pected in a year’s duration. For this reason we celebrate the importance of the role of pure natural units; it is important to understand risk as proportionate to exposure. To understand this importance, imagine yourself as the one exposed to a transient but intense hazard. But that does not imply the dismissal of statistical risk as a concern; it is also part of the risk analysis picture to consider how much risk exposure occurs within a given duration. This is the role of the standard unit.

Another complicating factor is the use of the term [level]{} itself. A level is a designator for a class of possibly intermittent indistinguishable probability distributions. Rather than being clear about this, MIL-STD-882E equivocates greatly in Table 3, confusing this designator with a literal probability statement. Only after full quantitative analysis is completed ($p$, $\iota$, and $\kappa$ known) can definite statements concerning probability be asserted. It is insufficient to mandate vague documentation of [all numerical definitions of probability used in risk assessments]{} without further guidance.

Table 4 below is a categorical rendering of the hyperbola of statistical risk. Definition \[D:STATISTICAL\_RISK\] asserts $h = \lambda \mu_L$. Excepting the administrative level [Eliminated]{}, this cross-tabulation presents the level $(\lambda)$ on the vertical axis and the category $(\mu_L)$ along the horizontal axis. For each combination of level and category, another categorical variable[^13] represents the statistical risk $h = \lambda \mu_L$ with values: High, Serious, Medium, and Low.

  ---------------- -------------- ---------- ---------- ------------
  SEVERITY /        Catastrophic   Critical   Marginal   Negligible
  PROBABILITY           (1)          (2)        (3)         (4)
  Frequent (A)          High         High     Serious      Medium
  Probable (B)          High         High     Serious      Medium
  Occasional (C)        High       Serious     Medium       Low
  Remote (D)          Serious       