PUBLIC HEALTH ASSESSMENT
GROVELAND WELLS
GROVELAND, ESSEX COUNTY, MASSACHUSETTS
The Groveland Wells National Priorities List (NPL) site is situated in the town of Groveland, Essex County, Massachusetts approximately 30 miles north of Boston. The site was added to the NPL in 1982 due to the detection of elevated trichloroethylene (TCE) levels in two municipal wells in 1979. A TCE contamination plume of 5 micrograms per liter or greater extended approximately 4,000 feet northward from the Valley Manufactured Products Inc. plant, where TCE was used extensively in degreasing operations. It has been demonstrated that the operation of these wells influenced the migration of TCE in their direction. As a result, residents from the towns of Groveland and West Newbury which were served by these wells may have been exposed to unsafe TCE levels for an indeterminate amount of time. The TCE-contaminated municipal wells were shut down in 1979. This site is judged a past public health hazard because of the potential risk to human health resulting from TCE exposure that may have resulted in adverse health effects. The site, however, currently poses no apparent health hazard.
In 1987, one of the wells was restored to operation after the installation of a granulated activated carbon filtration unit. Subsequent monitoring of the restored well has failed to detect unsafe TCE contamination levels (currently greater than 5 micrograms per liter). This well is used intermittently to supplement the production of a third well drilled off-site in 1979, one mile from the two contaminated wells. Consequently, ingestion of waters drawn from the active Groveland municipal wells does not currently pose a health threat.
Citizens from Groveland are concerned that TCE exposure may have impacted the overall cancer rates in the town and may be responsible for a possible elevation in the rate of neurobehavioral deficits in the town. The cancer rates for Groveland and West Newbury from 1982 through 1988 were analyzed. These rates for numerous anatomical sites are not elevated. There are, however, other cancers for which there are too few cases to establish stable rates that can be effectively compared with those for the remainder of Massachusetts. Infant mortality and incidence of congenital anomalies was also investigated in these two towns during that time when TCE exposure most likely occurred. For comparative purposes, these rates were also determined for a period after exposure ceased. The number of infant deaths and infants born with congenital anomalies in Groveland and West Newbury was too low to develop valid rate comparisons between these time periods.
In addition to the operation of the restored municipal well, the direction of TCE ground water contamination migration is influenced by land usage and its impact on the amount of precipitation infiltration into subsurface soils. Changes in these factors may result in altered contamination migration patterns in the future. Given this uncertainty, the remediation proposed by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is necessary to ensure the future safety of the Groveland water supply. Such remediation includes the extraction of contaminated ground water and the degradation of TCE using innovative chemical and physical means.
Hazardous levels of arsenic and lead have been detected sporadically in groundwater throughout the site. There is no known source of this contamination and it has not been detected in the municipal wells. EPA also intends to remove these heavy metals from extracted ground water and dispose of them in an approved manner.
The Haverhill Municipal Landfill is situated on the Groveland Wells
site but is also a separate NPL site. Health hazards associated
with landfill contaminants will be
evaluated separately in a
forthcoming Public Health Assessment.
A. Site Description and History
The Groveland Wells National Priorities List (NPL) site is situated in the town of Groveland, Essex County, Massachusetts approximately 30 miles north of Boston. The 850-acre site lies on a glacial drift aquifer and is bounded on the north by the Merrimac River, which drains into the Atlantic Ocean approximately 15 miles northeast of the site. The site is bounded on the west by Washington Street, on the south by Salem Street, and on the east by School Street. Center Street also runs in an east-west direction and divides the site with approximately two thirds of the acreage north of Center Street (See figure 1.).
Two municipal drinking water wells are situated on the site near Argilla Brook. From 1965 to 1979 Station 1 pumped water at approximately 600 gallons per minute (gpm) for 15 to 18 hours a day. To supplement the growing water demand, the Station 2 well was developed in 1973 at the junction of Argilla Brook and Johnson Creek. This well was pumped intermittently to serve the increased water needs between the months of May to October. In June of 1979, elevated levels of trichloroethylene (TCE) were detected in the Station 1 municipal well. As a result, this well was shut down and the Station 2 municipal well which contained low TCE levels, began operating at an increased rate. Elevated TCE levels were detected in the Station 2 well in November of 1979 which precipitated the shutdown of this well. Water rationing then was implemented in the town and sales of water to West Newbury, the adjacent town to the northeast, were halted. In December of 1979, a third municipal well was drilled off-site near the Merrimac River one and a half miles from the Station 1 municipal well. In 1987, a carbon filtration system was installed at Station 1, which then resumed operations at a reduced pumping rate of 400 gpm. This well currently runs intermittently to supplement town water needs1.
Three possible sources of TCE contamination were identified within the site boundaries. The Haverhill Municipal Landfill is situated in the northwest corner of the site and approximately 1,000 feet west of Station 2. Approximately two thirds of the acreage on this site was used for the disposal of municipal refuse. The landfill ceased to accept this refuse in 1981. Currently sludges from the Haverhill municipal sewerage treatment plant are disposed of in the northern tract of the landfill. This landfill was placed on the NPL in 1982 and will be considered in a separate public health assessment. A preliminary health assessment for the landfill was conducted by the Massachusetts Department of Public Health (MDPH) and released in December of 1989. There was insufficient environmental contamination data collected at the time the preliminary health assessment was conducted and the health impact associated with the site could not accurately be determined. Further characterization of contaminants at the Haverhill Municipal Landfill may be conducted by USEPA in the future. A separate Public Health Assessment will be conducted upon completion of these investigations.
The A.W. Chesterton Company is located on Salem Street, equidistant from both School Street and Washington Street. The plant currently produces mechanical seals and industrial maintenance products and transports liquid waste products to sites approved by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Prior to 1977, the plant was owned by the Pandel-Bradford Company, who for five years produced plastic shoes. The plant during this time also housed electroplating and spray painting facilities. Plant wastes ran through floor drains to a settling tank and an associated leaching field. When Chesterton took ownership of the plant, contents of the collecting tank were pumped and removed from the site and use of the disposal system was discontinued2.
Valley Manufactured Products is located on Washington Street approximately 200 feet from the corner of Center Street. The Valley factory, where screw machine parts have been manufactured since 1965, is located on a 1.6 acre plot. The company extensively used TCE during degreasing operations. It was reported that in 1973, a fitting broke on an underground tank where 500 gallons of TCE was stored. This resulted in a massive TCE release to subsurface soil. Intermittent TCE dumping on or near the factory grounds has been reported 2 and it was also reported that small amounts of exhausted TCE were sprayed around the facility for dust and weed control3. The company has since ceased using TCE in degreasing operations. It is currently using detergent based cleansers for degreasing purposes4.
Numerous studies investigating the extent of aquifer contamination have been conducted between 1981 and 1991. These studies concluded that Valley Manufactured Products was the primary source of TCE ground water contamination in the area1,2. As a result of the extensive TCE contamination, the Groveland Wells site was placed on the NPL in 1982.
In 1985, the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) reviewed existing contamination data and determined that a potential health risk existed if the contaminated wells were restored to use without treatment or if new wells were installed in or near the TCE contamination plume. This ATSDR documentation also stated that the TCE levels detected in the municipal wells in 1979 exceeded USEPA's existing standards, however, it could not be determined for how long well users were exposed to these levels.
A record of decision (ROD) was signed in 1988 recommending the use of a soil vapor vacuum extraction system to remove volatile organic compound (VOC) contamination from soils underneath the Valley plant. In addition, ground water contamination on the Valley site is planned to be removed using a recovery system which pumps ground water to an air stripper. Effluent waters from the air stripping unit would then be reinjected into ground water upgradient to the Valley plant1. In March of 1988, a ground water treatment plant was also installed at the northern edge of Mill Pond near the Valley site. This was the result of consent agreement between Valley Manufactured Products and the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (MDEP).
In 1991, a supplemental Remedial Investigation (RI) was completed to further characterize the extent of ground water contamination away from the Valley site. A feasibility study was also completed in July of 1991 which investigated remedial alternatives for ground water in the remainder of the aquifer. In September of 1991, a ROD was signed establishing ground water extraction and TCE destruction by chemical and physical means as the chosen remedial alternative. This public health assessment is being conducted in conjunction with the ROD signed in 1991.
The site was visited by William Strohsnitter, Environmental Analyst for MDPH, on August 7th 1990. Access to the Valley site and Mill Pond was not obtained, however, public areas were observed at this time. The Remedial Project Manager for USEPA and Mr. Strohsnitter revisited the site on April 9. 1992. Little human activity was noted on both of these visits. Horseback riders were observed along abandoned railroad tracks north of the Station 1 well during the Spring visit in 1992. The gravel and sand mines were inspected and while disposed tires and household appliances were noted on this visit, no persons were observed in the area at this time.
The Valley Manufactured Products grounds and the area near the air stripping plant at Mill Pond are accessible although the air stripping tower itself is fenced. Mill Pond is also freely accessible. Waters entering and exiting the pond were moderately flowing. Waters exiting the air stripping plant were observed discharging into the Johnson Creek waters that drain Mill Pond. Rust-colored sediment was observed at this discharge point. Marsh vegetation was observed at the southern end of Mill Pond. The central and northern regions of the pond, however, appeared as though swimming or wading activities may be possible.
While both the Mill Pond and Valley plant grounds were freely accessible to pedestrian traffic, there was little evidence to indicate that this occurs frequently. It is uncertain whether the sparse amounts of litter observed in these areas were placed by workers or passersby.
C. Demographics, Land Use and Natural Resources
The population of Groveland according to the 1990 census is 5,214. In 1980, the population of West Newbury was 2,861. The Groveland population in 1980 was 5,040 and 1,153 people (22.9% of the total Groveland population) resided within the site boundaries at the time. Many of the residences are located on the streets that comprise the site's boundaries. Other small residential developments are situated within these streets. Side streets along the upper half of School Street contain residential housing as do two streets connecting Salem and Center Streets. Another housing cluster is situated in the southwest corner of the site between Salem and Center streets. Five residences are situated 250 feet south of the Valley plant on Center Street near its juncture with Washington Street. Saint Patrick's Roman Catholic church is located on Center Street next to these residences and owns the property to the immediate east of the Valley grounds. Residences are located on Washington Street across from the Valley plant and another residence is located on Washington Street 300 feet north of the Valley plant.
In 1980, the elderly (persons aged 65 years or greater) comprised 7.5% (n=86) of the population within the site boundaries compared to 6.8% (n=263) for the remainder of the town. Thirty one per cent (n=357) of the population residing within the site boundaries was less than 18 years of age and 32.1% (n=1,247) of those living outside of the site boundaries were in this age category.
A business district is located in the northeast corner of the site, containing few shops, a restaurant and convenience stores. The Bagnall Elementary School on School Street is separated from the residential section in the south east corner of the site by a tract of wooded land. The land between Center and Gardner Streets is predominately undeveloped. An inactive gravel and sand mining pit comprises a large portion of this land. Another gravel pit is mined by the by Trimont Bituminous Products Inc. (TBP) and is situated in the north west corner of the site near the Haverhill Municipal Landfill.
Three streams are associated with the site. Johnson Creek runs the length of the site and discharges into the Merrimac River. Mill Pond was formed by damming Johnson Creek. Brindle Brook runs through the Chesterton property and joins with Johnson Creek immediately south of Center Street. Argilla Brook runs northwest and joins Johnson Creek at the TBP gravel pit. A pond is situated along Johnson Creek immediately south of this juncture. The Station 2 municipal well is also located where Argilla Brook joins Johnson Creek. The Station one municipal well is located on Argilla Brook approximately 2,000 feet east of Station 2.
None of the streams on the site support swimming activities. Mill Pond, as observed during the site visit conducted in the Spring of 1992, is approximately four to six feet deep and may support swimming activities in its central and northern region. It is reported that in the summer months, the pond is over run with vegetation5,6. Fishing does occur in the site-associated streams which were reportedly stocked with fish in the early 1950s1.
As previously stated, the majority of the Groveland populous is served primarily by a municipal well drilled in the northeast corner of the town away from the contaminated aquifer. Use of the public water supply is, however, not mandatory. Contractors for USEPA questioned local officials regarding the use of private wells in the area. No comprehensive list of private wells in the area currently exists, however, review of plans for private septic systems that are filed with the town also included some plans for private wells. No wells were identified within the site boundaries upon review of septic system plans.
One private well is known to be drilled within the site boundaries. This water is used for all household purposes except for drinking. The well is reported to be screened in the shallow overburden, where the contamination is not as prominent as in the other hydrogeologic zones. West Newbury, which purchased drinking water from Groveland prior to 1979, currently purchases its drinking water from the town of Newburyport. Also, West Newbury has since drilled its own municipal water well, five miles from the Groveland town line7.
In order to address community health concerns, incidence data from
the Massachusetts Cancer Registry (MCR) and the
High Risk Infant
Identification Program (HRIIP) were reviewed. Both of these data
bases are maintained with in the MDPH. Massachusetts law mandates
that all hospitals within the Commonwealth report to the MCL all
incident cancer cases diagnosed within their facility. Pertinent
information such as the age, sex and residence of the cases is also
maintained by the registry. Incident cancer cases have been
recorded in the Commonwealth since 1982. The HRIIP reviews birth
and death certificates for congenital anomalies. These records are
filed by all hospitals in the Commonwealth and birth defects have
been surveyed since 1969.
In conversations with local health officials, it became apparent
that concerns regarding elevated rates of cancer, adverse pregnancy
outcomes, and neurobehavioral deficits existed in the community8.
With the cooperation of the Chairperson of the Groveland Board of
Health, a town meeting was convened. On September 16, 1991, William
C. Strohsnitter and Robert S. Knorr of the Bureau of Environmental
Health Assessment met with the Groveland community to describe the
ATSDR public health assessment process and to solicit health
concerns that the Groveland citizens had with respect to the
Groveland Wells site. Approximately 50 citizens were in
attendance. The following questions were raised by citizens at the
meeting:
| 1) | Is it known for how long the Groveland Wells 1 and 2 were contaminated prior to detection? |
| 2) | Is water safe to drink? |
| 3) | Is there a birth defect registry in Massachusetts? |
| 4) | How can reliable rates of adverse reproductive outcomes be derived in Groveland since it is a small town? Is it possible to attribute one birth defect per year in a town this small to environmental exposure given statistical limitations? |
| 5) | Is there a registry for neurobehavioral disorders? Teachers at the Bagnall Elementary School have observed abnormal behavioral patterns in students who were born shortly after TCE was detected in the Groveland Wells. Could school health records be reviewed to ascertain if there may have been changes in the health profile of the student body over time? |
| 6) | Are citizens at an increased cancer risk as a result of past exposure to TCE in the Groveland municipal water? Can data from the Massachusetts Cancer Registry be used to accurately assess environmental impact on cancer rates in Groveland? Wouldn't the cancer rates in Groveland be invalidly lowered since exposed residents may have moved out of Groveland as a result of the municipal water contamination and residence of cancer cases in the registry is recorded at the time of diagnosis (and not at exposure)? |
| 7) | Hauling of sand and gravel from the mining operations at the site may have resulted in the release of contaminants away from the site. Can the MDPH conduct monitoring to ascertain whether or not his occurred? |
| 8) | When will the Public Health Assessment be completed? |
| 9) | Is there any thing that the Groveland citizens can do in assist in the Public Health Assessment process? |
It was generally believed by the audience members that there are elevated rates of all cancers, birth defects and neurobehavioral disorders which are attributable to exposure to contaminated drinking water. Frustration was expressed over the lack of non-neoplastic disease registries that would enable officials to accurately assess changes in disease patterns throughout the state. One audience member suggested the Office of Children's Early Intervention Program within the Massachusetts Department of Social Services as a data source. Another audience member contended that many people who believed that they were impacted by environmental exposure were not in attendance and as a result, not all citizen concerns were voiced at the meeting.
Next Section
Table of Contents
