ANALISIS PENILAIAN RISIKO TERHADAP BAHAYA PEKERJAAN PIGGING DENGAN METODE HAZARD AND OPERABILTY STUDY

(STUDI KASUS: BAGIAN PRODUKSI PT. PERTAMINA HULU MAHAKAM)

Authors

  • Hardiyono Hardiyono Universitas Balikpapan

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.36277/identifikasi.v6i1.121

Keywords:

Deviation, Hazard, Pigging, Pressure, Risk.

Abstract

Cleaning of pipelines is necessary to ensure that the pipeline remains in a condition that is suitable for use, does not contain impurities that can affect the product or affect the condition of the pipe. The research objective is to identify the K3 hazards and risk assessment of the pig acceptance process using Hazops techniques, as well as identify them. This study used a qualitative observational approach by assessing the 6 Node P&ID diagrams in the pigging process. Assessment using the Hazops table. The results showed that the first node of Pig Barrel 20 "MOL (HMC) identified 2 critical deviations, namely: less pressure and less flow; 5 Causes, and 5 Consequences, 2nd Node Pig Barrel 12 "MOL (Condensate) identified 2 critical deviations, namely: Less Pressure and Less Flow; 6 causes, and 5 consequences, the 3rd node of the Sump Tank (T-2080) identified 3 critical deviations, namely: High level, No pressure of the pump, and More sand; 5 Causes, 6 Consequences, 4th Node Close Drain (V-915) identified only 1 (one) critical deviation, namely: High Level; 3 Causes, 4 Consequences. The 5th node of the First Stage Separator HMC (V-860) identified 4 deviations, namely: High Level, High Pressure, Low Level, Low Pressure; 11 Causes, 15 Consequence, 6th Node First Stage Separator Condensate (D-6250) identified 5 (three) deviations, namely: High Level of Condensate, High Pressure, Low Level of condensate, Low Pressure, High Level of Water; 13 Causes, 19 Consequences. The conclusion in this study is that there are 17 deviations in the pigging work process and there are 5 hazards with low risk, 12 hazards with moderate risk, 4 hazards with high risk.

References

Chevron, 2006. Pipeline Pigging Incident.
ESDM, 2018. Akhirnya Pertamina Resmi Kelola Blok Mahakam. Dilihat Januari 16 <https://migas.esdm.go.id/>
Failure Investigation Report, 2009. Pig Trap Gas Release – Activity ID 127555.
Marvin Rausand dan Stein Haugen 2011. Risk assesment second edition (theory, methods, and applications. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 111 River Street, Hoboken,
Netherlocks Safety Systems 2013, Fatal incident stresses importance of eliminating human error on pigging operations. Di lihat Januari 2018 <https://www.netherlocks.com/>.
Pipeline Pigging Operations, 2006. Open to Injury. Canada.
PT PHM. 2018.Standard Operating Procedure receive pig.
PT PHM. 2018. CSU Operating Manual.
PT PHM. 2018. TPA Operating Manual.
PT Pertamina. 2018. PT Pertamina Hulu Mahakam Lakukan Pengapalan Perdana Minyak Mentah. Dilihat Februari 2018 <https://www.pertamina.com>.
Risviana, Renny dan Chandra Satrya (2013) Penilaian Risiko Keselamatan Kerja Dari Bahaya Fisik Pada Operator Pigging Pada Stasiun Penerimaan PIG di PT X Tahun 2013.

Downloads

Published

2020-10-30

How to Cite

Hardiyono, H. (2020). ANALISIS PENILAIAN RISIKO TERHADAP BAHAYA PEKERJAAN PIGGING DENGAN METODE HAZARD AND OPERABILTY STUDY: (STUDI KASUS: BAGIAN PRODUKSI PT. PERTAMINA HULU MAHAKAM). IDENTIFIKASI, 6(1), 278–290. https://doi.org/10.36277/identifikasi.v6i1.121

Most read articles by the same author(s)

Obs.: This plugin requires at least one statistics/report plugin to be enabled. If your statistics plugins provide more than one metric then please also select a main metric on the admin's site settings page and/or on the journal manager's settings pages.