Abstracts (PDF file, 1.8MB) - Society for Risk Analysis

More documents

Recommendations

Info

SRA 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts T3-D.3 Moez, S.; ANSES, French Agency for Food, Environmental and Occupational Health & Safety; moez.sanaa@anses.fr Risk assessment model for Shiga-toxin-producing Escherichia coli and Salmonella in ground beef in France: efficiency of different strategies of intervention and sampling beef trim. In France, 0.48% and 0.27% of ground beef samples (1878) tested in 2011 by the Food Safety authority were positive for pathogenic STEC ((most known E. coli O157:H7) and Salmonella spp respectively. Contaminated ground beef products have been implicated in a number of human cases and food borne outbreaks. In this study we developed a quantitative microbial risk assessment (QMRA) model to assess the public health risks associated with the consumption of ground beef contaminated with Salmonella or STEC, and to evaluate the relative efficiency of various interventions at different steps of the food chain and different strategies of sampling. The model considers typical ground beef plants producing batches of 10 000 to 50 000 of ground beef patties from carcasses slaughtered in France. The QMRA model is based on previous QMRA studies. The model combines four modules: farm module, slaughterhouse module, ground beef production and retailing module and consumer module. The model incorporates recent data on ground beef handling, preparation and consumption collected in France. Particularly, data on thermodynamics during cooking and STEC and Salmonella strains heat resistance were generated for different types of ground beef cooking. The risk associated to the consumption of contaminated ground beefs was then estimated using the more recent and appropriate dose-response models. Three type of interventions were implemented in the model: primary preventive measures against STEC contamination of meat, interventions that are expected to decrease prevalence or concentration of STEC in feces, secondary prevention measures that include slaughtering and ground beef production process hygiene measures, and tertiary prevention measures which are intervention taken during ground beef handling, preparation and cooking just before consumption. Finally, the model includes different strategies of sampling beef trim or ground beef using a cost benefit analysis. P.12 Mohri, H*; Takeshita, J; Waseda University, National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology; mohri@waseda.jp Risk analysis for networks with cooperative games We proposed a risk measure with cooperative game theory. Hausken (2002) has introduced a risk measure with non-cooperative game theory for risk analysis. In social sciences such as economics, the non-cooperative game theory is a kind of tool for modern microeconomics e.g. industrial organization theory. Now, it is very popular that non-cooperative game theory is taught in faculty of economics and management. Nevertheless, cooperative game theory is not so popular compared with non-cooperative game theory because researchers of economics think agents, like companies in markets, are competitive. Sometimes, we may come across situation in which agents are cooperative considering on risks. For example, suppose a chemical plant, it was operated by one company usually. It also consists of many sections. However, all sections should be cooperative to make chemical products in one plant under one company. Some researchers of economics saying, if agents are cooperative, cooperative game would be converted into non-cooperative game by Nash program. As we wrote above, it is very easy to suppose cooperative game situation in one chemical plant. Not only that but also agents of infrastructure networks should be regarded as cooperative. In this study, we firstly argued how cooperative game should be introduced for risk analysis. Secondly, we addressed things using concrete examples; some graphs whose had simple mathematical structures. They are series (tandem), parallel, and combined graphs. Then, we discussed how should be treated complicated structure matters. M3-A.3 Mojduszka, EM; USDA/OCE/ORACBA; emojduszka@oce.usda.gov An overview of applications of risk management principles in food safety and nutrition Effective and efficient food safety risk management is of great importance to the U.S. food industry, consumers, and the government. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) report that over 3000 people die each year in the U.S. from food borne illnesses and 128,000 are hospitalized. The cost to the U.S. economy (including productivity losses) from food borne illnesses is approximately $77 billion per year (CDC web-site). In addition, in the 1990s and 2000s, several indicators of the healthfulness of the American diet deteriorated, including an increase in the percentage of adults and children who are obese or overweight. The estimated cost of this epidemic to the U.S. economy by 2020 is expected to be in the hundreds of billions of dollars (CDC web-site). These estimates emphasize significance of nutrition risks to the U.S. population as well as importance of utilizing effective and efficient, private and public, nutrition risk management approaches. In this paper, I provide an overview of applications of risk management principles in food safety and nutrition. I compare and contrast the ISO 31000:2009 standard published in the general risk management area and standards published in specific food safety and nutrition risk management areas, including ISO 22000:2005 (Food Safety Management Systems), Codex Hazard Analysis, Hazard Critical Control Points (HACCP), and ISO 22002-1:2009 (Prerequisite Programs, PRPs, on Food Safety). I identify and evaluate advantages but also important shortcomings of the standards for food safety and nutrition risk management applications. My specific focus is on evaluating interdependence of the standards as substitutes or complements. This information is necessary for improving effectiveness and efficiency of the standards in practice. I finally propose how the applications of the standards could be further extended in private and public food safety and nutrition policy making. T1-K.2 Mokhtari, A; Beaulieu, SM; Lloyd, JM; Akl, S*; Money, ES; Turner, MB; Al Hajeri, K; Al Mehairi, A; Al Qudah, A; Gelle, K; RTI INTERNATIONAL, ENVIRONMENT AGENCY-ABU DHABI; steveb@rti.org Development of a practical approach to rank the relative health and environmental risks of industrial facilities in Abu Dhabi In pursuing their initiative to develop state-of-the-art environmental protection programs, the Environment Agency-Abu Dhabi (EAD) face a daunting challenge, namely, to identify the industrial sectors and facilities that pose the most significant risks. The EAD needed a practical tool to rank relative risks, establish a standard framework for evaluations (i.e., minimize subjective judgment), capture multiple dimensions of risk and, at the same time, avoid the types of errors that can be associated with Risk Assessment Matrix approaches. In collaboration with EAD, RTI International developed a methodological framework for relative risk ranking that is facilitated by a tablet-based Data Collection Tool (DCT). The tool maps facility-specific data to risk scenarios that describe the probability and the potential severity of adverse events. The DCT represents a simple yet innovative approach for gathering data related to four risk dimensions: first responders, workers, nearby residents, and local ecosystems. The “hazard evaluator” answers specific questions covering a wide range of “risk factors” including, for example, the types/volume of chemicals, management/storage of chemicals the availability of emergency response plans, and employee safety training. The evaluator need not be an experienced risk assessor to gather this information; the responses and help screens significantly reduce the need for subjective judgment, and the DCT allows for notes, drawings, and photographs to support follow up questions with subject matter experts. The facility data are automatically uploaded into a central database, and relative risk scoring algorithms produce risk scores for each of the four risk dimensions. The system supports relative risk ranking across facilities, sectors, and risk dimensions. It identifies facilities that represent an imminent threat, primary risk drivers, recommended risk mitigation actions, and facilities that require a more robust inspection frequency. December 8-11, 2013 - Baltimore, MD
SRA 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts P.2 Money, C; Corea, N; Rodriguez, C; Ingram, J; Zaleski, RT; Lewis, J*; ExxonMobil, SC Johnson, Procter and Gamble, Unilever; chris.money@exxonmobil.com Developing Specific Consumer Exposure Determinants (SCEDs) for assessing risk from chemicals used in consumer products The EU REACH Regulation requires that an assessment of the risks to consumers is undertaken when a substance is registered and is classified as hazardous. The assessment must cover all known consumer uses of the substance. The ECETOC TRA tool has proved to be the preferred lower tier exposure tool under REACH that provides conservative estimates of consumer exposure. In order to ensure that TRA users are able to reliably and efficiently refine exposure predictions, while maintaining the degree of conservatism inherent to lower-tier models, it should be possible to enter relevant habits and practices data into the tool However, in the absence of standardized descriptions of consumer use, there is a likelihood that different TRA users will describe common consumer uses differently. European industry has therefore undertaken an activity, in cooperation with EU regulators, which aims to describe typical habits and practices information for commonly encountered uses of consumer products in Europe. For each use, the habits and practices information is compiled in a transparent manner and described in a structured form (the Specific Consumer Exposure Determinant, SCED) that is capable of electronic data transfer and manipulation. The core elements within the SCED template are specifically designed for use with TRA algorithms. The process for developing the SCEDs, together with examples, will be described. T4-J.1 Morgan, KM*; Bertoni, MJ; US Food and Drug Administration; kara.morgan@fda.hhs.gov Risk Management to Achieve Priorities: Linking risk interventions to outcomes There are many models used in government agencies to develop estimates, simulate uncertainties, select priorities, differentiate among decision options, and provide insights into possible future scenarios. There are fewer models used for evaluating whether interventions were successful and for linking these interventions to higher level outcomes. There has been a shift in the government, driven by the Office of management and Budget, to identify performance measures for government work, with special interest in outcome measures. The development of performance measures is increasing, but expertise and knowledge about best practices in measurement and evaluation is sometimes lacking, especially among the scientists and engineers who often know the programs best. In this talk, I will propose one part of a framework for linking risk management activities to outcome measures using logic models. In order to establish a decision process that leads to making progress on the outcomes that we care about, a shift in resources is needed to strengthen research in and the development and validation of models for linking outcome data to agency actions. Data are missing and these gaps will have to be addressed if we are to proceed on the path we have started down to link program activities to outcomes. Conceptual models for policy analysis and risk-informed decision making typically include an evaluation component, but in reality, those steps are often overlooked when attention turns to the development of the next estimation model for the next problem. I propose that the risk community can play a role in increasing and improving the use of program evaluation and therefore strengthening the links to outcomes from risk analysis work. If the risk community can move in that direction, it could lead to a better alignment of resources with successful risk reduction efforts, and could also lead to larger opportunities for improving and validating risk models. T4-H.4 Morral, AR*; Price, CC; Ortiz, DS; Wilson, B; LaTourrette, T; Mobley, BW; McKay, S; Willis, HH; RAND Corporation; morral@rand.org Modeling Terrorism Risk to the Air Transportation System: An Independent Assessment of TSA's Risk Management Analysis Tool and Associated Methods Following a National Research Council (2010) report urging DHS to better validate its terrorism risk models, the Transportation Security Administration asked RAND to validate one of its principal terrorism risk modeling tools developed by TSA and Boeing to help guide program planning for aviation security. This model — the Risk Management Analysis Tool, or RMAT — was designed to estimate the terrorism risk-reduction benefits attributable to new and existing security programs, technologies, and procedures. RMAT simulates terrorist behavior and success in attacking vulnerabilities in the domestic commercial air transportation system, drawing on estimates of terrorist resources, capabilities, preferences, decision processes, intelligence collection, and operational planning. It describes how the layers of security protecting the air transportation system are likely to perform when confronted by more than 60 types of attacks, drawing on detailed blast and other physical modeling to understand the damage produced by different weapons and attacks, and calculating expected loss of life and the direct and indirect economic consequences of that damage. Key findings include: 1) RMAT has proven to be of great value to the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) in driving a more sophisticated understanding of terrorism risks to the air transportation system. 2) RMAT may not be well suited for the kinds of exploratory analysis required for high-stakes decision support, because of its reliance on a large number of uncertain parameters and conceptual models. 3) TSA should not treat RMAT results as credible estimates of terrorism risk to the aviation system but can use those results to better understand the components of terrorism risk and to explore possible influences of system changes on that risk. W4-D.3 Morris, J; Sayre, P; Alwood, J*; US Environmental Protection Agency; morris.jeff@epa.gov Risk Assessment and Management of Multiwalled Carbon Nanotubes: Recent Developments in Regulatory Approaches Within US EPA’s Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics (OPPT), the current risk management approach for multi-walled carbon nanotubes (MWCNT) includes respiratory protection and engineering controls to prevent inhalation exposures, requiring testing for physical/chemical properties and subchronic inhalation toxicity testing to better inform the assessment of potential risks, and minimizing water releases to limit environmental exposures. Efforts are also underway to better understand the effects of MWCNT using high-throughput and high-content screening approaches through research and development within EPA’s National Center for Computational Toxicology, and similar efforts funded by EPA grants. Knowledge is being gained through examination of these results, testing results seen in the OPPT new chemicals program and the open literature, and information generated through international efforts such as the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). The EPA is moving towards developing streamlined testing strategies for MWCNT based on findings from these activities. This work is being leveraged by cooperation with Canada through the Regulatory Cooperation Council by comparing and sharing information on risk assessment and risk management of nanomaterials, including a case study on a MWCNT that was assessed and regulated by both countries. Within the OECD, work has begun to amend OECD test guidelines and develop guidance to address nanomaterials. Priorities for risk assessment and risk management of MWCNT include developing screening tests, identifying key physical and chemical properties for risk assessment, and producing or amending test guidelines for endpoints of interest. The views expressed in this abstract are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views or policies of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. December 8-11, 2013 - Baltimore, MD
Page 1 and 2:
SRA 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts W
Page 3 and 4:
SRA 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts P
Page 5 and 6:
SRA 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts T
Page 7 and 8:
SRA 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts M
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36: SRA 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts P
Page 37 and 38: SRA 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts T
Page 41 and 42: SRA 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts M
Page 43 and 44: SRA 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts W
Page 85: SRA 2013 Annual Meeting Abstracts M
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
show all

Abstracts (PDF file, 1.8MB) - Society for Risk Analysis

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?