@article{fdi:010077863,
  title = {{T}he challenges of applying an {A}ctivity-{B}ased {S}ampling methodology to estimate the cancer risk associated with asbestos contaminated landfilled zones},
  author = {{C}ely-{G}arcia, {M}. {F}. and {L}ysaniuk, {B}enjamin and {P}asetto, {R}. and {R}amos-{B}onilla, {J}. {P}.},
  editor = {},
  language = {{ENG}},
  abstract = {{I}nhabitants of {S}ibate ({C}olombia) report that between approximately 1975 and 1985 asbestos-containing materials ({ACM}) were dumped at different locations in the urban area of the municipality. {S}tarting in around 1986, the dumping of materials resulted in landfilled zones, on top of which different facilities were then constructed. {I}n a previous study, an underground friable asbestos layer was discovered in these landfilled zones. {H}owever, potential exposure to asbestos on the surface of landfilled zones in {S}ibate has not been determined. {I}n the current study, the {U}.{S}. {EPA} {A}ctivity-{B}ased {S}ampling ({ABS}) methodology was adapted and applied in three scenarios located on potential landfilled areas in {S}ibate, to estimate the current risk of exposure to asbestos through inhalation, and the resulting excess lifetime cancer risk ({ELCR}). {F}or this purpose, generic {ABS} in a football stadium, and specific {ABS} in both a public playground and a school courtyard were conducted. {P}ersonal, 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. {E}xposure 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}. {E}ighteen of these samples (12 personal, 3 area samples and 3 blank samples) were analyzed using {TEM}. {T}he 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). {A}ll samples had {PCM}-{E}quivalent asbestos structures concentrations below analytical sensitivity. {O}f the 22 samples analyzed, 18 were overloaded with particles. {A}lthough 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. {S}ince 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 {S}ibate. {M}ethodological and analytical challenges encountered in the current study are discussed in detail, which could inform future {ABS} studies, not only in {S}ibate, but also in other areas with asbestos-contaminated soils.},
  keywords = {{A}ctivity-{B}ased {S}ampling ; {E}xcess lifetime cancer risk ; {E}nvironmental exposure ; {A}sbestos-contaminated landfilled zones ; {S}ibate ; {C}olombia ; {COLOMBIE} ; {SIBATE}},
  booktitle = {},
  journal = {{E}nvironmental {R}esearch},
  volume = {181},
  numero = {},
  pages = {art. 108893 [10 p.]},
  ISSN = {0013-9351},
  year = {2020},
  DOI = {10.1016/j.envres.2019.108893},
  URL = {https://www.documentation.ird.fr/hor/fdi:010077863},
}