NUREG/CR-1916

BNL-NUREG-51338

A Risk Comparison

Prepared by A. Coppola, R. E. Hall

Department of Nuclear Energy

Brookhaven National Laboratory

Prepared for

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission
NOTICE

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, or any of

their employees, makes any warranty, expressed or implied, or

assumes any legal liability or responsibility for any third,

party's use, or the results of such use, of any information,

apparatus product or process disclosed in this report, or

represents that its use by such third party would not infringe

privately owned rights.

Available from

Division of

U.

GPO Sales Program

Technical Information and Document Control

S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Washington, D. C. 20555

Printed copy price: $4.00

and

National Technical Information Service

Springfield, Virginia 22161
NUREG/CR-1916

BNL-NUREG-51338

R7, RG

A Risk Comparison

Manuscript Completed: January 1981

Date Published: February 1981

Prepared by

A. Coppola, R. E. Hall

Department of Nuclear Energy

Brookhaven National Laboratory

Upton, NY 11973

Prepared for

Division of Systems and Reliability Research

Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Washington, D.C. 20555

NRC FIN A3222

ABSTRACT

This report presents data for the comparison of societal risk from natural and man-made hazards. Only fatalities resulting from the hazards are

used in the comparison, with the data and the comparative analysis taken from

current literature. In comparing societal risks for most of the hazards, both

expected values and frequency vs. consequence curves are presented. For a

subset of hazards, notably the power generation technologies (nuclear, coal,

oil, and gas), which have not exhibited high consequence events (catastrophes), the comparisons are based on estimated expected values only.

Individual risk data are presented in two ways, a probability of death

within a year and the amount of life shortening of an average life span.

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

ABSTRACT .................................................................... vviii

1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................

1.1 Definitions ....................................................... 1

1.2 Hazards Studied ................................................... 2

1.3 Organization of this Report ...................................... 3

2. SUMMARY ............................................................. ... 4

2.1 Difficulties in Risk Comparisons .......... ........................ 4

2.2 Chronic and High Consequence Hazards .............................. 7

3. SOCIETAL RISKS FROM CHRONIC HAZARDS ................................... 8

3.1 Chronic vs. High Consequence Events............................. 8

3.2 Chronic Risks Associated with Electric Power Production ........... 10

4. HIGH CONSEQUENCE SOCIETAL RISKS ....................................... 17

4.1 Uncertainties.................................. 18

4.2 Natural Hazards ............................ .................... o.20

4.2.1 Hurricanes .......................... '..... ........ 20

4.2.2 Tornadoes ............................................... 22

4.2.3 Flood ...... .................... . ....... 23

4.2.4 Earthquake.............. o............... . ................ 24

4.3 Man-Made Hazards ............................................... 25

4.3.1 Aircraft ............................. .................. 25

4.3.2 Marine................................................. 27

4.3.3 Motor Vehic.. o.. le _........... ............. o........28

4.3.4 Railroad.... o o- oooo......o. oo.... o.. . .29

4.3.5 Mining................................ _ .o .... o... o...... 30

4.3.6 Fire and Explosion ................ . o ..... ....... 31

4.3.7 Liquified Natural Gas (LNG) and

Liquified Propane (LPG) - Risk Assessment ................. 32

4.3.8 Chlorine - Risk Assessment ..................... ....... 35

4.3.9 Dam Failures ............................................. 37

4.3.10 Nuclear Nuclear Power Plants - Risk Assessments ............ 39

4.4 Latent vs. Early Fatalities ....................................... 42

4.5 Comparison of High Consequence Risks ......................... 43

5. INDIVIDUAL RISKS ............................ 46

5.1 Life Shortening... ........................................ 48

6. DISCUSSION .......................................... ................. 49

v
TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont'd.)

Page

REFERENCES ................................................................. 50

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ........................................................... 52

APPENDIX ................................................................... A-1

vi
LIST OF TABLES

Page

TABLE 1 Public Risk Comparison (Nuclear vs. Oil) .......................... 6

TABLE 2 Risk Benefit Summary, 1000 MW(e) .................................. 7

TABLE 3 Accidents vs. Other Causes of Death ............................... 8

TABLE 4 Selected U.S. Accident Statistics 1959-1978 ....................... 9

TABLE 5 Estimated Health Effects in 1973 Associated with

the Production of Electric Power ................................ 11

TABLE 6 Estimated Deaths per 1000 MW(e) Power Plant ....................... 11

TABLE 7 Estimated Health Effects in 1975 Associated with

the Production of Electric Power................................ 12

TABLE 8 Increase in Mortality in the London Fog of December 1952 ......... 12

TABLE 9 Coal Cycle Effects Summary ........................................ 14

TABLE 10 Nuclear Fuel Cycle Effects Summary ............................... 15

TABLE 11 Estimated Incremental Health Effects of Air Pollution

from Coal Combustion .................... ....................... 16

TABLE 12 Confidence Factors .............................................. 19

TABLE 13 Dam and Levee Failures in the U.S. ............................. 37

TABLE 14 Accidental Deaths According to the International List of

Causes of Death (U.S. Only) ............................. 42

TABLE 15 Leading Causes of All Deaths ...................................... 47

TABLE 16 Loss of Life Expectancy Due to Various Causes ..................... 48

vii

LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE

FIGURE

FIGURE

FIGURE

FIGURE

FIGURE

FIGURE

FIGURE

FIGURE

FIGURE

FIGURE

FIGURE

FIGURE

FIGURE

FIGURE

FIGURE

FIGURE

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

Hazards, (U.S. Only) ............... ............................

Hurricane Catastrophes ..........................................

Tornado Catastrophes ............................................

Flood Catastrophes ..............................................

Earthquakes .....................................................

Air Catastrophes 1959-1978 ......................................

Marine Catastrophes 1959-1978 ...................................

Motor Vehicle Catastrophes 1959-1978 ............................

Railroad Catastrophes 1959-1978 .................................

Mining Catastrophes .............................................

Fire and Explosion Catastrophes .................................

LNG and LPG Risk Assessment .....................................

Clorine Transport Hazard ........................................

Clorine Transport Hazard with Mitigation ........................

Frequency of Chlorine Accidents Involving Fatalaties ...........

Dam Failures ....................................................

Probability Distribution for Early Fatalities per

Year for 100 Reactors (U.S.) ..................................

Probability Distribution for Latent Cancer Fatality

Incidence per Year for 100 Reactors (U.S.) ....................

Hazards Summary from Levine .....................................

Natural Hazards (U.S. only) .....................................

Man Made Hazards (U.S. only) ....................................

Page

5

21

22

23

24

26

27

28

29

30

31

34

35

35

36

38

39

40

41

44

45

F IGURE 18

FIGURE

FIGURE

FIGURE

19

20

21

ix

1. INTRODUCTION

The data and comparisons of hazards compiled in this report were generated as background and support for the studies of risk criteria at present

underway at Brookhaven National Laboratory (BNL). All of the data and some of

the comlparisons were taken from current literature, and the references are

listed at the end of this report. The data on natural hazards are primarily

actuarial , with some extrapolated estimates at the extreme high consequence, low probability end of the scale. The extrapolations are differentiated from

the acturarial by dashed lines. Some of the presentations on man-made hazards

are also based on actuarial data where available (primaril~y those on transportation and other activities involving a high frequency of fatal accidents).

Other man-made hazards, however, have such a low frequency of accidents or

events involving fatality that the presentations are mainly estimates based on

predictive "risk assessments." The predictive estimates are depicted as

dashed lines in graphical presentations and by estimate ranges in tables

(Liquified Natural Gas, chlorine, and all the power generation techlogies are

examples of this type).

Only fatalities resulting from the hazards are used to compare the risks

of the various hazards in this report. No attempt has been made to include

morbidity (illness) or economic loss (property damage) in these comparisons; therefore, any discussion of risks refers only to the risk of death (see Definitions, Section 1.1). The reasons for this limitation is that most of the

data available, both estimated and actuarial, are given in terms of fatalities. Morbidity data ar 'e scarce except for rare, large consequence accidents

involving many injuries, whereas most events involving ten or more fatalities

have been catalogued. Property damage estimates are usually order of magni- tude appraisals for natural events such as hurricanes and floods. Insurance

companies keep good records in cases of fire, but other risks such as air

crashes cannot be assessed on the basis of property damage, since only the

value of the aircraft is definitely known.

1.1 DEFINITIONS

For this report, the following definitions were adhered to:

e Risk - The probability of loss of life within a given time period, fo-ra given hazard.

e Societal Risk - The frequency of fatalities for a given hazard and a

given socie-ty (in this report, the U.S.A.)

* Individual Risk - The probability of loss of life within a given time

period (usua~lly one year) for a given hazard, for one individual subject to that hazard. Therefore, for each individual risk there is a

population at risk which must be specified in order to differentiate

this quantity from societal risk.

-1-
e Expected Values - For societal risks, the expected number of fatalities for a given time period (one year in this report). For hazards

which exhibit a high frequency of events (hurricanes, plane crashes),

the expected value can be approximated by the total number of fatalities over an extended time period (eg. 20 years), divided by the

time period.

* Early Fatalities - Fatalities occurring within one year of the causative event.

e Latent Fatalities - Fatalities occurring from one to forty years

after the causative event or the onset of causative events (start of

operation of a nuclear or fossil fuel power plant, for example, for

long latency period associated with low level exposure hazards).

* Hazard - An event or condition having the potential for unwanted consequences, which in this report are fatalities.

* Chronic Hazard - Hazard exhibiting a high frequency of events involving low number of fatalities (less than 10 per event, usually one per

event). Examples are motor vehicle accidents, heart disease, and

cancer. This definition incorporates a conditional probability concept, i.e. given fatalities do occur, they are generally low in

number.

* High Consequence Hazard - Hazard exhibiting a large proportion of

events involving a high number of fatalities (10 or more per event).

Examples are airplane crashes, hurricanes, and earthquakes. The

events themselves are commonly referred to as catastrophes or disasters. This definition also incorporates a conditional probability

concept, i.e. given fatalities do occur, they can with relatively

high probability be high in number.

1.2 HAZARDS STUDIED

Chapter 6 of WASH-1400 (ref. 19) presented a comparison of the potential

risks associated with accidental radioactive releases from nuclear power

plants that were predicted, to other risks to which society is exposed. The

data presented includes comparisons of early fatalities, latent illnesses, and

property damage on the basis of risk to individuals as well as overall societal risk. For societal risks, only high consequence risks were compared. For

individual risk, both chronic and high consequence risks were compared, but

only for accidents. Diseases and other natural causes were not included in

the comparison.

Chapter 6 of WASH-1400 (ref. 19) was reviewed and all the hazards mentioned were researched to obtain the latest data on the most common hazards.

Literature searches were conducted in other fields not included in WASH-1400,

in particular the hazards of power-production technologies, and these were added. Some data on disease and natural causes of death are also given as a

framework for comparison, and to put the risks discussed in perspective. In

summary, data on the following hazards are presented for comparison:

-2-
Natural Hazards

* Fl ood

e Earthquake

• Hurricane

* Tornado

Man-made Hazards

e Aircraft

e Marine

a Motor Vehicles

* Railroad

* Mining

e Dam Failures

* Fires and Explosions

* Liquified Natural Gas Transport

* Liquified Propane Gas Transport * Chlorine Transport

9 Fossil fuel power generation

e Nuclear power generation

In comparing societal risks for most of the hazards stated, both expected values (see Definitions), and frequency vs. consequence curves, are available and are presented. For some hazards, notably the power generation technologies (nuclear, coal, oil, and gas), which have not exhibited high consequence events (catastrophes), the comparisons are based on estimated expected

values only.

For individual risk, the data found in the literature are presented in

several ways. In some cases it is given as a probability of death within a

year (as per our definition) while others give the amount of life shortening

of an average life span. This variety of presentation makes comparison somewhat difficult. Wherever possible we have attempted to extract the individual risk as defined here from the data presented in the references. The

important variable which must be consistent for comparison is the estimate of

the population at risk.

1.3 ORGANIZATION OF THIS REPORT

Section 2 of this report will summarize the data presented in Sections

3, 4, and 5.

Section 3 presents the data derived from various sources on Chronic

Societal Hazards and includes comparisons of different power generation technologies, for the U.S. only.

Section 4 presents data on High Consequence Societal Hazards in the form

of frequency vs. consequence curves. In most cases curves for both the U.S.

and the World (excluding the U.S.) are presented for comparison.

Section 5 presents data on individual risk for the U.S. only.

Section 6 presents the author's concluding remarks.

-3-
2. SUMMARY

Figure 1 presents a comparison of a portion of the societal risks due to

common man-made and natural hazards with those due to the operation of 100

nuclear power plants in the continental United States. The term "Total" in

the description for the man-made and natural hazards curves should be interpreted as the total, of the risks covered in this report (see Section 4). The

portion of the risk represented by these curves is that associated with high

consequence or catastrophic eventCs (according to our definition, greater than

10 fatalities). While these high consequence events receive more public

attention and concern, they (or the "expected values" represented by the total

curves) account for less than 1000 fatalities per year in the U.S., or less

than one-tenth of one per cent of the present U.S. death rate. The usefulness

of these curves is in illustrating the probability of high consequence events

for the U.S. A comparison of risks for society would not be complete without

a presentation of the risks from less traumatic, chronic hazards presented in

Section 3, where it is shown that the accidental death rate for the U.S. is

approximately 5% of the total death rate from all causes, or about 100 times

the expected value of the total curve indicated in Fig. 1.

2.1 DIFFICULTIES IN RISK COMPARISONS

Comparing risks from different hazards might seem to imply a simple task

of collecting data from various sources and presenting results suggested by

the data. The major problem in making comparisons is that the basis for expressing risk varies in available risk assessments. In those areas of assessment involving catastrophic events resulting in fatalities (such as LNG fires,

chlorine tank ruptures, or nuclear reactor core melts), where the events are

rare, the risk is usually expressed as a predicted curve of frequency vs.

severity of occurrence (i.e., frequency vs. consequence). Figure 12, taken

from Simmons(9) is an example of the curve generated for the LNG Risk to the

Continental U.S. These predicted curves have large uncertainties due to data

and modelling uncertainties. Even within the group of hazards assessed on a

similar predictive basis, important variations must be noted before comparisons can be made. Figure 12 includes only acute fatalities, since most will

occur within weeks of the event (exposure to fire), whereas Fig. 18, from

WASH-1400(19) shows the latent fatalities due to cancer, which may be displaced in time by 20 years or more. Figure 17 (also from WASH-1400) shows the

predicted early fatalities from the same events used to generate the curves of

Fig. 18. Obviously, some combination of the data in Figs. 17 and 18 must be

made before comparison with Fig. 12 is warranted, if it is assumed that no

latent fatalities are expected for LNG or LPG, and "total" fatalities are to

be compared.

Some authors(11) assign a utility value to life, in order to differentiate between acute and latent fatality. This value may be simply the lost

years of life expectancy, so that an acute fatality has a higher value than a

latent fatality; in this way the consequences in Fig. 18, which involve latent

fatalities are reduced by some factor (e.g. average lost years of life expectancy for acute fatalities divided by the average lost years of life expectancy

for latent fatalities.)

-4-
10 2

I0'

100

LUJ

LUJ

Ai

10~ j-3

LU

0S

i0"6

0- 7

NUMBER OF FATALITIES (N)

Figure 1

-5-
Cohen and Lee(12) evaluated loss of life expectancies to produce a

ranking of risks from various hazards and activities. (See Section 5.1). The

risks evaluated go from a high of 3500 days' loss due to being an unmarried

male to a low of 0.02 days' loss due to radiation from the nuclear industry.

Included are data on all the common risks such as cigarette smoking, heart

disease, accidents, etc., and some novel data such as lack of an eighth grade

education (loss of 850 days of life expectancy).

Some authors assign a monetary value to life in order to allow the addition of morbidity (non-fatal, results) and property damage to fatalities to

compare total consequences. It is difficult to find an agreed upon monetary

value for life, but some references give a corollary to this, cost per life

saved, for some safety devices. Bick et al(14) cites costs ranging from $500

for mandatory safety belt usage to $7,680,000 for roadway alignment and gradient, for each life saved. Again, it is not easy to find agreement on how much

should be spent to save a life.

Despite the inherent difficulties, risk comparisons continue to be

pursued. Because of the public's concern with the growth of nuclear power,

comparisons of different power generating systems are numerous. Except for

portions of the hazards involved (such as mining and transportation of fossil

fuel, which can be compared directly on an actuarial basis), most of these

risk comparisons are based on predictions and extrapolations. Most of the

analyses indicate that there is greater risk to society from normal operation than from catastrophic acc 'idents when risk is measured as expected consequences (i.e. probability times consequence). The analyses vary from "worst

case" assumptions such as that presented in (15) for nuclear vs. oil comparison, where regulatory limits on toxic effluents are used to estimate total

mortality, to total risk-benefit analyses typified by (16) for nuclear vs.

fossil fuel comparison. In most cases, the health risk, based on estimated

expected fatalities, is one to two orders of magnitude higher for the nonnuclear alternative. Tables 1 and 2 are presented here as examples. The

absolute values of the numbers shown on these tables represents a small risk

to society (less than 1% of total mortality rate for the U.S.).

TABLE 1

PUBLIC RISK COMPARISON

Expected Annual Averages

(Deaths per 10 million population per 1,000

MWe plant per year)

Continuous Operation at I Total Risk

Plaint Type Regulated Exposure limits Ifrom Accidents

Nuclear reactor Negligible

(cancer deaths) 1 (0.00006)

Oil-fired plant Negligible

(respiratory deaths) 60 (0.00002)

From Ref. 15

-6-
TABLE 2

RISK BENEFIT SUMMARY, 1000 MW(e)

Annual Excess Mortality

SAccit Annual Benefit*

Plant Normal Operation Fuel Transportation Accidents m (10% 20 yr)

Nuclear 0.0001-0.08 0.003 (train) 0.005 9.1

ConvCntional 2-5 0.008 (boat) --

From Ref. 16

*Annual dollar savings (millions) per GWc based on 10% interest rate and 20 year amortization

2.2 CHRONIC AND HIGH CONSEQUENCE HAZARDS

When examining the expected value of fatalities for most hazards (all

those considered in this report), one finds that this quantity can be divided

into two separate components. One is the contribution made by low consequence

events (chronic) and the other is the contribution made by high consequence

events (catastrophic). For this report, the dividing line between low and

high, or chronic and catastrophic is arbitrarily set at ten fatalities. This

dividing line is simply an aid in classifying hazards and consequences. The

term chronic usually implies high frequency, and many hazards exhibit this

high frequency, low consequence dominance, that is, their expected value of

fatalities consists of a large number of low consequence events (chronic) and

a smaller number of high consequence events (catastrophic). Section 3 addresses chronic versus high consequence hazards and their associated risks. In

some cases (fossil fuel power generation) there are no data on high consequence events either estimated or actuarial. In these instances the expected

value consists entirely of chronic, low consequence events, and no frequency

vs. consequence curves are shown for these hazards.

The expected values of natural and man-made hazards are tabulated in

Section 3. For hazards which have exhibited or have estimated high consequence events, frequency vs. consequence curves are given in Section 4. Note

that these curves, even when drawn on the same scale, should not necessarily

be used to compare total risk since they show only the high consequence component.

-7-
3. SOCIETAL RISKS FROM CHRONIC HAZARDS

Table 3 is a recent summary of the major causes of death in the U.S.

This table and caption were taken directly from "Accident Facts," 1979

edition, published by the National Safety Council, and shows the leading

causes of death in 1977 for all ages and for males and females separately.

The vast majority (over 90%) are due to disease. This number is made up of

single fatalities unrelated by any specific event in time, therefore,

according to our definition, they do not represent a high consequence hazard

and can be considered chronic.

As seen in Table 3, approximately 5% of the total fatalities (100,000

out of 2,000,000) are caused by accidents of various types, of which motor

vehicle, falls, drowning, fires and burns, and poison are the major contributors (80% of accidents). Most of these fatalities will also fit our definition of chronic hazards.

TABLE 3

ACCIDENTS VS OTHER CAUSES OF DEATH

Accidents arc the leading cause of death among all persons aged 1 to 38. Among persons of all ages, accidents arc the

fourth leading cause of death. The following table shows the number of deaths and death rates for all ages and selected ages

groups from leading causes in 1977 (latest official figures) separately for male and female.

For youths ages 15 to 24 years, accidents claim more lives than all other causes combined, and about five times more

than the next leading cause of death. Four out of five accident victims in this group are males.

Number of Deaths

Cause Total Male Female

All Ages

All Causes ....... ................... ........ 1. 899.597 1.046.243 853354

I leart Disease ..................

Cancer .....................

Stroke (cerebrovascular disease) . .

Accidents ...................

...... °.....

............

... °.........

......... °..

....... °,...

............

Motor-Vehicle ......

Falls .............

Drowning .........

Fires, burns .......

Poison (solid, liquid)

I',iti,,,o,,ia .........

l)iabctes mellitus .......

Cirrhosis of liver ......

Arteriosclerosis .......

Suicide ............

Homicide ...........

Emphysema ..........

718,850

386,686

181,934

103,202

49,510

13,773

7,126

6,357

3,374

49,889

32,989

30,848

28,754

28,681

19,968

16,376

396,482

210,459

77,351

71,935

35,804

7,226

6,006

3,866

2,024

27,109

13,632

20,167

11,648

21,109

15,355

12,594

322,368

176,227

104,583

31,267

13,706

6,547

1,120

2,491

1,350

22,780

19,357

10,681

17,106

7,572

4,613

3,782

............

........°...

......... °..

............

............

From Ref. 6.

3.1 CHRONIC VS. HIGH CONSEQUENCE EVENTS

Some of the accident hazards are associated with high consequence

events, or catastrophes. These events receive far more public attention than

most individual accident fatalities, but in general they account for only a

small fraction of the total yearly fatalities for society.

-8-
Table 4 gives the ratios for some selected U.S. accident statistics for

categories of accidents which will be examined in Section 4. It is apparent

that the percentages shown depend on the cutoff point chosen for the definition of a catastrophe. If the number 5 (fatalities per event) had been chosen, the percentages or ratios would have been relatively unchanged in the

case of air, marine, railroad and mining. Only motor vehicle accidents (up to

0.5%) and fire (up to 12%) would show any significant increase. (Derived from

(18), U.S. Statistical Abstracts 1978.) In most technologies, chronic societal risks dominate catastrophic risks (i.e. risks from catastrophic events) but

for some technologies the opposite is true.* For example, gas fueled power

plant operation is estimated to cause only 7 "chronic" fatalities per year in

the United States(3), but if the potential for explosion were considered, or

if the plant were coupled with an LNG terminal, the projected catastrophic

deaths per year might exceed this low number of "chronic" fatalities. Another

example is that of Hydroelectric power, where the chronic effects are low or

non-existent (too low to estimate), but the catastrophic effects in case of

dam failure dominate the total risk to society. We will not give a table of

statistics for these activities when catastrophic risks might dominate since

data are sparse.

TABLE 4

SELECTED U.S. ACCIDENT STATISTICS 1959-78(1

Average Yearly Fatalities 1959-78

Category Chronic High Consequence(2) Total % Catastrophic

Air 1130 252 1380 18

Marine 7430 72 7500 1

Motor Vehicle 52,000 18 52,000 .03

Railroad 774 6.5 780 .8

Mining 310 23 330 7

Fire 2300 78 2375 3

(')Derived from Ref. 6 and U.S. Statistical Abstracts, 1978. (2)Derived from Ref. 1, over 10 fatalities per event.

( 3 )Drowning of individuals accounts for most of catastrophic and all of chronic

statistics.

It must be emphasized that these statistics represent risk to society

(the U.S.) and should not be naively used to calculate or infer individual

risk. If a person were to choose a mode of transport between two cities in

the U.S. on the basis of the presented societal risks, he might be misled by

the statistics on railroad fatalities, where less than 2% of the reported

fatalities are passengers, and over 98% are railroad employees and trespassers

(pedestrians on the tracks).

*Our definition of risk does not include any risk aversion. If risk aversion

were accounted for to indicate how society perceives a risk, then catastrophic

events might always dominate.

-9-
The natural hazards such as hurricanes and earthquakes also exhibit a

small proportion of chronic fatalities, while floods and tornadoes show a

larger ratio of chronic to high consequence (catastrophic) events. It is not

possible to derive tables such as Table 4 for these hazards since events involving single fatalities are generally not classified properly (i.e. single

flood victim might be classified as a drowning).

3.2 CHRONIC RISKS ASSOCIATED WITH ELECTRIC POWER PRODUCTION

Much work has been done by various groups on comparing the risks to

society from the major electric power generation fuel cycles, most notably the

coal, gas, oil, and uranium cycles. In all cases, the estimation of fatal

effects (both early and latent) from these activities is difficult and controversial.

For the nuclear reactor case, WASH-1400(19) is the most exhaustive study

available, but the predicted risk of fatality covers only the area of power

generation. Other areas of the fuel cycle are not examined. The results

given in the WASH-1400 study concentrate on fatalities expected from high consequence events (core melts and class 9 occurrences), and are discussed in

Section 4.

Studies concerning fossil fuel cycles do not account for high consequence events but they do deal with the complete fuel cycle (mining or acquisition, transportation, power generation, and waste handling, etc.).

The uncertainties in the predicted chronic risks from fossil fuel cycles

arise from the difficulties in attempting to correlate increased mortality

with air pollution such as S02/particulate concentration due to the operation of fossil fuel plants, and are summarized in reports such as that by

Christman, et al(2). Nonetheless, some evaluations have been made, and some

of the more comprehensive are the ongoing studies at the National Center for

the Analysis of Energy Systems at BNL, particularly the numerous reports

issued by L.D. Hamilton, S. Morris and other staff members of the Biomedical

and Environmental Assessment Division. Their predictions are summarized in

Table 5, taken from Ref. 3. The ranges of values given for deaths and

disabilities indicate the uncertainties assigned to calculations of deaths due

to low level air pollution.

The estimated yearly deaths per 1000-MW(e) plant shown in Table 6, were

derived from the more recent data in Table 7(4). The fatalities shown in

Tables 6 and 7 for fossil fuels include both immediate fatalities due to mining, transportation, and industrial accidents and latent fatalities due to

increased air pollution contributed by the fossil fuel plants. The proportion

of latent fatalities (approximately to 80%) is a cumulative effect and depends

on continued operation of these plants for extended periods (more than 20

years). The latent fatalities would be of the type listed in Table 8 (attributed to diseases), and would be indistinguishable in mortality tables such as

in Table 3.

-10-
TABLE 5

*Estimated Health Effects in 1973

Associated with Production of Electric Power*

1973

kwhe x 10

Equivalent No.

1000 MWe

plants

Estimated

deaths

Estimated

Fuel disabilities Unknowns

Coal

Oil

Gas

846.0

310.7

336.0

83.3

271.1

128.2

47.1

50.9

12.6

41.1

2,000-16,000

100-5,000

26,000-39,000

4,000-9,000

increased cancer, other

chronic disease, mutation

increased cancer, other

chronic disease, mutation

increased cancer, other

chronic disease, mutation

N uclear

Hydro

7

9-20

700

60-300 increased risk of

catastrophic accident

* * increased risk from dam

failure accident

Wood, waste,

Gcothcrmal

2.3 0.3 ** **

TOTALS 1849.4 280.2 2,100-21000 51,000-49,000

Approximate annual total deaths in U.S. = 2,000,000

Percent associated with electricity production = 0.1 - 1%

Approximate number of deaths in U.S. ages 1-74 = 1,100,000

Percent associated with electricity production = 0.2 - 1.9%

*Calculated from estimates of health effects of 1000 MWe plant operating at 75% power factor for one year.

**Not calculated.

From Ref. 3

These estimates were published in 1974 and 1975 when most operating fossil fuel plants did not meet EPA reqirements. Later estimates, shown in

Tables 9 and 11 for coal, show a reduction of more than half due to the new

EPA air quality standards.

The additional deaths due to cancer caused by the operation of nuclear

power plants shown in Table 6 and 7 would also be indistinguishable in mortality tables.

TABLE 6

Estimated Deaths Per Year Per 1000 MWe Power Plant

Fuel

Coal

Oil

Gas

Nuclear

No. Fatalities

15-120

2-100

0.13

0.7-1.6

Derived from Table 7.

-11-
TABLE 7

*Estimated Hlealth Effects in 1975

Associated with Production of Electric Power

1975 (a)

kwh x 10

Equivalent No.

1000-MW(e)

Dlants

Estimated Estimated

Fuel deaths disabilities

Coal 844 128 1,900-15,000 25,000-39,000

Oil 292 44 88-4,400 4,000-7,900

Gas 297 45 6 600

Nuclear 168 26 18-42 130-470

'rotals 1,604 243 2,000-19,000 29,000-48,000

apreliminary.

Data from Electrical World, 185(6), 54, 1976.

*Calculated from estimates of health effects of 1000 MW(e). Plant operating at

75% power factor for one year.

The numbers for nuclear power in Table 7 include only 2.4 deaths due to

radiation induced cancers. There are no catastrophic deaths included (due to

major core melt accidents), and the majority of the expected deaths are due to

mining, industrial, and transportation accidents.

Just as for the nuclear case, no high consequence events due to power

plant operation are included in the figures presented for coal, oil, or gas.

This does not imply that there are no high consequence events associated with

these activities. Episodes such as those in London in 1952 and Donora, PA, in

1948 have been extensively studied and are classified as air pollution catastrophes. The London fog of 1952 began on December 4 and lasted over one

week. The heavy fog and attendant temperature inversion with no wind caused

many tons of particulate matter from industrial and residential furnaces to

TABLE 8

Increase in Mortality in the London Fog of December 1952

Seasonal Percentage Cause norm Deaths of total

of (deaths in week Excess excess death per week) after fog deaths deaths

Bronchitis 75 704 629 39

Other lung diseases 98 366 268 17

Coronary artery

disease, myocardial

dcgcncration 206 525 319 20

Other diseases 508 889 381 24

Total 887 2484 1597 100

-12-
become trapped in the stagnant atmosphere which changed the color of the sky

from yellow to dark brown. Some sources attribute as many as 4000 to 8000 excess deaths to this occurrence in, the weeks following, for the area of greater

London (population 8.3 million)(21). Table 8, taken from Ref. 20, gives figures for the smaller area of the county of London.

Catastrophes of this type are not included in the fossil fuel mortality

predictions for the following reasons:

* During such an episode it is difficult to ascribe the correct quantity of pollutants to the proper source (motor vehicle emissions,

household heating, etc., could contribute).

o Some experts feel that with today's detection methods, and the constant monitoring of air quality in industrial areas, such episodes

are unlikely to recur because the monitoring authorities could eliminate the sources of pollution when alarm levels are reached.

With regard to the second argument it should be noted that since both

the means of detection and the decision to eliminate the sources of pollution

at a critical time involve people and machines, the probability of occurrence

under certain atmospheric conditions is amenable to analysis in the same way

as the probability of a class 9 nuclear catastrophe.

Table 5 also gives the annual total deaths and the estimated percent

(0.1 to 1%) associated with electrical power generation. This low proportion

makes it difficult to separate fatalities due to power plant operation from

those due to chronic natural causes. As shown in Table 8, the deaths attributable to the excess pollution during the London fog were similar in nature

to fatalities commonly occuring throughout the year. Only when the rates of

death due to causes such as bronchitis and coronary disease increase dramatically during limited periods can they be easily differentiated and ascribed to

pollution.

More recent estimates made by the BNL group, based on new EPA standards

and more recent mine accident data (Tables 9 and 10), indicate that the fatal

effects per plant for both coal and nuclear power plants will decrease in the

future. These tables, taken from Ref. 20, summarize the estimates of health

effect on a unit plant basis and assume the plants are operated within currently mandated environmental standards. Most of the work done by the BEAD*

group at Brookhaven was directed toward quantifying coal-mining accidents and

occupational disease, coal transport accidents, and air pollution from coal

combustion.

Estimates of total societal risk due to coal plants, however still show

net increases for the years 1985 and 1990 (Table 11) because of the older

plants in operation and the projected increased use of coal.

*Biomedical and Environmental Assessment Division, National Center for Analysis of Energy Systems.

-13-
TABLE 9 (From Ref. 20)

Coal Fuel Cycle Effects Summary

(Per 1,000 MW(e) Plant-Year, 65% Capacity)*

Deaths Disease/Injury

Minin.g'

Public - -

Workers

Accidcntial Injury2 0.6 42

Occuplations Disease 0.02-0.4 0.5-1.0

Processing

Public - -

Workers

Accidental Injury 0.05 2.9

Occupational Disease - -

Transport

3

Public and Workers

Accidental Injury 0.3-1.3 1.2-5.9

Electricity Generation

Public

Air Pollution (50 Mi radius) 4 0.6 (0-3) Not Estimated

Air P'ollution (total U.S.)s 6 (0-30) Not Estimated

Workers

Accidcntial Injury6 0.1 (0.02-0.3) 3.3 (2.7-4.0)

TOTAl. 7.7-9.1

1. Assumes 62% underground, 38% surface mining (the ratio of Applachian coal production, source U.S. Bureau of Mines,

Mineral Yearbook 1974, U.S. Government Printing Office, 1976, Vol. 1, pp. (367-76).

2. Coal Miners Accidental (non-fatal) Injury (1965-73 MEN)

Underground Mining - 27.6 Injuries Per 106 tons

Surface Mining - 5.2 Injuries Per 106 tons

1(27.6 x 0.62) + (5.2 x 0.38)] x 2.2 x 106 = 42 Injuries Per Plant-Year

From Morris, S.C., Novak, K.M. and Hamilton, L.D. 4 S

3. Assumes rail transport, 300 mile trips. Range is due to different methods of estimation.

4. Assumes 3 million people within 50 mile radius, sulfur oxide emission rate of 0.12 lbs. S02 per 106 Btu input (low sulfur coal combined with 90% removal of sulfur in flue gas). Results are approximately linear for SO 2 emissions.

5. Assumes total effect 10 x local effect.

6. Estimatcs from Bertolett and Fox, with Poisson 95% confidence limits.

*A 1000 MW(e) power plant operating with an average capacity factor of 65% produces 0.65 GWy, or 2.05 1016 j, or 1.94

l0' 3 Btu in a year.

-14-
TABLE 10 (From Ref. 20)

Nuclear Fuel Cycle Effect Summary

Mining

Public

Workers

Radiation Induced Cancer

Non-Radiation Induced

Occupational Disease

Occupational Accidents

SUBTOTAL

Pro cessing

Public

Workers

Radiation Induced Cancer

Occupational Accidents

S UBTOTAL

Electricity Generation

Routine Public

Workers

Radiation Induced Cancer

Occupational Accidents

Catastrophic Accidents

SUBTOTAL

Waste Management

Public

Workers

SUBTOTAL

Transport

Routine Public

Workers

Radiation Induced Cancer

Occupational Accidents

Catastrophic Accidents

Cancers

Prompt Deaths

SUBTOTAL

Decommissionin

Public

Workers

Radiation Induced Cancer

Occupational Accidents

SUBTOTAL

TOTAL

Deaths

0.08

0.06

0.07

0.31

0.52

0.002

0.034

0.004

0.04

0.017

0.07

0.013

0.1

0.20

5.1 x 10-5

7.45 x 10-4

7.96 x 104

6.1 x 10-4

8.5 x 104

0.01

8.3 x 10"S to

7.1 x 10-4

2.1 x 10"7 to

9.3 x 10"s

0.01

5.3 x 10-9

4.2 x 10-3

8.0 x 10-4

5 xl03

0.07

Disease/Injury

0.08

0.03

0.14-2.8*

11.96

12.21-14.87

0.002

0.034

1.3

1.34

0.017

0.07

1.13

1.217

5.1 x I0"s

7.45 x 10-4

7.96 x 10-4

6.1 x 10-4

8.5 x 10-4

0.1

8.3 x 10-s

7.1 x 10-4

0.10

5.3 x 10'9

4.2 x 10-3

0.07

0.07

14.9-17.6

* Based on ratio of occupational disease/death in coal miners. Lower estimate is

used in total.

** A 1000 MW(e) power plant operating with an average capacity factor of 65%

produces 0.65 GWy, or 2.05 1016 J, or 1.94 1013 Btu in a year.

-15-
TABLE 11 (From Ref. 20)

Estimated Incremental Health Effects of Air Pollution From Coal Combustion for National Coal Utilization Assessment

Utility and Industrial Emissions

1975-1985 19 75-1990

Pop. exp. increment Estimated Pop. exp. increment Estimated

Region 10 person-.ug/m3 Deaths 10 person-pg/m3 Deaths*

1 9.6 48-770 17.9 90-1400

2/ 42.8 210-3400 78.5 390-6300

3 (-7.3) (-36)-(-580) 24.2 120-1900

4 16.3 82-1300 51.5 260-4100

5 (-55.3) (-280)-(-4400) 2.2 11-180

6 18.1 91-1400 28.5 140-2300

7 (-5.9) (-30)-(-470) 2.0 10-160

8 1.2 6-96 2.8 14-220

9 7.9 40-630 13.0 65-1000

10 0.5 3-40 0.9 5-70

U.S. Total 28 140-2200 221.6 1100-18000

*60% range includes estimated error in health-damage function only.

Population exposure increments are due partly to the increased number of people exposed in 1985 and 1990 because of

population growth. Parentheses indicate decreases.

-.16-
4. HIGH CONSEQUENCE SOCIETAL RISKS

The societies of the world face many common hazards, both natural and

man made. Some of these hazards have demonstrated their ability to produce

high consequence events and are well publicized. These include natural hazards such as hurricanes and earthquakes, and man-made hazards such as aircraft

and dams. For these hazards, actuarial data exists which can be used to derive tables and curves useful in describing their effects. The representation

chosen for this report is frequency vs. consequence curves, which are given in

this section (the tables used to construct these curves appear in Appendix A).

Some hazards, such as the newer man-made ones, have not yet demonstrated

an ability to cause high consequence events (catastrophes) but are believed to

have this ability because of analyses based on proven lethal effects and extrapolations. Included in these hazards having predicted high consequences

are chemical hazards, nuclear hazards, and new fuels such as (LNG) liquified

natural gas. Probabilistic analyses, consisting of engineering evaluations

coupled with estimates of lethal effects are used to derive frequency vs. consequence curves for some of these newer hazards. Only a few of the hazards

having potential for high consequences have been analyzed in this manner.

Some, including the hazards from Love Canal and from other chemical dumps do

not lend themselves readily to this type of analysis. Since only hazards

having available actuarial data or calculated high consequence risks are dealt

with here, the "total" curves shown must be viewed as totals only of the individual hazards discussed.

For the natural hazards where actuarial data exists, Refs. 6, 17, 18,

and 19 were used to develop lists of high consequence events, with *Disaster!(17)

being the most complete reference for the U.S. and the world, especi-aTly fo-r

the 40 years 1938 to 1977. The hazards recorded included hurricanes,

earthquakes, tornadoes, floods, landslides, avalanches, storms, and other

weather phenomienon such as heat waves, cold waves and blizzards. Volcano

eruptions were also reviewed, but except for the recent eruption of Mt. St.

Helens, which claimed more than 20 lives, the 40 year period chosen showed no

events with ten or more deaths due to this cause in the U.S. The same was

true of lightning., Of the natural hazards, floods, earthquakes, hurricanes

and tornadoes were chosen for inclusion in this report. These are the natural

phenomiena considered in WASH-1400. Landslides and avalanches were not used

because only four events with more than ten fatalities occurred within that

period.(17) Storms, blizzards and weather-related phenomena such as cold or

hot spells are responsible for as many deaths as hurricanes or tornadoes, but

the numbers of fatalities seem to be more closely related to the duration of

the abnormal weather, than to any degree of severity. A prime example is the

recent (June-July 1980) heat wave in the south central U.S., which, according

to news reports, has claimed more than 1000 lives and could qualify as the

greatest single catastrophe in the U.S. in the last 40 years. However, since

these occurrences require comparatively longer periods of time, and seem to

affect the old and disabled much more than the general population, and their

*Compiled by the editors of Encyclopedia Brittanica from Smithsonian Inst.,

Center for Short Lived Phenomena Annual Reports from 1969, UNESCO Annual Summary of Information on Natural Disasters from 1966, and other publications.

-17-
consequences seem to require other contributing factors, it is difficult to

attribute fatalities to single events, and no frequency vs. consequence curves

were generated for them.

World data (excluding the U.S.) for hurricanes, floods, and earthquake ,s

were tabulated and curves were generated for them. Each is presented in the

appropriate section with the U.S. curves. Where the time period chosen affected the resultant curve (e.g. hurricanes, the period 1938-1977 omits the largest consequence ever recorded for a U.S. catastrophe, 6000 fatalities) an

additional curve covering a longer period is given for the U.S., to show the

difference, and the advantages and disadvantages of using either curve are

discussed.

For the man-made hazards, the choice of specific hazards to include is

much wider. For the hazards for which actuarial data are available, tables of

frequency vs. consequence (given in the Appendix) were compiled from Refs. 1,

6, 18, and 19. *Catastrophel(1) provided the most comprehensive listing of

high consequence events, in-cluding data on aircraft, railroad, marine, mining,

fire and explosion (combined), and motor vehicle hazards. Actuarial data on

all these hazards for the 20-year period 1959 to 1978 are presented here for

the U.S. and the rest of the world. For most man-made hazards this shorter,

more recent period is considered more appropriate because technological

changes affect the frequency and consequences of fatal events. Certain manmade hazards, such as dam failures, are not considered as dependent on technological changes because many of the structures stay in place for many years

with no improvements made; therefore, the data for dams cover a longer period

(90 years).

The newer man-made hazards that are considered capable of producing catastrophes are represented here by probabilistic assessments taken from current literature. These include the hazards associated with the transportation

of liquified natural gas (LNG), liquified propane gas (LPG), chlorine, and

with nuclear power plants. These were included because reports are available

which estimate their risks to the entire U.S. population. These are predictive and generally have large associated uncertainties. Other man-made hazards have been assessed for particular areas or segments of the population,

but these have not been included since U.S. societal risk is of concern here.

Because all man-made technologies and activities have not been included,

it is again emphasized that "total" curves generated here represent sums of

the risk curves of the individual hazards examined and do not represent risks

from all the conceivable hazards which exist.

4.1 UNCERTAINTIES

The uncertainties associated with the actuarial data and the resultant

curves presented here may be expressed as confidence factors which are a function of the number of observations. For the probability vs. consequence

curves, the number of observations (r) is the number of events with consequences greater than a particular value. The values for r are also equivalent

to a certain frequency if the time span for all the observations is known.

*Compiled by the editors of Encyclopedia Brittanica.

-18-
For example, for a 20 year span (man-made hazards) r = 1 = a frequency of 0.05

events/year and for a 40 year span (natural hazards), r = 1 = a frequency of

0.025 events/year. By using this relationship, Table 12 can be used to estimate the confidence factors (error factors) for all the actuarial curves given

here. These uncertainties are derived assuming the occurrence rate is constant over the time period examined (the number of occurrences is thus assumed

to follow a Poisson distribution).

Table 12

Confidence Factors

r Equivalent Frequencies (Events/Year) Confidence Factors

Number of Natural Hazards Man-made Hazards 95% • 5%

Observations (40 yr. interval) (20 yr. interval) Upper Bound Lower Bound

100 2.500 5.000 1.2 1.2

50 1.250 2.500 1.3 1.3

20 0.500 1.000 1.4 1.5

10 0.250 0.500 1.7 1.8

5 0.125 0.250 2.1 2.5

I 0.025 0.050 4.7 19.4

For natural and man-made hazard curves based on actuarial data.

For the LNG and LPG curves, the uncertainties are given, in detail, by

Simmons(9) and are summarized as follows: "The overall uncertainty in the risk

of fatalities from LNG tanker spills is estimated to be a factor of 2 to

1/100, mainly because of the disregard of the protection afforded by the tankship's double hull. For LPG spills, the overall uncertainty is estimated to

be a factor of 10 to 1/10."

These uncertainty factors are to be applied to the frequency or proba- bility as further explained in the authors summary as follows: "There are too

few historical data to verify the predictions of frequency of accidents with a

given number of fatalities. Nevertheless, based on the quality of the data

used to develop the frequency values for the four variables, the overall uncertainty for the LP-Gas spills was estimated to be a factor of 10 to 1/10.

For LNG tanker spills an uncertainty of a factor of 2 to 1/100 was estimated.

The latter factor primarily reflects the disregard of the protection afforded

by the double hull design."

For the nuclear power plant curves, the uncertainties are taken from

WASH-1400(19) and given on the figure for the curve. These uncertainties have

been criticized as being understated.(25)

For the chlorine assessment, Simmons et al(22) state: "The uncertainty

associated with these numbers on this basis (average conditions of weather,

tank car temperature, terrain and population density) is estimated to be a

factor of ten, being dominated primarily by the uncertainty associated with

the frequency of tank car accidents." The numbers referred to in this quote

are the accident frequencies used in the report.

-19-
4.2 NATURAL HAZARDS (HIGH CONSEQUENCE)

The most common natural hazards which produce high consequence events

for the U.S. are hurricanes, tornadoes, floods, and earthquakes. Their frequency vs. consequence curves, with pertinent comments, are presented in the

following paragraphs. Lines are drawn through the points to group associated

points and aid in presentation, but they do not represent any formal statistical fit.

4.2.1 Hurricanes

Cyclones originating over warm waters (80 0 F) are known as hurricanes

in the Western Hemisphere and typhoons in the Eastern. Hurricanes develop

usually in the Caribbean Sea and the Gulf of Mexico, from June to October.

About ten storms a year are large enough, or have winds exceeding 75 mph, to

be given names by the U.S. Weather Service and are tracked as possible risks

to the mainland. A few form west of Mexico, but these seldom cause any damage

to the U.S. The worst hurricane experienced in the U.S. was that which hit

Galveston, Texas, in 1900. It claimed the lives of 6,000 people in the

Galveston area alone.

The potential for death and destruction in any hurricane or cyclonic

storm is large. The greatest disaster of this century occurred in Bangladesh

in 1970 when between 200,000 and 1,000,000 lives were lost and over 1 million

acres of rice paddies were destroyed by a cyclone. The destruction of the

rice fields caused famine and suffering for months after the event. In the

last 40 years, in the U.S., the fatalities per event have tended to decrease

because of improved tracking and warning systems, but the property damage has

increased dramatically, due to the continuing development of hurricane-prone

areas.

Figure 2 gives the curve of frequency versus fatalities for hurricanes.

The general U.S. experience parallels that of the rest of the world if the

data from 1900 to 1977 are used.(16,19) If only the data from 1938 to 1977

are used (16), the curve for the U.S. shows a lower frequency of events

causing 100 or more fatalities and no events causing more than 750 fatalities.

In examining the data (Appendix A) the overall frequency of hurricanes has not

changed significantly, and the lower number of high consequence events is

compensated for by a higher number of lower consequence events (10 to 100

fatalities). If this trend continues, the curve for hurricanes will approach

that for tornadoes, and the expected number of fatalities per year are very

similar for these two hazards.

-20-
I0

LU

z

Al

co

z

LUJ

Ld

z

LUJ

LL

i0-I

10 102 103

N (FATALITIES)

Figure 2

-21-
4.2.2 Tornadoes

A tornado is an intense cyclone, affecting a small area, occurring

primarily over the mid-latitudes of large land masses. Velocities within a

tornado's funnel exceed those of a hurricane (-200 mph) and the destructive

force within its path is greater, but just outside this intense area (200 to

400 yards wide) the damage is small to negligible. Also, tornadoes are short

lived (generally minutes compared to days or weeks not unlikely for a hurricane). These characteristics serve to keep the fatality count low for any one

group of tornadoes or single tornado compared with that for a hurricane, but

the difficulty in predicting where and when a tornado will hit keeps the

expected fatalities per year fairly constant. Figure 3 gives the frequency

versus fatality curve for tornadoes.

Tornadoes are sometimes thought of as uniquely North American since few

are reported on other continents. They occur most often in the mid-western

states, although every state is subject to them. Figure 3, therefore, does

not show a curve for the rest of the world since so few are reported outside

of the U.S. and Canada.

I0 I 11 I 1I 11 I I I1I I1I14

TORNADO CATASTROPHES

LW 1938-77 >" U.S. ONLY

Al

Fz

Iii W

W , 0

Cr

L_

1I

10 102 10'3 .104

N (FATALITIES)

Figure 3

-22-
4.2.3 Floods

Figure 4 gives the frequency versus fatality curve for floods. The U.S.

has spent massive amounts of money on flood control, mostly in the form of

dams and irrigation projects.

Also, Federal and State authorities have been established to provide

monitoring and warning services for every major flood plain. Because of this,

there is considerable divergence in the higher consequence area of the frequency vs. consequence curves for the U.S. and the rest of the world (Fig. 4).

Although the average death per flood in the U.S. have shown a marked decrease

since the turn of the century, the amount of property damage per flood has

steadily increased, which reflects increasing development of flood plains.(21)

The average number of fatalities due to floods in the U.S. has gone down to 80

per year, while the average yearly property damage has gone up to one billion

dollars.(21)

POINT L

5 %

WORLD (EX. U.S.) -Al

• 0

z

2 I

N (FATALITIES)

z CONTINUATION OF

Al WORLD CURVE

I- U.S. z

UJ

n

0 •

bi 10-

0..

POINT L-t

FLOOD CATASTROPHES

1938-77

10-2 1 1 1 I 1 I 1 II 11 1 I II I I I I I JI I I I I

10 102 103 104

N (FATALITIES)

Figure 4

-23-
4.2.4 Earthquakes

Figure 5 gives the frequency versus fatality curve for earthquakes.

Earthquakes are perhaps the most frightening of natural disasters because of

their suddenness. Studies are presently underway at Columbia University and

other seismological centers on the feasibility of predicting them. In the

U.S., most quakes occur on the west coast, particularly along the fault lines

in California. Most are of low intensity and cause little damage and few

deaths, but a few have been catastrophic, including the recent (1964) quake in

Alaska that claimed 131 lives. The San Francisco quake of 1906 claimed 750

lives, and a number geologists feel that California is due for another quake

of similar magnitude.

The tremendous increase in population in California raises the possibility of tens of thousands of fatalities resulting from a large earthquake.

Figure 5 shows the world and U.S. experience for the period 1938 to 1977,

using data from Disasters!(17) Adding data from other sources for the U.S.

gives the curve shown for the period 1906 to 1977. Unlike the two hurricane

curves for which the better experience of the more recent past can be interpreted as a possible future trend because of better communications and ability

to evacuate an area, the two earthquake curves for the U.S., which both parallel the world curve, can only be interpreted as being slightly different because the return frequency for the larger consequence events is greater than

40 years.

--

wj -WORLD (EX. U.S.)

AlI

Liu

IL

I-2-

z

D EARTHQUAKES

u_ -U.S. 1938-77

10 - 2 1 0 1 I I I I I 1 I 1 1 1 I 1 I 1 1I I 1 1 1 1 1I 1 11 1 1

01102 103 104 105

N (FATALITIES)

Figure 5

-24-
4.3 MAN-MADE HAZARDS (HIGH CONSEQUENCE)

From events listed in Catastrophe!(1), frequency vs. consequence tables

were derived for the following hazards:

9 Aircraft

e Marine

9 Motor Vehicles

e Railroad

e Mining

e Fire and Explosions

The tables are presented in the Appendix as are tables developed for

natural hazards. Curves of frequency vs. consequence were constructed using

these tables and are presented in this section under the appropriate paragraphs. The curves were drawn to aid in presentation and are not formal

statistical fits.

Frequency vs. consequence curves for LNG, LPG, Chlorine, and Nuclear

Power Plants are taken from the other references and also presented here under

the appropriate paragraphs.

4.3.1 Aircraft

Statistics on fatalities from aircraft accidents would be expected to

vary directly-with increased numbers of aircraft in use, increased mileage

flown, and increased loading. They might vary either directly or inversely

with new technology such as new families of aircraft. These statistics are a

good example of a relatively large, high consequence risk (approximately one

order of magnitude greater than motor vehicles), but with a relatively low "chronic" risk component (more than one order of magnitude lower than motor

vehicles). This latter relation would probably not be true if the number of

aircraft in operation approached the number of motor vehicles in operation.

Figure 6 gives the frequency versus fatality curve for aircraft accidents. The time period covered by the data is particularly significant and

appropriate since it covers the introduction and growth of commercial jet

aviation. The curves (Fig. 6) are shown to converge at the highest consequence point (dotted lines), which represents the Canary Islands disaster:

the collision of two jumbo jets on the ground, one U.S. and one Dutch. This

one point seems to be off the curve, but it is a significant indication of the

potential for higher consequences introduced by the larger planes in use

today.

-25-
101

w

CL

az

Al

z

w

w

z

w

Or}

Lii

Uj-I

1-2 1

i01

N(FATALITIES)

Figure 6

-26-
4.3.2 Marine

Figure 7 gives the frequency versus fatality curve for marine accidents.

The data used to generate the marine hazard curve for the U.S. are probably

too low by a significant amount. The reason for this is that most Americans

travel on ships under foreign registration, and in foreign waters when they do

travel. The true risk is probably represented by a curve lying between that

for the U.S. and that shown for the rest of the world (Fig. 7). This risk is

not expected to. vary appreciably in the near future because both the technology and the use by Americans of this mode of transport change very slowly.

Since these statistics include only events with 10 or more fatalities, most

pleasure boating accidents are excluded. Most of the fatalities in these

lower consequence events are due to drowning and appear in statistics such as

those in Table 3, (Section 3).

I0

OL

Al

UwL

Lii 1O-I

Icf2 L

10 1 102

N (FATALITIES)

Figure 7

-27-
4.3.3 Motor Vehicle

Figure 8 gives the frequency versus fatality curve for motor vehicle

accidents. The statistics on high consequence motor vehicle hazards may show

an increase in the near future, as rising fuel prices induce more people to

use buses and van pools. Even if they tripled however, they would still not

be a significant proportion of the total motor vehicle risk, which in the U.S.

is dominated by the private auto (see Table 3, Section 3 and Table 14, Section

4.4). Technological advances such as the energy absorbant auto or air bags

could have a significant effect on the total motor vehicle risk in the future.

The relatively large difference between the U.S. and world curves (compared to other man-made risks), indicates the greater usage of buses in the

rest of the world, since most of the accidents representd by these curves

involve passenger carriers such as buses.

I0

Al

(I)

Iz

Wi

Lii '0-I

o-2L

101

N (FATALITIES)

Figure 8

-28-
4.3.4 Railroad

Figure 9 gives the frequency versus fatality curve for railroad accidents. Even with increased fuel costs, the use of railroads in the U.S.

seems resistant to increase. No significant change in these statistics (Fig.

9) is expected. The proportion of passenger deaths is higher in catastrophes

than for chronic fatalities (Section 3), but the total number of fatalities is

lower for railroads than other means of transportation.

Again, the relative large difference between the U.S. and

is due to the greater use of mass transportation in the rest of

world curves

the world.

10

Ln

zAl

AI

C)

z

LL

0.01

(EX. U.S.)

7

-j

-i

~1

U.S.

RAILROAD CATASTROPHES

1959-78

I0 100 1000

N (FATALITIES)

Figure 9

-29-
4.3.5 Mining

Figure 10 gives the frequency versus fatality curve for mining accidents. The statistics on mining hazards have declined dramatically in the

last 20 years under the influence of new government regulation and enforcement

both in the U.S. and abroad.(18) The use of coal, however, is being given new

encouragement, and the increased usage is expected to counteract the decline

in these statistics. While the data represented by these curves represents

all types of mining, the largest single contributor is coal mining.(1)

One aspect of coal mining not included in this data is the latent fatalities due to black lung disease. While this contribution to the "chronic"

component of risk is expected to decrease, due to improved working conditions,

it has never been properly documented as part of the total mining risk.

I01

LU

Al

uLJ

Ld

LLJ

10-I

I02L 10 O2 10 3

N (FATALITI ES)

Figure 10

104

-30-
4.3.6 Fire and Explosion

Figure 11 gives the frequency versus fatalities curve for fires and explosions. The U.S. experience is essentially parallel to that of the rest of

the world, indicating that there are no major differences for this hazard.

I I

06

Al

C-) Z

0

D&

LAY

i0-I

I01 102

N (FATALITIES)

Figure 11

10O3

-31-
4.3.7 Liquified Natural Gas and Liquified Propane Gas - Risk Assessment

There have been several studies on the risks involving transportation of

LNG and LPG, most commissioned by commercial interests for specific licenses*

at particular locations, for example the docket (7) for the licensing of Distrigas operation on Staten Island in New York Harbor. The conclusions of this

specific report are given in terms of probability of catastrophic spills over

a 10 year period due to ship and barge traffic in the harbor. It has been

criticized as not conservative by Fairley (8) who finds fault with some of the

assumptions made, such as reduced risk effects assumed for "double hull" construction of LNG tank ships and by special traffic provisions when they are

under way in the harbor. This report and, in general, the other available reports on LNG and LPG assessments are site-specific and do not give any estimates of fatalities (societal risk), and therefore do not meet the criteria

for comparison used here.

One report that does estimate societal risk was prepared by Simmons(9)

for the EPA and assesses the risk of LNG and LPG transport for the U.S. in

terms of fatalities. The results are shown in Fig. 12. This report does not

deal with all the hazards involved in the manufacture, transportation and

storage of LNG/LPG. It chooses specific aspects of transportation which are

considered most hazardous, namely, tank ship movements within a harbor for

LNG, and tank truck traffic on highways for LPG. Because the study is predictive, a discussion of the modelling used follows.

* Liquified Natural Gas

The assessment is based on petroleum tanker spill experience in the U.S.

harbors and does not reduce the risk of spill by any amount due to double hull

design or special traffic provisions. This study does not include any risk of

spill and/or catastrophic deflagration due to storage tank operation, nor does

it include any risk due to barge shipment within a harbor. The tank catastrophe is considered unlikely and the barge risk is not addressed.

The frequency of barge spills and accidents is larger according to (7),

while the amount of spillage and consequences of each spill are lower. The

effect of both of these unaccounted for risks would be to raise the entire

risk curve shown in Figure 12. Since no data equivalent to the tankship data

are available, the amount of the increase can only be estimated. If we use

the comparative frequencies between significant tankship and barge spills

given by Distrigas(7) as 10 (actually 9.3), this raises the origin of the LNG

risk curve by one order of magnitude as seen in comparing the "estimated" and

"tankers" curves of Fig. 12. This proportion, however, is valid only for the

Port of New York. At other locations, such as the California sites, barge

traffic will be small or nonexistent. This is therefore a conservative upper bound for this activity.

For the high consequence portion of the curve, we have one historical

data point involving a storage tank event in Cleveland in the 1940s which resulted in the death of 128 people. The frequency attached to this event would

again be additive since it was not used in deriving the "tankers" curve shown

in Figure 12. In order to use this data point, we need to have an estimate of

the number of tank years of operation in the U.S.

-32-
An examination of the tables listing early history LNG storage tanks

(10) and for proposed LNG storage terminals as of 1974(7) shows that up until

publication of Ref. 7, the number of tank years of •peration in the U.S. was

less than 100. Using an estimated frequency of 1O- /year for the Cleveland

accident raises the probability of the high consequence portion of the curve

by roughly one order of magnitude, which is similar to the increase in the low

consequence end of the curve.

Again this increase in the probability for the high consequence end is

considered conservative, since the tank involved in the Cleveland event was

not diked and all present or planned tanks are. Some would argue that this

event should be neglected because the error in design of this early tank has

been corrected; however, the arguments made here are only used to estimate

rough upper bounds. More detailed evaluations would be required if more precise results are desired.

a Liquified Propane Gas (LPG)

The assessment made for LPG is based on actuarial data. The LPG frequency versus fatality curve shown in Figure 12 was based on data from overland tank truck, storage, and distribution facilities, and is much broader in

scope than the LNG study. A much larger data base over a longer period (approximately 40 years) is available in this area and the data come from the LPG

industry itself rather than a "sister" industry such as gasoline handling and

transport. LPG is not shipped to the U.S. from overseas. It originates in

this country and is generally transported over land via tank truck. Therefore, there are a much greater number of shipments and storage facilities than

for LNG, but each is much smaller in size. For this reason the risk assessment curve is three orders of magnitude higher in the low consequence area and

drops off rapidly so that it crosses the LNG curve at approximately 10 fatalities. If the size of storage and transport facilities were increased, the

higher consequence portion of this curve would increase.

-33-
gO4 1 ALL FIRES AND EXPLOSIONS

03 IN U.S. AND CANADA

z 102 L.P.-GAS TANK\

Al / TRUCKS -,(FLAMMABLE \

(z: • IO -- . PLUME) \\

FIRES & EXPLOSIONS

>- " \U.S. ONLY

-0-1

- • 02 ESTIMATED

t I %.\ (TANKERS, 0o-3 BARGES,8 -

< \ \ STORAGE)

i, 10- , \

0 1--LNG TANKERS

10.5 1000 ANNUAL TRIPS \

(NO DOUBLE HULL,

10-6 FLAMMABLE PLUME)

10-7 3 1 1 1 1 I 1 ,o-3 -G2 ,' 0o ,I ,2 o3 ,4 ,o

10 10 10 10p 10 10' 10 l0 10p

N (ACCIDENT FATALITIES)

Fig. 12. LNG and LPG Risk Assessment

from Ref. 9

-- estimated (by authors)

-34-
4.3.8 Chlorine - Risk Assessment

A literature search revealed no additional data on this subject other

than that given by Simmons et al(22), which was also used in WASH-1400.(19)

Simmons sought to study all of the major toxic chemicals used in the U.S., and

made a detailed study of the risk of transporting chlorine in railroad tank

cars (90-ton capacity) which they used as a comparison model for other toxic

chemicals. The histogram resulting from their chlorine assessment with no

credit for evacuation (Fig. 13) showed fatalities far in excess of actual

experience (one fatality in 50 years), and they repeated their assessment with

the mitigating factor of evacuation, (Fig. 14). Both of these were converted

into frequency vs. consequence curves in Ref. 19, (Fig. 15).

For a discussion of uncertainties associated with these assessments, see

Section 4.1.

'CY

z

W

crLL

0-1

J o

0 0

"-'-4

I 10 102 103 104 1

ACCIDENT CLASS (POTENTIAL MORTALITIES)

Fig. 13. Chlorine Transport Hazard. Frequency of accident

evacuation (from Ref. 2).

104 ..

class without

U)

U,

F0

LiJ

I-

_<- ir0

<IZ

W

0-

- OU - 20,000

2500-5000

1000-2500

500-1000

250-500 I

100- 250 I

50-100 POTENTIAL MORTALITIES

10

I0

,,,,I , ° ° . .... ! . . . . .... I . ...... I

6 I0-5 1-4 1-3 1-2 10'

FREQUENCY (YEAR')

Fig. 14. Chlorine Transport Hazard with Mitigation.

dent class with evacuation (from Ref. 22).

-35-

Frequency of acci-
I I I I

I0-I

w >-10-2 _

CL

Al WITHOUT EVACUATION

I--

z

W -

> 0-

w

z

w WITH EVACUATION

o 10-4

LL

10-5

to 102 103 10e 10 5

FATALITIES, N

Fig. 15. Frequency of chlorine accidents involving fatalities (from

Ref. 19).

-36-
4.3.9 Dam Failures

Several references were consulted for data on catastrophic dam failures

(1, 6, 17, 19 and 21). Table 13 is a listing of the failures resulting in

fatalities in the U.S. The additional data do not significantly alter the

curve of Fig. 16, taken from WASH-1400 (19) nor the uncertainties associated

with this curve.

TABLE 13

Dam and Levee Failures in the U.S.

Ycar

1874

1889

1890

1894

1900

1928

Location

Wiljiamsburg, Mass.

Johnstown, Pa.

Walnut Grove, Prescott,

Ariz.

Mill River, Mass.

Austin/Austin, Pa.

St. Francis Dam/Ca.

Structure

Earth Dam

Earth Dam

Dam

Dam

Dam

Dam

Lives Lost

144

" 2000(2209)

150

143

8

S450 (up to 700)

1955

1963

1972

1972

1976

1976

1977

1874-Present

Yuba City, Ca.

Baldwin Hill, Los Ang.,

Ca.

Buffalo Creek, W. Va.

Rapid City, S.D.

Newfound, N.C.

Teton, Idaho

Toccoa, Ga.

Levee

Earth Dam

Reservoir

Slagheap Dam

Dam

Earth Dam

Earth Dam

Earth Dam

38

5(3)

125

200

4

14

35

3525-3775

-37-
0.%

w

d)

,.

z

M

n,,

z

w

w

z

w

w

LL.

'0-I

10-2

10-4 L.

10 1 104

FATALITIES, N

Fig. 16. Dam Failures (from Ref. 19)

-38-
4.3.10 Nuclear Power Plants - Risk Assessments

In Section 3 the chronic risks of the nuclear fuel cycle were compared

with other power generating technologies. Catastrophes or high consequence

accidents affecting the public during plant operation were not included in the

analyses. WASH-1400(19) is one of the most exhaustive studies to date on the

assessment of risks due to major core melt accidents (class 9 accidents) at

nuclear power plants of the present designs. Figures 17 and 18 taken from

(19) show the estimated probability (frequency) distributions for early and

latent fatalities respectively for a population of 100 reactors in the U.S. of

the size used in the study, l000-MWe. Again, according to our definition,

early fatalities occur within a short time of the causative event (generally

less than one year) and latent fatalities occur over an extended time period

after the event (generally one to forty years). There are at present over 70

reactors in operation (some under 1000 MWe), and there could be as many as 150

to 200 in operation by 1990. Note that the ordinates for the two curves are

different. For early fatalities the ordinate, like those for all the other

curves in this section, represents fatalities per event. For latent fatalities, the ordinate represents fatalities per event oer year. The fatalities

per year are integrated over the associated latent time period.

10-' 1l iI

10-2

Al i0-3

ir

0.J G)

I1- 0-

0~

10-6

Fig. 17. Probability distribution for early fatalities per year for 100

Reactors (U.S.). Note: Approximate uncertainties are estimated

to be represented by factors of 1/4 and 4 on consequence magnitude and by factors of 1/5 and 5 on probabilities.

-39-
l0-I I I I11111 I II~ I I I 11111 I I 1111 I MEEII

10-2

Al

S10.-3

LU

10-4

.j .

0:o 10-5

a.

10-6

o 0 1 2 3 4 5

LATENT CANCER FATALITIES per YEAR, X

Fig. 18. Probability distribution for latent cancer fatality incidence

per year for 100 Reactors (U.S.). Note: Approximate uncertainties are estimated to be represented by factors of 1/6 and 3 on

consequence magnitudes and by factors of 1/5 and 5 on probabilities.

These curves are the only ones so far presented that make a distinction

between early and latent fatalities. For all the other hazards considered in

this section, only early fatalities were counted in developing curves, both

from actuarial data and from assessments such as those for chlorine and LNG/

LPG. Several reasons can be given for latent effects not being evaluated in

the other risk calculations:

* For most man-made and natural hazards, the latent fatalities are

only a small fraction of the immediate fatalities and are not easily traceable to a specific event.

* For hazards having a high proportion of latent fatalities (e.g. fossil fuel power plants), the consequences are generally of a chronic

nature and are due to continuous low-level pollution and not to a

single catastrophic event.

-40-
Some authors, in trying to find a means for valid comparison, or addition, of the effects of latent and early fatalities, would reduce the latent

fatalities by some factor -- Kinchin(24) suggests 30, and add them to the early fatalities. Some of the reasons given for the reduction in latent fatalities are as follows:

a The loss of life expectancy is less for latent fatalities than for

immediate fatalities.

0 Public perception of future death is less disturbing or more

acceptable to society than that of immediate death - in other words

the public "discounts" future life in terms of immediate life,

much the same as an economic value.

These concepts of latent fatalities are not universally accepted, and in

some comparisons (see Section 2 on fossil fuel power plant fatalities) latent

and early fatalities are not differentiated. Levine(23) uses a factor of 30

reduction for latent fatalities and data from WASH-1400(19) on man-made hazards to produce a curve combining early and latent fatalities for nuclear

power plants which can be plotted on the same axis as immediate fatalities per

event from other hazards (Fig. 19). Levine cites Ref. 26 which gives arguments for the factor 30 reduction. The curve labelled "Early and Latent Fatalities" in Fig. 19 is the sum of the early curve plus 1/30 the latent fatality curve. IU

A

U,

I.-

z

LJ

Cz

LWJ

16-1

10-2

I;-3

10-5

10-6

i0-7 L

10 106

EARLY FATALITIES, X

Fig. 19. Hazard Summary from Levine (Ref. 23)

-41-
It is worth noting again that WASH-1400 has been criticized, not only by

opponents of nuclear power such as the Union of Concerned Scientists(27), but

also by the Lewis committee(25), the ad hoc review group chartered by the NRC

to review the WASH-1400 study. One of the major criticisms is that the uncertainty bands are thought to be larger than stated in WASH-1400. For the

UCS, the uncertainties "appear to dwindle and vanish"(27), while for the Lewis

report, they are "understated"(25).

4.4 LATENT VS. EARLY FATALITIES

In the case of nuclear power, we have emphasized the difference between

early and latent fatalities and added the two results to obtain total fatalities in any year due to nuclear accidents. As defined in this report, early

fatalities are deaths occurring within one year of an event, and latent fatalities are deathc occurring one to forty years after an event. For a nuclear

incident, the number of latent fatalities in general dominates the number of

early fatalities and therefore must be accounted for. For the other accidents

listed in Table 14, the data on latent fatalities are sparse, but as previously stated, those available tend to show that latent fatalities are a small

portion of the total (e.g. about less than 1%).

TABLE 14

Accidental Deaths According to

the International List of Causes of Death (U.S. only)

(Derived from Ref. 6, page 12)

Type of Accident or Manner of Injury

All Accidental D)eaths

Transport Accidents

(Motor Vehicle)

Poisoning by Solids and Liquids

Poisoning by Gases and Vapors

Falls

1977 1976 1975 1974

103,202 100,761 103,030 104,622

53,286 50,644 49,838 50,659

49,510 47,038 45,853 46,402

3,374 4,161 4,694 4,016

1,596 1,569 1,577 1,518

13,773 14,136 14,896 16,339

6,357 6,338 6,071 6,236

1,751 1,299 1,268 1,427

19,158 18,827 20,737 20,711

3,107 3,009 3,184 3,021

Fires and Flames

Natural and iE"nvironmcntal Factors

Other Accidents

Surgical and Medical Complications

and Misadventures

Late E'ffects (death more than one

year after accident) 800 778 765 695

-42-
Even though, in general, latent effects may be small, such as those of

fossil fuel power plants, the expected number of latent effects are likely to

dominate the expected number of early fatalities. A principal hazard posed by

fossil fuel plants is that due to increased air pollution (mainly sulfates,

particulates and other carcinogens), which increases mortality due to lung

cancer and cardiovascular impairment. These effects take long periods to be

manifest in any individual, but they add up to a constant, chronic increase in

mortality for the society. These fatalities are not easily definable or separated from other causes, i.e. one cannot distinguish a lung cancer victim

from power plant operation or from other causes, and hence data are not available which discriminate causes.

4.5 COMPARISON OF HIGH CONSEQUENCE RISKS

Figures 20 and 21 show comparisons of all the high consequence risks

discussed in this section. Figure 20 shows the data for natural hazards plus

an estimate for meteorites taken directly from WASH-1400 (19). Figure Ž1

shows the data for man-made hazards, with dam failures taken from WASH-1400

and the chlorine curve (without evacuation) derived from the same source as

used in WASH-1400. In order to compare the risks on the basis of fatalities,

a method of combining latent and early fatalities is performed here.

In the previous section, one method of summiing latent and early

fatalities was presented in order to be able to compare hazards on the same

axis; this method involved reducing the latent fatalities by a factor of 30.

Simple addition of the curves in Figs. 17 and 18, gives the resultant curve

for "100 REACTORS-EARLY & LATENT" in Fig. 20. This curve is very similar to

Levine's curve, for the following reason. The derivation of the curve for latent fatalities per year in Fig. 18 also involves a factor of approximately 30

reduction over the total latent curve. This is due to the fact that all latent fatalities due to one event, after a certain period of latency (during

which few deaths occur) are spread out over a long period of approximately 30

years. Thus when the per year curve given in Fig. 18 is added to the early

fatalities shown in Fig. 17, the result (Fig. 20) is very similar to Levine's

curve.

If the reader wants to use any other discount factor for latent fatalities, he may do so; we have simply combined them in the manner described as

one approach for comparison. Latent fatalities for all the other hazards have

not been included because they are negligible in comparison with the early

fatalities for these hazards, as documented by the National SafetyC7o~u~ncil(6),

which attributed only 800 deaths to "late effects" (death more than one year

after the accident) in a total of 103,202 accident fatalities in the U.S. in

1977. If, however, even a small fraction, say 10%, of these deaths were attributable to catastrophic events, the "expected value" of 80 would be large

compared with the expected value of less than 1 for 100 nuclear power plants.

Therefore, although the number of latent fatalities should be included in some

manner in the results for nuclear power plants because it is large compared

with the number of early fatalities due to nuclear power plants, the number of

latent fatalities for nuclear plants is small compared with the latent effects

of other hazards which have not been counted.

-43-
10O

/00

NATURAL HAZARDS

(US. ONLY)

1: 0-2 .

Ljj

CLj

LAt

uL

LUQv 4 U--

10-5 _ _

TO0 REACTORSI0"61 -,- 6 EARLY ONLY FATALITIES

NUMBER OF FATALI

Figure 20

ACTUARIAL

ASSESSMENT

106

TIES (N)

-44-
/I0

100

MAN MADE HAZARDS

(U.S. ONLY)

I0"'

L.J

CL

Al

104

LuA

Lu04

5L

ACTUARIAL

ASSESSMENT - - - - -

ESTIMATED-----

10-6

to -"7

101 /02 103 10Q4

NUMBER OF FATALITIES (N)

Figure 21

106

-45-
5. INDIVIDUAL RISK

Table 15(6) gives a breakdown by age of death rates for the most common

causes of death for the U.S. population. This table is an expanded version of

Table 3 in which the frequencies of fatalities are divided by the population

at risk to obtain the death rates for Table 14. Both Table 3 and 14 are obtained from statistics for the year 1977 when the total U.S. population was

216 million. The death rate can be translated to be a probability of death

from a specific cause for a member of a given age group in a specific year.

Some view this as a measure of individual risk. For example, in 1977 the

average U.S. person between the ages of 45 to 64 years of age had a probability of death in that year due to a motor vehicle accident of 18/100,000 or 1.8

x 10-. For the entire population, the probability of death per year due to

a motor vehicle accident for any person in the U.S. was 2.3 x 10-4, an

increase of approximately 30%, and for females only, the probability was 1.2 x

10-4, a decrease of approximately 33%.

Age and sex are not the only factors that can affect the calculation of

risk. For the major causes of death such as heart disease and cancer, heredity, life-style, eating, smoking and drinking habits, plus many more factors

can influence individual risk. There are enough differences in people so that

the "average individual risk" obtained when the frequency is divided by the

defined population at risk may not be very meaningful for a particular individual in that population. The individual risks thus calculated are averages

over certain defined populations and this fact must be remembered when reading

the table.

-46-
Table 15 . Leading Causes of All Deaths, U.S., 1977 [From Nat. Safety Council (6)] (Rate = deaths per 100,000

population in each age group; Stroke = cerebrovascular disease; numbers for drownings are partly estimated. Data

from USP'IIS).

All Ages ..................

Heart disease .................

Cancer ...................

Stroke ...................

Accidents .................

Motor vehicle .............

Falls ...................

D)rownin.g ...............

Fires, burns ..............

Other ..................

Under I Year ...............

Anoxia ...................

Conge. ital alloniolies .. ....

Complications of pregnancy and childbirth ........

Immaturity ................

Pneumonia ................

Accidents .................

Ingestion of food ..........

Motor vehicle .............

Mech. suffocation ..........

Fires, burns ..............

Other ...................

1 to 4 Years ................

Accidents .................

Motor vehicle .............

Drowning ...............

Fires, burns ..............

Ingestion of food ..........

Falls ...................

Other ..................

Congenital anomalies ..........

Cancer ...................

5 to 14 Years ...............

Accidents .................

Motor vehicle .............

Drowning ...............

Fires, burns ..............

Firearms ................

Other ..................

Cancer ...................

Congenital anomalies ..........

15 to 24 Years ..............

Accidents .................

Motor vehicle .............

Drowning ...............

Poison (solid, liq) ..........

Firearms ................

Other ..................

Suicide ...................

Homicide .................

Poison (solid, liq) ..........

Firearms ................

Other ..................

Suicide ...................

Homicide ....................

No.

1,899,597

718,850

386,686

181,934

103,202

49,510

13,773

7,126

6,357

26,436

46,975

10,604

8,420

5,786

3,714

1,665

1,173

275

253

206

159

280

8,307

3,297

1,219

650

608

168

121

531

1,066

631

12,579

6,305

3,142

1,110

550

344

1,159

1,733

676

47,986

25,619

18,092

2,150

709

665

4,003

5,565

5,196

709

665

4,003

5,565

5,196

Rate

878

332

179

84

48

23

6

3

3

13

1,485

335

266

183

117

53

37

9

8

6

5

9

69

27

10

5

5

1

1

5

9

5

35

17

9

3

1

1

3

5

2

117

63

44

5

2

2

10

14

13

2

2

10

14

13

25 to 44 Years ........

Accidents ...........

Motor vehicle ........

Drowning .........

Poison (solid, liq) ....

Fires, bums .

Falls ......

Other .....

Cancer ......

Heart Disease..

45 to 64 Years

I icart disease .

Cancer ......

Stroke ......

Accidents ....

.,...........

.............

.... °........

.............

... °..........

...... ,.....

.o...........

.............

..... ,.......

Motor vehicle .............

Falls ...................

Fires, burns ..............

Drowning ...............

Surg. complications .........

Other ..................

Cirrhosis of liver .............

Suicide ...................

65 to 74 Years ..............

Heart Disease ...............

Cancer ...................

Stroke ...................

Diabetes mellitus ............

Accidents .................

Motor vehicle .............

Falls ...................

Fires, burns ..............

Surg. complications .........

Ingestion of food ..........

Other ..................

Pneumonia ................

Cirrhosis of liver .............

75 Years and Over ...........

Heart Disease ...............

Stroke ...................

Cancer ...................

Pneumonia ................

Arteriosclerosis .............

Accidents .................

Falls ...................

Motor vehicle .............

Surg. complications .........

Fires, burns ..............

Ingestion of food ..........

Other ..................

Diabetes mellitus ............

Emphysema ................

No.

103,042

23,460

13,031

1,690

1,349

1,081

956

5,353

16,753

14,392

437,795

153,552

132,514

22,925

19,167

'8,000

2,245

1,481

940

865

5,636

17,166

8,368

445,595

182,354

115,587

37,896

9,611

9,006

3,060

1,995

843

767

447

1,894

8,335

6,208

797,318

366,141

116,753

116,675

30,487

23,683

15,175

7,762

2,713

1,030

1,023

723

1,924

13,993

6,190

Rate

182

42

23

3

2

2

2

10

30

25

1,000

351

303

52

44

18

5

4

2

2

13

39

19

3,054

1,250

792

260

66

62

24

14

6

5

3

13

57

43

8,941

4,106

1,309

1,308

342

266

170

87

30

12

11

8

22

157

69

-47-
5.1 Life Shortening

In order to compare the individual risks due to air pollution, cigarette

smoking and other "nontraumatic" causes with those due to motor vehicle accidents and other immediate effects, some authors have converted the statistics on individual fatalities to life shortening times for each hazard considered. Table 16, taken from Ref. 12, gives life shortening times for various causes.

The loss of life expectancy (AE) for a particular cause is defined as

the difference between life expectancy of an individual in our society (U.S.)

subject to that cause and the life expectancy of that same individual in the

absence of that particular cause. The basic information required for the

calculation of AE for a particular cause is a revised mortality rate. This

revised mortality rate is obtained by subtracting the mortality rate for the

particular cause in question from the general mortality rate which includes

all causes. A more complete derivation is given in Ref. 12 for the data shown

in Table 16.

TABLE 16

Loss of Life Expectancy (AE) Due to Various Causes

Cause Days Cause Days

Being unmarried - male

Cigarette smoking - male

lHeart disease

Being unmarried - female

Being 30% overweight

IBeing a coal niner

Cancer

20% overweight

< 8th grade education

Cigarette smoking - female

Low socioeconomic status

Stroke

Living in unfavorable state

Army in Vietnam

Cigar smoking

Dangerous job - accidents

Pipe smoking

Increasing food intake 100 cal/day

Motor vehicle accidents

P'neumonia - influenza

Alcohol (U.S. average)

Accidents in home

Suicide

Diabetes

Being murdered (homicide)

Legal drug misuse

Average job - accidents

3500

2250

2100

1600

1300

1100

980

900

850

800

700

520

500

400

330

300

ý20

210

207

141

130

95

95

95

90

90

74

Drowning

Job with radiation exposure

Falls

Accidents to pedestrians

Safest jobs - accidents

Fire - burns

Generation of energy

Illicit drugs (U.S. aver.)

Poison (solid, liquid)

Suffocation

Firearms accidents

Natural radiation (BEIR)

Medical X-rays

Poisonous gases

Coffee

Oral contraceptives

Accidents to pedalcycles

All catastrophes combined

Diet drinks

Reactor accidents - UCS

Reactor accidents - Rasmussen

Radiation from nuc. industry

PAP test

Smoke alarm in home

Air bags in car

Mobile coronary care units

Safety improvements 1966-76

41

40

39

37

30

27

24

18

17

13

11

8

6

7

6

5

5

3.5

2

2*

0.02*

0.02*

-4

-10

-50

-125

-110

*'These items assume that all U.S. power is nuclear. UCS is Union of Concerned Scientists,

the most prominent group of nuclear critics.

From Ref. 12

-48-
6. DISCUSSION

This report summarizes the author's detailed review of current actuarial

data and analysis results in the general area of societal risk. Throughout

the text there has been an attempt to discuss the usefulness and limitations

of various sources of information, however, the author's generalized opinions

have been purposely omitted. This will allow the user to objectively determine, on a case by case basis, the specific applicability of the results

presented to his or her analysis.

With the increased interest in the use of Probabilistic Risk Assessment

(PRA) in the decision making process of nuclear power generation, there has

developed a need to baseline the results. Without such a numerical anchor to

which the results of analyses can be relatively compared, the assessment of

the societal impact of a technology becomes difficult. One method of placing

the results of a PRA in perspective is to compare the risks to those of other

natural and man-made hazards. The Reactor Safety Study(19) utilized this type

of comparison. Therefore, the information presented by the authors in this

report can be considered an updating of the WASH-1400(19) comparison.

When applying the information from this report, the reader is cautioned

to review fully its applicability and ultimate goals of his or her study. In

general, the results of nuclear power PRAs are based on analyses due to the

lack of actuarial data and, as such, have relatively large uncertainties associated with them. Direct comparison to actuarial data requires great care

since, in general, the reported events have different time constants than

nuclear plant calculations. In addition, the comparison of man-made hazards

to which the public has no choice, i.e. power generation, to other man-made

hazards such as motor vehicles when the individual makes the conscious decision to accept the risk must be clearly defined. This also holds true when

comparing technological hazards to natural ones to achieve a meaningful conclusion.

The use of this report should help the reader in placing the results of

a PRA in perspective as related to overall societal risk. As work continues

on collecting actuarial data, and as analysis techniques are refined, direct

comparisons should become more apparent. However, until that time, engineering judgement will be a key factor in the use of comparative studies.

-49-
REFERENCES

1. "Catastrophe! When Man Loses Control ," editors of Encyclopedia Britannica,

Bantam/Britannica Books, 1979.

2. "Activities, Effects, and Impacts of the Coal Fuel Cycle for a 1000 MWe

Electric Power Generating Plant," NUREG/CR-1060, R.C. Christman et al.,

Teknekron Research, January 1980.*

3. "The Health and Environmental Effects of Electricity Generation,"

BNL-20582, July 1974.

4. "Health and Economic Costs of Alternate Energy Sources," L.D. Hamilton and

A.S. Manne, International Atomic Energy Agency Bulletin, Volume 20, No. 4,

August 1978.

5. "Health Effects of Air Pollution," L.D. Hamilton, BNL-20743, July 1975.

6. "Accident Facts," 1979 Edition, National Safety Council.

7. U.S. Federal Power Commission, Distrigas Corp. et al., Docket Nos. CP

73-132 et al.

8. W.B. Fairley, "Criteria for Evaluating 'Small' Probability of a Catastrophic Accident from the Marine Transportation of Liquified Natural Gas,"

September 1975.

9. John A. Simmons, "Risk Assessment of Storage and Transport of Liquified

Natural Gas and LP Gas," SAI, November 25, 1974.

10. D.L. Katz and H.H. West, "The Overall Problem - Risk/Benefit for LNG

Shipping and Storage," September 1975.

11. W. Baldewicz et al., UCLA - "Historical Perspectives on Risk for Large

Scale Technological Risks," UCLA-ENG-7485 of November 1974.

12. B.L. Cohen and I-Sing Lee, "A Catalog of Risks," Health Physics, Vol. 36,

June 1979.

13. B. Fischoff et al., "Weighing the Risks," Environment, Vol. 21, No. 4, May

1979.

14. T. Bick et al., "Target: Highway Risks," Environment, Vol. 21, No. 2,

March 1979.

15. C. Starr et al., "A Comparison of Public Health Risks" Nuclear News,

October 1972.

16. J. Miettenen et al., "Risk Benefit Evaluation of Nuclear Power Plant Siting," Annuals of Nuclear Energy, Vol. 3, December 1976.

17. "Disaster! When Nature Strikes Back" - Editors of Encyclopedia Brittanica,,

Bantam, Brittanica Books, 1978

-50-
REFERENCES (Cont'd)

18. U.S. Statistical Abstracts 1977, Bureau of Census

19. Reactor Safety Study, WASH-1400, (NUREG-75/014), U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission, October 1975.**

20. "Health Effects of Electricity Generation," L.D. Hamilton, BNL BEAD, Conference on Health Effects of Energy Production, Ontario, Canada, September

1979.

21. "The Great International Disaster Book," J. Cornell, Simon and Schuster,

1979.

22. "The Risk of Catastrophic Spills of Toxic Chemicals," J.A. Simmons, R.C.

Erdmann, B.N. Naft, UCLA-ENG-7425, May 1974.

23. "TMI and the Future of Reactor Safety," S. Levine, June 1960, The NUS Corp.

24. "Design Criteria, Concepts and Features Important to Safety and Licensing,"

G.H. Kinchin, UKAEA, 1978.

25. H.W. Lewis et al., "Risk Assessment Review Group Report to the NRC"

NUREG/CR-0400, September 1978. ***

26. D. Litai, "A Risk Comparison Methodology for the Assessment of Acceptable

Risk," Doctoral Thesis - MIT, January 1980.

27. Union of Concerned Scientists, "The Risks of Nuclear Power Reactors" UCS,

Cambridge, Mass., August 1977.

*Available for purchase from the NRC/GPO Sales Program, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission, Washington, DC 20555, and the National Technical Information

Service, Springfield, VA 22161.

**Available free upon written request to the Division of Technical Information

and Document Control, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555. ***Available for purchase from the National Technical Information Service.

-51-
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors wish to thank Dr. S.P. Mitra of Brookhaven National Laboratory for many useful discussions and suggestions throughout this effort. Many

improvements in the report resulted from reviews by Dr. W.E. Vesely and Mr. R.

Sturges of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and by the technical editing of

Ms. Margaret Dienes. The authors are also indebted to Ms. S. Dyroff and Ms.

S. Monteleone for their help in the preparation and typing of the manuscript.

-52-
APPENDIX A

This section contains the tables of frequency per year versus number of

fatalities used to construct the curves given in Section 4. The tables also

include values for number of events and cumulative totals. For all the common

hazards except Tornadoes, both U.S. and World data are given. They are given

in the same order as presented in Section 4.

A-i
LIST OF TABLES

Table No. Title Page

Al Hurricanes 1938-1977 ................................. A-3

A2 Tornadoes 1938-1977 .................................. A-7

A3 Floods 1938-1977 ..................................... A-8

A4 Earthquakes 1938-1977 ................................ A-12

A5 Aircraft Catastrophies 1959-1978 ..................... A-16

A6 Marine Catastrophies 1959-1978 ....................... A-21

A7 Motor Vehicle Catastrophies 1959-1978 ................ A-24

A8 Railroad Catastrophies 1959-1978 ..................... A-26

A9 Mining Catastrophies 1959-1978 ....................... A-28

ANO Fire and Explosion Catastrophies 1959-1978 ........... A-30

A-2
TABLE Al

HURRICANES 1938-1977

U.S. U.S. (Plus WASH-1400 Data) World (Ex. U.S.)

Number of

Fatalities

10

11

12

13

!

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

Number of

Events

1

1

1

1

1

2

Cumul ative

Total

28

27

26

25

24

23

22

20

Frequency

Per Year .N

0.700

0.675

0.650

0.625

0.600

0.575

0.550

0.500

Number of

Events

1

2

1

1

1

1

1

2

Cumulative

Total

42

41

39

38

37

36

35

34

33

31

Frequency

Per Year >_N

0.538

0.525

0.499

0.486

0.474

0.461

0.448

0.435

0.422

0.397

Number of

Events

2

4

3

3

1

3

2

2

1

2

3

2

2

2

3

Cumulative

Total

180

178

174

171

168

167

164

162

160

159

157

154

152

150

148

145

142

139

134

133

132

129

128

126

Frequency

Per Year >N

4.500

4.450

4.350

4.275

4.200

4.175

4.100

4.050

4.000

3.975

3.925

3.850

3.800

3.750

3.700

3.625

3.550

3.475

3.350

3.325

3.300

2.225

3.200

3.150

1

1

1

1

19

18

17

16

0.475

0.450

0.425

0.400

1

1

1

30

29

28

27

0.384

0.371

0.358

0.346

3

3

5

1

1

3

1

2

2

1 15 0.375 3 26 0.333
TABLE Al(Cont'd)

HURRICANES 1938-1977

U.S. U.S. (Plus WASH-1400 Data) World (Ex. U.S.)

Number of

Fatalities

Number of

Events

Cumulative

Total

Frequency

Per Year >N

Number of

Events

Cumulative

Total

Frequency

Per Year >N

Number of

Events

I

4•

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

51

52

53

54

55

56

60

65

67

68

69

71

74

75

80

84

86

90

99

100

2

1

4

1

Cumulative

Total

124

122

121

117

1

1

14

13

0.350

0.325

1

1

23

22

0.294

0.282

5

1

1

1

2

1

2

1

1

2

4

3

3

116

111

110

109

108

107

105

104

102

101

100

98

94

91

Frequency

Per Year >N

3.100

3.050

3.025

2.925

2.900

2.775

2.750

2.725

2.700

2.675

2.625

2.600

2.550

2.525

2.500

2.450

2.350

2.275

1

1

1

12

11

10

9

8

0.300

0.275

0.250

0.225

0.200

1

1

21

20

19

18

17

0.269

0.256

0.243

0.230

1 0.218

7 88 2.200
TABLE Al(Cont'd)

HURRICANES 1938-1977

U.S. U.S. (Plus WASH-1400 Data) World (Ex. U.S.)

Number of

Fatalities

105

110

115

120

130

134

135

138

145

>. 160

170

175

185

191

200

226

239

243

250

260

275

293

300

323

343

350

400

408

410

430

Number of

Events

Cumul ative

Total

Frequency

Per Year >N

Number of - Events Cumul ati ve

Total

Frequency

Per Year >N

Number of

Events

1

1

1

7

6

5

0.175

0.150

0.125

0.100

16

15

14

13

12

10

9

8

7

0.205

0.192

0.179

0.166

0.154

0.128

0.115

0.102

0.090

7

2

2

1

1

1

1

2

1

2

6

1

1

5

2

1

4

1

2

3

1

3

Cumul ati ve

Total

81

74

72

70

69

68

67

66

65

63

62

61

55

54

53

48

46

45

41

40

38

35

34

Frequency

Per Year >N

2.025

1.850

1.800

1.750

1.725

1.700

1.675

1.650

1.625

1.575

1.550

1.525

1.375

1.350

1.325

1.200

1.150

1.125

1.025

1.000

0.950

0.875

0.850

1 4
TABLE Al(Cont'd)

HURRICANES 1938-1977

U.S. U.S. (Plus WASH-1400 Data) World (Ex. U.S.)

Number of

Fatalities

448

500

525

534

545

579

650

700

730

750

769

787

800

845

975

1000

1450

1600

1800

2000

2300

4464

5000

6000

7000

10000

12000

17000

20000

30000

40000

Number of

Events

Cumulative

Total

Frequency

Per Year >N

Number of

Events

Cumulative Frequency

Total Per Year>._N

Number of

Events

1

1

3

2

1

0.075

0.500

0.025

1

1

1

6

5

4

3

2

0.077

0.064

0.051

0.038

0.026

1

2

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

4

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

Cumulative

Total

31

30

28

27

26

25

24

23

22

21

20

19

15

14

12

11

10

9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

Frequency

Per Year LN

0.775

0.750

0.700

0.675

0.650

0.625

0.600

0.575

0.550

0.525

0.500

0.475

0.375

0.350

0.300

0.275

0.250

0.225

0.200

0.175

0.150

0.125

0.100

0.075

0.050

0.025

1

1 1 0.013
TABLE A2

TORNADOES (1938-1977)

U.S.

Number of

Fatalities

Number of

Events

Cumulative

Total

Frequency

Per Year > N

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

45

56

59

61

70

97

100

114

115

116

125

136

145

167

250

270

323

79

74

70

67

58

55

52

49

47

46

43

40

39

37

36

35

33

32

31

28

27

26

25

23

22

21

20

19

18

17

16

15

14

13

12

10

9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

1.975

1.850

1.750

1.675

1.450

1.375

1.300

1.225

1.175

1.150

1.075

1.000

0.975

0.925

0.900

0.875

0.825

0.800

0.775

0.700

0.675

0.650

0.625

0.575

0.550

0.525

0.500

0.475

0.450

0.425

0.400

0.375

0.350

0.325

0.300

0.250

0.225

0.200

0.175

0.150

0.125

0.100

0.075

0.050

0.025

A-7
TABLE A3

FLOODS 1938-1977

U.S. WORLD (EXCEPT U.S.)

Number of

Fatalities

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

51

52

53

Number of

Events

2

1

3

4

5

5

3

1

2

3

1

1

1

1

1

2

Cumulative

Total

45

43

42

39

35

30

25

22

21

19

16

15

14

13

12

11

Frequency

Per Year

1.125

1.075

1.050

0.975

0.875

0.750

0.625

0.550

0.525

0.475

0.400

0.375

0.350

0.325

0.300

0.275

Number of

Events

4

6

1

1

3

8

2

1

1

8

2

2

4

4

4

3

2

1

11

.1

2

2

6

2

1

5

2

1

2

1

3

1

10

4

1

2

Cumulative

Total

281

277

271

271

270

267

259

257

256

255

247

245

243

239

235

231

228

226

225

214

213

212

210

208

202

200

199

194

192

191

189

188

185

184

174

170

169

Frequency

Per Year

7.025

6.925

6.775

6.775

6.750

6.675

6.475

6.425

6.400

6.375

6.175

6.125

6.075

5.975

5.875

5.775

5.700

5.650

5.625

5.350

5.325

5.300

5.250

5.200

5.050

5.000

4.975

4.850

4.800

4.775

4.725

4.700

4.625

4.600

4.350

4.250

4.225

A-8
TABLE A3

FLOODS 1938-1977

Numbr of U.S. WORLD (EXCEPT U.S.)

Number of

Fatalities

54

55

56

57

58

59

60

64

66

68

70

71

73

75

76

77

80

82

86

87

90

92

94

100

101

104

106

107

113

118

119

120

122

123

124

130

131

135

138

140

143

150

155

160

180

Number of

Events

1

Cumulative

Total

9

Frequency

Per Year

0.225

1

1

8

7

0.200

0.175

Number of

Events

1

1

6

1

1

1

2

1

1

2

1

1

6

1

1

1

1

2

1

16

1

1

1

1

2

1

1

2

1

3

1

1

1

1

1

1

5

1

1

1

Cumul ati ve

Total

167

166

165

164

158

157

156

155

153

152

151

149

148

147

141

140

139

138

137

135

134

118

117

116

115

114

112

111

110

108

107

104

103

102

101

100

99

98

93

92

91

Frequency

Per Year

4.175

4.150

4.125

4.100

3.950

3.925

3.900

3.875

3.825

3.800

3.775

3.725

3.700

3.675

3.525

3.500

3.475

3.450

3.425

3.375

3.350

2.950

2.925

2.900

2.875

2.850

2.800

2.775

2.750

2.700

2.675

2.600

2.575

2.550

2.525

2,500

2.475

2.450

2.375

2.300

2.275

2 6

4

3

0.150

0.100

0.075

A-9
TABLE A3

FLOODS 1938-1977

U.S. WORLD (EXCEPT U.S.)

Number of

Fatalities

182

184

186

187

198

200

207

208

215

218

225

226

235

237

242

250

265

267

272

300

305

325

330

377

400

427

450

467

470

475

489

500

542

560

563

618

630

638

649

700

800

810

894

1000

1500

Events

Cumulative

Total

Frequency

Per Year

2

1

0.050

0.025

Number of

Events

1

1

1

1

1

7

1

1

1

1

1

1

0

2

1

1

2

1

1

8

1

1

1

1

1

1

2

1

1

1

1

5

1

3

1

1

1

1

1

1

2

1

1

7

1

Cumulative

Total

90

89

88

87

86

85

78

77

76

75

74

73

72

70

69

68

66

65

64

56

55

54

53

52

51

50

48

47

46

45

44

39

38

35

34

33

32

31

30

29

27

26

25

18

Frequency

Per Year

2.250

2.225

2.200

2.175

2.150

2.125

1.950

1.925

1.900

1.875

1.850

1.825

1.800

1.750

1.725

1.700

1.650

1.625

1.600

1.400

1.375

1.350

1.325

1.300

1.275

1.250

1.200

1.175

1.150

1.125

1.100

0.975

0.950

0.875

0.850

0.825

0.800

0.775

0.750

0.725

0.675

0.650

0.625

0.450

A-10
TABLE A3

FLOODS 1938-1977

U.S. WORLD (EXCEPT U.S.)

Number of

Fatalities

Number of

Events

Cumulative

Total

Frequency

Per Year

1700

1800

2000

2600

3000

4000

5000

10000

22000

40000

57000

200000

2-500000

Number of

Events

1

1

5

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

Cumulative

Total

17

16

15

10

9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

Frequency

Per Year

0.425

0.400

0.375

0.250

0.225

0.200

0.175

0.150

0.125

0.100

0.075

0.050

0.025

A-11
TABLE A4

EARTHQUAKES 1938-1977

U.S. U.S. (WASH-1400 Data 1906-77) World (Ex. U.S.)

Number of

Fatalities

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

Number of

Events

Cumul ati ve

Total

Frequency

Per Year >N

Number of

Events

2

Cumulative

Total

9

7

6

Frequency

Per Year >N

0.127

0.098

0.085

Number of

Events

5

1

1 4 0.100 1

1

IN

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

36

39

40

44

45

47

48

2

4

2

2

1

2

1

1

1

1

1

2

2

4

1

1

1

1

2

2

1

3

1

Cumul ati ve

Total

165

160

159

158

156

152

150

148

147

145

144

143

142

141

140

138

136

132

131

130

129

128

126

124

123

120

Frequency

Per Year >N

4.125

4.000

3.975

3.950

3.900

3.800

3.750

3.700

3.675

3.625

3.600

3.575

3.550

3.525

3.500

3.450

3.400

3.300

3.275

3.250

3.225

3.200

3.150

3.100

3.075

3.000

1 3 0.075 1 5 0.070
TABLE A4(Cont'd)

EARTHQUAKES 1938-1977

U. S. U.S. (WASH-1400 Data 1906-77) World (Ex. U.S.)

Number of

Fatalities

50

53

54

57

60

62

64

65

71

S 73

I 75

c 79

80

82

83

90

92

97

100

110

112

113

125

128

130

131

133

145

150

172

Number of

Events

Cumulative

Total

Frequency

Per Year >N

Number of

Events

Cumulative

Total Frequency

Per Year >N

Number of

Events

1 2 0.050 1 4 0.056

3

2

1

2

2

1

2

1

2

1

1

2

1

1

2

1

1

5

1

1

1

2

1

1

1

1

1

1

Cumulative

Total

119

116

114

113

111

109

108

106

105

103

102

101

99

98

97

95

94

93

88

87

86

85

83

82

81

80

79

78

Frequency

Per Year >N

2.975

2.900

2.850

2.825

2.775

2.725

2.700

2.650

2.625

2.575

2.550

2.525

2.475

2.450

2.425

2.375

2.350

2.325

2.200

2.175

2.150

2.125

2.075

2.050

2.025

2.000

1.975

1.950

1 3 0.042

1 1 0.025 1 2 0.028
TABLE A4

EARTHQUAKES 1938-1977

U.S. U.S. (WASH-1400 Data 1906-77) World (Ex. U.S.)

Number of

Fatalities

174

176

187

191

197

200

228

233

240

276

277

293

300

330

350

375

400

424

431

437

474

500

521

556

574

600

620

700

750

900

Number of

Events

Cumulative Frequency

Total Per Year >N

Number of

Events

Cumulative Frequency

Total Per Year >N

Number of

Events

1

1

1

1

1

5

1

1

1

1

1

1

5

1

3

1

3

1

1

1

1

3

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

Cumulative

Total

77

76

75

74

73

72

67

66

65

64

63

62

61

56

55

52

51

48

47

46

45

44

41

40

39

38

37

36

35

34

Frequency

Per Year >_N

1.925

1.900

1.875

1.850

1.825

1.800

1.675

1.650

1.625

1.600

1.575

1.550

1.525

1.400

1.375

1.300

1.275

1.200

1.175

1.150

1.125

1.100

1.025

1.000

0.975

0.950

0.925

0.900

0.875

0.850

1 1 0.014
TABLE A4 (Cont'd)

EARTHQUAKES 1938-1977

U. S. U.S. (WASH-1400 Data 1906-77) World (Ex. U.S.)

IC.

Number of

Fatalities

1000

1011

1087

1088

1300

1330

1392

1400

1460

1500

1800

2000

2312

2394

4000

8000

10000

12403

20000

22500

25000

30000

66794

700000 Chir

Number of

Events

Cumulative

Total

Frequency

Per Year >N

Number of

Events

Cumulative Frequency

Total Per Year _>N

Number of

Events

5

1

1

1

1

1

1

3

1

1

1

1

1

1

2

2

1

1

1

1

1

2

1

1

Cumul ati ve

Total

33

28

27

26

25

24

23

22

19

18

17

16

15

14

13

11

9

8

7

6

5

4

2

1

Frequency

Per Year >N

0.825

0.700

0.675

0.650

0.625

0.600

0.575

0.550

0.475

0.450

0.425

0.400

0.375

0.350

0.325

0.275

0.225

0.200

0.175

0.150

0.125

0.100

0.050

ia 0.025 1976
TABLE A5

AIRCRAFT CATASTROPHES 1959-1978

N U.S. (Civilian and Military

Number of

Fatalities

U.S. (Civilian Only) World (Ex. U.S.)

0'i

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

Number of

Events

3

5

2

2

4

1

3

2

2

1

1

2

2

2

2

1

2

1

3

2

2

Cumiulative

Total

101

98

93

91

89

85

84

81

79

77

76

75

73

72

70

68

65

63

62

60

59

56

54

53

50

48

Frequency

Per Year >N

5.05

4.90

4.65

4.55

4.45

4.25

4.20

4.05

3.95

3.85

3.80

3.75

3.65

3.60

3.50.

3.40

3.25

3.15

3.10

3.00

2.95

2.80

2.70

2.65

2.50

2.40

Number of

Events

5

7

3

3

4

3

9

4

8

3

3

3

2

2

1

3

4

2

3

4

2

2

1

4

2

1

4

2

2

Cumulative

Total

154

149

142

139

136

132

129

120

116

108

105

102

99

97

95

94

91

87

85

82

78

76

74

73

69

67

66

62

60

Frequency

Per Year >N

7.70

7.45

7.10

6.95

6.80

6.60

6.45

6.00

5.80

5.40

5.25

5.10

4.95

4.85

4.75

4.70

4.55

4.35

4.25

4.10

3.90

3.80

3.70

3.65

3.45

3.35

3.30

3.10

3.00

Number of

Events

5

6

4

3

7

6

1

10

4

8

6

11

8

10

3

7

9

9

10

8

11

6

7

4

5

8

8

6

5

6

Cumul ativye

Total

366

361

355

351

348

341

335

334

324

320

312

306

295

287

277

294

267

258

249

239

231

220

214

207

203

198

190

182

176

171

Frequency

Per Year >N

18.30

18.05

17.75

17.55

17.40

17.05

16.75

16.70

16.20

16.00

15.60

15.30

14.75

14.35

13.85

13.30

13.35

12.90

12.45

11.95

11.55

11.00

10.70

10.35

10.15

9.90

9.50

9.10

8.80

8.55
TABLE A5(Cont'd)

AIRCRAFT CATASTROPHES 1959-1978

N

Number of

Fatalities

U.S. (Civilian Only) U.S. (Civilian and Military World (Ex. U.S.)

!-

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

51

52

53

54

55

56

57

58

59

60

61

62

63

64

65

66

67

68

69

70

2

2

1

2

1

1

2

Number of

Events

3

1

1

2

Cumul ative

Total

46

43

42

41

39

37

35

34

32

31

30

29

Frequency

Per Year >N

2.30

2.15

2.10

2.05

1.95

1.85

1.75

1.70

1.60

1.55

1.50

1.45

Number of

Events

3

2

3

2

1

2

2

1

1

3

1

1

Cumulative

Total

58

55

53

50

48

47

45

43

42

41

38

37

36

35

Frequency

Per Year >N

2.90

2.75

2.65

2.50

2.40

2.35

2.25

2.15

2.10

Number of

Events

6

2

1

2

5

4

3

5

4

5

3

5

1

4

1

2

3

1

2

1

2

3

3

1

1

4

1

4

Cumul ati ve

Total

165

159

157

156

154

149

145

142

137

133

128

125

120

119

115

114

112

109

108

106

105

103

100

97

96

95

91

90

Frequency

Per Year >N

8.25

7.95

7.85

7.80

7.70

7.45

7.25

7.10

6.85

6.65

6.40

6.25

6.00

5.95

5.75

5.70

5.60

5.45

5.40

5.30

5.25

5.15

5.00

4.85

4.80

4.75

4.55

4.50

2.05

1.90

1.85

1.80

1.75

2 86 4.30
TABLE A5(Cont'd)

AIRCRAFT CATASTROPHES 1959-1978

N

Number of

Fatalities

U.S. (Civilian Only) U.S. (Civilian and Military World (Ex. U.S.)

00

71

72

73

74

75

76

77

78

79

80

81

82

83

84

85

86

87

88

89

90

91

92

93

94

95

96

97

98

99

100

Number of

Events

1

2

1

3

1

2

1

2

2

2

1

Cumul ati ve

Total

27

26

24

23

20

19

17

16

14

12

10

9

8

Frequency

Per Year >N

1.37

1.30

1.20

1.15

1.00

0.80

0.70

0.60

0.50

0.45

0.40

Number of

Events

1

2

1

3

2

1

2

1

3

2

2

1

Cumulative

Total

34

32

30

29

26

24

23

21

20

17

15

13

12

11

Frequency

Per Year>_N

1.65

1.60

1.50

1.45

1.30

1.20

1.15

1.05

1.00

0.85

0.75

2

2

2

2

1

2

1

2

2

2

1

3

1

1

3

1

1

2

Number of

Events

1

4

3

1

1

Cumul ati ve

Total

84

83

79

76

75

74

72

70

68

66

65

63

62

60

58

56

55

52

51

50

47

46

43

42

41

Frequency

Per Year >_N

4.20

4.15

3.95

3.80

3.75

3.70

3.60

3.50

3.40

3.30

3.25

3.15

3.10

3.00

2.90

2.80

2.75

2.60

2.55

2.50

2.35

2.30

2.15

2.60

2.05

0.65

0.60

0.55
TABLE A5(Cont'd)

AIRCRAFT CATASTROPHES 1959-1978

N

Number of

Fatalities

U.S. (Civilian Only) U.S. (Civilian and Military World (Ex. U.S.)

!-

101

102

106

107

108

109

111

112

113

117

118

120

121

122

124

126

129

130

133

134

144

155

156

162

164

172

176

188

213

Number of

Events

2

1

Cumulative

Total

7

5

4

3

Frequency

Per Year >N

0.35

0.25

0.20

0.15

Number of

Events

2

2

1.

1

Cumul ative

Total

10

8

6

5

4

3

Frequency

Per Year >N

0.50

0.40

0.30

0.25

0.20

0.15

Number of

Events

1

1

2

1

1

1

2

1

2

3

1

1

2

1

2

1

2

1

1

3

1

1

1

3

1

1

Cumul ati ve

Total

39

38

37

35

34

33

32

30

29

27

24

23

22

20

19

17

16

14

13

12

9

8

7

6

3

2

Frequency

Per Year >N

1.95

1.90

1.85

1.75

1.70

1.65

1.60

1.50

1.45

1.35

1.20

1.15

1.10

1.00

0.95

0.85

0.80

0.70

0.65

0.60

0.45

0.40

0.35

0.30

0.15

0.10

1

1 2 0.10 1

1 2 0.10

582 1 1 0.05 1 1 0.05 1 1 0.05
TABLE A5(Cont'd)

AIRCRAFT CATASTROPHES 1959-1978

CONFIDENCE FACTORS

No. Fat. 95% UB 5% LB No. Fat. 95% UB 5% LB No. Fat. 95% UB 5% LB

95 1.3 1.3

81 1.4 1.5 84 1.4 1.5 124 1.4 1.5

92 1.7 1.8 101 1.7 1.8 155 1.7 1.8

107 2.1 2.5 113 2.1 2.5 176 2.1 2.5

582 4.7 19.4 582 4.7 19.4 582 4.7 19.4

0
TABLE A6

MARINE CATASTROPHIES 1959-78

U.S. WORLD (EXCEPT U.S.)

Number of

Fatalities

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

52

Number of

Events

2

5

1

1

1

1

1

2

2

2

1

1

3

1

1

Cumulative

Total

39

37

32

31

30

29

28

27

25

24

22

20

19

18

15

14

13

12

11

9

8

Frequency

Per Year

1.95

1.85

1.60

1.55

1.50

1.45

1.40

1.35

1.25

1.20

1.10

1.00

0.95

0.90

0.70

0.65

0.60

0.55

0.45

0.40

Number of

Events

8

4

8

8

8

7

6

6

7

9

7

5

9

4

4

2

5

1

4

5

10

3

5

3

1

2

2

2

1

4

8

1

1

1

3

2

3

Cumulative

Total

262

254

250

242

234

226

219

213

207

200

191

184

179

170

166

162

160

155

154

150

145

135

132

127

124

123

121

119

117

116

112

104

103

102

101

98

96

93

92

88

Frequency

Per Year

13.10

12.70

12.50

12.10

11.70

11.30

10.95

10.65

10.35

10.00

9.55

9.20

8.95

8.50

8.30

8.10

8.00

7.75

7.70

7.50

7.25

6.75

6.60

6.35

6.20

6.15

6.05

5.95

5.85

5.80

5.60

5.20

5.15

5.10

5.05

4.90

4.80

4.65

4.60

4.40

1

4

2

A-21
TABLE A6(cont'd)

MARINE CATASTROPHIES 1959-78

U.S. WORLD (EXCEPT U.S.)

Number of

Fatalities

54

57

58

60

61

65

67

68

69

71

72

74

75

79

80

84

85

88

89

90

91

94

95

98

100

105

112

113

125

127

129

132

134

143

150

155

159

160

162

191

200

212

Number of

Events

Cumulative

Total

Frequency

Per Year

Number of

Events

3

4

1

2

2

2

1

1

1

2

1 1

1

7

6

0.35

0.30

1

1

1

1

5

4

3

2

1

0.25

0.20

0.15

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

2

1

1

13

2

1

2

2

1

Cumulative

Total

86

83

79

78

76

74

72

71

70

69

67

66

65

64

63

62

61

60

59

57

56

55

42

40

39

37

35

34

33

32

27

26

25

23

22

21

14

Frequency

Per Year

4.30

4.15

3.95

3.90

3.80

3.70

3.60

3.55

3.50

3.45

3.30

3.25

3.20

3.15

3.10

3.05

3.00

2.95

2.85

2.80

2.75

2.10

2.00

1.95

1.85

1.75

1.70

1.65

1.60

1.35

1.30

1.25

1.15

1.10

1.05

0.70

0.10

0.05 1

5

1

1

2

1

1

7

1

A-22
TABLE A6(cont'd)

MARINE CATASTROPHIES 1959-78

U.S. WORLD (EXCEPT U.S.)

Number of

Fatalities

Number of

Events

Cumulative

Total

Frequency

Per Year

Number of

Events

250

259

261

264

275

279

290

300

400

450

500

1000

2

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

Cumulative

Total

13

11

10

9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

Frequency

Per Year

0.65

0.55

0.50

0.45

0.40

0.35

0.30

0.25

0.20

0.15

0.10

0.05

A-23
TABLE A7

MOTOR VEHICLE CATASTROPHIES 1959-78

U.S. WORLD (EXCEPT U.S.)

Number of

Fatal ities

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

52

Number of

Events

5

4

4

2

1

1

1

1

1

1

Cumulative

Total

24

19

15

11

9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

Frequency

Per Year

1.20

0.95

0.75

0.55

0.45

0.40

0.35

0.30

0.25

0.20

0.15

0.10

Number of

Events

9

19

12

7

11

21

11

9

16

15

18

16

9

19

6

4

9

14

6

9

13

4

2

5

Cumul ative

Total

336

327

308

296

289

278

257

246

237

221

206

188

172

163

144

138

134

125

111

105

96

83

79

77

72

64

58

54

50

47

40

36

34

30

29

27

26

22

Frequency

Per Year

16.80

16.35

15.40

14.80

14.45

13.90

12.85

12.30

11.85

11.05

10.30

9.40

8.60

8.15

7.20

6.90

6.70

6.25

5.55

5.25

4.80

4.15

3.95

3.85

3.60

3.20

2.90

2.70

2.50

2.35

2.00

1.80

1.70

1.50

1.45

1.35

1.30

1.10

8

6

4

4

3

7

4

2

4

1

2

1

4

3

A-24
TABLE A7(cont'd)

MOTOR VEHICLE CATASTROPHIES 1959-78

Number of

Fatalities

U.S.

Number of Cumulative Frequency

Events Total Per Year

WORLD (EXCEPT U.S.)

Number of

Events

54

56

58

60

64

65

69

72

77

78

79

83

88

100

102

1

2

1

1

2

1

2

1

2

1

1

1

1

1

1

Cumulative

Total

19

18

16

15

14

12

11

9

8

6

5

4

3

2

1

Frequency

Per Year

0.95

0.90

0.80

0.75

0.70

0.60

0.55

0.45

0.40

0.30

0.25

0.20

0.15

0.10

0.05

A-25
TABLE A8

RAILROAD CATASTROPHIES 1959-78

U.S. WORLD (EXCEPT U.S.)

Number of

Fatalities

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

52

Number of

Events

2

1

1

1

Cumulative

Total

7

5

4

3

2

Frequency

Per Year

0.35

0.25

0.20

0.15

0.10

Number of

Events

10

4

9

7

8

6

7

4

4

2

8

3

5

1

5

8

1

3

4

1

7

2

3

1

4

3

1

1

3

1

9

2

2

1

1

Cumulative

Total

180

170

166

157

150

142

136

129

125

121

119

111

108

103

102

97

89

88

85

81

80

73

71

68

67

63

60

59

58

55

54

45

43

41

40

39

38

37

35

Frequency

Per Year

9.00

8.50

8.30

7.85

7.50

7.10

6.80

6.45

6.25

6.05

5.95

5.55

5.40

5.15

5.10

4.85

4.45

4.40

4.25

4.05

4.00

3.65

3.55

3.40

3.35

3.15

3.00

2.95

2.90

2.75

2.70

2.25

2.15

2.05

2.00

1.95

1.90

1.85

1.75

1 1 0.05

1

1

2

1

A-26
TABLE A8(cont'd)

RAILROAD CATASTROPHIES 1959-78

U.S. WORLD (EXCEPT U.S.)

Number of

Fatalities

57

59

60

63

64

65

66

69

70

71

76

80

81

.82

83

91

94

100

107

110

124

135

141

162

163

Number of

Events

Cumulative

Total

Frequency

Per Year

Number of

Events

1

1

4

1

1

1

1

1

2

1

2

2

2

1

1

2

1

2

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

Cumulative

Total

34

33

32

28

27

26

25

24

23

21

20

18

16

14

13

12

10

9

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

Frequency

Per Year

1.70

1.65

1.60

1.40

1.35

1.30

1.25

1.20

1.15

1.05

1.00

0.90

0.80

0.70

0.65

0.60

0.50

0.45

0.35

0.30

0.25

0.20

0.15

0.10

0.05

A-27
TABLE A9

MINING CATASTROPHIES 1959-78

U.S. WORLD (EXCEPT U.S.)

Number of

Fatal ities

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

51

Number of

Events

2

1

1

2

1

1

1

Cumulative

Total

15

13

12

11

9

8

6

5

4

3

Frequency

Per Year

0.75

0.65

0.60

0.55

0.45

0.40

0.30

0.25

0.20

0.15

Number of

Events

3

1

8

4

2

4

3

8

2

3

1

5

2

2

4

4

3

2

3

4

3

1

1

1

2

1

1

1

1

1

2

1

Cumulative

Total

106

103

102

94

90

88

84

81

73

72

68

67

62

60

58

54

50

47

45

42

38

35

34

33

Frequency

Per Year

5.30

5.15

5.10

4.70

4.50

4.40

4.20

4.05

3.65

3.60

3.40

3.35

3.10

3.00

2.90

2.70

2.50

2.35

2.25

2.10

1.90

1.75

1.70

1.65

32

30

29

28

27

26

25

23

1.60

1.50

1.45

1.40

1.35

1.30

1.25

1.15

A-28
TABLE A9(cont'd)

MINING CATASTROPHIES 1959-78

U.S. WORLD (EXCEPT U.S.)

Number of

Fatalities

Number of

Events

Cumulative

Total

Frequency

Per Year

Number of

Events

54

60

.61

67

68

71

74

78

79

89

91

100

108

125

135

180

236

275

298

417

422

431

452

1

1

2

1

0.10

0.05

2

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

Cumulative

Total

22

20

19

18

17

16

15

14

13

12

11

10

9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

Frequency

Per Year

1.10

1.00

0.95

0.90

0.85

0.80

0.75

0.70

0.65

0.60

0.55

0.50

0.45

0.40

0.35

0.30

0.25

0.20

0.15

0.10

0.05

A-29
TABLE A1O

FIRE AND EXPLOSION CATASTROPHIES 1959-78

U.S. WORLD (EXCEPT U.S.)

Number of

Fatalities

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

51

Number of

Events

13

8

7

3

4

3

4

1

2

1

3

1

3

2

1

3

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

Cumulative

Total

72

59

57

44

41

37

34

30

29

27

26

23

22

19

17

16

13

12

11

10

9

8

7

6

Frequency

Per Year

3.60

2.95

2.55

2.20

2.05

1.95

1.70

1.50

1.45

1.35

1.30

1.15

1.10

0.95

0.85

0.80

0.65

0.60

0.55

0.50

0.45

0.40

0.35

0.30

Number of

Events

11

9

11

9

11

8

6

5

9

6

9

6

4

4

2

5

1

1

3

3

2

2

3

3

1

3

3

2

1

3

1

1

2

2

2

Cumulative

Total

189

178

169

158

149

138

130

124

119

110

104

95

89

85

81

79

74

73

72

69

66

64

62

59

56

53

52

49

46

44

43

40

39

38

36

34

Frequency

Per Year

9.45

8.90

8.45

7.90

7.45

6.90

6.50

6.20

5.95

5.50

5.20

4.75 4.45

4.25

4.05

3.95

3.70

3.65

3.60

3.45

3.30

3.20

3.10

2.95

2.80

2.65

2.60

2.45

2.30

2.20

2.15

2.00

1.95

1.90

1.80

1.70

A-30
TABLE A1O (cont'd)

FIRE AND EXPLOSION CATASTROPHIES 1959-78

U.S. WORLD (EXCEPT U.S.)

Number of

Fatalities

52

53

54

55

56

57

58

59

60

61

62

63

64

67

68

72

73

75

78

80

100

103

117

138

146

152

157

164

225

227

300

322

325

430

Number of

Events

1

1

1

Cumul ati ve

Total

5

8

3

Frequency

Per Year

0.25

0.20

Number of

Events

2

3

1

1

1

0.15

1 2 0.10

1

1

1

1

1

2

1

2

1

1

1

1

2

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

Cumulative

Total

32

30

27

26

25

24

23

22

21

20

19

17

16

14

13

12

11

10

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

Frequency

Per Year

1.60

1.50

1.35

1.30

1.25

1.20

1.15

1.10

1.05

1.00

0.95

0.85

0.80

0.70

0.65

0.60

0.55

0.50

0.40

0.35

0.30

0.25

0.20

0.15

1.10

0.05

1 1 0.05

A-31

NRC PORM 335 1. REPORT NUMBER (Assigned by DDC)

(7-77) U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION NUREG/CR-1916

BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATA SHEET BNL-NUREG-51338

4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE (Add Volume No., if appropriate) 2. (Leave blank)

3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION NO.

A Risk Conparison

7. AUTHOR(S) 5. DATE REPORT COMPLETED

A. Coppola and R. E. Hall M°lar(liary I Y1I1

9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND MAILING ADDRESS (Include Zip Code) DATE REPORT ISSUED

MONTH IYEAR

February 1981

Department of Nuclear Energy 6. (Leave blank)

Brookhaven National Laboratory

Upton, New York 11973 8. (Leave blank)

12. SPONSORING ORGANIZATION NAME AND MAILING ADDRESS (Include Zip Code) 10. PROJECT/TASKIWORK UNIT NO.

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission _

Division of Systems and Reliability Research 11. CONTRACT NO.

Office of Nuclear Requlatory Research FIN A3222

Washington, DC 20555

13. TYPE OF REPORT PERIOD COVEREb (Inclusive dares)

Technical 10/1/79 - 1/15/81

15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES 14. (Leave blank)

16. ABSTRACT (200 words or less)

This report presents data for the comparison of societal risk from natural

and man-made hazards. Only fatalities resulting from the hazards are used

in the comparison, with the data and the comparative analysis taken from

current literature. In comparing societal risks for most of the hazards,

both expected values and frequency vs. consequence curves are presented.

For a subset of hazards, notably the power generation technologies (nuclear,

coal, oil and gas), which have not exhibited high consequence events

(catastrophies), the comparisons are based on estimated expected values

only.

17. KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS 17a. DESCRIPTORS

Rish

Hazards

Acci dents

Reliability

17b. IDENTIFIERS/OPEN-ENDED TERMS

18. AVAILABILITY STATEMENT 19. SECURITYCLA•S I nc assi]TleThis report) 210O. OF PAGES

Unlimited 20. SECURITY CLASS (This page) 122. PRICE

IInclassified f $

NRC FORM 335 (7-77)
j

UNITED STATES

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555

OFFICIAL BUSINESS

PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE, $300

POSTAGE AND FEES PAID

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

2

C"

0,

0