Re: [SystemSafety] "Serious risks" in EC 765/2008

From: E. Douglas Jensen < >
Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2013 13:01:44 +0000

As a totally non-expert in safety, it seems to me that risks should be evaluated in the context of the consequences of the risk occurring. This is a problem I have with security as well. In the military context I work in, certain systems are explicitly engineered to allow appropriate levels of safety (or security) issues that enable the systems’ existence and acceptable functioning. I know of no perfectly safe and secure (for whatever definitions) weapons systems – many have quite high levels of risks (e.g., to human life) because acceptable performance with acceptable probabilities is regarded as far more important than the system not existing or not functioning at all due to inability to fully remediate safety and security issues. (Missile defense systems are just one example of accepting “Better sometimes than never.”) Perhaps these trade-offs are SOP in the safety community. (But I have experienced multiple instances of the “security uber alles” mindset which would render the system non-functional.)  


E. Douglas Jensen

 <mailto:jensen_at_xxxxxx jensen_at_xxxxxx


Voice 508-653-5653, Fax 508-443-3137

Mobile phone voice: 508-728-0809

Mobile phone email: <mailto:5087280809_at_xxxxxx 5087280809_at_xxxxxx

IM: AOL edouglasjensen (with or without PGP); Skype: e.douglas.jensen  

There is probably as much chance of finding a definition of "serious risk" in the IEC standards as there is in defining what a "significant change" is in the European Railway Authority, Common Safety Method!



Peter Sheppard
Senior Safety Engineer and Validator

Mobile: +44 7920 247931    

Please consider the environment before you print / Merci de penser à l'environnement avant d'imprimer / Bitte denken Sie an die Umwelt bevor Sie drucken

Bombardier Transportation UK Ltd
Registered Office: Litchurch Lane, Derby, DE24 8AD, England TEL +44 1332 344666, FAX +44 1332 266271 Registered in England
Registration No. 2235994

Sent by: systemsafety-bounces_at_xxxxxx 08/04/2013 11:03





[SystemSafety] "Serious risks" in EC 765/2008                   


In EC 765/2008, what is considered a "serious risk"? Is there a reference?
How are the "serious risk" mitigations assessed, especially when "The feasibility of obtaining higher levels of safety or the availability of other products presenting a lesser degree of risk shall not constitute grounds for considering that a product presents a serious risk."? This standard also mandates that the product should be recalled when the serious risk has materialized... and there is wording here to update the risk assessment with field reports.
So is a "serious risk" in this standard in fact a materialized danger...?

Thanks for comments.
Best regards,
Thierry Coq
DNV -----Original Message-----
From: systemsafety-bounces_at_xxxxxx [mailto:systemsafety-bounces_at_xxxxxx Peter Bernard Ladkin
Sent: 07 April 2013 10:46
To: systemsafety_at_xxxxxx Subject: [SystemSafety] Solar Storms and Charging Procedures for Electric Cars



I am running a group producing a risk analysis (in the sense of IEC Guide 51) of the charging process for electric road vehicles. There was and is stiff resistance from some quarters. I have pointed out that, first, IEC Guide 51 says that a risk assessment (compromising a risk analysis and risk evaluation) should be required in any safety-related IEC standard. Second that EC 765/2008 on product quality requires (Article 20) that products representing a serious risk be withdrawn from European markets, and that the judgment that products represent a serious risk be made through a risk assessment. This is European law. Since I have pointed that out in sufficiently general meetings, suggestions that the group's work is pointless have all but disappeared (although the will to limit its work has of course not, for this has other bases).

Prof. Peter Bernard Ladkin, University of Bielefeld and Causalis Limited

The System Safety Mailing List

The contents of this e-mail message and any attachments are confidential and are intended solely for the addressee. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately notify the sender by return e-mail and delete this message and its attachments. Any unauthorized use, copying or dissemination of this transmission is prohibited. Neither the confidentiality nor the integrity of this message can be vouched for following transmission on the Internet.

The System Safety Mailing List

This e-mail communication (and any attachment/s) may contain confidential or privileged information and is intended only for the individual(s) or entity named above and to others who have been specifically authorized to receive it. If you are not the intended recipient, please do not read, copy, use or disclose the contents of this communication to others. Please notify the sender that you have received this e-mail in error by reply e-mail, and delete the e-mail subsequently. Please note that in order to protect the security of our information systems an AntiSPAM solution is in use and will browse through incoming emails.
Thank you.

Ce message (ainsi que le(s) fichier(s)), transmis par courriel, peut contenir des renseignements confidentiels ou protégés et est destiné à l’usage exclusif du destinataire ci-dessus. Toute autre personne est, par les présentes, avisée qu’il est strictement interdit de le diffuser, le distribuer ou le reproduire. Si vous l’avez reçu par inadvertance, veuillez nous en aviser et détruire ce message. Veuillez prendre note qu'une solution antipollupostage (AntiSPAM) est utilisée afin d'assurer la sécurité de nos systèmes d'information et qu'elle furètera les courriels entrants.

The System Safety Mailing List
systemsafety_at_xxxxxx Received on Mon Apr 08 2013 - 15:01:59 CEST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Tue Jun 04 2019 - 21:17:05 CEST