1. The Role of Land-use Planning in Chemical Disaster Risk Management
International Conference
Environmental Knowledge for Disaster Risk Management
10-11 May, 2011
New Delhi, India
Prof. Dr. Chr. Jochum
on behalf of GIZ

2. Professional Profile Christian Jochum
Born 1943 in Frankfurt a.M./Germany
PhD in Chemistry, certified Safety Engineer
Honorary Professor (rtd.) at Frankfurt University
28 years experience in large chemical/pharmaceutical company (Hoechst AG)
1969 – 1979 Pharmaceutical research and pilot plant operations
1979 – 1997 Safety department (Site and Corporate Safety Director and „Major Accident Officer“ since 1987)
EHS – and crisis management consulting for different types of businesses and administration since 1997
Commission on Process Safety (formerly Major Hazard Commission) at the German Federal Minister for the Environment (Chairman since 1998)
European Process Safety Centre (Rugby/UK): Director of Centre since 2007
GIZ/InWEnt Senior Advisor since 2009

3. Commission on Process Safety (Kommission fuer Anlagensicherheit [KAS])
Mandated by the German Federal Immission Control Act
Advises German federal government as well as plant operators and state and local authorities on process safety
32 members with different professional and educational background representing different stakeholders (“Round Table”)
Any group needs “allies” to win votes
Consensus intended, but majority decisions possible
About 55 guidelines issued on different topics, e.g.
Land Use Planning (Safety distances)
Risk evaluation and perception
Emergency Planning
Industrial parks
Provisions against terrorist attacks on chemical plants
All publications of the Commission are available (partly in English) at

4. EPSC (European Process Safety Centre) www.epsc.org
Industry funded association of major chemical companies in Europe.
Approx. 40 contributing enterprises
Dedicated to improving best practice in Chemical Process Safety
Working groups on e.g.
Safety Critical Systems (inc. IEC 61511)
Layer of Protection Analysis (LOPA)
Auditing
Process Safety Incident and KPI reporting
Process Safety Competence
Senior Management Commitment
Work in conjunction with European Commission on implementation and upgrading Seveso 2 Directive
Cooperation with CEFIC (European Chemical Industry Council) and U.S. Centre for Chemical Process Safety (CCPS)

5. “Onion skin model” Industrial site
(Integrity of containment; On-site Emergency Plan)
Mitigation measures, evacuation
General emergency preparedness for worst-case scenarios
(Off-site Emergency Plan)

7. Land-use Planning as part of Chemical Disaster Risk Management
Industrial site
Restricted land-use
(commercial areas etc.)
Sensible land-use
(residential areas, schools, hospitals, stations etc)
Land-use Planning as part of Chemical Disaster Risk Management

8. Obligations according to Art. 12 of the EU Seveso II Directive
Member States are required
to control
– the siting of new establishments,
– modifications to existing establishments,
– new developments such as transport links, locations
frequented by the public and residential areas in the vicinity of
existing establishments
to ensure that their land-use and / or other relevant policies and
the procedures for implementing those policies take account of
the need, in the long term, to maintain appropriate distances
between Seveso establishments and certain sensitive land uses
(e.g. residential areas, buildings and areas of public use)

9. Guidance of the German Commission on Process Safety (KAS)
To facilitate implementation of Seveso II art. 12 the KAS has issued a guidance. It covers:
(Planning and) Siting of new establishments (“Greenfield Planning”)
Modifications to existing establishments
New developments in the vicinity of existing establishments
The guidance (originally from 2005) has been updated in 2011 as “KAS-18” (in German). A short version of the first issue “SFK/TAA-GS-1” is available in English, too. A translation of an updated short version is underway. All publications are available at at

10. Planning without detailed knowledge (“Greenfield Planning”)
No detailed knowledge of e.g.
kind of later industrial use
kind of technical installations
kind and quantity of dangerous substances to be handled
safety measures by the operator
Designation of building zones has to be future-orientated in order to allow for further development of both industrial and residential facilities.
Therefore, separation distances recommended for planning without detailed knowledge are usually greater than separation distances for the specific siting of an establishment, where detailed knowledge is available.

11. Recommended separation distances for “greenfield” planning

12. Planning with detailed knowledge
New development
Geplantes WR

13. Planning with detailed knowledge
Designation of sensitive areas in the vicinity of an existing establishment
⇨ most frequent planning case
Expansion of an existing establishment in the vicinity of sensitive areas
No problem, if distance between expansion area / existing establishment and sensitive area reaches or exceeds the recommended separation distance
If distance between expansion area / existing establishment and sensitive area is smaller than the recommended separation distance:
individual case study necessary to determine which distance is appropriate

14. Planning with detailed knowledge: Individual case study
General recommendations are made for the scenarios to be considered in a case study, e.g.:
total loss of containment unlikely
leak area not less than 80 mm2 (leak diameter: 10 mm)
medium dispersion conditions.
These recommendations cannot replace the consideration of the particular situation given.
Possible results of an individual case study:
intended expansion / designation cannot be realized to the extent desired
certain uses will not be possible / envisaged use has to be reconsidered
appropriate distance can be smaller than the recommended separation distances

15. Inapplicability of the guidance
Licensing procedures
application for new establishments within existing spatial planning
very rare cases in Germany
modifications within an existing establishment
 vast majority of cases
B. Assessment of historically grown situations
C. External emergency planning

16. “Farbwerke Hoechst” outside Frankfurt/Germany at about 1870

17. Hoechst Industrial Park (Frankfurt/M, Germany) today

18. Assessment of historically grown “mixed” situations
Legally
Guidance (and its separation distances) is not applicable
Competent authority has to make case by case decisions whether or not the operator meets his obligations according to the Federal Immission Control Act and / or any other relevant legal provisions.
In case of inacceptable risks the competent authority has to issue subsequent orders (up to closure of facility)
“Real Life”
Guidance with its separation distances plays more and more a prominent role in public discussions
Courts take the guidance into account as “recognised source”

19. External (off-site) emergency planning
Separation distances recommended for planning without detailed knowledge are based on “credible worst-case” scenarios
Off-site emergency planning has to be based on more serious scenarios (“ultimate worst-case”)
off-site emergency plan has to cover a larger zone than land-use planning
However, restricted land-use for areas which are possibly at risk will make emergency response easier and more effective
Sensitive developments (e.g. residential areas) endorsed by land-use planning have to be included in off-site emergency planning

20. Zoning around Industrial Sites
(On-site Emergency Plan)
Restricted land-use
(commercial areas etc.)
Sensible land-use
(residential areas, schools, hospitals, stations etc)
(Off-site Emergency Plan)

21. Zoning around Industrial Sites

22. Implementation of the Guidance on Land-use Planning
Absence of a legally binding land-use plan is a frequent case in heavily built-up urban areas which have developed over decades
High potential for conflicts regarding safety and separation distances between dangerous industrial establishments and sensitive areas
Increasing willingness of operators of establishments to file objections against building permissions issued for development projects in their immediate vicinity.
Remediation of existing “mixed” situations very seldom up to now:
Technical improvements at a filling station for toxic gases
Relocation of a chemical plant near Frankfurt airport
Plans for state funded relocation in the Netherlands
An early information exchange between “Seveso-” and land-use planning authorities as well operators of establishments is necessary to avoid incompatible developments

23. Thank you very much for your attention
I have to thank my colleagues W. Gierke and H. Marder for some of the slides

24. Back-up Slides

25. Planning and siting of new establishments
Planning usually starts with the drawing up of a legally binding land-use plan with designated building zones by the responsible municipal building authority.
Immission control authorities have to be consulted as “representatives of public interest“.
The siting of a completely new establishment, where dangerous substances are to be handled in greater amounts, is a rare case in Germany; much more frequent are modifications to existing establishments.

26. What is the right distance?
Sensitive area
Industrial site
„Appropriate Distance“

27. Methodology for the development of a guidance
1. Selection of representative industrial activities according to
Annex I of the EU IPPC Directive
2. Identification of representative dangerous substances
involved in the selected industrial activities
3. Calculation of standardized accident szenarios based on
agreed-upon conventions
4. Comparison of calculated szenarios with data of past
accidents
5. Allocation of dangerous substances to categories of
separation distances

28. Conventions for calculations
Pipe rupture as a representative szenario
(Total loss of containment is not considered)
Calculation of corresponding mass flow (kg/sec) for varied
source terms (pipe diameter: mm, leak area: mm2)
Duration of substance release: 10 min
Dispersion modell: VDI Guideline 3783, medium dispersion
conditions (plain ground, 20° C, wind speed: 3 m/sec)
Calculations for 3 endpoints:
– ERPG 2 (toxicological effects)
– 1.6 KW/m2 (thermal radiation)
– 0.1 bar (overpressure)

29. Comparison of calculated szenarios with data from past accidents
Analysis of major accidents reported under German and EU law between 1980 and 2001 concerning the amount of released substances and the size of leaks in pipes or containers
 For most of the representative substances a release
equivalent to a leak of a diameter of 25 mm (leak area:
490 mm2) seemed to match best with known accident history
Allocation of 18 leading substances to 4 classes of separation distances
Recommendations for planning without and with detailed knowledge

30. Licensing procedures
A licence has to be granted if obligations under the Federal Immission Control Act are complied with.
Operators‘ obligations are, among others,
to avoid harmful effects on the environment or any other hazards to the general public and the neighbourhood,
to take precautions to prevent any harmful effects on the environment or any other hazards, in particular by such measures as are appropriate according to the state-of-the-art of technology / best available techniques.
Due to the detailed knowledge of the installation to be sited, separation distances determined in a licensing procedure may be (considerably) smaller than the ones recommended for planning without detailed knowledge.

31. Industrial Sites: Original Design and Today
1930
2003