OVERVIEW

1. LAND USE PLANNING IN THE HABOUR AREA IN THE MUNICIPALITY OF AARHUS, DENMARK Application of a Danish Administration Practice on Land Use PlanningCyprus, 24. september 2012Morten R. ØstergaardDanish EPA, Aarhus

2. OVERVIEW • Introduction • The Danish Administration Practice • The Habour Area in Aarhus • Case: Risk Approval of APM Terminals – Cargo Service • Final remarks/lessons learnt

3. INTRODUCTION • Article 12 of Seveso Directive: “Member States shall ensure that the objectives of preventing major accidents and limiting the consequences of such accidents for human health and the environment are taken into account in their land-use policies or other relevant policies” (article 12(1)) ……and ensure that..... ”the procedures for implementing those policies take account of the need, in the long term to maintain appropriate safety distances between establishments covered by this Directive and residential areas, buildings and areas of public use, major transport routes as far as possible, and recreational areas” (article 12(2)).

4. INTRODUCTION • Article 12 does not set out • What an appropriate safety distance is • The method for determining appropriate safety distances • The manner in which to apply appropriate safety distances • In Denmark: • -> 2006: No specific guidelines concerning appropriate safety distances (review of risk analyses methods and acceptance criteria in 1989 for inspiration for local authorities) • 2006 ->: “The municipal council shall include consideration of the risk of major accidents in the planning prior to the establishment of provisions for land use in a municipality plan, which includes areas located within 500 meters of a Seveso Establishment” • 2008->: Development of The Danish Administration Practice

5. Zone 3 Iso risk curve 10-5/year Zone 2 Iso risk curve 10-6/year Zone 1 Seveso establishment Maximum consequence distance THE DANISH ADMINISTRATION PRACTICE:Risk zones based on quantitative risk analysis Criteria for land use planning • Zone 1: Seveso establishment must have full right of disposal of area • Zone 2: Neighboring establishments can be accepted under certain conditions. No vulnarable objects. • Zone 3: Neighboring establishments and vulnarable objects can be accepted provided that the criteria for societal risk curve is met. No objects playing a role in public emergency services or difficult evacuative people.

6. THE DANISH ADMINISTRATION PRACTICE:Calculation of iso risk curve and maximum consequence distance • The iso risk curve is based on ”location-based risk” that is calculated as the risk that a person who is continually present and unprotected at a given location will die (in contrast to ”individual risk” where the exposure, that is local protection and degree of presence, is included) • The maximum consequence is (only) calculated for scenarios with a frequency higher than 10-9/year • The maximum consequence distance is calculated out to the impact level that can lead to life-threatening and incurable injury

7. THE DANISH ADMINISTRATION PRACTICE:Threshold values for maximum consequence distance • Typical threshold values for maximum consequence distance (the values are determined jointly by the Seveso authorities in each individual case):

8. THE DANISH ADMINISTRATION PRACTICE:Accept criteria for societal risk curve

9. THE HABOUR AREA IN AARHUSThe habour grows… 1954 1974

10. THE HABOUR AREA IN AARHUSThe habour grows… 1995 2011

11. THE HABOUR AREA IN AARHUSThe habour grows…but so does the city 2012

12. CASE: RISK APPROVAL OF APM TERMINALS – CARGO SERVICE • APM Terminals – Cargo Service, a stevedoring company established in 2001 • Covering an area of 37 hectares, of which there are dangerous goods on the 22 hectares • Handles app. 360.000 containers/year, including 3.000 with dangerous goods • An upper-tier establishment according to danish legislation (over-implementation of the Seveso Directive in 2005, where “areas used for temporary storage og dangerous substances” are subject to risk legislation)

13. RISK APPROVAL OF APM TERMINALS – CARGO SERVICE • Legalization of an existing establishment • Receiving and handling of virtually all categories of dangerous goods in annex 1 in the Seveso Directive (toxic substances, explosives, flammable liquids etc.) • Risk analysis shows that the worst possible scenario is release of chlorine gas from a tank container (up to 25.000 liters). The second worst scenario is release of chlorine gas from a standard 20 or 40 foot container. • The analysis includes calculation of iso risk curves and societal risk curve • Close dialogue with the municipality (planning authority) and port in the calculation of the societal risk within the existing planning frameword has ment that the calculations also includes a possible future relocation of the ferry terminal

14. RISK APPROVAL OF APM TERMINALS – CARGO SERVICEIso risk curve inclusive scenario with chlorine gas in a tank container 10-9/year10-8/year10-7/year10-6/year10-5/year

15. RISK APPROVAL OF APM TERMINALS – CARGO SERVICEIso risk curve inclusive scenario with chlorine gas in a tank container AND special handling procedures 10-9/year10-8/year10-7/year10-6/year10-5/year 10-9/year10-8/year10-7/year10-6/year10-5/year

16. RISK APPROVAL OF APM TERMINALS – CARGO SERVICEIso risk curve exclusive scenario with chlorine gas in a tank container 10-9/year10-8/year10-7/year10-6/year10-5/year 10-9/year10-8/year10-7/year10-6/year10-5/year 10-9/year10-8/year10-7/year10-6/year10-5/year

17. RISK APPROVAL OF APM TERMINALS – CARGO SERVICERisk zones Iso risk curve 10-5/year Iso risk curve 10-6/year Ferry terminal Maximum consequence distance (850 m)

18. FINAL REMARKS • Lesson learnt: • Important to have fixed acceptance criteria for risk approval • Important that the calculated risk zones are known by all authorities • Important with close dialogue between planning authorities and authorities responsible for approving risk companies • Thank you for your attention • More information: mooes@mst.dk