Unknown User1
Timing for Ad-hoc Risk Assessments and Recording Criteria
2026.08.20 10:08
Risk Assessment and Safety System
The timing when ad-hoc risk assessment is required and
Implementation record standards
Ad-hoc risk assessments are separate from regular risk assessments, Risk assessment conducted when new hazardous or dangerous factors may arise due to changes in the work environment or work methods HR and safety and health managers should not view it as "finished because the regular evaluation was conducted this year," but rather verify whether ad-hoc evaluations are necessary at the time of changes in equipment, raw materials, work procedures, or processes, or when accidents occur.
The core of continuous evaluation is
This is a record of verification before change, reflection before work, re-inspection after an incident, and corrective measures.
This is a record of verification before change, reflection before work, re-inspection after an incident, and corrective measures.
๐ Short Answer
Ad-hoc risk assessments should be conducted when new risks that were not identified in previous assessments may arise.
Typical examples include the introduction of new machinery or equipment, changes to processes or chemicals, or alterations in work methods or procedures. Additionally, it is necessary to re-verify whether the existing risk assessment adequately reflects actual working conditions, even after maintenance or repair work or the occurrence of an industrial accident.
To summarize, the core of continuous evaluation is Verification before change, implementation before work, re-inspection after accident, record of corrective measures no see.
๐ When is an ad-hoc risk assessment required?
The point at which ad-hoc evaluation is necessary is not โwhether the regular evaluation period has passedโ Whether the on-site risk has changed It is recommended to view it based on this.
| situation | Things to check |
|---|---|
| New introduction of equipment and machinery | Risks of pinching, entrapment, electrical issues, noise, and flying debris from new equipment |
| Equipment and process changes | Workflow, protective devices, changes in worker exposure |
| Changes in raw materials and chemicals | MSDS, Hazards, Possibility of Mixing/Exposure |
| Changes in work methods and procedures | Changes in work sequence, personnel, work hours, and protective equipment |
| Maintenance and repair work | Abnormal operation, energy cutoff, risk of fall or electric shock |
| Occurrence of industrial accidents and near misses | Cause of accident, whether previous evaluations were omitted, prevention of recurrence |
| Subcontractor work deployment | Risk of interference between contracted and subcontracted work |
| New Workers & Transfers | Skill level, need for training, risk of job adaptation |
For example, even when using the same equipment, the level of risk can change if the work speed changes, raw materials are altered, or the workforce is reduced. In such cases, it is advisable to assess the necessity of ad-hoc evaluations rather than simply applying the results of existing periodic evaluations.
๐ Items for the person in charge to check before implementation
Ad-hoc risk assessments lose effectiveness if conducted by merely matching documents belatedly after changes have been completed. Whenever possible, risk factors should be identified during the change planning phase, and necessary measures should be reflected before actual work begins.
The person in charge must first specifically identify โwhat is changing.โ The evaluation criteria vary depending on whether the equipment, work sequence, materials used, or workers change.
It is also advisable to check the opinions of on-site workers. Actual workers are often aware of inconvenient workflows, temporary tasks, difficulties in wearing protective equipment, and risks of entrapment or falls during work that are not visible in drawings or procedures.
Preparing the following materials before the periodic evaluation makes record management easier.
- Change plan or work request
- Details of changes to facilities and processes
- Work procedure or standard work document
- MSDS, List of materials used
- Accident and Near Miss Records
- On-site photos or work flow data
- Worker opinions or pre-meeting records
- Improvement Action Plan and Person in Charge
๐ Items to be recorded in the execution log
If the record for ad-hoc risk assessments simply states "ad-hoc assessment conducted," it is difficult to verify later what changes led to the assessment. Reason for evaluation, details of changes, hazardous factors, corrective measures, and whether they were reflected prior to work We must stay together.
| division | Record Item |
|---|---|
| Reason for implementation | Changes in equipment, changes in raw materials, changes in work procedures, occurrence of accidents, etc. |
| Subject to evaluation | Workplace, process, equipment, job name |
| Changes | What has changed from the previous version |
| Participants | Safety and health managers, supervisors, workers, subcontractors, etc. |
| Risk factors | Entrapment, falls, electric shock, chemical exposure, noise, etc. |
| Risk assessment | Existing risk and risk after change |
| Improvement measures | Removal, replacement, engineering measures, administrative measures, protective equipment, etc. |
| Person in charge ยท Deadline | Person in charge of the action and scheduled completion date |
| Check before work | Whether corrective measures have been completed and whether work can be started |
| Sharing and Education | Worker guidance, TBM, training, postings, etc. |
| Supporting documents | Photos, meeting minutes, checklists, completed improvement materials |
In particular, regarding unscheduled evaluations related to changes in equipment or work methods, rather than saying "an evaluation was conducted" Whether the evaluation results led to measures taken prior to actual work It is important.
โ ๏ธ Points for the person in charge to note
One common mistake in periodic evaluations is underestimating the magnitude of changes. For instance, even a simple change in location, a minor modification to the work sequence, or alterations to cleaning and maintenance methods can affect worker exposure or the risk of accidents.
There are also cases where only an accident investigation is conducted after an accident occurs, without updating the risk assessment. If the cause of the accident was not reflected in the existing assessment, the identification of risk factors, assessment of risks, corrective measures, and training content must be reorganized.
When subcontractors are working together, the risks that the client and the contractor must verify may differ. If work overlaps in the same workspace, work interference, access control, communication systems, and emergency response standards must also be considered.
๐ Management Sheet Example
The table below is an internal example that can be used to manage records of ad-hoc risk assessments.
| division | Record example |
|---|---|
| Implementation date | 2026.08.20 |
| Reason for implementation | Change in raw materials for the mixing process |
| Subject to evaluation | Factory A Mixing Room / Mixing Work |
| Changes | Partial replacement of existing raw materials, increased working time |
| Participants | Safety and health officer, supervisor, 2 workers |
| Identified risk factors | Chemical exposure, lack of ventilation, suitability of protective equipment |
| Improvement measures | Reconfirm MSDS, check local exhaust ventilation, change protective equipment |
| Person in charge ยท Deadline | Safety and Health Team / 2026.08.27 |
| Worker Guide | Re-guidance on Pre-change TBM Procedures and Protective Equipment Wearing Standards |
| Supporting documents | MSDS, evaluation sheet, TBM records, before and after improvement photos |
โ Checklist
The checklist below is for internal inspection purposes to verify when ad-hoc risk assessments are required and to ensure that records of their implementation are not missing.
especially Reason for change, whether implemented prior to work, worker participation, corrective measures, person in charge/deadline, record preservation is a basic verification item. Among all items If 3 or more are insufficient It is recommended to review the periodic evaluation procedures and record standards.
| division | Confirmation items | check |
|---|---|---|
| Reason for implementation | We verified the reasons for the unscheduled evaluation, such as changes in equipment, raw materials, and work methods. | โ |
| Subject to evaluation | The target processes, tasks, equipment, and workers were specifically defined. | โ |
| Changes | I recorded the differences from the previous work. | โ |
| Check before work | We identified risk factors before starting the change work. | โ |
| Worker participation | It reflected the opinions of actual workers or supervisors. | โ |
| Risk factors | Additional hazardous and dangerous factors were identified. | โ |
| Improvement measures | Measures to reduce risk were established. | โ |
| Person in charge ยท Deadline | The person in charge of the improvement measures and the completion deadline were designated. | โ |
| Sharing and Education | The evaluation results and work precautions were provided to the workers. | โ |
| Supporting documents | Evaluation sheets, photos, meeting minutes, training records, etc. were kept. | โ |
โ ๏ธ Common mistakes
The first mistake is skipping ad-hoc assessments on the grounds that a regular risk assessment has already been conducted. If site conditions change, additional verification may be required separately from the regular assessment.
The second mistake is considering only equipment changes as subjects for periodic evaluation. Raw materials, work methods, work procedures, personnel, working hours, and the input of subcontractors can also change the risk.
The third mistake is establishing only preventative measures after an accident and failing to update the risk assessment records. If the cause of the accident was not reflected in the existing assessment, the evaluation table and records of corrective actions must be reorganized.
The fourth mistake is failing to set a deadline and the person responsible for corrective actions. For the results of the ad-hoc evaluation to lead to pre-work measures, you must specify who will do what and by when.
๐ฌ When EAP support is needed
Ad-hoc risk assessments and corrective actions cannot be replaced by an EAP. Equipment improvements, changes in work methods, safety measures, personal protective equipment, training, and decisions to stop work must be managed within the occupational safety and health management system.
However, employees may experience anxiety, sleep problems, post-accident stress, or job stress following industrial accidents, near misses, changes in hazardous work, or witnessing an accident. In such cases, EAP may be recommended as a supplementary channel.
For example, you can provide guidance as follows.
If you experience significant anxiety, sleep problems, post-accident stress, or job stress following an accident or hazardous work, you may utilize EAP counseling channels. EAP does not replace risk assessment, work environment improvement, safety measures, or legal judgment; it is a supplementary channel designed to support the psychological burden of employees.
In cases of suggestions of suicide or self-harm, immediate safety risks, or risks of violence, do not respond solely with general EAP guidance; you must first check emergency routes such as 119, 112, or the suicide prevention hotline 109.
๐ Related Posts
โ Frequently Asked Questions
Q1. Do I need to conduct an ad-hoc assessment even though a regular risk assessment has been conducted?
If site conditions change, it is advisable to consider conducting ad-hoc evaluations in addition to regular assessments. This is because new risks may arise due to equipment, raw materials, work methods, procedures, subcontractor operations, or accidents.
Q2. When should the continuous evaluation be conducted, before or after the change?
If possible, it is recommended to identify risk factors first during the change planning phase and incorporate necessary measures before actually starting the change work. Even after the change is completed, you must verify that there are no additional risks based on actual operating conditions.
Q3. Are minor changes to work procedures subject to periodic evaluation?
While not all minor changes need to be evaluated at the same level, it is advisable to review the necessity of periodic evaluations if they affect worker exposure, hazards of entrapment, falls, electric shock, or chemicals, or working hours and personnel.
Q4. How detailed should the records for the ad-hoc risk assessment be?
It is recommended to leave a record sufficient to allow verification of the reason for implementation, evaluation subject, changes, participants, risk factors, corrective measures, person in charge and deadline, and instructions for workers. Simply writing "Ad-hoc evaluation completed" makes subsequent verification difficult.
Q5. Should work by partner companies also be included in the ad-hoc evaluation?
If subcontractor work overlaps with existing work or could create new risks, you must identify the risk of interference between contracted and subcontracted work. It is recommended to review the scope of work, access control, communication systems, and emergency response standards together.
๐ Next step
Ad-hoc risk assessment is a procedure designed to ensure that on-site changes occurring between regular assessments are not overlooked. At points where risks changeโsuch as with equipment, raw materials, work methods, maintenance, or accidentsโthe necessity of an assessment must be confirmed first.
first of all What changes, what new risks arise, what measures must be taken before work, and how to keep records Try organizing it.
If you wish to overhaul your ad-hoc risk assessment standards, implementation record forms, corrective action management, and post-incident psychological support systems at the organizational level, review the operational methods suitable for your organization through a Nudge EAP implementation consultation.
first of all What changes, what new risks arise, what measures must be taken before work, and how to keep records Try organizing it.
If you wish to overhaul your ad-hoc risk assessment standards, implementation record forms, corrective action management, and post-incident psychological support systems at the organizational level, review the operational methods suitable for your organization through a Nudge EAP implementation consultation.
๐ Source and Information
National Law Information Center, Implementation of Risk Assessment under Article 36 of the Occupational Safety and Health Act
National Law Information Center, Guidelines on Workplace Risk Assessment
National Law Information Center, Interpretation regarding risk assessment for contractors and subcontractors
Korea Occupational Safety and Health Agency, Risk Assessment Support System
Korea Labor Welfare Network, Introduction to the Employee Assistance Program (EAP)
National Law Information Center, Guidelines on Workplace Risk Assessment
National Law Information Center, Interpretation regarding risk assessment for contractors and subcontractors
Korea Occupational Safety and Health Agency, Risk Assessment Support System
Korea Labor Welfare Network, Introduction to the Employee Assistance Program (EAP)
This content is intended for general informational purposes. Specific matters regarding laws, labor relations, occupational safety and health, risk assessment, timing of periodic assessments, contracted and subcontracted work, accident response, personal information protection, mental health, and psychological counseling may vary depending on the workplace situation, the latest laws, and official guidelines; therefore, review by relevant experts or agencies may be required. In cases involving indications of suicide or self-harm, immediate safety hazards, or risks of violence, do not rely solely on general EAP guidance; instead, prioritize checking emergency channels such as 119, 112, or the Suicide Prevention Hotline 109.
Comments1