Impact HUMAN (Offsite At Risk)
Audits & Reviews
Commitment & Culture
Compliance with Standards
Control of Work
Management of Change
MONITORING & IMPROVEMENT
PROCESS SAFETY MANAGEMENT
Food & Drink
Onshore Oil & Gas
Plastics & Polymers
Pulp & Paper
Papua New Guinea
Fluid release to ground
Fluid release to water
Gas/vapour/mist/etc release to air
Rapid phase-transition explosion
Runaway reaction explosion
Solid release to air
Solid release to ground
Solid release to water
Design of Plant
Loss of Process Control
Physical Security Breach
COST (On Site)
ENVIRONMENTAL (On Site)
HUMAN (Offsite At Risk)
HUMAN (Offsite Fatalities)
HUMAN (Offsite Injuries)
HUMAN (On Site At Risk)
HUMAN (On Site Fatalities)
HUMAN (On Site Injuries)
> 100 Fatalities
< 100 Injuries
11 - 100 Fatalities
11 – 100 Fatalities
≥ 100 Injuries
PSV – Pilot Operated
Safety & Control
Shell & Tube
Valves - Safety
Methyl Ethyl Ketone
Oil based solvent
Urea Ammonium Nitrate
Vinyl Chloride Monomer
Live Event Type
Quantitative Risk Assessment
Dust Safety Science
Dutch Safety Board
New Zealand Government
Process Safety Integrity
Step Change in Safety
Corrosion Under Insulation
High Pressure Water
Loss of Utilities
Low Temperature Embrittlement
Normalization of Deviance
Safe Operating Limits
Stress Corrosion Cracking
Permit To Work
Learning from Incidents
Floating Roof Tanks
Minute To Learn
Safety Critical Decisions
202314DecAll DayNational Freight Consortium Fire 1984National Freight Consortium Sheffield (GB)Industry:WarehouseCountry:United KingdomLanguage:ENLoC:Fire exposure Origin: HSE Incident:FIREHazards:FlammableImpact:HUMAN (Offsite At Risk)Effects:EnvironmentalMaterial:Various
On 14 December 1984 fire broke out in a furniture repository in Sheffield which formed part of a very large warehouse and transit shed building occupied by the National Freight
On 14 December 1984 fire broke out in a furniture repository in Sheffield which formed part of a very large warehouse and transit shed building occupied by the National Freight Consortium plc. In two days the fire destroyed the whole warehouse, with the exception of one protection section. It involved the attendance of several hundred fireman over a total period of six days.
Among the wide variety of goods stored in the building was a relatively small tonnage of chemicals. Concern was expressed during and after the fire about the difficulty experienced by the Fire Brigade in identifying the possible risks from the materials stored, followed by allegations by the Fire Brigades’ Union that firemen had been unnecessarily exposed to harmful fumes without the benefit of breathing apparatus.
The fire also led to expressions of concern about a number of aspects, including the delay in summoning the Fire Brigade and possible exposure of member of the public to harmful fumes and asbestos material evolved in the fire.
Image Credit: HSE
202421JanAll DayRiver Road Barking Explosion 1980Womersley Boome Chemicals (GB)Industry:WarehouseCountry:United KingdomLanguage:ENLoC:Fire exposure Origin: HSE Incident:Explosive decompositionHazards:OxidisingImpact:HUMAN (Offsite At Risk)Effects:EnvironmentalMaterial:Sodium Chlorate
A series of explosions which occurred at a chemical storage depot at 27 River Road, Barking on 21 January 1980 was probably caused by the rapid thermal decomposition of sodium
A series of explosions which occurred at a chemical storage depot at 27 River Road, Barking on 21 January 1980 was probably caused by the rapid thermal decomposition of sodium chlorate in an intense fire.
About 4000 people were temporarily evacuated from nearby housing estates when large quantities of smoke were blown in their direction.
The storage of sodium chlorate in quantities as low as 2-45 tonnes was not considered, prior to this incident, to be potentially dangerous. All previously recorded incidents involved quantities of 20 or more tonnes of the material.
This report emphasises the need for occupiers of similar premises to pay attention to:
– segregating various chemicals into different categories with regard to their relevant properties;
– obtaining advice on fire precautions from authoritative sources;
– preparing adequate emergency procedures in conjunction with the emergency services.
Image Credit: HSE
202413FebAll DayUniversal Freight Fire 1982Universal Freight Woodkirk (GB)Lessons:Emergency Preparedness,Risk Assessment,Stakeholder EngagementIndustry:WarehouseCountry:United KingdomLanguage:ENLoC:Fire exposure Origin: HSE Incident:Pool fireHazards:FlammableImpact:HUMAN (Offsite At Risk)Effects:EnvironmentalMaterial:Octyl PhenolTopics:Chemical Reaction
At approximately 10:00 hours workers on site noticed the electrical lights flickering and saw smoke coming from the warehouse. On opening the warehouse door to investigate, a wall of thick
At approximately 10:00 hours workers on site noticed the electrical lights flickering and saw smoke coming from the warehouse. On opening the warehouse door to investigate, a wall of thick smoke confronted an employee. Shutting the door he raised the alarm and called the fire brigade. The warehouse was used for storing large quantities of ICI herbicides in plastic bottles and drums with plastic liners and octyl phenol in paper sacks.
The fire brigade responded promptly and was automatically issued with TREM cards (Transport Emergency Cards) relating to the herbicides and Octyl Phenol. However, by this time the fire had become established and had broken through the roof of the warehouse. The intensity and speed at which the fire developed surprised the fire fighters, as they believed the warehouse contents to be largely incombustible.
Some of the drums/bottles had burst in the fire and their contents were washed down the road and into Hey Beck, a small stream that drains from the site. This resulted in a major pollution incident. Because of the large volumes involved the decision was taken to allow the material to continue to flow into the drains, washed down by the fire brigade. This washing down activity continued for over two days after the incident. The diluted herbicides turned the stream into a brown foaming torrent for several miles. The River Calder was affected by this pollution. The fire fighters were faced with additional problems because of the physical properties of octyl phenol. This substance floats on water producing a flowing pool of burning liquid.
The seriousness of the pollution prompted action to be taken to contact police, the water authority, local radio stations and the press to warn the general public of the dangers of coming into contact with the contaminated water. Farmers were warned to keep livestock away from riverbanks.
The exact cause of this accident is unknown. A worker had been shrink-wrapping paper sacks of octyl phenol onto wooden pallets using a plastic film and a hand held cylinder heat gun, shortly before the incident occurred. It is feasible that the flame from the gun passing too close overheated one of the pallets, causing one or more bags, or the pallet to smoulder, eventually bursting in flames.
• EMERGENCY RESPONSE / SPILL CONTROL
• REACTION / PRODUCT TESTING
Image Credit: West Yorkshire Fire & Rescue Service
202402MarAll DayRimbey Pipeline Flammable Release 1979Rimbey Pipeline Mill Woods (CA-AB)Lessons:Emergency Preparedness,Stakeholder EngagementIndustry:PipelinesCountry:CanadaLanguage:ENLoC:Deficiency Origin: HSE Incident:VCEHazards:FlammableImpact:HUMAN (Offsite At Risk)Effects:EnvironmentalMaterial:Propane
The Rimbey pipeline system in Alberta, Canada transports liquid propane, butane and condensate products in an 8-inch pipeline. On the day of the incident the operating pumps were pumping against
The Rimbey pipeline system in Alberta, Canada transports liquid propane, butane and condensate products in an 8-inch pipeline. On the day of the incident the operating pumps were pumping against a closed valve. The line failed at a pressure of approximately 8000 kPa, which is below the 8372 kPa maximum operating pressure for the pipeline.
Liquid propane erupted violently and formed a pond of boiling propane. The propane quickly formed a ground level flammable gas cloud, which rolled across topsoil until it reached a road where it was ignited by a passing truck. Liquid propane entered a nearby storm sewer catchment basin. The propane spread into adjacent sewer lines. Explosive mixtures were detected over a wide area within the sewer system.
No injuries were recorded, however the incident instigated a large-scale evacuation of 19,000 people while efforts were made to eliminate the explosive danger.
A combination of water flushing, ventilation and nitrogen gas blanketing successfully eliminated the danger about 23 hours after the original fracture. Maintenance crews plugged the pipeline either side of the fracture to stop the flow of leaking gas
• EMERGENCY RESPONSE / SPILL CONTROL
Image Credit: Provincial Archives Of Alberta
202417MarAll DayITC Tank Fire 2019ITC Deer Park (US-TX)Lessons:Emergency Preparedness,Operational Integrity,Stakeholder EngagementIndustry:StorageCountry:United StatesLanguage:ENLoC:Deterioration Origin: CSB Incident:FIREHazards:FlammableContributory Factors:Containment FailureImpact:HUMAN (Offsite At Risk)Effects:EnvironmentalMaterial:Naptha
On Sunday, March 17, 2019, at approximately 10:00 am, a large fire erupted at the Intercontinental Terminals Company, LLC (ITC) bulk liquid storage terminal located in Deer Park, Texas (Figure
On Sunday, March 17, 2019, at approximately 10:00 am, a large fire erupted at the Intercontinental Terminals Company, LLC (ITC) bulk liquid storage terminal located in Deer Park, Texas (Figure 1). The fire originated in the vicinity of Tank 80-8, an 80,000-barrel aboveground atmospheric storage tank that held naphtha, a flammable liquid, typically used as a feedstock or blend stock for production of gasoline. ITC was unable to isolate or stop the release of naphtha product from the tank, and the fire continued to burn, intensify, and progressively involved additional tanks in the tank farm. The fire was extinguished on the morning of March 20, 2019.
The incident did not result in any injuries to either ITC personnel or emergency responders. However, the local community experienced disruptions, including several shelter-in-place notifications, which prompted local schools and businesses either to close or operate under modified conditions.
• RELEASE DETECTION
• RELEASE ISOLATION
• PROLONGED EMERGENCY RESPONSE
Image credit: CSB
202407AprAll DayGlenpool Tank Farm Explosion 2003ConocoPhillips Glenpool (US-OK)Industry:StorageCountry:United StatesLanguage:ENLoC:Confined explosion Origin: NTSB Incident:VCEHazards:FlammableImpact:HUMAN (Offsite At Risk)Effects:EnvironmentalMaterial:Diesel fuel
On April 7, 2003, at about 8:55 p.m., central daylight time, an 80,000-barrel storage tank at ConocoPhillips Company’s Glenpool South tank farm in Glenpool, Oklahoma, exploded and burned as it
On April 7, 2003, at about 8:55 p.m., central daylight time, an 80,000-barrel storage tank at ConocoPhillips Company’s Glenpool South tank farm in Glenpool, Oklahoma, exploded and burned as it was being filled with diesel. The tank, designated tank 11, had previously contained gasoline, which had been removed from the tank earlier in the day. The tank contained between 7,397 and 7,600 barrels of diesel at the time of the explosion.
The resulting fire burned for about 21 hours and damaged two other storage tanks in the area. The cost of the accident, including emergency response, environmental remediation, evacuation, lost product, property damage, and claims, was $2,357,483. There were no injuries or fatalities. Nearby residents were evacuated, and schools were closed for 2 days.
Image Credit: NTSB