Skip to main content

Currently Skimming:

Appendix L Options for Dealing with Uncertainties
Pages 710-714

The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.

From page 710...
... The most significant inference uncertainties arise in risk assessments whenever attempts are macle to answer the following questions (NRC, 1994~: · What set or sets of hazard and close-response ciata (for a given substance) should be used to characterize risk in the population of interest?
From page 711...
... These types of long-stancling assumptions, which are necessary to complete a risk assessment, are recognized by risk assessors as attempts to clear with uncertainties in knowledge (NRC, 1994~.
From page 712...
... The NRC committee recommencleci that regulatory agencies in the United States identify the neecleci inference options in risk assessment and specify, through written risk assessment guidelines, the specific options that will be used for all assessments. Agencies in the United States have iclentifieci the specific models to be used to fill gaps in ciata and knowledge; these have come to be called default options (EPA, 1986~.
From page 713...
... TABLE L-1 Approaches for Dealing with Uncertainties in a Risk Assessment Program Program Model Advantages Disadvantages Case-by-case judgments by experts Written guidelines specifying defaults for data and model uncertainties (with allowance for departures in specific cases) Presentation of full array of estimates from all scientifically plausible models by assessors Flexibility; high potential to maximize use of most relevant scientific information bearing on specific issues Consistent treatment of different issues; maximization of transparency of process; resolution of scientific disagreements possible by resort to defaults Maximization of use of scientific information; reasonably reliable portrayal of true state of scientific understanding Potential for inconsistent treatment of different issues; difficulty in acnlevlng consensus; need to agree on defaults Possible difficulty in justifying departure or .
From page 714...
... 1986. Proposed guidelines for carcinogen risk assessment; Notice.

This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More information on Chapter Skim is available.