The article formulates a new concept for the integrated safety, clarifies the concept for the integrated safety system of explosive production facilities of the enterprises. Aggregated areas with scientific results on risk assessment in the integrated safety of production enterprises was formed. To improve safety at the enterprises under consideration, it was required to solve three problems. To solve the first problem, the current, practical results of the scientific research were analyzed both in Russia and in the foreign countries. It is concluded that the reduction of damage from the impact of hazardous events is to create a reasonable reserve designed to reduce (exclude) various risks, the rational use of the reserve based on the use of an approach developed from a new angle of view in relation to risk. When solving the second problem, the existing methods for assessing the state of the industrial and fire safety subsystems, occupational safety included in the integrated safety system of the enterprises under consideration, as well as a new direction for assessing the state of the integrated safety were presented in comparison. When solving the third problem, a formalized description of a new, different from the used model for improving and developing the integrated safety system for explosive production facilities of the enterprises is presented. The purpose of the assessment is formulated, the new methods and results of the assessment of the state of the integrated safety of these enterprises are presented. As a result, three problems were solved, on their basis the conceptual model for the development of the integrated safety system for explosive production facilities of the enterprises was formed.
2. Gvozdev E.V. Integrated Safety Management of Russian Oil and Gas Enterprises Using the Complex Number Method. Bezopasnost Truda v Promyshlennosti = OccupationalSafety in Industry. 2023. № 5. pp. 46–51. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.24000/0409-2961-2023-5-46-51
3. Gvozdev E. The influence of the human factor on the safety of operation of the industrial buildings and structures. Available at: https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1757-899X/1030/1/012031/pdf (accessed: July 1, 2023).
4. Makhutov N.A., Permyakov V.N., Akhmetkhanov R.S., Reznikov D.O., Dubinin E.F. Risk analysis and ensuring the safety of critically important objects of the petrochemical complex: textbook. Tyumen: TyumGNGU, 2013. 560 p. (In Russ.).
5. Dolgov A.I. Methodology of the scientific research: textbook. Rostov on Don: Izdatelskiy tsentr DGTU, 2013. 161 р. (In Russ.).
6. Makhutov N.A. Safety of Russia. Legal, socio-economic and scientific and technical aspects. Scientific bases of industrial safety. Мoscow: Znanie, 2019. 824 p. (In Russ.).
7. Ponomarev S.V., Mishchenko E.S. Guidelines to Formulate Scientific Novelty of Theses Abstract. Vestnik Tambovskogo gosudarstvennogo tekhnicheskogo universiteta = Tambov University Reports. 2011. Vol. 17. № 3. pp. 853–860. (In Russ.).
8. Matyushin A.V., Firsov A.G., Matyushin Yu.A., Goncharenko V.S. Risk-Oriented Model of the Distribution of Buildings (Structures) by Categories of Risk of Causing Harm (Damage) as the Result of Fire to Substantiate the Frequency of Scheduled Inspections of the Buildings (Structures). Bezopasnost Truda v Promyshlennosti = OccupationalSafety in Industry. 2021. № 11. pp. 75–80. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.24000/0409-2961-2021-11-75-80
9. Agapov A.A., Sofin A.S., Sumskoy S.I. Software Products of TOXI+ Line for Calculation of Accidents Consequences and Risk Assessment. Bezopasnost Truda v Promyshlennosti = OccupationalSafety in Industry. 2020. № 4. pp. 27–33. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.24000/0409-2961-2020-4-27-33
10. Poroshin A.A., Bobrinev E.V., Udavtsova E.Yu., Kondashov A.A. Dynamic Model for Assessing the State of the Occupational Health and Safety Management System. Bezopasnost Truda v Promyshlennosti = OccupationalSafety in Industry. 2021. № 6. pp. 28–33. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.24000/0409-2961-2021-6-28-33
11. Gvozdev E.V., Matvienko Yu.G. Comprehensive Risk Assessment at the Life Support Enterprises with Hazardous Production Facilities. Bezopasnost Truda v Promyshlennosti = OccupationalSafety in Industry. 2019. № 10. pp. 69–78. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.24000/0409-2961-2019-10-69-78
12. Mkrtchyan L., Straub U., Giachino M., Kocher T., Sansavini G. Insurability risk assessment of oil refineries using Bayesian Belief Networks. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries. 2022. Vol. 74. DOI: 10.1016/j.jlp.2021.104673
13. Makhutov N.A., Pokrovskii A.M., Dubovitskii E.I. Analysis of Crack Resistance of an Oil Trunk Pipeline Considering the Varying Failure Viscosity in the Neighborhood of a Welded Joint. Journal of Machinery Manufacture and Reliability. 2019. Vol. 48. Iss. 1. pp. 35–42. DOI: 10.3103/S1052618819010126
14. Yeung J.F.Y., Chan D.W.M. Developing a Holistic Fire Risk Assessment Framework for Building Construction Sites in Hong Kong. Journal of Construction Research. 2019. Vol. 1. Iss. 1. DOI: 10.30564/jcr.v1i1.1302
15. Popa C.M., Păun F.A., Gabor D.S. Aspects regarding the explosion risk assessment of installations in atmospheres with combustible dust. MATEC Web of Conferences. 2022. Vol. 354. DOI: 10.1051/matecconf/202235400010
16. Massel A.G., Pesterev D.V. Transformation of cognitive models into knowledge base of production expert system. Proceedings of the 19th International Workshop оn Computer Science and Information Technologies. Ufa: USATU, 2017. In 2 volumes. Vol. 1. pp. 121–124.