SIMOPS Risk Management: Best Practices for Industrial Facilities
SIMOPS Risk Management: Best Practices for Industrial Facilities
Author: Fidelis Associates | Published: 2026-03-02 | Last Updated: 2026-03-02
Meta Description: Simultaneous Operations (SIMOPS) occur when construction, commissioning, and operations happen concurrently at industrial facilities. Learn SIMOPS risk controls and coordination best practices.
Definition
Simultaneous Operations (SIMOPS) occur when two or more independent work activities take place at the same time in close proximity within an industrial facility, creating interactions and hazards that would not exist if the activities were performed separately. Common SIMOPS scenarios include construction alongside live operations at petroleum refineries, commissioning of new systems at petrochemical plants while adjacent units are in service, and turnaround activities overlapping with production at chemical manufacturing facilities and LNG terminals. SIMOPS require dedicated risk assessment, coordination, and communication protocols to prevent incidents caused by interference between activities.
Why Are Simultaneous Operations High-Risk?
Industrial facilities are designed to control hazards during normal operations. When construction, commissioning, maintenance, or demolition activities occur alongside live production, the normal hazard controls are disrupted:
- Physical barriers that normally separate hazardous areas may be removed or compromised during construction.
- Control systems for live units may be affected by power outages, instrument testing, or tie-in activities on adjacent systems.
- Personnel density increases significantly, with workers from multiple organizations, crafts, and experience levels operating in the same area.
- Communication complexity multiplies as multiple work fronts, supervisors, and permit systems must coordinate in real time.
- Shared utilities — steam, cooling water, nitrogen, instrument air, electrical power — create dependencies where work on one system can affect another.
- Hazardous energy sources from live operations (pressurized systems, hot surfaces, toxic atmospheres) are present alongside construction hazards (heavy lifts, welding, excavation).
The historical record of SIMOPS incidents consistently shows that the root causes are coordination failures, not technical failures. The individual activities are typically well-controlled; the incidents occur at the interfaces between activities.
Common SIMOPS Scenarios
Construction Alongside Live Operations
This is the most common and often the highest-risk SIMOPS scenario. New units are being built while existing units continue production. Risks include crane operations near live equipment, excavation near underground utilities, welding near flammable atmospheres, and construction vibration affecting sensitive instrumentation.
Commissioning Alongside Production
New systems are being tested, energized, and brought online while adjacent systems are in production — a frequent scenario at petroleum refineries adding new process units, midstream facilities expanding compression capacity, and hydrogen production facilities commissioning electrolysis trains. Risks include unintended tie-in activations, commissioning fluids entering production systems, utility demand conflicts, and testing-related pressure transients affecting connected systems.
Turnaround Activities Overlapping With Production
Portions of a facility are shut down for turnaround while other portions remain in operation. Risks include shared isolation boundaries, drainage and venting into live systems, hot work near units with residual hydrocarbons, and logistics conflicts in shared roadways and laydown areas.
Demolition Alongside Live Operations
Removing decommissioned equipment while adjacent units are operating creates risks from structural impacts, falling debris, severed connections, and dust and particulate generation near live process equipment.
SIMOPS Risk Assessment
SIMOPS risk assessment goes beyond standard job hazard analysis because it must evaluate the interactions between activities, not just the hazards of each activity in isolation.
Interaction Matrix
The most effective SIMOPS risk assessment tool is an interaction matrix that maps every active work front against every other active work front and against live operations. For each interaction, the matrix evaluates:
- Spatial conflicts — physical proximity and shared access routes
- Utility dependencies — shared steam, power, instrument air, cooling water, nitrogen
- Safety system interactions — shared fire protection, gas detection, emergency alarms
- Schedule conflicts — activities that cannot occur simultaneously (e.g., crane operations and hot work in the same zone)
- Communication requirements — who needs to know about what
Time-Based Risk Windows
SIMOPS risk is not constant. Certain activities create temporary but significantly elevated risk windows — crane lifts, tie-in activities, pressure testing, initial system energization. These high-risk windows must be identified, communicated, and controlled with enhanced precautions including management presence, elevated standby resources, and restricted concurrent activities.
SIMOPS Controls and Best Practices
Governance Structure
Establish a dedicated SIMOPS coordinator or coordination team responsible for:
- Daily SIMOPS coordination meetings with all work front supervisors
- Maintaining the SIMOPS interaction matrix and updating it as activities progress
- Authorizing high-risk concurrent activities
- Resolving conflicts between work fronts
- Communicating SIMOPS status to all parties
The SIMOPS coordinator must have the authority to stop work, modify schedules, and restrict concurrent activities when the combined risk exceeds acceptable levels.
Permit-to-Work Integration
The permit-to-work system must account for SIMOPS interactions. This means:
- Cross-referencing permits to identify conflicts between concurrent activities in the same area
- Simultaneous permit reviews where the permitting authority evaluates the combined hazards of all active permits in a zone, not just individual permits
- Geographic zoning that restricts incompatible activities (e.g., no hot work within a defined radius of hydrocarbon breaking activities)
- Dynamic permit conditions that change based on the status of adjacent activities
Physical Barriers and Zoning
Physical separation between SIMOPS activities reduces risk. Best practices include:
- Barricading construction zones from live operations areas
- Establishing controlled access points between zones with sign-in requirements
- Segregating pedestrian and vehicle traffic routes for each work front
- Installing temporary wind barriers where airborne contaminants could migrate between zones
Communication Protocols
SIMOPS require communication systems that go beyond normal operations:
- Daily SIMOPS briefings for all supervisors and safety representatives
- Pre-task coordination before any high-risk activity that could affect adjacent work fronts
- Real-time notification systems for emergencies, alarms, and unplanned events
- Shared radio channels or dedicated SIMOPS channels so all parties can hear critical communications
- Visual signals (flags, lights, alarms) for activities that create temporary exclusion zones
Shared Utility Management
When SIMOPS activities share utilities (steam, power, instrument air, nitrogen, cooling water), the facility must:
- Map all utility dependencies for each work front
- Establish protocols for planned utility interruptions with advance notice to all affected parties
- Define emergency procedures for unplanned utility loss
- Prohibit unilateral utility isolation without SIMOPS coordinator approval
How Does SIMOPS Intersect with PSM and PHA?
SIMOPS activities at PSM-covered facilities do not operate in a regulatory vacuum. When simultaneous operations modify process conditions, introduce new hazards, or change the facility's risk profile, existing PSM requirements apply:
- Process Hazard Analysis (1910.119(e)): SIMOPS risk assessments should integrate with the facility's existing PHA. When SIMOPS introduce hazards not evaluated in the original PHA — such as crane operations near pressurized equipment or construction vibration affecting safety instrumented systems — a supplemental hazard analysis should be performed.
- Management of Change (1910.119(l)): MOC triggers apply when SIMOPS activities modify process conditions, even temporarily. Connecting new systems to live utilities, modifying isolation boundaries, or changing operating procedures to accommodate construction activities are all potential MOC triggers.
- Operating Procedures (1910.119(f)): SIMOPS may require temporary modifications to operating procedures. Operators need updated procedures that account for construction activities, restricted access zones, and modified emergency response routes.
- Contractor Requirements (1910.119(h)): SIMOPS typically involve multiple contractor organizations. The employer must ensure that all contractor personnel are informed of potential hazards, that contractors train their employees on safe work practices, and that contractor safety performance is evaluated.
Facilities that treat SIMOPS risk management as separate from their PSM program create gaps. The most effective approach integrates SIMOPS planning into the existing PSM framework rather than running parallel systems.
SIMOPS Documentation Requirements
Effective SIMOPS management requires documentation beyond standard work permits. The following records should be created and maintained:
- SIMOPS Risk Assessment: The interaction matrix and supporting hazard analysis, including identified risk windows, control measures, and residual risk ratings for each activity combination.
- SIMOPS Authorization: Formal authorization from facility management to proceed with simultaneous operations, including any conditions or restrictions.
- Communication Protocols: Documented communication plan specifying radio channels, notification requirements, escalation procedures, and emergency communication arrangements.
- Pre-Job Safety Briefing Records: Documentation of daily SIMOPS coordination meetings and pre-task briefings, including attendees, topics covered, and any restrictions communicated.
- Incident and Near-Miss Reports: SIMOPS-specific incident and near-miss documentation that captures interface-related events — incidents caused by interactions between activities rather than within a single activity.
- Post-SIMOPS Review: After-action review documenting lessons learned, what worked, what failed, and recommendations for future SIMOPS at the facility.
These records serve dual purposes: they support real-time coordination during SIMOPS and provide evidence of due diligence for regulatory compliance and incident investigation.
Contractor Coordination in SIMOPS
SIMOPS environments at petroleum refineries, petrochemical plants, and energy infrastructure projects typically involve multiple contractor organizations working alongside the facility owner's operations team. Coordination failures between these organizations are the leading cause of SIMOPS incidents.
Pre-Mobilization Safety Alignment
Before contractors mobilize to the site, conduct alignment meetings that cover:
- The SIMOPS governance structure and the authority of the SIMOPS coordinator
- Facility-specific hazards and safety requirements
- Permit-to-work system requirements and cross-referencing procedures
- Emergency response procedures, including evacuation routes that account for construction zones
- Communication protocols and radio channel assignments
Authority-to-Stop-Work
Every contractor employee must have clear, documented authority to stop work when they observe an unsafe condition — regardless of employer, seniority, or schedule pressure. In SIMOPS environments, the stop-work threshold should be lower than normal because the consequences of interface incidents are typically more severe.
Contractor Qualification Verification
Per OSHA 1910.119(h), the facility owner must evaluate contractor safety performance before work begins. In SIMOPS environments, this evaluation should specifically assess:
- Experience with SIMOPS or concurrent operations at similar facilities
- Safety management systems for managing interface hazards
- Communication capabilities (radio-equipped supervisors, bilingual safety staff if needed)
- Incident response capabilities appropriate to the SIMOPS environment
SIMOPS Performance Metrics and KPIs
Measuring SIMOPS performance requires metrics that capture interface risk, not just individual activity safety:
| Metric | What It Measures | Target Direction | | -------------------------------------------- | --------------------------------------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------- | | Near-miss reporting rate (SIMOPS-specific) | Willingness to report interface-related events | Higher is better (indicates reporting culture) | | Schedule adherence vs. safety stop frequency | Balance between production pressure and safety stops | Track ratio over time | | Contractor safety incident rate | Contractor safety performance during SIMOPS | Lower is better | | Communication protocol compliance | Attendance at daily briefings, radio discipline | Higher is better | | Permit cross-reference completion rate | Percentage of permits reviewed for SIMOPS conflicts | 100% target | | High-risk window management compliance | Percentage of high-risk activities with enhanced controls | 100% target |
These metrics should be reviewed at daily SIMOPS coordination meetings and trended over the duration of the SIMOPS period. Deteriorating trends in any metric should trigger a management review and potential activity suspension.
Key Takeaways
- SIMOPS incidents result from coordination failures at the interfaces between activities, not from failures within individual activities.
- An interaction matrix that maps every work front against every other work front and against live operations is the essential SIMOPS risk assessment tool.
- A dedicated SIMOPS coordinator with stop-work authority is the most effective organizational control for managing concurrent activities.
- Permit-to-work systems must cross-reference concurrent permits to identify combined hazards that individual permit reviews would miss.
- Communication protocols and daily coordination meetings are non-negotiable for SIMOPS environments with multiple work fronts and multiple organizations.
Assess Your Program
Are you preparing for a project that involves simultaneous construction, commissioning, and operations? Assess your SIMOPS readiness with a free operational readiness check.
Start Free Operational Readiness Assessment →
For dedicated SIMOPS coordination and risk management support, FidelisForce provides experienced field teams who have managed SIMOPS at greenfield construction sites, brownfield expansions, and major turnarounds.
Related Resources
- Commissioning, Startup & Operational Readiness: A Complete Guide — SIMOPS are a critical risk factor during commissioning and startup phases.
- Commissioning vs. Startup vs. Turnover: Definitions and Differences — Understanding the phases where SIMOPS most commonly occur.
- What is a Pre-Startup Safety Review (PSSR)? — PSSR must account for SIMOPS conditions when commissioning occurs alongside live operations.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is SIMOPS in industrial operations? SIMOPS (Simultaneous Operations) refers to situations where two or more independent work activities occur at the same time in close proximity within an industrial facility, creating interaction hazards that would not exist if the activities were performed separately. Common examples include construction alongside live production operations, commissioning of new systems while adjacent systems are in service, turnaround activities overlapping with production, and demolition near operating units. SIMOPS is not defined by a single regulatory standard but is recognized across the process industries as a high-risk condition requiring dedicated risk assessment and coordination.
When is a SIMOPS risk assessment needed? A SIMOPS risk assessment should be conducted whenever concurrent activities at a facility create the potential for interaction hazards — that is, when the hazards of one activity could affect or be affected by another activity occurring nearby. Specific triggers include construction or modification work within or adjacent to operating process units, commissioning or startup activities while other units remain in production, turnaround work that overlaps with live operations, crane operations near energized or pressurized equipment, and any period when personnel density, permit volume, or work complexity significantly exceeds normal operations. The assessment should be completed before concurrent activities begin, not after problems emerge.
Who should be involved in SIMOPS planning and coordination? Effective SIMOPS planning requires representation from all parties whose work activities will interact. This typically includes operations management and shift supervisors, construction or project management, commissioning leads, maintenance and turnaround coordinators, safety and health professionals, and contractor supervisors for each work front. A dedicated SIMOPS coordinator — with the authority to stop work, modify schedules, and restrict concurrent activities — is the most effective organizational control. Daily SIMOPS coordination meetings involving all work front supervisors are a best practice for managing the dynamic nature of concurrent activities.
Fidelis Associates provides SIMOPS coordination, commissioning management, and operational readiness services through FidelisForce. Our field teams have managed SIMOPS at hydrogen facilities, used oil re-refineries, and major capital projects where construction, commissioning, and operations occurred simultaneously.
Ready to strengthen your operations?
Talk to a Fidelis specialist about how we can help.