Work-sensitive products: How to minimize risks?

In any operational setting, risk isn’t only confined to materials with obvious hazard labels. A broader category, which we can refer to as work-sensitive products, is another threat to operational continuity and safety that we must contend with. These are the materials whose viability is completely contingent on how they’re handled and the environmental conditions that surround them. These include not only the obviously, overtly dangerous but also what is critical to avoiding downtime: Temperature-sensitive biologics that lose efficacy if a cold chain is broken, for example, pressure-critical contents that can become volatile, raw materials with short shelf-lives that can derail production schedules, or perhaps bioactive agents that can quickly become contaminated with improper handling.

The gas cylinder 

Gas cylinders are a great place to start on this topic because they’re the quintessential example of a work-sensitive product. They have a dual-threat profile. They are very high-pressure vessels, unsurprisingly, making them a physical hazard if mishandled to those in the vicinity. They also contain chemicals that are flammable, toxic or corrosive. So, cutting down on this risk is impossible without specialized containment. The most obvious place to start for businesses evaluating their current safety protocols is to view storage options that meet safety standards. Purpose-built gas cylinder storage units provide the security, ventilation, and segregation to neutralize these inherent dangers, but it’s just the beginning when it comes to the broad scope of first-line effective risk control for work-sensitive products.

The blueprint for proactive safety

Compliance is important and is touched on later in this article, but it’s firstly important to go beyond basic checks and have a more proactive, all-encompassing approach to occupational risk mitigation. A structured risk assessment is going to be the central diagnostic tool for this process as it gives you a clear blueprint for action - and repeatability down the line should you expand. The initial phase is essentially exhaustive hazard identification. Not just cataloging chemicals but actually analyzing each and every step of a workflow to find potential failure modes. Simulations could be digitized, but they’re more often than not a manual process.

Following identification, a quantitative analysis is what provides the focus and results here. Risks are scored and prioritized using a matrix that plots the potential severity of an incident against its statistical likelihood. A low-probability, high-consequence event, such as a catastrophic cylinder failure, may demand more immediate than a high-probability, but ultimately low-consequence event, like minor, non-toxic spillage. 

This indexing helps standardize and prioritize. It may be possible to introduce Industry 4.0 elements here, such as IoT data to help quantify the likelihood of events, but assessing their consequence is difficult to automate. Still, predictive analytics can make prioritization even more accurate.

From assessment to action

With a prioritized risk register, the next step is implementing the controls according to the hierarchy of effectiveness. This framework for occupational risk mitigation essentially prioritizes permanent solutions over procedural ones - this accumulates passive risk protections early on for greater benefit and is more economical. At the apex of this are engineering controls, which physically eliminate or isolate the hazard. The gas cylinder cages mentioned previously are a perfect example as they engineer out the risk of impact and unauthorized access.

Next are the administrative controls, which are essentially the changes to how work is performed. Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) are your guide here as they provide intensive and recurrent training, along with deploying clear visual signage. Leadership is key in safety. The final, albeit least effective layer, is Personal Protective Equipment (PPE). PPE should never be the primary risk mitigation strategy as it only protects the individual if it is selected correctly, worn properly, and maintained. Nor does it protect surrounding assets.

Ensuring defensibility

Internal safety protocols ultimately gain their authority and defensibility when tested strenuously against the external regulatory compliance standards. While we can go above and beyond, compliance is there for a reason, and it’s what stakeholders are interested in.

Comprehensive standards like ISO 45001 offer a structure for a complete occupational health and safety system, with risk assessment and continual improvement into the organization's DNA. These are complemented by specific, prescriptive guidelines from bodies like OSHA or the UK's HSE, which dictate the handling procedures for each hazardous material. 

The actionable movement from hazardous to less hazardous materials, driven by rigorous risk assessment, yields results that are plain to see. A Eurostat analysis showed that between 2004 and 2023, EU chemical production saw a 42% reduction in materials with moderate chronic environmental hazards. It showed the success of a large-scale risk mitigation initiative.

Your essential risk minimization checklist

To translate these principles into more immediate action, the following checklist can be used in your operational management.

• Assess: Identify all work-sensitive products and their associated risks. Score each risk by severity and likelihood.

• Control: Implement a hierarchy of controls. Can the risk be engineered out? If not, what administrative procedures and training are required? Only then, look at the PPE required as a final safeguard.

• Comply: Regularly audit these processes against regulatory standards to maintain full compliance, defensibility and avoid fines.

• Review: Schedule periodic reviews of your risk assessments to adapt to new processes and regulations.