IRIS Public Science Meeting (Mar 2018)

EPA hosted an IRIS public science meeting to provide an opportunity for the public to give input and participate in an open discussion regarding the IRIS Assessment Plan (IAP) that was prepared for this IRIS chemical prior to the development of the draft assessment.

This included the following chemical: Uranium

On this page:

Meeting Details
Meeting Materials

Meeting Details

Meeting Objective

At IRIS Public Science Meetings, the IRIS Program encourages the scientific community and the public to participate in discussions on IRIS draft assessment materials. The scientific information and perspectives from the meeting would be considered as this assessment progresses.

At this meeting, the IRIS Program invited public discussion on the following draft assessment material:

IRIS Assessment Plan (IAP) for Uranium.

Dates

The meeting was held on March 22, 2018 from 1:30 pm - 3:30pm Eastern Time by webinar.

Meeting Materials

Meeting Agenda

On March 22, 2018, EPA hosted a public webinar to provide an opportunity for the public to give input and participate in an open discussion regarding the IAP of uranium. See the final agenda and meeting presentation:

IRIS Meeting Final Agenda Mar 22, 2018 (PDF) (1 pp, 117K)
IRIS Meeting Presentation Mar 22, 2018 (PDF) (20 pp, 2 MB)

Uranium: Paul White, Assessment Manager

IRIS Assessment Plan (IAP) for Uranium
Review comments submitted on these materials in the Uranium docket at EPA-HQ-ORD-2017-0747.
Federal Register Notice: Jan 31, 2018 announced the availability of the IAP for a 30 day public comment period.

Key Science Topic
Science Topic: An IRIS Assessment Plan, or IAP, communicates to the public the plan for assessing each individual chemical and includes summary information on the IRIS Program’s scoping and initial problem formulation, objectives and specific aims for the assessment, and the PECO (Populations, Exposures, Comparators, and Outcomes) criteria that outlines the evidence considered most pertinent to the assessment; and identification of key areas of scientific complexity. The PECO provides the framework for developing literature search strategies and inclusion/exclusion criteria, particularly with respect to evidence stream (i.e., human, animal, mechanistic), exposure measures and outcome measures. The IRIS program is seeking a discussion with the public aimed at improving or clarifying the IAP. Below are questions to facilitate the discussion of this science topic: Are the assessment objectives and specific aims articulated clearly? Does the background information and context that is provided support the objectives for the assessment presented in plan? Does the proposed PECO (Population, Exposure, Comparators, Outcomes) framework identify the most pertinent evidence to address the stated needs of the Agency programs and regions?

Key Science Topic

Science Topic: An IRIS Assessment Plan, or IAP, communicates to the public the plan for assessing each individual chemical and includes summary information on the IRIS Program’s scoping and initial problem formulation, objectives and specific aims for the assessment, and the PECO (Populations, Exposures, Comparators, and Outcomes) criteria that outlines the evidence considered most pertinent to the assessment; and identification of key areas of scientific complexity. The PECO provides the framework for developing literature search strategies and inclusion/exclusion criteria, particularly with respect to evidence stream (i.e., human, animal, mechanistic), exposure measures and outcome measures.

The IRIS program is seeking a discussion with the public aimed at improving or clarifying the IAP. Below are questions to facilitate the discussion of this science topic:

This figures illustrates the process the IRIS program utilizes to perform systematic review.

Are the assessment objectives and specific aims articulated clearly?
Does the background information and context that is provided support the objectives for the assessment presented in plan?
Does the proposed PECO (Population, Exposure, Comparators, Outcomes) framework identify the most pertinent evidence to address the stated needs of the Agency programs and regions?