Risk assessment physical setting

Health risk assessment is defined as Uie process or procedure used to estimate Uie likelihood that humans or ecological systems will be adversely affected by a chemical or physical agent under a specific set of conditions. 

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). 

Since 1970 the field of healtli risk assessment lias received widespread attention within both the scientific and regulatory communities. It has also attracted the attention of the public. Properly conducted risk assessments liave received fairly broad acceptance, in part because tliey put into perspective the terms toxic, liazard, and risk. Toxicity is an inlierent property of all substances. It stales lliat all chemiciil tmd physical agents can produce adverse healtli effects at some dose or under specific exposure conditions. In contrast, exposure to a chemical tliat lias die capacity to produce a particular type of adverse effect, represents a healdi hazard. Risk, however, is die probability or likelihood tliat an adverse outcome will occur in a person or a group diat is exposed to a particular concentration or dose of the hazardous agent. Tlierefore, risk is generally a function of exposure and dose. Consequently, healdi risk assessment can be defined as the process or procedure used to estimate die likelihood diat humans or ecological systems will be adversely affected by a chemical or physical agent under a specific set of conditions. 

The hazard classification should lead directly to labelling of acute health effects, environmental and physical hazards. The labelling approach that involves a risk assessment should only be applied to chronic health hazards, e.g. carcinogenicity, reproductive toxicity, or target organ systemic toxicity based on repeated exposure. The only chemicals it may be applied to are those in the consumer product setting where consumer exposures are generally limited in quantity and duration ... 

Risk characterization is the final step of the risk assessment process as laid out in the classic National Research Council report Risk Assessment in the Federal Government Managing the Process. In this step, the risk from a specific agent (chemical or physical) or group of agents in a particular setting is evaluated. This evaluation is based on a comparison of the results of the dose-response assessment for these agents with the outcome of the exposure... 

A risk assessment requires a characterization of exposure setting. In this step, the assessor characterizes the exposure setting with respect to the general physical characteristics of the site and the characteristics of the populations on and near the site. Basic site characteristics such as climate, vegetation, ground-water hydrology, and the presence and location of surface water are identified in this step. Populations are also identified and are described with respect to those characteristics that influence exposure, such as location relative to the site, activity patterns, and the presence of sensitive subpopulations. The characteristics of the current population, as well as those of any potential future populations are considered. 

Employees who are exposed to nanoaerosols should have adequate protection against nanoparticle exposure. The best option is exhaust by hood conventional dust masks may not be as effective as expected. At this moment, there is no legal standard that sets the occupational exposure threshold. The development of risk assessment of exposure to nanoaerosol has been limited by the lack of standard methods and compact instrumentation for long-term monitoring. Accurate risk assessment requires advanced nanoaerosol sampling and characterization techniques for the analysis of both physical and chemical properties of nanoaerosol. 

Risk assessment methods are used to decide on priorities and to set objectives for eliminating hazards and reducing risks. Wherever possible, risks are eliminated through selection and design of facilities, equipment and processes. If risks cannot be eliminated, they are minimized by the use of physical controls or, as a last resort, through systems of work and personal protective equipment. 

The EU prescribes the information to be provided in the notification dossier including physical-chemical properties and toxicological and ecological test data. The extent of the data package required depends on the amount of substance placed on the EU market. In the USA there is no specified data set, but the EPA is empowered to demand such testing as is deemed necessary to enable a risk assessment to be made or, under Sec. 5(e) of TSCA, testing may be required if the substance is produced in substantial amounts and there is significant human or environmental exposure. 

The process of risk assessment begins with a selection of events representing disruption of gas pipeline and a natural gas leak. A set of scenarios of possible gas pipeline damages and following physical effects... 

The potential physical and cyber-related consequences of any incident, including terrorist attacks and natnral or hnman-made disasters, are the first factors to be considered in risk assessment. In the context of the NIPP Base Plan, consequence is measured as the range of loss or damage that can be expected. The consequences that are considered for the national-level comparative risk assessment are based on the criteria set forth in Homeland Security Presidential Directive No. 7 of 2003 (HSPD-7). These criteria can be divided into four main categories (NIPP, 2011) ... 

The critical use of extrapolation methods implies consideration of the issue of validation. It has been remarked that validation of an extrapolation method should be considered in view of the target of an assessment, so that 1 approach can be sufficient for 1 target (e.g., setting quality criteria) but not for others (precise quantification of risk at contaminated sites). Higher tier methods can be used to address the degree of validity of lower tier methods, especially in the case of the higher tier physical models of reality. 

Analytic Judgment. In risky workplaces, experts must analyze human performance to assess safe work practices, to determine the sequence of tasks for particular jobs and positions, or to set general performance standards. To construct a body of risk knowledge, experts must imagine past events they have neither seen nor experienced. To determine the cause of an accident, for example, investigators must reconstruct victims actions from physical evidence after the accident and from their own knowledge of mine practice, particularly if there are no survivors or witnesses to the actual event. 

---