Program Objectives In light of industrialization trends across the globe, new hazards are constantly introduced in many workplaces. This program aims to provide Young Safety Professionals (YSPs) from diverse backgrounds with the requisite skill to address the health and safety hazards in the modern workplace.

1. Risk Assessment Program
Trainer: Mr. Muizz Anibire, MSc
Tel: +966501296203, Email: muizzanibire10@gmail.com

2. Risk Treatment
The ISO 31000 Risk Management Process and Risk Treatment Tools

3. Risk Treatment
 Risk treatment is defined by ISO Guide 73 (ANSI/ASSE Z690.1-
2011) as the ‘process to modify risk’.
 Risk treatments that deal with negative consequences are sometimes
referred to as “risk mitigation”, “risk elimination”, “risk prevention”
and “risk reduction”. (ANSI/ASSE Z690.1-2011)
 Risk treatment involves the selection and application of risk
reduction measures for a risk which is judged to be unacceptable. It
is the end result or output of the risk assessment process used to
control the identified hazard and reduce its risk.
 Without acting upon the risk assessment’s findings and treating risk,
a risk assessment is of no value, and in fact may lead to negligence
of the organization (Popov, Lyon, Hollcroft, 2016).
 Decisions on treating a risk will likely depend on the costs and
benefits of risk and the costs and benefits of implementing
improved controls (refer to ALARP concept).

4. Risk Treatment
 Risk treatment can involve:
 avoiding the risk by deciding not to start or continue with the activity that
gives rise to the risk;
 taking or increasing risk in order to pursue an opportunity;
 removing the risk source;
 changing the likelihood;
 changing the consequences;
 sharing the risk with another party or parties [including contracts and risk
financing; and
 retaining the risk by informed decision.

5. Risk Treatment
 Risk treatment requires the risk assessment team or decision makers
to determine the options available, and their degree of risk
reduction, reliability, and associated cost to implement and maintain.
 Feasible control options that may reduce or eliminate the risk from
the identified hazard(s) are identified using internal and external
resources.
 Existing internal sources include the OSH professional, experienced
stakeholders and operators familiar with the hazard and control
methods. Input from affected workers knowledgeable in the
operation, equipment or process is advised.
 External resources such as manufacturers' literature and engineering
reports; OSH-related research from institutes, and professional
organizations such as ASSE and AIHA; regulatory standards and
guidance; industry best practices; industry consensus standards;
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH)
publications are also available.

6. Risk Treatment
 Risk treatment plans can involve a single control or multiple risk
reduction measures to accomplish the risk reduction desired.
Concepts such as ‘inherently safe design’, ‘layers of protection’,
‘recognized and generally accepted good engineering practices’
and ‘safer technology and alternatives’ along with the hierarchy
of controls should be incorporated into the risk treatment plan.
 Risk treatment selection requires a balancing of the overall costs,
and the financial and non-financial benefits, including legal and
regulatory requirements. This requires some investigation into
the suppliers of the risk treatment, and associated costs including
purchase price, installation, training, maintenance and services
costs, as well as the expected life span of the treatment.
 Risks with extremely high severity potential, but low likelihood may warrant
risk treatment even when the costs of the treatment are not justified in a
typical cost benefit analysis.

7. Risk Treatment Selection Methods

8. Risk Treatment
Note 1: Recognized and Generally Accepted Good Engineering Practices (RAGAGEP)
Introduced by OSHA in the CFR 29, 1910.119 Process Safety Management (PSM) standard.
RAGAGEP involves the selection and application of appropriate engineering, operating, and
maintenance knowledge when designing, operating and maintaining chemical facilities with the
purpose of ensuring safety and preventing process safety incidents.
Note 2: Safer Technology and Alternatives (STAA)
One risk reduction approach for chemical incident prevention developed and implemented by
industry and stakeholders, is the promulgation of requirements for safer technology and
alternatives or STAA. The concept of safer technology and alternatives has been incorporated
into both the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) Risk Management Plan standard
and OSHA’s Process Safety Management standard. STAA refers to risk reduction strategies
developed through analysis using a hierarchy of controls model illustrated in the figure next slide.

9. Risk Treatment: Safer Technology and Alternatives (STAA)

10. Documenting and Communicating Risk
 Risk assessment results should be well documented to
demonstrate the methods, communicate the results and to be
referred to and understood by different people at different times.
 In ANSI Z590.3-2011, 7.12, Document the Results, it suggests
documenting the names, titles, and qualifications of the risk
assessment team, the methods, hazards identified, risks, controls
and follow-up actions.
 A risk register is one well accepted method of documenting the
risk assessment and its results.
 The Risk Assessment has little value if it is not effectively communicated to
all affected stakeholders. Communication must start from the beginning,
during the context phase throughout the process and include monitoring and
verifying risk reduction results.

11. Documenting and Communicating Risk
Risk Register
Case
#
Location Task
Hazard
#
Hazard
Current
State
Risk
Level
Additional
Controls
Completion
Date
Future
State
Risk
Level
1 QC Lab Plasma cutter 1.1
Electrical
Shock 14.00 Adm. 2/20/15 12.00
1 QC Lab Plasma cutter 1.2 burns 15.20
Adm.,
PPE 3/15/15 12.00
1 QC Lab Plasma cutter 1.3 arc flash 11.20 Adm. 2/20/15 9.80
1 QC Lab Plasma cutter 1.4 noise 19.00 Eng. 3/15/15 8.40
1 QC Lab Plasma cutter 1.5 fire 14.00 Adm. 3/15/15 12.00
1 QC Lab Plasma cutter 1.6 dust 11.20 Adm. 3/15/15 9.60
2 QC Lab
Weld
Destruct 2.1
ergo-
strains 14.00 Adm. 4/15/15 12.00
2 QC Lab
Weld
Destruct 2.2 vibration 19.00 Elim. 4/15/15 4.80
2 QC Lab
Weld
Destruct 2.3 noise 11.20 PPE 4/15/15 10.80
2 QC Lab
Weld
Destruct 2.4 struck by 15.20 PPE 2/20/15 14.40
2 QC Lab
Weld
Destruct 2.5 dust 16.00 Multi-Eng. 4/15/15 8.40
2 QC Lab
Weld
Destruct 2.6
struck
against 11.40 Multi-Eng. 3/15/15 6.30
2 QC Lab
Weld
Destruct 2.7
falls same
level 16.00 Eng. 3/15/15 11.20
3
Finishin
g Wash Station 3.1 hot liquid 9.00 Sub. 4/15/15 6.30
3
Finishin
g Wash Station 3.2
struck
against 14.25 Elim. 4/15/15 0.20
3
Finishin
g Wash Station 3.3
chem-
corrosive 11.20 Sub. 4/15/15 4.20
3
Finishin
g Wash Station 3.4
hot
surfaces 14.25 Elim. 4/15/15 2.10
3
Finishin
g Wash Station 3.5 mechanical 9.60 Multi-Eng. 3/15/15 4.80
3
Finishin
g Wash Station 3.6
ergo-
strains 11.20 Elim. 4/15/15 0.20

12. Risk Treatment Tracking– Interactive Tool