LNG INCIDENT
IDENTIFICATION
A Compilation & Analysis by the
International LNG Importer’s Group
A. Acton, BG Group
F. Katulak, Tractebel LNG North America
J.L. Deveautour, Gaz de France
K. Sakamoto, Osaka Gas
M. Kan, Tokyo Gas
Legal Notice
The information presented here represents the outcome of a study
undertaken by a group of LNG Importing Companies during the past
ten years and covering the period from the start of the commercial LNG
Industry. The information is intended to be useful for the LNG Industry
to help to improve design and operations and is provided in good faith.
However, GIIGNL and any of its members disclaim any direct or
indirect liability as to information contained in this presentation for any
industrial, commercial or other use whatsoever
The LNG Importer’s Group Study
A Study by the Permanent Technical LNG Incident Data Was Collected
Study Group of GIIGNL Comprising: from all Available Sources:
BG Group Previous Studies by GIIGNL
CMS Energy Recent Known Incidents at Study
Tractebel LNG North America Group Member’s Facilities
Enagas Public Domain Information
Fluxys A Questionnaire to all GIIGNL
Gaz de France Members, covering 38 facilities
Gastransport Services (Netherlands)
Osaka Gas Data Collection Was Anonymous
GNL Italia and Done on a Regional Basis
Tokyo Gas Americas, Europe, Far East
Routine Operational Incidents Were
GIIGNL Includes the Owners and/or Excluded
Operators of Practically all the The Survey Covered Two Time
World’s LNG Import Terminals Periods “Previous” from 1965-
Advantica Technologies, UK, 1994 and “New” from1994-2000
Worked on the Data Analysis “All” covers the full period of LNG
Commercial Operations, 1965-2000
Categories of Incidents Surveyed
Category 1 - Releases of Hazardous Material: Releases of LNG,
LPG, NGL, Hydrocarbon Gases, etc. Leading to, or with the
Potential to Lead to, Injury to Personnel or Damage to
Equipment or Buildings On or Off Site
Category 2 - Near Misses: Involving a Hazardous Material
System Where there Was no Actual Release of Hazardous
Material but Which had the Potential to Lead to a Category 1
Incident
Category 3 – Other Incidents of Concern: although not Involving
a Hazardous Material System, had the Potential to Lead to a
Category 1 Incident
The GIIGNL Database contains 246 Incidents in total
Category 2
7% Category 1
Category 1 68%
Incidents by Category
67%
By Category
'All'
Category 3
18%
Category 2
14%
Category 1
68%
Releases of hazardous material, near misses and other incidents of concern
Historical Incident Frequencies
Period Incidents Site-years Frequency
(Incidents/Site-yr)
1965 - 1974 15 44 0.34
1975 - 1984 52 179 0.29
1985 - 1994 94 327 0.29
1995 - 2000 85 191 0.45
Total 1965-2000 246 741 0.33
There have been on average only 0.33 incidents of all categories per site-year
Where Incidents Happen
Storage: LNG Tanks,In-tank Pumps & Boil-off Gas System
Unloading: LNG Ship at Berth, Jetty & Unloading Equipment
Send-out: Pumps, Vaporisers, etc. including LPG Plant
External: Equipment outside the Control of the LNG Terminal
Others: Utility & Other Equipment Not Included Above
Unit Frequencies by Equipment Function
Storage Unloading Sendout External Others
Data (Per Mn hrs) (Per Mn hrs) (Per 1012 m3 gas) (Per Mn hrs) (Per Mn hrs)
“Previous”
(1965-1994) 1.34 176.95 54.15 1.71 2.14
“New”
(1994-2000) 1.64 166.67 60.96 3.31 10.47
“All”
(1965-2000) 1.42 173.13 56.95 2.16 4.47
Incidents during LNG unloading functions are the most frequent
Day
81% Day
Incidents During the Day and Night 81%
Incident by Time of Day
'All'
Night
19%
Day
81%
Many fewer incidents occur during the night than during the operational day
Causes of Incidents
Immediate Cause (precipitating event)
Operation (actions, including maintenance)
Material (equipment, materials or installation)
External (anything out of influence of terminal)
Unknown (Immediate Cause never found)
Primary Cause (underlying cause)
Design/Construction (design & installation)
Operation/Maintenance (equipment failure, operator error, poor
procedures, poor maintenance)
External (anything out of influence of terminal)
Unknown (Primary Cause never found)
Each Incident was Reviewed for Consistency of Causes by
the GIIGNL Study Group
Incidents often have a Primary Cause but occur due to an Immediate Cause
Immediate Causes of Incidents
Major Immediate Cause Major Immediate Cause
'Previous' 'New'
Unknow n Unknow n
2% 5%
Operation Operation
27% 23%
Material
Material
52%
57%
External
External
14%
20%
Major Immediate Cause
'All'
Unknow n
3%
Operation
25%
Material
56%
External
16%
“Material” is the Immediate Cause of most incidents but has reduced recently
Primary Causes of Incidents
Main Primary Cause Main Primary Cause
'Previous' 'New'
External External D/C
8% 16% 12%
Unknow n D/C
3% 27%
Unknow n
7%
O/M O/M
62% 65%
Main Primary Cause
'All'
External D/C
11% 21%
Unknow n
5%
O/M
63%
D&C – Design & Construction O&M – Operation & Maintenance
D&C has reduced recently, but O&M is the biggest Primary Cause,
Release Quantity
Quantity of Release Quantity of Release
'Previous' 'New'
>1000kg
8%
>1000kg
100-1000kg
36%
1000kg
25%
1000kg 1000kg
Function for each Release Quantity
'All'
100
80
Unloading
60
Storage
40
Sendout
20
0
1000kg
The severity of incidents during LNG unloading has deceased dramatically
Primary Causes for Material
as Immediate Cause
Primary Cause for Major Cause as Material Primary Cause for Major Cause as Material
'Previous' 'New'
Poor Maint
Poor Procs Poor Procs
27%
11% Poor Maint 6%
15% Ex/Unknow n
Op Error Ex/Unknow n 4%
Op Error
9% 2% 6%
Design/Equip Design/Equip
51% 69%
Primary Cause for Major Cause as Material
'All'
Poor Procs
9%
Poor Maint Ex/Unknow n
15% 4%
Design/Equip
59%
Op Error
7%
Poor Maintenance / Operator Error / Poor Procedures
Maintenance, Operations & Procedures have improved recently
Primary Causes for Operation
as Immediate Cause
Primary Cause for Major Cause as Operation Primary Cause for Major Cause as Operation
'Previous' 'New'
Ex/Unknow n Design/Equip
Ex/Unknow n Design/Equip 0% 0%
13% 13% Poor Procs
22%
Poor Maint
Poor Procs 0%
31%
Op Error
43% Op Error
Poor Maint
78%
0%
Primary Cause for Major Cause as Operation
'New'
Ex/Unknow n Design/Equip
8% 8%
Poor Procs
27%
Op Error
Poor Maint 57%
0%
Design & Equipment has recently ceased to affect operational incidents