How to Correctly Describe a Hazard in Your NEBOSH NG2/IG2 Risk Assessment

One of the most common reasons learners lose marks in their NEBOSH NG2 or IG2 practical assessment is simple: the hazards they write down are not actually hazards. NEBOSH examiners expect clear, specific descriptions that show real potential for harm. Unfortunately, many submissions contain activities, pieces of equipment, or broken controls instead of true hazards.

This guide explains how to phrase hazards accurately, what NEBOSH markers look for, and how to avoid the mistakes that cost learners unnecessary marks.

What NEBOSH Means by “Hazard”

A hazard is something that could cause harm. It is not the job being carried out, nor is it the missing guard or faded sign you’ve noticed. It is the source of danger itself.

To write a hazard correctly, NEBOSH expects you to show:

• What the hazard is
• The context in which it exists
• Why it could cause harm

When this is done well, an examiner can picture the situation instantly.

Mistake 1: Writing Down Activities Instead of Hazards

This is probably the most widespread error. Students often list tasks such as changing bulbs or lifting boxes and assume that this counts as a hazard.

But tasks don’t cause harm — the hazard within the task does.

Poor example

“Changing light bulbs”

This tells the examiner nothing. What is the actual source of harm?

Strong example

“Working at height to change light bulbs using a step ladder approximately 5 metres tall, where workers are known to overreach instead of repositioning the ladder.”

This version:

• Shows the method (ladder use)
• Describes the risk factor (overreaching)
• Indicates the scale (5 metres)

It meets NEBOSH’s requirement for specificity and clarity.

Mistake 2: Listing Equipment as the Hazard

Another frequent issue is students writing down equipment names — electric power tools, ladders, forklifts — as though the equipment itself is the hazard.

Equipment is only hazardous because of what it can do, how it is used, or what condition it’s in.

Poor example

“Electric power tools”

This could relate to many different risks: vibration, noise, moving parts, dust, electric shock…

Strong example

“Use of 240-volt power drills and grinders in areas where cables are at risk of damage, potentially exposing live electrical conductors.”

This makes the danger obvious and helps the examiner understand the scenario instantly.

Mistake 3: Describing Missing Controls as Hazards

Many learners confuse control failures with hazards. NEBOSH examiners treat these very differently.

A broken guard, an unclear fire exit sign, or no PPE storage are problems with controls — not hazards.

Examples of control failures (not hazards)

• “Guard missing from conveyor belt.”
• “Fire exit signage unclear.”

These issues should appear in your action plan, not your hazard list.

What the real hazard is

For a missing guard on a conveyor, the hazard could be:
“Rotating shafts and moving parts of the conveyor system with the potential to entangle clothing or limbs.”

That is the source of harm.

Mistake 4: Using Incidents Instead of Hazards

“Falls from height”, “cuts”, “electrocution”, “burns” — these are outcomes, not hazards.

Poor example

“Possible falls from height when cleaning windows.”

The fall is the incident; you need to identify what might cause the fall.

Strong example

“Working at height on ladders up to 5 metres to clean windows, often involving overreaching and carrying buckets of water and equipment.”

This describes the situation that could result in the fall.

Writing Fire Hazards Correctly

A genuine fire hazard must always involve:

1. A fuel source
2. An ignition source
   (oxygen is assumed)

Many learners write housekeeping problems such as “blocked fire exit” or “poor signage” as if they were fire hazards. They are not.

Strong fire hazard example

“Large quantities of cardboard, plastic packaging, and paper stored close to electrical tools that can overheat or spark.”

This instantly communicates both elements of a fire hazard.

Putting It All Together

A well-written hazard should always:

• Identify a specific source of harm
• Show how it can cause harm
• Describe the context (where, how, or under what conditions)
• Avoid mentioning missing controls or consequences

If your marker can visualise the situation clearly, your hazard description is doing its job.

Good vs Poor Examples at a Glance

Poor Example	Better Hazard Description
Manual handling of boxes	Handling damaged boxes leaking battery acid in courier sorting areas, posing chemical burn risk
Changing light bulbs	Working at height on a 5m ladder to change bulbs, with frequent overreaching
Electric power tools	Use of 240V drills and buffers in areas where cables may become damaged and expose live conductors
Fire exit signs unclear	Storage of combustible packaging next to electrical tools capable of sparking
Guard missing from conveyor	Rotating drive shafts and moving parts of conveyor system capable of entanglement

Final Thoughts

Getting the hazard section right in your NEBOSH NG2/IG2 project is vital. Examiners expect clarity, accuracy, and detail. Once you understand what a hazard really is — and what it isn’t — the risk assessment becomes much easier to complete, and your marks improve dramatically.

If you’d like structured guidance, examples, and tutor support from former NEBOSH examiners, our Compassa NEBOSH course support and rescue packages provide everything you need for a confident pass.