A common issue I have observed is the absence of established infrastructure within companies. With each new ownership change, there is a tendency for management to start from scratch, leading to a blurring of standard operating procedures. This ambiguity increases the likelihood of important details being overlooked and falling through the cracks. This inconsistency in processes is a concern that I constantly keep in mind.
- 20-07-2024
- Wesley Jenkins
BP's Webbolt issues final report on fatal explosion in Texas City, announcing a $1 billion investment. Ross Pillari, president of BP Products North America Inc., acknowledged the underlying causes and management failures that led to the tragic incident, vowing to enhance safety, reliability, and environmental standards at the complex. The company plans to upgrade process control systems, implement a more robust maintenance management system, enhance worker training, eliminate blow down stacks, and address other recommendations outlined in the report to prevent future accidents. Terry O.
The switch to a robust maintenance management solution is underway, signaling the potential removal of SAP from the equation. The system has been labeled as a basic accounting platform in the latest analysis.
For the complete report, visit the BP Response website at http://www.bpresponse.org/go/site/946/. Explore detailed insights on the BP oil spill response efforts.
The issues highlighted in the report are primarily related to software implementation, rather than a lack of functionalities within the software. Simply switching to a different software may not easily resolve these issues and could require starting over from the beginning. The software suite has the ability to be a comprehensive solution for accounting, logistics, plant maintenance, human resources, or a combination of all, depending on how it is implemented.
In my experience with SAP, I believe that labeling it solely as an accounting system is due more to how it is implemented rather than its actual capabilities. Having worked extensively with SAP globally, I have encountered both challenges and advantages of the system. Despite some drawbacks, SAP remains a dominant player in the market and a robust tool for asset management.
Watch this video simulation depicting the BP Texas City Refinery accident. The animation is produced by CSB and provides a detailed reenactment of the incident involving Terry O.
As you have contributed a lot of information about BPTC in this discussion, could you redirect the focus on CMMS utilization issues in this thread back to the BPTC program? This shift in perspective could enhance the discussion and provide valuable insights for those interested in both topics.
In the conclusive statement regarding the explosion, Josh details the analysis of evidence in Chapter 5, particularly focusing on Maintenance and Mechanical Integrity in section 5.15 beginning on page 121.
After reviewing that particular section in the report, I believe it is crucial for Terrence to redirect the focus on CMMS implementation challenges to the key stakeholders at BPTC. This will enable them to release the report to the public for further transparency and insights.
The U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazardous Investigation Board recently rebuked BP Texas refinery for neglecting mechanical integrity oversight, leading to a devastating fire in July 2005. The fire was triggered by a mistake made by a BP contractor, JV Industrial Companies, who unknowingly replaced two elbows from a heat exchanger with different types of steel. This error caused the carbon steel elbows to crack under high temperatures, releasing hydrogen gases and sparking the fire. The board highlighted the importance of conducting x-ray testing on pipes to ensure they can withstand such conditions. It also criticized BP Texas City refinery for lacking procedures that require material identification tests during equipment maintenance, leading to hazardous system modifications.
Thank you, Terry, for sharing this information. The recent tower explosion incident, similar to others in modern times, was caused by a failure in a hidden function - the high-level switch. The malfunctioning level indicator also played a role in the incident, along with the failure of a level switch on the blow down tower. Early reports from the Buncefield explosion suggest similar initial causes of failure. It is disheartening that even after 30 years since the original RCM report and almost a decade since Moubray's paper on streamlined RCM dangers, incidents like this still occur. The lack of accountability and ignorance that lead to such situations is truly appalling. I sincerely hope those responsible are held fully accountable. Best regards.
A federal report released by lead investigator John Vorderbrueggen reveals that BP's lack of maintenance checks led to a pipe mix-up causing a refinery fire. This incident serves as a reminder to the industry about the importance of thorough maintenance practices to avoid potentially catastrophic consequences. The report also highlights that such mistakes are not exclusive to BP and calls for a collective effort to prioritize safety in all operations.
Is there any certainty that BP utilized a Reliability Centered Maintenance (RCM) process, even though it is not explicitly mentioned in the article?
It is apparent that significant improvements were needed to address the hidden failures within their operations. JM once expressed his belief in the future relevance of RCM in asset maintenance, comparing it to the essential role of double entry bookkeeping in accounting. This only reinforces the significance of his belief.
It is truly disheartening to see that even 30 years after the initial RCM report, and nearly a decade after Moubray's warning about the risks of streamlined RCM, issues like this still persist. It is a shame that despite the importance of RCM implementation, criticism is directed towards streamlined RCM without considering if any RCM practices were in place to begin with.
While I don't subscribe to the idea that "something is better than nothing" in terms of asset maintenance, I want to clarify that my intention was not to criticize streamliners. I am not necessarily advocating for Reliability Centered Maintenance (RCM). Moubray's influential paper titled "The Case Against Streamlined RCM" warned about the risks of asset failures and their potential impact on businesses. Despite the publication of this paper and the original RCM report 30 years ago, there are still individuals who lack a solid understanding of asset maintenance fundamentals. The importance of effective asset maintenance and the consequences of neglecting it are widely known. It is disheartening, especially considering the preventable tragedies that may occur due to inadequate maintenance practices. I have included the article for reference, although I may not agree with all of its points.
A Review Reveals Safety Issues at BP's Texas City Plant
According to an investigation by the U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board (CSB), budget cuts and a lack of leadership were factors contributing to significant safety issues at BP's Texas City plant, where a fatal explosion occurred in March 2005. The CSB's preliminary findings highlighted that BP management was aware of maintenance, spending, and infrastructure concerns well before the tragic incident that claimed the lives of 15 individuals and left over 170 injured.
The CSB noted that outdated equipment designs were not addressed and there were notable shortcomings in preventive maintenance practices at the plant. Interestingly, an external audit conducted by BP in 2003 already highlighted the subpar condition of the plant's infrastructure and assets, describing a "checkbook mentality" within the organization.
Furthermore, the CSB pointed out that the training staff at the Texas City plant was significantly reduced over the years, with a notable decrease in the training department budget. This revealed a concerning trend of neglect towards safety and maintenance practices at the facility.
- 23-07-2024
- Shawn Thompson
The upcoming civil trial for the BP plant blast, which resulted in the deaths of 15 people and injuries to over 170 others in Texas City, is set to begin. Eva Rowe, who lost her parents in the explosion, is determined to seek justice and make a difference by holding BP accountable. She believes that taking a settlement and walking away will not honor her parents' memory. Her attorney, Brent Coon, plans to highlight how budget cuts, lack of training, and management's negligence led to the tragic accident. Recent findings by the U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board suggest that BP was aware of maintenance issues prior to the blast but failed to address them. Despite BP accepting responsibility for the incident, Rowe hopes to achieve justice for all affected by the tragedy and make refineries a safer workplace for everyone.
Greetings everyone, I want to discuss BP's internal maintenance strategy known as a common maintenance strategy. This strategy involves a set of rules and tools used to evaluate and carry out maintenance tasks. Despite having a Reliability-Centered Maintenance (RCM) tool in place, the challenge lies in its underutilization or lack of expertise by BP employees, leading to overlooked recommendations from consultants. This can contribute to numerous minor incidents that often go unreported. Nevertheless, BP strives to prioritize safety in a high-risk industry.
Incorporating a common maintenance strategy is crucial for organizations like BP to effectively assess and carry out maintenance activities. Despite having an RCM tool in place, the challenge lies in its underutilization or lack of expertise among employees, leading to a failure to heed consultants' recommendations. Ahmed, do you have a published source on this topic that I can explore? - Steve
- 23-07-2024
- Quentin Foster
One crucial question to consider is: Who was accountable for safeguarding the integrity of the pressure boundary in the system failure? Identifying the specific individual in charge of this responsibility is crucial. If no individual can be pinpointed, then the onus falls on senior management and the board. Holding senior management and the board legally accountable for intentional negligence could potentially drive positive change. This accountability factor could serve as a powerful motivator for ensuring better oversight.
Hello Ron, in Canada, individuals can face personal accountability and fines of up to CND$100,000 or up to 25 years in prison. The UK has laws related to "Corporate killing," but there has not been a successful prosecution to date. However, there are ongoing discussions about strengthening these laws. Recently, there were unsuccessful prosecutions in a case involving a train crash, which included the former CEO of a rail infrastructure company, the head of a maintenance contracting company, and engineers. This trend also exists in two states of Australia. In the US, there have been many instances of personal fines and penalties for environmental damage. In my book, "The Maintenance Scorecard," I touch on the importance of safety in the corporate world and the role of asset management. Incidents like Bncefield, Hatfield, Potters Bar, and others highlight the changing landscape of accountability worldwide. Nowadays, when things go wrong, individuals are being held responsible, not just companies. Are you confident that your decisions and actions would hold up under scrutiny? The environment is evolving rapidly in this regard...
quote: Steve Turner originally stated that BP has an internal common maintenance strategy, a set of rules and tools they utilize for assessing and conducting maintenance activities. Despite having a Reliability Centered Maintenance (RCM) tool, they often do not utilize it effectively due to a lack of competence or willingness to listen to consultants' advice. Ahmed, is there any published source for this information that I can access? Steve is interested in reading more on this topic. Unfortunately, I cannot provide further details as these references are not publicly available. However, I suggest reaching out to BP directly for the necessary materials. Best regards, Ahmed.
Texas Report on BP Management Criticizes Safety Failures
By Michael Harrison, Business Editor
Published: 15 January 2007
The Independent
A scathing report on BP management is set to be released by former US secretary of state James Baker, investigating the tragic fire at the Texas City refinery that resulted in 15 deaths and numerous injuries. The report, commissioned by BP itself following the incident, highlights significant safety lapses in the company's US refinery operations and provides a comprehensive list of recommendations for improvement.
Although the 250-page report does not explicitly name individual directors for criticism, there is speculation that it may lead to changes at the board level. John Manzoni, the board director overseeing the Texas facility, may face scrutiny as the report's findings are unveiled.
The release of the report coincides with the news of BP's chief executive, Lord Browne, stepping down earlier than planned. The Texas City fire in 2005 was a major factor in the decision, as it exposed longstanding safety issues within BP's refining operations.
Despite settling civil actions related to the incident, BP and its managers still face potential criminal charges. The Baker report, initiated in 2005, aims to help BP learn from the tragedy and enhance safety measures to prevent future disasters at its US refineries. Prior to the 2005 fire, the Texas plant had a history of accidents, raising concerns about the company's safety standards.
In response to the findings, BP has implemented changes in its US operations, particularly in safety management. Collaboration with American unions has also been strengthened to ensure ongoing safety oversight at refinery plants.
- 23-07-2024
- Jessica Freeman
Hello everyone, I wanted to share a valuable link for those who are interested in downloading and reading detailed reports on incidents related to reliability. This link leads to the Baker Report on the Houston Explosion, which contains an illuminating excerpt. James Reason's statement on human error is particularly thought-provoking: "Preventing process accidents requires constant vigilance. A lack of incidents over time does not necessarily indicate that everything is fine and can lead to a dangerous sense of complacency." When individuals lose sight of the intended functionality of safety systems, complacency can set in, leading to forgotten lessons and acceptance of hazards. It is essential to prioritize sound engineering principles and controls to prevent disasters. Neglecting maintenance of systems and controls can result in catastrophic outcomes, such as equipment malfunctions, explosions, and loss of life. Let's stay mindful of the importance of upholding safety standards to prevent tragic consequences for both individuals and communities.
- 23-07-2024
- Vanessa Carter