Inherent Safer Design

Project-Level Inherent Safer Design Review

Multidisciplinary ISD review at conceptual / FEED — evaluates the whole design for inherent hazard reduction before freeze

Technical overview

Project-Level Inherent Safer
Design Review

Inherent Safer Design is the most economically effective risk-reduction strategy available — but only if it is applied before the design freezes. Once P&IDs are issued for construction, the cost of eliminating a hazard through Substitute or Minimise is 10–100× higher than at conceptual design. The CCPS Guidelines for Inherently Safer Chemical Processes (3rd Ed., 2009, updated CCPS alignment 2024) and the IChemE ISD Guide codify the SMMS hierarchy: Substitute (replace hazardous material or reaction), Minimise (reduce inventory to the minimum required), Moderate (use less hazardous conditions — lower temperature, pressure, or concentration), and Simplify (eliminate complexity and failure modes). ISD is also the only risk-reduction measure with no reliability requirement — a substituted chemical cannot fail to be safer. Modern ISD practice integrates quantitative Inherent Safety Index assessment (ISI / ISHI) to compare design alternatives, process intensification techniques (microreactors, flow chemistry, distributed production), and explicit LOPA integration to demonstrate SIL-target reduction where hazards have been eliminated at source.

Project-Level Inherent Safer Design Review — Overview
Engineering process

Project-Level Inherent Safer Design Review workflow

Design Stage Entry & Scope Definition

Engage at conceptual design or FEED; review process description, block flow diagrams, technology selection, and chemical inventory to define ISD scope, objectives, and review boundaries.

SMMS Index Assessment

Apply Substitute / Minimise / Moderate / Simplify screening to each major chemical, reaction, and process step; score inherent hazard index (ISI / ISHI) for each design option.

Technology Alternative Evaluation

Compare batch vs. continuous, solvent vs. solventless, open vs. closed systems; evaluate process intensification (microreactors, flow chemistry, distributed processing) opportunities.

ISD Multidiscipline Workshop

Facilitate structured SMMS review with process, safety, and engineering disciplines; document findings, feasibility assessment, and cost-benefit for each hazard-reduction recommendation.

HAZOP & LOPA Integration

Map ISD findings to P&ID nodes; identify hazard-elimination credits in LOPA; update SIL targets where hazards have been eliminated or inventories reduced through ISD.

Basis of Safety & FEED Update

Issue ISD study report, design-alternatives evaluation matrix, inherent safety index scores, ISD recommendations register, and updated FEED design basis with ISD rationale.

Project-Level Inherent Safer Design Review — Scope
Scope of work

Every deliverable — from basis to handover

Complete Project-Level Inherent Safer Design Review scope — every calculation, drawing, specification, and construction support activity.

SMMS screening: Substitute / Minimise / Moderate / Simplify applied per chemical, reaction, and process step
Inherent Safety Index (ISI / ISHI) scoring to quantify and compare hazard reduction across design alternatives
Technology selection review: batch vs. continuous, open vs. closed, solvent vs. solventless, distributed vs. centralised
Process intensification evaluation: microreactors, flow chemistry, reactive distillation, and in-situ generation
ISD integration with HAZOP: mapping SMMS findings to P&ID nodes and deviation scenarios
LOPA integration: demonstrating SIL-target reduction where ISD eliminates or substantially reduces hazard inventory
Basis of safety development: documenting the design rationale for retained and rejected ISD options
FEED design basis update with ISD recommendations, design-alternatives matrix, and ISD index scores
Engineering outcomes

Outcomes of Project-Level Inherent Safer Design Review

Inherent Hazard Elimination
  • Eliminates hazards rather than controlling them — the most effective safety strategy
  • Reduces size of emergency planning zones through inventory minimisation
  • Simplification reduces the number of failure modes requiring safeguards
  • ISD measures are inherently reliable — not subject to maintenance or human error
CCPS / IChemE ISD Review Defence
  • CCPS ISD principles aligned with OSHA PSM Process Design and Technology element
  • European Process Safety Centre (EPSC) ISD guidance compliance
  • Demonstrates prevention-first approach to COMAH/SEVESO authorities
  • Supports SIL reduction through hazard elimination at source
ISD Option Evaluation & FEED Discipline
  • Simpler designs are easier to operate and maintain
  • Reduced inventory decreases consequence severity of remaining incidents
  • Lower process conditions reduce equipment maintenance requirements
  • Process intensification can reduce both capital and operating cost
Hazard Reduction at Minimum Capex
  • Curbs number and SIL level of safety layers required
  • Lower insurance premiums from reduced inherent hazard inventory
  • Capital savings from smaller vessels, fewer relief devices, less complex SIS
  • Operating cost savings from simplified process design
Get Started

Ready to start your project?

Speak with our team to scope an engagement tailored to your facility, regulatory context, and lifecycle stage.