Skip to Main Content
Skip Nav Destination
ASTM Selected Technical Papers
Superfund Risk Assessment in Soil Contamination Studies: Third Volume
By
K Hoddinott
K Hoddinott
1
U.S. Army Center for Health Promotion and Preventive Medicine
Aberdeen Proving Ground,
MD
;
Symposium Chairman and STP editor
Search for other works by this author on:
ISBN-10:
0-8031-2484-8
ISBN:
978-0-8031-2484-4
No. of Pages:
162
Publisher:
ASTM International
Publication date:
1998

Hazard or ‘risk’ quotients are commonly used to characterize the risk to ecological receptors at Superfund sites. A risk quotient is the ratio of an estimated exposure level (concentration or dose) to an effects threshold level (concentration or dose). Ecological hazard quotients can be formulated and interpreted in probabilistic terms. The numerator of the ratio is the exposure corresponding to the maximum allowable risk to the receptor at the site. Given a distribution of exposures at a site, the specified exposure level defines the maximum acceptable probability that a receptor experiences unacceptable harm, i.e., maximum acceptable risk. The exposure level at Superfund sites is frequently specified by regulators to be that corresponding to the upper 95th confidence limit on the mean concentration. The denominator of the ratio is the exposure corresponding to the dose causing the maximum allowable adverse effect on the receptor. Given a distribution of exposures at a site, the effects threshold defines the actual probability that the receptor is exposed to levels greater than the threshold, i.e., actual risk. The effects threshold at Superfund sites is frequently required by regulators to be that corresponding to the no effect level. This formulation of ecological hazard quotients clarifies the meaning of the quotient and highlights the importance of the exposure level and effects thresholds specified by regulators. This paper also discusses the relationship between this probabilistic interpretation of risk quotients and probabilistic exposure modeling, e.g., Monte Carlo simulation.

1.
Barnthouse
,
L.W.
,
Suter
,
G.W.
,
Bartell
,
S.M.
,
Beauchamp
,
J.J.
,
Gardner
,
R.H.
,
Linder
,
E.
,
O'Neill
,
R.V.
, and
Rosen
,
A.E.
,
1986
.
Users Manual for Ecological Risk Assessment
, Publ. No. 2679, ORNL-6251,
Environmental Sciences Division, Oak Ridge National Laboratory
,
Oak Ridge, Tn
.
2.
EPA
,
1992
,
Framework for Ecological Risk Assessment
, EPA/630/R- 92/001, Risk Assessment Forum,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
,
Washington, D.C.
3.
Hoffmann
,
F.O.
and
Hammands
,
J.S.
,
1994
, “
Propagation of Uncertainty in Risk Assessments: The Need to Distinguish Between Uncertainty Due to Lack of Knowledge and Uncertainty Due to Variability
”,
Risk Analysis
 0272-4332. Vol.
14
, pp. 707D717.
4.
Ross
,
S.
1984
.
A First Course in Probability
. Second Edit.
Macmillian Publishing Co.
,
NY
.
5.
Ross
,
S.
1985
.
Introduction to Probability Models
.
Academic Press, Inc.
,
Orlando, Fl
.
6.
Wentsel
,
R.S.
,
La Point
,
T.W.
,
Simini
,
M.
,
Checkai
,
R.T.
,
Ludwig
,
D.
, and
Brewer
L. W.
1996
.
Tri-Service Procedural Guidelines for Ecological Risk Assessments
, ERDEC-TR-221,
Edgewood Research Development & Engineering Center
, Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD.
This content is only available via PDF.
You do not currently have access to this chapter.
Close Modal

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal