Risk assessment process measures

This model has a straightforward structure aud is simple to use. It is based on exposure studies carried out for registration purposes. In addition, it has relatively small databases for two out of three formulations and for downward applications with tractor-mounted equipment. It covers the full range of the risk assessment process, i.e. dermal absorption and a comparison of estimated exposure and tolerable exposure. Exposure reduction coefficients are presented for several important exposure reduction measures. 

The characterization of ecological effects is perhaps the most critical aspect of the risk assessment process. Several levels of confidence exist in our ability to measure the relationship between dose and effect. Toxicity measured under set conditions in a laboratory can be made with a great deal of accuracy. Unfortunately, as the system becomes more realistic and includes multiple species and additional routes of exposure, even the ability to measure effects is decreased. 

In summary, a large variety of methods have been deployed to predict ER binding of possible endocrine-disrupting chemicals. Consistently measured data for a large inventory of structurally diverse compounds are available [102,103] that will make extensive validation of the methods in future applications possible and also mandatory before helping regulatory bodies in the risk-assessment process. This validation should also include the prediction of affinities for compound classes that are not part of the training process. 

The first topic for discussion is the character of the dose-response relations toxicologists and epidemiologists are capable of measuring. We then show their limitations and how they are dealt with here we enter what is perhaps the most scientifically uncertain and controversial component of the risk assessment process. While the problem is immense it cannot be ignored, because to do so, I hope to show, creates an even more serious problem. 

Ecotoxicity can only be measured by the application of biological methods, whereas chemical analysis determines concentrations of defined chemicals that may be used to deduce toxic effects. All concentration levels such as screening values, guideline values, threshold concentrations, benchmark concentrations and trigger values used for the assessment of contaminated media (water, soil, sediments, etc.) should ideally be derived from the observation of biological effects. Comparing pollutant concentrations with these usually conservative standard values is a common practice in the preliminary assessment of contaminated sites. The integration of further information, such as ecotoxicity data from the site, can improve the risk assessment process and enable a more reliable prediction of environmental threats. 

It is important to distinguish between assessment and measurement endpoints (Gaudet 1994). An assessment endpoint is an environmental value that has to be protected. If the risk assessment process results in an unacceptable risk for the defined environmental value, then risk reduction measures (e.g. remediation of site) are required. A measurement endpoint is a measurable environmental characteristic, such as the quantitative summary of the results of a toxicity test or a biological survey (Suter 1993). If assessment and measurement endpoints are not the same, it is necessary to constitute a quantitative relationship between these to enable the extrapolation of measured effects to the threatened environmental characteristic. 

We suggest a semi-quantitative approach where the initial part of the risk assessment process is carried out in a workshop by the use of expert elicitation. The information gathered in the workshop is then refined by the risk analysts. The alternative safety measures are categorised by cost-effectiveness to provide support for decision-making. In the proposed method evaluation of cost-effectiveness is based on calculated expected values as in a traditional cost-effectiveness analysis (e.g. expected cost per ejqiected nmnber of lives saved), as well as uncertainties. 

In this paper we suggest a semi-quantitative approach for evaluation of safety measures in road tunnels based on cost-effectiveness. The initial part of the risk assessment process is carried out in a... 

Residual risk is defined as the risk remaining after preventive measures have been taken. No matter how effective the preventive actions, there will always be residual risk if an activity continues. Attaining zero risk is not possible. If the residual risk is not acceptable, the action outline set forth in the foregoing hazard analysis and risk assessment process would be applied again. 

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. 

If the risk assessment process is not done well or not at all, the appropriate preventive measures are unlikely to be identified or put in place. 

Risk assessment is the cornerstone of the European approach to prevent occupational accidents and ill health. If the risk assessment process—the start of the health and safety management approach— is not done well or not at all, the appropriate preventive measures are unlikely to be identified or put in place. 

The risk assessment process will vary depending upon an organisation s activities. It may be that the assessment will be a highly technical and complex scientific analysis, such as in the case of COMAH site activities (a site defined under the Control of Major Accident Hazards Regulations 1999). At the other end of the scale, the assessment may simply be a fairly succinct analysis of the hazards, risks and control measures relating to the work activities conducted in a small office environment. 

---