Technical Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences

Available online at www.tjeas.com

©2015 TJEAS Journal-2015-5-3/127-132
ISSN 2051-0853 ©2015 TJEAS

Assessment and risk, safety, health and

environmental management of on shore drilling
machines of National Iranian Drilling Company with
the method of ‘William Fine’
Meghdad Pirsaheb1, Ali Akbar Zinatizade2, Fateme Asadi1*, Saeide Pourhaghighat1,
Aahmad Mohamadi1, kiomars sharafi1,3
1. Department of Environmental Health Engineering, Kermanshah University of medical sciences, Kermanshah,
Iran
2. Water and Wastewater Research Center (WWRC), Department of Applied Chemistry, Faculty of Chemistry, Razi
University, Kermanshah, Iran
3. Department of Environmental Health Engineering, Tehran University of medical sciences, Tehran, Iran

*Correspondence author email: f_asadi56@yahoo.com

ABSTRACT: Production process in The National Iranian Drilling Company like other industrial
environments is associated with various safety, health, hygiene and ecosystems risks due to the nature
and type of such activities. As a result, there is the Possibility of harm to humans, equipment and the
environment. Therefore, the current study was done on evaluation of risk, safety, health and
environmental management to identify possible hazards, risk rate, control and reduce the level of risk and
in line with health maintenance personnel, equipment, capital and environment. In this study “William
Fine” method was used in which the organized and systematic risk assessment techniques in recognition
of the potential hazards and estimate the level of risk in order to manage risk was used. For this purpose,
after identifying the activities and processes of the company, risks and potential damage was identified
and then depending on the severity of the impact, the probability and its possible implications for human
exposure, environment and, assessment on the risk was performed and classified. : Level of safety
hazards for health in warehousing activities in pressure cylinders was the highest risk level with a score of
400. The lowest risk level was associated with safety in handling operations and delivering well in the
courtyard. The highest and lowest rate risk on the Environmental aspects is respectively related to the
supplementary operations with the score of 384 and establishing drilling machine with the score was 24.
Due to the high probability of occurrence, the severity of the effect and exposure and, therefore, high
risks, it is essential that special attention is paid to the industrial unit to prevent the risk and predict the
necessary facilities.
Keywords: Management, Safety Health, Environment, Drilling Machine

INTRODUCTION

With advances in technology and the increase in the use of machinery, the process of risk and the risk in
the accidents in industrial environments has increased (1). In the past, after occurring the accidents and irreparable
damages, the causes of accidents and defects in a system or a process was investigate and determined. But
today, because of the variety of methods of risk assessment, before the event, the critical spots can also be
identified and some actions can be taken to control and prevent accidents (2). Risk assessment, as an organized
and systematic method in the risks identification and risk assessment for ranking decisions, in order to reduce the
risk is acceptable (3). Risk assessment can be achieved through qualitative and quantitative methods. In the
quantitative process of risk assessment better results are obtained. Quantitative assessment method can identify
the focus and risk factors and by adopting measures can prevent and control the risk actions (4). Criteria for the
identification of work-related accidents are numerous but the most important in this project we have also
Tech J Engin & App Sci., 5 (3): 127-132, 2015

considered is related to safety, health and the environment issues. A review of the history of the use of the method
employed in this research shows that many studies, in the world, have been done on the evaluation health and
safety risks of industrial units using ‘William Fine’ method; in the following studies of W. Barens (2001) on the
evaluation of health risks of steel factory in Michigan (5), K. Smoskey and colleagues (2006) on the evaluation of
health and safety risk of railway lines factory Krasnovodsk of Russia (6), J. P. Varnere and university studies team
of Mont Polje France (2007) in assessing the risks to health and safety of production plant of water pipe network,
William Fine method has been used (7).
In Iran, background of the use of this method in identifying, classification and analysis of health and safety
risks of industrial units is not old. HSE (Health, Safety& Environmental) unit of Iranian Oil Refining and Distribution
Company have also used this method in predicting health effects in its industrial units from 1383 to 1385 (8).
Behran Company in assessing the safety and health risks of different parts of the production process in their
studies during the years 1384 to 1386 has used ‘William Fine’ method in analysis of failure modes and its effects
on the process of (PFMEA) (9).
National Iranian Drilling Company As one of the subsidiary companies of National Iranian Oil Company is
established in order to drill rigs, water and gas exploration, operation, repair and fluid injection, and provide
technical services. Environmental pollution and work-related accidents in this Industry is very diverse and
complicated. Along with development projects, in the absence of knowledge of industrial hygiene and control of
pollution and business risks, widespread occurrence and events such damaging effects, expanding lesions and
waste and extensive destruction of the environment and work-related accidents leading to the death and disability
may increase. Therefore, the present study in the field safety risk assessment and management, health and
environment to identify risks, estimate the risk, control and reduce the level of risk was performed in order to
protect the health of employees, equipment, investment and environment.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In order to determine the correct onshore drilling machine (drilling rig) from environment, health and safety
point of view, 61 conquests of fleet sets of National Iranian Drilling Company Machines were selected for the study.
A seven-member expert group including occupational health specialist (two), master of environmental management
(two), industrial safety specialist (two) and master of drilling operations (one person) was formed. Choosing these
people was based on expertise (familiarity with the chosen technology) and job experience (more than five years of
job experience in the National Iranian Drilling Company). Risk assessment efforts and onshore drilling machine
processes were conducted by a team of expert which aims to reduce the management risk by William Fine method.
For this purpose, the first step was to take inventories from all sources of risk. The results of these inventory-
takings were used to explain the process to ensure the accuracy and completeness of the information. The method
to complete this form was as: the activity of each of the components was described and the risks associated with
each of the activities were measured. Also the effects of risks to humans, environment and equipment were
predicted and to control and reduce their risks corrective or control measures was presented. In order to obtain
information regarding safety of the chosen participants, a questionnaire was developed. This questionnaire was
composed of three parts which the first and second parts were related to the characteristics of the interviewer,
respondent and the general characteristics of the drilling machine and the third part includes questions regarding
the immune status which 50 copies were provided for the operation and maintenance experts. To identify job
hazards and risks, the study of process stages, machinery and equipment, space and workplace conditions, and
type of products was completed using the observation and interviews with aware individuals. To evaluate the risk
by William Fine, ranking the severity of the impact, rating probability of risk and ranking the degree of exposure to
each of the activities and aspects of it in accordance with the tables relevant to this method was extracted.

Scoring and prioritization of risks

In this way, Risk rating was calculated according to ranking the severity of the impact, rating probability of
risk and ranking the degree of exposure tables by multiplying them according to equation 1.

Rate Risk (R) = PEC Equation 1

C: scores of ranking table for the severity risk of the outcomes;
E: scores of ranking table for Exposure to risks;
P: scores of ranking table for occurrence probability risk or probability of their influence.

128
Tech J Engin & App Sci., 5 (3): 127-132, 2015

After calculating the risk score (Emergency (H): > 200, Abnormal (M):90-199, Normal (L): 89>), ranking of
risk levels was performed. These rankings determine the effective corrective action which should be done in risk
management stages.
In the suggestion stage, corrective measures given the importance of risks, for the risks with a high level
(H) were taken and control programs to reach the abnormal or normal level should be taken. In the following, for
the danger with moderate or normal (M) level control programs have been prepared to apply control methods and
continuous monitoring to reach the normal levels (L).

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

In tables 1 to 3, ranking safety risks of drilling units were separately presented at high, medium and low
level. Also in tables 4 to 6, ranking of the environmental impacts of drilling units were separately presented at high,
medium and low level.

Table 1. Ranking of safety risks with high level of risk (200 <)

Probability

Score risk

Risk level
Exposure
severity
Activity Risk Description

effect
Item

1 Storage capsules Sudden explosion, vulnerable people, And equipment, death 10 10 4 400 high
2 Power supply unit Electrocution, Fire, Damage to Equipment 10 10 4 400 high
Lifting the tube by cable pickup elevator, cable cutting, Suspended loads,
3 Drive casing Risk of collision tubes, Risk of collision elevator, Watch Tower parietal, 6 10 6 360 high
Work at height
4 Loading Fall load from heights, Members fracture 5 10 6 300 high
Opening the drilling
5 Lift and Down sheets, Opening and down aerial lift 6 10 5 300 high
operation
Down valves stuck Opening and down Bell Nipple,
6 6 10 5 300 high
eruption Open bolts, Work at heights, Suspended loads
Explosion due to electricity supply, Unexploded bullets Explosion,
7 Lattice work 6 10 5 300 high
Explosion on result of a blow
8 Drilling with air The risk of rupture lines and hitting people 6 10 4 240 high
9 Working acid Create a sudden shock with lines 6 10 4 240 high
10 Welding and cutting Pleated dealing with eye, Electric shock, Nerve and muscle damage 6 10 4 240 high

Table 2. Safety risks with the average risk rating (199-90)

Probability

Score risk

Risk level
Exposure
severity

Activity Risk Description

effect
Item

Cutting off fingers, Noise and Hearing Loss, Additional items

1 Spad mast
2 Tubing Mobile
Scroll wells (top tube
3 Organ failure and fracture impaction devices, Noise
and down tube)
4 Start drilling
5 Wash Drilling Machine
6 5 6 180 Medium
thrown on the table
Work on the injector Strains and Skeletal disorders And
6 5 6 180 Medium
muscle, Open RAM, Outbreak strains
6 6 5 180 Medium
Cut the cable and hitting people, Fracture pin wrench, Plugging
5 8 4 160 Medium
the drill, Items falling on people
Use of chemicals, work at height, slipping 10 6 2 120 Medium

Table 3. Ranking of safety hazards with low risk (89>)

Probability

Score risk

Risk level
Exposure
severity

Activity Risk Description

effect
Item

Slipping environment, slipping, Sledgehammer,

1 Setup Drilling Machine 4 5 2 40 Low
ergonomic injuries
2 Handling Operations Skeletal and ergonomics injuries, Vibration, Financial losses 4 3 5 60 Low
delivering Wells and the Releasing load from crane, Ergonomic Risks and Complications,
3 5 5 2 50 Low
area Falling people
129
Tech J Engin & App Sci., 5 (3): 127-132, 2015

Table 4. Environmental aspects with a high risk rating (200 <)

Probability

Score risk

Risk level
Exposure
severity
Activity aspect consequences

effect
Item

kill well and Draining to

1 Finishing operations
2 acid Working
3 Cementing operations
4 Drilling with air
5 Start drilling
Soil Pollution 6 8 8 384 high
earth
Soil and air pollution,
Acid leak Unpleasant smell, Water 6 8 5 249 high
pollution
noise Noise pollution 6 6 6 216 high
noise Noise pollution 6 6 6 216 high
Discharge wastewater into
Soil Pollution, Reduce of water
the ground, The use of 10 3 6 200 high
resources, Noise pollution
water resources, noise

Table 5. Ranking of environmental aspects with abnormal risk (average) (199-90)

effect severity
Probability

Score risk

Risk level
Exposure
Activity aspect consequences
Item

Turn on the engine, Use of Noise pollution, Reduction of water

1 Power supply unit
Dig below the
2 equilibrium
pressure tank
3 Well navigation
Downing stuck-
4 water and soil pollution, Noise
eruption valves
5 Tubing Mobile
water resources, The use of resources and water and soil 10 3 5 150 Medium
oil and grease pollution
Noise pollution, Reducing fossil fuel
Noise, Fuel use 6 5 5 150 Medium
resources
Noise, The use of fossil fuels,
Noise pollution, Reducing fossil fuel
Discharge wastewater into the 10 3 4 120 Medium
resources, Water and soil pollution
ground
Reduction of water resources and
Water use, Wastewater
6 5 4 120 Medium
discharge, Noise
pollution
Discharge from leaking into
Soil Pollution 6 5 4 120 Medium
the ground

Table 6. Ranking of environmental aspects with normal risk (Low) (89>)

Probability

Score risk

Risk level
Exposure
severity
Activity aspect consequences
effect
Item

Noise, The use of fossil fuels, Noise pollution, Reducing fossil

1 Loading 6 5 3 75 Low
Discharge of oil derivatives fuel resources, Soil Pollution
testing Exhaust gas emission engines from power
Emission of air pollutants, Reduce
2 eruption-stuck generators, Discharge wastewater into the 6 3 2 36 Low
pollution in soil and surface water
valves environment, The use of oil and grease
Noise, The use of fossil fuels, Noise pollution, Reducing
3 Storage tank 10 2 3 54 Low
Emission of hydrocarbons resource, Carcinogenic substances
Noise pollution, Reducing fossil
Setup Drilling Clock tower platform installation, holding
4 fuel resources, Emission of air 6 2 2 24 Low
Machine Chest of drawers, Installing coat Walk
pollutants
The use of fossil fuels, The use of oil and Reducing fossil fuel resources,
Cutting the
5 grease, Noise, Soil Pollution, Noise pollution, toxic 4 2 2 16 Low
drilling cable
Emission of air pollutants air pollution

According to tables (2-4), regarding the assessment of risks related to occupational safety and health
activities, and operational processes of the drilling machine, the pressure storage cylinders of oxygen and
acetylene and the consequences of a risk of explosion, fire and poisoning caused by toxic gases and combustible
liquids, the power supply system and the activities set (such as transmission through cable lines to the target,
engine maintenance equipment, etc.) with dangers like fire, burning, electrocution and in extreme cases which can
be resulted in the death, with risk score of 400 were at high risk levels.
130
Tech J Engin & App Sci., 5 (3): 127-132, 2015

The tubing mobile (as a result of strains, ergonomic problems, the risk of falling, bursting lines) with a risk
score of 180, washing drilling machine and accessories (due to the use of chemicals, work at height, scoot) with a
score of 120, start drilling (due to cable wrench cut and hitting with people, fracture pin wrench, plug the drill, falling
items on people) with a score of 160, and wells browsing (with the consequences of stocking the body,
musculoskeletal injuries, ergonomic injuries, noise) with the score180 has a moderate level of risk. Activities and
processes for well delivery and its area with a risk score of 50, mobility operations with a score of 60, opening
drilling machine with a score of 40, wellhead and clinics with a score of 48 were such activities at low risk level.
According to Table (5-7), which include scores and the risk of environmental aspects of activities and processes of
drilling machine, consequences of finishing operations (setting up the wells and killing the well) with a score of 384
were at the highest level of risk. Outcome of finishing operations of direct discharge of the wellbore fluid into the
environment should happen during flowing and the killing the well, because the fluid into the well contains a variety
of chemicals, drilling mud and the oil or gas tank that without any process enters directly the environment at high
volumes. Acid working operations (leaking acid and its additives and discharge of the excess acid into the
environment) with a score of 249 is at a high risk level. The major outcome of acid-working is the discharge of large
amounts of excess acid into the environment during the operation and after the operation is completed which leads
to widespread contamination and degradation of the environment. Power supply unit (noise of engine) with a score
of 150, drilling below the equilibrium pressure tank (the noise of air compressors) with a score of 150 are among
the activities and processes that, in the level of drilling machine, contains environmental aspects with medium risk.
Cutting the drilling cables with a risk score of 16, holding drilling machine with a risk score of 24, operations of
drilling machine loading and storage capsules with a risk score of 75, and testing stuck-eruption valves with a risk
score of 36 were the lowest level of risk of environmental aspects. The results showed that activities and processes
of a drilling machine are at the high risk level. However, the risk at the critical level cannot be estimated. Although
some actions should be taken to reduce equipment and processes with a high degree of risk, proper resource
allocation and scheduling in the National Drilling Company should be implemented. Also, discarding, disposal and
landfill are the major outcomes resulting from the environmental aspects in the drilling machine. Based on the risk
assessment of environmental aspects, it can be concluded that activities in the category of activities with a high risk
level are: working at height, transporting and handling cargo, heavy and super heavy equipment, working alongside
the lines of high pressure, working in high noise and abnormal areas (near the engine and machinery and
equipment), impaction the body within the equipment. Malakouti (2013) in his study pointed that 60% of the harmful
agents is related to the noise and vibration and the risk of falls is estimated to be (27%) (10). Also Bahrampoor and
colleagues (2009), in their epidemiological study, announced that 48.58 % of the events are related to the fall of the
workers (11). Vazirinejad and colleagues (2005) have been reported that the most common occupational accident
is Body impaction among equipment (51.4 %) (12). Mortazavi and colleagues (2013) have been reported 47 %
risks are related to the operational phase, including: clash of drilling machines to people, falling, collision of
equipment and machine to each other, and failure to perform various activities according to the guidelines and
standards (13).

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the risk assessment, it can be concluded that most likely consequences resulting from their
activities and risks is related to ignorance of staff and lack of ongoing monitoring. Due to the high probability of
occurrence, the severity of the effect, exposure and therefore high risk, it is essential to pay a special attention to
prevent the risk occurrence and to predict the necessary facilities. Therefore, for the purpose of risks reduction,
proper management of people and equipment should be well defined in such a way that corrective and appropriate
preventive actions for each activity are implemented. These measures should be determined based on high-risk
areas to improve analysis and resource allocation. Corrective measures regarding the environmental aspects and
risks associated with a high risk level is recommended as the following:

Corrective measures proposed on the environmental aspects

To protect the environment and reduction of environmental pollutants resulting from the operation of the
drilling machine it is recommended to prepare environmental guidelines the activities and processes.
To reduce noise emissions in the area of drilling machine, the position of engines is changed
experimentally and by making the use of a sound meter the results is compared and evaluated with the present
arrangement.
It is recommended to reuse or sale the recyclable industrial waste such as oil, grease, scrap metal, sheet
metal and head tube.
131
Tech J Engin & App Sci., 5 (3): 127-132, 2015

It is recommended to optimize the control system, drilling wastes, using drilling waste management
systems such as Zero Discharge and Solid Control.
It is recommended to minimize the amount of excess acid solution and cement production to prevent
disposal of it into the environment after the cement operations and acid-working.
It is recommended to use oil and gas separator of drilling fluid to test operation and productivity of wells,
finishing operations in order to prevent their disposal to the environment.
It is recommended to educate the environmental staff and make them familiar with various effects of
pollutants on the environment and to minimize the amount of waste.
It is recommended to implement environmental management systems like ISO 14000- 2004 in the
Occupational Health and Safety Management System like OHSAS 1800-12007 at the level of drilling machine of
National Drilling Company.

Corrective measures proposed by on the occupational health and safety risks

It is recommended to prioritize risks based on risk tables for disaster management.
Risk assessment studies should be continuously done regarding drilling machine in the case of new
technologies, changes in the activities and the processes.
Risk areas in the drilling machines should be identified and provided for the personnel.
Since the main source of loud produced noise is caused by diesel engines, it is recommended to use
muffler sound instruments or it can be used to exhaust or motor for sound absorbing insulation.
It is recommended to apply new technologies and automatic methods in drilling that minimizes amount of
physical labor of the personnel.
It is recommended to allocate training time at pre-employment period regarding job for staff to become
familiar with workplace hazards.
Based on the risk assessment and high-risk activities in the drilling industry to further monitoring of the
implementation of control measures, it is recommended to station a safety officer at the drilling machine.
In order to maintain surveillance of occupational health personnel periodic examinations of occupational
medicine is required and any employed person should have health occupational identification.

REFERENCES

Ahmadzadeh A, Beigi F. Feasibility study of risk assessment and management methods in units being watched by Iran oil products refining and
distributing national company. The 2nd State Congress for “Safety Engineering” and “HSE” 2005: 43-55.(Persian)
Allahyari T. Hazard analysis and risk assessment in chemical processes. Fanavaran Andisheh Publications 2005; 1:56-61.(Persian).
Bahrampour A, Jafari Nodoushan R, Vatani Shoaa J. Five-Year Epidemiological Study and Estimation of Accidents Distribution in Construction
Industry Workers in Yazd City by the Year 2011 by Applying Time Series Model. Journal of Kerman University of Medical Sciences
2009;16:156-65.
Barens W. Occupatinal Health & Safety Risk Management In Michigan Steel Manufacturing By William Fine Method. Fuzzy Risk Assessment J.
2001;3:17-29.
Ebrahemzadih M, Halvani GH, Shahmoradi B, Giahi O. Assessment and Risk Management of
Ghoreishi N, Mohammadi SA. Safety and occupational health assessment in Behran company using combining “FM&EA” and “William F ine”
methods. The1st Congress on “HSE” in Oil, Gas and Petrochemical Industries. Bandarabbas 2006:17-22. (Persian)
Johnson KG, Khan MK. A Study into the Use of the Process Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (PFMEA) in the Automotive Industry in the UK.
Journal of Materials Processing Technology 2003;139: 348-56.
Malakouti J, Gharibi V. Risk Analysis of Automated Excavation Operations By Energy Trace & Barrier Analysis Method. Iran Occupational
Health 2013; 10(2):87-98.
Mortazavi Tabatabaei SAR, Farshdnia SM, Jabbari M. The Risks and Effects of Iranian Amirkabir Tunneling Project Using Failure Modes and
Effects Analysis (FMEA). Scientific Journal of Ilam University of Medical Sciences.2013;21:114-22.
Potential Hazards by Failure Modes and Effect Analysis (FMEA) Method in Yazd Steel Complex. Journal of Safety Science and Technology
2014;4: 127-35.
Rozenfeld O, Sacks R, Rosenfeld Y. CHASTE—Construction Hazard Analysis with Spatial and Temporal Exposure. Construction Management
& Economics 2009; 27: 625-38.
Smoskey K. Risk assessment of Bikishev railroad factory by William Fine method. Valentiniev Journal of Science: Moscow Technical University
2006; 4(27)64-75
Varnere JV. Occupational risk analysis of Samandile pipe manufacturing in constructional phase. of Strasburg University 2007; 1(9): 109-21.
Vazirinejad R, Esmaeili A, Kazemi M. Occupational Accidents in Construction Industry Among People Reffering to Lobor and Soci al Affairs
Office Rafsanjan, During 2000-2002. Journal of Rafsenjan University of Medical Sciences. [Research]. 2005;4(4):326-31.

132