HEALTH & SAFETY ALARP AN INTRODUCTION TO HOW FAR DO YOU HAVE TO GO TO REDUCE A RISK?
In previous issues we have introduced the risk management process, a simple method to assess risk (using risk assessment matrices) and the concept of risk tolerability using the diagram in Figure 1 (our “carrot diagram”).
ANYONE FOR T? So once a hazard has been identified, the risk assessed and evaluated, what happens next? The available options – the 4 T’s - are illustrated below.
Figure 2 – Options for Dealing with Risk Figure 1 – Tolerability of Risk
We discussed that when a risk falls within the bottom (green) region, it can be considered Broadly Acceptable and no further risk reduction is required. When in the top (red) region, the risk is considered Intolerable and measures must be taken to reduce the risk. In the middle (amber) region, further action must be taken to investigate additional risk reduction measures and implement them in order to reduce the risk As Low As Reasonably Practicable (ALARP).
Going back to the caged tiger example in our June/July 2011 article we could take the following action:
TERMINATE: Don’t keep tigers in the zoo, only have non-dangerous animals thus removing the hazard. Probably not a realistic option for zoos where the tiger is a main attraction.
TREAT: Make the cage from very strong materials, add locks and tightly control key access. Install barriers to keep visitors out of reach of the cage bars. This will control the risk.
TOLERATE: Once an appropriate level of measures are in place to protect against tiger escape, we accept the risk presented (assuming it is justified as ALARP).
TRANSFER: We could take out insurance against public liability should a tiger escape and attack a member of the public or staff however, our reputation would be significantly harmed and the zoo may even face closure.
In terms of safety, we tend not to be able to Transfer legal responsibility or at least not be able to isolate ourselves from the effect of an incident. Termination is straight forward in concept but the difficult task is when looking at the Treat and Tolerate areas, how far do we go in attempting to reduce the risk further? This takes us back to the amber region of our carrot diagram where a given risk is tolerable if it can be demonstrated ALARP.
34
www.windenergynetwork.co.uk
Increasing Risk
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140