1. Updates and News on MAHB-Supported Activities
7 November 2018

2. Outline of the presentation
Review of MAHB Work Strategic Vision and Work Programme
Highlighted topics
Inspections and land-use planning
MINERVA portal development (replaces MAHB website)
Lessons learned and eMARS
Environmental impacts in eMARS – Study results

3. Strategic Vision for MAHB
Remain a center of reference for Seveso technical information for DG-ENV, Member States, and the public
Focus resources on creating excellence in a limited number of areas
Risk management - Exchange of good practice and lessons learned
Risk assessment – Retrospective (accident analysis) and Prospective (risk analysis)
Risk governance – Bilateral/regional support to build strategy & capacity
Maintain a dynamic and forward-looking programme
By allocating resources to explore emerging issues and trends
By strengthening feedback mechanisms and our network presence

4. MAHB Thematic Areas Accident Analysis and Lessons Learned
Risk Assessment
Training and Best Practice Exchange
Promoting quality of reporting and compliance with Seveso Directive
Strengthening of database analytical functions
Research and dissemination of lessons learned from accidents
Development and Testing of Risk Assessment Tools and Methodologies
Support to Seveso Land-Use and Emergency Planning
Development of Tools for Analysis, Mapping, Data Collection and Exchange
Development of implementation guidance
Support to Seveso Inspections
Training on industrial risk assessment/ management
Making information collected/produced useful/accessible

5. Inspections and Land-Use Planning Updates

6. Inspections – Technical Working Group Updates
Outcomes of 2013 TWG 2 Meeting (Helsinki, June 2013)
Common Inspection Criteria Initiative (CIC)
First issue on Safety Instrumented Functions finalized
Available at
3 new issues started – Maintenance, Audits and , Hazard Identification
Break-out sessions on implementation questions for Article 20 of Seveso III – draft published in CIRCA

7. Inspections – TWG 2 - Mutual Joint Visit Programme
Recent and upcoming MJV Workshops
September 2013-Sweden -Learning Lessons from Accidents
September 2014 – MJV hosted by MAHB - SMS Practices in Multinational companies
Need countries to volunteer to host MJVs for 2015 – 2020!!!
MJV Expert Reports
Published MJV Norway (2009) on industrial parks & domino effects
Early MJV Germany (2010) on safety management systems
2014 – MJV Ireland on Emergency Planning and Response
2014 – MJV Sweden on Lessons Learned from Accidents

8. Land-Use Planning Scenarios Handbook
Revised Contents
Introduction –Use of the Scenarios Handbook
Risk Assessment Methodologies for Land-Use Planning
Selection of accident scenarios for most relevant substances and types of installations
Identification of typical causes or initiating events
For a limited number of configurations calculate distances
Illustration: Examples of application of scenario trees in two case-studies
References
Glossary

9. Next steps – Land Use Planning Scenario Handbook
Recommendations from June 2013 meeting:
Set up the remaining scenario trees by October 2013 – Sent to MS for review by 1 November 2013
(pumps/compressor and carrier for flammable liquids plus examples)
Case Study description to be modified by MAHB according to the change of scenario trees for LPG and Chlorine (pumps/compressor)
MS review scenario trees, safety barriers and causes by November 2013
MS review and run the Case Study and send results to MAHB by end of March 2014.

10. MINERVA Portal

11. Development of MINERVA – new MAHB web portal
Following on the imposition of new IT security policy in 2012
New infrastructure underpinning the MAHB website, the Seveso inspections website, eMARS and eSPIRS and all future applications
Parts already established and supporting eSPIRS development
Knowledge management centre with versatile functionality for searching, notification (e.g., RSS feeds), and interactivity
First release planned by June 2014

14. eMARS and Lessons Learned

15. eMARS - eMARS implementation strategy
Objective: To ensure a high quality lessons learned database:
Stimulate high quality in reporting (input)
Follow the reporting process from start to finish
Review and give feedback on each incoming report
Make it easier and easier to report (e.g., translation service, better input tool)
Review and improve where possible the quality of past reports
Motivate reporting by enabling versatile and useful output
Offer well-designed applications for searching, downloading and analyzing data
Generate and disseminate our own good quality analyses
Use every opportunity to demonstrate what makes an accident report useful

16. Quality processing of reports from start to finish
Tracking accidents through the European Media Monitoring (EMM) service -follow-up with MS/OECD on potential Seveso accidents
When a report is submitted (or after translation) quality check and interaction to complete missing or unclear information
MS re-checks the accident after translation and quality change
Regular monitoring of progress towards final online status
In 2014, we will also be working with MS to clean-up missing or incorrect entries in past reports (2000 – 2005, first step)

17. Continuing to work on improving speed of confirmed reports online but ongoing challenges:
-Resources
-Translation (EC)
-Legal process (MS)

18. Future eMARS improvements underway (input)
Re-programming to meet new server needs -mid-June 2014
EMARS has the highest security programming possible now.
Re-programming required to adapt to new servers (who are the only ones with JRC security certificates)
Improve accident administration functionality (MS/MAHB)
Cosmetic changes to the form
Add Seveso III, facilitate administration, clarify and clean-up
New emphasis on telling the story
Make free text prominent in both input form and output view
Provide advice in tool tips on accident details of interest
Multiple choice options still available but less prominent

19. Recent and future eMARS products/services (output)
Lessons learned bulletins
Accidents involving contractors (Dec 2012)
Accidents involving environmental consequences (June 2013)
Corrosion-related accidents in refineries (Dec. 2012)
Major studies – completed or planned
Corrosion-related accidents in EU and OECD refineries (in publication)
Toxic substances involved in eMARS accident releases (2014?)*
Lessons learned from emergency response (planned to start 2015)*
Creating accident exchange networks with other countries via international partners – e.g., OECD, UNECE, and UNEP
Providing training when possible
Ad hoc support to public, Commission services
AIDA accident analysis tool (in development)
*if MAHB resources allow

20. The dashboard showing statistics on some common eMARS query in real time

21. Dashboard

22. Step 1 - go to webpage
click

23. Environmental Impacts in eMARS

24. Question on Environmental Criteria for Reporting from 2012
Question from France about how countries interpret the Annex VI Criteria 3
MAHB reviewed all accidents where either:
Criteria 3 was checked,
where environmental consequences were indicated,
or the word “environment” appeared

25. Annex VI, Criteria 3 Immediate damage to the environment
— permanent or long-term damage to terrestrial habitats:
— 0,5 ha or more of a habitat of environmental or conservation
importance protected by legislation,
— 10 or more hectares of more widespread habitat, including agricultural land,
— significant or long-term damage to freshwater and marine habitats (*)
— 10 km or more of river or canal,
— 1 ha or more of a lake or pond,
— 2 ha or more of delta,
— 2 ha or more of a coastline or open sea,
— significant damage to an aquifer or underground water (**)
— 1 ha or more.

26. Findings 84 accidents identified Criteria interpretation
56 had indicated the accident consequences fulfilled Criteria 3, of which 7 did not indicate any environmental consequences
75 indicated that environmental consequences had occurred
2 mentioned environmental consequences only in the text
Criteria interpretation
The criteria uses linear and spatial area as the measure
Countries only sometimes (~50%) have precise linear or spatial information
When they don’t have this information, they make an expert judgement
Countries often have other criteria not captured by eMARS form
Fish kills (tonnes of fish)
Elevated contamination levels
Groundwater/drinking water contamination
Soil contamination

27. eMARS form and environmental consequences
Categories are types of landscapes; environmental impacts not well captured
Water bodies
Developed areas
Open land
Beach/ Shore

28. Should the Environmental Consequence section be reviewed?
Does not refer to environmental mediums but conservation areas
Air pollution
Water pollution
Soil contamination
But 4 different kinds of shore/beach terrain!
Does not have categories to capture other than spatial impacts
Fishkills
Drinking water/ground water contamination
Clean-up costs, etc.
The “other” field is the second most used category
No report uses the “quantity” field (what to put??)

29. For consideration eMARS is being reprogrammed (backend) in 2014
As noted, this gives opportunity to improve the form
MAHB will solicit ideas for revising the Consequences section to the eMARS FPEG
Open to reviewing other difficult sections, if necessary
New emphasis on free text, low profile for multiple choice fields, may already have needed impact in many areas
As with eSPIRS, there will be an opportunity for MS to test eMARS changes and input before finalization

30. Thank you for your kind attention!
11/7/2018