P 97 Post JERP

P  97

Post JERP

During the audit, the interface between members of both the teams were excellent and they had good cooperation from the respective complex fire chiefs & operations. The audit reports were presented to company's Apex management. Report of the audit observations were appreciated  and many of them have been implemented in respective plant areas. The whole exercise took about 6 months time to cover DMD/ HMD / VMD / NMD / PMD.

So by March 2011, I became free to engage with conceptualization of J3 OSBL.  A full battalion of manpower was  available under my disposal. As part of my newly entrusted responsibility by SM, I focused  on developing the draft  Loss Prevention Design Basis and other related detailed specifications  utilizing OSBL manpower. Here it is very important to mention the role of Sh Ranjit Sikdar for his versatality by virtue of his erstwhile BPCL experience and audit participation contributed excellent deliverable. He was an asset  in drafting the Basic Fire water Design basis Document  LP-DBD-001. Of course I played the back ground expertise by virtue of my ground experience in  JMD J1 &J2. Over&above I fully took the services&help of JMD-Fire Services team
to review/ comment/edit/ add so that complete approved documentation is in place. The end result was a fully comprehensive system basis was in place  at the start of J3. Rather , the end users were so happy that they could visualize  what they will get.

When it camS to plot plan development for J3, except for PX IV, there were jig-saw puzzle in locating the cracker +downstream units  Vs Gasification complex-DTA as well as SEZ ! The reasons being the number of gasifiers in each complex and the plot requirement asked by M/S Technip for main cracker unit. Moreover,  typical of Reliance, the management went on increasing the capacity of cracker plant  as well as added more number of gasifiers both in DTA and SEZ. so the entire plot orientation got altered from the original conception.  Moreover, neither M/S Fluor nor Reliance  had an iota  of idea about sensitivity regarding Syn.gas  toxicity to start with. They did not visualize the magnitude of toxicity  and considered it more safe from the hazardous angle. Only during the late stage of engineering completion, the awareness and sensitivity  factors realization crept in.  Lucky that since Reliance management gives due importance to safety, all these factors are getting addressed one by one  and getting implemented.

Sometime in third quarter of 2011, the management  thought it is better that I should hand over the OSBL Project execution responsibility to my able deputy Sh Yanamandra , as recognition for his work and rise in ladder.
                                                                                                         Contd....

Key Aspects :-  Delegation, Incident analysis,  Proactive approach, Recognition, Technical issue,
Team building, 

P 96 Post JERP

P  96

Post JERP

All the statutory authorities accepted BIS Codes as the standard norms, which had a good amount of reasoning and logic to arrive at the fire water pumping capacity requirement for a large complex having several plants.

The current  law stipulates that in a complex catered by a fire water network, the pumping capacity requirement should be arrived at by considering two largest simultaneous demand plot areas @1 lpm /M2 with 50%standby pumping requirement  and the remnant pressure at the remotest area in that network should be at least 7 kg/cm2 g. For plot area measurement, the fire break condition of at least 15 M apply.

At that time in 2010, that gave me a big relief.Discussed that idea with Dilip Koimattur , TechnoFire director&ex-TAC officer and he concurred that idea instantly.Immediately I shared the same with M/S Kiran Shinde and Kirit Brahmabhatt. Both of them okay ed the same as long as the concerned statutory authority approve. That ensured that South plot of the main refinery beyond 9th street Southwards in DTA plot shall be serviced with fire water from original DTA fire water pump house 713. Immediately I asked M/S Bechtel/MEC / and TechnoFire to carry out the initial check of hydraulics assuming the network periphery will be of 42" diameter. To our good fortune, it was coming to about 8-8.2 Kg/cm2 g which relieved us completely. There I have to specifically mention the important contribution of Mr Anthony Mankodi of MEC. He suggested that the linear length of parallel headers from existing pump house to DTA Gasification Complex B/L being about 4 Kms each long, it is better to make provision for cross breeders in the underground headers going to gasification complex B/L. That idea was welcomed by one and all and implemented.

As the J3 project execution start was getting delayed, sometime in August 2010, SM asked me to carry out an audit of the Fire Prevention System of all Reliance manufacturing locations excepting Jamnagar. For carrying out that audit, I formed a core team  of members drawn from OSBL project group for fire water system/network and core instrumentation manpower for Fire&Gas system.
The OSBL team led by M/S Sriram and Madhu Narayanan took care of auditing existing fire water pumping, overall network both in offsite as well as respective plant ISBL, quantity of throw and reach of the hydrants and monitors all across. I personally looked into the respective plant /complex original design basis and available hydraulic analysis calculations of complex network.

The instrument team led by Mr.Upendra Joshi  took care of auditing Fire&Gas system as well as the deluge arrangement & the fire water pump start sequence logic etc.
                                                                                                                 Contd....

Key Aspects :-   Accountable, Codes& Standard, Conviction, Incident analysis,  Team building, Transfer

P 95 Post JERP

P  95

Post JERP

Having completed JERP in March 2009,all the project manpower were engaged in Project close out report &record the lessons learnt exercise.One of the important aspect that came out was'model build-up inter-discipline checks quality lacking,which resulted in good amount of clash during field execution' & absence of underground engineering(C 84) modelling.

During that period , in late 2009. SM instructed me to look into the possibility of developing & creating an exclusive HSE engineering department in projects.He specifically guided me to take inputs from Bechtel team- M/S Vi Patel/Steve Wiggins, who were fully involved in the infrastructure build up &overall O&U project execution of JERP. That task undertaking has changed my career direction.

More or less that was the time , J3 projects identification tasks were on. I along with  Yanamandra  were working out the overall OSBL  requirement for the new upcoming projects. During that phase, in early 2010, a bright idea struck me  regarding utilization of DTA refinery fire water pumping capacity for the plants that come south of the old refinery in the available land up to Kanalus railway siding.

Here it calls for some explanation about the back ground. When we executed the original DTA refinery in second half of '90 s, for the fire water system approval,TAC, a statutory body under insurance were the controlling authority. They had a peculiar requirement for arriving at the overall fire water pumping requirement for an industrial complex. Irrespective of number of plants  and well laid plant layout with large inter-distances, it called for fire water pumping capacity equivalent to the required rate for the sum of equivalent hydrants all across complex, not considering any logic or analysis. It was purely an arithmetic calculation and we ended up in putting 16 X 1000 M3 /Hr pumping ! Rather that situation was sarcastically criticized by international re-insurers as well as by Shell Global Solutions, who assist Reliance in reviewing all safety matters.

The curse may be that , in those times, no authority in power would have envisaged such a large complicated industrial complex coming up in India. That forced us to go for 16 X 1000 M3/Hr fire water pumping capacity catering to all plants in DTA refinery. Tank farm had its own dedicated pumping system with pond.  As luck would have it, during the execution of JERP, in 2008 TAC got wound up and this responsibility has been shifted to PESO/OISD ( though not a statutory body but a society formulated by Petroleum ministry).
                                                                                                          Contd......

KeyAspects :-  Faith, Incident analysis, Initiative, Recognition, Responsible, Technical issue, Transfer

P 94 JERP Execution

P  94


JERP Execution

So far we have been seeing only technical and safety aspects of project execution in JERP. Now I am wishing to share certain human aspects and relations built which really benefited overall.

As I mentioned earlier, somehow the wavelength between me and Steve Wiggins/ Mike Beech/Bob Green matched so much that whatever I wished in terms of technical definition, schedule expediting, additional deliverable to clarify the misgivings etc. were obliged without any fuss. Of course Dilip Patel at Becrel Mumbai was completely backing me. My handling of contacts with various turn key vendors were really appreciated by the Management and Project Directorate. Mr Rajiv Gaikwad  as Project engineer from Becrel stood behind me as solid support.

Here I have to particularly mention how much I am lucky! In the beginning of 2007, when the above ground rack piping was about to pick up, my friend PBM Rao, who retired from Reliance phoned stating that Yanamandra has returned to India and looking for  a job. Without thinking a bit I responded to him stating 'ask Yanamandra to come and join'; in parallel  I phoned Sanjay Mashruwala
that I am taking Yanamandra and please request HR to regularize his  appointment immediately.
In Reliance , things used to move in flash and Yanamandra joined me next week.
Having worked with Yanamandra during Hazira project days, I knew his capacity and capabilities in piping execution. So I handed over the charge completely and forgotten the day today happenings on that front. Since Yanamandar knew Reliance style of operations, he earned the confidence of top construction management so that any drawing revisions can be routed with conviction . As always OSBL being the victim for any alterations at ISBL B/L , he could sell the changes/revisions  to Mr Dawda and seek his approval quickly. In that way he efficiently managed the OSBL area construction manager and expedited the job. He used  to take my help only for getting additional piping materials , which I used to take up with V Ganesh/Pallamraju and organize.

But in spite of these , I had two bitter incidents which almost spoiled my peace of mind.
One was ,when Becrel issued IFC drawing for utility air compressor shelter with structural column inter-distance with only 4Meters apart. When I noticed that grave error,I reacted typical of AR and told the concerned manager that he has to stop that deliverable issue as it is  and ensure undertaking review and revise. He had the audacity to state that he is from Bechtel and cannot be instructed by client project manager. That shook me up and I shouted on him. He complained the same to his boss who in turn has reported to Bechtel Project Directorate at London. They have issued complaint memo against me  seeking my removal from the project. When my management and Steve heard that, they laughed and rebutted to Bechtel. That made  Bechtel's deputy project director to realize their folly and he sought his apology to me and close.

Second was Bechtel's engineering manager at Becrel supporting the cause of ETP Indian contractor !
He was not understanding the full issue but tried to create internal politics.  Luckily my assistant NK Gupta took control then on and managed to complete the task. The management took the call for direct payment to sub vendors and got over the situation so that the main contractor  do not siphon off the payments without disbursing to their sub-contractors.

Then came out the as-built and close out.  Somehow most of the construction manpower do not realize the importance of making the as-built mark-ups and that deficiency is very much prevalent.

Key Aspects :- Accountable, Attitude,  Conviction,  Faith, Human relations, Incident analysis,
Planning, Recognition, Reputation, Ups&down 

P 93 JERP Execution

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, 

P 92 JERP Execution

 P  92

JERP Execution  Fire Water System &Safety features

Though we had engineered robust fire water system , during plant commissioning trials  we faced certain tricky situations.  In spite of having sufficient hydrant points and monitors in ISBL, we faced shortage of water throw quantity during emergency or accessibility restrictions. To find resolution for those challenges, Dilip Patel of Bechtel, me combined with JMD Fire leads took  field rounds  and identified the dark spots where suitable provisions have to be made and how portable trolley arrangement with sufficient take-offs for hydrant/monitor point provisions can be made.
That resulted in development of MHO (Multiple hydrant off take ) with X'Mas tree arrangement, portable trolley with different take-off hydrants/monitors etc. These became handy when there was freak fire incident in Coker plant commissioning trials.

But still there was a major challenge when it came to addressing the coke drum structure fire protection. There were several suggestions/options and each had its own limitations! One group suggested to opt for water spray system but that was ruled out from the angle of accessibility of nozzles for maintenance and nozzle choke due to coke dust. Another group came out placing several ground monitors; that was ruled out from emergency operability angle and throw reach to 55M height. There came Larry King with an ideal resolution. He proposed to try ROOMS with remote joystick arrangement.ROOMS is nothing but an oscillating monitor mounted at 20M high, which can be adjusted for spray range/direction and angle of throw etc. by a joystick placed at remote safe area.
Considering 110X55X55M coke drum platform we have gone for 6 numbers ROOMS strategically placed on either side of the structure. That solved our major worry.

Rim Seal Fire protection for large diameter floating roof tanks :
Though in DTA we had incorporated CHUBB make poly-urethene tubed rim seal fire protection system for all large diameter floating roof tanks, unfortunately that party went out of business and we had an issue. Somehow Praful got reference from Shell Scotland about  a party named BLAZE and that was chosen. Instead of conventional sensor tubing, it had a balancing arm arrangement to sense and release the foam for fighting the rim seal fire. But it never worked at all  and it was major blow.
Luckily that was the time the statutory authorities issued the gazette to relinquish its mandatory requirement. So we escaped then.  But it is different story now,that OISD incorporated them back with specific type and made to be incorporated  retrospectively even for small diameter tanks storing Class'A' liquid products.

One should remember and thank (Late) S Narayana for his acumen to recommend to opt M/S Rosenbauer for all fire fighting vehicles in JERP. The back ground may be that he has experienced major difficulty in financing the Indian party during DTA and quality control. But his decision was blessing in disguise.

Charted Engineer Audit

Though there is no statutory obligation to carry out pre-commissioning audit of fire fighting system for a hydrocarbon processing complex, following NFPA guidelines( Jurisdiction of Authority) Reliance/TechnoFire made it as standard practice to conduct Chartered Engineer Audit for all fire fighting systems. Mr TRA Krishnan, a chartered engineer by Registration is usually contracted to carry out the audit at engineering stage in DEC office and later to undertake field inspection as well as conduct spot trials of installation. Mr Krishnan being a thorough professional with repute, will go deep into design aspects  and question the DEC/Bechtel/TechnoFire/Reliance (AR) for even minor discrepancies. Let me share some of my personal experience in his audit of JERP.
                                                                                                         Contd....

KeyAspects :- Attitude, Conviction, Incident analysis, Initiative, Innovative, Technical issue, Team building 

P 91 JERP Execution

P  91

JERP Execution- Fire water System &safety Features

Having seen about the OSBL &ISBL Network, let us see the specific specials what we have incorporated in JERP .  Having experienced several difficulties in DTA with respect to throw height, accessibility,  throw quantity requirement, distribution in demand area, safety of hydrant point in heavy traffic/crane  movement spot etc. Bechtel/TechnoFire/Reliance went on configuring several new developments and succeeded to overcome those hurdles.  Some of them are explained here:

Our  senior construction manager Charles D'Souza came up with a fantastic improvisation of protecting the hydrant point from being damaged by crane movement in plant ISBL area. He suggested to add an additional spool below grade and place the hydrant point in built concrete pit.
His suggestion was to construct the  hydrant take-off point in that pit but defer erecting the spool as well as the hydrant point until all the heavy crane movement completion in that area. To allow free movement of crane, he got that pit filled with sand and put a concrete slab cover. Once the heavy equipment erection and crane movement was over, he arranged to clean the sand from the pit and fixed the spool and hydrant point and carried out service test for testing the integrity. His idea was revelation to all concerned in the industry.

With standard ground based monitor placed about 20M apart from the target object, when the network operating pressure at that point was  about 9-9,5 kg/cm2g, the discharge throw height reach was only about 35M height, whereas in refinery the tall columns are about 45/72M and some are even nearing 90M also. This handicap was highlighted by JMD fire team during the engineering stage; Reliance projects and Bechtel took that as a challenge  and searched for suitable solution in the market. One party  M/S Stang claimed to have hi-rise monitor that too mounted at grade level. Both Bechtel and Reliance believed their data sheet and committed an order for 50 numbers on that party.
But good sense prevailed on us and JMD fire team insisted to have a field sample trial for testing its performance. The party has agreed to carry out the same and asked Reliance/Bechtel to develop test rig with inflow orifice, inline flow meter and pressure gauge etc. with scaffolding arrangement . The whole thing was engineered and developed fully; the party's MD with specialist consultant turned up with two test pieces of monitors. The full battalion  of JMD Fire team, Reliance OSBL project members including me, Technofire represented by  Praful and Dilip Koimattur, Dilip Patel of Bechtel, M/S Stang' s representatives assembled at 3PM to conduct the field trial test. We simulated the throw quantity and requisite pressure at nozzle throat to test the samples; but to our utter surprise the throw reach height was not even crossing 18M elevation, when an adjacent fixed ground monitor of another make was giving at least 34M! the party tried to change another nozzle and adjusted its throw alignment etc. but could not improve it at all. The whole exercise went on until night 2AM and then we gave up. The party MD could not face us , he went away without telling anybody and later wrote to cancel the order. We were back to square one!

To my luck, that was the time Mr Larry King of M/S TFT was interacting with me and JMD fire team to promote their monitors for JMD. When I personally discussed with him about the possibility of utilizing their standard monitor mounted at high elevation, he also jumped with joy and agreed to carry out field trials.  Then came the challenge about mounting them at high elevation but at the same time to keep the safe distance of 20M away from target object. We took up with structural and piping group of Jamnagar engineering( Anil Chaudhary )&NR Prakash . They came out with two propositions-1) to design self standing tower of 13.5M high&mount the monitor on top, 2) strategically locate the monitor in already available structural platform in rack area and in both cases
route the riser pipe with an isolation valve at 1M from grade level. These were welcomed by one and all and the field trial was a roaring success. The only limitation is that the monitor focus is fixed and one has to climb through monkey ladder to adjust/change its direction. But that handicap was acceptable to the end user  and that has become Reliance standard for Hi-Rise monitor arrangement.


KeyAspects:-   Communication, Critical challenge, Faith, Incident analysis, Initiative, Innovative,
Multi discipline exposure, Technical issue