The Buncefield Expolsion & Fire - Dr. David Painter

Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 32

Health

Healthand
andSafety
Safety
Executive
Executive

The Buncefield incident-


experiences and lessons
learned
David Painter
Principal Specialist Inspector
UK Health and Safety Executive
Buncefield 11 December 2005
- the fuel depot before the incident
Buncefield 11 December 2005
- the release event
Health
Healthand
andSafety
Safety
Executive
Executive

Deflector plate

Liquid flow from Wind girder

the tank top

Impact zone
Liquid cascade - water
Liquid cascade - hexane
Buncefield 11 December 2005
- the extent of the vapour cloud

Forensic examination of the evidence


from:
• Burn damage
• Damaged objects (particularly cars)
• Off-site CCTV records
Allowed a good estimate of the cloud size
which extended between 150 and 200
metres from the side of the overfilled tank
Health
Healthand
andSafety
Safety
Executive
Executive

Extent of
vapour
cloud
Buncefield 11 December 2005
- the explosion
There were over forty injuries –
fortunately no fatalities
The explosion caused massive damage
on and off site (around £1 billion)
Extensive building damage and business
disruption
M1 motorway closed, nearby homes
evacuated
Reduced fuel supply to London airports
Buncefield 11 December 2005
- building damage
Buncefield 11 December 2005
- property damage
Buncefield 11 December 2005
- the fire

The explosion caused a fire that engulfed


at least 20 storage tanks
This burned for five days consuming
thousands of tonnes of fuel
Required a massive fire fighting response
Resulted in pollution of the local aquifer
by firewater and foam
Buncefield 11 December 2005
- the fire 09:00
Buncefield 11 December 2005
- the fire fighting response
Buncefield 11 December 2005
- after the fire
Buncefield 11 December 2005
- immediate causes of the event

Loss of control of tank filling process


Failure of level measurement and
independent high level trip
Leading to loss of primary containment
During the fire, failure of secondary &
tertiary containment
Buncefield 11 December 2005
- underlying causes
Poor management of key risk activity –
tank filling (human factors)
Poor design & maintenance of overfill
protection equipment
Inadequate change management
Poor design of bunds to deal with
prolonged fire event
Lack of adequate tertiary containment
Overall poor process safety management
Buncefield – The response

In general the risks from tank storage


operations were not well understood:
• the very efficient vapour formation in the
event of an overfill of gasoline
• the severity of an explosion of a large
shallow vapour cloud
As a result tank storage operations had
not received the attention they should
have done
Buncefield – Joint response

Industry and regulators worked together


to define good practice covering
• fuel transfer operations
• tank overfill protection
• staff competence & staffing levels
• emergency preparedness
• secondary & tertiary containment
Process Safety Leadership Group

Final report published 2009


“Safety and environmental standards for
fuel storage sites”
this covered 6 main themes plus
emergency planning:
Part 1: Systematic assessment of
safety integrity levels

• Overfill protection systems for storage


tanks
• BS EN 61511 – agreed standard
• Application of layers of protection
analysis (LOPA) to the overflow of
atmospheric tanks (appendix 2)
Part 2: Protecting against loss of
primary containment using high
integrity systems

• Management of instrumented systems


• Preventative maintenance
• Automatic overfill protection for gasoline
tanks – (appendix 4)
• Defining tank capacity – (appendix 3)
Part 3: Engineering against escalation
of loss of primary containment

• Siting of emergency response facilities –


(appendix 6)
• New tanks to BS EN 14015 or API 650
– Single bottom design
• Tank integrity management – EEMUA 159 / API
653
• Competence – inspectors to EEMUA 159 level 1
or API 653
Emergency arrangements

Appendix 6
• Routemap to emergency planning guidance
• Template for completion of COMAH on-site
plan
• Assessment of vulnerable emergency
response equipment & resources
• COMAH off-site plan exercising/auditing
record
• Communicating with the public
• (Note: COMAH = Control of Major Accident Hazards
Regulations 1999)
Part 4:Engineering against loss of
secondary and tertiary containment

• COMAH Competent Authority Containment


Policy
• Bund lining
• Pipe penetrations & expansion joints
• Bund capacity & strength
• Firewater management
• Tertiary containment
Part 5 & 6: Operating with high
reliability organisations – culture &
leadership

Appendix 5
• Leadership & safety culture
• Process safety management
• Hazard identification & layers of protection
• Roles responsibilities & competence
• Staffing, shift work & working conditions –
shift handover
• Organisational, plant & process change
• Principles for safe fuel transfer
Buncefield response – Key points

This way of working requires certain commitments:


• Responsibility for controlling risk remains with
site operators
• The regulators must allow sufficient time for
improvements to be made
• Industry Trade Associations must be able to
commit on behalf of member companies
• Must be clear on what each new standard
means in practice
• Engagement and commitment is essential
Buncefield – land use planning

• Following public consultation HSE revised


its approach to providing land use
planning advice for new fuel sites and
developments near to existing sites
• This included an accident scenario to take
account of the potential for a large vapour
cloud explosion
• Research continues in this area
Buncefield – research

Vapour cloud formation & prevention


Explosion mechanism
Event frequency
A reminder – Buncefield was not
unique
Puerto Rico 2009 Jaipur 2009

Venezuela 2012
Buncefield – references

Buncefield Investigation reports (MIIB)


http://www.buncefieldinvestigation.gov.uk/reports/index.htm

Buncefield: why did it happen


http://www.hse.gov.uk/comah/buncefield/buncefield-report.pdf

PSLG final report


http://www.hse.gov.uk/comah/buncefield/fuel-storage-sites.pdf

Vapour cloud formation & FABIG TN12


http://www.hse.gov.uk/research/rrpdf/rr908.pdf
http://www.fabig.com/video-publications/TechnicalGuidance

Explosion mechanism
http://www.hse.gov.uk/research/rrhtm/rr718.htm
Acknowledgements

With grateful thanks to HSE for


permission to share this presentation with
you
Also to colleagues in HSE, HSL and from
industry for all of their hard work and
dedication in helping to understand this
incident and to learn and apply the
lessons

You might also like