• Home
• About ATSDR
• Press Room
• A-Z Index
• Glossary
• Employment
• Contact Us
• CDC

ATSDR en Español

Search:

Skip directly to: content | left navigation | search

---

Find a Publication

1. ATSDR > Public Health Assessments & Consultations

PETITIONED PUBLIC HEALTH ASSESSMENT

HAWTHORNE MUNICIPAL WELLS
HAWTHORNE, PASSAIC COUNTY, NEW JERSEY

APPENDIX A

Table 1. Exposure Pathways

Pathway Name	Source	Medium	Route of Exposure	Exposure Elements			Exposure Activities	Chemicals of Concern
				Point of Exposure	Receptor Population	Time
Groundwater	Unknown	Groundwater	Ingestion, Inhalation, & Dermal Contact	Residential Water Taps	Users of BHMWS Completed Exposure	p	Drinking, Bathing, & Household Cleaning	See Table 6 (pages 20 and 21) and Table 8 (page 24)
					Private Well Users Potential Exposure	p	Drinking, Bathing, & Household Cleaning
Key: BHMWS = Borough of Hawthorne Municipal Water Supply; c = current; f = future; p = past

Table 2. Other Comprehensive Sites Located within a 1-Mile Radius of the Borough of Hawthorne

Well Owner	CSL-ID Number	Radial Distance from Site (mile)	Municipality
Hawthorne Realty	NJL000036657	0.20	Borough of Hawthorne
Atlas Associates	NJD065825341	0.21	Paterson City
Kohler Distribution Company	NJL000040345	0.23	Borough of Hawthorne
70 Wait Street	NJD980772040	0.28	Paterson City
Mobile Service Station Hawthorne	NJD986604627	0.34	Borough of Hawthorne
Samuel Braens Sons	NJD000582882	0.36	Borough of Hawthorne
Kessler Industries	NJD002165660	0.36	Paterson City
Pan Chemical Corporation	NJD002171619	0.38	Borough of Hawthorne
Brassbestos Manufacturing Corporation	NJD002169431	0.40	Paterson City
Republic Electronics Corporation	NJD002460384	0.40	Paterson City
Ecological & Specialty Products Inc.	NJD030239248	0.40	Paterson City
Purex Corporation Plant 11	NJD045056066	0.40	Paterson City
Thatcher Plastic Packaging	NJD002452290	0.40	Borough of Hawthorne
Jersey Chemical Company	NJD011619764	0.42	Paterson City
Pope Chemical Company	NJD002520583	0.48	Paterson City
Precision Products Incorporated	NJD053523072	0.49	Borough of Hawthorne
Paterson Department of Public Works	NJD980771836	0.50	Paterson City
Pyrolac Corporation	NJD001271931	0.55	Borough of Hawthorne
Commercial Doors Incorporated	NJL00003476	0.60	Paterson City
Witco Corporation	NJD002163350	0.64	Paterson City
Commercial Doors Incorporated	NJL000038257	0.67	Paterson City
Paterson Coal Gas (PSE&G)	NJD981084734	0.70	Paterson City
Kirker Chemical Company	NJD002180834	0.72	Paterson City
Sterling Creative Textile Printers Inc.	NJD002155356	0.75	Paterson City
Automatic Doorman Incorporated	NJD042897421	0.75	Paterson City
Hawthorne Municipal Well field Contamination	NJD980771679	0.79	Borough of Hawthorne
AMTECH Incorporated	NJD054068572	0.84	Borough of Fair Lawn
387 East 18th Street	NJL000038786	0.89	Paterson City
Congress Industries Incorporated	NJD002163434	0.95	Borough of Hawthorne
Commercial Products Company Incorporated	NJD002172898	0.95	Borough of Hawthorne
FIRETEK Corporation	NJD063147540	0.95	Borough of Hawthorne
ChemPlast Incorporated	NJD980642060	0.95	Borough of Hawthorne
WASTE SITE TALLY: There are approximately 32 other hazardous waste sites, as identified from the comprehensive list case file, within the Borough of Hawthorne SOURCE: Database Listing from the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection and Energy--Division of Publicly Funded Site Remediation [NOTE: The identification (and in some instances, creation) of hazardous waste sites is ongoing, it should be emphasized that this information is not intended to be a complete survey of all hazardous waste sites in the area. Recognizing that the listing may contain errors and omissions, it is advisable to use this resource as a guide. Also, the hazardous waste site locations, displayed in Figure 1, may reference more than one site (i.e., one location may represent two or more sites).]

Table 3. Groundwater Wells Located within the Borough of Hawthorne

PUBLIC SUPPLY WELLS		PRIVATE/DOMESTIC WELLS
Well Owner	Permit Number	Well Owner	Permit Number
Borough of Hawthorne	430061	Poughkeepsie Finishing	2605086
Borough of Hawthorne	4300062	Ricardo	2308425
Borough of Hawthorne	4300063	Letsch	2311291
Borough of Hawthorne	4300064	Silvestri, Joe	2309319
Borough of Hawthorne	4300065	J & R Building Construction	2307577
Borough of Hawthorne	4300066	J & R Building Construction	2307578
Borough of Hawthorne	4300067	NEWSTAR Development	2308466
Borough of Hawthorne	4300068	Schenk Construction Co.	2308486
Borough of Hawthorne	4300069	Destefano	2311536
Borough of Hawthorne	2305139	Venturo Francesco	2307615
Borough of Hawthorne	2304139	NEWSTAR Development	2308469
Borough of Hawthorne	2303099	NEWSTAR Development	2308492
		Maffei, Anthony	2308127
		Lefelar, Tom	2306963
		Nienhouse, John	2308856
		Boonstra	2307354
		Peters, Harold	2307411
		Landen Corp.	2308029
		Phillippo, Peter	2308116
		Lagos	2307831
		Schenk Construction Co.	2308239
		Krieger, Louis R.	2307260
		Garofalo, Anthony	2307775
		Barbato	2308031
		Scully	2312172
		Coral Dye & Finishing	2605128
		Ziegler, Harold D.	2308158
SOURCE: Database Listing from the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection--Water Supply Element--Bureau of Water Allocation [NOTE: The identification of groundwater wells is an ongoing process; it should be emphasized that this information is not intended to be a complete survey of all groundwater wells in the area. Recognizing that the listing may contain errors and omissions, it is advisable to use this resource as a guide. Also, the well locations displayed in Figure 1 may reference more than one well (i.e., one well location may represent two or more wells).]

Table 4. Volatile Organic Compounds Detected in the Borough of Hawthorne Municipal Water Supply for Raw (Unstripped) and Finished (Stripped) Water Samples: 1988 Results

Chemical	Concentration Range (ppb)		Comparison Value (ppb)
			Chronic C (more than 365 days)		Carcinogenic (ppb)	EPA's MCL
	Raw	Finished	Adult	Child
Bromochloromethane	0.5	ND	90 LTHA	---	---	---
Bromoform	ND	0.6 - 3.8	7,000 EMEG	2,000 EMEG	4 CREG	100
Chlorobenzene	2.7	ND	700 RMEG	200 RMEG	---	100
Chloroform	1.3	ND	400 EMEG	100 EMEG	6 CREG	100
1,4-Dichlorobenzene	1.2	ND	75 LTHA	---	0.44 RBC	75
2,2-Dichloropropane	1.0	ND	0.16 RBC	---	---	---
Chlorodibromomethane	1.0	1.6 - 2.3	1,000 EMEG	300 EMEG	0.4 CREG	100
1,1-Dichloroethane	0.6 - 0.9	ND	810 RBC	300 RBC	---	---
Cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene	3.6 - 4.7	ND	70 LTHA	---	---	7
Tetrachloroethylene	3.1 - 13.4	0.5	400 RMEG	100 RMEG	0.7 CREG	5
1,1,1-Trichloroethane	1.8 - 3.9	ND	200 LTHA	---	---	200
Trichloroethylene	7.7 - 48.6	ND	36 RBC	13 RBC	3 CREG	5
Reference: [11] Notes: A chemical substance is designated as a COC if the chemical level exceeds at least one of its comparison values. When no comparison value exists for the specified chemical, it may be designated as a COC depending upon the available scientific literature that discusses its toxicological effects. (Shading indicates that listed CV is exceeded for the substance.) Key: CREG = Cancer Risk Evaluation Guide(s); CV = Comparison Value(s); EMEG = Environmental Media Evaluation Guide(s); LTHA = Lifetime Health Advisory(ies); MCL = Maximum Contaminant Level(s); ND = Below Level of Detection (Unknown); N/A = Not Applicable; RMEG = Reference Dose Media Evaluation Guide(s);RBC = Risk Based Concentration(s); ppb = parts per billion

Table 5. Volatile Organic Compounds Detected in the Borough of Hawthorne Municipal Water Supply for Raw (Unstripped) and Finished (Stripped) Water Samples: 1991 Results

Chemical	Concentration Range (ppb)		Comparison Values (ppb)
							Carcinogenic (ppb)		EPA's MCL
			Chronic CVs (more than 365 days)
	Raw	Finished	Adult		Child
Bromochloromethane	ND	ND	90 LTHA		---		---		---
Bromoform	ND	ND	7,000 EMEG		2,000 EMEG		4 CREG		100
Chlorobenzene	ND	ND	700 RMEG		200 RMEG		---		100
Chloroform	ND	ND	400 EMEG		100 EMEG		6 CREG		100
1,4-Dichlorobenzene	ND	ND	75 LTHA		---		0.44 RBC		75
2,2-Dichloropropane	ND	ND	0.16 RBC		---		---		---
Chlorodibromomethane	ND	ND	1,000 EMEG		300 EMEG		0.4 CREG		100
1,1-Dichloroethane	ND	ND	810 RBC		300 RBC		---		---
Cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene	0.5 - 3.9	ND	70 LTHA		---		---		7
Tetrachloroethylene	4.2 - 14.0	ND	400 RMEG		100 RMEG		0.7 CREG		5
1,1,1-Trichloroethane	1.3 - 3.7	ND	200 LTHA		---		---		200
Trichloroethylene	3.1 - 6.6	ND	36 RBC		13 RBC		3 CREG		5
Reference: [11] Notes: A chemical substance is designated as a COC if the chemical level exceeds at least one of its comparison values. When no comparison value exists for the specified chemical, it may be designated as a COC depending upon the available scientific literature that discusses its toxicological effects. (Shading indicates that listed CV is exceeded or that there is no available CV for the Substance.) Key: CREG = Cancer Risk Evaluation Guide(s); CV = Comparison Value(s); EMEG = Environmental Media Evaluation Guide(s); LTHA = Lifetime Health Advisory(ies);MCL = Maximum Contaminant Level(s); ND = Below Level of Detection (Unknown); N/A = Not Applicable; RMEG = Reference Dose Media Evaluation Guide(s);RBC = Risk Based Concentration(s); ppb = parts per billion

Table 6. Volatile Organic Compounds Detected in the Borough of Hawthorne Municipal Water Supply before Residential Distribution: Pre-1988 Results (covered time period 02/14/79 to 04/08/86)

Chemical	Concentration Range (ppb)
						Carcinogenic (Evaluated further in Table 8)		EPA's MCL
		Chronic (more than 365 days) (Evaluated further in Table 7)
		Adult		Child
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate*	6.6 - 290	700 RMEG		200 RMEG		3CREG		6
Bromoform	5.8 - 6.7	7,000 EMEG		2,000 EMEG		4CREG		100
Carbon Tetrachloride	1.09 - 24	20 RMEG		7 RMEG		0.3CREG		5
Chlorodibromomethane	0.486	1,000 EMEG		300 EMEG		0.4CREG		100
Chloroform	1.1 - 8.4	400 EMEG		100 EMEG		6CREG		100
1,4-Dichlorobenzene*	0.76	75 LTHA		---		0.44RBC		75
1,1-Dichloroethylene	0.3 - 1.1	300 EMEG		90 EMEG		0.06CREG		7
Nitrobenzene*	82	20 RMEG		5 RMEG		---		---
Tetrachloroethylene	0.5-24	400 RMEG		100 RMEG		0.7 CREG		5
Trichloroethane	23 - 26	790 RBC		---		---		---
1,1,1-Trichloroethane	4.4 - 9.2	200 LTHA		---		---		200
1,1,2-Trichloroethane	1.2 - 1.3	100 RMEG		40RMEG		0.6CREG		5
Trichloroethylene	11 - 15	36 RBC		13RBC		3 CREG		5
Reference: [13-18, 19-24] * Indicates that sample was collected in wells prior to chlorination. No samples were available in distribution lines after chlorination. Concentration is expected to be less in the distribution than the values reported in this table. Shaded concentration are those that exceed a comparison value. These chemicals are evaluated further in Tables 7 or 8 Notes: A substance is designated as a COC if the chemical level exceeds at least one of its comparison values. When no comparison value exists for the specified chemical, it may be designated as a COC depending upon the available scientific literature that discusses its toxicological effects. (Shading indicates that listed CV is exceeded or that there is no available CV for the substance.) ey: COC = Chemical(s) of Concern; CREG = Cancer Risk Evaluation Guide(s); CV = Comparison Value(s); EMEG = Environmental Media Evaluation Guide(s);LTHA = Lifetime Health Advisory(ies); MCL = Maximum Contaminant Level(s); N/A = Not Applicable; RMEG = Reference Dose Media Evaluation Guide(s);RBC = Risk Based Concentration(s); ppb = parts per billion

Table 7. Estimated Exposure Dose for Chemicals that Exceeded Chronic CVs (Based on BHMWS Water Quality from 1979-1986)

Chemical	Maximum Chemical Concentration (1979-86) (ppb)	Estimated Exposure Dose 1 (mg/kg/day)		Acceptable Intake (mg/kg/day)
				Chronic Exposure
		Adult	Child
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate2	290	0.0083	0.018	0.02 (RfD)
Carbon Tetrachloride2	24	0.00069	0.0015	0.0007 (RfD)
Nitrobenzene2	82	0.0023	0.0051	0.0005 (RfD)
Trichloroethylene2	15	0.004	0.0009	0.006 (RfD)
Assumptions : Ingestion Rate - child, 1 liter per day, and adults, 2 liters per day Body Weight - child, 16 kg, and adults, 70 kg 2 Actual maximum concentration measured in distribution lines of BHMWS (if available), or the maximum concentration detected in BHMWS Shading indicates an exposure dose that exceeded the Reference Dose (RfD) Key: ATSDR = Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry; RfD = Reference Dose; MRL = Minimum Risk Level; mg/kg/day = milligrams of chemical per kilogram body weight per day; ppb = parts per billion

Table 8. Estimated Cancer Risk (Based on BHMWS Water Quality from 1979-1986)

Chemical	Maximum Chemical Concentration (ppb)	Estimated Exposure Dose 1 (mg/kg/day)	Cancer Slope Factor 5	Cancer Risk Estimate4 (Worst Case)	Cancer Classes		Level of Cancer Risk
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate2	290	0.0045	0.0141	6.3 x 10-5	2 B2	DHHS (NTP) EPA	No Apparent Increased Risk
Bromoform2	6.7	0.00010	0.0079 I	8.2 x 10-7	3 B2	DHHS (NTP) EPA	No Apparent Increased Risk
Carbon Tetrachloride2	24	0.00031	0.13 I	4.0 x 10-5	2 2B B2	DHHS (NTP) IARC EPA	No Apparent Increased Risk
Chlorodibromomethane2	0.486	0.0000075	0.084 I	6.3x 10-7	3 C	DHHS (NTP) EPA	No Apparent Increased Risk
Chloroform2	8.4	0.00013	0.0061 I	7.9 x 10-7	2 2B B2	DHHS (NTP) IARC EPA	No Apparent Increased Risk
1,4-Dichlorobenzene2	0.76	0.000012	0.024 H	2.8 x 10-7	2 2B	DHHS (NTP) IARC	No Apparent Increased Risk
1,1-Dichloroethylene2	1.1	0.000017	0.6 I	1.0 x 10-5	C	EPA	No Apparent Increased Risk
Tetrachloroethylene3	24	0.00037	0.052 E	1.9x 10-5	2 2A B2-C	DHHS (NTP) IARC EPA	No Apparent Increased Risk
1,1,2-Trichloroethane2	1.3	0.000020	0.057 I	1.1 x 10-6	3 C	DHHS (NTP) EPA	No Apparent Increased Risk
Trichloroethylene3	15	0.00023	0.011 W	2.5 x 10-6	B2-C	EPA	No Apparent Increased Risk
Assumptions : Ingestion Rate - adults, 2 liters per day Body Weight - adults, 70 kg Exposure Duration - 38 years 2Actual maximum concentration measured in municipal wells 4Cancer risk = exposure dose (mg/kg/day) x cancer slope factor (mg/kg/day-1) 5Sources of cancer slope factors: I EPA's Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) Database H Health Effects Assessment Summary Tables (HEAST) W Withdrawn from IRIS or HEAST E The EPA Superfund Health Risk Technical Support Center, part of the National Center for Environmental Assessment (NCEA) in Cincinnati, Ohio, develops provisional reference doses (RfDs) and cancer potency slopes (CPSs) on request for chemicals not in IRIS or HEAST. Cancer Classes EPA: A Human carcinogen B1 Probable human carcinogen (limited human, sufficient animal studies) B2 Probable human carcinogen (inadequate human, sufficient animal studies) B2-C Under consideration for placement into either the B2 or the C classification C Possible human carcinogen (no human, limited animal studies) IARC: 1 Human carcinogen 2A Reasonably anticipated to be a carcinogen (limited human studies) 2B Reasonably anticipated to be a carcinogen (sufficient animal studies) 3 Not classifiable 4 Probably not carcinogenic to humans DHHS (NTP) 1 Known human carcinogen 2 Reasonably anticipated to be a carcinogen 3 Not classified

APPENDIX B

Figure 1. Intro Map

Figure 2. North and South Wagaraw Fields, Borough of Hawthorne

APPENDIX C

LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

APPENDIX D

ATSDR COMPARISON VALUES AND HEALTH GUIDELINES

ATSDR comparison values are media-specific (i.e., air, soil, water) concentrations that are considered to be "safe" under default conditions of exposure. They are used as a screening criteria for selecting and identifying chemicals of concern (COC) at a site. A COC is merely a site-specific chemical substance that an ATSDR health scientist has selected for further public health evaluation of potential health effects, which does not necessary imply any level of health hazard. Generally, a chemical substance is selected as a COC because its maximum concentration in a environmental medium near a site exceeds one of ATSDR's comparison values. This approach is conservative by design and if enough data were available, actual exposures could possibly be estimated more accurately using average concentrations or a range of concentrations.

It cannot be emphasized strongly enough that comparison values are not thresholds of toxicity. While concentrations at or below the relevant comparison value may reasonably be considered safe, it does not automatically follow that any environmental concentration that exceeds a comparison value would be expected to produce adverse health effects. In fact, the whole purpose behind highly conservative, health-based standards and guidelines is to enable health scientists to recognize and resolve potential public health problems before they become actual health hazards. The probability that adverse health outcomes will actually occur depends on site-specific conditions, individual lifestyle, and genetic factors that affect the route, magnitude, and duration of actual exposures, and not on environmental concentrations alone.

Listed below are the abbreviations and descriptions for selected comparison values (CVs) and health guidelines (HGs), along with their units of measure, that are commonly used by ATSDR.

Comparison Values and Health Guidelines:

CLHA

Child Longer-Term Health Advisories: Health comparison values derived by the EPA. They are drinking water concentrations deemed protective of public health (taking into consideration of water availability, economic feasibility, and water treatment technology) over a lifetime (70 years), using a child's body weight (10 Kg) and ingestion rate (1 L/day).

CREG

Cancer Risk Evaluation Guides: Health comparison values derived by ATSDR. They are estimated media-specific concentrations expected to cause no more than one excess cancer in a population of a million individuals exposed over a 70-year lifetime. CREGs are calculated from EPA's cancer slope factors (CSFs) and therefore reflect estimates of risk, based on the assumption of zero threshold and lifetime exposure; however, it must be noted that the true value of risk is unknown and could be as low as zero.

CSF

Cancer Slope Factor: EPA's quantitative assessment to define the relationship between the chemical dose and carcinogenic effects as a linear function on the assumption of zero threshold and lifetime exposure; however, it must be noted that the true value of risk is unknown and could be as low as zero.

DWEL

Drinking Water Equivalent Levels: Health comparison values based on EPA's oral RfD and represent corresponding concentrations of a chemical substance in drinking water that are estimated to have negligible deleterious effects in humans at an intake rate of 2 liters per day, assuming that drinking water is the sole source of exposure.

EA&SL

Estimated Adequate and Safe Levels: Levels of certain essential nutrients that will meet an individual's daily nutritional requirement without inducing any toxic effects. These levels represent total intake and are not specific for drinking water or food. Consequently, they are not readily translated in terms of concentration limits.

EMEG

Environmental Media Evaluation Guides: Health comparison values derived by ATSDR. They are media-specific concentrations that are calculated from ATSDR's minimal risk levels (MRLs) and factoring in default body weights and ingestion rates. Different EMEGs are calculated for adults, children, and (in the case of soil) pica children. Likewise, different EMEGS are computed for varying durations of exposure such as acute (1-14 days), intermediate (15-365 days), and chronic (more than 365 days).

IDLH

Immediately Dangerous to Life or Health: Concentrations of chemical substances in the air that are immediately dangerous to life or health, as established by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH).

LAL

Lead Action Level: Since 1991, EPA's regulatory level for lead in drinking water has been 15 ppb. This action level prevents known or anticipated adverse human health effects to the extent feasible.

LTHA

Lifetime Health Advisories: Health comparison values calculated from the DWEL. Each represent the concentration of a chemical substance in drinking water estimated to have negligible deleterious effects in humans over a lifetime of 70 years, assuming a consumption of 2 liters of water per day for a 70-kg adult, and taking into account other sources of exposure. In the absence of chemical-specific data, the assumed fraction of total intake from drinking water is 20%. LTHAs are not derived for chemical substances which are potentially carcinogenic to humans.

MAAC

Maximum Acceptable Ambient Concentration: The MAAC is a state air standard used as a reference or indicator to trigger possible modifications to industrial processes (e.g., water treatment methods at an Industrial Wastewater Treatment Plant).

MCL

Maximum Contaminant Levels: Legally-enforceable drinking water standards promulgated by the EPA. They represent concentrations of chemical substances in drinking water that EPA deems protective of public health (considering water availability, economic feasibility, and water treatment technology) over a lifetime (70 years), at an exposure rate of 2 liters of water per day.

MCLA

Maximum Contaminant Level Action: Action levels for drinking water set by the EPA under its Superfund legislation. When the concentration of a chemical substance in an environmental medium exceeds the relevant action level, a regulatory response is triggered.

MCLG

Maximum Contaminant Level Goals: Non-enforceable drinking water standards or health goals recommended by EPA, where each corresponding concentration of a chemical substance is set at a level which no known or anticipated adverse human health effect is expected.

MRL

Minimal Risk Levels: Health guidelines derived by ATSDR representing estimates of daily human exposure to chemical substances (i.e., doses expressed in mg/kg/day) that the agency considers unlikely to be associated with any appreciable risk of deleterious noncancer effects over a specified duration of exposure. MRLs are calculated using data from human and animal studies and are reported for acute (1-14 days), intermediate (15-365 days), and chronic (more than 365 days) exposures. MRLs are published in ATSDR Toxicological Profiles for specific chemicals.

NAAQS

National Ambient Air Quality Standards: Air standards established by the EPA, as mandated in the 1990 Amendments to the Clean Air Act, for six criteria pollutants (carbon monoxide, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide, ozone, particulates, and lead). The air standards are classified as either primary, which define levels deemed protective of public health, or secondary, which in some instances establish lower levels to prevent adverse effects on vegetation, property, or other elements of the environment.

PEL

Permissible Exposure Limits: Concentrations of chemical substances in air that are 8-hour, time-weighted averages (TWA) developed for the occupational workplace, as established by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). This level may be exceeded for brief periods, but the sum of the exposure levels averaged over 8 hours must be equal to or below the PEL.

REL

Recommended Exposure Limits: Concentrations of chemical substances in air that are time-weighted averages for up to a 10-hour work day during a 40-hour work week. As established by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), these air concentrations are the recommended levels of exposure to hazardous substances commonly found in the occupational workplace.

RfC

Reference Concentrations: Health comparison values derived by EPA representing concentrations of chemical substances in air estimated from corresponding RfDs and factoring in default body weights and inhalation rates.

RfD

Reference Doses: Health guidelines derived by EPA representing estimates of human daily exposure to chemical substances unlikely to cause any noncarcinogenic adverse health effects over a lifetime. Like ATSDR's MRL, EPA's RfD is a dose expressed in mg/kg/day.

RMEG

Reference Dose Media Evaluation Guides: Health comparison values derived by ATSDR representing concentrations of chemical substances in air, water, or soil that are estimated from EPA's RfDs and factoring in default values for body weight and intake rate. Different RMEGs are calculated for adults and children.

RBC

Risk-Based Concentrations: Health comparison values derived by EPA's Region III Office. They represent levels of chemical substances (non-carcinogens and carcinogens, when applicable) in air, water, soil, and fish that are considered safe, assuming default values for body weight, exposure duration, and ingestion/inhalation rates.

TLV

Threshold Limit Values: Concentrations of chemical substances in air as established by the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH). The TLV is a time-weighted average concentration for a normal 8-hour workday and a 40-hour workweek, to which nearly all workers may be repeatedly exposed, day after day, without adverse effect. Many of ACGIH's TLVs were adopted by OSHA for use as PELs. TLVs and PELs, which are designed to protect healthy workers, are usually much higher than the health-based values of ATSDR and EPA, which were designed to protect the health of the general population, including the very young and the elderly. (Note: OSHA is required by statute to make rules that are economically feasible.) Although ATSDR does not base any of its community health decisions on TLVs or PELs, it sometimes cites such values in their reports merely as a means of putting concentrations of site-specific contaminants into a meaningful perspective for the reader.

Units of Measure:

ppm = parts per million, e.g., mg/L water or mg/kg soil.
ppb = parts per billion, e.g., ug/L water or ug/kg soil.
mg/kg/day = milligram per kilogram per day (unit of dose)
kg = kilogram (1,000 grams)
mg = milligram (0.001 grams)
ug = microgram (0.000001 grams)
L = liter
m³ = cubic meter (used in reference to a volume of air; equal to 1,000 liters)

References

Health Assessment Guidance Manual. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, Atlanta, GA, March, 1992.

Drinking Water and Health, Vol. 3, National Academy Press, Washington, D.C., 1980.

EPA Region III Risk-Based Concentration Table, January-June 1996. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 841 Chestnut Street, Philadelphia, PA, 19107. Available on EPA Region III's Internet website, http://www.epa.gov/reg3hwmd/riakmenu.htm?=Risk+Guidance.

1995-1996 Threshold Limit Values (TLVs) for Chemical Substances and Physical Agents and Biological Exposure Indices (BEIs). The American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH), 1995, Cincinnati, OH.

56 Federal Register. 26463, June 7, 1991.

APPENDIX E

ATSDR ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY

Quality Assurance

In preparing this report, ATSDR relied on the information provided in the referenced documents and by contacts with the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (HJDEP) and the community members. ATSDR assumes that adequate quality assurance and control measures were taken during chain-of-custody, laboratory procedures, and data reporting. The validity of the analyses and conclusions drawn in this document are determined by the availability and reliability of the information.

Human Exposure Pathway Evaluation and the use of ATSDR Comparison Values

ATSDR assesses a site by evaluating the level of exposure in potential or completed exposure pathways. An exposure pathway is the way chemicals may enter a person's body to cause a health effect. It includes all the steps between the release of a chemical and the population exposed: (1) a chemical release source, (2) chemical movement, (3) a place where people can come into contact with the chemical, (4) a route of human exposure, and (5) a population that could be exposed. In this assessment, ATSDR evaluates chemicals in the municipal water that people may consume or come into contact with.

Data evaluators use comparison values (CVs), which are screening tools used to evaluate environmental data that is relevant to the exposure pathways. Comparison values are concentrations of contaminants that are considered to be safe levels of exposure. Comparison values used in this document include ATSDR's environmental media evaluation guide (EMEG) and cancer risk evaluation guide (CREG). Comparison values are derived from available health guidelines, such as ATSDR's minimal risk levels and EPA's cancer slope factor.

The derivation of a comparison value uses conservative exposure assumptions, resulting in values that are much lower than exposure concentrations observed to cause adverse health effects; thus, insuring the comparison values are protective of public health in essentially all exposure situations. That is, if the concentrations in the exposure medium are less than the CV, the exposures are not of health concern and no further analysis of the pathway is required. However, while concentrations below the comparison value are not expected to lead to any observable health effect, it should not be inferred that a concentration greater than the comparison value will necessarily lead to adverse effects. Depending on site-specific environmental exposure factors (for example, duration of exposure) and activities of people that result in exposure (time spent in area of contamination), exposure to levels above the comparison value may or may not lead to a health effect. Therefore, ATSDR's comparison values are not used to predict the occurrence of adverse health effects.

The comparison values used in this evaluation are defined as follows: The CREG is a concentration at which excess cancer risk is not likely to exceed one case of cancer in a million persons exposed over a lifetime. The CREG is a very conservative CV that is used to estimate cancer risk. Exposure to a concentration equal to or less than the CREG is defined as an insignificant risk and is an acceptable level of exposure over a lifetime. The risk from exposure is not considered as a significant risk unless the exposure concentration is approximately 10 times the CREG and exposure occurs over several years. The EMEG is a concentration at which daily exposure for a lifetime is unlikely to result in adverse noncancerous effects.

Selecting Contaminants of Concern

Contaminants of concern (COCs) are the site-specific chemical substances that the health assessor selects for further evaluation of potential health effects. Identifying contaminants of concern is a process that requires the assessor to examine contaminant concentrations at the site, the quality of environmental sampling data, and the potential for human exposure. A thorough review of each of these issues is required to accurately select COCs in the site-specific human exposure pathway. The following text describes the selection process.

In the first step of the COC selection process, the maximum contaminant concentrations are compared directly to health comparison values. ATSDR considers site-specific exposure factors to ensure selection of appropriate health comparison values. If the maximum concentration reported for a chemical was less than the health comparison value, ATSDR concluded that exposure to that chemical was not of public health concern; therefore, no further data review was required for that chemical. However, if the maximum concentration was greater than the health comparison value, the chemical was selected for additional data review. In addition, any chemicals detected that did not have relevant health comparison values were also selected for additional data review.

Comparison values have not been developed for some contaminants, and, based on new scientific information other comparison values may be determined to be inappropriate for the specific type of exposure. In those cases, the contaminants are included as contaminants of concern if current scientific information indicates exposure to those contaminants may be of public health concern.

The next step of the process requires a more in-depth review of data for each of the contaminants selected. Factors used in the selection of the COCs included the number of samples with detections above the minimum detection limit, the number of samples with detections above an acute or chronic health comparison value, and the potential for exposure at the monitoring location.

APPENDIX E

Public Comments and ATSDR's Response

This appendix contains the comments received during the public comment period for Borough of Hawthorne Municipal Water Supply and ATSDR's response to those comments. The comments have been numbered and are in italic with the response directly below each comment.

1. The New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection performed two private well searches near two industrial facilities within the Borough of Hawthorne in 1996 and 1997. Both well searches showed no private potable wells near these sites. The public health assessment should be modified to reflect this fact.

These comments have been noted and included in the public health assessment. Page 1 now reads "There are approximately 30 private wells within approximately a one mile radius of the BHMWS (Table 3) [2]; however these private wells are not used for drinking water." The recommendation on page 8 ("Determine the location and use of all private wells within the Borough of Hawthorne. Sample the private wells identified as potable wells for VOCs, SVOCs, and metals") has been removed.

          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