Current state of the practice for facility siting studies

Abstract

Facilities that handle hazardous materials above threshold quantities are required to assess the impacts due to postulated accidents involving releases of these materials, and to ensure that people are adequately protected from the associated fire, explosion, and toxic hazards. An analysis of these hazards can be based solely on consequences from maximum credible events or can incorporate the likelihood of the events to characterize results in terms of risk. The methods of performing these analyses may vary, but, regardless of the specific techniques used, fundamental principles of thoroughness and defensibility should be achieved. This study describes best practices and basic requirements for consequence‐based and risk‐based facility siting studies (FSSs), also commonly referred to as quantitative risk analyses, consistent with industry guidance. The fundamental objective of a consequence‐based or risk‐based FSS is to ensure that the consequences or risks posed by facility operations are minimized to the extent practical.

Facility siting ‐ negotiating the minefield of “maximum credible event”

“…Obviously, the use of different consequence or risk criteria would lead to different conclusions and mitigation recommendations. 5…”

Hydrogen safety effect calculation (dispersion and thermal radiation effects) for determination of siting and safe distance

“…Conducting a facility siting study is a necessary initial step in the broader context of facility risk management. Mander et al 29 included both consequence‐ and risk‐based facility siting studies to determine whether the facility siting results are considered broadly acceptable, tolerable if demonstrated to be as low as reasonably practicable (ALARP), or intolerable. A mitigation plan can be decided based on the facility's siting results.…”