Assessment framework

Figure 4-1 displays the components for a generic assessment framework. Within this framework, there are several tools and methods that can be applied to baseline PSM assessments, which are discussed in this chapter. Regaidless of the assessment method selected, it s useful to keep in mind the following general principles ... 

FIGURE 4-1. Process Safety Management Assessment Framework Source Arthur D. Little, Inc. 

This framework represents a group eonsensus of the best way to transform, expand, and develop new and existing monitoring programs into an integrated assessment framework. The previous ehapters in this book identified and diseussed many attributes of a sueoessfid indieator (Chapters 2, 3, 4, and 5). The following attributes were identified ... 

FIGURE 2.1 Life cycle assessment framework with applications. 

Haas G, Wetterich F, Geier U. Life Cycle Assessment Framework in Agriculture on the Farm Level. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment. 2000 5(6) 345-348. DOI 10.1065/lca2000.11.038... 

Fig. 17 Relationship of the ecological risk management framework to the ecological risk assessment framework (modified after Stahl et al. [53])...

Figure 1. Recommended environmental risk assessment framework (Smith et al., 1988).

Jochem, E., Bradke, H., Cremer, C. et al. (2007). Developing an Assessment Framework to Improve the Efficiency of R D and the Market Diffusion of Energy Technologies EduaR D. Report Contract No. 0327 287. Karlsruhe Fraunhofer ISI. 

Risks have so far been presented in quantitative terms, with a discussion of some of the conditions that would have to be true if the risk were to be considered accurate. Additional commentary on the likelihood that these conditions are correct, and the likely effect on risk (to increase or decrease it) were any not to be, is a critical part of the risk characterization. Step 4 in the risk assessment framework. 

The risk assessment framework we have described for chemical toxicity is applicable to microbial risk assessment. Once the information is available on microbial hazards, which are for the most part acute (immediately observable) conditions resulting from acute (one-time) exposures, and their dose (pathogen count)-response characteristics, we should be ready to assess the risks associated with any dose of interest. Hazard information for the important pathogens is readily available but, as expected, their dose-response characteristics are much harder to come by. So with pathogen risk assessment we see the same types of uncertainties creeping into the framework as we have encountered for chemicals. 

While these contending forces will no doubt continue to contend, and to confuse the public, we should hope that mainstream science and thoughtful risk management policies will prevail. The risk assessment framework is central in the continuing search for the right balance point in these debates. 

The risk assessment framework, first proposed in 1983 by the National Academies committee that prodnced the Red Book, has proved to be durable. Its influence has extended to other areas of risk assessment, and public health authorities who are responsible for understanding and mitigating the truly large public health problems of our time, those associated in part with certain personal behaviors, are beginning to describe their activities within that same framework. 

Looking forward with hope to the continued development and use of the risk assessment framework, and of those scientific disciplines that supply the data and knowledge necessary for its use, I propose the following, perhaps overly grand, definition of risk assessment, in an attempt to ensure its applicability not only to the types of problems that have been the principal subjects of this book, but to all those of public health concern. 

Diamond, J. M. Serveiss, V. B. 2001. Identifying sources of stress to native aquatic fauna using a watershed ecological risk assessment framework. Environmental Science and Technology, 35, 4711-4718. 

Figure 28.1 The ecological risk assessment framework as set forth by the US Environmental Protection Agency.

In summary, the PFOA risk assessment is a good example of biomonitoring-led risk assessment. There is no attempt to calculate exposure dose with pathway analysis, because the sources of human PFOA exposure are too uncertain. Instead, the biomonitoring data served as the sole source of human exposure information. Those data could be interpreted in a risk-assessment framework with the aid of PK mod-... 

Heinis, F., Brils, J.M., Klapwijk, S.P. and De Poorter, L.R.M. (2000) From microbiotest to decision support system an assessment framework for surface water toxicity, in G. Persoone, C. Janssen and W.M. De Coen (eds.), New Microbiotests for Routine Toxicity Screening and Biomonitoring, Kluwer Academic / Plenum Publishers, New York, pp. 65-72. 

Suter, G.W. III. (1997) Overview of the ecological risk assessment framework, in C.G. Ingersoll, T. Dillon and G.R. Biddinger (eds.), Ecological Risk Assessment of Contaminated Sediments, SETAC Press, Pensacola, FL, USA, pp. 1-6. 

Finally, the diversity of extrapolation techniques relates to the diversity of technical solutions that have been defined in the face of the various extrapolation problems. Methods may range from simple to complex, or from empirical-statistical methods that describe sets of observations (but do not aim to explain them) to mechanism-based approaches (in which a hypothesized mechanism was guiding in the derivation of the extrapolation method). In addition, they may range from those routinely accepted in formal risk assessment frameworks to unique problem-specific approaches, and from laboratory-based extrapolations consisting of 1 or various kinds of modeling to physical experiments that are set up to mimic the situation of concern (with the aim to reduce the need for extrapolation modeling). 

Technical Guidance Document and Water Framework Directive approaches EU member state, North American, and other international approaches) and the way in which they are implemented (e.g., mandatory pass or fail probabilistic, e.g., 95th percentiles or tiered risk assessment frameworks). Soil and water standards were considered, as were values for the protection of human health and the natural environment. The focus was on European regulatory frameworks, although expert input was sought from other jurisdictions internationally. Chemical standards for aquatic (water and sediment) and terrestrial (soil and groundwater) systems were the main focus for the meeting. This workshop built on, and included some participants from, a 1998 SETAC workshop Re-evaluation of the State of the Science for Water-Quality Criteria Development (Reiley et al. 2003). 

McKone TE and Maddalena RL (1997) Soil contamination and human exposure A comprehensive assessment framework. International Journal of Toxicology 16(4-5) 319-337. 

The ecological risk assessment framework attempts to incorporate refinements to the original ideas of risk assessment and apply them to the general case of ecological risk assessment. The overall structure is delineated in Figure 12.2. 

These ten steps correspond to the portions of the ecological risk assessment framework as depicted in Figure 12.12. The first four steps of the RRM... 

Which aspect of the ecological risk assessment framework defines the question under consideration What are subunits to this formulation ... 

---