## 4 Case Study: Application of APIRM Model at Istanbul Airport
### Risk Assessment of Hazards  
Risk analysis methods are divided into two groups: quantitative and qualitative. Quantitative risk analysis uses numerical methods when calculating risk. In qualitative risk analysis, numerical values are given to values such as the probability of threat and the impact of the threat, and these values are processed with mathematical and logical methods to find the risk value. Risk maps, initial hazard analyses, work safety analyses, primary risk analysis using checklist, primary risk analysis, risk assessment decision matrix methodologies (L type and X type matrixes), hazard and operability study methodologies, fault tree analyses, possible failure modes and impact analysis methodologies, event tree analyses, cause-effect analyses and the Fine-Kinney method are the most commonly used risk analysis methods [47]. In our study, the Fine-Kinney method is used in risk assessment. The Fine-Kinney method is a technique used in the grading of risks, which is then used to determine works are given priority according to the grading results and where the resources should be allocated first. The method developed by [PERSON] and [PERSON] in 1976 is widely used in the construction and cement sector. There are three parameters in the Fine-Kinney risk analysis, which is a quantitative risk analysis method, as likelihood (L), frequency \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Hazard No.**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Evaluation Level**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**Hazard (Distress) Definition**} \\ \cline{2-5}  & **FAA PASER** & **Friction** & **IRI** & \\ \hline
9 & 4 & 3 & 2 & Minor deterioration in pavement structural integrity + partial corrugation or rutting \\ \hline
10 & 4 & 2 & 4 & Minor deterioration in pavement structural integrity + friction loss on the pavement surface \\ \hline
11 & 4 & 2 & 3 & Minor deterioration in pavement structural integrity + friction loss on the pavement surface + minor corrugation or rutting \\ \hline
12 & 4 & 2 & 2 & Minor deterioration in pavement structural integrity + friction loss on the pavement surface + partial corrugation or rutting \\ \hline
13 & 3 & 3 & 4 & Significant deterioration in pavement structural integrity \\ \hline
14 & 3 & 3 & 3 & Significant deterioration in pavement structural integrity + minor corrugation or rutting \\ \hline
15 & 3 & 3 & 2 & Significant deterioration in pavement structural integrity + partial corrugation or rutting \\ \hline
16 & 3 & 2 & 4 & Significant deterioration in pavement structural integrity + friction loss on the pavement surface \\ \hline
17 & 3 & 2 & 3 & Significant deterioration in pavement structural integrity + friction loss on the pavement surface + minor corrugation or rutting \\ \hline
18 & 3 & 2 & 2 & Significant deterioration in pavement structural integrity + friction loss on the pavement surface + partial corrugation or rutting \\ \hline
19 & 2 & 3 & 4 & Major deterioration in pavement structural integrity \\ \hline
20 & 2 & 3 & 3 & Major deterioration in pavement structural integrity + minor corrugation or rutting \\ \hline
21 & 2 & 3 & 2 & Major deterioration in pavement structural integrity + partial corrugation or rutting \\ \hline
22 & 2 & 2 & 4 & Major deterioration in pavement structural integrity + friction loss on the pavement surface \\ \hline
23 & 2 & 2 & 3 & Major deterioration in pavement structural integrity + friction loss on the pavement surface + minor corrugation or rutting \\ \hline
24 & 2 & 2 & 2 & Major deterioration in pavement structural integrity + friction loss on the pavement surface + partial corrugation or rutting \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 4: _Cont._(F) and possible consequence (C) and the risk score (R) of the hazards is formed by the multiplication of these three parameters as seen in Formula (1) [48].