Risk-Based Decision Making Steps

Typical Risk-based Decision Making Steps in a PSM PSSR Procedure... 

Here is an example of applying the algorithm to a higher risk trigger event. We will use the Table 4-1 - Typical Risk-based Decision-making Steps in a PSM PSSR Procedure to determine the potential impact. 

The data evaluation step in Tier 1 identifies the constituents of potential concern and the concentrations at which they occur in impacted media as determined by investigations conducted at the site. Most states do not require evaluation of historical data as part of the Tier 1 evaluation, although they may require submission of these data in the RBCA report as a basis for comparison (e.g., to demonstrate the decrease in constituent concentrations over time and/or demonstrate plume stability). However, the data that best represent the current environmental conditions at the site should be used in the risk-based decision-making approach. 

Risk-based decision making involves a series of basic steps. It can add value to almost any situation, especially when the possibility exists for serious (or catastrophic outcomes). The steps can be used at different levels of detail and with varying degrees of formality, depending on the situation. 

The key to the ASTM RBCA process is a step-by-step process from site investigation through decisionmaking to take a site to closure. The RBCA process is not very different from how site investigations have been conducted previously. The only additional information required focuses on the information required to make risk-based decisions. Briefly, the steps involved are described below. 

Step f considers all of the background information discussed in Section 2.f. If the information requirement is based on a regulatory concern or a special purpose need, then Steps 2 through 5 are bypassed and a QRA should be performed. If the information is needed for decision making, you must determine whether the significance of the decision warrants the expense of a QRA. If not, you may be able to use less resource-intensive qualitative approaches to satisfy your information requirements. Table 8 contains examples of typical conclusions reached from qualitative risk analysis results. 

In order to make justified risk management decisions, the first step is to classify the risks. This is often not an easy task. There is a balance between acceptability of a risk (both socially and regulatory based) and the chance that it occurs. In the case of allergen cross-contamination, this latter aspect is a crucial factor as risk management often focuses on reduction of the chance rather than avoidance. 

Automatic bans for carcinogenic, mutagenic or reprotoxic (CMR) substances following the restrictions procedure under Directive 76/769 have been excluded (step 2) because these will continue to apply under REACH. The result of the risk criteria evaluation for each substance according to the decision-making matrix is shown in Table 6.1 (step 3). Based on the selection procedure detailed in Section 5.3.2, the most suitable regulatory outcome... 

In the third step of fuzzy control model, further operators are consulted in order to calculate the final decision. Hereby the risk attitude of the decision maker is considered for the second time. By using different operators in the second and third step, the risk attitude of the decision maker can be made stronger or weaker. The result of the third step of frizzy control model is a crisp value. Based on the input values, a precise decision-making is possible. In this step also a sensitive analysis can be carried out by diversifying different operators. 

Risk assessment The estimation of seismic risk is the fundamental step in risk management and decision-making for risk mitigation. Risk assessment refers to the probable future losses (physical, performance, economic, social) not only due to structural damages but also considering the business interruption or interdependencies of lifelines. Lifeline companies and civil protection authorities are asked to determine how to best allocate the limited resources for risk reduction measures (actions 2, 3, and 4) based on the results of seismic risk analyses for their facihties and the... 

Frequently, the existence and source of such information is nnknown thns the data are not examined. Even when the existence and sonrces of information are known, decisions must be made in order to make an informed, and often quick decision on the next steps, even if later, one decides not to nse it for a particular application. Knowing about the relevant data gives investigators and analysts the ability to assess the data based on qnality assnrance criteria. This is especially true for users near the end of long decision processes, such as site cleanup, ecological risk assessments, and natural resource damage assessments. 

Risk management takes aviation safety to the next level. It is a six-step logic-based, common approach to making calculated decisions on human, material, and environmental factors before, during and after operations. Risk management enables senior leaders, functional managers, supervisors and individuals to maximize opportunities for success while minimizing risks. 

---