IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/riskan/v17y1997i2p187-201.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Multimedia Benchmarking Analysis for Three Risk Assessment Models: RESRAD, MMSOILS, and MEPAS

Author

Listed:
  • William B. Mills
  • J. J. Cheng
  • James G. Droppo
  • Ernest R. Faillace
  • Emmanuel K. Gnanapragasam
  • Robert A. Johns
  • Gerard F. Laniak
  • Christine S. Lew
  • Dennis L. Strenge
  • Jonna F. Sutherland
  • Gene Whelan
  • Charley Yu

Abstract

This paper is one in a series that describes results of a benchmarking analysis initiated by the Department of Energy (DOE) and the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). An overview of the study is provided in a companion paper by Laniak et al. presented in this journal issue. The three models used in the study—RESRAD (DOE), MMSOILS (EPA), and MEPAS (DOE)—represent analytically‐based tools that are used by the respective agencies for performing human exposure and health risk assessments. Both single media and multimedia benchmarking scenarios were developed and executed. In this paper, the multimedia scenario is examined. That scenario consists of a hypothetical landfill that initially contained uranium‐238 and methylene chloride. The multimedia models predict the fate of these contaminants, plus the progeny of uranium‐238, through the unsaturated zone, saturated zone, surface water, and atmosphere. Carcinogenic risks are calculated from exposure to the contaminants via multiple pathways. Results of the tests show that differences in model endpoint estimates arise from both differences in the models’ mathematical formulations and assumptions related to the implementation of the scenarios.

Suggested Citation

  • William B. Mills & J. J. Cheng & James G. Droppo & Ernest R. Faillace & Emmanuel K. Gnanapragasam & Robert A. Johns & Gerard F. Laniak & Christine S. Lew & Dennis L. Strenge & Jonna F. Sutherland & Ge, 1997. "Multimedia Benchmarking Analysis for Three Risk Assessment Models: RESRAD, MMSOILS, and MEPAS," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 17(2), pages 187-201, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:17:y:1997:i:2:p:187-201
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.1997.tb00858.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1997.tb00858.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1997.tb00858.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gerard F. Laniak & James G. Droppo & Ernest R. Faillace & Emmanuel K. Gnanapragasam & William B. Mills & Dennis L. Strenge & Gene Whelan & Charley Yu, 1997. "An Overview of a Multimedia Benchmarking Analysis for Three Risk Assessment Models: RESRAD, MMSOILS, and MEPAS," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 17(2), pages 203-214, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. William B. Mills & Christine S. Lew & Cheng Y. Hung, 1999. "Sensitivity of Concentration and Risk Predictions in the PRESTO and MMSOILS Multimedia Models: Regression Technique Assessment," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(3), pages 511-525, June.
    2. Heather A. Jones‐Otazo & Miriam L. Diamond & G. Mark Richardson, 2005. "An Interagency Comparison of Screening‐Level Risk Assessment Approaches," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(4), pages 841-853, August.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. William B. Mills & Christine S. Lew & Cheng Y. Hung, 1999. "Sensitivity of Concentration and Risk Predictions in the PRESTO and MMSOILS Multimedia Models: Regression Technique Assessment," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(3), pages 511-525, June.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:17:y:1997:i:2:p:187-201. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1539-6924 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.