Title Page
Abstract
Acknowledgments
Table of Contents

1.0 Introduction

2.0 Literature Review

3.0 Model Framework

4.0 Scenarios

5.0 Qualitative Analysis

6.0 Recommendations

7.0 References

Appendix A

Table of Contents

1.0 Introduction

2.0 Literature Review

3.0 Model Framework

4.0 CCEF Scenarios and Gap Analysis

5.0 Qualitative Analysis

6.0 Recommendations for Future Research in Micro-Environmental Modeling

7.0 CCEF Scenarios and Gap Analysis References

Appendix A

Figures

• Figure 1.3 Abstract Example of the Linkage Between Different Types of Framework Life-Cycle Ribbons
• Figure 1.3.1 Schematic Illustrating the Linkage of Models in FRAMES Using its Drag & Drop User Interface
• Figure 1.3.2 Design of a Module
• Figure 3.4.1 Task and Sequence Manager Diagram
• Figure 3.4.2.1 Illustrative Example of Linking Models Together into a Standard Risk Paradigm, using the 3MRA-HWIR Assessment Methodology
• Figure 3.4.2.2 Example Illustrating the Linkage of a Microenvironmental Model with a Standard Fate and Transport Modeling Scenario
• Figure 3.4.3 CCEF Design Relationships between Linkages and Model Servers, Host Client and Remote Database and Model
• Figure 3.5.1Traditional and Nontraditional Approach for Linking Models Together
• Figure 3.5.2 Using Annual Telephone Books to Illustrate the Concept of Backward Compatibility
• Figure 3.4.2.1 Illustrative Example of Linking Models Together into a Standard Risk Paradigm, using the 3MRA-HWIR Assessment Methodology
• Figure 3.4.2.2 Example Illustrating the Linkage of a Microenvironmental Model with a Standard Fate and Transport Modeling Scenario
• Figure 3.4.1 Task and Sequence Manager Diagram
• Figure 4.1.1 Life Stages For Exposure Scenarios
• Figure 4.2.1 Life Stages For Exposure Scenario 1
• Figure 4.2.2 Illustration Depicting The Setting For Exposure Scenario 1 In Study
• Figure 4.2.3 CCEF Model Flow Diagram Scenario 1
• Figure 4.3.1 Life Stages For Exposure Scenario 2
• Figure 4.3.2  Illustration Depicting The Setting For Exposure Scenario 2 In Study
• Figure 4.3.3 CCEF Model Flow Diagram Scenario 2
• Figure 4.4.1 Life Stages For Exposure Scenario 3
• Figure 4.4.2  Illustration Depicting The Setting For Exposure Scenario 3 In Study
• Figure 4.4.3 CCEF Model Flow Diagram Scenario 3
• Figure 4.5.1 Life Stages For Exposure Scenario 4
• Figure 4.5.2  Illustration Depicting The Setting For Exposure Scenario 4 In Study
• Figure 4.5.3 CCEF Model Flow Diagram Scenario 4
• Figure 4.6.1 Exposure of Compound A (2-BE on ceiling strips) to fetus via mother
• Figure 4.6.2 Exposure of Compound A (2-BE on ceiling strips) to newborn (or nursing infant) directly and via mother through nursing
• Figure 4.6.3 Exposure of Compound A (2-BE on ceiling strips) to non-nursing infant/toddler/child
• Figure 4.6.4 Exposure of Compound B (ethylene glycol) to fetus via mother
• Figure 4.6.5 Exposure of Compound B (ethylene glycol) to newborn (or nursing infant) directly and via mother through milk
• Figure 4.6.6 Exposure of Compound B (ethylene glycol in latex paint) to non-nursing infant/toddler/child
• Figure 4.6.7 Exposure of Compound C (DEHP or BBP or DINP) to newborn (or nursing infant) directly and via mother through milk
• Figure 4.6.8 Exposure of Compound C (DEHP or BBP or DINP) to newborn (or nursing infant) directly and via mother through milk
• Figure 4.6.9 Exposure of Compound C (BBP) to non-nursing infant/toddler/child
• Figure 4.6.10 Exposure of Compound C (DEHP) to non-nursing infant/toddler/child
• Figure 4.6.11 Exposure of Compound C (DINP) to non-nursing infant/toddler/child
• Figure 4.6.12 Occupational exposure of VOC Compound Group D (benzene, toluene, n-hexane) to adult male compounding solvent-based adhesive
• Figure 4.6.13Exposure of Father to Compound A (2-BE on ceiling strips), B (ethylene glycol in paint) & E (MTBE) Metabolite: Butoxyacetic Acid
• Figure 4.6.14Exposure of Father to Compound A (2-BE on ceiling strips), B (ethylene glycol in paint) & E (MTBE) Metabolites: Glycolic Acid and Oxalic Acid
• FigureExposure of Father to Compound A (2-BE on ceiling strips), B (ethylene glycol in paint) & E (MTBE) Metabolite: Tertiary Butyl Alchohol
• Figure A1.1 Communication between Models using DICtionary Files
• Figure A2.1 Schematic Illustrating the Linkages Between a S/U Module and a Database Supplying Statistical Data, the CCEF CSM with Linked Modules, and a Module that Analyzes the S/U Output
• Figure A2.2 Schematic Highlighting the Components of a "Hard-Wired" S/U Module and its Relationships to the System
• Figure A2.2 Schematic Highlighting the Components of a User-Defined S/U Module and its Relationships to the System
• Figure A3.3.1 Illustrative Example of Producing and Consuming Model Boundary Condition Nodes and Associated Polygon Areas
• Figure A3.3.2 Illustrative Example of API Procedure for Overlapping Producing and Consuming Model Grid System Boundary Interface Polygons
• Figure 3.4.1 Illustrative Example Procedure for Calculating the Mass Flux Rate Curve for a Consuming Polygon from two Overlapping Producing Polygons
• Figure A5.1 Schematic Illustrating the LInkage of Three Databases to a Model: National, Regional, and Site-Specific
• Figure A5.2.1 CCEF Design Relationships between Linkages and Model Servers, Host Client and Remote Database and Model
• Figure A5.2.2 Interaction between the DOT, DET and DCE
• Figure A5.3.1 GIS Site-Specific Overlays used for HWIR {After Whelan and Laniak 1998;RTI 1998}
• Figure A5.3.2 Example Illustrating the Linkage of an Existing GIS to the CCEF Needing Spacial Information
• Figure A5.3.3 User-Defined Pictorial Illustration of a GIS-based CSM identifying Well and Air Population-Usage Locations, Sources, Water Bodies, Farms, Aquifers, Watersheds, and Ecological Habitats
• Figure A5.3.4 Illustration of Using a Background Map to Facilitate the Identification of Polygons, Lines and Points
• Figure A5.3.5 Use of the GIS as a Visualization Tool to Summarize Time Varying Results at Specific Locations
• Figure A5.3.6 Use of the GIS as a Visualization Tool to Summarize Spacially Varying Results at a Point in Time.
• Figure A5.3.7 Example Illustrating a Simple Drag & Drop Pictorial of the GIS Module Linked to Other Models Needing Spacial Information, Including Inter-Model DIC Requirements

Tables

• Table 2.1.1 Framework Risk Assessment and Methods
• Table 2.1.2 Source, Fate & Transport
• Table 2.1.3 Exposure and Impacts
• Table 2.1.4 Databases
• Table 2.2.1 Chemical-Specific PBPK Models for Dose to Embryo/Fetus
• Table 2.2.2 Chemical-Specific Biologically Based Dose-Response Models for Pregnancy
• Table 2.2.3 Chemical-Specific PBPK Models for Neonatal Exposure via Lactation
• Table 2.2.4 Basic Biology Data Useful in PBPK Model Development
• Table 2.2.5 General Models and Dosimetry Considerations Useful in PBPK Model Development
• Table 2.2.6 Reviews of PK/PD in Developmental Toxicology
• Table 2.2.7 Role for kinetics/dosimetry in Children’s Health Issues
• Table 2.2.8 PD Models of the Endocrine System
• Table 2.2.9 Dose-Response Modeling for Endocrine Active Compounds
• Table 2.2.10 Metabolizing Enzymes as a Function of Age or Gestational Development (Reviews)
• Table 2.2.11 Standard Kinetics during Pregnancy or Lactation (only selected articles from a large database captured during PBPK searches)
• Table 5.1 Qualitative Ranking of Model Elements for Source and Transport Based on their Relative Contribution to Total Uncertainty (highest uncertainty listed first) and Research Need
• Table 6.2.1 Table of priority analysis conducted to produce a high, medium, and low scale for each model, database, and algorithm identified in the Gap and Sensitivity Analyses.

Go to this page, and click print on your browser to print the complete document.

Go to this page, and click print on your browser to print the complete PDF document.