Perspectives on chemical hazard characterization and analysis process at DOE

Laul, J. C.; Simmons, Fred; Goss, James; Boada-Clista, Lydia; Vrooman, Robert D.; Dickey, Rodger L.; Spivey, Shawn W.; Stirrup, T.S.; Davis, Wayne J.

doi:10.1016/j.chs.2005.06.001

Cited by 13 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This section offers guidance for performing a hazard or accident analysis of a liquid evaporation release using ALOHA, EPIcode, or another chemical dispersion model. This guidance summarizes information and recommendations that have been previously documented in other references [10][11][12][13][14][15] and builds upon them in light of the findings of the current effort that is documented in this report.…”

Section: Guidance For Safety Analysismentioning

confidence: 86%

“…The analysis for many sites use default specifications of F atmospheric stability class and 1-2 m/s wind speed. 10 These specifications are chosen to represent ''unfavorable'' meteorological conditions for accident analysis of the offsite receptor and ideally are based on analysis of site meteorological data. In defining unfavorable meteorological conditions for chemical releases, it seems reasonable to follow the practices that are used for radiological consequence analysis of the offsite receptor as prescribed by Appendix A of DOE-STD-3009.…”

Section: Guidance For Safety Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…10,11 Since the time basis for the rural dispersion coefficients used in ALOHA, EPIcode, and MACCS2 are less than 15 min, use of results from these codes without averaging time correction to represent a 15-min TWA adds conservatism for scenarios with releases lasting longer than 15 min. Note that MACCS2 also allows for the use of Tadmor-Gur dispersion coefficients (3-min time basis for s y ).…”

Section: Guidance For Safety Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Comparison of ALOHA and EPIcode for Safety Analysis Applications

Thoman¹,

O'Kula²,

Laul³

et al. 2006

J. Chem. Health Saf.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

EPIcode (version 7.0) and ALOHA (version 5.2.3) are two of the designated toolbox codes identified in the Department of Energy's Implementation Plan for DNFSB Recommendation 2002-1 on Software Quality Assurance issues in the DOE Complex. Both have the capability to estimate evaporation rates from pools formed from chemical spills and to predict subsequent atmospheric transport and dispersion. This report provides an overview of the algorithms used by EPIcode and ALOHA to calculate evaporation rates and downwind plume concentrations. The technical bases for these algorithms are briefly discussed, and differences in the EPIcode and ALOHA methodologies highlighted. In addition, sample calculations are performed using EPIcode and ALOHA for selected chemicals under various environmental conditions. Side-by-side comparisons of results from sample calculations are analyzed to illustrate the impact that the different methodologies used by EPIcode and ALOHA have on predicted evaporation rates and downwind concentrations.It is recommended that the safety analyst explicitly evaluate the strengths and limitations of any code before selecting it for a specific application. User skill and expertise can often outweigh most of the differences between ALOHA and EPIcode. Recognizing that EPIcode is inherently a scoping tool, while ALOHA is based on more detailed models, the user is recommended to perform a parameter sensitivity study to determine major dependences in the applied model and to check code output with independent techniques, such as a hand calculation, alternative computer code application, or spreadsheet techniques. A multi-tiered approach of this type will provide better confidence in overall results than to unilaterally use one code alone without questioning.

show abstract

Section: Guidance For Safety Analysismentioning

confidence: 86%

Section: Guidance For Safety Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Guidance For Safety Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparison of ALOHA and EPIcode for Safety Analysis Applications

Thoman¹,

O'Kula²,

Laul³

et al. 2006

J. Chem. Health Saf.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In a rearrangement of Kletz's thoughts, Gujar [56] revealed some of the HAZOP lacunas. Several authors shared their experiences on HAZOP by defining stages of the study and considering particularities to improve them: the examples they gave included planning for HAZOP, HAZOP preparation, HAZOP team composition, hazard specialists' responsibilities, and timing [57][58][59][60][61][62]. Focusing on the documentation stage of a HAZOP study, Freeman [63] established a detailed HAZOP report content and detailed basic rules to developing one.…”

Section: Sharing Hazop Experiencementioning

confidence: 99%

Hazard and operability (HAZOP) analysis. A literature review

Dunjó

Fthenakis

Vı́lchez

et al. 2010

Journal of Hazardous Materials

359

142

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The ERPGs/TEELs with increasing severity are defined as follows. 1,2,14 ERPG/TEEL-1: The maximum airborne concentration below which it is believed that nearly all individuals could be exposed for up to one hour without experiencing other than mild, transient adverse health effects or without perceiving a clearly defined objectionable odor.…”

Section: Erpgs/teels For Beryllium and Its Compounds And Their Criteriamentioning

confidence: 99%

Beryllium: Hazards evaluation, facility classification, consequence analysis of releases during potential accidents, and protection of public and workers

Laul¹,

Norman²

2008

J. Chem. Health Saf.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Comprehensive literature searches on beryllium (Be) and information on the particle size distribution of Be powder (Mishima et al.) 1,2 indicate that the new airborne release fraction/respirable fraction (ARF/RF) values for large coherent pieces, turnings/swarfs, chips/powder, and dust are several orders of magnitude lower for explosion, fire, and spill (e.g., 1EÀ2, 1.5EÀ5, 1EÀ6) than earlier estimates based on DOE-HDBK-3010. 3 This implies a lower consequence exposure and thus an increase in threshold limit or lower facility hazard classification (High-Moderate-Low), and less risk of exposure to workers and public during these accident scenarios. This is demonstrated by a case study of using 100 lbs chips/powder under various accident conditions (explosion, fire, and spill) in standard terrain (rural) and city terrain (urban) to assess the relative concentrations to a receptor at different distances, using EPIcode (Emergency Prediction Information Code) dispersion model.Beryllium aerosol exposure can cause: (1) acute exposure (short term) from Emergency Response Planning Guideline-3, -2 (ERPG-3, -2) levels; and (2) chronic (long term) from sensitization and chronic beryllium disease (CBD). Per 40 CFR 61.32, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Be emission standard limit to protect the public (no CBD) is 0.01 mg/m 3 on a 30-day time weighted average (TWA). 4 Facility hazard classifications require modeling to be performed to establish a distance beyond which the public is protected. A case study using 100 lbs chip/powder release with conservative assumptions (e.g., standard, term release) shows that the public is protected beyond 200 m.The American Conference of Government Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) 5 and Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) adopted exposure threshold limit value for workers at 2.0 mg/m 3 , based on 8-hr TWA. However, 10 CFR 850 Rule on CBD and Prevention Program 6 requires a protection at 0.2 mg/m 3 (8 h TWA), to further mitigate or prevent any health effects or CBD. Thus, 40 CFR 61.32, ACGIH and OSHA guide, and 10 CFR 850 Rule, coupled with the worker protection program and adequate safety controls, provide adequate protection from the CBD to the workers and public.

show abstract

Perspectives on chemical hazard characterization and analysis process at DOE

Cited by 13 publications

References 1 publication

Comparison of ALOHA and EPIcode for Safety Analysis Applications

Comparison of ALOHA and EPIcode for Safety Analysis Applications

Hazard and operability (HAZOP) analysis. A literature review

Beryllium: Hazards evaluation, facility classification, consequence analysis of releases during potential accidents, and protection of public and workers

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About