CIVE 449

Environmental Site Assessment

DETAILED REQUIREMENT RISK ASSESSMENT ADVISORY

NOTE OF SITE INVESTIGATION REPORT FOR LAND AT THE
CORNER OF QUARRY STREET & RODICK STREET, WOOLTON

Assessment 7:

BY
CARLOS RAMOS 201224791
TIANYU WANG 201181766

DEC, 2016
1. What the DQRA is?

The generic qualitative risk assessment suggested that there might be some potentially unacceptable risk
from land contaminants, and then DQRA can be conducted. The DQRA will refine the risk assessment, to give
a more realistic evaluation, making the potential risks more accurate, using generic approaches to define the
risks. DQRA can be used within a tiered risk assessment framework, to help justify “no further action” or “no
remediation” decisions, where it shows that the level of risk is not, in fact, unacceptable.

Each tier of risk assessment requires information about the site for possible solutions for managing the risk.
The information required should be

 Relevant to the context

 Sufficient for the required level of confidence
 Reliable in reflecting true or likely conditions
 Transparent in meaning

Using more criteria to decide whether there are unacceptable risks, the assessor identifies pollutant linkage
that require further detailed assessment. Some values of concentration with specific characteristics,
behaviours, pathways, and receptors correspond to relevant criteria in relation to harm human health or
pollution for deciding whether there is an unacceptable risk. Despite this information, the assessor could
need more information about to develop risk estimation models and site-specific assessment criteria. Then
the assessor refines the conceptual model and confirms the linkage need to be evaluated. The assessor
carries out risk estimation and evaluation. Finally, it is to consider further information about the assessment,
decision to move to options appraisal or where unacceptable risks have been identified.

Decisions

 Appropriate criteria or tools for estimating or evaluating the risks for a particular pollutant.
 Unacceptable risks with these linkages can be identified.
 Further action is needed or not

Outputs

 Evaluation and criteria used to estimate and evaluate risk, unacceptable risk identified and the
proposed next steps.
 Development and choice of criteria, tools and assumptions for risk estimation, evaluation of the
potential risks, the decisions of what happen next.
 When DQRA could not do this job better, the optional appraisal should be used.

2. Why and how does it differ from GQRA? (CLR11)

 Generic Assessment Criteria (GAC) are criteria derived using a largely generic assumption about the
characteristics and behaviour of sources, pathways, and receptor. These assumptions will be
conservative in a defined range of conditions. Site-specific assessment criteria are the value for the
concentration of the contaminants that have been derived using detailed site-specific information
on the characteristics and behaviour of contaminants, pathway and receptors, and the correspond
to relevant criteria in relation to harm or pollution for deciding whether there is an unacceptable
risk.
 GQRA
Outline of the work
Establishing whether generic assessment criteria and assumption
are appropriate for assessing the risk.
Apply them to establish whether there are actual or potential
unacceptable risk.
Derived from large generic assumption about the characteristic and
behavior source
Make a Decision
Which pollution linkages can be evaluated by using general
assessment criteria and assumption
Tools
Tools like staged intrusive investigation, data review and analysis
could be used, this is basis behind the derivation of authoritative
generic assessment criteria at the national or organizational level.
For doing the Output of work
Generic assessment criteria should be used
Could include the further work GQRA and DQRA
Characteristics of site and conceptual model
Information obtained during risk assessment (with reference to
former relevant site-investigation reports)
Derivation of generic assessment criteria Method and results of
comparison with GAC
Selection of generic assessment criteria Assessment of data quality
Uncertainty and information gap
The output of the work
The GQRA worded as ‘minimal risk thresholds’ for the assessment
of human health risk in relation to land use.
3. Generic Quantitative Risk Assessment (Tier 2/GQRA)
An assessment of the soil analysis data was carried out in accordance with the guidance presented in
CLR11 and in accordance with current guidance legislation from a number of sources.
DQRA
Establishing and using more detailed site-specific information
and criteria decide whether there are unacceptable risks.
Using the sole method for qualification assessment of the risk
refine the early assessment, some parameters must be used to
influence the scope of the investigation to support risk
assessment.
Searching value for concentration of the unacceptable risk,
focus on the questions which GQRA could not be determined
and conduct the final work
Which tools and criteria are appropriate for estimating and
evaluating the risks from particular pollutant linkages
More laboratory work and more elaborate field could be used.
(The general approach is to use a computer model or other
method of risk estimation to derive an assessment criterion
measured in a particular medium and point in the pathway so
that the estimated risk from the site would not represent an
unacceptable risk compared with relevant evaluation criteria.)
Special tools and criteria should be used
Further information collection to complete the final work (such
as the optional appraisal)
Characteristics of site, preliminary conceptual model and any
risk assessment using generic assessment criteria
Information and tools obtained or developed during risk
assessment
Development of any site-specific assessment criteria
Assessment of data (quality, zoning, outliers and other
anomalous features), Evaluation and choice of tools, Risk
estimation, Results from estimation techniques, Evaluation
criteria used Results of evaluation
Method of evaluation Uncertainty and information gaps
The purpose DQRA is to confirm the linkages being considered
in a detailed quantitative risk assessment, and whether any
should be combined to consider synergistic or cumulative risks.
Sometimes the work should further detail quantitative risk
assessment required to confirm characteristics of exposure
pathway; needed each of the linkage of with each contaminant.
It is proposed that site is redeveloped for residential use, and hence the Human health Risk Assessment
was carried out in accordance with the methodology for assessing soil samples based on a “Residential
with Plant Uptake”.

The GQRA is not suitable for assessing the risk by potential contamination at the site and the client
requires more information, for this reason, a Tier 3 DQRA (Detail Quantitative Risk Assessment) is
required.

a. Assessment of soil contamination data

 Assessment of Metal data

Exceedances of the SGV/GAC thresholds for this group of contaminants. Thus there is a
risk to human health.
 Assessment of non-metal data
Exceedances of the SGV/GAC thresholds for this group of contaminants. Thus there is a
risk to human health.
 Assessment of Asbestos Data
Asbestos was detected in the second sample analysed from the ground, and thus there is
a risk to human health.
 Summary of Human Health Assessment
The assessment concluded that some contaminants exceed its respective SGV/GAC
threshold value.

b. Recommendations

Some risks to human health are being identified by the assessment above. Further assessment of soil
contamination is required for the contaminant distribution on the site. Recommendations for the client:

• The assessment should be undertaken in line with the CL: AIRE document “Guidance on Comparing Soil
Contamination Data with a Critical Concentration”.

• For human remediation, the assessment should considerate specific factors such as the way the land is
used, the exact nature of the receptors and possible contact between the source of contaminant and
groundwater.

• Derivation to Site Specific Assessment Criteria (SSAC), a different approach where soil contamination
levels are used to calculate a hazard index for threshold substances or cancer risk estimate for on-
threshold substances.

• Using CLEA model to input variables in relationship to chemical data. The important tool for this
assessment is the advantage of CLEA to modify use and receptor information such as soil and produce
ingestion rates, soils data and building data. CLEA investigates relative influence of different individual
parameters to better reflect site conditions.

• SNIFFER tool will assess with each contaminant and soil equivalent intake for each exposure pathway.
It takes account soil and substance properties for local effects (respiratory irritation) and dermal exposure.

 Bioaccessibility is the term used to investigate the amount absorbed by humans. Some test like
Physiologically Based Extraction test (PBET) has been used in the UK for arsenic, nickel and lead. The
only problem is this test is in a developing stage and there are some substantial uncertainness provided
by laboratories.