Order this information in Print

Order this information on CD-ROM

Download in PDF Format

     

Click here to make tpub.com your Home Page

Page Title: 2.2 Considerations for Risk Assessment
Back | Up | Next

Click here for a printable version

Google


Web
www.tpub.com

Home


   
Information Categories
.... Administration
Advancement
Aerographer
Automotive
Aviation
Combat
Construction
Diving
Draftsman
Engineering
Electronics
Food and Cooking
Math
Medical
Music
Nuclear Fundamentals
Photography
Religion
USMC
   
Products
  Educational CD-ROM's
Printed Manuals
Downloadable Books
   

 

control surface runoff will also control plant or animal bioaccumulation.
Consideration of such influences may allow for a reduction in testing efforts or the
need to reevaluate some pathways. The full evaluation of all pathways may
therefore be an iterative process, depending on the project requirements.
2.2 Considerations for Risk Assessment
This section discusses the similarities between risk assessment and the general
UTM evaluation process within any tier of each pathway. As discussed in Section
2.1, the tiered process is intended to provide a decision in most cases without
having to conduct a formal, quantitative risk assessment in Tier IV. However,
even while intending to avoid Tier IV, it is important to recognize that some
aspects of the project evaluation may require a Tier IV risk assessment. The
evaluations in Tiers I through III provide the data for risk assessment, should it be
needed.
2.2.1 Overview of Risk Assessment
Risk assessment as it has often been used in other applications has typically
been thought of as a complex, time-consuming, and expensive process. However,
the concept of "screening level" risk assessments is being more widely embraced,
and risk assessment concepts are being applied in simpler, quicker, and more
efficient forms. The UTM is consistent with this trend, with its integration of risk
assessment elements into a tiered testing framework culminating in a formal,
quantitative risk assessment in the ultimate tier.
The fundamentals of the risk assessment process and its application to
dredged material evaluation are discussed in Moore, Bridges, and Cura (1998).
This overview of the risk assessment process is supplemented by Cura et al.
(2001), which discusses risk assessment as it applies to aquatic disposal of
dredged material, and Cura, Wickwire, and McArlde (in preparation), which
discusses risk assessment in the management of dredged material in wetland and
terrestrial habitats. The brief summary of risk assessment in this section merely
provides a context for discussing the risk elements of the UTM evaluation
process. The much more thorough discussion by Cura, Wickwire, and McArlde
(in preparation) is an important companion to the UTM, and the user should be
familiar with it to make the best use of the UTM in the context of risk assessment.
If it is necessary to carry the evaluation in the UTM to Tier IV, the guidance on
Tier IV risk assessments provided by Cura, Wickwire, and McArlde (in
preparation) should be followed.
At a fundamental level, risk assessment consists of the following four steps,
illustrated in Figure 2-2.
Problem formulation involves a thorough description of the activity
being evaluated, with an emphasis on the COC (Section 2.2.2), ROC
(Section 2.2.3), and complete exposure route(s) by which ROC could
plausibly come into direct physiological contact with COC under the
2-7
Chapter 2 Structure and Approach of the UTM

Privacy Statement - Press Release - Copyright Information. - Contact Us - Support Integrated Publishing

Integrated Publishing, Inc. - A (SDVOSB) Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business