화학 및 석유화학 공장과 같은 공정산업에서 위험물질이 누출할 때 초기대응의 중요성은 항상 강조되어 왔다. 그러나 이러한 화학물질의 누출동안 단계별 초기대응에 따른 피해예측에 대한 정량적 분석에 대한 연구는 그 동안 미흡하였다. 이에 본 연구에서는 불산 누출사고 동안에 초기대응의 영향을 조사하고자 하였고, 이를 위해 불산농도 범위에 따른 피해예측 영향거리를 산정할 수 있는 간이식을 우선 도출하였다. 그리고 시스템 다이내믹스 기법을 활용하여 초기 대응 단계의 인과지도를 작성하였고, 인과지도에 도출한 간이식을 적용하여 다양한 초기대응 시나리오에 따른 피해예측 영향거리를 분석하였다. 연구결과, 최대피해영향거리와 비교할 때‘누출발견 후 초기조치 시작시간’인 경우 최대 약 87%, ‘누출부위 차단조치’는 약 59%, ‘전문진압팀 도착시간’이후 조치는 약 50% 감소율을 보였다. 이 연구결과는 불산 취급 사업장에서의 초기대응 지침의 기초자료로 활용하는데 도움이 될 것으로 판단된다.

As hazardous chemicals are releasing in process industries such as chemical & petro-chemical plants, the importance of initial responses has been always emphasized. However, little attention of quantitative analysis of the consequence by different initial responses during releasing of the chemicals has been done. The main objective of current paper is to investigate the effects of initial responses for the release accidents of hydrofluoric acid. For this, a simplified equation that can easily calculate the effect distance by varying concentrations of hydrofluoric acid was firstly deduced. In addition, a causal loops for the initial response steps using the system dynamics technique was constructed during release of 50% hydrofluoric acid. The effect distances according to different scenarios of the initial actions were also quantitatively analyzed by applying the simplified equation to the causal map. As a result, the highest reduction rate on the maximum effect distance was obtained with 'start time of action after leak detection' being about 87% while the lowest was 'arrival time of professional response team' being about 50%, as expected. It is expected that the results gained from the current study can be helpful as of basics of the initial response to the workplace, dealing with the hydrofluoric acid.

Hydrofluoric acid Initial response System dynamics

National Institute of Chemical Safety, Chemistry Safety Cleaninghouse, https://csc.me.go.kr/accident/accidentInfoPList.do [Accessed 09 2018].
Kim JH, Jeong C, Kang SM, Yong JW, Yoo B, Seo JM, Korean Chem. Eng. Res., 55(1), 48 (2017)
Kim JH, Yang JM, Yong JW, Ko BS, Yoo B, Ko JW, Korean Chem. Eng. Res., 52(6), 736 (2014)
Ministry of Environment, Enforcement Rule of the Chemicals Control Act [Ordinance of the Ministry of Environment No.778], http://www.law.go.kr [Accessed 22 May 2018].
Ministry of Employment and Labor, Enforcement Decree of the Occupational Safety and Health Act, [Attached Table 10], http://www.law.go.kr [Accessed 22 May 2018].
Jo GY, Lee IM, Hwang YM, Moon JY, Journal of the Korea Academia-Industrial Cooperation Society, 18(4), 599-607(2017).
Won JH, Kim BH, Ma BC, Yoon Y, Jo AR, Chon YW, Moon JY, Korean Journal of Hazardous Materials, 4(2), 41-52(2016).
Jung YK, Kim BH, Heo HJ, Yoo BT, Sin CH, Yoon Y, Ma BC, Journal of the Korean Society of Safety, 32(2), 52 (2017)
Jung YK, Heo HJ, Yoo BT, Yoon Y, Yoon JH, Ma BC, Journal of the Korean Institute of Gas, 20(2), 49-57(2016).
Kim JH, Jung SH, Korean Chem. Eng. Res., 52(4), 582 (2016)
Ministry of Environment, Performance Report of Sale Representatives of Toxic Substances, (2012).
United States Environmental Protection Agency, https://www.epa.gov/rmp/list-regulated-substances-underrisk-management-plan-rmp-program [Accessed 20 May 2018].
AIHA Guideline Foundation, “2013 ERPG/WEEL Handbook,”AIHA(2013).
National Institute of Chemical Safety, “Response Process of Chemical Accidents(Practices),” 191-193(2017).
Korea Occupational Safety and Health Agency, “Technical Guide on Safety of Treatment for Hydrofluoric Acid (KOSHA Guide P-21-2010),” 1-22(2010).
Daniel AC, Joseph FL, Chemical Process Safety: Fundamentals with Applications, 3rd Ed., Prentice Hall, New York, 157-158(2011).