Risk Assessment – all risks approach John F. Ring John F. Ring BE, Dip.OSH, Dip.SHWW ,Dip.Env.Eng., MIITD, MIFS, BE, Dip.OSH, Dip.SHWW ,Dip.Env.Eng., MIITD, MIFS, MIOSH, Eur Ing C.Eng.MIEI. MIOSH, Eur Ing C.Eng.MIEI. College Safety Officer, UCC College Safety Officer, UCC
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Risk Assessment – all risks approachRisk Assessment – all risks approach
John F. RingJohn F. RingBE, Dip.OSH, Dip.SHWW ,Dip.Env.Eng., MIITD, MIFS, MIOSH, Eur Ing BE, Dip.OSH, Dip.SHWW ,Dip.Env.Eng., MIITD, MIFS, MIOSH, Eur Ing
C.Eng.MIEI. C.Eng.MIEI.
College Safety Officer, UCC College Safety Officer, UCC
Application of Risk AssessmentApplication of Risk Assessment
Use a numerical Use a numerical model to assess risk.model to assess risk.
Probability and Probability and consequence modelsconsequence models
Judgement, technical Judgement, technical knowledge and knowledge and experience required.experience required.
Subjectivity remainsSubjectivity remains A good model reduces A good model reduces
personal & individual personal & individual biases/ variations !!biases/ variations !!
Could be ‘bought in to’ Could be ‘bought in to’ by any medium to by any medium to large scale companylarge scale company
Problems with Numerical ModelsProblems with Numerical Models
‘‘Every’ risk is either Very High or Low!Every’ risk is either Very High or Low! Assessments often do not relate to reality!Assessments often do not relate to reality! Results are easily rubbished!Results are easily rubbished! Not seen to be very scientific!Not seen to be very scientific! Users may not be considered ‘professional’ Users may not be considered ‘professional’ Non- life risks are generally not covered. Non- life risks are generally not covered. How can other risk priorities be compared?How can other risk priorities be compared?
Risk Nomogram in use at UCCRisk Nomogram in use at UCC
Source: Source: Dr. Hani Raafat Dr. Hani Raafat of Aston Univof Aston Univ..
Economic, Life and Economic, Life and Environment Risk Types Environment Risk Types (on 1 model)(on 1 model)
Graded ConsequencesGraded Consequences Probability /FrequencyProbability /Frequency Exposure durationExposure duration
Semi-scientificSemi-scientific Easy to UseEasy to Use Well receivedWell received Risk Assessment by Risk Assessment by
Dept. (devolved)Dept. (devolved) Little variations in useLittle variations in use Good spread of results Good spread of results
Risk Nomogram Risk Nomogram Dr. Hani Raafat Dr. Hani Raafat
Four Types of Risk ConsequencesFour Types of Risk Consequences
Category I < €1 kCategory I < €1 k Category II < €10 kCategory II < €10 k Category III < €100 kCategory III < €100 k Category IV < €1 mCategory IV < €1 m Category V > €1 mCategory V > €1 m Category VI Category VI Total LossTotal Loss
Risk Nomogram Risk Nomogram Dr. Hani RaafatDr. Hani Raafat
Category I : Category I : Insignificant Insignificant Category II : Category II : MinorMinor Category III :Category III : Major Major Category IV : Category IV : SevereSevere Category V : Category V : FatalityFatality Category VI : Category VI : Multiple FatalitiesMultiple Fatalities
Definitions:Definitions: Effects on PersonnelEffects on Personnel
InsignificantInsignificant: No human injury expected or < : No human injury expected or < 3 days lost time 3 days lost time
MinorMinor: Injury/ Illness, 3 – 28 or 56 days lost : Injury/ Illness, 3 – 28 or 56 days lost time, full recovery expected.time, full recovery expected.
MajorMajor: Injury/Illness, 28 + or 56+ days lost time, : Injury/Illness, 28 + or 56+ days lost time, or permanent slight incapacityor permanent slight incapacity
Risk Nomogram Risk Nomogram Dr. Hani RaafatDr. Hani Raafat
Risk Consequence 3:Risk Consequence 3: Public and ReactionPublic and Reaction
Category I : Category I : Nuisance ( Mild reaction)Nuisance ( Mild reaction) Category II : Category II : Complaints ( Minor local outcry)Complaints ( Minor local outcry) Category III:Category III: GP attendances /Complaints ++.) GP attendances /Complaints ++.) Category IV: Category IV: Hospitalisation or Local Media attn Hospitalisation or Local Media attn Category V : Category V : Serious Injury or National Media attnSerious Injury or National Media attn Category VI : Category VI : Fatality or Govt & Media attnFatality or Govt & Media attn
Risk Nomogram Risk Nomogram Dr. Hani RaafatDr. Hani Raafat
Category I : Category I : Insignificant Insignificant Category II : Category II : Temp. Short Term DamageTemp. Short Term Damage Category III :Category III : Major Pollution Major Pollution Category IV : Category IV : Severe PollutionSevere Pollution Category V : Category V : Widespread DamageWidespread Damage Category VI : Category VI : Catastrophic DamageCatastrophic Damage
Risk Nomogram Risk Nomogram Dr. Hani RaafatDr. Hani Raafat
Probability (Likelihood):Probability (Likelihood): Ratings/ExperiencesRatings/Experiences
1 in 10 oror 10 -1 (Frequent)(Frequent) 1 in 100 oror 10 -2 (Probable)(Probable) 1 in 1,000 oror 10 -3 (Occasional.) (Occasional.) 1 in 10,000 oror 10 -4 (Remote)(Remote) 1 in 100,000 oror 10 -5 (Improbable)(Improbable) 1 in 1,000,000 oror 10 -6 (Extremely remote)(Extremely remote)
Life Risk Case Study ALife Risk Case Study A ( Risk Type: Staff safety) ( Risk Type: Staff safety)
Unguarded machine – potential for limb Unguarded machine – potential for limb amputationamputation
Regular breakdowns and cloggingRegular breakdowns and clogging untrained operatorsuntrained operators No maintenance proceduresNo maintenance procedures 6 hours operation /day = 25% of 24 hr day6 hours operation /day = 25% of 24 hr day Regular accidents Regular accidents
Tie Line
Risk Calculator
• Low (A)
• Moderate (B)
• High (D)
I
II
III
V
VI
Risk types1 to 4
Risk Conseq. Exposure
( % time)
<1%
1%
25%
50%
( 24 hr day)
75%100%
iv
Frequency
Frequent (10 -1 )
Probable (10 -2 )
Occasional (10 -3 )
Remote (10 - 4 )
Improbable (10 -5 )
Extremely Remote (10 -6 )
• Substantial (C)
Risk Level
1 1
Improvement Option 1Improvement Option 1
Train staff and provide PPE ( traditional Train staff and provide PPE ( traditional response!)response!)
Same operating hours & machine set upSame operating hours & machine set up
Tie Line
Risk Calculator
• Low (A)
• Moderate (B)
• High (D)
I
II
III
V
VI
Risk types1 to 4
Risk Conseq. Exposure
( % time)
<1%
1%
25%
50%
( 24 hr day)
75%100%
iv
Frequency
Frequent (10 -1 )
Probable (10 -2 )
Occasional (10 -3 )
Remote (10 - 4 )
Improbable (10 -5 )
Extremely Remote (10 -6 )
• Substantial (C)
Risk Level
# 1# 1
Improvement Option 2Improvement Option 2
Train staff and provide PPE has been Train staff and provide PPE has been triedtried
Consider reducing operating hours to 3 Consider reducing operating hours to 3 hours per day = 12.5% of a 24 hour dayhours per day = 12.5% of a 24 hour day
Retain machine set up ( un-guarded)Retain machine set up ( un-guarded)
Tie Line
Risk Calculator
• Low (A)
• Moderate (B)
• High (D)
I
II
III
V
VI
Risk types1 to 4
Risk Conseq. Exposure
( % time)
<1%
1%
25%
50%
( 24 hr day)
75%100%
iv
Frequency
Frequent (10 -1 )
Probable (10 -2 )
Occasional (10 -3 )
Remote (10 - 4 )
Improbable (10 -5 )
Extremely Remote (10 -6 )
• Substantial (C)
Risk Level
# 2
# 2
Improvement Option 3Improvement Option 3
Guard the machine / provide appropriate interlocks, emergency shut off devices, power isolation facilities
Introduce maintenance lock off systems and permit to work
Train staff, resume normal hours Maintain the equipment