Seismic Assessments in Major Hazard Industrial Facilities

SERVICE MARKET CLIENT International Oil Company YEAR 2025-2026

Brief

The client requested seismic risk assessments for critical components within their storage facility.

Project challenge

Italian regulation (OPCM 3274, March 20, 2003) requires seismic verification for buildings and infrastructure whose collapse could have significant consequences.

Additionally, according to Legislative Decree 105/2015 (Seveso III Directive), the operator of an industrial plant must demonstrate that all possible accident scenarios have been identified, including NaTech scenarios (Natural Hazard Triggering Technological Disasters), meaning accidents caused by natural events such as earthquakes.

Earthquakes are particularly important in Italy due to:

  • the country’s seismic vulnerability
  • the potential impact on industrial facilities, people, and the environment

The UNI/TS 11816-1 (2021) guidelines define how to comply with these requirements:

  • first, perform seismic assessments according to current standards (NTC 2018)
  • then, use quantitative risk analysis to design appropriate mitigation measures

Solution

Seismic assessments must not only consider buildings, but also:

  • process equipment
  • anchoring systems
  • underground pipelines
  • safety systems (both instrumented and non-instrumented)

An earthquake can damage multiple safety barriers at once, increasing:

  • the risk of domino effects
  • or the severity of accidents

 

Execution phases

FASE 1

Preliminary Risk Analysis

Different aspects were analyzed together:

  • structural types
  • stored substances
  • possible accident scenarios

This helped identify critical components for further analysis.

FASE 2

Seismic Safety Assessment

According to NTC 2018:

  • Serviceability Limit State (SLE)
  • Ultimate Limit State (SLU)

Advanced finite element modeling was used to:

  • simulate structural behavior during earthquakes
  • identify possible failure mechanisms

They evaluated:

  • structural aspects ? stability and containment of hazardous materials
  • non-structural aspects ? failure of safety systems (e.g., fire protection system)

Result: safety indexes were calculated for all components.

FASE 3

Based on the results

  • a quantitative risk analysis was performed
  • improvement actions were defined where needed

Achieved results

This approach allowed:

  • full compliance with client requirements
  • completion within deadlines

Most importantly:

Only proper seismic verification allows you to exclude severe scenarios (like total collapse of critical components) from the Safety Report.

 

Subscribe our Newsletter .