The Assessment of HSE Management System in Zanjan Zinc Industrial Plants from the Resilience Engineering Perspective in 2018

Today, the use of the Health, Safety and Environment Management System (HSE-MS) in the workplace to protect the health of employees, reduce occupational incidents, create a safe environment, modify or eliminating harmful impacts on the environment, increase productivity and sustainable development. In perspective of resilience, attention is paid to the intra-system and its reproducibility, learning mechanisms, component integration, and other features that enhance the systemchr('39')s adaptability to any environmental changes and shocks. Resilience Engineering(RE), as a new approach to management systems, seeks to maintain system performance under different conditions, relying on strength instead of weaknesses.  The resilience engineering perspective is a new and attractive approach because it emphasizes the preview models of human error analysis and considers the system as a whole. This focus is on present and future safety, that is, preventive safety rather than reactive safety, and so it is not just focused on past mistakes. This approach views humans as an integral part of resilience and does not focus solely on technical components or redundancy as key elements in enhancing immunity in systems. In the resilience perspective, unlike the vulnerability perspective that emphasizes outward looking within the system, attention is paid to the system and its reproducibility, learning mechanisms, component integration, and other features that enhance system adaptability to any environmental changes and shocks. . Therefore, resilience absorbs perturbations and effects by improving the systemchr('39')s capabilities and capabilities, and facilitates return to pre-perturbation state for the system. As all control systems fail over time or become obsolete due to changes, continuous performance measurement of HSE management under the resilience engineering parameter is necessary. Such measurement can occur at different levels, such as individual workstations, individual management processes, or at the level of the HSE management system in general. Investigating integrated health, safety and environmental management systems from a resilience engineering perspective can emphasize the benefits of reducing vulnerability to hazards, increasing safety levels and reducing harmful environmental impacts or mitigating environmental impacts. The purpose of this study was to Assessment the health, safety and environmental management system from a resilient engineering perspective in Zanjan Zinc Industrial Plants.

This is a descriptive-analytical study. The community study is 12 active zinc casting companies with a Health,Safety and Environment Management System or Integrated Management System Zanjan Zinc Industrial Plants. Zinc processing companies, with the above mentioned second category, were selected from 12 companies and 1460 personnel as the study population. Interviews were conducted from 300 people, including 12 top management or top management representatives, 12 HSE experts and 276 unit staff. The tool used to do this research is a questionnaire. The questionnaire was designed for three groups: staff (55 questions), HSE experts (161 questions), top management or management representative (55 questions).Interviews were conducted with staff in groups and in many cases as work units. Interviews with staff from all units were attempted, but in some cases interviews with staff from all units were not possible and units with the highest risk of HSE were replaced for the interview. The interview was also conducted without the presence of HSE managers and staff. The HSE-MS standard questionnaire was designed based on ISO 9001, 45001ISO, ISO 14001, ILO-OSH2001 and based on literature review in the field of HSE and RE management system. Health, safety and environmental checklists were collected from the Health Center, Labor Inspection Office, EPA respectively. To determine validation, we used content validity and Cronbachchr('39')s alpha coefficient. Cronbachchr('39')s alpha represents the proportion of a group of items that measures a construct. Conventionally, a minimum Cronbachchr('39')s alpha of 0.6 is desirable for descriptive studies. But a good internal validity index is usually considered to be between 0.7 and 0.8. In this study Cronbachchr('39')s alpha was 0.802, Which was considered 0.7 and above. To complete the questionnaire, a structural approach was first analyzed, which was limited to analyzing the documents and records described in the evidence sources for each HSE-MS case. Then the performance approach, where the indices extracted by the companychr('39')s HSE unit, were examined. After the structural and functional evaluation, the HSE-MS operational approach was evaluated, which included direct supervision, field visits, and staff interviews. given that the companies were in three shifts and rotations that were presented to each company for three consecutive weeks. Interviews, documentation reviews, field visits and direct observation were used to complete the questionnaire. Characteristics of the researcher-made questionnaire (Structured Interview) used in this study were: 7 main criteria, 20 sub-criteria, 5 sub-sub-criteria of evaluation. For each case, three types of audits, sources of evidence, RE assessments and requirements were identified. HSE-MS Criteria from the RE Perspective:1. HSE-MS Planning 2. Operational processes and Risk assessmen management 3. People management 4. Generic safety factors 5. Planning of the performance monitoring 6. Feedback, learning and continuous improvement 7. Results .Questionnaire scoring was based on the Brazilian National Quality Award, and finally the HSE-MS status was determined from the standpoint of resiliency engineering.

The status of the Health,Safety and Environment management system from the resilience engineering perspective, in Zanjan Zinc Industrial Plants was evaluated with a score of 57.8% on average. In the main criteria of Health,Safety and Environment management system, the criteria for assessment and risk management with 65.97%, and the criteria for the results with 42.95%, sub- criteria, the leadership and top management commitment with 71.4%, and the sub-measure of preventive performance with 42.46 %. and sub- sub- criteria of the sources with 77.91%. and contractors with 38.13%, respectively, had the highest and lowest score. Structural and operational approach were rated as 62.57% and 60.55% at moderate level and functional approach as poor as 42.95%. In the structural, operational and functional approaches, the system structure, the actual activities in the operational units and the results of the performance indicators were evaluated, respectively. The four principles of resilience: top management commitment 63.92%, learning 61.13%, flexibility 65.08% and awareness with 61.41% were determined by evaluating the criteria of health, safety and environment management system, and integration with resilience engineering.

Evaluate the health, safety and environmental management system from a resilience engineering perspective, which is a combination of HSE-MS and RE elements, and is a comprehensive assessment of other HSE management system audits. Because at the same time, three structural, functional and operational approaches coupled with resilience engineering were evaluated in one model. Considering the criterion of competence and its ability to influence the principle of learning from the principles of resilience engineering, it is important to note that the failure to employ a full-time HSE expert and, in the short term, the termination of collaboration with experts, had a negative impact on this principle. It was the success of companies that focused on selecting, retaining and valuing this group of experts. There was no training need assessment in many companies. If accidents and pseudo-incidents did occur, if properly documented and analyzed, they could serve as lessons learned for later periods. Another reason is that in examining accident reporting forms, similar incidents happened with similar causes, if they were preventable by corrective measures. Integrate management systems and integrate them with change management to optimize performance. Personal safety and process safety should be considered, because good performance in personal safety does not necessarily mean good process safety performance, while poor performance in process safety results from poor personal safety. Employee awareness of the results of HSE audits and the performance of the HSE management system can be effective in contributing to and improving indicators.