The Human Element: Integrating Human Factors into Process Safety Management

The Human Element: Integrating Human Factors into Process Safety Management

Introduction:

As the image aptly states, "Understanding human factors (errors) is critical to ensuring acceptable and controllable operational risk." In the realm of process safety management (PSM), this couldn't be truer. A facility's lifecycle, from design and construction to operation and maintenance, is deeply intertwined with human activities.

Recognizing that human error is inevitable, the focus of human factors studies within PSM is to manage these errors proactively, thereby maintaining an acceptable level of risk to personnel, property, and the environment. This post will delve into the essential elements and recommended guidelines for addressing human factors as a key component of process safety management.

The Critical Influence of Human Activity:

Human actions significantly shape the safety and reliability of industrial facilities. Errors can occur at any stage, highlighting the need for a systematic approach to understanding and mitigating human factors.

1. Required Elements for Addressing Human Factors:

1.1 Operator-Process/Equipment Interface:

• Every facility must have a system to address human factors throughout the design, construction, and operational phases of projects.
• A crucial aspect is the assessment of human interactions with the facility during the design process.
• This assessment must specifically consider computerized control systems, which can potentially overload operators with information during abnormal conditions (alarm management).
• The human factors assessment system should meticulously examine the following interfaces for potential issues:
  • Alarm display
  • Information display
  • Ergonomics
• Task analyses are essential to anticipate potential failures during specific tasks, understand how human intervention can recover from these issues, and, if recovery fails, how to control the potential problem areas.

1.2 Administrative Control Versus Engineering Control:

• Each facility needs a clear strategy outlining the use of administrative controls (e.g., procedures, training) versus engineering controls (e.g., interlocks, automation) in managing risks.

1.3 Human Error Assessment:

• A comprehensive assessment of the potential for human errors must be conducted throughout the facility's lifecycle, including design, construction, commissioning, operation, and maintenance.
• Facilities should have access to competent resources specializing in human error assessment.
• Human factor reviews should consider various approaches to reduce human error, such as:
  • Written guidelines and procedures
  • Human factor audits
  • Written communications
  • Design of the operator-process/equipment interface

2. Recommended Guidelines for Enhancing Human Factors Management:

2.1 Operator-Process/Equipment Interface:

• Human factors assessments should address potentially confusing aspects of equipment, including the positioning of dials, color coding inconsistencies, differing directions for on/off switches, cultural norms affecting interpretation, and the clarity of labeling.

2.2 Administrative Control Versus Engineering Control:

• When administrative controls are chosen over engineering controls, the facility should implement a system to periodically review the effectiveness of these administrative controls to ensure they remain adequate over time.

2.3 Human Error Assessment:

• While not explicitly detailed in the "recommended guidelines" section of this text, the overarching principle is to continuously improve the understanding and mitigation of human error.

3. Factors in Human Error Reviews:

Human error reviews should encompass a range of influencing factors, including:

• Understanding
• Judgment
• Motivation
• Education
• Training
• Stress
• Fatigue
• Cognition

My Experience:

In my work focusing on process safety management [cite: 1], the integration of human factors has been a critical element. For instance, when championing API/OSHA-compliant process safety standards [cite: 1], a significant part involved evaluating and improving the operator-process interface to minimize the potential for human error. This included reviewing alarm systems, control panel ergonomics, and the clarity of operating procedures. Recognizing the limitations of relying solely on administrative controls, the emphasis was always on implementing engineering controls where feasible and establishing robust review processes for administrative measures.

Conclusion:

Managing human error is paramount to achieving acceptable operational risk in high-hazard industries. By systematically addressing human factors through required elements like interface design and error assessment, and by adhering to recommended guidelines, facilities can significantly enhance their process safety performance. A thorough understanding of the factors influencing human error is essential for creating safer and more reliable operations.