Assessing Consequences

The ha2ard assessment is to iaclude identification of a worst-case scenario and other more likely scenarios for release of a regulated substance, and analy2e the off-site consequences of such releases. The release and consequence assessment is to iaclude the rate, duration, and quantity of the release, the distances for exposure or damage (usiag atmospheric, called "F" stabiUty and a 1.5-m/s wiad, and most-often-occurriag conditions), populations that could be exposed, and environmental damage that could be expected. 

Lazaro, M. A. et al, 1997, Model Review and Evaluation for Application in DE Safety Basis Documentation of Chemical Accidents Modeling Guidance for Atmospheric Dispersion and Consequence Assessment, ANL/EAD/TM-75, September. 

Reg. Guide 1.145, 1983, Atmospheric Dispersion Models for Potential Accident Consequence Assessments at Nuclear Power Plants, USNRC, February. 

Each occupied building was qualitatively ranked according to frequency and consequence per Table 5.2 and Table 5.4. Consequence ratings were based upon the results of the previously conducted consequence assessments. Frequency estimates were based upon consensus estimates of the HAZOP team. Risk rankings were then determined per Figure 5.1. 

It should be noted that consequence screening is performed without regard to the likelihood of an event s occurring. As a result, consequence screening does not determine risk. Furthermore, the consequence evaluation performed may not represent a detailed evaluation of consequences to the process plant. Instead, it is an approximation of expected consequences, given an estimate of potential blast overpressure and anticipated response of representative building types. The user should not mistake this evaluation for a detailed consequence assessment. 

Generally, the results obtained through the numerical simulation showed good agreement with the experimental data leading to the conclusion that CFD techniques can be effectively used in consequence assessment procedures concerning toxic/flammable dispersion scenarios in real terrains, where box models have limited capabilities. 

Consequence Assessment/Appropriate Design Basis Determination... 

Consequence assessment for the purposes of establishing design basis differs from consequence assessment in the context of a risk analysis study (see Qualitative and Quantitative Methods, below). A qualitative, or semi-quantitative (order of magnitude) consequence severity estimate may suffice for the latter. 

Subcommittee on Consequence Assessment and Protective Action (SCAPA) of the Emergency Management Advisory Committee of the U.S. Department of Energy. http //www.orau.gov/emi/scapa. 

Federal Coordinator for Meteorological Services and Supporting Research, Directory of Atmospheric Transport and Diffusion Consequence Assessment Models, FCM-13-1999, Washington, DC, March 1999. http //www.ofcm.gov. 

Ten to thirty percent of patients progress to cirrhosis after 30 years. Most individuals with chronic HCV in the United States are between the ages of 30 and 49 years and have yet to manifest sequelae of the disease. As a result, the impact of HCV on future health care costs is anticipated to be high. Unfortunately, clinical decisions to treat individual patients are confounded by the inconsistent progression and a lack of ability to predict clinical deterioration. Therapy with pegylated interferons and ribavirin can be very expensive and associated with serious adverse events. Consequently, assessing the cost, benefits, and cost-effectiveness of the various therapies is vital. 

The chapter consists of six sections. Section 11.2 describes the general structure of the methodology proposed. Section 11.3 discusses the approach of the consequence assessment of the problem. Section 11.4 presents the MOEA of emergency planning and response optimization around chemical plants. Section 11.5 includes some applications, and finally, section 11.6 offers a summary and the conclusion of this work. 

The main algorithm has been written in Visual C++ 6.0 and incorporates both the consequence assessment models as well as the MOEA. The general structure of the methodology is shown in Fig. 11.2. The following sections of this chapter describe the main parts of the model. 

Abbasi, T., and Abbasi, S. (2007) The boiling liquid expanding vapour explosion (BLEVE) Mechanism, consequence assessment, management. Journal of Hazardous Materials 141, 480-519. 

Develop a risk or consequence assessment. The results of the threat and vulnerability assessment are used to prepare a risk or consequence assessment. The risk assessment establishes consequences for the various threats in the con-... 

Before using a consequence assessment model, it is necessary to postulate events that follow the release of a hazardous chemical. In general, a hazardous material release may exhibit one or more of the following types of hazards ... 

Disturbed or influenced value Kind of influence Effect Consequence Assess- ment... 

DOE 0 151.lA, Chapter IV, sec. 3b(5) 4.4.4 Provisions shall be established to adequately assess the potential or actual on and offsite consequences of an emergency. Consequence assessments shall (a) be timely throughout the emergency (b) be integrated with the event classification and protective action process (c) incorporate monitoring of specific indicators and field measurements and (d) be coordinated with Federal, State, local, and Tribal organizations. 

---