Not sure if the following qualifies more as answer or as comment, but here it goes:
Though I am not using the SPOT model (just became aware of its existence), I am using Barateiro's approach to risk identification and mitigation, since the end of last year. I have augmented his approach to incorporate other aspects we could use.
One particular note I made about previous models I was able to review, is the fact "content obsolescence" is not perceived as a threat. We all know content loses value, and a lack of awareness of it at minimum, or failure to include this consideration in the overall process, at best, is leading to economic and technological investments that preserve materials the designated community finds "irrelevant". Libraries are moving away from this model of acquire/keep first, then user find it useful next to "we'll acquire/keep" what users find mostly valuable. One might think of "Beauty lies in the eyes of the beholder", except that the beholder (community here in ArchiveLand) is rarely involved in the prior appraisal decision...nor in the "continued valuation of the preservation asset", if this viewpoint is admittedly not revolutionary. So, to extend the efficacy of the risk models, designated community input could be sought and given some kind of weight, in the overall risk management approach to digital preservation.
I must say, the report you are referencing is well documented and did a good analysis of what's available to propose a well-reasonned model. As for the SPOT model, you are the first I know that intends to use it. I would be interested in learning about your test-drive conclusions:-)