Definition.Hazard identification

The Center for Chemical Process Safety s projects fall into a number of general topic areas that comprise a comprehensive program. These topic areas include identification of hazards and analysis of risks, prevention and mitigation of the hazards identified, and better definition of areas affected by a release of hazardous materials. This book is the latest in the series dealing with hazard identification and risk analysis. 

Hazard identification is defined as tlie process of determining whetlier human exposure to an agent could cause an increase in the incidence of a health condition (cancer, birtli defect, etc.) or whetlier exposure to nonliumans, such as fish, birds, and otlier fonns of wildlife, could cause adverse effects. Hazard identification cliaracterizes tlie liazard in terms of tlie agent and dose of the agent. Since tliere are few hazardous chemicals or hazardous agents for wliich definitive exposure data in humans exists, tlie identification of health hazards is often characterized by the effects of health hazards on laboratory test animals or other test systems. ... 

Identification and Listing of Hazardous Waste Definition of hazardous waste-generic exclusion levels for K061 and K062 nonwastewater HTMR residues 0.15 mg/L (maximum for any single composite sample TCLP 40 CFR 261.3 EPA 1992... 

During the process hazards identification and definition phase of a project design, a basic process control system (BPCS) strategy is normally developed in conjunction with heat and material balances for the process. 

Key elements of reactive hazard identification are owner-initiated review, chemistry review, review of unit operations, review of scenarios, definition of required testing, records testing, and interpretation of results for owner. 

Risk assessment of carcinogens is a two-step process involving first, a qualitative assessment of the data from the hazard identification stage (see above) and second, a quantitation of the risk for definite or probable human carcinogens. 

An important similarity between human and ecological assessment of mixtures is the structure of the assessment procedure. Both procedures are often organized along a series of consecutive steps, that is, problem definition, hazard identification, exposure assessment, effect- or dose-response assessment, and risk characterization... 

EPA. 1985a. Identification and listing of hazardous waste. Definition of solid waste. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Code of Federal Regulations. 40 CFR 261.2. 

The definitions applied to organic peroxide formulation behavior can be subject to interpretation. Therefore, in an effort to better identify commercial organic peroxide formulations by class, a listing of typical formulations and their classes can be found in the Appendix of NFPA 43B. This listing includes the name and concentration of the organic peroxide, type of diluent, maximum individual container size and the NFPA 704 hazard identification rating. 

HCF procedure development maintains consistency by follow/ing the TA-V Nuclear Facilities Conduct of Operations Manual (SNL 1998a) and the SNL ES H Manual (SNL 1998b). These documents describe procedure format and content, including Purpose, Scope, Ownership, Responsibilities, Definitions and Acronyms, Hazard Identification, Equipment and Materials, Format, Review and Approval Authority, and Document Control. Use of this format complies with DOE Order 5480.19, Conduct of Operations, Chapter 16 (DOE 1990). TA-V Standard Operating Procedures are written for tasks specifically identified in the Technical Safely Requirements (TSR) or as required by other directives or the SNL ES H manual to address special hazards. TA-V document types and hierarchy is described in TA-V Nuclear Facilities Conduct of Operations Manual (SNL 1998a) Chapter 16. 

Similarly, if the system definition or hazard identification phases are performed too narrowly, there is an immediate risk for not including relevant factors in the assessment. Establishing guidelines which allow for inclusion of all relevant factors is therefore important. 

The presence of a toxinogenic fungus in a food or feed commodity gives indication of the potential hazard, but definitive conclusions can be made only by the actual identification of the specific toxin, since the presence of a fungus itself provides no evidence that it is a... 

The job safety analysis (JSA) [also referred to as the job hazard analysis (JHA)], which is a more simplified form of task analysis, has been a longstanding tool for task and function analysis. JSA has been available and utilized in general industry for many years by the industrial safety community. However, many practitioners do not understand or are simply unfamiliar with the connection between the JSA and the system safety tasks of hazard identification and analysis. It has even been suggested by some in the profession that the JSA itself is a type of oversimplified system safety analysis and, if performed earlier in the job development phase, could be used as the basis of a preliminary hazard analysis for a specific task or set of tasks. However, because JSA is often (if improperly) used to analyze a function only after it has been implemented, much of the data is not factored into the system safety process. The primary purpose of the JSA is to uncover inherent or potential hazards that may be encountered in the work environment. This basic definition is not unlike that previously discussed regarding the various system safety analyses. The primary difference between the two is subtle but important and is found in the end-use purpose of the JSA. Once the job or task is completed, the JSA is usually used as an effective tool for training and orienting the new employee into the work environment. The JSA presents a verbal picture of a specific job. 

The initial task is hazard identification. Participants apply information from the theories, models, and definitions above, along with other knowledge and experience. The next task is to conduct risk assessments on the identified hazards. Based on results, the participants select acceptable levels of risk and appropriate hazard controls. Each possibility needs evaluation to determine the potential for risk reduction. The evaluation will apply the priorities for controls listed in Table 3-2. Then they test and implement one or more selected controls. The final task is to evaluate the effectiveness of implemented controls. The panel may apply the evaluation results in working through the process again. 

HAZOP study for procedure This is normally a detailed method and should be properly defined. This study is usually carried out by a well-balanced team from different disciplines. The information required includes but is not limited to procedure definitions, up-to-date P IDs, and other relevant drawings and documents. Also the aim of the study (depth of study and major area of interest such as HSE, accident, etc.) needs to be well defined before starting a step-by-step procedure. Each stage/step and action is examined with the guide word to identify meaningful deviation for analysis for hazard identification. In the case of a HAZOP study for procedure, human error is an important factor. 

---