Improving Risk-Based Screening at Vapor Intrusion Sites in California

被引:10
|
作者
Lahvis, Matthew A. [1 ]
Ettinger, Robert A. [2 ]
机构
[1] Shell Global Solut US Inc, 3333 Highway 6 South, Houston, TX 77082 USA
[2] 924 Anacapa St 4a, Santa Barbara, CA 93101 USA
来源
关键词
Screening - Indoor air pollution - Environmental Protection Agency;
D O I
10.1111/gwmr.12450
中图分类号
TV21 [水资源调查与水利规划];
学科分类号
081501 ;
摘要
The attenuation factor (AF) of 0.03 recommended by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) is increasingly being used by regulatory agencies for the development of subsurface vapor screening levels for vapor intrusion (VI). There are concerns, however, over the database used to derive the AF and the AF's applicability to building types and geographies not included in USEPA database. To derive a more technically defensible AF for subsurface vapor screening in California, a database consisting of 8415 paired indoor and subsurface vapor samples collected from 485 buildings at 36 sites in California was compiled. Filtering was applied to remove data of suspect quality that were potentially affected by background (non-VI) sources. Filtering reduced the size of the database to 788 indoor air and subsurface vapor pairs, 80% of which were trichloroethylene (TCE) measurements. An AF of 0.0008 was derived from only TCE vapor data, based on the ability of the AF to reliably identify buildings with indoor air concentrations above screening levels in 95% of cases where subsurface vapor screening levels were exceeded. The AF derived from this study demonstrated limited sensitivity to the variables typically considered important in VI characterization, which was partially attributed to relatively weak correlation of indoor air and subsurface vapor concentration data. The results of this study can be used to improve VI screening in California and other states and help focus limited resources on sites posing the greatest potential risk.
引用
收藏
页码:73 / 86
页数:14
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Application of Risk-Based Cancer Screening in Patients With Dermatomyositis
    Stone, Caroline J.
    Faden, Daniella Forman
    Xie, Lillian
    Gomes, Lais Lopes Almeida
    Hejazi, Emily Z.
    Werth, Victoria P.
    Shaw, Katharina S.
    JAMA DERMATOLOGY, 2024, 160 (11) : 1248 - 1251
  • [32] Risk-Based Prostate Cancer Screening: Who and How?
    Glass, Allison S.
    Cary, K. Clint
    Cooperberg, Matthew R.
    CURRENT UROLOGY REPORTS, 2013, 14 (03) : 192 - 198
  • [33] Risk-Based Approaches to Breast Cancer Screening in China
    Pace, Lydia E.
    JAMA NETWORK OPEN, 2022, 5 (11)
  • [34] Risk-Based Prostate Cancer Screening: Who and How?
    Allison S. Glass
    K. Clint Cary
    Matthew R. Cooperberg
    Current Urology Reports, 2013, 14 : 192 - 198
  • [35] Risk-Based Screening for Thyroid Dysfunction during Pregnancy
    Ohashi, Masanao
    Furukawa, Seishi
    Michikata, Kaori
    Kai, Katsuhide
    Sameshima, Hiroshi
    Ikenoue, Tsuyomu
    JOURNAL OF PREGNANCY, 2013, 2013
  • [36] Risk-based recommendations for mammographic screening for women in their forties
    Gail, M
    Rimer, B
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 1998, 16 (09) : 3105 - 3114
  • [37] Risk-based oral cancer screening — lessons to be learnt
    Anil K. D’Cruz
    Richa Vaish
    Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology, 2021, 18 : 471 - 472
  • [38] Risk-Based Policies for Airport Security Checkpoint Screening
    McLay, Laura A.
    Lee, Adrian J.
    Jacobson, Sheldon H.
    TRANSPORTATION SCIENCE, 2010, 44 (03) : 333 - 349
  • [39] Risk-based grouping for checked baggage screening systems
    Nie, Xiaofeng
    RELIABILITY ENGINEERING & SYSTEM SAFETY, 2011, 96 (11) : 1499 - 1506
  • [40] Risk-Based lung cancer screening: A systematic review
    Toumazis, Iakovos
    Bastani, Mehrad
    Han, Summer S.
    Plevritis, Sylvia K.
    LUNG CANCER, 2020, 147 : 154 - 186