P.O.Box 62, Oak Ridge, TN 37831; prices available from (615)

Similar documents
Report on the Suitability of Class 6, U.S. Government Security Repositories for the Storage of Small Quantities of High Explosives

A FIRST RESPONDERS GUIDE TO PURCHASING RADIATION PAGERS

Why Thermostats Matter

Structure Fires in Hotels and Motels

THERMAL VACUUM TESTS OF A FIVE WATT PSEUDO CHIP SEM-X ELECTRONIC MODULE CLAMPED IN A SATELLITE BOX

Reported Fires in High-Rise Structures in Selected Occupancies with and without Automatic Extinguishing Systems by Extent of Smoke Damage

STER 1981 ANNUAL INDUSTRIAL SUMMARY OF FIRE AND PROPERTY DAMAGE EXPERIENCE. Monsanto. MOUND FACILITY Miemisburg. Ohio MLM.ML

Electronic Refrigerant Leak Detector DE-FG36-98G Micronic, Inc. Elie Talamas, Jr. Period: 10/1/99 to 12/31/99

New Construction Builders Challenge: Sealed Attic and High Efficiency HVAC in Central Florida: A Year in Review

Condensate Induced Water Hammer in a Steam Distribution System Results in Fatality

Home Fires Involving Heating Equipment

Estimating Fires When a Product is the Primary Fuel But Not the First Fuel, With an Application to Upholstered Furniture

NATURAL CONVECTION HEAT EXCHANGERS FOR SOLAR WATER HEATING SYSTEMS. Technical Progress Report April 1,1995 to May 31,1995

FINAL ABSTRACT. CRADA TITLE. Miniature Transducers for Flight Test Unit Instrumentation - Magnetic Field Detector CRADA NUMBER: LA98C10367.

CHARACTERISTICS OF HOME FIRE VICTIMS

SELECTIONS FROM HOME COOKING FIRE PATTERNS AND TRENDS CHARCOAL GRILLS

AVIATION TECHNOLOGY SERVICES: PIPELINE LEAK DETECTION

A Cost Effective Multi-Spectral Scanner for Natural Gas Detection

U.S. STRUCTURE FIRES IN OFFICE PROPERTIES

Fire and Gas Detection and Mitigation Systems

a high level of operational reliability), and the designer (in performing probabilistic-based

THE SMOKING-MATERIAL FIRE PROBLEM

Fires in Petroleum Refineries and Natural Gas Plants Annual Averages and Trends since 1980

STRUCTURE FIRES IN EDUCATIONAL PROPERTIES

Title Page. Report Title: Downhole Power Generation and Wireless Communications. for Intelligent Completions Applications

HALON FLIGHTLINE EXTINGUISHER EVALUATION: DATA SUPPORTING STANDARD DEVELOPMENT [INCLUDES NOVEMBER 2007 ADDENDUM]

HOME STRUCTURE FIRES INVOLVING KITCHEN EQUIPMENT OTHER THAN COOKING EQUIPMENT

Food Service Technology Center

Experimental Assessment of the Thermal Performance of Storage Canisterm01d ing Fix ture Conj?gurations

HOME FIRES THAT BEGAN WITH UPHOLSTERED FURNITURE

Global Warming Impacts of Ozone-Safe Refrigerants and Refrigeration, Heating, and Air-conditioning Technologies. Steve Fischer Jim Sand Van Baxter

U.S. STRUCTURE FIRES IN NURSING HOMES. Jennifer Flynn Fire Analysis and Research Division National Fire Protection Association

W. T. Roybal J. T. Bradley III D. E. Rees P. Torrez D. K. Warner J. Debaca. LINAC 2000 Monterey, CA August ,2000

PlateScrape Plate Pre-Scrapper Test Report

Hugh Hoagland Consulting, Inc. Electric Arc Exposure Tests. For Innovative Textiles

PATTERNS OF FIREFIGHTER FIREGROUND INJURIES

LP GAS LEKAGE ALARM. M. G.. D. D. Wickramasinghe 1*, N. Abhayasinghe 2

Home Cooking Fires. November 2018 Marty Ahrens. November 2018 National Fire Protection Association

Structure Fires in Residential Board and Care Facilities

A Comprehensive Review of Market Research on Solar Water Heaters

TEST REPORT. Report No.: E Test Date: May 6, Rendered to: FUNDERMAX GMBH A-9300 St. Veit an der Glan, Austria

MEMORANDUM. NFPA Technical Committee on Fire Code (FCC-AAA) Subject: NFPA 1 Proposed Tentative Interim Amendment (TIA) No.1045

Permitting and Licensing for Hazardous Material Use and Storage

FIRE HAZARD ASSESSMENT IN SUPPORTING FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEM DESIGN OF A CHEMICAL PROCESS FACILITY ABSTRACT

Fixed fire protection solutions

Food Service Technology Center

Model Number Structure

TEST REPORT. Report No.: D Rendered to: 3M COMPANY St. Paul, Minnesota

p?:uam SYSTEMS Technical Progress Report Jane H. Davidson NAllJRAL CONVECTION HEAT EXCHANGERS FOR SOLAR WATER HEATING February 1,1996 to March 31,1996

Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory

Conducting a NFPA 652 Dust Hazard Analysis (DHA): Practical Tips & Approaches

Life-Cycle Energy Costs and Greenhouse Gas Emissions for Gas Turbine Power

COMPATIBILITY OF REFRIGERANTS AND LUBRICANTS WITH MOTOR MATERIALS UNDER RETROFIT CONDITIONS. Final Report

polyurethane & polyisocyanurate foam Six Steps for

IFE Level 4 Certificate in Fire Science and Fire Safety

Appliance Sales Tracking

FIRE PREVENTION STRATEGY FOR BUILDINGS IN CONSTRUCTION. Fire Department, Taipei City Government, Taipei, Taiwan, ROC 2

Fire Safety / Campus Fire Drills

Reporting of Fire Incidents in Heavy Timber Structures

Understanding Hazardous Locations Concepts

BOP Ram Sensing and Interface Concept Rationale Intelligent BOP RAM Actuation Sensor System

Detection of Inherent and Laser-Induced Scatter in Optical Materials

Electrical Safety for Facility Managers and Building Owners

Radon Measurement Survey Report. Oak Park Elementary School 1200 Front Street Aurora, Illinois Prepared For:

Los Alamos NATIONAL LABORATORY. A Review of Acceptance Testing of t h e. Continuous Air Monitor (CAM)

National Fire Protection Association. 1 Batterymarch Park, Quincy, MA Phone: Fax:

COMPARATIVE PROPERTIES AND EFFICIENCY OF R-421A FOR RETROFIT USE TO REPLACE R-22

FIRE PROTECTION PROGRAM

FABRITRAK SYSTEMS, INC. FIRE TEST REPORT

3NT SERIES FIXED TEMPERATURE THERMOSTATS Introduction

Patent Liability Analysis

NFPA 85 COMPLIANCES OF BMS: A CASE STUDY OF BOILER CONTROL AT SBM OFFSHORE MALAYSIA COMPANY 1. AHMED ABOUELRISH 2 Universiti Teknologi Petronas

NEC Requirement Guidelines 2002 Code Options for the Installation of Listed Less-Flammable Liquid-Filled Transformers

Property risk solutions

Ancient Greek and Roman planners recognized the importance of centralized gathering spaces within urban

FALSE ALARM ACTIVITY IN THE U.S. 2012

Measured Duct Leakage at Operating Conditions in 48 Homes

Modified Everitt-Jennings (MEJ) Method and the Gibbs Method: Downhole Card Comparison

High-Altitude, Aerial Natural Gas Leak Detection System

E2K-L. Liquid Level Sensor That Is Unaffected by the Color of the Pipe or Liquid. Liquid Level Sensor. Ordering Information

SN5446A, 47A, 48, SN54LS47, LS48, LS49 SN7446A, 47A, 48, SN74LS47, LS48, LS49 BCD-TO-SEVEN-SEGMENT DECODERS/DRIVERS

DUST EXPLOSION CODES AND STANDARDS: Ensuring Regional Compliance and Global Consistency

Hugh Hoagland Consulting, Inc. ArcWear.com. Electric Arc Exposure Tests. for Stern & Stern

Developing a Fire Test Strategy for Storage Protection Under Sloped Ceilings

DOE FUNDAMENTALS HANDBOOK INSTRUMENTATION AND CONTROL Volume 1 of 2

Unit 6: Fire Investigation

Radon Measurement Survey Report. Krug Elementary School 240 Melrose Avenue Aurora, Illinois Prepared For:

DuPont Formacel Z-2. Safety and Handling of DuPont Formacel Z-2: Thermoplastic* Foam Extrusion Applications FOAM EXPANSION AGENT TECHNICAL INFORMATION

SIGMADEK, LTD. FIRE TEST REPORT

Multiple-Fatality Fires in Residential Buildings

Second Revision No. 5-NFPA [ Section No ] Supplemental Information. Submitter Information Verification. Committee Statement

Intrinsically Safe Transmitters, Option Code 2n

12/21/2015 National Fire Protection Association Report

FIRES IN VACANT BUILDINGS. Marty Ahrens February 2018

This document is a preview generated by EVS

Collection of Data on Fire and Collapse, Faculty of Architecture Building, Delft University of Technology

Fire Risks of Loviisa NPP During Shutdown States

Stillwater Area Community Services Center Inc.

Smoke Alarms in U.S. Home Fires

Calculated Energy Savings for Disabling Anti- Sweat Door Heat on Glass Display Case Doors

Transcription:

DISCLAIMER This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. This report has been reproduced directly from the best available copy. Available to DOE and DOE contractors from the Office of Scientific and Technical Information, P.O.Box 62, Oak Ridge, TN 37831; prices available from (615) 576-8401. Available to the public from the National Technical Infomation Service, U.S.Department of Commercei 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, VA 22161.

DISCLAIMER Portions of this document may be inegible in electronic image products. Images are produced from the best avaiiable original dol.mnent.

Gas Induced Fire and Explosion Frequencies D. A. Coutts Westinghouse Savannah River Company m e n, SC, 29808, USA (803) 952-8626, Fax (803) 952-8642, allan.coutts@srs.gov Abstract The use and handling of flammable gases poses a fire and explosion hazard to many DOE nuclear facilities. This hazard is not unique to DOE fwilities. Each year over 2,900 non-residential structural fires occur in the US where a gas is the first item ignited. Details &om these events are collected by the National Fire Incident Reporting System (NFIRS) through an extensive reporting network. This extensive data set (800,000 fires in non-residential structures over a 5 year period) is an underutilized resource within the DOE community. Explosions in nuclear facilities can have very severe consequences. Th'e explosion can both damage the facility containment and provide a mechanism for significant radiological dispersion. In addition, an explosion can have significant worker safety implications. Because of this a quantitative fiequency estimate for explosions in an SRS laboratory facility has been prepared using the NFIRS data. In addition, conditional probabilities Introduction Fires that involve flammable gasesa are unique. Flammable gases have a high energetic content and do not require vaporization energy to volatize the fuel. In addition, there is the poteptial for explosions. Thus it is prudent to evaluate the fiequency of such events separately fiom the incipient fire fiequency. The U.S. Fire Administration is responsible for gathering fire data of all types. Incident-based fire data is provided by local fire departments to the administration's NFIRS. Forty-two states and 30 metropolitan departments participated in this system' in t995. The paper differentiates between explosion events with no ensuing fire, and general fire/explosion events. As described later each is tracked separately as the "Type of Situation Found'' by the fire department. Only those events where a gas is the first item ignited are considered. Thus explosions occurring after fire propagation have been neglected and should be handled as part of the consequence analysis. In addition, this analysis only evaluates the fkequency of fire ignition. this paper the term gas does not imply gasoline. Gas is a vapor at standard conditions. Gasoline is a liquid. 1 of7

c Nomenclature D Number of deaths F Frequency of a event (eventslyr) I Number of injuries L Monetary loss ($) P Conditional probability of an event Subscripts Explosion, given that a gas was the first m a t e d ignited Fire or explosioa with an after fire where a gas was the first material ignited Fire or explosion event where a gas was the first material ignited Explosion with no after fire Reported explosions with no after fire Total explosions with no after fire Unreported explosions with no after fire Available Data The National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) is a leadmg, source of U.S. fire incident data and statistics. The National Fire Protection Association (NF PA) compiles and performs a,nalyses of fire statistics. Some of the databases maintained or used by the NFPA include: Annual Survey of Fire Department Experience - Yearly survey of U.S. fire depapments to determine their fire experience during the previous :year. U.S. Fire Administration s National Fire Incident Reporting System F I R S ) - A nationally managed compellation of fire reports prepared by local fire departments. Approximately a third of U.S. fire departments participate in this program. 0 Fire Incident Data Organization PIDO) - An indexed compilation of 71,000 case studies of special interest and high loss (5 or more deaths or $ 1 million in property damage) fires. The NFIRS database has proved very usefbl in developing fire fiequency estimates. Estimating the fire fi-equencyat public service stations (e.g.,, gasoline staticm) is a good example of how this can be accomplished. Using the NFIRS database the NFPA estimates that between 1990 and 1994 the fire frequency at public service stations was 1060 fire:; per year. When this fieqyency is 2of7

t combined with the number of public service stations operating in the U.S. the fire fiequency per station can be estimated. The National Petroleum Newsletter publishes3 an annual c e ~ u son public service stations (average of 206,000 between 1991 and 1994). Thus the fire fiequency per station is: (1) F= 1060 fires / yr fires = 0.005 206000 stations station yr - Non-residential Structure Fires The NFIRS database includes a field that describes the type of material first ignited. A search4of this database determined that a gas was the type of mat&ial first ignited in 2,940 non-reqidential structural fires each year (1990 to 1994). The losses fiom such fires averaged $ 119,800,000 per year. Table 1 sunmarizes the results of this search (third column). During this same period the number of non-residential structural fires averaged 160,000 per year and the losses fiom these fires averaged $2,685,500,000 per year. (See the first column of Table 1.) Table 1.--Fire and explosion data from NFPA based on NFlRS searches Fires with gas as first material ignited All fires Item Number of fires Civilian deaths Civilian injuries Property damage (millions) 160,000 190 3,260 2685.5 2,940 12 196 119.8 Explosions with no afier fire 100 7 86 0,8648 The NFIRS database track Explosions with No Mer-Fire separately &om fire events. Thus a search of non-fire events is possible4. Based on this search 100 non-residential structural explosions with no after fire occur are expected each year. (See the third column in Table 1.) The losses fiom such events average $864,800 per year. Gas as the First Material Ignited The conditional probability that a gas is the first material ignited, given that a fire has occurred, can be estimated fiom the data in Table 1. (2) P f/e = Ff/e Fallfires - 2,940 fires - 160,000 fires = 0.018 A similar estimate can be made based on civilian deaths, civilian injuries, and property loss. These respective probabilities are 0.063, 0.060, and 0.045. Based on these values it can be copcluded that in non-residential structures, fires where gas is the first item ignited result in a proportionally higher number of deaths, greater number of injuries, and increased property losses than for fires where gas is not the first item ignited. 3 of7

Probability of a Fire Following Gas Ignition There are three potential outcomes when gas is ignited. 0 An explosion with no subsequent fire 0 An explosion followed by a fire 0 *A fire without an explosion Table 2 presents a comparison between the data for explosions with no after fire, and firedexplosions where gas is the first material ignited. There: are significant discrepancies that must be discussed The property damage for gas explosions without a fire is 0.7 percent of fire/explosions that involve gas as the first item ignited. This is less than the 3.4 percent value based, on the number of events. This difference is expected since fires or explosions with an after fire are expected to cause more damage than explosions with no after fire. The civilian deaths and injuries for gas explosions without a fire is 58 and 44 percent of fire/explosions that involve gas as the first item ignited. This is substantially greater than the 3.4 percent value based on the number of events. Thus events with casualties resulting fiom explosions with no after fire may be reported preferentially. Table 2.--Fire and explosion data from summarized from Attachment 1 Item Number of tires Civilian deaths Civilian injuries Property damage (millions) Explosions with no after fire Fires with gas as first material ignited 100 7 2940 86 0.8648 I: 2 196 1I: 9.8 Ratio 0.034 0.58 0.44 0.0072 The second discrepancy demonstrates a widely known fact; fire: and explosions events that do not result in significant loses, deaths or multiple injuries often are not included in the NFIRS +ta. As mentions previously the NFIRS database is collection of fire department reports thus if an event is not reported to a fire department, it will not appear in the NFIRS database. Small loss explosions and fires are most likely to go unreported. In addition, the locations that are very likely to have explosions hazards (e.g., chemical plants, manufacturing facilities, etc.) often rely on fire brigades or industrial iire departments. Events that are successfidly handled by such non-public forces are commonly not reported. Thus, m y fire and explosion events would be expected to go unreported. Lower Bound Estimate The statistics on fire/explosion events and the explosions with no after fiie events are considered mutually exclusive. Based on the number of reported events the conditional probability of no after-iire occurring for an event where gas is the first item ignited would be: (3) Prl, = 100 events Nn, = 0.033 Nf,, + Nnf 2,940 fires + 100 events 4of7 ~

This value will be rounded to 0.03 in the presentation of the results. If the estimate is based on monetary loss, then: (4) Pd = $0.8648 M Lnf = 0.007 Lf/, + Lnf $119.8 M + $0.8648 M The first estimate (Equation 3) is considered the more representative value and is considered a lower bound estimate. The second estimate based on loss data (Equation 4) is expeyted to contain a bias in that most explosions with no after-fire are expected to result is less damage than fire/explosions. Upper Bound Estimate Explosions that cause deaths or multiple injuries are more likely to be reported. Even if suppression assistance were not requested, fire department response would be expected to support coroner or insurance investigations. Thus the number of explosions that are not followed by a fke and result in a civilian death is expected to be representative of the overall population of explosions with no after fire. This conclusion allows the data in Table 1 to be adjusted to account for unreported explosions. If the probability of civilian deaths for explosions with no after fire is assumed equal to the probability of civilian deaths for all fires/explosions where gas was the first item ignited, then: Rearranging Equation 5, and including a term for unreported fires: (6) Nncu = (7 deaths)(2,940 fms) D nf N f/e - 100 fires = 1,600 fires -Nncr = 12 deaths D f/e Thus the adjusted yearly average for the number of explosions with no after-fire (Nnf,t) is 1,700. A similar estimate can be made using civilian injury data. (7) Nncu = InfNf/e If/e -Nncr = (86 injuries)(2,940 fires) - 100 fires = 1,200 fires 196 injuries Thus based on the injury count the adjusted yearly average (Nnf,t) would be 1,300. The adjustment based on deaths will be used in this analysis since it is higher and will be used to create an upper bound estimate. The upper bound estimate for the conditional probability of a fire where gas is the first item ignited would be: (8) Pnf = 1,700 fires Nnf = 0.37 Nf,, + Nnf 2,940 fires + 1,700 fires 5 of7

c Nominal Estimate The upper and lower bound estimates fiom above can be combiied to produce a nominal estimate. In combining these values an exponential probability distribution for fire loss is assumed. Thus a log average of the upper and lower bounds is lconsiderecl a nominal estimate. log(0.033) (9) P,f = logf + log(0.37) 2 1 = 0.1 Therefore 90 percent of the t h e a fire would be expected following ignition of a gas. Explosion/Fire Frequency Estimate The generic fire fiequency at SRS has been demonstrated5 as 33 fireskn2-yr. This value is for incipient fires and includes fires fiom all causes. Thus the fiequency of an incipient fire occurring in a large building (27,000 m2,290,000 ft2) can be estimated using the d o r m fire ignition fiequency. (10) fires Fallfies = (27,000 m This fiequency estimate includes incipient fires and explosions with no d;er fire. (Le., explosions with no after fire were not tabulated separately.) If explosions with no after fire are treated as fire events then fiom the data discussed previously the probability of gas being the first item ignited is: (11) Pg = 2,940 + 1,700 = 0.029 160,000 + 1,700 The fiequency of an explosion or fire in a large building (27,000 m2) where gas is the first item ignited is: (12) Fg,fle = Fall smpg = (0.89 fires / yr)(0.029) = 0.026 fires / yr. The fiequency of an explosion with no after fire where gas is the fist item ignited is: (13) Fg,nf = FallfiresPgPd = (0.89 fires / yr)(0.029)(0.1) = 0.0026 fires / yr It is expected that the fiequency of an explosion followed by a fire, where gas is the first item ignited, will be between these two values (Equation 12 and 13). If estimated as the midpoint between these two values using a log average: log(0.026) + log(0.0026) 2 1 events = 0.0082-- Yr Thus an explosion followed by a ire, where gas is the fist item ignited, is considered an unlikely event as defined6 by DOE-STD-3009-94. 6of7

* c By combining the results in Equation 13 and 14 the frequency of all explosions where gas is the fist item ignited is: (15) events events events = 0.01-1 F, = Fe,f/, + F&nf = 0.0082-+ 0.0026Y= Yr Yr This frequency estimate (Equation 15) does not include explosions where a gas is not tbe first time ignited. Even if such events are neglected, explosions occurring in large buildings should be considered anticipated events6, if safety controls and programs are limited to normal inqustrial practice. Conclusions It has been demonstrated that the nominal probabijity of an explosion occurring given ignition of a flammable gas is 0.1. The upper and lower bound values for this estimate are 0.4 and 0.03. In addition, explosions in large buildings (>27,000 m2) that handle flamtnable gases have been shown to be anticipated events if safety precautions are limited to normal industrial practice. Works Cited 1. U.S. Fire Administration: Fire Data http://www.ush.fema.gov/uswfd. htm. Web Page. 1997. (16 April). 2. Schwartz, N. 1997. Public Service Station Fires Reported to U.S. Public Fire Departments by Type of Material First Ignited. Quincy, MA: National Fire Protection Association. (8 April) unpublished NFIRS & NFPA Survey. facsimile. 3. 1996 NPN Station Count. 1997. Arlington Heights, IL: NPN, Adams Trade Press. fstcsimile. 4. Stewart, L.J. 1996. Non-Residential Structural Fires or Explosions. Quincy, MA: National Fire Protection Association. (1 1 November) unpublished NFIRS & NFPA Survey. facsimile. 5. Coutts, D.A. 1994. Fire Risk Assessment Methodology Generic Event Tree Description (u). Aiken, SC: Westinghouse Savannah River Company. (March) WSRC-TR-94-0188. 6. Preparation Guide for U.S. Department of Energy Nonreactor Nuclear Facility Safety Analysis Reports. 1994. Washington DC: U.S.Department of Energy. (July) DOF-STD- 3009-94. 7 of7