1 / 5

Discussion Leader Duane Huggett

Charge Question 1-1: Please comment on whether the assessment provides a clear and logical summary of EPA’s approach and analysis. Please provide specific suggestions for improving the assessment. Discussion Leader Duane Huggett. Overview.

aquarius
Télécharger la présentation

Discussion Leader Duane Huggett

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. Charge Question 1-1: Please comment on whether the assessment provides a clear and logical summary of EPA’s approach and analysis. Please provide specific suggestions for improving the assessment. Discussion Leader Duane Huggett

  2. Overview • The “Scope of Assessment for HHCB” and Conceptual Model for the Environmental Assessment” sections provide a very clear picture in terms of the key questions and assessment scenarios. • Figure 1.1 clearly summarizes EPA’s thought process and focus of the assessment. • This assessment focuses on effluent discharges to aquatic systems and terrestrial inputs via WWTP sludge. • Exposure to aquatic, sediment and soil organisms is expected. • Measured environmental concentrations are compared to effect concentrations from toxicity studies for the derivation of a risk quotient (RQ). • Other data are presented (e.g. estrogenic activity, multidrug resistant transporter inhibition)

  3. Comments • Assessment should be considered as a screening level assessment and needs to be clearly stated in the document • Probabilistic assessment with uncertainty analysis needed for risk determination • Read Across • Levels of risk/hazard used in the assessment need to be explained or justified • “Negligible” vs “Acceptable” • Why were mammals and birds beyond the scope of this assessment? • Higher Log Kow value of 5.3 and BCF value of 1,584

  4. Comments • Degradation products (e.g. HHCB-lactone) were not discussed in the assessment. Should this assessment address this transformation product or others in any way? At the very least, it should be stated that the assessment of transformation products is out of scope. • Details of the QA/QC of data sets (e.g. USGS monitoring data) should be explained. • Often detected in laboratory and field blanks • Add information to the Appendix

  5. Comments • Other data (e.g. estrogenic activity) were provided, but a statement is needed as to its use and meaning towards this assessment • Conceptual Model could be improved by accounting for manufacturing input (not considered [pg 27] yet accounts for 10% of used volume)

More Related