Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Hazardous material incidents: Some key results of a risk analysis

  • Published:
WMU Journal of Maritime Affairs Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Human safety and health, environmental and property protection and security concerning hazardous materials supply chain are important issues for many countries, industries and organisations around the world. This paper presents some key results of a comprehensive risk study on hazardous materials supply chain incidents. Based on a risk analysis framework adapted for maritime transport of packaged dangerous goods, this study combines qualitative and quantitative analysis of large and diverse datasets collected from some of the U.S.’s best and largest data sources. The study may be one of the largest of its kind, and some of the results might not be found elsewhere. Incidents have occurred in every system of the hazardous materials supply chain, including platforms, all modes of transport, chemical plants, terminals and storages. The results show that more than half (52.1 %) of incidents are attributed to the transport system. The study largely considers incidents happening during maritime transport, which account for 18% of transport incidents. In absolute terms, the FN curves of maritime transport human risks are generally found to be well below the corresponding FN curves of aggregated supply chain human risks.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Batten, S.D., R.J.S. Allen and C.O.M. Wotton. 1998. The Effects of the Sea Empress Oil Spill on the Plankton of the Southern Irish Sea.Marine Pollution Bulletin 36 (10): 764–774.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crokhill, M. 1992. “Santa Clara I” Incident.Hazardous Cargo Bulletin, September.

  • European Commission (EC). 1997.Working Paper on Risk Management. Directorate General III of the European Commission. Directive 76/769/EEC. Brussels: EC.

    Google Scholar 

  • -. 2006.The New EU regulatory framework (REACH) for chemicals. European Commission.

  • European Environment Agency (EEA). 1995.European Environment:The Dobris Assessment. Stanners D. and P. Bourdeau. Office for Official Publications of the EC, Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the EC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilfillan, E.S., E.J. Harner, J.E. O’Reilly, D.S. Page and W.A. Burns. 1999. A Comparison of Shoreline Assessment Study Designs Used for the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill.Marine Pollution Bulletin 38 (5): 380–388.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goulielmos, A.M. 2001. Maritime safety: facts and proposals for the European OPA.Disaster Prevention and Management: An International Journal 10 (4): 278–285.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Health and Safety Executive UK (HSE). 2001.Reducing risks: HSE’s decision-making process protecting people. Report of Health and Safety Executive, UK, HMSO.

    Google Scholar 

  • International Electro-technical Commission (IEC). 1995.Dependability management — Risk analysis of technological systems (International Standard IEC 300-3-9). IEC, Geneva.

    Google Scholar 

  • International Maritime Organization (IMO). Maritime Safety Committee (MSC). 1996.Reports on Marine Casualties, Harmonized Reporting Procedures. IMO documents-Annex 3, Draft MSC/MEPC Circular, IMO FSI4/18 1994, FSI2/22, 1996 Annex 2. London: IMO.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1997.Interim Guidelines for the Application of Formal Safety Assessment (FSA) to the IMO Rule-Making Process. MCS/Circ.829. London: IMO.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 2002.Guidelines for Formal Safety (FSA) for use in the IMO Rule-Making Process. The MSC/Circ. 1023, MEPC/Circ. 392. London: IMO.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 2004a.Formal Safety Assessment: Risk Evaluation, Report submitted by the International Association of Classification Societies (IACS). Maritime Safety Committee, 78th session, Agenda item 19, MSC 78/19/. London: IMO.

    Google Scholar 

  • -. 2004b.Bulk Carrier Safety: Comparative Study of Single and Double Side Skin Bulk Carriers. Submitted by Greece Maritime Safety Committee, MSC 78/5/1,78th session 20 February 2004, Agenda item 5.

  • International Programme on Chemical Safety (IPCS). 2001.Report of the World Health Organization Task Group on Environmental Health Criteria (224) for Arsenic and Arsenic Compounds.

  • International Organisation for Standardization (ISO). 1999.Petroleum and Natural Gas Industries — Offshore Production Installations — Guidelines on Tools and Techniques for the Identification and Assessment of Hazardous Events. Draft International Standard ISO 17776.

  • Kaplan, S. and B.J. Garrick. 1981. On the quantitative definitions of risks.Journal of Risk Analysis 1(1): 11–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirchsteiger, C. 1999. Trends in accidents, disasters and risk sources in Europe.Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries 12 (1): 7–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Konstantinos, G. and B.G. Ernestini. 2002. Assessing the risk of pollution from ship accidents.Disaster Prevention and Management: International Journal 11 (2): 109–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, J.O., I.Ch. Yeo and Y.S. Yang. 2001. A trial application of FSA methodology to hatchway watertight integrity of bulk carriers.Marine Structure 14: 651–667.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lois, P., J. Wang, A. Wall and T. Ruxton. 2003. Formal Safety Assessment of Cruise Ships.Tourism Management 25: 93–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loughran, C.G., A. Pillay, J. Wang, A. Wall, and T. Ruxton. 2002. A preliminary study of fishing vessel safety.Journal of Risk Research 5 (1): 3–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lloyd’s Register of Shipping (LRS). 1996.Casualty Return Series.

  • Lloyd’s Maritime Information Services (LMIS). 1995.Ships Editorial, Casualty System Guide. Maritime Information Publishing Group.

  • McGowan J. 1993. M/v “Santa Clara I” — Why the Incident is so Unique.Proceedings of U.S. Marine Safety Council.

  • Merrick, G. 1993. When disaster makes a port call,Proceedings of U.S. Marine Safety Council.

  • Miraglia, R.A. 2002. The Cultural and Behavioral Impact of the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill on the Native Peoples of Prince William Sound, Alaska.Spill Science and Technology Bulletin 7 (1–2): 75–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mullai, A. and U. Paulsson. 2002.Oil Spills in Öresund — Hazardous Events, Causes and Claims. Report on the SUNDRISK Project, Lund University Centre for Risk Analysis and Management (LUCRAM), Department of Industrial Management and Engineering Logistics, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mullai, A. 2004. A Risk Analysis Framework for Maritime Transport of Packaged Dangerous Goods (PDG). In Brindley C. 2004.Supply Chain Risk. Ashgate Publishing Company, UK, Chapter 9: 130–159.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 2006.Maritime Transport and Risks of Packaged Dangerous Goods. Safe and Reliable Transport Chains of Dangerous Goods in the Baltic Sea Region (DaGoB). Project Publication Series 4:2006, Turku School of Economics, Logistics, Turku, Finland.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 2007.A Risk Analysis Framework for Maritime Transport of Packaged Dangerous Goods -A Validating Demonstration, Volume II. Doctorial Thesis, Department of Industrial Management and Logistics, Engineering Logistics, Lund Institute of Technology, Lund University, Sweden.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Response Center (NRC). 2005.National Response Center Database for reporting of all oil, chemical, radiological, biological, and etiological discharges into the environment anywhere in the United States and its territories (1982–2004).

  • Trbojevic V.M. and B.J Carr. 2000. Risk based methodology for safety improvements in ports.Journal of Hazardous Materials 71: 467–480.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Environment Protection Agency (USEPA). 1992. Ship loses arsenic drums in Atlantic.EPA Journal 18 (2): 3.

    Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Department of Commerce (U.S. DOC). 2004. Bureau of Economic Analysis, National Income and Products Account (NIPA) U.S. Gross Domestic Product.

  • U.S. Department of Transportation (U.S. DOT). 1992.U.S. Coast Guard, M/v “Santa Clara I”. Board of Inquiry Report Concerning the Loss of Hazardous Materials Near the New Jersey Coast. January 3–4.

  • -. 2000. Bureau of Transportation Statistics, U.S. Department of Commerce, Economics and Statistics Administration, U.S. Census Bureau: 1997 Economic Census: Transportation, 1997 Commodity Flow Survey: Hazardous Materials, Issued April 2000, EC97TCF-U.S. (HM) RV.

  • -. 2001–2004. Maritime Administration, Office of Statistical and Economic Analysis 2001–2004: Vessel statistics: vessel calls and capacity.

  • -. 2004. Bureau of Transportation Statistics, U.S. Department of Commerce, Economics and Statistics Administration, U.S. Census Bureau: 2002 Economic Census: Transportation 2002 Commodity Flow Survey: Hazardous Materials, Issued December 2004, EC02TCF-U.S. (HM).

  • -. 2005. Hazardous Material Safety, Hazardous Materials Information System (HMIS): Hazmat Incident for calendar Years 1993–2004.

  • Wang, J. 1999. A subjective modelling tool applied to formal ship safety assessment.Ocean Engineering 27: 1019–1035.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • —. 2002. Offshore safety case approach and formal safety assessment of ships.Journal of Safety Research 33: 81–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, J. and P. Foinikis. 2001. Formal safety assessment of containerships.Marine Policy 25: 143–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ventikos, N.P. and H.N. Psaraftis. 2004. Spill accident modelling: a critical survey of the event-decision network in the context of IMO’s formal safety assessment.Journal of Hazardous Materials 107: 59–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wetzel, E.A. 2004. International Shipping: A Focus on the Republic of China: An Interview with Steven R. Blust, Chairman, Federal Maritime Commission.Review of Business 25(3): 5–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whipple, F.L., R.R. Laferriere and S.K. Moon. 1993. M/v “Santa Clara I”: Arsenic Trioxide Response —An Operational Review.Proceedings of the U.S. Marine Safety Council.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Engineering, LTH, Lund University, Ole Römers väg 1, Box 118, SE-22100, Lund, Sweden

    Arben Mullai & Everth Larsson

Authors
  1. Arben Mullai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Everth Larsson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Arben Mullai.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Mullai, A., Larsson, E. Hazardous material incidents: Some key results of a risk analysis. WMU J Marit Affairs 7, 65–108 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03195126

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03195126

Key words

Search

Navigation