Advertisement

The Risk Analysis Process

  • Elizabeth L. Anderson
Part of the Contemporary Issues in Risk Analysis book series (CIRA, volume 3)

Abstract

The process of risk assessment and risk management is widely recognized in the United States for making policy decisions to control the risk associated with toxic chemical exposures. This two-step process, to first evaluate risk and then decide what, if anything, should be done to reduce exposures, was first adopted by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in 1976 in its announcement of guidelines for assessing cancer risk (EPA, 1976; Albert et al., 1977). This approach was later endorsed by committees of the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) as the most appropriate process for informed public policy decisions to protect public health from toxic chemical exposures (NAS, 1982, 1983). Other United States federal interagency committees reviewed the basis for cancer risk assessment and published background documents that are largely consistent with the earlier and much briefer statement of risk assessment guidance published by the EPA in 1976 (IRLG, 1979; OSTP, 1984). The EPA has recently published updates of its cancer risk assessment guidelines and guidelines for other health effects that take into account its decade of experience in assessing cancer risks for hundreds of chemicals (EPA, 1984a–d, 1985a, 1986a–e).

Keywords

Risk Assessment Environmental Protection Agency Water Quality Criterion Allyl Chloride Quantitative Risk Assessment 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Albert, R. E., Train, R. E., and Anderson, E. L., 1977, Rationale developed by the Environmental Protection Agency for the assessment of carcinogenic risks, J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 58:1537–1541.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Andersen, M. E., Gargas, M. L., Jones, R. A., and Jenkins, L. J., Jr, 1980, Determination of the kinetic constants for metabolism of inhaled toxicants in vivo using gas uptake measurements, Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol. 54:100–116.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Andersen, M. E., 1981a, A physiologically based toxicokinetic description of the metabolism of inhaled gases and vapors: Analysis at steady state, Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol. 60:509–526.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Andersen, M. E., 1981b, Saturable metabolism and its relationship to toxicity, CRC Crit. Rev. Toxicol. 9: 105– 150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Andersen, M. E., Gargas, M. L., and Ramsey, J. C., 1984, Inhalation pharmacokinetics: Evaluating systemic extraction, total in vivo metabolism, and the time course of enzyme induction for inhaled styrene in rats based on arterial blood: inhaled air concentration ratios, Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol. 73:176–187.Google Scholar
  6. Anderson, E. L. and Carcinogen Assessment Group (CAG) of the Environmental Protection Agency, 1983, Quantitative approaches in use to assess cancer risk, Risk Anal. 3:277–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Armitage, P., 1985, Multistage Models of Carcinogenesis. Environ. Health Perspect. 63:195–201.Google Scholar
  8. Crump, K. S., 1981, Investigation of the Use of Pharmacokinetic Data in Carcinogenic Risk Assessment, (Submitted to Environmental Protection Agency).Google Scholar
  9. Crump, K. S., 1987, Investigation of the Incorporation of Pharmacokinetic Data for Selected Volatile Organic Chemicals into Quantitative Risk Assessment Methodology, (Submitted to State of New Jersey).Google Scholar
  10. Environmental Protection Agency, (EPA), 1976, Interim procedures and guidelines for health risks and economic impact assessments of suspected carcinogens, Fed. Reg. 41:21402.Google Scholar
  11. Environmental Protection Agency, (EPA), Carcinogen Assessment Group, (CAG), 1978, Summary and Conclusions for Assessment of Carcinogenic Risk of Chlorobenzilate (unpublished).Google Scholar
  12. Environmental Protection Agency, (EPA), 1979a, Water quality criteria: Request for comments (proposed), Fed. Reg. 44:15926–15981.Google Scholar
  13. Environmental Protection Agency, (EPA), 1979b, Water quality criteria: Availability (proposed), Fed. Reg. 44:43660–43697.Google Scholar
  14. Environmental Protection Agency, (EPA), 1979c, Water quality criteria: Availability (proposed), Fed. Reg. 44:56628–56656.Google Scholar
  15. Environmental Protection Agency, (EPA), 1980, Water quality criteria documents: Availability, Fed. Reg. 45:79316–79379.Google Scholar
  16. Environmental Protection Agency, (EPA), 1984a, Proposed guidelines for carcinogen risk assessment, Fed. Reg. 49(227):46294–46301.Google Scholar
  17. Environmental Protection Agency, (EPA), 1984b, Proposed guidelines for the health assessment of suspect developmental toxicants, Fed. Reg. 49:46324–46331.Google Scholar
  18. Environmental Protection Agency, (EPA), 1984c, Proposed guidelines for mutagenicity risk assessment, Fed. Reg. 49:46312–46321.Google Scholar
  19. Environmental Protection Agency, (EPA), 1984d, Proposed guidelines for exposure assessment, Fed. Reg. 49:46304–46312.Google Scholar
  20. Environmental Protection Agency, (EPA), 1985a, Proposed guidelines for the health risk assessment of chemical mixtures, Fed. Reg. 50:1170–1176.Google Scholar
  21. Environmental Protection Agency, (EPA), 1985b, Chemical Emergency Preparedness Program, Interim Guidance, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  22. Environmental Protection Agency, (EPA), 1986a, Guidelines for carcinogen risk assessment, Fed. Reg. 51:33992.Google Scholar
  23. Environmental Protection Agency, (EPA), 1986b, Guidelines for health assessment of suspect developmental toxicants, Fed. Reg. 51:34028.Google Scholar
  24. Environmental Protection Agency, (EPA), 1986c, Guidelines for mutagenicity risk assessment, Fed. Reg. 51:34006.Google Scholar
  25. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), 1986d, Guidelines for estimating exposure, Fed. Reg. 51:34042.Google Scholar
  26. Environmental Protection Agency, (EPA), 1986e, Guidelines for the health risk assessment of chemical mixtures, Fed. Reg. 51:34014.Google Scholar
  27. Interagency Regulatory Liaison Group (IRLG), 1979, Scientific bases for identification of potential carcinogens and estimation of risks, J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 63:244–268.Google Scholar
  28. Moolgavkar, S. H., and Venzon, D. J., 1979. Two-event models for carcinogenesis: Incidence curves for childhood and adult tumors, Math. Biosci. 47:55–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Moolgavkar, S. H., and Knudson, A. G., 1981, Mutation and cancer: A model for human carcinogenesis, J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 66:1037–1052.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Moolgavkar, S. H., 1986, Carcinogenesis modeling: From molecular biology to epidemiology, Ann. Rev. Pub. Health 7:151–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. National Academy of Sciences (NAS), 1982, Risk and Decision Making: Perspectives and Research ,National Research Council Committee on Risk and Decision Making, National Academy of Sciences Press, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  32. National Academy of Sciences (NAS), 1983, Risk Assessment in the Federal Government: Managing the Process ,National Research Council Committee on Risk and Decision Making, National Academy of Sciences Press, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  33. National Academy of Sciences (NAS), 1986, Ecological Knowledge and Environmental Problem Solving: Concepts and Case Studies ,National Research Council Committee on Risk and Decision Making, National Academy of Sciences Press, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  34. Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), 1984, Chemical carcinogens: Notice of review of the science and its associated principles, Fed. Reg. 49:21594–21661.Google Scholar
  35. Thorslund, T. W., Charnley, G., Bayard, S., and Brown, R., 1987b, Quantitative Model for the Tumor Promoting Activity of 2,3,7,8-TCDD. (Presented at the Seventh International Symposium on Chlorinated Dioxins and Related Compounds, Las Vegas, Nevada, October 4–9, 1987.)Google Scholar
  36. Thorslund, T. W., 1987, Quantitative Dose-Response Model for the Tumor Promoting Activity of TCDD, (Submitted to Environmental Protection Agency).Google Scholar
  37. Thorslund, T. W., and Charnley, G., Quantitative Dose-Response Models for Tumor Promoting Agents, in: New Directions in the Qualitative and Quantitative Aspects of Carcinogen Risk Assessment, Banbury Report (in press).Google Scholar
  38. Thorslund, T. W., Brown, C. C., and Charnley, G., 1987a, The use of biologically motivated mathematical models to predict the actual cancer risk associated with environmental exposure to a carcinogen, J. Risk Anal. 7:109–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Thorslund, T. W., Charnley, G., Bayard, S., and Brown, R., 1987b, Quantitative Model for the Tumor Promoting Activity of 2,3,7,8-TCDD. (Presented at the Seventh International Symposium on Chlorinated Dioxins and Related Compounds, Las Vegas, Nevada, October 4–9, 1987.)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1988

Authors and Affiliations

  • Elizabeth L. Anderson
    • 1
  1. 1.Clement Associates Inc.FairfaxUSA

Personalised recommendations