1 / 23

EPA Reference Values: Regulatory Context

George M. Woodall, PhD NCEA Toxicologist Leland Urban Air Toxics Research Center October 18, 2005. EPA Reference Values: Regulatory Context. National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP). Program Mandated in 1990 CAA Amendments

alea-hall
Download Presentation

EPA Reference Values: Regulatory Context

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. George M. Woodall, PhD NCEA Toxicologist Leland Urban Air Toxics Research Center October 18, 2005 EPA Reference Values:Regulatory Context

  2. National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) • Program Mandated in 1990 CAA Amendments • Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) • Assumption - Reducing emissions will reduce risk • However - No characterization of risk • Residual Risk Assessments • Risk remaining after NESHAPs enactment – usually 8 years • Assessment of risk

  3. Residual Risk • Characterization of emissions • Annual • Hourly (generally, 10 x apportioned annual emissions) • Modeling of emission dispersion • Emissions • Current Reported • MACT Limit • Meteorology • Worst-case for Hourly • 5-year Average for Cancer • Worst year for Chronic Non-cancer • Calculations of health-based risk • Using modeled receptors (often highest exposed receptor) • Both Cancer and Non-cancer Effects (acute and chronic durations)

  4. What is a Reference Value? Reference Values = Guidelines & Standards • Guidelines are recommendations for safe exposure levels • Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) • Reference Concentration (RfC) • Standards are enforceable legal limits • National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)

  5. Risk Assessment Paradigm (NAS, 1994)

  6. Purpose of Health Effects Reference Values • Each reference value system has a specific reason for existence • Protection for specific populations • Workers • General population (Public Health) • Susceptible sub-populations • Defined exposure scenarios • Peak vs. Repeated vs. Continuous exposures • Duration, schedule, etc. • Organizational Mandate

  7. Reference Valuesand HAP Chemicals • Two Durations Modeled in Residual Risk • Chronic • Continuous (24-hour/day; 7-days/week; potentially for a lifetime) • Low concentrations • Acute • Short-term (<= 24-hour, single events; potentially repeated) • High concentrations

  8. Cancer Reference Values • US EPA (http://www.epa.gov/iris/subst/index.html)-or- Cal EPA (http://www.oehha.ca.gov/air/cancer_guide/index.html) • Inhalation – Unit Risk (IUR) • Oral – Cancer Slope Factor (CSF) • Chronic Exposure Durations Assumed

  9. Chronic Non-Cancer Reference Values • US EPA –Reference Concentration (Chronic RfC) • http://www.epa.gov/iris/subst/index.html • ATSDR – Minimal Risk Level (Chronic MRL) • http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/mrls.html • California EPA – Reference Exposure Level (Chronic REL) • http://www.oehha.ca.gov/air/chronic_rels/index.html OAQPS Hierarchy: RfC > MRL > REL

  10. Categories of Acute Health Standards and Guideline Levels • Occupational • Healthy worker population • Exposures for average workday/workweek and short-term peaks • Emergency Response • General population – not necessarily the “most susceptible” • Rare, short-term exposures • Adverse effects, not “safe” exposure levels (not re-entry) • “Safe” Public Health Values • All susceptible subgroups (generally more conservative) • Longer-term, potentially repeated exposures

  11. Acute Reference Value Definitions (Woodall, 2005)

  12. Acute Reference Values • No hierarchy chosen • Arrays of all chemical-specific values used to determine “Safe” exposure level • Occupational values NOT used in Residual Risk • Comparisons to Chronic reference values also performed.

  13. No Public Health nor low-level Emergency Response values available for Ethylene Oxide Occupational values below the AEGL-2 and ERPG-2 levels indicate a potential problem. The Draft Acute RfC is not yet ready for use in the regulatory setting. So, what do you use?

  14. Analysis to Support Residual Risk Assessment • Characterize the Acute Reference Values for HAPS • Best value to use in individual Residual Risk assessments • Understand the basis for differences between values • Determine best course when critical Acute Reference Values are missing

  15. Reference Values Database(Air Toxics Health Effects Database: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/toxsource/summary.html) Database 854 Chemicals (2,275 Values ) Acute Inhalation 243 Chemicals (696 values) Comparable Values126 Chemicals

  16. Acute Chronic n =

  17. Comparison between Acute and Chronic Reference Values • Determine which acute values may be more critical for Residual Risk Assessments • Simple comparison (ratios) of acute to chronic values for single chemicals • A Priori Assumption – Concern if Acute values (mostly 1-hr) within 3 orders of magnitude of their corresponding Chronic value

  18. Ratio of Acute to Chronic Non-Cancer Inhalation Reference Values by HAP Chemical

  19. * ** ***

  20. Acute to Chronic Comparisons • 92 chemicals had ratios calculated: • 25 had a lowest ratio value ≤ 10 • 16 had a lowest ratio value > 10 and ≤ 100 • 19had a lowest ratio value > 100 and ≤ 1000 • 32 had a lowest ratio value > 1000

  21. Summary • Health Reference Values are developed for specific purposes and use outside those purposes should be done judiciously, if at all • Comparisons between Health Reference Values are more valid: • Within certain categories (occupational, emergency releases, public health protection) and • For comparable time frames • Acute reference values for some chemicals may be more critical for residual risk analysis than their corresponding chronic values.

  22. Acknowledgements • Roy L. Smith, PhD (US EPA/OAQPS) • Robert Hetes, PhD (US EPA/ORD) • Mark Corrales, PhD(US EPA/OPEI)

  23. References National Academies of Science (1994) Science and judgment in risk assessment. Washington, DC: National Academy Press Woodall, G.M. (2005) Acute health reference values: Overview, perspective, and current forecast of needs. Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health, Part A, 68:901-926

More Related