Process Safety in the Classroom: The Current State

of Chemical Engineering Programs at US

Universities
Sean J. Dee, Brenton L. Cox, and Russell A. Ogle
Exponent, Inc., 4580 Weaver Parkway, Warrenville, IL 60555; [email protected] (for correspondence)
Published online 00 Month 2015 in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com). DOI 10.1002/prs.11732

The role of process safety in the undergraduate and grad- consideration of hazards associated with the engineering
uate curriculum is a critical component of preparing chemi- application of basic sciences [1]. Previously, safety was only
cal engineers for their future careers. In 2011, the addressed in outcome “c” of Criterion 3, which details the
Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET) necessity of all engineering programs to teach students to
amended the requirements for Chemical, Biochemical, Bio- solve design problems within various constraints including
molecular, and similarly named Engineering Programs. The health and safety. The change in the curriculum requirement
change added a clause, indicating that the curriculum of for chemical engineering programs reemphasized the impor-
said programs should not only include the engineering appli- tance of process safety education.
cation of chemistry, physics, and/or biology to the design,
analysis and control of processes, but also the hazards asso- THE ANATOMY OF A CHEMICAL ENGINEERING CURRICULUM
ciated with those processes. Departments were then compelled The chemical engineering curriculum requires courses in
to adjust their curricula to meet the new requirement which many different subjects. Specifically, ABET specifies that a
would go into effect during the 2012–2013 Accreditation chemical engineering curriculum must include a thorough
evaluations. Herein, we present findings related to the major grounding in basic sciences including chemistry, physics,
milestones and challenges associated with updating the and/or biology with some content at an advanced level [1].
chemical engineering curriculum to include process safety ABET further elaborates that the curriculum must also
components at both the undergraduate and graduate level. include the engineering application of those sciences to the
First, a survey of publicly available information regarding design, analysis and control of processes and the associated
curriculum requirements, course syllabi, and program devel- hazards of those processes. ABET also comments generically
opments at US universities will be discussed. Next, insights regarding four components that should be included in all
from evaluating the challenges associated with adding new engineering curriculum in Criterion 5. The first component
content to an already overloaded curriculum will be dis- specifies one year of coursework should focus on college
cussed. Lastly, recommendations for continued improvement level math and basic science. The second component calls
in the process safety education provided to undergraduate for a year and a half of coursework bridging science and
and graduate students will be presented. VC 2015 American Insti-
math with engineering practice and design. In both the first
tute of Chemical Engineers Process Saf Prog 000: 000–000, 2015 and second component, a year is defined as the lesser of 32
Keywords: process safety; education; chemical engineer- semester equivalent hours or one-fourth the total credits
ing; Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology required for graduation. The last two components relate to a
general education component that complements the techni-
cal content of the curriculum and a major design experience
INTRODUCTION
that allows students to apply knowledge and skills while
The ABET certification of a degree program is often con- using engineering standards and constraints.
sidered to be a critical aspect of a university’s ability to prove The credit hour requirement for a chemical engineering
that it has properly educated, trained and prepared its gradu- degree varies across universities, but generally requires
ates for their future careers. For example, graduates of non- between 125–135 semester equivalent credit hours. Within a
ABET accredited programs may require a credentials evalua- chemical engineering department, the curriculum commonly
tion during the Professional Engineering licensure process. includes courses covering the following subjects:
This evaluation is generally not required for graduates of
ABET accredited programs. In the 2012 Criteria for Accredit-  Thermodynamics
ing Engineering Programs, the curriculum criteria for Chemi-  Material and Energy Balances
cal Engineering programs was changed to include  Transport Phenomena (Mass, Momentum, and Heat)
 Kinetics and Reaction Engineering
This article originally presented at the 10th Global Congress on
 Process Control
Process Safety, New Orleans, LA, March 31, 2014 to April 2, 2014.  Chemical Engineering Laboratory
 Design and/or Project
C 2015 American Institute of Chemical Engineers
V  Technical Communication

Process Safety Progress (Vol.00, No.00) Month 2015 1

Table 1. A selection of example process safety courses.

Entry School Course Title

1 Georgia Institute of Technology CHBE 4515 Process Safety
2 Michigan Technological Univ. CM 4310 Chemical Process Safety and the Environment
3 Texas A&M Univ. CHEN 445 Process Safety Engineering
4 Pennsylvania State Univ. CHE 452 Chemical Process Safety
5 The Ohio State Univ. CBE 5755 Chemical Process Safety
6 West Virginia Univ. CHE 475 Chemical Process Safety
7 Texas Tech Univ. CHE 4356 Process Safety
8 Univ. of Nevada, Reno CHE 473/673 Chemical Process Safety
9 Missouri Univ. of Science and Technology CHE 4140 Chemical Process Safety
10 Cleveland State Univ. CHE 494/594 Chemical Process Safety: Fundamentals and
Applications
11 Christian Brothers Univ. CHE 412 Industrial & Process Safety
12 Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology CHE470 Safety, Health and Loss Prevention
13 Oregon State Univ. CHE 320 Safety, Engineering Ethics and Professionalism
14 Univ. of Florida ECH 4714L Safety and Experimental Evaluation
15 Northeastern Univ. CHME 4626 Special Topics in Process Safety Abroad
16 Northeastern Univ. CHME 4624 Chemical Process Safety
17 Univ. of Minnesota IE 5531 Engineering Safety
18 Univ. of Pittsburgh IE 2302 Engineering for Process Safety
19 Univ. of California, Berkeley NE 167/267 Nuclear Reactor Safety
20 Univ. of California, Berkeley NE 224 Safety Assessment for Geological Disposal of Radioac-
tive Wastes
21 Syracuse University NUC 301 Introduction to Nuclear Engineering and Reactor Safety
22 Univ. of Texas, Austin CE 346K Hazardous Waste Management
23 Univ. of Nebraska CIVE 421 Hazardous Waste Management and Treatment
24 Univ. of Nebraska CIVE 432 Bioremediation of Hazardous Wastes
25 Texas A&M Univ. CHEN 430 Risk Analysis in Safety Engineering
26 Texas A&M Univ. CHEN 460 Quantitative Risk Analysis in Safety Engineering

Courses covering these topics account for approximately Despite these constraints, process safety has been
one-third of a program’s required credit hours including included in chemical engineering curricula through addi-
technical elective courses. Approximately one-half of a pro- tional course(s), integrating process safety topics into existing
grams required credit hours are allocated to courses in the courses, or a combination of both approaches [2]. Pintar con-
basic sciences (physics, chemistry and math) and other engi- cluded in 1999 that a combination of both approaches was
neering requirements (circuit design, computer program- the most effective way to teach chemical process safety to
ming, material science, etc.). General education requirements undergraduate chemical engineering students. Pintar argued
and electives outside of engineering and the basic sciences that the effectiveness came from sensitizing students to safety
constitute the remaining credit hours. The fractions reported issues in the dedicated course, and exposing them to practi-
here are meant as approximations. The ABET Criterion 5 cal issues through integration in courses such as unit opera-
requirement for one and a half years of engineering course- tions. Herein, we present examples of both dedicated course
work is exceeded when Chemical Engineering courses are topics and integration techniques observed in the chemical
combined with other engineering electives and core require- engineering curriculum at various ABET accredited
ments. For the purposes of this paper the inclusion of a programs.
safety component class was assumed to be the responsibility A selection of example courses that address process safety
of the chemical engineering department and not a general courses is provided in Table 1. These examples were found
engineering course. by searching department websites and soliciting input from
alumni of the Safety and Chemical Engineering Education
PROCESS SAFETY IN THE UNDERGRADUATE CURRICULUM (SAChE) faculty workshop. The list in Table 1 is not meant
Finding room within the curriculum to incorporate pro- to be exhaustive, but rather show several examples of
cess safety material is one of the primary challenges associ- courses that are focused on process safety. It should also be
ated with the new language in the ABET requirements. noted that ABET certification requires that all students dem-
Typically, students take between 15 and 18 credit hours per onstrate proficiency in understanding process hazards.
semester in a chemical engineering program, equating to 4–6 Therefore, offering safety related courses that all students are
different courses. This leaves very little extra room in the not required to complete as part of the degree program may
typical student’s course load, and can detract from student’s not demonstrate the requirements for ABET accreditation.
opportunities to take electives and non-engineering related Several chemical engineering departments offer or have
coursework. A completely new course requirement can result previously offered a course focused specifically on process
in the necessity to cut or combine other existing courses. safety as shown in entries 1–16 in Table 1. These dedicated
Incorporating safety topics into existing courses can also courses can range from one to three credit hours, and cover
prove difficult, specifically if professors already feel that topics including toxicology, industrial hygiene, flammability,
under existing curriculum requirements, the technical mate- fires and explosions, dispersion models and source models,
rial in their courses is not given the appropriate allotment of design of emergency relief systems, hazard identification,
time or focus. risk assessment, accident investigation, case histories,

2 Month 2015 Published on behalf of the AIChE DOI 10.1002/prs Process Safety Progress (Vol.00, No.00)
chemical reactivity hazards, chemical plant security, and dents to become independent researchers. Therefore, most
inherently safer design [3]. Two SAChE faculty workshop of the exposure that graduate students have to safety con-
alumni indicated that the process safety course is a required cepts within the department is usually related to laboratory
course within their department curriculum, while the other safety and not process safety.
entries either indicated the course as a technical elective or This limited exposure to process safety related concepts
did not specify if the course was required. Additionally, new creates both a first order and second order effect on the
chemical engineering programs are including process safety future of the chemical engineering industry. First, for gradu-
in their curriculum. For example, at California Baptist Univer- ate students who enter industry related jobs, core concepts
sity, Process Safety (EGR 475) was included in the early plan- of process safety may have not been emphasized or rein-
ning stages of the department curriculum and will be offered forced during the graduate school experience. This is partic-
as a required co-requisite course with Chemical Reaction ularly challenging in research and development groups,
Engineering (EGR 473) in 2015–2016. because some of the largest impacts on process safety can
Entries 17–24 in Table 1 list examples of courses offered be achieved in the initial design phases of process technolo-
outside the chemical engineering department, which focus gies. In these settings, concepts including inherently safety
on a specific safety topic. Pintar noted that environmental design, as well as other risk mitigation strategies can create
engineering issues have significant overlap with process large lasting impact on developing technologies.
safety topics [2]. Thus, process safety can be addressed in The second order effect of the lack of emphasis on pro-
technical elective sequences that focus on industrial, environ- cess safety in graduate programs is highlighted by Pintar [2].
mental, or nuclear engineering issues. Technical electives Speaking of the undergraduate learning experience, Pintar
addressing advanced process safety topics can also be highlights the need for process safety concepts to be
offered within the chemical engineering department, as embraced by faculty, and departments to develop a “safety
shown in Entries 25–26 in Table 1. While offering these types culture” to reinforce the importance of integrating process
of electives alone may not satisfy the ABET requirements, it safety concepts in the curriculum. One approach to attempt
can foster the development of a process safety culture within to build a “safety culture” in academia is to start enforcing
a department’s degree program and give students the oppor- the culture in graduate programs, so that the future faculty
tunity to further explore an interest in process safety. members in universities have increased exposure, knowl-
Process safety topics can also be integrated into existing edge, and understanding of process safety issues.
courses. Several SAChE faculty workshop alumni indicated The laboratory research environment provides an excel-
that while their department may not have an entire course lent opportunity to incorporate the core process safety con-
dedicated to process safety, the fundamental concepts of pro- cepts of hazard identification, evaluation, and control into
cess safety are covered in other chemical engineering courses the graduate program. In 2011, the U.S. Chemical Safety and
including Unit Operations, Controls, Process Design, and/or Hazard Investigation Board (Chemical Safety Board) pub-
Senior Project. For example, at the Massachusetts Institute of lished a case study of a chemical laboratory explosion inci-
Technology, safety issues are covered in lectures “Safety as dent at Texas Tech University that resulted in serious injuries
an Industrial Concern,” “Safety Assessment Models,” and to a graduate student [9]. In their report, the Chemical Safety
“Chemical Process Safety: HAZOP Analyses” in Integrated Board indicated that they had amassed information of over
Chemical Engineering I and II. [4], [5] Pintar also noted exam- 120 university laboratory incidents involving fires, explo-
ples of how safety topics were integrated in the Capstone sions, or toxic exposures. In response to this report, the
Chemical Engineering Laboratory at Michigan Technological American Chemical Society (ACS) issued a draft guidance
University [6]. Among the topics included were OHSA compli- document on hazard identification, evaluation, and control in
ance, safety meetings, Job Safety Assessment Forms, lock out the chemical laboratory [10]. While most researchers surely
tag out, and management of change practices. prioritize safety in the laboratory, the history of incidents
There are also additional methods that can be used to suggests a need for further incorporation of laboratory safety
reinforce process safety at the undergraduate level. In 2013, discussions into the routine project meetings between gradu-
West Virginia University chemical engineering students par- ate students and their advisers or peers. Such routine prac-
ticipated in a two-day Process Safety Boot Camp, similar to tice would serve as a tangible mechanism for reinforcing
the four day course offered by CCPS/AIChE [7]. Northeastern fundamental process safety principles. It may also be possi-
University’s chemical engineering department has offered a ble to incorporate a similar strategy into the undergraduate
Spring Break process safety focused program, where stu- laboratories.
dents travel to a facility and conduct their own hazard analy-
ses using techniques including hazard and operability studies CHALLENGES MOVING FORWARD
(HAZOPs). In 2008, New Mexico State University integrated Several key challenges arise when attempting to incorpo-
the SAChE program into their curriculum requiring students rate process safety into the undergraduate and graduate edu-
to obtain various certifications at different stages during pur- cational programs at universities. At the outset of the
suit of their degree [8]. As a result, NMSU has seen their program, departments must accept the notion that process
chemical engineering students nearly double their scores on safety concepts will change over time. This is in stark con-
the Safety, Health, and Environmental portion of the Funda- trast to the core concepts of several key chemical engineer-
mentals of Engineering Exam from 2008–2011. ing courses, such as thermodynamics, where a syllabus,
lesson plan, and lecture material can be reused each time a
GRADUATE PROGRAM CONSIDERATIONS professor teaches a course. Topics in process safety will
Graduate and undergraduate programs fall under the likely need to be continually updated and adapted as the
same mission statement of a chemical engineering depart- body of knowledge and generally accepted industry practices
ment. Generically speaking, a department mission statement regarding safety expand and mature.
usually focuses on furthering the field of chemical engineer- The difficulty in finding time within an already full load
ing through a combination of conducting innovative original curriculum has already been discussed. Several examples of
research and teaching the department’s students to become universities that have found ways to incorporate process
future researchers and leaders in industry, academia, and safety into the undergraduate program have been provided.
government. The emphasis in graduate level programs, spe- At a graduate level, the specific focus on the research thesis
cifically at the PhD level, is usually on teaching graduate stu- makes the inclusion of a process safety component more

Process Safety Progress (Vol.00, No.00) Published on behalf of the AIChE DOI 10.1002/prs Month 2015 3
complex. Any attempt to increase the focus on process safety damentals of Engineering exam or a sub-metric of the ABET
in the graduate experience would likely benefit from exter- Criterion 3 outcome “c”. After metric evaluation, programs can
nal support from funding agencies. Specific strategies that reassess and refine their programs to meet their process safety
may garner greater participation at the departmental level cultural mission and goals.
include tailoring requests for proposals to include a safety
aspect, or asking for specific research programs to examine
process safety related research problems. Allocation of addi- LITERATURE CITED
tional research funding from government agencies specifi- 1. ABET, Criteria for Accrediting Engineering Programs,
cally designated for investigations relevant to process safety 2012–2013, ABET: Baltimore, MD. Available at: http://
may spur greater faculty and graduate student interest. www.abet.org. Accessed on January 6, 2014.
Lastly, any improvements in process safety education at 2. A.J. Pintar, Teaching chemical process safety: A separate
the university level cannot serve as a replacement for course versus integration into existing courses, Confer-
employer provided safety training programs. Training engi- ence Proceedings, 1999 ASEE Annual Meeting, Charlotte,
neers to perform their jobs safely is a responsibility of both NC, June, 1999.
employers and their employees. While process safety con- 3. R.W. Johnson, The Ohio State University Process Safety
cepts can be taught in the classroom, site and process spe- Education. Available at: https://chemsecurity.sandia.
cific hazards will always require additional considerations. gov/discussion-board/RWJ%20extended%20abstract.
However, armed with advance knowledge of process safety pdf. Accessed on January 6, 2014.
concepts, techniques, and approaches, the future engineers 4. B. Johnston, 10.490 Integrated Chemical Engineering I, MIT
of industry can be better prepared to adapt and/or advance OpenCourseWare, Massachusetts Institute of Technology,
the safety practices they encounter in their careers. This will 2006. Available at: http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/chemi-
be especially true if the students can learn how chemical cal-engineering/10–490-integrated-chemical-engineer-
engineering fundamentals are the foundation for process ing-i-fall-2006. Accessed on January 6, 2014 License:
safety knowledge. Creative Commons BY-NC-SA.
5. G. McRae, 10.491 Integrated Chemical Engineering II, MIT
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OpenCourseWare, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
In response to the ABET requirements for certification, US Available at: http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/chemical-
universities and colleges have adopted a variety of strategies engineering/10–491-integrated-chemical-engineering-
for incorporating process safety into the chemical engineer- ii-spring-2006. Accessed on January 6, 2014. License: Cre-
ing curriculum. It is apparent, given the diversity of curricula ative Commons BY-NC-SA.
at these schools, that there will be no single strategy that will 6. A.J. Pintar, Capstone chemical engineering laboratory
work for every program. Departments considering course courses at Michigan tech, Conference Proceedings, 2001
additions or modifications may be required to demonstrate ASEE Annual Meeting, Albuquerque, NM, June, 2001.
that all students, regardless of the various options for curricu- 7. Press Release, WVU offers first-of-its-kind process safety
lum electives, are exposed to process safety concepts. Each boot camp to chemical engineering students, Available
program will have to assess their unique needs and adapt a at: http://wvutoday.wvu.edu/n/2013/04/19/wvu-
process safety pedagogical strategy that best suits them, and offers-first-of-its-kind-process-safety-boot-camp-to-
this strategy will likely need to change over time. chemical-engineering-students. Accessed on January
The review of process safety education in chemical engi- 6, 2014.
neering programs results in several potential recommenda- 8. ABET, ABET Self-Study Report for the Chemical Engineer-
tions. First, departments should consider assessing the process ing Program at New Mexico State University, ABET, Las
safety culture within their individual program to understand Cruces, NM, June 25, 2012. Available at: http://chme.
how the faculty, undergraduate, and graduate students value nmsu.edu/files/2014/05/NMSUChEProgramSelfStu-
process safety as part of chemical engineering education. Pro- dyReport2012.pdf. Accessed on January 6, 2014.
grams should then consider the various approaches previously 9. Chemical Safety Board, Texas Tech University Laboratory
discussed to further promote the process safety culture within Explosion, U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation
the department. Potential process safety components can be Board, Washington, DC, 2011.
included in both the undergraduate and graduate programs. 10. ACS, Identifying and Evaluating Hazards in Research Lab-
Finally, departments should consider tracking a metric tied to oratories, American Chemical Society, Washington, DC,
process safety education, such as relevant scores on the Fun- 2013.

4 Month 2015 Published on behalf of the AIChE DOI 10.1002/prs Process Safety Progress (Vol.00, No.00)