P 93
JERP Execution-Chartered Engineer audit &other experience
To ensure that everyone follow the defined design basis and it meet all the necessary/mandatory guidelines, he undertook a trip to UK to interact/interface with Bechtel LP team along with TechnoFire specialists Praful and Dilip Koimattur. Of course I was representing the client.
There were debates whether we can get away with OISD stipulation of 3 lpm/M2 for atmospheric storage tanks, what should be the inter-distance between one hydrant point to the next in OSBL and in ISBL area, what should be the criteria for arriving at pumping capacity, islanding valve arrangement in nodes etc. He even reviewed Dave Conolly's preliminary conceptual network layout
&endorsed his approach.
There after he has periodically undertaken field check visits to Jamnagar. Though in overall he was satisfied with engineering and field execution, he had a few specific observations where he insisted that unless and until they were rectified he cannot sign off his approval. I am listing here only a few :
1) MVWS piping arrangement for auto ignition temperature rated pumps in crude units
2) Either make provision of roof shelter for the sweet water pumping system for fire water first fill in MTF network or do not declare them as fire water pumps and take credit for fire water pumping capacity augmentation. As we had sufficient margin with the original DTA pumping arrangement itself, we opted the choice of not taking augmentation credit.
3) Provision of riser pipe isolation valve at 1m from grade level
4) Rectification of support for HVWS piping in fin fan coolers all across JERP.
5) His insistence on provision of riser pipe with hydrants at top platform of deaerators- his argument being there are lighting cables going on top and they have to be protected. Though the rest of the team was not convinced with his logic, there was no alternative but to implement!
6) Location selection of periphery monitors in compressor shelters.
7) Interface logic check between Honeywell supplied F&G system with deluge actuation in field as well as FM200 system in PIBs. He insisted to check the actuation of MVWS in some areas to check the throw pattern.
Having seen all about fire water systems, let me touch about my dual role as primarily instrument engineer by qualification and experience added with the responsibility of safety engineering implementation. As OSBl project manager, the FW network, its pumping system and hydraulics analysis check responsibility rested with me. But when it came to Fire &Gas system, the functional responsibility was with the instrument department but the system responsibility fell on me . It was because, I was identified as safety manager in projects and the ultimate F&G panel location placement in fire station , regular operation and monitoring responsibility came to fire department.
So I became internal consultant to process/instrument engineering for identification/selection of type of F&G device for various set of pumps depending on service /compressors/MCP etc.
Other than Loss Prevention and HSE, I had several sundry roles as OSBL project manager. They are the tasks like Natural gas receipt facility interface with Gujarat State NG Pipeline Ltd, B/L Custody Transfer metering systems for export and internal transfer metering etc. So in all these cases, more than technical aspects, my responsibility enhanced with transfer logistics, identifying the mandatory customs levy, convincing custom authorities, selection of type of custody transfer metering- coriallis type for custody transfer for export and positive displacement turbine type for B/L transfer, routing them internally so that we do not violate DTA and SEZ line of control etc.
Contd.....
Key Aspects :- Accountable, Codes&Standard, Critical challenge, Incident analysis,
Multi discipline exposure, Responsible,Technical issue,
JERP Execution-Chartered Engineer audit &other experience
To ensure that everyone follow the defined design basis and it meet all the necessary/mandatory guidelines, he undertook a trip to UK to interact/interface with Bechtel LP team along with TechnoFire specialists Praful and Dilip Koimattur. Of course I was representing the client.
There were debates whether we can get away with OISD stipulation of 3 lpm/M2 for atmospheric storage tanks, what should be the inter-distance between one hydrant point to the next in OSBL and in ISBL area, what should be the criteria for arriving at pumping capacity, islanding valve arrangement in nodes etc. He even reviewed Dave Conolly's preliminary conceptual network layout
&endorsed his approach.
There after he has periodically undertaken field check visits to Jamnagar. Though in overall he was satisfied with engineering and field execution, he had a few specific observations where he insisted that unless and until they were rectified he cannot sign off his approval. I am listing here only a few :
1) MVWS piping arrangement for auto ignition temperature rated pumps in crude units
2) Either make provision of roof shelter for the sweet water pumping system for fire water first fill in MTF network or do not declare them as fire water pumps and take credit for fire water pumping capacity augmentation. As we had sufficient margin with the original DTA pumping arrangement itself, we opted the choice of not taking augmentation credit.
3) Provision of riser pipe isolation valve at 1m from grade level
4) Rectification of support for HVWS piping in fin fan coolers all across JERP.
5) His insistence on provision of riser pipe with hydrants at top platform of deaerators- his argument being there are lighting cables going on top and they have to be protected. Though the rest of the team was not convinced with his logic, there was no alternative but to implement!
6) Location selection of periphery monitors in compressor shelters.
7) Interface logic check between Honeywell supplied F&G system with deluge actuation in field as well as FM200 system in PIBs. He insisted to check the actuation of MVWS in some areas to check the throw pattern.
Having seen all about fire water systems, let me touch about my dual role as primarily instrument engineer by qualification and experience added with the responsibility of safety engineering implementation. As OSBl project manager, the FW network, its pumping system and hydraulics analysis check responsibility rested with me. But when it came to Fire &Gas system, the functional responsibility was with the instrument department but the system responsibility fell on me . It was because, I was identified as safety manager in projects and the ultimate F&G panel location placement in fire station , regular operation and monitoring responsibility came to fire department.
So I became internal consultant to process/instrument engineering for identification/selection of type of F&G device for various set of pumps depending on service /compressors/MCP etc.
Other than Loss Prevention and HSE, I had several sundry roles as OSBL project manager. They are the tasks like Natural gas receipt facility interface with Gujarat State NG Pipeline Ltd, B/L Custody Transfer metering systems for export and internal transfer metering etc. So in all these cases, more than technical aspects, my responsibility enhanced with transfer logistics, identifying the mandatory customs levy, convincing custom authorities, selection of type of custody transfer metering- coriallis type for custody transfer for export and positive displacement turbine type for B/L transfer, routing them internally so that we do not violate DTA and SEZ line of control etc.
Contd.....
Key Aspects :- Accountable, Codes&Standard, Critical challenge, Incident analysis,
Multi discipline exposure, Responsible,Technical issue,
No comments:
Post a Comment