WORKING FOR A HEALTHY FUTURENear-field Consumer ExposureJohn CherrieINSTITUTE OF OCCUPATIONAL MEDICINE . Edinburgh . UK www.iom-world.org
Questions…• 1. What are some specific hurdles related to the issue that you feel should be addressed in an exposure-based prioritization approach?• 2. What are some specific steps that EPA could take to reduce or eliminate these hurdles?• 3. Are there any examples of approaches that could provide a template, or at least some ideas, for addressing these issues?• 4. Can you share one or two personal examples of how you previously have addressed similar issues?
Specific hurdles to be addressed…• Screening tools are necessarily going to predict worst-case exposures• Scenarios offer many advantages but care is needed in their development• Experience suggests tools will have high variability in their predictions, both within tools for different substances and between tools• Aggregating exposure estimates problematic (you may end up just prioritizing on the tool or on some substances- specific bias in a tool)• Limited information about tool validity
Specific steps that EPA could take• Screen on a very simple worst-case set of scenario- specific models• Consider incorporating expert judgment in the prioritization• Consider developing an international database of exposure measurements and contextual data that could be used to validate consumer models
Approaches used elsewhere…• In the EU Substances of Very High Concern (SVHC) are identified by Member States in discussion and though consultation http://echa.europa.eu/doc/about/organisation/msc/ working_procedure_msc_providing_opinion_annex_xiv.pdf