Improvements - Safe processes and the prevention of losses are essential elements in any economic activity. In contrast to recent events in the financial sector, the chemical, petrochemical and pharmaceutical industries are well aware of the grave consequences of mismanagement of risk. The hazards of these industries are well known and the consequences of getting it wrong clearly visible: fires, explosions and toxic releases. The chemical industry and related sectors are therefore in pole position in regard to hazard identification, risk assessment and management.

Over time through learning experiences across all industrialized countries, governments understandably started to impose strict regulations on handling hazardous substances and processes. However, the process industry has a strong self interest in safety and to a great extend goes beyond the regulatory stipulations. In fact, the regulators cannot set all rules in the complex world of the process industry; detailed safety management can only be done by the operating companies.
Serious accidents have happened and can never be completely discounted. Names like Flixborough, Seveso, Bophal and Basel stand for disasters which have strongly influenced both management and regulation. In addition to strict regulations on how to assess and manage process safety, companies have to report incidents far below the level marked by regulations such as the Seveso II Directive, Europe's regulation on major accident hazards. Although their number is small (only about 0.003 reportable incidents per year in establishments covered by the directive), recent incidents such as the explosions in Toulouse (2001) and Texas City (2005) as well as the fires at Buncefield (2005) and Cologne (2008) demonstrate that there is still a need for continuous improvement.

The chemical industry has always regarded process safety as a joint effort and not as a trade secret. To improve process safety performance through the whole sector and to support cooperation of professionals, both in the U.S. and in Europe, company networks have been created. In 1985, the American Institute for Chemical Engineers founded the Centre of Chemical Process Safety (CCPS). In 1992, the European Federation of Chemical Engineers initiated the European Process Safety Centre (EPSC). EPSC is a non-profit organisation, funded mainly by companies from the chemical, petrochemical, pharmaceutical and other "major hazard" industries, insurers, service providers, consultants and research institutes. It is hosted by the Institution of Chemical Engineers in Rugby, UK. Although most of EPSCs 37 full and nine associate members are acting globally, the main focus is Europe with its specific legal and cultural environment. However, EPSC takes note of CCPS projects and publications to avoid unnecessary duplication of effort where this is appropriate.

Central Role

EPSC aims to encourage the development and use of best practice to prevent and mitigate major accident hazards. Exchange of information and know-how is one of its main activities. This ranges from conferences and workshops to face to face meetings or user groups. For a number of issues members have formed project groups and published books or internal reports. Topics covered by current active projects include key performance indicators for process safety, layers of protection analysis, safety critical equipment, process safety competence and fostering senior management commitment for process safety.
A second major focus for EPSC is legislation and regulation. EPSC works closely with process safety specialists and the Technical Working Groups of the European Commission and is proud that its input is valued as a high level professional source.
Besides participation in major EU funded research projects such as PRISM (Human Factors), ARAMIS (Risk Assessment Methodologies) and S2S (Process Safety Information), EPSC is a member and presently chair of the Executive Committee of the European Technology Platform on Industrial Safety, which advises the EU Commission.

Changing Climate

Although process safety has a high priority for most companies, recent structural changes in industry and the present economic crisis has created new challenges - for companies and networks such as EPSC. Some of the big companies have split up into smaller entities - resulting in smaller process safety departments, and some companies have merged - eventually leading to fewer process safety specialists. The current economic crisis is also expected to cut back resources, as seemingly non-productive resources always come under tough scrutiny. As process safety is driven from experience and requires input from many different disciplines it is especially sensitive to shrinking resources. In addition process safety has disappeared from the curricula of many universities. The number of companies which are able to maintain a powerful department for process safety with experienced specialists from different disciplines (or at least an in-house network of these disciplines) has become shockingly small. Under these circumstances cross-company networking becomes even more important for safety professionals - and EPSC offers the platform.
Serious process safety incidents are typically "low probability - high consequence" events. Media, residential neighbours of chemical plants and authorities tend to scrutinize them, as these stakeholders mainly look at the potentially high consequences. Safety and operations professionals as well as management tend to focus on the low probability and associated low risk, which may lead to less attention being given to implement risk reduction measures. Furthermore, these "stochastic events" are difficult to evaluate statistically, to measure and to benchmark. Although these incidents may jeopardise the existence of companies, maintaining awareness is difficult. It turns out that the successful reduction in the numbers of serious process safety incidents in the last decades may become one of the obstacles against further improvement.

The Art Of Networking

Networking has to meet certain preconditions. The greater the trust, the more open the disclosure and the greater the benefit derived by all parties. Of course all parties need to contribute meaningfully to the discussion; disengaged observers do not make good members of networks. At the same time an unprepared meandering chat on nothing in particular is likely to prove equally frustrating. For networks to work effectively and efficiently they require a degree of preparation to enable dialogue of substance to emerge and develop. Information is power and it is vital that all members of a network enjoy equal access to knowledge.
Regardless of networking the level of process safety can only be improved and maintained if process safety is visibly promoted by top management. The Baker Report on the Texas City accident stresses the old truth that in hierarchical organisations the tone is set at the top. For many reasons in all major companies, including the chemical sector, senior management is heavily focused on short term results and increasingly without its own operating experience. Many members of the Senior Management or the Board have never experienced a major accident - as these accidents have a low probability and their jobs typically a short shelf life. Awareness of the risk of process safety incidents may no longer be presumed by senior management. Process safety has to be seen not as a cost driver but as an essential element for sustainability, image and responsibility.

Communicating Safety

Traditionally process safety professionals used the shock of a major incident at a "similar" company to raise awareness. However, as we all know from our own reaction to traffic accidents, the first shock fades quickly. Even the threat of criminal litigation as a possible consequence of an incident may help, but does not significantly change the culture. Therefore, communication specialists strongly suggest a "positive" approach as an alternative way to enhance the commitment of senior management for process safety.
EPSC and the European Federation of Chemical Engineers recently started a project which will use this approach. The project includes the creation of a short film (10 min.), which will act as opener or teaser to achieve positive emotions for process safety for non-technical senior management. Important messages will be conveyed by peers (CEO, CFO). The film is to be used by Process Safety Team to lead into their presentation focussing on the specific process safety issues of the company at Management Board meetings. The project will also result in a template presentation.
Networks like EPSC are able to improve process safety across companies. As major incidents not only hit individual companies, but the whole sector, it pays to invest into such networks. Companies are not compelled by law to network. They willingly share information because safety transcends everyday concerns such as commercial security and competitive advantage. It is also true that with a network "you get out more what you put in". Finally, networks should not be "closed shops", therefore EPSC welcomes new members.