Risk analysis avoidance

To those already familiar with hazard/risk analysis methods, a "PHA" designates a Preliminary Hazard Analysis. Unfortunately, the PSM Rule uses these same letters to designate Process Hazard Analysis. In this document, PrHA will designate Process Hazard Analysis to avoid confusion with Preliminary Hazard Analysis. Note that other literature may be confusing on this issue. 

Sample variabilities and the measurement error must be considered (risk analysis, cf. Section I.C) to avoid that an analyte signal yo will be measured outside the calibrated range. Thus, the range shall be chosen a little wider than the expected range of analyte concentrations. 

Hazard and risk analysis is a vast subject by itself and is extensively covered in the literature [22]. In order to plan to avoid accidental hazards, the hazard potential must be evaluated. Many new methods and techniques have been developed to assess and evaluate potential hazards, employing chemical technology and reliability engineering. These can be deduced from Fault Tree Analysis or Failure Mode Analysis [23], In these techniques, the plant and process hazard potentials are foreseen and rectified as far as possible. Some techniques such as Hazards and operability (HAZOP) studies and Hazard Analysis (HAZAN) have recently been developed to deal with the assessment of hazard potentials [24]. It must be borne in mind that HAZOP and HAZAN studies should be properly viewed not as ends in themselves but as valuable contributors to the overall task of risk management... 

Thus, a rigorous and consciously performed risk analysis should reduce both of the last components. This is the responsibility of the risk analysis team. Hence, it becomes obvious that risk analysis is a creative task that must anticipate events, which may occur in the future and has the objective of defining means for their avoidance. This may also be seen in opposition to laws that react on events from the past Therefore, it is a demanding task oriented to the future, which requires excellent engineering skills. 

Risk is defined as the probability of an undesirable event occurring and the impact of that event if it does occur. The result of this analysis will influence the degree to which the system development, implementation, and maintenance activities are performed and documented. By evaluating the system risk analysis, the system owner may uncover potential problems, which can be avoided during the development process. The chances of a successful, if not perfect, system implementation are improved. 

Based on knowledge of chance and effect (risk characterization), a first risk classification can be made. This will offer some insight into the priorities on risk avoidance or reduction, but it might leave a number of risks open for further risk analysis. Risk communication through the label or by other means then might become necessary. 

The process of risk assessment was first formalized (NRC, 1983) by the United States National Academy of Sciences through its National Research Council in 1983. The three stages of risk analysis are defined as risk assessment, risk management and risk communication (Figure 10). The important principle is the functional and organizational separation of exposure and risk assessment from risk management to avoid any non-science-driven influences on the assessment procedures. However, many interactive elements are essential for a systematic risk assessment and management process. 

Intervention studies usually measure relative or absolute risk. Analysis can either be done on (1) intention to treat, which compares outcome on the subjects assigned to each groups regardless of whether they continued with the intervention strategy, or (2) randomized treatment, which measures the outcome observed in the subjects being treated. The preferred method is intention to treat, which avoids bias that can arise from different levels of participation due to loss of follow-up (the loss of contact with subjects) however, the true effects of the intervention may sometimes be diminished. 

The ultimate goal of risk analysis and risk management is to eliminate unforeseen risks and avoid or minimize the impact of all foreseeable ones. 

Technical Authority (ITA) recommended in the report of the Columbia Accident Investigation Board. The risk analysis itself is described in the chapter on the new hazard analysis technique called STPA (chapter 8). But the first step in the safety or risk analysis is the same as for technical systems to identify the system hazards to be avoided, to generate a set of requirements for the new management structure, and to design the control structure. 

We beheve responsibilities are a natural form of expression for risk analysis within complex sociotechnical systems. We have developed the technique of responsibihty modelling, an approach which allows stakeholders to explore the hazards and associated risks of a given system in a structured and logical manner. These models can then be used to mitigate or avoid the risks associated with misunderstandings, and provide support for the analysis of potential process change. 

The use of established and defensible estimating techniques. Specifically identify the basis for cost allowances and contingency. Avoid making firm commitments except on a basis of adequate engineering, firm prices from the market-place, and thorough risk analysis. Be critical in the use of data based on previous projects, especially those set up as self-fulfilling prophesies. 

Angela Summers tarnishes the idea of an easily developed, perfect risk analysis in See Risk More Clearly Avoid a number of common errors that can blur yom vision [16]. The first paragraph of her article begins with ... 

Risk Analysis takes all inputs and products to produce a list of risk items to be properly dealt with the appropriate measures. As a general rule, risks in medical devices are usually avoided or mitigated. On the contrary, direct acceptance of a risk is not an option except for cases of highly beneficial medical devices. Even in that case, it shall be possible only for the most superficial, harmless and improbable risks that can hardly be reduced or mitigated. Mitigation and avoidance can be achieved by means of additional requirements, safety checks, boundary control, labelling, etc. Furthermore, software can hardly reduce the severity of a risk, instead it can reduce its probability to happen and/or increase its visibility should it happen. In the end, all risk items should have been brought to an acceptable level of residual risk. 

Hazards analysis Management did not carry out a risk analysis. Had they done so, and had they followed up on any findings, the event could have been avoided. For example, management relied on a single barrier (they did not install a second cement plug when mud was removed). 

What risk means in a security context and how the risk can be expressed and managed, is a contested topic in the scholar literature (Bier Von Winterfeldt, 2007 Deisler Jr, 2002 Jore Nja, 2010 Willis, 2007). Traditional quantitative risk analysis calculates risk based on the probability of an incident multiplied with the consequences. Newer perspectives often include uncertainties not captured in the probability or the background knowledge that the traditional risk estimates are based on (Aven, 2011). According to Aven (2013), in the area of security, application of probabilities is commonly avoided it is said that they are impossible to determine and that they are of little interest as a tool to support the decision making. Often qualitative assessments are performed on the basis of judgments of actors intentions and capacities, without references to a probability scale. 

---