Opinion ID: 6221175
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Nature and Severity of Potential Harm

Text: The next area of assessment is the nature and severity of potential harm. Pontinen argues that the nature and severity of the potential harm are low because he sometimes gets a “warning signal” anywhere from thirty seconds to two minutes before the seizure’s onset. He argues that this gives him enough time to remove himself from any dangerous sit‐ uation, retreat to a safe place, and prepare for the seizure. He told this to Dr. Abu‐Aita, who wrote it in his notes. However, he only got a warning signal before two of his three or four seizures, so it is not guaranteed that it would happen again. And if warned, there is no guarantee how much warning he would get or that he would be able to get to safety. Consider‐ ing Pontinen’s seizures cause him to lose consciousness, the consequences in the Midwest Plant could be disastrous. We already recited at length the requirements of the “safety‐critical” Utility Person position. It involves working with and around torches, shovels, power actuated tools, mo‐ bile equipment, pneumatic equipment, oxygen lances, mate‐ rials that may be hot, heavy, or sharp, hazardous chemicals, and molten metal, and will involve, eventually, cranes, trac‐ tors, trucks, dozers, loaders, boom trucks, and feeders. Given the unreliability of his warning signal and the po‐ tentially catastrophic consequences of losing consciousness in this dangerous setting, the nature and severity of the risk nec‐ essarily weigh in favor of a direct‐threat finding.