Re: [SystemSafety] Who applies risk acceptance principles - Part 2

From: ECHARTE MELLADO JAVIER < >
Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2013 11:08:19 +0000


Myriam,
There is a new ERA Report about Risk Acceptance, involving a "validation process". http://www.era.europa.eu/Document-Register/Pages/RAC-note-1-2013.aspx Basically, this is the proposal:
The following design targets shall apply to failures of functions of technical systems:
(a) For a failure that has a typical credible potential to lead directly to an accident affecting a
group of people and resulting in fatalities and/or severe injuries and/or major damages to the environment, the frequency of the failure of the function does not have to be reduced further if it is demonstrated to be less than or equal to 10-9 failures per operating hour.
(b) For a failure that has a typical credible potential to lead directly to an accident affecting an
individual person and resulting in fatality and/or severe injury, the frequency of the failure of the function does not have to be reduced further if it is demonstrated to be less than or equal to 10-7 failures per operating hour.
(c) For a failure that has a typical credible potential to lead directly to an accident resulting in
one or more light injuries, the frequency of the failure of the function does not have to be reduced further if it is demonstrated to be less than 10-5 failures per operating hour

The document includes some clarification and doubts, please read it before discussing it. I think that it is better to define a proper risk matrix (adjusting the CENELEC 50126 one, for example). But in any case, the "old paradigm of 10e-9" do not make sense, in my opinion... Javier Echarte
Altran Spain.

De: systemsafety-bounces_at_xxxxxx Enviado el: jueves, 20 de septiembre de 2012 10:53 Para: systemsafety_at_xxxxxx Asunto: [SystemSafety] Who applies risk acceptance principles - Part 2

Hello everybody,

A couple of months ago I started a thread under the subject "Who applies risk acceptance principles?", particularly in the railway field. With "who" I was referring to whether the client or the supplier should define what is a reasonable Tolerable Hazard Rate for a hazard associated and the risk associated with that hazard. Some people interpreted the question as "who" (in general) applies Probabilistic Risk Assessment.

Recently I have found some further answers to that question, particularly since a report regarding the revision of EC 352/2009 has been published. It is named "ERA_REC_02-2012_SAF - Accompanying Report on revision of CSM on risk assessment.doc".

The report confirms what I already suspected - there aren't any harmonised Risk Acceptance Criteria for Technical Systems for Railway, except for failures of functions with potential for catastrophic failure (4.3.1). They are only applied in aviation, nuclear and maritime sectors (Section 3.4.3).

I would recommend this report to anyone working in railway RAMS. Its title is "Agency report on the experience with the existing regulation (EC) No352/2009 on a common safety method on risk evaluation and assessment and on the revision of that regulation".

Kind Regards,

Myriam



The System Safety Mailing List
systemsafety_at_xxxxxx Received on Tue Jun 04 2013 - 13:08:30 CEST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Mon Apr 22 2019 - 20:17:05 CEST