TECHNICAL ENFORCEMENT SUPPORT AT HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
r x U.S. EPA CONTRACT NO. 68-01-7331 a 17
o o -J
N) I—1 U1 71 CDM Federal Programs Corporation
i 410325 REVISED FINAL REPORT REVISED ENDANGERMENT ASSESSMENT FULTON TERMINALS FULTON, NEW YORK
Prepared for
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Office of Vaste Programs Enforcement Washington, D.C. 20460
EPA Work Assignment No. 615 EPA Region II Site No. ,2P75 Contract No. 68-01-7331 CDM Federal Programs Corporation Document No. T615-C02-FR-DKJB-1 Prepared By Versar Inc. Work Assignment Project Manager Tom Willard Telephone Number (703) 750-3000 Primary Contact Nicoletta DiForte Telephone Number (212) 264-0970 Date Prepared June 27, 1989
(VP14/29) TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1
1.1 Site Desc?:iption and History 1-1 1.2 Contaminants Found Onsite 1-4 1.3 Selection of Indicator Chemicals 1-25
2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL FATE AND TRANSPORT • 2-1
2.1 Site Characteristics 2-1 2.1.1 Geology and Soils 2-1 2.1.2 Topography and Drainage .. 2-7 2.1.3 Hydrogeology 2-9 2.1.4 CI .matology 2-10 2.2 Site Contaminants and Migratory Pathways 2-11 2.2.1 Benzene 2-16 2.2.2 Ch'.orobenzene 2-18 2.2.3 4-Methyl-2-pentanone (MIBK) 2-19 2.2.4 1,:'.-dichloroethene 2-19 2.2.5 Tri.chloroethene 2-20 2.2.6 Vinyl chloride 2-21 2.2.7 Pyrene 2-22 2.2.8 Arsenic 2-23 2.2.9 Nickel 2-24 2.2.10 Barium 2-25
3.0 EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT 3-1
3.1 Contaminant Release Information 3-1 3.2 Routes of Exposure 3.3 3.3 Populations Exposed 3-18 3.4 Extent of Exposure 3-25
4.0 TOXICITY ASSESSMENT ; 4.1
4.1 Benzene 4.9 4.2 Chlorobenzene (monochlorobenzene) 4-12 4.3 4-Methyl-II-Pentanone (MIBK) 4-13 4.4 1,2-Dichloroethene 4-14 4.5 Trichlorocthene (TCE) 4-16 4.6 Vinyl Chloride 4-18 4.7 Pyrene 4-22 4.8 Arsenic 4-25 TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
Page
5.0 RISK CHARACTERIZATION 5-1
5.1 Human Health 5-1 5.2 Environmental Impacts 5-10
6.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS • 6-1
REFERENCES ' R-l
FIGURES
1-1. Area Location Map of the Fulton Terminals Site, Fulton, Oswego County, New York 1-2 1-2. Fulton Terminals Site Map 1-3 ' 1-3. Fulton Termiiials Site Layout Map 1-6 2-1. Location of Oswego County and Physiographic Provinces of New York 2-2 2-2. Generalized Cross Section of Bedrock Formations, Oswego County, New York 2-4 2-3. Origin of Selected Types of Glacial Deposits 2-5 2-4. Fulton Quadrangle Showing Glacial Deposits 2-6 2-5. Detailed Topographic Site Map Showing Storh Grate Inlet and Outfall to Oswego River 2-8 2-6. Wind Frequency Distribution 2-13 4-1. Diagram of Dose-Response Relationship 4-7 4-2. Health Effects from Ingesting Nickel 4-32
TABLES
1-1. List of Chemicals Analyzed for at Fulton Terminals Site 1-7 1-2. Compounds Detected at the Fulton Terminals Site 1-8 1-3. Summary Statistics for Soil Samples Collected at the Fulton Terminals Site 1-21 1-4. Total Comparison of Metal Concentrations in Soil, Fulton Terminals Site 1-24 2-1. Summary of Temperature and Precipitation Data, Oswego County, New York 2-12 2-2. Potential Release Mechanisms at the Fulton Terminals Site ... 2-15 2-3. Summary of Chemical, Physical, and Biological Properties for Indicator Chemicals at Fulton Terminals Site 2-17 3-1. Calculated Atmospheric Emission Rates, Fulton Terminals Site. 3-7 3-2. Calculation of Sorbed and Dissolved Contaminant Loads to Oswego River from Surface Water Runoff 3-12 TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
3-3. Contaminant Loading to the Oswego River from the Ground Water at Fulton Terminals 3-16 3-4. Mean Indicator Chemical Concentrations (PPB) in Shallow Soil Fulton Terminals Site 3-19 3-5. Calculation of Potential Contaminant Concentrations in Oswego River at the Fulton Terminals Site 3-22 3-6. Cumulative Short-Term and Long-Term Inhalation Exposures to Each Indicator Chemical, Fulton Terminals Site 3-27 3-7. Calculation of Intakes from Dermal Absorption of Chemicals in Surface Water Via Direct Contact (Subchronic and Chronic). 3-30 3-8. Calculate Intakes from Ingestion of Contaminated Fish, Exposure Point: Nearby Oswego River 3-32 3-9. Calculation of Intakes from Soil Ingestion Via Direct Contact (Subchronic and Chronic) 3-33 4-1. Concentrations Corresponding to a 1E-06 Lifetime Cancer Risk Leve 1 4.3 4-2. Water Quality Criteria for the Protection of Aquatic Life ... 4-4 4-3. TLVS for the Selected Contaminants at the Fulton Terminals Site 4-5 4-4. Critical Toxicity Values for Indicator Chemicals at the Fulton Terminals Site 4-8 4-5. Summary of Aquatic Fate of Pyrene 4-24 4-6. Dose-Response Relationships Between Prevalence of Skin Cancer and Arsenic Consumption by Age 4-28 5-1. Subchronic Human Intake Levels, Fulton Terminals .Site 5-2 5-2. Total Chronic. Human Intake Levels 5-3 5-3. Calculation of Subchronic and Chronic Hazard Indexes for Noncarcinogens 5.5 5-4. Calculation of Chronic Hazard Index 5-6 5-5. Risk Estimates for Carcinogens 5-8 5-6. Comparison of Estimated Short- and Long-Term Contaminant Concentrations in Oswego River to Freshwater Toxicity Criteria 5-11
APPENDICES
1. Selection of Indicator Chemicals Process 2. Toxicological, Reactivity, and Personal Protection Data for Indicator Chemicals 3. Supporting Computations 4. NYS Health Advisory ERRATA
Please remove the following pages from the June 23, 1989 Final Endangerraent Assessment for the Fulton Terminals Site in Fulton, New "ie.ptc*t4 4U4«V) York reportAwith the corresponding attached pages:
Page 3-33 (Table 3-9) Page 5-1 Page 5-2 (Table 5-1) Page 5-3 (Table 5-2) Page 5-4 Page 5-5 (Table 5-3) Page 5-6 (Table 5-4) Page 5-7 Page 5-8 (Table 5-5) Page 5-9 Page 6-2 Page 6-3 TABLE 3-9 CALCULATION OF INTAKES FROM SOIL INGESTION VIA DIRECT CONTACT (SUBCHRONIC AND CHRONIC)
Soil Subchronic Chronic Body Weight Consum./ Consum./ Subchronic Chronic CHEMICAL Concentration Consumption Consumption (Child) Event (subchron) Event (chronic) TWA Dose*** TWA Dose**** (ug/kg)* (g soil/day) (g soil/day) (kg)** (mg/event) (mg/event) (mg/kg.day) (mg/kg.day)
Arsenic 4884 0.8 0.2 10 3.91E-03 9.77E-04 3.91E-04
Barium 27680 0.8 0.2 10 2.21E-02 5.54E-03 2.21E-03
Benzene 8.15 0.8 0.2 10 6.52E-06 1.63E-06 6.52E-07
Chlorobenzene 5.85 0.8 0.2 10 4.68E-06 1.17E-06 4.68E-07
1.2-DCE (tot) 6.26 0.8 0.2 10 5.01E-06 1.25E-06 5.01E-07
MIBK 12.86 0.8 0.2 10 1.03E-05 2.57E-06 1.03E-06
Nickel 12634 0.8 0.2 10 1.01E-02 2.53E-03 1.01E-03
Pyrene 202 0.8 0.2 10 1.62E-04 4.04E-05 1.62E-05
TCE 9.66 0.8 0.2 10 7.73E-06 1.93E-06 7.73E-07
Vinyl Chloride 12.2 0.8 0.2 10 9.76E-06 2.44E-06 9.76E-07
Notes: * Soil concentrations are geometric means of surface soil contaminant data ** From Exposure Factors Handbook *** Based on per event exposure **** Based on 5 events per year and 5 years of exposure over 70 year lifespan
a c
o o -J
to OO 3-33 5.0 RISK CHARACTERIZATION
5.1 Human Health
The objective of this risk characterization is to integrate information in the exposure assessment (Section 3.0) and the toxicity assessment (Section 4.0) in order to evaluate potential or actual human health risks associated with the Fulton Terminals Site. Risk refers to the probability of injury, disease, or death resulting from exposure to the chemicals identified in this study. Risk values are generally expressed in scientific notation. An individual lifetime risk of one in -4 10,000 is represented as 1 x 10 or 1E-04 (Versar, 1987). Excess cancer risks refer to the increased, probability of cancer above a "normal" rate.
Impacts of noncarcinogenic chemicals on human health are evaluated by comparing projected or estimated intakes and reference levels for the chemicals of concern. A reference level represents an acceptable exposure level at which there will be no observable adverse effect or the lowest observable adverse effect on human health. The impact of carcinogenic chemicals is assessed by comparing calculated risks and target risks for known or suspected carcinogens. Target risks for carcinogens generally range from 1E-04 to 1E-07.
The estimated subchronic and chronic (short- and long-term, respectively) human intake levels for each of the indicator chemicals is presented in Tables 5-1 and 5-2. Subchronic intake levels, representing short-term intake levels were computed for oral and inhalation routes. Supporting calculations used to determine SDIs and CDIs are found in Chapter 3 and Appendix 3 of this report. The highest oral subchronic daily intake was computed for barium at 2.22E-03 mg/kg/day. Subchronic oral intake levels for the volatile organics ranged from 4.68E-07 to 1.03E-06 mg/kg/day. Subchronic daily intakes from inhalation of volatile organics ranged from 1.57E-08 mg/kg/day for chlorobenzene to 9.59E-08 mg/kg/day for TCE.
5-1 2545Y TABLE 5-1 SUBCHRONIC HUMAN INTAKE LEVELS FULTON TERMINALS SITE
Fish Soil Dermal Total Total CHEMICAL Ingestion Ingestion Absorption Oral Air SOI SDI SDI SOI SDI
Arsenic 6.73E-10 3.91E-04 NA 3.91E-04 NA
Barium 3.62E-06 2.21E-03 NA 2.22E-03 NA
Benzene 7.30E-11 6.52E-07 5.26E-11 6.52E-07 2.66E-08
Chlorobenzene 4.93E-11 4.68E-07 1.85E-11 4.68E-07 1.57E-08 I
1,2-DCE (tot) 1.29E-09 5.01E-07 3.02E-09 5.02E-07 7.13E-08
MIBK 1.78E-11 1.03E-06 9.20E-U 1.03E-06 NA
Nickel 4.01E-08 1.01E-03 NA 1.01E-03 NA
Pyrene 1.66E-10 1.62E-05 NA 1.62E-05 NA
TCE 1.28E-09 7.73E-07 4.52E-10 7.74E-07 9.59E-08
Vinyl Chloride 1.02E-11 9.76E-07 3.28E-11 9.76E-07 5.56E-08
All values 1n mg/kg/day. NA - No data. TABLE 5-2 TOTAL CHRONIC HUMAN INTAKE LEVELS
Ground Surface F1sh Soil Dermal Total Total CHEMICAL water Water Ingestion Ingestion Absorption Oral Air CDI COI CDI CDI CDI CDI CDI
Arsenic 0 0 9.31E-U 9.56E-08 NA 9.57E-08 NA
Barium 0 0 4.99E-07 5.42E-07 NA 1.04E-06 NA
Benzene 0 0 1.01E-11 1.59E-10 7.94E-14 I.70E-10 1.18E-08
Chlorobenzene 0 0 6.81E-12 1.14E-10 2.80E-I4 1.21E-10 8.33E-09
1,2-DCE (tot) 0 0 1.79E-10 I.23E-10 4.58E-I2 3.06E-10 2.16E-08
MIBK 0 0 2.47E-12 2.52E-10 1.40E-13 2.54E-10 NA
Nickel 0 0 5.54E-09 2.47E-07 NA 2.53E-07 NA
Pyrene 0 0 2.30E-11 3.95E-09 NA 3.98E-09 NA
TCE 0 0 1.76E-10 1.89E-10 6.83E-13 3.66E-10 9.08E-08
Vinyl Chloride 0 0 1.41E-12 2.39E-10 4.95E-14 2.40E-10 5.56E-08
Notes: All values 1n mg/kg/day. NA - No data.
5-3 Chronic daily intake levels, computed from long-term exposure estimates, were generally an order of magnitude or more lower than subchronic daily intake values.
Noncarcinogenic Effects
Any potential health effects are identified by computing hazard ' indices derived from subchronic and chronic intake levels. The hazard index is computed as follows:
DI1 DI2 DIn Hazard Index - + _ + •••'•+ 12 n Where DIn = subchronic or chronic daily intake (rag/kg/day) AIn =» subchronic or chronic acceptable intake level (mg/kg/day)
Table 5-3 presents the computed subchronic hazard index from potential exposures to the contaminants of concern. Table 5-4 presents the computer chronic hazard index. The cumulative subchronic hazard index was 5.05E-02, and the cumulative chronic hazard index was computed at 1.34E-04. If the computed hazard index scores (subchronic or chronic) are greater than unity, then health hazards may occur. (These hazard indices should not to be confused with probabilities used to assess carcinogenic human health risks.) These indices were calculated using the most significant exposure points (i.e., recreational users of the Oswego River and the nearest residences (census tract 211.01)) to the Fulton Terminals Site.
Carcinogenic Effects
For potential carcinogens, risks are estimated by the probability of increased cancer incidence. A carcinogenicity potency factor represents the upper 95 percent confidence limit on the probability of response per unit intake of the contaminant over a lifetime, and converts estimated intakes directly to incremental risk (U.S. EPA, 1986). Because all inputs into the exposure assessment are conservatively based, the
5-4 2545Y TABLE 5-3 CALCULATION OF SUBCHRONIC HAZARD INDICES
Inhalation ORAL CHEMICAL SOI AIS SDI:AIS SDI AIS SDI:AIS
Arsenic NA NA NA 3.91E-04 U U
Barium NA 1.00E-03 NA 2.22E-03 U U
Benzene 2.66E-08 U U 6.52E-07 U U
Chlorobenzene 1.57E-08 5.00E-02 3.14E-07 4.68E-07 3.00E-01 1.56E-06
1,2-DCE (tot) 7.13E-08 NA NA 5.02E-07 U U
MIBK NA 2.00E-01 NA 1.03E-06 5.00E-01 2.06E-06
Nickel NA 2.00E-02 NA 1.01E-03 2.00E-02 5.05E-02
Pyrene NA NA NA 1.62E-05 U U
TCE 9.59E-08 U U 7.74E-07 U U
Vinyl Chloride 5.56E-08 U U 9.76E-07 U U
HAZARD INDEX: 3.14E-07 HAZARD INDEX: 5.05E-02
Notes: U Unavailable NA Not Applicable TABLE 5-4 CALCULATION OF CHRONIC HAZARD INDICES
Inhalation ORAL CHEMICAL CDI AIC CDI:AIC CDI AIC CDI:AIC
Arsenic NA NA NA 9.57E-08 0.001 9.57E-05
Barium NA 1.00E-04 NA I.04E-06 5.10E-02 2.04E-05
Benzene 1.18E-08 U U 1.70E-10 U U
Chlorobenzene 8.33E-09 5.00E-03 1.67E-06 I.21E-10 3.00E-02 4.04E-09
1,2-DCE (tot) 2.16E-08 U U 3.06E-10 U U
MIBK NA 2.00E-02 NA - 2.54E-10 0.05 5.09E-09
Nickel NA 1.00E-02 NA 2.53E-07 2.00E-02 1.26E-05
Pyrene NA NA NA 3.98E-09 U U
TCE 9.08E-08 2.60E-02 3.49E-06 3.66E-10 1.02E-02 3.59E-08
Vinyl Chloride 5.56E-08 U U 2.40E-10 U U
HAZARD 1 INDEX: 5.16E-06 HAZARD INDEX: 1.29E-04
Notes: U Unavailable NA Not Applicable resulting risks identified for the Fulton Terminals Site represent upper-bound risk estimates, and may overestimate the actual risk from exposures to the indicator chemicals studied. Additional data would be required to derive a statistically valid estimate of error in the exposure and risk calculations. The conservative approach taken in this study ensures that the outcome would be protective to human health and the environment.
The carcinogenic risk equation is as follows:
Risk - CDI x CPF
Where CDI = chronic daily intake (mg/kg/day) CPF = carcinogenic potency factor (mg/kg/day)~^
Table 5-5 presents the calculated route-specific risk and total risk for each carcinogen evaluated and the cumulative upper-bound risk estimate for all the carcinogens. The upper-bound risk for all routes was determined to be 2.35E-07. Total risk computed for organics ranged from 4.18E-12 (TCE) to 4.57E-08 (pyrene). Quantitative risk assessment for exposures to the other carcinogenic organics and arsenic were evaluated according to the identified ingestion and/or inhalation routes. These risk estimates are upper bound estimates based on conservative assumptions. Conservative assumptions were employed throughout this study to ensure that any recommendations and conclusions would be protective of human health.
Ingestion Route
Ingestion exposures to carcinogens included consumption of fish caught from the Oswego River, and the inadvertent consumption of onsite soils. These exposures accounted for 75 percent of the total carcinogenic risk (Table 5-5). Assuming that the number of people potentially exposed annually is roughly 34 percent, or 1,676 people, of the population of Fulton's city wards 5 and 6, and an oral cancer risk value of 2.18E-07, then there would be 0.000077 excess cancer cases in 70 years assuming continuous exposure over that entire period. This translates to one excess cancer case in approximately 909,000 years.
5-7 254 5Y TABLE 5-5
RISK ESTIMATES FOR CARCINOGENS
Carcinogenic Route- Total CHEMICAL Exposure CDI Potency Factor Specific Chemical-specif1c Route (mg/kg.day) l/(mg/kg.day) Risk Risk
Arsenic Oral 9.57E-08 1.8 1.72E-07 1.72E-07 Inhalation NA 15 NA Barium NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Benzene Oral 1.70E-10 0.029 4.92E-12 3.47E-10 Inhalation 1.18E-08 0.029 3.42E-10 Chlorobenzene NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 1,2-DCE (tot) NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA MIBK NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Nickel NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Pyrene Oral 3.98E-09 11.5 * 4.57E-08 4.57E-08 Inhalation NA NA NA TCE Oral 3.66E-10 1.10E-02 4.03E-12 4.18E-12 Inhalation 9.08E-08 1.70E-06 1.54E-13 Vinyl Chloride Oral 2.40E-10 2.3 5.52E-10 1.70E-08 Inhalation 5.56E-08 0.295 1.64E-08
Total Upper Bound Risk - 2.35E-07
Notes: * based on CPF for benzo(a)pyrene NA Not Available Notes: * Based on CPF for benzo(a)pyrene. Carcinogenic Assessment Group (CAG) Risk Value (Clement, 1985)
5-8 The individual risks posed by consuming fish and direct ingestion of soil onsite is roughly equivalent.
Inhalation Route
Inhalation exposures to volatile organics released from the soil represented 25 percent of the total carcinogenic risk (Table 5-5). GEMS derived data enumerated 6,500 persons (Table 3-6) potentially exposed to these releases. From Table 5-5, the cumulative route specific (inhalation) risk for the carcinogens was 1.67E-08, yielding about .0000389 excess cancer cases in 70 years (or about one excess cancer case every 1,798,000 years).
Arsenic represented the highest potential carcinogenic health risk, having a total risk value of 1.72E-07 (all due to oral exposures). Inhalation exposures are considered negligible given arsenic's affinity for particulate matter and the site's low wind erosion potential which will minimize emissions of this contaminant.
There are a number of uncertainties associated with the carcinogenic risk estimates discussed above. These uncertainties are introduced because of (1) the need to extrapolate below the dose range of experimental tests using animals, (2) the variability of the receptor population, (3) assumed equivalency of dose-response relationship between animals and human, and (4) differences in exposure routes in test animals versus routes expected onsite. The recognized uncertainties in the issues listed are raised to help the reader understand the limitations of this type of study. However, the assumptions used in light of these limitations were consistently conservative in nature and biased towards protecting the public health. In addition to contaminant concentration, route, and duration of exposure, there are many other factors that may influence the likelihood of developing cancer. These include differences between individual nutritional and health status, age and sex, and inherited characteristics that may affect susceptability (USDHHS, 1983). Risk addition also assumes that intake levels will be small, without
5-9
2545V Four exposure routes were identified; (1) inhalation of volatile organics from contaminated soils, (2) ingestion of contaminated surface water and fish during recreational use of the Oswego River, (3) direct contact (dermal) exposure to contaminated surface water during recreational use of the Oswego River, and (4) direct contact (ingestion) exposure of contaminated soil from the Fulton Terminals Site. Recreational uses include swimming, wading, fishing, boating, and water skiing. Populations potentially exposed include recreational users of the Oswego River (expected to live in city wards 5 and 6 [U.S. Census track 211.01]), near the site, and neighborhood children venturing (trespassing) onto the site.
Total body burden rates were computed based on all potential exposure routes using an average body mass of 70 kg (adult) or 10 kg 3 (child), an inhalation rate of 22.0 m /day, an average 70 year lifetime. It was assumed that dermal exposures (swimming and wading etc.) would occur in 20 out of the 70-year average lifetime, while ingestion exposures (fishing) would occur in 40 out of an average 70-year lifetime (Whitmyre, et al., 1987). Estimated short and long term time-weighted average daily dose for each chemical (Table 5-1) subchronic oral intakes ranged from 4.68E-07 mg/kg/day (chlorobenzene) to 2.22E-03 mg/kg/day (barium). Subchronic intake levels for inhaled toxicants were lower, ranging from 1.57E-08 mg/kg/day (chlorobenzene) to 9.59E-08 mg/kg/day (trichloroethene).
Toxicity profiles were developed for each of the indicator chemicals based on current U.S. EPA accepted health effects documents. Toxicological evaluation included pharmacokinetics, human and environmental health effects, and a dose-response assessment. Toxicity information is dependent to a large extent on animal models upon which any potential adverse human health effects must be extrapolated.
Risk characterization included an assessment of risk associated with exposures to noncarcinogens and carcinogens. Noncarcinogenic risks were assessed using a hazard index computed from expected daily intake levels
6-2 2565Y (subchronic and chronic) and reference levels (representing acceptable intakes). Hazard index scores of 5.05E-02 (subchronic) and 1.34E-04 (chronic) were obtained. The hazard index scores are well below unity indicating a negligible noncarcinogenic health impact.
Potential carcinogenic risks were computed by multiplying chronic (long-term) intake levels to a respective carcinogenic potency factor. The cumulative upper bound risk for all carcinogens (all routes) was 2.35E-07. The highest risk computed for a given chemical (arsenic) was 1.72E-07, all derived from oral exposures (predominantly from ingestion of contaminated soil).
Upon evaluation of all available information on the site and the most recent analytical data collected from the site, minimal threat to human health exists.
Environmental impacts overall are expected to be minimal, however, localized impacts are expected in streambed sediments due to the presence of several semivolatile organic compounds. These compounds may directly impact benthic organisms (predominantly invertebrate species). Estimated (modeled) contaminant concentrations (sufficient time-series water quality data for the Oswego River were not available) in the Oswego River were well below all acute toxicity criteria for freshwater.
Recommendations
Analytical data suggest additional source areas are contributing to environmental contaminant concentrations. The collective impairment and any potential health risks (human and environmental) from other known or suspected source areas should be further evaluated. Based on the presence of high background contaminant levels in the ground water there are probably additional contaminant loadings from other sources than may be adversely impacting the Oswego River and biota present.
Although no human health risks associated with the site were identified in this study, recreational users of the Oswego River,
6-3
2565V 1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Site Description and History
The Fulton Terminals Site is a 0.9-acre facility that was once occupied by a roofing company and later was used as a staging and storage area for wastes scheduled for incineration at the Pollution Abatement Services, Inc., (PAS) Site. The site is located within the city of Fulton, Oswego County, New York (Figure 1-1). The site is bounded on the west by First Street, on the south by Shaw Street, on the east by a railroad right-of-way, and on the north by property which is used for a warehouse (Figure 1-2). Fulton lies 22 miles north-northwest of Syracuse and 10 miles southeast of Oswego (URS, 1987).
The Fulton Terminals Site was owned by the Logan Long Shingle Company of Fulton, Hew York between 1936 and 1960. Logan Long made roofing materials on the site during this time period. Asphalt for use in the roofing material manufacture was brought in and stored in above-ground storage tanks. Oil for use as fuel to run the boilers was stored in underground storage tanks until 1958 when the tanks were abandoned during the conversion from oil to gas (URS, 1987).
In 1972, the site was sold to Fulton Terminals, Inc., a company formed by the PAS corporate officers. The Fulton Terminals Site was used as a staging and storage area for materials to be destroyed in the PAS incinerator in Oswego. The site was used by PAS until 1977, when PAS went out of business. At that time, wastes from PAS were left on the site.
In April 1981, the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) was alerted to the fact that there were hazardous materials onsite. Fulton Terminals agreed to a voluntary cleanup program. Tanks 2, 4, and 7 were emptied, dismantled, and removed. The cleanup activities were terminated in March of 1983 when Fulton •T] Terminals was fined by DEC for using an unlicensed PCB hauler (DiForte, i G 1987; NUS, 1983). o o -J
11 1 K> 1-1 I 2390Y I W v 5 \L "-N A- ;'\ \ ~~7"&r *v • '• * \V • w *.v.\ PfttnfiWo*' * V' J" *% « -V •
TERMINALS SITE V V. •V v
\ *- •• • v i ~jf ,— • m_ vyiVs. .. \ • -y^ » \ • * ~\ :N\ / W '. j ; i-—-? . -Cv^;... - \_ _ ^ :* J IK \ X V1*^^1' ' \• • » ••••••• v,-'j••• tW| • IF ,^***2! '• /I' » •1 •i » •• -j, * (l ~~ "Tr' Slj£C I \ T\>S-«J:;s«lJt __ /1 \ >V3D$ -.-it...wii*'i tk*aii.i' s—-CSeh:—r&er. . f V\ s i • * f p" w ." •• :. T~ • ^a> i e a^\*rV : wu'in^
in ^7'- - '£ '
\
FIGURE 1-1 AREA LOCATION MAP OF THE FULTON TERMINALS SITE FULTON, OSWEGO COUNTY, NEW YORK (USDIO, 1955)
1-2 '*'^Wd i uc^
a f
o o -J NEW YORK STATE ROUTE 481 oM y trsVO Ol FIGURE 1-2 v. FULTON TERMINALS SITE MAP In September 1985, NYSDEC began a remedial investigation (RI). Observations made during the course of the study indicated that remaining tanks on the site wure leaking and that the soil was visibly contaminated. Pursuant to an Action Memorandum (March 1986), and two Administrative Orders (September 1986), the remaining tanks, two drums found onsite, and 3('0 yards of visibly contaminated soil were removed (DiForte, 1987).
The remedial investigation/feasibility study (RI/FS) was completed in June 1987, by URS Company, Inc. The remedial alternative recommended for the site was excavation and incineration of the approximately 26,100 tons of soil (URS, 1987). After release of the report, it was learned that the data had not undergone quality assurance review. In addition, RI/FS sampling was conducted prior to the implementation of removal activities at the site, and therefore was not representative of present site conditions. The Response and Prevention Branch of EPA Region II collected additional samples from the site in August 1987 to evaluate the need for additional removal activities. In January 1988, URS collected additional ground water, surface water, and sediment samples (DiForte, 1987). In response to concerns raised by the public and EPA that the sit:e was not properly characterized, EBASCO Services Incorporated was contracted by EPA in October 1988 to gather additional site data. EBASCO conducted the supplemental field investigation from January thru March 1989. The EBASCO data was fully validated based on Contract Laboratory Procedures. The analytical results of EBASCO's additional sampling effort was used as the primary source in the development of this endangerment assessment.
1•2 Contaminants Found Onsite
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region II provided Versar with two groups of analytical data. The first group consisted of soil samples collected at the Fulton Terminals Site in August 1987.* One data set consisted of analytical results of 19 soil samples collected
*Since the purpose of collecting this data was to evaluate the need for additional removal actions, locations which were most likely to indicate the presence of "hot spots" (e.g., areas where spills and leaks were reported, etc.) were targeted for sampling. 1-4 2390Y from 3 different depth intervals; shallow (0 to 2 feet below ground surface), middle (4 to 6 feet) and deep (8 to 10 feet). These samples were analyzed for hazardous substance list volatile organic compounds (VOCs), polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), and metals.
A second data set consisted of analytical results of six soil samples collected from two locations 4 to 6 feet below ground surface. These soil samples were analyzed solely for PCBs. A second group of samples were collected and analyzed in January 1988. These samples consisted of 3 surface water and 3 sediment samples collected from the Oswego River and 10 ground-water samples from monitoring wells installed during the RI.
The most comprehensive investigation of the site was conducted by EBASCO during January thru March of 1989. One of the objectives of the EBASCO study was to collect non-biased soil samples which would be more representative of site conditions and would more fully characterize soil contamination. This investigation involved the collection and analysis of 54 soil (from 27 soil borings), 21 ground water (from 10 new wells and 11 old wells), 4 surface water, and 4 sediment samples. All samples were analyzed for hazardous substance list volatile organics, base/neutral/acid extractable organics, inorganics (metals), pesticides, and PCBs. A listing of the compounds or elements resolved by these analytical methods :.s presented in Table 1-1.
The data was compiled and evaluated to determine the types or classes of contaminants that were identified as well as concentrations characterizing the aite. Table 1-2 presents a summary of all compounds and elements detected at the Fulton Terminals Site. Approximate sample locations for all modia from the most recent investigation are depicted on Figure 1-3.
The analytical data presented in Table 1-2 has been statistically summarized in order to estimate the distribution frequency of the positively detected compounds or elements identified from the soil samples collected at the Fulton Terminals Site. Summary statistics presented in Table 1-3 include the number of occurrences, minimum and maximum concentrations, and the geometric mean of the soil data.
1-5 2380Y 5*04-5004 N A LEGEND
-fc pwownv UNC homay BOuNDwrr CHAM UNK ftHCC Osa-i 50A. BORMC LOCATION ® rwr-io MONTTOftMC WELL SN01-S001 SURTACC NATDT AND A SEDIMENT SAMPUNC LOCATIONS
k>tr •wt/nv* Dr***Q r«f rree-m TABLE 1.1 LIST OF CHEMICALS ANALY2ED FOR AT FUITOH TERMINALS SITE
VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS SEMI VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED BNAs INORGANIC METALS ANO CYANIDE Chloroaethane Phenol 4-Hydroxy-4-Hethyl-2-Pentanone Broaoaethane Alualnue bis (2-Chloroethyl) Ether Acetyldlthlo Carbonic Acid Antimony Vinyl Chloride 2-Chiorophenol 3,2-Bepyrldlne Chloroetbane Arsenic ' 1,3-Dlchlorobenzene 2-P1nene Barlua Methylene Chloride 1,4-Dlchlorobenzene Acetone 3-Hethyl Octane Beryl 1lua Benzyl Alcohol Benzothleno Benzothlophene Cadalua Carbon Disulfide 1,2-Olchlorobenzene Hexanedlolc Acid, Dloctyl Ester 1,1-Olchloroethene Calclua 2-Hethylphenol 5-Methyl-3-Hexyn-2-ol Chroalua 1.1-Dlchloroethane bis (2-Ch1oro)sopropy1) Ether 1-Propanaalne Trans-l.2-D1chloroethene Cobalt 4-Nethylphenol 4-Hydroxy-4-Methyl-2-Pentanone Copper Chlorofora N-N1troso-01-n-Propylaa1ne 2-Methyl-2-Propanol 1.2-Dlch loroethane Iron Hexachloroethane Molecular Sulfur Lead 2-Butanone Nitrobenzene 3,3'-Oxyb1s-1-Propene 1.1.1-Trlchloroethane Magneslua Isophorone Trans-4-Chlorocyclohexanol Manganese Carbon Tetrachloride 2-N1trophenol 2-(2-Butoxyethoxy)-Ethanol Vinyl Acetate Mercury 2,4-Olnethylphenol 6-Aalno-Hexanolc Acid Nickel Broaodlchloroaethane Benzoic Acid 2.6-D1aethyl-Heptadecane 1,1.2,2-Tetrachloroethane Potasslua bis (2-chloroethoxy) Methane 2,7,10-Trtaethyl-Dodecane Selenlua 1,2-01chloropropane 2,4-Otchlorophenol 2,6,10,15-Tetraaethyl-Heptadecane Silver Trens-1,3-01chloropropene 1.2.4-Trlchlorobenzene 2,6,10-Trlaethyl-Oodecane Trlchloroethene Sodlua Naphthalene Nonanolc Acid Thallium Dlbroaochloroaethene 4-Chloroan111ne N-Methyl-N-(l-Oxododecyl)-Glyc1ne 1.1.2-Trlchloroethane Hexachlorobutadlene Tin 7.7-01chloro-B1cycloheptane Vanadlua Benzene 4-Chloro-3-Methylphenol (l.r-B1phenyl)-2,2'-D1ol c1s-l,3-01chloropropene Zinc 2-Methylnaphthalene 2-Hethyl-2-Ethyl-2-Propenotc Acid Cyanide 2-Chloroethylvlnyl Ether Hexachlorocyclopentadlene bis (4-Hethyl)-l,2-Benzened1carboxyltc Acid Broaofora 2,4.6-Trlchlorophenol 01heptyl-ES-l,2-Benzened1carboxyl1c Acid 2-Hexanone 2.4.5-Trlchlorophenol D11sononyl-1,2-Benzened1carboxyl1c Acid 4-Hethyl-2-Pentanone 2-Chloronaphthalene 3-N1tro-1.2-Benzenedtcarboxy11c Acid EP-TOXICITY ICTALS Tetrachloroethene 2-N1troan1l1ne Caprolactaa Toluene Olaethyl Phthalate EP-TOX Arsenic Chlorobenzene Acenaphthylene Ethylbenzene EP-TOX Barlua 3-N1troan1l1ne EP-TOX Cadalua Styrene Acenaphthene PESTICIDES Total Xylenes EP-TOX Chroalua 2,4-Dlnltrophenol EP-TOX Lead 4-Nttrophenol Alpha-BHC EP-TOX Mercury TENTATIVELY IOENTIFIEO VOCs Olbenzofuran Beta-BHC EP-TOX Selenlua 2,4-Dlnltrotoluene Oelta-BHC EP-TOX Silver 1,1,2-Trlchlorotrlfluoro Ethane 2,6-01nltrotoluene Gaaaa-BHC (Lindane) Hexane Diethyl Phthalate Heptachlor Broaochloroaethane 4-Chlorophenyl Phenyl Ether Aldrln Fluorene Heptachlor Epoxide MISCELLANEOUS INORGANIC COMPOUNDS 4-N1troan1l1ne Endosulfan I 4,6-01n1tro-2-Methylphenol Dleldrln Phenols (ug/L In aqueous samples) N-Nltrosodlphenylaalne 4,4'-D0E Aaaonla 4-Broaophenyl Phenyl Ether Endrln Nitrites Hexachlorobenzene Endosulfan II Nitrates Pentachlorophenol 4,4'-D00 Nitrate-Nitrite Phenanthrene Endrln Aldehyde Chlorides Anthracene Endosulfan Sulfate Total Dissolved Solids 01-N-Butyl Phthalate 4,4'-D0T Total Organic Carbon Fluoranthene Nethoxychlor Pyrene Endrln Ketone Butyl Benzyl Phthalate Chlordane 3,3'-01chlorobenz1d1ne Toxaphene Benzo(A)Anthracene bis (2-Ethylhexyl) Phthalate Chrysene Dl-N-Octyl Phthalate POIYCHLORIHATED BIPHENYLS (PCBs) BenzofblFluoranthene Benzolk Fluoranthene Aroclor-1016 Benzo(a Pyrene Aroclor-1221 Indeno 1,2.3-cd) Pyrene Aroclor-1232 01benzofa,hIAnthracene Aroclor-1242 Benzo(g,h,1JPerylene Aroclor-1248 Aroclor-1254 6613 LOO 10-3 Aroclor-1260 TABLE 1-2 COMPOUNDS DETECTED AT THE FULTON TERMINALS SITE SOIL SAMPLES LOCATION 1-1S 1-2D 2-1S 2-2M 3-1S 3-2M 4-IS 4-3D 5-1S 5-2D 6-IS 7-2S 8-1S 8-2D 9-1S 9-2S VOLATILE ORGANICS, PPB
VINYL CHLORIDE 9 10.5 8 11 9 8.5 750 10.5 5.5 6 8.5 20000 4100 26 9.5 8.5 8 9 METHYLENE CHLORIDE 7 6 4 5.5 18 9.5 1850 6.5 3 10.5 4.5 50 2400 13 19 15.5 8 4.5 ACETONE 9 205 8 7300 17 2200 750 900 17 0 13.5 110 4100 26 5000 2100 2550 750 1.1-DICHL0R0ETHENE 4.5 5.5 4 5.5 4.5 4.5 375 5.5 3 3 4.5 100 2050 13 4.5 4.5 4 4.5 1,l-DICHLOROETHANE 4.5 5.5 4 5.5 4.5 4.5 375 5.5 3 3 4.5 67 2050 13 4.5 4.5 4 4.5 1.2-DICHLOROETHANE 4.5 5.5 4 5.5 4.5 4.5 375 5.5 3 3 4.5 30 2050 13 4.5 4.5 4 4.5 1.2 DICHLOROETHENE (total) 4.5 5.5 4 5.5 4.5 4.5 375 5.5 3 3 4.5 30000 5300 13 4.5 4.5 4 4.5 CHLOROFORM 4.5 5.5 4 5.5 4.5 4.5 375 5,5 3 3 4.5 15 2050 13 2 4.5 4 4.5 2-BUTANONE 9 10.5 9 800 27 30 4100 4.5 8.5 1.1,1-TRICHLOROETHANE 4.5 5.5 4 5.5 4.5 4.5 375 5.5 3 3 4.5 380 2050 13 4.5 4.5 4 4.5 TRICHLOROETHENE 4.5 5.5 4 5.5 4.5 4.5 270 5.5 3 3 4.5 13000 110000 280 4.5 4.5 4 4.5 BENZENE 4.5 23 4 5.5 4.5 * 5 375 5.5 3 3 4.5 93 2050 13 4.5 4.5 4 4.5 4-METHYL-2-PENTANONE 9 10.5 11 9 8.5 1300 10.5 5.5 6 8.5 30 4100 26 2 8.5 8 9 2-HEXANONE 9 10.5 11 9 8.5 750 10.5 5.5 6 8.5 30 4100 26 9.5 8.5 8 9 TETRACHLOROETHENE 4.5 5.5 4 5.5 4.5 4.5 300 5.5 3 3 4.5 15 5800 33 4.5 4.5 4 4.5 TOLUENE 4.5 49 4 5.5 4.5 5 375 5.5 3 3 4.5 15 2050 13 4.5 4.5 4 4.5 CHLOROBENZENE 4.5 5.5 4 5.5 4.5 4.5 375 5.5 3 3 4.5 15 2050 13 4.5 4.5 4 4.5 ETHYLBENZENE 4.5 17 4 5.5 4.5 2 375 5.5 3 3 4.5 15 2050 13 4.5 4.5 4 4.5 STYRENE 4.5 5.5 4 5.5 4.5 4.5 375 5.5 3 3 4.5 15 2050 13 4.5 4.5 4 4.5 XYLENE (total) 4.5 170 4 5.5 4.5 20 375 5.5 3 3 4.5 15 2050 13 4.5 4.5 4 4.5 TRANS-1.2-DICHLOROETHENE PESTICIDES/PCBs
4,4'-DOT 19 10 8.5 11 10 9.5 10.5 8.5 10 9 9 9 9.5 9.5 9.5 9 9 ENDRIN KETONE 8.5 10 8.5 11 20 9.5 10.5 8.5 10 9 9 9 9.5 9.5 9.5 9 9 AROCHLOR 1248 43.5 49.5 43 55 49 47 55 43 49.5 44 44 44 47.5 46.5 47 45.5 46.5 AROCHLOR 1254 85 100 85 110 100 95 110 85 100 90 90 90 95 95 95 90 90 METALS. PPM (STATS PPB)
ALUMINUM 8050 13700 4150 6880 13200 7640 5480 7140 7920 7220 5210 5920 6480 7090 6150 6190 6730 6810 ARSENIC 5.3 4.7 4.5 45.5 14.2 79.7 26.9 19.2 2.6 66.7 3.6 37.3 4.6 2.3 6.1 7.7 20.8 16.5 BARIUM 58.3 153 23.6 177 197 64.1 167 141 88.3 156 36.7 191 122 31.5 94.6 109 114 83.4 CADMIUM 0.63 1.3 0.29 0.35 . 1.4 0.69 0.31 0.36 0.295 1.2 0.295 0.325 0.29 0.31 1.3 0.82 0.305 0.325 CALCIUM 4330 3200 3660 28000 18100 8280 1930 6860 1960 4940 2770 5810 2250 898 11800 6080 4650 5780 CHROMIUM 7.6 55.6 28.2 25.3 6.3 7.6 50.5 5.6 31.5 14.8 5.4 9.8 11.2 COPPER 24.6 33.7 80.3 39.3 25.1 31.1 17.1 22.7 147 63.7 65.5 27.6 19.3 41.7 228 22.1 22.2 IRON 14100 22000 13700 25800 35100 12500 35500 12400 14300 28100 11200 29000 14400 6400 10500 14600 12100 15000 LEAD 27.6 6.9 14.3 94.7 26.3 85.7 80.7 53.1 5.4 337 19 89.5 133 14.9 64.7 64.5 479 39.6 MAGNESIUM 3300 3710 2900 5940 4230 15100 6260 1550 2820 10500 2730 3600 4180 1370 1890 3040 3470 4210 MANGANESE 549 1020 758 409 520 818 414 1390 956 638 604 835 437 110 497 919 497 945 MERCURY 0.06 0.06 0.05 0.06 0.055 0.05 0.05 0.25 0.15 0.06 0.05 0.055 0.05 0.055 0.15 0.055 0.055 0.05 NICKEL 14.5 16.8 11.8 126 24.2 119 39.9 16.6 10.8 137 8.7 68 28.2 6.9 16.1 17.2 14.5 24.6 SILVER 2.2 2.3 0.85 1 2.4 1 0.9 1.05 0.85 1 0.85 0.95 0.85 0.9 2 3 0.9 0.95 VANADIUM 16.7 23.4 11.3 90.9 21.2 17.3 28.7 13 12.1 111 8.5 133 19.6 10.1 16.2 14.8 13.8 16.2 ZIW 48.7 35.1 44.9 103 128 83.3 32.8 143 31 72.6 230 49 59.4 68.8 102 52.6 oozz Notes: S - Shallow depth, 0-2 or 2-4 feet; M - Medium depth. 4-6 feet; and D - Deep depth, 8-10 feet LOO lag
(CONTINUED) TABLE 1-2 (CONTINUED) SOIL SAMPLES LOCATION 10-1S 10-2D 11-1S 11-20 12-IS 12-2D 13-1S 13-2H 14-IS 14-2S 15-1S 15-2S VOLATILE ORGANICS, PPB 16-1S 16-2D 17-1S 17-20 18- IS 18-20
VINYL CHLORIDE 8.5 10 9 6.5 6 9 8.5 9 30000 9 9 METHYLENE CHLORIDE 9 9 8.5 8.5 9.5 9.5 4 5 6 3 3 17 6 14 34500 9.5 13 7.5 ACETONE 7.5 5.5 6 19 6.5 345 17000 255 95 4.5 8.5 18.5 3000 345 485 10.5 1,1-DICHLOROETHENE 180000 8.5 8.5 3600 215 4 5 4.5 3 3 4.5 4 4.5 15000 4.5 4.5 4.5 1.1-DICHLOROETHANE 4.5 4.5 5 4.5 4 5 4.5 3 3 4.5 4 4.5 15000 4.5 4.5 4.5 1.2-DICHLOROETHANE 4.5 4.5 5 4.5 4 5 4.5 3 3 4.5 4 4.5 15000 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 1.2 DICHLOROETHENE (total) 4.5 5 4.5 4 5 4.5 3 31 4.5 4 4.5 15000 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 5 4.5 CHLOROFORM 4 5 4.5 3 3 4.5 4 4.5 15000 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 5 4.5 2-BUTANONE 14 31500 1,1,1-TRICHLOROETHANE 8.5 4.5 4 5 4.5 3 3 4.5 4.5 15000 4.5 4.5 4.5 TRICHLOROETHENE 4.5 4.5 5 4.5 4 5 4.5 3 3 4.5 4.5 15000 4.5 4.5 4.5 BENZENE 4.5 4.5 5 4.5 4 5 4.5 3 3 4.5 4.5 15000 4.5 4.5 4.5 4-METHYL-2-PENTANONE 4.5 4.5 5 4.5 8.5 10 9 6.5 6 9 9 30000 9 9 9 2-HEXANONE 9 8.5 8.5 9.5 9.5 8.5 10 9 6.5 6 9 9 30000 9 9 9 TETRACHLOROETHENE 9 8.5 8.5 9.5 9.5 4 5 4.5 3 3 4.5 4.5 15000 4.5 4.5 4.5 TOLUENE 4.5 4.5 5 4.5 4 5 4.5 3 3 4.5 4.5 15000 4.5 4.5 4.5 CHLOROBENZENE 4.5 4.5 5 4.5 4 5 4.5 3 3 4.5 4.5 15000 4.5 4.5 4.5 ETHYLBENZENE 4.5 4.5 5 9 4 5 4.5 3 3 4.5 4.5 15000 4.5 4.5 4.5 STYRENE 4.5 4.5 5 5 4 5 4.5 3 3 4.5 4.5 15000 4.5 4.5 4.5 XYLENE (total) 4.5 4.5 5 4.5 4 5 4.5 3 3 4.5 4.5 240000 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 TRANS-1.2-DICHLOROETHENE 4.5 5 4.5
PESTICIOES/PCBs
4,4'-DDT 9 10 9.5 10 10 10 9.5 9.5 9 9.5 9.5 9.5 5 9 9 9.5 9 ENDRIN KETONE 9 10 9.5 10 10 10 9.5 9.5 9 9.5 9.5 9.5 5 9 9 9.5 9 AROCHLOR 1248 44.5 49 46.5 50 50 49 46.5 47 44 47 46.5 46.5 50 45.5 46 46.5 46 AROCHLOR 1254 90 100 95 100 100 100 95 95 90 95 95 95 100 90 90 95 90 METALS. DATA IS PPM, STATS PPB
ALUMINUM 4810 12800 5990 6460 10300 8110 6840 8170 6020 8220 21400 6010 5790 6150 2370 ARSENIC 6330 8860 11900 5.1 3.8 3.9 3.1 7.7 5.3 4.4 9.5 4.9 2.1 18.8 2.7 9 18.7 2.3 BARIUM 5.5 11.6 7.8 588 131 36.7 56 73.8 58.3 87.5 119 116 41.9 83.8 18.4 211 1710 44.9 CADMIUM 140 183 185 0.305 0.325 0.77 0.33 0.335 0.315 0.3 0.295 0.305 0.305 0.98 0.32 0.305 0.325 0.98 0.3 CALCIUM 1.5 0.36 6790 1650 23400 4900 2550 32200 6850 1370 9530 3920 56100 4950 7770 1920 7110 2670 CHROMIUM 29800 2920 8.3 15.8 13.5 10.1 8 10.4 12.8 9.5 6.4 7.4 140 15.2 14 7.1 COPPER 13.3 15.3 8.3 8.1 53.6 16 12.2 23.2 30.4 35.9 18.8 18.2 21.5 11.6 36.4 33.5 IRON 19.9 20.1 53.6 31.8 10200 18600 12200 12700 12800 16300 15900 21000 5710 9000 29100 12200 12500 20600 12500 12100 13700 24000 LEAD 4.9 9.8 44 20.3 35.1 13.5 190 14.8 268 67.8 39 36.8 MAGNESIUM 4 22.5 8.2 266 6.6 3060 3440 7180 2610 1140 9770 5740 3600 2590 2920 20800 2790 3020 2870 2240 MANGANESE 2300 4110 5670 190 496 389 374 212 656 699 1490 131 146 346 157 334 9050 MERCURY 197 585 306 1510 0.41 0.06 0.36 0.13 0.06 0.055 0.05 0.05 0.18 0.055 0.22 0.05 0.19 0.06 0.055 0.055 0.055 0.06 NICKEL 15.3 15.5 13.3 12.8 6.7 13.2 16.2 19 7.3 9.9 30.3 7.8 33.1 19 7.6 13.4 16.3 27.9 SILVER 0.9 0.95 0.85 0.95 0.95 0.9 0.85 0.85 0.9 0.9 0.95 0.9 0.9 0.95 VANADIUM 1.1 2 0.95 1.05 6.7 19.8 13.1 11.6 15.6 15.8 22.8 15.5 13.3 20.5 77.6 12 14.6 11.5 5.9 ZINC 8.2 45.6 20.5 29.8 34.3 68.8 33.2 33.6 28.9 34.2 17.3 92 218 311 57.4 r Notes: S - Shallow depth, 0-2 or 2-4 feet; M - Medium depth, 4-6 feet; and D - Deep depth. 8-10 feet TOZZ LOO TAJ (CONTINUEO) TABLE 1-2 (CONTINUED) SOIL SAMPLES LOCATION 19-1S 19-20 20-IS 20-20 21-IS 21-2M 22-1S 22-2M 3-1S 23-20 24-1S 24-2M 25-IS VOLATILE ORGANICS. PPB 25-2S 25-3D 26-IS 26-2M 27-1S 27-2M
VINYL CHLORIDE 9 1650 9.5 9.5 8 8 8 8.5 9.5 1650 8 8 5.5 5.5 5.5 6 7000 6 2400 METHYLENE CHLORIDE 11.5 800 14 19 5 4 7 4 4.5 850 4 5 10 10 10 3 3450 3 1200 ACETONE 9 2150 410 2550 8 8 1500 2800 165 7500 8 80 5.5 5.5 5.5 32.5 80000 8.5 95000 1,1-DICHLOROETHENE 4.5 800 4.5 5 4 4 4 4.5 850 4 4 2.5 3 2.5 3 3450 3 1200 1.1-DICHLOROETHANE 4.5 800 4.5 5 4 4 4 4.5 850 4 4 2.5 3 2.5 3 3450 3 1200 1.2 DICHLOROETHENE (total) 4.5 800 4.5 5 4 4 4 4.5 850 4 4 2.5 3 CHLOROFORM 2.5 3 3450 4.5 800 4.5 5 4 4 4 4.5 850 4 4 2.5 3 2.5 3 1.2-DICHLOROETHANE 3450 3 1200 4.5 800 4.5 5 4 4 4 4.5 850 4 4 2.5 3 2.5 2-BUTANONE 3 3450 3 1200 9 3750 9.5 9.5 8 8 8 9.5 4350 8 8 6 7000 1.1.1-TRICHLOROETHANE 23 5500 4.5 800 4.5 5 4 4 4 4.5 850 4 4 2.5 3 2.5 3 TRICHLOROETHENE 3450 3 1200 4.5 800 4.5 5 4 4 4 4.5 850 4 4 2.5 3 2.5 3 3450 BENZENE 3 1200 4.5 800 4.5 5 4 4 4 4.5 850 4 4 2.5 3 2.5 3 3450 4-METHYL-2-PENTAN0NE 3 1200 9 1650 9.5 9.5 8 8 8 9.5 1650 8 8 5.5 5.5 5.5 6 7000 2-HEXANONE 6 2400 9 1650 9.5 9.5 8 8 8 9.5 1650 8 8 5.5 5.5 5.5 6 7000 TETRACHLOROETHENE 6 2400 4.5 BOO 4.5 5 4 4 4 4.5 850 4 4 2.5 3 2.5 TOLUENE 3 3450 3 1200 3 800 4.5 5 4 4 4 4.5 850 4 7 2.5 3 2.5 3 CHLOROBENZENE 3450 3 1200 4.5 800 4.5 5 4 4 4 4.5 850 4 4 2.5 3 2.5 3 3450 ETHYLBENZENE 3 1200 4.5 800 4.5 5 4 4 4 4.5 850 4 4 2.5 3 2.5 3 STYRENE 3450 3 1200 4.5 800 4.5 5 4 4 4 4.5 850 4 4 2.5 3 2.5 3 3450 XYLENE (total) 3 1200 4.5 800 4.5 5 4 4 4 4.5 850 4 7 2.5 3 2.5 3 3450 TRANS-I,2-DICHL0R0ETHENE 3 1200
PESTICIDES/PCBs
4.4'-DOT 10 9.5 9.5 9 9 9.5 85 9 9 8.5 10 9 10 12 8.5 9.5 9 9.5 ENDRIN KETONE 9.5 10 9.5 9.5 9 9 9.5 9 9 9 8.5 10 9 10 12 8.5 9.5 9 9.5 9.5 AROCHLOR 1248 49.5 47 48 46 46 47 46 45.5 45.5 480 49.5 45 49.5 60 41.5 45.5 AROCHLOR 1254 47 46.5 48 100 95 95 90 90 95 90 90 90 85 350 90 100 120 85 95 90 95 95 METALS, PPM (STATS PPB)
ALUMINUM 6660 5540 8080 6760 6810 8020 6120 4860 7270 4900 9210 7920 7250 6860 6060 4440 4760 3850 5550 ARSENIC 12.8 4 2.1 4.7 6.6 10.6 9.7 4.1 11.6 2.6 8.2 8.9 4.2 4.1 4.4 10.5 3.6 9.3 BARIUM 6.1 123 66.8 69.3 79.5 495 226 236 249 68.5 86.1 89 80.4 42.9 51.8 86.8 123 47.2 86.1 CADMIUM 97.9 0.84 0.315 0.335 0.3 0.31 0,32 0.3 0.305 1.4 0.31 0.315 0.75 0.58 0.305 0.295 2.2 0.305 0.31 CALCIUM 0.32 6390 1620 929 1160 3450 2100 5430 11100 8010 1340 2280 2070 8370 7940 3950 6130 34000 3320 2950 CHROMIUM 14.6 6.7 6.7 12.2 8 12.4 8.5 10.4 11.3 11.7 6.9 COPPER 8.4 62.4 46.7 14.3 32 53.2 35.4 35.2 8.8 67.5 34.2 31.3 25.3 14.3 21.4 86.6 IRON 62.5 15800 12500 8520 14700 13400 15900 14000 12000 13800 11400 16700 16300 14800 14200 15800 17000 8450 17200 15200 LEAD 288 9.1 24.6 23.8 10.3 48.4 12.6 47.8 10.4 108 49.2 3.8 4 3.1 MAGNESIUM 54.1 56.6 3110 2660 1120 3110 2720 2970 3800 4230 2380 2570 3290 3000 3180 2730 3370 2690 3350 1460 MANGANESE 2220 455 860 390 1200 209 556 279 397 151 465 656 583 566 745 968 398 1340 MERCURY 169 310 0.17 0.05 0.15 0.055 0.2 0.055 0.14 0.11 0.18 0.05 0.35 0.22 0.05 0.055 0.055 0.75 0.05 NICKEL 0.055 0.06 20 12.8 8.1 17.5 15.2 15.9 31.4 13.6 19.4 13.6 21.6 17.4 10.6 10.6 13.4 12.3 5.8 SILVER 9.2 11.4 0.9 0.9 0.95 0.85 1.9 2.7 2.1 0.9 0.9 0.9 2.2 2.4 0.85 0.9 0.85 0.85 0.9 0.9 0.9 VANADIUM 27.3 9.3 13.6 13.6 11.4 12.9 12.4 8.5 27.2 8.6 23.7 18.5 11.8 12.1 11.2 8.6 7.3 ZINC 10.7 11.2 177 28.4 38.9 32.5 48.1 43.8 69.6 262 26.3 89.8 60 21.8 19.4 26 1060 115 47.7 78.9 Notes: S - Shallow depth, 0-2 or 2-4 feet; M - Medium depth. 4-6 feet; and D - Deep depth. 8-10 feet
(CONTINUED) TABLE 1-2 SOIL SAMPLES (CONTINUED) LOCATION IS 2S 2M 2D 3S 3M 3D 4S 4H 4D 5S 6D 7S 7N 7D 8S 8M 80 9D VOLATILE ORGANICS, PPB
VINYL CHLORIDE METHYLENE CHLORIDE 50 928 135 10 2500 50 100 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 ACETONE 1,1-DICHLOROETHENE 1,1-DICHLOROETHANE 10 22.4 10 10 500 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 1.2-OICHLOROETHANE 1.2 DICHLOROETHENE (total) CHLOROFORM 2-BUTANONE 10 10 10 10 5630 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 1.1,1-TRICHLOROETHANE 10 164 10 67.2 1460 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 TRICHLOROETHENE 10 10 43 713 44100 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 BENZENE 10 306 10 25 7440 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 4-METHYL-2-PEMTANONE 10 2140 178 51.2 500 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 2-HEXANONE 10 10 10 10 500 10 10 10 10 10 10 67.7 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 TETRACHLOROETHENE 10 10 10 391 9600 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 TOLUENE 10 1140 26.5 269 20900 10 10 10 10 24.2 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 CHLOROBEMZENE 10 4250 99.1 1000 1780 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 ETHYLBENZENE 10 142 10 315 40000 10 10 10 10 1200 10 138 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 STYRENE 10 48.3 10 50.5 79000 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 XYLENE (TOTAL) 10 622 10 1240 99400 10 10 10 10 8850 10 3830 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 TRANS-1.2-DICHLOROETHENE 10 14400 129 2030 500 10 10 29.7 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10
PESTICIDES/PCBs '
4.4'-DOT ENDRIN KETONE AROCHLOR 1248 AROCHLOR 1254
METALS. PPB
ALUMINUM ARSENIC 0.38 50 6.3 5 2.2 2 3.6 0.38 2.2 4.8 1.9 1.4 4.7 57 4.3 0.38 1.5 4.1 0.81 BARIUM CADMIUM 0.027 0.058 0.055 0.027 . 0.14 0.075 0.027 0.097 0.085 0.31 0.37 0.027 0.09 0.027 0.027 0.027 0.027 0.35 0.12 CAIVNLV rum T UFL CHROMIUM 3.8 9.6 8.7 9.5 4.3 5.9 9.7 3 8.6 21.3 7.9 4.7 8 21.7 9.8 8.2 5.3 7.1 5.9 COPPER 11 126 40.7 17.5 17.9 17.8 17.6 8.7 13 64.1 3 14 29.2 83.8 2.9 6.8 15.6 42.6 6.3 IRON LEAD 9.4 135 82.9 4.3 43 3.9 4.9 39 4.3 39 1670 5.3 13 14 3.8 7.1 4.2 5.2 4.5 NNIINCD I UN MANGANESE MERCURY NICKEL 4.4 9.2 7.3 13 7.9 7.5 12 2.9 8.5 16.6 10 8.2 10 NO 8.2 2.8 9 26.1 6.7 SILVER 0.08 0.3 1.8 0.08 0.08 0.21 0.08 0.08 0.08 3.3 0.08 0.23 0.19 0.36 0.08 0.08 0.2 1.1 0.08 VANADIUM ZINC 26 77 42 44 NO 29 41 63 22 47 253 25 43 61 28 26 39 97 26
£OZZ IQQ rj£jj TABLE 1-2 (C0NT1NUE0) SOIL SAMPLES LOCATION 1-1S 1-2D 2-IS 2-2M 3-IS 3-2M 4-1S 4-3D 5-IS 5-20 6-1S 6-2M 7-IS 7-2S B-1S 8-2D SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICS. PPB 9-IS 9-2S
PHENOL 180 205 180 225 185 400 195 84 175 205 180 365 900 395 190 41 190 1,2-DICHLOROBENZENE 190 180 205 180 225 185 400 195 225 175 205 180 365 1300 340 190 195 190 BIS(2-CHLORISOPROPYL)ETHER 190 180 205 180 225 185 400 195 225 175 205 180 365 900 395 190 195 190 190 4-METHYLPHENOL 180 205 180 225 185 400 195 225 175 205 180 365 900 395 190 195 190 BENZOIC ACID 190 850 1000 900 1100 900 1950 950 1100 850 1000 900 1750 1900 950 950 900 950 1,2,4-TRICHLOROBENZENE 180 205 180 225 185 400 195 225 175 205 180 365 480 395 190 195 190 NAPHTALENE 190 180 46 180 225 185 400 195 225 175 160 180 365 900 395 190 66 190 2-METHYLNAPTHALENE 240 180 205 180 225 185 400 195 225 175 190 180 88 900 395 300 120 190 540 2-CHL0R0NAPHTHALENE 180 205 900 1100 900 1950 950 225 175 205 180 365 7300 395 190 195 190 190 DIMETHYL PHTHALATE 180 205 180 225 185 400 195 225 175 205 180 365 900 395 190 195 190 190 ACENAPHTHYLENE 180 205 180 225 185 400 195 225 175 205 180 365 900 395 190 195 190 190 DIBENZOFURAN 180 205 180 225 185 400 195 225 175 205 180 365 900 395 190 195 FLUORENE 190 70 180 205 180 225 185 400 195 225 175 205 180 365 900 395 190 195 190 PENTACHLOROPHENOL 190 850 150 900 1100 900 1950 950 1100 850 1000 900 1750 4450 1900 950 950 1800 950 PHENANTHRENE 180 205 180 225 51 880 195 225 175 205 180 84 900 395 52 195 470 ANTHRACENE 230 180 205 180 225 185 130 195 225 175 205 180 365 900 395 190 195 74 190 DI-N-BUTYLPHTHALATE 180 205 180 225 185 400 195 225 175 205 180 365 900 395 190 195 190 FLUORANTHENE 190 44 130 180 225 68 580 195 225 175 205 180 130 900 395 77 195 880 280 PYRENE 78 140 180 225 100 3400 195 110 175 51 180 130 280 395 69 195 800 300 BENZO(A)ANTHRACENE 180 205 180 225 185 3300 195 90 175 42 180 365 900 395 69 195 460 CHRYSENE 385 44 250 58 225 100 5300 195 140 175 75 180 230 900 395 no 195 550 220 BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL)PHTHALATE 180 235 180 225 185 400 210 1200 175 370 180 365 1300 200 190 195 390 750 DI-N-OCTYL PHTHALATE 180 205 180 225 185 400 195 225 175 410 180 130 900 395 190 195 190 190 BENZOIBIFLUORANTHENE 76 330 180 225 130 1800 62 100 175 180 180 365 900 395 200 120 910 440 BENZOIN1FLUORANTHENE 76 330 180 225 130 1800 62 100 175 180 180 365 900 395 200 120 910 440 BENZO(A)PYRENE 180 205 180 225 73 2500 195 130 175 205 180 365 900 395 92 195 400 200 INDEN0(1,2,3-CD)PYRENE 180 205 180 225 185 340 195 225 175 205 180 365 900 395 190 195 180 69 DIBENZ0(A,HlANTHRACENE 180 205 180 225 185 500 195 225 175 205 180 365 900 395 190 195 190 190 BENZ0(G,H,IJPERYLENE 180 205 180 225 185 940 195 225 175 205 180 365 900 395 66 195 240 89 Notes: S - Shallow depth, 0-2 or 2-4 feet; M - Medium depth, 4-6 feet; and D - Deep depth, 8-10 feet
. pozz loo anj
(CONTINUED) TABLE 1-2 (CONTINUED) SOIL SAMPLES LOCATION 0-1S 10-2D 11-1S 11-20 12- IS 12-2D 3-15 13-2M 14-IS 14-2S 15-1S 15-2S 16-1S 16-20 17-1S SEHIVOLATILE ORGANICS, PPB 17-20 18- IS 18-20
PHENOL 185 600 195 205 205 200 190 195 195 2050 200 195 190 210 185 195 190 1,2-DICHLOROBENZENE 190 185 600 195 205 205 200 190 195 195 2050 200 195 190 210 185 195 BIS(2-CHL0RIS0PR0PYL)ETHER 190 190 185 600 195 205 205 200 190 195 195 2050 200 195 190 210 185 4-METHYLPHENOL 195 190 190 185 600 195 205 205 200 190 195 195 2050 200 195 190 210 185 195 190 BENZOIC ACID 190 900 2950 950 1000 1000 1000 950 950 950 10000 950 950 950 1000 900 950 950 1,2,4-TRICHLOROBENZENE 900 185 600 195 205 205 200 190 195 195 2050 200 195 190 210 185 195 NAPHTALENE 190 190 185 600 195 205 205 200 190 195 195 9400 59 195 190 210 185 195 190 2-HETHYLNAPTHALENE 190 185 600 195 205 205 200 190 195 195 15000 89 950 950 1000 900 63 950 2-CHLORONAPHTHALENE 900 185 600 195 205 205 200 190 195 195 2050 200 195 190 210 185 195 190 DIMETHYL PHTHALATE 190 185 600 195 205 205 200 190 195 195 2050 200 195 190 210 185 195 190 ACENAPHTHYLENE 190 185 600 195 205 205 200 190 195 195 2050 200 195 190 210 185 195 DIBENZOFURAN 190 190 185 600 195 205 205 200 190 195 195 2050 200 195 190 210 185 FLUORENE 195 190 190 185 600 195 205 205 200 190 195 195 770 200 195 190 210 185 195 PENTACHLOROPHENOL 190 190 900 2950 950 1000 1000 1000 950 950 950 10000 950 950 950 1000 900 300 950 PHENANTHRENE 900 185 10000 220 205 205 200 50 195 195 1800 78 195 93 210 59 195 190 ANTHRACENE 190 185 600 42 205 205 200 190 195 195 2050 200 195 190 210 185 195 190 DI -N-BUTYLPHTHALATE 190 185 600 195 205 205 200 190 195 195 2050 200 195 190 210 185 195 190 FLUORANTHENE 190 185 2100 280 75 205 200 53 195 195 2050 200 195 230 210 130 195 190 PYRENE 190 185 16000 410 67 205 200 120 195 195 2400 41 195 150 210 140 46 190 BENZO(A)ANTHRACENE 190 185 780 210 63 205 200 190 195 195 2050 72 195 170 210 78 195 190 CHRYSENE 190 185 1300 200 79 52 200 150 195 195 1900 92 195 160 210 93 195 190 190 BIS(2-ETHVLHEXYL)PHTHALATE 185 800 230 205 260 690 190 195 180 2050 630 195 . 190 210 185 195 190 190 DI-N-OCTYL PHTHALATE 185 600 195 205 205 200 190 195 195 2050 200 195 190 210 185 195 190 190 BENZO(B)FLUORANTHENE 185 600 210 120 205 200 240 195 195 2050 65 195 210 210 190 BENZOIKlFLUORANTHENE 195 190 190 185 600 170 120 205 200 240 195 195 2050 65 195 150 210 190 195 190 190 BENZO(A)PYRENE 185 600 190 76 42 200 140 195 195 2050 200 195 110 210 65 195 190 190 INOENO(1,2,3-CD)PYRENE 185 600 47 205 205 200 190 195 195 2050 200 195 190 210 185 195 190 190 DIBENZO(A,H)ANTHRACENE 185 600 195 205 205 200 190 195 195 2050 200 195 190 210 185 195 190 190 BENZO(G,H,IJPERYLENE 185 600 190 205 205 200 190 195 195 2050 200 195 190 210 185 195 190 190 Notes: S - Shallow depth, 0-2 or 2-4 feet M - Medium depth, 4-6 feet; and D - Deep depth. 8-10 feet
S0" 100 I
(CONTINUED) TABLE 1-2 (CONTINUED) SOIL SAMPLES LOCATION 19- IS 19-20 20-IS 20-20 !1-1S 21-2M 22-IS 22-2M 23-1S 23-2D SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICS, PPB 24-1S 24-2M 25-2S 25-3D 26-IS 26-2M 27-1S 27-2M
PHENOL 405 195 200 190 190 195 190 185 395 900 205 185 250 170 1,2-OICHLOROBENZENE 405 195 195 185 190 200 200 190 190 195 190 185 395 900 205 185 250 170 BIS(2-CHLORISOPROPYL)ETHER 405 195 195 185 190 200 200 190 190 195 190 185 395 900 205 185 250 170 4-METHYLPHENOL 405 195 195 185 190 200 200 190 190 195 190 185 395 900 205 90 250 170 BENZOIC ACID 2000 950 195 185 190 200 950 950 900 950 900 900 96 4300 1000 900 1200 850 1,2,4-TRICHLOROBENZENE 405 195 200 190 950 950 190 195 190 185 395 900 205 185 250 170 195 185 NAPHTALENE 405 195 200 190 190 200 190 195 190 185 395 900 55 51 250 170 195 185 63 2-METHYLNAPTHALENE 170 4500 950 950 900 78 950 47 900 1900 17000 64 51 250 170 195 185 100 2-CHLORONAPHTHALENE 405 195 200 190 190 140 195 190 185 395 900 205 185 250 170 195 185 190 200 DIMETHYL PHTHALATE 405 195 200 190 190 195 190 185 395 900 205 185 250 170 195 185 190 ACENAPHTHYLENE 405 195 200 190 200 190 195 190 185 395 900 205 185 250 170 195 185 190 DIBENZOFURAN 405 280 200 190 200 190 195 65 185 395 1400 205 185 250 170 195 185 59 FLUORENE 405 530 200 130 60 190 195 59 185 395 2800 205 185 250 170 195 185 PENTACHLOROPHENOL 2000 950 950 950 190 200 900 950 900 900 1900 4300 1000 900 1200 850 950 900 PHENANTHRENE no 930 44 150 86 950 190 43 1000 185 140 4700 64 100 380 170 195 185 470 ANTHRACENE 405 195 200 190 310 190 195 160 185 395 190 205 185 85 170 195 185 OI-N-BUTYLPHTHALATE 90 53 200 190 100 53 190 195 190 185 395 900 205 185 250 170 195 185 FLUORANTHENE 280 77 200 190 200 190 190 49 820 45 no 900 205 185 440 170 195 PYRENE 150 110 200 185 590 320 76 190 42 1000 92 520 370 160 185 450 170 195 BENZO(A)ANTHRACENE 405 77 185 430 260 200 190 190 195 390 73 395 900 205 185 270 170 195 CHRYSENE 405 100 55 185 350 200 190 190 195 410 93 395 900 170 185 270 170 195 BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL)PHTHALATE 405 195 920 185 410 290 1400 860 340 190 185 395 330 400 185 240 81 160 89 DI-N-OCTYL PHTHALATE 405 195 200 190 94 100 190 195 190 185 395 900 205 185 250 170 195 185 190 BENZOIBIFLUORANTHENE 405 120 200 190 200 190 195 740 56 395 900 205 51 260 170 195 185 BENZOiKIFLUORANTHENE 405 120 200 720 370 190 190 195 740 185 395 900 205 185 230 170 195 185 BENZO(A)PYRENE 405 87 200 190 720 370 190 195 300 44 395 900 205 185 220 170 195 185 280 INDENO(1,2,3-CD)PYRENE 405 195 200 190 140 190 195 140 185 395 900 205 185 250 170 195 185 140 69 DIBENZO(A.H)ANTHRACENE 405 195 200 190 190 195 190 185 395 900 205 51 250 170 195 185 86 56 BENZO(G,H, IJPERYLENE 405 63 200 190 190 195 180 185 395 900 205 185 250 170 195 185 140 81 Notes: S - Shallow depth, 0-2 or 2-4 feet: N - Medium depth, 4-6 feet; and D - Deep depth, 8-10 feet
90ZZ LOO Kid (CONTINUED) Table 1-2 (continued) GROUNDWATER SAMPLES
FBW-1S FBW-1D FBW-ZS FBW-20 FBW-3 FBW-4S FBW-4D FBW-5S BW-50 FBW-6 1mw -is BMW-ID BMW-2 BMW-3S BMW-30 BMW-4 BMW-5 BMW-6S BMW-60 BMW-7 VOLATILE ORGANICS, (PPB)
VINYL CHLORIDE 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 48 0.25 0.25 1.8 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 88 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 TRICHLOROFLUOROMETHANE 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 3.7 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 1,1,-OICHLOROETHENE 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 2.7 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 49.6 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 METHYLENE CHLORIDE 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 185.9 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 ACETONE 68.2 66.9 60.5 15340.6 52.1 68.5 0.5 103.6 223.6 187.6 0.5 0.5 0.5 33.5 973.4 290.9 60 0.5 0.5 50 1,1-OICM.OROETHANE 0-S 0.5 0.5 0.5 5.8 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 14.9 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 24.3 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 CIS-1.2-01CHLOROETHENE 1.7 1.6 2.8 0.5 827.2 3.2 0.5 14.4 0.5 192 28.9 0.5 5.8 1.9 14387 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 1.1,1-TRICHLOROETHANE 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 113.2 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 BENZENE 51.2 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 422.7 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 20.8 0.5 0.5 10 88.2 0.5 TRICHLOROETHENE 0.5 0.5 0.6 0.5 3.5 0.7 0.5 6.2 0.5 0.5 20.1 0.5 1.2 3.1 2388 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 TOLUENE 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.4 1 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 64.9 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 6.8 0.5 0.5 3.6 3.9 0.5 TETRACHLOROETHENE 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.5 6.8 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 CHLOROBENZENE 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 1.3 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 162 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 ETHYLBENZENE 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 432.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 2.4 0.5 0.5 85 56.35 0.5 TOTAL XYLENE 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 303 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 3.1 0.5 1.4 105.8 SB.4 0.5 4-METHYL-2-PENTAN0HE 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 393 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 1,3,S-TRIHETHYLBENZENE 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 16.4 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 12.6 34.4 0.5 N-PROPYLBENZENE 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 81.7 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 37.7 0.5 1,2,4-TRIHETHYl BENZENE 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 2.6 215.8 237.6 0.5 SEC-BUTYLBENZEIC 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 3 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 1,2-DICHLOROBENZENE 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 24.4 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 NAPTHALENE 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 ' 0.5 0.5 0.5 79.6 2.7 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 32.6 48.7 0.5
SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICS, PPB
PHENOL 5 5 5 5 HA NA 5 NA 5 NA NA 5 5 11 5 5 5 NA NA NA 1,2-DICHLOROBENZENE 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 11 5 5 5 7 5 5 5 5 5 5 BENZOIC ACID 25 25 25 25 NA NA 25 NA 25 NA HA 25 25 47 25 25 25 NA NA NA NAPHTALENE 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 92 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 7 31 5
CHRYSENE 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 RISI2TETHYLHEXYL)PHTHALATE 2 62 10 5 5 6 5 4 7 2 6 2 5 5 28 5 5 5 5 5 N, 3 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 LOZZ LOO iru 1 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 4 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 4 5 5 Table 1-2 (continued) GROUNDWATER SAMPLES
FBW-1S FBW-1D FBH-2S F8W-20 FBW-3 FBW-4S FBW-40 FBW-SS FBW-50 FBW-6 INORGANICS, (PPB)
ALUMINUM 49400 107000 2220 5000 69900 48500 231 21800 4140 28700
ANTIMONY 28.8 57.8 9.35 26.5 36.8 9.35 9.35 23.1 935
ARSENIC 19.5 18.9 15.5 38.5 29.9 23.3 10.4 5.9 7.1 48.1
BARIUM 1790 11200 448 1440 1390 2120 21100 501 1170 2700
BERYLLIUM 6 5.4 6 2.7 0.65 2.7 5.5
CADMIUM 5.1 60.1 1.4 5.7 7.8 5.3 1.4 1.4 1.4 5.1
CALCIUM 118000 772000 128000 408000 264000 116000 352000 192000 148000 206000
CHROMIUM 1690 10800 523 131 149 7420 739 93.1 40.2 42.8 COBALT 63.4 200 9.2 62.9 162 14.6 19.2 8.8 18.5
COPPER 301 1120 16 150 447 377 34.1 48.8 15.2
IRON 130000 916000 7900 6760 185000 192000 3560 37200 10800 122000
LEAD 43.7 62 5.6 10.4 241 36.1 9.4 15 5.1 44.3
MAGNESIUM - 36800 74600 21900 55300 67700 41800 54700 37000 38700 48700
MANGANESE 17800 22100 2960 203 7910 24900 339 7870 704 32100 MERCURY 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.6 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1
NICKEL 1000 2500 270 73.1 174 3760 1180 53.6 25.6 67.1
POTASSIUM 12800 38400 6150 23600 12000 11000 . 28600 7120 4960 27100
SELENIUM 5.75
SILVER 4.05 4.05 4.05 4.05 4.05 4.05 4.05 12.7
SOOIUH 87200 340000 119000 231000 74400 107000 917000 143000 169000 26300
THALLIUM 0.7 0.65 3.5 0.7 3.5 3.5 3.5 0.7
VANADIUM B4.2 67.8 4.2 7.6 133 6 41.4 8.8 37
ZINC 258 1820 34.2 398 441 342 80.9 92.1 104 135
CYANIDE 14.2 34.3
8023 Z.00 ma TABLE 1-2 (CONTINUED) SURFACE HATER SAMPLES LOCATION SH-1S SH-2S SH-3S SH-3D SH-4S ALUMINUM 11.9 1020 ANTIMONY 9.35 9.35 23.6 9.35 24.2 ARSENIC 1.4 2.8 2.2 2 2.4 BARIUM 4.6 38.5 39.7 45.6 69 BERYLLIUM CADMIUM 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 CALCIUM 44.25 63300 66000 63900 67400 CHROMIUM 4.4 4.4 4.4 59 4.4 COBALT 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.75 7.6 COPPER 3.1 3.1 3.1 12.3 7.9 IRON 13.7 1770 LEAD 4.7 2.6 4.6 5.6 7.1 MAGNESIUM 63 12400 12900 12800 13700 MANGANESE 248 MERCURY 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 NICKEL 4.35 4.35 4.35 4.35 4.35 POTASSIUM 1.335 2230 2280 2290 2540 SELENIUM 1.1 2.7 1.1 1.15 SILVER 4.05 4.05 4.05 8.1 4.05 SODIUM 107 42600 44200 45900 47300 THALLIUM 0.65 0.65 0.65 3.5 3.5 VANADIUM 2.15 2.15 2.15 2.15 2.15 ZINC 3.9 3.9 7.85 3790
! 6022 Z-00 I TABLE 1-2 (CONTINUED) SURFACE MATER SAMPLES LOCATION MS SH-2S SW-3S SM-3D SW-4S VOLATILE ORGANICS. (PPB)
CHLOROHETHANE 5 5 5 5 5 BROMOMETHANE 5 5 5 5 5 VINYL CHLORIDE 5 5 5 5 5 CHLOROETHANE 5 5 5 5 5 METHYLENE CHLORIDE 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 ACETONE 130 22.5 11.5 5 80 CARBON DISULFIDE 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 1,1-DICHLOROETHENE 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 1.1-DICHLOROETHANE 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 1.2-DICHLOROETHENE (total) 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 CHLOROFORM 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 1.2-DICHLOROETHANE 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2-BUTANONE 5 2.5 5 5 5 1.1.1-TRICHLOROETHANE 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 CARBON TETRACHLORIDE 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 VINYL ACETATE 5 5 5 5 5 BROMODICHLOROMETHANE 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 1,2-DICHLOROPROPANE 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 CIS-1,3-OICHLOROPROPENE 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 TRICHLOROETHENE 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 D1BROHOCHLOROMETHANE 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 1.1.2-TRICHLOROETHANE 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 BENZENE 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 TRANS-1,3-DICHLOROPROPENE 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 BROHOFORM 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 4-METHYL-2-PENTANONE 5 5 5 5 5 2-HEXANONE 5 5 5 5 5 TETRACHLOROETHENE 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 1,1,2,2-TETRACHL0R0ETHANE 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 TOLUENE 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 CHLOROBENZENE 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 ETHYLBENZENE 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 STYRENE 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 XYLENE (total) 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICS. (PPB)
BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL)PHTHALATE 11 5.6 6.4
QTZZ LOO TABLE 1-2 SEDIMENT SAMPLES (CONTINUED) LOCATION SD-1S SD-2S SD-3S SD-4S VOLATILE ORGANICS, (PPB)
CHLOROMETHANE 11.5 8 12.5 12.5 BROMOMETHANE 11.5 8 12.5 12.5 VINYL CHLORIDE 11.5 8 12.5 12.5 CHLOROETHANE 11.5 8 12.5 12.5 METHYLENE CHLORIDE 8 4 24 10.5 ACETONE 11.5 27.5 29 75 CARBON DISULFIDE 5.5 4 6.5 6 1,1-OICHLOROETHENE 5.5 4 6.5 6 1.1-DICHLOROETHANE 5.5 4 6.5 6 1.2-DICHLOROETHENE (total) 5.5 4 6.5 6 CHLOROFORM 5.5 4 6 6 1,2-DICHLOROETHANE 5.5 4 6.5 6 2-BUTANONE 12.5 12.5 1.1.1-TRICHLOROETHANE 5.5 4 6.5 6 CARBON TETRACHLORIDE 5.5 4 6.5 6 VINYL ACETATE 11.5 12.5 12.5 BROMOOICHLOROMETHANE 5.5 4 6.5 6 1,2-DICHLOROPROPANE 5.5 4 6.5 6 CIS-I,3-0ICHL0R0PR0PENE 5.5 4 6.5 6 TRICHLOROETHENE 5.5 4 6.5 6 DIBROHOCHLOROWTHANE 5.5 4 6.5 6 1.1.2-TRICHLOROETHANE 5.5 4 6.5 6 BENZENE 5.5 4 6.5 6 TRANS-l,3-DICHLOROPROPENE 5.5 4 6.5 6 BROMOFORM 5.5 4 6.5 6 4-METHYL-2-PENTANONE 11.5 12.5 12.5 2-HEXANONE 11.5 12.5 12.5 TETRACHLOROETHENE 5.5 4 6.5 6 1,1,2,2-TETRACHLOROETHANE 5.5 4 6.5 6 TOLUENE 5.5 6.5 6 CHL0R08ENZENE 5.5 4 6.5 6 ETHYLBENZENE 5.5 4 6.5. 6 STYRENE 5.5 4 6.5 6 XYLENE (total) 5.5 6.5 3
IIZZ ^oo mj TABLE 1-2 SEDIMENT SAMPLES (CONTINUED) LOCATION I-1S SD-2S SD-3S SD-4S SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICS. (PPB)
PHENATHRENE 75 195 820 215 FLUOROANTHNENE 140 44 1900 215 PYRENE 150 65 1200 215 BENZO(A)ANTHRACENE 85 195 820 215 BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL)PHTHALATE 210 195 250 210 CHYRSENE 88 195 820 215 BENZOFLUORANTHENE 80 195 1600 215 BENZO(A)PYRENE 68 195 720 215 INDENOPYRENE 210 195 370 215 BENZOPERYLENE 210 195 370 215 METALS, (PPM)
ALUMINUM 5620 4220 9000 6580 ANTIMONY 2.5 2 2.75 2.2 ARSENIC 7.3 2 6.2 7.2 BARIUM 99.9 34.8 160 72.2 BERYLLIUM 1.3 0.9 1.2 0.31 CADMIUM 0.375 0.3 0.89 0.325 N> CALCIUM 64600 33100 32200 21800 O CHROMIUM 9.3 7.3 8.4 5.8 COBALT 5 3.4 6.7 5.9 COPPER 14.8 12.8 41.2 17.8 IRON 11700 14400 15700 13900 LEAD 18 8.4 111 4.8 MAGNESIUM 9000 9660 7710 8600 MANGANESE 313 1060 278 476 MERCURY 0.055 0.055 1.4 0.055 NICKEL 13 11.2 16.4 12 POTASSIUM 8.38 464 1600 1100 SELENIUM 0.28 0.24 0.99 0.64 SILVER 1.1 0.85 1.2 0.95 SOOIUM 214 128 191 170 THALLIUM 0.165 0.14 0.21 0.16 VANADIUM 10.7 7.6 13.3 13.1 ZINC 91.8 32.8 57.5
zizz LOO TABLE 1-3 SUMMARY STATISTICS OF SOIL DATA, (ppb)
Number of Geometric Occurences Maximum Mean VOLATILE ORGANICS
VINYL CHLORIDE 1 20000 21.02879 METHYLENE CHLORIDE 2 S4500 23.97401 ACETONE 4 180000 203.7378 1,1-DICHLOROETHENE 1 15000 1.1-DICHLOROETHANE 9.628741 2 15000 10.31655 1,2 DICHLOROETHENE (total) 4 30000 10.66800 CHLOROFORM 1 15000 9.157776 1.2-DICHL0R0ETHANE 1 15000 9.26338 2-BUTANONE 1 31500 27.19702 1,1,1-TRICHLOROETHANE 3 15000 11.30869 TRICHLOROETHENE 4 110000 13.82906 BENZENE 6 15000 11.52638 4-METHYL-2-PENTANONE 4 30000 18.88666 2-HEXANONE 1 30000 17.16967 TETRACHLOROETHENE 4 15000 11.21050 TOLUENE 7 20900 12.45702 CHLOROBENZENE 5 15000 12.26191 ETHYLBENZENE 7 40000 STYRENE 12.84768 3 79000 11.19321 XYLENE (TOTAL) 6 240000 16.19696 TRANS-1,2-DICHLOROETHENE 4 14400 28.86890 PESTICIDES/PCBs
4,4'-DDT 2 85 9.851558 ENDRIN KETONE 1 20 9.423104 AROCHLOR 1248 1 480 AROCHLOR 1254 49.18435 1 350 96.56964 METALS
ALUMINUM 55 21400000 6834510. ARSENIC 71 79700 5662.551 BARIUM 51 1710000 101221.6 CADMIUM 27 2200 CALCIUM 270.3088 55 56100000 4858513. CHROMIUM 60 140000 10399.34 COPPER 70 228000 26034.04 IRON 55 35500000 14701569 LEAD 70 1670000 25077.35 MAGNESIUM 55 20800000 3348162. MANGANESE 55 9050000 501384.6 MERCURY 20 750 84.64094 NICKEL 74 137000 14520.25 SILVER 21 3300 695.8250 VANADIUM 55 133000 ZINC 16136.73 65 1060000 56411.50
1-21 TABLE 1-3 (CONTINUED)
Number of Geometric Occurences Maximum Mean SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICS
PHENOL • 2 2050 223.4393 1,2-DICHLOROBENZENE 2 2050 235.1673 BIS(2-CHLORISOPROPYL)ETHER 1 2050 234.2208 4-METHYLPHENOL 1 2050 231.1162 BENZOIC ACID 1 10000 1056.724 1,2,4-TRICHLOROBENZENE 1 2050 231.5100 NAPHTALENE 10 9400 205.9748 2-METHYLNAPTHALENE 15 17000 332.3058 2-CHLORONAPHTHALENE 1 7300 282.0759 DIMETHYL PHTHALATE 1 2050 234.2208 ACENAPHTHYLENE 1 2050 234.2208 DIBENZOFURAN 6 2050 218.9488 FLUORENE 5 2800 232.5210 PENTACHLOROPHENOL 3 10000 1044.994 PHENANTHRENE 26 10000 216.5263 ANTHRACENE 8 2050 200.5600 DI-N-BUTYLPHTHALATE 2 2050 222.3575 FLUORANTHENE 23 2100 213.1961 PYRENE 32 16000 208.4055 BENZO(A)ANTHRACENE 17 3300 221.1291 CHRYSENE 27 5300 209.6863 BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL)PHTHALATE 23 2050 278.7374 DI-N-OCTYL PHTHALATE 1 2050 232.7541 BENZO(B)FLUORANTHENE 23 2050 233.3655 BENZO(K)FLUORANTHENE 22 2050 241.3343 BENZO(A)PYRENE 18 2500 209.7448 INDENO(1,2,3-CD)PYRENE 7 2050 216.1837 DIBENZO(A,H)ANTHRACENE 3 2050 221.0264 BENZO(G,H,I)PERYLENE 9 2050 220.9615
1-22 Of the volatile organics, benzene, chlorobenzene, ethylbenzene, toluene, and xylene:; (ortho, meta, and para isomers) represent the most frequently observed compounds ("hits"), occurring in over 40 percent of the samples taken. There is no clear pattern of the VOC distribution from shallow to deep soil samples. Samples from the same soil boring will occasionally have concentrations 2 to 3 magnitudes different with no clear trend of, for example, higher concentrations of VOCs in the surface soils.
Metal contamination in soils is more difficult to assess. Metals are frequently naturally occurring constituents derived from the underlying rock or parent material. In order to determine if levels of metals found in soil samples at the Fulton Terminals Site represent a potential health risk, comparisons can be made to either national or regional averages o;T these elements in soil. Table 1-4 presents a comparison of national ranges and typical average concentrations of elements to analytical soil data obtained from the Fulton Terminals Site.
In all cases, -:he average metal concentrations in soil samples collected at the Fu..ton Terminals Site did not exceed normal ranges obtained from national averages but a few metals did slightly exceed the mean concentrations which typify the bedrock at the site.
None of the surface water samples exceeded Safe Drinking Water Act Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs). However, ground-water samples exceeded MCLs for four metals, barium, cadmium, chromium, and lead. Benzene exceeded MCLs in four wells sampled, and both vinyl chloride and TCE exceeded MCLs in two wells.
There were 23 UNA hits in the ground water samples taken. However, only 8 (or 35 percent) of the hits were for non-phthalates. Since phthalates are known to be a common laboratory contaminant their presence may not be indicative of site contamination. Sediments yielded 15 different semivolatile organic compounds. Fourteen BNAs were found in C one sediment sample taken next to the site. The concentrations of BNA '
o 1-23 o 2390V TABLE 1-4 TOTAL COMPARISON OF METAL CONCENTRATIONS IN SOIL FULTON TERMINALS SITE
METALS Observed Geometric Mean National Range Typical Background Concentration Ranges (All Samples) (a) Concentrations in Shale Bedrock (b) ALUMINUM 2370 - 21400 6834.5 ANTIMONY 0.55 - 6.3 1.6 ND • 150 0.7 ARSENIC 0.38 - 79.7 5.7 0.10 - 194 7.0 BARIUM 18.4 - 1710 101.2 BERYLLIUM 0.14 - 1.6 0.8 CADMIUM 0.027 - 2.2 0.3 0.01 - 7.0 0.3 CALCIUM 898 - 56100 4858.5 CHROMIUM 3 - 140 10.4 5.0 - 3,000 62.5 COBALT 1.7 - 18.9 5.4 COPPER 2.9 - 228 26.0 2.0 - 100 23.5 IRON 5710 - 35500 14701.6 LEAD 3.1 - 1670 25.1 1.0 - 888 13.5 MAGNESIUM 1120 - 20800 3348.2 MANGANESE 110 - 9050 501.4 MERCURY 0.05 - 0.75 0.1 NICKEL 2.8 - 137 14.5 1.0 - 1,530 35.0 POTASSIUM 298 - 1630 684.5 SELENIUM 0.125 - 1.3 0.4 SILVER 0.08 - 3.3 0.7 0.1 - 8.0 0.07 SODIUM 23.1 - 672 98.4 THALLIUM 0.025 - 0.75 0.1 No Data 1.10 VANADIUM 5.9 - 133 16.1 ZINC 17.3 - 1060 56.4 10.0 - 2,000 55.5 Notes: (a) As revised by McClanahan (1984). (b) Adapted from Drever (1979)
1-24 compounds at this location (SD03-01) ranged from 65 (Napthalene) to 1,900 ppb (Fluoranthene). There were also BNAs detected in the upstream sediments approximately 125 feet from the corner of the site. The sediment sample taken at the SW corner of the site only had two positively detected BNAs.
1-3 Selection of Indicator Chemicals
This endangermont assessment focuses on selected site contaminants that have been identified through a screening process. The contaminants selected represent chemicals posing the most significant adverse effect on human health or the environment. These "indicator" chemicals are selected considering the following properties: intrinsic toxicological properties, quantity present (includes environmental concentration and prevalence at the s .te) , and properties affecting the chemical's mobility in the environment (and therefore potentially critical exposure routes) (Life Systems, 1985;. The indicator chemicals selected for this endangerment assessment are listed below.
• Benzene • Chlorobenzene • 4-Methyl-2-Pentanone • 1,2-Dichloroethene • Trichloroethene • Vinyl Chloride • Barium • Nickel Arsenic Pyrene
The selection process for the Fulton Terminals Site identified six volatile organic compounds, one semivolatile compound, and three metals upon which this endangerment assessment will be based. The six VOCs were: benzene, chlorobenzene, 4-methyl-2-pentanone, 1,2-dichloroethene, trichloroethene, and vinyl chloride. Barium, nickel, and arsenic were the metal contaminants of interest. Pyrene was the semivolatile compound selected. The indicator chemical selection process was based on the approach outlined in the Superfund Public Health Evaluation Manual (SPHEM j f Oct. 1986). The geometric mean of the monitoring data concentrations was I used as the representative concentration value while the highest detected 'j °
1-25 2390Y concentration was u:;ed as the maximum value. Both the mean and maximum value was multiplied by the appropriate toxicity constant (Exhibit C-5, SPHEM) to obtain a calculated concentration times toxicity (CT) value for carcinogens and noncarcinogenic contaminants. The CT scores were then ranked and compared by media (ground water or soil) and toxicological effect (carcinogenic or noncarcinogenic). The final selection process took into account the prevalence of the contaminant at the site by comparing the frequency of detection (number of hits). In addition, there was an attempt to include representative contaminants on the list of indicator chemicals from each class of compounds. The indicator chemicals selected are marked with a (+) in the last column of the table in Appendix 1.
The indicator chemical selection process focused on carcinogenic volatile organics. This is supported by the fact that the Fulton Terminals Site has operated as a petroleum and organic chemical tank storage facility (N1JS, 1983), the frequency of the observances of these compounds in soils and ground-water, and their toxic effects. Comparison of metals concentrations in soil at the Fulton Terminals Site to that of regional averages (Table 1-4) show no appreciable differences, and in many cases were lower. However, arsenic, nickel, and barium were included to address any potential public concerns that may be expressed due to arsenic's high carcinogenic potency factor and the prevalence, concentration, and relative toxicity of nickel and barium. In addition, other studies have included public health information on arsenic at this site. No similarities were discovered between metal concentrations and the VOCs in contaminated locations identified in the previous section. Metal concentration;; did not generally exceed concentrations that typify soils in this area or exhibit concentration trends that corresponded to known release areas of organic contaminants. Nor were there any apparent vertical or horizontal metal concentration gradients in the data set. Pyrene was included based on historical operations at the Fulton Terminals Site (roofing and asphalt work) that may have contributed to site contamination, and also due to its relatively higher concentration and toxic effects. Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) were not included due to low prevalence (number of "hits") at the site.
1-26 2390Y I
2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL FATE AND TRANSPORT
The purpose of this section is to establish the expected environmental fate and transport of the indicator chemicals at the Fulton Terminals site. The nature and extent of contamination which has, or had, the potential for offsite migration are governed by the site's environmental setting (e.g., geology and soils, topography and drainage, climate, hydrogeology) and the characteristics of the wastes found at the site (i.e. , concentrations, and chemical and physical properties). Release mechanisms identified through this qualitative evaluation will be further quantified to assess potential human and environmental exposures. All analyses in the following section are based on present site conditions without any further remediation.
2.1 Site Characteristics
Oswego County, New York, consists of two main physiographic provinces: the Tug Hill Plateau in the northeastern corner of the Erie-Ontario Plain (Figure 2-1). The city of Fulton is located in the Erie-Ontario Plain physiographic province. In this area, gently rolling hills are interspersed with moderately large level areas (USDA, 1981). Elevations range from about 250 feet to 600 feet above mean sea level (MSL)(Miller, 1982). Bedrock in the county is flat-lying sedimentary rock. Several advances and retreats of glacial ice have profoundly influenced the topography and soils of Oswego County (USDA, 1981).
Site characteristics that are important in influencing environmental fate and transport of the contaminants at the Fulton Terminals site are presented. The following subsections will provide a summary of site geology and soils, topography and drainage, hydrogeology, and climatology.
2.1.1 Geology and Soils
Most of Oswego County is covered by unconsolidated Quaternary sediments that were deposited during and after the last glaciation (' ' (Wisconsinan). These glacial deposits overlie bedrock that consists of ! nearly flat-lying Ordovician and Silurian sedimentary formations (Miller, ! 3 t"1
o o 2-1 -J 2525Y to to Hyo FIGURE 2-1 LOCATION OF OSUEGO COUNTY AND PHYSIOGRAPHIC PROVINCES OF NEW YORK (HILLER, 1982) ozzz loo ma 1982). Bedrock dip;; slightly to the southwest approximately 50 feet per mile (NUS, 1981). A generalized schematic cross-section of the bedrock formations in Oswego County is given in Figure 2-2.
The unconsolidated materials that make up the surficial geology consist of lodgment and oblation tills; kame, asker, outwash, beach, and wave-delta sand and gravels; and proglacial lake deposits of fine sand, silt, and clay (Miller, 1982). A schematic of the mode of deposition of these glacial deposits is presented in Figure 2-3.
The Fulton Terminals site is situated over lake silts and fine sands, which are, in turn, covered by a thin veneer of alluvial sediments that were deposited on the Oswego River floodplain (NUS, 1981). Although the precise thickness of the glacial deposits near Fulton is not known, it has been estimated by local drillers at approximately 20 feet (NUS, 1981). These sediments may be thinly bedded or massive, having low to moderate permeability. Most of the lake silts and fine sands are frequently over lodgment till (drumlin)(Figure 2-4). A generalized cross-section is given (refer to northeast corner of Figure 1-1)(Miller, 1981). Lodgment till or drumlins are formed beneath advancing glaciers and consist of poorly sorted sediments ranging from clay-sized particles to boulders. These materials are compressed in uniform directions beneath the massive weight of advancing ice sheets causing platy-like impermeable structures in the till (NUS, 1981; Miller, 1982) and also form the 20- to 150-foot high drumlins which dominate the local topography (Figure 1-1).
Soils in the vicinity of the Fulton Terminals site have been severely altered by urban development. The original soils (probably of the Amboy-Williamson Complex) were formed in glacilacustrine deposits during the Pleistocene Epoch (USDA, 1981). Most areas have been excavated, graded, or altered to such an extent that it is not possible to identify distinct soil types. Areas are now mostly covered by asphalt, concrete, or similar artificial fill (USDA, 1981). This artificial fill ranges in depth at the site from about 4 to 12 feet.
2-3 2525Y ] r^,
SOUTHWEST NORTHEAST OSWEGO COUNTY OSWEGO COUNTY
mm 3 in > 0 1a uF a
|ADAPTED PROM MILLER, ISM|
FIGURE 2-2 GENERALIZED CROSS SECTION OF BEDROCK FORMATIONS OSWEGO COUNTY, NEW YORK zzzz z,oo , inj Former level of Ice-dermied water
ro in
FIGURE 2-3 ORICIN OF SELECTED TYPES OF GLACIAL DEPOSITS (HILLER, 1982) "A zzzz z.oo ma \ r \
I frli .• • ;K.I» ' r- J- |,l MtfMf /..«•* <* i.
6400
PICURE 2-4 FULTON QUADRANGLE SHOWING CLAC1AL DEPOSITS (HII.LER, 1985) Fill materials are generally coarse textured (sand and gravel) with various percentages of demolition debris (shingle sands, tar/asphalt, cinder and concrete from previous industrial uses)(URS, 1985). Below the artificial fill, an upper (natural) unconsolidated silt and clay unit exists. This unit, which averages approximately 13 feet at the site, is gray or grayish-brown in color, and classified as a clayey silt, trace coarse to fine sand in some samples, and coarse to fine sand, and little medium to fine gravel in other samples (URS, 1985).
2,1,2 Topography and Drainage
Oswego County is drained by three river systems; the Oswego, Little Salmon, and Salmon Rivers. All drain northward into Lake Ontario (USDA, 1981). Oswego River drains the south-central portion of the county, which includes the city of Fulton. Stream gradients in this region are generally low. Approximately two-thirds of the county's water supply is derived from surface water supplies (streams and reservoirs)(USDA, 1981).
There is no flowing surface water at the Fulton Terminals site, but there are several small surface depressions in which water may accumulate during wet periods. Other surface return flows from the Fulton Terminals site are expected to runoff onto North First Street and then to Oswego River through offsite storm drains. An onsite storm grate that formerly conveyed runoff from the site to Oswego River was sealed by EPA in the spring of 1987. This sealed inlet grate is located near Tank No. 10 on the western portion of the site (Figure 2-5)(NUS, 1983).
Immediately west of the Fulton Terminals site (approximately 40 to 60 feet), the Oswego River flows northward toward Lake Ontario. Streamflow is greatest between December and March and lowest from July to September (NUS, 1983). The average annual discharge of Oswego River (Lock 7) at Oswego, New York, is 6,680 cubic feet per second (cfs). The highest monthly mean discharge for the 1985 water year was 11,850 cfs (occurring in March). The lowest monthly mean discharge for the water year 1985 was 921 cfs (occurring in August). River discharge rates do not include flow in the Oswego Barge Canal (Figure 1-1). A series of
2-7 2525Y o
9ZZZ L00 Ifld Contour li»Lorv«|;| foot •UR3. ISBM FI CUKE 2-5 SCALE DETAILED rOI'OCRAI'IIIC SITE HAI» SHOWING STOIIH OK/VIE INI.F.T 50 o sort(« AND OUTFALL TO OSWEGO KIVEK locks along the Oswego Barge Canal system provide some artificial flow regulation in the Oswego River basin. A large amount of natural storage is also provided by lakes and other interconnecting barge canal systems. Large diurual fluctuations occur along Oswego River during low and medium flow rates due to consumption of water by powerplants located upstream from the city of Oswego (USGS, 1985).
Several marsh areas exist within 2 to 3 miles of the site (Figure 1-1). These areas are not expected to be impacted by any surface releases of contaminants, because they are located in the upper reaches of the Oswego River (NUS, 1981; USDOI, 1955).
2.1,3 Hvdrogeology
Ground water is supplied throughout the county by wells screened in both glacial deposits and in the lower bedrock. Yields are generally low except from wells developed in coarse, well-sorted sands and gravel (Miller, 1982). Water quality is variable, becoming more brackish in bedrock with increasing depth.
In the immediate vicinity of the Fulton Terminals site, the near-surface aquifer material is predominantly deposited as lake sediments (NUS, 1981). Lake silts and sands, and clay deposits limit aquifer permeability and form the poorest yielding aquifers in the county. The water table occurs generally less than 10 feet below the land surface and undergoes minimal fluctuation (fluctuates typically less than 6 feet/year). Bedrock is generally separated from the lake sediments by lodgment till (refer to Figure 2-4). The till layer has low porosity and low specific yield, and it acts as a confining layer to the lower bedrock. Yields from the till range from 0.25 to 1.0 gallons per minute (gpm) and ground-water movement is slow, typically 0.01 foot/day. The water table in the till occurs between 5 and 20 feet below the ground surface (Miller, 1982).
Hydraulic gradients in lowland areas (e.g., adjacent to Oswego River) are slight; ground-water movement in lake sediment deposits has
2-9 2525Y been estimated at rates varying from 0.001 foot/year in clayey silt to 30 feet/year in fine sands (Miller, 1982).
Shallow ground-water movement at the Fulton Terminals site is westward, in the direction of Oswego River (Figure 1-2), and regional (deep) ground-water flow is northward toward Lake Ontario (NUS, 1983).
The city of Fulton obtains its municipal supply water from kame deposits adjacent to Lake Noahtahwanta lying west of the Oswego River (see Figure 1-1), and at Great Bear Farm, approximately 5 mils southeast of the city of Fulton (Miller, 1982). Wells at the Great Bear Farm range from 67 to 125 feet in depth and (yield) 100 to 600 gpm. Wells closer to Oswego River south of Fulton are about 450 feet deep and yield 200 to 400 gpm. Water levels and water quality studies for Great Bear wells indicate that the Oswego River is far enough downgradient from pumping wells that river water is not introduced to the wells, while wells closer to the river (within 200 feet) suggest that the wells south of Fulton may induce recharge directly from the Oswego River (Miller, 1982).
2,1,4 Climatology
Climatic features of greatest interest for this endangerment assessment include temperature, precipitation, wind speed, and wind direction. Thes climatic features may play an important role in influencing contaminant fate and transport, hence exposure, at the Fulton Terminal site.
The city of Fulton has a humid-continental climate that is typical of the northeastern United States (USDA, 1981). Lake Ontario plays a major role in the climate. The lake reduces heat in the summer and moderates extreme cold in the winter. The lake also contributes substantially to precipitation throughout the county. Cold air masses, moving eastward over the relatively warmer watet of Lake Ontario, acquire excess moisture which falls as snow or rain as the air masses move I eastward across the county. Winters in Oswego County are long and cold.
Data on the average temperature and precipitation for Oswego County ^ were obtained for a 30-year period. The average annual temperature for
ii °o 2-10 2525Y I !• ^ NJ Oswego County is 47 7°F (8.7°C). July has the highest monthly average temperature 70°F (21.1°C), and January the lowest monthly average temperature, 24°F (-4.4°C).
Annual precipitation in Oswego County averages 35.4 inches (90 cm). The average annual snowfall for Oswego County is 127 inches (323 cm). Precipitation is generally uniform throughout the year. The wettest period, on average, is between October and December, with 3.5 inches (8.8 cm). The driest period is between June and August, with 2.6 inches (6.5 cm)(USDA, 1982). Temperature and precipitation data are summarized in Table 2-1.
Information on wind speed and direction was obtained through EPA's Graphical Exposure Modeling System's (GEMS) Stability Tabular Array data file. This file contains meteorological data from 394 first-order weather stations. Site-specific information related to winds was not available. After an evaluation of the site's geographical surroundings, it was determined that wind data obtained from the National Weather Service Station in Syracuse, New York, could represent conditions in Fulton. The wind frequency distribution for Syracuse is presented in Figure 2-6. This distribution covers all wind speed categories (category 1 [0.75 mps] through category 6 [12.5 mps]). Winds are predominantly from the west.
2.2 Site Contaminants and Migratory Pathways
An environmental fate and transport analysis examines the potential for offsite migration of contaminants from sources identified in Section 1.2. Based on the operational history of the Fulton Terminals site and the manner in which contaminants were released, the likelihood of offsite migration from these source areas and the probable magnitude of release were assessed.
Potential release mechanisms identified at'the Fulton Terminals site include volatilization, infiltration through soil to ground water, ground-water discharge to the Oswego River, and surface water runoff.
2-11 2525Y C 4>> — as
<© <— c| 00 CM © © O © CM CM >-QJ »—
—I ro fO -H CM © © © © © CM
o 0*T^l£lMLni75 — CSJOJ r*. © rv. a> •SI (SJCMCMCMCM~H~«CMCM~^ eg en —> c > X
COO)N(J)0"?OKOPOIfilfiV CgCMCMegPOPMOjCMPOPOfPJPOlD
0)u u a> E 3 O cto > 3 «-» o X <0 E >0 H— X c 0)U Q. <0 0)U. I •^NOtriDU^^fOM I X 0)E 3a* 2O •— UJ _j o—4 c 0) u t_ O cto E 3 X V) 3 4-> O •— t- E *0 H- <0 u u U.I CTl M — CO CO CO CD 0) X a; a> to N CO CO CO 00 CO >- <0 a <0 X X 0)E 3CT 31 •— UJ X
z .S u-l N7)(ONtO(DMn^ Oto c
8. X I 2 Z J u-l
0) X S. 3 X — *-»w Eo> x0) <0 0) U O — 0) »> 3 «M o >
o o M
fO to CO 2-12 o WIND FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION
i m RSJ i 1 IS St IS St i i \SA IyA i i IC'SE ISA IS A 1 i RSI RSI RSI i i SS c/'i AA I i iAA vyrvyi 1 { ISA ISA !S 1 3X + Si r s* r *A% B-T**• s * 1 i'/i RS i RSI RSI I A A AA ISA AAS A 1
ISA m* ISA ISA ISA 1 SA 1 i TSi r/j m TSi j TSi TSi TSi TSi 1 I l^l/l l^/l AA UO-1 AA SA 1 2!5 i LA A ISA I/A _•ISA ISA ISA ISA ISA ISA ISA ISA i rr.j r/j r/j -i.Z RSI RSI R/I RSI RSJ RSI RSJ RSI RSI i TTA SA XX! XX X-"1 XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX j,--- '•s A ISA ISA ly.yi I.A A IAA IAA i AA IAA ISA ISA t.s A ' A -> I - ' A A I ..'A \ S* ISA ISA ISA is a rVj !• - \S 7 I"'J >S * r A . *SI RS\ R SI RSI r S\ T S} rSi TSI TSI TSIR SIR S! / /'i IS S\ \A St IS St iS .•• \S St f St IS St I* ' IS s> \S s'\ %S Xi W Si i'/i AA SA L•' .A i/\/l is A SS A SA SA AS AA AA AA AA i' x x ISA IA A IA A IS A IA A ISA ISA ISA IS a A A A 1 •vt IS IS IS Y/ r/' KXJ f.XI »VJ XJ '/' •'/i K/i >1 >1 rVi X/i X/i VA Ys~\ x'/t K K W«4 V A v A v A ^ yl V yl AA AA A.A V.A AA. V VA AA A A SA A WC C SC S SW w NW Pi rvmms ' i
FIGURE 2-6
a r<
2-13 8
to to £ These potential release routes were identified through a decision network for contaminants in soil and ground water (Versar, 1988). Organic chemicals at the Fulton Terminals site were apparently released via operational spillage and leakage of petroleum products, and later by waste chemicals stored in above and below ground tanks. Due to the presence of volatile organics in soil at the site, the release routes of contaminants to soils and to surface water (runoff) were identified. In addition, due to the presence of volatile organics in ground water at the site, the release route of ground water to surface water (through ground-water discharge) was identified. Migration of contaminants through soil (via percolation) and to ground water is another possible pathway. Volatilization of these compounds from soil (and potentially from ground water) and subsequent releases or emissions to air is expected to be a release route of concern. Particulate emissions should be insignificant, because turf grasses cover approximately 80 percent of the site. This cover increases the surface threshold frictional velocity and minimizes the potential for erosion.
Table 2-2 summarizes the potential release mechanisms at the Fulton Terminals site. Quantification of the contaminants released to all media will be evaluated in the following section (Section 3.0).
Many important transformation processes that govern the environmental fate of these contaminants at the site will also affect their migration. Contaminants identified via soil sampling at the site are expected to undergo hydrolysis, oxidation, reductive dehalogenation (all can be mediated by intercellular biological.reactions, or by external chemical/physical reactions), and photolysis. Each significant transport and fate mechanism will be identified, followed by an assessment of the expected behavior for each of the selected indicator chemicals. The environmental concentrations estimated through the use of predictive njV equations or models will be discussed in detail (Section 3.0). From G G this, the environmental transport and fate analysis will be used to o assess the expected, exposure levels from the Fulton Terminals site. o -j
to to u> 2-14 to 2525Y TABLE 2-2 POTENTIAL RELEASE MECHANISMS AT THE FULTON TERMINALS SITE
Process Media Affected Time Frame
Volatilization Air Continuous
Surface runoff Surface water, Episodic soils
Leachate generation Soils, ground water, Continuous surface water (through ground water discharge)
«T at"1
O O -J
2-15 to to 2525Y OJ LO A summary chemical profile was developed for each of the selected indicator chemicals. The chemical profiles provide important physical, chemical, and biological data which will govern the fate of these chemicals in the environment and will be used to estimate the levels of contaminants potentially migrating from the site. These profile summaries are presented in Table 2-3. Parameters regarding toxicological data, chemical reactivity, and personal protection for indicator chemicals are included in Appendix 2. Information in Appendix 2 was derived from a database, ChemTox (Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1987). A variety of reference sources were used to select the values in Table 2-3 (3.11 information sources are given in the table). In general, the hierarchy of sources were based on the most recently available information. Some values, however, reflect data obtained from sources that were specific for a particular compound or set of environmental conditions that were applicable to the Fulton Terminals site. For each indicator chemical fate data was gathered by a literature review. Compound-specific discussions based on literature reviews are presented in Sections 2.2.1 through 2.2.8 below.
2,2.1 Benzene
Benzene is a clear, colorless, highly flammable liquid and is slightly soluble in water (Windholz efal., 1983). Volatilization appears to be the primary transport process at the Fulton Terminals site. Most benzene was found in surficial soil samples. Based on cloud-chamber data, photooxidative destruction in the troposphere is thought to be rapid and complete (Clement Associates, Inc., 1985). The half-life of benzene in the atmosphere has been reported to range from 2.4 to 50 hours, depending on relative reactivities. Due to the relatively rapid attack of hydroxyl radicals, and because benzene does not absorb at wavelengths of light longer than 260 nm, diffusion to the stratosphere and subsequent photolysis are not expected (Callahan et al., 1979).
2-16 2525Y TABLE 2-3 SIM1ARY OF CHEMICAL, PHYSICAL, AND BIOLOGICAL PROPERTIES FOR INDICATOR CHEMICALS AT FULTON TERMINALS SITE
Henry's Molecular Water Vapor Constant Weight Solubility Pressure 3 , atm-m / Koc Log Fish (g/mole) (mg/1) (ran Hg) mol- °K (ml/g) Kow BCF Indicator Chemical CAS No. Ref.(1) Ref.(l) Ref.(1) Ref. (3) Kef.(2) Ref.(3) Ref.(3)
Benzene 71-13-2 78.11 1,780 76 5.59E-03 83 2.12 5.2
Chlorobenzene 108-90-7 112.56 500 9 3.72E-03 330 2.81 10
l-Methyl-2- 108-10-1 100.6 17,000 16 19.36 1.18 .726 pentanone
1,2-dichloroethene 2003 510-59-3 96.95 600 6.56E-03 59 1.18 1.6
Trichloroethene 1,1002 79-01-6 131.5 58 9.10E-03 126 2.17 10.6
Vinyl chloride 75-01-1 62.19 2,670 2660 8.19E-02 57 1.38 1.17
Pyrene 129-00-0 202. 0.132 2.5E-06 5.01E-06 6.1E+01 1.88 3511
Arsenic 7110-36-0 71.9 0 1.0
Barium 711-39-3 137 0 171
Nickel 7110-02-0 59 0 —
*A11 values determined at 23°C. ^Determined at 25°C.
References: (1) Verschueren, 1983 (2) Lyman et al., 1982; K • Kd/ZOC*100 oc (3) Superfund Public Health Evaluation Manual (EPA, 1986)
2-17 2525Y Although other processes affect the transport and fate of benzene, due to its occurrence in shallow soil layers volatilization and oxidation are thought to be the predominant transport and fate mechanisms occurring at the Fulton Terminals site.
2.2.2 Chlorobenzene
Chlorobenzene is a derivative of benzene and is a colorless liquid that has low solubility in water (Windholz et al., 1983). Unlike many priority pollutants, it is not possible to predict a predominant transport and fate process for chlorobenzene. It is thought to evaporate to the atmosphere, where it undergoes photooxidation at a relatively rapid rate, but this has not been quantified in the available literature. There is some evidence that photooxidation occurs in the presence of nitric acid, but this is not conclusive (Callahan et al., 1979). No evidence of the direct photolysis of chlorobenzene was found.
It should be noted that chlorobenzene is persistent in the environment and has a high affinity for lipophilic materials (Callahan et al. , 1979). Due to its relatively high log octanol/water partition coefficient of 2.84 (EPA, 1986), chlorobenzene is expected to move slowly through soil, and consequently, adsorb to any organic materials present. Biodegradation probably occurs eventually, but not at a substantial rate. Bioaccumulation is thought to be greater for chlorobenzene than for the other indicator chemicals chosen at the Fulton Terminals site; thus bioaccumulation of chlorobenzene may help regulate its fate (Clements Associates, Inc., 1985).
Chlorobenzene has been found at various depthis ranging from zero to 10 feet at the Fulton Terminals site; therefore, bioaccumulation, sorption, and volatilization are competing processes that need to be considered in determining its fate. If the rate of volatilization is more rapid than the rates of sorption and bioaccumulation, then atmospheric fate processes will dominate. Aquatic processes will dominate if the converse is true.
2-18 2525Y MIBK is a clear liquid with a sweet, sharp odor. Its low flashpoint (90 F) and f lammabi..ity may present a fire hazard in high concentrations. Volatilization appears to be the primary transport process at the Fulton Terminals site. Most MIBK was found in the surficial soil samples. Limited information is available on the transport and fate of MIBK. Ketones in general are probably not very persistent therefore MIBK would be expected to volatilize fairly readily. However, because it is somewhat soluble in water, volatilization from wet environments is probably limited. Once in the atmosphere, it is apparently oxidized (Clement Associates, Inc.).
The log octanol/water partition coefficient 1.18 (EPA, 1986) for MIBK indicates that it is probably not readily absorbed. Biodegradation is the most likely fate of MIBK in the environment. This is inferred from the high biological oxygen demand demonstrated by MIBK, which was 69% of the theoretical value after 20 days at 20°C.
2.2.4 1, 2-dichloroet'hene
1,2-dichloroethene is a highly volatile liquid which has low solubility in water and causes narcotic and irritant effects when encountered in high concentrations (Windholz et al., 1983). It is a mixture of two geometric isomers: cis-1,2-dichloroethene and trans-1,2-dichloroethene. The trans isomer is the more reactive of the two isomers.
Volatilization is believed to be the predominant transport process. This chemical is primarily found in shallow soil at the Fulton Terminals site, and due to its relatively high vapor pressure, it rapidly enters the troposphere. There, hydroxyl radicals attack the double bond to form formic acid, hydrochloric acid, carbon monoxide, and formaldehyde; thus photooxidation is the primary fate process (Clement Associates, Inc., 1985). The lifetime of 1,2-dichloroethene has been extrapolated to be less than 1 day (Callahan et al., 1979). Diffusion to the stratosphere, where direct photolysis occurs, is not expected.
2-19 2S25Y Although there is not much supporting evidence, properties of similar compounds suggest that direct photolysis, hydrolysis, oxidation, adsorption, bioaccuiiulation, and biodegradation occur, but are insignificant in the aquatic environment (Clement Associates, Inc., 1985). The octanol/water coefficient for trans-1,2-dichloroethene is low (1.48), which further suggests that bioaccumulation does not occur at a significant rate. Biodegradation occurs, but the rate is expected to be slow (Callahan et al, 1979).
2.2,5 Trichloroethene
Trichloroethene is a nonflammable, mobile liquid which is practically insoluble in water. Moderate exposure to trichloroethene can cause slight inebriation, whereas heavy exposure can lead to ventricular fibrillation (Windholz et al., 1983).
The most important transport process for trichloroethene in surface water and in the upper layer of soil is thought to be volatilization. This is also believed to be true for the Fulton Terminals site, because trichloroethene was not found in samples from deeper than 6 feet, and the highest concentrations were found within the first 2 feet of soil. Trichloroethene enters the troposphere by evaporation; then hydroxyl radicals attack the double bond to form hydrochloric acid, carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, and carboxylic acid" (Clement Associates, Inc., 1985). Based on the reaction with hydroxyl radicals, the reported lifetime in the troposphere is approximately 4 days. Oxidation is the primary fate of trichloroethene in the troposphere, and reportedly, photooxidacion is so rapid that it never enters the stratosphere. Therefore, direct photolysis does not contribute to the fate, because photolysis occurs above the ozone layer (Callahan et al., 1979).
In the aquatic environment, direct photolysis, hydrolysis, and oxidation do not contribute significantly to the fate of trichloroethene due to the rapid volatilization and the subsequent attack of the hydroxyl radicals. Additionally, the process of adsorption occurs but is not thought to be important. Based on available information, it is unclear
2-20 Z525Y whether trichloroethene can be biodegraded by microorganisms, or if it must be destroyed through desorption. Although there is no indication of the existence of microorganisms that can degrade trichloroethene, there is some evidence that it can be metabolized by higher organisms. Finally, bioaccumulation in marine organisms may occur, but no biomagnification in the food chain has been observed (Clement Associates, Inc., 1985). Studies have shown that bioaccumulation is directly related to the octanol/water partition coefficient of a compound. The value for trichloroethene is 2.47 (EPA, 1986), which indicates that bioaccumulation is possible but is probably not as important as volatilization (Callahan et al., 1979).
As previously stated, volatilization is considered to be the primary transport mechanism at the Fulton Terminals site, and oxidation determines the fate of trichloroethene.
2.2.6 Vinvl chloride
Vinyl chloride is a gas that is easily liquified and usually handled as a liquid. It is the most important vinyl monomer and the nineteenth highest-volume chemical produced in the United States. Vinyl chloride is an extremely toxic and hazardous material by all avenues of exposure and is a recognized human carcinogen. It is slightly soluble in water and has an extremely high vapor pressure.
Due to the high vapor pressure, volatilization from aquatic and terrestrial systems is the most important transport process for the distribution of vinyl chloride throughout the environment (Clement Associates, Inc., 1985). Under most natural conditions, vinyl chloride should not remain upon release to an aquatic exosystem. Half-lives in # aquatic systems range from several minutes to a few hours. Photooxidation in the troposphere is the dominant environmental fate of vinyl chloride.
Vinyl chloride reacts rapidly with hydroxyl radicals in the air, forming hydrogen chloride or formal chloride. Formyl chloride, if
2-21 2525Y formed, is reported to decompose at ambient temperatures, to carbon monoxide and hydrogen chloride with a half-life of about 20 minutes. As a result, vinyl chloride in the troposphere should be decomposed within a day or two of release (Callahan et al., 1979). The hydrogen chloride formed is removed from the troposphere during precipitation (Clement Associates, Inc., 1985).
Based on the information found, it does not appear that oxidation, hydrolysis, and biodegradation are important fate processes for vinyl chloride in aquatic environments. Equally sorption and bioaccumulation do not appear to be important transport processes. However, there is little information pertaining specifically to the rate of adsorption of vinyl chloride to particulate matter. Based on a low log octanol/water partition coefficient, (1.38), vinyl chloride typically travels rapidly through subsurface strata and is often found as a contaminant in ground-water supplies. At the Fulton Terminals site, for instance, vinyl chloride was detected only in the ground-water, indicating infiltration through the subsoils.
2.2.7 Pvrene
Pyrene occurs as pale-yellow plates and monoclinic prismatic tablets with a slight blue fluorescence (National Library of Medicine, 1982). Pyrene is virtually insoluble in water (Davis et al., 1947, May et al., 1978) and occurs ubiquitously in products of incomplete combustion; it also occurs in fossil fuels. It is found in relatively high quantities in coal tar (Windholz, 1976).
No estimated value for the half-life of pyrene in the aquatic media could be located in the available literature; however, photolysis of dissolved pyrene in the aquatic phase and adsorption onto particulate matter with subsequent sedimentation may be the important processes. Biodegradation of particulate-sorbed pyrene is likely to be an important removal process from sediment in the aquatic environment (U.S. EPA, 1984).
2-22 2325Y The fate of pyrene in soil is not known with certainty, but biodegradation is believed to be the most significant removal process (Santodonato et al. 1981). Based on its high soil adsorption coefficient (KQC = 84,000)(U.S. EPA, 1984) and low water solubility, this compound is not likely to leach significantly from soils, particularly from soils containing high organic carbon content (U.S. EPA, 1984).
The half-life for pyrene in the atmosphere has been estimated at 2 hours - >2 days based on the observed decomposition of soot-absorbed pyrene (58%) in artificial smog (Falk et al., 1956) and the photodecomposition study of Korfmacher et al. (1980),(U.S. EPA, 1984).
2,2.8 Arsenic
Though a rare element, arsenic (As) is ubiquitous in the earth's crust and occurs in hundreds of minerals, often with sulfur. With four possible oxidation states (3-, 0, 3+, and 5+), arsenic's speciation is both complex and important in determining its fate. Interconversions of the 3+ and 5+ states and organic complexation have the greatest impact of any transformations (Clement Associates, 1985). Arsenic is generally mobile in all environments in comparison to other metals. The chemical form of arsenic and the properties of the surrounding medium determine the degree of mobility of the metal.
When atmospheric deposition, runoff from soils, and industrial discharge send arsenic into aqueous environments (expected at the Fulton Terminals site), it tends to cycle through the water column, sediments, and biota. Arsenate (As^+) is generally the dominant species in aquatic systems, but biological activities may produce arsenite (As^+), 3 - methylated arsenicars (As ), and the highly volatile arsenic hydrides (AsH^)(U.S. EPA, 1984a). Most salts and compounds of arsenic are soluble in water (USDHHS, 1985). Ambient pH and Eh (reduction potential) conditions determine the prevailing form of the metal and thus influence its fate (U.S. EPA, 1979). Adsorption and desorption to sediments dominates the aquatic cycling process. Iron concentration affects
2-23 2525Y aqueous arsenic sorption, and coprecipitation with hydrous oxides of iron is a prevalent process expected at the Fulton Terminals site (U.S. EPA, 1979). Transport in solution to ocean sediments is the major sink for arsenic in water. Volatilization of arsenic or methylarsenics through biotransformations and highly reducing conditions is also an important mobilization process (Clement Associates, 1985), but this process is not expected to occur significantly at this site. Due to arsenic's toxicity, bioaccumulation is not an important fate in aqueous media and is significant only in lower trophic levels (U.S. EPA, 1979).
On land and in the atmosphere, arsenic is also quite mobile. In the air, arsenic trioxide (As20^) is the dominant species. Arsenic particles remain in the atmosphere for only a short period before continuing to cycle through the environment. Wet or dry deposition removes arsenic from the air. The properties of the soil determine the fate of arsenic on land. Soils containing clays and organic matter sorb arsenic well and retard its leachability. Arsenic will mobilize into the ground water from soils with low sorptive capacity (U.S. EPA, 1984). As with aquatic biota, bioaccumulation of toxic arsenic by terrestrial organisms contributes little to its transport and fate.
2,2.9 Nickel
A relatively mobile heavy metal, nickel (Ni) commonly occurs in the elemental and divalent states. Sorption processes and plant uptake may limit its mobility .somewhat. Photolysis, volatilization, and biotransformation do not play important roles in the environmental transport and fate The overall passage of atmospheric nickel may be characterized as a short-lived transport process. Various chemical forms of nickel appear in the atmosphere a.s dust and fumes, but any chemical interactions of nickel usually result in conversion to nickel oxide (U.S. EPA, 1985b). The length of stay in the atmosphere of nickel particulates before removal by wet or dry deposition depends on particle size and density. , I F i o o , -J 2-24 2525Y M to £>• to L . The average half-life in air is much longer for smaller particles, allowing greater transport distances. The average residence time for nickel in the air is 7 days. Nickel usually occurs in the divalent oxidation state in aqueous media and has a great affinity for organic liquids, hydrous iron, and manganese oxides. Most of the common aquatic organic liquids of nickel are soluble in water and support the metal's high mobility. However, sorption and copreci.pitation involving hydrous iron and manganese oxides moderately limit nickel mobility, especially at high pH (U.S. EPA, 1979). Another factor that regulates the mobility of nickel in aqueous media is the degree of pollution. Nonpolluted water favors sorption and precipitation, while polluted waters provide organic groups needed for the formation of so:.uble nickel compounds (Clement Associates, 1985). Based on Versar's modeling projections, both precipitated and soluble nickel could be found in surface waters near the Fulton Terminals site. Bioaccumulation of nickel by aqueous organisms is limited; bioconcentration factors are usually on the order of 100 to 1,000 (Clement Associates 1985). In general, most nickel introduced to rivers and streams eventually settles in ocean basins (U.S. EPA, 1979). Analogous to aqueous media, the composition of the soil exerts a dominating effect on the fate of nickel in terrestrial settings. Soil high in iron and manganese oxides sorbs nickel significantly and impedes its movement. The netal remains mobile in ground water with a high organic content (U.S. EPA, 1985b). Plants may take up some nickel, while other plants identified as nickel-accumulating plants extract great amounts of nickel from soil. Nickel is reasonably mobile in low pH and cation exchange capacity mineral soils, but less mobile in basic mineral soils and soils with high organic content. Nickel present in dump sites will have higher mobility under acid rain conditions and will be more likely to contaminate underlying aquifers (ATSDR, 1987b). 2.2,10 Barium Barium is a naturally occurring metal found in many types of rock. Limestones, sandstones, and soils in the eastern United States may 2-25 2525Y contain 300-500 ppm barium (Fed. Reg., 1985). Barium is extremely reactive, decompose;: in water, and readily forms insoluble carbonate and sulfate salts. Barium is present in solution in surface or ground water only in trace amounts. Large amounts will not dissolve because natural waters usually contain sulfate, and the solubility of barium sulfate is generally low. Bar:.um is not soluble at more than a few parts per million in water that contains sulfate at more than a few parts per million. The presence of chloride or other anions may increase barium sulfate solubility iClement Associates, 1985). Principal areas where high levels of barium have been found in drinking water include parts of Iowa, Illinois, Kentucky, and Georgia (Fed. Reg., 1985). Monitoring programs show that :.t is rare to find barium in drinking water at concentrations greater than 1 mg/L (Clement Associates, 1985). Anthropogenic sources of barium include oil and gas drilling muds, coal fired power plants, fillers for automotive paints and specialty compounds used in bricks, tiles, and jet fuels (Fed. Reg., 1985). Atmospheric particulate barium is removed by wet and dry deposition and it has a residence time of several days. In aquatic media, barium is likely to be present primarily as suspended particulate matter or sediments. In soil;:, barium is not expected to be very mobile because of its formation of water-insoluble salts and its inability to form soluble complexes with humic and fulmic materials. Under acidic conditions, however, some of the water insoluble barium, compounds may be solubilized and move back into ground water (U.S. EPA, 1984). 2-26 2525Y 3.0 EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT This exposure assessment is an evaluation of existing routes of exposures to humans and other potential receptors (fish and wildlife), as well as routes that may reasonably be expected to occur in the future. Releases from the Fulton Terminals Site were identified through a contaminant release screening process (Section 2.2). Specific routes through which exposures may occur will be identified through an environmental fate screening process to qualitatively assess all releases from the site, and the anticipated ranges of ambient concentrations at affected points distant from the site (U.S. EPA, 1986a). Contaminant release information (Section 3.1) presents a detailed summary by URS (198/) from an earlier Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS) of the Fulton Terminals Site. This section identifies the operational activities and waste handling practices employed by site owner/operators that contributed to the soil contamination of the site. This information wan used to identify all actual or potential routes of exposure (Section 3 2) and to characterize the populations exposed (Section 3.3), and qualify as possible, the extent of exposure (Section 3.4). These objectives have been achieved through a chemical analysis of soil samples collected at the site, and an evaluation of the site's environmental setting. This assessment is based on a "no action remedial response". 3.1 Contaminant Release Information Contaminants may be released into the environment by various mechanisms that depend largely on the manner of placement of wastes at the site, and subsequent emergency response (removal) actions that occurred prior to the 1987 summer soil sampling round. Waste materials were stored in eight tanks at the site, five of r which were above ground, one partially above ground, and two below j ^ ground. During the operating life of the site, an unknown amount of | o I ° to 3-1 cn 2531Y hazardous substance:; were stored in these tanks at the site. During the time period of 1981 to January 1987, the tanks and their contents were removed from the sice. Their previous locations, as shown on Figure 1.2, are considered to b<>. localized sources of contamination. Given the previous activities at the site, spills and leaks have probably * contributed to additional contamination (URS, 1987). From 1936 through the late 1960s, the Fulton Terminals Site was used for the manufacture and storage of asphalt. After its purchase in 1972 by Fulton Terminals, Inc., it was subsequently used (until 1977) as a staging and storage area for hazardous waste materials scheduled for incineration at the PAS facility in the city of Oswego. The actual operations during the period when the site was used for asphalt manufacturing and storage are unknown, the types of hazardous chemicals generically associated with this process include polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (anthracene, phenanthrene, pyrene and benzo(a)pyrene.) In addition, common compounds in fuel oil, as stored in on-site tanks during this period, include: benzene, toluene, and xylene. During Fulton Terminal's subsequent use for the staging and storage of PAS wastes, a much broader variety of hazardous chemicals were probably handled on-site, as indicated by the extremely wide range of waste types encountered at PAS during the remediation of that site (URS, 1987). In overview, the history of the Fulton Terminals Site suggests that waste materials may have been leaked, spilled or deposited during several separate episodes in time. The most recent and serious of these, in terms of the known occurrence and potential diversity of hazardous substances handled, was during the period from 1972 to 1977 when the site was used by Fulton Terminals, Inc. for the storage of hazardous waste chemicals from the PAS site in Oswego. Although there is insufficient historical data to determine the exact nature of hazardous substances 3-2 2531Y handled onsite, sampling and analyses of tanks, drums, and surficial soil during the early 1980s do provide limited data (URS, 1987). 3.2 Routes of Exposure Based on the contaminant release screening process and the environmental fate and transport characteristics at the selected indicator chemicals described earlier, the following potential exposure routes were identified: 1. Inhalation exposures to volatile organics emitted from contaminated soils at the Fulton Terminals Site and, to a much lesser extent, inhalation exposures to volatile organics released from the Oswego River; 2. Dermal exposures to volatile organics released to Oswego River during swimming, boating/water-skiing, and fishing; 3. Ingestion exposures to organics and metals from consuming contaminated fish caught from Oswego River; and 4. Ingestion exposures through direct contact with contaminated soils at the Fulton Terminals Site. These exposures may occur during unauthorized site access by children or young adults playing over the site and inadvertent ingestion of contaminated soil adhering to fingers and hands. Each exposure route was assessed through an environmental fate screening process. Environmental concentrations were estimated for each of the affected media; air, surface water, ground water, biota, and soil. Concentrations were estimated using predictive equations or models that rely (to the extent possible) on site-specific information. Direct ingestion exposures to contaminated ground water is not expected for populations on city (Fulton or Oswego) supplied water. However, contaminants released to ground water are expected to be discharged into Oswego River. Concentrations entering the river from this pathway were also estimated using a model. 3-3 2331Y Exposures to organics and metals due to ingestion of fish is highly speculative. Estimates of edible tissue concentrations are based on estimated contaminant concentrations in the Oswego River and estimated biocentration factors. Air Overall, a dominant transport process expected for the indicator chemicals occurring at shallow (0 to 2 feet) soil depths at the Fulton Terminals Site is volatilization. Volatilization is the process whereby a chemical evaporates in the vapor phase to the atmosphere (Lyman, et si. , 1982). This is; expected to be an important loss mechanism for volatile organics found in soil at the site. Previous studies have shown that most of the volatiles detected at the site occurred in the shallow (0 to 2 foot) soil depths (Versar, 1988). Volatile losses of organics from deeper soil depths may also occur by a transport process known as the wick effect (Hartley [1969] cited in Lyman, et al., [1982]). The organic compound migrates from the soil body to the soil surface by capillary action. Evaporation rate of the organic compound, which is a surface phenomenon, is enhanced by the evaporation of water. Organic compounds move upward to the surface via capillary action to replenish escaping vapor phases of these compounds. Depending on the quantity of water present at the surface and the vapor pressure of the compound in question, the surface layers may actually concentrate the solute at or near the surface. This may, in fact, partly explain the higher concentrations of volatile organics in the shallow soil depths at the site. The relatively high vapor pressures of benzene, dichloroethene, trichloroethene, and vinyl chloride (Table 2-3) compared to water (vapor pressure, 18 mmHg) will act as a driving force for the migration of volatile organics into the gaseous phase, and ultimately into the atmosphere through diffusion. Although chlorobenzene and tetrachloroethene have lower vapor pressures, they are appreciable enough to follow this similar pattern. 3-4 2531Y Volatilization is dependent on physical and chemical properties related to the particular chemical in question, and on the site's environmental characteristics. Chemical specific factors which affect its distribution between soil, soil water, soil air, and the atmosphere include: vapor pressure, solubility in water, molecular weight and structure, and type and number of functional groups. Environmental factors include the contaminants concentration in the soil; soil water content; wind, humidity, and temperature; and sorptive and diffusion characteristics of the soil (e.g., organic matter content, porosity, density, and clay content). Warm, moist, windy conditions will favor volatilization as opposed to cool, dry, calm conditions. Soils that have a high sorptive capacity tend to decrease volatilization rates by binding contaminants, though volatilization will still occur. Five of the indicator chemicals listed in Table 2-3 have appreciable vapor pressures, and are expected to exhibit gaseous phase transport to the atmosphere. Generally compounds having vapor pressures below 0.1 mmHg (20°C) begin to demonstrate measurably less volatilization potential. In order to estimate volatile emission rates for the indicator chemicals, each chemical's gaseous diffusion coefficient, D^, was first computed. Accurate estimates of Di were obtained by the method of Fuller, Schettler, and Giddings (1966). Gaseous diffusion is derived from the following correlation; -3 -1.75 10 • T M D. r l 0 33 0.33 2 air i ' Where: - Diffusion coefficient of contaminant i in air (A), (cnr/sec) T •=• Temperature, (°K) Mr - Molecular weight ratio, (unitless) P - Pressure, (atm) vair " Molar volume of air, (cm3/mol), and " Molar volume of contaminant i, (cm3/mol). | cj I I ° 1 o i -J l S 10 3-5 1 £ 2531Y U5 This method was most accurate for chlorinated aliphatics, unsubstituted aliphatics,' and aromatics (Jarvis and Lug, 1968; Lyman, et al., 1982), producing absolute average errors of less than 5.0 percent (Lyman, et al., 1982). To estimate contaminant diffusion, D 2 AB (cm /sec), from the soil solution phase to soil gas phase, and then to the atmosphere, the following relationship was used: dab - Di V33 Hi Where P - total soil porosity, 0.48 for sandy loam - dimansionless Henry's Law constant Table 3-1 presents the calculated emission rates based on the diffusion coefficients computed above. Emission rates were computed using equations developed specifically for spills, leaks, or intentional disposal of organic chemicals directly to the soil (Versar, 1988). Volatile release rates were estimated as follows: 2D..C A E. = AB o l 2D C t ~ AB o 2 d + °BC + d Where: E£ = emission rate of contaminant i, (g/sec) = diffusion coefficient of contaminant i in soil, (cm /sec) Co ~ Phase concentration of chemical (i) in soil, (g/cm3) - contaminant concentration in bulk soil, (g/cm^) t - time since sample was collected, (sec), and d - depth of dry zone at time of sampling, (cm). For estimating releases from the site, the area of contamination for each of the indicator chemicals was determined by contouring the soil concentration data using "Surfer", a contour generating computer program (Golden Software, 1987). After each chemical was contoured, the areas within the contours were digitized using the "Galaxy" computer digitizing software package (R S. Means Co.). A weighted average concentration was calculated for each of the volatile indicator chemicals by multiplying 3-6 2531Y |S> uui K TABLE 3-1 CALCULATED ATMOSPHERIC EMISSION RATES FULTON TERMINAL SITE OJ EMISSION RATES (g/sec) SIDE 10 days 90 days 120 days 360 days 70 years CONTAMINANT Dab Co Cb AREA LENGTH / 2. , . 2. CONTAMINANT (cm /sec) (g/cm3) (g/cm3) (cm ) (m) BENZENE 7.44E03 5.00E-10 1.60E-06 6.82E+06 26.12 8.31E-07 8.24E-07 8.22E-07 8.02E-07 3.72E-07 CHLOROBENZENE 4.40E-03 5.00E-10 1.60E-06 6.82E+06 26.12 4.92E-07 4.89E-07 4.89E-07 4.81E-07 2.63E-07 TRICHLOROETHENE 1.13E-03 3.10E-09 7.79E-05 1.33E+07 36.47 1.53E-06 1.53E-06 1.53E-06 1.53E-06 1.45E-06 1,2-DICHLOROETHENE 9.16E-03 1.90E-09 2.67E-06 5.17E+06 22.74 2.94E-06 2.88E-06 2.85E-06 2.68E-06 8.87E-07 VINYL CHLORIDE 5.15E02 2.50E10 2.32E10 5.30E+06 23.02 2.24E06 2.24E06 2.24E06 2.24E-06 2.24E-06 — iszz z.00 the area of concentration by the level of concentration for each of the contour intervals. The area determined to be contaminated was chosen as the area of soil contamination above 0.8 ppm. This cut-off was chosen because the contoured information suggested that areas with less than 0.8 ppm were too discontinuous and separated to be representative of overall contamination at the site. Table 3-1 contains the areas and average concentrations for each of the indicator chemicals. In addition, the equivalent side length, which is used by GEMS, is shown. Emission rates for the five indicator chemicals were then estimated for short-term and .ong-term exposures, ranging from 10 days to 365 days (short-term) and 70 years (long-term) since the time samples were collected (and analyzed) from the Fulton Terminals Site (Table 3-1). The depth of dry zone, d, was estimated at approximately 30 centimeters (1 foot). This is a reasonable estimate based on site characteristics. No field measurements of this parameter were available. The emission rate represents the depletion of the contaminant at the soil surface with time due to the volatilization of organics in successive unimolecular layers from soil particles (Versar, 1988). Movement of volatilized contaminants from the site will be determined by relative directional frequencies of wind over the site (refer to Figure Those offsite areas potentially.affected by ambient concentrations of these gases will be determined by atmospheric stability and wind speed. High stability and calm conditions (low wind speed) will result in higher atmospheric concentrations of contaminants close to the site. Conversely, low stability and high winds favor dispersal of contaminants and reduce ambient air concentration over greater areas (Versar, 1988). Deposition of volatilized contaminants through precipitation scavenging is expected to impact offsite soils, surface waters and G t"1 potentially edible l.iota only to a limited extent due to the extremely low emission rates. These intermedia transfers are difficult to quantify ° and therefore deposition will not be modeled in this assessment. ' to 3-8 2531Y V I Using Che GEMS Atmospheric Modeling system's Industrial Source Complex dispersion nodel, estimated ambient air concentrations were computed for each volatile indicator chemical detected in the soil. Concentrations were provided based on a short-term (emission rate after 10 days) and a long-term basis (emission rate after 70 years). Concentrations were calculated using a polar coordinate system using the 16 standard subcardr.nal compass point bearings, at radial distances of 1/4 mile (402 meter:;), 1/2 mile (805 meters), 1 mile (1,609 meters), 2 miles (3,218 meters), and 3 miles (4,827 meters) from the site. Average ground level concentrations were then assigned to each sector segment. Surface Water Two distinct exposure routes were identified related to contaminants that migrate to Oswego River. Direct contact (dermal) exposures may occur to humans who may use the river for recreation. Direct contact exposures will also occur to any aquatic biota that inhabit Oswego River. Ingestion exposures to individuals consuming fish from the river will be considered separately. Inhalation exposures, while swimming, are expected to be minor and will not be further evaluated. Contaminants axe generally sorbed onto soil particles at the soil surface or they exist in a dissolved state around soil particles. During rainfall events or snowmelt, these soil particles become' entrained through erosion and conveyed by runoff streams from the Fulton Terminals Site into storm sewers or by direct overland flow into Oswego River. The 0.9-acre site is generally flat with no naturally flowing water within its boundaries (NUS 1983). One storm grate inlet illustrated on Figure 2-5, which once carried return flows to Oswego River (NUS, 1983) but is presently plugged. hrj I ' G ! G I O ! O ! to NJ Ul U> 3-9 2531Y Releases via overland flow of contaminants from source areas identified in Section 1.3 were estimated using the Modified Universal Soil Loss Equation MUSLE) and sorption partition coefficients (Haith, 1980; Mills et al., 1982; [cited inVersar, 1988]). This equation provides an estimate of the amount of soil eroded during a single storm event of a given intensity, while sorption coefficients allow prediction of the amounts of contaminants that will be conveyed in the runoff in suspended form (as sediment) or in dissolved form. The equation presented by Mills ot al., (1982) is given by: Y(S)E = a(Vr • qp)0-56 KLSCP Where: Y(S)E = sediment yield, (metric tons) a = conversion constant, (11.8 metric) Vr = volume of runoff, (m^) qp = peak flow rate, (nr/sec) K = soil erosion factor, (tons/acre/R unit) L - slope-length factor (dimensionless) S - slope-steepness factor (dimensionless) C = cover factor (dimensionless, 0.013 for 80 percent cover, no appreciable canopy), and P = erosion control practice factor (dimensionless, 1.0 for bare soil). The supporting calculation for Y(S)£ is provided in Appendix 3 as Attachment C. Substituting these values: Y(S)E = (11.8);(5.51)(0.0027)]°-56(0.64)(0.1)(1)(0:013) = 0.0009.: metric tons of sediment/one inch storm event To estimate the partitioning of contaminants between solid and dissolved phases during a runoff event, a simple mass balance approach can be used. Partitioning of the contaminant is dependent on its sorption partition coefficient, Kd> the soil bulk density and available water capacity (Haith, 1980). The amounts adsorbed and dissolved can be estimated as: j a ss = [i/(i - ec/Kd£)] csoil A | and j® Ds = [1/(1 ^ .Kd/3)/ec] CSQil A j M to ! 3-10 ! 2531V Where: Ss sorbed substance quantity, (kg) Ds •« dissolved substance quantity, (kg) ©c " available water capacity of top centimeter of soil, (dimensionless) sorption partition coefficient, (cm^/g) £ soil bulk density, (g/cm^) Csoii *" contaminant concentration in soil, (kg/ha) and A •« contaminated area, (ha). To compute the amount of sorbed and dissolved contaminant loads to Oswego River, the following equation is used(Haith 1980): PXt - [Y(S)l/100 0] ss and PQi - [Qr/Rt] Ds Where: PX^ - sorbed contaminant loss per event, (kg) PQ^ - dissolved contaminant loss per event, (kg) Qr - total storm runoff depth, (cm) and Rt - total storm rainfall, (cm). Table 3-2 presents the estimated partitioning of each indicator chemical between the sorbed and dissolved phases and the expected short-term contaminant loads to Oswego River due to surface run-off. Ground Water Migration of contaminants through soil and into ground water was an additional pathway identified in Section 2.0. The principle concern of exposures stems fron the discharge of contaminated water into the Oswego River from ground water below the site. No ingestion exposures were identified for ground-water users near the Fulton Terminals Site. The city of Fulton's war.er supply source is derived from wells south of the city limits (Great Rear Wells) and augmented by lake water piped in from Lake Ontario which is not expected to be influenced by any ground-water contamination from the Fulton Terminals Site. Once the contaiiinants have entered the ground water below the site, they are transported with ground-water flow to potential receptor '2 i c points. In the ground-water flow system at the Fulton Terminals Site, j t~' !i °o I -j 3-11 w to 2531Y ui m I TABLE 3-2 CALCULATION OF SORBED AND DISSOLVED CONTAMINANT LOADS TO OSWEGO RIVER FROM SURFACE WATER RUNOFF B 3 C .. 0 (cm /g) (g/cm ) SOI 1 Area S D PX. PQ. Contaminant (Ref. 1) (Ref. 2) (Ref. 3) (kq/ha) (ha) (kq) (kq) (ko1 1 IKq)ftnl Arsen ic 0.139 4.71 1.49 7.79E-04 0.19 1 .45E-04 2.87E-06 4.82E-06 3.28E-07 Barium 0.139 337000 1.49 1.50E-02 0.19 2.85E-03 7.88E-06 9.44E-08 9!00E-07 Benzene U . 103 u.o3 1.43 1.36L-G3 0.13 L . 32C-04 c.OCL *uj / . OOL-UCJ L . O! L"UU Chlorobenzene 0.139 3.64 1.49 1.41E-03 0.19 2.60E-04 7.34E-06 8.62E-09 8.39E-07 1,2-Dichloroethene (total) 0.139 0.54 1.49 9.60E-04 0.19 1.56E-04 2.69E-05 5.16E-09 3.07E-06 4-Methyl-2-Pentanone (MIKB) 0.139 0.19 1.49 2.24E-03 0.19 2.87E-04 1.38E-04 9.51E-09 1.58E-05 Nickel 0.139 54.6 1.49 1.87E-03 0.19 3.54E-04 6.04E-04 1.17E-08 6.90E-08 Pyrene 0.139 380 1.49 2.89E-02 0.19 5.50E-03 1.35E-06 1.82E-07 1.54E-07 Trichloroethene 0.139 0.59 1.49 1.44E-03 0.19 2.55E-04 1.89E-05 8.46E-09 2.16E-06 Vinyl Chloride 0.139 5700 1.49 1.82E-03 0.19 2.96E-04 4.85E-05 9.83E-09 5.54E-06 References: (1) Available water capacity is the difference between water content at field capacity and water content at the permanent wilting point. An average value was obtained from 24 similarly textured soils (Baes et al., 1983). (2) Kd values for organics were computed as KQC = ^/organic carbon (Lyman, et al.. 1982) and assumes a 1 percent organic carbon content in the soil. Kd value for arsenic was obtained from Dragun (1987). Koc = Kd/or9an,c carbon content of soil (Lyman, et al., 1982) by first estimating a K using the solubility of BaSO, (Dragun, 1987). oc 4 Kd for nickel was estimated by comparison to Kd's of other metals and by considering factors which control K . such as atomic radiusS\ and valence number (Lyman, et al., 1982). 9SZZ LOO mj the ground water be..ow the site flows westward to the Oswego River. For an exposure assessment study, the river is considered a receptor point. The organisms the r:.ver supports are considered ecological receptors; and the river should meet the water quality standards for human health. The Fulton Terminals Sir.e boundary borders the river so the transport distance is relatively short, ranging from 30 feet for monitoring wells EBMW-1 and EBMW-7, r.o 560 feet for monitoring well FBW-1. The study was designed to ensure that all potential contaminant sources be included so that any potential health risks would be identified. An analytical model, Soil Contamination Evaluation Methodology (SOCEM), was used to characterize the threat that contaminated ground water below the Fulton Terminals Site may have on the Oswego River (CH2M Hill, 1985). Versa)" has substituted actual ground water monitoring results to estimate contaminant concentrations reaching Oswego River. The model assumes the following: • steady state conditions, • continuous source of contaminants, • constant source concentration, • no retardation of contaminants, • no losses or decay mechanisms (degradation, volatilization), • no longitudinal dispersion, • no diffusion, and • no precipitation recharge. These assumptions will produce a conservative estimate of potential offsite contaminant concentrations. The numbers can be viewed essentially as a "worst-case" situation since they do not allow for important loss mechanisms. Exposure levels computed from these numbers will therefore be biased high. This conservative approach is taken to ensure that the potential human or environmental health risks will be identified, and that: selected remedial alternatives will be protective. 3-13 2531Y The codified version of SOCEM used in this endangerment study was based on EPA's (50 FR 7882) Vertical and Horizontal Spread (VHS) model, adapted from an equation presented by Domenico and Palciauskas (1982). The SOCEM version of their equation is given by: Cgw = CQ * erf[Z/(2(d*X)0•5] * erf[Y/(4(d*X)°•5)] Where: Cgw = Contaminant concentration at the ground-water receptor, in this case, the Oswego River, C0 •= Initial ground-water contaminant concentration at the source, in this case, concentrations in monitoring wells, d = Aquifer transverse dispersivity, X = Distance to receptor in the direction of ground-water flow, Y - Width of contaminated zone at the waste boundary (measured perpendicular to the direction of ground-water flow), Z - Thickness of the contaminated zone at the waste boundary (measured downward from the ground water table), and erf(f) = The error function of any function (f). The developers of SOCEM (CH2M Hill, 1985) intended that the model be used to evaluate the effect alternate remedial options have on reducing the concentration at: the receptor. The Memorandum Report for SOCEM suggests that the model be used as a straight forward, simplified procedure to characterize the threat that contaminated soil may pose to ground water at Superfund sites, even though they do not suggest a way of estimating one of the most critical input values to the SOCEM model, the initial source concentration in ground water due to contaminated soil CH2M Hill, 1985). To circumvent problems associated with generated ground-water concentration values from soil concentration values, the ground-water exposure assessment relies on the ground-water monitoring data, and not soils concentration data. In such an approach, each monitoring well with constituent concentration, Cq, acts as a source of contaminated ground water that will be transported to the Oswego River. 3-14 2531Y If each location where samples were taken is treated as a source of contamination, and the concentration of constituents at all depths at each location are summed, their contributions of contamination introduced to the Oswego River can be calculated using the VHS or the SOCEM Models. Table 3-3 shows total constituent concentrations entering the river from the ground water. The site source areas (Y) were assumed to be 36 feet wide, which is approximately 1/llth of the length of the site measured perpendicular to the direction of the ground water flow. The penetration depth of the contamination (Z) was determined for shallow wells by subtracting the depth to water from the total depth of the well. For deep wells, Z is the distance from the bottom of the adjacent shallow well to the bottom of each deep well. Appendix 3 includes tables that indicate the contributing concentration from each well for each indicator chemical detected in the ground water. The SOCEM Model was used to calculate concentrations of contaminated water released to the Oswego River for each constituent identified at each sampling location, and totaled for all indicator chemicals from each sampling location. Biota Based on interviews with city officials in Fulton, and a number of concerned citizens, there is significant recreational uses of Oswego River that may lead to potential ingestion exposures (Patane, 1988; Weston, 1988; Scrudato, 1988; and Daly, 1988). Fish species such as northern pike, perch, catfish, bass, and salmon have been fished along Oswego River from its first lock station (approximately 1-2 river miles upstream from Lake Ontario) (Weston,,1988) up to points immediately downstream (within one block) of the Fulton Terminals Site (Patane, 1988; Weston, 1988). However, the 1989-90 NYS Department of Health, Health Advisory recommends that individuals consume no more than one meal per month of Channel Catfish caught in the Oswego River Power Dam in Oswego to the Upper Dam at Fulton. The entire Health Advisory is appended to this report. 3-15 2531Y TABLE 3-3 CONTAMINANT LOADING TO THE OSWEGO RIVER FROM THE GROUND WATER AT FULTON TERMINALS Loading (ug/1) Arsenic 13 46 Barium 6723.28 Benzene 12.29 Chlorobenzene 4.32 1,2-dichloroethene 710.59 4-Methyl-2-Pentanone 21.32 Nickel 749.59 Tricliloroethene 106.11 Vinyl Chloride 7.59 3-16 Due to tendency of some volatile organics to bioaccumulate in the food web, this exposure route may be significant, particularly to individuals who fish this river on a regular basis. A quantitative assessment of the fate of each indicator chemical into biotic populatrons was therefore conducted. However, precise estimates of volati._e organic concentrations in tissue of edible flora and fauna is not possible based on the data available for this study. Bioconcentration factors were used in an attempt to estimate these concentrations in edible portions of the fish tissue (skeletal muscle). Due to the complexities involved in assessing individual ecological communities, biotic species present, their interaction with toxic substances, and relationship to human activities, these estimates are highly speculative. For aquatic organisms, notably fishes, but also freshwater shellfish, tissue contaminant concentrations are estimated as a function of equilibrium partitioning between water and tissue, and therefore are directly related to ambient concentration in water and a bioconcentration factor (BCF) which describes the ratio of aquatic animal tissue concentration to water concentration (Versar, 1988). Since site-specific sampling data were insufficient for development of BCFs, values were obtained from technical literature. Estimating contaminant concentrations in terrestrial animal tissue (beef cattle, sheep swine, deer, grouse, pheasant, etc.) or in plant species (grains, grasses, vegetables, etc.) cannot be reliably determined on the available data. Negative correlations have been found between concentrations of organics in adipose tissue and their corresponding water solubility, however, BCFs could only be predicted with 3- to 4-order of magnitude! [Kenaga, 1980 cited in (Versar, 1988)]. Direct contact with contaminated soils of the Fulton Terminals Site j I o may lead to exposure: to organics and metals primarily through accidental ° to to Mean contaminant concentrations in shallow soil samples (0 to 2 feet) (Table 3-4) wore used to calculate direct contact exposures. Thirty-six samples comprise the population of surface soil samples (refer to Table 1-2). Each sample result was given equal weight in the determination of mean contaminant concentration. 3.3 Populations Exposed A quantitative analysis of exposed populations was completed to determine the likelihood of receptor contact with environmental contaminants presented in Section 3.2. Exposed population screening involved an examination of each of the exposure pathways listed in Table 2-2. Results of the screening process identified exposures via inhalation of volatile contaminants, potential dermal exposures via direct contact with contaminated surface water and river sediments, potential exposure '"ia ingestion of contaminated surface water and fish from Oswego River, and direct contact (ingestion) exposures of contaminated soils at the site. Identification and enumeration of exposed human populations was derived from 1980 census data compiled by the U.S. Department of Commerce. Census tract information for 1980 indicate that the total population of Fulton is 13,312. More detailed block group information was obtained to provide age and sex data on potentially exposed 3-18 2531Y TABLE 3-4 MEAN INDICATOR CHEMICAL CONCENTRATIONS (PPB) IN SHALLOW SOIL FULTON TERMINALS SITE Locations: 1-1S 2-1S 3-1S 4-1S 5-IS 6-1S 7-1S 8-IS 9-1S 10-1S 11-1S 12-1S 13-1S 14-1S ARSENIC 5300 4500 14200 26900 2600 3600 4600 6100 20800 5100 3900 7700 4400 4900 BARIUM 58300 23600 197000 167000 88300 36700 122000 94600 114000 588000 36700 73800 87500 116000 BENZENE 4.5 4 4.5 375 3 4.5 2050 4.5 4 4 3 4.5 4.5 CHLOROBENZENE 4.5 4 4.5 375 3 4.5 2050 4.5 4 4 3 4.5 4.5 1.2 DICHLOROETHENE (total) 4.5 4 4.5 375 3 4.5 5300 4.5 4 4 3 4.5 4.5 4-METHYL-2-PENTAN0NE 9 8 9 1300 5.5 8.5 4100 2 8 8.5 6.5 9 9 NICKEL 14500 11800 24200 39900 10800 8700 28200 16100 14500 15300 13300 6700 16200 7300 PYRENE 78000 180000 100000 195000 175000 180000 280000 69000 800000 185000 410000 205000 120000 195000 TRICHLOROETHENE 4.5 4 4.5 270 3 4.5 110000 4.5 4 4 3 4.5 4.5 VINYL CHLORIDE 9 8 9 750 5.5 8.5 4100 9.5 8 8.5 6.5 9 9 Locations: 15—IS 16-IS 17-1S 18-IS 19-IS 20-IS 21—IS 22-1S 23-IS 24—IS 25-1S 26-1S 27-1S ARSENIC 18800 9000 2300 11600 12800 2100 6600 9700 11600 8200 4200 10500 9300 BARIUM 83800 211000 44900 183000 123000 69300 495000 236000 68500 89000 42900 123000 86100 BENZENE 4.5 4.5 4 5 4.5 4.5 4 4 4.5 4 2.5 3 3 CHLOROBENZENE 4.5 4.5 4 5 4.5 4.5 4 4 4.5 4 2.5 3 3 1.2 DICHLOROETHENE (total) 4.5 4.5 4 5 4.5 4.5 4 4 4.5 4 2.5 3 4-HETHYL-2-PENTAN0NE 9 9 8.5 9.5 9 9.5 8 8 9.5 8 5.5 6 6 NICKEL 30300 33100 7600 16300 20000 8100 15200 31400 19400 21600 10600 12300 9200 PYRENE 41000 150000 140000 190000 150000 200000 190000 1000000 520000 160000 195000 430000 TRICHLOROETHENE 4.5 4.5 4 5 4.5 4.5 4 4 4.5 4 2.5 3 3 VINYL CHLORIDE 9 9 8.5 9.5 9 9.5 8 8 9.5 8 5.5 6 6 GEOMETRIC Locations: IS 2S 3S 4S 5S 7S 8S MEAN ARSENIC 380 50000 2200 380 1900 4700 380 5229.926 BARIUM 100830.1 BENZENE 10 306 7440 10 10 10 10 9.099915 CHLOROBENZENE 10 4250 1780 10 10 10 10 9.437148 1.2 DICHLOROETHENE (total) 6.442486 4-NETHYL-2-PENTANONE 10 2140 500 10 10 10 10 15.01324 NICKEL 4400 9200 7900 2900 10000 10000 2800 12517.09 PYRENE 194277.6 TRICHLOROETHENE 10 10 44100 10 10 10 10 9.672209 VINYL CHLORIDE 12.18567 LOO £9 populations near the Fulton Terminals Site. Block groups are minor civil divisions or tracts within the city of Fulton, and can therefore represent a smaller segment of Fulton's total population. The city of Fulton is divided into four census tracts, designated 211.01 through 211.04. The Fulton Terminals Site is located within census tract 211.01. 1980 census data for tract 211.01 reveals a total population of 4,928. Females (all age groups) comprise 54 percent (2654) of the population. Child-hearing age groups, conservatively figured at 15 to 54 years of age, comprise 26 percent (1278) of the population. The total population of elderly, aged 65 years and over was 15 percent (728). The median age for all age groups is 30 years (USDOC, 1987). Populations Exposed by Air Route Volatile organ:.c concentrations for each of the indicator chemicals estimated using the GEMS Atmospheric Modeling System's (GAMS) Industrial Source Complex (ISC; long-term model were stored at the 1980 census block group and enumeration district (BG/ED) geographic level. Block groups represent smaller divisions within a city's census tract (enumeration districts apply only to county subdivisions). Populations exposed to inhalation exposures to volatile releases from the Fulton Terninals Site were estimated in GAMS on a polar coordinate system. This coordinate system was divided into 16 sectors representing the standard subcardinal compass point directions (north, north northeast, northeast, east northeast, etc.). The coordinate system was centered over the Fulton Terminals Site and examined five radial distances (concentric rings) from the source area. These distances were 1/4. 1/2, 1, 2, and 3 miles (402, 805, 1,609, 3,218, and 4,827 meters) from the source area. GAMS then stores the concentration computed for the sector segment :.n question for each block group whose center's latitude and longitude coordinates fall within the sector segment. 1980 census data are then applied to enumerate the populations in each block group or enumeration district. 3-20 2531Y Populations Exposed by Surface Water Route Section 3.2 presents estimated contaminant loading from surface runoff (in dissolved and suspended states) and estimated contaminant concentrations in ground-water as it enters Oswego River. These contributions taken collectively were used to estimate resultant contaminant concentrations in the river considering dilution effects. The following equatron was used to calculate these concentrations: C - (Csrs + Csrd} " Qsr + ^ " W r Qr Where: Cr = Concentration of contaminant, i, in Oswego River, (ug/1) Csrs = (;°ncentration of contaminant, i, in surface runoff suspended state, (ug/1) Csrd - Concentration of contaminant, i in surface runoff dissolved state, (ug/1) Cgw ~ Concentration of contaminant, i, in ground-water entering Oswego River, (ug/1) Qsr = Flow rate of surface runoff, assuming 0.29cm runoff over 4 hours on 0.9 acres, 0.82 liters/second Qgw = Flow rate of ground water, 56.4 liters/second Qr = Mean annual flow rate of Oswego River, at Oswego (1.89E+05) liters/sec) All supporting calculations and assumptions used to determine contaminant concentrations and flow rates are presented in Appendix 3, Attachment D. Estimated river concentrations for each of the indicator chemicals is presented in Table 3-5. Dermal Exposures Volatile organ.cs released to Oswego River are expected to lead to dermal exposures to individuals using the river for recreational purposes. Recreational exposures may result from many activities; primarily swimming, boating/skiing, and fishing (Whitmyre, et al., 1987). r' ' Individuals swimming and wading in Oswego River in locations downstream of the Fulton Terminal:; Site are subject to whole-body dermal exposures to >j Qt-1 volatile organics in surface water. Dermal absorption of contaminants ' 0 I o -J bo 3-21 bo 253IY I ui TABLE 3-5 CALCULATION OF POTENTIAL CONTAMINANT CONCENTRATIONS IN OSWEGO RIVER AT THE FULTON TERMINALS SITE Csrs Csrd 08r Cgw Ogw Qr (1) Cr Contaminant (ug/1) (ug/1) (l/sec) (ug/1) (l/sec) (l/sec) (ug/1) Short Term Arsenic 8.74E-04 5.96E-03 0.383 13.457 2.51 26100 1.29E-03 Barium 1.71E-02 1.63E-02 0.383 6723.00 2.51 26100 6.46E-01 Benzene 1.39E-03 5.39E-02 0.383 12.29 2.51 26100 1.18E-03 Chlorobenzene 1.56E-03 1.52E-02 0.383 4.323 2.51 26100 4.16E-04 1,2-DCE 9.36E-04 5.57E-02 0.383 710.6 2.51 26100 6.83E-02 MIBK 1.73E-03 2.86E-01 0.383 21.32 2.51 26100 2.05E-03 Nickel 2.13E-03 1.25E-03 0.383 749.6 2.51 26100 7.21E-02 Pyrene 3.31E-02 2.80E-03 0.383 0 2.51 26100 5.26E-07 TCE 1.42E-03 7.75E-02 0.383 106.1 2.51 26100 1.02E-02 u> Vinyl Chloride 2.08E-03 1.17E-05 0.383 7.587 2.51 26100 7.29E-04 to to Long Term Arsenic 8.74E-04 5.96E-03 0.383 13.457 2.51 189000 1.79E-04 Barium 1.71E-02 1.63E-02 0.383 6723.00 2.51 189000 8.92E-02 Benzene 1.39E-03 5.39E-02 0.383 12.29 2.51 189000 1.63E-04 Chlorobenzene 1.56E-03 1.52E-02 0.383 4.323 2.51 189000 5.74E-05 1,2-DCE 9.36E-04 5.57E-02 0.383 710.6 2.51 189000 9.43E-03 MIBK 1.73E-03 2.86E-01 0.383 21.32 2.51 189000 2.84E-04 Nickel 2.13E-03 1.25E-03 0.383 749.6 2.51 189000 9.95E-03 Pyrene 3.31E-02 2.80E-03 0.383 0 2.51 189000 7.27E-08 TCE 1.42E-03 7.75E-02 0.383 106.1 2.51 189000 1.41E-03 Vinyl Chloride 2.08E-03 1.17E-05 0.383 7.587 2.51 189000 1.01E-04 (1) Short-term discharge was calculated as the mean flow in Oswego River at Lock 7 during August (month of lowest flow) for the water year 1985. Long-term discharge was the average of discharge for Oswego River at Lock 7, computed from a 52-year record (USGS, 1985). J 99ZZ L00 1(1.3 contained in .river sediments may occur. However, the typically high K values of BNAs and netals, the contaminants of highest prevalence in the sediments, disallow passive or active transport across the skin barrier. Inhalation and inadvertent ingestion exposures may also occur during these activities. Inhalation exposures to volatile organics is considered through the air route. Fishing is expected to lead to partial-body dermal exposures, generally through hands and forearms. Oswego River serves as an important recreational resource to residents of Oswego County. The river is used extensively for fishing, swimming, boating, and water skiing (Patane, 1988; Weston, 1988; Daly, 1988; Scrudato, 198o). Although city and county officials could not provide an estimate of the number of individuals swimming or fishing the river near the site a nearby boat launch and fishing area within one block downstream of the Fulton Terminals Site was identified as a location frequented year round by a number of individuals (Weston, 1988). According to Weston (1988) , a member of a citizen action group concerned with Oswego River water quality issues, a number of low-income residents living nearby eat die fish caught from Oswego River, which may represent a significant portion of their diet. This district (city wards 5 and 6) corresponds to U.S. census tract 211.01 (USDOC, 1987). Up to a dozen individuals have been observed on a single day fishing from this location (Weston, 1988). The boat launch area also provides direct access to the Oswego River for boaters and swimmers. In order to enumerate the potentially exposed populations (dermal route), a national average of individuals who use natural bodies of water (includes oceans, rivers, and lakes) was used to provide a conservative estimate. Based on data from the Bureau of Outdoor Recreation, 34 percent of the total population swims outdoors in natural surface water bodies (USDOI, 1973). Using this percentage estimate and assuming the boat launch area is generally used by individuals from city wards 5 and 6 (census tract 211.01) which has a total population of 4928, then up to 1676 individuals (34 percent of 4928) may be dermally exposed to volatile organics in the Oswego River. 3-23 253XY Ingestion Exposure There were no water supply sources identified downstream of the Fulton Terminals Site which uses surface water directly from the Oswego River (Patane, 1988 Daly, 1988; Proud, 1988; Florek, 1988). The city of Fulton obtains its water supply from a series of wells near the southern corporate limits of Fulton and from the Great Bear wells (refer to Section 2.1.3). Four municr.pal wells recently taken out of service adjacent to the river (well numbers 1, 3, 4, and 5) had shown elevated levels of iron, manganese, and barium. No volatile organics have been observed (Florek, 1988; Walsh, 1988). These elevated levels have been attributed to the naturally high levels of these elements in the lodgement till (Walsh, 1988). The city of Fulton now augments their water supply by purchasing water supplied by the city of Oswego (piped in from Lake Ontario). Populations Exuosed bv Biota Route Individuals who eat fish that are caught from the Oswego River may be potentially exposed to the contaminants that may accumulate in edible portions of fish meat. Due to the migratory behavior of fish in the Oswego River, this nay not be limited just to reaches downstream of the Fulton Terminals Site. Interviews with individuals living in Fulton and nearby Minetto have identified several fish species that inhabit Oswego River, including catfish, northern pike, bass, "perch, and salmon (Patane, 1988; Scrudato, 1988; Weston 1988). The Oswego River is fished extensively, particularly near the river's first lock gate (approximately 1 to 2 miles downstream of the site) Daly (1988) estimated that up to 250 people may fish the river from this area. Weston (1988) has observed up to 12 people fishing near the boat launch area immediately do\nastream of the Fulton Terminals Site.• Using these figures, and an average of 2.3 individuals per household (Versar 1986) that may consume the fish caught by these 262 people, an estimated 603 ( people may be potentially exposed to contaminants through the ingestion of contaminated fish. This figure assumes that recreationally caught fish are consumed by every member of the household. However, the number of 3-24 2531Y people who consume :ish caught in the Oswego River may recently have declined due to pub..ic warnings issued regarding the consumption of fish caught in the Oswego River (conversion with EPA). Populations Exposed bv Direct Contact Neighborhood children or young adults playing over the site may be potentially exposed by direct contact (ingestion) to contaminants in the soil. Exposures assume that one-third of the population of 0 to 19 year olds (male and female) living in city wards 5 and 6 may visit the site to play. The 1980 census data enumerate a total of 1,631 persons in the 0 to 19-year-old age group in census track 211.01, corresponding to city wards 5 and 6 (USDOC, 1980). One-third of this total, 543, is therefore the number of persons assumed to be potentially exposed by this route. Exposures are assumed to occur five times a year for 5 years (based on professional estimate on rate of occurrence) during an average 70-year lifetime. 3.4 Extent of Exposure The final step in the exposure assessment is the calculation of dose incurred. Exposure to the contaminants released from the Fulton Terminals Site considers collectively each of the various routes the receptor may be exposed to these toxic substances, the frequency and duration of exposure, and the amount of contaminated material (concentrations) present. Short- and long-term exposures are generally computed in a similar fashion. Each exposure value considers the amount of contaminant contacted and adsorbed for each event. Short-term exposures typically examine time frames from 10 to 90 days while long-term exposures are based on events projected over 70 years. Exposure estimates contained in this report are based on an average adult body mass of 70 kg (20 kg for children) and an assumed 70-year lifespan (Versar, 1988). '^ Toxic effects of dermally adsorbed contaminants is assumed to have jo identical toxic effects as oral exposures. This assumption is made / ^ because U.S. EPA haa not developed toxicity values for contaminants via ' the dermal route. vo 3-25 2531Y Inhalation Exposures Inhalation exposures to each of the indicator chemicals were estimated using the GEMS Graphical Atmospheric Modeling System. These exposures were computed based on average contaminant concentrations occurring within sector segments over each block group and enumeration district near the city of Fulton (up to 3 miles away). Table 3-6 presents the cumulative short-term and long-term inhalation exposures for each of the indicator chemicals. Populations exposed to each of the indicator chemicals are also summarized in Table 3-6. Concentration levels provided by GEMS are presented for 10-day (short-term) and 70-year (long-term) exposure. Ambient concentration is assumed to represent the average atmospheric concentration and may vary considerably day to day. Exposures are also assumed to occur indoors as well as outdoors. Since contamination was determined to cover a significant portion of residential areas, the exposure duration was assigned to be 24 hours. Various studies have documented marked differences in contiiminant concentrations of airborne particulates' between these two environs. Differences may be expected with volatile emissions, though not as great Without additional information, generating more precise estimates of inhalation exposures is not possible. Time-weighted average dose is obtained by dividing the respective concentration level by an average body weight of 70 kg, multiplying by an average ventilation 3 rate of 22.0 m /day/person, and converting the mass of contaminant to milligrams. C F o o -J to to -J o 3-26 2531Y TABLE 3 - 6 CUMULATIVE SHORT-TERM AND LONG-TERM INHALATION EXPOSURES TO EACH INDICATOR CHEMICAL FULTON TERMINALS SITE Population Exposed and Exposure to Benzene Emissions Concentration Cumulative Population Time-Weighted Level Exposed Average Dose (ug/m3) Persons X (mg/kg/day) Short Term 8.45E-05 2,139 32.91 2.66E-08 Long Term 3.77E-05 2,139 32.91 1.18E-08 Population Exposed and Exposure to Chlorobenzene Emissions Concentration Cumulative Population Time-Weighted Level Exposed Average Dose (ug/m3) Persons X (mg/kg/day) Short Term 4.99E-05 2,139 32.91 • 1.57E-08 Lone Term 2.65E-05 2,139 32.91 8.33E-09 Population Exposed and Exposure to Vinyl Chloride Emissions Concentration Cumulative Population Time-Weighted Level Exposed Average Dose (ug/m3) Persons X (mg/kg/day) Short Term 1.77E-04 2,139 32.91 5.56E-08 Lone Term 1.77E-04 2,139 32.91 5.56E-08 3-27 2531Y TABLE 3-6 CUMULATIVE SHORT-TERM AND LONG-TERM INHALATION EXPOSURES TO EACH INDICATOR CHEMICAL ' FULTON TERMINALS SITE (Continued) Population Exposed and Exposure to 1,2-dichloroethene Emissions Concentration Cumulative Population Time-Weighted Level Exposed Average Dose (ug/m ) Persons Z (mg/kg/day) Short Term 2.27E-04 2,139 32.91 7.13E-08 Long Term 6.86E-05 2,139 32.91 2.16E-08 Population Exposed and Exposure to Trichloroethene Emissions Concentration Cumulative Population Time-Weighted Level Exposed Average Dose (ug/m3) Persons Z (mg/kg/day) Short Term 3.05E-04 2,139 32.91 9.59E-08 Long Term 2.89E-04 2,139 32.91 9.08E-08 3-28 2531V Dermal Exposures Dermal exposures to organics are expected to occur during swimming, wading, fishing, or water skiing in the Oswego River. Dermal exposures due to direct contact with contaminated surface water and sediments were determined based on the concentration of the indicator chemical .n the surface water, the extent of contact, and the duration of contact with each contaminant. Annual exposures (dosage incurred over a one year period) is based on a national average of 7 occurrences or even :s per year (USDOI, 1973). Dermal exposures or absorption percent were computed using the following equation derived by Konz (Versar, 1989) based on an article by Baranowski and Dutkiewicz 1982. DEX = J) x A x C x Flux Where: DEX = Estimated dermal adsorption per event (mg/event) D = duration of exposure event (hours/event) A - .skin surface area available for contact, (18,150 cm^ :.s an adult average) C = Contaminant concentration in water, (mg/cm^), and Flux - dermal permeation rate of water across skin, (0.5 cm/hour) Table 3-7 presents the estimated dermal exposures and annual exposures to each of the indicator chemicals. Dermal exposure to the metal and BNA contaminants of concern is expected to be negligible due to their lower solubility and affinity for sediment (fines) in the surface water. Diffusion or active transport of contaminants across the skin barrier is generally limited to small molecular weight, nonpolar organic compounds (Versar, .988). Ingestion Exposures Ingestion exposures are expected to occur through consumption of contaminated fish caught from the river. Exposures may also occur through the inadvertent ingestion of contaminated soil adhering to fingers and hands of individuals directly contacting soils at the site. 3-29 2531Y TABLE 3-7 CALCULATION OF INTAKES FROM DERMAL ABSORPTION OF CHEMICALS IN SURFACE HATER VIA DIRECT CONTACT (SUBCHRONIC AND CHRONIC) Short-term Long-term Sktn Duratton of Dermal Absorption/ AbsorptIon/ Subchron1c Chronic CHEMICAL Hater Cone. Hater Cone. Surface Exposure Permeation rate Event (subchron) Event (chronic) THA Dose** THA Dose*** (ug/1) (ug/1) (cm2) (hours/event) (cm/hour) (mg/event)* (mg/event)* (mg/kg.day) (mg/kg.day) Arsenic NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Barium NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Benzene 1.S6E-07 2.15E-08 18150 2.6 0.5 3.68E-09 5.07E-10 5.26E-11 7.94E-14 Chlorobenzene 5.48E-08 7.57E-09 18150 2.6 0.5 1.29E-09 1.79E-10 1.85E-11 2.80E-14 1,2-DCE (tot) 8.97E-06 1.24E-06 18150 2.6 0.5 2.12E-07 2.93E-08 3.02E-09 4.58E-12 MIBK 2.73E-07 3.78E-0B 18150 2.6 0.5 6.44E-09 8.92E-10 9.20E-11 1.40E-13 Nickel NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Pyrene NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA TCE 1.34E-06 1.85E-07 18150 2.6 0.5 3.16E-08 4.37E-09 4.52E-10 6.83E-13 Vinyl Chloride 9.73E-08 1.34E-08 18150- 2.6 0.5 2.30E-09 3.16E-10 3.28E-11 4.95E-14 Notes: * Exposure - permeation rate x cone, x skin area x duration ** Based on per event exposure *** Based on 7 events per year and 40 years of exposure over 70 year lifespan NA Not Applicable IrLZZ Z.00 md Consumption of fish taken from the Oswego River constitutes an ingestion route of special significance not only because of bioconcentration of these organics (refer to Table 2-3), but also because fish may represent a significant portion of the diet of individuals living near the Fulton Terminals Site. Concentration of each of the indicator chemicals in fish tissue (assumed to be derived at equilibrium from skeletal muscle) were computed using chemical specific bioconcentration factors (BCF) (U.S. EPA, 1986), and the estimated short and long term river concentrations of each indicator chemical. Human intake coefficients were calculated by dividing standard fj-eshwater fish intake per day by the average adult body weight which ii; incorporated into Table 3-8 as the Human Intake Factor according to the procedure outlined in the SPHEM. Ingestion exposures to individuals potentially coming into direct contact with contamr.nated soils at the Fulton Terminals Site were computed assuming an average child/young adult (0 to 19 years) model. The exposure scenario assumes free access to a barren site, and that all soil contaminants adhering to fingers and hands will be consumed. This exposure route is e,rent-based, meaning exposure rate is dependent on the number of visits an individual will make to the site. Since no information exists no estimate this rate, Versar conservatively estimated that the site would be visited five times per year for 5 years over an average 70-year lifetime. Soil ingestion rates for children will vary based on the childs manner of play, therefore, a subchronic consumption rate of 0.8 grams of soil per day was used to estimate a worse case scenario (EPA Exposure Factors Handbook, May 1989). A chronic consumption rate of 0.2 grams of soil per day was used. Table 3-9 presents both the short and long term time-weighted average done for the route. 3-31 2531Y TABLE 3-8 CALCULATION OF INTAKES FROM INGESTION OF CONTAMINATED FISH * EXPOSURE POINT: NEARBY OSHEGO RIVER Bio- Human Intake Short-term Subchronic Duration Long-term Chronic CHEMICAL concentration Factor (TWA) concentration Dally Intake (fraction concentration Dally Intake 1 factor (kg flsh/kg.day) (mg/1) (mg/kg.day) of year) (mg/1) (mg/kg.day) Arsenic 44 0.00009 1.70E-07 6.73E-10 0.5 2.35E-08 9.31E-11 Barium 474 0.00009 8.49E-05 3.62E-06 0.5 1.17E-05 4.99E-07 Benzene 5.2 0.00009 1.56E-07 7.30E-11 0.5 2.15E-08 1.01E-11 Chlorobenzene 10 0.00009 5.48E-08 4.93E-11 0.5 7.57E-09 6.81E-12 1.2-OCE (tot) 1.6 0.00009 8.97E-06 1.29E-09 0.5 1.24E-06 1.79E-10 MIBK 0.726 0.00009 2.73E-07 1.78E-11 0.5 3.78E-08 2.47E-12 Nickel 47 0.00009 9.47E-06 4.01E-08 0.5 1.31E-06 5.54E-09 Pyrene 3514 0.00009 5.26E-10 1.66E-10 0.5 7.27E-11 2.30E-11 TCE 10.6 0.00009 1.34E-06 1.28E-09 0.5 1.85E-07 1.76E-10 Vinyl Chloride 1.17 0.00009 9.73E-08 1.02E-11 0.5 1.34E-08 1.41E-12 Notes: * Calculations according to SPHEM 9lzz z.oo ma TABLE 3-9 CALCULATION OF INTAKES FROM SOIL INGESTION VIA DIRECT CONTACT (SUBCHRONIC AND CHRONIC) Soil Subchronic Chronic Body Height Consum./ Consura./ Subchronlc Chronic CHEMICAL Concentration Consumption Consumption (Child) Event (subchron) Event (chronic) THA Dose*** THA Dose**** (ug/kg)* (g soil/day) (g soil/day) (kg)** (mg/event) (mg/event) (mg/kg.day) (mg/kg.day) -7 Arsenic 20.54 0.8 0.2 10 1.64E-05 4.11E-06 1.64E-06 4.02E-10 • Vxi o Barium 90.25 0.8 0.2 10 7.22E-05 1.81E-05 7.22E-06 1.77E-09 u> r l Ul w Benzene 10.73 0.8 0.2 10 8.58E-06 2.15E-06 8.58E-07 2.10E-10 Chlorobenzene 11.08 0.8 0.2 10 8.86E-06 2.22E-06 8.86E-07 2.17E-10 1,2-DCE (tot) 9.6 0.8 0.2 10 7.68E-06 1.92E-06 7.68E-07 1.88E-10 MIBK 17.7 0.8 0.2 10 1.42E-05 3.54E-06 1.42E-06 3.46E-10 Nickel ; 50.93 0.8 0.2 10 4.07E-05 1.02E-05 4.07E-06 9.97E-10 Pyrene 220.5 0.8 0.2 10 1.76E-04 4.41E-05 1.76E-05 4.32E-09 TCE 11.33 0.8 0.2 10 9.06E-06 2.27E-06 9.06E-07 2.22E-10 Vinyl Chloride 15.57 0.8 0.2 10 1.25E-05 3.11E-06 1.25E-06 3.05E-10 dotes: * Soil concentrations are geometric means of surface soil contaminant data ** From Exposure Factors Handbook *** Based on per event exposure ~— - **** Based on 5 events per year and 5 years of exposure over 70 year lifespan LLZZ ^00 4.0 TOXICITY ASSESSMENT The objective of this toxicity assessment is to describe the nature and extent of potential health and environmental hazards that may be associated with the selected indicator chemicals at the Fulton Terminals Site through the exposure routes identified in Section 3.0 of this report. This section contains information on pharmacokinetics, human health effects, environmental toxicity, and dose-response assessments for the contaminants of concern. In the pharmacokinetic sections, the absorption, distribution, metabolism, and excretion of particular chemicals are discussed. Under human health effects, the various human side effects from exposure to a chemical will be listed. These effects may include toxicity, carcinogenicity, mutagenicity, and teratogenicity. The environmental toxicity sections will focus on aquatic toxicity and will provide chemical concentrations known to be toxic to certain aquatic plant and animal species. The dose-response sections will discuss the correlation between a particular dose of chemical and the response in the exposed individual. These sections will also include several human health criteria such as carcinogenic potency values, threshold limit values (TLVs), and the chemical concentrations associated with specific cancer risk levels. Throughout this section, Versar lists various environmental and toxicological criteria for the selected chemicals. These criteria are divided into several categories such as carcinogenic potency and acute aquatic toxicity. For clarification of the significance of these criteria, the different categories are defined below. EPA developed Water Quality Criteria to help protect human health and aquatic life. Human health criteria include toxicity and carcinogenicity protection factors. For carcinogens, EPA established concentrations corresponding to several incremental lifetime cancer risk levels (i.e., 1E-05. 1E-06, and 1E-07). A risk of 1E-05, for example, 4-1 2377Y indicates a probability of one additional case of cancer for every 100,000 people exposed (Federal Register, 1980). Table 4-1 lists the 1E-06 lifetime cancer risk levels for arsenic, benzene, trichloroethene, and vinyl chloride. The Water Quality Criteria for the protection of aquatic life are summarized in Table 4-2. Aquatic life criteria are divided into acute and chronic values for both freshwater and saltwater environments. The values are based on research data for plants and animals occupying various trophic levels. A trophic level is a hierachical stratum of a food web characterized by organisms that are the same number of steps removed from the primary producers. Acute values are maximum concentrations allowed at any time, and chronic values are maximum 24-hour average concentrations. EPA developed this two-number criteria to describe the highest average ambient water concentration that will produce a suitable water quality while restricting the extent and duration of the excursions over that average to harmless levels (Federal Register, 1980). Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) are standards established under the Safe Drinking Water Act and represent the allowable concentrations in public water systems. In general, MCLs are based on lifetime exposure (70 years) to the contaminant of concern for a 70 kg adult who consumes 2 liters of water per day. The New York State Department .of Health has adopted standards to limit organic chemical contamination to public drinking water supplies. The code revision to Part 5 of the State Sanitary Code establishes maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) or standards for "Principal organic Contaminants" (POCs). For this particular site New York State has decided to base its remedial decision, in part, on a comparison of the ground water contamination levels with these standards. The POCs are assigned a maximum contaminant level of 5 ppb, except for vinyl chloride which is assigned a MCL of 2 ppb. The concentrations of most of the VOC and BNA contaminants detected in the ground water at the Fulton Terminals have exceeded New York's Part 5 MCL drinking water standard. Versar frequently uses Threshold Limit Values (TLVs) for air criteria guidelines. Although TLVs are used in occupational health situations, they are also useful as toxicological criteria for air 4-2 2377Y TABLE 4-1 CONCENTRATIONS CORRESPONDING TO A 1E-06 LIFETIME CANCER RISK LEVEL (Values Expressed in / Ingesting Water Ingesting Ingesting and Organisms^- . Organisms Only^ Water Only Benzene 0.66 40 0.67 Trichloroethene 2.7 80.7 2.8 Vinyl Chloride 2.0 525 2.0 Arsenic 0.002 0.018 0.025 1 = Federal Register, 1980. ^ = Public Health Assessment Manual, 1986. Abbreviations: NF = Not found. No toxicity or carcinogenicity criteria for humans were found. 4-3 2377Y TABLE 4-2 WATER QUALITY CRITERIA FOR THE PROTECTION OF AQUATIC LIFE1 (Values Expressed in mg/1) Freshwater Saltwater Acute Chronic Acute Chronic Benzene 5.3 NA 5.1 0.70 Chlorobenzene NA NA NA NA Trans-1,2-Dichloroethene^ 11.6 NA 224 NA Trichloroethene 45 21.9 2.0 NA Vinyl Chloride NA NA NA NA Arsenic 0.36 0.19 0.069 0.036 ^Source is U.S. EPA (1980). These values are not specifically for trans-1,2-dichloroethene but are the values associated with the general category dichloroethenes. NA « Not available. hi a I ° ! o ! 4-4 to 2377Y | (O 00 TABLE 4-3 TLVS FOR THE SELECTED CONTAMINANTS AT THE FULTON TERMINALS SITE1 TLV-TWA Benzene 10 ppm Chlorobenzene 75 ppm Trans-1,2-Dichloroerhene 200 PPm Trichloroethene 50 PPm Vinyl Chloride 5 Arsenic 0.2 mg/m3 4-5 2377Y exposures. TLVs are used instead of permissible exposure limits (PELs), because in many cases, PELs are derived from TLVs published in 1968. Current TLVs, therefore, are usually more stringent than PELs. The three categories of TLVs are defined below (ACGIH, 1987): • The Threshold Limit Value - Time Weighted Average (TLV-TWA) is the time-weighted average concentration for a normal 8-hour workday and a 40-hour workweek to which nearly all workers may be repeatedly exposed without adverse effect. • The Threshold Limit Value - Short Term Exposure Limit (TLV-STEL) is the concentration to which workers can be exposed continuously for a short period of time without suffering adverse effects. • The Threshold Limit Value - Ceiling (TLV-C) is the concentration that should not be exceeded during any part of the working exposure. The TLV-TWA values for the selected contaminants are shown in Table 4-3. Carcinogenic potency values are frequently used to help compare the carcinogenic effect.'; among various chemicals. These values are also used to determine risks t:o individuals. The potency values (or unit risks) are upper 95 percent: confidence limits on the slope of the dose-response curve. Assuming low-dose linearity, the potency value represents the excess lifetime risk due to a continuous lifetime exposure of one unit of carcinogen concentration. A generalized dose-response curve is shown in Figure 4-1. For inhalation and ingestion, typical exposure units are milligrams per kilogram of body weight per day. Table 4-4 lists the carcinogenic potency values and other toxicity values for the selected chemicals at the Fulton Terminals Site (U.S. EPA, 1986a). EPA has also developed acceptable intakes for noncarcinogens. These values are expressed in units of milligrams per kilogram of body weight per day. The Acceptable Intake for Subchronic Exposure (AIS) is the highest human intake of a chemical that does not cause adverse effects when exposure is short term (i.e., for an interval which does not 4-6 2377Y S 10 20 SO 100 200 400 SOO 2.000 DOSE (mg/kg-day) FIGURE 4-1 DIAGRAM OF DOSE-RESPONSE RELATIONSHIP Source: Casarett, 1986 G G o o -J K> 4-7 [O 00 .t* I personnel protection summary *********#****##«.«.* CHEMTOX RECORD : 49 CAS NUMBER: 7440-38-2 NAME : ARSENIC NIOSH RESPIRATION PROTECTION RECOMMENDATIONS NIOSH (ARSENIC) Greater at any detectable concent rat i or.. : Any self-contained breathing apparatus with full facepiece and operated in a pressure—demand or other positive pressure mode. / Any supplied-air- respirator with a full facepiece and operated in pressure-demand or other positive pressure mode ir. combination with an auxiliary self-contained breathing apparatus operated in pressure—demand or other positive pressure mode. e-SCAPE: Any air-purifyir.g full facepiece respirator (gas mask) with a chin-style or front- or back- mounted acid gas canister having a high-efficiency particulate filter. / Any appropriate escape-type self-contained breathing apparatus. CHEMTOX TOXICOLOGICAL DATA **•»*»#•»#****»»»•»»»«»„. »c. 1 =>85, St, 8/, as, 1983 by Resource Consultants, Inc. All rights reserved. CHEMTOX RECORD ;743 :BARIUM METAL CAS NUMBER .-7440-39-3 IDLH Not available OSHA DATA Transit iorial Limits: PEL = O.5mg/M3 Final Rule Limits: TWA = O. 5 rng/M3 TARGET ORGANS SKIN, EYES Source: NIOSH REPRODUCTIVE TOX Not listed in RTECS as a mammalian reproductivs toxin. SHORT TERM TOX No data available LONG TERM TOX MEDICAL CON'DTION AGGRAVATED :No data available SIGNS/SYMPTOMS :DERMATITIS, DEPILATION, VERTIGO, NAUSEA, VOMITING, COLIC, DIARRHEA, RAPID RESPIRATION, HYPERTENSION, IRREGULAR HEART ACTION, CYANOSIS, MUSCULAR WEAKNESS, TREMOR, LUMBAR PAIN, CONVULSION, PARALYSIS. Source- THC THC LD50 (rng/Kg) [Not in RTECS 1988 hi G G o o •j to to 00 CHEMTOX RECORD :743 NAME :BARIUM METAL CAS NUMBER :7440-33-3 FORMULA :Ba CHEMICAL CLASS :METAL INCOMPATIBILITIES .-WATER, OXIDIZING AGENTS, OXYGEN, ACIDS, CHLORINATED SOLVENTS REACTIVITY TO WATER :Nc f " ! hi g g o o to to 00 ******»**«•*»«***»*#*»»»» personnel PROTECTION SUMMARY *»•#«***#**#«**»•»» CHEMTOX RECORD : 743 CAS NUMBER: 7440-33-3 NAME : BARIUM METAL NIOSH RESPIRATION PROTECTION RECOMMENDATIONS OSHA t r ~ ' a f o o •vl ! tO to 00 00 \ TABLE 4-4 CRITICAL TOXICITY VALUES FOR INDICATOR CHEMICALS AT THE FULTON TERMINALS SITE Carcinogenic AIS AIC Potency Factor (mg/kg/day) mg/kg/day l/(mg/kg/day) Inhalation Route Arsenic @ U U 1.50E+01 Barium 1.40E-03 1.40E-04 NA Benzene U U 2.90E-02 Chlorobenzene 5.30E-02 5.70E-03 NA 1,2-DCE (total) U U NA MIBK u 5.00E-02 NA Nickel @ 2.00E-02 1.00E-02 1.19E+00 Pyrene (2 U U U TCE <3 U 2.62E-02 1.70E-06 Vinyl Chloride U U 2.95E-01 Ingestion Route Arsenic (2 U 1.00E-03 1.80E+00 Barium U 5.10E-02 NA Benzene u U 2.90E-02 Chlorobenzene 2.70E-01 2.70E-02 NA 1,2-DCE (total) U U NA MIBK 5.00E-01 U NA Nickel (2 2.00E-02 U NA Pyrene (2 U U U TCE (2 U 1.00E-02 1.10E-02 Vinyl Chloride U 9.47E-07 2.30E+00 @ - potential carc:.nogen U = unavailable NA = not applicable 4-8 2377Y constitute a significant portion of the life span) (U.S.. EPA, 1984a). The Acceptable Intake for Chronic Exposure (AIC) is the highest human intake of a chemical that does not cause adverse effects when exposure is long term (i.e., for a lifetime) (U.S. EPA, 1984a). The AIS and AIC for chlorobenzene are listed in Table 4-4. 4.1 Benzene Pharmacokinetics According to the Health Effects Assessment document for benzene (U.S. EPA, 1984a), quantitative data on the rate and extent of benzene absorption are not available. Absorption can, however, be inferred from various studies. A significant portion of any dose of benzene is exhaled unchanged or is stored in fat in both animals and humans (Casarett, 1986). Evidence suggests that benzene toxicity is caused by one or more metabolites of benzene rather than by benzene itself (Snyder [1981] cited in Casarett [1986]). Some of the metabolites resulting from benzene's biotransformation in animals include the following: phenol, catechol, hydroquinone, and 1,2,4-trihydroxybenzene (Parke [1953] cited in Casarett [1986]). The metabolites of benzene also covalently bond to cellular macromolecules. Many researchers believe this bonding is related to the mechanism of benzene's toxicity or carcinogenicity or to both (Casarett, 1986). In mice, benzene metabolites reportedly bind to proteins in the liver, bone marrow, kidney, spleen, blood, and muscle (Longacre [1981] cited in Casarett [1986]). Other studies have shown covalent bonding to protein in bone marrow preparations (Irons [1980] cited in Casarett [1986]). Human Health Benzene is a volatile aromatic hydrocarbon present in fossil fuels, including gasoline and other petroleum-based products. Humans are most frequently exposed t:o benzene through inhalation, and therefore, much of 4-9 2377Y the human health information is based on exposure by this route. Acute exposure to high concentrations of benzene depresses the central nervous system and may cause unconsciousness and death. Acute exposures can also cause fatal cardiac arrhythmias (Synder [1975] cited in Casarett [1986]). Milder exposures to benzene can,produce vertigo, drowsiness, headache, nausea, menstrual irregularities, and unconsciousness. Benzene can also be dermally absorbed, causing blistering, erythema, and dermatitis (Clement, 1985). In humans, the primary adverse effect of benzene is hematopoietic toxicity, that is, interference with the formation of blood or blood cells (Casarett, 1986). Chronic exposure to low levels of benzene is associated with blood disorders including aplastic anemia and leukemia (Synder [1975] cited in Casarett [1986]). The bone marrow toxicity of benzene is characterized by a progressive decrease in the number of circulating blood colls (i.e., erythrocytes, thrombocytes, and leukocytes). Blood cell depletion correlates to the degree of benzene exposure (Casarett, 1986). If the depression of the number of blood cells is severe, tho condition is called pancytopenia and is characterized by necrosis (death of living tissue) and fatty replacement of bone marrow (Casarett, 1986). Many epidemiology studies have associated occupational exposure to benzene (via inhalation) with an increased incidence of leukemia (U.S. EPA, 1984a). The most common leukemia associated with these exposures is acute myelogenous (bone marrow) leukemia. EPA has classified benzene as a Group A carcinogen (i.e., there is sufficient evidence from epidemiologic studies to support a causal association between exposure and cancer). Benzene has been thoroughly tested for genotoxic properties; however, it has not been shown to be mutagenic in several bacterial and yeast systems (U.S. EPA, 1984a). Many people have studied the effect of benzene on the chromosomes of bone marrow cells and peripheral lymphocytes. The results of most of 4-10 2377Y these studies indicate significant increases in chromosomal aberrations in both symptomatic and asymptomatic groups who were exposed at some time to benzene (U.S. EPA, 1984a). Environmental Toxicity For freshwater aquatic life, acute toxicity occurs at concentrations as low as 5.3 milligrams per liter (mg/1) (U.S. EPA, 1980). For saltwater, levels as low as 5.1 mg/1 are acutely toxic to aquatic life (U.S. EPA, 1980). Chronic toxicity has been observed at about 0.70 mg/1 (U.S. EPA, 1980). Dose-Response Because benzene is a carcinogen, no level of exposure is recognized as safe (nonthreshold concept). The EPA calculated a range of concentrations for benzene corresponding to cancer risk levels of 1E-05, 1E-06, and 1E-07. In calculating these values, EPA assumed an intake of 2 liters per day of drinking water, 6.5 grams per day of fish, and a human body weight o:: 70 kilograms (kg). The corresponding criteria for these levels for various conditions are listed below: consumption of Consumption of Consumption of Risk Level Uater and Fish Fish Only Water Only (M1) (MD 0*1). 1E-05 6.60 400.0 6.70 1E-06 0.66 40.0 0.67 1E-07 0.066 4.0 0.067 The carcinogenic potency factor for benzene via inhalation is 2.6 E-02 (mg/kg/day) This calculation assumes complete absorption and an inhalation rate of 20 cubic meters (m ) per day for a 70 kg man. The lower limit of benzene exposure via inhalation that will elicit hematologic effects is thought to be less than 100 ppm (U.S. EPA, 1984a). Occupational exposure to benzene at 300 to 700 ppm has been linked to blood abnormalities (U.S. EPA., 1984a). 4-11 2377Y The TLV-TWA for benzene is 10 ppm (ACGIH, 1987). EPA has established an MCL of 0.005 mg/1 for benzene (Federal Register, 1985). 4. 2 Chlorobenzene (monochlorobenzene") Pharmacokinetics Chlorobenzene can enter the body through ingestion, inhalation, and skin absorption. According to several animal studies, chlorobenzene is rapidly absorbed into the blood stream from the lungs and gastrointestinal (GI) tract (U.S. EPA, 1984e). It has also been reported that the ingestion of fats and oils facilitates the GI absorption of chlorobenzene (U.S. EPA, 1984e). Human Health Chlorobenzene is irritating to the skin, eyes, and mucous membranes of the upper respiratory tract, and can cause central nervous system depression (AIHA, 1985). Animals chronically exposed to chlorobenzene have shown histological changes in the liver, kidneys, and lungs (AIHA, 1985). A 70-vear-old woman exposed for 6 years to a glue containing 70 percent chlorobenzene experienced headaches and irritation of the respiratory mucosa, and eventually exhibited reduced marrow development (U.S. EPA, 1984e). Workers exposed to chlorobenzene for 1 to 2 years complained of headaches, somnolescence, indigestion, and numbness and stiffness in the extremities (U.S. EPA, 1984e). Other occupational studies suggest that chronic exposure to chlorobenzene vapor may cause abnormal blood conditions, increased plasma lipids, and cardiac dysfunction (Clement, 1985). There is currently no evidence indicating that chlorobenzene is a human carcinogen (U.S. EPA, 1984e). Animal studies have failed to confirm or deny the carcinogenicity of chlorobenzene in rats or mice (U.S. EPA, 1984e). 4-12 2377Y Environmental Toxicity Chlorobenzene was acutely toxic to fish at levels greater than 25 mg/1 and to aquatic invertebrates at levels greater than 10 mg/1 (Clement, 1985). Dose-Response The subchronic acceptable intake (AIS) values for chlorobenzene are 0.053 mg/kg/day through inhalation and 0.27 mg/kg/day through ingestion (U.S. EPA, 1986a). The chronic acceptable intake (AIC) values for this compound are 0.0057 mg/kg/day through inhalation and 0.027 mg/kg/day through ingestion (U.S. EPA, 1986a). The Water Quality Criteria Document for chlorinated benzenes recommends a maximum concentration for chlorobenzene of 488 jil to protect the public health (Federal Register, 1980). A chlorobenzene concentration of 75 ppm in the air causes discomfort in humans; at 200 ppm, symptoms of illness begin; and at 400 ppm, severe toxic effects are exhibited (Verschueren, 1983). The TLV-TWA for chlorobenzene is 75 ppm (ACGIH, 1987). 4.3 4-Methyl-2 Pentanone (MIBK') The most likely exposures to MIBK is by inhalation and by adsorption by skin and eye contact (Smyth, 1942). MIKB has a low degree of oral toxicity. Skin exposures should produce little irritation unless the compound is in close contact. Continued skin contact may produce dermatitis due to its defatting properties. Repeated doses by various routes indicate that MIBK is not neurotoxic. Vapors of MIBK inhaled at high concentrations can produce narcosis and death. However, the low odor threshold (0.10 ppm) and its irritant effects should prevent overexposure (Krasavage et. al., 1982). Human Health MIBK is irritating to the skin and eyes and can cause dermatitis. Animals chronically exposed to MIBK have shown histological changes in the kidneys and liver (U.S. EPA, 1985). 4-13 2377Y The most important manifestation of MIBK toxicity is its narcotic effect (Smyth, 1956). In addition to the effects on the central nervous system, exposure to methyl isobutyl ketone may also affect the i cardiovascular system (Wayne et al., 1960). MIKB is most appropriately classified as a group D chemical, i.e., not classified as to human carcinogenicity (U.S. EPA, 1987). Environmental Toxicity The only study on the toxicity of MIBK in wildlife reported that the TL50 for brine shrimp was 1,230 mg/1. Also, it is probable that MIBK is not very toxic to other aquatic or terrestrial animals (U.S. EPA, 1985). Dose-Response The subchronic acceptable intake (AIS) value for ingestion of MIBK is 0.5 mg/kg/day and 0.23 mg/kg/day for a 70 KM man through inhalation (U.S. EPA, 1987). The chronic acceptable intake (AIC) values for MIBK are 0.05 mg/kg/day through ingestion and 1.6 mg/kg/day for a 70 KM man through inhalation (U.S. EPA, 1987). An occupational exposure study by Elkins (1959) in which workers involved in waterproofing boots were exposed to 100 ppm of MIBK complained of headache, nausea, and respiratory irritation. 4.4 1,2-Dichloroethene Pharmacokinetics EPA estimates that almost 100 percent of ingested dichloroethene and 35 to 50 percent of inhaled dichloroethene may be absorbed systemically (U.S. EPA, 1984d). The metabolism of trans-1,2-dichloroethene yields dichloroacetylaldehvde, presumably via the formation of an epoxide compound. The exact intermediary metabolism, however, lias not been determined (Casarett, 1986). 4-14 2377Y Human Health Little information is available concerning human exposure to 1,2-dichloroethene. Exposure to high vapor concentrations has been found to cause nausea, narcosis, dizziness, vomiting, weakness, tumors, and cramps (Clement, 1985). There are no reports of carcinogenic or teratogenic results from exposure to 1,2-dichloroethene (Clement, 1985). In rats, repeated 3 exposure via inhalation of 800 mg/m for 16 weeks produced fatty degeneration of the liver (Clement, 1985). This compound was also found to inhibit in-vitro aminopyrine demethylation in rat liver microsomes. This indicates that 1,2-dichloroethene may interact with certain aspects of the drug-metabolizing system of the liver (Clement, 1985). Environmental Toxicity For dichloroetlienes in general, a value of 11.6 mg/1 is acutely toxic to freshwater aquatic life. No other environmental criteria were located. Dose-Response Because of inadequate data, EPA has not been able to derive acceptable intakes for 1,2-dichloroethene. Based on data from animal studies, EPA calculated a human MED (minimum effective dose) of 189 mg/day (U.S. EPA, 1984d) for trans-1,2-dichloroethene. One animal study showed that no adverse effects occurred following inhalation exposure to a 1,000-ppm mixture of 1,2-dichloroethene isomers for 6 months (U.S. EPA, 1984d). In contrast, other researchers observed fatty changes in the liver and minor changes in the lungs following exposure to 200 ppm trans-1,2-dichloroethene for 16 weeks (U.S. EPA, 1984d). 4-15 2377Y The carcinogenic potency value for 1,2-dichloroethene is 1.16 (mg/kg/day) for both inhalation and ingestion exposure routes. The TLV-TWA for 1,2-dichloroethene is 200 ppm (ACGIH, 1987). 4. 5 Trichloroethene (TCE-) Pharmacokinetics Data are not available on the rate of absorption of TCE in humans. However, rats exhale 72 to 85 percent of ingested TCE through the lungs and excrete in the urine an additional 10 to 20 percent of the amount originally ingested (U.S. EPA, 1984b). This indicates that 80 to 100 percent of ingested TCE is absorbed into the blood stream from the GI tract of rats. Absorption of TCE through the lungs occurs quickly and reaches equilibrium in about 2 hours (U.S. EPA, 1984b). Like other solvents, TCE is biotransformed to various metabolites. The first step in the biotransformation is thought to involve microsomal oxidation leading to an epoxide formation across the double bond (Henschler [1982] cited in Casarett [1986]). It has been suggested that the resulting metabolites are highly reactive and can, therefore, covalently bond to nucleic acids (Casarett, 1986). Human Health Following acute inhalation exposure to TCE, narcosis and death can occur. Workers exposed to high levels of TCE show signs of central nervous system disturbance. Initial signs include disorientation, euphoria, giddiness, and confusion. Symptoms then progress to unconsciousness, paralysis, convulsion, and death from respiratory or cardiovascular arrest (Casarett, 1986). Separate from TCE's acute central nervous system depressant action is its toxic effect on the liver. Fatty infiltration of the liver and other liver damage can occur following repeated exposures via inhalation to what would otherwise be tolerable levels of TCE (Casarett, 1986). The hepatotoxicity of TCE has been attributed to a reactive metabolite (Casarett, 1986). 4-16 2377Y Persons recovering from an acute ingestion of ethanol are more susceptible to liver damage from subsequent exposure to TCE than persons who had not ingested ethanol (Casarett, 1986). EPA has classified TCE as a B2 carcinogen. This classification means there is sufficient evidence of carcinogenicity in animals and inadequate evidence of carcinogenicity in humans. For humans, three cohort studies and two surveys showed no excess cancer risk (U.S. EPA, 1986b). Results from various animal studies (U.S. EPA, 1986b) are briefly described below: • Hepatocellular carcinomas in male and female mice via gavage, • Hepatocellular carcinomas in male and female mice via inhalation, • Malignant lymphomas in female mice via inhalation, and • Borderline increases in renal adenocarcinomas in male rats via gavage. The supporting evidence for the B2 classification is as follows: • Commercial grade TCE is a weakly active, indirect mutagen (requires metabolic activation) in a number of test systems representing a wide evolutionary range of organisms. • TCE caused a positive cell transformation in an in vitro study with rat embryo cells. • Trichloroethene oxide caused a positive cell transformation in a study with hamster embryo cells. Environmental Toxicity The acute toxicity value in freshwater for TCE is 45 mg/1, and the chronic toxicity concentration in freshwater is 21.9 mg/1 (U.S. EPA, 1980). Further information is provided in Table 4-2. 4-17 2377Y Dose-Response Because TCE is a probable human carcinogen, no level of exposure is recognized as safe. The EPA calculated a range of concentrations for TCE corresponding to cancer risk levels of 1E-05, 1E-06, and 1E-07. The criteria associated with these levels for various conditions are shown below: ..ngesting Water Ingesting Ingesting Risk Level and Organisms Organisms Only Water Only (pl) (md (md 1E-05 27.0 807.0 28.0 1E-06 2.7 80.7 2.8 1E-07 0.27 8.07 0.28 The carcinogenic potency value for TCE is 4.6E-03 (mg/kg/day)"1 via inhalation and i.lE-02 (mg/kg/day) via ingestion. In humans, eye irritation usually begins at a TCE concentration of about 160 ppm; symptoms of illness occur at about 800 ppm; severe toxic effects are manifested at 2,000 ppm; and full narcosis occurs at 2,500 to 6,000 ppm (Verschueren, 1983). The TLVs for TCE are 50 ppm (TWA) and 200 ppm (STEL) (ACGIH, 1987). EPA has established an MCL for TCE of 0.005 mg/1 (Federal Register, 1985). 4.6 Vinvl Chloride Human Health The most likely route of exposure for vinyl chloride is through inhalation. Short-term exposures to very high levels in contaminated air can cause dizziness, giddiness, stumbling and incoordination, headache, unconsciousness, and death. Long-term exposure to lower concentrations, for example, in factories where vinyl chloride was made or processed, has caused "vinyl chloride disease" which is characterized by severe damage to the liver, effects on the lungs, poor circulation in the fingers, t ^ 1 f ! ° to 4-18 to 2377Y i VO changes in the bone:; at the end of the fingers, thickening of the skin, and changes in the blood, as well as increased risk of cancer of the liver, brain, lungs and possibly other organs. An increased risk of miscarriage has been associated with breathing air in factories containing vinyl chloride. Vinyl chloride can be detected in urine and body tissues, but the tests are not a reliable indicator of exposure. Hepatotoxicity liver disease, is probably the most common adverse effect associated with exposure to vinyl chloride. Humans can be exposed to vinyl chloride from environmental and occupational source:;. The low levels of vinyl chloride found in the environment are usually more than a thousand times lower than levels found in occupational locations. Highest background levels have been measured in air near vinyl chloride factories or over chemical waste storage areas. Background levels in drinking water may come from sources such as factories that release wastes into rivers and lakes, from seepage into water in areas where, chemical wastes are stored, or from contact with polyvinyl chloride pipes. Pharmacokinetics The pharmacokinetics of vinyl chloride in humans exposed by inhalation is well understood, but little information is known of oral and dermal pharmacokinetics. The pharmacokinetics of oral vinyl chloride in relevant animal nodels is well understood, and dermal exposure is not likely to be signif:.cant. Metabolism to an epoxide and an aldehyde provides reactive intermediates thought to be responsible for the carcinogenicity and probably the hepatotoxicity of the compound in animals and humans. r' i Metabolism proceeds via oxidation and subsequent conjugation with 1 £2 sulfhydryl groups. An important oxidative pathway involves ^ t mixed-function oxidase and results in reactive electrophillic ° intermediates, 2-ch..oroethylene oxide and 2-chloroacetaldehyde, which ! ^ 4-19 w o 2377Y o bind to live macromolecules and may be responsible for the toxicity and oncogenicity associated with vinyl chloride. Excretion of polar metabolites is predominately through the urine. When metabolic pathways are saturated, substantial amounts of unmetabolized vinyl chloride are exhaled. Respiratory and gastrointestinal absorption of vinyl chloride appears to be rapid Humans retain 42 percent of vinyl chloride inhaled at concentrations ol 3 to 24 ppm. Animal studies suggest that gastrointestinal absorption is nearly complete. Dermal absorption of vinyl chloride vapors is not likely to result in toxicity. Distribution of absorbed vinyl chloride may be widespread, with highest levels of parent compound located in fat, but metabolism and excretion occur so rapidly that highest levels of excretory products are located in the liver and kidney, the primary organs of metabolism and excretion. Environmental Toxicity Levels of viny. chloride in the environmental media are typically low and not likely to result in significant human exposure. The most important medium for human exposure is air. Atmospheric levels in most places are usually below the level of detection. Levels from trace to 3 105 jim (0.4 ppm) have been found near vinyl chloride production . plants, and levels have ranged from undetectable to 23.4'/im^ (0.01 ppm) over landfills. It is unlikely that levels in ambient air would result in significant exposure. Exposure from contact with contaminated soil is likely to be negligible, because dermal absorption is not considered significant. The level of vinyl chloride in drinking water is expected to be highest in areas where the raw water supplies are contaminated with vinyl chloride. The most probable source of surface water contamination is wastewater from vinyl chloride, PVC, and vinyl chloride copolymer manufacturers. The most common source of ground-water contamination are landfills. 4-20 2377Y Limited data are available on the persistence of vinyl chloride in the environment, particularly in surface waters, soil and ground water. Although a half-lift; for vinyl chloride in surface water has been estimated, significant uncertainty exists. The estimated half-life values for vinyl chloride in aquatic media have been derived from the reaeration rate ratio (0.675) and the oxygen reaeration rate of 0.19 to 0.96 per day. The half-lives in surface water range from 1 to 5 days. Due to lack of data, it was not possible to estimate a half-life for vinyl chloride in soil or ground water. Environmental Toxicity The fate of vinyl chloride in soil is not known with certainty. Evaporation is expected to be the predominant loss mechanism from the soil surface. The half-life from soil evaporation should be longer than its evaporative half-life from water. Dose Response From available data in animals, the EPA has estimated that breathing air containing 1 ppn vinyl chloride every day, all day, for 70 years, increases, at the most, the risk of 1,100 persons in a population of 10,000 developing cancer (1E-01). These risk values are upper-limit estimates. Actual risk levels are unlikely to be higher and may be lower. Oral lethality data are limited to an LD^Q in rats of 500 mg/kg . (Sax, 1984), an effect level of 1.3 (mg/kg/day), and a NOAEL of 0.13 mg/kg/day in a lifetime dietary study in rats. EPA calculated estimated levels of vinyl chloride in water from the following: 4-21 2377Y Ambient Daily Drinking Risk Level Fish and Shellfish Oil Water Only Water Consumption (MD (Ml) (Ml) IE-04 1E-05 5246.0 20.0 1.5 1E-06 525.0 2.0 0.15 1E-07 52.5 0.2 0.015 The carcinogenic potency value for vinyl chloride is 2.5E-02 (mg/kg/day) via inhalation and 2.3 (mg/kg/day) via ingestion. EPA has classified vinyl chloride as a Group A carcinogen in the same group as benzene. The TLV-TWA for vinyl chloride is 5 ppm (ACGIH, 1987). 4.7 Pvrene Pharmacokinetics According to the Health Effects Assessment document for pyrene (U.S. EPA, 1984) absorption data on humans is not available. Data on experimental animal;; indicate that pyrene is poorly absorbed orally from the gut of male rat;;. However, inhalation studies indicate rapid pulmonary absorption of pyrene, with widespread tissue disturbance after 60 minutes of exposure (U.S. EPA, 1984). Pyrene fed to young rats at a concentration of 2,000 mg/kg for 100 days showed an inhibition of growth and enlarged livers, and increased survival and hyperplastic changes were seen in mice embyros injected with pyrene (IARC, 1983) Pyrene is known to metabolize to 1-hydroxy, 1,6-, 1,8-dihydroxy and 4,5 dehydrodiol in rats and rabbit livers (IARC, 1983. Human Health Pyrene has been identified as a product of incomplete combustion and is found in fossil fuels and coal tar (IARC, 1983). Pyrene has also been 4-22 2377Y identified in mainstream cigarette smoke, sidestream cigarette smoke, gasoline engine exhaust, exhaust of burnt coals, and in various oils and crude oil products .IARC, 1983). Data on the carcinogenic effects from pyrene is not presently available. The carcinogenicity of oral or inhalation exposures of humans or animals to pyrene have not been evaluated. When applied dermally, pyrene is regarded as a noncarcinogen. Pyrene was ineffective as a complete carcinogen when app..ied to the skin of mice. Mouse skin is known to be highly sensitive to the effects of carcinogenic PAH. Pyrene is not an effective tumor initiator for mouse skin (U.S. EPA, 1984). IARC (1983) reported that there was insufficient evidence regarding the carcinogenic risk to humans and experimental animals associated with oral or inhalation exposure to pyrene. Applying the criteria for evaluation of the overall exposure to pyrene. Applying the criteria for evaluation of the overall weight of evidence for the carcinogenic potential for humans proposed by the Carcinogen Assessment Group of the U.S. EPA-(Federal Register, 1984), pyrene is most appropriately designated a Group I) - Not Classified chemical (U.S. EPA, 1984). Environmental Toxicity No specific data regarding the environmental toxicity of pyrene is available. A summary of the aquatic fate of pyrene is listed in Table 4-5. Dose Response 1^50 f°r mice • 514 mg/kg (body weight) - 7 days ^50 for mice " 678 m6/kS (b°dy weight) - 4 days (IARC, 1983) hj g o o -u 4-23 nj 2377Y I o I TABLE h-5 SUM1ARY OF AQUATIC FATE OF PYRENE Environmental Summary Half-Life Confidence Process3 Statement Rate Photolysis Dissolved portion may undergo rapid p.iotolysis. Oxidation Oxidation of PAH by R02 radical is 1,000 days slow; not a significant process Hydrolysis PAHs do not contain groups amenable to hydrolysis Volatilization Is probably not as important as adsorption as a transport process Sorption Measured adsorption coefficients for PAH and suspended solids are high; movement in suspended sediment is considered an important transport process. Bioaccumulation A short-term process; PAHs with A or less aromatic rings are readily metabolized and long-term partitioning into biota is not a significant fare process. Biotransformation/ PAHs with A or fewer aromatic rings Biodegradation are degraded by microbes and are raadily metabolized by multicellular organisms; biodegradation is probably tne ultimate fate process. a. There is insufficient information in the reviewed literature to permit assessment of a most probable fate. b. Very little environmental fate data specific to pyrene were found; the summary statement is made from data reviewed for PAHs as a group. c. Data on pyrene are not sufficient to permit confidence ranking. The confidence of the data reviewed for PAHs in general ranges from low to high. 4-24 2377Y 4.8 Arsenic Pharmacokinetics In mice, approximately 90 percent of orally administered trivalent arsenic (As +) or pentavalent arsenic (As5+) was absorbed through the GI tract (Casarett, 1986). In humans, up to 95 percent of administered inorganic arsenic is absorbed (U.S. EPA, 1984). Following absorption into the blood, arsenic was rapidly and widely distributed to all body tissues. The highest percentage of arsenic was found in the liver and kidney (Clayton, 1981). Arsenic is excreted primarily in urine. The biological half-life of ingested inorganic arsenic is about 10 hours, and the half-life of methylated arsenic in humans is about 30 hours. Arsenic is also excreted through desquamation of skin and in sweat (Casarett, 1986). Results of studies indicate that placental transfer of arsenic is possible (Casarett, 1986). Human Health Effects Arsenic poisoning produces a variety of effects in humans. Acute poisoning of humans who have ingested as little as 130 mg of arsenic has been reported. Acute poisoning is characterized by nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, abdominal pain, and severe gastrointestinal damage. Chronic arsenic poisoning is associated with digestive and nervous system problems, liver damage, and kidney problems. Dermal effects of chronic toxicity include hyperkeratosis and arsenical melanosis. Mucous membrane effects of chronic toxicity include irritation of the nose and pharynx. Arsenic is a recognized carcinogen of the skin, lungs, and liver. It is a cumulative poison in mammals, although a small percentage 4-25 2377Y is considered essential for normal life (Clayton, 1981). The OSHA permissible exposure limit for arsenic is 10 mg/m3 (USDHHS, 1985). Environmental "oxicitv A few cases of arsenic poisoning of domestic animals have been reported. The poisoning caused hyperemia and edema of the gastrointestinal tract, hemorrhage of cardiac serosal surfaces and peritoneum, and pulmonary congestion and edema. Inorganic form.*; of arsenic seem to be much more toxic to aquatic organisms than organic forms. Arsenic trioxide is acutely toxic to adult freshwater animals at a concentration as low as 812 micrograms per liter (4g/l)• A level as low as 40 Mg/1 can be toxic to the early life stages of aquatic organisms (Clement, 1985). Acute toxicity to saltwater fish occurs at 15 mg/1. Some saltwater invertebrates are affected at much lower levels (Clement, 1985). Dose-Response Studies discussed in the arsenic Health Effects Assessment document (U.S. EPA, 1984f) present useful human dose-response information. One study involved 74 individuals who had ingested arsenic-containing antiasthmatic herbal preparations for periods ranging from less than 6 months (intermittent ingestion) to 15 years. Doses wejre estimated to be 2.5 mg arsenic/day as arsenic oxide (trivalent arsenic) or 10.3 mg arsenic/day as arsenic sulfides. The following systems of the individuals were affected: cutaneous (91.9 percent), neurological (51.3 percent), gastrointestinal (GI) (23 percent), hematological (23 percent), and renal and other (19 percent); 5.4 percent of the patients had internal malignancies. In this study, the major effects in more than 10 percent of the subjects were generalized hyperpigmentation (arsenic melanosis), f hyperkeratosis of palms and soles, "raindrop" depigmentations, palmar and i plantar hyperhidrosis, multiple arsenical keratoses, sensorimotor 4-26 I CO 2377Y i o I ^ polyneuropathy, fine finger tremors, persistent chronic headache, lethargy, weakness and insomnia, psychosis, gastritis or gastroenteritis, mild iron deficiency anemia as a result of toxic marrow suppression, and transient albuminurr.a without azotemia. The internal malignancies consisted of two squamous-cell carcinomas of the lungs, one squamous-cell carcinoma of the ga..l bladder, and one hemangiosarcoma of the liver. Similar neurological effects were observed in people who consumed approximately 3 mg arsenic/day in contaminated soy sauce for 2 to 3 weeks. Other studies have indicated that airborne arsenic compounds are associated with skin lesions, cardiovascular and respiratory effects, and peripheral neuropathy, but no adequate exposure information is available for any of the studies (U.S. EPA, 1984f). Chronic inhalation exposure to arsenic compounds results in symptoms similar to those observed following oral exposure (U.S. EPA, 1984f). For example, a direct relationship has been reported between the length and intensity of exposure of smelter workers to airborne arsenic, predominantly as arsenic trioxide, and alterations in peripheral nerve function. No studies were available in which exposure levels are characterized sufficiently for the determination of dose-response relationships (U.S. EPA, 1984f). Numerous arsentc compounds, particularly trivalent inorganics, have been associated with lung and skin carcinomas in humans. In two studies, (U.S. EPA, 1984f), investigators surveyed 40,421 residents of Taiwan who consumed artesian well water containing 0.01-1.8 mg arsenic/1 for 45 to 60 years. A dose-response relationship (Table 4-6) was established between the prevalence of skin cancer and arsenic6consumption, which was based on arsenic concentrations in different wells and length of exposure (age). The overall incidence of skin cancer was 10.6/1,000; the maximum incidence was 209.6/1,000 in males over 70 years of age (U.S. EPA, 1984f). The carcinogenic potency values for arsenic are 15 (mg/kg/day) 1 via inhalation and 1.8 (mg/kg/day)via ingestion. ^ i gj These values represent significantly higher cancer risks than other j ^ o o vj 4-27 2377Y to CO TABLE 4-6 DOSE RESPONSE RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN PREVALENCE OF SKIN CANCER AND ARSENIC CONSUMPTION BY AGE Age (vearsl Exposure Range 20-39 40-59 >60 (ppm) (30) (50) (70) 0-0.29 0.0013 0.0065 0.0481 0.30-0.59 0.0043 0.0477 0.1634 >0.6 0.0224 0.0983 0.2553 Source: U.S. EPA (].984f) 4-28 Z377Y contaminants of concern at the Fulton Terminals Site. However, the EPA Risk Assessment Council has recently recommended that the risk associated with ingestion exposure of inorganic arsenic be scaled down by a factor of 10 based on the Council's judgment that exposures by this route are less likely to induce lethal cancers (Moore, 1987). 4.9 Nickel Pharmacokinetics Human and animal studies indicate that 1 to 10% of dietary nickel is absorbed (ATSDR, 1987b). Nickel solutions penetrate human skin, and depending on type oi nickel compound in solution and application conditions, up to 7,'% of the nickel can be absorbed. Distribution of nickel occurs in humans in the nasal mucosa and lungs following inhalation and in the blood following oral exposure. In animals, nickel was found in the lungs and kidneys following inhalation in the kidneys, lungs, liver, heart testes, and central nervous system following oral exposure, and in various tissues following dermal exposure (ATSDR, 1987b). Once absorbed, nickel binds to a number of serum bimolecular components. A number of disease states and physiological stresses (i.e., myocardial infarction) have been reported to alter the metabolism of nickel in man and animals (ATSDR, 1987b). Nickel is removed from the body in urine, feces, hair, and perspiration. The J./2 life of nickel in nasal mucosa has been estimated 3.5 years, and at: 100 hours in blood serum. EPA conducted that age-dependent accumulation of nickel in soft tissue appears to occur only in the lungs (ATSDR, 1987b). Human Health Effects The lung is the primary target of inhalation exposure to nickel and its compounds in humans and animals. Dermal exposure to nickel is associated with contact dermatitis and effects only those sensitive to 4-29 2377Y nickel (<15^ of the human population). Oral and inhalation exposure to nickel has effects on the immune system, the kidney, and hematological and hematopoietic systems (ATSDR, 1987b). Some nickel compounds associated with nickel refinery dust are classified as known human carcinogens via the inhalation exposure route. Other data suggest that nickel compounds may be mutagenic and elastogenic, processes which are thought to be related to carcinogenesis. Warner (1979) reported that there were no clinical data on developmental effects from women working at a nickel refinery in Wales. No human studies on reproductive toxicity are available. Environmental "oxicitv Studies show that some laboratory animals exposed to airborne o concentrations of n.ckel compounds in the mg/m concentration range die from pulmonary inf Limitation, necrotizing pneumonia, or emphysema. LD50 values have been established for several nickel compounds via oral exposure ranging from hundreds to thousands of mg Ni/kg. Ill effects have been documented from short-term exposures to airborne nickel chloride or nickel oxide concentrations of 109 ng/m or 3 112 ng/m , respectively. Lung problems, including lesions, were observed in dogs fed nickel sulfate hexahydrate at 2,500 ppm for 2 years. Acute exposures to nickel have been shown to effect the immune system and immune system components. Nickel has also been shown to impair renal function. Hematological effects and hematopoietic effects as well as decreased body weight have been observed in animals treated orally with nickel compounds. Exposure of animals to nickel salts is associated with delayed fetal development at 1.3 and 2.5 mg/m3 but not 3 a 0.6 mg/m (Weischner et. al., 1980) and increase resorptions. Genotoxicity and carcinogenicity have also been found as the result of nickel treatment in animals (ATSDR, 1987b). The toxicity 03: nickel for freshwater organisms depends on the water's hardness; n.ckel tends to be more toxic in softer water (Clement, 4-30 2377Y 1985). Acute values for exposure to a variety of nickel salts, expressed as nickel, range from 50 fig/1 for Daphnia magna (a freshwater brachiopod) to 46,200 fig/1 for banded killifish at comparable hardness levels. Chronic values range from 14.8 ^g/1 for Daphnia magna in soft water to 530 fig/1 for the fathead minnow in hard water (Clement, 1985). Residue data for the fathead minnow indicate a bioconcentration factor of 61. Freshwater algae experience reduced growth at nickel concentrations as low as 100 fig/1 (Clement, 1985). Acute values for saltwater species range from 152 fig/\ for mysid shrimp to 350,000 fig/1 for the mummichog (a killifish). A chronic value of 92.7 fig Ni/1 has been reported for mysid shrimp. Bioconcentration factors ranging from 299 to 416 have been reported for oysters and mussels (Clement, 1985). The growth of saltwater algae is reduced at nickel concentrations as low as 1,000 fig/1. Dose-Response For drinking water, EPA advises that the following concentrations are probably associated with minimal risk: 1 mg Ni/1 for 10 days for children, 3.5 mg Ni/1 for 10 days for adults, and 0.35 mg/Ni/1 for lifetime exposure of adults. Figure 4-2 shows dose-response information for nickel ingestion (ATSDR, 1987b). 4.10 Barium Pharmacokinetics Barium is a least partially absorbed by the human body following ingestion. McCauley and Washington (1983) studies the absorption of various barium salt;; and reported relative absorption rates of barium chloride greater than barium sulfate greater then barium carbonate. Following inhalation exposure in rats, barium was concentrated in the area immediately beneath the basement membrane within 24 hours and remained in this arra for at least 7 days (U.S. EPA, 1984*) 4-31 2377* figure 4-2 health effects from ingesting nickel SHORT-TERM EXPOSURE LONG-TERM EXPOSURE (LESS THAN OR EQUAL TO 14 DAYS) (GREATER THAN 14 DAYS) EFFECTS EFFECTS EFFECTS EFFECTS IN DOSE IN IN DOSE IN ANIMALS (mg/kg/day) HUMANS ANIMALS (mg/kg/day) HUMANS .1000 1000 DEATH- -DEATH REPRODUCTIVE 100 EFFECTS AND 100 EFFECTS ON REDUCED UNBORN OR •< SURVIVAL NEWBORN LUNG AND 10 10 BLOOD EFFECTS- 1.0 1.0 MINIMAL RISK FOR EFFECTS OTHER THAN °-1 CANCER 0.1 MINIMAL RISK FOR -EFFECTS OTHER THAN CANCER 0.01 0.01 4-32 Human and Health Effects Acute exposure to barium results in a variety of cardiac, gastrointestinal, and neuro muscular effects (Federal Register, 1985). ' There are no report:; of carcinogenicity, mutagenicity, or teratogenicity associated with bar:.um or its compounds (Clement, 1985). Insoluble forms of barium, particularly barium sulfate, are not toxic by ingestion >>r inhalation because only minimal amounts are absorbed. However, soluble barium compounds are highly toxic in humans after exposure by e.ther route. The most important effect of acute barium poisoning is a prolonged stimulant action on muscle (Clement, 1985). Welch, et. al., (1983) reported that the antinociceptive and lethal effects of barium chloride could be reversed by naloxene or atropine (U.S. EPA, 1984*). Effects on the hematopoietic system and cerebral cortex have also been reported in hunans. Accidental ingestion of soluble barium salts have resulted in gastroenteritis, muscular paralysis, and ventricular fibrillation and extra systoles. Potassium deficiency can occur in cases of acute poisoning. Baritosis, a benign pneumoconiosis, is an occupational disease arising from the inhalation of barium sulfate dust, barium oxide dust, and barium carbonate. The radiologic changes produced in the lungs are reversible with cessation of exposure (Clement, 1985). Environmental Toxicity Although the toxic effects of barium exposure in humans are reinforced by laboratory animal studies, adequate data for characterization of toxicity to wildlife and domestic animals are not available (Clement, 1985). Dose Response assessment Doses of bariun carbonate and barium chloride of 57 mg/kg and 11.4 mg/kg respectively, have been reported to be fatal in humans (Clement, 1985). Based on a 110 observed effect level (NOEL) in animal studies, the acceptable intake for subchronic inhalation exposure (AIS) has been set 4-33 2377Y at 0.098 mg Ba/day. For chronic exposure, the acceptable intake (AIC) for oral exposure to barium has been set at 0.02 mg Ba/day and that for inhalation exposure set at 0.01 mg Ba/day. Insufficient data is available to estima :e an AIS for oral exposure (U.S. EPA, 1984*). 4-34 2377Y 5.0 RISK CHARACTERIZATION 5.1 Human Health The objective of this risk characterization is to integrate information in the exposure assessment (Section 3.0) and the toxicity assessment (Section 4.0) in order to evaluate potential or actual human health risks associated with the Fulton Terminals Site. Risk refers to the probability of injury, disease, or death resulting from exposure to the chemicals identified in this study. Risk values are generally expressed in scientific notation. An individual lifetime risk of one in -4 10,000 is represented as 1 x 10 or 1E-04 (Versar, 1987). Excess cancer risks refer t:o the increased probability of cancer above a "normal" rate. Impacts of noncarcinogenic chemicals on human health are evaluated by comparing projected or estimated intakes and reference levels for the chemicals of concern. A reference level represents an acceptable exposure level at which there will be no observable adverse effect or the lowest observable adverse effect on human health. The impact of carcinogenic chemicals is assessed by comparing calculated risks and target risks for known or suspected carcinogens. Target risks for carcinogens generally range from 1E-04 to 1E-07. The estimated subchronic and chronic (short- and long-term, respectively) human intake levels for each of the indicator chemicals is presented in Tables 5-1 and 5-2. Subchronic intake levels, representing short-term intake levels were computed for oral and inhalation routes. Supporting calculations used to determine SDIs and CDIs are found in Chapter 3 and Appendix 3 of this report. The highest oral subchronic daily intake was computed for pyrene at 1.76E-05 mg/kg/day. Subchronic oral intake levels for the volatile organics ranged from 7.69E-07 to 1.42E-06 mg/kg/day. Subchronic daily intakes from inhalation of volatile organics ranged from 1.57E-08 mg/kg/day for chlorobenzene to 9.59E-08 mg/kg/day for TCE. 5-1 2545Y TABLE 5-1 SUBCHRONIC HUMAN INTAKE LEVELS FULTON TERMINALS SITE Fish Soil Dermal Total Total CHEMICAL Ingestion Ingestion Absorption Oral A1r SOI SDI SOI SOI SOI Arsenic 6.73E-10 1.64E-06 HA 1.64E-06 NA Barium 3.62E-06 ( 7.22E-06^) NA 1.08E-05 NA Benzene 7.30E-U 8.58E-07 5.26E-11 8.58E-07 2.66E-08 Chlorobenzene 4.93E-U 8.86E-07 1.85E-11 8.86E-07 1.57E-08 1,2-DCE (tot) 1.29E-09 7.68E-07 3.02E-09 7.69E-07 7.13E-08 MIBK 1.78E-11 1.42E-06 9.20E-11 1.42E-06 NA Nickel 4.01E-08 4.07E-06 J NA 4.11E-06 NA Pyrene 1.66E-10 1.76E-05 NA 1.76E-05 NA TCE 1.28E-09 9.06E-07 4.52E-10 9.08E-07 9.59E-08 Vinyl Chloride 1.02E-11 1.25E-06 3.28E-11 1.25E-06 5.56E-08 All values 1n mg/kg/day. NA - No data. TABLE 5-2 TOTAL CHRONIC HUMAN INTAKE LEVELS Ground Surface Fish Soil Dermal Total Total CHEMICAL water Hater Ingestion Ingestion Absorption Oral Air COI CDI CDI CDI CDI CDI CDI Arsenic 0 0 9.31E-11 4.02E-10 NA > 4.95E-10.. NA Barium 0 0 4.99E-07 1.77E-09 NA JL01E-07 ^ NA Benzene 0 0 1.01E-11 2.10E-10 7.94E-14 2.20E-10 1.18E-08 Chlorobenzene 0 0 6.81E-12 2.17E-10 2.80E-14 2.24E-10 8.33E-09 1,2-DCE (tot) 0 0 1.79E-10 1.88E-10 4.58E-12 3.71E-10 2.16E-08 MIBK 0 0 2.47E-12 3.46E-10 1.40E-13 3.49E-10 NA Nickel 0 0 5.54E-09 9.97E-10 NA 6.54E-09 NA Pyrene 0 0 2.30E-11 4.32E-09 NA 4.34E-09 NA TCE 0 0 1.76E-10 2.22E-10 6.83E-13 3.99E-10 9.08E-08 Vinyl Chloride 0 0 1.41E-I2 3.05E-10 4.95E-14 3.06E-10 5.56E-08 Notes: All values 1n mg/kg/day. NA - No data. Chronic daily intake levels, computed from long-term exposure estimates, were generally an order of magnitude or more lower than subchronic daily intake values. Noncarcinogenic Effects Any potential health effects are identified by computing hazard indices derived fror.1 subchronic and chronic intake levels. The hazard index is computed as follows: DI1 DI2 DI Hazard Index - —+ ... + — AI. Al. AI 12 n Where DIn = subchronic or chronic daily intake (mg/kg/day) AIn - subchronic or chronic acceptable intake level (mg/kg/day) . Table 5-3 presents the computed subchronic hazard index from potential exposures to the contaminants of concern. Table 5-4 presents the computer chronic hazard index. The cumulative subchronic hazard index was 2.12E-04, and the cumulative chronic hazard index was computed at 1.59E-05. If the computed hazard index scores (subchronic or chronic) are greater than unity, then health hazards may occur. (These hazard indices should not to be confused with probabilities used to assess carcinogenic human health risks.) These indices were calculated using the most significant exposure points (i.e., recreational' users of the Oswego River and the nearest residences (census tract 211.01)) to the Fulton Terminals Site. Carcinogenic Effects For potential carcinogens, risks are estimated by the probability of increased cancer incidence. A carcinogenicity potency factor represents the upper 95 percent: confidence limit on the probability of response per unit intake of the contaminant over a lifetime, and converts estimated intakes directly to incremental risk (U.S. EPA, 1986). Because all inputs into the exposure assessment are conservatively based, the 5-4 2545Y TABLE 5-3 CALCULATION OF SUBCHRONIC HAZARD INDICES Inhalation ORAL CHEMICAL SDI AIS SOI:AIS SDI AIS SDI:AIS Arsenic NA NA NA 1.64E-06) U U Barium NA 1.00E-03 NA 1.08E-05N U u Benzene 2.66E-08 U U 8.58E-07 U u Chlorobenzene 1.57E-08 5.00E-02 3.14E-07 8.86E-07 3. OOE-Ol 2.95E-06 1,2-DCE (tot) 7.13E-08 NA NA 7.69E-07 U U MIBK NA 2.00E-01 NA 1.42E-06 5.00E-01 2.83E-06 Nickel NA 2.00E-02 NA 4.11E-06 2.OOE-02 2.06E-04 Pyrene NA NA NA 1.76E-05 U U TCE 9.59E-08 U U 9.08E-07 U U Vinyl Chloride 5.56E-08 U U 1.25E-06 U U HAZARD INDEX: 3.14E-07 HAZARD INDEX: 2.12E-04 Notes: U Unavailable NA Not Applicable TABLE 5-4 CALCULATION OF CHRONIC HAZARD INDICES Inhalation ORAL CHEMICAL CDI AIC CDI:AIC CDI AIC CDI:AIC Arsenic NA NA NA 4.95E-I0 0.001 4.95E-07 Barium NA 1.00E-04 NA 5.01E-07 5.10E-02 9.82E-06 Benzene 1.18E-08 U U 2.20E-10 U U Chlorobenzene 8.33E-09 5.00E-03 1.67E-06 2.24E-10 3.00E-02 7.46E-09 1,2-DCE (tot) 2.16E-08 U U 3.71E-10 U U MIBK NA 2.00E-02 NA 3.49E-10 0.05 6.98E-09 Nickel NA 1.00E-02 NA (^ME-O^)2.00E-02 3.27E-07 Pyrene NA NA NA 4.34E-09 U U TCE 9.08E-08 2.60E-02 3.49E-06 3.99E-10 1.02E-02 3.91E-08 Vinyl Chloride 5.56E-08 U U 3.06E-10 U U HAZARD INDEX: 5.16E-06 HAZARD INDEX: 1.07E-05 Notes: U Unavailable NA Not Applicable 5-6 resulting risks identified for the Fulton Terminals Site represent upper-bound risk estimates, and may overestimate the actual risk from exposures to the indicator chemicals studied. Additional data would be required to derive a statistically valid estimate of error in the exposure and risk calculations. The conservative approach taken in this study ensures that the outcome would be protective to human health and the environment. The carcinogenic risk equation is as follows: Risk = CDI x CPF Where CDI = chronic daily intake (mg/kg/day) CPF = carcinogenic potency factor (mg/kg/day)"^ Table 5-5 presents the calculated route-specific risk and total risk for each carcinogen evaluated and the cumulative upper-bound risk estimate for all the carcinogens. The upper-bound risk for all routes was determined to ^e^6~82E^08^) Total risk computed for organics ranged from 4.54E-12 (TCE) to 4.99E-08 (pyrene). Quantitative risk assessment for exposures to the other carcinogenic organics and arsenic were evaluated according to the identified ingestion and/or inhalation routes. These risk estimates are upper bound estimates based on conservative assumptions. Conservative assumptions were employed throughout this study to ensure that any recommendations and conclusions would be protective of human health. Ingestion Route Ingestion exposures to carcinogens included consumption of fish caught from the Oswego River, and the inadvertent consumption of onsite soils. These exposures accounted for 75 percent of the total carcinogenic risk (Table 5-5). Assuming that the number of people potentially exposed annually is roughly 34 percent, or 1,676 people, of the population of Fulton's city wards 5 and 6, and an oral cancer risk ^/"value of 5.15E-08, then there would be 0.0000033 excess cancer cases in 70 years assuming continuous exposure over that entire period. This translates to one excess cancer case in approximately 21,800,000 years. 5-7 2545Y TABLE 5-5 RISK ESTIMATES FOR CARCINOGENS Carcinogenic Route- Total CHEMICAL Exposure CDI Potency Factor Specific Chemical-specif1c Route (mg/kg.day) l/(mg/kg.day) Risk Risk Arsenic Oral 4.95E-10 1.8 8.91E-10 ' 8.91E-10 Benzene Oral 2.20E-10 0.029 6.38E-12 3.49E-10 Inhalation 1.18E-08 0.029 3.42E-10 Pyrene Oral 4.34E-09 11.5 * 4.99E-08 4.99E-08 TCE Oral 3.99E-10 1.10E-02 4.39E-12 4.54E-12 Inhalation 9.08E-08 1.70E-06 1.54E-13 Vinyl Chloride Oral 3.06E-10 2.3 7.04E-10 1.71E-08 Inhalation 5.56E-08 0.295 1.64E-08 Total Upper Bound Risk - C6.82E-08/' . Notes: * Based on CPF for benzo(a)pyrene, Carcinogenic Assessment Group (CAG) Unit Risk Value (Clement, 1985) 5-8 The individual risks posed by consuming fish and direct ingestion of soil onsite is roughly equivalent. Inhalation Route Inhalation exposures to volatile organics released from the soil represented 25 percent of the total carcinogenic risk (Table 5-5). GEMS derived data enumerated 6,500 persons (Table 3-6) potentially exposed to these releases. From Table 5-5, the cumulative route specific (inhalation) risk for the carcinogens was 1.67E-08, yielding about .0000389 excess cancer cases in 70 years (or about one excess cancer case every 1,798,000 years). Vinyl chloride represented the highest potential carcinogenic health risk, having a total risk value of 4.99E-08 (all due to oral exposures). Inhalation exposures are considered negligible given pyrene's affinity for particulate matter and the site's low wind erosion potential which will minimize emissions of this contaminant. There are a number of uncertainties associated with the carcinogenic risk estimates discussed above. These uncertainties are introduced because of (1) the need to extrapolate below the dose range of experimental tests using animals, (2) the variability of the receptor population, (3) assumed equivalency of dose-response relationship between animals and human, and (4) differences in exposure routes in test animals versus routes expected onsite. The recognized uncertainties in the issues listed are raised to help the reader understand the limitations of this type of study. However, the assumptions used in light of these limitations were consistently conservative in nature and biased towards protecting the public health. In addition to contaminant concentration, route, and duration of exposure, there are many other factors that may influence the likelihood of developing cancer. These include differences between individual nutritional and health status, age and sex, and inherited characteristics that may affect susceptability (USDHHS, 1983). Risk addition also assumes that intake levels will be small, without 5*9 2545Y synergistic or antagonistic chemical effects, and that individuals will be exposed to each of the indicator chemicals and elicit a carcinogenic response. 5.2 Environmental Impacts Environmental impacts resulting from chemical releases from the Fulton Terminals Site are expected to be negligible with the possible exception of adverse impacts to benthic organisms inhabiting stream sediments near the .site. Relatively high concentrations of several semivolatile organic compounds in shallow sediment samples collected near the site may cause undesirable effects to aquatic invertebrates (i.e., injury, death, loss in productivity, or biomass). This impact may be localized due to the relative immobility of these compounds in sediments. Hydrologic transport (particularly during flooding) of bed sediments will act to move contaminants downstream toward Lake Ontario. Estimated river concentrations of each of the indicator chemicals were compared to the available freshwater acute and chronic toxicity criteria (Table 5-6). Short- and long-term concentrations were many orders of magnitude less than the freshwater toxicity criteria for acute and chronic effects Adverse impacts are thus not expected at these levels. Volatile contaminant releases from soils at the Fulton Terminals Site were estimated to be low due to the small size of the site and low concentrations present, and therefore are not expected to impact any migratory or resident biota near the site. Vegetative cover over most of the site will minimize any erosional losses to the river during large storm events. The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation did not identify from currently available information, any potential impacts on endangered, threatened, or special concern wildlife species (Ozard, 1987). This includes rare plant, animal, or natural community occurrences, and other significant habitat areas near Fulton Terminals, or northward to Battle Island State Park (Figure 1-1). 5-10 25A5Y TABLE 5-6 COMPARISON OF ESTIMATED SHORT- AND LONG-TERM CONTAMINANT CONCENTRATIONS IN OSWEGO RIVER TO FRESHWATER TOXICITY CRITERIA1 Short-Term Long-Term Estimated Freshwater Estimated Freshwater Contaminant Acute Contaminant Chronic Contaminant Concentration Toxicity Concentration Toxicity Benzene 1.18E-03 5,300 1.63E-04 ND Cnlorobenzene 4.16E-04 10,000 5.74E-05 ND 1,2-dichloroethene 6.83E-02 ND 9.43E-03 ND Trichloroethene 1.02E-02 45,000 1.41E-03 ND Vinyl chloride 7.29E-04 ND 1.01E-04 ND - Arsenic 1.29E-03 440 1.79E-04 ND 1A11 concentrations in fl&/) . Source: Clement, 1985. 5-11 2545Y 6.0 CONCLUSIONS AN!) RECOMMENDATIONS Contaminant screening was performed on two sets of (analytical) data collected or submitted by U.S. EPA in March/April 1989. Selection of indicator chemicals upon which this endangerment assessment was based included four noncarcinogens, and six carcinogens. These compounds or elements were selected due to their highly toxic effects, potentially critical exposure routes, and higher concentrations present in comparison to other contaminants. The indicator chemicals chosen in this study were Noncarcinogens Carcinogens Chlorobenzene Pyrene 1,2- dichloroethene Benzene Barium Trichloroethene Me thy1i sobutyIke tone Vinyl chloride Arsenic Nickel Environmental fate and transport properties were evaluated for each of the indicator chemicals based on an assessment of the site's environmental setting and the chemical, physical, and biological properties of each contaminant. Predominant transport processes identified include volatilization from soils, movement through soils (percolation) to ground-water and thence to Oswego River, and surface runoff of contaminants to Oswego River. The fate of these compounds and elements vary; however, in general, the volatile organics, due to either their stable, lower molecular weight, or their highly oxidized form, are somewhat resistant to various degradation processes, particularly biodegradation. Half-lives in air were generally less than 10 days (EPA, 1986). Aquatic fate is dominated by hydrolysis for most, though arsenic and pyrene tend to accumulate in streambed sediments. Biomagnification up the food web is not expected to be significant, however, several of these chemicals may bioaccumulate in aquatic species. Estimated contaminant concentrations in Oswego River were well below levels that may pose any threat to fish and wildlife. 6-1 2565Y Four exposure routes were identified; (1) inhalation of volatile organics fiom contaminated soils, (2) ingestion of contaminated surface water and fish during recreational use of the Oswego River, (3) direct contact (dermal) exposure to contaminated surface water during recreational use of the Oswego River, and (4) direct contact (ingestion) exposure of contaminated soil from the Fulton Terminals Site. Recreational uses include swimming, wading, fishing, boating, and water skiing. Populations potentially exposed include recreational users of the Oswego River (expected to live in city wards 5 and 6 [U.S. Census track 211.01]), near the site, and neighborhood children venturing (trespassing) onto the site. Total body burden rates were computed based on all potential exposure routes using an average body mass of 70 kg (adult) or 10 kg 3 (child), an inhalation rate of 22.0 m /day, an average 70 year lifetime. It was assumed that dermal exposures (swimming and wading etc.) would occur in 20 out of the 70-year average lifetime, while ingestion exposures (fishing) would occur in 40 out of an average 70-year lifetime (Uhitmyre, et al., 1987). Estimated short and long term time-weighted average daily dose for each chemical (Table 5-1) subchronic oral intakes ranged from 7.69E-07 mg/kg/day (1,2-dichloroethene) to 1.76E-05 mg/kg/day (pyrene). Subchronic intake levels for inhaled toxicants were lower, ranging from 1.57E-08 mg/kg/day (ciilorobenzene) to 9.59E-08 mg/kg/day (trichloroethene). Toxicity profiles were developed for each of the indicator chemicals based on current U.S. EPA accepted health effects documents. Toxicological evaluation included pharmacokinetics, human and environmental health effects, and a dose-response assessment. Toxicity information is dependent to a large extent on animal models upon which any potential adverse human health effects must be extrapolated. Risk characterization included an assessment of risk associated with exposures to noncarcinogens and carcinogens. Noncarcinogenic risks were assessed using a hazard index computed from expected daily intake levels 6-2 2565Y (subchronic and chronic) and reference levels (representing acceptable intakes). Hazard index scores of 2.12E-04 (subchronic) and 1.59E--Q5 ^ (-(•chronic) were obtained. The hazard index scores are'well below unity indicating a negligible noncarcinogenic health impact. Potential carcinogenic risks were computed by multiplying chronic (long-term) intake levels to a respective carcinogenic potency factor. The cumulative upper bound risk for all carcinogens (all routes) was 6.82E-08. The highest risk computed for a given chemical (pyrene) was 4.99E-08, all derived from oral exposures (predominantly from ingestion of contaminated soil).. Upon evaluation of all available information on the site and the most recent analytical data collected from the site, minimal threat to human health exists. Environmental impacts overall are expected to be minimal, however, localized impacts are expected in streambed sediments due to the presence of several semivolatile organic compounds. These compounds may directly impact benthic organisms (predominantly invertebrate species). Estimated (modeled) contaminant concentrations (sufficient time-series water quality data for the Oswego River were not available) in the Oswego River were well below all acute toxicity criteria for freshwater. Recommendations Analytical data suggest additional source areas are contributing to environmental contaminant concentrations. The collective impairment and any potential health risks (human and environmental) from other known or suspected source areas should be further evaluated. Based on the presence of high background contaminant levels in the ground water there are probably additional contaminant loadings from other sources than may be adversely impacting the Oswego River and biota present. Although no human health risks associated with the site were identified in this study, recreational users of the Oswego River, 6-3 2565Y particularly, swimmers and individuals consuming fish taken from this stream may be at sone risk due to other sources. Until a evaluation can be made on the collective impacts and potential health risks identified resulting from releases from other significant source areas, residents should be warned of possible health risks from consuming these fish. 6-4 2565Y REFERENCES ACGIH. 1987. Threshold Limit Values and Biological Exposure Indices for 1987-1988. AIHA. 1965. Tetrachloroethene. Hygienic Guide Series. American Industrial Hygiene Association. AIHA. 1985. Chlorobenzene. Hygienic Guide Series. American Industrial Hygiene Association. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ASTDR). 1987. Toxicological Profile for Benzo(a)anthracene. U.S. Public Health Service. October 1987.' Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ASTDR). 1987. Toxicological Profile for Vinyl Chloride. U.S. Public Health Service. January 1988. Aller, L., T. Bennett, J.H. Lehr, R.J. Petty, and G. Hackett. 1987. Drastic: A Standardized System for Evaluating Ground Water Pollution Potential Using Hydrogeologic Settings. U.S. EPA Office of Research and Development EPA-600/2-87-035. Barker, J.F., G.C. Patrick, and D. Major. 1987. Natural Attenuation of Aromatic Hydrocarbons in a Shallow Sand Aquifer, Ground Water Monitoring Review, VII(1):64-71. CH2M Hill. 1985. Soil Contamination Evaluation Methodology, Preliminary Draft Memorandum Report. CH2M Hill, Southeast, Inc., Reston, Virginia. EPA Contract No. 68-01-7090, Subtask 2.3, W61501.AO. May 28, 1985. Callahan, Michael A., Michael W. Slimak, Norman W. Gabel, Ira P. May, Charles F. Fowler, J. Randall Freed, Patricia Jennings, Robert L. Durfee, Frank C. Whitmore, Bruno Maestri, William R. Mabey, Buford R. Holt, and Constance Gould. 1979. Water-Related Environmental Fate of 129 Priority Pollutants. Prepared by Versar, Inc., and SRI International for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. December 1979. Casarett, L.J., and J. Doull. 1986. Toxicology - The Basic Science of Poisons. Ed. C.D. Klaasen, M.O. Amdur, and J. Doull. MacMillan Publishing Co., New York. I ! 1 G Chiou, C.T., L.J. Peters, and V.H. Freed. 1979. A Physical Concept of I f Soil-Water Equilibria for Nonionic Organic Compounds. Science, | I o Vol. 209, pp. 831-832. i o i -J ! 10 u> R-l u> 2525Y L Clayton, G.D., and F.E. Clayton, eds. 1981. Patty's Industrial Hygiene and Toxicology. Vol. 2A, 34th Ed. New York: John Wiley and Sons. Clement Associates, Inc. 1985. Chemical, Physical, and Biological Properties of Compounds Present at Hazardous Waste Sites. Prepared by Clement Associates, Inc., for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. September 27, 1985. Daly, H. 1988. Personal communication with Donald Peterson, Versar, Inc. (February 2, 1988) regarding uses of Oswego River. Oswego River RAP Committee. Dean, J.A. 1985. Editor for Lange's Handbook of Chemistry, 13th Ed. McGraw-Hill Book Co., New York. DeHollander, J. 1988. Personal Communication with Donald Peterson, Versar, Inc., regarding soil erodibility and rainfall factors for use in Modified Universal Soil Loss Equation. John DeHollander, District Manager, Soil Conservation Service, Oswego County, New York. DiForte, Niccoletta. 1987. Personal communication with Donald Peterson, Versar, Inc., regarding site conditions at Fulton Terminals. U.S. EPA, Region II, New York. August 21, 1987. Dixon, W.J. 1951. Ann. Math. Statis., 22:68 (1951). Domenico, P.A., and V.V. Palciauskas. 1982. Alternative Boundaries in1 Solid Waste Management. Ground Water, Vol. 20, No. 3, pp. 303-311. Dragun, J. 1987. Soil Chemistry (draft). Presented at Superfund 87. Post Conference Seminar on Soils. HWMRI, Washington, D.C. Drever, James. 1979. Geochemistry of Natural Waters. John Wiley & Sons, New York. Federal Register. 1980. Water Quality Criteria Documents; Availability. Vol. 45, No. 231, p. 79341. November 28, 1980. Federal Register. 1985. Hazardous Waste Management System; Identification and Listing of Hazardous Waste;. Final Exclusions and Final Vertical and Horizontal Spread Model (VHS). Environmental Protection Agency Final Rule. Federal Register, Vol. 50, No. 229, pp. 48886-48887, and 48896-48910. November 27, 1985. Federal Register. 1985. Proposed Rules, Vol. 50, No. 219, p. 46969. *1 November 13, 1985. a c Florek, J. 1988. Personal communication with Donald Peterson, Versar, o Inc., (February 3. 1988) regarding water supply for City of Fulton. o Water Works Superintendent, City of Fulton. -J to u> R-2 u> to 2525Y Fuller, E.N., P.D. Schettler, andJ.C. Giddings. 1966. A New Method for Prediction of Binary Gas-Phase Diffusion Coefficients. Ind. Eng Chem., 58:19-27. Golden Software. 1987. Surfer Version 3.0. Golden Software, Inc. Golden, Co. January 1987. Haith, D.A. 1980. A Mathematical Model for Estimating Pesticide Losses in Runoff. J. Env. Qual., 9(3):428-433. Hartley, G.S. 1969. Evaporation of Pesticides. Chapter II in Pesticidal Formulations Research, Physical and Colloidal Chemical Aspects. Advances in Chemistry Series, 86, Americal Chemical Society, Washington, D.C. Hausenbuiller, R.L. 1978. Soil Science, Principles and Practices. 2nd Ed. Wm. C. Brown Co., Dubuque, Iowa. Henschler, D., and R. Hoos. 1982. Metabolic Activation and Deactivation Mechanisms of Di, Tri-, and Tetrachloroethylenes. Biological Reactive Intermediates - II: Chemical Mechanisms and Biological Effects, pp. 659-66. Irons, R.D., J.G. Dent, T.S. Baker, and D.E. Richert. 1980. Benzene is Metabolized and Covalently Bound in Bone Marrow In Situ. Chem. Biol. Interactions, 30:241-45. Jarvis, M.W., and G.A. Lugg. 1968. The Calculation of Diffusion Coefficients of Vapors and Liquids into Air. Report 318, Australian Defense Scientific Service, Alexandria, Virginia, p. 33 (July 19, 1968). Kenaga, E.E. 1980. Correlation of bioconcentration factors of chemicals in aquatic and terrestrial organisms with their physical and chemical properties. Env. Sci. Tech., 14 (5):553-556. Karickhoff, S.W., D.S. Brown, T.A. Scott. 1979. Sorption of Hydrophobic Pollutants on Natural Sediments. Water Research, Vol. 13, pp. 241-248. Krasavage, W.J., Donoghue, J. L., and Vincenzo, G.D., Patty's Industrial Hygiene and Toxicology, Vol. 3, pp. 4747-4751, 1982. Leblanc, G.A. 1980. Acute Toxicity of Priority Pollutants to Water Flea (Daphnia Magna). Bull. Environm. Contam. Toxicol., 24, 684-691. Life Systems, Inc. 1985. The Endangerment Assessment Handbook. Prepared for U.S. EPA, Office of Waste Programs Enforcement, EPA Contract No. 68-01-7037, WA No. 136. o o to CO R-3 CO 2525Y CO Longacre, S.L., J.J. Kocsis, and R. Snyder. 1981. Influence of Strain Differences in Mice on the Metabolism and Toxicity of Benzene. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol., 60:398-409. Lyman, W.J., W.F. Reehl, and D.H. Rosenblatt, eds. 1982. Handbook of Chemical Property Estimation Methods, Environmental Behavior of Organic Compounds. McGraw-Hill, New York. McClanahan. 1984. Metals in Soils, 847C. Revised June 22, 1984. McConnell, G., D.M. Ferguson, and C.R. Pearson. 1975. Chlorinated Hydrocarbons and the Environment. Endeavor, XXXIV:13-18. Mills, W.B. , J.D. Dean, D.B. Porcella, et al. 1982. Water Quality Assessment: A Screening Procedure for Toxic and Conventional Pollutants: Part 1. U.S. EPA, Environmental Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, Athens, GA: Contract No. 68-03-2673. Moore, J. 1987. Action Memorandum on "Recommended Agency Policy on the Carcinogenicity Risk Associated with the Ingestion of Inorganic Arsenic," from John A. Moore, Chair, Risk Assessment Council, to Lee M. Thomas, U.S. EPA Administrator Inside EPA, December 25, 1987. NIOSH/OSHA. 1981. Occupational Health Guidelines for Chemical Hazards, Publication No. 81-123. NUS Corporation. 1983. Remedial Action Master Plan, Fulton Terminals Site, Fulton, Oswego County, New York. EPA Contract No. 68-01-6699, WA No. 01-2V75.0. Ozard, J. 1987. Letter to Donald A. Peterson, Versar, Inc., regarding potential impacts on endangered, threatened, or special concern wildlife species, rare plant, animal, or natural community occurrences, or other significant habitat areas. New York State Dept. Env. Conserv. Wildlife Resources Center (November 13, 1987). Parke, D.V., and R.T. Williams. 1953. Studies in Detoxication. The Metabolism of Benzene Containing 14C Benzene. Biochem. J., 54:231-38. Patane, S. 1988. Personnel communication with Donald Peterson, Versar, Inc., (February 1, 1988) regarding uses of Oswego River. Engineers Office, City of Fulton. Pearson, C.R., and G. McConnell. 1975. Chlorinated C^ and C2 Hydrocarbons in the Marine Environment. Proc. Roy. Soc. London B 189:305-322. Pignatello, J.J. 1987. Microbial Degradation of 1,2-Dibromoethane in Shallow Aquifer Materials. Technical Report, J. Env. Qual., 16(4):307-312. R-4 2525Y Proud, G. 1988. Personal communication with Donald Peterson, Versar, Inc., (February 3. 1988) regarding water supply for Village of Minetto, New York. Village: supervisor for Minetto, New York. Richards, D.L., and W.K. Shieh. 1986. Biological Fate of Organic Priority Pollutants in the Aquatic Environment. Water Res., 20(9):1077-1090. Rowe, V.K., D.D. McCollister, H.C. Spencer, E.M. Adams, and D.D. Irish. 1952. Vapor Toxicity of Tetrachloroethylene for Laboratory Animals and Human Subjects. AMA Arch. Ind. Hyg. & Occup. Med., 5:566. Sax, N.I. 1984. Dangerous Properties of Industrial Materials, 6th Ed. Schwarzenbach, R.P., and J. Westall. 1981. Transport of Nonpolar Organic Compounds from Surface Water to Groundwater. Laboratory Sorption Studies. Environmental Science and Technology, Vol. 15, pp. 1360-1367. Scrudato, R. 1988. Personal communication with Donald Peterson, Versar, Inc. (February 1, 1988) regarding City of Fulton's water supply and fishing in Oswego River. State University of New York. Smyth, H.F., Jr., Hygienic Standards for Daily Inhalation, American Industrial Hygiene Association 17, 129-185 (1956). Snyder, R., S.L. Longacre, C.M. Witmer, J.J. Kocsis, L.S. Andrew, and E.W. Lee. 1981. Biochemical Toxicology of Benzene. Reviews in Biochemical Toxicology, Vol. 3, pp. 123-52. Synder, R. and J.J. Kocsis. 1975. Current Concepts of Chronic Benzene Toxicity. CRC Crrt. Rev. Toxicol., 3:265-88. USDA. 1980. Food and nutrient intakes of individuals in 1 day in the United States, Spring 1977. Nationwide food consumption survey 1977-78, preliminary report no. 2. Science and Education Administration, Washington, D.C. USDOC. 1980. Census of Population and Housing, Syracuse, New York. Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area. Bureau.of the Census, U.S. Department of Commerce. USDOI. 1955. 7.5-Minute Series (Topographic) Map. Fulton Quadrangle, New York. Photo revised 1978. U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia. USDOI. 1973. Outdoor Recreation: A Legacy for America. Washington, D.C. USEPA. 1980. Ambient Water Quality Criteria Documents, EPA 440/5-8 series. R-5 2525Y USEPA. 1980. Blue Book. NAS-NAE, 1972, Water Quality Criteria-1972. EPA-R3-73-033, Washington, D.C. USEPA. 1984a. Health Effects Assessment for Benzene, Final Draft. Environmental Criteria and Assessment Office, Cincinnati, Ohio. USEPA. 1984b. Health Effects Assessment for Trichloroethylene, Final . Draft. Environmental Criteria and Assessment Office, Cincinnati, Ohio. USEPA. 1984c. Health Effects Assessment for Tetrachloroethylene, Final Draft. Environmental Criteria and Assessment Office, Cincinnati, Ohio. USEPA. 1984d. Health Effects Assessment for 1,2-t-dichloroethylene, Final Draft. Environmental Criteria and Assessment Office, Cincinnati, Ohio. USEPA. 1984e. Health Effects Assessment for Chlorobenzene, Final Draft. Environmental Criteria and Assessment Office, Cincinnati, Ohio. USEPA. 1984f. Health Effects Assessment for Arsenic, Final Draft. Environmental Criteria and Assessment Office, Cincinnati, Ohio. USEPA. 1984g. Health Effects Assessment for PAHs, Final Draft. Environmental Criteria and Assessment Office, Cincinnati, Ohio. USEPA. 1986a. Superfund Public Health Evaluation Manual. Office of Emergency and Remedial Response, Washington, D.C. OSWER Directive 9285.4-1. October 1986. EPA/540/1-86/060. USEPA. 1986b. Draft Memorandum from Robert McGaughy, Carcinogen Assessment Group (CAG) to Peter Preuss, Office of Health and Environmental Assessment Concerning CAG Carcinogenicity Data Base. USGS. 1985. Streams Tributary to Lake Ontario, Oswego River at Lock 7, Oswego, New York. Water Resource Data, New York Water Year 1985, Volume 3, West New York. USGS Water Data Report, NY85-3. Van Nostrand Reinhold, Inc. 1987. ChemTox. Versar, Inc. 1986. Draft Superfund Exposure Assessment Manual. Prepared for the Office of Emergency and Remedial Response, USEPA, under OSWER Directive 9285.5-1, May 20, 1986. Versar, Inc. 1986. Draft Superfund Exposure Assessment Manual. Prepared for U.S. EPA, Office of Emergency and Remedial Response under OSWER Directive 9285.5-1. May 20, 1986. / Versar, Inc. 1987. The Nonexposure Aspects of Risk Assessment, An 1 Introduction for the Exposure Assessor (Revised Draft Report). I Prepared for USEPA, Contract No. 68-02-4254, Task No. 80.13, December 1, 1987. R-6 2525Y Verschueren, K. 1983. Handbook of Environmental Data on Organic Chemicals, Second Edition. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York. 1,310 pp. Wayne, L.G., and Oratt, H.H., "The Relative Potentials of Common Organic Solvents as Precursors of Eye-Irritants in Urban Atmospheres", Journal of Occupational Medicine, 2, 383 (1960). Weston, S. 1988. Personal communication with Donald Peterson, Versar, Inc., (February 2, 1988) regarding uses of Oswego River. Oswego River RAP Committee. Whitmyre, G.K., et al. 1987. The Human Health Risks of Recreational Exposure to Surface Waters Near NPL Sites: A Scoping Level Assessment. Superfund '87, Proc. 8th National Conference. The Hazardous Materials Control Research Institute, Washington, D.C. Windholz, Martha, Susan Budavari, Rosemary F. Blumetti, and Elizabeth S. Otterbein, eds. 1983. The Merck Index, tenth edition. Merck & Co., Rahway, New Jersey. R-7 2525Y APPENDIX 1 SELECTION OF INDICATOR CHEMICALS TABLE Al-I INDICATOR CHEH1CAL SELECTION PROCESS FOR SOILS Frequency Ge one trie Maximo Toxicity RVe CPA Toxicity CT Values Rank tng oT Mean Cone, Cone. Class Category Constants Non-Carctn. Carcinogenic Non-Carctn. Carcinogenic Indicator detection (ppb) (PPb) (a) (b) (c) tTn sTc Mean Max Mean Max Hean Max Mean Max Chemicals SENIVOLATIIE ORGANICS PHENOL 2 223.439357 2050 NC 4 9.37E-06 0.002093 0.019208 13 26 BIS(2-CHLOROETHYL)ETHER 230.163192 2050 2-CHLOROPHENOL 234.2208IS 2050 1.3-OICHLOROBEN2ENE 234.2208IS 2050 1.4-0ICHL0R06CNZENC 227.551046 2050 BENZYL ALCOHOL 234.220815 2050 1.2-OICHLOROBENZENE 2 235.167347 2050 NC 6 I.21E-06 0.000284 0.002480 17 34 2-HETHYLPHENOl 234.220815 2050 BIS(2-CHLOR1SOPROPYI)ETHER 1 234.220815 2050 NC 1.35E-06 0.000316 0.002767 16 33 4-METHYLPHENOL 1 231.116261 2050 NA H-NITROSO-Ol-N-PROPYl AMINE 234.220815 2050 HEXACHLOROETHANE 234.220815 2050 NITROBENZENE 234.220815 2050 ISOPHORONE 234.220815 2050 2-NITROPHENOL 234.220815 2050 2,4-DIHETMYLPHENOL 234.220815 2050 BENZOIC ACIO 1 1056.72482 10000 NA B1S(2-CHLOROETHO*Y)METHANE 234.220815 2050 2,4-DICHLOROPHENOL 234.220615 2050 1.2.4-TRICHLOROBENZENE 1 231.510082 2050 NC 4 1.07E-05 0.002477 0.021935 12 24 NAPHTALENE 10 205.974865 9400 NA 4-CHLORO-3-METHYLPHENOL 234.220815 2050 HEXACHL0R06UTA0INENE 234.220815 2050 4-CHLORO-3-METHYLPHENOL 234.220615 2050 2-METHYLNAPTHALENE IS 332.305880 17000 NA MEXACHLOROCYCLOPENTADIEHE 234.220815 2050 2,4.6-TRIOR.OROPHENOL 231.233556 2050 2.4.5-1RICNLOROPHEROL 1141.26475 10000 2-CHLORONAPNTHALENE 1 282.075999 7300 NA 2-NITROANILINE 713.005244 10000 OIHETHYl PHTNALATE 1 234.220015 2050 NA ACENAPHTHYLENE 1 234.220815 2050 PC NA 2.6-OINITROTOLUENE 234.220815 2050 3-NITROAHIL1NE 1141.26475 10000 ACENAPHTHENE 230.390802 2050 2.4-DINITR0PHEN0L 672.993891 10000 4-N1TROPHEHOL 734.575793 10000 DIBENZOFURAN e 218.948697 2050 NA 2,4-DINlTROTOLUENE V 234.220815 2050 D1ETHYLPHTHALATE 234.220015 2050 4-CHLOROPHENYl-PHENYLETHER 234.220815 2050 FLUORENE s 232.521003 2800 PC NA 4-NITROARILINE 1154.74486 10000 4.6-D1NITRO-2-MEVTHYLPHENOI 1141.26475 10000 . N-NITROSOOIPHENYLAHINE 234.220815 2050 4-BROMOPHENYL-PHENYLETHER 234.220815 2050 HEXACHLOROBENZENE 234.220015 2050 PENTACHLOROPHENOL i 1044.99465 10000 NC 7 2.04E-05 0.021317 0.204 11 13 PHENAMTHRENE 26 216.526389 10000 PC NA ANTHRACENE B 200.560067 2050 PC NA DI-N-BUTYLPHTNALATE t 222.357584 2050 NC B I.90E-06 0.000422 0.003895 IS 31 FLUORANTNENE 23 213.196171 2100 PC NA PYRENE 32 20B.405545 16000 PC NA BUTYLBENZYLPHTNALATE 229.155555 2050 3.3-DICNLOROBENZIDINE 464.533154 4050 PC 6 2.26E-06 0.001049 0.009153 6 9 BENZMAIANIHRACENE IZ 221.129156 3300 PC B2 2.91E-05 0.006434 0.09603 5 6 CHRYSENE 27 209.686336 5300 PC 82 NA BISI2-ETHYIHEXYI1PNTHALATE 23 278.737440 2050 PC B2 2.86E-08 0.000007 0.000058 10 13 OI-N-OCTYl PHTNALATE 1 232.754105 2050 BENZOfB TFLUORANTHENE 23 233.365596 2050 PC 82 NA BENZOfKVLUORANTHENE 22 241.334315 2050 PC D NA BENZOlAlPYRENE IB 209.744872 2500 PC 6 82 I.34E-06 2.28E-04 0.000281 0.00335 0.047821 0.57 18 32 4 4 1NOENO(1,2,3-CO)PYRENE 7 216.183717 2050 PC C NA OIBENZO(A,H)ANTHRACENE 3 221.026434 2050 PC 82 3.S7E-04 0.078906 0.73185 3 3 .<• G TBTGYLCRL 9 220.961547 2050 PC NA Notesi (a) NC - Hon Card nogen. PC - Potential Carcinogen. (b) Rating Value, a qualitative Indication of toxicity (10 It highest). 6££Z LOO TOd (c) Qualitative ranking For carcinogens. ranging From A (sufficient evidence of carcinogenicity), to D (no evidence of rsrclnogenlclty). 1ABIE Al-I INDICATOR CHEMICAL SEIECIION PROCESS FOR SOILS Frequency Geoaetrlc Haxlmia Toxicity RVe EPA of Toxicity CT Values Ranking Mean Cone. COIICe Class Category Detection Constants non-tare In. Carcinogenic Non-Carcln. Carcinogenic Indicator (PPb) (PPb) (•) (b) (c) «Tn tic VOLATILE ORGANICS Mean Max Mean Max Mean Max Mean Max Cheutcals CHLOROHETHANE 21.3491247 7000 BRONOMETHANE 21.3491247 VINYL CH10RI0E 7000 1 21.0287958 30000 CHLOROETHANE PC 2.14E-07 NA 0.000004 0.00642 21.3491247 7000 29 METHYLENE CHLORIDE 2 23.9740199 ACETONE 34500 4 203.737846 160000 CARBON OISULFIOE NC 6.36E-07 0.000170 0.15048 10.6921978 3450 21 14 l.l-DICHLOROETHENE 1 9.62874111 15000 1.1-01CHLOROETHANE PC 1.86E-05 1.59E-05 0.000179 2 10.3165593 15000 NC 0.279 0.000153 0.2385 20 12 7 5 1.2 OICHLOROETHENE (total) 4 10.6680086 1.29E-06 0.000013 0.01935 29 25 CHLOROFORM 30000 NC 2.6SE-06 0.000028 0.0795 1 9.15777654 15000 27 17 1.2-OICHLOROETHAXE PC B2 2.21E-06 2.81E-06 0.000020 0.03315 0.000025 0.04215 9.29633875 15000 28 22 9 7 2-BUTANONE 1 27.1970242 31500 1.1.1-TRICHLOROETHANE 3 11.3086918 15000 CARBON TETRACHLORIDE NC 3.67E-06 0.000000 0.000550 10.6921976 3450 35 35 VINYL ACETATE 21.4016803 7000 BROHOOICHIOROHETHANE 10.6921978 1.2-OICHLOROPROPANE 3450 10.6921978 3450 CIS-1.3-OICHLOROPROPENE 10.6921978 3450 TRICHLOROETHERE 4 13.8290666 110000 OI8ROHOCHLOROMETNARE PC B2 5.26E-05 I.OOE-07 0.000727 5.786 0.000001 10.6921978 3450 0.011 14 13 1.1.2-TRICH.OROETKANE 10.6921978 3450 BENZENE 6 11.5263834 15000 PC 5 S.85E-06 3.66E-07 0.000067 0.08775 0.000004 0.00579 TRANS-1,3-OICHLOROPROPENE 10.6921978 3450 24 16 12 11 BROHOFORH NC 4.40E-06 0.000047 0.01518 10.6921976 3450 25 27 4-METHYL-2-PEHTAN0NE 4 16.8866626 30000 2-HEXANONE NC 4 1.54E-06 0.000029 0.0462 1 17.1696730 30000 26 20 TETRACHLOROCTHENE 4 11.2105013 15000 PC 1.1.2,2-TETRACHLOROETHANE 7 02 4.81E-07 4.I5E-07 0.000005 0.007215 0.000004 0.006225 10.6921976 3450 PC 5 31 28 11 10 TOLUENE 7 12.4570252 2.27E-05 0.000242 0.078315 19 20900 NC 7 2.60E-07 0.000003 0.005434 16 CHLOROBENZENE 5 12.2619155 34 30 15000 NC 4 7.14E-06 0.000087 0.1071 ETHYLBENZEHE 7 12.8476886 40000 22 15 STYRERE NC 4 5.52E-07 0.000007 0.02206 3 11.1932173 79000 30 23 XYLENE (TOTAL) NC NA 6 16.1969604 240000 NC TRANS-1,2-OICMLOROETHERE 10 2.20E-07 0.000003 0.0526 4 28.8689007 14400 NC 5 33 19 82 2.65E-06 0.000076 0.03616 23 21 TOTAL PCS* 686.897357 69100 PESTICIOES/PCB. 4.4*-OOT 9.15155605 65 PC 7.97E-06 ENORIN KETONE 9.42110426 20 0.000076 0.000677 12 AROCM.OR 1241 49.1643560 4tO AROCHLOR 1254 96.5696432 350 METALS ALUNIRUH 55 6B345I0.70 21400000 ANTIMONY 1566.03620 6300 ARSENIC 71 5662.55155 79700 NC BARIUM 51 101721.606 9.00E-04 2.03E-04 5.096296 71.73 1.149497 16.1791 1710000 NC 2.04E-04 20.64920 348.64 BERYLLIUM 796.692243 1600 CADMIUM 27 270.306826 2200 B1 1.79E-03 0.483652 3.938 CALCIUM 55 4856513.83 56100000 CHROMIUM 60 10399.3495 140000 COBALT 5435.69660 18900 COPPER 70 26034.0457 226000 3.57E-05 0.929415 6.1396 IRON 55 14701569.4 35500000 LEAD 70 25077.3525 1670000 4.46E-05 1.118449 74.482 MAGNESIUM 55 3348162.76 20600000 MANGANESE 55 501364.635 9050000 MERCURY 64.6409463 20 750 NC 9.2IE-04 0.077954 0.69075 NICKEL 74 14520.2514 10 11 137000 PC 2.13E-04 1.I5E-05 3.092813 29.181 0.166982 1.5755 POTASSIUM 664469.421 1630000 3 4 SELENIUM 360.255896 1300 SILVER 21 695.625044 3300 1.00E-03 0.695825 3.3 SOOIUH 96406.5385 672000 10 110.133052 750 55 16136.7371 133000 NC 1.88E-04 65 3.033706 25.004 op£z z.oo 56411.5061 1060000 NC S.33E-06 0.300673 5.6498 Notesi (a) NC • No* Carcinogen, PC Potential Carcinogen, (b) Rating Value, a qualitative Indication of toxicity (10 Is klghest). (c) Oialitattve ranking For carcinogen* rAitflliMi frnm A i4llff Ip1»ilf Av Mane a r\f rnrr (nnnan Ir 4 0 i,3 a a f\ fa. a,.i4..«a ap TABLE AI-2 INDICATOR CHEMICAL SELECTION 1 Toxicity CT Values Ranting Indicator Freguency Geometric . Haxlaua Toxicity RVe EPA Constants Non-Care In. Carcinogenic Non-Care In. Care VINYL CHL0R10E 3 0.48 88 PC 10 O.OB77 0.00429 0.0421 7.72 0.0020 0.3775 20 TRICHLOROFLUOROHETHANE 1 0.55 3.7 NC 22 1,1.-DICHLOROETHENE 2 0.68 49.6 PC 6 0.310 0.240 0.2162 15.77 0.1686 12.300 17 METHYLENE CHLORIOE 1 0.067 185.9 18 ACETONE 14 26.5 15341 NC 5 0.0167 0.4426 256.19 1,1-OICHLOROETHANE 16 10 3 0.81 24.3 NC 7 0.0250 0.0209 0.63 C1S-I.2-DICHIOROETHENE 23 24 11 3.85 14387 HC 5 0.0559 0.2152 004.23 1,1,1-TRlCHLOROETHANE 18 7 1 0.66 113.2 NC 2 0.000733 0.0005 0.08 29 28 BENZENE 4 1.6 422.7 PC 5 A 0.117 0.00771 TRICHLOROETHEHE 0.1872 49.46 0.0123 3.2590 19 14 8 1.35 2388' PC 5 BZ 1.05 0.002 1.4175 2507.4 0.0027 4.776 TOLUENE 14 4 6 0.91 64.9 NC 7 0.0052 0.0047 0.34 TETRACHLOROETHENE 28 26 2 0.57 6.6 PC 7 BZ 0.00962 0.00029 0.0055 0.07 0.0047 0.0563 CHLOROBENZENE 27 29 2 0.7 162 NC 4 0.143 0.1001 23.17 ETHYLBENZENE 21 17 4 1.24 432.5 NC 4 0.011 0.0136 4.76 TOTAL XYLENE 25 21 4 1.34 303 NC 10 0.0044 0.0059 1.33 4-HETHYL-Z-PENTAN0NE 26 23 1 3.22 393 25 23 1,3,5-TRINETHYlBENZENE 3 0.86 34.4 N-PROPYlBENZENE 2 0.6 81.7 1,2,4-TRIHETHYLBENZENE 3 1 237.6 SEC-BOTYLBENZENE 1 0.55 3 I.Z-OICHLOROBENZENE 1 0.61 24.4 NC 6 0.0241 0.0147 0.59 24 25 SENIVOLAT1LE ORGANIC! PHENOL S.339557009 II NC 0.107 0.9985 2.06 I.Z-OICHLOROBENZENE IS 22 5.ZB9Z919SI II NC 0.0241 0.1275 0.27 20 27 BENZOIC ACID Zt.35035055 47 HAPHTALENE 6.443723279 92 CHRYSENE 5.0000 5 PC Bisiz-ETHYLHEXYLIPHTHALATE 5.71ZO 62 PC 0.00057 0.0032 0.0354 DI-N-OCTYl PHTKALATE 4.0739 5 Z-HETHYLNAPHTHALEHE 4.0097 5 INORGANIC! ALUMINUM 10 12810.33046 107000 ANTIMONY 7 31.27697360 935 RC 10 4.35 136.1 4067.2 ARSENIC 5 3 10 17.80985865 48.1 PC 9 A 10 4.07 320.6 865.S 72.486 195.76 3 6 BARIUM 10 2043.963813 21100 NC 4.00 6339.4 86088.0 BERYLLIUM I 1 10 3.382539163 6 PC 81 7.7121 13.68 CADMIUM Z.ZO 13 18 6 4.121708078 60.1 PC 8 81 35.9 148.0 2157.6 4 5 CALCIUM 10 222710.3592 772000 CHROMIUM 10 416.2093671 10800 PC A COBALT 10 33.57703616 200 COPPER 10 114.7467170 1120 NC 5 0.714 81.9 799.7 6 8 IRON 10 45663.18597 916000 NC LEAD 10 23.12496985 241 NC 10 0.093 20.7 215.2 11 12 MAGNESIUM 10 45477.16387 74600 MANGANESE 10 4413.903131 32100 NC MERCURY 10 0.136426160 0.6 NC 7 10.4 0.229 2.5 11.0 0.0312 0.1374 13 19 NICKEL 10 284.7716506 3760 PC 10 A 4.26 1213.1 16017.6 2 2 POTASSIUM 10 13839.48462 38400 SELENIUM 1 5.75 5.75 NC 10 7.43 42.7 42.7 9 15 SILVER 1 4.671954563 12.7 NC 1 20 93.4 254.0 6 SOOIUH 10 143802.3185 917000 II THALLIUM 1 1.550814670 3.5 NC 4 11.4 17.7 39.9 12 16 VANADIUM 9 23.89373948 133 HC 6 3.75 89.6 498.8 7 9 ZINC 10 199.6935431 1820 NC 8 0.107 21.4 194.7 10 13 CYANIOE 22.06943587 34.3 Notesi NC - Aon Carcinogen, PC - Potential Carcinogen. Noting Value, a oualltatlve Indication oT toxicity (10 Is highest). (NialltatWe ranking for carcinogens, ranging frosi A (sufficient evidenceevl of carcinogenicity), to 0 (no evidence of carcinogenicity). lt£Z L oo ma APPENDIX 2 TOXICOLOGICAL, REACTIVITY, AND PERSONAL PROTECTION DATA FOR INDICATOR CHEMICALS , , . _ *• # *• "*1 CHtiMTuX TOXICOLOGICAL DATA •*•«-*< c> 3ti J, 3£, 67, 88, 1939 by Resource Consultants, Inc. All rights reserved CHtMiOx RECORD :49 NAME .•ARSENIC CA€ NUMBER ; 7440-38-2 IDLH :Not available OSKA DATA :Fina1 Rule Limits: TWA = 10 u g/M 3 ACGIH TLV ~ ppm STEL : Not specified TARGET ORGANS No data available REPRODUCTIVE TOX This chemical is a reproductive toxin to mammals. SHORT TERM TOX COUGHING, DYSPNEA,, CHEST PAINS, IRRITATION TO SKIN AND MUCOUS MEMBRANES, FEVER, INSOMNIA, ANOREXIA, LIVER SWELLING, MELANOSIS, DISTURBED HEART FUNCTION AND FACIAL EDEMA. *•» Source: 15 LONG TERM TOX :Unknown MED ICAL CON'DTI ON AGGRAVATED :SKIN DISEASE. LIVER DISEASE. CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASE. RESPIRATORY DISEASE. CENTRAL NERVOUS SYSTEM DISEASES **• Source: 15, THIC SIGN9/SYMPTOMS :NAUSEA, VOMITING, DIARRHEA, DEATH Source: COUGHING DYSPNEA, CHEST PAIN, IRRITATION TO SKIN AND MUCOUS MEMBRANES, FEVER, INSOMNIA, ANOREXIA, LIVER SWELLING MELANOSIS AND DISTURBED HEART FUNCTION. FACIAL EDEMA' SKIN LESIONS AND NEURITIC SIGNS. Source: 15 ' LDSO (tn g / K g ; orl-rat LDSO:763 mg/kg OTHER TClOXICITY DATA:£Fl9K12 orl-rat LDSO:763 mg/kg GTPZAB 31(IS),53,87 idF 19K1 id orl-mus LDSO:145 mg/kg GTPZAB 31(IS), 53, 87 uF13Kld ipi mus LD50:46£00 ug/kg GTPZAB 31(IS),53 87 scu-rbt LDLo:30C mg/kg ASBIAL S4,44S,38 ' i P» gpg LDLo: 10 mg/kg CRSBAW 81,164,18 scu-gpg LDLo:300 rng/kg ASBIAL £4, 44S,38 -H.S CHEMICAL IS A KNOWN OR SUSPECTED CARCINOGEN LISTED BY NPT, IARC OR OSHA "3 d tr1 o o -4 to u> U> ------^ TOX ic) ot, 87, 88, l **"•*•* +* CHEN REACTIVITY DAT; 989 by Resource Consultants, Ir,c. All right s reser\ CHENTOX RECORD :43 NAME .•ARSENIC CHS NUMBER :7440-38—0 FORMULA :As4 CHEMICAL CLASS IMCOMPATIBILITIES 1 ACFTvfASIDS? *R0MINE OX^E, DIRUBIDIUM ACET^LIDE, HALOGENS, PALLADIUM, ZINC PLATINUM TRIOX?DP T^^LDRIDE' SILVER ""RATC SSK REACTIVITY TO WATER TRIOXIDE, SODIUM PEROXIDE REACTIVITY WITH :Not reactive, or unknown. COMMON MATERIAL- :No reactions of a hazardous nature. NEUTRALIZATION :Not applicable. TOXIC FIRE GASES : WHEN HEATED OR ON CONTACT WITH ACID OR an r, FUMES, EMITS HISHLY TOXIC FUMES bounces: CHRIS Manual and NI03H/0SHA Guide 00 1 £>. #%r:::r:r;r:rr:r# chemtox t°xicol°gi^l d*ta - Id8v,06,a,,38,1*89 by Resource Consultants, Inc. All rights reserved. CHEMTOX RECORD :59 NAME :BENZENE CA3 NUMBER :71-43-2 IpLH ic'UUUPPM Source: NIOSH USHA DATA :Fina1 Rule Limits: TWA = l pprn STEL = 5 pprn AC'G I H TL V :lo pprn Suspected human carcinogen STEL : 25 pprn CARC TARGET ORGANS :BLOOD, CNS, SKIN, BONE MARROW, EYES, RESP SYS Source: NIOSH REPRODUCTIVE TDX :This chemical is a reproductive toxin to mammals. SHORT TERM TOX :No data available LONG TERM TOX :LEUKEMIA *•* Source: NIOSH MEDICAL CON'DTION AGGRAVATED :No data available • IGNS SYMPTOMS :IRRIT EYES, NOSE, RESP SYS; GIDDY; HEAD, NAU, STAGGERED GAIT; FTG, ANOR, LASS; DERM; BONE MARROW DEPRES; ABDOM PAIN Source: SAX DIZZINESS, EXCITATION, PALLOR, FOLLOWED BY FLUSHING, WEAKNESS, HEADACHE, BREATHLESSNESS, CHEST CONSTRICTION. COMA AND POSSIBLE DEATH. Source: CHRIS CONSTRICTION. COMA AND POSSIBLE DEATH. Source: CHRIS LD50 (nig/Kg) tori—rat LD50:33O6 rng/kg OTHER TOXICITY DATA i or1 —rat LD50:330£ rng/kg TXAPA9 19,699,71 ihi—rat LC50: 10000 pprn/7H 28ZRAQ -,113,60 3Jl6L30P20i pr—rat LD5C>:2690 ug/kg 36YFAG -,302,77 or1 —rnus LD50:4700 rng/kg HYSAAV 32(3), 349, 67 ihl-mus LC50:99S0 pprn JIHTAB 25,366,43 ipr-mus LD50:340 rng/kg ANYAA9 243,104,75 or1-dog LDLo: 2000 rng/kg HBAMAK 4,1313,35 ih1 —dog LCLo: 146000 mg/rn3 HBTXAC 1,324,55 i h 1-cat LC'Lo: 170000 rng/rn3 HBTXAC 1,324,55 ivn-rbt LDLo:88 mg/kg JTEHD6 Tl a o o ISO CO Cn CHEMTOX REACTIVITY DATA *«.****««.*«.« w, 86, 8/, tl8, 1989 by Resource Consultants, Inc. All rights reserved. CHEMTOX RECORD :59 NAME ••BENZENE CAS NUMBER :71 —43—£ FORMULA :C6H£ CHEMICAL CLASS :AROMATIC INCOMPATIBILITIES :STRONG OX,CHLORINE,BROMINE WITH IRON REACTIVITY TO WATER !Not reactive, or unknown. REACTIVITY WITH COMMON MATERIALS •No react ions of a hazardous nature, NEUTRALIZATION rNot applicable. TOXIC FIRE GASES : VAPOR IS HEAVIER THAN AIR AND MAY TRAVEL CONSIDERABLE DISTANCE.TO SOURCE OF IGNITION AND FLASH BACK. Sources: CHRIS Manual and NIOS'H/OSHA Guide *1 G F o o -j to to G\ V. personnel, protection summary #*»»*»#**#****»«»•** VC) 1985,as,S7,38,1983 by Resource Consultants, Inc. " All rights reserved. CHEMTOX RECORD : 59 CAS NUMBER: 71-43-2 NAME : BENZENE ** WEAR APPROPRIATE EQUIPMENT TO PREVENT: Repeated or prolonged skin contact. ** WEAR EYE PROTECTION TO PREVENT: Reasonable probability of eye contact, *•* EXPOSED PERSONNEL SHOULD WASH: Promptly wash with soap when skin becomes contaminated. ** REMOVE CLOTHING: Immediately remove any clothing that becomes wet to avoid any f1 amrnabi 1 itv hazard. ** REFERENCE: NIOSH ** HYDROCARBON VAPOR CANISTER, SUPPLIED AIR OR HOSE MASK; HYDROCARBON-INSOLUBLE RUBBER OR PLASTIC GLOVES; CHEMICAL GOGGLES OR FACE SPLASH SHIELD; HYDROCARBON-INSOLUBLE APRON SUCH AS NEOPRENE. ** REFERENCE: CHRIS MANUAL NIOSH RESPIRATION PROTECTION RECOMMENDATIONS NIOSH (BENZENE) Greater at any detectable concent ration. : Any self-contained breathing apparatus with full facepiece and operated in a pressure—demand or other positive pressure mode. / Any supplied-air respirator with a full facepiece and operated in pressure—demand or other positive pressure mode in combination with an auxiliary self—contained breathing apparatus operated in pressure—demand or other positive pressure mode. E=»CAPE: Any ait purifying full facepiece respirator (gas mask) with a chin—style or front— or back—mounted organic vapor canister. / Any appropriate escape—type self—contained breathing apparatus. >V G C o o -J to u> *•*•*****«.«.#** Jll- ^ "******** C'HEMTOX TOXICOLOGICAL DATA •c.> 1935, 8£, 67,S 3, 1383 by Resource Consultants, Inc. All rights reserved CHEMTOX RECORD :101 NlPtMtl :CHLOROBENZENE CAS NUMBER :106-90-7 IDLH :£40D PPM Source: NIOSH QSHA DATA :Transit io/ial Limits: pEL = 75ppm<350rng/M3> Final Rule Limits: TWA = 75 pprn (350 mg/M3) ACGIH TLV :75 pprn STEL : Not specified TARGET ORGANS 5RESP SYS, EYES, SKIN, CNS, LIVER Source: NIOSH REPRODUCTIVE TOX :This chemical is a reproductive toxin to mamma Is. SHORT TERM TOX :No data available LONG TERM TOX MEDICAL CON'DTION AGGRAVATED :No data available SIGNS/SYMPTOMS ••IRRITATING TO SKIN, EYES, MUCOUS MEMBRANES. REPEATED EXPOSURE OF SKIN MAY CAUSE BERMITITIS DUE TO DEFATTING ACTION. CHRONIC INHALATION OF VAPORS OR MIST MAY RESULT IN DAMAGE TO LUNGS, LIVER, KIDNEYS. ACUTE VAPOR EXPOSURES IN DAMAGE TO LUNGS, LIVER, KIDNEYS. ACUTE VAPOR EXPOSURES CAN CAUSE SYMPTOMS RANGING FROM COUGHING TO TRANSIENT ANESTHESIA AND CENTRAL NERVOUS SYSTEM DEPRESSION. SOMNOLENCE, LOSS OF CONSCIOUSNESS, TWITCHING OF EXTREMITIES, CYANOSIS, RAPID RESPIRATION AND WEAK, IRREGULAR PULSE. IRRITATION TO EYES, NOSE AND THROAT. Source: CSDS,CHRIS LD! (rn g / K g ) :orl—rat LD50:££30 mg/kg OTHER TOXICITY DATA:orl—rat LD50: ££30 rng/kg 38MKAJ 2B, 3S03, fll i pr—rat LDLo:7400 rng/kg RMSRA6 IS, 443, 1836 scu-rat LDLo: 7000 rng/kg RMSRA6 16,443,1896 orl -rnus LD50: £300 rng/kg 65GMAT -,34,82 ih1 -rnus LCLo: 15 grn/rn3 GISAAA £0(8), 19, 55 i pr-rnus LD50: 515 rng/kg PHMC'AA 10,172,68 orl-rbt LD50:2250 rng/kg 3SMKAJ £6,3603,81 orl-gpg LD50: £250 rng/kg 85GMAT -,34,82 i pr—gpg LDLo:41OO mg/kg RMSRA6 16,443,1836 unr—rnarn LD50: 23O0 rng/kg GISAAA 51 (5>,61,86 ; / c? o o fo I Co I CO** CHEMT0X ^ACTIVITY DOT A c 3&u,8b,8/,88,1983 by Resource Consultants, Inc. All rights reserved. \ CHEMTGX RECORD :101 NAME :CHLOROBENZENE CAS NUMBER :1OS-90-7 FORMULA :C8H5C1 CHEMICAL CLASS :CHLORINATED AROMATIC INCOMPATI DI L I TIES :STRONG OXIDIZERS REACTIVITY TO WATER - :Not reactive, or unknown. REACTIVITY WITH COMMON MATERIALS :No reactions of a hazardous nature. NEUTRALIZATION :Not applicable. TOXIC FIRE GASES :None identified, except unburnned vapors. Sources: CHRIS Manual and NI03H/0SHA Guide "3 d o o -J to OJ VD ****•****************»**.,,. peRS0nnel PROJECTION SUMMARY ' **•********#*#»***«.# (c) 1965,6£,67,66,1969 by Resource-Consultants, Inc. "" All rights reserved. CHEMTOX RECORD : 101 CAS NUMBER: 108-90-7 NAMd. : CHLOROBENZENE ** WEAR APPROPRIATE EQUIPMENT TO PREVENT: Repeated or prolonged skin contact. ** WEAR EYE PROTECTION TO PREVENT: Reasonable probability of eye contact. ** EXPOSED PERSONNEL SHOULD WASH: Immediately when skin becomes wet. ** REMOVE CLOTHING: Immediately remove any clothing that becomes wet to avoid any flamrnabi 1ity hazard. ** REFERENCE: NIOSH «•* ORGANIC VAPOR-ACID GAS RESPIRATOR WHERE APPROPRIATE; NEDPRENE OR VINYL GLOVES; CHEMICAL SAFETY SPECTACLES, PLUS FACE-SHIELD WHERE APPROPRIATE; RUBBER FOOTWEAR; APRON OR IMPERVIOUS CLOTHING FOR SPLASH PROTECTION; HARD HAT. ** REFERENCE: CHRIS MANUAL NIOSH RESPIRATION PROTECTION RECOMMENDATIONS OSHA (CHLOROBENZENE) lOOO ppm: Any powered air-purifying respirator with organic vapor cartridge(s). * Substance causes eye irritation or damage; eye protection needed. / Any chemical cartridge respirator with a full facepiece arid organic vapor cartridge(s) . 18/5 ppm: wny supplied—air respirator operated in a continuous flow mode. * Substance causes eye irritation or damage; eye protection needed. id AGO ppm: Any air purifying full facepiece respirator (gas mask) with a chin—style or front— or back—mounted organic vapor canister. / Any self—contained breathing apparatus with a full facepiece. / Any supplied—air respirator with a full facepiece. EMERGENCY OR PLANNED ENTRY IN UNKNOWN CONCENTRATIONS OR IDLH CONDITIONS. : Any self—contained breathing apparatus with full facepiece and operated in a pressure-demand or other positive pressure mode. / Any supplied-air respirator with a full facepiece and operated in pressure—demand or other positive pressure mode in combination with an auxiliary self—contained breathing apparatus operated in pressures-demand or other positive pressure mode. ESCAPE: Any air-purifying full facepiece respirator (gas mask) with a chin-style or front- or back—mounted organic vapor canister. / Any appropriate escape-type self-contained breathing apparatus. hj a F o o -u KJ 00 On o CHEMTDX toxicological data **»»»*»***»»***»«******^ » 1 , So, 8 /, 88, 1983 by Resource Consu 11ant s, Inc. WJ All rights reserved CHEMTOX record : 1 £7 NAME :1,2-DICHLORGETHYLENE CAS NUMBER :5A0-53-0 IDL.H 4000 PPM Source: NIOSH OSHA DATA Transit ione1 Li/nits: pCL = 200ppm (790rng/M3> Final Rule Limits: TWA = £00 pprn (790 rng/M3) AuGIH TLV c.'0'.t pprn STEL : 250 pprn TARGET RESP SYS, EYES, CNS Source: NIOSH REPRODUCTIVE TOX Not listed in RTECS as a mammalian reproductive toxin. SHORT TERM TOX No data available LONG TERM TOX Unknown MEDICAL CON'DTION AGGRAVATED :No data available BIGNS/SYM PTuMS :INHALATION CAUSES NAUSEA, VOMITING, WEAKNESS, TREMOR, EPIGASTRIC CRAMPS, CENTRAL NERVOUS DEPRESSION. CONTACT WITH LIQUID CAUSES IRRITATION OF EYES & (ON PROLONGED CONTACT) SKIN. INGESTION CAUSES SLIGHT DEPRESSION CONTACT) SKIN. INGESTION CAUSES SLIGHT DEPRESSION TO DEEP NARCOSIS. Source: CHRIS LD50 (m g /K g > tori-rat LD50:770 rng/kg OTH^R TOXICITY DATA:orl—rat LD50:77C> rng/kg ARSIM 20,10,68 ipr-wus LD50:2 gm/k.g EJTXA2 7,247,74 3C'08F13J25ih 1 —frg LCLo:117 rng/rn3/lH AISFAR 15,1,37 "3 C3 tr1 o o -J to u> 1—1 11*11*1™!****"******* CHEMT0X REACTIVITY DATA 198o,86,87,88, 1*89 by Resource Consultants, Inc. fin rights reserved. CHEMTOX RECORD :167 NAME :1,£-DICHLOROETHYLENE CAS NUMBER :540—59—6 FORMULA :C£H£C1£ CHEMICAL CLASS INCOMPATIBILITIEJ rSTRONG OXIDIZERS, NITROGEN DIOXIDE, SOLID CAUSTIC ALKALIES OR THEIR CONCENTRATED SOLUTIONS; DIELUOROMETHYLENE, DEHYPOFLUORITEI REACTIVITY TO WATER :Not reactive, or unknown. REACTIVITY WITH COMMON MATERIALS :No reactions of a hazardous nature, NEUTRALIZATION :Not applicable. TOXIC EIRE GASES :None identified, except unburned vapors. Sources: CHRIS Manual arid NIOSH/uSHA Guide Ml G o o -J to u> U1 to PERSONNEL PROTECTION SUMMARY • '~v 1 BBS, £j£ , 37, S3, 19S9 by Resource" Consultants, Inc. All rights reserved. CHEMTCX RECORD : 1S7 CAS NUMBER: 540-53-0 NAME : l,2-DICHLCROETHYLENE ** WEAR APPROPRIATE EQUIPMENT TO PREVENT: Repeated or pro1 onged skin contact. •** WE AH EYE PROTECTION TO PREVENT: Reasonable probability of eye contact. ** EXPOSED PERSONNEL SHOULD WASH: -rompt iy when skin becomes wet. •*' REMOVE CLOTHING: Immediately remove any clothing that becomes wet to avoid any fiarnrnabilit • • rt Z cr( w *'* REFERENCE: NICSH * * RUBBER GLOVES; SAFETY GOGGLES; AIR SUPPLY MASK OR SELF-CONTAINED BREATHING APPARATUS. REFERENCE: CHRIS MANUAL NIOSH-RESPIRATION PROTECTION RECOMMENDATIONS OS;-:A < 1, E-DICHLOROETHYLENE) lOOO ppm: Any powered air-puri fyirig respirator with organic vapor cartridge Ml G G o o ro CO en CO ****«•*•*********•****•***.**. CHEMTDX TNY T RNI NR T RAI MTD .... CHEMTDX RECORD :££87 NAME :METHYL ISOBUTYL KETONE CAS NUMBER :108-10-1 IDLH :3000 PPM Source: NIOSH OSHA DATA .'Transit ional Limits: PEL = lOOpprn (410rng/M3> Final Rule Limits: TWA = 50 pprn (£05 rng/M3> STEL = 75 pprn (30O rng/M3> ACGIH TLV MOO pprn STEL : 1£5 pprn TARGET ORGANS :RESP SYS, EYES, SKIN, CNS Source: NIOSH REPRODUCTIVE TOX :Th i s chemical is a reproductive toxin to mammals. SHORT TERM TOX :No data available LONG TERM TOX MEDICAL CON'DTION AGGRAVATED :No data available SIGNS/SYMPTOMS :IRRIT EYES, MUC MEMB, HEAD; NARCISOS, COMA, DERM Source NIOSHP LD50 (ing/ K g ) : or1 —rat LD50: £080 rng/kg OTHER TOXICITY DATA:or1-rat LD50:£080 rng/kg UCDS 4/£5/5Q i pi—rat LD50: 400 rng/kg, 38MKAJ £C, 4748, 8£ or1—mus LD50: £871 rng/kg T0LED5 30,13,86 i h 1 —rn us LCSO: £3300 rng/rn3 GTPZAB 17 < 1 1) , 5£, 73 ipr-rnus LD50: £68 rng/kg SCCUR -,7,61 or1-gpg LD50: 1600 rng/kg 38MKAJ £C, 4748, 8£ i pi—gpg LD50:800 rng/kg 38MKAJ £C, 4748, 8£ urn—rnarn LD50: 1396 rng/kg GISAAA 51 (5), 61, 86 71 G G o o -j to LO U1 >> Y . PERSONNEL protection summary #***»»*»#***#**«.»*» 'CO l-35, SG, a?, 88, 1983 by. Resource^ Consultants, Inc. All rights reserved. CHEMTOX RECORD : £££7 CAS NUMBER: 1OS-10-1 NAME : METHYL ISOBUTYL KETONE ** NEAR APPROPRIATE EQUIPMENT TO PREVENT: Repeated or prolonged skin contact. ** WEAR EYE PROTECTION TO PREVENT: Reasonable probability of eye contact. ** EXPOSED PERSONNEL SHOULD WASH: Promptly when skin becomes wet. ** REMOVE CLOTHING: Immediately remove any clothing that becomes wet to avoid any flammability hazard. REFERENCE: NIOSH T ; CHEMTOX TOX ICQLOGICAL DAT ft (c) 1^85,So,87,88,1989 by Resource Consultants, Inc. fill rights reserved. CHEMTOX RECORD :284 NAME :NICKEL CAS NUMBER :7440—02—0 IDLH :Not available 03HA DATA :Transitional Limits: PEL = lmg/M3 Final Rule Limits: TWA = l rng/M3 ACGIH TLV :- pprn CANCER SUSPECT AGENT STEL : 3mg/m3 pprn TARGET ORGANS :NASAL CAVITIES, LUNG, SKIN. Source: NIOSH REPRODUCTIVE TOX :This chemical is a reproductive toxin to mammals. SHORT TERM TOX :No data available LONG TERM TOX ••MAY CAUSE DERMATITIS IN SENSITIVE INDIVIDUALS - INGESTION OF SOLUBLE SALTS CAUSES NAUSEA, VOMITING, DIARRHEA. ** Source: SAX, MI MEDICAL CON'DTION AGGRAVATED :No data available SIGNS/SYMPTOMS .•CANCER LUNGS, NASAL CAVITIES; PNEUMONITIS; ALLERGIC ASTH SENS DERM. GINGIVITIS, STOMATITIS (INFLAMMATION A3TH SENS DERM. GINGIVITIS, STOMATITIS (INFLAMMATION OF THE MOUTH), METALLIC TASTE, METAL FUME FEVER, NICKEL DERMATITIS, ECZEMA (SWELLING) BY SENSITIZATION, ANOSMIA, SINUS AND PULMONARY CARCINOGENESIS BY LONG PERIOD EXPOSURE. Source: THIC '-D50 (rng/Kg) :orl—rat' LDLo:5 grn/kg OTHER TOXICITY DATA:orl-rat LDLo:5 grn/kg FDRLI 7684D,83 it)—rat LDLo:12 mg/kg NTIS AEC-TR-6710 ivn-mus LDLo:50 mg/kg FATOAO £3,549,SO ivn-dog LDLo:10 mg/kg 14CYAT 2,1120,63 scu-cat LDLo:12500 ug/kg NTIS PB158-508 ipi—rbt LDLo:7 mg/kg NTIS PB158-508 scu-rbt LDLo:7500 ug/kg NTIS PB158-508 orl-gpg LDLo:5 mg/kg YAKUD5 22,455,80 THIS CHEMICAL IS A KNOWN OR SUSPECTED CARCINOGEN LISTED BY NPT, IARC OR OSHA 71 a f o o -J to to V) o\ *******•*»•**»*»#*»«**«»»»*## CHEMTOX REACTIVITY DATA CHEMTOX RECORD :284 NAME :NICKEL CAS NUMBER :7440—O2—0 FORMULA :Ni CHEMICAL CLASS INCOMPATIBILITIES :STRONG ACIDS, SULFUR, NI(N0S)2, WOOD, OTHER COMBUSTIBLES REACTIVITY TO WATER :Not reactive, or unknown. REACTIVITY WITH COMMON MATERIALS :No react ions of a hazardous nature. NEUTRALIZATION :Not applicable. TOXIC FIRE GASES :None identified, except ur.burr.ed vapors. Sources: CHRIS Manual and NIOSH/OSHA Guide 71 G G o o -J to 00 on -J M*personnelprotection summary #*••«»*•**##•**»»«» *<=•)- i =>85, QE-, 87, 38, l'j39 by Resource- Consultants, Inc. " All rights reserved. CHSMTQX RECORD : 284 CAB NUMBER: 7440-02-0 NAME : NICKEL <-* WEAR APPROPRIATE EQUIPMENT TO PREVENT: Repeated or prolonged skin contact. ** EXPOSED PERSONNEL SHOULD WASH: Immediately when skin becomes contaminated. ** WORK CLOTHING SHOULD BE CHANGED DAILY: If is, is reasonably probable that the clothing may be contaminated. ** REMOVE CLOTHING: Promptly remove non-impervious clothing that becomes contaminated. ** REFERENCE: NIOSH *0 a f o o NJ U) CHEMTOX TOXICOLOGICAL DATA •»**•»»»»**»*••»»**»«»»„ vc 1.H6_., u£, a7, 83, 1989 by Resource Consultants, Inc. flu rights reserved. CK-NTOX RECORD W w/tD NAME PYRENE CAS NUMBER 123-GO-O IDLH Not available OSHAi DATA Transitional Limits PEL = O.2mg/M3 Final Rule Limits: TWA = O. £ rng/M3 TARGET ORGANS SKIN Source: NIOSH REPRODUCTIVE TOX Not listed in RTECS as a mammalian reproductive toxi ri. SHORT TERM TOX No data available LuNS TERM TOX MEDICAL CON'DTION AGGRAVATED iNo data available SIGNS/SYMPTOMS tA SKIN IRRITANT Source: SAX LD 5 O i m g /K g > or1—rat LD50:£700 mg/kg OTHER TOXICITY DATA:3D23D£5F13F£3or1 —rat LD50:£700LD50: mg/kg GTPZAB 15(2),59,71 3D25F13F£3i h1—rat LC50: 170 mg/rn3 GTPZAB 15(2), 59, 71 TD25F13F2~— r£3orl-mu! " LD50:800 rng/kg GTPZAB 15(2),59,71' ipr-mus LD50:514 rnD/Un DMRCn T I ^ I f I PERSONNEL PROTECTION SUMMARY #*#******•»*«.**»»** fC'- :9SS' SC"S7'38' igS5 R»«oure. Consultants, Inc. " All rights reserved. CHEMTOX RECORD : 33£ CAS NUMBER: 129-00-0 NHh^ ; PYRENE •JO PERSONAL PROTECTION DATA AVAILABLE FOR THIS COMPOUND a tM o o vl Nj U) CTl o CHEMT0X TO X I C'OL OG I COL DATA * -», 8b, 8r, 88, 1989 by Resource Consultants, Inc. All rights reserved. CHEMTOX RECORD :407 NAME :TRICHLOROETHYLENE CAS NUMBER :79-01-6 1DLH :Not available OSHA DATA :Final Rule Limits: TWA = 50 pprn (£70 mg/M3) STEL = £0O pprn (1080 rng/M3> ACGIH TLV :50 pprn STEL : 150 pprn TARGET ORGANS :EYES, SKIN, NOSE, THROAT, RESP. SYSTEM, HEART, LIVER, KIDNEYS, CNS. Source: NIOSH REPRODUCTIVE TOX 'This chemical is a reproductive toxin to mamma1s. SHORT TERM TOX :No data available LONG' TERM TOX :CARD I AC' FAILURE; DAMAGE TO LIVER AND OTHER ORGANS. ** Source: '"SAX MEDICAL CON'DTION AGGRAVATED :BERMATITIS, CMRDIAC FAILURE. *# Source: HCDB SIGNS/SYMPTOMS :HEAD, VERTIGO, VIS DIST, TREMORS, SOMNOLENCE, NAU, VOMIT, CARD ARRHY, PARESTHESIA, IRRIT EYES, DERM, BLURRED VISION, IRRITATION OF NOSE AND THROAT, NAUSIA, BLURRED VISION, IRRITATION OF NOSE AND THROAT, NAUSIA, ATTITUDE OF IRRESPONSIBILITY, DISTURBANCE OF CENTRAL NERVOUS SYSTEM, LACHRYMATION. INHAL OF HIGH CONC CAUSES NARCOSIS AND ANESTHESIA. Source: CHRIS,SAX LD50 (rng/Kg) :Not in RTECS 1988 OTHER TOXICITY DATA: ih 1 —rat LCLo: 8000 pprn/4H AIHAAP 30,470,69 i pr—rat LD50:1£8£ rng/kg ENVRAL 40,411,86 3F05F19R21 orl-rnus LD50: £402 rng/kg NTIS AD-A080-636 ihl-rnus LC50: S450 pprn/4H APTOAS 9,303,53 2F04F19 scu-rnus LD50:16 grn/kg JPETAB 123, £24, 56 ivn-rnus LD50:3390O ug/kg CBCCT 6,141,54 1L14 ip>—dog LD50: 1900 rng/kg TXAPA9 10,119,67 scu-dog LDLo: 150 rng/kg HBTXAC 5,76,59 ivn-dog LDLo: 150 rng/kg QJPPAL 7,205,34 or1 -cat LDLo:5864 rng/kg HBTXAC 5,76,59 ih 1-cat LCLo: 32500 rng/rn3/£H AHBAAM 116,131,36 orl-rbt LDLo: 7330 rng/kg HBTXAC 5,76,59 ihl-rbt LCLo: 11OOO pprn FADNAU 48A, 121,70 scu-rbt LDLo:1800 mg/kg QJPPAL 7,205,34 ihl-gpg LCLo:37£00 ppm/40M HBTXAC 5,76,59 THIS CHEMICAL IS A KNOWN OR SUSPECTED CARCINOGEN LISTED BY NPT, IARC OR OSHA "3 G o o -J to u> a\ CHEMT0X REfiCTIVITY DfiTfl CHEMTOX RECORD :407 NAME :TRICHLOROETHYLENE CAS NUMBER :79-01—6 FORMULA :CSHC13 CHEMICAL CLASS :CHLORINATED HC INCOMPATIBILITIES .•STRONG CAUSTICS; WHEN ACIDIC REACTS WITH ALUMINUM; CHEMICALLY ACTIVE METALS; BARIUM, LITHIUM, SODIUM, MAGNESIUM, TITANIUM REACTIVITY TO WATER :Not reactive, or unknown. REACTIVITY WITH COMMON MATERIALS :No reactions of a hazardous nat ure. NEUTRALIZATION :Not applicable. TOXIC FIRE GASES :None identified, except unturned vapors. Sources: CHRIS Manual and NIOSH/OSHA Guide a tr1 o o -J to I u> en 1 10 PERSONNEL PROTECTION SUMMARY *•*•****«-•******•*.••* lC! i9aS, 3£-, S7, OS, 19QS by Resource Consultants, Inc. " All nights reserved. CHEMTOX RECORD : 407 CAS NUMBER: 73-01-6 NAME TRICKLOROETHYLENE ' ** Wt.R.R APPROPRIATE EQUIPMENT TO PREVENT: Repeated or prolonged skin contact. WEAR EYE PROTECTION TO PREVENT: .•ifcasonabl e probability of' eye contact. **•' EXPOSED PERSONNEL SHOULD WASH: Promptly when skin becomes wet. **• REMOVE CLOTHING: Promptly remove non-impervious clothing that becomes wet. **• REFERENCE: NIOSH 'V G G O O vj K) CO O CO t * + CHEMTOX TOXICOLOGICAL DATA C'' 15S5' 36' 87' 3a' 1989 b>' Resource Consultants, Inc. All nights reserved. CHEMTOX RECORD :4.19 NAME :VINYL CHLORIDE COS NUMBER :75-01-•4 IDLH :Not ava i1able OS-IA DATA :Final Rule Limits: TWA = 1 ppm (See £9 CFR 1910. 1017 mg/M3> STEL = 5 ppm ACGIH TLV :5 ppm ppm HUMAN CARCINOGEN STEL : Not specified TARGET ORGANS :SKIN, EYES, MUCOUS MEMBRANES, NERVOUS SYSTEM, LIVER, KIDNEYS. Source: NIOSH REPRODUCTIVE TOX :This chemical is a reproductive toxin to rnarnrnals. SHORT TERM TOX :CENTRAL NERVOUS SYSTEM DEPRESSION AND NARCOSIS. *•* Source: LONG TERM TOX :LIVER DAMAGE, SCLERODERMA AND RAYNAUD'S SYNDROME. RARE LIVER CANCER AFTER £0 YEARS EXPOSURE. LOSS OF FEELING IN HANDS AND FEET. Source: f'SAXr,HCL3 MEDICAL CON1DTION AGGRAVATED :MODERATE IRRITATION, LIVER DAMAGE. ** Source: HCDB LIENS/SYMPTOMS :IRRITATION OF EYES, NOSE; HEADACHE; NARCOSIS; NAUSEA; VOMITING; DIARRHEA; DRY SKIN; FREEZING; INFLAMMATION; VOMITING; DIARRHEA; DRY SKIN; FREEZING; INFLAMMATION; LIQUID CAUSES FROSTBITE; SHOCK, COMA, DEATH AS RESULT OF CARDIAC OR RESPIRATORY FAILURE. "VINYL CHLORIDE DISEASE." A HMN BRAIN CARC AND AN EXPER BR Source: SAX, FAM, MI .DEO (rng/Kg) :orl—rat LD50:S0C> mg/kg 0•HER iOX ICITY DATA:or1-rat LD50:500 mg/kg DOWCC THIS CHEMICAL IS A KNOWN OR SUSPECTED CARCINOGEN LISTED BY NPT, IARC OR OSHA r~ a o Q ro oo o> CHEMTOX REACTIVITY DATA »***»»*«»**»#»«»*»*«»»«.»« 13Qj, 8£, 87, 86, 1389 by Resource Consul t ant s, Inc. All rights reserved. CHEMTOX RECORD :419 NAME :VINYL CHLORIDE CAS NUMBER :75-01-4 FORMULA :C2H3C1 CHEMICAL CLASS INCOMPATIBILITIES REACTIVITY TO WATER sNot reactive, or unknown. REACTIVITY WITH COMMON MATERIALS :No react ions of a hazardous nature. NEUTRALIZATION :Not applicable. TOXIC FIRE GASES :None identified, except unburnned vapors. Sources: CHRIS Manual and NIOSH/OSHA Guide a o o •W KJ CO CHEMTOX RECORD : 419 CAS NUMBER: 75-01-4 NHME : VINYL CHLORIDE NIOSH RESPIRATION PROTECTION RECOMMENDATIONS NIOSH (VINYL CHLORIDE) breater at any detectable concent ration. : Any self-contained breathing apparatus with full facepiece and operated in a pressure-demand or other positive pressure mode. / Any supplied-air respirator with a full facepiece «nd operated in pressure-demand or other positive pressure mode in combination with an auxiliary self-contained breathing apparatus operated ir» pressure-demand or other positive pressure mode. ESCAPE: Any air-purifying full facepiece respirator (gas mask) with a chin-style or front- or back-mounted canister providing protection against the compound of concern. / Any appropriate escape-type self-contained breath i ng apparat us. APPENDIX 3 SUPPORTING CALCULATIONS ATTACHMENT A DIFFUSION COEFFICIENTS (DL) The diffusion coefficients of organic indicator gases in air were calculated using the Fuller, Schettler, and Giddings method (Lyman, et al., 1982, p. 17-12): 10"3 T1'75 JiT pK1/3 + V73)2 Di « diffusion coefficient of organic gas (B) in air (A), (cm2/sec) T = temperature, (°K) Mr = molecular weight ratio of air (A) and gas (B), (unitless) P «= pressure, (atm) 3 VA = molar volume of air = 20.1 cm /mol (Lyman, et al., 1982, Table 17-3, p. 17-11) Vg = molar volume of gas in question, (cm /mol) The temperature (T) was computed as the average between the mean daily maximum temperature (55°F) and the mean daily minimum temperature (40°F) for Oswego, New York (USDA, 1985). T(°F) = (55 + 40)/2 - 47.5°F T(°C) = 5/9[T(°F)-32] - 5/9[47.5 - 32] - 8.68°C T(°K) = T(°C) + 273 - 8.6 + 273 - 281.6 BK 2498Y The molecular weight ratio (M ) is defined as follows (Lyman, et al., 1982, p. 17-6). (ma + hB) VH Where MA - molecular weight of air - 28.97 g/mol (Lyman, et al., 1982, Table 17-3, p. 17-11) = molecular weight of gas in question, (g/mol) The molecular weights (M^) of each gas in question are as follows (Verschueren, 1983). MB Gas (g/mol) Benzene 78.11 Chlorobenzene 112.56 Dichloroethene 96.95 Trichloroethene 131.50 Vinyl Chloride 62.50 The molecular weight ratio (Mr) for each gas is presented below. Benzene (28.97 + 78.11)/(28.97)(78.11) - 4.73 X 10"2 Chlorobenzene (28.97 + 112.56)/(28.97)(112.56) - 4.34 X 10"2 Dichloroethene (28.97 + 96.95)/(28.97)(96.95) - 4.48 X 10"2 Trichloroethene (28.97 + 131.50)/(28.97)(131.50) - 4.21 X 10"2 Vinyl Chloride (28.97 + 62.50)/(28.97)(62.50) - 5.05 x 10I-2 2498Y The pressure (P) is calculated based on a 2.5 mmHg drop in barometric reading trom absolute pressure (760 mmHg) for every 100-foot rise in elevation (Dean, 1985) and an elevation of = 320 feet mean sea level (msl) (UR5, 1987). Pressure drop = (2.5 mm Hg/100 foot) 320 feet = 8.0 mm Hg Pressure = 760 mm Hg - 8 mm Hg •= 752 mm Hg = 752 mm Hg (latm/760 mm Hg) - 0.99 atm The molar volume (Vg) of each gas was estimated from the chemical structure of the mo..ecule and the diffusion volume increments (AVg) (Lyman, et al., 198.!, Table 17-4, p. 17-11). The diffusion volume increments of interest are as follows. Atom/Structure AVg C 16.5 H 1.98 CI .19.5 aromatic ring -20.2 The molar volume (Vg) for each gas is presented below. Benzene C,H, D O 6(16.5) + 6(1.98) -.20.2 - 90.68 Chlorobenzene C,HcCl 0 3 6(16.5) + 5(1.98) - 20.2 + 19.5 - 108.20 Dichloroethene C2H2C12 2(16.5) + 2(1.98) + 2(19.5) - 75.96 Trichloroethene C2HC12 2(16.5) + 1.98 + 3(19.5) - 93.48 Vinyl Chloride C2H3C1 2(16.5) + 3(1.98) - (19.5) - 58.44 The diffusion coefficient (D^) for each chemical indicator in air is thus: (cnr/sec) Indicator Chemical Computed Di Benzene 8.18E-02 Chlorobenzene 7.27E-02 Dichloroethene 8.58E-02 ' Trichloroethene 7.64E-02 ! Vinyl Chloride 1.03E-01 ! 2498Y The diffusion coefficient for organic indicator chemicals from soil solution phase to soil gas, and then from soil gas phase to air, was computed from (Versar, 1988): n = n p 1.33 u 1 BA ui *t Hi Where = total soil porosity, 0.48 (sandy loam; Hausenbuiller, 1978) = dimensionless Henry's Law Constant Where H^" = RT With R = gas constant, (8.2E-05 atm-m3/mol-°K) T = absolute temperature, (281.6°K) = Henry's Law Constant for contaminant i, (atm-m /mol) (U.S. EPA, 1986) H. H. Contaminant l RT l Benzene 5.59E-03 2.31E-02 2.42E-01 Chlorobenzene 3.72E-03 2.31E-02 1.61E-01 Trans-1,2-dichloroethene 6.56E-03 2.31E-02 2.84E-01 Trichloroethene 9.10E-03 2.31E-02 3.94E-01 Vinyl Chloride 8.19E-02 2.31E-02 3.55 Therefore, the diffusion coefficient, D_ of contaminant i fin in soil is: 1.33 1 D D P H 2 BA Contaminant i t i (cm /sec) Benzene 8.18E-02 0.376 2.42E-01 7.44E-03 Chlorobenzene 7.27E-02 0.376 1.61E-01 4.40E-03 Trans -1,2-dichloroethene 8.58E-02 .0.376 2.84E-01 9.16E-03 Trichloroethene 7.64E-02 0.376 3.94E-01 1.13E-02 Vinyl Chloride 1.03E-01 0.376 3.55 5.15E-02 2498Y ATTACHMENT B EMISSION RATES OF ORGANICS FROM SURFACE SOIL The emission rate of organics from surface soil was calculated using the following equation (Versar, 1988, p 3-29). 2Dra C A BA o EB d + d 2 + 2DBftC„t CB Where Eg = emission rate of compound B, (g/sec) DBA = diffusion coefficient of organic (B) from liquid phase to gas phase, and then from gas phase to diffusion in air, (cm2/s) CQ = liquid phase concentration of compound B in the soil, (g/cm2) A = contaminated surface area, (cm2) d = depth of dry zone at time of sampling, (cm) t = time measured from sampling time, (sec) Cg = bulk soil concentration of compound B, (g/cm^) Pt = total soil porosity, (dimensionless) The liquid phase concentration (C ) of each indicator chemical in soil was o assumed to be equivalent to the ground-water concentrations of selected onsite monitoring wells. The contaminated surface area (A) for each indication chemical was estimated with Surfer, a contour generating computer program (Golden Software, 1987). The sampling stations were located on a grid pattern using X, Y coordinates. The sampling station coordinates and the indicator chemical concentrations were inputed to Surfer to generate concentration contours for each indicator chemical. The area of contamination was chosen as the area of concentration greater than .8 ppm. Average concentration was calculated using a weighted average for each contour interval. The depth of the dry zone at sampling time (d) was assumed to be 1 foot (30.48 cm) The times (t) measured from sampling were assumed to be 10 days (8.64E+05 s ^ 90 days (7.776E+06 sec), 120 days (1.0368E+07 sec), 365 days (3.1536E+07 sec), i £3 years (2.20752E+09 sec). i o o The bulk soil concentration (CD) of each indicator chemical is the ! ^ concentration of the contaminant in soil (pg/kg) assuming a soil bulk density i fo 3 I to of 1.40 g/cm . I vi NJ 2498Y ATTACHMENT C SURFACE RUNOFF AND GROUND WATER CONTAMINATION ANALYSIS Releases by overland flow of contaminants from source areas at Fulton Terminals is estimated using the Modified Universal Soil Loss Equation (MUSLE) and sorption partition coefficients derived from each compound's octanol-water partition coefficient KQW (Haith, 1980; Mills, • i 1982). The MUSLE allows estimation of the amount of surface soil eroded in a storm event of given intensity, while sorption coefficients allow the projection of the amounts of contaminant carried along with the soil and the amount carried in dissolved form. Soil loss calculation: The modified universal soil loss equation is (Mills et al., 1982): Y(S)E - a (Vrqp)0-56 KLSCP Where: Y(S)r E = sediment yield (metric tons) a = conversion constant (11.8 metric) V 3 r = volume of runoff (m ) 3 qP = peak flow rate (m /sec) K - soil erodibility factor (tons/acre/runoff) L - slope-length factor (dimensionless) ' S - slope-steepness factor (dimensionless) C - cover factor (dimensionless, 0.013 for 80 percent cover, no appreciable canopy) P - erosion control practice factor (dimensionless, 1.0 for bare soil). G G o o -J to j CO 2498Y ! "J ; co Volume of runoff (V ) V~r aAQ Where a = conversion constant (100 metric) A = contaminated area, (ha) = (4.2 x 103 cm2)2 + 1.8 x 107 cm2 - 1.88 x 107 cm2 = 1.88 x 107 cm2 (1.076 x 10"3 ft2/cm2)(2.296 x 10"5 acres/ft2) - 0.465 = 0.465 acres (0.4047 ha/acres) - 0.19 ha Qr = depth of runoff, (cm) - (Rt - 0.2Sw)2/(Rt + 0.8SW) Rt = total storm rainfall, (cm) = 2 54 cm (1-inch storm) = water retention factor (cm) flOOO t CN 10') CN = curve number (dimensionless) - 82 (Versar, 1988, Table 3-4) a = conversion constant (2.54 metric) L000 loj 2.54 I CN 5 5756 cm Qr = [2.54cn - 0.2(5.5756cm)]2/[2.54 cm + 0.8(5.5756cm) *» 0.29 cm 100 (0.19 ha)(0.29 cm) 5.51 m3 "3 a f O O -J (O 00 2498Y •vj Peak flow rate Q _ aARtQr P Tr(Rc - 0.2SW;.: Where = peak storm duration (hours), assume 1 hour (a 1-inch storm over a total storm duration of 4 hours is greater than the 24-hour maximum 4.27 inches of rain recorded for Syracuse, New York, in August 1954 [URS, 1987]). a = conversion factor, 0.028 metric qp = (0.028H0.19haU2.54cmH0.29cm^ (lhr)[(2.54cm - 0.2(5.5756cm)] = 0.0027 m3/sec Soil erodibilitv factor K =0.64 Based on soil survey of Oswego County (USDA, 1985) and an artificial fill that is characterized by clayey silt with trace sand and fine gravel. Low permeability on the order of 0.06-0.2 inches/hour. K values lower than 0.64 generally typify coarser soils common throughout the county. See Table 11 and 12. Slope length and slope steepness factors LS = 1-foot elevation difference over 300-foot slope length (URS, 1986, Figure 5-3) . - <0.1 (Versar 1988, Table 3-5) Cover factor C - 0.013 (Versar, 1988, Table 3-5) Erosion control practice factor P - 1.0 (Versar, 1988) Soil loss calculation Y(S)E - (11.8 [(5.51m3)(0.0027m3/sec)]0-56 (0.64)(0.1)(0.013)(1) = 0.00093 metric tons/event 2498Y The following equations were used to predict the degree of soil/water partitioning for given compounds once storm event soil loss has been calculated. Dissolved/sorbed contaminant loading calculation: (Versar, 1988, p. 3-37) ss = [l/d + ec/Kd/?; ] csoil A Ds = [1/(1 + Kd^ec) csoil A Where S£ = sorbed substance quantity, (kg) Ds = dissolved substance quantity, (kg) 6C - available water capacity of the top cm of soil, (dimensionless) Kd - sorption partition coefficient, (cm3/g) - soil bulk density, (g/cm3) Csoil = soil substance concentration, (kg/ha) A = contaminated area (ha) Available water capacity 6c = wfc - Wwp Where Wfc - Water content at field capacity, measured at 0.3 bar tension Wwp = Water content at wilting point, measured at 15 bar tension Using the geometric mean of a data set of 24 observations, the average available water capacity, ©c, for sandy loams is 6C - e*1-53 - e-2-56 6C - 0.139 Reference: (Baes, et al., 1983): Baes, C. F., III, and Sharp, R. D., "Proposal for Estimation of Soil Leaching and Leaching Constants for Use in Assessment Models," Journal of Environmental Quality, Vol. 12, No 1 1983 '2 pp. 17-28. ' ' ; £ I O I o i v! CO 2498Y U> Arsenic 4.71 Barium 33.7 (Dragun, 1987)* Benzene 0.83 Chlorobenzene 3.3 1,2-Dichloroethene (total) 0.54 4 -me thy1- 2 -pentanone 0.19 Nickel 54.6** Pyrene 380 Trichloroethene 1.26 Vinyl Chloride 0.57 Soil bulk density Sandy loam is assumed to approximate the coarse textured surface soil at the site; therefore, bulk density is assigned a value of 1.49 g/cc (Baes et at., 1985) *The Kd value for barium was computed using the solubility, S, of BaSCL to estimate a KoC: Koc " 3.64 - 0.55 log S (Dragun, 1-987) S for BaSO^ -1.6 mg/1 in water (Clement Associates, 1985) Then, using KQC - Kd/organic carbon content of soil; Kd - 10^3-64 - 0.55 log 1.6) *Q.01 - 33.7 **Kd for nickel was estimated by comparison to Kds of other metals and by considering factors which control Kd such as atomic radius and valence number (Lyman et al., 1982). - TJ~ 1 • F o o I 3 2498Y " ! I Soil Substance Concentration For a soil with a bulk density of 1.49 g/cc, a 1-hectare by 1-centimeter volume (ha-cm) weighs: 8 2 ^ 1.49 g/cc + 1 ha-cm x 10 cm x 1 kg/lOOOg - 1.49 x 10 kg ha ha•cm Soil contaminant concentrations are calculated as: fig contam. x 1.49 x 105 kg soil x 1 kg kg soil ha-cm 1 x 10l 4g For each indicator chemical: conc. (jig/kg) :: 1.49 x 105 kg x 1 kg cone. kg ha-cm 1 x 109 Mg ha - cm Chemical conc. (Mg/kg) conc. (kg/ha-cm) Arsenic 5.23 3.06E-03 Barium 100.8 1.34E-02 Benzene 9.10 1.65E-03 Chlorobenzene 9.44 1.65E-03 1,2-Dichloroethene 6.44 1.17E-03 4-methyl-2-pentanone 15.0 2.64E-03 Nickel 12.5 7.59E-03 Pyrene 194 3.29E-02 Trichloroethene 9.67 1.69E-03 Vinyl Chloride 12.19 2.32E-03 c: I t-* ° I o I vl I fo (A) v| 00 2498* I Contaminated Area 7 2 Surface Area " 1.9 x 10 cm (site map) 7 2 2 1.9 x 10 cm x 1 m x 1 ha = .19 ha 100 cm 10,000 m2 Calculation of Sorbed/Dissolved Substance Quantity Ss = [1/(1 + 0.139/Kd (1.49))] CSQil A Ds = [1/(1 + Kd(1.49))/(6.75)] Csoil A Kd (cm3/g) Csoil (Kg/ha-cm) A (ha) Arsenic 4.71 7.79E-04 0.19 Barium 33.7 1.50E-02 0.19 Benzene 0.83 1.36E-03 0.19 Chlorobenzene 3.30 1.41E-03 0.19 1,2-Dichloroethene 0.54 9.60E-04 0.19 4-methyl-2-pentanone 0.19 2.24E-03 0.19 Nickel 54.6 1.87E-03 0.19 Pyrene 380 2.89E-02 0.19 Trichloroethene 1.26 1.44E-03 0.19 Vinyl Chloride 0.57 1.82E-03 0.19 C ^ i £ o o -j M U> 2A98Y Dissolved/Sorbed Contaminant T.oading Results Compound S^(Kg) D.(Kg) Arsenic 1.45E-04 2.87E-06 Barium 2.85E-03 7.88E-06 Benzene 2.32E-04 2.60E-05 Chlorobenzene 2.60E-04 7.34E-06 1-2"DCE 1.56E-04 2.69E-05 MIBK 2.87E-04 1.38E-04 Nickel 3.54E-04 6.04E-07 pyrene 5.50E-03 1.35E-06 TCE 2.55E-04 1.89E-05 Vinyl Chloride 2.96E-04 4.85E-05 **3 a c O o -J I to u> 2498Y 00 o Load to Oswego River: After calculating the amount of sorbed and dissolved contaminant, the loading to the receiving water body is calculated as follows (Versar, 1988, p. 3-43, adapted from Haith, 1980): PX. = [Y(S)e/100 0]i!g PQi = [Qr/Rt]Ds PX^ = sorbed substance loss per event, (kg) PQ^ = dissolved substance loss per event, (kg) MS)E = sediment yield (metric tons) •= 9.3E-04 tons/event (see soil loss calculation." /3 = bulk density, 1.49 g/cm^ Sg = sorbed substance quantity, (kg) (see contaminant loading calculation) Qr = storm runoff depth, (cm) - 0.29 cm (see soil loss calculation) Rt = storm rainfall, (cm) - 2.54 cm (see soil loss calculation) Ds = diss°Pved substance quantity, (kg) (see contaminant loading calculation) Calculation of Loading to the Receiving Stream PX. •= [0.00093/100(1.49)]St PQj -= [0.29/2. 54]Dg s PX. D s l s pQi (ke} (ke'> Ckel Cke") Arsenic 1.45E-04 4.83E-09 2.87E-06 3.28E-07 Barium 2.85E-03 9.44E-08 7.88E-06 9.00E-07 Benzene 2.32E-04 7.68E-09 2.60E-05 2.97E-06 Chlorobenzene 2.60E-04 8.62E-09 7.32E-06 8.39E-07 1,2"DCE 1.56E-04 5.16E-09 2.69E-05 3.07E-06 {• 3 MIBK 2.87F'.-CtL Q Sic-no i i cor- I t"1 2.87E-04 9.51E-09 1.38E-04 1.58E-05 Nickel 3.54E-04 1.17E-08 6.04E-07 6.90E-08 I ° Pyrene 5.50E-03 1.82E-07 1.35E-06_ 1.54E-07 o TCE TCE 2.55E-04 8.46E-09R AAF-flQ 1.89E-05i nor nc i2.16E-06 i i\r Vinyl Chloride 2.96E-04 9.83E-09 4.85E-05 5.54E-06 to OJ 00 M 2498Y I ATTACHMENT D CALCULATION OF CONTAMINANT CONCENTRATIONS IN OSWEGO RIVER The concentrations of contaminants in the Oswego River are the result of contributions of suspended and dissolved contaminants from surface runoff and contributions of contaminants from ground-water interception. The following equation provides a rough estimate of the concentration of a substance downstrean from a point source release into a flowing water body, after dilution by the receiving water body (Versar, 1988, p 3-31). rCr = Ce Q^e Qt Where Cr = concentration of substance in stream, (/ig/1) Ce = concentration of substance in effluent, (/xg/1) Qe = effluent flow rate, (l^sec) Qt = combined effluent and stream flow rate, (1/sec) The three contaminant contributions include (1) surface runoff, suspended contaminants (srs), (2) surface runoff, dissolved contaminants (srd), and (3) ground-water interception (gw). Therefore, the contaminant concentration in the stream is as follows: (C • Q ) + (C .• Q ) + (C • Q ) srs sr srd xsr gw gw Cr ^r Short term Qr computed as mean flow in Oswego River at Lock 7 during August (month of lowest flow) for the water year 1985, 26,100 liters/sec. Long term Qr was the average discharge for Oswego River at Lock 7, computed from a 52-year record, 189,000 liters/sec. Contaminant Concentration in Surface Runoff, C ~ sorbed substance loss per event srs runoff depth x area PX. i_ QrA Where A - 0.19 ha x (1 x 106 dm2/ha) - 1.9 x 105 dm2 3 r PX. I t* usrs ~ L-i I (0.29cm)(0 1 dm/cm)(1.9 x 105 dm2)(l l/dm3) i o o (109^,/kg) -J I 5,510 1 * to 2498Y 00 00 to ComP°und PX. (Kg) Csrs (Mg/1) Arsenic 4.82E-09 8.74E-04~ Barium 9.44E-08 1.71E-02 Ben2ene 7.68E-09 1.39E-03 Chlorobenzene 8.62E-09 1.56E-03 1,2-Dichloroethene 5.16E-09 9.36E-04 4-Methyl-2-pentanono 9.51E-09 1.73E-03 Nic^el 1.17E-08 2.13E-03 Pyrene 1.82E-07 3.31E-02 Trichloroethene 8.46E-09 1.53E-03 Vinyl Chloride 9.83E-09 1.78E-03 Contaminant Concentration in Surface Runoff Dissolved £ _ dissolved substance loss per event sr PQ. (109Mg/kg) 5,510 1 Compound PQi (Kg) Cgrd (/ig/1) Arsenic 3.28E-07 5.96E-03 Barium 9.00E-07 1.63E-02 Benzene 2.97E-06 5.39E-02 Chlorobenzene 8.39E-07 1.52E-02 1,2-Dichloroethene 3.07E-06 5.57E-02 4-Me thy1- 2 -pentanono 1.58E-05 2.86E-01 Nickel 6.90E-08 1.25E-03 Pyrene 1.54E-07 2.80E-03 Trichloroethene 2.16E-06 3.91E-02 Vinyl Chloride 5.54E-06 1.01E-01 Surface Runoff Flow Rate Q - ^rRtA sr At Where At « total storm duration, assume 4 hours Qsr » 0.29cmr0. lOdm/cmHl.9xl05dm21 m /dm31 4hr (60 min/hr)(60 sec/min) " 0.3831/sec 2A98Y Contaminant Concentration in Ground Water For each indicator chemical, the concentrations from each well were added to determine Cgw because the VHS model assumes each well location as a point source. The following table gives information used in the VHS model and the resulting concentrations in Oswego River. C o o •«J to CO oo 2 Arsenic FBW-1S 19.5 560 36 15 12.0 0.159 FBH-1D 18.9 550 36 15 46.5 0.595 FBH-2S 15.5 230 36 15 9.0 0.229 FBW-2D 38.5 240 36 15 49.0 2.822 FBW-3 29.9 55 36 15 14.0 2.760 FBW-4S 23.3 60 36 15 13.5 1.912 FBW-4D 10.4 60 36 15 57.3 2.826 FBW-5S 5.9 50 36 15 11.0 0.472 FBH-5D 7.1 55 36 15 14.4 0.673 FBH-6 48.1 180 36 15 10.0 1.007 TOTAL • 13.457 Barium FBH-1S 1790.0 560 36 15 12.0 14.584 FBH-1D 11200.0 550 36 15 46.5 352.791 FBW-2S 448.0 230 36 15 9.0 6.631 FBW-2D 1440.0 240 36 15 49.0 105.566 FBH-3 1390.0 55 36 15 14.0 128.308 FBW-4S 2120.0 60 36 15 13.5 173.939 FBH-4D 21100.0 60 36 15 57.8 5733.850 FBH-5S 501.0 50 36 15 11.0 40.093 FBH-5D 1170.0 55 36 15 14.4 110.960 FBH-6 2700.0 180 36 15 10.0 56.553 TOTAL - 6723.275 Benzene FBH-1S 51.2 560 36 15 12.0 0.417 FBH-1D 0.5 550 36 15 46.5 0.016 FBH-2S 0.5 230 36 15 9.0 0.007 FBH-2D 0.5 240 36 15 49.0 0.037 FBW-3 0.5 55 36 15 14.0 0.046 FBH-4S 0.5 60 36 15 13.5 0.041 FBH-4D 0.5 60 36 15 57.8 0.136 FBH-5S 0.5 50 36 15 11.0 0.040 FBH-5D 0.5 55 36 15 14.4 0.047 FBH-6 422.7 180 36 15 10.0 8.854 BMW-IS 0.5 30 36 15 1.0 0.006 BMW-ID 0.5 30 36 15 8.0 0.047 BMW-2 0.5 50 36 15 56.0 0.152 BMW-3S 0.5 120 36 15 21.0 0.032 BMW-3D 20.8 120 36 15 14.0 0.905 BMW -4 0.5 185 36 15 17.0 0.017 BMW-5 0.5 210 36 15 34.5 0.030 BMW-6S 10.0 465 36 15 . 7.0 0.057 BMH-6D 88.2 460 36 15 17.0 1.236 BMH-7 0.5 30 36 15 33.0 0.164 TOTAL • 12.289 Chlorobenzene FBH-1S 0.5 560 36 15 12.0 0.004 FBW-1D 0.5 550 36 15 46.5 0.016 FBH-2S 0.5 230 36 15 9.0 0.007 FBH-2D 0.5 240 36 15 49.0 0.037 FBH-3 1.3 55 36 15 14.0 0.120 FBW-4S 0.5 60 36 15 13.5 0.041 FBH-4D 0.5 60 36 15 57.8 0.136 FBH-5S 0.5 50 36 15 11.0 0.040 FBH-5D 0.5 55 36 15 14.4 0.047 FBH-6 162.0 180 36 15 10.0 3.393 BMW-IS 0.5 30 36 15 1.0 0.006 "3 BMW-ID 0.5 30 36 15 8.0 0.047 G BMW-2 0.5 50 36 15 56.0 0.152 G BMW-3S 0.5 120 36 15 21,0 0.032 BMW-3D 0.5 120 36 15 14.0 0.022 O BMW-4 0.5 185 36 15 17.0 0.017 o BMW-5 0.5 210 36 15 34.5 0.030 BMW-6S 0.5 465 36 15 7.0 0.003 BMW-6D 0.5 460 36 15 17.0 0.007 to BMW-7 0.5 30 36 15 33.0 0.164 CO 00 Cn TOTAL • 4.323 Distance Width of Transverse Depth of Cgw to Cone, of from well Contaminated Dispersivtty Contamination Oswego Chemical to river (X) CHEMICAL Zone (Y) (D). (Z) River WELL (ug/L) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ug/L) 1.2-Dichloroethene FBW-1S 1.7 560 36 15 12.0 0.014 FBW-1D 1.6 550 36 15 46.5 0.050 FBW-2S 2.8 230 36 15 9.0 0.041 FBW-2D 0.5 240 36 15 49.0 0.037 FBW-3 827.2 55 36 15 14.0 76.357 FBW-4S 3.2 60 36 15 13.5 0.263 FBW-4D 0.5 60 36 15 57.8 0.136 FBW-5S 14.4 50 36 15 11.0 1.152 FBW-5D 0.5 55 36 15 14.4 0.047 FBW-6 192.0 180 36 15 10.0 4.022 BMW-IS 28.9 30 36 15 1.0 0.347 BMW-ID 0.5 30 36 15 8.0 0.047 BMW-2 5.8 50 36 15 56.0 1.768 BMW-3S 1.9 120 36 15 21.0 0.123 BMW-30 14387.0 120 36 15 14.0 625.959 BMW-4 0.5 185 36 15 17.0 0.017 BMW-5 0.5 210 36 15 34.5 0.030 BMW-6S 0.5 465 36 15 7.0 0.003 BMW-6D 0.5 460 36 15 17.0 0.007 BMW-7 0.5 30 36 15 33.0 0.164 TOTAL 710.585 4-Methyl-2-Pentanone FBW-1S 2.5 560 36 15 12.0 0.020 FBW-1D 2.5 550 36 15 46.5 0.079 FBW-2S 2.5 230 36 15 9.0 0.037 FBW-2D 2.5 240 36 15 49.0 0.183 FBW-3 2.5 55 36 15 14.0 0.231 FBW-4S 2.5 60 36 15 13.5 0.205 FBW-4D 2.5 60 36 15 57.8 0.679 FBW-5S 2.5 50 36 15 11.0 0.200 FBW-5D 2.5 55 36 15 14.4 0.237 FBW-6 2.5 180 36 15 10.0 0.052 BMW-IS 2.5 30 36 15 1.0 0.030 BMW-ID 2.5 30 36 15 8.0 0.237 BMW-2 2.5 50 36 15 56.0 0.762 BMW-3S 2.5 120 36 15 21.0 0.161 BMW-30 393.0 120 36 15 14.0 17.099 BMW-4 2.5 185 36 15 17.0 0.086 BMW-5 2.5 210 36 15 34.5 0.151 BMW-6S 2.5 465 36 15 7.0 0.014 BMW-6D 2.5 460 36 15 BMW-7 17.0 0.035 2.5 30 36 15 33.0 0.822 TOTAL 21.323 Nickel FBW-1S 1000.0 560 36 15 12.0 8.147 FBW-1D 2500.0 550 36 15 46.5 78.748 FBW-2S 270.0 230 36 15 9.0 3.996 FBW-2D 73.1 240 36 15 49.0 5.359 FBW-3 174.0 55 36 15 14.0 16.062 FBW-4S 3760.0 60 36 15 13.5 308.495 FBW-4D 1180.0 60 36 15 57.8 320.661 FBW-5S 53.6 50 36 15 11.0 4.289 FBW-50 25.6 55 36 15 14.4 2.428 FBW-6 67.1 180 36 15 10.0 1.405 TOTAL 749.591 'fl ea F o o to OJ 00 Trichloroethene FBW-1S 0.5 560 36 15 12.0 0.004 FBW-1D 0.5 550 36 15 46.5 0.016 FBW-2S 0.6 230 36 15 9.0 0.009 FBW-2D 0.5 240 36 15 49.0 0.037 FBW-3 3.5 55 36 15 14.0 0.323 FBW-4S 0.7 60 36 15 13.5 0.057 FBW-4D 0.5 60 36 15 57.8 0.136 FBW-5S 6.2 50 36 15 11.0 0.496 FBW-5D 0.5 55 36 15 14.4 0.047 FBW-6 0.5 180 36 15 10.0 0.010 BMW-IS 20.1 30 36 15 1.0 0.241 BMW-ID 0.5 30 36 15 8.0 0.047 BMW-2 1.2 50 36 15 56.0 0.366 BMW-3S 3.1 120 36 15 21.0 0.200 BMW-3D 2388.0 120 36 15 14.0 103.899 BMW-4 0.5 185 36 15 17.0 0.017 BMW-5 0.5 210 36 15 34.5 0.030 BMW-6S 0.5 465 36 15 7.0 0.003 BMW-6D 0.5 460 36 15 17.0 0.007 BMW-7 0.5 30 36 15 33.0 0.164 TOTAL - 106.111 Vinyl Chloride FBW-1S 0.25 560 36 15 12.00 0.00204 FBW-1D 0.25 550 36 15 46.50 0.00787 FBW-2S 0.25 230 36 15 9.00 0.00370 FBW-2D 0.25 240 36 15 49.00 0.01833 FBW-3 48.00 55 36 15 14.00 4.43077 FBW-4S 0.25 60 36 15 13.50 0.02051 FBW-4D 0.25 60 36 15 57.80 0.06794 FBW-5S 1.80 50 36 15 11.00 0.14405 FBW-5D 0.25 55 36 15 14.40 0.02371 FBW-6 0.25 180 36 15 10.00 0.00231 BMW-IS 0.25 30 36 15 1.00 0.00014 BMW-ID 0.25 30 36 15 8.00 0.00889 BMW-2 0.25 50 36 15 56.00 0.26133 BMW-3S 0.25 120 36 15 21.00 0.01531 BMW-3D 88.00 120 36 15 14.00 2.39556 BMW-4 0.25 185 36 15 17.00 0.00651 BMW-5 0.25 210 36 15 34.50 0.02362 BMW-6S 0.25 465 36 15 7.00 0.00044 BMW-6D 0.25 460 36 15 17.00 0.00262 BMW-7 0.25 30 36 15 33.00 0.15125 •rva f o o -J to 00 00 -J Ground-Water Flow Rate Qgw - q • A Where q = Ki K = Hydraulic conductivity = 32.0 ft/day = 9.75 m/day (assumed maximum value) i = Horizontal gradient - 0.005 (EBASCO, 1989) q = (9.75 m/day) (0.005) = 0.048 m/day Where A = area ground-water flows through into stream = 0.25 (2»rr)l r - depth of stream - 20 ft (0.3048 m/ft) - <>. 1 m 1 = j.ength of west side of property = 200 ft (0.3048 m/ft) - 60.96m A = 0.25(2JT(6.1))(60.96) =584 n2 2 3 1 day Qgw - 0.048 m/day (584 m )(1,000 1/m ) 8. 64 x 10 sec = 0.329 1/sec River Flow Rate Short Term Qr = 921 ft3/sec (28.32 1/ft3) = 2.61E+04 Qr = 6,680 ft3/sec <;28.32 1/ft3) o o 1.89E+05 1/sec to u> co oo 2498Y Short Term Contaminant Concentrations in Oswego River (c_r_ x 0.383) + (C x 0.383) + (C x 0.324) sis srd gw 2.61E+04 Contaminant Csrs csrd Cr(Mg/l) Arsenic 8.74E-04 5.96E-03 13.457 1.70E-04 Barium 1.71E-02 1.63E-02 6723 8.49E-02 Benzene 1.39E-03 5.39E-02 12.29 1.56E-04 Chlorobenzene 1.56E-03 1.52E-02 4.323 5.48E-05 1,2-Dichloroethene 9.36E-04 5.57E-02 710.6 8.97E-03 4-Methyl-2 -Pentanonn 1.73E-03 2.86E-01 21.32 2.73E-04 Nickel 2.13E-03 1.25E-03 749.6 9.47E-03 Pyrene 3.31E-02 2.80E-03 0 5.26E-07 Trichloroethene 1.53E-03 3.91E-02 106.1 1.34E-03 Vinyl Chloride 1.78E-03 1.01E-01 7.587 9.73E-05 Long Term Contaminant Concentration in Oswego River x 0.383) + (CRrri x 0.383) + (C Cr = ^'srs gw x 0.324) 1,,89'E + 05 Contaminant Csrs WU Csrd {^/l) (Mg/1) Cr(Mg/l) Arsenic 8.74E-04 5.96E-03 13.457 2.35E-05 Barium 1.71E-02 1.63E-02 6723 1.17E-02 Benzene 1.39E-03 5.39E-02 12.29 2.15E-05 Chlorobenzene 1.56E-03 1.52E-02 4.323 7.57E-06 1,2-Dichloroethene 9.36E-04 5.57E-02 710.6 1.24E-03 4-Methyl- 2 -Pentanone 1.73E-03 2.86E-01 21.32 3.78E-05 Nickel 2.13E-03 1.25E-03 749.6 1.31E-03 Pyrene 3.31E-02 2.80E-03 0 7.27E-08 Trichloroethene 1.42E-03 7.75E-02 106.1 1.85E-04 Vinyl Chloride 2.08E-03 1.17E-05 7.587 1.34E-05 I hj 1 G I F o o 2498Y I £ / 00 APPENDIX 4 NYS HEALTH ADVISORY r' G F o o ««j to 2498Y u> vo o NVS Department of Health HEALTH ADVISORIES: CHEMICALS IN SPORTFISH OR GAME SUMMARY t?konNfnWlI0rkvStfLDfP!rtment 0f Health (D0H) issues an advisory on eating sportfish and wildlife iJliSH ° r r? ! Uk6c?u.se some of these foods contain potentially harmful levels of chemical contaminants. The health advisory is divided into three sections: (1) general advice on sportflsh S.ltrn^, n ^ Y°;kS,a,e; water bodies; and (3) advice on wildlife. The advisory is developed and updated yearly and is directed to persons who may be likely to eat large quantities of sportflsh or wildlife which might be contaminated. BACKGROUND Fishing and hunting provide many benefits including food and recreation. Many people eniov cooking and eating their own catch. However, some fish and wildlife contain elevated levels of potentially harmful chemicals. These chemicals or contaminants enter the environment through Filfh amHanMn1? P?Si! ,"dustnal discharges, leaking landfills and the widespread use of pesticides Fish and wildlife take in contaminants directly from the environment and from the food they eat ' Some chemicals remain in them and then are ingested by people. DDT, PCBs. mirex chlordane and mercury have been found in some species of fish taken in New York State at levels that exceed hMtth Jffortc «'ni h Lon9"!er71|fxP°sure to high levels of these chemicals has been linked to health effects such as cancer (in laboratory animals) or nervous system disorders (in humans). The federal government establishes standards (tolerance levels or action levels) for chemical residues in or on raw agricultural products, including fish, in the United States. A tolerance level is the maximum amount of a residue expected when a pesticide is used according to the label directions, provided that the level is not an unacceptable health risk. The health risks are estimated assuming that people eat about one one-half pound fish meal each month. Action levels rlnt! » f hemicals that do not have approved agriculture uses but may unavoidably contaminate food due to their environmental persistence. Fish and wildlife cannot be legally sold if they contain a contaminant at a level greater than its tolerance or action level. In New York State, the Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) routinely monitors c°ntan?mant levels in fish and wildlife. The contaminant levels are measured in a skin-on fillet th has.not bee.n t.r'miT,®d: the federal government uses this sample in determining whether or not the fish exceeds the tolerance level. When fish from a specific water body are found to contain high contaminant levels, DOH issues a sportfish consumption advisory for that species offish. rnntamln^lS f,rcijmsta"c.es' the state prohibits the sale or offering for sale offish containing high contaminant levels. Advisories are also developed for contaminated wildlife. These actions are taken to minimize public exposure to contaminated food products. GENERAL ADVISORY The general health advisory for sportfish is that an individual eat no more than one meal (one-half h6r W /?K i J1 I 81316 8 freshwaters, the Hudson River estuary, or the New York City harbor area (the New York waters of the Hudson River to the Verrazano Narrows Bridge, the East River to the Throgs Neck Bridge, the Arthur Kill, Kill Van Kull, and Harlem River). This generr' contamTnlftoH^r6 a0amSt consumPtion of ,ar0e amounts of fish which may come fro ThP nTnofit W3/S thatfre 38 yet untested or which may contain unidentified contaminant: a The general advisory does not apply to fish taken from marine waters. Ocean fish, although less c eHS:eod;areif,ne:3,y contaminated than freshwater fish, and fish that live further out from o shore are likely to be even less contaminated than those that live or migrate close to the shore o to to to I SPECIFIC FRESHWATER ADVISORIES KdieTofwa?earrt n* recommendations tor specittc contaminant level that exceeds an action level or » tni water bodies that have fish with a recommendations are based on the ^ontammim ifii ." Ievel' DePartmenl Health eating a specific kind of fish from a particular body of wrter S|r?E!,lmit'n0 °r avoidin0 »s available to issue advisories based on the lennth «*•»?« J 5.?^ cases, enough information contaminated than younger (smaller) fish. of the fish. Older (larger) fish are often more e - - and specific water bodies listed in the advisory The tha*they not eat fish from the can have a potentially areater imoart on •on for !hls specific advice is that chemicals Waters which have specin^ you,n? ,?hlldra" in the fetes contaminant level, wh'ich meansTafa crntamiSn^sLr/js6m^rfeart'he^watr3'6'1 MARINE WATERS npp'yo striped Striped bass, bluefish, and eels have spelif* habm?rrtS,i,5 •?"»»"« ™™>«y in effect, likely to have contaminants than other marine species. actenst,cs which make them more PCB contamination. Although saltwater in Hudson River waterscanbeconla^ bass which sPend striped bass is divided into two ?? Standards- The advisory for New York Harbor and western Long Island waters the HealthDma? ?" fr°m the Hudson River- consumption. For bass taken from eastern LonniJianH I! • DePart™ent recommends against any one meal per month. Women E* advlsory ls ,0 aa« » than striped bass. cnnoDearmg age, infants and children under fifteen should not eat contFmefa^^wit^PC^6 ahhough ?o aTess^e^enMha'n vt'Sh T, Ame5ca" a'a bluefish and American eels caught in New York State's wat^p?? t Si 8 recommendat'°n for (one-half pound) per week with an ariditinnai r= waters is to eat no more than one meal Hudson. Harlem. rndras^RrrsaanddN:rY:rVecit;:a^nbtr,rai0 ^ AmerlCan eels "°m ,ha OTHER ADVISORIES and wartrfowfwhich have'lS^S'to bVSam'nated with TCBs" C^k*"6'' W",urtles- «sh Ke^ ^CrTk. A"y°b^ly <*— organs) should be discarded. condition of the fish skin, meat or internal ^ a, o o -J to to to to SHELLFISH been linked to gastrointestinal Illness and hepatitis A, caused by bacteria or viruses. SHOULD I BE CONCERNED ABOUT MEDICAL-TYPE WASTE AND GARBAGE AFFECTING FISH? or transmit the AIDS virus. Consumers need not limit consumption should^.' 1,1° sanitary practices should be followed when preparing fish from a^waters F^h should be kept iced or refrigerated until cleaned and filleted and then refrigerateduntilVOOLH Hands, utensils, and work surfaces should be washed before and after hanHii.fi fL cooked, including fish. Seafood should be cooked to an internal temperature of 140° F * *** °° ' WHAT CAN I DO TO REDUCE MY EXPOSURE TO CHEMICAL CONTAMINANTS FROM FISH? Fish is an important source of protein and is low in saturated fat. Naturallv occurrinn flesh niic hauo been reported to lower plasma cholesterol and triglycerides, thereby decreasina the risk of SntrlfiF I!?® B86" lnCreasin0 fish consumption is useful in reducing dietary fat and ten" -H I9 weight- eating a diet which includes food from a variety of protein sources an individual is more likely to have a diet which is adequate in all nutrients sources. an fLSh^h3S S°m® health benefits-fish with high contaminant levels should be avoided beSs IJSXZHSSStSi disease'. ^ 1 C°nCem When Mm»ared «° «» ' "tah "d 'heir contaminant intake by 1. Department's^dTisory^ SWCleS b0d'eS WhiCh are n0'lis,ed in ,he H«lth 2. These rilfSir which, reduce ,he skin' ,at,f and dark meat, available from the SEC contaminants. A pamphlet on this method is 3. Choose smaller fish, consistent with DEC regulations, within a soecies sinrp thou M av!ls' 0ld?r 'lar9er) fish within a species m^Te more contaminated because they have had more time to accumulate contaminants in their bodies. 4. Srtfn^/tei!LnUCh,aS CtrabTLa,nd l0bster' d0 not eat the soft Q^een substance found in the body \ rhomi^ii F y- l,vfKThis part of the shellfish has been found to contain high levels of a chemical contaminants, including PCBs and heavy metals. 9 j & o which ^iowcontamlnantsfro'm't'he'f^y^^fonsonisMo'to Pan frying o -J since t^es^ilquld^may^etaln contaminants '"Sh wafers shouldba avoTdeS Nj U) VO U) ADDITIONAL INFORMATION NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH For more information on health effects from exposure to chemical contaminants, contact Environmental Health Information 1-800-458-1158 (toll-free number) Bureau of Toxic Substance Assessment 2 University Place Leave your name, number and brief Albany, NY 12203-3313 message. Your call will be (518) 458-6376 returned as soon as possible. NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION For more Information on fishing, contact: Regional Offices Region 1 Region 4 SUNY Campus, Bldg. 40 Region 7 2176 Guilderland Ave. 7481 Henry Clay Blvd. Stony Brook, NY 11794 Schenectady, NY 12306 (516) 751-7900 Liverpool, NY 13088 (518) 382-0680 (315) 428-4497 Region 2 47-40 21st St. Region 5 Region 8 Long Island City, NY 11101 Route 86 Routes 5 and 20 (718) 482-4900 Ray Brook, NY 12977 Avon, NY 14414 (518) 891-1370 (716) 226-2466 Region 3 21 South Putt Corners Rd. Region 6 Region 9 New Paltz, NY 12561 State Office Bldg. 600 Delaware Ave. (914) 255-54538 Watertown, NY 13601 Buffalo, NY 14202 (315) 785-2236 (716) 847-4600 For information on contaminant levels, contact Bureau of Environmental Protection 50 Wolf Road Albany, NY 12233 (518) 457-6178 Prepared by: New York State Department of Health Division of Environmental Health Assessment April 1989 1989-90 HEALTH ADVISORY "« ?" contMliunt th, »e. ,„tk ° f8t n? "ore than one seal (one half pound) per week af fi.h JSSi-y.Sa.'K,1- 21 ^isxss&r'ss.srissa-- Water Species Recommencefjftn Belmont Lake Carp (Suffolk Co.) Eat None. Buffalo River Carp and Harbor Eat none. (Erie Co.) Canadice Lake (Ontario Co.) oJ« ?{.br0Wn tr°ut Eat none- Canandaigua Lake Lake trout over 24" (Ontario-Yates Co.) Eat no more than one meal per month. Cayuga Creek All species (Niagara Co.) Eat none. East River (NYC) American eel Eat none. Fourth Lake Lake trout (Herkimer- Eat none. Hamilton Co.) Freeport Reservoir All species (Nassau Co.) Eat no more than one meal per month. Gill Creek All species (Niagara Co.; Eat none. mouth to Hyde Fark Lake Dam) (Nassau*?"?) Carp' Goldfish Eat none. (NYC) River American eel Eat none. Boosic River Brown and rainbow Eat no more than (Rensselaer Co.) trout one meal per month. Hudson River - Hudson Palls to All specie* Troy Daa No fishing. ~ Troy Dan south to American eel, White Eat none. and including the perch, Carp, Goldfish, Lower N.Y. Harbor Brown bullhead, Largemouth bass, Pumpkinseed, White catfish. Walleye, Striped bass Black crappie. Est no sore than Rainbow saelt, one seal per aonth. Atlantic needlefish, Bluefish, Tiger muskellunge, Northern pike Blue crab Eat no aore than 6 crabs per week. - hepatopancreas Eat none, (mustard, liver or tonalley) - cooking liquid Discard. Indian Lake All species (Lewis Co.) Eat no more than one meal per month. Irondequoit Bay Carp Eat none. Keuka Lake Lake trout over 25" (Yates-Steuben Co.) Eat no more than one meal per month. •Kinderhook Lake American eel (Columbia Co.) Eat no more than one meal per month. •Lake Champlain -whole lake Lake trout greater Eat no more than one than 25' meal per month. -Bay within American eel. Eat no more than one Cumberland Brown bullhead Head to meal per month. Valcour Island Lake Ontario, St. Eel, Channel catfish, Eat none. Lawrence and Niagara Lake trout, Chinook River below the falls salmon, Coho salmon over 21*, Rainbow trout over 25", Brown trout over 20". Carp, white perch, Eat no more than smaller Coho one meal per month. salmon, Rainbow and Brown trout. -3- Loft's Pond Carp, Goldfish (Nassau Co.) Bat no more than one meal per month. Long Pond (Lewis Co.) Splake over 12" Bat none. Reservoir"Nassau Co.) "hite perch Bat no more than one meal per month. *Mohawk River White perch (Below Lock 7) Bat none. Smallmouth bass Eat no more than one meal per month. Nassau Lake All species (Rensselaer Co.) Eat none. Niagara River (entire) Carp Eat no more than one meal per month. Niagara River Smallmouth bass (below the falls; Bat no more than also see Lake Ontario) one meal per month. Onondaga Lake All species (Onondaga Co.) Eat none. Oswego River (Oswego Co.; Channel catfish power dam Eat no more than one in »eal per month. Oswego to upper dam at Fulton) St. James Pond All species (Suffolk Co.) Eat no more than one meal per month. St. Lawrence River (see Lake Ontario) cannon River Smallmouth bass (Oswego Co.; mouth Eat none. to Salmon Reservoir; also see Lake Ontario) Saw Mill River American eel (Westchester Co.) Eat no more than one meal per month. r Schroon Lake I ' ^3 Lake trout c: (Warren Co.) Eat no more than > tr< one meal per month. Sheldrake River o American eel o (Westchester Co.) Eat none. Smith Pond fo All species CO Rockvilie Center Eat no more than lo (Nassau Co.) •vl one meal per month. Smith Pond Carp, Goldfish Roosevelt Park Eat no more than (Nassau Co.) one meal per month. Spring Pond All species (Suffolk Co.) Eat none. Stillwater Reservoir Splake (Herkimer Co.) Bat no more than one meal per month. Valatie Kill All species - between Co. Rt. 18 Eat none. and Nassau Lake Add i" T ftrlT \ rr (except mercury) can he £ otner contaminants of concern portions alo^the JaS, SdH aS the, sKin and trout, lake trout, coho salmon •••ll«>uth bass, brown technique does not reduce mercury 8 £lu#'A«h. (Tfclg method can be obtained from any DEC Iffice* A 9Ulde to this «">"test's/Hi'."? rvhi°«••»' p» species taken from marile waterT T ® ^ not to other E„t „ivers and iorrSIrbJJ "o^.M.T' fro°the •"'»« »««• Of a line between Wading River and thf *Jat.P°rti°n of the Island west Mastic Beach. Eat no 2ri Sin Sne S-i M J?U* °* *>«• «« near striped bass taken from Eastern Lono inland Pound) per month of childbearing age, infants and rhifd? lsla"d marine waters. Women of bass taken hm LoiS'Silnd^afiJ"^;?*',?5 8bou" »«* I?r£ed marine striped bass is 36".) waters. (Legal minimum length of becuse thi. or9.„ h«. HijPioSfMlJSt ^flppinQ turtles • SnAppino turtles retsin .--t . liver, eggs and to a lease? Ixltnlinttt .f2n?a"ln!Stl in thelr consume snapping turtles, carefully trimf ?f you ch008« to discarding the fat. liver and trimming away all fat and preparing soup or other dishes wi?i fid°r t0 coolc*n9 the meat or childbearing age, and childrll InJi/^UC® e*P°8«®. Women of ingesting snapping turtles or anD *9? 15 8hould avoid turtle meat. 9 or any soup or stew made with snapping SiS^.".i"c.utj5°s:,,af"" r ??'n<> •««•«•«. co.»o„ species. Other watelfowl IhluLd be IkinnLC°ni8mf?ated wat«*°wl cooking; stuffing should be discarded " sf11 fat r«»°v«d before two meals per month. Monitoring data indfea?®0!^"*7 liBlt ®ating to SaU£?a 9«ese are less contaminated than that wood ducks and dabbler ducks and then . ? than other waterfowl species with contaminant levels. ducks having increasingly higher CDM Federal Programs Corporation 13135 LEE JACKSON MEMORIAL HIGHWAY FAIRFAX, VIRGINIA 22033