Abstract
Major tunnel fires are rare, unpredictable, and often devastating. History provides examples of major tunnel operations that had incorporated various elements of Fire Life Safety (FLS) and Emergency Preparation and Management (EPM) into the design, infrastructure, operations, and emergency response capability. Yet, tunnel operators have often found out in hindsight that their preparations were not sufficient. Factors that may either minimize or worsen a catastrophic event can be estimated and evaluated. Risk analysis is used extensively in various industries for both quantitative and qualitative applications. Formal, quantitative risk analysis uses “known-unknowns” and enables the use of quantitative analysis of probabilities and consequences. Uncertainty analysis deals with “unknown-unknowns” and is restricted to qualitative analysis. Researchers at the Colorado School of Mines have created a unique process to evaluate qualitative risks through an Emergency Preparedness Rubric and an Event Consequence Matrix method. The process was applied cross the functional areas of FLS-EPM and the tunnel’s functional components that are important to safety. The method is universally adaptable and enables stakeholders involved in tunnel design, operations, management, and emergency response to identify and communicate areas where the systems and components are insufficient. This paper will address the approach, methodology, and results for a representative focus case.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Luchian, S.F.: Minister of the interior, and ministry of equipment, task force for technical investigation of the 24 March 1999 fire in The Mont Blanc Vehicular Tunnel. Report of 30 June 1999 (English translation). Minister of interior, Minister of equipment, transportation and housing (1999)
National Transportation Safety Board: Highway accident report multiple vehicle collision and Fire, Caldecott Tunnel, Near Oakland, California, April 7, 1982 (NTSB/HAR-83/1). National Transportation Safety Board, Washington DC (1983)
Dix, A.: Operational management of fire suppression systems. In: 13th Australian tunneling conference. AusIMM, Melbourne, 5 (2008)
Voeltzel, A., Dix, A.: A comparative analysis of the Mont Blanc, Tauern and Gotthard Tunnel Fires. Routes-Roads (No. 324), 19 October (2004)
English, Gary, interview by Kirk H. McDaniel. 2016. Chief, Assistant Fire Marshal, Seattle Fire Department, Seattle, Washington, 4 August (2016)
Kerzner, H.: Project management, a systems approach to planning, scheduling and controlling. Wiley, New York (1998)
World Road Association: PIARC. Road tunnels manual, Chap. 2: Safety (2007)
Henke, A., Gagliardi, M.: The 2001 Gotthard fire: response of the system, behavior of the users. How was the fast reopening of the tunnel possible? In: 5th international conference safety in road and rail tunnels. Marseille, Tunnel Management International, France, 10 (2003)
Dix, A.: Expert report for the victorian coroner: the fatal burnley tunnel crashes, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia (2011)
California Department of Transportation District 4: Caldecott tunnel bore 3/bore 4 emergency response plan. 15 November (2013)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Science Press and Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this paper
Cite this paper
McDaniel, K.H., Brune, J.F. (2019). Evaluating the “Unknown” Risks of Vehicular Tunnel Fires Through the Rubric and Matrix Method. In: Chang, X. (eds) Proceedings of the 11th International Mine Ventilation Congress. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-1420-9_87
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-1420-9_87
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-13-1419-3
Online ISBN: 978-981-13-1420-9
eBook Packages: Earth and Environmental ScienceEarth and Environmental Science (R0)