14 replies to this topic

[Simon]

As well as learning about the law, health and safety management systems, risk assessment etc. after 13 weeks on the NEBOSH Certificate probably the most important tool I came away with was ERICPD which is an acronym for defining the hierarchy of hazard control.

Eliminate
Reduce
Isolate
Control
Personal Protective Equipment
Discipline

The hierarchy of control is used to remove or reduce hazards and risks and should be used during a risk assessment. The idea is that you start by choosing methods from the top of the list and work your way down if required.

As an example imagine in a manufacturing factory where operators need to clean machine rollers regularly with a chemical like MEK because of a build up of glue from the processed material; presenting hazards from the chemical and a risk of getting hands injured in the rollers. When considering the hazards it is easy to get sucked into PPE, safe systems of work and training but the best way is to use ERICPD.

Eliminate – why are we cleaning the rollers in the first place, can the supplier improve the material? Are we using too much pressure on the rollers? Can we coat the rollers with a non-stick material? Maybe this is the end of the story – the safest control measure is to eliminate the hazard completely.

Reduce or Substitute – OK so we cannot eliminate but can we improve it by doing some of the above things so that we need to do it less often, can we reduce the number of people who are allowed to clean the rollers so they can be made experts, can we use a less hazardous chemical for cleaning the rollers.

Isolate – This one is not particularly relevant in this case but let’s say the chemical was extremely toxic and only applied to one machine maybe we could screen the machine off maybe in a separate room and isolate it from the rest of the workers and have local controls.

Control – This is where we consider organizational and technical controls such as safe systems of work, procedures, training, supervision, local exhaust ventilation, machine guards, safety devices and tools to carry out the task to keep hands away from the rollers etc.

Personal Protective Equipment – such as wearing suitable and well-maintained gloves, eye protection and respirators.

Discipline – make sure that all controls are monitored reviewed and enforced.

I suppose it’s just commonsense but it provides a great reminder to me of where to begin and what questions to ask when trying to reduce the risk from a hazard. I wonder how many of the tasks we carry out in the workplace have been analyzed by a thorough methodology such as ERICPD – now I always look through his eyes.

Regards,
Simon

[Simon]

Can (is) this logical sequence or similar applied when dealing with food safety hazards?

[Jules]

I suppose that the CCP decision tree is a form of ERICPD.

When constructing flow diagrams, it surprises me how many handling tasks can be removed, people "touch" because they had to man handle on the last machine. Can we eliminate this step.

Oooh, i shall have to go back and get Eric Peedy to check through my HACCP.

[Simon]

He's a good friend, whenever I look at a hazard I always think of Eric.

[adarsh Immanuel]

As well as learning about the law, health and safety management systems, risk assessment etc. after 13 weeks on the NEBOSH Certificate probably the most important tool I came away with was ERICPD which is an acronym for defining the hierarchy of hazard control.

Eliminate
Reduce
Isolate
Control
Personal Protective Equipment
Discipline

The hierarchy of control is used to remove or reduce hazards and risks and should be used during a risk assessment. The idea is that you start by choosing methods from the top of the list and work your way down if required.

As an example imagine in a manufacturing factory where operators need to clean machine rollers regularly with a chemical like MEK because of a build up of glue from the processed material; presenting hazards from the chemical and a risk of getting hands injured in the rollers. When considering the hazards it is easy to get sucked into PPE, safe systems of work and training but the best way is to use ERICPD.

Eliminate – why are we cleaning the rollers in the first place, can the supplier improve the material? Are we using too much pressure on the rollers? Can we coat the rollers with a non-stick material? Maybe this is the end of the story – the safest control measure is to eliminate the hazard completely.

Reduce – OK so we cannot eliminate but can we improve it by doing some of the above things so that we need to do it less often, can we reduce the number of people who are allowed to clean the rollers so they can be made experts, can we use a less hazardous chemical for cleaning the rollers.

Isolate – This one is not particularly relevant in this case but let’s say the chemical was extremely toxic and only applied to one machine maybe we could screen the machine off maybe in a separate room and isolate it from the rest of the workers and have local controls.

Control – This is where we consider organizational and technical controls such as safe systems of work, procedures, training, supervision, local exhaust ventilation, machine guards, safety devices and tools to carry out the task to keep hands away from the rollers etc.

Personal Protective Equipment – such as wearing suitable and well-maintained gloves, eye protection and respirators.

Discipline – make sure that all controls are monitored reviewed and enforced.

I suppose it’s just commonsense but it provides a great reminder to me of where to begin and what questions to ask when trying to reduce the risk from a hazard. I wonder how many of the tasks we carry out in the workplace have been analyzed by a thorough methodology such as ERICPD – now I always look through his eyes.

Regards,
Simon

MR. Simon,


Its perfect :). We can also add substitution for your list. I feel it will add more value.


Regards,
Adarsh

[Simon]

Good Point Adarsh, although it would spoil the name ERIC?
Where do you see "substitute" fitting into the hierarchy?

Thanks,
Simon

[Cranberry]

Useful tool. Saves you spending time on solutions lower down the list when a better solution would be to eliminate the hazard all together (if possible).

I'm sure my previous MD would like to have 'Shouting' included, possibly between Isolate and Control!

[Color.Ocean24]

Hi Simon,

ERICPD is a wonderful tool that we start using at out workplace and found useful for some of hazard activities.

Thanks again for posting the ERICPD in details.

Warm Regards,

Color.ocean

[Simon]

Thanks for bumping this old topic color.ocean, it serves as a useful reminder.

Reading back on the thread Jules made the point.

I suppose that the CCP decision tree is a form of ERICPD.

Is it? Can foodies learn anything from this Health & Safety tool or vice versa?

Cheers,
Simon

[Color.Ocean24]

As I'm in the Food storage industry the formula ERICPD helps to controls the critical points in the food handling process.
I'm under impression that HACCP study based on ERICPD.

Thanks,
Color.ocean

[George @ Safefood 360°]

Hi Simon

In my opinon the answer to your question 'can this model be applied to food safety?' is YES. More than that I feel that this approach is essential.Without knowning all the detail of the model it is up to a point what is done in food safety at the moment. The Codex CCP decision tree attempts this but IMO fails.

it appears the ERICPD takes all hazards as being equal and then you apply the hierarchy of controls starting from the most desired (elimination) working down the list until the one that can realistically be applied is found.

Where it differs from food safety and where it may have limitiations is in terms of Significance. In food safety all hazards cannot be treated the same! Some will be more significant that others and need to be controlled as such.For example a high risk hazard will need the appropriate control and not what is the most realistic and practical. Question 2 in CODEX CCP tree asks 'Is the step specifically designed to eliminate or reduce the likely occurrence of the hazard to an acceptable level?' but before you get to ask this question a risk assessment has been completed. It is based on the logic that reducing the likely occurence reduces the risk when control is applied.

But ERICPD has one essenial element lacking in the current food safety models and that is the application of controls based directly on the hazard and I assume the risk. We can use this to develop a better approach whereby a high risk hazard would only be associated with ER, medium with IC and low PD (PRP's) for example.

George

[Simon]

Hi George, thanks for your input, I think this is a worthy discussion topic.

it appears the ERICPD takes all hazards as being equal and then you apply the hierarchy of controls starting from the most desired (elimination) working down the list until the one that can realistically be applied is found.

Not at all, before getting to this stage you will have already conducted the risk assessment for each particular hazard using the likelihood x severity risk rating and arrived at a prioritized list of hazards based on significance of risk. Then you start at the top of the list and thrash it with ERICPD.

But ERICPD has one essential element lacking in the current food safety models and that is the application of controls based directly on the hazard and I assume the risk. We can use this to develop a better approach whereby a high risk hazard would only be associated with ER, medium with IC and low PD (PRP's) for example.

I’m not so sure, I think that could restrict us. Yes start at the top and control those hazards first (ideally with higher level controls), but do not neglect all of ERICPD for even the lowest rated hazard. Always in mind in Health & Safety when selecting control measures is the premise “*so far is reasonably practicable”. That said if it is quick and easy to eliminate something then why not do it even if it gives just a small reduction of risk.

Regards,
Simon

*So Far as is Reasonably Practicable
The term "so far as is reasonably practicable" means that the degree of risk in a particular situation can be balanced against the time, trouble, cost and physical difficulty of taking measures to avoid the risk. If these resources are so disproportionate to the risk that it would be unreasonable to expect any employer to have to incur them to prevent it, the employer is not obliged to do so unless there is a specific requirement that he does.
The greater the risk, the more likely it is that it is reasonable to go to very substantial expense, trouble and invention to reduce it. But if the consequences and extent of a risk are small, insistence on great expense would not be considered reasonable. It is important to remember that the judgement is an objective one and the size or financial position of the employer are immaterial.

[George @ Safefood 360°]

That makes a lot a sense, Simon. So the hazards are risk assessed and deemed to be of a certain significance which is consistent with other models. All are applied to ERICPD to ideally get as close to 'E' as possible. It still begs the question why conduct a risk assessment at all if the ERICPD is applied to even the lowest rated hazards?

George

[Simon]

It still begs the question why conduct a risk assessment at all if the ERICPD is applied to even the lowest rated hazards?

We must do this to get our prioritized list then we focus our work top down with our limited resources.
And decide to just shout at employees instead.

Regards,
Simon

[George @ Safefood 360°]

We must do this to get our prioritized list then we focus our work top down with our limited resources.
And decide to just s

Regards,
Simon

Ok Simon - I get it now . The prioritisation of the hazards is where RA is applied. Interesting...
George