DOCSLIB.ORG

Risk Assessment Moz Power Invest, S.A

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Risk Assessment Moz Power Invest, S.A REPORT Central Térmica de Temane Project - Risk Assessment Moz Power Invest, S.A. and Sasol New Energy Holdings (Pty) Ltd Submitted to: Ministry of Land, Environment and Rural Development (MITADER) Submitted by: Golder Associados Moçambique Limitada 6th Floor, Millenium Park Building, Vlademir Lenine Avenue No 174 Maputo, Moçambique +258 21 301 292 Report No. 18103533-321094-18 April 2019 April 2019 18103533-321094-18 DOCUMENT CHANGE HISTORY PAGE/LINE CHANGE DATE REV Document Initial Release 11th September 2018 0 Document Updated to comments 10th October 208 1 received from the client i April 2019 18103533-321094-18 Distribution List 12 x copies - National Directorate of Environment (DINAB) 4 x copies - Provincial Directorate for Land, Environment and Rural Development (DPTADER)-I'bane 1 x copy - World Bank Group 1 x copy - SNE, EDM and TEC 1 x copy - Golder project folder i April 2019 18103533-321094-18 Executive Summary RISCOM has completed a quantitative risk assessment for the Central Térmica de Temane (CTT) project located in the Inhambane Province, Mozambique to quantify the extent of the impacts on and risks to the surrounding communities posed by the hazardous chemicals to be handled on site. The methodology used is based on the legal requirements of the Netherlands, and the Bevi reference manual for risk assessments developed by the Netherlands National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM). It can be concluded from the study that: Some of the proposed incidents associated with natural gas, were found to have risks beyond the site boundary of greater than (1x10-6 fatalities per person per year) which is an internationally applied measure used to assess risks associated with hazardous chemicals and assess any limitations on land usage to protect vulnerable groups and communities; The Identified risks fall into the ALARP range (1 x 10-6 fatalities per person per year to 1 x 10-4 fatalities per person per year) which would be acceptable, with the potential for reduction during detailed engineering. Some mitigation measures have been proposed for consideration by the project; These will impact not significantly on the public due to the low population density in the vicinity of the facility and the extent and nature of the impacts, particularly if the land is allocated for industrial use; National standards for societal risk in Mozambique have not been identified; The methodology used in this assessment is based on the legal requirements of the Netherlands, as outlined in CPR 18E (Purple Book; 1999) and the Bevi reference manual for risk assessments (RIVM (2009)), developed by the Netherlands National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM). The evaluation of the acceptability of the risks is accessed in accordance with the UK Health and Safety Executive (HSE) ALARP criteria that clearly cover land use, based on the determined risks. The BEVI reference manual is widely used as a guideline for QRAs in many jurisdictions including South Africa. The surrounding areas are largely bush/natural vegetation, and there is little evidence on satellite imagery to suggest that the land is inhabited. This has been confirmed by referencing the list of sensitive receptors for the project. It is understood that a 500m partial protection zone (PPZ) would be applied to the site, which would further negate the impacts of hazardous materials on the public. The societal risks for both alternatives would not exceed the threshold value and were not presented; A quantitative assessment of the environmental impacts of the various scenarios identified that the impacts would be of low significance (<15) based on the scoring system applied. This can be attributed to the short durations associated with hazardous chemical losses of containment (minutes) compared with those of environmental impacts (years); and RISCOM has not found sufficient differentiation between the proposed technology solutions (Closed Circuit Gas Turbine and Open Circuit Gas Engine) based on community safety/quantitative risk assessment to decide either way and have not expressed a specific preference for either technology. The available information allows a medium confidence level in the assessment. This is based on the information provided being at a detailed conceptual level, which has the potential for changes during implementation and construction. Typically, a high level of confidence would only be assigned based on a review of designs that are finalised for construction. RISCOM did not identify any fatal flaws that would prevent the project proceeding to the detailed engineering phase of the project. ii September 2018 18103533-321094-18 Table of Contents 1.0 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................................... 1 2.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE KEY PROJECT COMPONENTS ........................................................................ 4 2.1 Ancillary Infrastructure ...................................................................................................................... 5 2.2 Water and electricity consumption .................................................................................................... 7 2.3 Temporary Beach Landing Site and Transportation Route Alternative ............................................ 7 2.4 Terms of Reference (TOR) ............................................................................................................. 10 3.0 POLICY, LEGAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE FRAMEWORK ..................................................................... 10 3.1 National Laws .................................................................................................................................. 10 3.2 International Guidelines and Standards .......................................................................................... 11 3.2.1 The World Bank (WB) ................................................................................................................. 11 3.2.1.1 Standard 4: Community Health, Safety and Security ................................................................. 11 3.2.2 Quantitative Risk Assessment .................................................................................................... 13 4.0 RECEIVING ENVIRONMENT ................................................................................................................... 13 4.1 General Background ....................................................................................................................... 13 4.2 Meteorology..................................................................................................................................... 14 4.2.1 Surface Winds ............................................................................................................................. 15 4.2.2 Precipitation and Relative Humidity ............................................................................................ 17 4.2.3 Temperature ................................................................................................................................ 17 4.2.4 Atmospheric Stability................................................................................................................... 18 4.2.5 Meteorological Input Values for Consequence Analysis............................................................. 21 5.0 PROCESS DESCRIPTION ....................................................................................................................... 22 5.1 Site Layout ...................................................................................................................................... 22 5.2 Process Schematics ........................................................................................................................ 22 5.2.1 Natural Gas Pipeline and Fuel Gas System ............................................................................... 23 5.2.2 Combined Cycle Gas Turbine (CCGT) Alternative 1 .................................................................. 25 5.2.3 Open Cycle Gas Engines (OCGE) Alternative 2 ........................................................................ 25 5.2.4 Balance of Plant .......................................................................................................................... 26 6.0 BASELINE CONDITIONS ......................................................................................................................... 27 6.1 Scope of study................................................................................................................................. 27 i September 2018 18103533-321094-18 6.2 Study methodology ......................................................................................................................... 27 6.2.1 Desktop review of available information ..................................................................................... 29 6.2.2 Modelling ..................................................................................................................................... 29 7.0 HAZARD IDENTIFICATION ..................................................................................................................... 29 7.1 Substance Hazards ......................................................................................................................... 29 7.1.1 Chemical Properties ...................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A Model for Mandatory Job Safety Analysis Embedded in the Premit-To-Work System >
    International Gas Union Research Conference 2011 <A MODEL FOR MANDATORY JOB SAFETY ANALYSIS EMBEDDED IN THE PREMIT-TO-WORK SYSTEM > Main author I. K. Yoon KOREA ABSTRACT Permit to Work (PTW) systems is defined as "a formal documented system used to control the certain types of work that are potentially hazardous". Generally, PTW system should be designed to specify the work to be done safely and the precaution to be taken as well as approval, responsibility, permissions of work. For this reason, PTW is regarded as one of the most important safety management system to control the risk of maintenance that causes 30% of the accident in chemical industries. In the early days, PTW was based on paper based system. But recently has continued to evolve into a computer based system. And these advanced systems has been applied to 80% of oil industry in North Sea and upgraded with providing the hazard information as well as supporting documentation. Usually, the hazard information is provided in the form of hazard checklist or attached risk assessment report such as JSA sheet. But when we consider the various types of work, place and environment, all the potential work related hazard cannot be reviewed in the form of prescribed checklist or certain attachment. To review the potential hazard perfectly, the work permit should be supported by Job Safety Analysis (JSA). But it has rarely been seen that company have a rule to require the mandatory JSA whenever permit to work is accomplished. Despite a relatively simple analysis structure, it is time-consuming and person-consuming methodology to complete all the procedure.
    [Show full text]
  • Personal Protective Equipment Hazard Assessment
    WORKER HEALTH AND SAFETY Personal Protective Equipment Hazard Assessment Oregon OSHA Personal Protective Equipment Hazard Assessment About this guide “Personal Protective Equipment Hazard Assessment” is an Oregon OSHA Standards and Technical Resources Section publication. Piracy notice Reprinting, excerpting, or plagiarizing this publication is fine with us as long as it’s not for profit! Please inform Oregon OSHA of your intention as a courtesy. Table of contents What is a PPE hazard assessment ............................................... 2 Why should you do a PPE hazard assessment? .................................. 2 What are Oregon OSHA’s requirements for PPE hazard assessments? ........... 3 Oregon OSHA’s hazard assessment rules ....................................... 3 When is PPE necessary? ........................................................ 4 What types of PPE may be necessary? .......................................... 5 Table 1: Types of PPE ........................................................... 5 How to do a PPE hazard assessment ............................................ 8 Do a baseline survey to identify workplace hazards. 8 Evaluate your employees’ exposures to each hazard identified in the baseline survey ...............................................9 Document your hazard assessment ...................................................10 Do regular workplace inspections ....................................................11 What is a PPE hazard assessment A personal protective equipment (PPE) hazard assessment
    [Show full text]
  • Hazards Analysis Report
    PROJECT MANAGEMENT Doc. No. LUSI SUB-SYSTEM DOCUMENT PM-391-001-34 R0 1.1 Management Hazards Analysis Report Technical Contact: Nadine Kurita LUSI Chief Engineer Signature Date Approved by: Tom Fornek LUSI Project Manager Signature Date Approved by: John Galayda LCLS Project Director Signature Date Rev Description Date 0 Initial Release July 8, 2008 PM-391-001-34 R0 Verify that this is the latest revision. 1 of 34 Check for change orders or requests TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Introduction............................................................................................................. 3 1.1 Purpose and Scope .............................................................................................. 3 1.2 Environment, Worker and Public Safety ............................................................ 3 2. Summary................................................................................................................. 4 2.1 Overview of Hazards .......................................................................................... 4 2.2 Comprehensiveness of the Safety Analysis ........................................................ 5 2.3 Appropriateness of the Accelerator Safety Envelope ......................................... 5 3. Project Description..................................................................................................5 3.1 X-Ray Pump/Probe Diffraction Instrument........................................................ 6 3.2 Coherent X-ray Imaging Instrument..................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Personal Protective Equipment/Job Hazard Analysis Program
    SALISBURY UNIVERSITY PPE/JOB HAZARD ANALYSIS STANDARD PRACTICE INSTRUCTION DATE: January 15, 2019 SUBJECT: Personal Protective Equipment/Job Hazard Analysis Program REGULATORY STANDARD: 29 CFR §1910.132-138. I. PURPOSE: The purpose of this program is to establish procedures for wearing Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) by all Salisbury University employees, contractors and visitors on campus. This program supports compliance with the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) standards that cover PPE, specifically, 29 CFR 1910.132, .133, .135, .136 and .138. This program applies to all University employees, contractors and visitors who work in areas that contain hazards to the eyes, face, head, hands and feet. Respiratory and noise hazards are covered in the S0U Respiratory Protection Program and the SU Hearing Conservation Program. II. DEFINITIONS: ANSI (American National Standards Institute): A nonprofit organization that approves national safety standards. Ophthalmologist: A physician/surgeon who specializes in diagnosing and treating eye diseases and disorders. Optician: A skilled technician who, when given a medical prescription, is qualified to make, fit and dispense eyeglasses and contact lenses, either in an optical laboratory or for retail sale to the public; opticians do not examine patients or write prescriptions. Optometrist: A licensed primary eye-care provider who performs eye examinations, prescribes and dispenses eyeglasses and contact lenses and performs some diagnostic work, such as screening for glaucoma or cataracts. Plano: A common term for nonprescription safety glasses. PPE: Personal Protective Equipment III. RESPONSIBILITIES: A. The Program Administrator The SU PPE Program Administrator is the Director of Sustainability & Environmental Safety. Responsibilities include: Modify only under the supervision of the Safety Manager.
    [Show full text]
  • Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) Guide
    Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) Guide Volume 1: General PPE February 2003 F417-207-000 This guide is designed to be used by supervisors, lead workers, managers, employers, and anyone responsible for the safety and health of employees. Employees are also encouraged to use information in this guide to analyze their own jobs, be aware of work place hazards, and take active responsibility for their own safety. Photos and graphic illustrations contained within this document were provided courtesy of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Oregon OSHA, United States Coast Guard, EnviroWin Safety, Microsoft Clip Gallery (Online), and the Washington State Department of Labor and Industries. TABLE OF CONTENTS (If viewing this pdf document on the computer, you can place the cursor over the section headings below until a hand appears and then click. You can also use the Adobe Acrobat Navigation Pane to jump directly to the sections.) How To Use This Guide.......................................................................................... 4 A. Introduction.........................................................................................6 B. What you are required to do ..............................................................8 1. Do a Hazard Assessment for PPE and document it ........................................... 8 2. Select and provide appropriate PPE to your employees................................... 10 3. Provide training to your employees and document it ........................................ 11
    [Show full text]
  • EPA COVID-19 Job Hazard Analysis (JHA) Supplement, July 6, 2020, Final
    EPA COVID-19 Job Hazard Analysis (JHA) Supplement, July 6, 2020, Final Table of Contents 1. Introduction 2. OSHA Worker Exposure Risk to COVID-19, Summary 3. Pre-Travel Considerations 4. EPA COVID-19 Job Hazard Analysis (JHA) Supplement Instructions 5. EPA COVID-19 Job Hazard Analysis (JHA) Supplement Template 6. EPA COVID-19 OLEM Job Hazard Analysis Supplement Example 1. Introduction • The COVID-19 Public Health Emergency is very dynamic. Federal, state and local government guidance is updated frequently. There may be new CDC, OSHA or EPA guidance that will impact the current content of this JHA prior to the next update. As a result, it is important to review the government links in this JHA for new information. Additionally, due to possible differences in state or local health department requirements on COVID-19, the employee, supervisor and the SHEMP manager should review applicable state/local requirements before traveling and deployment to a site. These state/local requirements may be more flexible for essential workers that are traveling into the area, and EPA travel for field work may qualify as such essential travel. • Prior to travel, assess the prevalence for COVID-19 cases in the area(s) you are traveling to (and through) in addition to where you will be performing site work. This assessment should include evaluation of whether the area has demonstrated a downward trajectory of positive tests and documented cases within a 14-day period. Including this will help staff determine how to “assess the prevalence.”. • Specific COVID-19 information can be found on state/territorial/local government and health department websites.
    [Show full text]
  • Onondaga Lake Pre-Design Investigation: Phase Iv Work Plan Addendum 1: Habitat
    FINAL ONONDAGA LAKE PRE-DESIGN INVESTIGATION: PHASE IV WORK PLAN ADDENDUM 1: HABITAT Onondaga County, New York Prepared For: 5000 Brittonfield Parkway East Syracuse, NY 13057 Prepared By: Parsons 290 Elwood Davis Road, Suite 312 Liverpool, New York 13088 Phone: (315) 451-9560 Fax: (315) 451-9570 and 290 Elwood Davis Road Liverpool, NY 13088 JULY 2008 PARSONS ONONDAGA LAKE PDI PHASE IV WORK PLAN ADDENDUM 1: HABITAT FINAL TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................1 2.0 PROJECT OBJECTIVES......................................................................................1 3.0 MOBILIZATION AND LOGISTICS ...................................................................2 4.0 SAMPLE COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS.......................................................3 4.1 Fish Nest Characterization .............................................................................3 4.2 Aquatic Macrophyte Survey...........................................................................4 4.3 Evaluation of Substrate Suitability.................................................................5 5.0 DATA MANAGEMENT AND REPORTING .....................................................6 6.0 REFERENCES ......................................................................................................7 LIST OF TABLES Table 1 Summary of Proposed Sampling Locations, Frequency of Collection, Number of Samples, Sample Timing, and Duration of Sampling LIST OF FIGURES Figure
    [Show full text]
  • Hazard Identification Is the Foundation of a Safe Workplace
    HAZARD IDENTIFICATION Hazard identification is the foundation of a safe workplace. You cannot eliminate, reduce, or manage a risk until you know what the risk is. At the most basic level, hazard identification is simply looking at a task or a situation and asking, “Is there anything here that could hurt someone?” Several standard hazard identification tools that can help you document the hazard-identification and risk-management process are: Job hazard analysis (JHA) Personal protective Also referred to as a job safety analysis (JSA), a equipment (PPE) assessment JHA is a systematic way of identifying hazards Required by Oregon OSHA, a PPE assessment associated with a specific task or operation. determines what PPE is required for a specific The JHA simplifies the process of identifying job or task. This document also serves as a hazards by looking at the individual subtasks valuable training and communication tool for involved in a specific job. teaching employees what PPE they need to wear to perform their work safely Pre-task planning (PTP) Pretask planning is similar to conducting a JHA. Hazard inspections, PTP is a valuable tool in construction and other surveys, and observations work where the operations and conditions can Hazard inspections can be general or specific. change frequently. It can be used daily to remind They can include the use of a checklist or be workers of the risks associated with the work documented using a “blank page” approach. they will perform that day. Checklists are easy to use and considered best for ensuring compliance with regulations, rules, and policies.
    [Show full text]
  • JOB SAFETY ANALYSIS PROGRAM Owner: Risk Management Document Number: Q-001 Revision No: 01 Date Last Revised: 03-27-2018
    JOB SAFETY ANALYSIS PROGRAM Owner: Risk Management Document number: Q-001 Revision No: 01 Date last revised: 03-27-2018 Table of Contents 1.0 Applicability ......................................................................................................................................................2 2.0 Scope ...............................................................................................................................................................2 3.0 Definitions ........................................................................................................................................................2 4.0 Core Information and Requirements ...............................................................................................................2 5.0 Roles and Responsibilities ...............................................................................................................................6 6.0 Goals, Objectives and Performance Measures ...............................................................................................7 7.0 Training ............................................................................................................................................................8 8.0 Program Evaluation .........................................................................................................................................8 9.0 Resources ........................................................................................................................................................8
    [Show full text]
  • Independent Hazard Analysis
    Prepared by: Independent Hazard Analysis Jupiter Drill Break Tierra del Mar Subsea Cable Landing Site Tillamook County, Oregon Peer-Reviewed by: 28 August 2020 The business of sustainability 28 August 2020 Independent Hazard Analysis Jupiter Drill Break Tierra del Mar Subsea Cable Landing Site Tillamook County, Oregon Paul Krause, PhD Kim Marcus LG, LEG, LHG ERM Partner ERM Partner Nikki Payne, P.E. ERM Partner ERM-West, Inc. 1050 SW 6th Ave. Suite 1650 Portland, Oregon 97204 Geosyntec Consultants, Inc, (Peer-Reviewer) 920 SW 6th Ave, Suite 600 Portland, Oregon 97204 © Copyright 2020 by ERM Worldwide Group Ltd and / or its affiliates (“ERM”). All rights reserved. No part of this work may be reproduced or transmitted in any form, or by any means, without the prior written permission of ERM www.erm.com Version: 1.0 28 August 2020 INDEPENDENT HAZARD ANALYSIS CONTENTS Jupiter Drill Break CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .............................................................................................................................. 1 1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................ 2 1.2 Overview of Analysis ............................................................................................................................ 4 1.3 Credentials of Preparers ....................................................................................................................... 4 2. BACKGROUND .................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Methods of Control
    MODULE 4 METHODS OF CONTROL Recognize Evaluate Control At the end of this module, you will be able to… Identify the three types of control that should be used to achieve electrical safety. Identify the engineering, administrative and PPE electrical controls you use on your job as well as the controls you should be using. Identify facts and procedures relating to lockout/tagout. List the steps required to achieve an electrically safe condition. Recognize when a work permit is required to work on energized electrical circuits. Recognize the appropriate warning signs to alert employees to the danger of electricity. Recognize the appropriate PPE to use based on the calculated energy value of an energy source. Given a case study, determine the most appropriate method of control and necessary corrective action. Prevention Strategies for Electrical Hazards 1 © 2008 National Safety Council MODULE 4 PARTICIPANT GUIDE Controls for Electrical Hazards Question: What is a control? Answer: Three Types of Control Engineering—Engineering controls engineer the hazard out by initial design specifications or by applying substituion methods, isolation, enclosure, or ventilation. Of the three types of controls, engineering control methods should be considered first. Examples: Administrative—Administrative controls reduce employee exposures through methods such as education and training, work reduction, job rotation, maintenance/repairs, housekeeping, personal hygiene, and appropriate work practices. Administrative controls depend on constant human implementation or intervention. Examples: Personal Protective Equipment (PPE)—Personal Protective Equipment is worn by employees to protect them from the environment. PPE includes anything from gloves to full body suits with self-contained breathing apparatus and can be used with engineering and administrative controls.
    [Show full text]
  • Control of Hazardous Energy
    Control of Hazardous Energy (Lockout/Tagout – 1910.147) “Authorized” - Students’ Manual A Program of the Health & Safety Department International Union, UAW This material was revised under grant #SH17038-08-60-F26 from the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, U.S. Department of Labor. It does not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the U.S. Department of Labor, nor does mention of trade names, If you have suggestions or questions, contact: commercial products, or organizations imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. Education and Health & Safety Department, UAW This material was revised under grant #SH-22230-11-60-F-26 from the 8000 East Jefferson Avenue Occupational Safety and Health Administration, U.S. Department of Labor. Detroit, MI 48214 It does not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the U.S. Department of Labor, nor does mention of trade names, commercial products, or Phone: 313. 926.5563 organizations imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. Fax: 313. 926.5755 February 2012 Control of Hazardous Energy (LOTO 1910.147) - Authorized Course Goal Course Goal – The aim of this program is to provide comprehensive on-site training to high-risk workers (i.e. skilled trades and maintenance workers) and management on the requirements of 1910.147, “Control of Hazardous Energy” and the prevention of serious injuries and fatalities during service and maintenance operations at their worksites. Participants will develop an understanding of the requirements of the Lockout/Tagout (LOTO) Standard and will be able to identify and reduce, eliminate or control the hazardous energy in their workplace during “service and maintenance operations”.
    [Show full text]