Article

Comparison of the Johnson-Ettinger Vapor Intrusion Screening Model Predictions with Full Three-Dimensional Model Results

School of Engineering, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island 02912, United States.
Environmental Science & Technology (Impact Factor: 5.48). 02/2011; 45(6):2227-35. DOI: 10.1021/es102602s
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The Johnson-Ettinger vapor intrusion model (J-E model) is the most widely used screening tool for evaluating vapor intrusion potential because of its simplicity and convenience of use. Since its introduction about twenty years ago, the J-E model has become a cornerstone in guidance related to the potential for significant vapor intrusion-related exposures. A few papers have been published that claim it is a conservative predictor of exposure, but there has not been a systematic comparison in the open literature of the J-E model predictions with the results of more complete full three-dimensional descriptions of the phenomenon. In this paper, predictions from a three-dimensional model of vapor intrusion, based upon finite element calculations of homogeneous soil scenarios, are directly compared with the results of the J-E model. These results suggest that there are conditions under which the J-E model predictions might be quite reasonable but that there are also others in which the predictions are low as well as high. Some small modifications to the J-E model are also suggested that can bring its predictions into excellent agreement with those of the much more elaborate 3-D models, in some specific cases of homogeneous soils. Finally, both models were compared with actual field data.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Yijun Yao, Aug 29, 2015
1 Follower
 · 
165 Views
  • Source
    • "The open ground surface is taken to be at atmospheric reference pressure and is a sink of zero contaminant concentration. A negative pressure of −5 Pa and a contaminant flux equation is assigned at the crack, the same as in the former studies [28] [29] [30] [31] [32] [33]. The detailed parameters are shown in Table 1. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In 2002, U.S. EPA proposed a general buffer zone of approximately 100 feet (30m) laterally to determine which buildings to include in vapor intrusion (VI) investigations. However, this screening distance can be threatened by factors such as extensive surface pavements. Under such circumstances, EPA recommended investigating soil vapor migration distance on a site-specific basis. To serve this purpose, we present an analytical model (AAMLPH) as an alternative to estimate lateral VI screening distances at chlorinated compound-contaminated sites. Based on a previously introduced model (AAML), AAMLPH is developed by considering the effects of impervious surface cover and soil geology heterogeneities, providing predictions consistent with the three-dimensional (3-D) numerical simulated results. By employing risk-based and contribution-based screening levels of subslab concentrations (50 and 500μg/m(3), respectively) and source-to-subslab attenuation factor (0.001 and 0.01, respectively), AAMLPH suggests that buildings greater than 30m from a plume boundary can still be affected by VI in the presence of any two of the three factors, which are high source vapor concentration, shallow source and significant surface cover. This finding justifies the concern that EPA has expressed about the application of the 30 m lateral separation distance in the presence of physical barriers (e.g., asphalt covers or ice) at the ground surface. Copyright © 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
    Journal of Hazardous Materials 11/2015; 298. DOI:10.1016/j.jhazmat.2015.05.024 · 4.33 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "The operational conditions of buildings, such as the indoor air exchange rate, are usually quite difficult to quantitatively predict a priori. This intrinsic character of such models can result in incorrect predictions of entry rates, as shown by Yao et al. [9]. To avoid such uncertainties associated with building operational parameters (such as indoor air exchange rate and depressurization), contaminant subslab concentration is sometimes used as the indicator of PVI potential [10] [11]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In this study, the development and partial validation are presented for an analytical approximation method for prediction of subslab contaminant concentrations in PVI. The method involves combining an analytic approximation to soil vapor transport with a piecewise first-order biodegradation model (together called the Analytic Approximation Method, including Biodegradation, AAMB), the result of which calculation provides an estimate of contaminant subslab concentrations, independent of building operation conditions. Comparisons with three-dimensional (3-D) simulations and another PVI screening tool, BioVapor, show that the AAMB is suitable for application in a scenario involving a building with an impermeable foundation surrounded by open ground surface, where the atmosphere is regarded as the primary oxygen source. Predictions from the AAMB can be used to determine the required vertical source-building separation, given a subslab screening concentration, allowing identification of buildings at risk for PVI. This equation shows that the "vertical screening distance" suggested by U.S. EPA is sufficient in most cases, as long as the total petroleum hydrocarbon (TPH) soil gas concentration at the vapor source does not exceed 50-100mg/L. When the TPH soil gas concentration of the vapor source approaches a typical limit, i.e. 400mg/L, the "vertical screening distance" required would be much greater.
    Journal of Hazardous Materials 05/2014; 279:336-347. DOI:10.1016/j.jhazmat.2014.05.065 · 4.33 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "The assessment of extent and hazard posed by vapor intrusion of VOCs into buildings has received increasing attention in recent years (Murphy and Chan, 2011; Eklund et al., 2012; McHugh et al., 2012; Picone et al., 2012; Turczynowicz et al., 2012; Wang et al., 2012). With *500,000 contaminated sites in the United States presenting uncertain VOC vapor intrusion risk (Schuver, 2007), the assessment of risk from inhalation of these vapors has been a topic of recent discussion, field investigations (Fitzpatrick and Fitzgerald, 2002; Sanders and Hers, 2006; William et al., 2007), and modeling studies (Abreu and Johnson, 2005; DeVaull, 2007; Tillman and Weaver, 2007; Bozkurt et al., 2009; Pennell et al., 2009; Yao et al., 2011). In 2002, the U.S. EPA issued a draft guidance for vapor intrusion assessment (EPA, 2002), and new final guidance is imminent. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: http://online.liebertpub.com/doi/abs/10.1089/ees.2013.0133
    Environmental Engineering Science 01/2014; · 0.93 Impact Factor
Show more