content_image/593542.jpg content_image/593543.jpg content_image/593544.jpg
change, if known. Trace through causes and solution states to arrive at a means of distinguishing those measures that quantitatively (or only qualitatively) support declarations of severity by the SRM panel. In the early stages of SRM for alternative concepts, there are occasionally solution fragments and less than fully defined systems, making it difficult to assign specific severity and likelihood ratings. Document assumptions and justifications for how severity and likelihood for each hazard condition were determined. Describe whether the alternatives are detailed enough at this stage in development to draw meaningful conclusions about their differences with regard to safety. If additional information is required, describe when and how any deferred analysis reaches a definitive answer, if possible. Describe any new data collection methods required, and identify future decision points at which important measures are likely to be available. 

## 4.2.7 Assess Each Alternative from a Safety Perspective 

Assess the acceptability of the safety risk associated with implementation of each alternative under consideration. Document the assessments using Table D.2. ( Note : Each alternative assessed has its own table.) Summarize any similarities and note any significant differences. Explain the level of confidence with the outcome by determining a rudimentary level of precision with regard to the possible breadth of range of values that the SRM panel expressed. 

<img src='content_image/593542.jpg'>

## Controls: 

<img src='content_image/593543.jpg'>

## Initial Risk: 

<img src='content_image/593544.jpg'>

