• 한국지하수토양환경학회지:지하수토양환경
• /
• 제16권1호
• /
• pp.32-41
• /
• 2011

By using a newly developed Korean risk-based corrective action (K-RBCA) software (K-RBCA) and the RBCA Tool Kit, risk assessment was performed on a site that was contaminated with aromatic hydrocarbons and heavy metals. Eight chemicals including benzene, ethylbenzene, xylenes, naphthalene, benz(a) anthracene, benzo(b) fluoranthene, benzo(a) pyrene, and arsenic that exceeded the US EPA Soil Screening Level were chosen as the target pollutants. A conceptual site model was constructed based on the site-specific effective exposure pathways. According to the RBCA Tool Kit the carcinogenic risk of arsenic was larger than $10^{-6}$, which is the generally acceptable carcinogenic risk level. The K-RBCA estimated the same level of carcinogenic risk for arsenic. With the RBCA Tool Kit, the carcinogenic risk of benzo(a) pyrene was estimated to be about $1.3{\times}10^{-6}$. However, with the K-RBCA benzo(a) pyrene did not exhibit any risk. The inconsistency between the softwares was attributed to the different fundamental settings (i.e., medium division) between the two softwares. While the K-RBCA divides medium into surface soil, subsurface soil, and groundwater, the RBCA Tool Kit divides medium into only soil and groundwater. These differences lead to the different exposure pathways used by the two softwares. The K-RBCA considers the exposure pathways in surface soil and subsurface soil separately to estimate risk, however, the RBCA Tool Kit considers the surface soil and subsurface soil as one and uses the integrated exposure pathways to estimate risk. Thus the resulting risk is higher when the RBCA Tool Kit is used than when the K-RBCA is used. The results from this study show that there is no significant difference in the risks estimated by the two softwares, thus, it is reasonable to use the K-RBCA we developed in risk assessment of soil and groundwater. In addition, the present study demonstrates that the assessor should be familiar with the characteristics of a contaminated site and the assumptions used by a risk assessment software when carrying out risk assessment.

• 생약학회지
• /
• 제53권3호
• /
• pp.170-180
• /
• 2022

Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons(PAHs) contents were analyzed by measuring benz(a)anthracene(BaA), chrysene(Chr), benzo(b)fluoranthene(BbF) and benzo(a)pyrene(BaP), and the related risk characterization was conducted for 113 samples out of 14 different agricultural products used for food and medicine. Detection rate of PAHs was 90.3% as a whole, and the highest one was 80.5% for BaP. The detection rate of BaP exceeding the maximum permitted concentration of Rehmanniae Radix Preparata and Rehmanniae Radix, 5.0 ㎍/kg was 1.8%, and the detection rates of BaA, Chr and BbF were within the range of 2.7~10.6%. The highest average concentration of BaA was 3.41 ㎍/kg detected from Lycii Fructus, while those of Chr, BbF, BaP and PAH4(sum of detected BaA, Chr, BbF and BaP) were 5.00, 1.79, 2.36, 12.36 ㎍/kg, respectively, detected from Rehmanniae Radix Preparata. As for the risk characterization on PAHs, the overall MOE(Margin of Exposure) values were measured within the range of 10⁵~10⁷, which is unlikely to cause direct health concerns, but the worring values of MOE were measured 6.57×10⁴ for BaP and 6.10×10⁴ for PAH4 from Rehmanniae Radix Preparata, which may require an improvement plan to reduce BaP contents.