Health Risk Assessment After Decontamination of the Beaches Polluted by the Wrecked ERIKA Tanker

Abstract

Following the wreck of the oil tanker ERIKA off the north-west coast of France in December 1999, cleaning up of the beaches involved considerable work, which in any case could not be perfect. This raised the question of the short- and long-term health risks for the future bathers related to the toxicity of the remaining oil polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). This risk assessment study was conducted to help health authorities plan risk management policies and inform the public. Thirty-six beaches were selected, representing a sample of the most frequently encountered topographic and beach usage situations; seven "control" beaches, unspoiled by ERIKA, were also investigated. Samples of water and sand were taken from each site, as well as from the surface of rocks. The 16 PAHs selected by the U.S. EPA were quantified in each environment. Several scenarios of exposure were contemplated: (1) a child between 2 and 4 years accidentally ingesting a small ball of fuel, (2) a child daily exposed throughout his holiday-time stay, (3) an adult (including a pregnant woman) spending his/her holidays on the coast, (4) an adult working on the beach, (5) and an adult practicing water sports. Among the available and significant toxicological values, the most conservative ones were selected for computing risks. The sand and water, after decontamination, were slightly polluted (respectively, 7.8 microg/kg and 23.3 ng/l of total 16 PAHs), with values similar to those found in the control beaches. By contrast, the rocky areas in some places were still highly polluted (up to 23 mg/kg on the surface layer). No lethal risk was found for a young child who had accidentally ingested a small ball of fuel. The life-long excess risks for skin cancer and for all other cancers were about 10-5 in scenarios including contact with the polluted rocks. In all other cases, excess risks were considerably lower. The hazard quotient for teratogenic effects was very small, except in scenarios where pregnant women would walk among rocks containing high pollution levels. In conclusion, exposure was mainly associated with polluted water among children, and with spoiled rocks for adults. Despite uncertainties, mainly dealing with the prediction of long-term risks following a short-term exposure, this study showed that beaches where pollution was no longer visible after decontamination did not entail any significant health risks and could be opened to the public.

Exposure to contaminated sediments during recreational activities at a public bathing place

“…We expect that the general outline of this assessment and the exposure factors herein can be reused to assess similar exposure situations elsewhere. For example, this investigation indicates that beach visitors spend less time at the beach and in the water as compared to assumptions in the literature [1][2]5]. However, both climate and cultural differences motivate further studies to obtain realistic estimates.…”

“…Two risk assessments have been published from this incident, and both assessed cleaning as well as tourist activities [1,2]. The calculations were in both cases deterministic (point estimates) and based on exposure factors from the literature, supplemented by assumptions about exposure time (duration), frequency, intakes of water and sediment, and skin contact.…”

Child dermal sediment loads following play in a tide flat

“…These responses also supplement very limited prior activity pattern data applicable to a child shoreline recreation scenario. Published examples of risk assessments of coastal contamination that have included child resident or visitor/ trespasser scenarios include an evaluation of estuary sediment pollution related to onshore releases (Adams et al, 1994) and of beach fouling related to a tanker wreck (Dor et al, 2003). In the former case, assessment of child dermal exposure is reported but exposure factors specific to children are not.…”

The attitudes of recreational user representatives to pollution reduction and the implementation of the European Water Framework Directive

“…This is largely on the basis of a growing body of evidence and opinion that reducing pollution levels improves the quality of the experience for participants in many water related recreation activities. The activities that may benefit from a reduction in pollution include: bathing, swimming, scuba diving and other activities where there is direct contact with the water (Jagals, 1997;Pendleton et al, 2001;Dor et al, 2003;Hanley et al, 2004;Turbow et al, 2004;Söderqvist et al, 2005;Lepesteur et al, 2006;Novotny et al, 2007;Rao, 2008); inland and sea fishing (Freeman, 1995;Willis and Garrod, 1999;Grosch et al, 2000;Wolter and Arlinghaus, 2003;Massey et al, 2006); and surfing (Laviolette, 2006;Surfers Against Sewage, 2007;Wheaton, 2007).…”

“…In particular, the work on fishing and surfing generally focuses on constraints and reduced enjoyment of the activities (Wolter and Arlinghaus, 2003;Massey et al, 2006;Laviolette, 2006), whereas the work on swimming and water-contact activities is much more about barriers that prevent activity (Dor et al, 2003;Söderqvist et al, 2005). In addition, some of the studies note that the determining factor in participation is often people's perceptions of water quality, rather than the actual levels of pollution, or any scientific evidence about the impact of the pollution on human health and well-being.…”