Jurisdiction summary: There is no single worldwide QRA acceptance limit. A defensible study first identifies the governing law, regulator, project standard, exposed population, risk metric and decision being supported. It then documents the applicable individual-risk, societal-risk, land-use and ALARP requirements, including how uncertainty and vulnerable receptors will be treated.
International projects often ask for “the global QRA standard”. In practice, QRA is a framework supported by jurisdiction-specific legislation, regulator guidance, company standards and recognized technical methods. A numerical criterion copied from another country can be misleading when its endpoint, occupancy basis, land-use purpose or legal context is different.
What must be fixed before selecting risk criteria?
| Decision item | Questions the QRA basis must answer |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction and authority | Which national law, competent authority, free-zone rule, port rule or client standard governs? |
| Lifecycle decision | Is the study for concept selection, layout, permitting, safety case, land-use planning, operation or modification? |
| Exposed group | Are criteria for workers, the public, contractors, sensitive receptors or all groups? |
| Risk endpoint | Fatality, dangerous dose, injury, environmental harm, asset damage or business interruption? |
| Risk metric | Individual risk, location-specific risk, societal risk/F-N, scenario risk or risk integral? |
| Occupancy basis | Resident, most-exposed person, annualized worker occupancy, transient population or time-specific occupancy? |
| ALARP demonstration | Which good-practice, hierarchy-of-control, gross-disproportion or cost-benefit expectations apply? |
| Acceptance authority | Who reviews and approves the basis, assumptions, results and residual risk? |
How major jurisdictions approach QRA
| Jurisdiction/framework | QRA relevance | Do not assume |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom: COMAH and HSE land-use planning | Safety reports address major-accident scenarios, likelihood/conditions, prevention and consequence limitation. HSE land-use advice considers residual risk, consequence, development sensitivity and defined zones. | That every HSE contour or example criterion is automatically a facility-wide corporate acceptance limit. |
| European Union: Seveso III | Upper-tier safety reports include possible major-accident scenarios and risk analysis; land-use policy must address appropriate safety distances and acceptable risk. | That the Directive imposes one numerical QRA threshold across every Member State. |
| Singapore: Major Hazard Installation regime | MHI resources include QRA and ALARP guidance. Safety cases must demonstrate prevention and reduction of major-accident risk to ALARP. | That a single-scenario target replaces cumulative individual or societal risk where those are required. |
| India: sector and state requirements | Applicable requirements may arise from environmental clearance, factory/major-accident rules, OISD, PNGRB, PESO, port or state authority conditions. PNGRB petroleum-installation rules require QRA at layout stage and after defined major changes. | That one India-wide number covers every industry, authority and project decision. |
| Company or lender standard | May add corporate tolerability bands, engineering practices, assurance gates or disclosure requirements. | That a client standard can reduce mandatory legal or regulator obligations. |
Individual risk, societal risk and ALARP are different tests
Individual risk estimates the annual risk to a defined person or hypothetical individual at a location. Societal risk considers accidents that could cause multiple fatalities and is commonly presented as an F-N curve. ALARP is a risk-reduction demonstration: meeting a numerical boundary does not automatically show that further reasonably practicable controls have been considered.
For example, an HSE publication on explosives in ports illustrates individual-risk regions using 10-4 and 10-6 per year. Those figures belong to that guidance context; they should not be copied as universal acceptance criteria. Always verify the current competent-authority basis and the endpoint represented.
Acceptance-criteria hierarchy for an international project
- Binding national and local legislation
- Competent-authority or permitting guidance
- Sector rules and licence conditions
- Approved project design basis and client standards
- Recognized technical guidance for methods and data
- Explicit, documented assumptions where no criterion is prescribed
Cross-border QRA basis checklist
- Record every applicable jurisdiction, authority and permit.
- Obtain written agreement on risk endpoints and metrics before modelling.
- Separate worker, public, transient and vulnerable-receptor populations.
- State whether contours are individual risk, location-specific risk or another measure.
- Define the F-N population boundary, fatality threshold and aggregation method.
- Identify domino effects, natural hazards and neighbouring establishments.
- Define required uncertainty, sensitivity and model-validation work.
- Map each acceptance test to a report table, contour or ALARP record.
- Record deviations between legal, regulator, client and lender requirements.
- Have the basis approved before final scenario-frequency integration.
Common international QRA mistakes
- Calling a corporate matrix a statutory acceptance criterion
- Mixing fatality risk with dangerous-dose or injury contours
- Comparing F-N curves built with different population boundaries
- Using a public-risk criterion for workers without justification
- Ignoring local land-use sensitivity categories
- Treating “below the line” as a substitute for ALARP
- Quoting an old guidance number without confirming current applicability
Official sources
- UK HSE: Control of Major Accident Hazards Regulations 2015
- UK HSE: land-use-planning methodology
- UK HSE: role of QRA, individual risk, societal risk and ALARP
- EUR-Lex: Seveso III Directive 2012/18/EU
- Singapore MOM: Major Hazard Installations
- India PNGRB: safety standards for petroleum installations
Related Elion QRA resources
- QRA consultancy and study scope
- Individual risk, F-N curves and ALARP calculations
- QRA, LOPA, FMEA, Bow-Tie and SIL comparison
- Design-stage QRA input checklist
This guide is technical information, not a legal opinion. Confirm the current requirements with the competent authority for the specific project and location.