Occupational hazards counteraction in industrial work environment - selected management problems

• Autorzy: Tabor Joanna , Moraru Roland-Iosif

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.2478/czoto-2022-0029

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

The aim of the article is to present the basic strategies for counteracting threats that are used in an industrial work environment, with particular emphasis on strategies based on the concept of safety barriers. The article presents the main categories of safety barriers and the basic safety functions implemented within the key barrier systems. In addition, the most commonly used criteria for assessing safety barrier systems as well as safety functions are presented. The most characteristic examples in this regard are given. The analysis was carried out in terms of the implementation of barrier management towards reducing the risk of adverse events in the industrial work environment.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

safety management; hazards counteraction; safety barrier

PL

zarządzanie bezpieczeństwem pracy; zapobieganie zagrożeniom; bezpieczeństwo pracy

• Wydawca: De Gruyter
• Czasopismo: System Safety : Human - Technical Facility - Environment
• Rocznik: 2022
• Tom: Vol. 4, nr 1
• Strony: 282--292
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 29 poz., tab.

Twórcy

autor

Tabor Joanna

• Czestochowa University of Technology, Poland

• https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7746-2970

autor

Moraru Roland-Iosif

• University of Petrosani, Romania

• https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8629-8394

Bibliografia

• 1. Andersen, H., Casal, J., Dandrieux, A., Debray, B., De Dianous, V., Duijm, N. J., et al., 2004. ARAMIS - user guide. EC Contract number EVG1-CT-2001-00036.
• 2. Bento, J.-P. 2003. Review from an MTO-perspective of five investigation reports from BP. Norway: Stavanger.
• 3. CCPS, 2001. Layer of protection analysis simplified process risk assessment. New York: Center for Chemical Process Safety of the American Institute of Chemical Engineers.
• 4. DoE, 1997. Implementation guide for use with DOE Order 225.1A, accident investigation, DOE G 225.1A-1, Rev. 1. Washington, DC: US Department of Energy (DOE).
• 5. Dianous, V., Fiévez, C., 2006. ARAMIS project: A more explicit demonstration of risk control through the use of bow-tie diagrams and the evaluation of safety barrier performance, Journal of Hazardous Materials, 130, 220-233, doi: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2005.07.010
• 6. Duijm, N. J., Andersen, H. B., Hale, A., Goossens, L., Hourtolou, D., 2004. Evaluating and managing safety barriers in major hazard plants, [In:] PSAM 7 - ESREL ’04, Berlin, Germany.
• 7. Goossens, L., Hourtolou, D., 2003. What is a barrier? ARAMIS - working document. Hale, A., 2003. Note on barriers and delivery systems, [In:] PRISM conference, Athens.
• 8. Harms-Ringdahl, L., 2003. Assessing safety functions - Results from a case study at an industrial workplace, Safety Science, 41(8), 701-720, doi: 10.1016/S0925- 7535(02)00019-X
• 9. Harms-Ringdahl, L., 2013. Guide to safety analysis for accident prevention, IRS Riskhantering, AB, Stockholm, Sweden.
• 10. Hauge, S., Krakenes, T., Habrekke, S., Johansen, G., Merz, M., Onshus, T., 2011. Barriers to Prevent and Limit Acute Releases to Sea – SINTEF A20727Report. SINTEF.
• 11. Hollnagel, E., 2004. Barrier and accident prevention, Hampshire, UK: Ashgate.
• 12. Hollnagel, E., 2008. Risk + barriers = Safety? Safety Science, 46, 221-229, doi: 10.1016/j.ssci.2007.06.028
• 13. Johnson, W. G., 1980. MORT safety assurance systems, New York: Marcel Dekker.
• 14. Kang, J., Zhang, J., Gao, J., 2016. Analysis of the safety barrier function: Accident caused by the failure of safety berries and quantitative evaluation of their performance, Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 43, 361-372, doi: 10.1016/j.jlp.2016.06.010
• 15. Kecklund, L. J., Edland, A., Wedin, P., Svenson, O., 1996. Safety barrier function analysis in a process industry: A nuclear power application, International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 17(3), 275–284, doi: 10.1016/0169-8141(94)00112-X
• 16. Klimecka-Tatar, D., Niciejewska, M., 2016. The OSH management system in the "small-sized" production company, Production Engineering Archives,13(4), 49-52, DOI: 10.30657/pea.2016.13.11
• 17. Neogy, P., Hanson, A. L., Davis, P. R., Fenstermacher, T. E., 1996. Hazard and Barrier analysis guidance document, Rev. 0. US Department of Energy (DoE), EH-33 Office of Operating Experience Analysis and Feedback.
• 18. NORSOK, 2008. S-001 Technical safety (edition 4, February 2008).
• 19. Pitblado, R., Fisher, M., Nelson, B., FlØtaker, Molazemi, K., Stokke, A., 2016. Concepts for dynamic barrier management, Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industry, 43, 741746, doi: 10.1016/j.jlp.2016.07.005
• 20. PSA, 2013. Principles for Barrier Management in the Petroleum Industry. Norway Petroleum Safety Authority. www.ptil.no
• 21. Reason, J. 1997. Managing the risks of organizational accidents, Aldershot: Ashgate.
• 22. Rosness, R., 2005. Ten thumbs and zero accidents? About fault tolerance and accidents. Kjeller: Institute for Energy Technology.
• 23. Sklet, S., Hauge, S., 2004. Reflections on the concept of safety barriers, [In:] PSAM7-ESREL 2004, Berlin.
• 24. Sklet S., 2006. Safety barriers: Definition, classification, and performance, Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industry, 19, 494-506, doi: 10.1016/j.jlp.2005.12.004
• 25. Sobral, J, Guedes Soares, C., 2019. Assessment of the adequacy of safety barriers to hazards, Safety Science, 114, 40-48, doi: 10.1016.j.ssci.2018.12.021
• 26. Tabor, J., 2015. Management of Technical Prevention Systems in Manufacturing Companies, Polish Journal of Management Studies, 12(1), 198-208.
• 27. Ulewicz, R., Mazur, M., Klimecka-Tatar, D., Niciejewska, M., 2015. Wybrane aspekty zarządzania bezpieczeństwem i higiena pracy, Wyd. SMJiP, Częstochowa (in Polish).
• 28. Vatn, J., 2001. SINTEF internal memo regarding safety critical functions in the railway system in Norway. Rev. 3. Trondheim: SINTEF.
• 29. Svenson, O., 1991. The accident evolution and barrier function (AEB) model applied to incident analysis in the processing industries, Risk Analysis, 11(3), 499-507, doi: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.1991.tb00635.x

Uwagi

Opracowanie rekordu ze środków MEiN, umowa nr SONP/SP/546092/2022 w ramach programu "Społeczna odpowiedzialność nauki" - moduł: Popularyzacja nauki i promocja sportu (2022-2023).