WHO IS BEST SUITED TO TRAIN OPERATORS?

“We are”, say most of the operation training departments in the U.S. RPI , and this has been true for a very long time. The roots of these training practices go back generations, and pre-date the existence of process training companies that now serve our industry. Over the last twenty-five or so years, professional training consultants have developed extensive expertise in the border region between two previously distinct disciplines: unit-specific process operator training and the science of adult learning. In order to understand some of the barriers to achieving uniform competency assurance among process operations in general and console operators specifically, it is important to understand the operator training culture in the U.S. RPI. Let us examine how operators are typically trained in the industry today.

THE UNIT TRAINER

The responsibility for operator training (both field operators and console operators) in the U.S. RPI typically resides at the process unit level. This is chiefly due to the fact that for many decades there simply didn’t exist external training companies that could tackle the complexities of equipment specificity and the apparent idiosyncratic training requirements encountered in a typical process unit. Conventional wisdom correctly led the industry to conclude that no one was better positioned to train operators, than other operators who had mastered the operational nuances of these complex units. Traditionally and out of necessity, Operator Trainers are pulled from the ranks of operators who, it should be noted, are very often hired into operating positions without prior specialized training or educational achievement beyond a high school diploma. Consequently, the criteria for becoming a unit trainer typically centers on responsible, conscientious behaviors and organizational skills, such as: possessing a good understanding of the process, making good rounds on the unit, demonstrating accountability and a willingness to assume responsibility. Today many community colleges around the country offer associate degree programs in Process Technology (PTECH degrees), and plants located in regions where PTECH programs exist find it advantageous to raise the educational requirements for new operator hires. Although when the PTECH graduates find work in the U.S. RPI they still must be trained on the intricacies of the unit which they will eventually operate. This is where, once again, the industry turns to the Operator Trainer.

THE TRAIN WHAT THEY KNOW

The operators who become Operator Trainers as I once did, and like the operation supervisor who trained me years before that, train well on the things they know. But their body of unit process knowledge is too often encompassed by the instructions they received from their operator trainer, and the knowledge and skills they acquired as a result of their personal motivation and inquisitiveness. As a result Operator Trainers naturally focus on the essential tasks that made them good at what they do, such as:

•Understanding alarms and how to respond to them • Knowing where to locate and read instrumentation • Knowing where to locate and how to make rounds on process equipment, vessels and control valves • Knowing the purpose and safe use of utilities • Knowing where to locate and when to utilize procedures • Describing the basic functionality of technologies in the plant While these training topics are appropriate for most field operator positions, they fall short of the skills required to be a competent console operator. There still exist in our industry today, many sites where console operator training is accomplished by osmosis. Absent any formal curriculum, operators are assigned to parallel or “shadow” on the console with an experienced, qualified operator for weeks or months until they can replicate the key tasks of their trainer.

THE PROBLEM WITH TRAINING BY OSMOSIS

From the Center for Process Safety, American Institute of Chemical Engineers, “Guidelines for Preventing Human Error in Process Safety, on operator training: “In general, little use is made in the process industry of more sophisticated approaches such as job and task analysis to define the mental and physical skills required for specific types of work, and to tailor the training program accordingly. Instead, informal on-the-job training is common, even in more complex types of work such as control room tasks. Although the necessary skills will eventually be acquired by this process, its inefficiency leads to the need for extended periods of training. In addition, there is the problem that inappropriate or even dangerous practices may become the norm as they are passed from one generation of workers to the next. To achieve the level of competency demanded in this job, Console operators in the U.S. RPI must have formal classroom, simulator, and on-the-job training to achieve full capability. Certainly no less rigorous than that of many regulated trades such as, Journeyman Electrician or Machinist. Console operator training must cover topics such as process theory, process control, safety guidelines, safety procedures, math for technicians, instrumentation, pumps, valves, thermodynamics, chemistry, distillation, boilers, furnaces, compressors, reactors, heat exchanges and troubleshooting to name some.”

WHAT NEEDS TO CHANGE

We must no longer accept the outdated culture and practices of operators-training-operators. console operators in refining and petrochemical industries should be required to successfully complete comprehensive curricula, based on a competency framework, targeted to teach technical fundamentals, process fundamentals and unit-specifics. One approach is to have the methods and standards for competency identification, curricula development and assessments managed through an Industrial-Academic Consortium, coordinated by an industry-recognized trade association such as the AFPM or API. The training must include formal classroom and simulator training covering the entire range of topics from fundamental concepts to unit-specific emergency response. After trainees demonstrate proficiency in the fundamentals they enter the unit-specific portion of training where they learn to operate their unit.

At that point the Operator Trainer comes back into the picture. But this time the trainer is not burdened with the responsibility for designing training programs, that task requires the skill sets of training professionals. The Operator Trainer fills the role in the development of a training program for which they are perfectly suited and qualified – that of Subject Matter Expert (SME). The Operator Trainer works with professional training consultants who specialize in the development and execution of fundamental and unit-specific training material and process simulations, to insure the training is customized for their unit. After successfully completing the fundamental and unit-specific training courses the console operator would serve an apprenticeship, paralleling on the actual console with a previously qualified operator before the trainee is certified to work the console alone. As a model for rigorous competency assurance we can look to the nuclear industry, where the knowledge base and performance levels of licensed nuclear board operators parallel closely in depth and breadth to those of console operators in the refining and petrochemical industries, along with salaries. This type of approach to achieving uniform competency assurance in the refining and petrochemical industries, will not only give plant managers and surrounding communities the innate assurance that all is well in the control room, but will pay for itself many times over, in day-to-day operational benefits and in the timely mitigation of emergencies.

If you are interested in learning more about improving operator training, please contact George E. Dzyacky.