Risk assessment hazard evaluation techniques

These techniques are addressed broadly in the Guidelines within the ehapters titled Overview of Hazard Evaluation Techniques and Using Hazard Evaluation Techniques. Brief descriptions of some of those techniques are given in Chapter 8, A Primer on Hazard analyses and Risk assessment. ... 

This chapter provides general information for performing qualitative or quantitative risk assessments on buildings in process plants. For detailed guidance on risk assessment techniques, the user is referred to other CCPS books on this subject, including Reference 3, Guidelines for Hazard Evaluation Procedures, Second Edition, and Reference 4, Guidelines for Chemical Process Quantitative Risk Analysis. 

General References Guidelines for Hazard Evaluation Procedures, Second Edition with Worked Examples, American Institute of Chemical Engineers, New York, 1992 Layer of Protection Analysis A Simplified Risk Assessment Approach, American Institute of Chemical Engineers, New York, 2001 ISA TR84.00.02, Safety Instrumented Functions (SIF)—Safety Integrity Level (SIL) Evaluation Techniques, Instrumentation, Systems, and Automation Society, N.C., 2002. 

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... 

Allowing time in the early stages of design for critical reviews and evaluation of alternatives would involve studies such as an early hazard and operability (HAZOP) study, using flowsheets, before final design begins,4 Fault tree analysis, quantitative risk assessment (QRA), checklists, audits, and other review and checking techniques can also be very helpful. These techniques are extensively discussed in the technical literature and will not be discussed in detail here. 

Exposure assessments may be conducted for one of four purposes hazard evaluation leading to appropriate control efforts, monitoring to ensure compliance with workplace standards, dose-response characterization within the context of epidemiological studies, and estimation of dose or uptake for risk assessments. Assessment strategies and measurement techniques will differ depending on the purpose at hand. 

Although immunophenotyping is part of many immunotoxicologic evaluations, it is unlikely to ever be a stand-alone analysis in risk assessment because of limited applicability as a screen for immunotoxicity. Despite not being a stand-alone technique and with only a limited role in hazard identification, immunophenotyping remains an important tool in hazard characterization, primarily in understanding mechanisms of immunotoxicity. 

Secondly, stracture provides the reader with a means of evaluating completeness. The goal-based assessment methodology and a number of common risk assessment techniques can occasionally be criticised for their inability to clearly demonstrate completeness. A convincing safety argument may be set out based on the evident facts but how can one be reassured that all credible hazards have been considered The application of structure to an argument facilitates the reader in determining this and perhaps invites their welcome criticism. 

How many risk assessment techniques are there Pat Clemens gave brief descriptions of 25 techniques in A Compendium of Hazard Identification Evaluation Techniques for System Safety Applications in the System Safety Analysis Handbook, 101 methods are described. 

A Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) is a sequential analysis and evaluation of the kinds of failures that could happen and their likely effects, expressed in terms of maximum potential loss. The technique is used as a predictive model and forms part of an overall risk assessment study. This analysis is described completely in the MIL-STD-1629A. The FMEA is most useful in system hazard analysis for highlighting critical components (Ridley, 1994). 

Occupational health and safety management tools (including hazard identification and risk assessment, selection and implementation of appropriate hazard controls, developing proactive and reactive performance measures, understanding techniques to encourage employee participation and evaluation of work-related accidents and incidents)... 

For facilities that are still in the design stage, the actions taken, particularly during the Risk Assessment step, will change for each iteration. For example, early evaluations of risk will use a HAZID (Hazard Identification) technique later on, as detailed engineering information becomes available, the more comprehensive HAZOP (Hazard and Operability Study) method will be used. 

In the previous chapter, it was established that in industry, plant hazards can cause harm to property (plant—machinery, asset), people, or the environment. So, it is important to develop some means of analyzing these and come up with a solution. Unfortunately, it is not as straightforward as it sounds. There are plenty of plant hazard analysis (PHA) techniques and each of them has certain strengths and weaknesses. Also each specific plant and associated hazard has specific requirements to be matched so that hazard analysis will be effective. In this chapter, various hazards (in generic terms) will be examined to judge their importance, conditions, quality, etc. so that out of so many techniques available for PHA it is possible to select which one is better (not the best because that needs to be done by experts specifically for the concerned plant) suited for the type of plant. So, discussion will be more toward evaluation of PHA techniques. Some PHA is more suited for process safety management (PSM) and is sometimes more applicable for internal fault effects [e.g., hazard and operability study (HAZOP)]. In contrast, hazard identification (HAZID) is applicable for other plants, especially for the identification of external effects and maj or incidents. HAZID is also covered in this chapter. As a continuation of the same discussion, it will be better to look at various aspects of risk analysis with preliminary ideas already developed in the previous chapter. In risk analysis risk assessment, control measures for safety management systems (SMSs) will be discussed to complete the topic. 

The evaluation of the risks associated with cancer virus research is extremely difficult, since we lack much scientific data on such vital characteristics as agent host range, infec-tivity, host susceptibility, and infectious dose (see Section 11.2). Because the potential consequences of accidental inoculation of laboratory workers with oncogenic viruses are so serious, standards have been developed for work with these agents (476, 477). The technique of risk assessment, which classifies both agents and experimental procedures on the basis of their relative hazards, is very useful for assigning particular ents into hazard categories based upon available data. 

---