• Risk assessment for Soil Contamination Warning Standard and Soil Background Concentration
  • Dong Shin1·Seong-Jae Park1·Young Tae Jo1·Jae-eun Bong1·Jeong-Hun Park1*

  • 1Department of Environment and Energy Engineering, Chonnam National University, Gwangju 61186, Korea

  • 토양오염 우려기준과 토양 자연배경농도에 대한 위해성평가
  • 신 동1·박성재1·조영태1·봉재은1·박정훈1*

  • 1전남대학교 환경에너지공학과

  • This article is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

There is domestic Soil Contamination Warning Standard (SCWS) as remediation standard concentration of contaminated soils. No risk should be observed at soil concentration less than SCWS. Therefore, SCWS was evaluated to confirm the risk assessment. Background Concentration of Soil (BGC) and target remediation concentration were also assessed. The results show that Excess Cancer Risk (ECR) of SCWS was the highest in the groundwater intake pathway (Adult: 6.27E-04, Child: 2.81E-04). Total Cancer Risk (TCR) was 7.76E-04 and 4.30E-04 for adult and child, exceeding reference value (10-6). Hazard Quotient (Non-Carcinogenic Risk, HQ) was the highest in the indoor air inhalation pathway (Adult: 3.64E+03, Child: 8.74E+02). Hazard Index (Total Non-Carcinogenic Risk, HI) exceeded reference value 1. ECR of the BGC was the highest in the groundwater intake pathway (Adult: 1.71E-04, Child: 7.67E-05). TCR was 2.12E-04 for adults and 1.17E-04 for children, exceeding the reference value (10-6). HQ was the highest in groundwater intake pathway (Adult: 4.10E-01, Child: 1.84E-01). HI was lower than reference value 1 (Adult: 4.78E-01, Child: 2.50E-01). The heavy metal affecting ECR was Arsenic (As). The remediation-concentration of As was 7.14 mg/kg which is higher than BGC (6.83 mg/kg). TCR of As should be less than reference value (10-6), but it was higher for all of SCWS, BGC and target remediation concentration. Therefore, it is suggested that risk assessment factors should be re-evaluated to fit domestic environmental settings and SCWS should be induced to satisfy the risk assessment.


Keywords: Risk assessment, Soil contamination warning standard, Background concentration, Carcinogenic risk, Non-carcinogenic risk

This Article

  • 2021; 26(3): 37-49

    Published on Jun 30, 2021

  • 10.7857/JSGE.2021.26.3.037
  • Received on Jun 2, 2021
  • Revised on Jun 7, 2021
  • Accepted on Jun 21, 2021

Correspondence to

  • Jeong-Hun Park
  • Department of Environment and Energy Engineering, Chonnam National University, Gwangju 61186, Korea

  • E-mail: parkjeo1@jnu.ac.kr