natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
In other cases, the product hazard may not be so readily recognisable, such as a short-circuit within an electric iron, warning labels may be overlooked or misunderstood, and consumers will only rarely be able to take preventive measures.
V drugih primerih pa nevarnosti ni mogoče zlahka prepoznati, kot npr. kratek stik v električnem likalniku, oznake z opozorili se spregledajo ali napačno razumejo, potrošniki pa bodo lahko le redkokdaj sprejeli preventivne ukrepe.
Consumer behaviour in the event of an incident: Where the hazard impinges on the consumer it may cause injury.
Vedenje potrošnika v primeru nesreče: Kadar se potrošniku zgodi nesreča, lahko povzroči poškodbo.
It is thus important for a risk assessment to consider how the consumer may react.
Zato je treba v oceni tveganja preučiti, kakšen bi lahko bil odziv potrošnika.
Will he put the product to one side calmly and take preventive action, such as combating a fire caused by the product, or will he throw it away in a panic?
Ali bo mirno odložil proizvod in izvedel preventivni ukrep, na primer pogasil požar, ki ga je povzročil proizvod, ali pa bo proizvod v paniki odvrgel?
Vulnerable consumers, especially children, may after all not behave the same as other, non-vulnerable consumers.
Ranljivi potrošniki, zlasti otroci, se ne vedejo tako kot drugi potrošniki, ki niso ranljivi.
The consumer’s cultural background and the way a product is used in his home country may influence the risk of a product.
Na tveganje, ki ga predstavlja proizvod, lahko vpliva kulturno ozadje potrošnika in način uporabe proizvoda v njegovi državi.
Manufacturers in particular have to take account of these cultural differences when launching a new product on a market.
Te kulturne razlike morajo upoštevati zlasti proizvajalci, ko uvajajo nov proizvod na trg.
Manufacturers’ experience in this area can thus be a valuable source of information for authorities preparing a risk assessment.
Izkušnje proizvajalcev na tem področju so lahko dragocen vir informacij za organe, ki pripravljajo oceno tveganja.
Most injury scenarios consist of the following three main steps:
Večino scenarijev poškodb sestavljajo naslednji trije glavni koraki:
the product has a ‘defect’ or can lead to a ‘dangerous situation’ during its foreseeable lifetime;
proizvod ima „napako“ ali pa lahko med svojo predvideno življenjsko dobo povzroči „nevarno situacijo“;
the ‘defect’ or ‘dangerous situation’ results in an accident;
posledica „napake“ ali „nevarne situacije“ je nesreča;
the accident results in an injury.
posledica nesreče je poškodba.
These three main steps can be divided into further steps to show how the product hazard can lead to injury and the like.
Ti trije glavni koraki se lahko razdelijo v nadaljnje korake, ki pokažejo, kako lahko nevarnost proizvoda pripelje do poškodbe in podobnega.
Nevertheless, these ‘steps to injury’ have to be clear and concise, and not exaggerate the detail or the number of steps.
Ne glede na to morajo biti ti „koraki do poškodbe“ jasni in zgoščeni ter ne smejo pretiravati v podrobnostih ali številu korakov.
With experience, it will be increasingly easier to identify the conditions for the occurrence of any given injury and the ‘shortest path to injury’ (or ‘critical path to injury’).
Na podlagi pridobljenih izkušenj bo opredelitev pogojev za pojav katere koli navedene poškodbe in „najkrajše poti do poškodbe“ (ali „kritične poti do poškodbe“) vedno lažje.
It is probably easiest to start with a scenario with the consumer for whom the product is intended where the consumer uses the product as per the instructions or, if there are none, according to normal handling and use.
Verjetno je najlažje začeti s scenarijem za potrošnika, kateremu je proizvod namenjen, ko potrošnik uporablja proizvod v skladu z navodili, ali če teh ni, običajnim ravnanjem in uporabo.
If this assessment produces the highest risk level, there is normally no need to carry out further assessments, and appropriate risk reduction measures can be taken.
Če je rezultat te ocene največja stopnja tveganja, nadaljnje ocene običajno niso potrebne in se lahko sprejmejo ustrezni ukrepi za zmanjšanje tveganja.
Similarly, where an incident is reported in a specific consumer complaint, a single injury scenario may be sufficient to conclude as to appropriate risk reduction measures.
Podobno lahko v primeru poročila o nezgodi v pritožbi potrošnika zadostuje en scenarij poškodbe, na podlagi katerega se lahko sprejmejo ustrezni ukrepi za zmanjšanje tveganja.
Otherwise, further scenarios could be developed to include vulnerable consumers, in particular children (see table 1), slight or more pronounced deviations from normal use, use under different climate conditions, such as very cold or very hot, unfavourable conditions of use, such as without proper daylight or illumination, use as suggested when the product was sold (for instance, a lamp sold in a toy shop should also be assessed for its risk when used by a child), use over the entire life-time (including wear and tear), etc. Each scenario should be considered through the entire risk assessment procedure.
V nasprotnem primeru se lahko nadaljuje razvijanje scenarijev, ki vključujejo ranljive potrošnike, zlasti otroke (glej preglednico 1), manjše ali bolj izraženo odstopanje od običajne uporabe, uporabo v različnih podnebnih razmerah, kot sta hud mraz ali huda vročina, neugodne okoliščine uporabe, kot je odsotnost ustrezne dnevne svetlobe ali razsvetljave, uporabo, priporočeno ob prodaji proizvoda (svetilko, ki se prodaja v trgovini z igračami, je na primer treba oceniti tudi glede tveganja, kadar jo uporablja otrok), uporabo skozi celotno življenjsko dobo (vključno s fizično obrabo). Vsak scenarij je treba upoštevati v celotnem postopku ocenjevanja tveganja.
Where the product displays several hazards, injury and thus risk scenarios should be developed for each of them.
Kadar proizvod izkazuje več nevarnosti, je treba razviti scenarije poškodbe in tveganja za vsako od teh nevarnosti.
Nevertheless, a plausibility check as to whether an injury scenario might lead to a risk requiring action can limit the number of injury scenarios.
Ne glede na to pa lahko preverjanje verjetnosti, ali lahko scenarij poškodbe privede do tveganja, ki zahteva ukrepanje, omeji število scenarijev poškodb.
From all the scenarios generated, the scenario providing the highest risk (= ‘the risk’ of the product) will normally be decisive for the risk reduction measures to be taken, because action on the highest risk reduces the risk most effectively.
Izmed vseh teh scenarijev je za odločitev o sprejemu ukrepov za zmanjšanje tveganja običajno odločilen scenarij z največjim tveganjem (= „tveganje“, ki ga predstavlja proizvod), saj je ukrepanje v zvezi z največjim tveganjem običajno najučinkovitejše za njegovo zmanjšanje.
An exception to the rule might be a specific, less-than-highest risk stemming from a different hazard, which could be managed by specific measures and should, of course, also cover the highest risk.
Izjema od tega pravila bi lahko bilo posebno tveganje, ki je manjše od največjega in izhaja iz druge nevarnosti ter ga je mogoče obvladati s posebnimi ukrepi, seveda pa mora zajemati tudi največje tveganje.
As a rule of thumb, injury scenarios can lead to the highest risk level when
Kot pravilo palca lahko scenariji poškodbe vodijo do največje stopnje tveganja, kadar:
the injury(ies) considered are in the highest severity levels (levels 4 or 3);
so obravnavane poškodbe na največji stopnji resnosti (stopnji 4 ali 3),
the overall probability of an injury scenario is quite high (at least > 1/100).
je celotna verjetnost scenarija poškodbe dokaj velika (vsaj > 1/100).
Table 4 provides further guidance in this respect.
V preglednici 4 so nadaljnja navodila v zvezi s tem.
This might help to limit the number of scenarios.
Ta lahko pomagajo omejiti število scenarijev.
Of course, the number of injury scenarios remains the responsibility of the risk assessor, and it depends on the number of factors that need to be taken into account when determining 'the risk' of the product.
Seveda ostaja število scenarijev poškodb odgovornost ocenjevalca tveganja in je odvisno od številnih dejavnikov, ki jih je treba upoštevati pri določanju „tveganja“ proizvoda.
It is therefore impossible to give a specific number of injury scenarios that may be necessary in a specific case.
Zato je nemogoče napovedati število scenarijev poškodb, ki bi bili potrebni v posebnem primeru.
To help develop a suitable number of scenarios, these guidelines provide a table with typical injury scenarios (table 2).
Kot pomoč pri pripravi ustreznega števila scenarijev vključujejo te smernice preglednico z značilnimi scenariji poškodb (preglednica 2).
These should be adapted to the specific product, consumer type and other circumstances.
Treba jih je prilagoditi glede na določen proizvod, vrsto potrošnika in druge okoliščine.
The injury that a hazard can cause to the consumer can have different degrees of severity.
Poškodba, ki jo lahko nevarnost povzroči potrošniku, ima lahko različne stopnje resnosti.
The severity of the injury thus reflects the effect the hazard has on the consumer under the conditions described in the injury scenario.
Resnost poškodbe zato odraža učinek nevarnosti na potrošnika pod pogoji, opisanimi v scenariju poškodbe.
The severity of the injury can depend on:
Resnost poškodbe je lahko odvisna od:
the type of hazard (see list of hazards above and in table 2).
vrste nevarnosti (glej prej in v preglednici 2 navedeni seznam nevarnosti).
A mechanical hazard, such as sharp edges, can cause cuts to the fingers; these are immediately noticed, and the consumer will take action to heal his injuries.
Mehanska nevarnost, kot so ostri robovi, lahko povzroči vreznine na prstih, ki so takoj opazne in potrošnik poskrbi za zdravljenje poškodbe.
On the other hand, a chemical hazard may cause cancer.
Na drugi strani pa lahko kemična nevarnost povzroči raka.
This normally passes unnoticed, and the illness may appear only after many years, and is considered to be very severe since cancer is very difficult to cure, if at all;
Tega dogajanja običajno ne opazimo in bolezen se lahko pojavi šele po nekaj letih ter se šteje za zelo resno poškodbo, saj je rak zelo težko, če sploh, ozdravljiv,
how powerful the hazard is.
tega, kako močna je nevarnost.
For example, a surface heated to 50 °C may cause slight burns, whereas a surface at 180 °C will cause severe burns;
Površina, segreta na 50 °C, lahko na primer povzroči manjše opekline, medtem ko površina, segreta na 180 °C, povzroči hude opekline,
how long the hazard impinges on the consumer.
trajanja delovanja nevarnosti na potrošnika.
A short contact time with an abrasion hazard may scratch the consumer’s skin only superficially, whereas a longer time may take off large parts of the skin;
Kratek čas trajajoč stik z nevarnostjo odrgnin lahko povzroči samo površinsko odrgnino na koži potrošnika, medtem ko lahko dalj časa trajajoč stik odstrani velike dele kože,
what body part is injured.
dela telesa, ki je poškodovan.
For example, penetration by a sharp point into the skin of the arm is painful, but penetration into an eye is a more serious and perhaps a life-affecting injury;
Vbod kože na roki z ostro konico je na primer boleč, vendar je vbod v oko resnejša poškodba, ki lahko vpliva na življenje potrošnika,
what impact the hazard has on one or several body parts.
vpliva nevarnosti na enega ali več delov telesa.
An electrical hazard may cause an electric shock with unconsciousness and, subsequently, a fire which may damage the lungs when the unconscious person inhales the smoke;
Nevarnost električnega udara lahko povzroči električni udar z nezavestjo in posledično požar, ki lahko poškoduje pljuča nezavestne osebe, ki vdihava dim,
the type and behaviour of the consumer.
vrste in vedenja potrošnika.
A product labelled with a warning message can be used, without harm, by an adult consumer, because the consumer adjusts to using the product.
Proizvod, označen z opozorilnim sporočilom, lahko odrasel potrošnik uporablja brez škode, saj se prilagodi uporabi proizvoda.
On the other hand, a child or other vulnerable consumer (see table 1) who cannot read or understand the warning label may be very seriously injured.
Na drugi strani pa lahko otrok ali druga ranljiva oseba (glej preglednico 1), ki ne zna brati ali ne razume opozorilne oznake, utrpi zelo resne poškodbe.
To quantify the severity of injury(ies), table 3 in these guidelines shows how to classify injuries into four categories, depending on the reversibility of an injury, i.e. whether recovery from an injury is possible and to what extent.
Za količinsko opredelitev resnosti poškodb vsebuje preglednica 3 v teh smernicah razvrstitev poškodb v štiri kategorije glede na reverzibilnost poškodbe, tj. če je po poškodbi možna ozdravitev in do kakšne mere.
This categorisation is for guidance only, and a risk assessor should change the category if necessary, and report it in the risk assessment.
Ta razvrstitev je navedena le kot vodilo in ocenjevalec tveganja mora po potrebi spremeniti kategorijo ter o tem poročati v oceni tveganja.
Where several injury scenarios are considered in the risk assessment, the severity of each injury should be classified separately, and considered throughout the entire risk assessment process.
Kadar se v oceni tveganja upošteva več scenarijev poškodb, je treba razvrstiti resnost vsake poškodbe posebej in jo upoštevati v celotnem postopku ocenjevanja tveganja.
An example: A consumer uses a hammer to knock a nail into a wall.
Primer: potrošnik uporabi kladivo za zabijanje žeblja v steno.
The hammer head is too weak (due to incorrect material) and it breaks, one of the pieces flying into the eye of the consumer so hard that it causes blindness.
Glava kladiva je prekrhka (zaradi napačnega materiala) in se zlomi, eden od delcev odleti v oko potrošnika s tako silo, da povzroči slepoto.
The injury is thus an ‘eye injury, foreign body in eye: permanent loss of sight (one eye)’, which is a level 3 injury in table 3.
Poškodba je torej „poškodba oči, tujek v očesu: trajna izguba vida (eno oko)“, ki je v preglednici 3 razvrščena pod poškodbo 3. stopnje.
The ‘probability of injury’ is the probability that injury scenario may indeed materialise during the expected lifetime of the product.
„Verjetnost poškodbe“ je verjetnost, da se bo scenarij poškodbe uresničil med pričakovano življenjsko dobo proizvoda.
This probability is not easy to estimate; but when a scenario is described in distinct steps, each step can be given a certain probability, and multiplying these partial probabilities together gives the overall probability of the scenario.
Ocenjevanje te verjetnosti ni preprosto, vendar če je scenarij opisan z jasnimi koraki, se vsakemu koraku določi verjetnost, zmnožek teh delnih verjetnosti pa prikazuje celotno verjetnost scenarija.
This stepwise approach should make it easier to estimate the overall probability.
S pristopom v več korakih naj bi se olajšalo ocenjevanje celotne verjetnosti.
Of course, where several scenarios are developed, each scenario requires its own overall probability.
Kadar obstaja več scenarijev, je seveda treba določiti celotno verjetnost za vsak scenarij posebej.
Where an injury scenario is nevertheless described in a single step, the probability of the scenario can also only be determined in a single overall step.
Kadar je scenarij poškodbe kljub vsemu opisan v enem koraku, se lahko verjetnost scenarija prav tako določi samo z enim samim korakom.
This would only be a ‘guesstimate’, however, which could be severely criticised and thus call the entire risk assessment into question.
Vendar bi bilo to le „ugibanje“, ki bi lahko sprožilo resne kritike in postavilo pod vprašaj celotno oceno tveganja.
A more transparent assignment of probabilities to a several-steps-scenario is therefore preferable, especially as the partial probabilities can be built on undisputable evidence.
Zato je primernejša preglednejša določitev verjetnosti scenarija v več korakih, zlasti ker lahko delne verjetnosti temeljijo na neizpodbitnih dokazih.
These guidelines distinguish between 8 levels of probability to classify overall probability: from < 1/1000000 to > 50 % (see left-hand side of table 4).
Te smernice razvrščajo celotno verjetnost v 8 stopenj verjetnosti: od < 1/1000000 do > 50 % (glej levo stran preglednice 4).
The following example of a hammer head that breaks when the user knocks a nail into a wall should illustrate how to assign a probability to each step, and how to classify overall probability:
Naslednji primer glave kladiva, ki poči, ko uporabnik zabija žebelj v steno, prikazuje, kako se vsakemu koraku določi verjetnost in kako se razvrsti celotno verjetnost:
The weakness was determined in a test, and with the reported weakness the probability of the hammer head breaking during the otherwise expected lifetime of the hammer is put at 1/10.
Krhkost je bila določena s preskusom in na podlagi tako ugotovljene krhkosti je verjetnost, da bo glava kladiva med njegovo sicer pričakovano življenjsko dobo počila, 1/10.
One of the pieces of the hammer hits the user when it breaks.
Ko glava kladiva poči, eden od koščkov kladiva zadene uporabnika.
The piece hits the user in the eye.
Delec zadene uporabnika v oko.
The eyes are considered to be about 1/20 of the area of the head, and therefore the probability is 1/20.
Oči naj bi predstavljale približno 1/20 področja glave in verjetnost bi bila zato 1/20.
This requires rather a lot of experience, thus suggesting that the assistance of persons experienced in risk assessment should be sought (see above in section ‘Let others check your risk assessment’).
Za to so potrebne izkušnje in je priporočljivo poiskati pomoč osebe z izkušnjami pri ocenjevanju tveganja (glej oddelek „Naj drugi preverijo vašo oceno tveganja“).
When the product is used by more vulnerable consumers in a scenario, the probability may have to be raised in general because more vulnerable consumers can be injured more easily.
Kadar v scenariju proizvod uporabljajo ranljivejši potrošniki, bo treba verjetnost na splošno morda povečati, saj se ranljivejši potrošniki lažje poškodujejo.
This applies in particular to children, since children do not normally have the experience to take preventive action, on the contrary (see also ‘Vulnerable consumers’ in section 3.3).
To velja zlasti za otroke, ki običajno nimajo izkušenj z izvajanjem preprečevalnih ukrepov, nasprotno (glej tudi „Ranljivi potrošniki“ v oddelku 3.3).
When accidents have been reported that fit into the injury scenario, the probability for that scenario could increase.
Po poročilu o nesreči, ki spada v scenarij poškodbe, se lahko verjetnost za ta scenarij poveča.
In cases where accidents have only rarely been reported, or are not known at all, it may be useful to ask the manufacturer of the product whether he is aware of any accident or adverse effect caused by the product.
V primerih, ko so poročila o nesrečah redka ali jih sploh ni, je koristno vprašati proizvajalca proizvoda, ali ve za kakšno nesrečo ali škodljiv učinek, ki bi ga povzročil proizvod.
When a fairly large number of conditions are needed for the injury to occur, the overall probability of the scenario would normally be lower.
Kadar je za nastanek poškodbe potrebno dokaj veliko število pogojev, je celotna verjetnost scenarija običajno manjša.
When the conditions needed for the injury to occur are easily met, this may increase the probability.
Kadar se pogoji za nastanek poškodbe uresničijo brez težav, lahko to poveča verjetnost.
When the test results of the product fail by a large margin to come within the limit values required (by the relevant standard or legislation), the probability of the injury (scenario) occurring may be higher than if the product performed close to the limit values.
Kadar rezultati preskusov proizvoda močno odstopajo od mejnih vrednosti, ki se zahtevajo (po ustreznem standardu ali zakonodaji), je lahko verjetnost za nastanek poškodbe (scenarija) večja, kot če so rezultati preskusa proizvoda blizu mejnih vrednosti.
The ‘probability of injury’ in this instance is the probability that the injury scenario may actually happen.
„Verjetnost poškodbe“ je v tem primeru verjetnost, da se scenarij poškodbe dejansko uresniči.
Probability does not therefore describe the general exposure of the population to the product, calculated, for example, by considering the millions of product items sold on the market and then considering that a few of them might fail.
Verjetnost torej ne opisuje splošne izpostavljenosti populacije proizvodu, izračunane na primer za milijone kosov proizvodov, prodanih na trgu, od katerih nekateri morda ne bi izpolnjevali zahtev.
Considerations of this kind do, however, play a role when determining the appropriate risk reduction measures (see section 4).
Takšen način razmišljanja se uporablja pri določanju ustreznih ukrepov za zmanjšanje tveganja (glej oddelek 4).
Also, accident statistics, even if product-specific, have to be considered with care when used for to estimate probability.
Kadar se za ocenjevanje verjetnosti uporabljajo statistični podatki o nesrečah, je potrebna previdnost, četudi se nanašajo samo na določen proizvod.
The circumstances of the accident may not be reported in sufficient detail, the product may have changed over time, or the manufacturer may be different, and so on.
Poročilo o okoliščinah nesreče morda ni bilo dovolj podrobno, proizvod se je lahko sčasoma spremenil ali pa se je zamenjal proizvajalec in tako naprej.
In addition, light accidents may not have been reported to those collecting the data for the statistics.
Poleg tega pa poročilo o lažji nesreči morda sploh ni bilo posredovano tistim, ki zbirajo podatke za statistične namene.
None the less, accident statistics can shed light on injury scenarios and their probability.
Ne glede na to lahko statistični podatki o nesrečah osvetlijo scenarije poškodb in njihovo verjetnost.
Once the severity of the injury and the probability have been determined, if possible for several injury scenarios, the risk level then needs to be looked up in table 4.
Ko sta določeni resnost poškodbe in verjetnost, če je mogoče, za več scenarijev poškodb, je treba v preglednici 4 poiskati stopnjo tveganja.
Table 4 combines both the severity of the injury and the probability, and the highest risk is ‘the risk’ of the product.
Preglednica 4 združuje resnost poškodbe in verjetnost, največje tveganje pa je „tveganje“, ki ga predstavlja proizvod.
Risks requiring specific risk management measures should also be reported, to ensure that all risks are reduced to a minimum.
Poročati je treba tudi o tveganjih, ki zahtevajo posebne ukrepe za obvladovanje tveganja, za zagotovitev, da so vsa tveganja zmanjšana na najnižjo možno raven.
These guidelines distinguish between 4 levels of risk: serious, high, medium and low.
Te smernice razlikujejo med 4 stopnjami tveganja: resno, veliko, srednje in majhno.
It is then necessary to reconsider the injury scenarios and the assigned severity of injury(ies) and probability(ies). At the end of the sensitivity analysis the risk assessor should be confident that the risk level is sufficiently plausible and that he can document it and pass the information on.
Ob koncu analize občutljivosti mora biti ocenjevalec tveganja prepričan, da je stopnja tveganja dovolj verjetna ter da jo lahko dokumentira in posreduje informacijo.
Once the risk assessment is complete it will normally be used to decide whether action needs to be taken to reduce the risk and thus prevent harm to a consumer’s health.
Ko je ocena tveganja dokončana, se običajno uporabi za odločanje o ukrepu za zmanjšanje tveganja in s tem preprečevanje škode za zdravje potrošnika.
Although action is separate from risk assessment, some points are raised here to illustrate the possible follow-up of identified risks.
Čeprav je ukrep ločen od ocene tveganja, je tukaj navedenih nekaj točk za ponazoritev možnih nadaljnjih ukrepov v zvezi z ugotovljenimi tveganji.
Within market surveillance, action will often be taken in contact between the authority and the manufacturer, importer or distributor.
Pri nadzoru trga se ukrepi pogosto izvajajo s stiki med organom in proizvajalcem, uvoznikom ali distributerjem.