SC-31.1 ES&H Division

Environment, Safety and Health Division (SC-31.1)

Home Pages

Office of Safety, Security and Infrastructure
(SC-31)

Environment, Safety & Health Division
(SC-31.1)

Infrastructure Division
(SC-31.2)

Safeguards and Security Division
(SC-31.3)

SC Safety Program

Environment, Safety & Health Division

-Accelerators
-Best Practices
-Documents
-ESH Links
-Fire Protection
-ISM Workshop
-Laser Safety
-Lessons Learned
-NEPA Compliance
-ORPS Reports
-Quarterly Reports
-Radiation Protection
-Staff Directory

SC Labs

-Ames
-ANL
-BNL
-Fermi
-LBNL
-NBL
-ORISE
-ORNL
-PNNL
-PPPL
-SLAC
-TJNAF

Work Smart Standards in Fire Protection

In 1996, the DOE adopted a philosophy known as the "Work Smart Standards Process," whereby each contractor conducts a formal review of hazards at a site, facility, or activity, identifies ES&H standards required to safely perform the work given those hazards, has an independent review group critique the set of standards, and then has the set of standards approved for use by the DOE. There are no initial conditions for the identification of this required set of standards; everything is "fair game."

The ES&H Division will continue to remain cognizant of technical issues in fire protection in the model building codes and National Fire Protection Association standards.

Property Protection Issues

One of the Work Smart Standards Process pilot exercises, done at the Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory, found difficulty in determining standards for property protection requirements. They determined that the property protection requirements of the old DOE Order 5480.7A were best suited to their current situation, and placed that language in their contract with the DOE. The Fermilab N&S Identification Team for their Necessary and Sufficient Standards Process stated the following in their report to their Convened Group:

The bottoms-up approach to worker safety and public protection utilized in this Pilot N&S Closure Process did not draw out the issue of property protection or program interruption due to fire. This issue has historically been integrated into an overall fire protection program, as formulated by DOE Order 5480.7A , which implements, in an ill-defined manner, the insurance industry methodology for Highly Protected Risk (HPR). The choice to implement a system to control property loss and program (business) interruption is a business management decision primarily based on financial considerations. It is the recommendation of the [N&S] Identification Team that this issue be addressed through an independent N&S process. The process to address this issue would vary significantly from the extant [Fermilab] Pilot in that the primary effort would be to develop a site-specific set of criteria and then to reach consensus on both the criteria and the application of those criteria to each facility or structure on a site-wide basis. Also included in the process should be the assignment of property loss liability for each of the stakeholders - URA [University Research Associates, Inc.], BAO [Batavia Area Office], and SC [Office of Science]. Lastly, it is envisioned that the loss control criteria would allow for a new facility classification of 'conventional/commercial facility' for which the application of the local building code and NFPA standards is sufficient, be based on Maximum Credible Loss (instead of Maximum Possible Loss), and provide for the graded application of protective measures consistent with the mission.