{"id":22270,"date":"2025-09-04T14:48:21","date_gmt":"2025-09-04T13:48:21","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.serianaedilizia.it\/?p=22270"},"modified":"2025-09-05T14:39:29","modified_gmt":"2025-09-05T13:39:29","slug":"seismic-risk-prevention","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.serianaedilizia.it\/en\/seismic-risk-prevention\/","title":{"rendered":"Seismic risk prevention: legal obligations and retrofit solutions for companies"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Is seismic risk assessment a legal obligation? The answer can only be yes.
Preventing seismic risk is not only good practice: it is a legal duty<\/strong> and a responsibility toward workers, company assets, business continuity and the environment. Italian regulations are explicit: seismic risk must be assessed and managed in the DVR<\/strong> \u2013 Risk Assessment Document (Legislative Decree 81\/2008<\/strong>); it must be framed within organizational models and management systems (Legislative Decree 231\/2001<\/strong>); and it falls under the responsibility of the employer or the appointed safety delegate to adopt all safety measures (Art. 2087 of the Civil Code<\/strong>), with possible criminal implications in case of omissions (Art. 589 of the Criminal Code<\/strong>). For strategic and relevant buildings<\/strong>, a seismic vulnerability check<\/strong> is required (O.P.C.M. 3274\/2003<\/strong>). In short, prevention is a legal obligation<\/strong> even before being a moral one.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Before getting into individual legislative references, two operational points are worth fixing: seismic risk must be included in the company risk assessment<\/strong> and, by its nature, constitutes a material risk for workers<\/strong>, because it can cause significant harm with a non-negligible probability. Consequently, seismic safety assessment is not optional<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Which buildings must be checked (and often improved\/retrofitted)? All those not designed in accordance with the Ministerial Decree 14\/01\/2008 (NTC 2008)<\/strong>, the standards that came into force on 1 July 2009<\/strong>. For these buildings it is necessary to schedule a seismic safety assessment<\/strong><\/a> and, if required, an anti-seismic intervention<\/strong> (improvement or upgrading) to protect people, the environment and business continuity.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

I. Legislative Decree 81\/2008, as amended<\/strong>
What does Legislative Decree 81\/2008 provide? \u2013 Risk Assessment Document (DVR) and the duty to assess seismic risk<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The employer must assess all<\/strong> risks, none excluded, including earthquakes, as set out in Art. 15 \u2013 \u201cGeneral protective measures\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThe general measures for the protection of workers\u2019 health and safety in the workplace are:
a) the assessment of all<\/strong> risks to health and safety;
b) the planning of prevention, aimed at an overall approach that consistently integrates, within prevention, the company\u2019s technical-production conditions as well as the influence of environmental factors and work organization (\u2026);
c) the elimination of risks and, where this is not possible, their reduction to a minimum in relation to the knowledge acquired on the basis of technical progress.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Article 17 \u2013 Non-delegable obligations of the employer<\/strong>
\u201c1. The employer may not delegate the following activities:
a) the assessment of all risks, with the consequent preparation of the document provided for in Article 28;
b) (\u2026)\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Article 28 \u2013 Object of the risk assessment<\/strong>
\u201c1. The assessment referred to in Article 17, paragraph 1, letter a), including in the choice of work equipment and of the substances or chemical preparations used, as well as in the layout of workplaces, must cover all<\/strong> risks to the safety and health of workers (\u2026).\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In conclusion<\/strong>, Legislative Decree 81\/2008 establishes that the assessment of all<\/strong> risks\u2014including seismic risk<\/strong>\u2014and the drafting\/updating of the DVR are non-delegable obligations<\/strong> of the employer. This assessment must encompass equipment, substances used, and the organization\/layout of workplaces, so as to ensure effective protection of workers\u2019 health and safety and to avoid liabilities and sanctions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

What are the requirements for workplaces?<\/strong>
Article 63 – Health and safety requirements<\/strong>
\u201cWorkplaces must comply with the requirements set out in ANNEX IV<\/strong> (\u2026).\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Article 64 \u2013 Employer\u2019s obligations<\/strong>
\u201cIt is mandatory that systems and safety devices intended to prevent or eliminate hazards are subjected to regular maintenance and functional checks.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Annex IV \u2013 Workplace environment requirements<\/strong>
\u201c1.1. Stability and robustness
1.1.1. Buildings housing workplaces, or any other works and structures present in the workplace, must be stable and have a robustness consistent with their intended use and with environmental conditions (\u2026).\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In summary<\/strong>, Articles 63 and 64 of Legislative Decree 81\/2008, together with Annex IV, require that workplace buildings and structures be stable and suitable for their use and environmental conditions (including earthquakes). The employer must regularly maintain and check systems and safety devices, taking action whenever issues arise.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

From assessment to operational decisions<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n


The seismic risk assessment must be entrusted to a qualified professional and takes the form of a Safety Assessment<\/strong> of the building. Operational decisions follow from this: when performance is adequate, no works are required; if shortcomings emerge, seismic retrofit or improvement<\/strong> measures are planned; where minimum safety levels cannot be ensured, usage limitations<\/strong> or downgrading of areas<\/strong> are applied.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Particular attention must be paid to prefabricated industrial buildings<\/strong> not designed with seismic criteria: damage experience and technical literature highlight recurring weaknesses in beam\u2013column<\/strong>, roof\u2013beam<\/strong>, and cladding panel\u2013column<\/strong> connections, as well as in the bracing of storage racks<\/strong>. These are clear weak points that cannot be ignored during verification.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Finally, it is essential to dispel a common misconception: certificates of occupancy, commissioning tests and other administrative permits do not equate to a seismic safety standard<\/strong>. For workplaces, it is necessary to verify that the buildings housing production activities have been constructed (or retrofitted) with features suitable to ensure stability and resistance<\/strong> in the event of an earthquake. Only then does seismic prevention become concrete, measurable, and consistent with legal obligations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The specific case of prefabricated industrial buildings: Article 29 \u2013 Methods of conducting the risk assessment ( \u2026 )<\/strong>
\u201cRisk assessment must be immediately revised, in accordance with the procedures set out in paragraphs 1 and 2, in the event of changes to the production process or to work organisation that are significant for workers\u2019 health and safety, or in relation to the state of the art in technology, prevention or protection ( \u2026 ). Following such revision, prevention measures must be updated ( \u2026 ).\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

What must the employer do once critical issues have been identified? Article 64 \u2013 Employer\u2019s obligations<\/strong>
\u201c1. The employer shall ensure that:
( \u2026 )
c) workplaces, systems and devices are subjected to regular technical maintenance and that any defects identified which may jeopardise workers\u2019 health and safety are remedied as quickly as possible;
( \u2026 )\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

II. Beyond D.Lgs. 81\/2008: what ASL, the Ministry of Labour and Civil Protection say<\/strong>
Alongside the general obligations of the Consolidated Safety Act, several official notices have clarified that seismic risk must be explicitly assessed in the DVR and, where necessary, followed by seismic retrofitting or upgrading works.
The Bergamo ASL, in a letter from the Directorate-General dated 1 April 2014 (subject: \u201cAssessment of seismic risk in prefabricated industrial buildings not designed with anti-seismic criteria\u201d), reminded employers\u2014pursuant to Arts. 17 and 28 of D.Lgs. 81\/08\u2014of the obligation to carry out a specific earthquake-risk assessment, stressing the high vulnerability of these structures, particularly if built before seismic zoning.
The same line is reiterated by the Ministry of Labour in a press release (Rome, 6 June 2012): the stability and solidity of buildings are safety requirements referred to in Annex IV of D.Lgs. 81\/2008; failure to comply is punishable and cannot be \u201cneutralised\u201d by waivers. The standardised procedures for risk assessment also include natural events\u2014earthquakes among them\u2014among the hazards to be considered, in line with the DVR\u2019s required \u201cglobal\u201d approach.
Finally, OPCM 3274\/2003 introduced an obligation on owners to verify the seismic vulnerability of buildings whose functionality is strategic or whose potential failure could have significant consequences; this applies both to existing buildings whose functionality during seismic events is fundamental for Civil Protection purposes and to buildings that may become relevant in relation to the consequences of a possible collapse.
In practice: for many production sites\u2014particularly for \u201clegacy\u201d prefab buildings\u2014a generic assessment is no longer sufficient; a targeted seismic diagnosis is needed and, where required, a seismic-retrofit programme that protects people, the environment and business continuity.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

III. CIVIL CODE \u2013 Art. 2087 (Protection of working conditions)<\/strong>
<\/strong>\u201cEntrepreneurs are required, in the conduct of the undertaking, to adopt the measures which, according to the particular nature of the work, experience and the state of the art, are necessary to protect the physical integrity and moral personality of workers.\u201d
In other words, the employer must ensure a safe working environment, adopting\u2014based on the nature of the activity, experience and current best practice\u2014all measures suitable to safeguard workers\u2019 health and dignity. It is an \u201copen-ended\u201d clause: it requires risks to be prevented even beyond the bare legal minimum whenever necessary.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

IV. CRIMINAL CODE \u2013 Art. 589 (Manslaughter) and paragraph repealed by Law 23 March 2016, No. 41<\/strong>
\u201cAnyone who, through negligence, causes the death of a person shall be punished with imprisonment from six months to five years. If the act is committed in breach of the rules on the prevention of workplace accidents, the penalty shall be imprisonment from two to seven years (\u2026)\u201d
\u201cIn the case of the death of several persons, or the death of one or more persons and injury to one or more persons, the penalty applicable for the most serious of the violations committed shall be increased up to threefold, but the penalty may not exceed fifteen years.\u201d
In conclusion, anyone who negligently causes another\u2019s death is punishable by 6 months to 5 years\u2019 imprisonment. If the event occurs in breach of occupational safety rules, the penalty rises to 2\u20137 years. Where there are multiple fatalities (or fatalities and injuries together), the penalty for the most serious violation may be increased up to three times, with an overall cap of 15 years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

V. Legislative Decree 8 June 2001, No. 231 \u2013 \u201cAdministrative liability of companies and entities\u201d and subsequent amendments by Law No. 179 of 30 November 2017<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

D.Lgs. 231\/2001 introduces the administrative liability of legal persons<\/strong> (companies and entities) for offences committed by their representatives, directors, employees or third parties acting in their name and on their behalf.
Law 179\/2017, which amends the decree, strengthens the sanctions regime<\/strong> and requires the adoption of effective Organisation, Management and Control Models (MOG)<\/strong> to prevent offences.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In particular, Articles 5 and 6<\/strong> highlight the liability of those who hold functions of representation, administration or management within the company. If such a person (e.g., CEO, country manager, or similar) fails to fulfil their duties\u2014such as compliance with safety rules or environmental risk requirements\u2014the company may seek recourse<\/strong> against that individual. This creates significant exposure for managers<\/strong>, especially in the event of workplace accidents or seismic events.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Each role is crucial in ensuring that the company complies with laws on safety, prevention and protection<\/strong>, particularly in critical situations such as workplace accidents or earthquakes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

What conditions trigger a company\u2019s liability for the offence of negligent injury\/manslaughter of a worker?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\uf0b7  The offence was committed in the interest or to the advantage of the entity<\/strong>;<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\uf0b7  No adequate Organisation, Management and Control Model (MOG)<\/strong> was adopted;<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\uf0b7  No Supervisory Body (OdV)<\/strong> was appointed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

What are the sanctions?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    \n
  • Monetary fine up to approx. \u20ac1,500,000<\/strong>;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
  • Disqualifying measures from 3 to 12 months<\/strong>;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
  • Confiscation<\/strong>;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
  • Publication of the judgment<\/strong>.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

    Are D.Lgs. 231\/2001 and D.Lgs. 81\/2008 connected?<\/strong>
    Legislative Decree No. 231\/2001 has been extended to negligent offences in the field of workplace safety, including manslaughter<\/strong> and serious personal injury<\/strong>, pursuant to Art. 9 of Law No. 123\/2007<\/strong>.
    This made it necessary for companies, including smaller ones, to adopt an Organisation, Management and Control Model (MOG)<\/strong> to prevent such offences.
    In particular, Art. 6<\/strong> of Decree 231 provides that, to exclude the entity\u2019s liability, the latter must adopt an effective MOG<\/strong>.
    D.Lgs. 81\/2008<\/strong> requires the adoption of a Safety Organisation and Management Model (MOGS)<\/strong> which, if properly implemented, exempts<\/strong> the entity from the sanctions provided by Decree 231.
    The two models (MOG<\/strong> and MOGS<\/strong>) are distinct but coordinated, with the Supervisory Body (OdV)<\/strong> overseeing their implementation, ensuring workplace safety and preventing the risk of offences. In addition, Art. 30 of D.Lgs. 81\/2008<\/strong> and Art. 6 of D.Lgs. 231\/2001<\/strong> stress that adopting a MOG entails further obligations, such as risk assessment<\/strong> and safety measures<\/strong>.
    In short, a MOG cannot be considered \u201ceffectively implemented\u201d<\/strong> unless all the obligations under D.Lgs. 81\/2008<\/strong> are also fulfilled, including the Risk Assessment Document (DVR)<\/strong> and the related prevention measures.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    \"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

    Conclusion<\/strong>
    In Italy, seismic risk in workplaces is governed by a set of provisions that converge on key pillars: assessing all risks (earthquakes included)<\/strong>, ensuring building stability and robustness<\/strong>, keeping systems and safety devices efficient<\/strong>, planning works and maintenance<\/strong>, and organising emergency management<\/strong>. In practice, compliance requires a technical-structural diagnosis<\/strong>, the definition of priorities and timelines for action<\/strong> (seismic retrofit or upgrade<\/strong>), document traceability<\/strong>, and the active involvement of the employer\/plant operator<\/strong>. It is a continuous improvement journey in which seismic retrofit<\/strong> turns legal obligations into tangible safety<\/strong> for people, company assets, business continuity<\/strong>, and the environment.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

    Is seismic risk assessment a legal obligation? The answer can only be yes.Preventing seismic risk is not only good practice: […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":219,"featured_media":22279,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[44,29],"tags":[],"interventi":[40],"class_list":["post-22270","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-seismic-risk-analysis","category-uncategorized","interventi-industriale-en"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.serianaedilizia.it\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/22270","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.serianaedilizia.it\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.serianaedilizia.it\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.serianaedilizia.it\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/219"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.serianaedilizia.it\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=22270"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/www.serianaedilizia.it\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/22270\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":22300,"href":"https:\/\/www.serianaedilizia.it\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/22270\/revisions\/22300"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.serianaedilizia.it\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/22279"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.serianaedilizia.it\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=22270"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.serianaedilizia.it\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=22270"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.serianaedilizia.it\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=22270"},{"taxonomy":"interventi","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.serianaedilizia.it\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/interventi?post=22270"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}