Cely-Garcia M. F., Lysaniuk Benjamin, Pasetto R., Ramos-Bonilla J. P. (2020). The challenges of applying an Activity-Based Sampling methodology to estimate the cancer risk associated with asbestos contaminated landfilled zones. Environmental Research, 181, p. art. 108893 [10 p.]. ISSN 0013-9351.
Auteurs
Cely-Garcia M. F., Lysaniuk Benjamin, Pasetto R., Ramos-Bonilla J. P.
Source
Environmental Research, 2020,
181, p. art. 108893 [10 p.] ISSN 0013-9351
Inhabitants of Sibate (Colombia) report that between approximately 1975 and 1985 asbestos-containing materials (ACM) were dumped at different locations in the urban area of the municipality. Starting in around 1986, the dumping of materials resulted in landfilled zones, on top of which different facilities were then constructed. In a previous study, an underground friable asbestos layer was discovered in these landfilled zones. However, potential exposure to asbestos on the surface of landfilled zones in Sibate has not been determined. In the current study, the U.S. EPA Activity-Based Sampling (ABS) methodology was adapted and applied in three scenarios located on potential landfilled areas in Sibate, to estimate the current risk of exposure to asbestos through inhalation, and the resulting excess lifetime cancer risk (ELCR). For this purpose, generic ABS in a football stadium, and specific ABS in both a public playground and a school courtyard were conducted. Personal, area and blank samples were collected and analyzed using phase contrast microscopy (PCM) and transmission electron microscopy (TEM) following NIOSH 7400 and ISO 13794 methods, respectively. Exposure point concentrations were determined and compared against the action level for asbestos in air (ALAA), and were also used to calculate the ELCR of each scenario. A total of 25 airborne asbestos samples were collected, and 22 of these (12 personal samples, 7 area samples and 3 blank samples) were analyzed using PCM. Eighteen of these samples (12 personal, 3 area samples and 3 blank samples) were analyzed using TEM. The total asbestos structures concentration of personal samples ranged from non-detected to 0.326 S/cc (i.e., total asbestos structures counts ranged from 0 to 12). All samples had PCM-Equivalent asbestos structures concentrations below analytical sensitivity. Of the 22 samples analyzed, 18 were overloaded with particles. Although chrysotile and actinolite were identified in some personal samples, suggesting a potential risk of asbestos exposure, the ELCR was at U.S. EPA acceptable risk levels. Since the ABS methodology was applied in a limited number of scenarios and a small number of samples were collected, these results should be interpreted with caution and additional sampling campaigns are required to fully understand the risk of asbestos exposure in Sibate. Methodological and analytical challenges encountered in the current study are discussed in detail, which could inform future ABS studies, not only in Sibate, but also in other areas with asbestos-contaminated soils.
