4
SciPoll 551: USEPA's Proposed Changes to TSCA Risk Evaluation Framework Rule
Explicit risk evaluation of all exposure routes and pathways relevant to the chemical substance should be required, including those that are regulated under other federal statutes
Results
(108 Answers)
Answer Explanations
- Agreeuser-125195Consideration of this is needed when considering overall total population risk even for screening level assessments. The level of detail by which this is considered should be tailored to the purpose of the assessment (e.g., screwing level. vs.. comprehensive assessment)
- Agreeuser-841110Given all the unknowns of exactly what long-term effects of chemicals may be, being as comprehensive as possible is preferable.
- Disagreeuser-774962For risk assessment purposes the most relevant, and sensitive, route should be used.
- AgreeSciPinion Admincomprehensive evaluation is always best and relying in others would lead to needlessly limited perspective on the overall risk assessment. no harm in replicating, if that happens -- that is what scientist should try to do anyway: replicate not trust others.
- Agreeuser-523578We need to know the routes and the sources to be successful with prevention.
- Agreeuser-445218Certainly this should occur for proper screening so critical scearios are not missed.
- No opinionuser-697743I'm not sure- seems like including this language provides framework for a more comprehensive assessment, but adding requirements may take longer, be more expensive, and in some instances may not be feasible. If there is redundant policy, this also can create complications.
- Agreeuser-997228Requiring explicit risk evaluations of all exposure routes and pathways relevant to a chemical substance, including those regulated under other federal statutes, can have several significant implications:
- Comprehensive Risk Assessment: Mandating evaluations of all exposure routes and pathways ensures a more comprehensive understanding of potential risks associated with a chemical substance. This approach allows for a thorough examination of various ways individuals might come into contact with the substance.
- Holistic Approach to Risk Management: Considering exposure routes and pathways regulated under different federal statutes ensures a holistic assessment, avoiding potential gaps in understanding the risks associated with a substance across different regulatory domains.
- Enhanced Protection: Evaluating all exposure routes and pathways, regardless of the regulatory framework, can lead to stronger protections for public health and the environment by addressing potential risks from multiple sources of exposure.
- Agreeuser-678105This is important. This is especially relevant for pregnancy and nursing mothers.
- Agreeuser-553839The more we know about the risk, the better equipped we are to deal with an unforeseen exigency. Therefore an explicit risk evaluation of all exposure routes and pathways related to the chemical substance should be made mandatory. This would not only create more awareness to the people who are handling such chemicals but also to non-experts, thus enhancing the safety levels.
- Agreeuser-754769Public disclosure of all possible routes of exposure to chemicals should be mandatory. Neglect of this has led to serious chemical injuries in the past.
- Disagreeuser-348103If any exposure route or pathway has been regulated by authority, I don't think it is necessary for the industry to explicit risk evaluation for these chemicals.
Consumer of the chemical should not be responsible for validating exposure routes or pathways of the chemical, as this would be very hard for small sized industries.
A private risk evaluation can be done by the consumer according to the warnings of the manufacturer of the chemical. - Agreeuser-931808That's straightforward
- Agreeuser-673903This is already done with pesticide risk assessments. It is very important for cumulative exposures.
- Agreeuser-521436aggregate exposures are a more realistic exposure scenario.
- Agreeuser-998255More transparent
- Agreeuser-574398In the interest of transparency, this seems like a good idea. It could mean that methods used to meet the goals of different federal statutes would need to be harmonized, or at least at acknowledgement of the conclusions of other evaluations.
- Agreeuser-378118To make an assessment more relevant and holistic
- Disagreeuser-573537Doing so may increase the chances of precluding the full application of the regulation, due to lack of a complete set of data.
- Agreeuser-414626Federal laws do not protect against exposures. Enforcement might.
- Disagreeuser-499245Stay in your lane. EPA is not omnipotent.
- Agreeuser-175854It will ensure no potential exposure is overlooked, leading to more thorough and effective risk management.