Consider the following scenarios:. All of the changes small, medium and large that occur in a brownfield facility over the course of the initial five years baseline development have the potential to create obsolete and stagnant SIS Grandfathering Documentation.
This is especially true when one recognizes that these changes are occurring in parallel with the initial SIS Grandfathering Documentation efforts themselves. A database driven safety lifecycle software tool to manage the SIS Grandfathering Documentation via a management of change work process is critical to success of this task.
SIS Grandfathering Documentation execution is considered part of the execution phase of safety lifecycle compliance. With regards to this paper, organizational readiness refers to people whose job description includes references to maintaining compliance with the safety lifecycle. This implies job descriptions have been modified, training programs developed, corporate SIS procedures issued, and management at the top of the corporation is supportive of safety lifecycle compliance.
Again, this sounds straightforward; however, this requires changes in the organization, which may be met with resistance. To further complicate the issue of organizational readiness is the fact that multiple groups within the organization need to align for this effort to be successful. For instance, let us assume the company is structured as follows:. For the five tasks to be successfully implemented within an organization, all of the above groups must align to deliver a sustainable process safety culture. This culture has to be driven from the top of the organization downward throughout the various groups.
As one reflects on his or her own organization, it is probably obvious that this cultural alignment may be slow to gain momentum. Once again, this could be a multi-year effort and should be factored into the overall planning for safety lifecycle compliance. Without personnel in the organization that are accountable for delivering a sustainable safety lifecycle process, the full benefits will not be realized.
Organizational readiness execution is considered part of the execution, monitor and sustain phases of safety lifecycle compliance. As competent personnel are required throughout the organization to support these activities. The concept of evergreen documentation associated with the safety lifecycle is critically important, however most companies do not even realize this is an issue they should be addressing.
The first project is as-built 6 months afterward, the second project as-built 9 months afterward and the final project is as-built 1 year later. If one of the projects increased occupancy in the unit, what is the risk of bypassing PT? Have we added or deleted Safety Rated Alarms?
Have we changed set points with potential impacts to process safety time and overall safety operating limits for a piece of equipment? This problem can be readily rectified and will be the subject of future papers. However, it will require the process safety organization and industry itself to recognize the need for change.
Evergreen execution is considered part of the sustain phase of safety lifecycle compliance. To cost effectively tackle the five tasks noted below an overall roadmap for success needs to defined.
The best approach to determine where to start, or more typical what is the most efficient means to finish, the safety lifecycle compliance journey is to conduct a detailed site assessment. It will document current work practices related to the safety lifecycle. It will also document a data flow diagram noting sources and quality of data required to support automation of the safety lifecycle.
The assessment focuses on each of the five tasks:. Short term, medium term and longer-term action plans will be created for each task. Figure 1 below is an example on how one can depict the site assessment results graphically. Site assessment execution is considered part of the execution phase of safety lifecycle compliance. Based upon site best practices, existing status of documentation and data, and current initiatives, unique plans may be required for different sites within a business unit as a whole.
However, with a sound execution plan that recognizes the unique interactions between the five tasks, the initially overwhelming concept of safety lifecycle compliance can now be reduced simply to a project management issue. Thus, through planning a very complex process can be broken down into small and readily measurable, and achievable, steps.
The most important concept to recognize regardless of the site assessment results is that the scheduling of the five tasks is a finish-to-finish effort. The individual tasks may have initial staggered starts, but all tasks must finish together to minimize regret costs. Figure 2 below is a sample milestone schedule that highlights the finish-to-finish requirements.
Planning execution is considered part of the execution phase of safety lifecycle compliance. With measurement, one can now track performance versus requirements. It is through this cycle of monitoring and sustaining the facility via offensive instead of defensive corrective actions that truly positive changes can occur.
The invisible becomes visible and more importantly actionable. The answer is the data required to be measured is often scattered in multiple sources some electronic and some in paper format only within an organization and this data is not typically readily usable as it stands today. This is further complicated, as discussed in the Organizational Readiness section, by the fact that multiple groups, working in distinct silos and often using different toolsets, are each responsible for pieces of the big picture.
systems for the process industry sector — Part 3: Guidance for the determination . of achieving functional safety,. This standard on safety instrumented systems. I.S. EN &A Functional safety - Safety instrumented systems for the process industry sector - Part. 1: Framework, definitions.
Thus, the greatest benefit of safety lifecycle compliance journey is typically the last step most companies undertake. Thus, one does not necessarily need to wait for years before compliance benefits can be measured.
The intention with safety systems is usually protect people and environment. Wether it is financial loss, image loss, or any other kind of loss a company might endure. The theoretical answer is: No, not at all. The word certification does not even exist in the requirements of the standard. The only thing the standards requires besides that work that needs to be done is verification, validation and assessment.
The practical answer is: Without certification nothing works in the functional safety world. Everything basically needs to be certified. This is driven from industry though, not from the standard. Through this program we certify safety instrumented systems, organisations and professionals according to IEC and other functional safety standards. We can certify the design, but also whether the certified design was actually installed in the field. We are specialised in enduser and site certification. Knowledge Base. Functional Safety.
IEC standard fact sheet Title: Functional safety: Safety instrumented systems for the process industry sector First release: Applies to: Safety instrumented functions and systems Industry: Process industry Stakeholders: End users, EPCs, system integrators, third parties. Our guidance often deals with the practical challenges that are not covered in standards such as how to deal with legacy systems, how process and machine safety come together, combining control and safety systems, etc.
The rationale behind this statement is obvious. IEC is the international standard for safety- instrumented systems associated with electrical, electronic and software-based safety-related systems. To cost effectively tackle the five tasks noted below an overall roadmap for success needs to defined. At a certain point in the safety life cycle compliance journey, a company will issue an edict that all capital projects from this time forth shall be compliant with IEC The IEC also mandates that one collect and calculate failure rate data that is specific to a given installation, process conditions and maintenance practices.
Please see downloads for more information. The final vote on the issue of IEC Ed2 was taken by 20 countries, and is available from the IEC Website, together with a separate corrigendum. This approval is required before it can become a BS.