What is the GTC 45
GTC 45 is an ICONTEC guide for organizing hazard identification and risk assessment in occupational safety and health. The second update from 2012 is a widely used reference in Colombia. Its application is related to the IPER ( Identification of Hazards and Risk Assessment ), but it is important to distinguish between the preventive objective and the tool chosen to document it.
This guide should not be presented as a law or as the only valid methodology for every situation. Decree 1072 of 2015 requires a systematic methodology with a scope appropriate to processes, tasks, and people. The selection must allow for the identification of hazards, the assessment of risks, and the establishment of controls, also considering the specific technical requirements that apply.
Information needed before risk assessment
The quality of the evaluation begins with understanding the work. It’s important to observe both routine and non-routine activities, talk to those who perform them, and review changes, incidents, and exposure conditions. A description based solely on the job title can obscure relevant tasks, such as cleaning, adjustments, relocation, or intervention in response to process failures.
Hazard identification should explain what can cause harm, to whom, and under what circumstances. It’s different to record “mechanical risk” than to describe the possibility of a hand reaching a moving area during a specific task. The latter allows for the examination of controls and the decision-making regarding actions; the former may be too broad to guide prevention efforts.
Risk assessment logic
The guide combines levels of deficiency and exposure to obtain a probability level, and relates this to the consequences to assess risk. In its notation, NP = ND × NE and NR = NP × NC. The values and interpretations should be applied using the tables and conditions of the edition used, without reconstructing scales from memory.
Calculation is only one part of the analysis. The evaluator needs to justify the inputs and acknowledge uncertainties. If the actual frequency of a task or the effectiveness of a control is unknown, assigning a number does not eliminate that lack of information. The decision must indicate what is known, what remains to be verified, and how additional evidence will be obtained.
Existing controls and proposed measures
It is essential to distinguish between measures already implemented and pending proposals. Equipment that has been purchased but not yet installed does not reduce current exposure. Nor is it sufficient to mention a procedure if observed conditions prevent its implementation. The assessment must reflect the actual situation so that intervention priorities do not depend on safeguards that exist only on paper.
The hierarchy of controls helps to study elimination, replacement, and technical solutions before relying solely on instructions or personal equipment. Selection needs to consider effectiveness, compatibility, and maintainability. After implementing a measure, its operation should be checked, and it should be reviewed whether it introduces new difficulties, such as hazardous access for cleaning or an overload on another task.
When is a specific evaluation needed?
A general matrix does not replace required industrial hygiene measurements, ergonomic studies, or psychosocial assessments. If exposure to noise, substances, or physical exertion exists, further investigation with specific methods and qualified personnel may be necessary. The overall result serves to identify the need and prioritize its resolution, not to declare compliance with limits without adequate evidence.
A risk category should not be interpreted as an exact statistical probability of an accident. Scales help to organize decisions within a defined method and context. Comparing numbers between matrices with different criteria can lead to errors. Therefore, it is advisable to retain the methodological version and the rules used when presenting results to management or other departments.
Practical example
In a hypothetical example, a company reviews incoming materials. The observation identifies that a person enters a maneuvering area to check labels while the load is being moved. The assessment describes that interaction and the existing controls, rather than grouping all the activity under a single generic row of internal transport.
The team is studying changing the checkpoint and separating the movement of people and goods. This measure is incorporated into the annual OHSMS plan, with a designated person responsible and a verification process. After implementation, a representative inspection is conducted to verify that the solution works and does not simply shift the problem to another phase of the process.
Participation and updates
Those who perform the work can explain exceptions, shortcuts imposed by the process, and changes in conditions. Their participation allows for a comparison of the documented assessment with the actual practice. The technical lead must integrate this information without mistaking individual opinion for sufficient evidence, resorting to observation or measurement when necessary to resolve relevant doubts.
The assessment needs to be reviewed in response to changes and within the applicable update obligations. It is useful to keep records of versions and reasons for modifications: new tasks, incidents, measurement results, or implemented improvements. This allows you to distinguish a real risk reduction from a simple change in how the activity is scored or described.
Common mistakes
Common mistakes include copying matrices from other organizations, evaluating positions without assigning tasks, and reducing scores to improve presentation. Another mistake is reducing all measures to training and PPE use without exploring more effective alternatives. A lengthy matrix is not necessarily a comprehensive evaluation if its rows don’t allow for concrete action decisions.
The usefulness of GTC 45 depends on its competent application and its connection to actual controls. The document should facilitate understanding risks, assigning priorities, and tracking results. The assessment loses its value when it ends by saving the spreadsheet and does not influence the design, organization, or execution of the work.
