The risk is expressed as consequence of damage multiplied by likelihood of failure. The installation of a protective system reduces the risk by reducing the likelihood of failure at the facility. Also, the protective system has different effects on the likelihood of failure according to the proof test cycle. However, when assessing risks in the Off-site Risk Assessment (ORA) system, the variation in risk was not reflected according to the proof test cycle of protective system. This study was conducted to examine the need for proof test and the importance of cycle setting by applying periodic proof test of the protective system to ORA. The results showed that the likelihood of failure and the risk increased with longer proof test cycle. The risk of a two-yearly proof test was eight times greater than that of a three-month cycle. From the results, the protective system needs periodic proof test. Untested protective system for a long term cannot be reliable because it is more likely to be failed state when it is called upon to operate. In order to reduce the risk to an acceptable level, it is effective to differently set the proof test cycle according to the priority. This study suggested a more systematic and accurate risk analysis standard than ORA. This standard is expected to enable an acceptable level of risk management by systematically setting the priority and proof test cycle of the protective system. It is also expected to contribute to securing the safety of chemical facilities and at the same time, will lead to the development of the ORA system.