[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 111 (Tuesday, July 11, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Page S9649]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                     PRINCIPLES FOR RISK ASSESSMENT

  Mr. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I want to talk briefly about the matter 
that is currently before this body, regulatory reform.
  Very briefly, we have been reviewing some of the principles 
associated with regulatory reform. I would like to talk a little bit 
about risk assessment this morning and some guidelines for which the 
applicability of risk assessment should be used, and why it can be 
very, very helpful as we address the responsibility of determining 
which policies make sense and which policies are redundant and costly 
and inefficient.
  If we establish principles for risk assessment, some of the bases for 
evaluation should include the following:
  First, the use of sound science and analysis as the basis for 
conclusions about risk.
  Second, to use the appropriate level of detail for any analysis.
  Third, to use postulates, or assumptions, only when actual data is 
not available.
  Fourth, to not express risk as a single, high-end estimate that uses 
the worst-case scenario.
  I think we have all heard horror stories about various cases where 
applications are promoted and promulgated, and over an extended period 
of time, when much expenditure has taken place in evaluating the 
prospects for a particular approval, we find that the agency has 
evaluated under a worst-case basis. If we, in our daily lives, were to 
make our decisions based on a worst-case scenario, we probably would 
not get out of bed in the morning. As a consequence, to reach that kind 
of an evaluation is clearly misleading, in many cases, to the applicant 
that never would have proceeded with a request for approval from the 
various agencies if the applicant had assumed that the agency would 
come down to the worst-case basis.
  Oftentimes the agency will follow a particular line to reach a worst-
case basis, and after expending a great deal of money and time, they 
look at another alternative, but only at the conclusion of reaching a 
worst-case scenario. So there are other opportunities that should be 
pursued with regard to that.
  Further, some of the other principles for risk assessment would 
require comparing the risk to others that people encounter every day to 
place it in a perspective. I could speak at some length on that, but I 
think that is obvious to all of us.
  Further, to describe the new or substitute risks that will be created 
if the risk in question is regulated.
  Use independent and external peer review to evaluate risk results.
  Finally, to provide appropriate opportunities for public 
participation.
  So what we are talking about here is improved risk assessment, which 
helps the homeowners, farmer, small business, taxpayers, consumers--all 
Americans. To conclude, risk reduction equals benefit.
  I thank the Chair and yield the floor.
  

                          ____________________