Proceedings of the

The 33rd European Safety and Reliability Conference (ESREL 2023)
3 – 8 September 2023, Southampton, UK

Juridical Side of ALARP: The Monte Bianco Tunnel

Emin Alakbarli1,a, Noemi Sara Gentile2 and Massimo Guarascio1,b

1Department of Civil, Constructional and Environmental Engineering, Sapienza University, Rome, Italy.

2Department of Political Sciences, Sapienza University, Rome, Italy.


When the ALARP "as low as reasonably practicable" principle is considered in judgments, this always comprehends a proportionate cost-risk analysis of protection measures: minimum risk has to mean level of safety maximization conditional to a given equitable profit, and maximum profit given a minimum sufficient level of safety. In London Court in 1949, Lord Asquith's definition of "reasonably practicable" in its judgment "Edwards v. National Coal Board", as well as the whole judgment, became the legal basis of a requirement for risk assessments. Since then, ALARP has been officially endorsed and safety measures implemented in governments and enterprises in order to mitigate and manage risks. The study aims to analyse the failures in the Monte Bianco tunnel's accident - which occurred on March 24, 1999 - from a logical perspective in order to develop a higher level of safety based on past experience and that played a central role in generating the current European Directive 2004/54/EC on minimum safety requirements for tunnels. This article reveals the consequences of ignoring the value of ALARP principle. Error analysis in Forensic Engineering are discussed and Gu@larp model contribution is considered.

Keywords: ALARP, Juridical, Forensic engineering, Fire investigation, Monte Bianco tunnel.

Download PDF