the plantprocesses that support delivery of the prod-uct to the sales meters. The consequences offailure or obsolescence or spurious instru-ment "trips' or lack of maintenance onDCS/BPCS systems is an expensive short-

term loss of production. Furthermore, thesesystems become obsolete and have supportissues that require the systems be replacedevery 10 to 15 years. The justification for theupgrades is often economic and appears tomake sense at the time the decision is madeto upgrade.

But is it good business? Owner-operatorshave a responsibility today that is much larg-er than just significant short-term produc-tion losses. Their responsibility also encom-passes the facility itself, the company's repu-tation, operator's licenses, environmentalmanagement, and of course the lives of thefacilities personnel. There is a lot at stake;more than is expected or manageable withDCS/BPCS systems. The role and focus on

up to date critical control and safety systemsis therefore essential to consider.

The justification for critical control andsafety systems can be described as highlyreliable safeguarding systems dedicated toprotecting life, environment, assets, and rep-utation. Compare this with the justificationfor DCS and BPCS systems where the pro-duction losses and process optimization arethe primary focus. In most situations failureof the DCS or BPCS should not result in adangerous event. The safeguarding systemsshould always be in place and available toprotect and take the facility to a safe con-trolled state if required. This provides a clearand present need for intelligent and reliablesystems that safeguard against much morethan short-term production loss. It's often aplace where owner-operators place critical

functions that they cannot afford to be with-out and relates to people, environment andcritical assets. (For example, fire & gasalarms, manual emergency shutdown sta-tions, building, piping and vessel integrityprotection systems, primary rotating equip-ment protection schemes, etc).

Because safeguarding systems play a mas-ter role in a facility and require high avail-ability and reliability they are designed tostrict standards (IEC 61511/61508) whichapply to not only the design stage but for thelife of facility. This is a huge differentiator ascompare to DCS or BPCS systems.

This is good business, and this is the mes-sage that is putting a leading group of facil-ity owner-operators in a stronger competi-tive position.. Owners that have upgradedtheir critical control & safety systems haveextensive as-built programs for their facilities(they know what they own). They build onthese with a detailed examination of the risksand hazards inherent in the facility and theprocesses, (typically with a HAZOP) fol-lowed by the development of safeguards andthe examination of the risks of those safe-guards failing (using SIL analysis that con-forms to the IEC 61511 standard). Thisensures that the safeguards are in place andthat they will actually work when calledupon. By analyzing the risks and the safe-guards, owner-operators can document pre-cisely which safeguards (alarms, procedures,pressure shut-off valves, instrument trips,inspection and monitoring programs) needto be maintained. In some cases, if theprocess is done early enough, the basic facil-ity design can be enhanced to inherently pre-vent hazards and thereby minimizing theneed for safeguards, and lowering theCAPEX and OPEX.

Once owner-operators understand whichsafeguards are critical, they can reduce oper-ations and maintenance costs by focusingresources on the critical equipment and pro-cedures, rather than blindly across the entiresystem.

Although not as obvious, savvy owner-operators are beginning to use the informa-tion from the risk assessment of hazards and

PPRROOCCEESSSSSAFETYKen Bingham

...for savvy oil & gas operators

SSaaffeettyy SSyysstteemmss AArree aaCCoommppeettiittiivvee AAddvvaannttaaggee

“A growing group ofproactive operators

of oil and gas facilitiesare upgrading their

critical control and safety systems”

PPRROOCCEESSSSWest | Issue One 2006 | 65

safeguards as a basis of alarm management,bypass management, and for an increasedassurance of facility uptime.

Here's why this is valuable. Responding toalarms is much less costly than responding totrips which shutdown production and costmoney. When no bypasses are in place andthe plant is running smoothly, most instru-ment trips can be alarms. When numerousbypasses are in place and the plant is in tur-moil more alarms can become trips. When atrip is imminent, operations still have achance to prevent the trip by following pro-cedures and training. When alarms are fre-quent and bypasses are in place, the level ofrisk exposure can be displayed, and opera-tions management can quickly interpret therisk-level indicators for remedial action ratherthan an unscheduled shutdown.

Consider using these simple questions asan acid test of whether your facilities couldbenefit from upgraded critical control & safe-ty systems:•What is your risk exposure if you have anaccident? (impact of loss of containment inci-dent i.e. H2S) •Do you have a measurement of risk and riskreduction?•What is your risk now? •What is the accuracy and availability ofplant-critical operating information (P&IDs,cause & effect keys, safeguard manuals, train-ing manuals, etc.)?•What are the current standards and accept-able industry practices for risk assessment ofhazards and safeguards? If you are not fol-lowing them, then what standards are youfollowing? Are these acceptable?•What is your competitive edge in this tightresource environment of not enough peopleand too little time to train them?•Are your employees encouraged to improvesafety and reduce risk exposure? Are theygiven the tools, education, and resources todo this? (Bill C-45 enforced FederalLegislation: http://www.canada.justice.gc.ca/en/dept/pub/c45/index.html))

Knowing what is important to maintain,and what is important to pay attention to iscritical in efficiently and effectively dealingwith hazardous processes. Responding quick-ly to alarms reduces the chance of productionloss, harm to personnel, or the environment.Having multiple layers of safeguards that are

intelligently linked reduces the likelihood ofunscheduled plant downtime. These are goodsolid practical benefits of up to date criticalcontrol and safety systems. This is good busi-ness. PPWW

Readers can contact the author, KenBingham of ACM Facility Safety adivision of ACM Automation Inc.for more information by email:ken.bingham@acm.ab.ca and byphone 403-264-9637