MOEL Ordinance No. 470: connect risk assessment to participation and action (Partial amendment to the Enforcement Rule of the Occupational Safety and Health Act)
The Enforcement Rule now specifies assessment procedure/timing, worker participation and sharing, detailed records, and investigation-report preparation and disclosure.
Change at a glance
Promulgated: 2026-05-29
Effective: 1 Jun 2026
Current-text check:
| Item | Before | After |
|---|---|---|
| Procedure and timing | Existing law and notices | Explicit initial/regular/additional timing in Article 37 |
| Participation/sharing | No corresponding separate articles | New Articles 37-2 and 37-3 specify methods and information |
| Retention | Three years under former Article 37 | Three years maintained in 37-4; fields made explicit |
| Investigation reports | No corresponding preparation/disclosure article | New Article 71-2 specifies content and disclosure arrangements |
Identify hazards, decide acceptability and implement improvements
Article 37 specifies identification of all confirmed or reasonably anticipated exposures, a decision on acceptable risk and implementation of measures for unacceptable risks. Risk assessment and improvement were not first invented in 2026.
Initial assessment is required before the first work begins; regular assessment at least annually from the following year; additional assessment before relevant work where new hazards may arise or a major industrial accident or industrial injury has occurred. Read the implementing notice for detailed methods, procedures and timing.
Include workers and share information before and after
Article 37-2 specifies participation through workplace walkthroughs, optionally supplemented by surveys, interviews or other consultation. Where special circumstances prevent walkthrough participation, use at least one of those alternative methods.
A name on a form does not represent actual participation. Article 37-3 specifies sharing the schedule before assessment, and hazards, risk decisions, improvement plans and implementation results afterwards.
Check that completion results are shared, not only the original plan.
Check your workplace
- Are initial, regular and additional assessments tied to actual work?
- Can worker participation and before/after sharing be demonstrated?
- Are implementation results, not just plans, retained for three years?
Three-year retention continues, with more explicit record fields
The former Article 37 already required records of hazards, risk decisions and measures to be kept for three years. Ordinance 470 moves the record provision to Article 37-4 and specifies assessment timing and responsible persons, participating workers and worker representatives, and the findings/plans/results.
It is inaccurate to describe three-year retention itself as newly created. Linking action owners and completion checks is a useful practical suggestion for tracing actual implementation.
Investigation and disclosure provisions also change
Article 71 covers specified non-major industrial injuries selected by ministerial notice, involving events such as fire/explosion, collapse, falls, asphyxiation/poisoning, chemical release or heatwave work. Not every minor accident automatically falls into this investigation category.
Article 71-2 specifies workplace overview, event sequence, causes and prevention recommendations in reports, with publication through channels such as the ministry website. Read Act Article 56-2 for disclosure timing and exclusions.
The amendment commenced on 1 June 2026; the current Rule also incorporates later Ordinance 477. Penalties and staged enforcement cannot be determined from this ordinance alone.
Putting it into practice
Share the schedule, walk through the workplace with workers, decide risk acceptability and implement controls. Recheck completion, retain linked records of participants, dates, findings and results, and explain the outcome to workers.
Technical insight
Connect participation to completed improvements
Worker input can be lost unless it feeds into assessment and corrective action. This article explains a South Korean amendment, not a worldwide legal requirement.
Track a reported trapping hazard through equipment identification, assessment, action and the resulting condition. A signature alone does not explain how the concern was handled.
Sources
- 국가법령정보센터 · 제470호 개정문 / Amendment text대한민국 / Republic of Korea
- 산업안전보건법 시행규칙 · 현행 / Current Enforcement Rule대한민국 / Republic of Korea
- 시행규칙 종전 제37조 / Earlier Article 37대한민국 / Korea