SC415 UNIT 8: Example Case Study

Risk Assessment
River Valley Industrial Complex
The River Valley Industrial Complex operated as a circuit board manufacturing facility from 1965 to 2005 in
a semi-rural area bordering an ecologically significant river system. This 15-acre site, located just half a
mile from residential neighborhoods, was once a thriving hub of electronic component production. The
complex employed specialized manufacturing processes including metal plating, degreasing, and chemical
etching techniques that, while standard for the industry at the time, involved the use of numerous
hazardous chemicals to include chromium and trichloroethylene (TCE)

Following the facility's closure in 2005, the property remained largely abandoned. Local residents began
reporting concerns about potential contamination. Reports were received by the EPA that certain health
conditions such as respiratory tract caners and contact dermatitis had increased in the area along with
reports of fewer fish and wildlife such as amphibians, herons, and river otters along certain parts of the
river. Residents also reported the occasional chemical odor when the wind blew a certain way.

The growing number of these reports prompted regulatory authorities to commission comprehensive
environmental sampling in 2023. The investigation revealed significant soil and groundwater contamination
with heavy metals (particularly chromium and lead) and chlorinated solvents, including trichloroethylene
(TCE).

The 2023 environmental sampling confirmed soil concentrations of hexavalent chromium ranging from 2.5
to 45 mg/kg, which significantly exceeds the regulatory standard for residential soil. Lead contamination
was also discovered, with levels between 25 and 80 mg/kg in river sediment. Additionally, TCE
concentrations up to 25 μg/L were detected in groundwater samples, well above aquatic life protection
thresholds. And tissue samples from fish taken from the river were found to have chromium levels
averaging 2.5 mg/kg and lead levels of 3.0 mg/kg.

With over 2,500 residents within a one-mile radius and a sensitive river ecosystem adjacent to the site,
environmental health officials initiated detailed risk assessments to evaluate potential threats to both
human health and ecological systems.

SC415 UNIT 8: Example Risk Assessment:

Site Overview:
The River Valley Industrial Complex: A former manufacturing facility operated from 1965-2005, producing
electronic components. The 15-acre site has documented soil and groundwater contamination with heavy
metals (primarily chromium and lead) and chlorinated solvents, including trichlorethylene (TCE). The site is
located 0.5 miles from a residential area and adjacent to a river system where there are over 2500
residents within a one-mile radius. These contaminants pose potential risks to terrestrial and aquatic
ecosystems adjacent to the site. The nearby river system serves a critical habitat for fish, amphibians,
aquatic invertebrates, and riparian vegetation.
Environmental Health Risk Assessment:
The following health risk assessment reviews the “River Valley Industrial Complex”:

Hazard Identification
The River Valley Industrial Complex operated as a circuit board manufacturing facility from 1965-2005.
Production processes included metal plating, degreasing, and chemical etching. Environmental sampling in
2023 revealed soil concentrations of hexavalent chromium ranging from 2.5 to 45 mg/kg, exceeding
regulatory standards of 0.003 mg/kg for residential soil.

Dose-Response Assessment
After reviewing the toxicological data for each contaminate, the following was noted: Hexavalent chromium
is a known human carcinogen through inhalation exposure. The EPA’s oral reference dose is 0.003 mg/kg-
day. Key health effects include respiratory tract cancers from inhalation, gastrointestinal effects from
ingestion, and contact dermatitis from dermal exposure.

Exposure Assessment
The individuals that might be exposed could include current site workers during remediation, future
residents if the area is developed, nearby community members, and recreational river users. These
individuals could be exposed by one of three exposure pathways that would require evaluation to include
inhalation of contaminated dust from soil disturbance, dermal contact with contaminated soil or
groundwater, or ingestion of contaminated groundwater through drinking water wells.

The potentially exposed population includes 2500 residents within a one-mile radius. Exposure duration is
estimated at 350 days/year for residents, with children representing the most sensitive subpopulation.

Risk Characterization
For residential exposure to chromium in soil using the standard EPA method, the following formula was
used:
Chronic Daily Intake = (Soil concentration × Ingestion rate × Exposure frequency × Exposure duration) /
(Body weight × Averaging time)

Therefore, the Chronic Daily Intake for hexavalent chromium is CDI = (45 mg/kg × 100 mg/day × 350
days/year × 30 years) / (70 kg × 365 days/year × 70 years) = 0.0025 mg/kg-day.

This in turn makes the Hazard Quotient equal to CDI / RfD = 0.0025 / 0.003 = 0.83 and the cancer risk
equal to CDI × Cancer Slope Factor = 0.0025 × 0.5 = 1.25 × 10^-3.

Risk Management
Based on our risk assessment findings, we propose these immediate actions for short-term controls (0-6
months): install perimeter fencing and warning signage, apply dust suppression measures (soil stabilizers,
temporary covers), establish surface water runoff controls, install groundwater monitoring wells, notify and
educate nearby residents, and provide alternative water supplies if needed. For emergency response
procedures establish notification protocols, define emergency action levels, create communication
flowcharts, identify emergency resources, and train response personnel.

For long-term remediation, the strategy would require three phases. In Phase 1 (6-18 months), control of
the source would be established by excavating the highly contaminated soil hotspots (>40 mg/kg
chromium), install groundwater extraction systems, construct treatment wetlands for surface water, and
implement soil vapor extraction systems. In Phase 2 (18-36 months) treatment would begin via the
operation of a pump-and-treat system for contaminated groundwater, conducting in-situ chemical reduction
for chromium, the establishment of phytoremediation zones, and monitoring for treatment effectiveness. In
Phase 3 (36-48 months) site restoration would see the restoration of native vegetation, creation of habitat
enhancement areas, established recreational buffer zones, and the development of long-term land use
controls.

Finally, monitoring protocols should be implemented to ensure environmental health safety. The monitoring
protocols would consist of an environmental monitoring program, health monitoring, and ecological
monitoring. Environmental monitoring program criteria would include quarterly groundwater sampling,
monthly surface water testing, semi-annual soil sampling, continuous air quality monitoring, and annual
biological surveys. Health monitoring would include community health surveys, worker exposure
monitoring, implementation of biomonitoring programs, and health registry maintenance. Ecological
monitoring would include benthic community surveys, fish population studies, vegetation stress analysis,
and wildlife population counts.

Ecological Risk Assessment:

Problem Formulation
The ecological receptors and endpoints would be the fish, amphibians, aquatic invertebrates, and riparian
vegetation; the health of riparian plant species and their ability to support local biodiversity, and the stability
of predator-prey dynamics in the food web, particularly for species that depend on aquatic life as a food
source, such as birds and mammals.

Conceptual models outline pathways through which contaminants might move from the source to ecological
receptors. Key exposure pathways include leaching of heavy metals and solvents into groundwater that
discharges into the river, erosion and runoff transporting contaminated soil particles to the river, and
bioaccumulation of heavy metals in aquatic organisms, leading to biomagnification in higher trophic levels.

Analysis Phase
The exposure analysis of sampling data revealed chromium concentrations in river sediment ranging from
15 to 50 mg/kg and lead levels between 25 and 80 mg/kg, exceeding sediment quality guidelines. Water
samples indicated TCE concentrations up to 25 µg/L, well above aquatic life protection thresholds. A tissue
analysis of fish found chromium levels averaging 2.5 mg/kg and lead levels of 3.0 mg/kg, suggesting
significant bioaccumulation.
The effects analysis from laboratory studies and literature indicate that chromium and lead at these levels
can impair reproduction in fish and amphibians, inhibit growth in aquatic plants, and cause neurotoxic
effects in predatory birds and mammals. TCE is known to interfere with the development of aquatic
invertebrates and has toxic effects on fish gills, reducing their oxygen uptake efficiency.

Risk Characterization
The likelihood and severity of adverse ecological effects were estimated by comparing contaminant
concentrations to established ecological thresholds. For aquatic organisms, risk quotients:
RQ=C measured / C threshold
Note: C measured is the measured concentration of the contaminant in sediment and C threshold is the
ecological threshold or sediment quality guideline for the contaminant, typically derived from regulatory
standards or scientific studies.

Chromium:
Measure concentration: 50 mg/kg the highest concentration observed in sediment
Ecological threshold: 2 mg/kg (Threshold Effects Level, TEL, for chromium in freshwater sediment based
on guidelines.)
RQ = 50mg/kg / 2mg/kg = 25.

Lead:
Measured concentration: 80 mg/kg – highest concentration observed in sediment
Ecological threshold: 35 mg/kg (Probable Effects Level, PEL, for lead in freshwater sediment based on
guideline)
RQ = 80 mg/kg / 35 mg/kg = 2.29 in sediment were calculated with values exceeding 10 for fish and
invertebrates, indicating a high risk of reproductive and developmental effects.

For riparian vegetation, soil contamination adjacent to the river poses a moderate risk to plants, potentially
reducing habitat quality and affecting the food web. For predators, birds and mammals consuming
contaminated fish are at risk of biomagnification, with estimated hazard quotients (HQs) exceeding 5 for
lead, indicating a high probability of neurotoxicity.

Risk Management
Based on the findings, the following risk management strategies are recommended: source control
(excavate and stabilize contaminated soils on-site to prevent further erosion and runoff into the river),
remediation (use sediment dredging in hotspots and monitored natural attenuation for TCE in groundwater),
habitat restoration (replant riparian zones with native vegetation to reduce runoff and improve habitat
stability), monitoring and assessment (establish long-term monitoring of sediment, water, and biota to
assess the effectiveness of remediation and track recover trends), and community involvement (engaging
local stakeholders and conservation groups in restoration efforts and educate the public about avoiding
consumption of fish from the contaminated area until risks are mitigated.