Click here to make your Home Page

Page Title: Evaluation of Facility Hazards and Potential Accidents (Facility Level)
Back | Up | Next

Click here for thousands of PDF manuals




Information Categories
.... Administration
Food and Cooking
Nuclear Fundamentals


Evaluation of Facility Hazards and Potential Accidents (Facility Level)
As discussed in Section 3 and shown in Figure 1, there are several opportunities for integrating
HA activities at the facility-level. In particular, activities related to the performance of PrHA and
nuclear facility safety analysis serve as the primary baseline for establishing a "safe envelope"
under which a facility can operate. These HA activities share much in common and present an
opportunity for streamlining HA activities. This practice is recognized and encouraged by DOE-
STD-3009 and DOE-HDBK-1100-96, DOE Handbook on Chemical Process Hazard Analysis,
where both are required at a particular facility. Integration can be achieved through a single set of
hazard/accident analyses and documentation, assuming DOE contractors work with local site
management during the initial planning process and agree on the approach and expectations.
More generally, there are several practices related to all facility-level HA activities that can
improve cost-effectiveness and reduce technical inconsistencies among HA efforts. The practice
addressed in Section 3.1, as related to the use of Teams, is of primary importance. Improving
communication among safety disciplines, analysts and facility/project management cannot be
overemphasized as the most important element to ensuring team performance and integration of
HA activities. Not adhering to the practice will result in duplicative efforts and possibly
inconsistent assumptions on consequences and necessary controls related to the same set of
hazards. This applies to both contractor and DOE organizations and is necessary to ensure that
goals and expected HA outcomes are commonly understood and shared among all participants.
This practice also must be extended to worker involvement.
Another important practice that improves cost effectiveness of HA activities is the standardization
and appropriate use of HA tools and techniques used at a given facility or site. HA techniques
vary in sophistication and cost of implementation, and users should ensure techniques are
appropriately selected for the condition being analyzed. For example, a Hazard and Operability
Study may be excessive for a non-complex operation such as a waste storage facility. Instead, a
qualitative technique such as a hazards checklist may be sufficient.  The application of a wide
variety of HA techniques and tools translate into additional personnel training and procedures that
must be provided on their use. The Center for Chemical Process Safety provides useful
guidelines (see reference) on selecting and grading HA techniques.
It is also important to select appropriate methods and models for estimating consequences from
hazardous material releases. As encouraged by DOE G-151-1, Emergency Management Guide:
Hazards Surveys and Hazards Assessments, and similar consequence assessment models should
be used for emergency planning and response purposes, as well as safety analysis activities.
Where dispersion and consequence models are necessary, they should be appropriate for the
material being released, the physical characteristics of the site and its atmospheric dispersion
conditions. Additional recommendation on selection of consequences modeling can be found in
DOE G-151-1.
Sources of Information on Integration of Facility Accident Analysis:
 DOE HDBK-1100-96, "Chemical Process Hazard Analysis"
 DOE-STD-3009, "Preparation Guide for U.S. Department of Energy Nonreactor Nuclear
Facility Safety Analysis Reports"
 Center for Chemical Process Safety (CCPS), "Guidelines for Hazard Evaluation
Procedures, Second Edition with Worked Examples"

Privacy Statement - Press Release - Copyright Information. - Contact Us

Integrated Publishing, Inc. - A (SDVOSB) Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business