Health and Safety - Section 5

5.1. Safety Report - Hazard Identification and Evaluation.

The research laboratory is a dynamic and constantly evolving environment. As experiments change and progress, they can introduce a wide range of hazards—including chemical, physical, biological, and radiological risks. Researchers working in these settings may be at different stages of their academic or professional careers, with varying levels of experience. Regardless of background, it is essential that all laboratory personnel are proficient in identifying hazards, evaluating risks, and implementing appropriate control measures. Integrating these safety practices into daily research activities is critical for maintaining a safe and collaborative workplace.

Hazard identification and evaluation are foundational to ensuring the safety of both personnel and the environment. Research often involves hazardous chemicals, biological agents, and complex equipment, all of which can pose significant risks if not properly managed. By proactively identifying potential hazards, laboratories can implement effective safety controls, such as elimination, engineering solutions, administrative procedures, and personal protective equipment (PPE). Regular evaluation ensures these controls remain adequate and up to date, minimizing the risk of accidents and exposure while fostering a strong culture of safety and regulatory compliance.

In the Department of Chemical Engineering, several tools support hazard identification and evaluation. The Department Hazard Register, maintained by the Chair, provides an overview of hazard management across the department. Meanwhile, the Supervisor Monthly Safety Inspection allows lab supervisors to monitor individual labs for compliance with safety regulations.

A key tool used by researchers is the Safety Report, a mandatory document for all individuals working in Chemical Engineering labs. Prepared by the researcher and reviewed by the supervisor before the start of lab work, the Safety Report outlines the specific hazards associated with each research project and details the procedures for mitigating those risks.

Central to the Safety Report is the Control Banding technique, a structured method for assessing and managing laboratory hazards by focusing on a defined set of control measures. This technique categorizes hazards into “bands” based on their nature and potential exposure levels. Each band is then linked to a recommended level of control, guiding researchers in selecting appropriate safety strategies.

The Safety Report is particularly effective for providing a streamlined overview of hazard controls in laboratories where chemical processes and reactions are well-established. However, for non-routine or high-hazard activities, a more rigorous assessment is required. In such cases, additional tools, such as Structured Development of Standard Operating Procedures, are employed to address the unique risks involved. For more information, refer to Section 5.2 below.

This report is designed to guide researchers through the process of hazard identification, evaluation, and control specific to their research projects within the Department of Chemical Engineering. Its primary goal is to proactively identify and assess potential sources of harm in the laboratory and implement effective control measures to manage risks before incidents occur. This process consists of:

• Hazard Identification: Recognizing the existence of hazards is central to completing this safety report. Simply stated, a hazard is a potential for harm. The term is often associated with an activity involving an agent or equipment (a chemical or biological agent, a substance-related process or a source of energy) that, if left uncontrolled, could result in an injury, illness, loss of property, or damage to the environment.
• Hazards Evaluation: The qualitative and, whenever possible, quantitative description of the inherent properties of an agent or situation having the potential to cause adverse effects. This information can be found in Safety Data Sheets, equipment manuals, and other relevant documents.
• Hazard Control: Hazard evaluation helps determine the necessary controls to ensure safe work practices. These controls follow the “hierarchy of control”—elimination, engineering controls, administrative controls, and PPE—applied in that order.

The Safety Report template is available at the link below.

CHE Safety Report - Hazard Identification and Evaluation

5.2. Structured Development of Standard Operating Procedures for Laboratory Safety.

The systematic development of Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) provides a comprehensive framework for assessing and mitigating safety risks associated with scientific experiments and processes. To ensure safety and reliability, every component of an experiment must be meticulously planned in advance. This involves identifying potential hazards and implementing measures to minimize risk throughout each stage of the procedure.

Each step is first analyzed independently to identify potential failure points. Following this, the steps are evaluated collectively to determine whether any interactions or combinations of processes could compromise safety. A further predictive review is conducted to anticipate possible deviations and assess the consequences of any safety failures.

5.2.1. How to develop a safety-focused SOP

• Define scope and objectives: Identify process covered and list associated hazards (chemical, physical, biological).

• Gather safety information: Obtain Safety Data Sheets (SDSs), equipment manuals, and relevant institutional safety guidelines.

• Assess hazards: Use structured tools, such as What-If Analysis (see section 5.3 below), to determine appropriate controls using the hierarchy of controls (elimination, engineering, administrative, PPE). Consult with experienced lab members or your Supervisor/PI for additional insights.

• Write integrated steps: Provide step-by-step instructions highlighting safety-critical steps and specifying required hazard controls.  Include emergency actions such as spill response, equipment shutdown, etc.

• Review and Approval: Medium/High Risk: SOPs must be reviewed and approved by the Supervisor/PI. Low Risk: SOPs may be peer-reviewed, ideally by an experienced lab member. In some cases low-risk cases, a written procedure outlining safety protocols is sufficient.

• Update regularly– Revise after incidents or changes in process.

A SOP template is available at the link below.

CHE SOP - ICP Sample Prep

5.3. What-if Analysis

What-if Analysis involves a systematic brainstorming approach to explore potential problems in a given scenario. It assesses both the likelihood of those problems occurring and the severity of their consequences.

This method can be used at nearly any stage of the laboratory evaluation process.

By analyzing responses to what-if questions, researchers can make informed decisions about whether the identified risks are acceptable. If any risks are considered unacceptable, appropriate actions can be planned to mitigate them.

5.3.1. How to Conduct a What-if Analysis.

• Define scope – Identify the process, experiment, or activity to be reviewed and outline the boundaries (e.g., a single reaction step or equipment operation).

• Form a team – Involve researchers, lab staff, and safety professionals who are familiar with the process. Different perspectives help identify a broader range of hazards.

• Ask “What-if” questions – Ask structured, open-ended questions covering deviations in procedures, equipment malfunctions, human errors, and external factors, such as:

  • “What if the cooling system fails?”

  • “What if the wrong chemical is added?”

  • “What if ventilation is interrupted?”

• Identify potential consequences – For each “What-If” question, list possible outcomes (e.g., fire, toxic exposure, release of gas, equipment damage).

• Evaluate risk and Recommend Controls– Estimate the likelihood and severity of each consequence.  Propose practical measures to prevent or mitigate each scenario (e.g., interlocks, alarms, revised SOPs, PPE requirements, etc.).

• Review regularly – Revisit the analysis when processes change, new equipment is introduced, or after incidents/near-misses.

An example of a What-if analysis table is available at the link below.

Using a hotplate with flammable liquid