what to do after an fss

1

WHAT TO DO AFTER A FACILITY SITING STUDY (FSS)

Experience leading facility siting studies (consequence and risk based), business interruption risk analyses, pipeline and transportation risk assessments, hazardous area classification studies, and audits.

Leads FSS and QRA training focused on inputs, methodology, analyses, results, and understanding and managing the results.

Member of the API RP 752, 753, 756 Facility Siting Revision committee and National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 59A (LNG) Technical Committee

www.BakerRisk.com

Presenter: Joshua Bruce-Black

Copyright BakerRisk. All rights reserved.

BakerRisk Webinar Series, What to do After a FSS 2


Webinars On Demand


FSS & QRA Training

2-Day Course

Virtual / San Antonio

July 20 - 21

Presenter: Joshua Bruce-BlackPrincipal Consultant, BakerRisk

What to do after a Facility Siting Study (FSS)

July 13, 2021Copyright BakerRisk. All rights reserved.

[email protected]


Typical FSS Results Refinement Mitigation Leverage

Overview


Facility Siting Results

• Risk results should o Be presented in tables with sources contributing the greatest risk and locations

incurring the greatest risk at the facility. o Identify the contribution of risk by hazard and sorted from highest to lowest risk

Why?• This provides the most straightforward and effective approach to

identifying appropriate risk refinements and mitigation strategies


Source Societal Risk Results

Source Baseline Societal Risk (fatalities/year) % of TotalExplosion Flash Fire Toxic Jet / Pool Fire Total Source Cumulative

Source 01 2.0E-5 1.7E-6 3.2E-4 1.2E-7 3.4E-4 40% 40%Source 02 1.2E-5 7.3E-7 2.4E-4 1.2E-8 2.5E-4 29% 69%Boiler Building Fill 9.5E-5 9.5E-5 11% 80%Source 03 4.7E-5 4.2E-8 1.0E-5 3.2E-6 6.0E-5 7% 87%Source 04 2.4E-5 1.4E-7 2.0E-5 5.1E-6 4.9E-5 6% 93%Source 05 1.5E-7 6.3E-6 2.8E-6 1.2E-5 2.1E-5 2% 96%Furnace Firebox 1.2E-5 1.2E-5 1% 97%Source 06 1.3E-8 8.6E-6 8.6E-6 1% 98%Source 07 1.2E-8 1.1E-8 1.6E-8 8.5E-6 8.5E-6 1% 99%Source 08 1.0E-8 8.5E-9 1.2E-7 8.1E-6 8.2E-6 1% 100%

Totals 2.1E-4 8.9E-6 6.0E-4 3.7E-5 8.6E-425% 1% 70% 4%


Location Societal Risk Results

LocationBaseline Societal Risk (fatalities/year) % of Total

Explosion Flash Fire Toxic Jet / Pool Fire Total Location CumulativeLaboratory 1.2E-5 2.6E-6 2.8E-4 0.0E+0 3.0E-4 34% 34%Office Building 6.9E-10 4.9E-7 1.8E-4 0.0E+0 1.8E-4 21% 56%Control Room 1.0E-4 2.4E-8 1.0E-5 8.0E-6 1.2E-4 14% 70%Maintenance Building 2.4E-5 4.6E-6 8.0E-5 0.0E+0 1.1E-4 13% 82%I&E Building 3.7E-5 4.4E-7 2.7E-5 3.2E-6 6.8E-5 8% 90%Admin Building 3.6E-5 3.8E-7 9.8E-6 0.0E+0 4.6E-5 5% 96%Process Area 1 1.2E-8 3.7E-7 9.2E-7 9.1E-6 1.0E-5 1% 97%Process Area 2 1.7E-7 8.5E-9 0.0E+0 8.5E-6 8.7E-6 1% 98%Engineering Building 3.2E-9 1.3E-8 8.6E-6 0.0E+0 8.6E-6 1% 99%Process Area 3 2.0E-8 9.5E-8 1.2E-8 8.1E-6 8.2E-6 1% 100%

Totals 2.1E-4 8.9E-6 6.0E-4 3.7E-5 8.6E-425% 1% 70% 4%

Note: Blue highlighting identifies outdoor areas



Sources contributing risk to locations

Building Source Name Frequency (per year)

Societal Risk (fatalities per year)% of Risk

Explosion Flash Fire Toxic Jet/Pool Fire TotalAdministration NH3-07-C102-6 2.6E-04 5.0E-05 4.1E-08 ###### 0.0E+00 5.0E-05 27%Administration Crude-06-P211-6 5.9E-05 0.0E+00 2.1E-09 ###### 4.6E-05 4.6E-05 24%Administration Crude-04-PIPE-6 1.4E-05 0.0E+00 7.6E-10 ###### 3.5E-05 3.5E-05 18%Administration Crude-04-P202-6 4.6E-05 0.0E+00 1.6E-09 ###### 3.4E-05 3.4E-05 18%Administration Crude-05-P217-6 5.4E-05 0.0E+00 0.0E+00 ###### 1.1E-05 1.1E-05 6%Administration NH3-07-C102-Fill90 1.4E-03 1.1E-05 0.0E+00 ###### 0.0E+00 1.1E-05 6%Administration Util-01-PIPE-6 1.0E-05 0.0E+00 0.0E+00 ###### 9.5E-07 9.5E-07 1%

Source Modeling

Risk Modeling

Building Modeling

11

Potential Refinement Options

BakerRisk Webinar Series, What to do After a FSS

12

Source Modeling

0500

10001500200025003000350040004500

0 200 400 600 800 1000

Rele

ase

Rate

(lb/

min

)

Time (s)

(80s; 2700 lb/min)


FEA

13

Building Modeling


14

Risk Modeling

PFD_32_SD_LEVEL_LOW

FTD_LOW_LEVEL

1.152E-2

FLOAT_1

6.107E-3

PROBE_1

PLC

6.975E-3

PLC_DEMAND_DU

1.912E-3

PLC_DEMAND_DD

2

FTSD_BOILER

Fail to ShutdownBoiler

PLC fails ondemand

PLC Fails onDemand Dangerous

Detected

PLC Fails onDemand Dangerous

Undetected

Probe LevelTransmitter Fails

on Demand

Float LevelSwitch Failson Demand

PFD of Boiler32 Steam Drum

Level Low

Fail to detect lowsteam drum level


Elimination/Reduction of Hazards

Release Prevention

Detectionand Isolation

Water Spray

15

Potential Mitigation Strategies

Relocate Personnel

Building Upgrades

New Building Design

PPE

Source Risk Location Risk


Building Feasibility Analysis

Building Upgradability Analysis

Mitigation Examples

Toxic SIP Sensitivity

PPE Water Spray



Source Societal Risk Results

Source Baseline Societal Risk (fatalities/year) % of TotalExplosion Flash Fire Toxic Jet / Pool Fire Total Source Cumulative

Source 01 2.0E-5 1.7E-6 3.2E-4 1.2E-7 3.4E-4 40% 40%Source 02 1.2E-5 7.3E-7 2.4E-4 1.2E-8 2.5E-4 29% 69%Boiler Building Fill 9.5E-5 9.5E-5 11% 80%Source 03 4.7E-5 4.2E-8 1.0E-5 3.2E-6 6.0E-5 7% 87%Source 04 2.4E-5 1.4E-7 2.0E-5 5.1E-6 4.9E-5 6% 93%Source 05 1.5E-7 6.3E-6 2.8E-6 1.2E-5 2.1E-5 2% 96%Furnace Firebox 1.2E-5 1.2E-5 1% 97%Source 06 1.3E-8 8.6E-6 8.6E-6 1% 98%Source 07 1.2E-8 1.1E-8 1.6E-8 8.5E-6 8.5E-6 1% 99%Source 08 1.0E-8 8.5E-9 1.2E-7 8.1E-6 8.2E-6 1% 100%

Totals 2.1E-4 8.9E-6 6.0E-4 3.7E-5 8.6E-425% 1% 70% 4%

• Significant toxic release sources (source 01 and 02)o Prevention of releaseo Detection and isolation of releaseo Water spray mitigationo Enclose, filter, and/or direct to elevated stack

• Boiler Building Fill Scenarioo Prevention of releaseo Detection and isolation of releaseo Sectionalize buildingo Reduce confinement


Source Risk Mitigation



LocationBaseline Societal Risk (fatalities/year) % of Total

Explosion Flash Fire Toxic Jet / Pool Fire Total Location CumulativeLaboratory 1.2E-5 2.6E-6 2.8E-4 0.0E+0 3.0E-4 34% 34%Office Building 6.9E-10 4.9E-7 1.8E-4 0.0E+0 1.8E-4 21% 56%Control Room 1.0E-4 2.4E-8 1.0E-5 8.0E-6 1.2E-4 14% 70%Maintenance Building 2.4E-5 4.6E-6 8.0E-5 0.0E+0 1.1E-4 13% 82%I&E Building 3.7E-5 4.4E-7 2.7E-5 3.2E-6 6.8E-5 8% 90%Admin Building 3.6E-5 3.8E-7 9.8E-6 0.0E+0 4.6E-5 5% 96%Process Area 1 1.2E-8 3.7E-7 9.2E-7 9.1E-6 1.0E-5 1% 97%Process Area 2 1.7E-7 8.5E-9 0.0E+0 8.5E-6 8.7E-6 1% 98%Engineering Building 3.2E-9 1.3E-8 8.6E-6 0.0E+0 8.6E-6 1% 99%Process Area 3 2.0E-8 9.5E-8 1.2E-8 8.1E-6 8.2E-6 1% 100%

Totals 2.1E-4 8.9E-6 6.0E-4 3.7E-5 8.6E-425% 1% 70% 4%

• Laboratory, Office, and Maintenance buildingso What is the current emergency response strategy and should it be changed?o If shelter-in-place (SIP), how is HVAC system isolated and how leak tight?o What PPE is currently available?o Are there challenges to sheltering strategy?

• Control Roomo What type of upgrades could be implemented?o What is cost of upgrades and impact on operations?o How does this compare to cost of a new control room?


Building Risk Mitigation

• Utilize your FSS results as a resourceo To identify potential risk refinements and mitigation strategies o To make informed and effective mitigation decisions

Facility Siting Results


22

Leverage Your FSS

FSS

Consequence / Risk Based Building

DesignLeak Tightness

Testing / Shelter in Place (SIP) Design

Asset Damage and Business

Interruption Studies

Process Hazard Analysis (PHA)

Emergency Response Planning

Hazardous Area Classification (HAC)

Pressure Relief and Flare Analysis

Fire Hazard and Mitigation Analysis

(FHMA)

Fire and Gas Detection (F&G)



PHA /HAZOP / LOPA

• To align PHA team on consequences of PHA scenarios

• To create internal PHA lookup tables

PHA / HAZOP / LOPA

BakerRisk assists clients by providing the most

experienced PHA facilitators with wide

ranging industry experience in different

processes

Scenario

(Release/Weather)

Concentration (mol%) Plume Length (ft)

UFL LFL 1/2 LFL UFL LFL 1/2 LFL

Crude-01-P201-0.5/B2.2 4 0 0 7 181 300

Crude-01-P201-0.5/D3.4 4 0 0 6 31 54

Crude-01-P201-0.5/D7.2 4 0 0 5 23 28

Crude-01-P201-0.5/F2.1 4 1 0 8 31 62

Crude-01-P201-2/B2.2 4 1 0 26 30 50

Crude-01-P201-2/D3.4 4 1 0 22 33 40

Crude-01-P201-2/D7.2 4 1 0 19 30 31

Crude-01-P201-2/F2.1 6 1 0 27 31 56

Crude-01-P201-6/B2.2 6 1 0 33 100 197

Crude-01-P201-6/D3.4 6 1 0 33 84 169

Crude-01-P201-6/D7.2 6 1 0 30 61 116

Crude-01-P201-6/F2.1 6 1 0 34 114 255



Asset Damage and Business Interruption Risk

• To calculate asset damage / equipment vulnerability

• To calculate business interruption risk accounting for:o downtime, o product loss, o lost revenue, and o other operational interdependencies

Asset Damage and Business Interruption Risk

1E-5

1E-4

1E-3

1E-2

1E-1

1 10 100

Freq

uenc

y$ (Million)

F$ Curve (Asset Damage)


Business Interruption Risk

Source Risk

Equipment / Building Risk



Fire & Gas Detection Mapping

Remove the guesswork for placement of fire and gas detectors by quantitative modeling of consequence and detector interaction in

3D space to optimize detector coverage.

• To determine coverage (percentage of scenarios detected)

• To prioritize high-risk sources and optimize placement and number of detectors

Fire & Gas Detection Mapping

Detection successful



Fire Hazard & Mitigation Analysis

• To quantitatively determine:o Maximum firewater demando Firewater coverageo Deficient passive fire protection

• To optimize placement and number of monitors/deluge during design phase

Fire Hazard and Mitigation Analysis

Firewater Coverage for Assessed Scenario

Accessible monitor

Inaccessible monitor


• Identify, develop, and implement practical risk refinements and mitigation strategies

• Experienced and integrated team of consultants in fire protection, hazard identification, risk analysis, and loss prevention

• Leverage results from your consequence and risk models to perform:

• Fire and gas detection • Fire hazard and mitigation analysis • Process hazard analyses / Layer of protection analyses • Asset damage / Business interruption risk studies• Hazardous area classification• …and more

32

How Can We Help?



www.BakerRisk.com

Questions?

https://www.bakerrisk.com/

34

WHAT TO DO AFTER A FACILITY SITING STUDY (FSS)

Experience leading facility siting studies (consequence and risk based), business interruption risk analyses, pipelines and transportation risk assessments, hazardous area classification studies, and audits.

Leads FSS and QRA training focused on inputs, methodology, analyses, results, and understanding and managing the results.

Member of the API RP 752, 753, 756 Facility Siting Revision committee and National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 59A (LNG) Technical Committee

www.BakerRisk.com

Presenter: Joshua Bruce-Black


what to do after an fss

Documents