Solvent Fire at Argonne National Laboratory - West

1
Solvent Fire at Argonne National Laboratory - West

• ORPS Report CH-AA-ANLW-ANLW-2003-0004
• Presented by
• Jim Geringer
• Dary Newbry

2
Event Description

• Journeyman painter had completed pouring used
  solvents from a five gallon plastic bucket into
  an installed funnel on a 55 gallon drum
  (Satellite Accumulation Area).
• The worker was using a nylon bristle brush to
  remove the last portions of solvent and paint
  residue when the vapors ignited in the five
  gallon bucket and metal funnel.

3
Event Description (cont.)

• The 5-gallon container, funnel, the workers
  gloves and brush ignited.
• Worker dropped brush and shook off gloves.
• Worker left area, contacted nearby co-worker and
  actuated nearest fire alarm.
• No sprinkler activation occurred due to low heat
  output and short duration of fire.

4
Immediate Actions

• Plant Service Building evacuated
• Fire extinguished (by itself) after 1-3 minutes.
• Personnel examined for injury (slight singeing of
  workers hair)
• Paint Storage Room secured.
• Bulk solvent usage in operations prohibited
  pending event evaluation.

5
Background Information

• The 55-gallon drum is a RCRA Satellite
  Accumulation Area located in a paint storage
  room.
• Room had wet sprinkler fire suppression system,
  explosion proof fixtures, and grounding system
  for 55-gallon storage drum.
• The worker was wearing the appropriate PPE.
• Room was built in 1993 to current NFPA standards.
  NFPA 77 Recommended Practice on Static
  Electricity, standard was revised in 2000 to
  include changes regarding the use of plastic
  containers with flammable and combustible liquids.

6
Paint Storage Room
7
View of Paint Storage Room through the door
8
Funnel threaded into waste solvent drum.
Grounding connection barely visible.
Five gallon plastic bucket which contained
solvent and paint residue.
9
Cause Determination

• Technical evaluations determined the cause was
  ignition of solvent vapors probably caused by a
  static discharge between the plastic bucket and
  the grounded funnel.
• The cause was determined through the process of
  elimination and from input from Subject Matter
  Experts (SMEs).
• Technical evaluations by SMEs reviewed the
  following
• Fire Protection
• Chemistry Disciplines
• Electrical Disciplines
• Search of literature detailing fire events caused
  by static electricity

10
Results of Evaluations

• There was no chemical reaction that would cause
  the ignition.
• No other operations were in progress that would
  cause the ignition.
• Electrical and ventilation systems for the room
  were functioning properly and met current NFPA
  standards.

11
Description of Cause

• Direct cause was inadequate or defective design.
• NFPA 77 (2000 edition) contains additional
  limitations on the use of plastic containers that
  were not in NFPA 77 (1993 edition).
• ANL-W believes these additional requirements
  could have prevented the ignition.
• Root cause was management problem

12
Contributing Causes

• Defective or inadequate procedures.
• Error in selection of equipment or material.
• Training deficiency inadequate curriculum
  content, and personnel were not informed of the
  potential static hazards with the use of plastic
  containers.

13
Corrective Actions

• Provide Hazard Specific Training to personnel.
• Evaluate paint storage room and spray booth
  activities against NFPA Code 30 Flammable and
  Combustible Liquids Code and NFPA Code 77, and
  implement appropriate changes.
• Revise the ESH Manual section and Plant Services
  procedure to include information from the most
  current NFPA Codes.
• Revise fire safety inspections to focus on NFPA
  compliance.
• Develop Lessons Learned from this event.

14
Typical Grounding SystemNFPA 77
15
Changes To Paint Locker
16
Close-up of Changes
17
Lessons Learned

• A program should be in place to ensure that the
  most recent revisions to federal codes and
  standards are reviewed periodically and changes
  are incorporated into the appropriate procedure.
• Scheduled safety inspections should include
  checks for compliance with the most current codes
  and regulations.
• Hazards Assessment is a function that must be
  routinely applied, even to situations that appear
  to be normal activities.
• Changes to NFPA must be reviewed against the
  existing systems and methods of operation that
  are in place.