The Influence of Dispersion Analysis on Relief System Design for Small Vessels

Process Hazard Analyses (PHAs) and all kind of Hazard Reviews are explained in detail in textbooks, guidelines, and papers, including: the different methodologies and how to choose them; node sectioning approaches; software; the PHA Leader skills, requirements and responsibilities; how to choose the team and their skills; how to perform more efficient meetings to optimize brainstorming and avoid burnout; and many other topics. However, there’s a role that’s usually underestimated and only barely explained: the scribe (CCPS Definition: A hazard evaluation team member who is responsible for capturing the significant results of discussions that occur during a hazard evaluation team meeting). There is not much information on PHA Scribing because the definition seems to be self-explanatory and the skills required, obvious: Organized and good typing skills. But, how much of a difference can a bad/decent/excellent scribe do in the PHA overall? Is “As long as we don’t have to wait too much for him/her to record” enough? Should the scribe just “listen and record”? Is there anything the Scribe can do to improve the quality of the meetings?

This paper is backed by about a million of hours of PHA scribing and tries to answer all these question by going beyond the trivial set of skills needed. It describes key side-tasks the scribe can do to optimize the PHA team efforts, the skills required to do them and the interaction with the PHA Leader.