Alarm rationalization practices per ISA 18.2 and Safety PHA teams tend to have different approaches to justify alarms. As a result of these differences, alarms taken as safeguards in PHAs can be downgraded or in some cases removed during alarm rationalization. On the other side, PHA teams have a tendency to add more alarms than needed as safeguards which is counter to alarm rationalization principles. This session will highlight examples of these differences and approaches to agree through collaboration by understanding the needs of each team. Participants will:

• See examples of PHA risk ranking contrasted with alarm prioritization matrix that illustrates one difference


• See why it is ok to challenge safety alarms if redundant or counter to alarm rationalization principles


• See why the alarm rationalization team may recommend PHA team swap or change safeguards


• See why it is important to have the alarm management database aligned with PHA documentation


• Understand the difference between a rated independent protection layer (IPL) and a non-rated safeguard as it pertains to alarm rationalization

Facilitator: Alyssa Parks, Pemex Deer Park

Panel:
Steve Gill, HF Sinclair
Karen Kuhn, Cenovus Energy Inc.
Patrick Robinson, Phillips 66
John Durnin, Marathon Petroleum Corporation