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

Mon Apr 8 15:01:44 CEST 2013

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.)

Doug

----

E. Douglas Jensen

 <mailto:jensen at real-time.org> jensen at real-time.org,
jensen at time-critical-technologies.com

 <http://www.real-time.org/> http://www.real-time.org,
http://www.time-critical-technologies.com

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

Mobile phone voice: 508-728-0809

Mobile phone email:  <mailto:5087280809 at messaging.sprint.com>
5087280809 at messaging.sprint.com  

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! 

Cheers 

Peter 

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 

<Thierry.Coq at dnv.com> 
Sent by: systemsafety-bounces at techfak.uni-bielefeld.de 
08/04/2013 11:03 

To

<systemsafety at techfak.uni-bielefeld.de> 

cc

Subject

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

Hi,

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 techfak.uni-bielefeld.de
[mailto:systemsafety-bounces at techfak.uni-bielefeld.de] On Behalf Of
Peter Bernard Ladkin
Sent: 07 April 2013 10:46
To: systemsafety at techfak.uni-bielefeld.de
Subject: [SystemSafety] Solar Storms and Charging Procedures for
Electric Cars

Folks,

<cut> 
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).
<cut>

Prof. Peter Bernard Ladkin, University of Bielefeld and Causalis Limited
_______________________________________________
The System Safety Mailing List
systemsafety at TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE

************************************************************************
**************
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
systemsafety at TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE

________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________ 
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.
Merci. 
________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________ 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de/mailman/private/systemsafety/attachments/20130408/e25cc934/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 5600 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de/mailman/private/systemsafety/attachments/20130408/e25cc934/attachment-0001.bin>