Review of the US Navy's Human Health Risk Assessment of the Naval Air Facility at Atsugi, Japan (2001) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Appendix F: Health Risk Assessment
Appendix F: Health Risk Assessment
Pages 30-35
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 30... ...
that are not representative of average US exposures to the substances in question but are averages of all reported indoor-exposure measurements. APPENDIX F Health Risk Assessment Human-Health Risk-Assessment Results The results section of NEHC's draft summary report (2000, pp.
|
From page 31... ...
Health Evaluation On p. 41 ofthe NEHC draft summary report, the stated purpose ofthe health-evaluation section is "to interpret and provide a context for presenting the results of the risk assessment, to discuss health concerns associated with the risk and to further characterize the estimated health risks based upon the sampling and risk analysis performed at NAF Atsugi." Overall, much of this section is repetitive of earlier sections of the draft summary report and not central to its stated purpose.
|
From page 32... ...
The subcommittee also notes that the value of 3.9 ~g/m3 used in the risk assessment (Pioneer 2000) as the UCL95 on the sitewide mean air lead concentration is incorrect by a factor of about ~ 0: the UCL95 on the mean is close to 0.4 ~g/m3, although the estimate depends somewhat on the assumptions made about the distribution.
|
From page 33... ...
draft report mentions a procedure called "Compound Rules of Decision". The procedure is neither described nor referenced, and it is not stated whether the circumstances under which it is supposed to be invoked ever occurred in the risk assessment.
|
From page 34... ...
In the risk assessment, the average case appears to use RME estimates for all exposure parameters except the exposure-point concentration, where the difference between average and RME cases is the difference between an estimate of mean concentration and a UCL95 on the mean concentration (see, for example, Tables 3-2 through 3-6, particularly their footnote c)
|
From page 35... ...
2. Take the concentrations measured at each site for each chemical on the selected days, calculate dayby-day concentration differences for each chemical, and compute the average of these differences in daily concentrations for each chemical over all days selected and upper 95th percentiles on such average differences.
|
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.