Tunnels

This report is one of the three reports produced as part of a project undertaken to establish a comparative risk assessment method for assessing whether a tunnel route is safer than a surface route for the road transit of dangerous goods (DG) materials.

This report describes a case study of a hypothetical tunnel, illustrating the three stages of the comparative assessment, with incorporation of mitigation measures. The example concludes with the overall lowest life safety risk route being achieved by directing some classes of dangerous goods through the tunnel and retaining other classes on the surface route.

Road authorities, competent authorities and risk specialists will find the case study a useful demonstration of the intent of the method that is detailed in the second report of the project AP-R704-24 Methodology for Comparing Dangerous Goods Risks in Road Tunnels to Those on Alternative Routes: Manual for Using DG-QRAM in the Australasian Context. This report provides background on the development, capabilities, and limitations of a Dangerous Goods Quantitative Risk Assessment Model (DG-QRAM) as well as guidance as to how the DG-QRAM tool should be applied to road tunnels in Australia and New Zealand.

The first report AP-R703-24  Methodology for Comparing Dangerous Goods Risks in Road Tunnels to Those on Alternative Routes: Best Practice Review  presents best international practice in road tunnel DG risk assessment and provides justification for the selection of DG-QRAM as the tool most appropriate for comparative DG risk assessments.

Watch a webinar about the methodology with Dr Conrad Stacey and Nigel Casey.