Annex B - Risk Assessment

Annex 1.1
GUIDANCE ON MAIN ELEMENTS OF RISK ASSESSMENT
Fig.1. The process of risk assessment and control

1. Classify work activities

1.1 A useful preliminary to risk assessment is to identify separate work
activities, to group them in a rational and manageable way, and to gather
necessary information (or collate existing information) about them. Infrequent
maintenance tasks, as well as day-to-day operations, should be included.
Possible ways of classifying work activities include:
(a) department/location on board ship;
(b) stages of an operation or work routine;
(c) planned and unscheduled maintenance;
(d) defined tasks (e.g. loading/unloading cargo).
1.2 Information required for each work activity might include:

(a) tasks being carried out: their duration and frequency;

(b) location(s) where the work is carried out;
(c) who normally/occasionally carries out the tasks;
(d) others who may be affected by the work (e.g. contractors, passengers);
(e) training that personnel have received for the task.
2. Identify hazards
2.1 Asking these three questions should help to identify where there is a
hazard:
(a) Is there a source of harm?
(b) Who (or what) could be harmed?
(c) How could harm occur?
Hazards that clearly possess negligible potential for harm should not be
documented or given further consideration, provided that appropriate control
measures remain in place.
2.2 To help with the process of identifying hazards it may be useful to
categorise hazards in different ways, for example by topic, e.g.:
(a) mechanical
(b) electrical
(c) physical
(d) radiation
(e) substances
(f) fire and explosion.
(g) chemical
(h) biological
(i) psychological
2.3 A complementary approach may be to develop a prompt list such as:
During work activities could the following hazards exist?
(a) slips/falls on the level;
(b) falls of persons from a height;
(c) falls of tools, materials, etc, from a height;
(d) inadequate headroom;
(e) inadequate ventilation;
(f) hazards from plant and machinery associated with assembly,
commissioning, operation, maintenance, modification, repair and dismantling;
(g) hazards from manual handling.
The above list is not exhaustive, and employers could develop their own
prompt list taking into account the particular circumstances.
3. Identify Risk Controls
3.1 Risk and hazard identification are essential elements of the risk assessment
process and inherently only the application of appropriate control measures

reduces risks. In many instances this will require no more than comparing the
controls in place against what is established good practice.
3.2 A risk assessment should be comprehensive enough to identify hazards and the
required control measures to reduce the risk of harm, including those planned or in place.

3.3 As well as identifying the necessary control measures for particular risks,
the risk assessment process should also consider the arrangements to ensure
that these control measures are implemented and kept in place.
3.4 Risk Control Systems, provide the method of management control for
individual control measures, or types of control measure. Using the Taking a
Permit-to-Work (PTW) system as an example, this would include defining
aspects such as:
(a) the scope (range of activities) for which the PTW is needed;
(b) responsibility for the design of the PTW system and the responsibilities of
those involved in its operation;
(c) training and competency of those who design or operate the PTW system;
(d) communication and consultation needed in the design and operation of the
system;
(e) arrangement for inspection and audits of the system and its implementation
(f) arrangements to review the performance of the PTW system and determine
whether improvements are needed.
3.5 When evaluating existing risk control systems, consideration should be
given to measures that reduce the likelihood and or the severity of harm. The
following hierarchy can be applied:
(a) If practicable eliminate hazards altogether or try to combat risks at the
source
(b) If elimination is not possible, try to reduce risk at the source
(c) Reduce risk via procedures and safe systems of work, adopting PPE only as
the last resort after all other control measures have been considered.
4. Estimate risk
4.1 The risk from the hazard may be determined by estimating: the potential
severity of harm; and the likelihood that harm will occur. These two
components should be judged independently.
4.2 When seeking to establish potential severity of harm, the following should
be considered:
(a) part(s) of the body likely to be affected;
(b) nature of the harm, ranging from slight to extreme:
Care should be taken to ensure that harm category definitions reflect both the
short and long term health and safety consequences. A possible categorization
of severity harm levels based on the three bands of slight, moderate and
extreme is shown:

Table 1 Examples of categories for severity of harm

Category Slight harm

Moderate harm

Extreme harm

Health

Nuisance and
irritation (e.g.
headaches);
temporary ill health
leading to
discomfort (e.g.
diarrhea).

Deafness; dermatitis; asthma; work

related upper limb disorders;
illhealth leading to permanent
minor disability

Occupational cancer; severe life

shortening diseases; acute fatal
diseases; permanent substantial
disability.

Safety

Superficial injuries; Lacerations; burns; concussion;

Minor cuts and
serious sprains; minor fractures;
bruises;
musculoskeletal disorders
Eye irritation from
dust

Amputations; major fractures;

poisonings; multiple injuries;
fatal injuries

The health and safety harm categories are effectively defined by quoted
examples and these lists are not exhaustive Source: British Standard
8800:2004 Pg. 47
4.3 Individuals can adapt the above structure to reflect their objectives. For
example the structure describe could be expanded from three harm bands
(slight, moderate and extreme) to four bands by dividing the extreme harm
band into two categories such as severe harm (e.g. major factures) and
extreme harm (e.g. fatal).
4.4 In order to establish the likelihood of harm the adequacy of control
measures already in place should be considered. Legal requirements and
guidance in this Code and other safety publications are good guides to
adequate control of specific hazards.
The following issues should then typically be assessed:
(a) number of personnel exposed;
(b) frequency and duration of exposure to the hazard;
(c) effects of failure of power or water supply;
(d) effects of failure of plant and machinery components and safety devices;
(e) exposure to the elements;
(f) protection afforded by personal protective equipment and its limitations;
(g) possibility of unsafe acts by persons for example, who:

(i) may not know what the hazards are;

(ii) may not have the knowledge, physical capacity, or skills to do the work;
(iii) underestimate risks to which they are exposed;
(iv) underestimate the practicality and utility of safe working methods.

A possible categorization of severity harm levels based on the four bands, of

very likely; likely; unlikely or very unlikely, is shown:

Table 2. Examples of categories for likelihood of harm

Categories for Very Likely
Likely
Unlikely
Very Unlikely
the likelihood
of harm
Type of
occurrence

Typically
experienced at least
once every six
months by an
individual

Typically
Typically
experienced once experienced once
every five years by during the working
an individual
lifetime of an
individual

Less than 1% chance

of being experienced
by an individual
during their working
lifetime

Source: British Standard 8800:2004 Pg. 48

4.5 Any given hazard is more serious if it affects a greater number of people.
But some of the more serious hazards may be associated with an occasional
task carried out by just one person, for example maintenance of inaccessible
parts of lifting equipment.
Table 3 shows a simple method for estimating risks according to the potential
severity of harm and the likelihood, as described above.
Table 3. A simple risk estimator
Likelihood/Severity of Harm Slight Harm

Moderate Harm

Extreme Harm

Very Unlikely
VERY LOW RISK VERY LOW RISK HIGH RISK
Unlikely

VERY HIGH RISK

VERY LOW RISK MEDIUM RISK

Likely

VERY HIGH RISK

LOW RISK

HIGH RISK

LOW RISK

VERY HIGH RISK VERY HIGH RISK

Very Likely

Source: British Standard 8800:2004 Pg. 49

Note: Very Low risk here means that the risk has been reduced to
the lowest level that is reasonably practicable
5. Determine the tolerability of the risks
The next step is to decide which risks are acceptable, tolerable or
unacceptable. In making decisions as to whether the risk is tolerable the work
force should be consulted. To do this the organization should first establish
tolerability criteria to provide a basis for consistency in all its risk assessments.
This should involve consultation with workers representatives, other
stakeholders and should take account of legislation and regulatory agency
guidance, where applicable. A simple evaluation of risk tolerability, based on a
five band structure is shown below:
Table 4 A simple risk categorization
Category of risk Evaluation of tolerability
Very low

Acceptable

Low

Risks that should be

reduced

Medium

so that they are tolerable

High

or acceptable

Very high

Unacceptable

Source: British Standard 8800:2004 Pg. 50

6. Prepare risk control action plan

6.1 Having determined the significant risks, the next step is to decide what
action should be taken to improve safety, taking account of precautions and
controls already in place.
6.2 Risk categories form the basis for deciding whether improved controls are
required and the timescale for action. Table 5 suggests a possible simple
approach. This shows that the effort made to control risk should reflect the
seriousness of that risk.
Table 5. A simple risk based control plan
ACTION AND TIMESCALE
VERY
LOW

These risks are considered acceptable. No further action is necessary other than to
ensure that the controls are maintained

LOW

No additional controls are required unless they can be implemented at a very low cost
(in terms of time, money and effort). Actions to further reduce these risks are assigned
low priority. Arrangements should be made to ensure that controls are maintained

Consideration should be given as to whether the risks can be lowered, where applicable,
MEDIUM to a tolerable level, and preferably to an acceptable level, but the costs of additional risk
should be taken into account. The risk reduction measures should be implemented within
a defined time period. Arrangements should be made to ensure that the control measures
are maintained, particularly if the risk levels are associated with harmful consequences.
HIGH

VERY
HIGH

Substantial efforts should be made to reduce the risk. Risk reduction measures should be
implemented urgently within a defined time period and it might be necessary to consider
suspending or restricting activity, or to apply interim risk control measures, until this has
been completed. Considerable resources might have to be allocated to additional control
measures. Arrangements should be made to ensure that the control measures are
maintained, particularly if the risk levels are associated with extremely harmful
consequences and very harmful consequences.
These risks are unacceptable. Substantial improvements in risk controls are necessary, so
that the risk is reduced to a tolerable or acceptable level. The work activity should be
halted until the risk controls are implemented that reduces the risk so that it is no longer
very high. If it is not possible to reduce the risk the work should remain prohibited.

Source: British Standard 8800:2004 Pg. 50

Note: Also where the risk is associated with extremely harmful consequences,
further assessment is necessary to increase confidence in the actual likelihood
of harm.
6.3 The outcome of a risk assessment should be an inventory of actions, in
priority order, to devise, maintain or improve controls.
6.4 Controls should be chosen taking into account the following, which are in
order of effectiveness:
(a) if possible, eliminate hazards altogether, or combat risks at source eg. Use
a safe substance instead of a dangerous one;
(b) if elimination is not possible, try to reduce the risk e.g. where risk is of
electrocution, by using a low voltage electrical appliance;
(c) where possible adapt work to the individual, e.g. to take account of
individual mental and physical capabilities;
(d) take advantage of technical progress to improve controls;
(e) give precedence to measures that protect everyone;

(f) if necessary, use a combination of technical and procedural controls;

(g) introduce or ensure the continuation of planned maintenance, for example,
of machinery safeguards;
(h) ensure emergency arrangements are in place;
(i) adopt personal protective equipment only as a last resort, after all other
control options have been considered.
6.5 In addition to emergency and evacuation plans (see Chapter 10), it may be
necessary to provide emergency equipment relevant to the specific hazards.
7. Review adequacy of action plan
7.1 Any action plan should be reviewed before implementation, typically by
asking;
(a) will the revised controls lead to tolerable risk levels?
(b) are new hazards created?
(c) what do people affected think about the need for, and practicality of, the
revised preventive measures?
(d) will the revised controls be used in practice, and not ignored in the face of,
for example, pressures to get the job done?
8. Ensure risk assessment and controls are effective and up-to-date
8.1 Risk Assessment and control is a continual process. Hence, risk
assessments should be subject to periodic formal reviews to confirm the
validity of the assessment and whether the risk controls are still effective and
adequate.
8.2 Irrespective of the schedule for formal review, if conditions are changing to
the extent that hazards and risks are significantly affected then risk
assessments should be reviewed. Such changes can include:
(a) expansion,
(b) contraction or restructuring of activities;
(c) relocation of responsibilities;
(d) changes to methods of working or patterns of behaviour;
(e) occurrence of a hazardous event
8.3 The review of risk assessments and in particular, the scrutiny of risk
assessments during audits is a useful tool to help maintain the validity and
effectiveness of the risk assessments and controls. The review can also help
ensure consistency across risk assessments carried out by different people or
at different times.
8.4 Since risk assessment is intended to reduce the occurrence of hazardous events, such
as occurrences might indicate weakness in the way risks have been assessed or in the
way controls have been designed, implemented or monitored.