Risk assessment output

Table 4. Risk Assessment Output for a typical assay/impurity method (adapted from Raska et ah, 2012)...

Effective communication among risk assessment practitioners, decision makers, and other stakeholders is essential and is the responsibility of all parties involved in the risk assessment process. Poor communication together with ambiguous, inexplicit, or inaccurate interpretations of risk assessment outputs result in 1) an erosion of scientific credibility, 2) ineffective decision making, and 3) futile use of resources. 

Assumptions used in analyzing the output of the method and how final probability v.ilucs tor ose in tlie overall risk assessment were determined, mid... 

The focus of MANAGER is somewhat different, in that it was primarily developed to provide a numerical output for use in risk assessment. Nevertheless, the qualitative dimensions included in the audit trail will undoubtedly provide information which can be used as part of an error prevention program. 

Risk characterization is the last step in the risk assessment procedure. It is the quantitative or semi-quantitative estimation, including uncertainties, of frequency and severity of known or potential adverse health effects in a given population based on the previous steps. Risk characterization is the step that integrates information on hazard and exposure to estimate the magnitude of a risk. Comparison of the numerical output of hazard characterization with the estimated intake will give an indication of whether the estimated intake is a health concern. ... 

Another problem of EGAs is that they are non-site-specific. The reasons for this lie in the fact that they include the whole life cycle of systems with resources which may originate in different countries and waste products and emissions which may distribute globally. They deal with factual inputs, outputs and the environmental impact potentials of the system under investigation on a global, and, in some cases, regional scale. Yet, they do not address the intrinsic risks resulting from the system itself. However, a combination with risk assessment methods can be used to close this gap. 

Human Exposure and Health Risk Assessments Using Outputs of Environmental Fate Models... 

The output of an exposure and risk assessment will usually describe the levels of exposure and quantity the population exposed for both humans and other biota, and will estimate the associated probabilities of the incidence of adverse health effects. Population exposure or risk, obtained by multiplying the individual (per capita) exposure or risk by the numbers exposed at each level of exposure, may also be a useful measure of impact. Various analyses can be performed on the results, for example, comparison of exposures in a particular geographic area against national average exposure levels. Likewise, for the same pollutant, environmental risks due to a particular industry might be compared against risks associated with occupational or household activities. In addition, the health risk of different substances could be compared for priority setting. 

The outputs provided by the model can be used to perform a risk assessment if they are compared with reference limit values and literature data in order to determine whether the situation is risky or not. The values obtained by USEtox and used for the characterization of the risk in China are presented in the following tables. Table 4 presents the values for the concentration into the environmental compartments of the concerning additives (Pb and DeBDE). 

It is interesting to mention that USEtox is mainly a tool for LCIA studies where characterization factors are obtained for a wide list of substances. However, the model also provides intermediate output parameters (e.g., intake doses, concentrations in environmental compartments, substance exposure) that can be used for risk assessment studies. This was the case in the present study comparing the values from USEtox with reference limit values. 

The official list of priority pollutants threatening the aquatic environment is presently based on that reported on Directive 2008/105/EC [27]. It was the output resulting from a previously done risk assessment study carried out by the Fraunhoffer Institute (COMMPS procedure) [28, 29], using monitoring data gathered throughout many European river basins. 

However, applicability of the bottom-up approach is limited primarily by cost implications to conduct ecosystem risk assessment following accurately the formal U.S. EPA procedure, an assessor must spent huge amounts of time and money on collecting necessary input data, data processing and interpreting the outputs. Of importance, very specific data are often required that cannot be easily obtained with the help of standard environmental monitoring studies. 

Priority substances were selected, which are considered to be of particular concern to human health and/or the environment. The suppliers of these priority substances had to provide any missing studies to complete a EU notification Base Set (Table 1). A rapporteur Competent Authority evaluates the full review dossier on behalf of the EU. The final output is a risk assessment (see Section 14), with final recommendations on how to deal with the substance i.e., it may be of no concern, require risk reduction or restriction, or further data may be needed before a decision is made. 

In the case of the transfer of multiple products (as may be the case with factory closures), which are all unfamiliar to the receiving site, the outputs of the risk assessment may need to be re-evaluated after the first transfer. At this stage, the receiving laboratory has gained experience of the new... 

An exposure assessment is the quantitative or qualitative evaluation of the amount of a substance that humans come into contact with and includes consideration of the intensity, frequency and duration of contact, the route of exposure (e.g., dermal, oral, or respiratory), rates (chemical intake or uptake rates), the resulting amount that actually crosses the boundary (a dose), and the amount absorbed (internal dose). Depending on the purpose of an exposure assessment, the numerical output may be an estimate of the intensity, rate, duration, and frequency of contact exposure or dose (the resulting amount that actually crosses the boundary). For risk assessments of chemical substances based on dose-response relationships, the output usually includes an estimate of dose (WHO/IPCS 1999). 

For risk assessment of chemicals based on a DNEL as described above, the output of the exposure assessment (Chapter 7) is usually an estimate of dose or concentration. Exposure data can either be measured or predicted. Measured exposure data are preferred if they are valid, i.e., an actual exposure estimate. However, in most cases, measured data are not available and therefore model-generated data must be used for the risk characterization, i.e., a predicted exposure estimate. 

Another important reason for using multiple scenarios is to represent major sources of variability, or what-if scenarios to examine alternative assumptions about major uncertainties. This can be less unwieldy than including them in the model. Also, the distribution of outputs for each separate scenario will be narrower than when they are combined, which may aid interpretation and credibility. A special case of this occurs when it is desired to model the consequences of extreme or rare events or situations, for example, earthquakes. An example relevant to pesticides might be exposure of endangered species on migration. This use of multiple scenarios in ecological risk assessment has been termed scenario analysis, and is described in more detail in Ferenc and Foran (2000). 

Conduct risk assessment refinements using appropriate uncertainty analysis methods based on output from the sensitivity analysis. Use appropriate experts in this process. 

The application of fuzzy logic to the risk assessment of the use of solvents in order to evaluate the uncertainties affecting both individual and societal risk estimates is an area with relevance to the present considerations (Bonvicini et al., 1998). In evaluating uncertainty by fuzzy logic, fuzzy numbers describe the uncertain input parameters and calculations are performed using fuzzy arithmetic the outputs will also be fuzzy numbers. The results of these considerations work are an attempt to justify some of the questions the use of fuzzy in the field of risk analysis stimnlates. 

The outputs from risk assessment will normally include information about the relationship between dose and risk and estimates of levels of doses and thus risks in the population. For contaminants that have a toxicological threshold the Provisional Tolerable Weekly Intake (PTWI) might be defined and the number of consumers who have the potential to exceed this level of intake quantified. If a PTWI cannot be established (such as for genotoxic carcinogens) then it may be possible to quantify the proportion of a population exposed to a given level of risk by using QRA methods. If QRA methods cannot be applied then a qualitative assessment can be made such as to reduce intake levels to as low as is reasonably practicable. In either case it is the function of risk management to identify an optimal course of action to minimise the risk to consumers. 

But the output of the model has to be carefully evaluated according to the law. For instance, some regulations address chemicals according to property categories, such as carcinogenic or not, toxic for aquatic organism, etc. The purpose can be classification and labeling. In other cases, a continuous dose is necessary, e.g., the aquatic toxicity (toward fish, for instance) has to be compared with an exposure value to assess if there will be a toxic effect in fish for the environmental concentration that may occur. This is the case of risk assessment. Thus, we can have... 

SimpleBox was created as a research tool in environmental risk assessment. Simple-Box (Brandes et al. 1996) is implemented in the regulatory European Union System for the Evaluation of Substances (EUSES) models (Vermeire et al. 1997) that are used for risk assessment of new and existing chemicals. Dedicated SimpleBox 1.0 applications have been used for integrating environmental quality criteria for air, water, and soil in The Netherlands. Spreadsheet versions of SimpleBox 2.0 are used for multi-media chemical fate modeling by scientists at universities and research institutes in various countries. SimpleBox models exposure concentrations in the environmental media. In addition to exposure concentrations, SimpleBox provides output at the level of toxic pressure on ecosystems by calculating potentially affected fractions (PAF) on the basis of species sensitivity distribution (SSD) calculus (see Chapter 4). 

Tiering is often applied in risk assessment in order to reduce expenditures in time, money, and labor when the assessment requires only simple and possibly conservative output. Table 5.3 provides a suggested tiered approach in mixture extrapolation and is further described in the bulleted list below. The tiering is based on the way that mixture mechanisms are addressed in the approach. It is assumed that issues such as matrix and media extrapolation have been addressed according to the methods described in the pertinent chapters. 

---