Traffic Control Hierarchy of Controls Assessment

Traffic Control Hierarchy of Controls Assessment
Assessment Purpose and Tool Scope
This assessment documents the hierarchy of controls review for traffic control activities where workers may be exposed to live traffic. Its purpose is to show whether worker exposure can be eliminated, reduced through alternative control methods, or whether AFAD or manual TCP control requires documented justification.
WorkSafeBC Part 18 requires a risk assessment before workers are permitted to perform work that may expose them to traffic. For short-duration and long-duration work, that assessment must be in writing, and the traffic control plan must be based on that assessment. This tool is intended to support that process by documenting the decision path for traffic control method selection.
This is not a general site risk assessment. Unlike the Guided Traffic Control Risk Assessment Tool, which reviews broader site and operational hazards, this assessment is specifically focused on the process of elimination of worker exposure to traffic, the hierarchy of controls, AFAD suitability, and manual TCP justification where applicable.
Use this assessment to document why exposure elimination was or was not practicable, what alternative control methods were considered, whether AFAD was suitable, and why manual TCP control was selected only if necessary.
HIERARCHY OF CONTROLS DECISION SUMMARY
Section 1 — Project and Site Context

Complete the project and site details below before reviewing the hierarchy of controls.
Project Name
Project Location
Road Authority / Owner
Prime Contractor / Employer
Supervisor / Assessor Name
Assessment Date

MonthDayYear
Date
Type of Work Activity
If Other, Describe Work Activity
Work Duration
Work Condition
Posted Speed Limit
Traffic Volume Condition
Road Configuration
If Other, Describe Road Configuration
Surrounding Environment
Sight Distance Condition
Vulnerable Road Users (VRU) Present
Intersection Influence
Potential Worker Exposure Level
Section 2 — Exposure Elimination Review

This section documents whether worker exposure to live traffic can be eliminated through closures, detours, barriers, work from outside the travelled way, alternative access arrangements, or other effective measures.
Can worker exposure to live traffic be eliminated for this activity?
If Yes or Partially, describe how exposure is eliminated or reduced
If No, explain why elimination is not practicable
Can barrier separation or physical isolation be used?
Describe barrier, closure, detour, remote work method, or isolation options considered
Section 3 — Alternative Control Measures Review

If worker exposure cannot be fully eliminated, review whether traffic can be controlled using devices, layout changes, sequencing, or administrative controls before selecting AFAD or manual TCP control.
Can traffic be controlled without exposing a worker?
Describe device-based, layout-based, or sequencing controls considered
Can the work be rescheduled to off-peak or lower-risk periods?
Can the work method be modified to reduce worker exposure time?
Describe administrative or procedural controls available to reduce exposure
Section 4 — AFAD Suitability Review

If worker exposure cannot be eliminated and traffic control still requires direct control of road users, review whether AFAD is suitable before considering manual TCP control.
Can AFAD be used for this activity?
Would AFAD reduce worker exposure compared with manual TCP control?
Is the traffic control method single lane alternating traffic?
Are site geometry and layout suitable for AFAD placement and visibility?
Are sightlines adequate for AFAD operation?
Do intersection influence, turning movements, or access conflicts reduce AFAD suitability?
Are pedestrian, cyclist, transit stop, or driveway conflicts present that require added review?
Is there adequate space for AFAD setup, transition, buffer, and safe operation?
If AFAD is suitable, describe how AFAD would be deployed for this activity
If AFAD is not suitable or is conditional, explain why
Describe AFAD failure contingency, backup traffic control method, operator response, and escalation procedure
Describe transition procedure if AFAD cannot continue operating safely
Is there a documented contingency if AFAD operation fails, requires manual override, or cannot be safely continued?
Section 5 — Manual TCP Justification

Complete this section only if AFAD is not suitable or is not being used, and manual TCP control remains under consideration.
Is manual TCP control still being considered for this activity?
Explain why higher-order controls do not fully address worker exposure for this activity
Explain why AFAD is not being used
Can the TCP be positioned in a safe location for this activity?
Is a safe escape route identified for the TCP position?
Can the manual TCP method be carried out without positioning the worker in an unsafe location?
Required Supervision Level
Describe the manual TCP control method and the residual controls required
Section 6 — Assessment Outcome Summary

Record the selected control path, the reason for the decision, and any conditions, limitations, or required follow-up actions.
Selected Control Method
Assessment Summary and Rationale
Required Controls, Conditions, or Limitations
Follow-Up Actions or Additional Review Required
Does this assessment require supervisor or management review before implementation?
Reviewed By
Review Date

MonthDayYear
Date
Should be Empty:

Traffic Control Hierarchy of Controls Assessment

Assessment Purpose and Tool Scope

HIERARCHY OF CONTROLS DECISION SUMMARY

Section 1 — Project and Site Context

Section 2 — Exposure Elimination Review

Section 3 — Alternative Control Measures Review

Section 4 — AFAD Suitability Review

Section 5 — Manual TCP Justification

Section 6 — Assessment Outcome Summary