Steps of Risk Analysis

There are many risk analysis methods, but all have three steps in common  

If these three steps are at the heart of the risk analysis, it is also true that performing these steps requires preliminary work and other steps that should not be bypassed [1, 8]. 

By systematically studying past incidents in the chemical industry, several causes can be identified. These are summarized in Table 1.3. 

the risk analysis must be well prepared, meaning that the scope of the analysis must be clearly defined data must be available and evaluated, to define the safe process conditions and the critical limits. Then, and only then, the systematic search for process deviations from the safe conditions can be started. The identified deviations lead to the definition of scenarios, which can be assessed in terms of severity and probability of occurrence. This work can advantageously be summarized in a risk profile, enhancing the major risks that are beyond the accepted limits. For these risks, reduction measures can then be defined. The residual risk, that is, the risk remaining after implementation of the measures, can be assessed as before and documented in a residual risk profile showing the progress of the analysis and the risk improvement. These steps are reviewed in the next sections. 

---

Systematic searches for hazard, assessment of risk, and identification of possible remediation are the basic steps of risk analysis methods reviewed in this chapter. 

This is the last step of risk analysis. After having completed the risk analysis and defined the measures to reduce risks, a further risk assessment must be carried out to ensure risks are reduced to an accepted level. The risks cannot be completely eliminated risk zero does not exist, thus a residual risk remains. This is also because only identified risks were reduced by the planned measures. Thus, the residual risk has three components ... 

Figure 1. General steps of risk analysis (going from the initial event to the impact).

After an introduction that considers the place of chemical industry in society, the basic concepts related to risk analysis are presented. The second section reviews the steps of the risk analysis of chemical processes discussed. Safety data are presented in the third section and the methods of hazard identification in the section after that. The chapter closes with a section devoted to the practice of risk analysis. 

The addition of fluxes increases the risk of raising the blank value, as a result of the amount of flux required for successful fusion. In addition, the final aqueous solution obtained from the fusion has a high salt concentration, which can cause difficulties in subsequent steps of the analysis. The high temperatures required for a fusion increase the danger of volatilization losses. 

Despite the fact that the reports of these committees are written in a very scientific language, one cannot avoid that they are not always fully scientific in their conclusions. Numbers and figures on permitted levels of toxic substances have no longer the same intrinsic value after passing this step of risk-benefit analysis as those resulting from the toxicity analysis. They are not built on the same rational basis and have another meaning which would be far too long to discuss here. 

Step 2—Risk Analysis the process (qualitative or quantitative) of evaluating consequence and likelihood and estimating the overall level of risk associated with the selected scenarios. 

The first and most important step in any risk management program is to identify the hazards. Hazards analysis is the most important step in risk analysis because, unless hazards are identified, consequence and likelihood reduction cannot be implemented. In the context of process safety and operational integrity programs, this usually means that a Process Hazards Analysis (PHA) must be conducted. 

The three steps of risk assessment are hazard identification, risk analysis, and risk evaluation. Only once these processes have been completed can a total risk profile be compiled. 

The aim of risk analysis is to identify and to evaluate possible accidents scenarios for the purpose of prevention measures and emergency response. The risk analysis for toxic gas/vapor release consists of following steps (Fig. 1) initial event characterization, airborne quantity determination, dispersion conditions proposal, and acute toxicity impact evaluation. 

Detailed steps of risk treatment, when applying the cost-effectiveness analysis method described in this paper, is presented in Fig. 2 below. 

Another example of risk analysis follows a process of computing risk and cost for controls. The final results give estimates of return on investment. The procedure will analyze processes, activities or equipment. The first step is hazard identification, followed by estimates of frequency and severity of losses for each hazard. There are one or more controls associated with each hazard. The procedure determines the... 

Step E verification of risk analysis and—prognosis No. Action... 

The goal of risk analysis is to identify events that may have one or several undesirable consequences on a system, and to assess the likelihood and severity of these consequences. A lot of methods can be used to conduct risk analysis (Flaus, 2013a) such as Preliminary Hazard Analysis (PHA) and Failure Mode Effects Analysis (FMEA) (Papadopoulos et al., 2004). In most of these methods, the obtained information may be used to build a risk model. The next step after risk analysis is to study the behavior of the system, when the undesirable events occur, in order to evaluate its performance in degraded conditions, and its robustness or resilience. An approach to allow integrated risk analysis and simulation has been proposed for business process management (Tjoa et al., 2011). 

Risk artalysis varies fiom simple to very complex and detailed. A preliminary analysis rrray be corrducted prior to a detailed risk artalysis. The stage of risk analysis includes the following key steps ... 

Design procedures are developed with the intention of improving the safety of equipment. Tools used in this step are hazard and operability studies and quantitative risk analysis (ORA). The following scheme may be used ... 

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. 

Multiple eoneurrent failures are also ineluded in the analysis. The last step in the analysis is to analyze the data for eaeh eomponent or multiple eomponent failure and develop a series of reeommendations appropriate to risk management. 

When performing human reliability assessment in CPQRA, a qualitative analysis to specify the various ways in which human error can occur in the situation of interest is necessary as the first stage of the procedure. A comprehensive and systematic method is essential for this. If, for example, an error with critical consequences for the system is not identified, then the analysis may produce a spurious impression that the level of risk is acceptably low. Errors with less serious consequences, but with greater likelihood of occurrence, may also not be considered if the modeling approach is inadequate. In the usual approach to human reliability assessment, there is little assistance for the analyst with regard to searching for potential errors. Often, only omissions of actions in proceduralized task steps are considered. 

The first step of a "What If analy sis is to define the study boundaries. There arc two types of study boundaries to be considered the consequence category boundmy, which includes public risk, employee risk, and economic risk, and the physical boundaiy which addresses the section of the plant that should be considered for analysis. 

First, we investigate some of the regulatory motivations for chronic risk analysis. Next, it is necessary to point up the similarities and differences between acute and chronic risk and delineate the steps in estimating health risks posed by environmental chemicals. Following some illustrations of model structure, we conclude by discussing specific factors in fate analysis that suggest choices of model components. 

Let us now turn our attention to the main steps of any procedure constructed to anticipate or respond to the risk analysis requirements set forth by the statutes reviewed above or voluntarily established as product standards by industries. It is important to note that this type of procedure is a technical means to arrive at a quantitative estimate. The decisions regarding the acceptability of the result is sociopolitical and is, therefore, beyond the scope of this discussion. 

---