The Cleanup of Chemical Waste Sites — A Rational Approach

  • Charles A. Staples
  • Richard A. Kimerle
Part of the Advances in Risk Analysis book series (AIRA, volume 5)


A conceptual hazard assessment design is presented here for addressing waste site cleanup. Three main steps to be carried out in an evaluation of any potential waste site include, identification of potential chemical exposure, assessment of that exposure in relation to established ‘safe’ concentrations, and control measures to remediate the exposure. Hazard assessment techniques are used to establish the appropriate ‘how clean is clean enough’ endpoints based on calculated margins of safety (MS), where MS = toxicologically safe concentration/exposure concentration. A successful remedial action endpoint is achieved when the targeted exposure reduction action results in a margin of safety that is greater than 1.0 (MS > 1.0) including the uncertainty of the estimate. This assessment program is carried out in a cost effective step by step tiered approach to guide selection of a remediation endpoint.


Exposure Concentration Chemical Exposure Waste Site Exposure Scenario Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Adrian, G.W., 1981, Development of a National Groundwater Strategy. In: Proceedings AWWA Seminar entitled, ‘Organic Chemical Contaminants in Groundwater: Transport and Removal’. AWWA ( American Water Works Association) Denver, CO.Google Scholar
  2. Cairns, J., Jr., K.L. Dickson and A.W. Maki, 1978. Estimating the Hazard of Chemical Substances to Aquatic Life. ASTM STP 657. American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, PA.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Callahan, C.A. 1984, Earthworms as Ecotoxicological Assessment Tools, U.S. environmental Protection Agency Report No. EPA-600/D-84–272.Google Scholar
  4. Frost, E.G., 1982. Risk Assessment Under the Revised National Contingency Plan to Superfund. In: Risk Assessment of Hazardous Waste Sites, Edited by E.A. Long and G.E. Schweitzer, ACS No. 204, American Chemical Society, Washington,D.C.Google Scholar
  5. Gilford, J.H. 1985, Environmental Effects Assessment of New Chemicals under the Toxic Substances Control Act. Presented at 1985 Summer National Meeting, American Institute of Chemical Engineers, Seattle, WA.Google Scholar
  6. Houk, U.N., 1982, Determining the Impact on Human Health Attributable to Hazardous Waste Sites. In: Risk Assessment of Hazardous Waste Sites, Edited by F.A. Long and G.E. Schweitzer, ACS No. 204, American Chemical Society, Washington, D.C. PL-98616, 1984, Hazardous and Solid Wastes Amendments of 1984.Google Scholar
  7. Stephan, C.E., D.A. Mount, D.J. Hausen, J.H. Gentile, G.A. Chapman and W.A. Brungs, 1983. Draft U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Document.Google Scholar
  8. Thomas, J.M., 1984, Characterization of Chemical Waste and its Extent Using Bioassays. Report to U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Contract D.E.-AC06–76RL0 1830, Pacific Northwest Laboratory, Richland, WACrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Thomas, J.M. and J.F. Cline, 1985. Modification of the Neubauer Technique to Assess Toxicity of Hazardous Chemicals in Soils. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 4: 201–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1987

Authors and Affiliations

  • Charles A. Staples
    • 1
  • Richard A. Kimerle
    • 1
  1. 1.Monsanto Co.St. LouisUSA

Personalised recommendations