Risk Assessment Page 6 of 6 FSC OPERATIONAL CODES OF PRACTICE No.9 : RISK ASSESSMENTS This is the Mandatory Operational Code of Practice for Risk Assessment produced by the Field Studies Council. 1. Introduction 2. Definitions and Usage of Terms 3. Responsibilities 4. Setting up and using Risk Assessment systems Table 1 : Assessment Scales for Risk Parameters Table 2 : Qualitative Statements for Risk Parameters Severity 5. Carrying out Risk Assessments 6. Safety Management 7. Review of Risk Assessments 8. Further guidance on specific items 1. Introduction Risk Assessments have been required by law since 1989. Initially, they were a requirement under the Control of Substances Hazardous to Health Regulations 1988 [now superseded by the COSHH Regulations 1995]. However, several pieces of legislation now, either directly or by implication, determine that risk assessments are needed for any work place or work activity in which there is a hazard. All workplaces and work activities will have the potential to adversely affect the well-being of people who are in those workplaces or who are carrying out particular work activities. Guidance Note The term 'well-being' covers all aspects of a person's health, safety and welfare. When carrying out risk assessments, it is important not just to consider or concentrate on those factors which may cause immediate and obvious harm to a person e.g. an uneven floor which may cause a person to trip or fall, so causing a physical injury. Some factors may have more subtle or long term effects on a person's physical health e.g. excessive dust may trigger asthmatic attacks ; exposure to certain chemicals may eventually result in cancer. Others can affect a person's mental or psychological health e.g. the frequent occurrence of headaches [as a result of incorrect use of a VDU] can impair a person's ability to 'lead a normal life', aside from the actual pain and direct effects of the headache itself lack of adequate toilet and restroorn facilities may be an important consideration for employees who are also expectant or new mothers. Lastly [although no-one may suffer direct harm] the loss of property or equipment, e.g. as the result of a fire, can have a profound effect on 'employee's welfare' if it leads to the closure of a business and subsequent redundancy of the employees. The purposes of Risk Assessments are: To identify the factors which could cause harm. To gauge the potential for harm in terms of likelihood of occurrence and severity of outcome. To decide what steps are being or can be taken to minimise the possibility of harm being caused. In the light of the information so gained, to establish or achieve a specified conclusion / outcome, i.e. a particular activity at a particular location may been undertaken by designated personnel provided it is done in a particular manner which involves certain precautions. It is important that all 'findings' in relation to the above purposes are adequately recorded. Such records provide evidence that the Risk Assessments have been carried out properly. In addition, these records have three other functions : Circumstances and situations may change. Risk Assessments therefore need to be periodically reviewed or repeated. The records then provide a 'baseline' against which any changes can be judged. They can prevent unnecessary repetition of the actual Risk Assessment process e.g. the potential for harm involved in 'undertaking fieldwork on rocky shores' may remain the same regardless of the actual locations being used. Once a conclusion / outcome has been decided upon, it is important that it is implemented. The records therefore provide both an 'instruction manual' which can be followed by employees, and a 'rule book' against which periodic monitoring procedures can check / confirm that implementation is taking place. Failure to carry out Risk Assessment properly can result in: People's lives being ruined because of injuries and physical or mental ill-health. The reduction in or total prevention of a business's ability to operate successfully. Legal proceedings being taken against the person or persons who have failed to fulfil this responsibility, with the possibility of heavy fines and / or imprisonment. Guidance Note In a recent case [resulting from a fatal incident involving heavy metal structures] the company concerned was successfully prosecuted and very heavily fined not on the basis of the accident itself or the fatality, but on the grounds that they had not carried out an adequate Risk Assessment of the means and manner in which the metal structures had been stored. Historically, the FSC has a 'good safety record' in that the number of incidents or occurrences, which have had serious outcomes, has been relatively small. This may be partly due to the fact that Unit premises and activities are such that they would not be regarded as 'high risk' when compared to, for example, the chemical manufacturing industry, or offshore oil exploration and production. However, it is also evidence that staff, through their experience and training, have already carried out Risk Assessments. It is therefore envisaged that, in undertaking Risk Assessments, Units will be largely 'formalising' this situation by producing adequate records of the relevant Risk Assessments. Whilst this will undoubtedly involve time and effort on the part of the staff involved, it will not necessarily result in major changes to premises, equipment or activities being required. 2. Definitions and Usage of Terms The Health and Safety Executive [HSE] has defined a hazard as something with the potential to cause harm, including ill health and injury, to persons or to cause damage to property, equipment, etc. Guidance Note In this context, the 'something' may be : A feature of a particular location, e.g. being near to a cliff edge presents the possibility of falling from the cliff edge. A feature of a particular piece of equipment or its use, e.g. using a grass strimmer presents the possibility of debris being thrown up into the operator's face. A feature of a particular activity, e.g. preparing food presents the possibility of food poisoning occurring. The HSE defines a risk as the likelihood of a hazard causing harm in practice. However, in the "Management of Health and Safety at Work Approved Code of Practice" [19921, the HSE discusses the 'extent of the risk' and thus widens the definition so that any 'risk' should be viewed not only in terms to the likelihood of the hazard actually occurring, but also in terms of the severity of its outcome. Further, in terms of 'severity', there are two aspects to be considered : Who might be harmed or, more correctly, how many people might be harmed. The nature, extent or scale of the harm which is caused. On the basis of such considerations, an assessment should enable the assessor to determine whether A risk is insignificant and therefore the hazard is acceptable, or A risk is significant and therefore the hazard is unacceptable. If it is decided that a risk is significant, then the hazard [location, equipment, activity] must not be faced or encountered until or unless some action is taken to manage the risk which either Reduces the likelihood of the hazard actually occurring, or Reduces the severity of its outcome in terms of who is affected by the harm or of the scale of the harm caused. Guidance Note This widening of the meaning of the term 'risk' can be confusing and is best clarified by the following examples: Food preparation involves the use of kitchen knives. These knives present a hazard in that they have the potential to cause cuts. The cuts are usually small and heal quickly so the severity of harm is minor. However, such cuts can occur frequently to the same person or occasionally to many people, so the likelihood is high and therefore the risk is significant and steps must be taken to manage the hazard. Electric shock from equipment powered by mains electricity is a hazard and the severity of outcome is high because it could result in death. However, with properly designed and modem equipment, there is only a small likelihood of a person receiving an electric shock and therefore the risk is insignificant [and will remain so, provided the equipment is inspected regularly and maintained so as to ensure it is safe to use]. Many cleaning chemicals are described as 'Harmful' or 'Corrosive' because they will cause bums if spilt on exposed skin [or worse if swallowed]. They therefore represent a hazard which has the potential to cause severe harm. With well informed and instructed cleaning staff, the risk is insignificant because the staff will take adequate care to ensure that the chemicals are not spilt during use [and certainly will not drink the chemicals!] i.e. the hazard is acceptable because the likelihood of the hazard actually occurring is slight.However, leaving such chemicals on an open shelf or in an unlocked storage cupboard means that the risk becomes significant in that unauthorised persons [visitors who may lack the experience and responsibility to appreciate the hazard] now have unsupervised access to the chemicals and the likelihood of harm occurring has increased to an unacceptable level. The term 'Risk Assessment' can be applied to the actual process of identifying hazards and deciding on the level of risk involved. When used with this meaning, there is the implication that the assessment must be carried out before the hazard is to be encountered i.e. before a location or a piece of equipment is used, or a particular activity undertaken. However, it is also an ongoing and continuous process in that all staff must remain observant in situations which have been assessed as 'hazardous' [even if steps have been taken to make any hazard acceptable]. If staff become aware that the situation is changing or has changed so that the risk has become significant, then they must modify their actions or take appropriate steps to return to a 'safe condition'. 'Risk Assessment' is also applied to safety management procedures and practices and the conclusion / outcome derived from the identification decision process referred to above. [It is usually clear from the context in which the term is used if it is this meaning which is being implied.] A conclusion / outcome can take one of a number of forms : Model or Generic Risk Assessment where the conclusion / outcome is drawn from the general information derived from a number of similar workplaces or work activities. For example, FSC OCoP No.7 Safety for Swimmers describes the steps [management procedures] which must be undertaken by all Units before allowing students to swim. Additionally, this FSC OCoP contains information derived from a Model Risk Assessment produced by ROSPA in connection with safety procedures for swimming in general. Special Risk Assessment made by an outside body to cover novel situations of which an organisation or its staff have little experience or knowledge of the hazards involved or the safety management which must be employed. For example, the FSC has consulted the Communicable Diseases Surveillance Unit in order to provide Units with information on Lyme Disease. Adaptation of the above by a Unit to fit its particular circumstances. For example, the FSC requires that first aid kits are available at Units in order to carry out initial / emergency treatment of any injuries. The decision as to the numbers, location and contents of such kits is a matter for the UM in the context of their experience and knowledge of the Unit and its activities. Modification of the above made by a particular staff member in response to a specific circumstance. For example, the FSC may require that appropriate Personal Protective Equipment is provided to all staff using hazardous equipment. A Unit may therefore specify that a wire mesh face guard must be worn when using a strimmer. A staff member, who found that the face guard was broken, could still carry out the strimming of a lawn edge wearing safety goggles With the exception of a modification [as described in d. above], it is preferable that any conclusion / outcome is made as a statement in writing, or can refer to such statements. As indicated, certain FSC OCoPs provide such statements, as do materials such as HSE publications, 'safety instructions / advice' provided by manufacturers and suppliers, text books on specific topics or activities [eg. Catering manuals containing information on food hygiene],.etc. A Unit's USOs may contain specific statements related to that Unit and may be further supplemented by 'point-of-use texts' which are available at Units. Fieldwork Site Information documents, student worksheets, schemes of work, cleaning schedules, vehicle checklists are all examples of where statements or reminders of 'safety procedures' can be made. Guidance Note There is much to recommend the practice of including specific Risk Assessment [Conclusion 1 Outcome] statements in 'point-of-use' documents. These documents are in daily use, so: There is a better chance that they will be read and implemented. If there are any changes in the hazards or risks, it is more likely that any consequent modification to these Risk Assessments will be considered and the statements modified accordingly. 3. Responsibilities The FSC, as an employer, has a legal responsibility to undertake risk assessment as part of its general duty to ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable, the health, safety and welfare of its employees and other persons at its workplaces. Given the geographic dispersion of its Units and the variation in the Unit's premises and activities, the FSC delegates to UMs the responsibilities of setting up a system of Risk Assessments at each Unit. However, the FSC provides information and instruction on Risk Assessments through FSC OCoPs and the Red Safety File held by each Unit, which in turn refer to other Model Risk Assessments. The FSC retains the responsibility for ensuring that Risk Assessments are carried out by Units. Such auditing and monitorings, as is necessary to fulfil this responsibility, will be carried out by the FSC Systems Officer during periodic visits to Units at the direction of the CEO. Employees are legally required to have regard for their own health and safety and that of others at a workplace, and to co-operate with their employer on such matters. In this respect, they must carry out their activities according to the information and instruction provided by the FSC, including that for Risk Assessments. Further, employees must inform an appropriate line manager [UM, FSC Systems Officer, CE01 or staff representative of what they consider, in respect to Risk Assessments, to be : Serious failures in safety arrangements or procedures. Serious hazards and risks which have not been identified. Changes in hazards and risks which may require Risk Assessments to be reviewed and modified. Aside from their personal responsibility in this context [as an FSC employee], UMs must : Inform staff of their responsibilities. Encourage and develop such responsibility amongst staff. 4. Setting up and using Risk Assessment systems Guidance Note The Health and Safety Commission, in 'Management of Health and Safety at Work Approved Code of Practice' 1992 note: '.....There are no fixed rules about how a Risk Assessment should be undertaken…..' '.....The aim is to identify the significant risks in the workplace…..' That the 'significant findings of risk assessment' should be recorded. Employers need to be able to demonstrate that '…..they have undertaken a suitable and sufficient assessment…..' and also that '…..if circumstances change, the assessment can be readily reviewed and…..revised.'. UMs must ensure that all Risk Assessments are carried out such that compliance with items b., c. and d. of the above guidance note is achieved. Guidance Note There is no implication or intention that Risk Assessments have to be undertaken so that records are made on forms of a single, pre-determined format / style which are then kept altogether at one known location. An HSE inspector would need to be satisfied that hazards had been identified and considered, and that any appropriate actions had or were being been taken. For example, an inspector could ask about 'chemical safety'. Separate and different records that 'use of chemicals' : Had been considered as part of an overall risk assessment of the Unit's main office carried out by an experienced secretary. Featured in a list of 'Hazards associated with household cleaning' provided to all cleaning staff. Had resulted in an instruction to the appropriate line manager, stating that a particular cleaning material was not to be purchased because a named, less hazardous alternative was available, being recorded in the minutes of staff meetings under the permanent agenda item 'Health & Safety'. Was included amongst the warnings and safety advice in the teaching notes associated with a particular fieldwork activity. Involved the UM keeping a list of all chemicals held, together with records to show that the UM monitored the situation by periodically checking the list against the actual holdings and carrying out any required actions / amendments. would probably provide more satisfactory evidence to the inspector that 'risk assessment and safety management were actually being practised by the Unit' than solely having a file labelled 'Chemical Risk Assessments' kept on a shelf in the UM's office. Guidance Note The HSC comment that the 'significant risks' should not be obscured by 'concentrating on trivial risks'. A frequently stated example of such a 'trivial risk' is that of electrical shock. UMs must exercise caution in considering this and similar hazards at a workplace. Guidance Note Where the electrical supply circuits have been installed in a workmanlike manner and using materials and parts which comply with current standards, then the risk of electrical shock is 'insignificant' and [since the hazard is therefore 'acceptable'] it does not need to be considered when carrying out risk assessments in every area or on every occasion at a workplace. But, as examples : Old electrical installations do deteriorate over time eg. rubber covering and insulation on cables and flexes becomes brittle and breaks off, thus exposing bare metal wires. [There is a recommendation that generally, in domestic premises, the electrical wiring is inspected and / or replaced at least every 20 -25 years.] Rodents in premises will gnaw through insulation coverings of electrical wiring which is not chased into walls or protected by conducting, thus exposing bare metal wires. Given the nature and location of Unit premises, it would be appropriate to have a full inspection of the electrical systems undertaken by a suitably qualified person unless there is documented evidence that the electrical systems have been satisfactorily installed [or previously inspected] within the past 10 years. A written report of such an inspection, indicating that the electrical system was considered 'safe', would then provide evidence that the hazard had been considered and the findings recorded. It would also enable, for example, a statement "Electrical wiring need not be considered amongst possible hazards, since it has been checked and found sound" to be made in a 'point-of-use' guidance text / instruction provided to staff carrying out risk assessments. Modem electrical equipment will comply with approved safety standards. The same may not be true of older equipment. Even when such equipment is 'maintained', internal [and not 'visible or obvious'] faults, failures or breakages may render such equipment unsafe. Hence the requirements for periodic safety inspections and checks such as those legally required for portable electrical equipment, and the FSC requirement for quarterly visual checks on electrical sockets, etc. Although UMs may delegate the responsibility of carrying out Risk Assessments or of adapting Model Risk Assessments to other designated staff, UMs must ensure that any such staff are competent to do so. In this respect, the staff should be experienced and should be familiar with the location, equipment, activity, etc. The UM must record the name[s] / post[s] of the person[s] given this responsibility Using Model Risk Assessments Where Model Risk Assessments exist, other authorities or experts have decided that a significant risk exists or may exist, and they state or suggest appropriate safety management steps to be taken in order to make the hazard acceptable. Examples of such Model Risk Assessments include operating instructions provided by equipment manufacturers, product COSHH data sheets provided by chemical suppliers and safety texts such as the CLEAPSS Laboratory Handbook. Guidance Note Care should be taken to ensure that such information is reliable in that it is up-to-date [i.e. the text has been produced / published recently], and is of sufficient precision as to be of value [e.g. a specific concentration for a chemical' s usage is stated, rather than simply a note 'Dilute with water before use']. In these circumstances i.e. having identified that a hazard exists, there is no need for Units to document a Risk Assessment in terms of establishing the likelihood, extent or severity of the risks. For example, in carrying out a Risk Assessment in relation to cleaning operations, it may be observed that containers for a particular cleaning chemical bear hazard classification labels [Irritant, Harmful, Toxic, Corrosive, etc.]. The Risk Assessment can then simply note 'Cleaning chemical X - known hazard [Corrosive] ; Significant risk'. Units can then consult the appropriate Model Risk Assessment [i.e. manufacturer's or supplier's safety information] in order to decide on the safety management procedures which will be established in connection with the use of that chemical in the Unit's cleaning operations. The Risk Assessment could note ' Provide all cleaning staff with written instructions for storage and use of chemical X including action to be taken in event of spillages.', i.e. the recorded safety management procedure is 'point-of-use documentation' In 'keeping the above records', there is not any implication that this should take the form of a series of documents of a single format kept in a known location at the Unit premises. It is considered that such 'records' could largely be in the form of 'point of-use' material. Such material provides confirmation / evidence to the HSE that : Hazards have been considered / appreciated and Model Risk Assessments used. The Model Risk Assessments have been appropriately adapted customised. The adapted / customised material can be readily reviewed and revised. Guidance Note By way of examples: Pictogram / notices are commercially available to place adjacent to meat-slicing machines which warn that the equipment is only to be operated by staff over 18 years old. A second pictogram / notice is also available which states that only designated staff are to clean such machinery [an activity recognised as being more hazardous than operating the machine] and provides sufficient blank area for the names of these staff to be written in by hand. Teaching notes for tutors, on a vegetation sampling activity involving point-quadrat frames, should advise that: 'Students MUST be warned not to carry the frames assembled or with the stand spikes protruding from bags and rucksacks because of the risk of injury if they fall or if someone walks or stumbles into them.' Instructions for a technician setting up for EDTA titrations could include notes that: Solochrome indicator is toxic, ammonia buffer is corrosive and refer them to COSHH statements on these chemicals. Reagent bottles must have appropriate hazard labels. Care to be exercised when clearing away because of risks from residues left in flasks and other containers. However, Units must record The source or reference for the Model Risk Assessment. Guidance Note In a list of 'hazardous kitchen equipment' provided to catering staff, a Head Chef could include the note 'See Manufacturer's Instructions [kept in Yellow Kitchen File] before operating or cleaning any of this equipment'. The steps which are to be taken to comply with the Model Risk Assessment or adapt / customise the Model Risk Assessment to their specific circumstances. Guidance Note Consideration may need to be given to the location of a bench grinder or to other activities / materials in a workshop area in response to a manufacturer's warning that 'Use of the grinder produces metal fragments which are sharp and very hot' since this indicates a risk of fire as well as that of personal injury to an operator. Under HACCP procedures, caterers are advised to 'purchase goods from reputable suppliers'. Consideration needs to be given to how it is established that a supplier is reputable : Seeking confirmation in writing that supplier keeps temperature records for frozen goods stored on their premises. Visiting supplier's premises to ensure that vermin control measures are adequate. Dulux note that '....Where possible, water-based paints should be selected in preference to solvent-based paints - particularly for any large interior surface area such as walls, ceilings and floors....' and '....When solvent based paints are applied to trim areas such as doors, skirting boards, windows and radiators, or when used out of doors, solvent vapour does not present a problem providing they are correctly applied in accordance with the can instructions….'. Such advice may have a bearing on the timing and extent of any painting undertaken as part of premises maintenance programmes e.g. having one person spending limited periods over several days applying gloss paint in a poorly ventilated room, rather having several people trying 'to get the entire job done in a single day' before moving onto the next room. The means by which appropriate personnel are informed of, instructed or trained in these steps. Guidance Note In deciding upon the means, consideration will need to be given to factors such as : The person's experience Is a new tutor familiar with the determination of water hardness by EDTA titration? Has a placement student ever had to dilute concentrated sulphuric acid before? Their age A-level students may not require the written and spoken warnings 'to wear eye protection' and supervision of the activity which could be necessary with a group of Year 8 pupils. The wording / style of safety advice may need to be different on worksheets for KS2 pupils to that on KS4 worksheets. Their knowledge Do cleaning staff know what to do if they find laboratory chemicals inadvertently left out? Do office staff comply with instructions about which way up containers should be stored when taking delivery of chemicals and equipment? Is English the first written and spoken language of staff? Where no Model Risk Assessment exists Having identified a hazard, staff may be unable to find a relevant Model Risk Assessment [ie. suggestions for the safe management of the hazard, the risk of which has previously been assessed as significant]. In such circumstances, staff will have to decide upon the likelihood, extent and severity of outcome of the risk in order to determine its significance. [Only if the risk is considered to be significant will it then be necessary to determine the appropriate steps to be taken in order to manage the risk.] Guidance Note In order to determine the significance of a risk, attempts can be made to quantify the various parameters using arbitary numerical scales [see Table 1 below]. This process can then be extended by combining the various scale values into a single 'Risk Assessment Score [RAS]' and using this RAS to indicate the significance of the risk and the necessity 1 requirement to then specify appropriate safety management [see Calculation 1 below]. However, such scales do not take into account the 'extent of outcome' [number of people affected] which is considered to be an important aspect by the HSC. To do so [especially by another arbitary numerical scale] would complicate any attempt to determine the significance of the risk by interpreting the three scale values or any RAS derived from them. Guidance Note Another possibility is to simply make qualitative statements with regard to the risk parameters i.e. 'Low', 'Medium' or 'High'. Such statements can make the determination of the significance of the risk easier [see Table 2 below]. Any valid, meaningful decision as to the significance of a risk will depend upon the experience and knowledge of the person carrying out the risk assessment. To a greater or less extent, a similar consideration will apply to a person's ability to identify hazards and to decide upon appropriate safety management. Guidance Note By way of example, if a staff member was using Table 1 below to assess risk significance - Does the statement 'Highly unlikely to ever occur', when applied to a particular hazard, relate only to FSC [or even a particular Unit's] operations and activities or should a more general view of the occurrence of that hazard in workplaces or as a result of work activities be taken. If the identified hazard was 'Fall, trip or slip on uneven / damaged floor surface', staff [in the light of their Unit's own accident records] could assess the likelihood of occurrence as scale value 3. However, they could be equally justified in assigning a scale value of 5 on the grounds that such a hazard is generally acknowledged as the commonest cause of injuries in workplaces. The knowledge that [within the FSC], whilst most falls, trips and slips on steep ground would lead to an RAS of 9 [LO value 3 x SO value 31, a fatality as a result of this hazard has occurred [RAS = LO 2 x SO 5 = 101 may lead staff to given more careful consideration to a work situation in which this hazard had been identified. For this reason, UMs must exercise suitable care when selecting staff to undertake risk assessments and must encourage such staff to seek the advice of and consult with their colleagues throughout any risk assessment which they undertake. Table 1 : Assessment Scales for Risk Parameters Scale Value Likelihood of Occurrence 1 Highly unlikely to ever occur 2 May occur but rarely 3 Does occur but only rarely 4 Occurs from time to time 5 Likely to occur often     Scale Value Severity of Outcome 1 Slight inconvenience 2 Minor injury requiring first aid 3 Medical attention required 4 Major injury leading to hospitalisation 5 Fatality or serious injury leading to disability [6] Multiple fatalities Calculation 1 For Hazard X : Scale Value for 'Likelihood of Occurrence [LO]' determined as 3. Scale Value for 'Severity of Outcome [SO]' determined as 4. Risk Assessment Score [RAS] = LO value x SO value = 3 x 4 = 12 Since RAS exceeds 10, activity / operation must only be undertaken if appropriate safety management steps are in place 1 used to reduce the risk to acceptable levels. Even if RAS is less than 10, any reasonable safety management steps should still be taken so as to further reduce the risk. Only if the RAS is 3 or less should it be considered that the risk is insignificant and that safety management steps are not likely to be necessary / required for a particular hazard. Table 2 : Qualitative Statements for Risk Parameters Severity Likelihood Severity Extent Possible interpretation Low Low Low No significant Risk Low Low Medium No significant Risk Low Low High Possible significant Risk Low Medium Low Possible significant Risk Low Medium Medium Possible significant Risk Low Medium High Possible significant Risk Low High Low Possible significant Risk Low High Medium Probable significant Risk Low High High Probable significant Risk Medium Low Low Possible significant Risk Medium Low Medium Probable significant Risk Medium Low High Probable significant Risk Medium Medium Low Probable significant Risk Medium Medium Medium Significant Risk Medium Medium High Significant Risk Medium High Low Significant Risk Medium High Medium Significant Risk Medium High High Significant Risk High Low Low Possible significant Risk High Low Medium Probable significant Risk High Low High Significant Risk High Medium Low Significant Risk High Medium Medium Significant Risk High Medium High Significant Risk High High Low Significant Risk High High Medium Significant Risk High High High Significant Risk 5. Carring out Risk Assessments Most of the risk assessments carried out by Unit staff will be for existing work activities. There will be relatively few occasions when staff will be dealing with the introduction of an entirely new work activity, and it is even less likely that staff would be carrying out risk assessments involving new workplaces. Staff [carrying out risk assessments] must be aware of this position and the possibility that, because of either their own familiarity with the workplace or activity, or existing [but unstated / unrecorded] safety management steps, they may: Fail to recognise / identify a hazard. Underestimate the level of risk posed by a hazard. Guidance Note An irritant cleaning chemical is a hazard and the risk is significant. The presence 1 use of the chemical at a Unit's premises will result in a Risk Assessment which identifies the hazard and records that it constitutes a significant risk. The Risk Assessment will then go on to record that existing safety management steps are in place to reduce the risk, namely : Written instructions for correct use of the chemical are provided to all cleaning staff. The chemical is stored in locked cupboards to prevent unauthorised access / use by other staff and by visitors. Further [in cases of an identified hazard for which no Model Risk Assessment exists] staff in assessing and recording the level / significance of the risk posed by the hazard, must disregard any safety management which is already in place when making and stating their determination as to risk. Guidance Note By treating and by noting the identification of a hazard and the level of risk posed by the hazard as independent Of and separate from other parts of the risk assessment process and record: The HSE requirements, that risk assessments should be full and appropriate, but only significant findings need be recorded, are fulfilled. Any statements [as to safety management] can then be taken to have the implication that such steps are those considered reasonable / necessary to reduce the risk to a level where the hazard may be considered acceptable. 6. Safety Management Safety management steps must be taken where : The risk posed by an identified hazard has been assessed as significant i.e. an RAS of 4 or more [see Table 1 and Calculation 1 above] ; all risk interpretations apart from those labelled 'No significant risk' [see Table 2 above]. It is necessary that the work place is used or the work operation carried out. [NB. With regard to educational activities : is the activity worth doing, does it make an educational point {including 'awe and wonder'} effectively?] Safety management can eliminate the hazard itself. Guidance Note For example : The hazards posed by the occasional use of a corrosive chemical during cleaning operations will be eliminated by substituting another non-corrosive chemical even if this chemical then has to be used more frequently in order to achieve the same 'cleaning standard'. The hazards posed by the occasional use of a strimmer to an operator [e.g. a Unit handyperson], because of their inexperience / unfamiliarity I 'lack of practice', may be eliminated by employing a specialist contractor to carry out the necessary work. Safety management directed at the risk parameters posed by a hazard can reduce the parameters to an 'acceptable level' but does not eliminate either the risk or the hazard itself. Guidance Note For example, road traffic accidents are a hazard of using motor vehicles. Speed restrictions, driver training lessen the likelihood of an RTA occurring &crumple zones', seat belts, airbags, etc. lessen the severity of outcome ; but RTAs still happen and people still get hurt. Safety management must be reasonable and appropriate to the nature of the hazard and the level of risk involved. Guidance Note For example, given that 'slipping on wet surfaces' is a common cause of accidents and injuries, : Use of suitable temporary 'A-board signs' may be all that is required to alert people to the fact that a corridor is being cleaned, the floor is wet and that they should exercise due caution / care when moving along the corridor. [The notice lessens the 'likelihood of occurrence' for a hazard where the most probable 'severity of outcome' is either a sprain / bruising or the dislocation or fracture of a limb.] A wet surface as a result of cleaning a staircase may require the use of warning signs and physical barriers to prevent access to the staircase, combined with the provision of directions to an alternative route. [Even though the likelihood of occurrence would be reduced, allowing 'cautioned people' access to the area would remain an unacceptable risk in that the 'severity of outcome' for a fall on the staircase would remain as 'possible fatality from head injuries received'. An external metal fire-escape which becomes slippy in wet / cold weather would require the use of antislip paint or antislip tiles and stair nosings on the treads [ Obviously access to an emergency escape can not be restricted or prevented because of the weather ; use of it will be by people moving rapidly in the stressful conditions of an emergency situation and who are therefore unlikely to be heeding notices warning of 'Slippy surface when wet'.] Although the approach has its place in safety management [particularly for use by FSC staff], steps do not need to involve or consist solely of verbal, written or pictorial safety information, instructions and warnings. Examples of alternative approaches are given in Appendix 1. Where a hazard has been identified and the risk assessed as 'considerable', i.e. RAS of 10 or more [see Table 1 and Calculation 1 above] or the risk interpretation labelled as 'Significant Risk' [see Table 2 above], the work activity must not continue or be undertaken until and unless safety management steps are or can be taken either to eliminate the hazard or to reduce the risk. Where safety management steps are already in place and such steps are considered adequate to control the hazard, it is only necessary, as part of the risk assessment, to record this fact. It is not necessary to consider or implement further safety management [To do so, could or would be unreasonable or inappropriate to the nature of the hazard or the risk posed by it.]. However, there are situations in which further or new safety management action may be considered or required : When a new work activity is introduced or a new work place is used. When information or instruction is received that a previously used Model Risk Assessment has been revised or changed. When a change in an existing work activity or place results in the risk assessment for that activity or place being reviewed. When an incident at a workplace or as a result of a work activity results in a review of the risk assessment. When the carrying out of a risk assessment of an existing work activity or work place indicates that existing safety management is not adequate to control the hazard or the risk posed by the hazard. In such situations, any recommendations for further or new safety management must be recorded as part of the risk assessment, and the UM must make a written record of prioritisation for the recommendations ie. which are to be implemented, by what date and by whom. Guidance Note Depending upon the nature of the hazard and the risk involved, to have refused or unnecessarily delayed the implementation of a safety management recommendation on the grounds of financial costs or time involved could, in the event of an incident involving an uncontrolled hazard, be held to have been 'unreasonable' in the general terms / context of the HSW Act and liability then claimed as a result. 7. Review of Risk Assessments Risk Assessments should not be regarded as permanent. They must be reviewed and amended if appropriate whenever such a review is considered necessary. Generally, the situations described in section 6.8.a - d would result in a risk assessment being reviewed. The FSC requires that UMs must confirm annually that any necessary reviews of risk assessments have been carried out. 8. Further guidance on specific items The HSE publication '5 Steps to Risk Assessment' [INDG 163L] provides a proforma for carrying out risk assessments. Various versions of this proforma have been or are being used by Units particularly as a recording sheet for noting any hazards identified when actually carrying out a risk assessment. Where such proformas are used, they must clearly indicate: The purpose of the risk assessment, eg. Fire risk in building X, Manual handling by household and kitchen staff, etc. The person carrying out the risk assessment. The date on which the risk assessment was carried out. It may be useful to have a checklist of potential hazards [as an aide memoir] when carrying out risk assessments for a number of activities or locations where the same or similar hazards may exist, e.g. when assessing fieldwork sites. However, such checklists must be used carefully : Hazards which do not actually exist must be deleted from the record. The activity or location must be examined critically so that all hazards are identified even if they are not on the check list. The risk level posed by a hazard must be assessed for each activity or location, i.e. it must not be assumed that risk is always the same. As noted in other sections, it is recommended that risk assessments are carried out by staff who are experienced in or familiar with the location or activity being assessed. It can also be recommended that risk assessments should be carried out when visitors are present in a Unit since their presence may have a bearing on the identified hazards and their significance. For example, in carrying out a fire risk assessment, : Having 20 people leaving a room via a single emergency exit route could be totally different to having to evacuate 70+ people along the same route. An emergency exit route may appear 'hazard free' unless it is appreciated / observed that a set of coathooks along the route results in the route being compromised by the presence of outdoor clothing, boots, bags and other equipment left by visitors returning from a fieldwork activity. It may be more realistic, provided there is an appreciation of the relevant and normal activities / operations carried out, to undertake a risk assessment for a particular type of hazard than to attempt to identify all the risks which may be present in a particular location. For example : An assessment of fire risk on a room by room basis throughout an entire building will be more focussed than carrying out a general assessment of the building, trying to identify all the hazards which could potentially be present in any room or area. An assessment could be made of all chemicals used in connection with Unit activities / operations. Use of a focussed approach [so as to ensure that hazards are not overlooked] may also be achieved by breaking down particular activities or operations into their constituent parts, rather than attempting to assess the activity operations as a whole. For example : By assessing the hazards and risks posed in 'cleaning' by considering manual handling, use of equipment, use of chemicals, lone working, etc. separately. For a 'teaching day', a full risk assessment of the 'fieldwork' could be made separately from a risk assessment of any associated 'laboratory analysis session'. The person undertaking a particular risk assessment should be aware of other risk assessments which have been carried out [so as to avoid unnecessary repetition]. For example, in carrying out a risk assessment for a particular 'teaching day', : It is not necessary to consider / include / record the general hazards posed by transporting people to and from the fieldwork site if this is already covered by a risk assessment for 'Minibus Operations'. However, staff should remain alert to specific hazards which may have a bearing on the other risk assessments, eg. What to do with equipment, such as pondnets, ranging poles, etc., which pose a hazard to a vehicle's occupants if they are not securely / safely stowed in a vehicle. If the 'teaching day' included the carrying out of a Winkler titration, the risk assessment [of that 'teaching day'] could simply note "Winkler Titration - Hazardous Activity - See 'Risk Assessments for Laboratory Techniques' file". | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | Page 6 of 6