Speak to a Senior Engineer
Service

Risk Engineering & Assurance

iDRISK risk engineering delivers consequence-focused, defensible assessments that identify critical controls, verify their effectiveness, and provide risk-ranked action plans for high-hazard industrial facilities.

Risk Engineering & Assurance
Reduce RiskIdentify & control critical risks
Assured ComplianceSFAIRP-defensible outcomes
Operational ConfidenceRegulator & insurer-ready
Service Overview

Risk engineering at iDRISK goes beyond generic risk matrices. We apply bowtie methodology, consequence modelling, and systematic control verification to understand how credible hazard scenarios unfold — and what controls genuinely prevent or mitigate them. Our risk engineering practice supports Major Hazard Facilities (MHF), SEPP 33 land use planning submissions, process hazard analyses, and corporate assurance programs.

Key Challenges

Critical controls not formally identified, owned, or verified in practice

Risk assessments completed as procedural exercises rather than engineering analysis

MHF safety case documentation failing to demonstrate SFAIRP compliance

SEPP 33 submissions lacking credible consequence and risk quantification

Bow-tie barriers not maintained or tested to demonstrate effectiveness

Industry Applications
Major Hazard Facilities (MHF) — Chemical, Petroleum and ExplosivesOil and Gas Processing and Pipeline OperationsMining and Heavy Industrial OperationsDefence and Government High-Consequence FacilitiesPort and Logistics InfrastructureEnergy and Utility Infrastructure
Compliance Considerations

Major Hazard Facilities in Australia are regulated under state Work Health and Safety Regulations and require a formal Safety Case demonstrating SFAIRP risk management. SEPP 33 in Victoria requires quantitative risk assessment (QRA) for land use planning near hazardous industries.

Benefits of Engagement
Rigorous, consequence-focused risk assessments accepted by regulators
Critical control identification supporting targeted investment decisions
MHF safety case documentation prepared to regulatory expectations
Risk-ranked action registers enabling efficient risk reduction programs
Independent assurance providing confidence to boards and insurers
What We Deliver
Risk Engineering Assessment Report
Bowtie Analysis and Critical Control Register
Consequence and Escalation Assessment
Barrier Effectiveness Review
MHF Safety Case Support Documentation
Risk-Ranked Action Plan with close-out tracking
Our Process
1
Scoping
Define hazard scenarios, assessment boundary and regulatory context.
2
Consequence Analysis
Model credible escalation pathways and consequence severity.
3
Control Review
Verify critical controls against bowtie threat and consequence pathways.
4
Risk Evaluation
Assess residual risk against SFAIRP and regulatory tolerability criteria.
5
Action Planning
Develop risk-ranked action register with implementation guidance.
What Clients Value

"iDRISK risk engineers combine formal risk engineering methodology with direct operational experience in high-hazard environments. We know what credible looks like — and what regulators and insurers expect from a rigorous risk assessment."

Commission an independent risk engineering review for your facility.

Speak With a Specialist