157 Yer HS PSM 0101

Yanbu Export Refinery Project
PROJECT DESIGN BASIS 157A.5.3 PPHA Report Product Blending System Document No.: 157-YER-HS-PSM-0101 Revision No.: FF Issue Date: 13 March 2008
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 2.0 2.1 2.2 3.0 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 4.0 5.0 6.0 6.1 6.2
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY............................................................................................. 4 General........................................................................................................................ 4 Process Hazards Analysis........................................................................................... 4 Definitions and Acronyms............................................................................................ 4 INTRODUCTION......................................................................................................... 5 Scope and Overview ................................................................................................... 5 Process Description .................................................................................................... 5 METHODOLOGY ........................................................................................................ 6 Introduction.................................................................................................................. 6 Objective ..................................................................................................................... 6 Review Process........................................................................................................... 7 What if? Technique ................................................................................................... 7 Software ...................................................................................................................... 8 REFERENCE DOCUMENTS ...................................................................................... 8 TEAM MEMBERS ....................................................................................................... 9 RESULTS.................................................................................................................... 9 Action Items................................................................................................................. 9 Action Item Tracking.................................................................................................... 9
General Confidential Page 2 of 13

TABLES: TABLE 1 P&IDs Reviewed During PPHA .................................................................................. 8 TABLE 2 PPHA Participants....................................................................................................... 9 APPENDICES: APPENDIX A APPENDIX B APPENDIX C PPHA Worksheets............................................................................................ 11 PPHA Action & Response Sheets .................................................................... 12 Piping & Instrument Diagrams ......................................................................... 13

1.0 1.1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY General The Yanbu Export Refinery Project comprises the development and installation of a new Grassroots refinery in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia that will process 400,000 BPD of Arabian Heavy crude into gasoline and diesel products for export. New facilities for import of crude feed and export for products are also provided. The refinery will be located in Yanbu Industrial City on the west coast of Saudi Arabia. The entire project includes refinery process units, utilities and interconnecting piping, associated feedstock and refined product storage/logistic facilities, as well as the offsite services necessary to support the safe and efficient operation of the refinery.
1.2
Process Hazards Analysis This report presents the FEED team findings of the Preliminary Process Hazards Analysis (PPHA) for the Yanbu Export Refinery, Unit 157 Product Blending System. The PPHA team for this study systematically reviewed the unit's ICA issue Piping and Instrumentation Diagrams, and other relevant documentation to identify potential hazards and operability problems, evaluate if designed safeguards were adequate, and recommend action when warranted. The methodology used was based on the guidelines published by the Center for Chemical Process Safety of the American Institute of Chemical Engineers. The report contains all the recommendations agreed upon by the PPHA team; these items are documented on the PPHA Work sheets (Appendix A 1 page). Within the PPHA there were no action items identified.
1.3
Definitions and Acronyms P&ID IOU KBR PFD YERP PPHA API MSDS BPSD Piping and Instrumentation Diagram Infrastructure, Offsites, & Utilities Kellogg Brown & Root Process Flow Diagrams Yanbu Export Refinery Project Preliminary Process Hazards Analysis American Petroleum Institute Material Safety Data Sheets Barrels per Stream Day

2.0 2.1
INTRODUCTION Scope and Overview The Unit 157 - Product Blending System PPHA was conducted to identify any items in the FEED design that could result in unsafe conditions or unexpected operational or mechanical difficulties. The PPHA sessions were held on 12 December 2007 at the KBR Offices located in Houston, Texas. A complete list of PPHA team members is found in Section 5. The What if? methodology was used for this PPHA. This methodology is used for many similar facilities around the world and is accepted by numerous regulatory agencies for Process Safety Management of Highly Hazardous Chemicals. This methodology is a team exercise that requires input and agreement from all team members. A discussion of the What if? methodology is found in Section 3. This technique was selected as an appropriate method to identify any features of the design or operating practices that could cause unforeseen hazards. The technique is in widespread use in the process industries, and is recommended by industry groups. The technique has been applied successfully to many similar projects and facilities. The PPHA Work sheets are a record of the teams discussion during the sessions. These work sheets contain the wording agreed upon by all team members. The PPHA work sheets are in Appendix A. The study resulted in no recommendations. The P&IDs that were reviewed are included as Appendix C.
2.2
Process Description Product Blending for export will utilize inline type equipment with real time measurement of components utilizing a series of flowmeter streams to automatically control the flow rates of proper ratios. Gasoline blending is expected to utilize 5-6 metering streams with each metering leg sized to accommodate the expected blend rate for the input fuel. Blending facilities are not included for Diesel product streams. In addition to the blending facilities included in this document, export tanks and pumps will be provided to transfer product to the NGL facility for loading and are included in WBS 179. All capacities listed in this document are in accordance with the following criteria: Tank capacities are Working Capacities Unit capacities are Design Capacities Pump flow rates are Normal Flow rates with no margin added.

The gasoline blending system will be designed for the following blend rates in BPSD based on blending daily production from each unit in 8 hours: Isomerate and Light Reformate NHT Light Naphtha BEU Raffinate HCK Light Naphtha CCR Hvy Reformate Toluene Butane 69,400 45,000 51,000 40,500 144,100 (Winter only-rates to be determined)
The capacity of the blending system will be 350,000 BPSD based on the above blending rates. 3.0 3.1 METHODOLOGY Introduction The What if? methodology was chosen as the appropriate technique for this project to ensure a rigorous examination of process hazards as well as potential operational problems that could propagate into "serious events." The What if? is a disciplined method of providing a Preliminary Process Hazards Analysis (PPHA) team with the means to visualize the ways a plant, process, or piece of equipment can fail, malfunction, or be improperly operated. The technique provides opportunities for reviewers to think creatively concerning the ways hazards or operating problems might arise in a plant or process. Identification of hazards associated with the processing of chemicals or hydrocarbons is the focus of a PPHA. Within the PPHA, the process under investigation is systematically examined to determine the consequences (hazards) of deviations from the design intent. The premise of the technique is that a problem can exist if the process deviates from the design intent. 3.2 Objective The objective of the PPHA was an assessment of the design and the potential hazards associated with its operation. The review aimed at systematically examining the design documentation in order to identify potential hazards and significant operability problems. The study resulted in the documentation of the findings, identifying possible conditions, design modifications, or further studies that may be required by others.

Except in obvious cases, the purpose of the review was not to resolve the action items or provide a quality check. Its purpose was to identify credible deviations from the design intent and their consequences. 3.3 Review Process The PPHA Facilitator presented a description of the methodology and the goals of the review. As desired by the PPHA team members, the KBR Process Engineer presented a process overview of the unit using available documentation (e.g. PFDs, Process Description, Heat and Material Balances, etc.) to provide those members of the PPHA team who were not design team members with an understanding of the design basis and intent. The team then applied the review methodology to the various sections of the unit. 3.4 What if? Technique The first step in the What if? review is to select the locations where the process deviations will be examined, called "nodes" on the PHA work sheets. Process Safety Engineers review the drawings provided, then select the nodes to be considered. The descriptions of these nodes are entered into the "HAZOP Manager" computer program in preparation for the review. This computer program produces the PPHA work sheets which serve as a record of the PPHA sessions and are found in Appendix A. The nodes are numbered for recording purposes and highlighted on P&IDs posted for all team members to inspect during the review meetings. The Process Safety Engineer then formulates various what if? scenarios for each node characterizing hypothetical deviations from the design intent. The team considers the scenarios. The next topic usually addressed when examining a particular scenario is the potential consequence(s) of the process deviation at that node. If there is no or only an insignificant consequence resulting from that deviation, that scenario is usually not fully discussed. This enables the team to concentrate on process deviations which could cause unsafe conditions or operating problems. The team is free to suggest additional what if? scenarios to those that have been formulated prior to the review sessions. When such a process deviation that could cause unsafe conditions or operating problems to arise is suggested, possible consequences are discussed and recorded in the CONSEQUENCE column of the work sheet. The "what if?" study technique used in this analysis involves documenting the reasonable worst case consequences for a scenario without taking into account design safeguards. This allows the team to examine the hazards or consequences associated with failures of engineering and administrative controls for these process areas. Once the consequences are evaluated and documented, the team focuses on the identification of existing SAFEGUARDS for the what if? or its consequences. More severe consequences require existing specific, reliable safeguards, or action items are developed by the team to improve safety or operability. If system

safeguards, such as instrumentation, alarms and shutdowns, relief valves, or operator action could help mitigate the situation, the expected system response is entered in the SAFEGUARDS column on the work sheet. If the team decides that a change is warranted to improve safety or operability, those suggestions are noted in the ACTION column. These changes could involve addition/removal of hardware, instrumentation and control, or suggestions for proposed operating procedures. In some cases, further study is needed to evaluate the question, and a recommendation for outside study is noted. 3.5 Software The review was recorded using HAZOP Manager Version 6.0 from Lihou Technical Software Services. This software is integrated recording, reporting, and analysis systems for the management of PHA studies. The program provides all traditional functions for recording the PPHA review utilizing the "What if?" methodology of analysis. It features the ability to customize standardized wording for scenarios, consequences, safeguards and actions for individual processes being reviewed. 4.0 REFERENCE DOCUMENTS Current status design documents were required to perform the PPHA. The following documents were available for reference during the Yanbu Export Refinery Project PPHA Process: PFDs for the unit Unit preliminary Plot Plan Applicable MSDS sheets
Record copy Piping and Instrumentation Diagrams (P&IDs) were used for the PPHA review. The drawing numbers and titles are listed below. Copies of the P&IDs are included as Appendix C.
Drawing Number 157-YER-PE-PID-0021 157-YER-PE-PID-0022 157-YER-PE-PID-0023
Drawing Title Product Blending Product Blending Product Blending
Revision F1 F1 F1
Node 5.01 5.01 5.01
TABLE 1
P&IDs Reviewed During PPHA

5.0
TEAM MEMBERS The team assembled to conduct the PPHA was comprised of individuals from KBR and YERP (ConocoPhillips and Saudi Aramco) with experience in production, process engineering, utilities, plant safety, process safety, operations, and project engineering. The following table lists the participants in the PPHA. Name Javed Akhtar Robert Farrell Ujjal Kumar Basu Rosemary Jones Olaleye Ahmad Aldhubabian Riley West Adnan Al-Subhi Roger Cratin Ty Walraven Company KBR KBR KBR KBR YERP YERP YERP KBR (consultant) KBR Responsibility Project Engineer Process CSE Process Project Engineer Operations Project Engineer Facilitator Scribe
TABLE 2
6.0 6.1 RESULTS Action Items
PPHA Participants
Through the course of the PPHA review recommendations were made concerning the addition/removal of hardware, instrumentation, or controls, suggestions for proposed operating procedures, or outside study. The review generated no action items. The action items are documented on Study Action & Response sheets (Appendix B). 6.2 Action Item Tracking Each of the action items generated as a result of the Unit 157 Product Blending Facilities PPHA Review is assigned to one or more responsible parties for closure. The KBR Process Safety Group manages the action item tracking process to ensure that each recommendation is considered and appropriate resolution is achieved in a timely manner. Action responders are instructed to carefully weigh the recommendations of the PPHA team, but they are ultimately responsible for the actual response. When a recommendation is very straightforward and is succinctly carried out (e.g. add a high alarm to an existing instrument, or delete a valve from the indicated location), the responder need only indicate that the action has been carried out and that the resulting change can be found on the revision of the drawing, data sheet, or

other document specified in the response (a copy of the newly revised document could also be attached to the action response sheet). When the PPHA teams recommendation is not warranted, the responder is expected to include documentation to support not carrying out the PPHA teams suggestion. This support includes, but is not limited to, project specifications, engineering codes and standards, engineering recommended practices, etc. Excerpts from the applicable supporting literature should be attached to the response sheet along with any correspondence among project personnel sustaining the response. Action items are generated, distributed and responded by means of Word/Excel files generated by the HAZOP Manager software. Files are generated and placed in the appropriate Documentum file folder. The assigned party can then enter resolution and save the completed Action/Response Sheet for inclusion in the PPHA final report. If the assigned party thinks that the action should be assigned to someone else for response, the assigned party will notify Process Safety who will then work with the appropriate Project Engineers to reassign the action item to the appropriate party. Process Safety reviews action item responses for clarity and completeness. If a response is sufficient, the resolution will then be included in the final PPHA report sent to Client for final approval and sign off. On a regular basis, Process Safety reviews the status of the PPHA action items to report to the Project. For this review, there are three levels of status: Open: No resolution for the recommendation has been achieved. Answered: Sufficient resolution for the action item has been achieved, however the resolution still requires future action before it can be considered Closed. Closed: Sufficient resolution for the action item has been achieved and Process Safety approves and has included the resolution in the final report. In some cases an action item is deferred to another study (i.e. QRA, POC SOA/SIL Review) for resolution. These action items will remain open until the referenced study is complete. When completed, the resolution of the action item will be contained within the context of the deferred study. For these action items, the resolution will contain a reference to the deferred study and will be considered closed. The action item will achieve Issue status when the deferred study has been formally issued.

APPENDIX A PPHA Worksheets
PPHA Work Sheets

Project No: J6491 NODE: 5.01
Client: YERP Unit Name & No: Product Blending System - 157 DATE REVIEWED: December 2007
ITEM: WBS 157 - Product Blending Blending of various components for product distribution. DRAWINGS AND DOCUMENTS 157-YER-PE-PID-0021 157-YER-PE-PID-0022 157-YER-PE-PID-0023 WHAT IF?... 3 FV-0007A malfunctions? 0 (closed or open) 4 CONSEQUENCE Potential to create an off spec blend. SAFEGUARDS ACTION
Valve position indications are No further action required reported, down stream analysis of final product, bypass around valve.
3 FV-0007B malfunctions? 0 5 3 FIT0007 malfunctions 0 6
No new issue identified.
potential for off spec blend.
FIT health output reported, No further action required down stream analysis of final product. Ability to calculate flow from upstream tank level measurement. Lab analysis every shift. AIT health is reported. No further action required
3 AIT0061 malfunctions? 0 7
Potential to create an off spec blend.
General Confidential
A-1
Preliminary Process Hazards Analysis

APPENDIX B PPHA Action & Response Sheets
PPHA Actions
Project No: J6491
Client: YERP Unit Name & No: Product Blending System - 157 WHAT IF? STUDY ACTION AND RESPONSE SHEET
ACTION ON: Project ACTION NO: 0
NOTE: NO ACTIONS IDENTIFIED DURING PPHA
RESPOND BY: A.S.A.P
MEETING DATES:
DRAWINGS AND DOCUMENTS: ITEM: WHAT IF?...: CONSEQUENCE: SAFEGUARDS: ACTION: RESPONSE: DATED: HAZARD CATEGORY: RISK:
SIGNED: ENTER YOUR RESPONSE IN THE BOX ABOVE, THEN SIGN AND RETURN TO: NOTES (for use of Hazop Secretary only)
General Confidential
B-1
Preliminary Process Hazards Analysis

APPENDIX C Piping & Instrument Diagrams

157 Yer HS PSM 0101

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

157 Yer HS PSM 0101

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

157 Yer HS PSM 0101

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Yanbu Export Refinery Project

General Confidential Page 2 of 13

Yanbu Export Refinery Project

General Confidential Page 3 of 13

Yanbu Export Refinery Project

General Confidential Page 4 of 13

Yanbu Export Refinery Project

General Confidential Page 5 of 13

Yanbu Export Refinery Project

General Confidential Page 6 of 13

Yanbu Export Refinery Project

General Confidential Page 7 of 13

Yanbu Export Refinery Project

Drawing Number 157-YER-PE-PID-0021 157-YER-PE-PID-0022 157-YER-PE-PID-0023

Drawing Title Product Blending Product Blending Product Blending

Node 5.01 5.01 5.01

P&IDs Reviewed During PPHA

General Confidential Page 8 of 13

Yanbu Export Refinery Project

Yanbu Export Refinery Project

General Confidential Page 10 of 13

Yanbu Export Refinery Project

APPENDIX A PPHA Worksheets

General Confidential Page 11 of 13

PPHA Work Sheets

3 FV-0007B malfunctions? 0 5 3 FIT0007 malfunctions 0 6

No new issue identified.

potential for off spec blend.

Potential to create an off spec blend.

Preliminary Process Hazards Analysis

Yanbu Export Refinery Project

APPENDIX B PPHA Action & Response Sheets

General Confidential Page 12 of 13

ACTION ON: Project ACTION NO: 0

NOTE: NO ACTIONS IDENTIFIED DURING PPHA

RESPOND BY: A.S.A.P

Preliminary Process Hazards Analysis

Yanbu Export Refinery Project

APPENDIX C Piping & Instrument Diagrams

General Confidential Page 13 of 13

You might also like