Chrostowski P C, Foster S A, Anderson E L
Clement International Corporation, Fairfax, Virginia 22031-1207.
Risk Anal. 1991 Sep;11(3):465-81. doi: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.1991.tb00632.x.
Upperbound lifetime excess cancer risks were calculated for activities associated with asbestos abatement using a risk assessment framework developed for EPA's Superfund program. It was found that removals were associated with cancer risks to workers which were often greater than the commonly accepted cancer risk of 1 x 10(-6), although lower than occupational exposure limits associated with risks of 1 x 10(-3). Removals had little effect in reducing risk to school populations. Risks to teachers and students in school buildings containing asbestos were approximately the same as risks associated with exposure to ambient asbestos by the general public and were below the levels typically of concern to regulatory agencies. During abatement, however, there were increased risks to both workers and nearby individuals. Careless, everyday building maintenance generated the greatest risk to workers followed by removals and encapsulation. If asbestos abatement was judged by the risk criteria applied to EPA's Superfund program, the no-action alternative would likely be selected in preference to removal in a majority of cases. These conclusions should only be interpreted within the context of an overall asbestos risk management program, which includes consideration of specific fiber types and sizes, sampling and analytical limitations, physical condition of asbestos-containing material, episodic peak exposures, and the number of people potentially exposed.
利用为美国环境保护局超级基金项目开发的风险评估框架，计算了与石棉清除活动相关的终生癌症风险上限。研究发现，清除活动会给工人带来癌症风险，这种风险通常高于普遍认可的1×10⁻⁶的癌症风险，不过低于与1×10⁻³风险相关的职业接触限值。清除活动对降低学校人群的风险作用不大。含有石棉的学校建筑中教师和学生面临的风险与公众接触环境石棉的风险大致相同，且低于监管机构通常关注的水平。然而，在清除过程中，工人和附近人员面临的风险都会增加。粗心大意的日常建筑维护给工人带来的风险最大，其次是清除和封装。如果根据应用于美国环境保护局超级基金项目的风险标准来判断石棉清除活动，在大多数情况下，不采取行动的方案可能会比清除方案更受青睐。这些结论仅应在整体石棉风险管理计划的背景下进行解读，该计划包括考虑特定的纤维类型和尺寸、采样和分析的局限性、含石棉材料的物理状况、间歇性峰值暴露以及可能接触的人数。
