Major Accident Hazard Analysis and Determination of Safety Critical Elements at Gresik Gas Distribution Station Using the HAZOP Method
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.51747/energy.v16i2.p255-269Keywords:
Hazard and Operability Study (HAZOP), Major Accident Hazards (MAH), Safety Critical Elements (SCEs), Risk Assessment, Gas Distribution StationAbstract
The Gresik Gas Distribution Station (GDS) is a critical natural gas facility operating under high-pressure conditions, where process failures may lead to Major Accident Hazards (MAHs). Therefore, systematic hazard identification is essential to ensure process safety and operational reliability. This study aims to identify potential MAHs and determine the Safety Critical Elements (SCEs) required to prevent and manage these hazards. The study employed the Hazard and Operability Study (HAZOP) method to evaluate three key process nodes: the metering and regulating system, odorant injection system, and instrument air system. Process deviations were analyzed using guide words, followed by risk assessment to identify MAHs. Safety Critical Elements were subsequently identified based on their safety functions, including the prevention, detection, control, mitigation, and recovery of MAH events. The analysis identified 17 potential causes classified as Major Accident Hazards and 76 Safety Critical Elements, grouped into 26 SCE types. Based on the criticality assessment, 4 SCEs were classified as high criticality, 9 as medium criticality, and 13 as low criticality. The most critical SCEs were HC Pipework, Level Indicator, Fixed Point Flammable Gas Detectors, and Flame Detectors. These findings demonstrate that the HAZOP-based approach effectively identifies Major Accident Hazards and establishes priorities for Safety Critical Element management, providing a practical basis for improving process safety and operational reliability in natural gas distribution facilities.
References
[1] Center for Chemical Process Safety, Guidelines for Hazard Evaluation Procedures, 4th ed. New York, NY, USA: AIChE, 2022.
[2] J. Dunjó, V. Fthenakis, J. A. Vílchez, and J. Arnaldos, “Hazard and operability (HAZOP) analysis: A literature review,” J. Hazard. Mater., vol. 173, no. 1–3, pp. 19–32, 2010, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2009.08.076.
[3] R. Ghasemi Pirbalouti, B. Behnam, and M. Karimi Dehkordi, “A risk-based approach to identify safety-critical equipment in process industries,” Results Eng., vol. 20, Art. no. 101448, 2023, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rineng.2023.101448.
[4] H. Hidayattuloh, A. N. Sommeng, and A. Nengkoda, “Analysis of Safety Critical Elements (SCEs) as barriers to prevent Major Accident Hazard (MAH) events on Early Production Facilities (EPF),” SSRN Electron. J., 2025, doi: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.5246117.
[5] M. Kharat, R. Sharma, and P. Singh, “Hazard identification and risk assessment using HAZOP in petrochemical industries,” J. Loss Prev. Process Ind., vol. 78, Art. no. 104842, 2022.
[6] D. Li, Q. Cao, J. Wang, and X. Mi, “Application of integrated method of HAZOP-AHP and fuzzy comprehensive evaluation in coal mine gas explosion accident,” IOP Conf. Ser.: Earth Environ. Sci., vol. 692, no. 4, Art. no. 042103, 2021, doi: https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/692/4/042103.
[7] Y. Liu, X. Zhang, and H. Wang, “Integration of HAZOP and quantitative risk assessment for natural gas processing facilities,” Process Saf. Prog., vol. 40, no. 4, Art. no. e12245, 2021.
[8] P. K. Marhavilas, M. Filippidis, G. K. Koulinas, and D. E. Koulouriotis, “An expanded HAZOP-study with fuzzy-AHP (XPA-HAZOP technique): Application in a sour crude-oil processing plant,” Saf. Sci., vol. 124, Art. no. 104590, 2020, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2019.104590.
[9] R. F. Mufid, S. S. Noto, and R. Dharmastiti, “Analisis Risiko Major Accident Hazard (MAH) pada Fasilitas Platform Proses Operasi Produksi Offshore di Perusahaan X Hulu Minyak dan Gas Bumi dengan Metode MAH Risk Register,” J. Tek. Mesin Elektro Ilmu Komput., vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 20–35, 2025, doi: https://doi.org/10.55606/teknik.v5i1.5744.
[10] A. de J. Penelas and J. C. M. Pires, “HAZOP analysis in terms of safety operations processes for oil production units: A case study,” Appl. Sci., vol. 11, no. 21, Art. no. 10210, 2021, doi: https://doi.org/10.3390/app112110210.
[11] D. Priyanta, M. B. Zaman, and Semin, “Maintenance priority: A literature review of equipment criticality analysis in the oil and gas industries,” IOP Conf. Ser.: Earth Environ. Sci., vol. 1423, no. 1, Art. no. 012010, 2024, doi: https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/1423/1/012010.
[12] Z. Spasenic, D. Makajic-Nikolic, and S. Benkovic, “Integrated FTA-risk matrix model for risk analysis of a mini hydropower plant’s project finance,” Energy Sustain. Dev., vol. 70, pp. 511–523, 2022, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esd.2022.08.024.
[13] C. D. Swann and M. L. Preston, “Twenty-five years of HAZOPs,” J. Loss Prev. Process Ind., vol. 8, no. 6, pp. 349–353, 1995, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/0950-4230(95)00041-0.
[14] Z. Wang, J. Wang, P. Guan, and W. Song, “SIL assessment of in-service safety instrumented systems in the chemical industry based on FBN-LOPA,” Process Saf. Environ. Prot., vol. 195, 2025, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psep.2024.12.121.
[15] H. Zhang, Y. Li, and X. Chen, “Digital HAZOP framework for hazard identification in high-risk energy systems,” Saf. Sci., vol. 165, Art. no. 106203, 2023
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 ENERGY: JURNAL ILMIAH ILMU-ILMU TEKNIK
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
