METHODOLOGICAL FOUNDATIONS FOR DEVELOPING ACCIDENT SCENARIOS AND ASSESSING EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS INDICATORS IN INDUSTRIAL ENTERPRISES
- Authors
-
-
Aliev Abu Bakr
Occupational Health and Safety Inspector Foreign Enterprise “ANADOLU INSAAT” LLC -
Narziev Shovkiddin
Professor at the Department of Engineering and Design, Renaissance University
-
- Keywords:
- Industrial enterprise technological emergency accident scenario preparedness level critical time time margin coefficient protective function human factor risk-based assessment
- Abstract
- This article develops a conceptual and methodological approach to assessing industrial enterprises’ preparedness for technological emergencies based on accident scenarios, time dynamics, and the technical and organizational reliability of protective systems. The study aims to evaluate both the availability of protective measures and their capacity to perform required functions before critical time limits are reached. Accident progression is examined as a complex process involving an initiating event, hazard development, detection, warning, decision-making, protective system activation, and evacuation. The analytical model integrates total protective response time, critical time, the time margin coefficient, and the effectiveness and reliability of protective functions. Overall preparedness is assessed using risk weights reflecting scenario probabilities and consequence severity. Theoretical analysis indicates that a high integrated preparedness score does not guarantee effective protection when time margins are insufficient. Human-related delays in decision-making and evacuation are examined, and high, limited, and insufficient preparedness levels are characterized. Automation, evacuation route optimization, protective system redundancy, and diagnostics are identified as improvement priorities. The proposed approach may provide a methodological basis for conducting safety audits, developing emergency response plans, and designing protective systems.
- References
-
[1] ISO 31000:2018. Risk management – Guidelines. Geneva: International Organization for Standardization, 2018.
[2] IEC 31010:2019. Risk management – Risk assessment techniques. Geneva: International Electrotechnical Commission, 2019.
[3] Center for Chemical Process Safety (CCPS). Guidelines for Hazard Evaluation Procedures. 3rd ed. New York: Wiley, 2008.
[4] IEC 61508-1:2010. Functional safety of electrical/electronic/programmable electronic safety-related systems – Part 1: General requirements. Geneva: IEC, 2010.
[5] IEC 61511-1:2016. Functional safety – Safety instrumented systems for the process industry sector. Geneva: IEC, 2016.
[6] ISO 22320:2018. Security and resilience – Emergency management – Guidelines for incident management. Geneva: ISO, 2018.
[7] ISO 45001:2018. Occupational health and safety management systems – Requirements with guidance for use. Geneva: ISO, 2018.
[8] International Labour Organization. Prevention of Major Industrial Accidents Convention, 1993 (No. 174). Geneva: ILO, 1993.
[9] United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNDRR). Words into Action Guideline: Man-made/Technological Hazards. Geneva: UNDRR, 2018.
[10] United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNDRR). Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030. Geneva: UNDRR, 2015.
[11] European Parliament and Council of the European Union. Directive 2012/18/EU of 4 July 2012 on the control of major-accident hazards involving dangerous substances (Seveso III). Official Journal of the European Union, 2012.
[12] Нарзиев Ш. М., Мударисова Р. Х., Жуманазаров Б. Ш. Роль психологических факторов в формировании культуры безопасности //Renaissance of Universal Mind. – 2026. – Т. 1. – №. 1. – С. 26-34
[13] S. Gwynne, E. D. Kuligowski, M. Kinsey, and L. Hulse, “Modelling and influencing human behaviour in fire,” Fire and Materials, vol. 41, no. 5, 2017, doi: 10.1002/fam.2391. NIST
[14] E. Ronchi et al., “Incorporating human factors in emergency evacuation—An overview of behavioral factors and models,” International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, vol. 60, Art. no. 102254, 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.ijdrr.2021.102254. ScienceDirect
[15] E. Ronchi et al., “Developing and validating evacuation models for fire safety engineering,” Fire Safety Journal, vol. 120, Art. no. 103020, 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.firesaf.2020.103020. ScienceDirect