Hazard Identification and Risk Analysis in the Light of Process Safety Management in Mobarakeh Steel Company (Case study: Oxygen and Hydrogen Unit)
Subject Areas : soil pollution
Hanieh
Nikoomaram
1
(Assistant Professor, Faculty of Natural Resources and Environment, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran. )
Hossein
Modaresifar
2
(Health, Safety and Environment Manager, Mobarakeh Steel Company, Esfahan, Iran. )
Javad
Kiani
3
(Head of Safety, Occupational Health and Firefighting, Mobarakeh Steel Company, Esfahan, Iran.)
Mohammad
Dehbozorgi
4
(Research Fellow, Faculty of Natural Resources and Environment, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran. *(Corresponding Author))
Keywords: Risk Analysis, Process Safety Incident, Hazard Identification, Process Safety Management.,
Abstract :
Background and Objective: The steel industry is one of the most hazardous process industries due to the nature of metal melting and high heat, gases and hazardous chemicals. The high potential of process incidents with consequences such as fire, explosion and release of toxic substances in the mentioned industry emphasizes the importance of hazard identification as the first step in process safety risk management. In the present research, to provide the necessary infrastructure, including a written methodology for hazard identification and risk analysis studies as one of the most vital requirements of Process Safety Management (PSM) and in line with PSM implementation in Mobarakeh Steel Company, the relevant procedure was developed and to ensure its applicability, process safety hazards and their associated incidents in one of the most hazardous units (oxygen and hydrogen unit) were identified and analyzed using the aforementioned procedure. Material and Methodology: The “hazard identification and process safety risk analysis” procedure was developed in accordance with the requirements of process safety management expatiated in PSM best practices and other relevant technical documents. The procedure includes hazard identification (HAZID) worksheet, guide words, levels of probability of occurrence and severity of consequences, risk matrix, implementation methodology, etc. In order to conduct the HAZID study in the oxygen and hydrogen unit, a team including experts and experienced engineers in their relevant job fields was formed, and after preparing the necessary arrangements such as reviewing the documents, HAZID meetings were held according to the developed methodology, the worksheets were completed and analyzed as per the study nodes and relevant corrective measures were also suggested. Findings: From the total of 40 process safety incidents identified in the oxygen and hydrogen unit, 5% had a low-risk level, 65% had a medium-risk level, 15% had a high-risk level and 15% had an extreme-risk level. Therefore, the majority of the identified process safety risks had a medium (tolerable) risk level. Major Process Incidents (MPIs) with high (unacceptable) and extreme (intolerable) risk levels also constitute 30% of all incidents. The plants of the oxygen unit had the most process incidents in terms of the number, and gas and liquid tanks had the highest risk level of process safety incidents. In total, 12 MPIs with high and extreme risk levels were identified. Discussion and Conclusion: One of the key achievements of the research is the development of the “hazard identification and process safety risk analysis” procedure in Mobarakeh Steel Company to identify and analyze the process safety incidents and other related characteristics such as the causes and consequences of incidents, prevention and mitigation controls, the probability of occurrence and severity of consequences, risk level, etc. Also, the aforesaid procedure would help deliver a coherent methodology for assessing process safety risks, provide a suitable platform for adopting corrective measures for major risks, conduct supplementary studies, and develop and implement other mechanisms required to meet PSM requirements.
1. Yang, Y., Chen, G., Reniers, G., Goerlandt, F., 2020. A Bibliometric Analysis of Process Safety Research in China: Understanding Safety Research Progress as a Basis for Making China’s Chemical Industry More Sustainable. Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 263, pp. 121433.
2. Seligmann, B. J., Németh, E., Hangos, K. M., Cameron, I. T., 2012. A Blended Hazard Identification Methodology to Support Process Diagnosis. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, Vol. 25, No. 4, pp. 746-759.
3. Smith, P., Kincannon, H., Lehnert, R., Wang, Q., D. Larrañaga, M., 2013. Human Error Analysis of the Macondo Well Blowout. Process Safety Progress, Vol. 32, No. 2, pp. 217-221.
4. Swuste, P., Van Gulijk, C., Groeneweg, J., Zwaard, W., Lemkowitz, S., Guldenmund, F., 2020. From Clapham Junction to Macondo, Deepwater Horizon: Risk and Safety Management in High-Tech-High-Hazard Sectors: A Review of English and Dutch Literature: 1988–2010. Safety science, Vol. 121, pp. 249-282.
5. Amin, M. T., Khan, F., Amyotte, P., 2019. A Bibliometric Review of Process Safety and Risk Analysis. Process Safety and Environmental Protection, Vol. 126, pp. 366-381.
6. Shen, R., Jiao, Z., Parker, T., Sun, Y., Wang, Q., 2020. Recent Application of Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) in Process Safety and Loss Prevention: A review. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, Vol. 67, pp. 104252.
7. Aziz, A., Ahmed, S., Khan, F. I., 2019. An Ontology-based Methodology for Hazard Identification and Causation Analysis. Process Safety and Environmental Protection, Vol. 123, pp. 87-98.
8. Satish, R., Murugabhoopathy, K., Rajendhiran, N., Vijayan, V., 2020. Technology Strategy for Improved Safety Management in Steel Industry. Materials today: proceedings, Vol. 33, pp. 2660-2664.
9. Beljikangarlou, M., Naebi Taheri, M., Dehdashti, A., Fatemi, F., Besharat Zadeh, A., 2021. Risk Assessment of Occupational Safety and Health Hazards Using Job Safety Analysis: A Case Study of Steel Industry. Journal of Preventive Medicine, Vol. 8, No. 4, pp. 25-35. (In Persian)
10. Worldsteel Association, Safety and Health Committee. Safety Guidance Note Process Safety Management. 2019; Rev 2.0.
11. Fardafshari, M., Soltani, M. E., 2013. Argon Purification Process by Hydrogen. The First National Hydrogen Conference. Shahin Shahr & Meymeh, Iran. (In Persian)
12. US Center for Chemical Process Safety (CCPS), 2007. Guidelines for Risk Based Process Safety. John Wiley & Sons.
13. Ehrampoush, M. H., Halvani, G. H., Ghaneian, M. T., Dehghani, A., Shafie, M., Hesami Arani, M., 2017. Equipment´s Environmental Risks Identification in the Hot-rolling Kavir Steel Industry Using What If and Risks Assessment Using William Fine Methods. Occupational Medicine Quarterly Journal, Vol. 9, No. 1, pp. 84-95.
14. Soltani, Z., Ayoubi, Sh., Khademi, H., 2017. Variability of Some Heavy Metal Concentration in Various Physical Fractions of Soil Surface of Foolad-e-Mobarakeh Steel Company, Isfahan. Journal of Soil Management and Sustainable Production, Vol. 6, No.4.
15. Mojapelo, J., Mafini, C., Dhurup, M., 2016. Employee Perceptions of Occupational Health and Safety Standards in the Steel Industry. International Journal of social sciences and humanity studies, Vol. 8, No.2, pp. 106-121.
16. Dehghani, Z., Tajik, R., Zarea, R., 2020. The Relationship Between Occupational Stress and Job-Related Risks in the Steel Industry. Journal of Arak University of Medical Sciences (JAMS). Vol. 23, No.1, pp.60-71.
17. Beljikangarlou, M., Naebi Taheri, M., Dehdashti, A., Fatemi, F., Zadeh, A., Abbas, B., 2020. Risk Assessment of Occupational Safety and Health Using the MIL-STD Standard: A Case Study of Steel Industry. Journal of Preventive Medicine. Vol. 8, No.1, pp. 25-35.
18. Ghiami, M., Vaziri M.H., Gholamnia, R., Saeedi, R., Motalebi, M., 2020. Investigating the Relationship between Risk Perception, Resources and Rate of Job Stress with Occupational Accidents in a Steel Industry. Iran Occupational Health, Vol. 17, pp.1109-1121. (In Persian)
19. Nikpishe Kohjhari, F., Morovati, M., Sadeghinia, M., Amanat Yazdi, L., 2020. Assessment and Management of Environmental Risks of Steel Industries by EFMEA Method (Case Study: Ardakan Steel and Melting factory). Journal of Environmental Health Engineering. Vol. 7, PP. 76-88. (In Persian)
20. Sanjari, S., Rezaian, S., Jozi, S. A., 2017. Environmental Risk Assessment of Sponge Iron Production Unit in Khorasan Steel Company Using Comparative Methods ETBA and JSA. Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, Vol. 19, No. 5, pp. 93-102. (In Persian)
21. Zahmatkesh, F., Sadr, M. K., Cheraghi, M., 2022. Environmental Risk Assessment of Steel Plant Using ANP and TOPSIS Methods (Case study: Hamadan Wian Steel Plant). Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, Vol. 24, No.3, pp. 157-169. (In Persian)
22. Nezamodini, Z., Jafari, B., Sari, H., Jazayeri, S. A., 2020. Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment Using Hazard Analysis Method in Facilities Zone of a Steel Industry in Khuzestan, Iran. Journal of health research in community, Vol. 6, No. 3, pp. 33-42. (In Persian)
23. Afshari, D., Nourollahi-Darabad, M., Shirali, G. A., 2021. Applicability of WBGT Index in Determining the Allowable Working Time in Hot Climate Conditions. Journal of Health and Safety at Work, Vol. 11, No. 4, pp. 614-626. (In Persian)
24. Halvani, G., Ehrampoush, M. H., Ghaneian, M. T., Dehghani, A., Hesami Arani, M., 2017. Applying Job Hazard Analysis and William Fine Methods on Risks Identification and Assessment of Jobs in Hot Rolling Steel, Iran. Journal of Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences, Vol. 26, No. 145, pp. 293-303. (In Persian)
25. Rangkooy, H. A., Rashnoudi, P., Amiri, A., Shabgard, Z., 2021. The Effect of Noise on Hearing Loss and Blood Pressure of Workers in a Steel Industry in the Southwest of Iran. Occupational Hygiene and Health Promotion, Vol. 5, No. 4, pp. 386-399. (In Persian)
26. Moradi, A., Nadershahi, M., 2019. A Fuzzy Multi-Criteria Risk Assessment Based on Decision Matrix Technique: A Case Study in One of the Steel Industries. Journal of Occupational Hygiene Engineering, Vol. 6, No. 2, pp. 9-18. (In Persian)
27. Conejo, A. N., Birat, J. P., Dutta, A., 2020. A review of the Current Environmental Challenges of the Steel Industry and Its value Chain. Journal of environmental management, Vol. 259, pp. 109782.
28. Krishnamurthy, M., Ramalingam, P., Perumal, K., Kamalakannan, L.P., Chinnadurai, J., Shanmugam, R., Srinivasan, K., Venugopal, V., 2017. Occupational Heat Stress Impacts on Health and Productivity in a Steel Industry in Southern India. Safety and health at work, Vol. 8, No.1, pp.99-104.
29. Sun, W., Xu, X., Lv, Z., Mao, H., Wu, J., 2019. Environmental Impact Assessment of Wastewater Discharge with Multi-pollutants from Iron and Steel Industry. Journal of environmental management, Vol. 245, pp. 210-215.
30. Jia, J., Cheng, S., Yao, S., Xu, T., Zhang, T., Ma, Y., Wang, H., Duan, W., 2018. Emission Characteristics and Chemical Components of Size-segregated Particulate Matter in Iron and Steel Industry. Atmospheric Environment, Vol. 182, pp. 115-127.
31. Behbahani, S., Dashti, S., 2018. Risk Assessment in Energy Trace and Barrier Analysis using TOPSIS in Steelmaking plant of Iran National Steel Industrial Group. Journal of Occupational Hygiene Engineering, Vol, 5. No.3, pp. 25- 34.
32. Dewi, D., Bastori, I., Yuliyanto, A. T., Stankevica, K., Soetrisnanto, A., 2020. Manufacturing Risk Identification in the Steel Industry. E3S Web of Conferences, 190(2):00006.
33. Kukhar, V., Yelistratova, N., Burko, V., Nizhelska, Y., Aksionova, O., 2018. Estimation of Occupational safety Risks at Energetic Sector of Iron and Steel Works. International Journal of Engineering & Technology, Vol. 7, No. 2.23, pp. 216-220.
34. Vivek, S., Karthikeyan, N., Balan, A. V., 2015. Risk Assessment and Control Measures for Cold Rolling Mill in Steel Industry. International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Research, Vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 63-71.
35. Nitin, G., Raghu, K. M., Karthick, M., 2015. Risk Assessment and Control Measures for Chemical Hazards in Stainless Steel Industry-A Review. International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Research, Vol. 5, No.1, pp. 71-76.
