Document Type : Research Paper
Authors
1
School of Mining Engineering, College of Engineering, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran
2
College of Environment, Department of Environment(DOE), Iran
3
School of Mining Engineering, College of Engineering, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.
10.22059/ijmge.2024.373443.595157
Abstract
In this research, the levels of safety, health, and environmental risks in a building stone processing company (BSPC) have been identified using the integrated approach of EFMEA (Environmental Failure Mode and Effects Analysis) and William Fine method, along with the TOPSIS technique for prioritizing organizational safety layers, examining potential incidents, and enhancing organizational efficiency. To achieve this, data and risk assessment information were first collected and evaluated, and then, with the formation of an expert task force, brainstorming sessions were held to identify and analyze environmental risks in the production process using the EFMEA technique. Additionally, with the assistance of the William Fine method, safety and health risks in the production process were identified and examined. In the next step, the costs of corrective actions were calculated, and the results obtained from the tables of both EFMEA and William Fine techniques were combined, and decisions were made regarding risks with high and very high levels. Subsequently, using TOPSIS, protective layers were prioritized based on two criteria: cost and time. Following the risk assessment using the EFMEA method, 4 risks were classified as high-risk, 9 risks as medium-risk, and 2 risks as low-risk. Subsequently, employing the William Fine technique, a total of 41 hazards were evaluated across 5 worksheets. 5% of the hazards were categorized as very high-risk, 19% as high-risk, 27% as medium-risk, and 49% of the evaluated hazards were classified as low-risk. Ultimately, the results obtained from the integration of the William Fine and EFMEA techniques categorized 2 risks as very high-risk, 12 risks as high-risk, 20 risks as medium-risk, and 22 risks as low-risk. Furthermore, working at heights was selected as one of the risks with high risk, and protective layers and control measures were proposed and examined. The use of helmets, shoes, harnesses, and the establishment of a safety platform, considering both time and cost criteria, is the first priority for controlling risks in working at heights activity.
Keywords
Main Subjects
)