Comparisons of human risk assessment models for heavy metal contamination within abandoned metal mine areas in Korea

Abstract

This study was initiated to develop a model specialized to conduct human risk assessments (HRAs) of abandoned metal mine areas in Korea. The Korean guideline (KG) model used in study was formulated via modification of the original Korean guidelines on HRAs of soil contamination. In addition, the newly developed model was applied to the HRAs of two abandoned metal mines contaminated with arsenic (As) and heavy metals (Cd, Cu, Pb, and Zn). The results of the KG model were compared with those of two internationally renowned models [Contaminated land exposure assessment (CLEA) and CSOIL models]. The HRA results of the three models indicated that the areas of concern were unsafe when it came to both carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic hazards. Furthermore, the hazards in both areas were mostly attributed to As and the predominant exposure pathways were identified as crop intake in the KG model and surface soil dermal contact in CLEA and CSOIL models. Accordingly, measures to protect against As exposure should be established immediately to prevent adverse health effects on inhabitants in these areas. A comparison of HRA results revealed significant differences between KG, CLEA, and CSOIL models due to the various types of exposure pathways, contaminants, and input data, such as exposure factors and receptor parameters. This study suggests that set-up of an exposure scenario is crucial for the successful performance of HRAs, and the most relevant HRA model should be deliberately selected to attain risk assessment goals.