County:
 
AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT

Garfield County is experiencing technical problems with an email server outage. Please call the county if you need assistance.
 
pages

2008-12 Health Risk Assessment


Air Toxics Inhalation Screening Level Human Health Risk Assessment: Trends in Air Quality from 2008-12

Cover page

Table of contents

Executive Summary
Table ES-1. Summary of Major Changes in the Estimated Chronic Risk Pattern from 2008 to 2012 at the Bell, Parachute and Rifle Monitoring Sites.

1. Introduction
1.1 CDPHE Role
1.2 Purpose
1.3 Risk Assessment Approach
1.1.1 Utility of Risk Assessments


2. Exposure Assessment
2.1 Exposure Assumptions
2.2 Air Monitoring
2.3 Contaminants of Potential Concern
2.4 Exposure Concentration


3. Toxicity Assessment
3.1 Overview
3.2 Toxicity Values

4. Risk Characterization
4.1 Cancer Risk Estimation
4.2 NonCancer Hazard Estimation
4.3 Cumulative Risks for Multiple Chemicals
4.4 Results of Risk Estimation
4.4.1.1. Cancer Risk Estimates


5. Uncertainty Evaluation
5.1 Uncertainties in Exposure Assessment
Air Quality Data
5.2 Uncertainties in Toxicity Assessment
5.3 Uncertainty in Risk Estimation due to Multiple Contaminants
5.4 Uncertainty in Risk Characterization

Summary of Findings

Conclusions

Knowledge Gaps in Oil and Gas Health Risk Evaluation

Recommendations

References


List of tables
Table 1. COPCs (23) with toxicity values evaluated quantitatively
Table 2. Aliphatic (45) and Aromatic hydrocarbons (5) evaluated semi-quantitatively using EPA's fractional approach (surrogate toxicity method).
Table 3. COPCs (17) with no available toxicity values evaluated qualitatively.
Table 4. Comparison of the exposure point concentrations (EPCs) for chemicals with toxicity values at the rural Bell and Rulison/Battlement Mesa Monitoring Sites from 2008 to 2012
Table 5. Comparison of the exposure point concentrations (EPCs) for chemicals with toxicity values at the Parachute and Rifle Monitoring Site from 2008 to 2012
Table 6. Comparison of the maximum concentrations for chemicals with toxicity values at the Bell and Rulison Monitoring Sites from 2008 to 2012
Table 7. Comparison of the maximum concentrations for chemicals with toxicity values at the Parachute and Rifle Monitoring Site from 2008 to 2012
Table 8. Comparison of the Cumulative Estimated Cancer Risks (CR) and Noncancer Hazard Indices (HIs) Across Monitoring Sites from 2008 to 2012.
Table 9. Percent Contribution of various air toxics to the Cumulative Estimated Cancer Risks (CR) and Noncancer Hazard Indices (HIs) Across the Bell, Parachute, and Rifle Monitoring Sites from 2008 to 2012.
Table 10. Comparison of the estimated cancer risks and noncancer hazard quotients (HQs) from 2008 to 2012 at the Bell Monitoring Site.
Table 11. Comparison of the estimated cancer risks and noncancer hazard quotients (HQs) from 2009 to 2012 at the Rulison and Battlement Mesa Monitoring Sites.
Table 12. Comparison of the Estimated Cancer Risks and Noncancer Hazard Quotients (HQs) from 2008 to 2012 at the Parachute Monitoring Site.
Table 13. Comparison of the Estimated Cancer Risks and Noncancer Hazard Quotients (HQs) from 2008 to 2012 at the Rifle Monitoring Site.
Table 14. Summary of Major Changes in the Estimated Chronic Risk Pattern from 2008 to 2012 at the Bell, Parachute and Rifle Monitoring Sites.

Appendix-A: 2008
Data Summary for All Chemicals of Potential Concern (COPCs)
Table A1. 2008 Chemicals with Toxicity Values at the Bell and Brock Sites in the Rural Oil & Gas Development Area.
Table A1.1. 2008 Chemicals with Toxicity Values at the Parachute and Rifle Sites in the Urban Oil & Gas Development Area
Table A 2. 2008 Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPHs) with Toxicity Values at the Bell and Brock Sites in the Rural Oil & Gas Development
Table A2. Continued
2008 Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons with Toxicity Values at the Bell and Brock Sites in the Rural Oil & Gas Development Area.
Table A2.1. 2008 Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons with toxicity values at the Parachute and Rifle Sites in the Urban Oil & Gas Development Area
Table A2.1. Continued.
2008 Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons with toxicity values at the Parachute and Rifle Sites in the Urban Oil & Gas Development Area
Table A3. 2008 Chemicals with No Toxicity Values at the Bell and Rulison Sites in the Rural Oil & Gas Development Area
Table A3.1. 2008 Chemicals with No Toxicity Values at the Parachute and Rifle Sites in the Urban Oil & Gas Development Area
Table A4. 2008 Summary of Exposure Point Concentrations ( EPCs) at all Monitoring Sites.
Table A5. 2008 Estimated Potential Lifetime Cancer Risks and Noncancer Hazards (HQ)


Appendix-B: 2009
Data Summary for All Chemicals of Potential Concern (COPCs) and Toxicity Values
Table B1. 2009 Chemicals with Toxicity Values at the Bell and Rulison Sites in the Rural Oil & Gas Development Area.
Table B 1.1 2009 Chemicals with Toxicity Values at the Parachute and Rifle Sites in the Urban Oil & Gas Development Area
Table B2. 2009 Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPHs) with Toxicity Values at the Bell and Rulison Sites in the Rural Oil & Gas Development Area.
Table B2 Continued
2009 Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons with Toxicity Values at the Bell and Rulison Sites in the Rural Oil & Gas Development Area.
Table B2.1. 2009 Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons with toxicity values at the Parachute and Rifle Sites in the Urban Oil & Gas Development Area
Table B2.1. Continued
2009 Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons with toxicity values at the Parachute and Rifle Sites in the Urban Oil & Gas Development Area
86 Table B3. 2009 Chemicals with no toxicity values at the Bell and Rulison Sites in the Rural Oil & Gas Development Area
Table B3.1. 2009 Chemicals with No Toxicity Values at the Parachute and Rifle Sites in the Urban Oil & Gas Development Area
Table B4. 2009 Summary EPCs at all monitoring sites.
Table B5. 2009 Estimated Potential Lifetime Cancer Risks and Noncancer Hazards (HQ)


Appendix-C: 2010
Data Summary for All Chemicals of Potential Concern (COPCs) and Toxicity Values
Table C1. 2010 Chemicals with Toxicity Values at the Bell and Rulison Sites in the Rural Oil & Gas Development Area.
Table C 1.1. 2010 Chemicals with Toxicity Values at the Parachute and Rifle Sites in the Urban Oil & Gas Development Area
Table C 2. 2010 Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons with Toxicity Values at the Bell and Rulison Sites in the Rural Oil & Gas Development Area.
Table C2. Continued
2010 Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons with Toxicity Values at the Bell and Rulison Sites in the Rural Oil & Gas Development Area.
Table C 2.1. 2010 Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons with toxicity values at the Parachute and Rifle Sites in the Urban Oil & Gas Development Area
2010 Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons with toxicity values at the Parachute and Rifle Sites in the Urban Oil & Gas Development Area
Table C3. 2010 Chemicals with no toxicity values at the Bell and Rulison Sites in the Rural Oil & Gas Development Area
Table C3.1. 2010 Chemicals with No Toxicity Values at the Parachute and Rifle Sites in the Urban Oil & Gas Development Area
Table C4. 2010 Summary of EPCs at all Monitoring Sites.
Table C5. 2010 Estimated Potential Lifetime Cancer Risks and Noncancer Hazards (HQ)


Appendix-D: 2011
Data Summary for All Chemicals of Potential Concern (COPCs) and Toxicity Values
Table D1. 2011 Chemicals with Toxicity Values at the Bell and Battlement Mesa Sites in the Rural Oil & Gas Development Area.
Table D1.1. 2011 Chemicals with Toxicity Values at the Parachute and Rifle Sites in the Urban Oil & Gas Development Area
Table D 2. 2011 Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons with Toxicity Values at the Bell and Battlement Mesa Sites in the Rural Oil & Gas Development Area.
Table D2. Continued
2011 Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons with Toxicity Values at the Bell and Battlement Mesa Sites in the Rural Oil & Gas Development Area.
Table D 2.1. 2011 Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons with toxicity values at the Parachute and Rifle Sites in the Urban Oil & Gas Development Area
Table D 2.1. Continued.
2011 Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons with toxicity values at the Parachute and Rifle Sites in the Urban Oil & Gas Development Area
Table D3. 2011 Chemicals with no toxicity values at the Bell and Battlement Mesa Sites in the Rural Oil & Gas Development Area
Table D3.1. 2011 Chemicals with No Toxicity Values at the Parachute and Rifle Sites in the Urban Oil & Gas Development Area
Table D4. 2011 Summary EPCs at all monitoring sites.
Table D5. 2011 Estimated Potential Lifetime Cancer Risks and Noncancer Hazards (HQ) at the various rural and urban monitoring sites.


Appendix-E: 2012
Data Summary for All Chemicals of Potential Concern (COPCs)
Table E1. 2012 Chemicals with Toxicity Values at the Bell and Battlement Mesa Sites in the Rural Oil & Gas Development Area.
Table E1.1. 2012 Chemicals with Toxicity Values at the Parachute and Rifle Sites in the Urban Oil & Gas Development Area
Table E 2. 2012 Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons with Toxicity Values at the Bell and Battlement Mesa Sites in the Rural Oil & Gas Development Area.
Table E2. Continued
2012 Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons with Toxicity Values at the Bell and Battlement Mesa Sites in the Rural Oil & Gas Development Area.
Table E 2.1. 2012 Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons with toxicity values at the Parachute and Rifle Sites in the Urban Oil & Gas Development Area
Table E 2.1. Continued
2012 Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons with toxicity values at the Parachute and Rifle Sites in the Urban Oil & Gas Development Area
Table E3. 2012 Chemicals with no toxicity values at the Bell and Battlement Mesa Sites in the Rural Oil & Gas Development Area
Table E3.1. 2012 Chemicals with No Toxicity Values at the Parachute and Rifle Sites in the Urban Oil & Gas Development Area
Table E4. 2012 Summary of EPCs at all monitoring sites.
Table E5. 2012 Estimated Potential Lifetime Cancer Risks and Noncancer Hazards (HQ)at the various rural and urban monitoring sites.

Appendix-F: Acute Risk Evaluation
Table F1. Selection of COPCs for Acute Risk Evaluation: Comparison of the highest maximum concentration with chronic noncancer toxicity values.
Table F 2. Evaluation of the 2008 noncancer acute risks based on a range of acute hazard quotients (HQs) derived using the average (the 95% UCL of the mean) and maximum detected air concentrations.
Table F 3. Evaluation of the 2009 noncancer acute risks based on a range of acute hazard quotients (HQs) derived using the average (the 95% UCL of the mean) and the maximum detected air concentrations.


Appendix-G: Chronic Toxicity Values
Table G1. Cancer and Noncancer Toxicity Values for COPCs: Inhalation Unit Risk (IUR) and Chronic Reference Level (RfC).
Table G1. Continued

resources
 
 
Public Health - Rifle
195 West 14th Street
Rifle, CO 81650


970-625-5200 | phone
970-625-4804 | fax

map
  Public Health - Glenwood Springs
2014 Blake Avenue
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601


970-945-6614 | phone
970-947-0155 | fax

map
   
 
privacy policy