Accident and Catastrophes - Coursework Example

Name: Tutor: Course: Date: a. Probability of loss of product containment In the case study: Probability of failure in 5 years = 0.2 Probability of failure of level recorder = 0.5 Probability of failure of manual shutdown = 0.5 Probability of failure of the alarm = 0.5 Probability of failure of the shutdown system = 0.5 Probability will be obtained by = probability of failure of 1 in 5 years* probability of failure of level recorder* probability of failure to detect and initiate a manual shutdown* probability of failure of the alarm* probability of failure of the shutdown system Substituting into the above equation, we obtain: P= 0.2*0.5*0.5*0.5*0.5 = 0.0125 b. Likelihood of the incident resulting in vapour cloud explosion and fatality. Vapour cloud explosion that results into fatality can be contributed by the overflow of the vessel and the probability of the fuel catching fire resulting in explosion1. This will be illustrated as shown below: Probability = probability of overfilling the vessel* probability of the fuel catching fire = 0.5*0.5 = 0.25 c. The following fault tree diagram provides an illustrations of the risks involved in the case: 1. Ferret, E., & Hughes, P., ‘Introduction to Health and Safety at Work: The Handbook for the Nebosh National General Certificate’, Industrial Law, vol. 7, no. 3, 2011, p. 69. d. Comments on the risks compared with the risk tolerance criteria. The risk of product loss containment is 0.0125 which is outside the risk tolerance criteria of 10-6. This implies that there is a high chance of loss of product containment during the use of the vessel. Consequently, there is the need to ensure this risk is controlled so that the operation of the vessel does not result into loss of fuel containment. In addition, the risk of likelihood of an event that results into cloud explosion is 0.25 which is greater than the tolerance criteria of 10-6. This implies that there is a high risk of vapour explosion, thus, there is the need to develop measures for preventing the explosions. e. Role of human error in occurrence of major risk incident. Human error can contribute significantly towards occurrence of major risks. This can be explained by use of various theoretical models2. For instance, according to the ‘Swiss Cheese Model’, of system failure every step in a procedure has a possibility of failure to an extent. This can be represented by means of a stack of slices of cheese. In the stack; the holes illustrate opportunities for the failure of the process2. When there is an error, the problem is able to pass through the hole in one layer, but in the next layer the holes are placed in different locations and the problem is likely to be caught. 2. Mannan, Sam. Lees' Loss Prevention in the Process Industries Hazard Identification, Assessment and Control. [S.l.]: Butterworth-Heinemann, vol. 1, no. 4, 2012, p. 51  Each layer represents a defence against a possible error that affects the outcome. When the error is catastrophic, the holes must be aligned in the same path in the slices enabling all defences to be defeated and resulting in occurrence of an error. When the layers are created with the holes in the same line, this result into an inherent flaw in the system that will enable the problem persist from the beginning of the process until the end of the outcome. Slices of cheese represent opportunities that enable a person stop an error, when a person puts up more defences, the better the chances of preventing an error. In addition, when the holes are fewer and also smaller, the more likely it is to stop an error that is likely to occur. In addition, the theory of automatic subsystems theory states that when we intend to perform a particular action, there are several competing plans on how the action should be completed. As a result of this competition, there is a possibility of committing an error that is incorrect in one way but highly lawful in another way. The theory of automatic subsystems is explained by the frequency gambling schema. The extent to which decisions are based on gambling determines whether an error will be committed or not4. When a person makes more decisions without being sure of the outcome of the decision, there is a high chance of making an error. On the other hand, when a person does not gamble, the possible error can be anticipated and there is less likelihood that an action will result into an error. ‘Rasmussen’s SRK Taxonomy is applicable in understanding human error in performance of tasks. This framework consists of three levels; skill-based level, rule based level and knowledge-based level. In skill-based level, an activity requires little or no conscious control in order to perform. However, it requires skills. Consequently, when a person is more conscious in the performance of tasks while the person has little skills, there is a high chance of making an error and the reverse is true for a person who has more skills. This level is based on the observation that unintended deviations from the expected principles performed by a person can result into errors4. In the rule-based level, a task may require particular principles to be followed in order to achieve the intended outcome. When the person involved is unable to follow these principles, there is a high chance of making an error even if the person has the knowledge and skills to perform the task. This rule is based on the principle that when a person is unable to choose consciously between alternative courses, there is a high chance of making errors. 3. Muhlbauer, W. Kent. Pipeline Risk Management Manual Ideas, Techniques, and Resources. Amsterdam: Elsevier/Golf Professional Pub, vol. 6, no. 2, 2004, p. 4. The third level of this framework is knowledge-based level. This is the level which states that some tasks require the person performing them to have particular knowledge and reasoning in order to perform them successfully and accomplish the desired results. The person involved must know the fundamental principles and laws that govern the system. Thus, when a person does not have the right knowledge that enables him achieve specific goals while performing a task, there is a high chance of making an error4. The principle of knowledge based level is based on the fact that people tend to define procedures based on knowledge about systems being used and possibility of making errors is high when a person is unable to apply the knowledge in order to perform a particular task. Hale and Glendon’s ‘Behaviour in the Face of Danger Model’ is also applicable in understanding human error in a number of ways. This model states that in any working environment, there is always danger that can result into harm. However, actions and efforts are always made in the forms of equipment design and safeguarding, skilled procedures and preventive maintenance and allocation of responsibilities with the focus on preventing the danger. When all the relevant dangers and possible hazards have been foreseen and preventive measures for them have been designed, there is less likelihood of occurrence of damage. However, if there is a deviation from the desired, normal state in which a task needs to be performed, an accidental process can start to take place. f. Barriers that should be introduced to increase the level of safety and decrease the level of risk There exist various measures that can be implemented to reduce the level of risks at work place. An example of such a measure is proper design of equipment and facilities at work place so that they do not cause errors while being used. In addition, it involves selection of skilled operators who are less likely to make mistakes that cab be costly to an organization. Another measure can involve performing preventive maintenance activities on all equipment and facilities at a particular workplace so that chances of breakdown that can result into errors are prevented4. Furthermore, the organization concerned should allocate responsibility of safety measurement to qualified persons so that they conduct regular maintenance tasks on machinery and other equipment so that errors are anticipated and prevented. In order to ensure safety at workplace, it is required that that the responsible person should conduct consultation, cooperation and coordination activities with other people at workplace. 4. Howarth, T. & Griffith, A., ‘Construction Health and Safety Management’. Technical Law, vol. 4, no. 1, 2014, p. 31. This involves sharing responsibilities for health and safety matters with other members in the business environment. For instance, it suggests that when a person is involved in seeking the services of hired workers, the person has the duty of care for the people with the task they are involved in. in these circumstances, it is required that the hazards must be identified and precautions to be taken with the hired workforce so that accidents and errors do not take place5. It is not right to assume that someone has the responsibility of taking care of health and safety needs at work place. It is recommended that the person performing a particular task should be identified and there should be cooperation with the person so that any risks can be identified and eliminated. The management of any organization has a role to play in control of any hazards that are anticipated at a work place. For instance, it is required that the management should understand the operational conditions at work place and understand what could go wrong and the consequences that can be experienced5. This should be followed by identifying what can be done to eliminate health and safety risks resulting from business undertaking. This is because a number of hazards are well-known and their associated control measures can be effectively established and implemented. In these circumstances, the management is required to assess the risk and determine how the risk can be controlled in an effective manner. It also involves thinking about ways in which employees in the organization might be harmed and establishing the knowledge of employees about areas where hazards might be experienced, due to the fact that they are more likely to know where there are hazards compared with the management. For each hazard, it is important to know those who are most likely to be harmed so that the best ways of controlling them can be identified. This can best be done by identifying groups of people such as those that have particular requirements. For instance, new employees, migrant employees, those who have disabilities, contractors and temporary workers are more likely to be harmed in different ways. This should be followed by determining those who are less likely to be harmed at a particular time at work place, such as visitors and maintenance employees. Consider the needs of members of the public if there is a possibility of subjecting them to harm by work activities. If the management is involved in sharing workplace with other business, it is recommended that one should consider the effect of work on other workers. 5. Wilson, Laird, Doug McCutcheon, and Marilyn Buchanan. Industrial Safety and Risk Management. Edmonton: University of Alberta Press, vol. 4, no. 4, 2003, p. 25. Consulting workers is another method that can enable risk management in an organization. According to the requirements of Work Health and Safety Act, the employer is required to consult, so far as reasonably as required, with employee who are involved in work performance. When the workers have a WHS representative, the consultation must involve the representative. Consultation is the process where information is shared and workers are given the reasonable opportunity to express their views and ensuring action is taken on those views so that health and safety matters are addressed5. During the process of conducting risk assessment, the employer is required to consult workers and their health and safety representatives during each stage. This enables the employer draw on the experiences, knowledge and ideas of the employees so that all hazards are identified and effective control measures are chosen. When those who are likely to be harmed by a particular risk have been identified, it is required that risks should be evaluated by determining the ways in which they can occur and ensuring measures are taken to protect those who are likely to be harmed. In order to avoid the risks, some steps such as trying less risky options in performing tasks need to be identified and preventing access to the hazards as much as possible. It is also required that protective equipment should be worn when performing tasks that are likely to be harmful to a person. Other measures can include installing first aid equipment so that any harmed person can be provided with treatment to alleviate the pain or consulting with employees. References 1. Ferret, E., & Hughes, P., ‘Introduction to Health and Safety at Work: The Handbook for the Nebosh National General Certificate’, Industrial Law, vol. 7, no. 3, 2011, p. 69. 2. Mannan, Sam. Lees' Loss Prevention in the Process Industries Hazard Identification, Assessment and Control. [S.l.]: Butterworth-Heinemann, vol. 1, no. 4, 2012, p. 51  3. Muhlbauer, W. Kent. Pipeline Risk Management Manual Ideas, Techniques, and Resources. Amsterdam: Elsevier/Golf Professional Pub, vol. 6, no. 2, 2004, p. 4. 4. Howarth, T. & Griffith, A., ‘Construction Health and Safety Management’. Technical Law, vol. 4, no. 1, 2014, p. 31. 5. Wilson, Laird, Doug McCutcheon, and Marilyn Buchanan. Industrial Safety and Risk Management. Edmonton: University of Alberta Press, vol. 4, no. 4, 2003, p. 25. Read More