PESO submission summary
A QRA can support a PESO-related submission, but it does not guarantee approval. Submission readiness depends on the applicable licence or rule, accurate drawings and inventories, traceable scenarios and assumptions, consequence and risk results, mitigation commitments, and consistency between the QRA, layout and other safety documents. The relevant PESO authority decides what is required for the specific application.
Facilities handling petroleum, compressed or liquefied gases, explosives or other regulated hazardous materials may need permissions, approvals or licences administered by the Petroleum and Explosives Safety Organisation (PESO). A quantitative risk assessment can help demonstrate that credible fire, explosion and toxic-release scenarios have been evaluated, but a QRA is only one part of a complete and internally consistent submission.
This checklist is for project owners, engineering teams and safety managers preparing a QRA that may be used alongside a PESO application. It is not a substitute for the applicable Act, Rules, licence form, circular, drawing requirement or direction from the licensing authority.
What PESO regulates
PESO is a statutory authority responsible for safety and security relating to petroleum, explosives, compressed gases and associated activities. The applicable framework depends on the material, equipment and activity. Common examples include the Petroleum Rules, 2002, the Explosives Rules, 2008, and the Static and Mobile Pressure Vessels (Unfired) Rules, 2016. Amendments, application forms and site-specific directions also matter, so the compliance basis must be confirmed before the study scope is frozen.
Useful PESO facts
- PESO states that it serves through nine Circle Offices and their subordinate Sub-Circle offices.
- PESO’s 2024–25 annual report describes 51 licensing modules operating through a paperless process.
Sources: PESO official website and PESO Annual Report 2024–25. Applicants should use the current portal, forms and instructions for their licence category.
When can a QRA support a PESO submission?
A QRA may be relevant when a project involves bulk petroleum storage, LPG or other pressurised gas systems, hazardous installations, major layout changes, capacity expansion, new tanks or vessels, or changes that alter credible accident consequences. Whether a QRA is required—and the depth, endpoints and acceptance criteria expected—depends on the applicable rules, licence or approval type, project facts and authority instructions.
Do not begin with a generic promise that “PESO requires QRA for every project.” Begin by mapping the proposed activity to the correct regulatory route. Then define what safety evidence is required and how the QRA will support it.
QRA submission-readiness checklist
1. Confirm the legal and licensing basis
- Identify the substance, class, maximum inventory and operating state.
- Identify the applicable Act, Rules, amendments, licence form and approving office.
- Record whether the work is for a new licence, amendment, renewal, expansion, layout approval or another purpose.
- Capture any written scope, observations or study requirements issued by PESO or another authority.
2. Freeze a controlled plot plan and equipment layout
The plot plan used in the QRA should match the drawing submitted with the application. Tank numbers, vessel capacities, property boundaries, buildings, occupied areas, roads, escape routes, ignition sources, transfer points and safety distances must be identifiable. A revised layout paired with an old QRA is a common consistency failure.
3. Validate hazardous-material and operating data
- Normal and maximum inventories, pressures, temperatures and compositions
- Tank and vessel dimensions, fill levels and relief conditions
- Line sizes, isolation philosophy, transfer rates and shutdown times
- Population and occupancy data for onsite and relevant offsite receptors
- Meteorological data and surface-roughness assumptions used for dispersion modelling
4. Make the scenario register traceable
Each release scenario should be linked to a specific equipment item or activity. The report should explain hole sizes, rupture cases, leak duration, detection, isolation, ignition assumptions, weather cases and escalation logic. Scenarios should cover credible events rather than presenting unexplained software outputs. See our guide to QRA calculations, frequency and consequence modelling.
5. State models, endpoints and limitations
Document the software and version, model selection, thermal-radiation levels, overpressure levels, toxic endpoints where relevant, vulnerability relationships and frequency data. Explain why each model fits the material and release behaviour. Results should distinguish consequence contours from individual or societal risk; they are not interchangeable.
6. Reconcile the QRA with other safety documents
| Document or drawing | Consistency check |
|---|---|
| Plot plan and licence drawing | Same equipment, capacities, boundaries, separation distances and revision |
| Process description and P&IDs | Same operating conditions, line sizes, isolation and relief provisions |
| HAZOP/HIRA records | Major scenarios and safeguards carried consistently into the QRA |
| Fire-protection philosophy | Detection, deluge, hydrants, monitors and access reflect the actual design |
| Emergency plan | Emergency zones, evacuation decisions and resource planning use relevant QRA findings |
7. Convert findings into controlled actions
Recommendations should identify the risk driver, required measure, responsible party, target date and closure evidence. Where the layout or design changes, determine whether affected scenarios must be remodelled. “Complied” without a drawing, calculation, specification or approved record is weak closure evidence.
8. Complete an independent pre-submission review
Before upload, check page references, appendices, drawing numbers, signatures, assumptions, units, contour legends and version history. Confirm that redacted or compressed files remain readable. Use the design-stage QRA checklist to align the review with project gates.
Common reasons a QRA package attracts questions
- The QRA inventory differs from the application form or latest plot plan.
- Scenarios are copied from another facility and do not match the actual equipment.
- Consequence contours are presented without assumptions, endpoints or a readable scale.
- Risk results are stated without explaining frequency sources or uncertainty.
- Recommendations are generic, have no owner or are contradicted by the submitted layout.
- The report claims that completing a QRA itself guarantees regulatory approval.
What a good PESO-facing QRA deliverable contains
A defensible package normally includes an executive summary; scope and regulatory basis; facility and process description; hazardous-material inventory; methodology; scenario register; frequency and consequence assumptions; risk results; contour drawings; sensitivity or uncertainty discussion where material; recommendations; and appendices with traceable inputs. The report should let a reviewer follow a result back to the equipment, data and assumption that produced it.
Does a QRA guarantee PESO approval?
No. A technically sound QRA may strengthen the safety evidence for an applicable submission, but PESO approval depends on the governing Rules, application category, drawings, certificates, fees, inspections, compliance history and the authority’s review. Requirements can vary by project and may change through amendments or official directions.
How Elion supports submission-ready QRA work
Elion Technologies and Consulting structures QRA studies around verified site data, credible scenarios, transparent calculations and actionable mitigation. We can coordinate the study inputs with engineering, fire-safety and compliance teams so the report is consistent with the project documentation. Learn more about our quantitative risk assessment services or review what QRA means and how it differs from HIRA and HAZOP.
Need a PESO-facing QRA review?
Share the applicable licence category, latest plot plan, hazardous-material inventory and project stage. Elion can identify missing inputs, define an appropriate QRA scope and prepare a traceable technical report. Final regulatory requirements and decisions remain with the relevant authority.