WAO 2010 Daejeon Korea
Break out sessions:
FIRE PROTECTION

4/15/10

P. Sampson WAO 2010: Fire Protection

1

Attendees• Paul W. Sampson (BNL) Chair• Michael Aiken (JLAB)• Kyungjean Min (PEFP)• Dae Il Kim (PEFP)• Jin-Seok Hong (PEFP)• Paul Miller (SLAC)• Yun Sang-Pil (PEFP)• Fujinawa Tadashi (RIKEN)
4/15/10

P. Sampson WAO 2010: Fire Protection2

Subjects: Legacy items• Methods for re-assessment of existing systems.
• Upgrades to suppression and detection systems.
• Authorization for change: local, lab wide etc.
The group discussed various methods by which their respective fire systems areassessed, maintained and updated. At SLAC and BNL issues of older, inadequate oroverkill (CO2) systems were mentioned.
Riken was mentioned as a good model wherein accelerator operations cedes authority
to the local municipality. They intern use suggestions from Accelerator operations
to resolve and implement solutions.
In the case of SLAC and RHIC (BNL), the fire suppression systems are implemented bylab fore departments. Difficulties in getting changes to the system were expressed.
The desire for the removal of CO2 suppression systems was universal.
Replacements for such systems were discussed and included Halon, foam andsprinkler systems.
For the US facilities, adherence to NFPA codes were discussed. Similar codes exit forJapanese facilities, while standards for accelerator facilities in Korea seemed to be
still in the process of being defined.
At PEFP, the test facility is housed in a building that had detection sprinklers.
4/15/10

P. Sampson WAO 2010: Fire Protection

3

Emergency Ingress and Egress
The group discussed the various ways that their institution implements
emergency ingress and egress. Focus on connections to individual
personnel protective or access controls systems showed similarities inmost cases but also suggested improvements could be made in all.
At SLAC, the doors are designed to swing out (into the lesser occupies areas)
after a short delay. The doors are magnetic and have a pseudo mechanicalbar.
Similarly at RHIC, some doors are strictly mechanical while others aremagnetic. Exit from these gates can be done instantly, though areas
adjacent will need to be re-swept as a result. At both facilities, areas neednot be re-swept unless actually entered (i.e. by fore rescue or otheremergency personnel)
RIKEN has keys at the doors, which the fire department use to enter during anemergency, while exit is made by crashing out of mechanical doors.
Adherence to fire code was again brought up.

4/15/10

P. Sampson WAO 2010: Fire Protection

4

Securing Hazards
The group discussed methods by which hazards may be secured for facilityaccess.
All facilities had policy of securing power to accelerator devices prior toemergency access.
At BNL and SLAC, high hazards such as the Main Magnet supplies areinterlocked by the doors via the Access controls system, while othersystems were secured by operators.
RIKEN has a system of internal cameras that allow for an operator to checkvisually for fire in an alarming area and react accordingly. In the event thatan alarm is real, they secure the facility (shut down) and call the local fire
authority.
A general discussion of fire/access/radiation controls systems followed inwhich each facilities methods for combining or segregating these systems
was explored.
The general consensus was that, while separation of the systems was nice,some connection between all of the systems was necessary.

4/15/10

P. Sampson WAO 2010: Fire Protection

5General and Closeout
The Group described methods, frequency and follow-up for Fire Drills
and methods for improvement.
Detection methods and detector types were recommended.
Restrictions on types and venders for this equipment was alsodiscussed.
Reaction to sprinkler or other suppression discharge was discussed.
The recovery from the fire at the PEFP test facility was described.
Smoke damage was the major contributor to the damage toequipment while water form sprinkler systems caused less.
Finally, training requirements and certification methods weredescribed by participants. In some cases a yearly certificate wasissued for fire protection adherence (RIKEN) while at others thecertification was part of as training program as well as an integral
part of the access controls systems yearly checkout

4/15/10

P. Sampson WAO 2010: Fire Protection

6Conclusion
I found that this diverse group was able to touch upon
many of the aspects in which an accelerator facility isattached to fire protection at every phase.
Each facility had both common and unique techniques forachieving necessary goal of safety, environmental
protection, equipment protection and continuedoperation.
As a result of information attained at this session, I planon assessing both the methods and the equipmentused at CAD for RHIC fire protection and implementing
a cite wide improvement plan.
4/15/10

P. Sampson WAO 2010: Fire Protection7