Integration of the SMS to IMS in Estonian Seveso II establishments: selected case studies

This paper concerns the integration of Safety Management Systems of the Estonian Seveso II establishments into ISO-based Integrated Management Systems (IMS). Estonia has an obligation to follow the requirements of the EU Seveso II Directive since joining the EU in 2004. Today altogether 51 enterprises with major accident hazards are in the official register. According to the data available at the Estonian Association for Quality, seventeen of these establishments have certified quality (ISO 9001), environmental (ISO 14001) management integrated systems. Therefore it is useful and politically sound to integrate the SMS to the IMS. The essential goal of the current study is to explain the application of the unified management system and to find characteristic features for further recommendations. The results have demonstrated that, in spite of different approaches, a number of common factors exist, enabling general recommendations to be worked out.

[1]  C Winder,et al.  Occupational health and safety management systems. , 1997, Quality assurance.

[2]  Neil Mitchison,et al.  Safety management systems under Seveso II : Implementation and assessment , 1999 .

[3]  日本規格協会 環境マネジメントシステム : 要求事項及び利用の手引 = Environmental management systems : requirements with guidance for use , 2002 .

[4]  Olivier Salvi,et al.  Risk assessment and risk decision-making process related to hazardous installation in France , 2004 .

[5]  Lars Harms-Ringdahl,et al.  Relationships between accident investigations, risk analysis, and safety management. , 2004, Journal of hazardous materials.

[6]  Norberto Piccinini,et al.  Risk analysis as a basis for safety management system , 2004 .

[7]  B Basso,et al.  Reviewing the safety management system by incident investigation and performance indicators , 2004 .

[8]  Nijs Jan Duijm,et al.  Quantifying the influence of safety management on the reliability of safety barriers. , 2006, Journal of hazardous materials.

[9]  S. Bouchon,et al.  A methodological approach for the definition of multi‐risk maps at regional level: first application , 2009 .

[10]  Beatriz Fernández-Muñiz,et al.  Safety management system: Development and validation of a multidimensional scale , 2007 .

[11]  Louis Anthony Cox,et al.  What's Wrong with Risk Matrices? , 2008, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[12]  Wout Dullaert,et al.  Designing continuous safety improvement within chemical industrial areas , 2009 .

[13]  Branko Kontić,et al.  Implementation of the Seveso II Directive in Slovenia: Survey of implementation and opinions of operators regarding its safety benefits , 2009 .

[14]  Paolo Pittiglio,et al.  The digital representation of safety systems at “Seveso” plants and its potential for improving risk management , 2010 .

[15]  Ben J. M. Ale,et al.  Modeling the major accident prevention legislation change process within Europe , 2011 .

[16]  E. S. Levine Improving risk matrices: the advantages of logarithmically scaled axes , 2012 .