Monday, June 7, 2010

Do you have a vision for getting everyone involved in QHSE? Would you like to get more individuals and more areas of the organization reporting risks so that you can learn from the information and mitigate those risks? Would you like to increase the reporting of low consequence events, near misses, and issues so that you can have a balanced pyramid of data which you can use to identify problem areas, trends, and to put action plans in place that will reduce risks? We will share best practices in engaging the workforce in critical aspects of QHSE management. It highlights ways to encourage individuals to identify and report items that often go unreported. It shows the value that is gained when such events are submitted into a corporate-wide system. Finally, it highlights the importance of not only increasing the volume of events that are reported, but also of ensuring a good mix of events are reported by more individuals on the front lines of all areas of an organization.

Safety management systems that meet and exceed the Elements of VPP. You may be there already.

Why does BBS seem to falter and fail so often? How can an organization maintain the high energy and momentum after implementation? Learn 5 reasons BBS fails in most organizations and proven methodologies to sustain the process without recreating the concept. Attendees will have a renewed faith in the BBS process and learn how to take the activity to new levels. Learn the "keys" to success based on over 12 years of research and study of human behavior and risk tolerance.

The Dow and Aquilex/HydroChem partnerships reduced risk and incidents through technological improvements, automation development, and safety innovations. Management commitment, common goals, visible metrics and improvements in work processes and tools were necessary to achieve these results, and can be applied to any craft. Success stories in hydroblasting technology development and application, as well as safety controls and work processes will illustrate the benefits of the Dow and Aquilex/HydroChem partnership.

This presentation describes a modern approach for dealing with electrical area classification and its link to API 752/753 studies. With a growing focus on the implementation and application of API 752/753, facilities are quickly moving forward to identify any potential onsite building issues. API 752/753 requires compiling a vast amount of process data, building data, and basic site information to examine the potential flammable, toxic, and explosion impacts.

When examining the likelihood of potential flammable and explosion impacts, often times the difference between a non-event (unignited vapor cloud) and a fire/explosion is encountering an ignition source. One of the main types of ignition sources in operating facilities is improperly classified electrical equipment, which is an issue that is addressed through electrical area classification (EAC). Traditionally, EAC involves a subjective application of prescriptive figures documented in API 500. This paper presents a new approach that allows for a quick transition from an API 752/753 study to an electrical area classification study and vice versa based on specific process data and site information.

One of the weak points of traditional electrical area classification methods is that as process streams change, and units are added, mothballed or demolished, EAC drawings quickly become outdated and cannot be easily updated to reflect changes. With this method, changes can quickly be incorporated to see the potential impacts on electrical area classifications and facilities can quickly and easily demonstrate compliance with regulation and facility guidelines.