10.2190/81DE-F9G6-XV7T-7PTX 81DEF9G6XV7T7PTX 319 SPILL PREVENTION PRIORITY ANALYSIS FOR REDUCING ACCIDENTAL RELEASE RISKS DURING PIPELINE TRANSPORT 319 335 20021002 20021002 20021002 20021002 81DEF9G6XV7T7PTX.pdf http://baywood.metapress.com/link.asp?target=contribution&id=81DEF9G6XV7T7PTX 4 BERRIN TANSEL MONALI NAKHATE ORHAN SEVIMOGLU Florida International University, Miami Spill risk during pipeline transportation is about 4 times higher in comparison to transportation by barges, and about 7 times higher in comparison to transport by rail. Since accidental spills cannot be eliminated, efforts to reduce risks of accidental releases during pipeline transportation and adequacy of the resources allocated for managing accidental releases should be periodically evaluated. A simple risk assessment technique was developed to evaluate the risks of leakage during pipeline transportation. The spill prevention priority analysis (SPPA) developed in this study is a flexible, risk based approach which can be used to develop strategies to gradually reduce spills during pipeline transport. The method developed incorporates failure probabilities, detection capabilities for failures, and significance of the consequences due to a spill to estimate a set of spill prevention priority numbers (SPPN) for possible failure modes which could lead to a spill. The relative magnitudes of the SPPNs can be used for development of risk management strategies and in decision making for allocating resources to reduce the spill risks to acceptable levels. S. Bonvicini, P. Leonelli, and G. Spadoni, Risk Analysis of Hazardous Materials Transportation Evaluating Uncertainty by Means of Fuzzy Logic, Journal of Hazardous Materials, 62, pp. 59-74, 1998. N. Rasmusse, Reactor Safety Study--An Assessment of Accident Risks in U.S. Commercial Nuclear Power Plants, U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, Report No. WASH-1400, 1974. K. Shaffer and D. Rhodes, Spill Prevention, Environmental Protection, 4, pp. 35-37, 1993. D. Slater and H. Jones, Environmental Risk Assessment and the Environment Agency, Journal of Hazardous Materials, 65, pp. 77-91, 1999. P. T. J. C. Von Rooy, D. Anderson, and P. J. T. Verstraelen, Weighing the Risks of Accidental Releases, Water Environment & Technology, 3, pp. 37-40, 1993. G. J. Stam, P. H. Bottelberghs, J. G. Post, and H. G. Boss, PROTEUS, a Technical and Management Model for Aquatic Risk Assessment of Industrial Spills, Journal of Hazardous Materials, 71, pp. 439-448, 2000. S. Atallah, Assessing and Managing Industrial Risk, Chemical Engineering, 87, pp. 94-103, 1980. M. V. Grau and T. Groves, The Oil Spill Process: The Effect of Coast Guard Monitoring on Oil Spills, Environmental and Resource Economics, 10, pp. 315-339, 1997. K. A. Solomon, W. E. Kastenberg, and P. Nelson, Dealing with Uncertainty Arising Out of Probabilistic Risk Assessment, Rand Publications Series, Prepared for Oak Ridge National Laboratory (R-3045-ORNL), 1993. P. A. Cirone and B. Duncan, Integrating Human Health and Ecological Concerns in Risk Assessments, Journal of Hazardous Materials, 78, pp. 1-17, 2000. A. G. Bruzzone, R. Mosca, R. Revetria, and S. Rapallo, Risk Analysis in Harbor Environments Using Simulation, Safety Science, 35, pp. 75-86, 2000. S. Atallah and E. M. Drake, Safety Considerations in Siting Housing Projects, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, HUD-PDR-161, 1976. SAI (Science Application, Inc.), LNG Terminal Risk Assessment Study for Los Angeles, California, report prepared for Western LNG Terminal Company, December 1975. J. R. Welker, Fire Safety Aboard LNG Vessel, U.S. Department of Transportation, U.S. Coast Guard Report No. CG-D-94-76, 1976. G. A. Papadakis, Major Hazard Pipelines: A Comparative Study of Onshore Transmission Accidents, Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 12, pp. 91-107, 1999.