Classifying Drinking Water Contaminants for Regulatory Consideration (2001) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Pages 45-70
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 45... ...
2Sociopolitical Considerations for Developing Future CCLs INTRODUCTION In its two previous reports (NRC, 1999a,b) , the committee emphasized that the decisions related to the development of a Drinking Water Contaminant Candidate List (CCL)
|
From page 46... ...
defensible, transparent, or available for public comment. In particular, several major policy decisions were made during the process that lacked sufficient explanation and justification.
|
From page 47... ...
period, EPA excluded from consideration several tens of thousands of chemicals that might pose a threat to safe drinking water but have not yet been identified or included on one of the selected lists (NRC, 1999b)
|
From page 48... ...
at least until the development of future CCLs. Finally, the stipulated size of the CCL reflected an unstated policy decision on the general amount of resources EPA would devote to the regulation of drinking water contaminants.
|
From page 49... ...
insufficient explanation and justification for the inclusion or exclusion of specific contaminants. To a large extent, the widespread recognition of these limitations helped lead to the formation of this National Research Council (NRC)
|
From page 50... ...
affects the provision of public water is likely to engender legitimate scientific disagreement. The report also recognizes that identifying and agreeing on what is sound science is itself a difficult and error-prone enterprise.
|
From page 51... ...
in the tens of thousands given the number of chemicals currently in commercial use.2 As noted in Chapter 1 (see Figure 1–3) , the committee has previously suggested (NRC, 1999b)
|
From page 52... ...
1999a,b) , the committee continues to recommend that EPA "err on the side of public health protection," opting for high sensitivity in the generation of future CCLs.
|
From page 53... ...
Perhaps worse, suspicion exists that students are admitted or rejected in a nonrandom fashion although the underlying mechanisms are often hard to discern. To summarize, the placement of a contaminant first on the PCCL and from there on the CCL involves not one, but several, difficult classification judgments.
|
From page 54... ...
It includes perceptions of self-identity and local environment (e.g., local hazards, local socioeconomic conditions) , political beliefs and moral values, and views and values held by the social groups with which an individual identifies and belongs.
|
From page 55... ...
person is assumed to be a self-interested "utility calculator," determining the optimum balance of personal satisfaction from among various options and the information available (Anderson, 1993)
|
From page 56... ...
one should seek, the "good life," social equality, "best practices," and the proper consideration and treatment of humans and the ecosystem are used as evaluative standards. Presupposed by this reasoning scheme is a notion of "deliberative democracy" in which members of an openminded community of equals are willing to move beyond self-interest and attempt to reach consensus on the general interest and common good (Einsiedel and Eastlick, 2000)
|
From page 57... ...
health effects that makes them perceived to be more severe than others. For example, what is it about cancers that usually makes them appear more severe than other health effects such as mood changes, depression, infertility, and developmental disorders?
|
From page 58... ...
expands, our ability to identify vulnerable subpopulations will improve. It should also be recognized that all people experience changes in susceptibility and risk over time.
|
From page 59... ...
groundwater supplies used by small water utilities (Bullard, 1994)
|
From page 60... ...
identified and protected (Parkin et al., 2000)
|
From page 61... ...
developing future CCLs should include an oversight mechanism to allow public participation in all aspects of its design, development, and implementation. The process would also have to be transparent (i.e., "…easily understood, where information about the policy is available, where accountability is clear, and where citizens know what role they play in the implementation of the policy"; Finkelstein, 2000)
|
From page 62... ...
EPA has previously attempted to address the issue of transparency in its Guidance for Risk Characterization (EPA, 1995)
|
From page 63... ...
the resulting accumulation (or deterioration) of trust and credibility concerning the agency's agenda, policies, and decisions.
|
From page 64... ...
represents "an honest attempt to find answers that are not predetermined" (Oreskes, 1998)
|
From page 65... ...
potential health effects and occurrence) , as well as a discussion of the magnitude of the effect each chosen parameter has on the model's results and the quality of data for each parameter (e.g., uncertainties, data gaps, timeliness of the data)
|
From page 66... ...
Two additional ways to enhance the transparency of the classification model would be (1) to remove or add parameters to determine how the selection of contaminants changes (a discussion of such results would also serve to improve the transparency of the process)
|
From page 67... ...
(Einsiedel and Eastlick, 2000) , citizen juries (Lenaghan et al., 1996)
|
From page 68... ...
genuine impact on policy. Public participation procedures that follow from this rationale would include referenda, public opinion surveys, focus groups, consensus conferences, and citizen juries.
|
From page 69... ...
intentions and expectations for the selected procedure, and how well the agency implements the procedure (Chess, 2000; NRC, 1996)
|
From page 70... ...
people who are exceptionally sensitive to an array of chemical contaminants, people with specific medical conditions that make them more susceptible, people with poor nutrition, and people experiencing socioeconomic hardships and racial or ethnic discrimination. • Transparency should be incorporated into the design and development of the classification and decision-making process for future CCLs in addition to being an integral component in communicating the details of the process to the public.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.