ShipperCarrier Cooperative Efforts in Risk Analysis P040059

1
Shipper/Carrier Cooperative Efforts in Risk
Analysis (P04-0059)
Presented by Mark P. Stehly

• Transportation Research Board
• Annual Meeting
• Washington, DC
• January 11-15, 2004

2
Joint Effort By Following People

• Dennis Ashworth
• Cherry Burke
• Corporate Distribution Safety ConsultantE.I.
  DuPont de Nemours
• Mark Stehly
• Assistant Vice PresidentEnvironment and Research
  DevelopmentBurlington Northern Santa Fe
  Railway

• Chris Barkan
• Associate Professor DirectorRailroad
  Engineering ProgramUniversity of Illinois at
  Urbana-Champaign

3
Paradox of Distribution Risk Management

• Extensive data and sophisticated analysis often
  required and results can be difficult to
  communicate
• Many stakeholders both inside and outside ones
  company have a role and need to understand
• Paradoxically, if simpler methods are used, they
  may not stand up to the scrutiny of risk analysis
  experts
• Thus, the challenge is to preserve the analytical
  rigor, and enhance the ability to communicate the
  results
• Information technology advances over the past
  decade have brought this objective within reach

4
Distribution Risk Management
What is Distribution Risk Management? Pre-Respons
ible Care An informal process persons
responsible for the distribution of chemical
products undertook to strive to have our products
distributed as safely as possible within business
constraints.
5
Distribution Risk Management
What is Distribution Risk Management Responsible
Care Distribution Code Risk Management MP 1.1
Distribution Risk Prioritization and Reviews
Regular evaluations of chemical distribution
risks which consider the hazards of the material,
the likelihood of accidents/incidents and the
potential for human and environmental exposure
from release of the material over the route of
transport. MP 1.2 Distribution Risk Reduction
Implementation of chemical distribution risk
reduction measures that are appropriate to the
level of risk. MP 1.3 Incident Reporting and
Implementation of Preventative Measures
Internal reporting and investigation of chemical
distribution accidents/incidents, and
implementation of preventative measures.
6
Distribution Risk Management
7
Distribution Risk Management
Process Summary
Chemical Listing
Chemical Hazard Ranking
Movement Exposure Ranking
Prioritization
Risk Reviews
Risk Reduction Alternative Development
Risk Reduction Implementation
8
Distribution Risk ManagementChemical Listing -
Example
Product
Mode
Tons/Year
Origin
Destination (miles)
Methyl Mercaptan Styrene Sulfuric
Acid Xylene 1-Dodecene
Rail Barge Truck Rail Truck
9,000 160,000 48 12,000 200
Houston, TX St. James, LA Baton Rouge,
LA Pascagoula, MS Hammond, IN
Chicago, IL (1,089) Marietta, OH
(1,051) Belle Chasse, LA (91) New Orleans, LA
(114) Albany, NY (808)
9
Distribution Risk Management -Prioritization
Movement Exposure Ranking
Chemical Hazard Ranking
10
Distribution Risk Management -Chemical Hazard
Ranking
Chemical Listing
Chemical Hazard Ranking
Movement Exposure Ranking
Prioritization
Risk Reviews
Risk Reduction Alternative Development
Risk Reduction Implementation
11
Distribution Risk Management -Chemical Hazard
Ranking
Two steps based on
DOT Hazard Class NFPA Rating
NFPA Rating
DOT Hazard Class
12
Distribution Risk Management -Chemical Hazard
Ranking (DOT)
Chemical Hazard Ranking Based on DOT Hazard
Priority List (49 CFR 173.2 (a))
Chemical
DOT Hazard Class
Ranking Category
Radioactive Material Poisonous Gases Flammable
Gases Non-flammable Gases Poisonous Liquids, PG
I Pyrophoric Material Self-Reactive
Material Poisonous Liquids / Solids Spontaneously
Combustible Dangerous When Wet Flammable
Solid Flammable Liquid Corrosive
Material Oxidizer Combustible Liquids Miscellaneou
s Hazardous Material
Methyl Mercaptan Styrene,
Xylene Sulfuric Acid 1-Dodecene
Very High (4) Very High (4) Very High (4) Very
High (4) Very High (4) High (3) High (3) High
(3) High (3) High (3) Medium (2) Medium
(2) Medium (2) Medium (2) Low (1) Low (1)
13
Distribution Risk Management -Chemical Hazard
Ranking (NFPA)
Chemical Hazard Ranking Based on NFPA Hazard
Values Health (0-4) Flammability (0-4)
Reactivity (0-4)
NFPA Total
Ranking Category
Chemical
10-12 7-9 4-6 0-3
Very High (4) High (3) Medium (2) Low (1)
Methyl Mercaptan (4408) Styrene
(2327) Xylene (2305) Sulfuric Acid
(3025) 1-Dodecene (0101)
14
Distribution Risk Management -Movement Exposure
Ranking
Chemical Listing
Chemical Hazard Ranking
Movement Exposure Ranking
Prioritization
Risk Reviews
Risk Reduction Alternative Development
Risk Reduction Implementation
15
Distribution Risk Management -Movement Exposure
Ranking
Two steps based on
Ton-Miles / Year Population Exposure / Year
Population Exposure
Ton - Miles
16
Distribution Risk Management -Movement Exposure
Ranking - Example
Avg. Trip Distance
Product
Mode
Tons/Year
Ton-Miles / Year
Methyl Mercaptan Styrene Sulfuric
Acid Xylene 1-Dodecene
Rail Barge Truck Rail Truck
9,000 160,000 48 12,000 200
1,089 1,051 91 114 808
9,801,000 168,160,000 4,368 1,368,000 161,600
17
Distribution Risk Management -Movement Exposure
Ranking
Ton-Miles / Year Tons Transported/Year x
Transportation Route Distance in Miles
Ton-Miles/Year
Ranking Category
Chemical
Styrene Xylene, Methyl Mercaptan 1-Dodecene Sulfur
ic Acid
Very High (4) High (3) Medium (2) Low (1)
gt 10,000,000 gt 1,000,000 gt 100,000 lt 100,000
18
Distribution Risk Management -Movement Exposure
Ranking Example
Avg. Trips/Year
Avg. Population Exposure/Trip
Avg. Population Exposure/Year
Product
Methyl Mercaptan / Rail Styrene / Barge Sulfuric
Acid / Truck Xylene / Rail 1-Dodecene / Truck
103 50 2 137 7
1,001,945 450,000 337,000 128,000 1,047,000
103,200,000 22,500,000 674,000 17,536,000 7,329,00
0
19
Distribution Risk Management -Movement Exposure
Ranking
Movement Exposure Ranking Based on Population
Exposure / Year. Population Exposure/Year
Average Population Exposed/Chemical Shipment
(1-mile radius) x Average of Trips/Year
Population Exposure/Year
Ranking Category
Chemical
gt 100,000,000 gt 10,000,000 gt 1,000,000 lt
1,000,000
Very High (4) High (3) Medium (2) Low (1)
Methyl Mercaptan Styrene Xylene 1-Dodecene Sulf
uric Acid
20
Distribution Risk Management -Prioritization
Chemical Listing
Chemical Hazard Ranking
Movement Exposure Ranking
Prioritization
Risk Reviews
Risk Reduction Alternative Development
Risk Reduction Implementation
21
Distribution Risk Prioritization
Chemical Hazard Ranking
Medium
Movement Exposure Ranking
22
Distribution Risk Prioritization
23
Distribution Risk Management -Risk Reviews
Chemical Listing
Chemical Hazard Ranking
Movement Exposure Ranking
Prioritization
Risk Reviews
Risk Reduction Alternative Development
Risk Reduction Implementation
24
Product Movement Methyl Mercaptan Borger,
Texas to Taft, Louisiana by Rail

• Product Properties
• Toxic Gas
• DOT Hazard Class 2.3
• Marine Pollutant
• Inhalation Hazard,Zone C
• Use
• Methionine (amino acid) and other Ag chemicals
• Quantity/Railcar
• 156K pounds

• Tank Car
• 105S500W, with 1/2 Headshields

25
What Is a Risk Review?
What is Risk?
Risk P1 x P2 x C P1
Probability of Event (accident) P2
Probability of Event (release) C
Consequences of Event Influences on P1 - mode
carrier selection routing (road or track
quality, yard visits) Influences on P2 -
container design, maintenance, securement
speed Influences on C - material properties
routing (population) emergency response
Risk Review ? Route Review
26
Current Case

• Assume mode, container, carrier, and processes
  reviewed - found acceptable, no changes warranted
• What about the route? Is it the best?
• What alternatives are there?
• What factors to consider?
• What metrics to use?
• Where to get information?

27
TAFT
28
Dos and Donts for Route Evaluation

• Dont go it alone
• Dont assume you know how the railroad operates
• Dont skip it if you dont have in-house risk
  expertise

DO work with the railroads to identify and
evaluate alternate routes!
29
Other Dos for Route Evaluation

• Recognize that people use the risk term
  differently
• Some mean just the probability of an event
• Some mean just the consequences of an accident
• Some mean just the low probability, very high
  consequence event
• Some really mean risk!

DO work with the railroad and persons in your
own company to establish common terminology and
goals for a specific assessment!
30
Route Factors for Possible Examination

• Trip Length
• Total Trip Time
• Total Transit Time
• of Carriers
• of Trains
• Switched in Blocks
• Key Route

• Ave. Detector Spacing
• Segment Variations in Acc. Rate
• Major Popn. Centers
• Overall Popn. Density
• Major Popn. Centers and Density in 1 Mile Radius

31
Where Can We Get This Information?

• Trip Length
• Total Trip Time
• Total Transit Time
• of Carriers
• of Trains
• Switched in Blocks
• Key Route

• Ave. Detector Spacing
• Segment Variations in Acc. Rate
• Major Popn. Centers
• Overall Popn. Density
• Major Popn. Centers and Density in 1 Mile Radius

Generally available from railroad - but must
know who to ask!
Available from maps, census data - and some
Geographic Information Systems
32
What are the most feasible routes?
TAFT
33
Choosing a route that merely minimizes population
exposure can lead to lengthy, circuitous routings
34
Consider the feasible route options
35
Option 1

• Borger (PNR) - Amarillo (BNSF) - Fort Worth (UP)
  - Dallas (UP) - Shreveport (UP) - Alexandria (UP)
  -Taft (UP)
• Miles 920
• Popn (1 mile radius) 650,000
• Several population centers DFW area highest

36
Option 2

• Borger (PNR) - Amarillo (BNSF) - Lubbock (BNSF) -
  Somerville (BNSF) - Beaumont (UP) - Taft (UP)
• Miles 1,038
• Popn (1 mile radius) 434,000
• Fewer population centers Beaumont highest

37
Option 3

• Borger (PNR) - Amarillo (BNSF) - Lubbock (BNSF) -
  Somerville (BNSF) - Rosenberg (BNSF) - Houston
  (UP) - Beaumont (UP) -Taft (UP)
• Miles 1,069
• Popn (1 mile radius) 671,000
• Added population centers Houston and Beaumont

38
Rail carrier responsibility
Information from the carrier is critical to
assess risk and develop effective options
39
Railroad TrainConsist Information

• Emergency contact and basic hazard information is
  provided

Car of interest DJAX 77380 methyl mercaptan
shipment from Borger to Taft

• Hazmat cars in the train are conspicuously shown
  in the train consist

40
Emergency response information

• Emergency response information for each hazmat
  car in the train consist is also provided
• This information is contained in all train
  consists, irrespective of the route, or the
  railroad
• Available for use by first responders arriving on
  the scene

41
Distribution Risk Management -Trip
Characteristics
Trip Characteristics Route 1 Route 2 Route 3
Trip Length, in miles 920 1,040 1,070 Trip
Transit Time (days) 5 7 6 Number of
Carriers 3 3 3 Number of Train Connections 5 5 4
of trip along key routes 100 100 100




42
Track Class
Track affects probability of derailment
Track Class Derailment Rate 3 0.7 4 0.2 5 0.1
FRA reportable derailments per billion gross ton
miles
43
Trackside Warning Detectors (TWD)

• Roller bearing failure is an important cause of
  train derailments
• TWDs detect overheated bear-ings before they fail
  (and other defects)
• Closer spacing of TWDs increases likelihood of
  detection

Photos diagram from Canadian Transportation
Safety Board
44
Signal System
Photo by E.H.Robl
Photo by B.C Hellman

• Signal system can detect broken rail in track
  ahead
• If a rail breaks, the signal will go to red
  aspect, indicating Stop
• In CTC territory, dispatcher willalso be alerted

45
Distribution Risk Management -Track
Characteristics
Route 1
Route 2
Route 3
Track Characteristics
920 4 17 75 10 15
1,040 4 18 60 15 25
1,070 4 15 75 15 10
Trip Length, in miles Track Class TWD
Spacing Signal system ( of route) CTC
(signal) ABS (signal) TWC (non-signaled)


46
Distribution Risk Management -Predictors Of
Consequences
Attribute
Route 1
Route 2
Route 3
Population within 1 mile
650,000
434,000
671,000
Other attributes we would like to measure
Estimated response time Groundwater
vulnerability Cleanup costs
47
Distribution Risk Management -Movement Partial
Risk Ranking
Trip Characteristics
Route 1
Route 2
Route 3
1 2
2 1
3 3
Probability of a release Consequences to people
Need more data and development Consequences to
the environment
(1 is lowest, 3 is highest)
48
Distribution Risk Management -Summary

• Risk management requires a team effort
• Routing
• Loading and unloading
• Packaging
• Operating practices and infrastructure
• Answers may not always be overwhelming
• Change may be possible to reduce risk
• Periodically re-evaluate to look at changed
  circumstances
• Communication is vitally important