Ig2 Example v4
Ig2 Example v4
Ig2 Example v4
Declaration: By submitting this assessment (Parts 1 – 4) for marking I declare that it is entirely my own work. I understand that falsely claiming that
the work is my own is malpractice and can lead to NEBOSH imposing severe penalties (see the NEBOSH Malpractice Policy for further information).
Important note: You must refer to the document ‘Unit IG2: risk assessment – Guidance and information for learners and Learning Partners’ while
completing all parts of this assessment. Your Learning Partner should provide you with a copy, but it can also be downloaded from the relevant
resources section for this qualification on the NEBOSH website.
Part 1: Background
Number of workers 24
IGG Ltd is a medium sized garage with offices, vehicle repair shop (including stores area) and
paint spray booth. It is family owned and does not have any other branches.
The business does a lot of repairs and maintenance on vans/lorries and body repairs for insurance
companies on cars that have been involved in accidents. Servicing is also carried out for members
General description of the organisation of the public. Typical activities undertaken include moving spare parts from the stores to the
workshop, engine repairs, activities relating to servicing, body repair, draining fuel/oil, spray booth
activities (including the use of paints that are solvent based).
The garage operates from 8am to 6pm on weekdays and is closed at the weekends. Workers are
only required to work 7 hours per day so there are staggered start and finish times in place.
Description of the area to be included in the The risk assessment will cover the garage (that includes the storage area) and spray booth
risk assessment activities; the office area has a separate risk assessment.
Following the inspection, I referred back to the notes that I made during the inspection and the
sources of information that I had already reviewed to help me to decide on any additional control
measures or actions that were needed.
Hazard Who might be harmed What are you already doing? What further controls/actions are Timescales for
category and and how? required? further actions Responsible
hazard to be person’s job
completed title
(within …)
Hazardous All workers, customers and Dust masks available but it is not 1. Enclosed area to be set up for 6 months
substances others visiting the mandatory that these are worn. sanding/grinding operations including that
organisation. will include a suitable local exhaust workshop
Dust - high ventilation system manager
High concentrations of
concentrations (actions 1, 3a,
process dust are always
of process dust 2. Purchase of ‘on tool’ dust extraction 1 month 4, 5, 6, 8, 9,
present from the routine and
in the air. systems 10, 12, 13 and
frequent activities being
14)
carried out. Since there is
3. Use of face masks in conjunction with 1 month
no dust extraction (only
extraction systems (3a. enforcement of finance director
dilution ventilation is
use, 3b. purchase of) (actions 2, 4, 6,
currently being used),
11, 13, 14 and
people are breathing in
4. Consider RPE if the above do not fully To be assessed 15)
hazardous dust particles.
control the hazard on completion of
This can cause anything
the enclosure stores
from short-term (acute ie,
manager
occupational asthma) to
5. Maintenance programme for all 6 months (actions 3b, 12
long-term (chronic ie,
ventilation systems. and 13)
occupational cancers)
respiratory health conditions.
6. Improved housekeeping – purchase at 1 month
People can also get the dust least two suitable vacuum cleaners to
on their skin (which can keep dust in the general workplace and
cause dermatitis), in their office areas to a minimum.
eyes (causing eye irritation
and damage) or even Safe system of work (SSoW) to be
accidentally swallow it introduced for:
Use of motor oil These substances are Overalls are cleaned on a regular 1. Source nitrile or vinyl gloves for 1 month stores
and fuel. known to be sensitisers/ basis by an outside contractor. mechanics use. manager
carcinogens so, over time, (actions 1 and
could cause occupational Spill kit available and all workers 2. Set up monitoring system to ensure 2 months 2)
dermatitis and/or skin trained in its use gloves are being worn at all relevant times.
cancers. workshop
Specialist contractor used for 3. Set up system for disposal of used 1 month manager
disposal of waste oil/fuel and used gloves. (actions 3 and
spill kit. 5)
4. Check whether the same specialist 2 months
contractor who removes the waste oil will finance director
collect/remove used gloves from site. (action 4)
Moral, general legal and financial IGG Ltd has a moral duty to protect all workers. Our workers come to work to earn a wage, not to be put at
arguments risk of falling ill, now or in the future, because of the work activities that they carry out now. Some of the ill-
health conditions that could be contracted or injuries that could occur, will have a major impact on the lives of
the workers and their family/friends. Long term injuries/ill-health and also likely to have a major impact on our
workers’ mental health. The mental health of other workers could also be affected if they are witness to any
serious injuries to other workers.
IGG has legal requirements to protect its workers under the ILO’s Safety and Health Convention
(C155).
Financial impacts could be broken down into three categories. Costs associated with:
• injured workers (sick pay, replacement worker wages, medical costs, lost working time etc);
• replacement equipment and/or infrastructure costs for example if control is lost over a vehicle being
moved around the work shop and this subsequently crashes through one of the garage walls; and
• costs associated with enforcement actions.
Possible enforcement actions that IGG could receive include being served with prohibition (stopping all work
on a particular activity) or improvement (meaning that things must be put right within a certain period of time)
notices relating to these activities by the regulator. This would obviously have a massive financial impact on
the organisation if these activities could not continue.
The organisation could also find that civil claims from workers made ill by these work activities could be made.
Some of these claims may be made some years after the worker has left IGG Ltd’s employment. The likely
amount of compensation payable for civil claims can be substantial; in addition to this, legal fees (lawyers,
If something goes catastrophically wrong, IGG’s reputation could take a serious hit which could result in loss
of contracts (especially the insurance work).
Consideration of likelihood AND severity The likelihood of injuries occurring from working in and around the inspection pit is very likely. This is due to
the inspection pit being in daily use and most mechanics will work in this area at least two to three times per
week for an average of two hours per job.
The severity rating for this hazard being realised has been set at ‘major’. It is very probable that injuries will
require hospital treatment eg, broken limbs or possibly head injuries. Damage to equipment is also likely to
be significant if it is dropped into the pit while workers are trying to jump across.
How effective the action is likely to be in The bridge will improve working practices in the area of the inspection pit as it will stop workers from jumping
controlling the risk. Explanation to from one side of the pit to the other.
include:
I have given a timescale of two months as this is a specialised piece of equipment that nobody in the
• the intended impact of the action;
business has used before. The business will need to source a supplier and then arrange a delivery date. It
• justification for the timescale that you is hoped that this project will be completed well within the two-month timeline.
indicated in your risk assessment;
and This action will fully control the risk as long as the bridge is used, maintained and inspected as set out in the
• whether you think the action will fully safe system of work that will be produced following the purchase.
control the risk.
Action Enclosed area to be set up for sanding/grinding operations including that will include a suitable local exhaust
ventilation system (hazard category ‘hazards substances’).
Specific legal arguments The ILO’s Convention C155 and Recommendation (R164) requires employers to make sure that processes
are reasonably safe. The ILO code of practice (CoP) ‘Safety in the use of chemicals at work’ gives specific
advice on the appropriate measures that employers must make to protect workers against the risks identified
by an assessment of risk. The ILO’s Code of Practice ‘Recording and notification of occupational accidents
and diseases’ requires employers to report cases of occupational asthma to our country’s health and safety
regulator.
Consideration of likelihood AND severity The likelihood that workers will become ill through inhaling dusts from sanding/grinding activities is very high.
The worker is close to the source and, at the moment, facemasks are not worn regularly by all relevant
workers.
Please see ‘Justification 1’ for the severity categories. It will stop the dust from spreading across all work
areas. Most of the workforce and the general public using the garage are currently exposed to dust as these
operations are not carried out in an enclosed area. Inhalation of dust could cause occupational asthma;
breathing in dust over a prolonged period could also cause occupational cancers. The severity is likely to be
between ‘major’ and ‘catastrophic’ for workers carrying out the activity or those working nearby. For members
of the public it is likely to be ‘minimal’ as they will rarely visit the garage and will not be directly in the area
where work is carried out.
How effective the action is likely to be in The dust enclosure will have a major impact on reducing the amount of dust in general work areas as the
controlling the risk. This should include: enclosure will stop the spread. I have given a timescale of six months for this to be completed as plans will
• the intended impact of the action; need to be drawn up and the budget for the project will also need to be agreed with the managing director. I
would hope that this will be the maximum amount of time that this project will need to be completed.
• justification for the timescale that you
indicated in your risk assessment; Once installed the dust enclosure alone will not fully control the risk but will significantly reduce it. If it is used
and in conjunction with the other suggested control measures eg, ‘on tool extraction’ it should fully control the risk.
• whether you think the action will fully
control the risk.
Action Purchase of ‘on tool’ dust extraction systems (hazard category ‘hazardous substances’).
Specific legal arguments The ILO’s Convention C155 and Recommendation (R164) requires employers to make sure that processes
are reasonably safe. The ILO code of practice (CoP) ‘Safety in the use of chemicals at work’ gives specific
advice on the appropriate measures that employers must make to protect workers against the risks identified
by an assessment of risk. The ILO’s Code of Practice ‘Recording and notification of occupational accidents
and diseases’ requires employers to report cases of occupational asthma to our country’s health and safety
regulator.
Consideration of likelihood AND severity The likelihood that workers will become ill through inhaling dusts from sanding/grinding activities is very high.
The worker is close to the source and, at the moment, facemasks are not worn regularly by all relevant
workers.
Please see ‘Justification 1’ for the severity categories. It will stop the dust from spreading across all work
areas. Most of the workforce and the general public using the garage are currently exposed to dust as these
operations are not carried out in an enclosed area. Inhalation of dust could cause occupational asthma;
breathing in dust over a prolonged period could also cause occupational cancers. The severity is likely to be
between ‘major’ and ‘catastrophic’ for workers carrying out the activity or those working nearby. For members
of the public it is likely to be ‘minimal’ as they will rarely visit the garage and will not be directly in the area
where work is carried out.
How effective the action is likely to be in This action will have a major impact on the majority of the workforce; the extraction tool will remove the dust
controlling the risk. This should include: at source meaning that the amount of dust present in the air won’t be as concentrated as it is at present. I
• the intended impact of the action; have given a timescale of ‘within one month’ for the on-tool extraction systems due to the immediate impact
this will have on reducing the amount of dust in the area. The budget for the purchase of the systems needs
• justification for the timescale that you
to be agreed with the managing director.
indicated in your risk assessment;
and This action alone won’t fully control the hazard. It needs to be used in conjunction with the other controls that
• whether you think the action will fully have been identified in the risk assessment.
control the risk.
Planned review date/period with Company policy is to review risk assessments at least every 12 months. I therefore set the review
reasoning date to be no later than 13 July 2021. However, I will also make sure that this will be reviewed
before this date is there is:
• any new equipment or working procedures brought in;
• a change in relevant legislation or other standards (eg ACoPs) that affects NGG Ltd;
• a significant change to the number of workers or to the shift patterns (staggered start
times) that are worked.
How the risk assessment findings will be I will arrange a meeting with the finance director to go through and assign the actions in the risk
communicated AND who you need to tell assessment. I will then provide a summary of the findings and actions for the workshop and stores
managers (these will be emailed initially with follow-up meetings if required). The findings of the
risk assessment will be included in the next available toolbox talk where I will also advise the
workers on the actions that are to be taken. A summary of the risk assessment and actions to be
taken will also be posted on the company intranet that all workers have access to.
How you will follow up on the risk I will set diary reminders for roughly 10 days before the action is due to be completed. I will speak
assessment to check that the actions to the responsible person for each of the actions to find out the progress against each action.
have been carried out Should the action not be on target for completion, I will find out the reasons why, eg, is it down to
finance or other resource issues such as worker time to complete actions. If any actions look like
they are not going to be completed on time I will speak to the finance director to see if additional
resource is available for the action. Actions that are very overdue (ie, completion is more than six
months late) will be referred to the managing director via the finance director.