RESEARCH PAPER
Tiered risk assessment of chemical pollution caused by military activities
More details
Hide details
1
National Academy of the Ground Forces, Kiev, Ukraine
Online publication date: 2016-12-30
Publication date: 2016-12-30
Security and Defence Quarterly 2016;13(4):79-97
KEYWORDS
ABSTRACT
The methodology of environmental risk is becoming more common to assess the impact
of chemical pollution on human beings and the environment, providing information for
making environmental remediation decisions. This article examines the impact on human
health chemicals that penetrated into river water as a result of an accident at a military
ammunition depot. The river is the source of drinking water for the population. Assessing
the impact of chemicals on the health of adults, adolescents and children is carried out
in stages (tiers), from simple to complex. Assessment is carried out both for carcinogenic
and non-carcinogenic substances. The first tier is executed by a deterministic method –
a method in which all biological, chemical, physical, and environmental parameters are
assumed to be constant and can be accurately specified. Deterministic methods commonly
apply to either a “most likely” value for a parameter, or a conservative value. When the
obtained values are insufficient for making the decision, the second tier of a risk assessment
begins. The values in this case have the form of probability distributions that determine
their variability. Processing the risk model with the help of the one-dimensional Monte
Carlo method gives more accurate data in the form of risk distribution. However, the
method does not consider the lack of knowledge about the values of input variables, so, at
the third tier of a risk assessment, the two-dimensional Monte Carlo method is used. In this
case, the specifi ed values of risk look like trend charts and indicate the limits of probability
of risk for a certain percentage of the population.
REFERENCES (12)
2.
Cullen A. C. Probabilistic techniques in exposure assessment. A handbook for dealing with variability and uncertainty in models and inputs / Alison C. Cullen, H. Christopher Frey - New York, NY: Plenum, 1999. - 335 р.
3.
EPA 540-R-02-002. Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund: Process for Conducting Probabilistic Risk Assessment. Vol. III. Part A. Washington, DC, 2001. -
http://www.epa.gov/superfund/R....
4.
EPA/100/B-04/001. An Examination of EPA Risk Assessment Principles And Practices. - Washington, DC: EPA, 2004. - 193 p.
5.
EPA/540/1-89/002. Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund: Human Health Evaluation Manual. Part A. Interim Final. Washington, DC, 1989. -
http://www.epa.gov/ower/riskas... ragsa/index.htm.
8.
Guidance for use of probabilistic analysis in human health risk assessments. Portland, Oreg. DEQ, 1998 158 рр.
9.
Human and Ecological Risk Assessment: Theory and Practice Dennis J. Paustenbach (Ed.). - New York, NY: Wiley, 2002. - 1586 p.
10.
J. Solarz Сhemical contamination – typology of threats. NDU Scientific Quarterly no 4(93) 2013 р. 207-223. doi:10.5604/08672245.1157066.
11.
S.I. Azarov, V.I. Palamarchuk, V.L. Sydorenko. Risk assessment for population, which uses drinkable water after accident on an ammunition depot. Transactions of Kremenchuk Mykhailo Ostrohradskyi national university No 5 (64) pt.1 2010 p. 141–144 (in Ukrainian).
12.
WHO human health risk assessment toolkit: chemical hazards. - Geneva: WHO Press, 2010. - 105 p.