A framework for fully integrating environmental assessment

Environmental Management

Volumn 42, Issue 4, 2008, Pages 543-556

  Cormier, Susan M ^a   Suter II, Glenn W ^a  

^a U S ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY   (United States)

Author keywords

Causality; Eco epidemiology; Ecology; Environmental assessment; Environmental epidemiology; Environmental management; Environmental outcome; Risk assessment

Indexed keywords

ASSESSMENT PROCESSES; BIOLOGICAL IMPAIRMENTS; CAUSAL RELATIONSHIPS; CAUSALITY; CHEMICAL-; CONDITION ASSESSMENTS; ECO-EPIDEMIOLOGY; ECOLOGY; ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT; ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENTS; ENVIRONMENTAL EPIDEMIOLOGY; ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT; ENVIRONMENTAL OUTCOME; ENVIRONMENTAL PROBLEMS; ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAMS; SOCIETAL RISKS;

ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING; ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT; ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENTS; RISK PERCEPTION; RIVER POLLUTION; TERMINOLOGY;

RISK ASSESSMENT;

PESTICIDE;

DECISION ANALYSIS; ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT; ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT; ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING; EPIDEMIOLOGY; IDENTIFICATION METHOD; RISK ASSESSMENT;

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK; DECISION MAKING; ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT; ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT; ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; REVIEW; RISK ASSESSMENT; RIVER; WATER CONTAMINATION; WATER POLLUTION CONTROL; WATER QUALITY;

CONSERVATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES; PLANNING TECHNIQUES; RISK ASSESSMENT;

EID: 51849109963     PISSN: 0364152X     EISSN: 14321009     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00267-008-9138-y     Document Type: Review

References (50)

1. Burgman M (2005) Risks and decisions for conservation and environmental management. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK
2. Dale VH, Biddinger GR, Newman MC, Oris JT, Suter GW, Thompson T, Armitage TM, Meyer JL, Allen-King RM, Benfield EF, Burton GA, Chapman PM, Conquest LL, Fernandez IJ, Landis WG, Master LL, Mitsch WJ, Mueller TC, Rabeni CF, Rodewald AD, Sanders JG, van Heerden IL (2008) Enhancing the ecological risk assessment process. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management 4(3)
3. AMH de Bruyn DJ Marcogliese JB Rasmussen 2003 The role of sewage in a large river food web Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 60 11 1332 1344
4. RA Efroymson JP Nicollette GW Suter II 2004 A framework for net environmental benefit analysis for remediation or restoration of contaminated sites Environmental Management 34 3 315 331
5. Fairbrother A, Kapustka LA, Williams BA et al (1997) Effects-initiated assessments are not risk assessments. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment 3(2):119-124
6. ME Finkelstein RH Gwiazda DR Smith 2003 Lead poisoning of seabirds: environmental risks from leaded paint at a decommissioned military base Environmental Science and Technology 37 15 3256 3260
7. GA Fox 1991 Practical causal inference for ecoepidemiologists Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health Part A 33 4 359 373
8. Friis RH, Sellers TA (2003) Epidemiology for public health practice. Jones & Bartlett Publishers, Boston, MA
9. Hanley N, Spash CL (1993) Cost-benefit analysis and the environment. Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham, UK
10. Holling CS (1978) Adaptive environmental assessment and management. Wiley and Sons, Chichester
11. Karr JR, Chu EW (1999) Restoring life in running waters: better biological monitoring. Island Press, Washington, D.C
12. Linkov I, Satterstrom FK, Kiker G et al (2006) Multicriteria decision analysis: a comprehensive decision approach for management of contaminated sediments. Risk Analysis 26(1):61-78
13. Mahler BJ, van Metre PC, Bashara TJ et al (2005) Parking lot sealcoat: an unrecognized source of urban polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. Environmental Science and Technology 39(15):5560-5566
14. Menzie CA, Hoeppner SS, Cura J et al (2002) Urban and suburban stormwater runoff as a source of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) in Massachusetts estuarine and coastal environments. Estuaries 25(2):165-176
15. Murphy BL, Morrison RD (eds) (2002) Introduction to environmental forensics. Academic Press, San Diego, CA
16. National Research Council (NRC) (1983) Risk assessment in the federal government: managing the process. National Academy Press, Washington, DC
17. National Research Council (NRC) (2005) Superfund and mining megasites: lessons from the Coeur D'Alene river basin. National Academies Press, Washington, DC
18. Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (Ohio EPA) (1988) Biological criteria for the protection of aquatic life: volume II: users manual for biological assessment of Ohio surface waters. Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, Ecological Assessment Section, Division of Water Quality, Planning & Assessment, Columbus, OH. WQMA-SWS-6. Available at http://www.epa.state.oh.us/ dsw/documents/BioCrit88_Vol2Cover.pdf. Accessed 12 May 2008
19. Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (Ohio EPA) (2000) Total maximum daily loads for the Middle Cuyahoga River, Final report. Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, Division of Surface Water, Columbus, OH
20. M Power LS McCarty 1998 A comparative analysis of environmental risk assessment/risk management frameworks Environmental Science and Technology 32 224A 231A
21. M Power LS McCarty 2002 Trends in the development of ecological risk assessment and management frameworks Human and Ecological Risk Assessment 8 7 18
22. Presidential/Congressional Commission (1997) Risk assessment and risk management in regulatory decision-making. The Presidential/Congressional Commission on Risk Assessment and Risk Management, Washington, DC
23. RETEC Group (2002) Final baseline human health and ecological risk assessment: Lower Fox River and Green Bay, Wisconsin remedial investigation and feasibility study. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Madison, WI
24. Science Advisory Board (SAB) (2000) Toward integrated environmental decision-making. Science Advisory Board, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, EPA-SAB-EC-00-011
25. AM Scheuhammer DM Templeton 1998 Use of stable isotope ratios to distinguish sources of lead exposure in wild birds Ecotoxicology 7 1 37 42
26. JM Simpson JW Santo Domingo DJ Reasoner 2002 Microbial source tracking: state of the science Environmental Science and Technology 36 24 5279 5288
27. Stratus Consulting, Inc. (1999a) Injuries to avian resources, Lower Fox River/Green Bay natural resource damage assessment. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC
28. Stratus Consulting, Inc. (1999b) Injuries to fishery resources, Lower Fox River/Green Bay natural resource damage assessment. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC
29. Stratus Consulting, Inc. (1999c) PCB pathway determination for the Lower Fox River/Green Bay natural resource damage assessment. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC
30. GW Suter II 2001 Applicability of indicator monitoring to ecological risk assessment Ecological Indicators 1 101 112
31. Suter II GW, Cormier (2008) A theory of practice for environmental assessment. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management 4(3)
32. Suter II GW, Cormier SM, Norton SB (2007) Ecological epidemiology and causal analysis. In: Suter GW II (eds) Ecological risk assessment, 2nd edn. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, pp 39-68
33. GW Suter II SB Norton SM Cormier 2002 A methodology for inferring the causes of observed impairments in aquatic ecosystems Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 21 6 1101 1111
34. Suter II GW, Vermier T, Munns Jr WR et al (2003) Framework for the integration of health and ecological risk assessment. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment 9(1):281-301
35. United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) (1989) Green Bay/Fox River mass balance study. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region V, Chicago, IL, EPA-905/8-89/001
36. United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) (1992) Framework for ecological risk assessment. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Risk Assessment Forum, Washington, DC, EPA/630/R-92/001
37. United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) (1994) Guidance for the data quality objectives process. EPA QA/G-4. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Washington, DC, EPA/600/R-96/055
38. United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) (1998a) Guidelines for ecological risk assessment. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Risk Assessment Forum, Washington, DC, EPA/630/R-95/002F
39. United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) (1998b) RCRA, Superfund and EPCRA hotline training module: introduction to: the Superfund response process. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, Washington, DC, EPA 540-R-98-029. OSWER9205.5-14A. PB98-963 237. Available at http://www.epa.gov/superfund/contacts/sfhotlne/resp. pdf. Accessed 12 May 2008
40. United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) (2000) Stressor identification guidance document. U.S.Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC. EPA/822/B-00/025. Available at http://www.epa.gov/ waterscience/biocriteria/stressors/stressorid.pdf. Accessed 12 May 2008
41. United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) (2002) The twenty needs report: how research can improve the TMDL program. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Office of Wetlands, Oceans and Watersheds, Assessment and Watershed Protection Division (4503T), Washington, DC, EPA 841-B-02-002. Available at http://www.epa.gov/owow/tmdl/20needsreport_8-02.pdf. Accessed 12 May 2008
42. United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) (2005) Section 319 nonpoint source program success story, Ohio: dam modification project helps restore water quality in the Middle Cuyahoga River. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC EPA 841-F-05-004Y. Available at http://www.epa.gov/OWOW/NPS/Success319/state/pdf/oh_cuy.pdf. Accessed 12 May 2008
43. United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) 2006 Carbofuran; interim reregistration eligibility decision; notice of availability Federal Register 71 168 51610 51612
44. United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) (2006b) Interim reregistration eligibility decision: carbofuran. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances (7508P), Washington, DC, EPA-738-R-06-031. Available at http://www.epa.gov/oppsrrd1/reregistration/REDs/ carbofuran_ired.pdf. Accessed 12 May 2008
45. United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) (2007) Causal analysis, diagnosis decision information system. Available at www.epa.gov/caddis. Accessed 12 May 2008
46. USFWS (US Fish and Wildlife Service) (1999) Preassessment screen and determination: Lower Fox River and Green Bay, Wisconsin. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Region 3, Ft. Snelling, MN, Available at http://www.fws.gov/Midwest/ FoxRiverNRDA/prescreen.html. Accessed 12 May 2008
47. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) (1988) Lower Green Bay remedial action plan for the lower Fox River and lower Green Bay: area of concern. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Madison, WI, PUBL-WR-175-87 REV 88
48. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR), United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) (2003) Record of decision, operable units 3, 4, and 5, Lower Fox River and Green Bay, Wisconsin. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region V, Chicago, IL
49. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR), United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) (2006) Final basis of design report: Lower Fox River and Green Bay Site; Brown, Otagami and Winnebago counties. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region V, Chicago, IL. Available at http://dnr.wi.gov/org/water/wm/foxriver/documents/BODR/Final_BODR_Volumel.pdf. Accessed 12 May 2008
50. World Health Organization (WHO) (2001) Report on Integrated Risk Assessment. World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland, WHO/IPCS/IRA/01/12