Established soil sampling methods for asbestos are inadequate to support risk assessment and risk-based decision making at Superfund sites due to difficulties in detecting asbestos at low concentrations and difficulty in extrapolating soil concentrations to air concentrations. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s Office of Land and Emergency Management (OLEM) currently recommends the rigorous process of Activity Based Sampling (ABS) to characterize site exposures. The purpose of this study was to compare three soil analytical methods and two soil sampling methods to determine whether one method, or combination of methods, would yield more reliable soil asbestos data than other methods. Samples were collected using both traditional discrete (“grab”) samples and incremental sampling methodology (ISM). Analyses were conducted using polarized light microscopy (PLM), transmission electron microscopy (TEM) methods or a combination of these two methods. Data show that the fluidized bed asbestos segregator (FBAS) followed by TEM analysis could detect asbestos at locations that were not detected using other analytical methods; however, this method exhibited high relative standard deviations, indicating the results may be more variable than other soil asbestos methods. The comparison of samples collected using ISM versus discrete techniques for asbestos resulted in no clear conclusions regarding preferred sampling method. However, analytical results for metals clearly showed that measured concentrations in ISM samples were less variable than discrete samples.

The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) conducted an evaluation of exposures to asbestiform amphibole, known as Libby Amphibole (LA), to personnel from the US Department of Agriculture-Forest Service (USFS) working in the Kootenai National Forest near a former vermiculite mine close to Libby, Montana. LA is associated with vermiculite that was obtained from this mine; mining and processing over many years have resulted in the spread of LA into the surrounding Kootenai Forest where it has been found in tree bark, soil, and forest floor litter. As a result of this and other contamination, Libby and surrounding areas have been designated a “Superfund” site by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). This article describes the application of EPA methods for assessing cancer risks to NIOSH sampling results. Phase-contrast microscopy for airborne asbestos fiber evaluation was found to be less useful than transmission electron microscopy in the presence of interfering organic (plant) fibers. NIOSH Method 7402 was extended by examination of larger areas of the filter, but fiber counts remained low. There are differences between counting rules in NIOSH 7402 and the ISO method used by EPA but these are minor in the context of the uncertainty in concentration estimates from the low counts. Estimates for cancer risk are generally compatible with those previously estimated by the EPA. However, there are limitations to extrapolating these findings of low risk throughout the entire area and to tasks that were not evaluated.

Measuring the concentrations of asbestos in contaminated soils is challenging. Data are often highly variable. Variability in soil measurements has led to limitations in comparing results from sites nationally and difficulties in reproducing results, even from the same sites over time. The difficulties in collecting reproducible soil data limit the ability to extrapolate from concentrations in soil and compare to concentrations in air. This extrapolation is necessary if soil data are to be used in human health risk assessments. To address this substantial limitation of asbestos soil data, researchers from Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regions and the National Exposure Research Laboratory are conducting a series of efforts to advance the use of data that are collected, processed, and analyzed using the most reproducible methods. These soil data, collected from a variety of sites across the country, will be compared to air data from activity-based sampling in an attempt to establish a quantitative relationship between asbestos soil concentrations and airborne fiber concentrations. This research plan summary provides an update on the EPA efforts under way and the challenges that lie ahead.