Analysis and evaluation model of oil and gas pipeline contractor behavior safety risk

doi:10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2025.06.0131

Abstract

Abstract:

In order to systematically analyze the behavioral safety risks of contractors in oil and gas pipeline projects and improve the scientificity and standardization of risk assessment work, a contractor behavioral safety risk assessment model was constructed based on the concept of full life cycle management, integrating the three key elements of the safety management system, behavior and status. The weights of indicators at all levels were determined by the analytic hierarchy process (AHP), and a quantitative scoring mechanism was established. The model was verified by cases such as the Yixian sub-transmission station, the Beijing branch water conservation project, and the Linxian operation area sewage treatment system replacement project. The results show that typical problems in the stages of business selection and pre-entry preparation, project construction, project end and completion include incomplete construction plans, unclear personnel responsibilities, missing safety supervision records, and low training coverage. The assessment model can identify and classify different types of risks and clarify their distribution characteristics throughout the life cycle. The behavioral safety risks of oil and gas pipeline contractors have different manifestations at different stages. There is a significant correlation between organizational behavior and management status, and risks are prone to concentrate on the weak links of stage connection and management chain.

Key words: oil and gas pipelines, contractors, behavioral safety, risk assessment, safety management

CLC Number:

X913.4安全系统工程

CUI Jinghui, DONG Guoyu, ZHANG Zengqiang, SUN Ninghao, TONG Ruipeng. Analysis and evaluation model of oil and gas pipeline contractor behavior safety risk[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2025, 35(6): 19-26.

Figures/Tables 10

Fig.1

Table 1

Fig.2

Fig.3

Table 2

Table 3

Table 4

Fig.4

Fig.5

Fig.6

References 13

[1]	付明福, 张明星, 朱晓曼, 等. 油气长输管道作业分级定量风险评价方法研究及应用[J]. 中国安全生产科学技术, 2019, 15(7): 137-141.
	FU Mingfu, ZHANG Mingxing, ZHU Xiaoman, et al. Research and application of quantitative risk assessment method for operation classification of oil and gas long-distance pipeline[J]. Journal of Safety Science and Technology, 2019, 15(7): 137-141.
[2]	宁波, 刘永强. 化工企业承包商日常风险管控措施实施与应用[J]. 化工管理, 2022(10): 7-10.
	NING Bo, LIU Yongqiang. Implementation and application of daily risk control measures of chemical enterprise contractors[J]. Chemical Enterprise Management, 2022(10): 7-10.
[3]	WU Chunlin, FANG Dongping, LI Nan. Roles of owners' leadership in construction safety: the case of high-speed railway construction projects in China[J]. International Journal of Project Management, 2015, 33(8): 1665-1679.
[4]	HEINRICH W H, PETERSON D, ROOS N. Industrial accident prevention[M]. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1980: 113-126.
[5]	傅贵, 殷文韬, 董继业, 等. 行为安全“2-4”模型及其在煤矿安全管理中的应用[J]. 煤炭学报, 2013, 38(7): 1123-1129.
	FU Gui, YIN Wentao, DONG Jiye, et al. Behavior-based accident causation: the "2-4" model and its safety implications in coal mines[J]. Journal of China Coal Society, 2013, 38(7): 1123-1129.
[6]	屈静, 张建彬, 华宁, 等. 基于改进TOPSIS的承包商安全能力评价模型及应用[J]. 安全, 2020, 41(8): 20-24, 30.
	QU Jing, ZHANG Jianbin, HUA Ning, et al. Contractor safety capability evaluation model and its application based on improved TOPSlS method[J]. Safety, 2020, 41(8): 20-24, 30.
[7]	曹勇, 卢云峰, 贺一博, 等. 外委承包商安全管理策略研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2021, 31(增1): 8-13.
	CAO Yong, LU Yunfeng, HE Yibo, et al. Study on safety management strategy of outsourcing contractors[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2021, 31(S1): 8-13. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn 1003-3033.2021.S1.002
[8]	GILL P. Outsourcing intelligence: contractors and government accountability[J]. The International Journal of Intelligence, Security, and Public Affairs, 2019, 21(3): 263-264.
[9]	蒋海夫, 那国良, 孙桂花. 基于实例的化工项目安全检查分析及提升研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2024, 34(增1): 129-133.
	JIANG Haifu, NA Guoliang, SUN Guihua. Analysis of actual chemical project safety inspection and improvement[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2024, 34(S1): 129-133. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2024.S1.0044
[10]	佟瑞鹏, 刘亚飞, 刘欣. 基于行为安全理论的安全管理评价普适模型与实证分析[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2014, 24(6):123-128.
	TONG Ruipeng, LIU Yafei, LIU Xin. A universal behavior safety theory-based model for safety management evaluation and its empirical analysis[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2014, 24(6): 123-128.
[11]	GU Shengyu, ZHANG Pan, YANG Jianying. System dynamics model based on evolutionary game theory for quality supervision among construction stakeholders[J]. Journal of Civil Engineering and Management, 2018, 24(4): 318-330.
[12]	WICKS D. Institutionalized mindsets of invulnerability: differentiated institutional fields and the antecedents of organizational crisis[J]. Organization Studies, 2001, 22(4): 659-692.
[13]	王廷春, 张亚丽, 孙德青, 等. 炼化承包商综合安全能力评估[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2018, 28(8): 155-160. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2018.08.026
	WANG Tingchun, ZHANG Yali, SUN Deqing, et al. Evaluation of comprehensive safety capability of refining contractor[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2018, 28(8): 155-160. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2018.08.026

风险类型	所在阶段	评估特征
选商风险	投标审核	资质真实性、技术方案的针对性与可执行性
设计风险	合同签订	方案中安全措施与费用安排、主要负责人能力
合规风险	入场准备	培训覆盖率、设备完好率、人员资质和健康状态
监管风险	施工过程	技术交底完整性、沟通频次与有效性
施工风险	作业实施	作业合规性、应急响应、设备与环境风险控制
安全事故管理	项目全过程	是否发生严重事故及其责任归属

标度	含义
1	表示两者同样重要
3	表示2个指标相比,前者比后者稍微重要
5	表示2个指标相比,前者比后者明显重要
7	表示2个指标相比,前者比后者强烈重要
9	表示2个指标相比,前者比后者极端重要
2、4、6、8	表示上述相邻判断的中间程度
倒数	前者与后者相比,重要性为a_ij则后者与前者相比的重要性为1/a_ij

一级指标	二级指标	三级指标	权重
安全管理体系 (0.43)	安全组织结构 (0.22)	专业资质	0.06
		安全业绩	0.08
		运营情况	0.03
		技术方案	0.05
	安全制度体系 (0.21)	安全措施	0.07
		安全费用	0.09
		人员名单	0.05
安全管理行为 (0.30)	监管行为 (0.09)	安全技术交底	0.03
		入场安全培训	0.03
		日常安全检查	0.01
		现场安全监督	0.02
	组织行为 (0.10)	培训计划实施	0.03
		检查计划执行	0.01
		作业合规管理	0.01
		应急处置管理	0.03
		分包安全管理	0.02
	岗位行为 (0.11)	主要负责人	0.06
	岗位行为 (0.11)	安全管理人员	0.03
		作业人员	0.02
安全管理状态 (0.27)	人的状态 (0.12)	入场资格	0.06
		专业能力	0.04
		身心状态	0.02
	物的状态 (0.07)	设备完整性	0.04
	物的状态 (0.07)	设备维护管理	0.03
	环境状态 (0.08)	危险有害因素	0.04
		现场作业环境	0.01
		现场文明施工	0.01
		废弃物处理	0.02

[1]	CHEN Zi, QIU Huawan, LIU Jiayu, YANG Siyu, LI Zhiyong. Risk assessment of deep foundation pits in subway stations based on variable fuzzy sets [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2025, 35(6): 105-110.
[2]	LI Hang, HAN Feng, HU Xiaobing. Risk assessment method of urban UAVs falling onto ground transportation [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2025, 35(6): 157-164.
[3]	WANG Haoshui. Work safety solution for China's chemical (hazardous chemicals) enterprise [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2025, 35(5): 16-22.
[4]	WU Lizhou, LI Hua, ZHANG Peng, QIAN Hongyan, KANG Fei, TAN Guangli. Simulation and risk assessment of urban flooding under realistic 3D data [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2025, 35(5): 237-245.
[5]	WANG Dalong, WANG Bingshan, CAO Rui, WANG Zhigang, LYU Hongliang, TONG Ruipeng. Interaction mechanism and model of coal mine safety management behaviors [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2025, 35(5): 32-38.
[6]	WEI Mingyao, HUANGFU Haoqi, GAO Kang, LU Chunqin, YU Liyuan, FU Shigen. Quantitative evaluation of oil-type gas emission risk in mine with coal-oil-gas coexistence [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2025, 35(4): 67-75.
[7]	CHEN Wentao, YANG Mingkai, WANG Wenhe, SONG Hongwei, SUN Chao. Chemical process risk assessment utilizing SDG and CBR methodologies [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2025, 35(3): 77-84.
[8]	YUAN Leping, ZHENG Ying, GU Zekun, GAO Yuyu. A review of research for civil aviation safety resilience [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2025, 35(2): 1-9.
[9]	SHI Tongyu, GAO Yi, WANG Yantao. Research on aircraft control system fault risk assessment based on hybrid probability models [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2025, 35(2): 10-20.
[10]	LI Min, WANG Dan, HE Shan, SHI Shiliang, WANG Deming, LU Yi. Research review and progress of coal mine gas explosion risk assessment [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2025, 35(2): 127-136.
[11]	WANG Feiyin, YUAN Jintong, LIU Xiaochen, TAN Wei, WANG Lei. Pattern identification and risk assessment model of civil aircraft abnormal flight based on QAR [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2025, 35(2): 160-167.
[12]	SUN Bin, LI Hao, MAO Zhanli, BAI Zicong, LIU Yanqian. Fire risk assessment of large complex based on order relation analysis method [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2025, 35(2): 81-88.
[13]	LIU Qing, SHEN Tian. Risk assessment of biological sample transport by UAVs based on Bayesian networks [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2025, 35(1): 16-24.
[14]	LIU Zhen, LIU Tao, PENG Guowen. Research progress on emergency management of nuclear power plants: bibliometric analysis based on CiteSpace [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2025, 35(1): 223-230.
[15]	JIANG Haifu, NA Guoliang, SUN Guihua. Analysis of actual chemical project safety inspection and improvement [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2024, 34(S1): 129-133.