• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Risk analysis >Inconsistencies in Risk Analyses for Ambient Air Pollutant Regulations
【24h】

Inconsistencies in Risk Analyses for Ambient Air Pollutant Regulations

机译：环境空气污染物法规的风险分析不一致

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

This article describes inconsistencies between health risk analyses that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) uses to support its decisions on primary National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), and in the associated Regulatory Impact Analyses (RIAs) that accompany each NAAQS rulemaking. Quantitative risk estimates are prepared during the NAAQS-setting deliberations using inputs derived from statistical associations between measured pollutant concentrations and health effects. The resulting risk estimates are not directly used to set a NAAQS, but incorporated into a broader evidence-based rationale for the standard that is intended to demonstrate conformity with the statutory requirement that primary NAAQS protect the public health with a margin of safety. In a separate process, EPA staff rely on the same risk calculations to prepare estimates of the benefits of the rule that are reported in its RIA for the standard. Although NAAQS rules and their RIAs are released simultaneously, the rationales used to set the NAAQS have become inconsistent with their RIAs' estimates of benefits, with very large fractions of RIAs' risk-reduction estimates being attributed to populations living in areas that will already be attaining the respective NAAQS. This article explains the source of this inconsistency and provides a quantitative example based on the 2012 revision of the fine particulate matter (PM2.5) primary NAAQS. This article also demonstrates how this inconsistency is amplified when criteria pollutant co-benefits are calculated in RIAs for non-NAAQS rules, using quantitative examples from the 2011 Mercury and Air Toxics Standards and the currently proposed Clean Power Plan.
机译：本文介绍了美国环境保护署（EPA）用于支持其关于主要国家环境空气质量标准（NAAQS）的决定的健康风险分析与每个NAAQS规则制定相关的法规影响分析（RIA）之间的不一致之处。在NAAQS设定的审议过程中，使用从测得的污染物浓度和健康影响之间的统计关联得出的输入来准备定量风险估计。由此产生的风险估计值不会直接用于制定NAAQS，而是已纳入该标准的更广泛的基于证据的依据，该标准旨在证明符合主要NAAQS在安全范围内保护公众健康的法定要求。在一个单独的过程中，EPA工作人员依靠相同的风险计算来准备在该标准的RIA中报告的规则收益的估算。尽管同时发布了NAAQS规则及其RIA，但用于设置NAAQS的理由与RIA的收益估算不一致，RIA降低风险的估算中有很大一部分归因于居住在本区域的人口获得相应的NAAQS。本文解释了这种不一致的根源，并提供了基于2012年修订的细颗粒物（PM2.5）原始NAAQS的定量示例。本文还演示了如何使用2011年《汞和空气有毒物质标准》和当前拟议的《清洁能源计划》中的定量示例，在针对非NAAQS规则的RIA中计算标准污染物协同效益时如何加剧这种矛盾。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号