Appendix D: Human Health Risk Assessment - Garfield County ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Appendix D Screening Level Human Health Risk Assessment February 2011 Battlement Mesa, Colorado Health Impact Assessment Colorado School of Public Health for each activity). In addition, one background sample was collected for each location. The well completion and background data was employed in this HHRA. Data also was collected for particulate matter of 2.5 microns or less (PM2.5), real time VOCs, and meteorology during the 2008 air toxics study. This data is discussed in Uncertainty Section. 2.1.3 2008 to 2010 Garfield County Ambient Air Study The GCPHD collected ambient air samples from five monitoring stations over 24-hour intervals and shipped the samples to ERG for analyses of 78 SNMOCs by EPA method TO-12 and 11 carbonyls by EPA method TO-11a. Samples for SNMOC analysis were collected into Summa canisters every 6 days. Samples for carbonyl analysis were collected onto pre-treated 2,4-dinitrophenylhydrazine (DNPH) cartridges every 12 days. CDPHE performed an annual screening level risk assessment for ambient air with the data collected in 2008 (CDPHE 2010) The data from 163 samples collected from the Bell-Melton Ranch monitoring station from January 2008 through November 2010 were employed in this HHRA. Ozone, PM10, and PM2.5 data collected at the Rifle and Parachute monitoring stations will be discussed in the Uncertainty Section. In September 2010, GCPHD began collecting ambient air samples over 24-hour intervals by the methods described above from a monitoring station located on the roof of the fire station in Battlement Mesa. Data from 13 samples (collected September 2010 through November 2010) were employed in this HHRA for the assessment of baseline conditions in Battlement Mesa. 2.1.4 2010 Antero Sampling Antero contracted Olsson Associates, Inc. to collect 10 ambient air samples (including 2 field duplicates) at its Watson Ranch well pad during well completion and flow back activities on August 19-20, 2010. The samples were collected in Summa Canisters over 24-hour intervals and shipped to Atmospheric Analysis and Consulting Inc. in Ventura California for analysis of 56 SNMOCs by EPA method TO-12. Antero also collected background air samples and air samples during drilling activities at the Watson Ranch pad. The sample results from the drilling were neither sensitive nor specific enough for the HHRA. The background results were not available at the time the HHRA was prepared. In addition, two grab samples for carbonyl analysis were collected onto pre-treated 2,4dinitrophenylhydrazine (DNPH) cartridges on August 20, 2010 and shipped to Atmospheric Analysis and Consulting Inc. in Ventura California for analysis of 13 carbonyls by EPA method TO-11a. These samples were collected at 350 feet and 500 feet to the South of the well pad, along the access road. Appendix D page 11
Appendix D Screening Level Human Health Risk Assessment February 2011 Battlement Mesa, Colorado Health Impact Assessment Colorado School of Public Health Although a QAPP was not prepared for the collection this data, data was collected using EPA methods and accredited laboratories. The data is of suitable quality use in screening level risk assessment. 2.1.5 2010 annual groundwater quality results – Battlement Mesa Water treatment plant The Battlement Water Treatment Plant collected one groundwater sample from one of the back-up groundwater wells in July 2010 and submitted the sample to Accutest Laboratories in Wheat Ridge Colorado for analysis of VOCs by EPA method 524.2, endothall by EPA method 548.1, 1,2-dibromo-3-chloropropane and 1,2-dibromoethane by EPA method 504.1, herbicides by EPA method 515.4, carbamates by EPA method 531.1, and pesticides by EPA method 508. This data was used to evaluate baseline groundwater conditions. 2.2 Sample Quantitation Limit Evaluation Method reporting limits (MRLs) were adjusted for sample characteristics, sample preparation, and analytical adjustments. Therefore, the MRL is equivalent to the sample quantitation limit. Chemicals reported as not detected are considered to have a concentration less than the MRL for the purposes of the HHRA. The MRLs were compared to EPA regional screening levels (RSLs) (EPA 2010) to determine if they were adequate for the purposes of the HHRA. RSLs are protective health-based levels below which chronic health effects are not expected to occur. If the RSL is greater than the MRL, the MRL is adequate for determining the chemical is not present at a concentration that may impact health. If the RSL is less than the MRL, the MRL is not adequate to determine whether the chemical is present at a concentration which may impact health. 2.2.1 2005 to 2007 VOC data Table 2-1 summarizes the MRLs for chemicals with a detection frequency less than five percent for the VOC data collected between 2005 and 2007. For the following 15 VOCs with a detection frequency of less than five percent, the EPA RSL was less than the minimum MRL: • 1,2-Dibromoethane • 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane • Bromodichloromethane • 1,2-Dichloroethane • Chloroform • 1,1,2-Trichloroethane • Vinyl Chloride • 1,4-Dichlorobenzene Appendix D page 12
Page 1 and 2: Draft Battlement Mesa HIA, Revision
Page 3 and 4: Appendix D Screening Level Human He
Page 23: Appendix D Screening Level Human He
Page 75 and 76:
Appendix D Screening Level Human He
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
1 of 2 Table 2-1 Comparison of MRLs
Page 89 and 90:
Table 2-2 Comparison of MRLs from 2
Page 91 and 92:
Table 2-3 Comparison of MRLs for 20
Page 93 and 94:
Chemical Number of samples Table 2-
Page 95 and 96:
Table 2-4 Summary Statistics and Se
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Number of Samples Table 2-7 Summary
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Table 2-8 Ambient Air Summary Stati
Page 111 and 112:
Table 2-8 Ambient Air Summary Stati
Page 113 and 114:
Chemical Table 2-9 95% UCLs and Sel
Page 115 and 116:
2010) 4 of 4 Table 2-9 95% UCLs and
Page 117 and 118:
Chemical Table 2-10 95% UCLs and Se
Page 119 and 120:
Chemical Table 2-11 95% UCLs and Se
Page 121 and 122:
Statistic Table 2-12 Comparison of
Page 123 and 124:
Table 3-1 Cancer and Non-Cancer Air
Page 125 and 126:
Table 3-2 Cancer and Non-Cancer Air
Page 127 and 128:
Table 3-3 EPCs and Surface Water In
Page 129 and 130:
Table 4-1 Cancer and Non-Cancer Inh
Page 131 and 132:
4 of 4 Table 4-1 Cancer and Non-Can
Page 133 and 134:
Chemical Available Toxicity Values
Page 135 and 136:
Table 5-1 Baseline Risk Characteriz
Page 137 and 138:
Table 5-2 Comparison of EPCs to BTV
Page 139 and 140:
1 of 2 Table 5-4 Chronic Risk Chara
Page 141 and 142:
1 of 1 Table 5-5 Subchronic Risk Ch
Page 143 and 144:
Table 5-7 Acute Risk Characterizati
Page 145 and 146:
Table 6-1 Chemicals Identified from
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
Benzene, Ethylbenzene, and d m&p-Xy
Page 153:
Sources Potential Releases Exposure
Page 156:
Excess Canc cer Risk per one Millio
show all

Appendix D: Human Health Risk Assessment - Garfield County ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?