Safety Assessment Techniques and Analysis har? ‘1969-10 Acceptable risk and safety priorities If the consequences of an incident can be predicated quantitatively (property loss and the possible number of fatalities), then a quantitive assessment can be made of the risk. If the loss can be measured in money, the cash value of the risk can be compared with the cost of safety equipment or design changes to reduce the risk. In this way, decisions on safety can be made in the same way as other design decisions: to give the best return of the money invested. Hazards invariably endanger life as well as property, and any attempt to make cost comparisons will be difficult and controversial. It can be argued that no risk to life should be accepted. However, resources are always limited and some way of establishing safety priorities is needed. One approach is to compare the risks, calculated from a hazard analysis, with risks that are generally considered acceptable; such as, the average risks in the particular industry, and the kind of risks that people accept voluntarily. One measure of the risk to life is the "Fatal Accident Frequency Rate" (FAFR), defined as the number of deaths per 10'working hours. This is equivalent to the number of deaths in a group of 1000 men over their working lives. The FAFR can be calculated from statistical data for various industries and activities; some of the published values are shown in the following Tables. The tables show the relative position of the chemical industry compared with other industries and values for some of the risks that people accept voluntarily are shown also. In the chemical process industries it is generally accepted that risks with an FAFR greater then 0-4 (one-tenth of the average for the industry) should be eliminated as a matter of priority, the elimination of lesser risks depending on the resources available; see Kletz (1977). This criterion is for risks to employees; for risks to the general public (undertaken involuntarily) a lower criterion must be used. The level of tisk to which the public outside the factory gate should be exposed by the operations will always be a matter of debate and controversy. Kletz (1977) suggests that a hazard can be considered acceptable if the average risk is less than one in 10 million, per person, per year. This is equivalent to a FAFR of 0-001; about the same as deaths from the bites of venomous creatures in the UK, or the chance of being struck by lighting. Page 119TABLE FARs for some UK industries 1974-78 FAR Risk per person per year Offshore oil and gas 82 165 x 10° Deep sea fishing 44 88 x 10> Coal mining 10 20 x 10° Construction 75 17.5 x 10° Shipbuilding and marine engineering 5.25 10.5 x 10% Chemical and allied industries 4.25 85x 105 All premises covered by the Factories Act =4 28x 10> All manufacturing industry 1.15 23x 10% Vehicle manufacture 0.75 15x10 Clothing manufacture 0.25 0.5 x 10°TABLE Some non-occupational risks Risk of death per person per year Cancer Road accidents (UK) Road accidents (US) Alll accidents (UK) Murder (UK) Smoking 20 cigarettes/day Drinking (1 bottle wine/day) Rock climbing (100 h/y) All risks, man aged 20 All risks, man aged 60 Lightning (UK) Release from nuclear power station (at 1 km) Flooding of dykes (Holland) Fall of aircraft (UK) Hit by meteorite 280 x 107° 10x 10° 24x 10% 30x 1075 1x 10° 500 x 107° 75x 10° 400 x 10° 100 x 10° 1000 x 10° 1077 1077 107 0.2% 107 10°! (1 in 360) (1 in 10,000) (1 in 4000) (1 in 3300) (1 in 100 000) (1 in 200) (1 in 1300) (1 in 250) (1 in 1000) (1 in 100) (1 in 10 million) (1 in 10 million) (1 in 10 million) (1 in 50 million) (1 in 100 billion)