The Chief Officer is reviewing a newly drafted risk assessment for a moderately routine job and wonders whether it needs the same level of detail as one written for a rare, high-risk task. What's the correct approach to how much effort an assessment should involve?

A. Routine jobs should have minimal documentation, since experienced crew don't need detailed written guidance

B. The required level of detail is determined solely by company policy, with no link to the actual risk involved

C. The assessment should be 'suitable and sufficient' for the level of risk involved — the amount of effort and detail should scale with the risk and with how well it's already controlled by existing precautions, not be uniformly maximal or uniformly minimal regardless of the job

D. Every risk assessment, regardless of task, should be written to the same maximum level of detail to avoid any inconsistency

A. Daily, weekly, monthly, and annual risk assessments, based purely on time interval

B. Low, medium, high, and critical risk assessments, based only on severity rating

C. Generic risk assessments (company-level), task-based risk assessments (onboard, specific to the job), toolbox talks (discussing the assessment with those doing the work), and personal/dynamic assessment (an individual's ongoing informal check while working)

D. Deck, engine, catering, and bridge risk assessments, based on department

A. Nothing further — the generic company risk assessment for enclosed space entry already covers this job

B. Only a toolbox talk is needed, since the team already knows the general hazards of enclosed spaces

C. A new generic risk assessment must be drafted and submitted to the company before this job can proceed

D. A task-based risk assessment specific to this entry and these personnel, followed by a toolbox talk walking the team through its findings before work begins