National Academies Press: OpenBook

Refinements to the Methods for Developing Spacecraft Exposure Guidelines (2016)

Chapter: 3 Selecting and Prioritizing Contaminants for Assessment

« Previous: 2 Derivation of SMACs and SWEGs
Suggested Citation:"3 Selecting and Prioritizing Contaminants for Assessment." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Refinements to the Methods for Developing Spacecraft Exposure Guidelines. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21888.
×

3

Selecting and Prioritizing Contaminants for Assessment

Air and water contaminants are identified by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) through a comprehensive assessment of potential sources of contaminants aboard spacecraft (NRC 1992, 2000; Kahn-Mayberry et al. 2011). The process is complex, requiring an understanding of all the materials and components onboard spacecraft, the environmental control and life-support system of space vehicles, processes that might occur in space, experiments to be performed, and a variety of other scenarios. Major contaminants are chemicals produced from off-gassing of cabin materials, components, and equipment; metabolic waste products from crew members; chemicals formed in the water treatment system; chemicals added to the water supply to retard bacterial growth; and compounds formed by chemical and physical processes in the cabin air. Scenarios considered are continuous or frequent releases from routine operations and activities; inadvertent, accidental, or emergency releases; and releases from experiments performed on the space station. Information about known and new sources of contaminants has been accumulated over decades of spaceflight experience and from environmental sampling and monitoring (Kahn-Mayberry et al. 2011).

Because NASA has insufficient resources to conduct comprehensive risk assessments of all potential air and water contaminants, it is important that priorities be established to focus on the chemicals that pose the greatest potential human health risk. The earlier guidance from the National Research Council (NRC) on setting spacecraft water exposure guidelines found that there are many approaches to setting priorities for choosing candidates for formal risk assessment (NRC 2000). The approaches range in complexity and each has its advantages and disadvantages. The three approaches to priority setting considered by the previous committee included an ad hoc approach, an ad hoc approach with factors specified, and a formal system with parameters, weights, and interrelationships specified. Key elements of each approach include the following:

  • Ad Hoc Approach: Candidate chemicals are proposed as the chemicals become of interest to NASA. They might be identified through screening of
Suggested Citation:"3 Selecting and Prioritizing Contaminants for Assessment." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Refinements to the Methods for Developing Spacecraft Exposure Guidelines. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21888.
×
  • potential sources of atmospheric or water contaminants or from monitoring of the environmental control and life-support systems. Periodically a chemical is chosen from the list of candidates by NASA on the basis of informed judgment using subjective and qualitative information. The parameters or the data elements on which candidates are chosen are not specified and the candidates are not weighed against each other in a quantitative sense.

  • Ad Hoc Approach with Factors Specified: A slightly more formal approach to setting priorities is for NASA to specify the parameters it considers in setting priorities. Such parameters might include evidence of exposure, magnitude of routine and accidental exposure, short- and long-term health effects, ability to monitor and control exposure, and the need to have the chemical on board a spacecraft.
  • Formal System: Priorities are based on a specified set of parameters, a formula is used to combine scores for various parameters, and the relationship and weighting of the parameters are specified. The formula could be a simple sum of scores of various parameters or a more formal complex formula in which parameters are given unequal weights and their relationships are other than additive. Parameters that might be relevant for NASA’s purposes include likelihood of routine exposure, medical intelligence from ground-based or flight-based experience, likelihood of unusual exposure, severity of toxicity, design requirements (e.g., the capacity for controlling and eliminating exposures), special spaceflight considerations, and spaceflight experience (NRC 2000).

Previous NRC guidance has encouraged flexibility in selecting chemicals as a means to increasing the effectiveness of risk assessment. The process should allow for new information on changes in parameters, changes in information on specific chemicals, and the addition of new chemicals for consideration. For example, a series of priority rankings based on changes in parameters considered, their weighting, or their relationships could be developed. Priority rankings could then be compared in a way akin to sensitivity analysis in mathematical risk assessment.

Similar conclusions about available schemes were drawn by other NRC committees formed to provide the US Environmental Protection Agency with assistance in establishing a priority-setting process for drinking water contaminants (NRC 1999, 2001). Those committees evaluated existing schemes and explored the development of alternative approaches and found that there are no sharp boundaries between the types of schemes, as all involve a mix of data and to some degree expert judgment. The main differences are the specific mix of parameters considered and the extent to which explicit or implicit judgments come together to produce reliable results. The committee concluded that the output of most prioritization schemes is so uncertain that they are only useful in making preliminary screening assessments or classifications and should not be used for sorting contaminants in a specific order.

Suggested Citation:"3 Selecting and Prioritizing Contaminants for Assessment." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Refinements to the Methods for Developing Spacecraft Exposure Guidelines. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21888.
×

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The options for choosing candidate chemicals for risk assessment remain the same as previously available. One choice is subjective and is based on informed expert judgment. The second approach provides a slightly more formal approach, in which parameters for making the decision are specified but their weights and interrelationships are not. The third approach is more formulaic and involves specifying and quantifying the elements that are considered and using a weighting system for ranking contaminants.

Recommendation: The committee endorses NASA’s use of a combination of these approaches to select chemicals for risk assessment. The process should be described to support the selection process.

REFERENCES

Khan-Mayberry, N., J.T. James, R. Tyl, and C. Lam. 2011. Space toxicology: protecting human health during space operations. Int. J. Toxicol. 30(1):3-18.

NRC (National Research Council). 1992. Guidelines for Developing Spacecraft Maximum Allowable Concentrations for Space Station Contaminants. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

NRC. 1999. Setting Priorities for Drinking Water Contaminants. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

NRC. 2000. Methods for Developing Spacecraft Water Exposure Guidelines. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

NRC. 2001. Classifying Drinking Water Contaminants for Regulatory Consideration. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

Suggested Citation:"3 Selecting and Prioritizing Contaminants for Assessment." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Refinements to the Methods for Developing Spacecraft Exposure Guidelines. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21888.
×
Page 41
Suggested Citation:"3 Selecting and Prioritizing Contaminants for Assessment." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Refinements to the Methods for Developing Spacecraft Exposure Guidelines. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21888.
×
Page 42
Suggested Citation:"3 Selecting and Prioritizing Contaminants for Assessment." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Refinements to the Methods for Developing Spacecraft Exposure Guidelines. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21888.
×
Page 43
Next: Appendix A: Biographical Information on the Committee on Spacecraft Exposure Guidelines »
Refinements to the Methods for Developing Spacecraft Exposure Guidelines Get This Book
×
Buy Paperback | $29.00 Buy Ebook | $23.99
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

Human spaceflight is inherently risky, with numerous potential hazards posed at each phase of a mission. Potential health risks during spaceflights include short-term health consequences from being in microgravity, as well as long-term health consequences that arise, or continue, months or years after a flight. Additional health considerations are risks posed by exposure to environmental contaminants onboard spacecraft. Because the International Space Station and spacecraft are closed environments that require recirculation of air and water supplies, some contamination of the air and water will occur. Even with onboard air and water purification systems, chemicals will accumulate in the air and water as they recirculate or are recycled onboard. Therefore, it is necessary for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) to identify hazardous contaminants and determine exposure levels that are not expected to pose a health risk to astronauts.

NASA uses spacecraft maximum allowance concentrations (SMACs) and spacecraft water exposure guidelines (SWEGs) to provide guidance on acceptable exposures to air and water contaminants during normal operations and emergency situations. Refinements to the Methods for Developing Spacecraft Exposure Guidelines updates the methods for establishing SMACs and SWEGs and assists NASA with identifying chemicals that need updated SMACs or SWEGs and new chemicals for which these guidelines should be developed.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    Switch between the Original Pages, where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  9. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!