Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

ScienceDirect 
ScienceDirect 
Available
Availableonline
Procedia atatwww.sciencedirect.com
Manufacturing
online 00 (2017) 000–000
www.sciencedirect.com
Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2017) 000–000 www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
ScienceDirect
ScienceDirect 
Procedia Manufacturing 13 (2017) 1463–1469
Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2017) 000–000
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia

Manufacturing Engineering Society International Conference 2017, MESIC 2017, 28-30 June
Manufacturing Engineering Society
2017, International Conference
Vigo (Pontevedra), Spain2017, MESIC 2017, 28-30 June
2017, Vigo (Pontevedra), Spain
Operational monitoring in the technological process
Operational
Manufacturing Engineeringmonitoring in the
Society International technological
Conference process
2017, MESIC 2017, 28-30 June
in the2017,
aspect
Vigo of occupational
(Pontevedra), Spain risk
in the aspect of occupational risk
Costing models for capacity optimization T. Karkoszka in Industry 4.0: Trade-off
T. Karkoszka
between used capacity Silesianand operational efficiency
Institute of Engineering Materials and Biomaterials, Silesian Technical University, Konarskiego St. 18a, Gliwice 44-100, Poland
Institute of Engineering Materials and Biomaterials, Technical University, Konarskiego St. 18a, Gliwice 44-100, Poland

Abstract
A. Santanaa, P. Afonsoa,*, A. Zaninb, R. Wernkeb
Abstract a
University of Minho, 4800-058 Guimarães, Portugal
Improving the technological process shouldbUnochapecó,
be aimed at89809-000
fulfillment of theSC,
Chapecó, requirements
Brazil posed by all of the interested parties.
Improving
The the technological
new standards process ISO
ISO 9001:2015, should be aimedand
14001:2015 at fulfillment
project of ofthethe requirements
standard posedintroduce
ISO 45001 by all oftothe
theinterested
integratedparties.
scope
The new of
the term standards ISO control,
operational 9001:2015,
whichISOapplication
14001:2015 and project
should of risk
limit the the standard ISO 45001
of not fulfilling introduce to the
the requirements. integratedthescope
Therefore, aim
the term
of the of operational
study was to prepare control, which application
the operational should
monitoring limit
model the risk
within of not fulfilling
the occupational the The
safety. requirements. Therefore, theposes
proposed methodology aim
of the
Abstract
the study was
guidance for totheprepare the operational
risk assessment monitoring
of the process as model
well within
as for the
theoccupational
identificationsafety.
of theThekeyproposed methodology
technological featuresposes
and
the guidancewhich
parameters, for the riskoperational
as the assessment of the process
parameters as well should
of the process, as for undergo
the identification of the key technological features and
supervision.
parameters,
Under
© The which
2017 the concept
Authors. as the
of operational
"Industry
Published parameters
4.0", B.V.
by Elsevier of the process,
production shouldwill
processes undergo
be supervision.
pushed to be increasingly interconnected,
© 2017 The Authors.
information
Peer-review based
under onPublished
a real
responsibility by
time
of Elsevier
basis
the B.V.necessarily,
and,
scientific much more efficient. In this Society
context,International
capacity optimization
© 2017 The Authors.
Peer-review under Published by
responsibility Elsevier
ofof B.V. committee of the Manufacturing Engineering
thecapacity
scientific
committee of the Manufacturing
Engineering Society International
Conference
Conference
goes
2017.beyond the traditional aim maximization, contributing also for organization’s profitability
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the Manufacturing Engineering Society International Conference and value.
2017.
2017. lean management and continuous improvement approaches suggest capacity optimization instead of
Indeed,
Keywords: Operational
maximization. The control
study andof monitoring; risk assessment;and
capacity optimization integrated
costingmanagement
models is an important research topic that deserves
Keywords: Operational control and monitoring; risk assessment; integrated management
contributions from both the practical and theoretical perspectives. This paper presents and discusses a mathematical
model for capacity management based on different costing models (ABC and TDABC). A generic model has been
1. Introduction
developed and it was used to analyze idle capacity and to design strategies towards the maximization of organization’s
1. Introduction
value. The trade-off capacity maximization vs operational efficiency is highlighted and it is shown that capacity
So far, the quality of the technological process has been appointed exclusively by the technological quality having
optimization
So far, themight
quality hide
of operational inefficiency.
the technological process
©
the reflection
2017 The
in the
Authors.
quality
Published
ofElsevier
by
the product beinghas been appointed
introduced on theexclusively
market. Inby the technological
theory, qualityprocess
the technological
B.V. being introduced on the market. In theory, the technological process
having
the reflection
should course in the
within quality of the
the set conditions, producthowever, in of
the reality, it is accompanied
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee Engineeringby numerous threatsConference
which with
should course
some extent within
lead to thetheoccurrence
set conditions,
of thehowever, in thethe
incompatibility
Manufacturing
reality, it is accompanied
in reaching the quality aims
Society
by International
numerous
[1]. threats
Therefore, it iswhich with
necessary
2017.
some extent lead to the occurrence of the incompatibility in reaching the quality aims [1].
to control the process realized by the measurements of the current values describing the condition of the process and Therefore, it is necessary
to control
the devices,
Keywords: theModels;
Cost process
confirmation realized
ABC; of the
TDABC; byCapacity
the measurements
compatibility of the
Management; ofobtained
Idle the current
Capacity; values
values with
Operational describing the condition
the accepted
Efficiency of the process
criteria, current and
monitoring
the devices, confirmation of the compatibility of the obtained values with the accepted
enabling the identification of the deregulations occurring within the process as well as the control directed towards criteria, current monitoring
enabling the identification
the stabilization of the [2-4].
of its realization deregulations occurring within the process as well as the control directed towards
the stabilization
1.However,
Introduction of its realization [2-4].
one should take into account that the process control – so far interpreting as the quality control – will
be However, one should
slowly replaced by thetake into account
integrated process that the process
control, withincontrol – socontrol
which the far interpreting
covers alsoas the
the environmental
quality controlfactors
– will
be The
slowly
costreplaced by the integrated
of idle capacity processinformation
is a fundamental control, within which the and
for companies control
theircovers also theofenvironmental
management factors
extreme importance
in modern©production
2351-9789 systems.
2017 The Authors. In general,
Published it isB.V.
by Elsevier defined as unused capacity or production potential and can be measured
in several©under
2351-9789
Peer-review ways: tons of production,
2017responsibility
The Authors. Published
of available
by Elsevier
the scientific B.V.hours
committee of manufacturing,
of the Manufacturing etc.Society
Engineering The International
management of the 2017.
Conference idle capacity
Peer-review underTel.:
* Paulo Afonso. responsibility
+351 253 of the761;
510 scientific committee
fax: +351 253 604of741
the Manufacturing Engineering Society International Conference 2017.
E-mail address: psafonso@dps.uminho.pt

2351-9789 © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.

Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the Manufacturing Engineering Society International Conference 2017.
2351-9789 © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the Manufacturing Engineering Society International Conference 2017.
10.1016/j.promfg.2017.09.192
1464 T. Karkoszka / Procedia Manufacturing 13 (2017) 1463–1469
2 T. Karkoszka / Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2017) 000–000

and these ones concerning the work safety. The base of such a integration within control has created in the
organizations the integrated process approach ensuring the identification of both: input and output of the processes –
in the integrated meaning – and being promoted by the standard ISO 9001:2008 [5] and strengthen by the standard
ISO 9001:2015 [6]. One should also expect that the established position of the process control will be ensured by
more and more largely understood process management as well as the new consolidated structure of the standardized
requirements [3,7,8].
These requirements stated by the following standards: ISO 9001:2015, ISO 14001:2015 and ISO 45001, aim at
ensuring not only the compatibility of the structures which would support the integration process but also the process
considering the accompanied risk and control of these processes in the situations while in the environment are active
some factors distorting the regular course. While analyzing the requirements stated by the new standards, on one
hand, one should consider that the outcome of the integration, which is based on the common points identification
within the requirements stated towards the integrated systems, can be just the integration of standards and not the
real integration of the implemented systems in the organization [9]. On the other hand, one should pay close
attention to the structure of the requirements directed towards the new standards and pose the question if in reality it
can be the base of the operational control of the integrated character [3,6,10-12].
On the operational level, point 8 – operation – requires from the organization realizing the aims which have been
planned previously, considering the outcomes of the actions undertaken on the stage of planning. However,
officially, common for the following standards: ISO 9001:2015, ISO 14001:2015 and ISO 45001 is only the point:
operational planning and control (8.1). It refrains from both: comparison of the standards’ structure and the
directive describing the guidance for uniting the requirements stated by various standards developed by ISO and
covering the systemic requirements. The point question means the implementation of the solutions preventing from
the variation from the planned aims of the following character: quality, environmental and occupational safety. From
the organization it is required to define the process criteria and application of such control tools which will ensure
confirmation of the process compatibility with the specified criteria. Simultaneously, in the point: monitoring,
measurement, analysis and evaluation (9.1) one expects from the organization to define what, when and by which
methods will be monitored [6,10-12].
According the point 3.11.3 of the norm ISO 9000:2015, monitoring means: “determining the status of a system,
a process, a product, a service or an activity”, however, according to the point 3.4.8 of the norm ISO 14001:2015 and
the point 3.28 of the norm’s project ISO 45001 – means: “determining the status of a system, a process or an
activity”; in all the cases with the application of the check, supervise or the critical observation [10,11,13].
Meeting the requirements of the new standards is not easy, and especially within the scope of the operational
control. Even though the operational control has already been an element of the standard ISO 14001:2004, and the
quality supervision over the process has been written in the requirements stated by the standard ISO 9001:2008, the
requirements concerning the operational control within the range of PN-N 18001 and the integrated management
have not been present. Therefore, the organizations are looking for the “tailored”, own, authorial solutions which
would enable for – based on the risk criterion – monitoring of the operational parameters being of the meaningful
character for the integrated management system [3,5,14,15].
With regard to the above the proposed authorial methodology creates the basis for the supervision of the key
operational parameters of the process. The chosen elements of the application have been presented for the
continuous casting process. The described methodology is consistent with the quality and environmental monitoring
and can be used within the range of any organization realizing the technological processes in a compatible way with
the integrated requirements.

2. Methodology

The developed methodology covered the compilation of the guidelines for estimating the occupational risk of
technological process and identification of the key operational parameters. It reflects the originality of the study.
The method allowing for the complex assessment of the realized processes is the integrated assessment of its risk.
The result of the assessment should be the base for the decision concerning the way of dealing with the process’
risk. Its lowering can be the result of the technical or technological solutions or – in the situation when there is no
 T. Karkoszka / Procedia Manufacturing 13 (2017) 1463–1469 1465
T. Karkoszka / Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2017) 000–000 3

possibility of applying such technical or technological methods – organizational innovations. For sure, the way
ensuring the realization of the process with the risk monitoring can be the operational control.
The crucial part of the operational control is operational monitoring. Its subject must always be the operational
criteria pointed on the base of the operational parameters, and these in turn should concern the results of the risk
assessment connected with the potential failures’ occurrence, environmental influences and the results of the
occupational threats. Application of the operational monitoring should ensure the compatibility with the pointed key-
parameters with the requirements. The operational monitoring covers not only the key-parameters of quality but all
the key-parameters of operation within the range of the integrated scope. Among these parameters, within the
quality, environment and workplace safety, the following are the key-ones (Fig. 1):
 technological features: technical parameters of products, environmental aspects and impacts, occupational health
and safety threats,
 technological parameters of process.

key technological features operational key

parameters technological
occupational environmental technical parameters
threats aspects parameters

operational
operational monitoring operational
criteria criteria

supervised supervised key

supervised key technological features
operational technological
occupational environmental technical parameters parameters
threats aspects parameters

Fig. 1. Scheme of the operational monitoring of key technological parameters and features.

The starting point for defining the operational criteria is the identification of the key-operational parameters
(technological features and parameters), which means these ones which must undergo the monitoring process due to
the high risk accompanied.
The measurement of the risk estimation for the particular technological features within the range of work safety
are the following:

 Unit occupational risk ratio (URRs) describing the risk connected with the results of the work safety threats,
 Priority ratios of occupational threat effect occurrence, importance and threat exposition (PROs, PRIs, PREs).

The threat connected with the occurrence of the result of the occupational safety threat one has described as the
dependence (1) between the frequency of the occurrence of the result of the work safety threat and its importance as
well as the time of the exposition to the threat. Finally one has defined Priority ratio of occupational threat effect
occurrence (PROs), Priority ratio of occupational threat effect importance (PRIs) and Priority ratio of exposition to
occupational threat (PREs), and as the effect – Unit occupational risk ratio (URRs). 

URRs  PROs  PRIs  PREs (1)

1466 T. Karkoszka / Procedia Manufacturing 13 (2017) 1463–1469
4 T. Karkoszka / Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2017) 000–000

where:

URRs – Unit occupational risk ratio,

PROs – Priority ratio of occupational threat effect occurrence,
PREs – Priority ratio of exposition to occupational threat,
PRIs – Priority ratio of occupational threat effect importance.

The indispensable guidance for defining the Priority ratio of occupational threat effect occurrence (PROs) –
defining the frequency of occurring the outcome of the occupational safety threat considering all of the applied
preventive actions – one has compared in Table 1.

Table 1. Comparison of the guidance for estimating the frequency of occurring the injuries and occupational illnesses – PROs.

PROs Criteria of the estimation

1 Occurring the injuries and occupational illnesses nearly improbable, injury or occupational illness can appear during
very low the worker’s occupational activeness maximum twice

2 Low probability of occurring the injuries and occupational illnesses, outcomes of the workplace safety threat – injury
low or illness can appear during the worker’s occupational activeness maximum twice per 5 years

3 Moderate probability of occurring the injuries and occupational illnesses, outcomes of the workplace safety threat – injury
moderate or illness can appear during the worker’s occupational activeness once per 2 years

4 High probability of occurring the injuries and occupational illnesses, outcomes of the workplace safety threat – injury
high or illness can appear during the worker’s occupational activeness maximum twice per year

5 Very high probability of occurring the injuries and occupational illnesses, outcomes of the workplace safety threat – injury
very high or illness can appear during the worker’s occupational activeness more than once per month

The indispensable guidance for defining the Priority ratio of exposition to occupational threat (PREs) – reflecting
the frequency of exposing the worker to the threats considering all of the applied preventive actions – one has
compared in Table 2.

Table 2. Comparison of the guidance for estimating

the exposition of the worker towards the threats – PREs.

PREs Criteria of the estimation

1 very low Rare; once per year

2 low Minimal; few times per year
3 moderate Occasional; once per month
4 high Frequent; at least once per week
5 very high Constant; daily in a continuous manner

The guidance for estimating the Priority ratio of occupational threat effect importance (PRIs) one has compared in
Table 3.
 T. Karkoszka / Procedia Manufacturing 13 (2017) 1463–1469 1467
T. Karkoszka / Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2017) 000–000 5

Table 3. Comparison of the guidance for the injury and the occupational illnesses importance assessment – PRIs.

PROs Criteria of the estimation

1 very low Ailments not causing the absenteeism at the work place: fatigue, very low harmfulness
2 Injuries and the illnesses causing short-lasting ailments not causing the absenteeism at the work place: headaches, eyesight
low irritation, cuts, little poisonings, low harmfulness
Injuries and the illnesses causing short-lasting and repeating ailments, causing the short-term absenteeism at the work place:
3
wounds, bruises, skin allergies, nor complicated fractures, first-degree burns, little musculoskeletal strains, fractures,
moderate
second-degree burns on small area, moderate harmfulness
Injuries and the illnesses causing heavy and continuous ailments causing long-term absenteeism at the work place: strong
4
third-degree burns, second-degree burns on large body area, vibration white finger syndrome, occupational impairment
high
of eyesight and hearing, asthma, black lung, fractures with the consequence of dysfunction, high harmfulness
Injuries and the illnesses causing heavy and constant ailments causing full absenteeism at the work place: amputations,
5
multi-area fractures with the consequence of dysfunction, neoplastic diseases, toxic damages of the internal organs and
very high
the nervous system, injuries and the illnesses with the consequence of death of one or more person, very high harmfulness

The starting point for defining the operational criteria is the identification of the key-operational parameters
(technological features and parameters), which means these ones which must undergo the monitoring process due to
the high risk accompanied.
Unit occupational risk ratio reflects the size of the risk connected with the occurrence of both: particular injury
during the work time or the occupational illness.
Both high values of the Unit risk ratio (URRs) and/or the highest values of the Priority ratios of the occurrence,
importance or exposition (PROs, PRIs, PREs) allow for the identification of the occupational safety threats of the
critical character.
The sum of the Unit occupational risk ratio for all identified threats has been described as Occupational risk ratio
– ORR. Its value reflects the total risk associated with the work safety threats occurrence within the analyzed
technological process, and at the same time allowing for the complex assessment in the context of ensuring the work
safety, and in connection with the Quality risk ratio and Environmental risk ratio – estimation of the process in the
integrated scope.
Values of the Unit risk ratio assigned to the technological features constitute the direct input element in the
identification of the key-technological parameters from the integrated point of view.
The measurement of the risk assessment of not ensuring the safe conditions of workplace connected with the
particular technological parameters is the Risk influence ratio (RRs) appointed on the base of (2):

RRs  I  URRsi
(2)

where: 
RRs – Risk influence ratio, 
URRs – Unit occupational risk ratio,
I – presence of the dependence between the particular technological parameter and the particular technological
feature.

The value of the Risk influence ratio (RRs) within the occupational safety depends on the value of the Unit
occupational risk ratio (URRs) and the presence of the dependence between the particular technological parameters
and the occupational technological features.
Pointing the key technological parameters and features, therefore, determines the identification of the operational
criteria, and the control over the operational criteria ensures the conformity of the key technological parameters and
features with the requirements.
1468 T. Karkoszka / Procedia Manufacturing 13 (2017) 1463–1469
6 T. Karkoszka / Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2017) 000–000

3. Results and discussion

The developed methodology of the identification of the key technological features has been verified for the steel
continuous casting process.
Among the potential technological features of the process one has listed mainly the following: hot microclimate,
noise, mechanical and chemical factors as well as the threats of the oppressive character.
In accordance to the accepted methodology they have been estimated. For the analyzed process the maximum
value of the Priority ratio has been defined as PROs/PRIs/PREs = 5. The maximum value of the Unit occupational
risk ratio has been taken as URRs ≥ 60.
The results of the assessment have been presented in the Table 4; simultaneously appointing the key-
technological features as well as the determinants of their key-character.

Table 4. Comparison of the exemplary results of the occupational technological features assessment with identification of the key ones
in the process of the casting.

Key Possible Determinants

occupational technological effects of the key-character
features of occupational features URRs PROs PRIs PREs
Hot working conditions Faints loss of consciousness, overheating of the body 60 4 3 5
Contact with extremely high Death due to first, second and third degree of skin burns, skin burn
45 3 3 5
temperature objects due to the burnt clothing, temporary or permanent eyesight injury

Fatigue and diminishing of the mental and psychical efficiency,

Stress lowered illness defense, lowering of the eyesight, hearing 18 3 3 2
and manual precision efficiency

Mechanically or manually Stroke or crush – contusion, crushing,

45 3 5 3
transported materials facture, death

Irritation of the eyesight, lowering of the eyesight efficiency,

Improper lightening, contrast 60 4 3 5
headache, fatigue

Noise exposure Momentous or permanent hearing loss 60 4 3 5

Heavy burns all over the body, strong poisoning possibly leading
Fire, explosion - failure risk 5 1 5 1
to death

The results of the technological features estimation have been used for the assessment of the technological
parameters of the process. The exemplary dependences of the technological features to the technological parameters
“casting temperature” and “stripe’s surface temperature” have been presented in Table 5.

Table 5. Scheme of the dependences among the values of the Unit risk ratio (URRs) of the chosen technological features and the Risk influence
ratio (RRs) for the technological parameters “casting temperature” and “ stripe’s surface temperature”.

Technological parameters of the processes Technological parameters

vs. their technological features
URRs
Temperature Temperature
Technological features of casting of the strip’s surface

Hot working conditions 60 (+) 60 (+) 60

Contact with extremely high temperature objects 45 (+) 45 (+) 45
Stress 18 (+) 18 (+) 18
Mechanically or manually transported materials 45 - -
Improper lighting, contrast 60 - (+) 60
Noise exposure 60 - -
Fire, explosion, failure risk 5 (+) 5 (+) 5
Risk influence ratio (RRs) 128 188
 T. Karkoszka / Procedia Manufacturing 13 (2017) 1463–1469 1469
T. Karkoszka / Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2017) 000–000 7

The described above identification of the key technological features and parameters constitutes just the exemplary
way of defining the key-operational parameters. Among the compared technological features the following ones are
of the meaningful character: hot working conditions (URRs = 60, PREs =5), improper lightening, contrast
(URRs = 60, PREs = 5), noise exposure (URRs = 60, PREs = 5) and contact with extremely high temperature objects
(PREs =5), mechanically or manually transported materials (PRIs = 5), fire or explosion (PRIe = 5). However, the
higher values of the Risk influence ratio (RRs), the more important for operational control technological parameters
are; for two analyzed in the occupational safety aspect technological parameters, the temperature of the strip’s
surface (RRs = 188) needs to be more carefully supervised then the temperature of casting (RRs = 128).

4. Conclusions

The standards ISO 9001:2015, ISO 14001 as well as the norm’s project ISO 45001 require from the organization
the operational processes control. It’s idea is to use in the processes the mechanisms which allow for the taking up
the decisions aiming at the ensuring the compatibility with the criteria of these processes.
In the paper presented as the mechanism one has presented the authorial methodology of identifying the key-
operational criteria in the frame of the integrated risk. It enables appointing the key-operational parameters
presented as the technological features and parameters. The key-character within the range of the occupational
safety have the following:

 the technological features described by the high values of the Unit occupational risk ratio (URRs) and the
maximum values for the Priority ratio of occupational threat effect occurrence (PROs), Priority ratio of
occupational threat effect importance (PRIs) as well as Priority ratio of exposition to occupational threat (PREs),
 the technological parameters described by the high values of the Risk influence ratio (RRs).

Such an algorithm enables pointing the responsible for maintaining the operational criteria as well as describing
the way of actions to be taken during exceeding them. It can be applied into each technological process as the
element of the realization of the process in question.

References

[1] M. Asif, O.A.M. Fisscher, E.J. de Bruijm, M. Pagell, Oper. manage. res., 3 (3) (2010) 146-160.
[2] J. Gawlik, J. Plichta, A. Świć, Production processes, Polish Economic Publishers, Warsaw, 2013.
[3] T. Karkoszka, Operational control with application of the risk analysis in the integrated management system of technological process, Silesian
Technical University Publishing House, Gliwice, 2017.
[4] T. Karkoszka, Risk management as an element of process continuity assurance, Procedia eng., 63 (2013) 873-877.
[5] ISO 9001:2008. Quality management systems – Requirements, PKN Publishing House, Warsaw, 2009.
[6] ISO 9001:2015. Quality management systems – Requirements, PKN Publishing House, Warsaw, 2015.
[7] Ch. Kymal, G. Gruska, R.D. Reid, Integrated management systems, American Society for Quality, Quality Press, Milwaukee, 2015.
[8] A. Kania, M. Spilka, J. ach. mater. manuf. eng. 78 (2) (2016) 78-84.
[9] I.A. Beckmerhagen, H.P. Berg, S.V. Karapetrovic, W.O. Willborn, Int. J. Qual. Reliab. Manag., 20 (2) (2003) 210-228.
[10] ISO 14001:2015, Environmental management systems – Requirements with guidance for use, PKN Publishing House, Warsaw, 2015.
[11] ISO/DIS 45001, Occupational health and safety management systems – Requirements with guidance for use, International Organization for
Standardization, Geneva, 2016.
[12] ISO/IEC Directives, Consolidated ISO Supplement. Procedures specific to ISO, Annex SL, International Organization for Standardization,
Geneva, 2015.
[13] ISO 9000:2015, Quality management systems – Fundamentals and vocabulary, PKN Publishing House, Warsaw, 2015.
[14] ISO 14001:2004, Environmental management systems – Requirements with guidance for use. PKN Publishing House, Warsaw, 2005.
[15] PN-N 18001:2004, Occupational health and safety management systems – Requirements, PKN Publishing House, Warsaw, 2004.