Appendix E Preliminary Hazard Analysis

PRELIMINARY HAZARD ANALYSIS, BITUMEN STORAGE AND HANDLING, VOPAK TERMINALS AUSTRALIA PTY LTD, PORT BOTANY, NSW
Prepared by: Dean Shewring 1 November 2011
Pinnacle Risk Management Pty Limited

ABN 83 098 666 703
PO Box 5024 Elanora Heights NSW Australia 2101 Telephone: (02) 9913 7284 Facsimile: (02) 9913 7930
Pinnacle Risk Management
Preliminary Hazard Analysis, Vopak, Bitumen Storage and Handling
Disclaimer
This report was prepared by Pinnacle Risk Management Pty Limited (Pinnacle Risk Management) as an account of work for Vopak Terminals Australia Pty Ltd (Vopak). The material in it reflects Pinnacle Risk Managements best judgement in the light of the information available to it at the time of preparation. However, as Pinnacle Risk Management cannot control the conditions under which this report may be used, Pinnacle Risk Management will not be responsible for damages of any nature resulting from use of or reliance upon this report. Pinnacle Risk Managements responsibility for advice given is subject to the terms of engagement with Vopak.
Rev A B C D
Date 23/8/11 19/9/11 10/10/11 1/4/11
Description Draft for Comment Site Location Changed Vopak Comments Included Final Issue
Reviewed By Vopak Vopak Vopak
Vopak Bitumen PHA Report Rev D.Doc 1 November 2011
CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................ I GLOSSARY ........................................................................................................... III 1 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................. 1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 2 3 Background...................................................................................... 1 Objectives ........................................................................................ 2 Scope................................................................................................ 2 Methodology .................................................................................... 2 Findings and Recommendations ................................................... 3
SITE DESCRIPTION......................................................................................... 5 BITUMEN FACILITY DESCRIPTION .................................................................... 8 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 3.9 Operations Product Flow ................................................................ 8 Proposed Tanks............................................................................... 8 Vapour Combustor ........................................................................ 10 Shipping Supply and Discharge................................................... 10 Bitumen Road Tanker Loading Gantry ........................................ 11 Heating System.............................................................................. 12 Heat Tracing ................................................................................... 12 Thermal Insulation and Cladding ................................................. 12 Pipework ........................................................................................ 13
3.10 Fire Protection System ................................................................. 13 4 HAZARD IDENTIFICATION .............................................................................. 14 4.1 4.2 4.3 Hazardous Materials...................................................................... 14 Potential Hazardous Incidents Review ........................................ 16 Hazardous Events - Shipping ....................................................... 16
Pinnacle Risk Management Hazardous Events Terminal Operations ................................... 18
4.4 5
RISK ANALYSIS ........................................................................................... 33 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.6 5.7 Pool Fire Modelling ....................................................................... 35 Products of Combustion ............................................................... 40 Natural Gas Fires and Explosions ............................................... 41 Aircraft Impact and Other External Events ................................. 43 Cumulative Risk............................................................................. 44 Societal Risk .................................................................................. 44 Risk to the Biophysical Environment .......................................... 45
5.7.1 Escape of Materials to Atmosphere ............................................. 45 5.7.2 Escape of Materials to Soil or Waterways ................................... 46 5.7.3 Solid Wastes .................................................................................. 46 6 7 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ......................................................... 48 REFERENCES .............................................................................................. 50
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 - Site Location .................................................................................... 6 Figure 2 Site Layout ...................................................................................... 7
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 Hazard Identification Word Diagram Bitumen Facility ............. 19 Table 2 - Risk Criteria, New Plants ................................................................ 34 Table 3 Predicted SEP................................................................................. 36 Table 4 Fire Scenarios Calculation Data and Results .............................. 37 Table 5 - Radiant Heat Impact ....................................................................... 38 Table 6 Layout Considerations Tolerable Radiant Heat Levels ........... 38 Table 7 Fire Plume Rise Modelling ............................................................ 40 Table 8 Natural Gas Jet Fires ...................................................................... 41 Table 9 Effects of Explosion Overpressure .............................................. 42 Table 10 Natural Gas Vapour Cloud Explosions and Flash Fires ........... 42 Table 11 - Piping Failure Frequencies .......................................................... 43
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix 1 Process Flow Drawing. Appendix 2 Radiant Heat Contours.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Vopak Terminals Australia Pty Ltd (Vopak) is proposing to install a bitumen import, storage and road tanker loading facility at the Vopak Site A facility, Port Botany. As part of the project requirements, a Preliminary Hazard Analysis (PHA) is required. This report details the results from the analysis. The risks associated with the new tanks, associated equipment and bitumen facilities at the Vopak Site A, Port Botany, have been assessed and compared against the DoP risk criteria. In summary: 1. Fires: No risk of injury or fatality at residential areas or other sensitive land uses as the separation distance is large, i.e. 1 km or larger to residential areas; As the estimated radiant heat levels from potential fire events are less than 12.6 kW/m2 at neighbouring industrial facilities, the likelihood of fatality at these locations is acceptably low and there exists a high probability of escape; and Propagation to neighbouring industrial facilities is not expected given that the significant levels of radiant heat are largely contained on-site.
2. The shipping activities associated with this project are commensurate with the zoning for the Port Botany area and are not considered intolerable. 3. Societal risk is qualitatively concluded to be acceptable given: Few events analysed in the study have the potential for off-site impact and, for the ones that do, their likelihood is acceptably low; and The population density in the Port Botany area is relatively low.
Therefore, the results of this PHA show that the risks associated with the proposed changes comply with the DoP guidelines for tolerable fatality, injury, irritation, propagation and societal risk. Also, risks to the biophysical environment from potential hazardous events are broadly acceptable. Additionally, the proposed bitumen handling and storage equipment have no significant impact to the cumulative individual risk contours (for future development planning) as presented in the Port Botany Land Use Safety Study by DUAP in 1996.
The primary reason for the low risk levels from the proposed changes is that significant consequential impacts from potential hazardous events (mainly radiant heat from fires) do not extend far from the relevant processing areas. It is assumed that the proposed changes will be reviewed via the HAZOP methodology, a fire safety study will be performed and the existing safety management systems and emergency response plans will be updated to reflect the proposed changes. The following recommendations are made from this review: 1. Include in the existing Vopak safety management system procedures for safely emptying and opening a bitumen tank or vessel given the risk of fires on contact with air. 2. Procedures need to be developed to routinely handle and remove carbonaceous deposits (possibly with iron sulphides which can result in a pyrophoric material) inside the bitumen tanks and vessels. If not routinely removed, the carbonaceous deposits may provide an ignition hazard when they are exposed to a sudden increase in temperature or oxygen supply. Also, solid deposits can float on the bitumen surface and these can interfere with level instruments. 3. Develop procedures to control the risk of hydrogen sulphide exposure to personnel in the vicinity of the bitumen handling equipment or those who are required to enter confined spaces associated with the bitumen equipment. 4. Develop procedures for heating a tank from cold given the risk of a boilover event from water in the tank being heated and evaporating. 5. Perform a SIL study on the proposed bitumen storage and processing facility to ensure the instrumented protective loops are suitably designed and are of adequate reliability for the potential hazardous events that can occur. 6. Ensure the transformer / MCC building is adequately designed to prevent fire propagation from a transformer explosion / fire event to the electrical switch gear and/or to the adjacent hot oil heaters or vice versa.
ii
GLOSSARY
API AS ASME BLB CCTV DoP ESD ESV HAZAN HAZOP HIPAP IEC LEL LPG LNG MCC ML NDT PHA QRA SEP SIL SPC STEL TLV TNO American Petroleum Institute Australian Standard American Society for Mechanical Engineers Bulk Liquids Berth Closed circuit television NSW Department of Planning Emergency Shutdown Emergency Shutdown Valve Hazard analysis Hazard and operability study Hazardous Industry Planning Advisory Paper International Electro-technical Commission Lower explosion limit Liquefied petroleum gas Liquefied natural gas Motor Control Centre Megalitre Non-destructive testing Preliminary hazard analysis Quantitative risk assessment Surface emissive power Safety Integrity Level Sydney Ports Corporation Short Term Exposure Limit Threshold Limit Value The Netherlands Organisation of Applied Scientific Research
iii
REPORT
1
1.1
INTRODUCTION
BACKGROUND
Vopak Terminals Australia Pty Ltd (Vopak) is proposing to install a bitumen import, storage and road tanker loading facility at the Vopak Site A facility, Port Botany. Vopak have owned and operated the existing Chemical Terminal (Site A) facility for hazardous and non-hazardous bulk liquids at Port Botany since 1979. The Petroleum Terminal (Site B) has been in operation since 1996. The proposed bitumen facility will occupy approximately 10,000 m2 of the approximately 40,000 m2 site. The projected annual throughput of the proposed facility is 160,000 tonnes of bitumen feedstock with potential for future growth. The projections indicate an increase in shipping movements at BLB1 (Bulk Liquids Berth) of approximately 16 arrivals / discharges per year. The main features of the proposal are summarised as follows: Bitumen feed stock will be imported via BLB1 and transferred to three heated 10 ML tanks; The bitumen will be transferred from the storage tanks into road tankers via new road tanker loading bays; and Loaded trucks will deliver bitumen to the customers.
The Bitumen is classified as a Dangerous Goods Class 9, Packing Group III, elevated temperature liquid. As part of the project requirements, a Preliminary Hazard Analysis (PHA) is required. This PHA has been prepared in accordance with the guidelines published by the NSW Department of Planning (DoP) Hazardous Industry Planning Advisory Paper (HIPAP) No 6 (Ref 1). Vopak have appointed Pinnacle Risk Management Pty Ltd (Pinnacle Risk Management) to prepare this Preliminary Hazard Analysis report.
1.2
OBJECTIVES
The main aims of this PHA study are to: Identify the credible, potential hazardous events associated with the new bitumen facility; Evaluate the level of risk associated with the identified potential hazardous events to surrounding land users, including other Port Botany companies and their operations, and compare the calculated risk levels with the risk criteria published by the DoP in HIPAP No 4 (Ref 2); Review the adequacy of the proposed safeguards to prevent and mitigate the potential hazardous events; and Where necessary, submit recommendations to Vopak to ensure that the proposed facility is operated and maintained at acceptable levels of safety and effective safety management systems are used.
1.3
SCOPE
This PHA assesses the credible, potential hazardous events and corresponding risks associated with the new equipment at the proposed Vopak Port Botany bitumen facility with the potential for off-site impacts. In summary, the assessment includes: The new equipment and operations associated with the bitumen import, storage and road tanker loading facility; and On-site pipelines and the proposed new bitumen pipeline in the pipeline corridor from the existing Bulk Liquids Berth to site.
Off-site transport risk is not included in this PHA as off-site traffic impacts are to be assessed in the Review of Environmental Factors. Qualitative assessment of the use of the berth operations and shipping activities is included in this report. The BLB is a purpose built wharf specifically for transferring hazardous cargo such as the materials stored at Port Botany, e.g. LPG, and it is used by a number of companies.
1.4
METHODOLOGY
In accordance with the approach recommended by the DoP in HIPAP 6 (Ref 1) the underlying methodology of the PHA is risk-based, that is, the risk of a particular potentially hazardous event is assessed as the outcome of its consequences and likelihood.
The PHA has been conducted as follows: Initially, the proposed equipment and its location were reviewed to identify credible, potential hazardous events, their causes and consequences. Proposed safeguards were also included in this review; As the equipment is located at a relatively significant distance from other sensitive land users, the consequences of each potential hazardous event were estimated to determine if there is any possible unacceptable off-site impacts; Included in the analysis is the risk of propagation between the new equipment and the surrounding land users; Where adverse off-site impacts can occur, the likelihood of each potential hazardous event was reviewed, using appropriate techniques / methods, to check if there is any significant increase to existing risk levels and if the risk levels are within the criteria in HIPAP 4 (Ref 2); and A comparison is made to the existing Port Botany regional study (Ref 3) to determine if there is any impact on cumulative risk.
1.5
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The risks associated with the new tanks, associated equipment and bitumen facilities at the Vopak Site A, Port Botany, have been assessed and compared against the DoP risk criteria. In summary: 1. Fires: No risk of injury or fatality at residential areas or other sensitive land uses as the separation distance is large, i.e. 1 km or larger to residential areas; As the estimated radiant heat levels from potential fire events are less than 12.6 kW/m2 at neighbouring industrial facilities, the likelihood of fatality at these locations is acceptably low and there exists a high probability of escape; and Propagation to neighbouring industrial facilities is not expected given that the significant levels of radiant heat are largely contained on-site.
2. The shipping activities associated with this project are commensurate with the zoning for the Port Botany area and are not considered intolerable. 3. Societal risk is qualitatively concluded to be acceptable given: Few events analysed in the study have the potential for off-site impact and, for the ones that do, their likelihood is acceptably low; and
The population density in the Port Botany area is relatively low.
Therefore, the results of this PHA show that the risks associated with the proposed changes comply with the DoP guidelines for tolerable fatality, injury, irritation, propagation and societal risk. Also, risks to the biophysical environment from potential hazardous events are broadly acceptable. Additionally, the proposed bitumen handling and storage equipment have no significant impact to the cumulative individual risk contours (for future development planning) as presented in the Port Botany Land Use Safety Study by DUAP in 1996. The primary reason for the low risk levels from the proposed changes is that significant consequential impacts from potential hazardous events (mainly radiant heat from fires) do not extend far from the relevant processing areas. It is assumed that the proposed changes will be reviewed via the HAZOP methodology, a fire safety study will be performed and the existing safety management systems and emergency response plans will be updated to reflect the proposed changes. The following recommendations are made from this review: 1. Include in the existing Vopak safety management system procedures for safely emptying and opening a bitumen tank or vessel given the risk of fires on contact with air. 2. Procedures need to be developed to routinely handle and remove carbonaceous deposits (possibly with iron sulphides which can result in a pyrophoric material) inside the bitumen tanks and vessels. If not routinely removed, the carbonaceous deposits may provide an ignition hazard when they are exposed to a sudden increase in temperature or oxygen supply. Also, solid deposits can float on the bitumen surface and these can interfere with level instruments. 3. Develop procedures to control the risk of hydrogen sulphide exposure to personnel in the vicinity of the bitumen handling equipment or those who are required to enter confined spaces associated with the bitumen equipment. 4. Develop procedures for heating a tank from cold given the risk of a boilover event from water in the tank being heated and evaporating. 5. Perform a SIL study on the proposed bitumen storage and processing facility to ensure the instrumented protective loops are suitably designed and are of adequate reliability for the potential hazardous events that can occur. 6. Ensure the transformer / MCC building is adequately designed to prevent fire propagation from a transformer explosion / fire event to the electrical switch gear and/or to the adjacent hot oil heaters or vice versa.
SITE DESCRIPTION
Vopaks Site A was established in 1979 to serve an identified need for an independent bulk liquid distribution facility in the greater Sydney Region. The facility caters for the distribution of bulk liquid chemicals to chemical manufacturers, oil companies and chemical traders who sell into the local markets. A map of the area showing the location of Site A is shown in Figure 1. A site layout drawing is shown in Figure 2. The four hectare site is bounded to: The north by Friendship Road; The south by the Port Botany pipeline corridor and Patricks Container Depot; The east by Patricks Container Depot; and The west by Origin Energy (LPG Storage & Distribution).
The nearest residential area is located at Phillip Bay approximately 1 kilometre to the east of the site across Yarra Bay. Other residential areas, slightly further away, are located at Chifley to the north-east and Botany to the north-west. The site is an established bulk chemicals storage and distribution facility. Security for the site is also established and comprises the following measures: Site perimeter fence installed with electronic access gates; The main gate is monitored by security staff based at Site B outside normal hours; All personnel gain access via the main gate (either by swiping their security passes or by signing in as a visitor); The site has lighting throughout the night to aid observation; Patrols by Site B operations personnel outside Site A operational hours; and The site can be observed by security personnel via a closed circuit TV.
There are approximately 30 people during normal business hours and none outside of normal business hours on the site (except when shipping operations occur). Depending on weather conditions, it may lie under the flight path to Sydney Airport. There are no known natural hazards associated with this location that pose unacceptable levels of risk.
Figure 1 - Site Location
New Vopak Bitumen Facility
Figure 2 Site Layout
3
3.1
BITUMEN FACILITY DESCRIPTION

OPERATIONS PRODUCT FLOW
From Ref 4, bitumen feedstock will be imported via BLB1 and transferred to heated 10,000 m tanks. A process flow diagram is shown in Appendix 1. The facility is proposed to be comprised of: Ship receipt facilities, including an electrically traced pipeline to BLB 1; Storage and heating facilities for bitumen products in three 10,000 m3 tanks; and Gantry facilities for loading and in-line blending bitumen road tankers (2 bays initially with expansion to 4 in the future).
The bitumen will be stored at approximately 140C - 150C and will be loaded out at approximately 180C. Heating will primarily be facilitated through two hot oil heaters and associated heat exchangers by the use of natural gas as fuel. The facility will store up to three imported bitumen grades (no cutback grades proposed). Various specialty grades will be generated by blending the main grades through an inline blending system during road tanker loading. The facility will operate 24 hours a day, 365 days a year.
3.2
PROPOSED TANKS
Three tanks are to be constructed each with a capacity of 10,000 m. The tanks are 22 metres in diameter and have an overall height of 27 metres. These tanks will be used to store the three grades of bitumen. There is one (smaller) tank for potentially contaminated storm water associated with the facility. The tanks will be fixed roof carbon steel and fabricated to API650 standard. The venting of these tanks will be to a vapour combustor for the three large tanks during ship unloading operations. Overfill protection will be installed and will comprise of two independent level systems with high level alarms as well as an automatic computer driven product transfer system between tanks. The main tanks features are as follows: The tanks will meet industry design standards (API 650 and API2000) and customer requirements; The product in storage will be maintained at 140C - 150C and must be on delivery at the road tanker loading gantry at 180C - 190C;
8
Product receipt into the tanks will be approximately 400 te/hr (minimum) at a temperature of 140C; The tanks will have hot oil coils and controls capable of maintaining the product at 150C; Level measurement and monitoring will be with a radar level gauging system: Alarm points suitable for alarming and/or interlocking (high, highhigh, low and low-low) Control system feedback capability
Independent high-high level capacitance switches will be fitted; Thermal insulation suitable for maintaining storage temperatures at 150C will be fitted. Design and installation will be consistent with best industry practice to minimise corrosion under insulation. Lagging installation will be designed to prevent water or hydrocarbon ingress into insulation. The tank vents will be suitable for bitumen and sized for air blowing of the ships line; The tanks will be top filled via an external riser and internal slotted pipe; Alarms and interlocks will be as follows: High level to generate an audible alarm and a message in the control room; High-high level to generate a site audible alarm and a message in the control room; High-high independent level switch to generate a site audible alarm and a message (in the control room) and an emergency shutdown; Low level to generate an audible alarm and a message in the control room; Low-low level alarm to generate a site audible alarm and message in the control room; Low-low level alarm activation will stop the loading pumps, close the tank pump suction valve and close the hot oil coil control valve; High temperature to generate an audible alarm and a message in the control room; and High-high temperature to generate a site audible alarm and a message in the control room and close the hot oil coil control valve.
Lighting to be provided for night dipping, ship unloading, truck loading and sampling operations;
The tanks will be connected to a vapour combustor for use during filling of the tanks and road tankers; Structural integrity tests conducted every 10 years in accordance with AS1940; and Containment of liquid within the bund to meet AS1940 requirements.
The bunded areas (tank pits, pump bays and road tanker loading gantries) will have sumps for the collection of rainwater and possible spills and will be directed to the waste water treatment plant prior to disposal. Treated water collected in these sumps will be sampled and inspected prior to release to stormwater. Should the water be contaminated, it will be pumped to a waste tank for transport to an approved (Office of Environment and Heritage) waste treatment facility. Open paved areas will have a first flush containment system (10mm / m2 design criteria) with a capability to direct flow to the waste water treatment plant. The tanks are separated by intermediate bund walls and are designed to overflow into each other providing a total containment capacity to meet AS1940.
3.3
VAPOUR COMBUSTOR
A vapour combustor is to be located in a new facilities compound adjacent to Friendship Road. This will be used for treating the bitumen tanks vapours during ship unloading operations and truck venting when being filled. This unit will be fired by natural gas.
3.4
SHIPPING SUPPLY AND DISCHARGE
The facility will receive products (160,000 tonnes per year) via ship from BLB1. Bitumen products would be imported on vessels of up to 15 kte tanker size and the typical parcel size would be 5-10 kte per shipment. The frequency would be 8-16 shipments per annum (depending on ship size). The main features for the shipping transfers are summarised as follows: A single carbon steel pipeline (electrically heat traced and insulated) is to be dedicated for bitumen unloading from BLB1. The unloading capacity minimum rate is 400 te/hr with electric heat tracing and insulation / cladding; All hoses and fittings required to connect the ship to the unloading pipeline will be dedicated to bitumen use only; Hose and wharf pipeline design will facilitate draining / blowing of the hoses and means to confirm that the hose is drained prior to breaking connections (e.g. low point sample point);
10
Suitable bunding / containment will be provided at the wharf connection point (for smaller spills); The design of the pipeline between the wharf and the storage tanks will include requirements for the following issues: Heating prior to and during transfers (required to heat from ambient to 120C within 24 hours and maintain product at 120C); Resting the line empty or on product (or partially empty); Public safety (e.g. hot surfaces, electrical hazards); Product security; Thermal relief; and Thermal expansion and thermal stress of the pipeline as it heats / cools.
The wharf pipeline will be blown clear of product with nitrogen at the completion of each discharge.
3.5
BITUMEN ROAD TANKER LOADING GANTRY
A two bay road tanker loading gantry is proposed. Loading operations will occur 24 hours per day, 365 days a year and will be driver self-loading. The main features of the road tanker loading gantry are as follows: The gantry will initially consist of 2 loading bays, each fitted with 1 loading arm, with provision to increase to 4 bays in the future; The facility will be sized to accommodate the ingress / egress and turning requirements of a 26 metre B-Double road tanker, without reversing; Each barrel of the B-Double will be loaded separately; Each bay will be capable of loading at a rate of 80 tonnes/hr; Mass flow meters will be installed with a pre-set auto shut off and also an overfill protection probe; The gantry will house the bay controller in a safe area (i.e. an enclosed area) from where the driver can view the truck hatch. The bay controller will be fitted with a 3 minute (man down) delay button; Truck top access via fold down stairs with a cage on the end (fall protection) will be installed; A truck earth system with an interlock will be installed; All bays will be provided with weather protection to protect the truck and driver from exposure to elements; The road tanker parking area will be outside the gantry but on-site; and
11
A paperwork collection station will be provided.
It is anticipated that there will be an average of 15 trucks per day.
3.6
HEATING SYSTEM
A thermal oil system and furnace will be installed to fulfil the following heating applications: Heating of the bulk storage tanks using hot oil coils; Heating of the bitumen loading line heat exchangers; Heating of the oil traced pipeline systems (where required); and The furnace fuel will be natural gas.
The hot oil system will incorporate the following features: 100% redundancy of the hot oil pumps; A radar level gauge will be fitted to the hot oil expansion tank; A low-level switch will be installed on the expansion tank which will trip the furnace and hot oil pumps and raise an alarm in the office; A degassing pot; and All electric equipment will be rated to the required zone classification.
3.7
HEAT TRACING
Unless identified by exception all pipelines and equipment operating in bitumen service require heat tracing. Heat tracing may be either hot oil or electric. Electric tracing will be in accordance with IEC 62086 Electrical Resistance Trace.
3.8
THERMAL INSULATION AND CLADDING
All pipelines, tanks and equipment operating above 70C will require thermal insulation for heat conservation and personnel protection. Thermal insulation will be designed, fabricated and installed in accordance with best practices to shed and drain water and to minimise potential for corrosion under insulation. Insulated pipes and equipment will be located so as to minimise the potential for mechanical or pedestrian damage to insulation and cladding.
12
3.9
PIPEWORK
All pipework will be designed and constructed in accordance with the appropriate piping classes e.g. (AS4041). Pipework design will consider variations in operating temperatures (including start up and shut down) and the corresponding impact on product viscosity. A pipework stress analysis study will be completed to ensure that only acceptable stresses are developed in pipework systems and transferred to equipment nozzles. The stress analysis will consider start up, shut down and operating conditions as well as shipping transfers. A surge study will also be performed for the wharfline.
3.10 FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEM

It is expected that a Fire Safety Study will be conducted on this new facility. However, it is anticipated that the fire protection facilities will include a fixed ring main system with installed hydrants, hand held hoses, portable fire extinguishers, fire and/or smoke detection, fire call points and a fire indicator panel.
13
4
4.1
HAZARD IDENTIFICATION
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
The proposed equipment will handle and store the following chemicals:
1. 2. 3.
Bitumen; Natural gas; and Hot oil.
A summary of the material hazards is given below. Bitumen Bitumen is a complex black solid consisting of high molecular weight organic compounds with carbon numbers greater than C25 and high carbon to hydrogen ratios. It is used for road building, and industrial and civil engineering applications. It is not classified as Hazardous according to the Worksafe Australia criteria but it is combustible. Bitumen is relatively stable and unlikely to react in a hazardous manner. Bitumen can contain hydrogen sulphide, which is a toxic and flammable gas, as well as other flammable light hydrocarbons. The latter can collect in confined spaces, e.g. within a tank, and hence pose an explosion hazard. For the control of ignition sources, e.g. avoid static buildup, equipment should be earthed and hoses to be electrically continuous. Any confined areas where hydrogen sulphide can collect pose significant risks to humans due to its toxicity. As bitumens normal boiling point and flash point are both above 250 oC then the fire hazard is relatively low. Care is therefore required to prevent overheating. As bitumen is a solid at ambient temperature, it is normally handled and stored at temperatures above 100oC. Therefore, contact with hot bitumen is a potential burn hazard. In the presence of water, there is a risk of boilover, i.e. on heating of the bitumen and hence water, steam can be rapidly evolved with the potential to overpressure tanks with subsequent losses of containment. Therefore, bitumen tanks need to be as watertight as possible and any steam heating coils are regularly checked for leaks. For bulk bitumen storage, the temperature should not be allowed to fluctuate above and below 100 oC due to the risk of water condensation leading to boilover. It is possible that pyrophoric (self-heating) deposits may form inside storage tanks. These can lead to fires and/or explosions. Products of combustion include smoke, carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, hydrogen sulphide and oxides of sulphur.
14
Whilst bitumen is not biodegradable, spills are unlikely to penetrate into the soil and cause significant environmental impact. As it is relatively stable, spills are also unlikely to have a long term impact on the aquatic environment. Natural Gas Natural gas is a Class 2.1 Dangerous Good (flammable gas). Natural gas is a colourless hydrocarbon fluid mainly composed of the following hydrocarbons: Methane (typically 88.5% or higher); Ethane (typically 8%); Propane (typically 0.2%); Carbon dioxide (typically 2%); and Nitrogen (typically 1.3%).
For a typical natural gas, the TLV is approximately 1,000 ppm and the STEL (short term exposure limit) is 30,000 ppm (i.e. approaching 5 vol% which is the lower explosive limit). The hydrocarbons are not considered to represent a significant environmental threat. Their hazard potential derives solely from the fact that they are flammable materials. To enable ready leak detection, natural gas is normally odorised with mercaptans (sulphur containing hydrocarbons). The flammability range is typically 5% to 15% v/v in air. The vapours are lighter than air and will normally disperse safely if not confined and/or ignited. Natural gas ignition can lead to jet fires, flash fires or vapour cloud explosions. Products of combustion include carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide. Hot Oil: The proposed hot oil is classified as a combustible liquid. However, as it will be handled at elevated temperatures, there is an increased risk of fires when losses of containment occur, e.g. spraying of the hot oil with a source of ignition. All petroleum products are potentially injurious to humans, e.g. carcinogenic properties, and aquatic organisms.
15
4.2
POTENTIAL HAZARDOUS INCIDENTS REVIEW
In accordance with the requirements of Guidelines for Hazard Analysis, (Ref 1), it is necessary to identify hazardous events associated with the tank operations. As recommended in HIPAP 6, the PHA focuses on atypical and abnormal events and conditions. It is not intended to apply to continuous or normal operating emissions to air or water. A search of available literature and information was conducted to review the types of historical events that can occur with bulk fuel terminals and bitumen facilities. The search included the following references:
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.
Frank Lees, Loss Prevention in the Process Industries (Ref 5); Australian, US and UK Departments of Transport records; US National Transport Safety Board statistics; US Occupational Health and Safety Administration statistics; US Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board statistics; UK Health and Safety Executive statistics; and Previous risk studies for various terminals.
4.3
HAZARDOUS EVENTS - SHIPPING
Whilst it is not the purpose of this PHA to perform a detailed analysis of all shipping activities at or near the BLB, the following types of potential hazardous events are included for information. As previously noted in Section 1.3, the BLB is a purpose built wharf specifically for transferring hazardous cargo such as the materials stored at Port Botany and it is used by a number of companies. The proposed changes to Vopak operations are commensurate with the design intent of the BLB. Hazardous events resulting from the release of the products include pool fires upon ignition and pollution of the local environment. Shipping incidents which could occur that may lead to losses of containment of products include grounding, collision (ship-ship), impacts with the wharf and movement away from the wharf during transfer. Descriptions of potential scenarios are as follows (Refs 5 and 6). Grounding Grounding occurs when a vessel runs onto the shore or submerged rocks and would require either loss of power and/or steering, human error or severe weather conditions.
16
Striking This is where a vessel moored at the wharf is struck by another passing vessel. The risk of significant damage to the moored vessel in such an event clearly depends on the size, speed, direction and type of the vessel doing the impacting. Collision Collision refers to the collision of two vessels underway, either with their own power or being manoeuvred by tugs. The potential energy in such a collision may theoretically be sufficient to damage the outer and inner (if included) hulls of a vessel. Impact with Wharf Impact with the wharf / jetty could result from the vessel approaching the wharf too fast or attempting to dock during bad weather. Fire / Explosion A fire or explosion (e.g. within the engine room) on a vessel may spread to involve the cargo and/or bunker. A fire / explosion could also occur directly within the cargo. Transfer Incidents Losses of containment can occur while a vessel is being loaded / unloaded. Causes include water hammer from, for example, fast closing of valves, movement of the ship away from the wharf, line failures due to mechanical impact from a vehicle, corrosion, mechanical defect (e.g. poor weld), flange leaks and thermal expansion of trapped liquid causing overpressure, hose or hose coupling failures, and human error, e.g. leaving drain valves open. Overflowing of the vessels tanks can also occur during loading. In addition to the above events, the following events are also possible but are generally found to represent lower risks: Foundering / Capsize This occurs when a ship sinks in rough weather or a leak has occurred. Structural Failure This occurs where the cargo tank cracks due to fatigue, wave loads, vibration or adverse cargo load distribution. Aircraft Strike There exists the possibility of an aircraft or helicopter impact with the ship.
17
Spontaneous Failure Manufacturing defects may lead to a spontaneous failure of the cargo tank. Domino Incident Where an accident on one ship either causes or is caused by an accident on a nearby ship or in a storage or process plant onshore. Sabotage / Terrorism It is possible that an act of sabotage, either from company or non-company employees or terrorism can lead to a loss of containment. Natural Events Natural events such as strong winds can lead to losses of containment. The accident outcomes for the above causes for a loss of containment of products could be a fire (pool fire) and/or environmental effect, including fish and bird kill. These events can also lead to injuries due to radiant heat impact and/or equipment damage. Fires will also release products of combustion such as carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, water vapour, NOx, soot etc. As the bitumen is hot, burns to people can also occur should a loss of containment occur. These potential hazardous events can occur now at the BLB or immediate area for the bulk liquid fuels and the use of the berth for bitumen is not considered inappropriate.
4.4
HAZARDOUS EVENTS TERMINAL OPERATIONS
In keeping with the principles of risk assessments, credible, hazardous events with the potential for off-site effects have been identified. That is, slips, trips and falls type events are not included nor are non-credible situations such as an aircraft crash occurring at the same time as an earthquake. The large majority of the specific release scenarios are generic equipment failures, e.g. failures of tanks, pipes etc, as per previous industrial incidents. These are supplemented by process incidents due to other abnormal modes of operation, control system failure and human error. The credible, significant incidents identified for the proposed bitumen facility are summarised in the Hazard Identification Word Diagram following (Table 1). A literature search of incidents involving bitumen processing and storage facilities indicates numerous events involving bitumen. One study (Ref 7) on heated bitumen tanks shows that there were 73 significant incidents reported in the UK during the period 1971 to 1992. The results of the literature search are combined in the scenarios in Table 1. This diagram presents the causes and consequences of the events, together with major preventative and protective features that are included as part of the design.
18
Table 1 Hazard Identification Word Diagram Bitumen Facility

Event ID No. 1. Hazardous Event Explosion within a bitumen tank or vessel Causes Buildup of flammable gases from the bitumen with subsequent source of ignition (such as electrical equipment). Welding on a tank with bitumen still present. Unblocking pipes or vents with direct flames. Low level in the bitumen tanks with exposure of the heating tubes. This can lead to temperatures above the autoignition point for the vapours in the tank. Overheating a tank and hence the potential for greater flammable vapour generation. Smouldering of deposits on the underside of the roof can lead to high enough temperatures (if sufficient oxygen is present) for the flammable vapours to autoignite Possible Consequences Damage to the tank and possible injury to people nearby, e.g. by ejected bitumen. Potential for missile generation and propagation to nearby equipment. Explosions can result in a bitumen fire. For historical tank explosions, some tanks have rocketed away from the foundations Proposed Prevention and Mitigation Control Measures Bitumen tanks have frangible roofs to prevent excessive explosion overpressures developing and also include large diameter emergency vents. Hazardous Area Electrical Equipment standards applied. Control of ignition sources throughout the terminal. All equipment is to be earthed. Hot work permits for maintenance. Unblocking procedures are based on the storage and handling of bitumen products standard (DR 07435 CP; previously AIP CP 20). The storage tank temperatures are automatically controlled at about 140 C. Heating is by coils via hot oil and no direct flame heating. Hot oil high temperature is limited with alarms and trips. Storage tanks designed to maintain minimum level above heating floor coils (normal draw-
19
Event ID No.
Hazardous Event
Causes
Possible Consequences
Proposed Prevention and Mitigation Control Measures off point higher than upper heating coil level). Stripper drain locked closed except for maintenance purposes (procedural control to isolate heating etc). Fire protection facilities available, e.g. ring main with hydrants Low likelihood event given the proposed bitumen grades have low sulphur content. The storage tank temperatures are automatically controlled at about 140 C. Heating is by coils and no direct flame heating. Hot oil high temperature is limited with alarms and trips. Storage tanks are balanced with atmospheric air in breathing (21% oxygen). Storage tank roofs are not heated but they are insulated. Deposits within tanks are to be removed during ten year tank shutdowns when the tank is cool and high pressure water jetting or mechanical cutting tools are used
2.
Self-ignition of bitumen. Note that when oxygen levels fall below 3%, the tank condition favours the formation of pyrophoric materials. Smouldering of deposits can lower the oxygen levels to below 3%
Bitumen heated and exposed to air. Deposits can build-up, e.g. under tank roofs due to the condensation of hot vapours, which can autoo ignite around 190 C or at lower temperatures if iron sulphide is present. Deposits can also self-heat if their thickness exceeds critical values. Deposit formation will increase with overheating, i.e. excessive vapour generation
Tank fire (typically slow burning) with toxic products of combustion and radiant heat emitted. Potential for injury to people nearby and environmental impact
20
Event ID No. 3.
Hazardous Event Burns or exposure to hydrogen sulphide. Note that these events will not contribute to off-site risk but are included for completeness
Causes People exposed to hot bitumen from losses of containment. People exposed to hydrogen sulphide from losses of containment or entering confined spaces
Possible Consequences Burn injuries. Potential for toxic impact from hydrogen sulphide. This may result in fatality if the dose is high enough. Note that people may suffer loss of smell at high concentrations of hydrogen sulphide, e.g. 300 ppm
Proposed Prevention and Mitigation Control Measures The piping design is to comply with existing Vopak and Australian Standards, e.g. AS4041, to minimise the likelihood of losses of containment. Trained first aiders available from Site B for elevated temperature bitumen burns. Safety showers are to be located throughout the bitumen processing facility for quick quenching of any hot bitumen that may be stuck on peoples skin or for cooling of any burns. Road tanker loading is enabled by the driver being in a protected booth and fumes are extracted from area. Confined space entries, risk assessments and permits are included in the Vopak safety management system. The bitumen will not be heated above 200 C in the storage tanks nor road tankers to avoid generating too much fumes. Fumes / vapours are handled by extracting / treating or returned to source tanks and are not free vented to limit exposure potential. Emergency response including ringing 000 to get an ambulance for the affected people to get to hospitals for further treatment.
o
21
Event ID No.
Hazardous Event
Causes
Proposed Prevention and Mitigation Control Measures 200 ppm of H2S in tank (typically as tested in tank ullage), i.e. typically below fatal level for short exposures. Access to the tank bunds to be banned (signage / chain across stairs to be installed) and as well as banning access to the tank tops during shipping discharges. Tanks will vent to a combustor via ducting during shipping discharges (note H2S hazard in combustor area). Confined Space Entry Rules to apply to bund access. Special, enclosed type sampling devices to be used o All tanks to be kept above 100 C to prevent water condensation. Tanks will have a large diameter emergency vent as well as open goose neck vents. Steam will not be used to heat the tanks (hot oil used). Frangible roofs
4.
Tank boilover
Water entering a tank and being heated
Steam will be generated with the potential to overpressure the tank, causing failure, and resulting in a loss of containment
22
Event ID No. 5.
Hazardous Event Overflowing a bitumen tank
Causes Incorrect conversion factors for changes in bitumen temperature. Failure of the level instruments
Possible Consequences Potential for burns. Potential for a fire if exposed to source of ignition with injury to people, damage to equipment and environmental impact from products of combustion
Proposed Prevention and Mitigation Control Measures Bitumen tanks safefill level to be nominated and included in the level monitoring and alarming system. Level instrumentation to be included in the existing Vopak preventative maintenance systems. Redundant independent level systems on all tanks with additional alarms. Tanks are bunded. Control of ignition sources in the bunded areas Tanks designed to API 650. Bitumen solidifies quickly when heating removed. Regular maintenance and inspection procedures. Tank and site fire protection facilities available
6.
Major mechanical failure of tanks
Metal fatigue Faulty fabrication Corrosion of tank base / weld Adjacent tank on fire
Large spillage of bitumen in bund. Fire if ignited. Impact to people (radiant heat and/or exposure to products), property and the environment (products of combustion)
23
Event ID No. 7.
Hazardous Event Loss of containment from piping systems
Causes Pipe failures, e.g. due to corrosion, valves left open, hose failures, pump seal, shaft or casing failures and water in the hot oil system
Possible Consequences Potential for burns. Potential for a fire if exposed to source of ignition with injury to people, damage to equipment and environmental impact from products of combustion. Hot oil transfer / return pipework leaks
Proposed Prevention and Mitigation Control Measures Regular maintenance and inspection procedures. Emergency isolation valves on the outlet lines of the new tanks. Fire fighting system. Most pipes in bunded areas; all pumps are bunded. Pipelines surge study. The piping is designed to ASME 31.3 / AS 4041 to resist the combined effects on internal pressure due to contents, wind loads, earthquake forces and hydrostatic test loads. Trained first aiders on site for elevated temperature bitumen burns. Safety showers are to be located throughout the bitumen processing facility for quick quenching of any hot bitumen that may be stuck on peoples skin or for cooling of any burns. Operators to wear additional appropriate PPE for handling bitumen if they have potential for exposure; i.e. heat resistant gauntlet gloves, face shield and hood (all skin protected). Bitumen hoses to be included in the existing
24
Event ID No.
Hazardous Event
Causes
Proposed Prevention and Mitigation Control Measures Vopak Hose Register with routine inspection, testing and replacement. The hot oil system includes an expansion tank with a 200 mm free vent and a vessel pressure rating of 400 kPa to cope with overpressure should water ingress occur The piping design is to comply with existing Vopak and Australian Standards, e.g. AS4041, to minimise the likelihood of losses of containment. Operators to wear additional appropriate PPE for handling bitumen if they have potential for exposure; i.e. heat resistant gauntlet gloves, face shield and hood (all skin protected). Safety showers are located at the BLB for quick quenching of any hot bitumen that may be stuck on peoples skin or for cooling of any burns. Trained first aiders on site for elevated temperature bitumen burns. Bitumen hoses to be included in the existing Vopak Hose Register with routine inspection, testing and replacement Surge study will be done on the wharfline system. There will be a slow closure rate for the ESVs. Slow line velocity (300 mm line at 400 m3 per hour) to limit surging
8.
Loss of containment at the berth
Pipe failures, e.g. due to corrosion, valves left open, hose failures. Hose rupture on an emergency shutdown valve (ESV) closure
Potential for burns. Potential for a fire if exposed to source of ignition with injury to people, damage to equipment and environmental impact from products of combustion. Potential for bitumen to enter the water, sink and hence environmental impact
25
Event ID No. 9.
Hazardous Event Loss of containment in the Pipeline Corridor
Causes Pipe failures, e.g. due to corrosion, thermal overpressure, pipe thermal expansion or third party activity / malicious act
Possible Consequences Most likely outcome is a spill onto the ground with subsequent cooling and solidification. Few sources of ignition exist in the Pipeline Corridor. Note, however, when solid deposits are heated, there is the risk of flammable vapours being evolved with subsequent ignition and burning of the bitumen
Proposed Prevention and Mitigation Control Measures Regular maintenance and inspection procedures. Emergency isolation valves. Fire fighting system. Pipelines surge and thermal expansion study. Routine inspections during transfers Small amount of bitumen adsorbed as limited to about 50 mm thick insulation around tanks. Flammable vapours are limited and H2S is readily noticeable at low odour levels of 0.005 ppm well before LEL. Combustible product. Fire fighting systems. Tank top vent design includes drip catchment (for light ends). The insulation specification includes waterproofing and minimised roof top openings to handrail supports etc (that may allow ingress)
10.
Insulation fires
Loss of containment of bitumen into the piping, tank or vessel insulation. Light ends dripping from the tank top vents
Potential for fires, i.e. from burning of the bitumen and/or flammable vapours, and hence propagation to the adjoining system
26
Event ID No. 11.
Hazardous Event Failure of a hot oil heater coil (in a tank)
Causes High temperature induced failure, cycling of the metal temperature, corrosion, material of construction failure
Possible Consequences Potential for bitumen and flammable vapours to enter the heating circuit. The flammable vapours could ignite, e.g. when exiting the hot oil head tank
Proposed Prevention and Mitigation Control Measures Hot oil piping designed to suit conditions. Hot oil piping system is higher pressure (usually 5 to 10 bar) than bitumen storage so leaks are into bitumen system. The top of the bitumen tanks are designed for Zone 1 so no immediate ignition sources. Regular testing and monitoring of hot oil for degradation and in turn contamination. Fire fighting systems Hot oil is combustible product at maximum temperature. Furnace leak likelihood low due to routine visual inspection and routine NDT (nondestructive testing). Furnace explosion side panels. Fire fighting systems The hot oil temperature is limited to 270 C. High temperature trip (in the emergency shutdown system [ESD]). SIL study to confirm adequacy of the overheat protection. Regular sampling and replacement of the hot oil. Control of ignition sources within the facility. Hot work permits for any spark producing activities
12.
Hot oil fires
Loss of containment of hot oil with subsequent ignition, e.g. pump seal failures or sprays from a joint failure, or failure of a hot oil tube within the furnace
Hot oil fire with the potential to burn people and/or damage nearby equipment. Products of combustion, e.g. smoke, will have an environmental impact
13.
Explosion within the hot oil system
Operating the oil at high temperatures for a significant period of time
Potential for the hot oil to crack to lighter hydrocarbons which can accumulate within the vessels, e.g. the hot oil expansion tank. If ignited, these lighter hydrocarbons can lead to an explosion (i.e. they have lower flash points than the bitumen)
27
Event ID No. 14.
Hazardous Event Loss of containment of natural gas
Causes Pipe failure, e.g. corrosion, flange failure or impact. Valve left open
Possible Consequences Potential for a jet fire, flash fire or vapour cloud explosion (particularly if some degree of confinement exists), if ignited. These events can lead to injury and/or radiant heat / explosion overpressure damage to equipment. In the absence of confinement, most probable outcome will be jet or flash fires if ignited
Proposed Prevention and Mitigation Control Measures Piping is welded steel or brazed copper and at low pressure. Piping is designed and constructed to AS 2885, Gas Pipelines code. Fully welded pipeline with no flanges in the natural gas pipeline except at regulator; metering and control valve stations / areas. All drain and vent valves are plugged. Annual pipeline inspection as part of the regular maintenance and inspection procedures. Piping is located in open areas promoting good dispersion of buoyant gas. Gas is odorous and periodically patrolling enables easy detection if leaking Double isolation valves as automatic shutdown with a certified burner management unit. Pre-purge before start up sequence. Testing of shutdown and pre-purge sequence on a regular basis to AS 3788 as part of regular maintenance and inspection procedures. Furnace explosion side panels
15.
Internal explosion within the oil heaters
Passing natural gas isolation valves during a shutdown and the heaters are not adequately purged at startup
Potential for an internal explosion within the heater which can result in injuries to nearby personnel and/or damage to equipment. Historically, the effects of these types of incidents are generally local to the heaters
28
Event ID No. 16.
Hazardous Event Internal explosion within the vapour combustor
Causes Gas mixture is in the flammable region, e.g. during a startup, and a source of ignition is present, e.g. flame igniter
Possible Consequences Potential for an internal explosion within the combustor which can result in injuries to nearby personnel and/or damage to equipment. Historically, the effects of these types of incidents are generally local to the combustors (the combustor is an open ended burner in a vertical chamber)
Proposed Prevention and Mitigation Control Measures Detection of no flame closes the double isolation valves. Pre-purge before start up sequence. Testing of shutdown and pre-purge sequence on a regular basis to AS 3788 as part of regular maintenance and inspection procedures. Detonation arrestors fitted at tanks, road tanker loading and vapour combustor. These will be included in the preventative maintenance system for routine cleaning Low load, sealed 11KV transformer. Testing schedule for transformers and oil degradation. Separated from plant and people activity areas. Emergency Response Plan includes fire events. Smoke detection within the MCC. Flammable and combustible materials will not be stored within the MCC
17.
Transformer fires / MCC fires
Short circuiting, build-up of flammable gas (hydrogen) in the oil with subsequent ignition, loss of containment of oil with subsequent ignition
Potential for an initial explosion followed by a fire involving the transformer oil. Potential for damage to the electrical equipment within the MCC. Potential to damage nearby equipment and/or injure people
29
Event ID No. 18.
Hazardous Event Leak during filling of road tanker
Causes Failure of loading arm. Leak from valves or fittings. Road tanker overfill. Switch loading (Class 3 fumes from cutback bitumen tankers). Boilover (water traces in RTL compartment)
Possible Consequences Leak of bitumen in loading area. Fire if ignited. Impact to people (radiant heat and/or exposure to products), property and the environment (products of combustion)
Proposed Prevention and Mitigation Control Measures High level of surveillance and immediate access button to shutdown systems. Drivers are well trained so as to minimise chance of operator error and ensure quick response to leaks. Driver Pre-Checklist in place. Ignition sources controlled at top of road tanker. Road tanker overfill shutdown system. Fire fighting systems. Driver training including a slow start to filling where the driver can listen for water (will create cracking / popping sounds if present in road tanker). Proposed entry traffic lights to prohibit entry into the neighbouring bay during the initial start sequence
30
Event ID No. 19.
Hazardous Event Road tanker drive-away incident (i.e. driver does not disconnect the arm and drives away from the loading bay)
Causes Failure of procedures and hardware interlocks
Possible Consequences Leak of bitumen in loading area. Fire if ignited. Impact to people (radiant heat and/or exposure to products), property and the environment (products of combustion). Loading arm break-away
Proposed Prevention and Mitigation Control Measures Driver training. Driver not in cab during filling but monitoring at same elevation as loading arm. Automatic loading system instructs driver on actions required. Ignition sources controlled at top of road tanker. Fire fighting systems. Traffic lights (or boom gates) to be installed. Walkway and loading arm not rigidly connected to vehicle, therefore, expect minor damage only Design of road tankers to survive accident without a loss of containment - pipes and running gear designed to shear off without product loss Driver training and choice of routes to reduce accident potential As per aviation standards
20.
Road accident (off-site)
Bad road or traffic conditions
Most likely outcome is no loss of load. Leak may occur, leading to fire. Impact to people (radiant heat and/or exposure to products), property and the environment (products of combustion) Propagation to tank / bund fires. Impact to people (radiant heat and/or exposure to products), property and the environment (products of combustion)
21.
Aircraft crash
Pilot error. Bad weather. Plane fault
31
Event ID No. 22.
Hazardous Event Strong winds, earthquakes, floods
Causes Strong winds cause equipment damage etc
Possible Consequences Loss of containment leading to a fire if ignited (as above)
Proposed Prevention and Mitigation Control Measures The tanks are designed API 650 / AS 1692 / AS 1170 to resist the combined effects on internal pressure due to contents, weight of platforms, ladders, live loads, wind loads, earthquake forces and hydrostatic test loads. Operations stopped in adverse weather conditions
23.
Breach of Security / Sabotage
Disgruntled employee or intruder
Possible release of product with consequences as per above
Security measures include fencing, CCTV, security patrols, operator / driver vigilance. Pressure tests prior to commissioning transfer. Pipe inspections prior to commissioning transfer; regularly during ship discharge and otherwise on a periodic basis
32
RISK ANALYSIS
The assessment of risks to both the public as well as to operating personnel around this industrial development requires the application of the basic steps outlined in Section 1. As per HIPAP 6 (Ref 1), the chosen analysis technique should be commensurate with the nature of the risks involved. The typical risk analysis methodology attempts to take account of all credible hazardous situations that may arise from the operation of processing plants etc. For quantitative risk analysis (QRA), this is done by first taking a probabilistic approach to vessel and pipe failures for all vessels containing hazardous materials. Specific incidents, identified by a variety of techniques, are then added and the combined data used to generate composite risk contours which can be used for both the public and plant personnel. Having assembled data on possible incidents, risk analysis requires the following general approach for individual incidents (which are then summated for all potential recognised incidents to get cumulative risk): Risk = Likelihood x Consequence For QRA and hazard analysis, the consequences of an incident are calculated using standard correlations and probit-type methods which assess the effect of fire radiation, explosion overpressure and toxicity to an individual, depending on the type of hazard. In this PHA, however, the approach adopted to assess the risk of the identified hazardous events is scenario based risk assessment. The reasons for this approach are: 1. The distance to residential and other sensitive land users is large for the Port Botany area and hence it is unlikely that any significant consequential impacts, e.g. due to radiant heat from fires, from the proposed equipment will have any significant contribution to off-site risk; and 2. The distance between the on-site tanks and other equipment to the neighbouring industrial facilities is relatively large, hence, the consequential impacts may not have any significant contribution to off-site industrial risk. Therefore, appropriate analysis of credible scenarios is performed in this PHA. Initially, the consequences of the potential events with off-site impact are assessed. For the events which do not contribute to off-site risk (as determined by the risk criteria in HIPAP No. 4 (Ref 2) then no further risk analysis is warranted. When the consequence of an event does contribute to off-site, the likelihood and hence risk is then analysed as required.
33
The risk criteria applying to developments in NSW are summarised in Table 2 below (from Ref 2). Table 2 - Risk Criteria, New Plants
Description Fatality risk to sensitive uses, including hospitals, schools, aged care Fatality risk to residential and hotels Fatality risk to commercial areas, including offices, retail centres, warehouses Fatality risk to sporting complexes and active open spaces Fatality risk to be contained within the boundary of an industrial site Injury risk incident heat flux radiation at residential areas should not 2 exceed 4.7 kW/m at frequencies of more than 50 chances in a million per year or incident explosion overpressure at residential areas should not exceed 7 kPa at frequencies of more than 50 chances in a million per year Toxic exposure - Toxic concentrations in residential areas which would be seriously injurious to sensitive members of the community following a relatively short period of exposure Toxic exposure - Toxic concentrations in residential areas which should cause irritation to eyes or throat, coughing or other acute physiological responses in sensitive members of the community Propagation due to Fire and Explosion exceed radiant heat levels 2 of 23 kW/m or explosion overpressures of 14 kPa in adjacent industrial facilities Risk Criteria 0.5 x 10 per year 1 x 10 per year 5 x 10 per year
-6 -6 -6 -6
10 x 10 per year 50 x 10 per year 50 x 10 per year

-6 -6
10 x 10 per year
-6
50 x 10 per year
-6
50 x 10 per year
-6
As discussed above, the consequences of the potential hazardous events are initially analysed to determine if any events have the potential to contribute to the above-listed criteria and hence worthy of further analysis.
34
5.1
POOL FIRE MODELLING
The credible hazardous events associated with the bitumen operations are largely pool fires due to potential losses of containment being ignited. The potential fire events associated with the new equipment are detailed in Table 4. This data is used in the fire modelling. A discussion on burndown rates and surface emissive powers is given below. Burndown Rates: For burning liquid pools (Ref 8), heat is transferred to the liquid via conduction, radiation and from the pool rim. For pool fires less than 1 m diameter, the radiative heat transfer and the resulting burning rate increases with pool diameter. For pool diameters greater than 1 m, radiative heat transfer dominates, thus a constant burning rate is expected. Wind can affect the burning rate (experiments have shown both an increase and decrease in burning rates due to the effects wind) but also can affect flame stability (and hence average flame emissive power) (Ref 9). Therefore, average reported values for burndown rates are used in this study. For very large pool fires with diameters greater than 5 to 10 m, there is some evidence of a slight decrease in burning rate. This is believed to be due to poor mixing with air and is unlikely to reduce the burning rate by more than 20%. Typical burndown rates for general hydrocarbon fuels are 4 to 6 mm/min (Refs 5 and 10). An average value of 5 mm/min is used for the hot oil. Due to the heavy nature of bitumen, the burndown rate is taken to be 2 mm/min (Ref 5). The burning rate is used in the determination of flame height. Normally, the higher the burning rate, the higher the estimated flame height. Surface Emissive Power: Surface emissive power can be either derived by calculation or by experimentation. Unfortunately, experimental values for surface emissive powers are limited. When calculated, the results can be overly conservative, particularly for large diameter fires, as it is assumed that the entire flame is at the same surface emissive power. This is not the case for large diameter fires as air entrainment to the centre of the flame is limited and hence inefficient combustion occurs. A surface emissive power correlation that fits experimental data well for products that produce smokey flames (as is the case for bitumen) is as follows (Ref 8): SEP (average) = 140 x e (-0.12xD) + 20 x (1 e (-0.12xD)) Where D = the pool fire diameter.
35
Pinnacle Risk Management The constant, 140 kW/m2, is the maximum emissive power of luminous spots and the constant, 20 kW/m2, is the emissive power of smoke. The values in the following table are derived from this equation. Table 3 Predicted SEP
Diameter, m 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 SEP Average, 2 kW/m 126 86 56 40 31 26 23 22 21 21 20
Note that materials such as propane, ethane, LNG, ethanol and other low molecular weight materials do not produce sooty flames. The distances to specified radiant heat levels for the potential fire scenarios are shown in Table 4. The distances were calculated using the View Factor model for pool fires (Refs 5 and 10). This model was used as it better approximates the square sided potential bund fires. It will be slightly conservative for the tank top fires. Graphical representations of the estimated radiant heat contours are shown in Appendix 2.
36
Table 4 Fire Scenarios Calculation Data and Results

Note that Eq. D is the equivalent diameter of the fire (4 x the fire area / the fire perimeter) and SEP is the surface emissive power (i.e. the radiant heat level of the flames). Where bund fires width is significantly different to the length, the top row results corresponds to the radiant heat predicted for an object perpendicular to the width and the bottom row results corresponds to the radiant heat predicted for an object perpendicular to the length. Item No. Item Description Width, m Length, m Eq. D, m Tank Height, m Liquid Density, 3 kg/m SEP, 2 kW/m Distance to Specified Radiant Heat Level, m (from base of flame) 35 2 kW/m 1 2 3 4 5 6 Bund fire, i.e. for all three tanks Individual bund fire (Tank B used) Pump bund Tank top fire Bitumen road tanker bay fire Hot oil unit fire 66 36 8 8 8 70 37 29 8 12 68 34 8 22 8 8 27 970 970 970 970 970 875 20 22 66 29 66 66 3 3 3 23 2 kW/m 5 5 5 12.6 2 kW/m 4 4 5 8 7 8 8 4.7 2 kW/m 34 35 23 15 20 15 15 2.1 2 kW/m 66 68 42 24 34 24 24
Notes for Table 4: 1. Note that Scenario Numbers 2 and 6 are modelled as a channel fire, i.e. the equivalent diameter is taken as the width (to estimate the flame height) along the entire length of the channel. 2. The fire dimensions for a road tanker bay fire are based on typical conditions expected once the fire is established.
37
The maximum ground level radiant heat values for the tank top fires are typically much lower due to the angle from the base of the flames (approximately the tank top height) to the ground. Representative ground level radiant heat levels are as follows. 1 Tanks, 22 m diameter, tank height being approximately 27 metres - a maximum ground level radiant heat value of 3.3 kW/m2 at 10 metres from the tank wall is estimated.
The values of interest for radiant heat (DoP, HIPAP No. 4 and ICI HAZAN Course notes) are shown in Table 5. Table 5 - Radiant Heat Impact
HEAT FLUX 2 (kW/m ) 1.2 2.1 4.7 12.6 EFFECT Received from the sun at noon in summer Minimum to cause pain after 1 minute Will cause pain in 15-30 seconds and second degree burns after 30 seconds. Glass breaks 30% chance of fatality for continuous exposure. High chance of injury Wood can be ignited by a naked flame after long exposure 23 100% chance of fatality for continuous exposure to people and 10% chance of fatality for instantaneous exposure Spontaneous ignition of wood after long exposure Unprotected steel will reach thermal stress temperatures to cause failure 35 60 25% chance of fatality if people are exposed instantaneously. Storage tanks fail 100% chance of fatality for instantaneous exposure
For information, further data on tolerable radiant heat levels is shown in Table 6. Table 6 Layout Considerations Tolerable Radiant Heat Levels
Plant Item Drenched Storage Tanks Special Buildings (Protected) Cable Insulation Degrades Normal Buildings Vegetation Plastic Melts Escape Routes Tolerable Radiant Heat 2 Level, kW/m 38 25 18-20 14 12 12 6 Source Ref 5 Ref 5 Ref 5 Ref 5 Ref 5 Ref 5 Ref 5
38
Plant Item Glass Breakage Personnel in Emergencies Plastic Cables Stationary Personnel
Tolerable Radiant Heat 2 Level, kW/m 4 3 2 1.5
Source Ref 11 Ref 5 Ref 5 Ref 5
The results in Table 4 are analysed as follows to check compliance with HIPAP 4 (Ref 2) risk criteria. For assessment of the effects of radiant heat, it is generally assumed that if a person is subjected to 4.7 kW/m2 of radiant heat and they can take cover within approximately 20 seconds then no serious injury, and hence fatality, is expected. However, exposure to a radiant heat level of 12.6 kW/m2 can result in fatality for some people for limited exposure durations. Therefore, for the larger spills, appropriate emergency response actions are required to minimise the potential for harm to people. This should include moving people away from such releases to a safe distance. Given the large distance to the nearest residential area (approximately 1 km to the east) and the estimated radiant heat levels from the potential fire events shown in Table 4 then there is no credible risk of injury or fatality in residential areas or to other sensitive land users. Correspondingly, the risk criteria for fatality and injury (Table 2) in residential areas are satisfied for radiant heat from fires. The results in Table 4 also show that the estimated levels of radiant heat at neighbouring industrial areas (including the pipeline corridor and the Origin Energy site) are less than 12.6 kW/m2. It is possible under some wind conditions that the radiant heat levels will increase downwind, e.g. due to flame drag or wind tilt. This may occur for the larger bund fires. Fortunately the likelihood of these potential fire events is low (approximately 6 x 10 -6 per year for large bund fires, Ref 12). Given that the radiant heat levels are less than 12.6 kW/m2 at neighbouring facilities and the adjacent areas are not usually occupied then it is unlikely that fatality at these industrial neighbouring areas will result from these events. The risk of propagation due to fires to neighbouring industrial areas (i.e. exceeding 23 kW/m2) is not expected given the predicted results in Table 4. Therefore, the criterion of 50 x 10-6/year for industrial propagation risk for exceeding 23 kW/m2 (Table 2) is satisfied for fire events. Hence, propagation to neighbouring industrial facilities is unlikely due to radiant heat from pool fires.
39
For the same reasons above for off-site propagation not being expected, propagation within the Vopak site, i.e. across the internal access road to the existing adjacent tanks, is not expected given the predicted results in Table 4 (i.e. the 23 kW/m2 contours do not impact existing plant areas). In the event that strong winds are blowing in this direction during a low likelihood bitumen bund fire event then emergency cooling will need to be provided to these existing tanks to prevent propagation. Should a large loss of containment occur from the tanks and be ignited then, as per the current bund design, the other intact bitumen tanks in the larger pit are at risk of failure. This is a common business risk for pit designs where the intermediate bund walls within the pit are lower than the outer bund walls. Given the limited radiant heat impact as above, no further risk analysis of the identified pool fire scenarios is warranted in this study as compliance with the DoP criteria (Table 2) has been shown.
5.2
PRODUCTS OF COMBUSTION
There is a potential risk to those attending a fire emergency (and possibly offsite) of effects from toxic products of combustion, e.g. carbon oxides and smoke, as well as vaporised product (i.e. not combusted). Impact from toxic products of combustion will only be significant, generally, local to the fire. As stated in Lees (Ref 5): The hot products of combustion rising from a fire typically have a temperature in the range 800-1200oC and a density a quarter that of air. Hence, a buoyant plume is formed (as seen when smoke is emitted from a chimney) and the combustion products rise and are dispersed as per the prevailing wind / weather conditions. Several runs of the Briggs Plume Model (Ref 9) for various combinations of weather / wind conditions and fire temperatures show that the plume rises from a 22 m diameter tank fire to at least 132 metres and then disperses via passive dispersion in the down wind direction. Momentum effects continue to cause the plume to rise whilst it is dispersing. The results are shown in Table 7. The results also show that plume rise is insensitive to fire temperature variations of 800 oC +/- 100oC (not shown). An efflux velocity of 5 m/s for the products of combustion is taken for the fire event. Table 7 Fire Plume Rise Modelling
Wind (m/s) / Weather 5D 3E 2F Initial Height of Plume, m 132 220 330
40
Therefore, unless a temperature inversion exists where reverse atmospheric currents can occur (i.e. air slumps to the ground as opposed to air eddies that rise), no effect at ground level is expected. Note that dispersion models best account for temperature inversions by using F class stability (i.e. typically when the adiabatic lapse rate is positive). The models, however, do not include the provision for air slumping to ground.
5.3
NATURAL GAS FIRES AND EXPLOSIONS
Failures associated with the natural gas feed line to the hot oil heaters or combustor will release the natural gas to atmosphere and, if ignited, it can form a jet fire, a flash fire and/or an explosion. The natural gas line is proposed to be installed from the existing street main to the new Utilities Building, i.e. adjacent to Friendship Road and the weighbridge area. This building will house the hot oil heaters etc. The supply pressure is 4 barg and the gas pipe will be 75 mm nominal diameter. The pipe will have welded joints where possible. All flanged joints will have a hazardous atmosphere zone around them. The analysis of the potential jet fires from the natural gas feed line to the hot oil heaters / combustor is shown in Table 8. From above, the natural gas pressure is taken as 4 barg at ambient temperature. Table 8 Natural Gas Jet Fires
Stream Estimated Release Rate, kg/s 2.3 1.0 0.07 Jet flames modelled using methane. Estimated Length of Jet, m 15 10 3
Full bore failure (75 mm) 50 mm hole 13 mm hole Notes:
However, as the new gas pipeline is to be piped underground from the street main and then above ground only when entering the new Utilities Building (valves / regulators etc to be installed on the outside of the Utility Building wall) then the risk of adverse radiant heat levels being imposed off-site from a natural gas fire is low. Potential flash fires and vapour cloud explosions (in particular, if the gas cloud is large and/or confined) can occur from the natural gas line failures, i.e. delayed ignition. The effects from explosion overpressures (Ref 2) are summarised in Table 9.
41
Pinnacle Risk Management Table 9 Effects of Explosion Overpressure

OVERPRESSURE, kPa 3.5 90% glass breakage No fatality, very low probability of injury 7 Damage to internal partitions & Joinery 10% probability of injury, no fatality 14 21 Houses uninhabitable and badly cracked Reinforced structures distort, storage tanks fail 20% chance of fatality to person in building 35 Houses uninhabitable, rail wagons & plant items overturned. Threshold of eardrum damage, 50% chance of fatality for a person in a building, 15% in the open 70 Complete demolition of houses Threshold of lung damage, 100% chance of fatality for a person in a building or in the open PHYSICAL EFFECT
For flash fires, any person inside the flash fire cloud is assumed to be fatally injured. As flash fires are of limited duration (typically burning velocity is 1 m/s, Ref 13) then those outside the flash fire cloud have a high probability of survival without serious injury. The analysis of the potential flash fires and vapour cloud explosions from the natural gas pipe failures is shown in Table 10. The mass calculated in the flammable range is assumed to be 25% confined, i.e. 25% of the gas is involved in the explosion calculations. As methane is not a high reactive flammable gas and the quantities involved are relatively small then a weak deflagration is assumed in the explosion calculations (multi-energy method TNO). Table 10 Natural Gas Vapour Cloud Explosions and Flash Fires
Stream Mass of Natural Gas in the Flammable Range, kg 81 20 Radius of Flash Fire, m Distance (m) to 14 kPa Explosion Overpressure Distance (m) to 7 kPa Explosion Overpressure
Full bore failure (75 mm) 50 mm hole
64 m 37 m
< 10 m <8m
22 m 15 m
Notes: 1. Pipeline failures assumed to be isolated within 30 minutes.
42

2. Radius of flash fires calculated for F weather stability and 2 m/s wind speed. 3. 13 mm holes not modelled as they are too small to generate gas clouds of any significant size.
For these releases of natural gas, choked flow exists and rapid jet mixing with air occurs. The result is a relatively small vapour cloud size with limited consequential impacts if ignited. The probability of ignition with a subsequent explosion is significantly less than 1% (Ref 10). The 30 minute release duration also has no significant impact on the release. Steady state conditions are reached soon after the release occurs (i.e. after approximately 4 minutes, the distance to the LEL does not change at steady state dispersion conditions). Given these results for the natural gas vapour cloud explosions and flash fires, no significant adverse consequential impacts will be imposed off-site. The low likelihoods for these events are supported by the following data. For piping failures, frequencies have been estimated either from data compiled and published by ICI (Ref 14) or from frequency estimates published by the Institution of Chemical Engineers (Ref 15). Table 11 - Piping Failure Frequencies
Type of Failure Pipelines 13 mm hole 50 mm hole 3 mm gasket (13 mm hole equivalent) Guillotine fracture (full bore): < 50 mm > 50 mm but < 100 mm > 100 mm 0.6 x 10 / m 0.3 x 10 / m 0.1 x 10
-6 -6 -6
Failure Rate per year

-6
3 x 10 / m 0.3 x 10 / m 5 x 10 / joint
-6 -6
/m
For example, the frequency of catastrophic pipe failure for an 80 mm pipe is 0.3 x 10-6 / m. This is a low level of risk and not considered intolerable.
5.4
AIRCRAFT IMPACT AND OTHER EXTERNAL EVENTS
Catastrophic events such as aircraft crashes are possible but are rare. Previous studies, e.g. Ref 16, show the following typical frequencies associated with aircraft crashes are: Scheduled aircraft 1x10-8/year; and Unscheduled aircraft 4x10-7/year.
43
The outcomes of any aircraft crash on this site will be dominated by larger hazardous events in other storage and handling areas as well as the ensuing fire from the plane wreckage. This is an existing risk for the site and the proposed changes to the site have negligible effect. The likelihood of this type of event is acceptably low for a site of this size and location. Other external events that may lead to propagation of incidents on any site include: Subsidence Burst Dam Storm and high winds Storm surge Flood Breach of security Tidal waves Landslide Vermin/insect infestation Forest fire Rising water courses Storm water runoff Lightning Earthquake
These events were reviewed and none of them were found to pose any significant risk to the new bitumen facility given the proposed safeguards.
5.5
CUMULATIVE RISK
Cumulative risk for the Port Botany area was considered by the Department of Urban Affairs and Planning (now the DoP) in 1996 (Ref 3). The estimated risk contours extended well beyond the Vopak site and largely over the water. As shown in this PHA, the proposed changes to the Vopak site will have negligible impact on the cumulative risk results for the Port Botany area as the significant radiant heat levels are retained on the site. Therefore it is reasonable to conclude that the modified development does not make a significant contribution to the existing cumulative Port Botany risk. The recommendations from the 1996 study have been reviewed to determine if the proposed changes are consistent with the intent of these recommendations. In summary, all current proposed changes to the Vopak site have been found to be consistent with the intent of the recommendations and do not contribute to unacceptable cumulative risk in the Port Botany area.
5.6
SOCIETAL RISK
The above criteria for individual risk do not necessarily reflect the overall risk associated with any proposal. In some cases for instance, where the 1 pmpy contour approaches closely to residential areas or sensitive land uses, the potential may exist for multiple fatalities as the result of a single accident. One
44
attempt to make comparative assessments of such cases involves the calculation of societal risk. Societal risk results are usually presented as F-N curves, which show the frequency of events (F) resulting in N or more fatalities. To determine societal risk, it is necessary to quantify the population within each zone of risk surrounding a facility. By combining the results for different risk levels, a societal risk curve can be produced. In this study of the modified Vopak site at Port Botany, the risk of fatality does not extend off the site and is therefore well away from the residential areas. In fact, the nearest house is approximately 1 kilometre away. The concept of societal risk applying to residential population is therefore not applicable for the terminal.
5.7
RISK TO THE BIOPHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT
The main concern for risk to the biophysical environment is generally with effects on whole systems or populations. For the expanded terminal, it is suitably located away from residential areas. However, due to the nature of the activities, there are operations, e.g. ship transfers and road tanker filling, where losses of containment can potentially impact the environment. Major fires can also effect the environment (combustion products). Whereas any adverse effect on the environment is obviously undesirable, the results of this study show that the risk of losses of containment is broadly acceptable. For completeness, risks to the biophysical environment due to loss of containment events are summarised below. 5.7.1 Escape of Materials to Atmosphere Combustion of bitumen, caused by ignition following a spillage or leak, will release products of combustion (e.g. carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, soot, vaporised product [unburnt] and water vapour). As shown in Section 5.2, for typical wind / weather conditions, the products of combustion from a fire will rise due to momentum and buoyancy. Local impact can be expected for very still conditions only (in which case, emergency response is required for evacuation). The products of combustion are unlikely to include any materials which present a long-term risk to the biosphere. Hydrocarbons vapour emissions whilst loading a road tanker and ship unloading are, as previously discussed, controlled via a combustor unit. Hence emissions of hydrocarbon vapours and low levels of hydrogen sulphide are prevented during these activities. Whilst natural gas releases can occur, the likelihood of these events is acceptably low given the pipe failure rates in Table 11.
45
5.7.2 Escape of Materials to Soil or Waterways Products Stored in Bunded Areas Spillages of materials from the tanks, heat exchangers, vessels and adjacent piping are contained in the bunds. The bunded areas are sized to contain the entire contents of the single tank so that a total loss of contents does not spill over the bund, plus an allowance for rainwater, fire water, hosing down etc. The bitumen heat exchangers, pumps and hot oil heaters are also located within bunded areas. Drainage Systems and Site Grades These have been designed so that in the event of fire, fire water run off containing any materials is held on site. All open areas are paved. Loss of containment within the bitumen road tanker loading bay will be contained within a bunded area. If a spill was to occur on a general paved site area then equipment such as absorbents and booms are available for use to minimise the spread of the liquid. As bitumen readily cools, most spills will solidify and then be removed manually. Bulk Liquids Berth For small spills at the Bulk Liquids Berth, containment will be provided by the bunded area of the Berth deck (250mm kerbing) which in turn drains to two 1,000 L catchment tanks under the decking. Small bitumen spills will not reach these tanks. Shipping discharge preparations will include provisions of spill kits / laying out of booms alongside each hose string. Larger releases are designed to be contained by a bunded wharf with a collection sump providing 100,000 litres containment. Any liquid spills entering the sea water involve emergency response from personnel from Vopak, SPC and the ships crew. Again, for bitumen, recovery of solid bitumen will be required as it will solidify on entering the water (if a loss of containment is not held by the BLB catchment systems). 5.7.3 Solid Wastes There will be minimal solid wastes from the new equipment and are low consequence hazards. The dedicated bitumen dockline will be purged with nitrogen to the relevant storage tank and left with residual bitumen. This material will solidify as the heat tracing is turned off between ship unloading operations; removing the need to completely empty the pipeline. Any maintenance of equipment will require purging to remove residual liquid. Any residual solidified product will be recycled to stakeholder facilities, where practicable, or sent off site for disposal.
46
From the analysis in this report, no incident scenarios were identified where the risk of whole systems or populations being affected by a release to the atmosphere, waterways or soil is intolerable.
47
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The risks associated with the new tanks, associated equipment and bitumen facilities at the Vopak Site A, Port Botany, have been assessed and compared against the DoP risk criteria. In summary: 1. Fires: No risk of injury or fatality at residential areas or other sensitive land uses as the separation distance is large, i.e. 1 km or larger to residential areas; As the estimated radiant heat levels from potential fire events are less than 12.6 kW/m2 at neighbouring industrial facilities, the likelihood of fatality at these locations is acceptably low and there exists a high probability of escape; and Propagation to neighbouring industrial facilities is not expected given that the significant levels of radiant heat are largely contained on-site.
2. The shipping activities associated with this project are commensurate with the zoning for the Port Botany area and are not considered intolerable. 3. Societal risk is qualitatively concluded to be acceptable given: Few events analysed in the study have the potential for off-site impact and, for the ones that do, their likelihood is acceptably low; and The population density in the Port Botany area is relatively low.
Therefore, the results of this PHA show that the risks associated with the proposed changes comply with the DoP guidelines for tolerable fatality, injury, irritation, propagation and societal risk. Also, risks to the biophysical environment from potential hazardous events are broadly acceptable. Additionally, the proposed bitumen handling and storage equipment have no significant impact to the cumulative individual risk contours (for future development planning) as presented in the Port Botany Land Use Safety Study by DUAP in 1996. The primary reason for the low risk levels from the proposed changes is that significant consequential impacts from potential hazardous events (mainly radiant heat from fires) do not extend far from the relevant processing areas. It is assumed that the proposed changes will be reviewed via the HAZOP methodology, a fire safety study will be performed and the existing safety management systems and emergency response plans will be updated to reflect the proposed changes.
48
The following recommendations are made from this review: 1. Include in the existing Vopak safety management system procedures for safely emptying and opening a bitumen tank or vessel given the risk of fires on contact with air. 2. Procedures need to be developed to routinely handle and remove carbonaceous deposits (possibly with iron sulphides which can result in a pyrophoric material) inside the bitumen tanks and vessels. If not routinely removed, the carbonaceous deposits may provide an ignition hazard when they are exposed to a sudden increase in temperature or oxygen supply. Also, solid deposits can float on the bitumen surface and these can interfere with level instruments. 3. Develop procedures to control the risk of hydrogen sulphide exposure to personnel in the vicinity of the bitumen handling equipment or those who are required to enter confined spaces associated with the bitumen equipment. 4. Develop procedures for heating a tank from cold given the risk of a boilover event from water in the tank being heated and evaporating. 5. Perform a SIL study on the proposed bitumen storage and processing facility to ensure the instrumented protective loops are suitably designed and are of adequate reliability for the potential hazardous events that can occur. 6. Ensure the transformer / MCC building is adequately designed to prevent fire propagation from a transformer explosion / fire event to the electrical switch gear and/or to the adjacent hot oil heaters or vice versa.
49
Appendix 1
Process Flow Diagram
A1.1
Vopak Bitumen PHA Report Rev D.doc 1 November 2011
Appendix 1 Process Flow Diagram.
A1.2
Appendix 2
Radiant Heat Contours
A2.1
Appendix 2 Radiant Heat Contours. Scenario 1 Bund Fire
Note: The shape of these radiant heat contours are an approximation only given the irregular shape of the bund.
Key: 12.6 kW/m 4.7 kW/m

2 2
A2.2
Scenario 2 Individual Bund Fire (Tank B shown)
Note: The shape of these radiant heat contours are an approximation only given the irregular shape of the bund.
Key: 12.6 kW/m 4.7 kW/m

2 2
A2.3
Scenario 3 Pump Bund Fire
Key: 23 kW/m
2
12.6 kW/m 4.7 kW/m

2
A2.4
Scenario 5 Road Tanker Bay Fire
Key: 23 kW/m
2
12.6 kW/m 4.7 kW/m

2
A2.5
Scenario 6 Hot Oil Unit Fire
Key: 23 kW/m
2
12.6 kW/m 4.7 kW/m

2
A2.6
REFERENCES
1 2
Department of Urban Affairs & Planning (NSW) Hazardous Industry Planning Advisory Paper No 6 Guidelines for Hazard Analysis, 1992 Department of Urban Affairs & Planning (NSW) Hazardous Industry Planning Advisory Paper No 4 Risk Criteria for Land Use Safety Planning, 1992 DUAP, Port Botany Land Use Safety Study, Overview Report, 1996 Vopak, Project Description, Bitumen Storage Facility at Vopak Site A, [Lot 5 & Part Lot 3], 29 Friendship Road, Port Botany, 5 September 2011 Lees F.P., Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 2nd Edition 1996 Advisory Committee on Dangerous Substances (ACDS), Major Hazards Aspects of the Transport of Dangerous Substances, 1991 Davie et al, Case Histories of Incidents in Heated Bitumen Storage Tanks, Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 1994, Vol 7, No. 3 Centre for Chemical Process Safety, Guidelines for Chemical Process Quantitative Risk Analysis, 2000 TNO, Methods for the Calculation of Physical Effects (The Yellow Book), 1997 ICI HAZAN Course Notes, 2000 TNO, Methods for the Determination of Possible Damage (The Green Book), 1992 Thomas, Historical Fire Incident Data Use & Sources, June 2003 ICI HAZAN Course Manual, 1997 ICI Engineering Department, Process Safety Guide 14 - Reliability Data, ICI PLC (UK) A W Cox, F P Lees and M L Ang, Classification of Hazardous Locations, Institution of Chemical Engineers, 1990 Pinnacle Risk Management, Preliminary Hazard Analysis, Site B Petroleum Stage 3 Project, Vopak Terminals Sydney Pty Ltd, Port Botany, NSW, September 2006
3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
50

Appendix E Preliminary Hazard Analysis

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Deskripsi Asli:

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Appendix E Preliminary Hazard Analysis

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

PRELIMINARY HAZARD ANALYSIS, BITUMEN STORAGE AND HANDLING, VOPAK TERMINALS AUSTRALIA PTY LTD, PORT BOTANY, NSW

Prepared by: Dean Shewring 1 November 2011

Pinnacle Risk Management Pty Limited

Pinnacle Risk Management

Preliminary Hazard Analysis, Vopak, Bitumen Storage and Handling

Date 23/8/11 19/9/11 10/10/11 1/4/11

Reviewed By Vopak Vopak Vopak

Vopak Bitumen PHA Report Rev D.Doc 1 November 2011

Pinnacle Risk Management

Vopak Bitumen PHA Report Rev D.Doc 1 November 2011

Pinnacle Risk Management Hazardous Events Terminal Operations ................................... 18

Vopak Bitumen PHA Report Rev D.Doc 1 November 2011

Pinnacle Risk Management

Vopak Bitumen PHA Report Rev D.Doc 1 November 2011

Pinnacle Risk Management

Vopak Bitumen PHA Report Rev D.Doc 1 November 2011

Pinnacle Risk Management

Vopak Bitumen PHA Report Rev D.Doc 1 November 2011

Pinnacle Risk Management

Vopak Bitumen PHA Report Rev D.Doc 1 November 2011

Pinnacle Risk Management

Vopak Bitumen PHA Report Rev D.Doc 1 November 2011

Pinnacle Risk Management

Vopak Bitumen PHA Report Rev D.Doc 1 November 2011

Pinnacle Risk Management

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Vopak Bitumen PHA Report Rev D.Doc 1 November 2011

Pinnacle Risk Management

The population density in the Port Botany area is relatively low.

Vopak Bitumen PHA Report Rev D.Doc 1 November 2011

Pinnacle Risk Management

Vopak Bitumen PHA Report Rev D.Doc 1 November 2011

Pinnacle Risk Management

Figure 1 - Site Location

New Vopak Bitumen Facility

Vopak Bitumen PHA Report Rev D.Doc 1 November 2011

Pinnacle Risk Management

Figure 2 Site Layout

Vopak Bitumen PHA Report Rev D.Doc 1 November 2011

Pinnacle Risk Management

BITUMEN FACILITY DESCRIPTION

Pinnacle Risk Management

Vopak Bitumen PHA Report Rev D.Doc 1 November 2011

Pinnacle Risk Management

SHIPPING SUPPLY AND DISCHARGE

Pinnacle Risk Management

BITUMEN ROAD TANKER LOADING GANTRY

Pinnacle Risk Management

A paperwork collection station will be provided.

It is anticipated that there will be an average of 15 trucks per day.

THERMAL INSULATION AND CLADDING

Vopak Bitumen PHA Report Rev D.Doc 1 November 2011

Pinnacle Risk Management

3.10 FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEM

Vopak Bitumen PHA Report Rev D.Doc 1 November 2011

Pinnacle Risk Management

Bitumen; Natural gas; and Hot oil.

Vopak Bitumen PHA Report Rev D.Doc 1 November 2011

Pinnacle Risk Management

Vopak Bitumen PHA Report Rev D.Doc 1 November 2011

Pinnacle Risk Management

POTENTIAL HAZARDOUS INCIDENTS REVIEW

HAZARDOUS EVENTS - SHIPPING