首页> 外文会议>Hazardous waste combustors specialty conference and exhibition >Hazardous Waste Combustors: Regulatory Review ofRisk Assessment Protocols and Reports
【24h】

Hazardous Waste Combustors: Regulatory Review ofRisk Assessment Protocols and Reports

机译:危险废物燃烧器:风险评估协议和报告的法规审查

获取原文

摘要

Expertise in the RCRA permitting of hazardous waste combustors varies amongregulators and their contractors. Some are technically astute in all areas while others arewell-versed in many areas but not in all. Due to the diverse levels of expertise amongpotential readers and reviewers, facilities are well served by submitting clear andtransparent documentation in risk assessment protocols and reports. Such documentationensures that regulators, readers and reviewers understand all aspects of the risk analysis.This approach can be especially important when portions of the analysis are open tocontention or interpretation.In reviewing combustion risk documents, two areas are consistently identified whereregulators need more information than provided initially by the facility: describing theenvironmental setting and the design and operation of the hazardous waste combustionsystem; and documenting the use of site-specific parameter values and deviations fromthe methodologies recommended in regulatory risk documents. Further, many facilitiesfail to take full advantage of the uncertainty analysis, limiting the discussion to specific,isolated issues. Discussions that integrate the effect of all sources of uncertainty on theestimated risks, authored by the risk assessor(s), are needed to adequately characterize thelevel of conservatism in the risk analysis. Issues can also arise around policy decisions.It is not unusual for a regulatory agency to modify a previously recommended approach.Agency-authored risk documents may even be revised or replaced while a facility ispreparing a protocol.Frequent communication between facilities and regulators during the process can providethe foundation for performing complete and defensible risk assessments in an expeditiousmanner. For example, interaction between all interested parties at the start of the projectcan help establish expectations, develop consensus on contentious issues, and assistfacilities in clearly defining the audience and purpose of their risk assessment documents.
机译:RCRA允许危险废物燃烧器的专业知识因 监管机构及其承包商。有些在技术上在各个领域都很精明,而另一些则在 在许多领域都精通,但并非全部。由于专业知识水平的差异 潜在的读者和审阅者,通过提交清晰, 风险评估协议和报告中的透明文档。这样的文件 确保监管者,读者和审阅者了解风险分析的各个方面。 当部分分析可以接受时,此方法尤其重要 争论或解释。 在审查燃烧风险文件时,一致确定了两个领域: 监管机构需要的信息比该机构最初提供的信息更多: 环境设置以及危险废物燃烧的设计和运行 系统;并记录特定于站点的参数值的使用以及与 监管风险文件中建议的方法。此外,许多设施 无法充分利用不确定性分析,从而将讨论限制在特定范围内, 孤立的问题。讨论将所有不确定性因素的影响整合到了 需要由风险评估者撰写的估计风险,以充分表征风险 风险分析中的保守程度。政策决策周围也会出现问题。 监管机构修改以前推荐的方法并不罕见。 机构授权的风险文件甚至可能会在设备处于故障状态时进行修订或替换。 准备协议。 在此过程中,设施与监管机构之间的频繁交流可以提供 快速进行完整且可辩护的风险评估的基础 方式。例如,在项目开始时所有相关方之间的交互 可以帮助建立期望,在有争议的问题上达成共识并提供帮助 明确定义其风险评估文件的受众和目的的设施。

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