quantitative risk assessment... · the main output of the initial project was a quantitative risk...

Document: 21206-RP-004 Sherpa Consulting Pty Ltd (ABN 40 110 961 898) Revision: 1 Phone: 61 2 9412 4555 Revision Date: 6 Apr 2018 Document ID: 21206-RP-004 without Stolt BST Rev 1.docx Web: www.sherpaconsulting.com

QUANTITATIVE RISK ASSESSMENT

AMERICA'S CUP PROPOSAL WYNYARD HOBSON OPTION

EFFECT OF DISCONTINUING STOLTHAVEN HAMER ST AND

BST OPERATIONS

LAND USE SAFETY PLANNING IMPLICATIONS

PANUKU DEVELOPMENT AUCKLAND

MINISTRY OF BUSINESS INNOVATION AND EMPLOYMENT

PREPARED FOR: H Kirkham

Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment (MBIE)

M Twose

Panuku Development Auckland

DOCUMENT NO: 21206-RP-004

REVISION: 1

DATE: 6 April 2018

http://www.sherpaconsulting.com/

Document: 21206-RP-004 Revision: 1 Revision Date: 6 Apr 2018 Document ID: 21206-RP-004 without Stolt BST Rev 1.docx

DOCUMENT REVISION RECORD

REV DATE DESCRIPTION PREPARED CHECKED APPROVED METHOD OF ISSUE

A 9 Mar 2018 Draft for comment J Polich - - Word

0 16 Mar 2018 For final approval J Polich G Peach G Peach Word

1 6 April 2018 For final issue J Polich G Peach G Peach Word

RELIANCE NOTICE

This report is issued pursuant to an Agreement between SHERPA CONSULTING PTY LTD (‘Sherpa Consulting’) and Panuku Development Auckland which agreement sets forth the entire rights, obligations and liabilities of those parties with respect to the content and use of the report.

Reliance by any other party on the contents of the report shall be at its own risk. Sherpa Consulting makes no warranty or representation, expressed or implied, to any other party with respect to the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of the information contained in this report and assumes no liabilities with respect to any other party’s use of or damages resulting from such use of any information, conclusions or recommendations disclosed in this report.

Title:

Quantitative Risk Assessment

America's Cup Proposal Wynyard Hobson Option

Effect of Discontinuing Stolthaven Hamer St and

BST Operations

QA Verified: R Bush

Date: 6 April 2018


CONTENTS

1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................... 5

1.1 Background ................................................................................................................................ 5

1.2 Study requirement ..................................................................................................................... 6

1.3 Scope ......................................................................................................................................... 6

1.4 Exclusions and limitations ......................................................................................................... 6

2 REVISED RISK PROFILE ................................................................................................................. 8

3 AMERICAS CUP DEVELOPMENT OPTIONS ................................................................................ 10

3.1 Wynyard Hobson Option ......................................................................................................... 10

3.2 Other ........................................................................................................................................ 10

4 RISK REVIEW ................................................................................................................................. 12

4.1 Review against individual risk criteria ...................................................................................... 12

4.2 Societal Risk ............................................................................................................................ 12

4.3 Conclusions and recommendations ........................................................................................ 17

5 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................................ 19

TABLES

Table 4.1: Proposed Land Uses, HIPAP 4 Risk Acceptability Wynyard Hobson Option 14

Table 4.2: Revised Populations 15

Table 4.3: Recommendation summary 18

FIGURES

Figure 2.1: Existing Individual Fatality Risk ............................................................................................... 9

Figure 2.2: Individual Fatality Risk Without Stolthaven South Hamer St or BST Terminals ..................... 9

Figure 3.1: Wynyard Hoson Option Layout ............................................................................................ 11

Figure 4.1: Fatality Risk Contours in relation to Wynyard Hobson option (without BST and Stolthaven

Hamer St) ................................................................................................................................................ 13

Figure 4.2: Societal Risk – Effect of Wynyard Hobson proposal and Discontinuing Stolthaven South

Hamer St and BST Operations ................................................................................................................ 16

Figure 4.3: Area where public access should be discouraged ................................................................ 17


ABBREVIATIONS

AC36 36th America’s Cup

ALARP As Low As Reasonably Practicable

FFIRF Ferry and Fishing Industry Relocation Facility

HIPAP (NSW Department of Planning) Hazardous Industry Planning Advisory

Paper

MBIE Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment

QRA Quantitative Risk Assessment


1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

Sherpa Consulting Pty Ltd (Sherpa) was retained by Sea+City Projects Ltd (now Panuku

Development Auckland as the successor council organisation and landowner of

Wynyard Point) in 2010 to provide independent risk consultancy services for the

Sea+City development in the Wynyard Quarter, Auckland, New Zealand.

The main output of the initial project was a Quantitative Risk Assessment (QRA)

covering the existing industries in the area. (Ref 1, Final Quantitative Risk Assessment

Summary Report Risk Profile June 2010). The QRA included three bulk liquids terminal

sites in the Wynyard Quarter (operated by Stolthaven (formerly Marstel) Terminals Ltd,

BST and Shell) as well as the Sanford fish processing facility.

An addendum for the QRA was prepared in 2011 in light of Stolthaven’s acquisition of

the Shell site lease and the relocation of Stolthaven’s toxic products to the former Shell

site (Ref 2, Quantitative Risk Assessment Wynyard Quarter Addendum December 2010

Risk Profile Incorporating Marstel Relocation to Former Shell Site).

The relocation project gave greater separation distances from hazardous industry to the

Sea+City development future population, hence reducing the risk profile. The 2011 QRA

addendum included a land use planning guidance table to assist the planning authorities

with determining whether future development proposals that may arise would be

compatible with the residual risk levels from the facilities. Broadly the guidance stated:

As risk levels are concentrated around the bulk liquids terminals north of Jellicoe St, no residential

or sensitive development should occur north of Jellicoe St. As individual fatality risk criteria are set

with regard to lower population densities, it is also recommended that populations be minimised,

hence development should be restricted to low density non-hazardous commercial or industrial uses

in this area. Emergency planning provisions should also be in place.

A review of large events was also carried out (Ref 3 Quantitative Risk Assessment,

Wynyard Quarter, Major Events, Societal Risk Implications) and various

recommendations were made to restrict public access to Wynyard Point in areas north

of Jellicoe St for large events in Silo Park or North Wharf.

Sherpa has been advised that the existing planning regime applying to the Wynyard

precinct generally identifies sensitive activities located north of Jellicoe Street (including

large scale events) as a non-complying activity. Marine and port related activities are

generally provided for on land and within the coastal environment north of Jellicoe Street.

These include activities such as boat building and maintenance.

To address risk, part of the overall focus of the planning provisions is to require that “new

activities, buildings and works to be designed, located, and managed to avoid

unacceptable levels of risk”1.

1 Auckland Unitary Plan, Wynyard Precinct: Policy 26


1.2 Study requirement

Auckland will be hosting the 36th America’s Cup (AC36) in 2021. Part of the Wynyard

Quarter precinct area north of Jellicoe Street is proposed to be used for this purpose,

and also for the purpose of relocating some existing marine, fishing and vehicle ferry

activities.

Panuku Development Auckland (Panuku) has retained Sherpa to review the risk and

land use safety planning implications of the proposed America’s Cup development in the

Wynyard Quarter area, and to provide a report for use in the assessment process.

1.3 Scope

Sherpa previously completed a review of the risk implications of the initial Wynyard Basin

option and prepared a report in January 2018 that included results of this review and

recommendations for reducing risk (Ref 4, Quantitative Risk Assessment, America's Cup

Proposal, Risk Implications, Wynyard Quarter, Panuku Development Auckland doc ref

21206-RP-001 Rev 0 8 Jan 2018).

Since January 2018, additional options have been investigated which utilise the ASB

carpark located between the current two Stolthaven terminals for some of the America’s

Cup facilities.

Both options are in close proximity to the Stolthaven South Hamer Street terminal, and

it was evident from the risk reviews that this was the main risk driver to all options. Hence

the risk reviews recommended investigating potential closure of the Stolthaven South

Hamer St terminal prior to AC36 commencing (ie prior to the end of lease date of 2022).

It has now been agreed with Stolthaven that the Stolthaven South Hamer Street

Terminal discontinue operations prior to AC36. Negotiations are underway with BST

such that operations at their site will also discontinue prior to the AC36.

This report provides:

1. a revised individual fatality risk profile for the Wynyard Point area without the

Stolthaven South Hamer St or BST terminals operating.

2. an updated societal risk assessment for the Wynyard Hobson option based on

the revised fatality risk profile.

1.4 Exclusions and limitations

The only update made to the base QRA model is to remove the Stolthaven South Hamer

Street and BST terminals and associated pipelines in entirety.

It is noted that some of the operations from the Stolthaven South Hamer St terminal may

be consolidated to the Stolthaven Wynyard Point terminal which may affect the

cumulative risk profile. However this will have a very small effect on the Wynyard Point

terminal cumulative risk as the Stolthaven South Hamer St flammable products are very

similar to those at the Wynyard Point terminal, and there are no high toxicity products at


Stolthaven South Hamer St to be relocated hence no change to the toxic risks from the

Wynyard Point terminal. Therefore consolidation of Stolthaven operations will not

materially affect the residual Stolthaven Wynyard Point terminal risk profile or associated

assessment of risk to the America’s Cup proposal.

In summary, the QRA model for the Stolthaven Wynyard Point terminal remains

unchanged as per comments in the initial America’s Cup risk implication review report

(Ref 4).

The only other changes that have been made are to populations to assess the effect of

the proposal on societal risk.

This review covers risk due to terminal operations involving hazardous materials only.

Other risks are excluded as follows:

Marine side risk (eg proximity of additional boats to dangerous goods (DG) ship

import tankers) is outside the scope of this study and is covered elsewhere.

Traffic and pedestrian / vehicle interactions in the Wynyard Point area outside of

the scope of this study and are covered elsewhere.


2 REVISED RISK PROFILE

The current and revised (without Stolthaven South Hamer St and BST) individual fatality

risk contours are shown in Figure 2.1 and Figure 2.2 respectively. As per all previous

studies the contours represent the individual fatality risk criteria levels defined in the

NSW Department of Planning and Environment (DPE) Hazardous Industry Planning

Advisory Paper No 4 Risk Criteria for Land Use Safety Planning (HIPAP 4 2011).

The 1x10-9 per year contour is also shown in Figure 2.1 and Figure 2.2. This contour

sets the maximum extent of the potentially risk affected area as the societal risk criteria

do not extend to frequencies below 1x10-9 per year. Therefore populations outside the

1x10-9 per year fatality risk contour (eg the America’s Cup bases in the Viaduct Events

Centre and on Hobson Wharf Extension) have no impact on societal risk and are not

included in the revised risk assessment.

Note that the extent of the 1x10-9 per year contour (ie the overall area contributing to

societal risk) is unchanged by discontinuing Stolthaven South Hamer St and BST

operations as this contour is due purely to the Stolthaven operations involving toxic

materials at the north end of Wynyard Point, which are unchanged.


FIGURE 2.1: EXISTING INDIVIDUAL FATALITY RISK

FIGURE 2.2: INDIVIDUAL FATALITY RISK WITHOUT STOLTHAVEN SOUTH HAMER ST OR BST

TERMINALS


3 AMERICAS CUP DEVELOPMENT OPTIONS

3.1 Wynyard Hobson Option

As shown in Figure 3.1, proposed facilities in the Wynyard Point area include (listed from

north to south):

New Northern Connector directly south of Stolthaven's north facility to maintain

traffic / emergency vehicle circulation on Wynyard Point.

New piled breakwater to the north of the bases (shown as 81m long).

Construction of 2 double bases (shown as C and D in figure) in the former ASB

carpark area.

Construction of 3 single bases (shown as E, F and G in figure) in the former

Stolthaven South Hamer Street and BST site areas.

Closure of that part of Brigham St affected by the yards for bases C-G.

New green space south of the BST site. (Note this is simply an extension of Silo

Park and no extra people in this area have been accounted for as these have

already been taken into account in existing risk model numbers for Silo Park).

The double bases are anticipated to accommodate a work force of up to 110 persons

per base and up to 300 additional persons per base for corporate events during the

event period. Single bases anticipate up to 70 staff per base and up to 300 additional

persons per base for corporate events.

The bases will be accessible to the general public for entertainment / functions and retail.

3.2 Other

As per the previous risk assessment (Ref 4), the following facilities will also be provided

for the Wynyard Hobson option. These do not have any significant risk implications. The

superyachts and relocated Ferry and Fishing Industry Relocation Facility (FFIRF) are

already allowed for in the updated societal risk (as per reported population in Ref 4):

Superyacht mooring in the sheltered area south of the new breakwaters from

Wynyard Wharf and Halsey Wharf Extension;

the FFIRF

Various facilities on the North Wharf, Halsey Street Extension Wharf and Hobson Wharf

Extension are outside the risk affected area (hence not included in societal risk

modelling).


FIGURE 3.1: WYNYARD HOSON OPTION LAYOUT


4 RISK REVIEW

4.1 Review against individual risk criteria

Table 4.1 tabulates the proposed land uses2 against the relevant HIPAP 4 individual

fatality risk criteria.

The Wynyard Hobson option is shown with the revised fatality risk contours (ie without

Stolthaven South Hamer St and BST) overlaid in Figure 4.1

Figure 4.1 demonstrates that the residual risk at the proposed bases from the Stolthaven

Wynyard (north) operations is well below all relevant risk criteria.

4.2 Societal Risk

Population assumptions used to model the societal risk for the Wynyard Hobson option

are shown in Table 4.2.

This covers a conservative estimate of the populations anticipated to be associated with

the bases, including consideration of event and retail populations. All other population

assumptions (general area, FFIRF etc) are the same as reported in the previous risk

review (Ref 4).

It should be noted that there is no allowance for additional populations north of the bases.

The existing societal risk, with both Stolthaven South Hamer St and BST terminals

operating but with previous limits on populations in the area, is shown in Figure 4.2. This

includes the effect of relocating the FFIRF (as per Ref 4). The level of societal risk is in

the negligible or the lower part of the ALARP zone and has been considered acceptable

previously.

The net effect on the societal risk of ceasing both the Stolthaven South Hamer St and

BST terminal operations, but allowing increased populations north of Jellicoe St as

defined in Table 4.2 (but with no new population north of the new bases) is also shown

in Figure 4.2. Figure 4.2 demonstrates that there is barely any change in societal risk

compared to current levels (ie a slight increase shown by black line increasing very

slightly above yellow line).

The societal risk remains in the negligible or lower ALARP area, ie societal risk is

acceptable for the Wynyard Hobson option with cessation of both Stolthaven South

Hamer St and BST operations.

2 For comparison with risk criteria the proposed America’s Cup bases have been classified as ‘commercial’

type land uses on the basis of their relatively high population (compared to industrial populations) and

buildings required (rather than recreational / open space), and usage as function spaces with public access.


FIGURE 4.1: FATALITY RISK CONTOURS IN RELATION TO WYNYARD HOBSON OPTION (WITHOUT BST AND STOLTHAVEN HAMER ST)


TABLE 4.1: PROPOSED LAND USES, HIPAP 4 RISK ACCEPTABILITY WYNYARD HOBSON OPTION

Proposal – Base ID

Location Land Use Classification (as per HIPAP 4 criteria)

Applicable Risk Criteria Fatality (per year)

Criteria met Comments

Base C ASB carpark –

northern end

Commercial 5x10-6 Yes Residual risk level is around 2x10-8 per year Major risk contributor is toxic scenarios from Stolthaven Wynyard (north) – would need emergency planning and also provide egress

Base D ASB carpark – southern end

Commercial 5x10-6 Yes Residual risk level approx. 1 x10-8 per year Major risk contributor is toxic scenarios from Stolthaven Wynyard (north) – would need emergency planning and also provide egress

Base E Replaces

Stolthaven Hamer

St terminal

Commercial 5x10-6 Yes Residual risk level approx. 5 x10-9 per year Major risk contributor is toxic scenarios from Stolthaven Wynyard (north) – would need emergency planning and also provide egress.

Base F Replaces

Stolthaven Hamer

St terminal / BST

Commercial 5x10-6 Yes

Residual risk level approx. 2 x10-9 per year Major risk contributor is toxic scenarios from Stolthaven Wynyard (north) Egress straightforward

Base G Replaces BST Commercial 5x10-6 Yes

Residual risk level approx. 1 x10-9 per year Major risk contributor is toxic scenarios from Stolthaven Wynyard (north) Egress straightforward


TABLE 4.2: REVISED POPULATIONS

NOTE: Population estimates are thought to be conservative, ie an overestimate of likely populations. Bases Americas Cup

Area Hours per day

no of days per year

Probability of presence (annual)

N (Number of people)

Comments (from meeting, Beca and Panuku 14 Dec 2017).

Wynyard Point – bases

Base E - Day time 6 365 0.250 70 single base - Crew / staff

Base E- Day time events 6 365 0.250 370 Crew / staff plus functions etc

Base F - Day time 6 365 0.250 70 single base - Crew / staff

Base F - Day time events 6 365 0.250 370 Crew / staff plus functions etc

Base G - Day time 6 365 0.250 70 single base - Crew / staff

Base G - Day time events 6 365 0.250 370 Crew / staff plus functions etc

Base C - Day time 6 365 0.250 110 Double base - Crew / staff

Base C - Day time - event 6 365 0.250 410 Crew / staff plus functions etc

Base D - Day time 6 365 0.250 110 Double base - Crew / staff

Base D - Day time - event 6 365 0.250 410 Crew / staff plus functions etc

Base E - Night time 12 365 0.5 8 Assume 10% present at night

Base F - Night time 12 365 0.5 8 Assume 10% present at night

Base G - Night time 12 365 0.5 8 Assume 10% present at night

Base C - Night time 12 365 0.5 11 Assume 10% present at night

Base D - Night time 12 365 0.5 11 Assume 10% present at night

Retail populations – spread over all

bases (but not north of bases)

6 365 0.25 25 Estimated assume 5 per base

Race day events – base visitors -

spread over all bases (but not north of

bases)

6 35 0.024 200 Estimated assume 200 over all bases

New piled breakwater

Race day events only 6 35 0.024 100 Estimated


FIGURE 4.2: SOCIETAL RISK – EFFECT OF WYNYARD HOBSON PROPOSAL AND DISCONTINUING STOLTHAVEN SOUTH HAMER ST AND BST

OPERATIONS


4.3 Conclusions and recommendations

4.3.1 Risk acceptability

Overall the risk results of the Wynyard Hobson proposal after accounting for the

shutdown of Stolthaven South Hamer St and BST terminal operations show that:

the risk levels are fully compliant with the individual fatality risk criteria; and

the societal risk is very similar to the current societal risk level (taking into account

the FFIRF relocation) and therefore remains acceptable.

4.3.2 Emergency planning recommendations

To remain consistent with the assumptions in the QRA model, access should continue

to be discouraged to the Wynyard Point area north of the new breakwater and northern

access road between the bases and the remaining Stolthaven operations as shown in

Figure 4.3. Minimising the number of people in the vicinity of the remaining Stolthaven

bulk liquid terminal will also facilitate emergency planning and evacuation.

Recommendations are made relating to emergency planning and population

management in the vicinity of the remaining Stolthaven operations in the north part of

Wynyard Point and are summarised in Table 4.3.

FIGURE 4.3: AREA WHERE PUBLIC ACCESS SHOULD BE DISCOURAGED


TABLE 4.3: RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY

Type Recommendations - Wynyard Hobson option

Population

management,

emergency

planning and

egress

Rec ERP1: Access to the new piled breakwater can only occur when there is no DG ship at the wharf, and no access to be allowed north

of this location either on the wharf itself or on to the north part of Brigham St adjacent to the remaining Stolthaven Wynyard (north)

Terminal.

Rec ERP2: An Emergency Evacuation Plan be prepared and implemented prior to the bases being occupied and all team members

accommodated within the bases should be inducted and trained in the Emergency Evacuation Plan.

Rec ERP3: Adequate access for emergency service vehicles is maintained to the whole area, specifically ensuring access to the remaining

Stolthaven Wynyard (north) terminal is retained.

Rec ERP4: Public access to the area in the vicinity of the Stolthaven Wynyard (north) terminal in the north part of Wynyard Point, (ie

Brigham St and wharf north of the piled breakwater, and the Hamer St area that is north of the new access road between the bases and

remaining Stolthaven operations) be discouraged by way of measures including but not limited to parking restrictions, bollards, no provision

of pedestrian walkways, lookout points or other similar facilities that may have the effect of attracting the public to the area.

Rec ERP5: Pre-planning with terminal operator to avoid coincident discharge of ships to terminals (which is the highest risk activity) with

expected peak population timing (for example race finals).


5 REFERENCES

1 Sherpa Consulting Pty Ltd (29 July 2010) Final Quantitative Risk Assessment Summary

Report Risk Profile doc ref 20359-QRA-006 Rev 0

2 Sherpa Consulting Pty Ltd (11 Aug 2011) Quantitative Risk Assessment Wynyard

Quarter Addendum December 2010 Risk Profile Incorporating Marstel Relocation to

Former Shell Site doc ref 20359-QRA-009 Rev 0

3 Sherpa Consulting Pty Ltd (30 Aug 2011) Quantitative Risk Assessment, Wynyard

Quarter, Major Events, Societal Risk Implications doc ref 20515-001 Rev 0

4 Sherpa Consulting Pty Ltd (8 Jan 2018), Quantitative Risk Assessment, America's Cup

Proposal, Risk Implications, Wynyard Quarter, Panuku Development Auckland doc ref

21206-RP-001 Rev 0

quantitative risk assessment... · the main output of the initial project was a quantitative risk...

Documents