Welcome Guest! The IOSH forums are a free resource to both members and non-members. Login or register to use them

Postings made by forum users are personal opinions. IOSH is not responsible for the content or accuracy of any of the information contained in forum postings. Please carefully consider any advice you receive.

Notification

Icon
Error

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
stebello  
#1 Posted : 16 March 2020 15:44:34(UTC)
Rank: New forum user
stebello

Hello everyboy,

I would like to discuss with you about the possibility to build a new gas terminal nearby an existing one (after the construction, the existing one will be dismissed).

I represent the Contractor side, and the Client asked me about the risk to place a working site within a COMAH area, represented by the existing plant. They asked us whether we have reflected the risks associated to 3rd party construction activities in our documents. Actually the QRA we have produced only reflects the risk associated to workers within the site after the commisioning phase, so when the site is operating.

Although from the documentation they gave us, related to the existing plant, it seems that our development can be accepted, what they basically ask is whether the individual risk contours level related to the nearby existing plant could represent an issue for the the workers employed in the new construction activities.

Thanks for the opportunity to discuss with you,

Stefano

Roundtuit  
#2 Posted : 16 March 2020 16:14:30(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Roundtuit

You have not mentioned construction phase issues such as:

1) Additional traffic in the area for the duration of the build - construction, delivery and workers

2) The possibility of blocking emergency access routes to the existing plant

3) The possibility of interupting critical services to the existing plant - power, water, telecommunications, drains/sewers/effluent

4) The "tie-in" to existing supply lines

5) Service capability to support simultaneous operation of both plants during comissioning & de-comissioning i.e. is there enough capacity in the electrical grid, mains pressure in the water supply

thanks 2 users thanked Roundtuit for this useful post.
stebello on 16/03/2020(UTC), stebello on 16/03/2020(UTC)
Roundtuit  
#3 Posted : 16 March 2020 16:14:30(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Roundtuit

You have not mentioned construction phase issues such as:

1) Additional traffic in the area for the duration of the build - construction, delivery and workers

2) The possibility of blocking emergency access routes to the existing plant

3) The possibility of interupting critical services to the existing plant - power, water, telecommunications, drains/sewers/effluent

4) The "tie-in" to existing supply lines

5) Service capability to support simultaneous operation of both plants during comissioning & de-comissioning i.e. is there enough capacity in the electrical grid, mains pressure in the water supply

thanks 2 users thanked Roundtuit for this useful post.
stebello on 16/03/2020(UTC), stebello on 16/03/2020(UTC)
stebello  
#4 Posted : 16 March 2020 17:12:01(UTC)
Rank: New forum user
stebello

Originally Posted by: Roundtuit Go to Quoted Post

You have not mentioned construction phase issues such as:

1) Additional traffic in the area for the duration of the build - construction, delivery and workers

2) The possibility of blocking emergency access routes to the existing plant

3) The possibility of interupting critical services to the existing plant - power, water, telecommunications, drains/sewers/effluent

4) The "tie-in" to existing supply lines

5) Service capability to support simultaneous operation of both plants during comissioning & de-comissioning i.e. is there enough capacity in the electrical grid, mains pressure in the water supply

Thanks for your contribution. All these issues hereabove listed are interesting and they are worth analysing during construction phase (as far as I know, the No. 2 and 3 should not apply in the present problem). However I think at this moment the main issue is represented by the presence of the workers in the area for the duration of the construction phase, and how the IRPA of the existing nearby plant impacts on such presence.

andybz  
#5 Posted : 17 March 2020 08:24:50(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
andybz

The risk assessment for the existing gas terminal may have assumed low manning levels on site. This becomes invalid during construction because there are likely to multiple people working on site for an extended duration.

So I guess the questions are:

1. Does the existing terminal have to change its mode of working during construction to keep the fire/explosion/toxic risk to construction personnel tolerable? (e.g. shutdown operations)

2. Can the construction method be changed so that people do not need to be in the hazardous area? (e.g. prefabricate offsite).

thanks 1 user thanked andybz for this useful post.
stebello on 17/03/2020(UTC)
Users browsing this topic
Guest
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.