Process Safety Management

Developing optimum safety and risk management systems, guidelines and standards, and audit protocols worldwide.

A proactive approach, coupled with properly planned and implemented safety and risk management systems can help you comply with local, state and federal PSM regulations, as well as minimize loss of life, environmental impact, equipment damage, citations and litigation.

Learn More

How We Can Help You

Our experts support every aspect to ensure that your facility runs safely and efficiently.

Integrating best practices with cost-effective solutions to address program deficiencies.

Helping manage risk with facility siting studies, assessments and recommendations.

Decades of experience leading incident investigations for process industry companies.

We prepare expert opinion reports and provide expert testimony for process incident cases.

Experienced engineers who have performed LOPAs on a wide range of facilities and terminals.

Our experts are at the forefront of pipeline Process Safety Management proficiency.

Senior knowledgeable engineers prepare, organize, lead and document PHAs remotely or onsite.

Proven track record of performing QRAs for facilities, pipelines and transportation routes.

Have a Question on Process Safety Management?

Contact Us


Featured Videos


PSM Frequently Asked Questions

Does your facility need a PSM program? Is your PSM program effectively implemented?

If your facility uses, stores, manufactures, handles, or moves flammable or highly hazardous chemicals on site above the threshold quantity (TQ), OSHA does require PSM implementation. Learn the facts about process safety management.

Contact Us Today

View More Videos

Our Team

Georges A. Melhem, Ph.D., FAIChE

President & CEO The founder of ioMosaic and internationally renowned expert in the areas of pressure relief and flare systems design, chemical reaction systems, process safety and risk analysis. Read more...

Neil Prophet

Senior Vice President and Partner Pressure relief and flare systems design project management and engineering expertise for chemical, pharmaceutical and petrochemical companies. Read more...

Daniel Nguyen, PE & PMP

Senior Vice President and Partner Responsible for a team of software engineers in the development of ioMosaic’s PSO software and manages pressure relief and flare systems evaluation and design projects. Read more...

Katherine Anderson, CCPSC

Principal Consultant Experienced project leader in hazard identification, evaluation, functional safety, process safety and risk management. Read more...

John Barker, Ph.D.

Director The Director of our U.K. office and an expert in risk management for the international oil and gas and transportation industries. Read more...

Marcel Amorós-Martí

Director, California Office Lead His expertise includes pressure relief and flare systems design for large chemical and petrochemical companies around the globe and in the United States. Read more...

Charles Lea, P.E.

Director, Minneapolis Office Lead He directs a number of large technical projects across multiple offices and is also responsible for all project management in our Minneapolis office. Read more...

Pamela M. Nelson, CCPSC

PSM Consultant She leads process safety projects for business units across the U.S., Canada, Thailand, China, and the U.K. Read more...

Featured Case Studies

Corporate Guidance On Risk Management

The chemical company of a large integrated energy company was developing a corporate standard for LOPA, which incorporated a risk ranking matrix. The company was interested in obtaining an independent review of the design of the risk matrix, and in benchmarking the underlying risk tolerability criteria with generally accepted industry norms.

View Case Study
A large Canadian refinery was performing risk assessments to identify personnel, environmental, and operational hazards. This work was being done on a planned schedule with a different unit being reviewed annually. The challenge was to use Process Hazard Analysis (PHA) methodologies that provide an effective analysis appropriate to the unit to be studied and the potential hazards.
When a tank car failed at a customer’s plant, a release of toxic gas occurred. Our client, the supplier of the chemical, was the subject of a class action lawsuit.

Companies have implemented their process safety management programs to comply with OSHA and EPA requirements, but they continue to have accidents. Process safety management programs can meet the letter of the law, but may not be effective in preventing accidents.


Featured Resources

Leveraging Existing Management Systems to Comply with both cGMP and Process Safety Requirements

cGMP regulations protect people and animals from the adulteration of food and drugs that makes the product impure, unsafe, or unwholesome. This paper compares the key elements from the U.S. PSM requirements from 29 CFR 1910.119 with the International Conference on Harmonization (ICH) Q7 which is cGMP for Active Pharmaceutical Ingredients (APIs). 

Read the White Paper

Risk-Based Approach – Risk Evaluation

The risk evaluation of a hazardous facility entails the calculation and quantification of the risk based on the Loss of Containment (LOC) scenarios identified in the Hazard Identification step as a function of the likelihood of occurrence (i.e., Frequency Analysis) and the associated impacts (i.e., Consequence Analysis). When conducting a risk-based quantitative assessment, several pieces of data need to be accounted for in order to ensure the completeness of the study: (1) infrastructures and associated population; (2) process equipment; and (3) ignition sources.

Once the required data is correctly defined, the risk evaluation allows the development of several tools: (1) Individual Risk Contours (IRC), (2) Hazard Risk Contours determined at several thresholds due to explosions, fires and hazardous dispersions, (3) Individual and Societal Risk Indices; (4) FN Curves and (5) Exceedance Curves (EC) Approach.


A key step on a risk-based assessment is the quantification of the risk as a function of the likelihood of occurrence (i.e., Frequency Analysis) and the associated impacts (i.e., Consequence Analysis) based on the Loss of Containment (LOC) scenarios identified via systematic Process Hazard Analysis (PHA) (i.e., Hazard Identification) [1], [2]. A Quantitative Risk Analysis (QRA) considers generic and non-generic LOC scenarios; i.e., generic frequencies of occurrence based on historical data and non-generic frequencies of occurrence estimated via the Fault Tree Analysis (FTA) [3]. In addition, it accounts for the consequences of all outcomes from given LOCs that could lead to explosions, fires and flammable and toxic dispersions in a facility that handles hazardous materials [4]. Once the consequences and likelihoods of occurrence are determined, the risk is calculated as function of the population present at a location and at a specific time (i.e., Societal Risk) and as a function of the acceptability of a particular level of risk to an exposed individual (i.e., Individual Risk). The primary purpose of this manuscript is to explain in detail the different tools that can be developed during a risk-based assessment. Figure 01 illustrates a simplified risk management program flowchart and the risk evaluation step is highlighted.


Risk evaluation is the fifth step of a complete risk-based assessment. In this step, both the individual and societal risks are calculated.

On one hand, the individual risk is characterized by the Individual Risk Contours (IRC), a graphical tool that allows the user to view which are the areas that have major risk within a site that handles hazardous materials. The IRC usually considers the effects of all the hazards present in a typical facility: toxicity, thermal radiation and overpressure. Additionally, contours at specific thresholds for explosions, fires and dispersions can be calculated.

On the other hand, the societal risk is characterized by the FN Curves (FN), a discrete curve in which the X axis is the number of N fatalities or more and the Y axis is the cumulative frequency of having N or more fatalities. Furthermore, other risk indices that help the decision-makers to conduct valuable statistical and sensitivity analyses are discussed as these parameters offer insight and can help tracking the progress of a facility in terms of process safety (e.g., conducting risk-based assessments before and after risk reduction measures are implemented, or between different project phases, etc.). These graphical results need to be compared to risk tolerability criteria in order to decide if additional risk reduction measures are required or not (i.e., inherent safer operation, prevention and mitigation).

Featured Services

Process Hazard Analysis

Senior knowledgeable process safety engineers prepare, organize, lead and document PHAs remotely or onsite. Read more...

Asset Integrity Management

Our experts support every aspect to ensure that your facility runs safely and efficiently to maximize the lifecycle and reliability of your assets. Read more...

Latest News

Want to Get the Latest News from ioMosaic?

Sign Up Now