I’ve facilitated HAZOP (Hazard and Operability) reviews before, but never a HAZID (Hazard Identification) review. In fact, I’ve never attended one as well. Anyone know how the process goes?
For HAZOPs, here’s an outline of the review steps:
- Break up the process (note that it is process based) up into nodes, allowing an easier analysis of the process. Implicit is that the system is assumed to be reductionist, i.e. the sum is made of the parts.
- How big should a section be, you ask? Well, each process equipment is a good start. Make sure you define the boundaries properly, such that all process deviations are logically covered. For example, you might want to lump the isolation and control valves of a vessel into the vessel node, rather that with upstream or downstream equipment. If you were really pedantic, you might want nodes as small as a single line…
(to be continued)
Wata - Malaysian Oil and Gas Engineer 
In typical Dilbert style, bring lots of donuts, scatter a lot of A3 drawings on the meeting room table , hook up a projector with excel on it- look at facilitator and shout out any hazards u can see in the drawings based on a guide words ie “object dropping, ship crashing, platform falling over, explosions, “. Collect all hazards in a register, risk rank them ( ie all are low probability and low consequence) propose actions (ie, conduct QRA, amend procedures) and file document in brown box in the store room.
LOL nicely put there by Darth Maul. I like the way you describe typical review meetings.
lol… nicely put.
Darth Maul: welcome back. Now we await the rest of the mob.