Risk assessment matrices described

Risk Assessment 4 3D (see Tables 2.1-2.3). Although weld seam failure can occur, its likelihood can be described as remote (i.e., unlikely, but possibly occurring in the life of an item). If the seams were to fail, the severity of the outcome would be assessed as marginal (i.e., minor injury, occupational illness, or system damage). Hence, the risk assessment matrix classifies this incident as acceptable, with a review by engineering and management personnel. 

Risk Assessment 6 2C (see Tables 2.1-2.3). Obviously, critical mishaps such as those described above might possibly occur during the life cycle of this system ( occasional ). The risk assessment matrix indicates that such risk is undesirable and must, if at all possible, be controlled or reduced to acceptable levels or eliminated totally. 

Note that the EMEA process described here requires the entry of probability, severity, and risk codes. The example of a risk assessment matrix shown in Table 13, and the Risk Category Codes, given in the nearby text fulfill the needs for traditional FMEA purposes. A Eailure Modes and Effects Analysis form on which those codes would be entered is provided in Addendum C at the end of this chapter, courtesy of A-P-T Research, Inc. 

The next step is to correlate the severity with the likelihood and make an assessment as to the relative risk of an accident. Chapters 13 and 14 describe a more sophisticated approach to risk assessment. For now, however, the fairly simple risk assessment matrix in Table 5.4 is the most often used in hazard analysis. 

Tiering is often applied in risk assessment in order to reduce expenditures in time, money, and labor when the assessment requires only simple and possibly conservative output. Table 5.3 provides a suggested tiered approach in mixture extrapolation and is further described in the bulleted list below. The tiering is based on the way that mixture mechanisms are addressed in the approach. It is assumed that issues such as matrix and media extrapolation have been addressed according to the methods described in the pertinent chapters. 

A wide-ranging compilation of techniques, Extrapolation Practice for Ecotoxicological Effect Characterization of Chemicals describes methods of extrapolation in the framework of ecological risk assessment. The book, informally known as EXPECT, identifies data needs and situations where these extrapolations can be most usefully applied, making it a practical guide to the application of extrapolation procedures. It focuses on the extrapolation of chemical effects and covers the extrapolation of exposures in the context of interactions between toxicants and the matrix. 

Matrix models are sets of mostly linear difference equations. Each equation describes the dynamics of 1 class of individuals. Matrix models are based on the fundamental observation that demographic rates, that is, fecundity and mortality, are not constant throughout an organism s life cycle but depend on age, developmental stage, or size. Ecological interactions, natural disturbances, or pesticide applications usually will affect different classes of individuals in a different way, which can have important implications for population dynamics and risk. In the following, I will only consider age-structured models, but the rationale of the other types of matrix models is the same. For an example of this approach applied to pesticide risk assessment, see Stark (Chapter 5). 

In theoretical population ecology, there is a broad spectrum of model types. Although in principle this spectrum is a continuum, some major types can be identified. Different classifications exist (Grimm and Railsback 2005, Chapter 10), but in the context of pesticide risk assessment, it is sufficient to distinguish 3 main classes differential and difference equations, matrix models, and individual- or agent-based simulation models (IBMs or ABMs). These model types are described in more detail in Chapters 3, 5, 6, and 7. 

The RAC matrix and the risk acceptability criteria described in this example are representative of many of the risk assessment efforts presently in use and are consistent with the MIL-STD-882B approach to risk assessment. 

A population-based case-control study on brain cancer was carried out in some areas in the United States with petroleum refining and chemical manufacturing industries (i.e., activities suspected of being associated with brain cancer) and is described in detail in the monograph on dichloromethane (see this volume). Probability, intensity, duration and calendar time of life-long individual exposures to each of six chlorinated aliphatic hydrocarbons, including 1,1,1-trichloroethane, were assessed through an ad-hoc job-exposure matrix. Whereas risk excesses of some consistency were associated with exposure to other chlorinated aliphatic hydrocarbons, exposure to 1,1,1-trichloroethane showed little indication of an association with brain cancer (Heineman et al., 1994). 

Sample preparation in NLC and NCE is the most important step in analysis due to the nano nature of these modalities. The sampling should be carried out in such a way as to avoid changes in the chemical composition of the sample. The quantitative values of species depend on the strategy adopted in sample preparation. Extraction recoveries may vary from one species to another and they should, consequently, be assessed independently for each compound as well as for the compounds together. Materials with an integral analyte, that is, bound to the matrix in the same way as the unknown, which is preferably labeled (radioactive labeling) would be necessary, which is called method validation. As discussed above few papers described off- and online sample preparation methods on microfluidic devices. Of course, online methods are superior due to lower risk of contamination and error of methods. Not much work been carried out on online nanosample preparation devices, which need more research. Briefly, to get maximum extraction of analytes, sample preparation should be handled very carefully. 

As these parameters are monitored and changes in risk identified, critical issues can be escalated for more detailed review. Once several risk reduction strategies are identified, the same types of risk evaluation criteria (e.g., risk index, risk matrix, or other quantitative measures) described earlier in this book can be used to assess the relative benefits of each proposed risk mitigation option. Risk reduction can thus be defined as the process of evaluating and identifying options available to reduce risk, that achieve the desired level of risk reduction, and can be justified on a cost-benefit basis. 

Assess the consequence, likelihood, and risk of each of the identified hazards using a risk matrix system such as that described in Chapter 1. 

---