Not All HAZOPs are Created Equal: How to Ensure HAZOP Quality?

The answer to the question, “Are there good or bad HAZOPs?”, is an emphatic YES. However, what constitutes a good or bad HAZOP, is not obvious.

HAZOP/PHA or any brainstorming approach used for hazard identification is a critical risk assessment tool. In fact the Minerals Management Services (MMS) recognizes PHA as a critical component in incident prevention – based on data of 1,443 incidents MMS found 13% of them had hazard identification as a contributing cause.

Given the critical role HAZOP/PHA plays in risk reduction, maintaining the quality of a HAZOP/PHA study is vital. Yet surprisingly thus far there does not appear to be enough effort put into developing appropriate criteria for a quality HAZOP.

There are certain practices adopted by the industry for conducting quality HAZOPs but these are not consistent and rational and may not necessarily be the most appropriate. In this paper, we propose logical strategies that will increase the likelihood of a successful HAZOP and ensure the critical follow up activities after the HAZOP studies.