Commission on risk assessment

lines of evidence are quotient estimates, modeling results, field

experiments, or field observations. Lines of evidence may be qualitative

or quantitative. Five criteria to evaluate if changes in assessment

endpoints are "adverse changes" are mentioned in this document. These

criteria are:

(1) Nature of effects.

(2) Intensity of effects.

(3) Spatial scale.

(4) Temporal scale.

(5) Potential for recovery.

One hint given for evaluating "adverse effects" is to keep both the ecological

and statistical contexts of the results in mind. A complete risk description should

also be included in the risk characterization report.

The final section of the "Proposed Guidelines" (USEPA 1996c) is a reminder

that the assessor should communicate to the risk manager the major risks to

assessment endpoints and the extent of the data supporting the conclusions made

in the risk assessment. Then, the risk manager can consider the results of the risk

assessment, as well as other social, political, economic, or legal issues to make a

decision about further environmental action (if any). The authors of this document

also mention that a risk characterization report is a way to communicate ecological

risks to the general public. Thus, an ecological risk assessment serves a dual

purpose, to guide risk management decisions and to communicate with the public

about environmental concerns.

Also in the "Proposed Guidelines" document are several useful appendices.

Appendix B defines Key Terms used in ecological risk assessment guidance.

Appendices C and D provide examples of conceptual models and analysis phase

considerations, respectively. A hypothetical example for evaluating ecological

adversity is also given in Appendix E.

Commission on risk assessment

Document: "Risk assessment and risk management in regulatory decision-

making." Commission on Risk Assessment and Risk Management, Washington,

DC. (Omenn et al. 1996).

Contact: Gilbert S. Omenn (Chairman of the Commission), Dean, School of

Public Health and Community Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle.

Significance: This is an important document in that it expresses a clear

concern from a Congressionally mandated commission that risk assessment be

incorporated into the Federal decision making processes. The United States

Congress mandated this commission as part of the Clean Air Act Amendments of

Appendix A Summary of Federal, State, and Regional Guidance