Risk Assessment for Transportation of Hazardous Materials through Tunnels
Abstract
Two vehicle collisions involving hazardous materials (HM) occurred in 1999 in the tunnels of Mont Blanc between Italy and France and in Tauern, Austria. These collisions showed that the consequences of such crashes are catastrophic for both the motorists in the tunnel and the tunnel itself. This paper presents a methodology to help decision makers estimate the risk associated with the transportation of HM through tunnels and identify remedial measures to minimize unacceptable risk levels. A risk assessment procedure is used to identify the societal risk of the tunnel. If the risk is above an acceptable level, alternative routes are considered, and the overall risk is estimated for both the route with the tunnel and the alternative routes. The route with the minimum risk is established. If the route of minimum risk is through the tunnel, then risk reduction measures are introduced and the risk assessment methodology is implemented to verify the result. The full implementation of the methodology is demonstrated in a case study. The characteristics of the tunnels, the type of HM, and the characteristics of the traffic and accident risk at each tunnel are accounted for. Given an estimate of risk for a tunnel produced by the analytical procedure used in this paper, the applicable regulatory criteria at a given location are found to substantially affect the required response. The response may vary from “no restriction to HM traffic,” to “remedies required,” to “total restriction of HM type X is advised” for the subject tunnel. The case study considers several remedial actions and assesses their impact on risk and subsequent recommended actions.
Get full access to this article
View all access and purchase options for this article.
References
1. Accord Dangereux Routier 2001. United Nations Economic Commission for Europe. http://www.unece.org/trans/danger/publi/adr/adr2001/English/ContentsE.html. Accessed May 15, 2009.
2. Accord Dangereux Routier 2009. United Nations Economic Commission for Europe. http://www.unece.org/trans/danger/publi/adr/adr2009/09ContentsE.html. Accessed May 15, 2009.
3. Accord Dangereux Routier 2005. United Nations Economic Commission for Europe. http://www.unece.org/trans/danger/publi/adr/adr2005/05ContentsE.html. Accessed May 15, 2009.
4. Mont Blanc Tunnel. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mont_Blanc_Tunnel. Accessed January 30, 2009.
5. Tauern Road Tunnel. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tauern_Road_Tunnel. Accessed January 30, 2009.
6. Knoflacher H. Transport of Dangerous Materials Through Road Tunnels. Joint OECD/PIARC Research Project ERS2. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris, 1998.
7. Saccomanno F., and Haastrup P. Influence of Safety Measures on the Risks of Transporting Dangerous Materials through Road Tunnels. Journal of Risk Analysis, Vol. 22, No. 6, 2002, pp. 1059–1069.
8. Pijawka K. D., Foote S., and Soesilo A. Risk Assessment of Transporting Hazardous Material: Route Analysis and Hazard Management. In Transportation Research Record 1020, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1985, pp. 1–6.
9. Saccomanno F. F., Van Aerde M., and Queen D. Interactive Selection of Minimum-Risk Routes for Dangerous Materials Shipments. In Transportation Research Record 1148, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1987, pp. 9–17.
10. Abkowitz M., and Cheng P. D.-M. Hazardous Materials Transport Risk Estimation Under Conditions of Limited Data Availability. In Transportation Research Record 1245, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1989, pp. 14–22.
11. Erkut E., and Glickman T. Minimax Population Exposure in Routing Highway Shipments of Hazardous Materials. In Transportation Research Record 1602, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1997, pp. 93–100.
12. Ashur S. A., Hadi Baaj M. H., Pijawka K. D., and Serhan D. S. Environmental Impact Assessment of Transporting Hazardous Waste Generated by Maquiladora Industry in U.S.-Mexico Border Region. In Transportation Research Record 1602, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1997, pp. 84–92.
13. Harwood D. W., Russell E. R., and Viner J. G. Characteristics of Accidents and Incidents in Highway Transportation of Hazardous Materials. In Transportation Research Record 1245, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1989, pp. 23–33.
14. Brogan J. D., and Cashwell J. W. Routing Models for the Transportation of Hazardous Materials—State-Level Enhancements and Modification. In Transportation Research Record 1020, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1985, pp. 19–22.
15. Frank W. C., Thill J. C., and Batta R. Spatial Decision Support System for Hazardous Material Truck Routing. Transportation Research Part C, Vol. 8, No. 1-6, 2000, pp. 337–359.
16. Brainard J., Lovett A., and Parfitt J. Assessing Hazardous Waste Transport Risks Using a GIS. International Journal of Geographic Information Systems, Vol. 10, 1996, pp. 831–849.
17. Lepofsky M., Abkowitz M., and Cheng P. D.-M. Transportation Hazard Analysis in Integrated GIS Environment. Journal of Transportation Engineering, Vol. 119, 1993, pp. 239–254.
18. Coutinho-Rodrigues J., Current J., Climaco J., and Ratick S. Interactive Spatial Decision-Support System for Multiobjective Hazardous Materials Location-Routing Problems. In Transportation Research Record 1602, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1997, pp. 101–109.
19. Kara B. Y., and Verter V. Designing a Road Network for Hazardous Materials Transportation. Transportation Science, Vol. 38, 2004, pp. 188–196.
20. Erkut E., and Gzara F. Solving the Hazmat Transport Network Design Problem. Computers and Operations Research, Vol. 35, 2008, pp. 2234–2247.
21. Abkowitz M., Cheng P. D.-M., and Lepofsky M. Use of Geographic Information Systems in Managing Hazardous Materials Shipments. In Transportation Research Record 1261, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1990, pp. 35–43.
22. Lassarre S., Fedra K., and Weigkricht E. Computer-Assisted Routing of Dangerous Goods for Haute-Normandie. Journal of Transportation Engineering, Vol. 119, 1993, pp. 200–210.
23. Schweitzer L. Environmental Justice and Hazmat Transport: A Spatial Analysis in Southern California. Transportation Research Part D, Vol. 11, No. 6, 2006, pp. 408–421.
24. Carotenuto P., Giordani S., and Ricciardelli S. Finding Minimum and Equitable Risk Routes for Hazmat Shipments. Computers and Operations Research, Vol. 34, No. 5, 2007, pp. 1304–1327.
25. Bianco L., Caramia M., and Giordani S. A Bilevel Flow Model for Hazmat Transportation Network Design. Transportation Research Part C, Vol. 17, No. 2, 2009, pp. 175–196.
26. Erkut E., and Alp O. Designing a Road Network for Hazardous Materials Shipments. Computers and Operations Research, Vol. 34, 2007, pp. 1389–1405.
27. Gopalan R., Batta R., and Karwan M. H. The Equity Constrained Shortest Path Problem. Computers and Operations Research, Vol. 17, 1990, pp. 297–307.
28. Gopalan R., Kolluri K. S., Batta R., and Karwan M. H. Modeling Equity of Risk in the Transportation of Hazardous Materials. Operations Research, Vol. 38, 1990, pp. 961–973.
29. Current J., and Ratick S. A Model to Assess Risk, Equity and Efficiency in Facility Location and Transportation of Hazardous Materials. Location Science, Vol. 3, 1995, pp. 187–201.
30. Akgün V., Erkut E., and Batta R. On Finding Dissimilar Paths. European Journal of Operations Research, Vol. 121, 2000, pp. 232–246.
31. Dell'Olmo P., Gentili M., and Scozzari A. On Finding Dissimilar Pareto-Optimal Paths. European Journal of Operations Research, Vol. 162, 2005, pp. 70–82.
32. Bonvicini S., and Spadoni G. A Hazmat Multi-Commodity Routing Model Satisfying Risk Criteria: A Case Study. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, Vol. 21, No. 4, 2008, pp. 345–358.
33. Dutch National Environmental Policy Plan 1989. Premises for Risk Management. Second Chamber of the State General, Session 1988-1989, The Hague, Netherlands, 1989.
34. Fabiano B., Currò F., Palazzi E., and Pastorino R. A Framework for Risk Assessment and Decision-Making Strategies in Dangerous Good Transportation. Journal of Hazardous Materials, Vol. 93, No. 1, 2002, pp. 1–15.
35. Transport of Dangerous Goods Through Road Tunnels: Current National and International Regulations. Reports 1 and 2. OECD and PIARC, Paris, 1997. http://www.oecd.ord/dsti/sti/transpor/road/index.htm. Accessed Nov. 21, 2008.
36. Safety in Tunnels: Transportation of Dangerous Goods Through Road Tunnels. PIARC and OECD, Paris, 2001. http://www.oecd.org/document/9/0,3343,en_2649_34351_2071369_1_1_1_1,00.html. Accessed Nov. 21, 2008.
37. Methods for the Calculation of Physical Effects Due to Releases of Hazardous Materials (Liquids and Gases). In Yellow Book, 3rd ed. TNO, Committee for the Prevention of Disasters, The Hague, Netherlands, 1997.
38. Calculations of the Intensity of Thermal Radiation from Large Fires. First Report of the Major Hazards Assessment Panel–Thermal Radiation Working Group. Institution of Chemical Engineers, Rugby, United Kingdom, 1989.
39. Guidelines for Evaluating the Characteristics of Vapor Cloud Explosions, Flash Fires, and BLEVEs. American Institute of Chemical Engineers, New York, 1998.
40. Fire and Smoke Control in Road Tunnels. PIARC Technical Committee on Road Tunnel Operation, Paris, 1999.
41. Lees F. P. Loss Prevention in the Process Industries. Hazard Identification Assessment and Control, Vol. 2, Butterworth-Heinemann, London, 1996.
42. Guidelines for Chemical Process Quantitative Risk Analysis. American Institute of Chemical Engineers, New York, 2000.
43. Lees F. P. Loss Prevention in the Process Industries. Hazard Identification Assessment and Control, Vol. 3, Butterworth-Heinemann, London, 1996.
44. Area-Specific Societal Risk, Societal Risk on the Map. TNO Report 2006-A-R0021/B. TNO, The Hague, Netherlands, 2006.
45. Major Hazard Aspects of the Transport of Dangerous Substances. Health and Safety Commission, London, 1991. http://www.science-direct.com/science?_ob=ArticleListURL&_method=list&_ArticleListID=969154529&_sort=r&view=c&_acc. Accessed June 15, 2009.
46. Vinnem J. E., and Kristensen W. Use of ALARP Evaluations and Risk Acceptance Criteria for Risk Informed Decision-Making in the Norwegian Offshore Petroleum Industry. Proc. ESREL 2006, Estoril, Portugal, 2006, pp. 2567–2574.
Cite article
Cite article
Cite article
OR
Download to reference manager
If you have citation software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice
Information, rights and permissions
Information
Published In
Article first published online: January 1, 2010
Issue published: January 2010
Authors
Metrics and citations
Metrics
Journals metrics
This article was published in Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board.
VIEW ALL JOURNAL METRICSArticle usage*
Total views and downloads: 33
*Article usage tracking started in December 2016
Altmetric
See the impact this article is making through the number of times it’s been read, and the Altmetric Score.
Learn more about the Altmetric Scores
Articles citing this one
Receive email alerts when this article is cited
Web of Science: 0
Crossref: 7
- Deep Learning Process and Application for the Detection of Dangerous G...
- Development of a Novel Framework for Hazardous Materials Placard Recog...
- A review on research in transportation of hazardous materials
- INSIGMA: an intelligent transportation system for urban mobility enhan...
- Methodological aspects for modeling the environmental risk of transpor...
- Contribution of the INSIGMA Project to the Field of Intelligent Transp...
- Methodological approaches for tunnel classification according to ADR a...
Figures and tables
Figures & Media
Tables
View Options
Get access
Access options
If you have access to journal content via a personal subscription, university, library, employer or society, select from the options below:
loading institutional access options
Alternatively, view purchase options below:
Purchase 24 hour online access to view and download content.
Access journal content via a DeepDyve subscription or find out more about this option.
