In Document No. 116 of 2014, Articles 14 and 15 – I’m not sure how to interpret them
Thread Content
14. Chemical enterprises and hazardous chemicals storage facilities that involve operational production units or facilities classified as “two key items and one major item” shall, on the basis of conducting comprehensive process hazard analyses (such as Hazard and Operability Studies), determine the safety instrument functions and the requirements for risk reduction through risk analysis, and promptly assess whether the existing safety instrument functions meet these risk reduction requirements. Note: “Two key areas and one major aspect” refers to “highly regulated hazardous chemicals, highly regulated hazardous chemical processes, and major hazard sources of hazardous chemicals”. 15. Enterprises should, based on assessments, develop management plans for safety instrumented systems as well as regular inspection and testing plans. For safety instrument functions that do not meet the requirements, relevant maintenance plans and corrective action plans must be developed, with the assessment and improvement of the safety instrument system to be completed by the end of 2019. Other chemical processing units and hazardous chemical storage facilities shall be implemented in accordance with the requirements of these guidelines. ub] Question: What does it mean to complete the safety instrumented system assessment by the end of 2019? ? ? My understanding is that it’s not just about simply performing a SIL classification, right? It should be an evaluation of the entire instrumentation system; the time is approaching. Has any unit done it? What qualifications are required?
1. Conduct HAZOP/LOPA/SIL analyses on the device; in previous designs, only HAZOP analysis was carried out. It is necessary to combine hazard identification in order to thoroughly verify whether the safety instrumented systems are installed as required, whether the interlock logic is comprehensive, and whether the SIL level of the interlock circuits meets safety requirements – in other words, to ensure that the safety interlock functions that need to be implemented in the SIS system are indeed implemented as specified； 2. The safety instrument system is a static system that does not operate during normal operation; it is required to “neither malfunction nor act incorrectly”. Safety instrumented system management plans, such as establishing interlock management systems, ensuring the integrity of the SIS system, and conducting regular evaluations ； The regular inspection and testing plan refers to the need to test the correctness of interlocks during equipment maintenance, that is, the interlock logic coordination test. Since it is not possible to test the SIS on a regular basis, testing can only be carried out during maintenance ； In fact, among the input, logical operation, and output stages, it is the output stage (the valve along with its accessories) that tends to have the most problems. There are also some methods for online testing, such as the Partial Stroke Test (PST) for valves; these requirements should be specified during the design phase, especially for important valves. 3. There are many third-party consulting firms that conduct security assessments, but the qualification requirements are not clear.
Completing the assessment of the safety instrumented system involves conducting a risk assessment of the safety across the entire plant; SIL is just one part of this assessment. After analyzing the results of this assessment, a decision is made as to whether to add additional safety instrumented functions. Our company is currently carrying out SIL classification, and based on the results, we will decide whether to implement an additional SIS system. Currently, third parties engaged in risk assessment must possess the relevant qualifications; generally, Class A design institutes in China have such qualifications. SINOPEC’s Safety Engineering Institute and CNPC’s East China Institute have carried out more work in this area.