Risk Evaluation
How does risk evaluation differ technically from risk analysis in WorkSafeBC/CSA terms?
Risk analysis focuses on estimating risk by determining likelihood and severity of harm for each hazard, using data from walkthroughs and incident history. Risk evaluation compares those estimated risks against risk criteria, including legal limits, standards like CSA Z432, and organizational tolerance, to produce decisions on acceptability, required treatment, and prioritization.
What constitutes 'risk criteria' for evaluation under CSA ISO 31000 / WorkSafeBC?
Risk criteria include regulatory minimums (e.g., OHS Regulation requirements), standards and codes (e.g., CSA Z432), organizational tolerances and policies (e.g., risk appetite), and industry best practice. These benchmarks are used to judge if a risk is acceptable or requires action.
How should SafeDesk structure a compliant risk evaluation record for WorkSafeBC inspections?
A robust record should include hazard identification details, risk analysis results (likelihood, severity, rating), risk evaluation (criteria applied, decision, rationale), control decision and prioritization (hierarchy of controls, timeline), and verification/review plan (method to evaluate after controls, review frequency). This helps demonstrate that the risk assessment is acceptable and controls provide adequate protection.
Risk evaluation is the formal process of comparing estimated risk levels (likelihood × severity) against predefined risk criteria, such as legal requirements, organizational risk tolerance, and industry standards, to determine whether a risk is acceptable with existing controls or requires additional action. It is the decision-making stage that bridges risk analysis and risk control, prioritizing corrective actions based on established criteria.
On a manufacturing shop floor, risk evaluation is where safety staff and supervisors decide if risks are acceptable given current controls and regulatory requirements. For example, a CNC lathe with a missing interlocked guard is evaluated as high risk, exceeding company criteria and CSA Z432 standards, requiring immediate engineering controls. Conversely, a solvent paint booth with adequate ventilation and PPE may be judged acceptable with ongoing monitoring if exposures are below limits. This step ranks risks to address the greatest first, ensuring compliance with WorkSafeBC OHS Regulation and standards like CSA Z432 for machinery safeguarding.
Treating risk evaluation as a subjective 'gut check' without documented comparison to risk criteria, leading to unaddressed high risks and compliance violations.
Using a risk matrix but not linking it to legal or standard requirements, such as mandatory machine guarding or exposure limits, resulting in incorrect acceptance of risks that require controls.
Failing to re-evaluate risk after controls or changes, leaving residual risks unaddressed and violating requirements for periodic assessment and verification of control effectiveness.