.svg)
Mandatory since 2001, the creation of the Single Document for occupational risk assessment (DUERP) is still perceived by some companies as a complex and burdensome process. Beyond the need to meet regulatory requirements, developing the Single Document is actually a unique opportunity for every company to identify its priority risks and define a relevant, long-term prevention strategy.
Single Document: what are the expected benefits?
The expected benefits are truly significant, whether in terms of:
- Reducing accidents and near-misses,
- Reducing costs,
- Improving employee health,
- Managing financial risks,
- Reducing executive liability,
- Facilitating audit management
Review of best practices - methodological recommendations
We offer a review of best practices and methodological recommendations to ensure the Single Document is truly useful for companies.
1/ Collect and utilize existing data
Before beginning the actual occupational risk assessment, it is essential to identify and compile the technical data already available within the company to help identify and characterize the various types of risks present: employee exposure levels, implemented protective measures, job descriptions, accident scenarios, etc.
This input data may be found, for example, in measurement reports (e.g., noise levels, concentrations of hazardous chemical agents at the workstation), user manuals for machinery and work equipment, the history of incidents or accidents, inspection reports from the Health, Safety and Working Conditions Committee (CHSCT), or Safety Data Sheets (SDS) for chemical products.
It is advisable to gather and record all relevant data and values within the Single Document, so they can be easily accessed during the risk analysis phase.
2/ Involve employees beyond just the HSE department
Creating the Single Document must be a collaborative process that necessarily involves the HSE department, as well as representatives from all sectors of the company. This approach allows for:
- on one hand, benefiting from multiple perspectives and cross-functional insights to conduct the hazard inventory and risk assessment
- on the other hand, fostering employee involvement and ownership of the process.
The Single Document thus becomes a reflection of a genuine collective effort carried out within the company.
3/ Define relevant work units
The occupational risk assessment formalized in the Single Document must be carried out for each "work unit" in the company.
A work unit can be defined as a group of employees exposed to similar risks. This concept may correspond to a single workstation or encompass several work situations that share the same characteristics. Consequently, the breakdown into work units does not have to be strictly geographical, as some units may very well cover different locations (e.g., handling). To assess chemical or psychosocial risks in particular, it is also common practice to group employees into "homogeneous exposure groups" (HEGs) that constitute work units.
In any case, the company must pay close attention to the "granularity" of its work unit breakdown. This can, in fact, have a real impact on the results of the risk assessment and the amount of work to be done. However, grouping comparable exposure situations should only be considered after an exhaustive inventory of all work situations and their associated risks has been completed.
4/ Ensure all risks are comprehensively addressed
The company must not forget to include certain less obvious risks in its Single Document, such as:
- risks related to thermal environments (extreme heat, cold)
- risks with delayed effects (e.g., exposure to chemicals, night work, or shift work)
- emerging risks (e.g., optical radiation, electromagnetic fields, nanoparticles, etc.)
- psychosocial risks, such as stress and harassment situations.
Such omissions are still common in companies' single risk assessment documents.
Furthermore, the assessment must be conducted by taking into account risks that may arise during all stages of an activity's operation:
- start-up and shutdown phases
- adjustment or maintenance phases
- routine operation
- malfunctions
- emergency situations
In summary, the medium used to formalize the single risk assessment document must make it easy to distinguish and identify risks in normal, degraded, or accidental operating modes. Finally, depending on the complexity of the company's activities, bringing in an outside expert perspective can be useful to ensure the inventory of hazards and risks is comprehensive.
5/ Define an objective, consistent, and transferable scoring method
Once risks have been inventoried and identified, the single risk assessment document process involves scoring them according to criteria specific to the company (severity, frequency of exposure, occurrence, control, etc.) in order to prioritize them.
Risk scoring must not depend on the sensitivity and subjective judgment of the person in charge of the risk assessment. It must be based on factual elements. As such, scoring scales and criteria must be precise and documented so that they are understandable and can be applied consistently by multiple people. This also helps ensure the consistency and reproducibility of analyses carried out in different work units. Vague scoring scales (e.g., "a little/a lot," "serious/not very serious," "often/sometimes") should therefore be avoided.
Logically, scoring criteria must also be adapted according to the type of risk. In practical terms, an immediate risk of falling or cutting cannot be scored in the same way as a delayed risk linked to recurring exposure to chemicals.
Finally, it is desirable for the scoring method to lead to a sufficient spread of scores. The reason: to make the risk hierarchy clearly visible and to allow for easy deduction of action priorities.
Given the stakes, companies may choose to be supported in defining their scoring method. This method can then be implemented in software to facilitate its application and prevent scoring errors and inconsistencies.
6/ Perform regular updates to the single risk assessment document
Because businesses are constantly evolving, occupational risk assessment is a dynamic and therefore iterative process. Consequently, the Labor Code requires the Single Document to be updated in the following cases:
- At least once a year => This periodic assessment should, in particular, help validate the effectiveness of prevention actions taken by tracking changes in risk ratings from one year to the next.
- Whenever there is a significant change to a workstation resulting from modifications to equipment, a change in products, or a change in work organization.
- When additional information regarding the assessment of a risk in a work unit is gathered => This additional information may be scientific or technical (e.g., a newly identified risk, a new hazard classification for a chemical product, etc.), regulatory, or derived from lessons learned following an accident.
Aim for maximum added value, all the time
Beyond the mandatory nature of risk assessment reviews, it is important to note that the added value of a good risk assessment is only sustainable if it is regularly updated. Your industrial site is constantly evolving. Even if nothing changes, your perspective on safety shifts, if only for the sake of continuous improvement. However, without an adequate solution, this regular updating becomes very burdensome over time, especially for companies that do not have a dedicated HSE manager at every site. Without a tool, your company misses out on the added value that true risk assessment management can provide: direct economic benefits, fewer accidents, improved employee health, reduced liability for executives in the event of an accident, a better social climate, easier audit management, and overall value creation for the company.
Need to improve efficiency in your HSE monitoring? Rely on our HSE regulatory monitoring solution from Tennaxia.