()

1.
2.

3.
4.
(TCLP)

5.
6.
7.

()
1.
2.
3.
( )
-1-

()

( )

( )

()

10-6

-2-

()

-3-

-4-

hazard identification

2
()
1.

2.

3. short term test

Ames test

4.

-5-

1.

2. structure activity relationship

3.

4. 1
2
3

5. in vitro
in vivo

6.

7.

-6-


International Agency for Research on Cancer;
IARC Group 1,
Carcinogenic to humans 107 Group
2A, Probably carcinogenic to humans 59
Group 2B, Possibly carcinogenic to humans 267
Group 3, Not classifiable as to carcinogenicity to
humans 508 Group 4,
Probably not carcinogenic to humans 1 2011 6 17
IARC

mice
rat

human carcinogens

probably
carcinogenic to humansgroup 2A 59

possible carcinogenic to
humansgroup 2B 267

unclassifiable as to carcinogenicity in humans

group 3 508 2011 6 17

-7-

(1)
Hazardous
Substances Data Bank, HSDB(Integrated
Risk Information System IRIS)(2)
(International Agency for Research on Cancer; IARC)(3)
(Provisional Peer Reviewed Toxicity Values,
PPRTVs)(4) (Agency for Toxic Substance and
Disease Registry, ATSDR) (5)
(Minimal Risk Level, MRL)( 6)(7)
(Material Safety Data Sheets, MSDS)

1.
http://flora2.epa.gov.tw/Toxicweb/ToxicUC4/database.asp
2.
http://www.iosh.gov.tw/msds.htm
3.
http://www.merck.com.tw/56_1f.asp
4. (Integrated Risk Information System,
IRIS)http://www.epa.gov/IRIS
5. (International Agency for Research on Cancer, IARC)
http://www.iarc.fr/
6. (Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. EPA)
http://www.epa.gov/
7. (National Institute for Occupational
Safety and Health, NIOSH)

-8-

http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/homepage.html
8. (Chemical Abstracts Service, CAS)
http://www.cas.org/
9. Toxnet
http://toxnet.nlm.nih.gov/
3

1.
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
2.
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
-9-

3.
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4) ()
4.
(1)
(2)
(3) (
)
(4)
(5) ()
(6)
(7)
(8)
5.

1.

2.

3.
-10-


4.

5.

1.
2.
3.
4.

1.
2.

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.

1.
2.

1.

-11-

2.

1.
2.
3.

-12-

Dose Response Assessment

(NRC1983)

RfD (reference dose) RfC

(reference concentration)(slope factor)

RfD (reference dose) [mg/kg-day]

RfC (reference concentration) [mg/L ( ) mg/m3 ( )
mg/kg ()]
(slope factor) [(mg/kg-day)-1]
(Hazard index) [ 1
1
]
(cancer risk) [ 10-6~10-4]

-13-

No-observed-adverse effect level, NOAEL

Lowest-observed-adverse effect level,
LOAEL

(
)()

(Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons, PAHs)

()

(toxicokinetics)
(physiological based
pharmacokinetics, PBPK)

()

mode of action
()
mode of action

()
-14-

NOAEL
NOAEL
LOAELNOAEL
(reference dose, RfD)
(reference concentration, RfC)(uncertainty
factors, UFs)UFs(
)RfDRfC

RfD (mg/kg/day) or RfC (mg/m3/day) = NOAEL (or LOAEL) / UFs

()

LOAEL
1
NOAEL

(
)(slope
factor or cancer potency)

Cancer Risk = Exposure Dose Slope factor

-15-

(Integrated Risk Information System, IRIS)

(The Risk Assessment Information
System RAIS)
(WHO Concise
International Chemical Assessment Documents WHO CICAD WHO
Environmental Health Criteria, WHO EHC)
(Provisional Peer Reviewed Toxicity Values,
PPRTVs)
(Agency for Toxic Substance and Disease Registry,
ATSDR)(Minimal Risk Level, MRL)
(Health Effect Assessment Summary
Table , HEAST)

Benchmark dose analysis

Point of Departure, POD
1%10%
PODNOAEL

1
-16-

(SF)
(UR)

(RfD, RfC)

-17-

(UF)

(Point of

(NOAEL)

departure)

exposure assessment

hypothetical

uncertainties

-18-

Acute Hazard QuotientAHQHuman Health Risk Assessment
Protocol for Hazardous Waste Combustion Facilities, U.S. EPA, OFFICE
OF SOLID WASTE, 2005 Chemical Exposure
Index CEI DOWs Chemical Exposure Index Guide, AIChE,
1994

1970

Procter & GambleMonsanto 3M

-19-

Fugacity
Fugacity
(Fugacity) (Fugacity Model)

( 3)(Air)
(Water)(Soil)(Sediment)(Biota)
()

Fugacity

1. Fugacity
Fugacity

2. Fugacity
Fugacity Model

Fugacity Model ()
log Kow
()

-20-

 3 Fugacity
MEPAS

-21-

1.
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
2.
(1) Win 95
(2) http://mepas.pnl.gov/earth/mepasbuy.html
(3)
3.
(1) Multimedia Environmental Pollutant Assessment System
(2) Pacific Northwest National
Laboratory
(3) /Version 4.1.1/2002 5
(4)

(5)
a.

b.

c. CERCLA CAA CWA

Remedial Action Priority SystemRAPS
4.
-22-

(1) http://mepas.pnl.gov/earth/mepasbuy.html
(2)

MMSOILS
1.
(1)240

(2)underground storage tankssurface

impoundmentswaste pilelandfill

(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
2.
(1)

MS-DOS

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

3.
(1)

The Multimedia Contaminant Fate, Transport, and Exposure

Model

(2)

USEPA, Office of Research and

Development

(3)

/Version 4.0/19976

(4)

-23-

(5)

a.

b. RCRA relative comparison

c.

4.
(1) http://www.epa.gov/ceampubl/mmedia/mmsoils/index.htm

(2)

MULTIMED
1.
1
2Contaminated soilLandfill
Surface impoundment
3
4
5
6
2.
1MS-DOS
2
3

-24-

3.
1The Multimedia Exposure Assessment Model
2USEPA, Office of Research and
Development
3/Version 1.01/1992 11
4

4.
1http://www.epa.gov/ceampubl/mmedia/multim1/index.htm

3MRA
1.
(1)

(2) Surface impoundmentAerate tank

LandfillWaste pileLand application unit
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
2.
(1) Win 98/NT/2000/XP
(2)
(3)
-25-

3.
(1) Multimedia, Multipathway, Multireceptor Risk Assessment
(2) USEPA, Office of
Research and Development, Office of Solid Waste
(3) /Version 1.0/2003 6
(4)

(5)

a.

b.

Hazardous Waste
Identification Rule (HWIR)
4.
(1) http://www.epa.gov/ceampubl/mmedia/3mra/index.htm

(2)
http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/id/hwirwste/risk03.htm

TRIM
1.
(1)

HAP
particulate matterozonecarbon monoxide
nitrogen oxidessulfur dioxidelead

(2)

-26-

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

2.
(1)

Win 98/NT/2000/XP

(2)

(3)

3.
1Total Risk Integrated Methodology
2USEPA, Office of
Air Quality Planning and Standards
3/2005 9
4

5
a.

b.

c.

d.

4.
(1) http://www.epa.gov/ttn/fera/fate_download.html

(2)
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/fera/trim_fate.html

-27-


Lifetime Average Daily Dose, LADD
Average Daily Dose, ADD

LADDinhalation

C tw IRinhalation AFinhalation ED

BW
AT

LADD i n h a l a t i o n (mg/kg/day)
C t w (mg/m 3 )
IR i n h a l a t i o n Nm 3 /day
AF i n h a l a t i o n (%)
(Potential Dose) AF1
BW(kg)
ED
AT

ADDinhalation

C tw IRinhalation AFinhalation ED

BW
AT

ADD i n h a l a t i o n (mg/kg/day)
C t w (mg/m 3 )
IR i n h a l a t i o n Nm 3 /day
AF i n h a l a t i o n (%)
(Potential Dose) AF1
BW(kg)
-28-

ED
AT

Life-time Average Daily Dose, LADD

LADD i n g e s t i o n (mg/kg/day)
C(mg/Lmg/kg)
IR i n g e s t i o n L/daykg/day
AF i n g e s t i o n (%)
(Potential Dose) AF1
LFCLocal food consumption
BW(kg)
ED
AT

Life-time Average Daily Dose, LADD

LADDskin absorption

LADD s k i n

C M s SA AFskin absorption
BW

ED
AT

(mg/kg/day)
C(mg/Lmg/kg)
MsL/m 2 kg/m 2
SAm 2 /day
AF s k i n a b s o r p t i o n (%)
(Potential Dose) AF1
BW(kg)
ED
AT
absorption

-29-

-30-

risk characterization

significance of the risk

Unit Risk
low-dose linearity

ppm-1 ppb-1
ppm-1 (g/m3)-1 (mg/m2) -1
Dose Corresponding to a Given Level
of Risk

-31-

Individual and Population Risks

cocarcinogenspromotors
initiators

1.

Risk LADD t o t a l SF
LADD t o t a l
(mg/kg/day)
SFSlope factor (mg/kg/day) - 1
2.

Risk C Unit Risk

C(mg/Nm3mg/Lmg/kg)

-32-

Unit Risk

10-6

Average Daily
Dose
hazard quotient, HQ

HQ

ADD
RfD

hazard index, HI

HIHQ

1
1

Acute Hazard Quotient, AHQinh

AHQinh = Cacute0.001/AIEC
Cacute(g/m3)AIECAcute Inhalation Exposure
Criteria6(mg/m3)

http://www.epa.gov/waste/hazard/tsd/td/combust/risk.htm434

-33-

ACCESSAHQ1

50

Monte Carlo simulation

5095
(Monte Carlo Simulation)

-34-

()

()

()

1. (surrogate

-35-

data)?
2. ?
3. ?
4. ()?
5. ?
6. ?
7. ?

1,000
(
)

-
()

Log Normal
50

95%
(95% percentile)

-36-