Assimilating Design Formulation and Design Review into a HAZOP

There have been numerous guidebooks written for the application of Hazard and Operability (HAZOP) Studies [1] to operating facilities and capital projects where the design is relatively mature. For these systems, critical process safety information is typically available, but for fastmoving capital projects that is often not the case, and in addition there are often many contrasting issues:  Design flexibility allows for more extensive changes at early stages of the project. Even the ability to cost-effectively make larger numbers of smaller changes can have a measureable improvement in safety and decreased operational risk.  Less-detailed design information at early stages of the project can result in an incomplete safety assessment resulting in re-work and re-HAZOP.  Late design changes can have a more significant impact on project schedule later in the project cycle.  With the proper focus, designers can often benefit from feedback obtained from owneroperator personnel and from the thought process invoked by the HAZOP approach. These issues represent fundamental contrasting priorities. Although applying a designed-to-bedetailed analysis tool like HAZOP at early stages of the project is a fundamental challenge and presents many dilemmas to the HAZOP Study Facilitator, the application of a phased approach can help achieve the true objectives of the HAZOP Study, which is to make as many safety improvements as practical to minimize risk. The "double-edge sword" is by incorporating HAZOP Study approaches early in the design process, important safety improvements can be done more cost-effectively, allowing limited project funds to have a greater impact in lowering net risk, but it may require some "re-visiting" of the HAZOP Study. The alternative (doing a final HAZOP Study, after all of the design work