Dynamic approach to risk management: Application to the Hoeganaes metal dust accidents

Process Safety and Environmental Protection

Volumn 92, Issue 6, 2014, Pages 669-679

  Paltrinieri, Nicola ^a,b   Khan, Faisal ^c   Amyotte, Paul ^d   Cozzani, Valerio ^b  

^a SINTEF TECHNOLOGY AND SOCIETY   (Norway)

^b UNIVERSITY OF BOLOGNA   (Italy)

^c MEMORIAL UNIVERSITY OF NEWFOUNDLAND   (Canada)

^d DALHOUSIE UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

Dust explosion; Dynamic risk assessment; Dynamic risk management; DyPASI; Early warning; Hazard identification

Indexed keywords

ACCIDENTS; DUST; HAZARDOUS MATERIALS; HAZARDS; RISK ANALYSIS; RISK MANAGEMENT; RISK PERCEPTION;

DUST EXPLOSION; DYNAMIC RISK ASSESSMENTS; DYNAMIC RISKS; DYPASI; EARLY WARNING; HAZARD IDENTIFICATION;

RISK ASSESSMENT;

EID: 84929148011     PISSN: 09575820     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.psep.2013.11.008     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. Abbasi, T., Abbasi, S.A., 2007. Dust explosions - cases, causes, consequences, and control. Journal of Hazardous Materials 140, 7-44.
2. Abuswer, M., Amyotte, P.R., Khan, F.I., 2013. A quantitative risk management framework for dust and hybrid mixture explosions. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries 26 (2), 283-289.
3. Amyotte, P.R., Pegg, J.M., Khan, F.I., 2009. Application of inherent safety principles to dust explosion prevention and mitigation. Process Safety and Environment Protection 87, 35-39.
4. Apple, 2012. Apple Supplier Responsibility. Progress Report. Apple Inc, Retrieved from: www.images.apple.com/supplierresponsibility/pdf/Apple-SR-2012-Progress-Report.pdf (accessed 15.11.12).
5. ARIA - Analyse, Recherche et Information sur les Accidents, 2012. French Ministry of Ecology and Sustainable Development, Retrieved from: www.aria.developpement-durable.gouv.fr/indexen.html (accessed 20.09.12).
6. Blair, A.S., 2007. Dust explosion incidents and regulations in the United States. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries 20, 523-529.
7. CCPS - Center for Chemical Process Safety, 2008. Guidelines for Hazard Evaluation Procedures. America Institute of Chemical Engineers (AIChE), New York, USA.
8. CSA, 2007. CSA-Q850, Risk Management: Guideline for Decision Makers. Canadian Standard Association (Standard Q850-97).
9. Delvosalle, C., Fiévez, C., Pipart, A., 2004. Deliverable D.1.C, WP 1. EC project ARAMIS, 6th FP, Contract number: EVG1-CT-2001-00036.
10. Delvosalle, C., Fievez, C., Pipart, A., Debray, B., 2006. ARAMIS project: a comprehensive methodology for the identification of reference accident scenarios in process industries. Journal of Hazardous Materials 130 (3), 200-219.
11. Eckhoff, R.K., 2005. Current status and expected future trends in dust explosion research. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries 18, 225-237.
12. Handboek Kanscijfers, 1994. Ministerie van de Vlaamse Gemeenschap. Departement Leefmilieu en Infrastructuur, AMINAL, Brussel.
13. HSE - Health and Safety Executive, 1978. Canvey: An Investigation of Potential Hazards from Operations in the Canvey Island/Thurrock area. Health and Safety Executive, HMSO, London.
14. IEC - International Electrotechnical Commission, 1998. IEC 61508, Functional Safety of Electrical, Electronic and Programmable Electronic Safety-related Systems, Parts 1-7. International Electrotechnical Commission, Geneva.
15. IEC - International Electrotechnical Commission, 2001. IEC 61511, Functional Safety Instrumented Systems for the Process Industry Sector, Parts 1-3. International Electrotechnical Commission, Geneva.
16. IRGC - International Risk Governance Council, Geneva 2009. Risk Governance Deficits, Report. International Risk Governance Council, ISBN 978-2-9700631-9-3.
17. ISO, Geneva, Switzerland 2009. ISO 31000, Risk Management - Principles and Guidelines, ISO 31000:2009.
18. Jovanovic, A., 2009. 1st iNTeg-Risk Conference: Dealing with Risks of Tomorrow's Technologies. Steinbeis Edition, Stuttgart, ISBN 978-3-941417-40-3.
19. Jovanovic, A., Renn, O., Salvi, O., 2010. 2nd iNTeg-Risk Conference: New Technologies & Emerging Risks. Dealing with Multiple and Interconnected Emerging Risks. Steinbeis Edition, Stuttgart, ISBN 978-3-938062-33-3.
20. Jovanovic, A., Renn, O., Salvi, O., 2011. 3rd iNTeg-Risk Conference & 20th SRA-Europe Meeting. Steinbeis Edition, Stuttgart, ISBN 978-3-941417-65-6.
21. Kalantarnia, M., Khan, F., Hawboldt, F., 2009. Dynamic risk assessment using failure assessment and Bayesian theory. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries 22, 600-606.
22. Kalantarnia, M., Khan, F., Hawboldt, F., 2010. Modeling of BP Texas City refinery accident using dynamic risk assessment approach. Process Safety and Environmental Protection 88, 191-199.
23. Kaplan, S., Garrick, B.J., 1981. On the quantitative definition of risk. Risk Analysis 1, 11-27.
24. Khan, F.I., Haddara, M.R., 2004. Risk-based maintenance of ethylene oxide production facilities. Journal of Hazardous Materials 108 (3), 147-159.
25. Mannan, M.S., 2005. Lees's loss prevention for the process industries, vols. I-III., third ed. Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann, Burlington, MA.
26. Meel, A., Seider, W.D., 2006. Plant-specific dynamic failure assessment using Bayesian theory. Chemical Engineering Science 61, 7036-7056.
27. MHIDAS - Major Hazard Incident Data Service, 2003. AEA Technology, Major Hazards Assessment Unit. Health and Safety Executive, UK.
28. NFPA - National Fire Protection Association, 2012. NFPA 484: Standard for Combustible Metals. NFPA, Quincy, MA, USA.
29. NORSOK, 2010. Standard Z-013, Risk and Emergency Preparedness Analysis. Norwegian Technology Centre, Oslo, Norway.
30. Paltrinieri, N., Dechy, N., Salzano, E., Wardman, M., Cozzani, V., 2012a. Lessons learned from Toulouse and Buncefield disasters: from risk analysis failures to the identification of atypical scenarios through a better knowledge management. Risk Analysis 32, 1404-1419, http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2011.01749.x.
31. Paltrinieri, N., Dechy, N., Salzano, E., Wardman, M., Cozzani, V., 2013a. Towards a new approach for the identification of atypical accident scenarios. Journal of Risk Research 16 (3/4), 337-354, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2012.729518.
32. Paltrinieri, N., Øien, K., Cozzani, V., 2012b. Assessment and comparison of two early warning indicator methods in the perspective of prevention of atypical accident scenarios. Reliability Engineering and System Safety 108, 21-31, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2012.06.017.
33. Paltrinieri, N., Tugnoli, A., Buston, J., Wardman, M., Cozzani, V., 2013b. Dynamic Procedure for Atypical Scenarios Identification (DyPASI): a new systematic HAZID tool. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries 26 (4), 683-695, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jlp.2013.01.006.
34. Paltrinieri, N., (PhD Thesis) 2012. Development of advanced tools and methods for the assessment and management of risk due to atypical major accident scenarios. Alma Mater Studiorum - University of Bologna, Bologna.
35. Purple book, 1999. Committee for the Prevention of Disasters. The "Purple book" - Guidelines for quantitative risk assessment, CPR 18 E.
36. Schoeff, R.W., 2006. US Agricultural Dust Explosion Statistics. Kansas State University in Cooperation with FGIS-USDA.
37. Shalev, D.M., Tiran, J., 2007. Condition-based fault tree analysis (CBFTA): a new method for improved fault tree analysis (FTA), reliability and safety calculations. Reliability Engineering and System Safety 92, 1231-1241.
38. UNEP - United Nations Environment Program, 2012. Distasters Database. United Nations Environment Program, Division of Technology, Industry and Economics, Sustainable Consumption & Production Branch, Retrieved from: http://www.unepie.org/scp/sp/disaster/database/ (accessed 20.09.12).
39. UNIBO-CONPRICI, 2011. Definition of the new iNTeg-Risk paradigm: description of the different risks, emerging risks and the way of dealing with emerging risks including the interaction with relevant stakeholders (T-H-C-R), Deliverable D.2.1.1.1 of EC project iNTeg-Risk, 7th FP, Grant: CP-IP 213345-2.
40. US CSB - Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board, 2005. Hayes Lemmerz International - Huntington, IN, Aluminum Dust Explosion. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board, Retrieved from: http://www.csb.gov/assets/1/19/HayesReport.pdf (accessed 20.09.12).
41. US CSB - Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board, 2006. Combustible Dust Hazard Study. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board, Retrieved from: http://www.csb.gov/assets/document/DustFinal-Report-Website-11-17-06.pdf (accessed 20.09.12).
42. US CSB - Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board, 2011. Hoeganaes Corporation: Gallatin, TN, Metal Dust Flash Fires and Hydrogen Explosion. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board, Retrieved from: http://www.csb.gov/investigations/detail.aspx?SID=100 (accessed 20.09.12).
43. Vose, D., 2000. Risk Analysis: A Quantitative Guide, second ed. John Wiley, Chichester, England.