Abstract
Community, state, and federal approaches to conventional and cumulative risk assessment (CRA) were described and compared to assess similarities and differences, and develop recommendations for a consistent CRA approach, acceptable across each level as a rigorous scientific methodology, including partnership formation and solution development as necessary practices. Community, state, and federal examples were described and then summarized based on their adherence to CRA principles of: (1) planning, scoping, and problem formulation; (2) risk analysis and ranking, and (3) risk characterization, interpretation, and management. While each application shared the common goal of protecting human health and the environment, they adopted different approaches to achieve this. For a specific project-level analysis of a particular place or instance, this may be acceptable, but to ensure long-term applicability and transferability to other projects, recommendations for developing a consistent approach to CRA are provided. This approach would draw from best practices, risk assessment and decision analysis sciences, and historical lessons learned to provide results in an understandable and accepted manner by all entities. This approach is intended to provide a common ground around which to develop CRA methods and approaches that can be followed at all levels.