Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs) in Soil and Sediment from Industrial,Residential, and Agricultural Areas in Central South Africa: An Initial Assessment

Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) are of global concern due to their ubiquitous presence, toxicity, and carcinogenicity. No data on PAHs in soils from South Africa have been published, even though it has the largest economy and industrial base in Africa. During this initial assessment, the levels of PAHs were determined in soils and sediments collected from central South Africa, specifically targeting industrial, residential, and agricultural areas. Analysis was performed by gas chromatography/mass spectrometry (GC/MS). The total concentration of PAHs (Σt-PAH) ranged between 44 and 39,000 ng/g, dw and the concentration of carcinogenic PAHs (Σc-PAH) ranged between 19 and 19,000 ng/g, dw. Pyrogenic processes were the most likely sources, with minimal petrogenic contributions. PAH levels were in the same range as levels reported from other countries, and the majority of the sites did not exceed Canadian environmental quality guidelines. Based on assumptions for dermal contact and ingestion of PAH-contaminated soil, we provisionally calculated only a small increase in cancer risk, but additional PAH inhalation could add considerably to this risk. Our data indicates a need for more analysis in industrial and residential areas, and should include air.     

The Use of Epidemiology in Risk Assessment: Challenges and Opportunities

The assessment of risk from environmental and occupational exposures incorporates and synthesizes data from a variety of scientific disciplines including toxicology and epidemiology. Epidemiological data have offered valuable contributions to the identification of human health hazards, estimation of human exposures, quantification of the exposure–response relation, and characterization of risks to specific target populations including sensitive populations. As with any scientific discipline, there are some uncertainties inherent in these data; however, the best human health risk assessments utilize all available information, characterizing strengths and limitations as appropriate. Human health risk assessors evaluating environmental and occupational exposures have raised concerns about the validity of using epidemiological data for risk assessment due to actual or perceived study limitations. This article highlights three concerns commonly raised during the development of human health risk assessments of environmental and occupational exposures: (a) error in the measurement of exposure, (b) potential confounding, and (c) the interpretation of non-linear or non-monotonic exposure–response data. These issues are often the content of scientific disagreement and debate among the human health risk assessment community, and we explore how these concerns may be contextualized, addressed, and often ameliorated.     

Genotoxicity risk assessment: a proposed classification strategy

Recent advances in genetic toxicity (mutagenicity) testing methods and in approaches to performing risk assessment are prompting a renewed effort to harmonize genotoxicity risk assessment across the world. The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) first published Guidelines for Mutagenicity Risk Assessment in 1986 that focused mainly on transmissible germ cell genetic risk. Somatic cell genetic risk has also been a risk consideration, usually in support of carcinogenicity assessments. EPA and other international regulatory bodies have published mutagenicity testing requirements for agents (pesticides, pharmaceuticals, etc.) to generate data for use in genotoxicity risk assessments. The scheme that follows provides a proposed harmonization approach in which genotoxicity assessments are fully developed within the risk assessment paradigm used by EPA, and sets out a process that integrates newer thinking in testing battery design with the risk assessment process. A classification strategy for agents based on inherent genotoxicity, dose-responses observed in the data, and an exposure analysis is proposed. The classification leads to an initial level of concern for genotoxic risk to humans. A total risk characterization is performed using all relevant toxicity data and a comprehensive exposure evaluation in association with the genotoxicity data. The result of this characterization is ultimately used to generate a final level of concern for genotoxic risk to humans. The final level of concern and characterized genotoxicity risk assessment are communicated to decision makers for possible regulatory action(s) and to the public.     

Genotoxicity risk assessment: a proposed classification strategy

Recent advances in genetic toxicity (mutagenicity) testing methods and in approaches to performing risk assessment are prompting a renewed effort to harmonize genotoxicity risk assessment across the world. The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) first published Guidelines for Mutagenicity Risk Assessment in 1986 that focused mainly on transmissible germ cell genetic risk. Somatic cell genetic risk has also been a risk consideration, usually in support of carcinogenicity assessments. EPA and other international regulatory bodies have published mutagenicity testing requirements for agents (pesticides, pharmaceuticals, etc.) to generate data for use in genotoxicity risk assessments. The scheme that follows provides a proposed harmonization approach in which genotoxicity assessments are fully developed within the risk assessment paradigm used by EPA, and sets out a process that integrates newer thinking in testing battery design with the risk assessment process. A classification strategy for agents based on inherent genotoxicity, dose-responses observed in the data, and an exposure analysis is proposed. The classification leads to an initial level of concern for genotoxic risk to humans. A total risk characterization is performed using all relevant toxicity data and a comprehensive exposure evaluation in association with the genotoxicity data. The result of this characterization is ultimately used to generate a final level of concern for genotoxic risk to humans. The final level of concern and characterized genotoxicity risk assessment are communicated to decision makers for possible regulatory action(s) and to the public.     

Environmental Risk of Pesticides: Applying the DelAzulPestRisk Model to Freshwaters of an Agricultural Area of Argentina

DelAzulPestRisk is a risk-based chemical ranking model based on human and local biota toxicities that estimates the integrated risk of pesticides in water from their extensive (concentration, risk) and intensive (persistence, bioaccumulation) chemical properties. The model is built on two modules: human health risk factor (estimated based on the probabilistic cancer and non-cancer health risk by using U.S. Environmental Protection Agency models applied to a bathing exposure scenario) and biota health risk factor (quantified on the basis of the probabilistic toxicity exposure ratio –PEC/PNEC– for three local representatives of water biota multiplied by an amplification factor supported by the persistence and bioaccumulation potential). The model was applied to shallow creeks of Tres Arroyos County, Argentina, which flow across wheat and soybean agricultural lands, and in whose waters were detected many organochlorine pesticides (α, γ, y, δ-HCH, aldrin, heptachlor, γ-chlordane, endosulfan, endosulfan sulphate, dieldrin, and DDD). Dieldrin, aldrin, and heptachlor generated the worst potential effects—due mainly to the cancer and non-cancer dermal health risk—although this was not a significant environmental threat. DelAzulPestRisk is a screening assessment tool for water management purposes that become useful in countries lacking efficient water quality control systems.     

Does the Emperor Have Any Clothes: Using Mechanistic Information or Doing Houdini Risk Assessments?

Risk assessment research rarely quells controversy. Mega-mouse, and mega-rat, experiments contradicted a threshold for carcinogenesis, yet thresholds are still argued. High to low dose continuity of response from cigarette smoking to environmental tobacco smoke, and from occupational asbestos exposure to take-home asbestos, contradict thresholds in people. Nevertheless, mechanistic hypotheses allege “Houdini Risk Assessments”, which make risks disappear or allow industries to escape from protecting workers. Despite concerns for animal-to-human extrapolations, priority occupational exposures with sufficient or substantial evidence of carcinogenicity in people not addressed by new exposure limits include silica, sulfuric acid mist, chromates, diesel particulate matter, particulate matter generally, metalworking fluids, welding fume, and formaldehyde. “Houdini Risk Assessments” are exercises in “anti-hypothesis generation”: ignore selected tumor sites and types; ignore data from people (as with formaldehyde and diesel); choose the most resistant species in laboratory tests; select biochemical parameters in which the most resistant species resembles people; assume a mechanism that gives threshold or steep exposure response for carcinogenic effect; and reduce estimated people risk by the parameter ratio to the most resistant species. NORA research should focus on quantitative reconciliation of laboratory and epidemiology studies, and develop a counter “anti-hypothesis” generation research agenda for key exposure circumstances.     

Risk Assessment Applications Beyond Baseline Risks and Clean-Up Goals

Historically, the phrase “Risk Assessment” brought to mind a thick Superfund-type baseline risk assessment or clean-up goal derivation document filled with pages of tables with endless seemingly unrelated algorithms and numbers. Over the last decade, the principles of risk and exposure assessment have gained wide-reaching acceptance and are increasingly utilized to help solve other environmental impact, occupational health, or risk mitigation design problems. The typical objective of the classic risk assessment is the evaluation of current or future risks from exposure to contaminated media within the framework of a regulatory waste management or remediation program. Risk-based techniques are increasingly being used on a voluntary basis (i.e., outside of the standard regulatory arena) to demonstrate the presence, absence, or extent of environmental or health-related concerns in specific exposure circumstances. Likewise, a risk or exposure evaluation may be useful in determining the need for, or the legitimacy of, a public health advisory, alone or in conjunction with remedial or mitigative actions. Finally, risk-based techniques often find their way into the courtroom. Three case studies are presented in which riskbased solutions were employed to assist in resolving environmental or health-related issues: (1) a reversal of a fish consumption advisory; (2) an evaluation of arsenic in soil on and adjacent to a school facility; and (3) a challenge to a case of alleged methyl bromide exposure in a litigation context. In each case, the use of risk assessment principles was employed beyond the classic baseline risk assessment to address an applied problem of toxicological significance.     

11种常用农药对地熊蜂工蜂的毒性和风险评估

【目的】评估常用农药对地熊蜂Bombus terrestris的生态风险,为设施大棚合理施用农药提供科学依据。【方法】分别采用饲喂法和接触法测定了6种杀虫剂(虫螨腈、高效氯氟氰菊酯、氟吡呋喃酮、螺虫乙酯、异丙威和除虫脲)、3种杀螨剂(丁氟螨酯、唑螨酯和联苯肼酯)及2种杀菌剂(春雷霉素和啶酰菌胺)共11种常用农药对地熊蜂成年工蜂的急性经口和急性接触毒性,并评估其生态风险性。【结果】11种农药经饲喂法测定,对地熊蜂工蜂的急性经口毒性除高效氯氟氰菊酯、异丙威和虫螨腈为高毒,氟吡呋喃酮和唑螨酯为中毒外,其余药物均为低毒。经接触法测定,对地熊工蜂的急性接触毒性除高效氯氟氰菊酯和异丙威为高毒,虫螨腈为中毒外,其余药物均为低毒。生态风险评估表明,对地熊蜂工蜂而言,异丙威和高效氯氟氰菊酯的经口与接触毒性为中风险,氟吡呋喃酮、啶酰菌胺、除虫脲、唑螨酯、联苯肼酯、螺虫乙酯、春雷霉素、丁氟螨酯的经口与接触毒性为低风险;虫螨腈的经口毒性为中风险,接触毒性为低风险。【结论】在设施作物花期使用地熊蜂授粉时,建议禁用异丙威、高效氯氟氰菊酯和虫螨腈这3种存在中风险的农药,慎重使用氟吡呋喃酮和唑螨酯这2种农药,以避免对地熊蜂造成危害,而另外6种低毒农药可根据田间情况合理施用,并可采取通风晾晒、设置间隔期等方式降低农药对地熊蜂的生态风险。     

Risk Posed by Pesticides to Aquatic Organisms in Rivers of Northern Inland New South Wales,Australia

An ecological assessment was conducted to determine the risk posed by agricultural pesticides to inland rivers of north-west New South Wales (NSW), Australia. A preliminary screening of 30 pesticides provided a short-list of eight for further investigation (atrazine, chlorpyrifos, diuron, endosulfan, fluometuron, metolachlor, profenofos, prometryn). Selection was based on chemical characteristics, toxicity, detection frequencies and environmental concentrations. Hazard quotients were calculated for both spray and non-spray seasons. Where possible, hazard quotients were calculated for both acute and chronic exposures for crustaceans, insects, micro-organisms, molluscs, plants and vertebrates. Chlorpyrifos, endosulfan and profenofos posed a high hazard (HQ > 0.5). A probabilistic risk analysis indicated that chlorpyrifos, endosulfan and profenofos posed a risk from acute exposure during the spray season, while endosulfan also posed a risk from chronic exposure during the spray season. The risks posed by profenofos and chlorpyrifos were characterised by a low probability of detection, but these detections affected a high percentage of species. The risks posed by acute and chronic exposures of endosulfan were characterised by a high probability of detection, but only a limited number of these detections affected a high percentage of species. Risk during the non-spray season was not assessed, as the detection of pesticides was infrequent during this period.     

Risk analysis: an overview

Risk analysis increasingly is considered as an integral part of the environmental management decision-making process. Risk, defined as the probability of occurrence of a particular adverse effect on human health or the environment, should not be confounded with hazard, defined as a source of potential injury independent of occurrence. Risk analysis has to be followed by risk management. Some opponents of risk analysis make the reproach that the science used in risk analysis is immature and consequently that the entire process in laden with hidden value judgments. Attempts to overcome these critics are increasingly based on the use of robust biologic data the final considered values system being efficacy-based, efficiency-based or equity-based. Globalization has brought with it new problems, and there is an urgent need to improve risk analysts; to increase its public acceptability and to establish consensus regarding solutions to global environmental problems. In this context biologic-based models and biomarkers hold, the greatest promise for improving risk assessment. These considerations are illustrated by a few examples, also pertaining to low-dose extrapolation and to the problem of thresholds for carcinogenesis. Future directions for development are evoked.     

Breast cancer and the environment

The most recent estimate of the overall worldwide burden of cancer is that in the year 2000 more than 10 million new cancer cases occurred and approximately 6 million cancer deaths. Breast cancer accounts for about 1 in 10 cancers and is the most frequent cancer affecting women. Since 10% of all cancers in the world are breast cancer (only affecting half of the population as breast cancer almost exclusively concerns only women), it is being considered an epidemic. In terms of the absolute number of incident cases, breast cancer now ranks first not only in the industrialized world but also in the developing world. The worldwide mortality figure for the year 2000 was 370,000. However, there are marked geographical differences, with Africa and Asia currently having incidence rates some 10 times lower than those of North America and northern Europe. Studies of migrant populations have long indicated that the genetic background only plays a tiny, if any, role in these differences. Over time, clear increases have been seen in the global number of cases: from 572,000 in 1980 to 1,050,000 in 2000. This corresponds not only to a modest increase in incidence rates in countries with a long history of frequent breast cancer but also to marked increases in countries with previously low rates. The reasons for these increases are currently unexplained and a possible hypothesis relates to environmental factors. By contrast, in a number of countries in the western world mortality rates are stable, and, in the USA and the United Kingdom, even decreasing slightly. The aetiology of breast cancer has been the subject of hundreds of studies since the pioneering investigation of Lane Claypon in 1926. Risk factors belong to different domains: reproductive life, hormonal factors, diet, genetics (BRCA1, BRCA2) and exposure to radiation and selected chemicals. Yet, much breast cancer remains unexplained and new aetiological links must be sought such as occupational factors and exposure to pesticides and other endocrine disrupters. A recent international summit on breast cancer and the environment outlined the need for more research to be conducted into the effects of exposure in the vicinity of nuclear power plants or chemical landfill sites and, more generally, into contaminants in food, air, water and soil. This is particularly relevant in some parts of the world such as Africa.     

Review of chemical,physical, and toxicologic properties of components of total petroleum hydrocarbons

Risk is a function of exposure and hazard, and both aspects must be incorporated into sound risk assessment efforts. However, risk assessment for sites contaminated with petroleum products is complicated by a general lack of information relevant to exposure to and toxicity of petroleum mixtures (especially total petroleum hydrocarbons, or TPH). Specifically, there is often inadequate information about the components of the TPH present at the site and the physical and chemical properties and toxicities of these components. Such information is crucial to developing a strong conceptual model of exposure to and risk from petroleum hydrocarbons at contaminated sites. This article presents information that can be incorporated into risk assessments for sites contaminated with petroleum hydrocarbons.     

Pesticide Risk Perceptions,Knowledge, and Attitudes of Operators,Workers, and Residents: A Review of the Literature

The literature on the risk perceptions, knowledge levels, and attitudes of operators, workers, and residents in relation to non-dietary exposure to agricultural pesticides is reviewed. No literature was identified in relation to bystander exposure. Research has primarily been conducted on participants in developing countries and migrant workers in the United States. For operators and workers, illiteracy, poverty, and a perception that exposure to pesticides is an inevitable part of their work results in limited adoption of safety precautions while using and storing pesticides. As a result, risk communication activities aimed at operator and workers need to take account of the wider socioeconomic and cultural conditions in which workers and operators are working and living. There is less research focused on residents’ and bystanders’ perceptions, attitudes, and behaviors. The lack of European data in general, and residents’ and bystanders’ data in particular, represents a knowledge gap that is pertinent to emerging EU legislation requiring residents’ and bystanders’ inclusion in pesticide risk assessment. This review provides a comprehensive overview that can assist policy-makers, and risk communicators in the development of targeted training and awareness-raising material for operators, workers, bystanders, and residents. Areas for future research are suggested.     

The practice of health risk assessment in the united states (1975–1995): How the U.S. and other countries can benefit from that experience

The process of quantitatively predicting the likelihood of an adverse response in humans or wildlife due to exposure to one or more chemicals is collectively known as environmental risk assessment. Quantitative risk assessment has been practiced in the United States and Canada for nearly 20 years and is the basis for most environmental and many occupational health regulations in North America. However, only since 1990 has it begun to receive serious consideration in Europe, Australia, Asia, and other regions. This paper reviews the historical evolution of health risk assessment in the United States and the scientific shortcomings in the process that have been introduced due to various regulatory policies. Despite these limitations and the reluctance of some countries to implement risk‐based policies, risk assessment will undoubtedly grow in importance within the international arena as other countries search for an ideal balance between cost and risk reduction. With the emergence of risk analysis as an international tool for understanding environmental issues, several improvements to the risk assessment process are recommended here that the United States and other countries could immediately incorporate into hazard identification, dose‐response and exposure assessments, and risk characterization. Examples of these improvements include use of a weight‐of‐evidence approach, physiologically‐based pharmacokinetic (PB‐PK) modelling, Monte Carlo techniques, and uncertainty analyses. These recommendations could, if coupled with an understanding of the historical experience in the United States, lead to superior environmental risk assessment policies for all countries as they enter the 21st century.     

Extrapolation for Terrestrial Vertebrates

Risk assessment for terrestrial birds and mammals is most usually conducted for pesticides in standardized systems based on results of limited tests required for regulatory approval. Increasingly, attempts at risk assessment are being made for other chemicals. Typically for pesticides, dietary tests are extrapolated to a few representative species and risk factors derived as ratios against modeled environmental concentrations. There has been criticism of the validity of some of the standard tests, which makes even this simple approach difficult to justify. Attempts have been made to extrapolate from those values considered more reliable using statistical approaches. Relative sensitivity of test species has been determined. However, reliable extrapolation from laboratory to field remains elusive. Statistically derived values from test results probably generate extremely conservative estimates of environmental no-effect levels. Substantial information on the biology, distribution and food preference of species has, thus far, barely been applied to risk assessment. Other promising approaches, such as species differences in metabolic capacity, population dynamics models, and even sublethal effects on reproductive or behavioural endpoints, cannot in themselves provide simple risk factors either. A simple approach to generate approximate or relative risk factors is explored. While the accumulation of a set of circumstantial evidence might not be regarded as risk assessment in the normal sense, it might offer us a means to extrapolate to a reasonable understanding of likely effects in the field and contribute to a weight-of-evidence approach that informs risk management. It also focuses further studies to those areas and species within the environment most likely to be adversely affected     

Analytical methods for biological monitoring of exposure to pesticides: a review

Synthetic pesticides have been used since in the early to mid twentieth century. In the US alone, over 800 pesticide active ingredients are formulated in about 21,000 different commercial products. Although many public health benefits have been realized by the use of pesticides, their potential impact on the environment and public health is substantial. For risk assessment studies, exposure assessment is an integral component, which has unfortunately, often been weak or missing. In the past several decades, researchers have proposed to fill these missing data gaps using biological monitoring of specific markers related to exposures. In this paper, we present a review of existing analytical methodology for the biological monitoring of exposure to pesticides. We also present a critical assessment of the existing methodology and explore areas in which more research is needed.     

Risk assessment of neurotoxic pesticides

In order to establish safe exposure levels for toxic chemicals, risk assessment guidelines have been developed. A compilation is given by the author on the elements of risk assessment of hazardous neurotoxic pesticides, using data obtained from human epidemiological studies, from animal experiments, from the international literature and from the author's own experiments as well. Well-controlled laboratory studies of neurotoxicity have the potential to provide adequate exposure and effect data for accurate hazard identification. Animal models of neurotoxicity as highly sensitive behavioral and neurophysiological methods as a function of doses, provide data for human low dose extrapolation by using mathematical models. This procedure might be the basis for reducing risk ("risk management"), therefore some examples are given, how to handle properly neurotoxic pesticides with different- high or low-risk.     

Use of in vivo genetic toxicity data for risk assessment

Mutagenicity studies have been used to identify specific agents as potential carconogens or other human health hazards; however, they have been used minimally for risk assessment or in determining permissible levels of human exposure. The poor predictive value of in vitro mutagenesis tests for carcinogenic activity and a lack of mechanistic understanding of the roles of mutagens in the induction of specific cancers have made these tests unattractive for the purpose of risk assessment. However, the limited resources available for carcinogen testing and large number of chemicals which need to be evaluated necessitate the incorporation of more efficient methods into the evaluation process. In vivo genetic toxicity testing can be recommended for this purpose because in vivo assays incorporate the metabolic activation pathways that are relevant to humans. We propose the use of a multiple end-point in vivo comprehensive testing protocol (CTP) using rodents. Studies using sub-acute exposure to low levels of test agents by routes consistent with human exposure can be a useful adjunct to methods currently used to provide data for risk assessment. Evaluations can include metabolic and pharmacokinetic endpoints, in addition to genetic toxicity studies, in order to provide a comprehensive examination of the mechanism of toxicity of the agent. A parallelogram approach can be used to estimate effects in non-accessible human tissues by using data from accessible human tissues and analogous tissues in animals. A categorical risk assessment procedure can be used which would consider, in order of priority, genetic damage in man, genetic damage in animals that is highly relevant to disease outcome (mutation, chromosome damage), and data from animals that is of less certain relevance to disease. Action levels of environmental exposure would be determined based on the lowest observed effect levels or the highest observed no effect levels, using sub-acute low level exposure studies in rodents. As an example, the known genotoxic effects of benzene exposure at low levels in man and animals are discussed. The lowest observed genotoxic effects were observed at about 1–10 parts per million for man and 0.04–0.1 parts per million in subacute animal studies. If genetic toxicity is to achieve a prominent role in evaluating carcinogens and characterizing germ-cell mutagens, minimal testing requirements must be established to ascertain the risk associated with environmental mutagen exposure. The use of the in vivo approach described here should provide the information needed to meet this goal. In addition, it should allow truly epigenetic or non-genotoxic carcinogens to be distinguished from the genotoxic carcinogens that are not detected by in vitro methods.     

Downscaling Pest Risk Analyses: Identifying Current and Future Potentially Suitable Habitats for Parthenium hysterophorus with Particular Reference to Europe and North Africa

Pest Risk Assessments (PRAs) routinely employ climatic niche models to identify endangered areas. Typically, these models consider only climatic factors, ignoring the ‘Swiss Cheese’ nature of species ranges due to the interplay of climatic and habitat factors. As part of a PRA conducted for the European and Mediterranean Plant Protection Organization, we developed a climatic niche model for Parthenium hysterophorus, explicitly including the effects of irrigation where it was known to be practiced. We then downscaled the climatic risk model using two different methods to identify the suitable habitat types: expert opinion (following the EPPO PRA guidelines) and inferred from the global spatial distribution. The PRA revealed a substantial risk to the EPPO region and Central and Western Africa, highlighting the desirability of avoiding an invasion by P. hysterophorus. We also consider the effects of climate change on the modelled risks. The climate change scenario indicated the risk of substantial further spread of P. hysterophorus in temperate northern hemisphere regions (North America, Europe and the northern Middle East), and also high elevation equatorial regions (Western Brazil, Central Africa, and South East Asia) if minimum temperatures increase substantially. Downscaling the climate model using habitat factors resulted in substantial (approximately 22–53%) reductions in the areas estimated to be endangered. Applying expert assessments as to suitable habitat classes resulted in the greatest reduction in the estimated endangered area, whereas inferring suitable habitats factors from distribution data identified more land use classes and a larger endangered area. Despite some scaling issues with using a globally conformal Land Use Systems dataset, the inferential downscaling method shows promise as a routine addition to the PRA toolkit, as either a direct model component, or simply as a means of better informing an expert assessment of the suitable habitat types.     

Software Review of Risk*Assistant (Version 1.1) and RiskEZ (Version 1), both for Windows

RiskEZ and Risk*Assistant both make site risk assessment more accessible to many users and provide a relatively efficient means for performing screening level risk assessments. The programs perform basic site risk assessment calcu lations for users and provide point estimates of incremental individual cancer risks and non cancer hazard quotients following standard Environmental Pro tection Agency risk assessment guidance documents. Risk*Assistant allows the user to input raw data from which it can perform some dispersion modeling and calculate exposure point concentrations, while RiskEZ takes the exposure point concentrations as inputs. RiskEZ includes features that allow multiple network users to work on the same site and to deal with radioactive contami nants as well as chemical ones, while Risk*Assistant limits access to a site to one user at a time and it includes non radioactive substances. Neither program currently has the capability to perform probabilistic risk analyses, although Risk*Assistant allows the user to peform some sensitivity analysis. This review highlights differences between the programs and demonstrates how selection of a particular program might influence the results.