Chapter 3

NATIONAL MINERALS INDUSTRY SAFETY AND HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT GUIDELINE (NMISHRAG)

GO DIRECT TO:

Home » Chapter3

Chapter 3.pdf
Chapter 3
3. Setting The Context
	3.1 Introduction 3.2 Setting the strategic, organisational and risk management context 3.3 Defining required resources 3.4 Defining risk assessment project timing 3.5 Establishing clear accountability 3.6 Risk Assessment Pitfalls
3.	Setting the Context
3.1	Introduction
	As part of the overall management of hazards associated with any operation, it would be anticipated that the organisation would have a Safety Management System (SMS). This system would be an integral part of the operation's total management process. The purpose of the SMS is to ensure safe operation of a facility, by providing a comprehensive and integrated process for systematically managing all aspects of the adopted control measures. To achieve this purpose, the SMS must not only be comprehensive and integrated with respect to the control measures, it needs to be suitable and appropriate to the specific facility, it must be used in practice, and must be reviewed and revised whenever the circumstances require. A SMS will typically have a set of generic elements forming a continuous improvement cycle. Such a cycle could be Policy and objectives Standards and targets Planning and prioritising Implementation Monitoring Audit Corrective action Review with a continual improvement loop back. As a specific example, the API Model EHS Management System is comprised of 5 components in a continual improvement loop. The components are defined as:
		1. 2. 3. 4. 5.	Corporate vision, Policy and Management Commitment Plan Management Leadership Responsibilities/Accountabilities Risk Assessment/Management Compliance and other requirements EHS Planning and Programmes Do Personnel Training and Contractor Services Documentation and communications Facilities design and construction Operations, Maintenance and Management of Change Community Awareness and Emergency Response Assess EHS Performance Monitoring and Measurement Incident Investigation, Reporting and Analysis EHS Management Systems Audit Adjust Management Review and Adjustment

	As can be seen Risk Assessment/Management is a key component of the Planning stage on which the remainder of the cycle depends. This Guideline is focussed on this Risk Assessment component within the overall context of the SMS. For example, to explore more information on various Safety Management Systems approaches try:
			http://www.workcover.vic.gov.au/vwa/home.nsf/pages/so_majhaz_guidance/$File/GN12.pdf
			NSW Department of Urban Affairs and Planning, 1995. Guidelines for Preparation of Safety Management Systems, Hazardous Industries Planning Advisory Paper No.9. ISBN 0 7310 3062 6. This useful resource is only available as a hardcopy. The publication can be purchased online (http://www.planning.nsw.gov.au) or alternatively contact the Department.
			American Petroleum Institute, 1998. Model Environmental, Health and Safety (EHS) Management System, API 9100A. This useful resource is only available as a hardcopy. The publication can be purchased online (http://global.ihs.com/search_res.cfm?currency_code=USD&customer_id=21254D4D5BOA &shopping_cart_id=2724482F2F4A40304F5B4020250A&rid-AP&country_code=US&lang_ code=ENGL&input_doc_number=API%209100A&org_code=API)
			American Petroleum Institute, 1998. Guidance Document for Model EHS System, API 9100B. This useful resource is only available as a hardcopy. The publication can be purchased online (http://global.ihs.com/search_res.cfm?currency_code=USD&customer_id=21254D4D5EOA& shopping_cart_id=2724482F2F4A40304F5B4020250A&rid=API&country_code=US&lang_ code=ENGL&input_doc_number=API%209100B&org_code=API).

3.2	Setting the strategic, organisational and risk management context Expected outcomes of this step include:
			Corporate / site commitment
			There should be a documented organisation or site commitment to the process of proactively considering hazards and risks during the making of key decisions in the project or operation. This type of commitment may be mentioned in a risk management related documents but should be expanded in more detail, for example in a procedure, in order to deal with issues noted below.
			Application and defined expected deliverables of risk assessment & risk management
			The context for risk assessment (i.e. the procedure) in an organisation or site should identify the situations where application of risk assessment is required. THIS IS A KEY ISSUE. The selected applications would likely consider the most important decisions in the organisation. This might include identification of expected deliverables such as procedures, plans, operating guidelines, design review information or others. Defining the deliverables of the risk assessment is necessary before the selection of the most appropriate analytical method. (See Chapter 4 of this guideline on Scoping / Designing the Risk Assessment). Some organisations have “procedures’ that cover the method(s) of risk assessment but give little guidance on the reasons for applying the methods. THIS IS A KEY ISSUE This may lead to the situation where risk assessment is done without a clear image of the desired deliverable. In other words the objective is to do a risk assessment, rather than produce a useful deliverable such as a key plan, operational recommendations, design review recommendations, safe job procedure, etc. This problem may lead to ineffective use and appreciation of risk assessment.
	back to top
3.3	Defining required resources Resources are required for a risk assessment and, as such, should be recognised in the relevant policy or procedure. Resources for some risk assessment methods include a facilitator, a suitable team, a suitable room, information recording equipment, the required time, etc. However, in addition there may be resources to scope or design the risk assessment and resources to gather information on the existence, nature or magnitude of hazards, as well as resources to take the required action as a result of the assessment.
			Sometimes risk assessment teams are created with conveniently available personnel such as those on light duties, even though they may be, at best, only basically familiar with the system being reviewed when compared to other site personnel. This is undesirable and compromising to the entire process. THIS IS A KEY ISSUE
	back to top
3.4	Defining risk assessment project timing The timing of a risk assessment depends of the required deliverable but the general principle is the earlier the better. Sometimes the use of a life cycle approach can be helpful to consider the timing of risk assessment (Figure 3.1).

	Figure 3.1 The life cycle stages of a project.
			The Life Cycle illustrates the various stages in any project. The most cost effective timing for risk assessment is in the concept / design phase. THIS IS A KEY ISSUE. Risk Assessments should, at least, be done at the earliest possible point in each life cycle stage.
	Minimally, the timing of risk assessment should allow time for a quality analysis, as well as time to effectively apply the deliverables from the analysis. The context of risk assessment (such as a procedure) should include guidance on timing and resource expectations. The next tables provide an indication of what is being looked for at each of the stages in the project life cycle and indicate which techniques discussed later in this guideline might be appropriate for the particular stage. The choice of a specific technique depends on the specific project, study, timing etc.
	Table 3.1 Stage Issues

	Table 3.2 Applications of Assessment Methods
	Note: In the preceding table Checklists are identified as an assessment technique. A checklist identifies known hazards, potential design deficiencies and potential incident situations associated with common equipment or operations. It can be used for processes, equipment, materials and procedures. It is most commonly used when there is a significant, large body of experience or knowledge on the subject under study. However general checklists can sometimes be used for new or unusual designs. The method is usually limited to ensuring that a process, piece of equipment, material or procedure conforms to accepted standards. Checklists are noted for being exclusive rather than inclusive in the sense that if an issue is missing from the checklist it probably will be ignored. An example of a checklist for Acquisitions is given in the Appendices (See Acquisition Checklist). Checklists are not discussed any further in the guideline. LESSONS LEARNED 3.1 back to top
3.5	Establishing clear accountability
	The context (or procedure) must include the accountability for areas such as;
			initiation of a risk assessment in defined circumstances,
			planning or scoping the risk assessment,
			meeting the resource requirements,
			utilisation of facilitators (including consideration of external resources for complex assessments),
			methods for implementing deliverables, and
			checking the quality of risk assessment activities.
	LESSONS LEARNED 3.2 Finally, there are many textbooks available covering risk assessment, including a downloadable System Safety text that covers many of the principles and tools mentioned in this guideline. For example, to explore more information on various risk assessment approaches try:
			http://www.dfrc.nasa.gov/Business/DMS/PDF/DHB-S-001.pdf
	back to top
3.6	Risk Assessment Pitfalls
	Although risk assessment is a potentially powerful tool, as with all tools, if it is not used with care and understanding, the outcomes may well be totally incorrect and lead to bad decisions being made that are not supportable in reality. A recent report by HSE in the UK examined a range of assessments and identified the following “common” pitfalls.
			Carrying out a risk assessment to attempt to justify a decision that has already been made.
			Using generic assessment when a site specific assessment is needed.
			Carrying out a detailed, quantitative risk assessment without first considering whether any relevant good practice was applicable, or when relevant good practice exists.
			Carrying out a risk assessment using inappropriate good practice.
			Making decisions on the basis of individual risk estimates when societal risk is the appropriate measure.
			Only considering the risk from one activity.
			Dividing the time spent on the hazardous activity between several individuals – the “salami slicing” approach to risk estimation.
			Not involving a team of people in the assessment or not including employees with practical knowledge of the process/activity being assessed.
			Ineffective use of consultants.
			Failure to identify all hazards associated with a particular activity.
			Failure to consider all possible outcomes.
			Inappropriate use of data.
			Inappropriate definition of a representative sample of events.
			Inappropriate use of risk criteria.
			No consideration of ALARP arguments (i.e. using cost benefit analysis to attempt to argue that it is acceptable to reduce existing safety standards.
			Not doing anything with the results of the assessment.
			Not linking hazards with risk controls
	The full report is available on the HSE website at:
			http://www.hse.gov.uk/research/rrpdf/rr151.pdf
	back to top

For more information about the risk assessment guidelines (NMISHRAG) please contact the author:

Prof Jim Joy
Director, Minerals Industry Safety and Health Centre (MISHC)
Phone: 3365 8334
E-mail: j.joy@mishc.uq.edu.au

Chapter 3 is part of
National Minerals Industry Risk Assessment Guideline (NMISHRAG)

| LESSONS LEARNED| CASE STUDIES| USEFUL LINKS|

This document was last reviewed on 14/1/2005

Minerals Industry Safety & Health Centre (MISHC)
The University of Queensland
Brisbane, Queensland 4072 Australia
E-mail: mishc@mishc.uq.edu.au Phone:(61) 7 3365 9787
Created by: Dr Guldidar V Kizil E-mail: g.kizil@mishc.uq.edu.au
Authorised by: Prof Jim Joy
Last Modified:14/1/2005
@Minerals Industry Safety & Health Centre (MISHC)

Provides examples or illustrations of problems that can arise throughout the risk assessment process. They are mostly examples of past issues in the minerals industry.

Lessons Learned
Case Studies
Useful Links