ATSDR - PHA - FISHER CALO, KINGSBURY, LA PORTE COUNTY, INDIANA

Skip directly to: content | left navigation | search

ATSDR > Public Health Assessments & Consultations

PUBLIC HEALTH ASSESSMENT

FISHER CALO
KINGSBURY, LA PORTE COUNTY, INDIANA

Figure 1. Site Facilities Map

Figure 2. Site Area Map

Figure 3. Site Features Map
Study Area A

Figure 4. Site Features Map
Study Area B

Figure 5. Site Features Map
Study Area C

Figure 6. Site Features Map
Study Area D

Figure 7. Site Features Map
Study Area E

Figure 8. Soil Gas Survey Location Map

Figure 9. Surface Water/Sediment
Sample Location Map

Figure 10. Monitoring Well Location Map

Figure 11. Maximum Detection Levels
and Extent of Contamination Found in
Round 1 and 2 GW Samples - Shallow Wells

Figure 12. Maximum Detection Levels
and Extent of Contamination Found in
Round 1 and 2 GW Samples - Intermediate Wells

Figure 13. Maximum Detection Levels
and Extent of Contamination Found in
Round 1 and 2 GW Samples - Deep Wells

APPENDIX B

B. Public Comments and Responses

PUBLIC COMMENTS AND RESPONSES
For
Public Health Assessment For
The Fisher-Calo Chemical and Solvents Corporation

1. Comment We have serious concerns that the incinerator-mediated induction of TCDD on a chronic basis, even at very low levels, could still create potential environmental problems. We still advocate that soil incineration be conducted off site, in a less sensitive location. Should soil incineration be done on site, periodic monitoring for possible bioaccumulation of site-related contaminants must be done for faunal and floral species in the area.

Response Periodic monitoring for potential bioaccumulation in organisms that inhabit the environment near the site is an excellent idea. We would suggest that this recommendation be brought to the attention of the Department of Natural Resources.

2. Comment To our knowledge, the town of Kingsbury is not serviced by the Kingsbury Utility Company.

Response This information was noted and appropriate changes were made to the document.

3. Comment The last water sampling referenced by the assessment took place in 1988. This data are not sufficiently current to be used in a 1995 health assessment.

Response Under ideal circumstances, we would prefer to have recent data when writing public health assessments. However, as the Indiana State Department of Health relies on other government agencies to provide us with sampling data, this is not always possible. Due to such issues, our Recommendations section usually addressess any data gaps in order to give an accurate assessment. Please note recommendations 2 and 3.

4. Comment The assessment reports that production wells within KIP are supposedly tested on an "ongoing basis," and that VOCs observed in these tests are "below detection level." No mention is made, however, of the frequency of this testing. Is this monitoring in compliance with Public Water System requirements or not.?

Response The production wells are tested once a year. Per a representative of IDEM, the monitoring of these production wells are in compliance with Public Water System requirements.

5. Comment No comprehensive well survey has been conducted relevant to this health assessment.

Response This point is stated on page 23 of the document. Please note that there is a recommendation that a well survey be performed.

6. Comment On pages 22 and 26, there seems to be a contradiction with respect to contaminants found in the surface water.

Response This information was reviewed, and appropriate changes were made to the document.

7. Comment The assessment made no mention of the potential exposure route from windblown surface/soil contaminants.

Response As the majority of the site is vegetated the potential for exposure to contaminated windblown dust is negligible. This will be mentioned in the Pathways section of the document.

8. Comment The assessment made no mention of previous exposures of past and present KIP workers, and area residents, to on-site fires.

Response According to the data reviewed in preparation for writing this document, there were fires (see page 4) which occurred in 1974 and 1978. It would be unlikely that an individual would be exposed to contaminants from the fire for an extended period of time.

9. Comment The assessment does not address possible synergistic effects from exposure to the multiple on-site chemicals. The assessment implies that onsite levels were not sufficient to warrant concern.

Response Synergistic effects would have been calculated if there were any completed exposure pathways. It would be unlikely that any individual would have chronic maximal exposures for even the potential exposure pathways, if these exposures were to coincide at one time.
The calculations in the document are based on potential exposure to the maximum concentration found in any given media. This calculation is very conservative. Factors such as percent uptake into the blood stream and/or storage in organs; the length of exposure; and individual characterisitcs such as age, gender, nutritonal status, family traits, life-style, and state of health determine the degree of adverse health effects which occur in any individual who is exposed to contaminants.
Please note that the on-site levels do not warrant concern because there are no completed pathways for on-site media.

Table of Contents

Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, 1825 Century Blvd, Atlanta, GA 30345
Contact CDC: 800-232-4636 / TTY: 888-232-6348

Department of Health and Human Services

1. Comment	We have serious concerns that the incinerator-mediated induction of TCDD on a chronic basis, even at very low levels, could still create potential environmental problems. We still advocate that soil incineration be conducted off site, in a less sensitive location. Should soil incineration be done on site, periodic monitoring for possible bioaccumulation of site-related contaminants must be done for faunal and floral species in the area.
Response	Periodic monitoring for potential bioaccumulation in organisms that inhabit the environment near the site is an excellent idea. We would suggest that this recommendation be brought to the attention of the Department of Natural Resources.
2. Comment	To our knowledge, the town of Kingsbury is not serviced by the Kingsbury Utility Company.
Response	This information was noted and appropriate changes were made to the document.
3. Comment	The last water sampling referenced by the assessment took place in 1988. This data are not sufficiently current to be used in a 1995 health assessment.
Response	Under ideal circumstances, we would prefer to have recent data when writing public health assessments. However, as the Indiana State Department of Health relies on other government agencies to provide us with sampling data, this is not always possible. Due to such issues, our Recommendations section usually addressess any data gaps in order to give an accurate assessment. Please note recommendations 2 and 3.
4. Comment	The assessment reports that production wells within KIP are supposedly tested on an "ongoing basis," and that VOCs observed in these tests are "below detection level." No mention is made, however, of the frequency of this testing. Is this monitoring in compliance with Public Water System requirements or not.?
Response	The production wells are tested once a year. Per a representative of IDEM, the monitoring of these production wells are in compliance with Public Water System requirements.
5. Comment	No comprehensive well survey has been conducted relevant to this health assessment.
Response	This point is stated on page 23 of the document. Please note that there is a recommendation that a well survey be performed.
6. Comment	On pages 22 and 26, there seems to be a contradiction with respect to contaminants found in the surface water.
Response	This information was reviewed, and appropriate changes were made to the document.
7. Comment	The assessment made no mention of the potential exposure route from windblown surface/soil contaminants.
Response	As the majority of the site is vegetated the potential for exposure to contaminated windblown dust is negligible. This will be mentioned in the Pathways section of the document.
8. Comment	The assessment made no mention of previous exposures of past and present KIP workers, and area residents, to on-site fires.
Response	According to the data reviewed in preparation for writing this document, there were fires (see page 4) which occurred in 1974 and 1978. It would be unlikely that an individual would be exposed to contaminants from the fire for an extended period of time.
9. Comment	The assessment does not address possible synergistic effects from exposure to the multiple on-site chemicals. The assessment implies that onsite levels were not sufficient to warrant concern.
Response	Synergistic effects would have been calculated if there were any completed exposure pathways. It would be unlikely that any individual would have chronic maximal exposures for even the potential exposure pathways, if these exposures were to coincide at one time. The calculations in the document are based on potential exposure to the maximum concentration found in any given media. This calculation is very conservative. Factors such as percent uptake into the blood stream and/or storage in organs; the length of exposure; and individual characterisitcs such as age, gender, nutritonal status, family traits, life-style, and state of health determine the degree of adverse health effects which occur in any individual who is exposed to contaminants. Please note that the on-site levels do not warrant concern because there are no completed pathways for on-site media.