CVEN30008 Engineering Risk Analysis

Assignment 2 - Quantitative Risk Analysis of a Chlorination Disinfection Process

Group 06 (Tutorial 13)

Tuan Ngo –742252, Adrian Feng –833264, Fei Jiang –876401, Vy Nhat Le –860112

Finished Date: 17/05/2018

 1. Executive summary

The report is consisted of five main sections, which are introduction and purpose, risk identification, quantitative risk analysis, risk
treatments and proposed implementation, and findings and recommendations. First, the introduction and purpose briefly describe the
assignment and its general objectives. Second, the risk identification section shows possible risks regarding the discharge quality during
operation of the treatment plant, including the threat to human health and the environment due to the leaking of liquid chlorine, by-
product of chlorine disinfection, and the exceeded E.coli count in the water used as human consumption. The third part of the report
presents the quantitative risk analysis using the given data to investigate the discharge quality. Fourthly, the next part proposes risk
treatments and implementation for the mentioned risks in part 2. Finally, the findings and recommendations include the completed Risk
Register with a narrative that highlights the risks and their ongoing monitoring & management recommendations together with a
recommendation on when the risk assessment process should be repeated because of possible future changes in the project risk context.
Beside from these, there is a reference list showing all sources of information and data used and an appendix including the MATLAB code.

2. Introduction and Purpose

Following “the Tertiary Upgrade of the of the Eastern Treatment Plant,” additional risks must be recognised and evaluated. The objective
behind the upgrade of the Eastern Treatment Plant were:

• To address the impacts of the current discharge on the receiving marine environment
• To produce high quality Class A recycled water for non-potable applications
• To reduce solids, colour, odour, + disinfection

As such, in this assignment we position ourselves as the Project Engineer of the Tertiary Upgrade of the Eastern Treatment Plant and aim
to identify potential risks involved in the discharge quality during operation of the treatment plant post-completion of the tertiary
upgrade. We will be taking into consideration the risk that the treated effluent leaving the treatment plant may not comply with the
required discharge quality standard by evaluating the performance of the chlorination element of the disinfection process via a
quantitative risk analysis. Following this, we propose a set of effective control measures ensuring the risk is nullified or reduced to an
acceptable level. The purpose of conducting this report is to apply our understanding of quantitative risk analysis in a real-world
engineering scenario.

3. Risk Identification
a. Risk 1: The environment and human health is threatened by the leaking of liquid chlorine.

In the process of chlorine disinfection of tertiary treatment, the main material is the liquid chlorine. The liquid chlorine may vaporize into
the chlorine（gas）at room temperature, which means that the containers for chlorine storage must have some properties such as good
tightness and anti-corrosion (McGuire, 2013). Otherwise, there is a high likelihood of chlorine leaking and polluting air. Besides that, If the
pipelines and the containers of chlorine are not dry enough, the liquid chlorine might react with water, and generate hypochlorous acid
and hypochlorite. The hypochlorous acid and hypochlorite have some properties such as oxidizability and corrosion, which means that the
containers and the pipelines might be corroded, and the chlorine might leak (Jianxiang et al, 2009). Furthermore, The eastern treatment
plant is built in the coast. the natural condition such as rainy and windy is more frequent than interior, which means that It is possible for
the surface of containers and pipelines to be corroded because of the relatively adverse natural conditions day by day. Chlorine burns the
eyes, nose, and throat eventually causing bronchial inflammation, respiratory tract damage, even death. The environment and human
health might be threatened by leaking of chlorine (Monaghan, 1991).

As such we have identified the risk to have a probability score of 3, with rare exposure and a consequence score of 1 resulting in a risk
score of approximate 94.

b. Risk 2: People health might be threatened, and the ocean might be polluted when the water after tertiary treatment contains
the by-product of chlorine disinfection.

After tertiary treatment of the eastern treatment plant, most of water will be pumped into the ocean, and the rest of the water will be can
be reused in the process of water treatment and used for supplying people life as well. If the water, which contains the by-product of
chlorine disinfection such as trihalomethanes (THMs), haloacetic acids (HAAs) and halogen oxides (Jansson et al, 1995), has been used as
the human consumption for a long term, human bodily function, such as nervous system, respiratory system, organs and skins, might be
seriously damaged and even people might be threatened by cancer (Watson et al, 2012). Besides that, the by-products of chlorine
disinfection are not only harmful to people health, but also might pollute the ocean. The by-products such as THMs, HAAs and halogen
oxides might have toxic effects on fish and marine life.

As such we have identified the risk to have a probability score of 2, with rare exposure and a consequence score of 1 resulting in a risk
score of approximate 185.

c. Risk 3: The exceeded E.coli count in the water used as human consumption will threat people health.

The E.coli count content is the important standard to assess the effect of sewage treatment, which means that controlling the E.coli count
content of water is the necessary part of water treatment, especially for the drinking water. Because of exceeded E.coli count in internal
surface of water transport pipelines, insufficient disinfection time and not enough disinfection materials such as liquid chlorine and ozone,
it is possible that the E.coli count content of drinking water has exceeded the allow standards. the exceeded E.coli count might cause
various diseases and even some diseases are lethal (Hawley, 2013).

As such we have identified the risk to have a probability score of 3, with rare exposure and a consequence score of 2 resulting in a risk
score of approximate 68.

4. Quantitative Analysis

Q2.a - Statistics Summary

Through Matlab functions, we developed a summary of statistics regarding the data given for Chlorine and E.Coli readings, including
statistics such as: Mean, Median, Mode, Standard Deviation, Length, Max and Min.

Method:

Initially we create data vectors for both Clc and E.coli encompassing the readings given.

Following this we use Matlab functions to calculate each statistic for the given sample:

Clc:
E.Coli:

Now that those values have been obtained, we use the display function to show those values as a vector:

Running the code we get :

Where the 1st column shows statistic summary for Clc and 2nd column shows E.Coli.

Q2.b - Confidence Intervals

Using Matlab functions and calculations, we can determine values for 99% confidence intervals.

Method:

Initially, we define the: data given as a vector, number of samples, the sample mean, and the sample standard deviation.

Given the fact that we need a 99% confidence we can calculate alpha, alpha/2 and inverse of the standard normal cumulative distribution
function (cdf), evaluated at the probability values in alpha/2 for both Clc and Ecoli:

From here, we create a normal density plot, calculate the standard error and develop an interval for a 99% confidence for Clc and Ecoli.
Running the code, it outputs a graph of the normal density plot, the normal inverse for alpha/2 and confidence interval.

Clc:

E.coli:

Q2.c - Hypothesis Test:

By using Matlab, hypothesis test with a 5% level of significant for the below two statements have been carried out:

· The discharge chlorine concentration (Clc) is less than 0.1 mg/L. (Statement 1)

· The number of E.coli bacteria per 100 ml of discharged effluent is less than 10. (Statement 2)

Method:

Two Matlab code snippets have been created for the simulation (Appendix & Appendix ).

At first, the value of mean, sample size, standard deviation and standard error are determined for each data set(Chlorine concentration in
the discharged effluent and E.coli count per 100ml) are determined.

sample_size = length(x);

mu = sum(x)/sample_size;

stdev = std(x);

std_error = stdev/sqrt(sample_size);

The test value is now assigned to the variable ‘test’. For chlorine concentration data set , test value is 0.1 whilst E.coli count per 100ml is
10.

test = 0.1; and test = 10;

As the sample size for both data set is 10. Thus, small sample test for population mean should be carried out. T-value for each of the data
set have been computed using the below equation:

t = (mu - test)/std_error;

In which: mu is the mean.

test is the test value.

std_error is the standard error.

Because null hypothesis for the statement 1 and statement 2 are H0: µ ≥ 0.1 and H0: µ ≥ 10 respectively. P-value is calculated by left tail
test. To determine the t distribution which correspond to the degree of freedom of the t value, the function tcdf(t, degree_of_fredom) is
called. The below code snippet described how p-value can be computed by left tail test:

p_val = tcdf(-abs(t), sample_size - 1);

The final step is to print out the result whether the statement can be accepted or not.

if p_val > alpha

display(p_val);

display(alpha);

display('Do not reject H_0 since p > alpha');

else

display(p_val);

display(alpha);

display('Reject H_0 since p <= alpha');

end

Results:

P-value and the outcome of hypothesis test for the two statement is as shown below.

I/ Testing the statement “The discharge chlorine concentration (Clc) is less than 0.1 mg/L”:

Figure : Statement 1 hypothesis test result.

II/ Testing the statement “The number of E.coli bacteria per 100 ml of discharged effluent is less than 10”:

Figure : Statement 2 hypothesis test result.

Q2.d – Monte Carlo Simulation:

To determine the probability of (Clc.> 0.1 mg/L) and the probability of (E.coli count>10 per 100ml), Monte Carlo simulation is applied to
model for 1000 data for both chlorine concentration in the discharge effluent and the E.coli count per 100ml.

Method:

The seed using in Monte Carlo simulation is 112 which is the last 3 digit of Le Nhat Vy’s student ID.

The function randn will draw one thousand random number. Hence, a thousand sample is generated with the given mean and standard
deviation of each data set (Chlorine concentration and E.coli count).

r = mu + stdev.*randn(run,1);

Now, using the for loop to check whether the sample generated match with the condition and count the number of sample satisfy with
the condition.
for i = 1:run

if r(i) > Ecoli_count

count = count + 1;

end

end

Probability is now can be determined:

probability = count*100/length(r);

Result:

I/ Chlorine concentration:

Figure :

Graph :

II/ E.coli count per 100ml:

Figure :

Graph :
 5. Risk Treatments and proposed implement

According to quantitative risk analysis result, after the tertiary treatment, the probability of chlorine concentration more than 0.1 ml/L is
about 29.8%, which means that methods still should be taken to reduce the chlorine concentration of effluent. In addition, the probability
of E.coil bacteria per 100ml less than 10 of discharged effluent is 0.3%, which means that the tertiary treatment works well. Thus, it is
more important to focus on the control measurement to lower the chlorine concentration in the discharge effluent without increasing the
probability of E.coli count in the discharge.

Risk 1: The environment and human health might be threatened by the leaking of liquid chlorine.

Measures: chlorine gas is toxic and green-yellow in colour at room temperature. At 0.3 to 0.5 parts per million (ppm), chlorine gas can be
smelt, and trouble soon follows in higher concentrations. For preventing the accident that chlorine gas exposure, the measures can be
taken as followed:

In the workplace, both portable gas detectors and fixed gas detection system need to be employed to help protect workers from chlorine.
The types gas detectors can be chosen depending on the type of workplace hazard. Before developing a chlorine gas safety program and
determining the requirements for portable and/or fixed gas detectors in the water treatment plant, the applications of chlorine should be
had a broader understanding (Dharmavaram, 1993). In this project, chlorine is used in the chlorine disinfection. Both portable and fixed
gas detectors should be equipped to avoid the accidents because the large amount of chlorine is used in the process of chlorine
disinfection. The fixed gas detectors often are used in the chlorine tanks, the chlorine dosing pump, the chlorine mixer, and the sampling
are. In open settling pond ares, portable gas detectors are carried to warn workers of excessively high concentrations of gas (Austin, 2005).
There are many factors should be considered when planning the toxic gas safety program to protect against chlorine. The factors are
(Austin, 2005)：

（1）Walk the plant, check potential leak sources, think over placement of fixed detectors, and identify confined space permit hazard
areas for portable detectors.

（2）Review the plant's ambient operating environment (watching for temperature and humidity extremes).

（3）Consider the various portable and fixed detector sensing technologies for performance and reliability.

（4）For portable detectors, think about ease of use, training, battery life, and service life.

（5）For fixed detectors, look at ease of installation, calibration, and maintenance.

（6）Evaluate the detector's maintenance and repair needs.

The tightness of the chlorine tanks and the chlorine dosing pump should be checked regularly and supervised by professionals. Besides,
proper training needs to be organised regularly, which not only raises the awareness of preventing the leaking of chlorine, but also
minimize the risk bringing from leaking of chlorine (Austin, 2005).

Risk 2: People health might be threatened, and the ocean might be polluted, when the water after tertiary treatment contains the by-
product of chlorine disinfection.
Measures: For achieving the desired disinfection effect, the excessive chlorine is used in the process of chlorine disinfection. The residual
chlorine, which is consisted of combined chlorine forms and free chlorine, might react with the substance in the water to produce by-
products such as trihalomethanes (THMs), haloacetic acids (HAAs) and halogen oxides. Human bodily function, such as nervous system,
respiratory system, organs and skins, might be seriously damaged and even people might be threatened by cancer (Zyara et al, 2016).
Furthermore, fish and marine life might be threatened as well. For preventing such accidents, some methods can be used as followed:

• Improving disinfectant: for reducing the risk bringing from the residual chlorine, chlorine dioxide can be used to replace
chlorine gas. Chlorine dioxide has the strong oxidation effect, which means that it is easy for chlorine dioxide to decompose the
microbial protein to reach the effect of disinfection (Cheng et al, 2011). Compared with chlorine gas, the advantages of
chlorine dioxide are more safe and more environmental (RSETE, 2011). However, the high cost is one of reason that chlorine
dioxide can not be widely employed in the water treatment .
• Further purification: adding further treatment to reduce the content of residual chlorine is another way can be used in the
case. The common methods of further purification are ion exchange, electroosmosis, reverse osmosis and ultrafiltration
(Fuchigami et al, 2010). The method chosen of further purification should depend on the content of residual chlorine, the
required standard limitation of effluent and the budget of the project.
• Controlling the input of chlorine to maximize the utilization of chlorine: According to the theory of chlorine disinfection
(Figure 1) and the condition of tertiary water treatment, the approximately range of input of chlorine, which can adequately
disinfect with the least content of residual chlorine, can be calculated and control by the professional equipment.

Figure 1:The common forms of chlorine disinfection

Risk 3: The exceeded E.coli in the water used as human consumption will threat people health.

Measures: E.coil is fecal bacteria frequently found in the intestines of animals that transfers to sewage, animal waste or water, and it can
make humans and other animals very sick. In this project, the mainly source of E.coil is the human waste and according to the quantitative
risk analysis result, the probability of E.coil bacteria per 100ml less than 10 of discharged effluent is 0.3%, which means that the tertiary
treatment works well. It is not necessary to focus on reducing the content of E.coil. The tertiary treatment can be improved depending on
making the application cheaper and easier after the chlorine concentration already has been controlled well.

Further purification: adding the further method is a good way to reduce the residual chlorine as well as reduce the E.coil. Because the
main aim is to reduce the residual chlorine and the ability of removing E.coil is not quite important, the common methods can be chosen
are ion exchange, electroosmosis, reverse osmosis and ultrafiltration.

Improving disinfectant: the risk of residual chlorine is mainly because of the dangerousness of chlorine. And the residual chlorine of
chlorine disinfection might threat the human health. chlorine dioxide can be used to replace chlorine gas. It has the advantages of the
stronger oxidizability and less toxic by-products.
 6. Findings and Recommendations

In summary, the we found 3 possible risks regarding the discharge quality during operation ofthe treatment plant after completion of the
tertiary upgrade project, particularly the performance of the chlorination element of the disinfection process. The risks can be present
with the Risk Register below:

Risks Probability Consequence Measures Risk Score

Leaking of liquid Unusual but Disaster • portable gas detectors and fixed gas detection 94
chlorine possible system
• tightness of the chlorine tanks and the chlorine
dosing pump should be checked regularly and
supervised by professionals
• proper training needs to be organised regularly
By-product of Quite Disaster • Improving disinfectant 185
chlorine possible • Further purification
disinfection • Controlling the input of chlorine to maximize the
utilization of chlorine
The exceeded Unusual but Very serious • Further purification 68
E.coli count possible • Improving disinfectant

By doing the quantitative analysis, we obtained the results for the probability of chlorine concentration to be greater than 0.1ml/L is
29.8%, whereas the probability of Ecoli. count to be greater than 10/100ml is only 0.3%. This shows that the risk of having excessive
amount of chlorine concentration is more severe, and therefore needed to have more attention and better measures to limit the damage
to human health and the environment.

Besides from the mentioned measures for each risk, it is necessary to come up with a long-term plan to mitigate the risks if the conditions
change in the future. There are a few possible actions that can be included in this long-term recommendation plan:

• Regular check up for future changes in project risk context should be maintained to timely contain existing risks and prepare for
new occurring risks.
• Current measures for existing risks should be applied effectively and monitored by supervisors to ensure the efficiency of these
processes.
• Forming a team to speculate potential risks that might occur due to the changes in project risk context to plan ahead and build
measures to prepare for these risks.
 7. References

McGuire, M. J. (2013). The chlorine revolution. [electronic resource] : water disinfection and the fight to save lives. Denver, Co. : American
Water Works Association, 2013.

Zyara, A. M., Torvinen, E., Veijalainen, A. M., & Heinonen-Tanski, H. (2016). The effect of chlorine and combined chlorine/UV treatment on
coliphages in drinking water disinfection. Journal Of Water And Health, 14(4), 640-649. doi:10.2166/wh.2016.144

Jianxiang, J., Xuekai, S., & DingCheng. (2009). Study on Environmental Risk Assessment of Accidental Leaking of Liquid Chlorine in a
Chemical Plant. GUANGDONG CHEMICAL INDUSTRY, (11). 75.

Dharmavaram, S. a. (1993). Techniques for Measuring Hydrogen Fluoride and Chlorine Releases from Leaking Equipment. A And Wma
Annual Meeting, 91.

Austin, A. K. (2005). Preventing Chlorine Gas Accidents. OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY, (5). 48.

Monaghan, P. (1991). An evaluation of chlorine as a disinfectant for potable water supplies in the United States : weighing the human
health risks.

Jansson, K., Hyttinen, J., Niittykoski, M., & Mäki-Paakkanen, J. (1995). Mutagenicity in vitro of 3,4-dichloro-5-hydroxy-2(5H)-furanone
(mucochloric acid), a chlorine disinfection by-product in drinking water.

Watson, K., Shaw, G., Leusch, F. L., & Knight, N. L. (2012). Chlorine disinfection by-products in wastewater effluent: bioassay-based
assessment of toxicological impact. Water Research, 46(18), 6069-6083. doi:10.1016/j.watres.2012.08.026

Fuchigami, T., Takeda, M., & Terashima, K. (2010). Effect of advanced water treatment on behaviour of residual chlorine and development
of chlorine control method in distribution systems. WATER SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY -WATER SUPPLY-, (5). 700.

Cheng, L. H., He, A. H., Bi, X. J., & Wang, Q. (2011). Advanced Treatment of Municipal Wastewater Effluent by Coagulation/Sedimentation
and Chlorine Dioxide Disinfection. Applied Mechanics And Materials, 71(1), 2792.

Hawley, H. M. (2013). E. Coli infection. Magill’S Medical Guide (Online Edition).

 8. Appendix (MATLAB code)

Q2.a:

%Statistics Summary for Clc and E.Coli

%Group 6 Tutorial 13

%Adrian Feng 833264, Tuan Ngo 742252, Fei Jiang 876401, Vy Nhat Le 860112

%Clc Sample

Clc=[0.083 0.094 0.103 0.91 0.077 0.111 0.097 0.08 0.089 0.11];

MeanClc=mean(Clc);

LengthClc=length(Clc);

SClc=std(Clc);

MedianClc=median(Clc);

ModeClc=mode(Clc);

MaxClc=max(Clc);

MinClc=min(Clc);

display([MeanClc LengthClc SClc MedianClc ModeClc MaxClc MinClc])

%Ecoli Sample

Ecoli=[7 6 5 5 8 3 5 7 6 4];

MeanEcoli=mean(Ecoli);

LengthEcoli=length(Ecoli);

SEcoli=std(Ecoli);

MedianEcoli=median(Ecoli);

ModeEcoli=mode(Ecoli);

MaxEcoli=max(Ecoli);

MinEcoli=min(Ecoli);

display([MeanEcoli LengthEcoli SEcoli MedianEcoli ModeEcoli MaxEcoli MinEcoli])

Q2.b

%99 percent confidence interval

%Group 6 Tutorial 13

%Adrian Feng 833264, Tuan Ngo 742252, Fei Jiang 876401, Vy Nhat Le 860112

%Clc Sample

Clc=[0.083 0.094 0.103 0.091 0.077 0.111 0.097 0.08 0.089 0.11];

N=length(Clc);

mu=mean(Clc);

stdev=std(Clc);

Confidence=0.99;

alpha=1-Confidence;

alphaon2=alpha/2;

Z_alphaon2=norminv(alphaon2);

display(Z_alphaon2);

normspec([norminv(alphaon2) -norminv(alphaon2)],0,1);

grid on;

stderror=stdev/sqrt(N);

CI=[mu+tinv(alphaon2,N-1)*stderror, mu-tinv(alphaon2,N-1)*stderror];

display(CI)

%Ecoli Sample

Ecoli=[7 6 5 5 8 3 5 7 6 4];

N=length(Ecoli);

mu=mean(Ecoli);

stdev=std(Ecoli);
Confidence=0.99;

alpha=1-Confidence;

alphaon2=alpha/2;

Z_alphaon2=norminv(alphaon2);

display(Z_alphaon2);

normspec([norminv(alphaon2) -norminv(alphaon2)],0,1);

grid on;

stderror=stdev/sqrt(N);

CI=[mu+tinv(alphaon2,N-1)*stderror, mu-tinv(alphaon2,N-1)*stderror];

display(CI)