Nowadays, different accident causation models are used to explain how accidents happen, whereas most of them were developed long time ago. There is an argument that significant changes have occurred in the industry and traditional models may have limitations in identifying causes of accidents in modern industry within complex socio-technical environment. Consequently, new accident models based on systems theory have been introduced, but they are mainly used by academic researchers. Among systemic accident models, Systems-Theoretic Accident Model and Processes (STAMP), Functional Resonance Accident Model (FRAM), and AcciMap methods have been identified as the most frequently cited models.This article presents a case study-based comparison of these three models. STAMP and FRAM are used to analyze the Chevron Richmond refinery accident, which is investigated by U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board (CSB). CSB investigation team developed an AcciMap of the accident.The results are compared and differences are discussed. In conclusion, STAMP is likely to be more instrumental and comprehensive in identifying contributing factors and generating recommendations.

No abstract

No abstract

In response to most of these accidents many changes and improvements happened in regulations, organizations and technical aspects with the intention to prevent similar accidents or mitigate their consequences. For example, in Europe, Seveso (1976) accident prompted the adoption of legislation on the prevention and control of major accidents (Directive 82/501/EEC) that was called as Seveso Directive. In UK, Piper Alpha (1988) accident completely reshaped the offshore safety regime. One of the main recommendations led to the Offshore Installations Regulations (Safety Case).Companies involved in the process industry make many efforts to prevent and control major accidents. They carry out several safety studies and activities at different times during the life of a process plant.