Building Consensus Through Risk Assesment and Management of the Department of Energy's Environmental Remediation Program (1994) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Process for Performing Risk Assessments
Process for Performing Risk Assessments
Pages 23-42
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 23... ...
These comments of the workshop were often directed specifically to risk assessment, risk management, overall decision-making, and public participation. The committee notes that the four processes of risk assessment, risk management, overall decisionmaking, and public participation occur simultaneously and com 23
|
From page 24... ...
We have not attempted to address each of the other processes comprehensively, and we certainly would not claim that our recommendations fully address the improvements that could be made in the process as a whole. However, we have gone in some depth throughout this section into how public participation should fit into the decision-making and risk assessment process to achieve the objectives described below.
|
From page 25... ...
Figure 3-1 Factors Influencing Remedial Action Decisions PUBLIC POLICY DECISION-MAKERS .~. RISK MANAGEMENT RISK ASSESSMENT 49 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION 1~ Type of Remediation Degree of Remediation Identification of Risks to Workers and Public During Remediation On and Off Site Determination of Remaining Risk Following Remediation 25
|
From page 26... ...
The first and probably most important step in effective risk assessment and risk management is to establish public participation that involves all the stakeholders. Figure 3-2 depicts a general sequence of events in the decisionmaking process for remediation.
|
From page 27... ...
General risk assessment me~ods Perspectives and values of stakeholders (e.g., historical, aes~edc, religious, and cultural) High-risk groups 27
|
From page 28... ...
Monitoring needs relevant to specific exposure concerns Information needs and data quality objectives Coordinate: Regulatory requirements and timetables Consider: Possible future land uses Possible exposure during that use Conduct: Preliminary data-gathering, e..g, -- historical records on occurrence and patterns of disease and population activities -- anecdotal data from public on health and environmental impacts of concern due to exposure -- particular ecological impacts of concern) Review of scoping by external national advisory panel of scientific experts Establish items to be addressed in risk assessment Identify contaminants, pathways of exposure, and end points of concern to stakeholders Specify methods to be used in assessing exposures and risks 28
|
From page 29... ...
6 Review of Work Plans Preliminary Risk Assessment Risk Assessment Review Step ~ Risk Assessment Identify research needs relative to data gaps and methodological needs Identify kinds of monitoring needed to improve risk assessment Outline timetable for assessment and remediation activities Determine mechanisms and timing of public participation Indicate how results of risk assessment and remediation activities will be provided to public Determine mechanisms to provide technical and scientific assistance to public Develop list of options for site remediation and future land use Indicate how stakeholder perspective and views are to be addressed Review of scoping by external national advisory panels Conduct site-oriented preliminary risk assessment Identify data gaps Review of risk assessment by external national advisory panels Conduct assessment (as needed) for long-term risks Conduct further site characterization (as needed)
|
From page 30... ...
9 10 11 Risk Assessment Review Site Remediation and Future Land Use Option Selection Remediation 12 Remediation Monitoring Review 13 Step II Risk Assessment 14 Risk Assessment Review IS Population Monitoring Conduct off-site exposure monitoring and assessment Review of risk assessment by external national advisory panels Determine (with public participation) options for site remediation and future land use based on results of Step ~ risk assessment Conduct remediation activities Monitor exposure to environment, population, and workers Review of monitoring plan and results by external national advisory panels Determine effect of remediation activities on worker and public as data are available Review of remediation risk assessments by external national advisory panels Continue long-term population exposure measurements and surveillance following remediation (where justified)
|
From page 31... ...
A continuing effort at outreach and openness by DOE to the views of all interested stakeholders is the only general rule that is easily identified. SCOPING Scoping identifies the potential human and nonhuman targets of pollution and possible adverse consequences of exposure to be considered in a risk assessment, and it identifies the general methods to be used in the assessment.
|
From page 32... ...
At this stage, the perspectives and values of the stakeholders are explicated, and high-risk groups and communityspecif~c exposure scenarios are identified. For example, particular dietary practices might be found to increase or decrease the risks associated with exposure to specific agents through the food chain and therefore might require adjustment in risk assessment scenarios os, or loss of a component of the ecological system might be shown to have a large potential effect on the way of life and economic well-being of a community and thus require special consideration during risk assessment.
|
From page 33... ...
An SSAB not only can help in the initial scoping activity, but can help to ensure that the entire facilityremediation process-including risk assessment, public participation, risk management, and decision-making proceeds effectively with the concurrence and understanding of the stakeholders. The efforts of SSABs and other kinds of groups can be complemented by public workshops, public comment periods, public hearings, and specifically designed opinion polls to elicit public concerns.
|
From page 34... ...
It should also outline a realistic timetable for assessment activities and a preliminary timetable for remediation activities, contingent, of course, on the findings of the site assessment and consideration of remediation options. STEPS OF RISK ASSESSMENT Depending on the specifics of a work plan for a site, the information obtained in the scoping phase might be used in a siteoriented preliminary risk assessment (see Figure 3-2~.
|
From page 35... ...
Step IT} could be updated periodically until it is determined that the site, in its intended use, will no longer pose a potential hazard to the population or the environment. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION Stakeholder involvement must be planned en c} scheduler} with at least the same degree of care that is taken in planning anc} scheduling the technical aspects of risk assessment and risk management.
|
From page 36... ...
Broad stakeholder participation can improve the quality of assessments by increasing the comprehensiveness of data; ensuring that all site-relevant pathways, end points, and land uses are taken into account and are based on an accurate understanding of habits, values, and preferences of affected people; and contributing to the discussion of appropriate and acceptable uses for risk assessment in the process of risk management. Stakeholder participation in assessing risks at DOE facilities must be an integral component of any process that is expected to result in credible, broadly accepted assessments.
|
From page 37... ...
Their preferences might differ by site, and SiteSpecif~c Advisory Boards can be helpful in providing advice about stakeholder involvement. iNSTI~TIONAL ~NGEMEN~ Assistant Secretary Grumbly questioned whether the institutions used by DOE were able to conduct risk assessments in such a manner as to achieve the objectives set forth at the beginning of this section, and he expressed particular concern about their credibility.
|
From page 38... ...
The value of the best risk assessment is reduced if the information that it provides is not communicated accurately, clearly, and in a manner that makes it readily understood by decision-makers and by the people affected. To ensure the institution's credibility, serious consideration should be given to establishing a national stakeholder oversight board that includes representatives of the various stakeholder groups that are represented in the SSABs described earlier.
|
From page 40... ...
The pane} could review the risk assessment work plans developed in scoping, including methods proposed, gaps in plans, and exposure and monitoring protocols and programs. Such reviews would not only provide quality assurance for individual plans, but help to ensure national consistency in the technical and scientific elements of the plans, particularly in the use of up-to-date risk assessment science and default options.
|
From page 41... ...
DOE cannot afford to delay remedies ation because it is establishing a new risk assessment institution The need for speed probably favors existing organizations over ones to be newly established. However, it is not clear that any existing organization has all the required attributes.
|
Key Terms
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.