PUBLIC HEALTH ASSESSMENT
METACHEM PRODUCTS, LLC
(a/k/a STANDARD CHLORINE OF DELAWARE, INCORPORATED)
NEW CASTLE, NEW CASTLE COUNTY, DELAWARE
ATSDR classifies the Standard Chlorine/Metachem NPL site currently as no apparent public health hazard for local residents because they are not exposed to the chemicals on the site.
On-site air monitoring should continue until remediation is completed. Workers should continue to wear personal protective equipment as indicated by monitoring of site conditions.
ATSDR does not know if the site was a health hazard during the two large spills in the 1980s and during the containment and removal activities after the spills. It is possible that during those times, the air may have contained contaminants at levels above the guidelines set by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Some of the employees probably came in contact with the spilled chemicals during the spills or while cleaning them up. Therefore, workers on the site and employees of nearby companies or workers involved with the responses to the spills may have been exposed by the inhalation and dermal pathways–i.e., through breathing vapors from and physical contact with the spilled chemicals. However, ATSDR does not have any monitoring data to determine what exposures may have occurred.
From the limited data ATSDR has reviewed, it appears that the OxyChem ball field area is not contaminated with Metachem chemicals; therefore, use of the ball field should not be a public health hazard.
ATSDR agrees with EPA's decision in the Record of Decision that restrictions should be placed on the property deed to prevent future activities at the site that would disturb any contaminated areas that are left in place and capped to prevent future exposures. ATSDR also agrees with EPA that measures are needed to prevent the use of the Columbia aquifer near the site for drinking water.
If these measures are put in place and the site remediation is completed, the Metachem site will not be a future public health hazard.
RECOMMENDATIONS AND PUBLIC HEALTH ACTION PLAN
The public should comply with the State of Delaware fishing advisories for Red Lion Creek and the Delaware River.
State officials should periodically check to make sure that the signs warning the public not to eat fish from Red Lion Creek or the Delaware River are present and clearly visible at locations where people are likely to fish or enter the water, such as boat ramps, bridges, piers, and parks.
Monitoring of air on the site and at the perimeter of the site should continue until the chemical products and other wastes are removed from the site and contaminated soil and sediment is excavated and treated. If the air monitoring at the fence lines indicates the presence of chemicals at levels of health concern, Air Products employees should be notified and anyone using the OxyChem ball field should be warned to evacuate the area.
During future off-site soil sampling, ATSDR recommends that samples be taken in the ball field area to confirm that area is not contaminated with site-related chemicals.
ATSDR staff should continue to work with EPA and the Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control to provide consultation and assistance regarding public health issues, as needed, during the removal of the chemicals and wastes, closure and decontamination of the facility, and remediation of the site.
Betty C. Willis, MS
Environmental Health Scientist
ATSDR/Division of Health Assessment and Consultation
Lora Siegmann Werner, MPH
Regional Representative, Region III
ATSDR/Office of Regional Operations
Technical Review by
Allan S. Susten, PhD, DABT
Toxicologist/Assistant Director for Science
ATSDR/Division of Health Assessment and Consultation
Coordination by
Capt. John A. Steward, MPH, REHS
Petition Coordinator
ATSDR/Division of Health Assessment and Consultation
Community Relations by
Youlanda R. Outin
Health Communications Specialist
ATSDR/Community Involvement Branch
.. Last accessed April 30, 2002... Last accessed May 30, 2002. Last accessed September 4, 2003.. Last accessed August 19, 2003.. Last accessed June 21, 2002.. Last accessed August 27, 2003.
Figure 1. GIS Demographic Map (5)
Figure 2. Spills in 1981 and 1986 (2)
Figure 5. Aerial Photograph of Metachem Products, LLC and OxyChem Ball Field Outlined in Blue (42)
Figure 6. Cancer Incidence Rates for 1980-1998 (40)
APPENDIX B: FISH CONSUMPTION ADVISORIES (27)
Delaware Division of Fish & Wildlife
Fish Consumption Advisories
Fishing is an important activity in Delaware's inland and coastal waters. Among the benefits provided by fishing are quality recreational opportunities, direct and indirect input to the local economy, food for recreational anglers and food for the commercial marketplace.
Fish are a good source of readily digestible protein, they are low in fat and sodium, and the unique type of fats found in fish are believed to provide cardiovascular benefits. Despite the general benefits of fishing and fish consumption, there has been a growing concern regarding the presence of chemical toxins in the flesh of finfish and shellfish taken from Delaware waters and the associated health risk to anglers and their families who consume their catch. The existence of chemicals in the edible portion of some fish has resulted in the public advisories listed in the table below. These advisories are as a result of joint action taken by the Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control and the Department of Health and Social Service's Division of Public Health.
The advisories were deemed necessary because of the nature of pollutants such as polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). Even when present in the water in extremely small amounts, some chemicals tend to build up over time in fish tissue because fish can absorb and concentrate contaminants from food they eat, or to a lesser extent, directly from the water. The amount of contaminants fish accumulate depends on the species, size, age, sex, and feeding area of the fish. Generally speaking, older larger individual fish accumulate the most contaminants, although in some cases contaminants are shed each time the fish spawn. Since fish accumulate many contaminants in their fatty tissues, certain species with higher oil content can pose more risk than others when both inhabit polluted areas.
More information concerning health advisories for Delaware waters can be obtained by contacting the Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control at (302) 739-4506, and/or by phoning the Division of Public Health at (302) 739-4071 or (302) 739-5617.
| Delaware Fish Consumption Advisories as of February, 2002 | ||||
| Waterbody | Species | Geographical Extent | Contaminants of Concern* | Advice |
| Becks Pond | All Finfish | Entire Pond | PCBs, Mercury | No more than six 8-ounce meals per year |
| Delaware River | All Finfish | Delaware State Line to the C&D Canal | PCBs, Arsenic, Dioxin, Mercury, Chlorinated Pesticides | No Consumption |
| Red Lion Creek | All Finfish | Rt 13 to the Delaware River | PCBs, Dioxin | No more than three 8-ounce meals per year |
| Lower Delaware River and Delaware Bay | Striped Bass, Channel Catfish, White Catfish, American Eel, White Perch | C&D Canal to Delaware Bay Mouth | PCBs, Mercury, Dieldrin | No more than one 8-ounce meal per year. |
| Tidal Brandywine River | All Finfish | River Mouth to Baynard Blvd. | PCBs | No Consumption |
| Non-Tidal Brandywine River | All Finfish | Baynard Blvd. To Pennsylvania Line | PCBs, Dioxin | No more than two 8-ounce meals per year |
| Shellpot Creek | All Finfish | Rt. 13 to the Delaware River | PCBs, Chlordane | No Consumption |
| Tidal Christina River | All Finfish | River Mouth to Smalley's Dam | PCBs, Dieldrin | No Consumption |
| Non-tidal Christina River | All Finfish | Smalley's Dam to I-95 | PCBs | No more than six 8-ounce meals per year |
| Little Mill Creek | All Finfish | Creek mouth to Kirkwood Highway | PCBs | No Consumption |
| Tidal White Clay Creek | All Finfish | River Mouth to Route 4 | PCBs | No Consumption |
| Non Tidal White Clay Creek | All Finfish | Rte. 4 to Paper Mill Road | PCBs | No more than one 8-ounce meal per month |
| Red Clay Creek | All Finfish | State Line to Stanton | PCBs, Dioxin, Chlorinated Pesticides | No Consumption |
| Chesapeake & Delaware Canal | All Finfish | Entire Canal in Delaware | PCBs | No Consumption |
| Appoquinimink River | All Finfish | Tidal Portions | PCBs, Dioxin | No More than one 8-ounce meal per year |
| Drawyers Creek | All Finfish | Tidal Portions | PCBs, DDT | No More than one 8-ounce meal per year |
| Silver Lake Middletown | All Finfish | Entire Lake | PCBs, Dieldrin, DDT, Dioxin | No More than one 8-ounce meal per year |
| St. Jones River | All Finfish | River Mouth to Silver Lake Dam | PCBs, Dioxin, Mercury, Arsenic | No More than two 8-ounce meals per year |
| Moores Lake | All Finfish | Entire Pond | PCBs, DDT | No More than two 8-ounce meals per year |
| Silver Lake Dover | All Finfish | Entire Pond | PCBs, Dioxin, Mercury | No More than two 8-ounce meals per year |
| Wyoming Mill Pond | All Finfish | Entire Pond | PCBs, Dioxin, DDT | No More than two 8-ounce meals per year |
| * The pollutant listed first is of the greatest concern in this system. | ||||
National Methylmercury Fish Consumption Advisory
On January 12, 2001, EPA and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued concurrent national fish consumption advisories recommending restricted consumption of freshwater coastal and marine species of fish due to methylmercury contamination. EPA's advisory targeted women of childbearing age and children who may be consuming noncommercial freshwater fish caught by family or friends. The advisory specifically recommends that women who are pregnant or could become pregnant, women who are nursing a baby, and their young children, should limit consumption of freshwater fish caught by family and friends to one meal per week unless the state health department has different advice for the specific waters where the fish are caught. For adults, one meal is six ounces of cooked fish or eight ounces uncooked fish; for a young child, one meal is two ounces of cooked fish or three ounces of uncooked fish.
FDA issued advice on mercury in fish bought from stores and restaurants, which includes ocean and coastal fish as well as other types of commercial fish; FDA advises that women who are pregnant or could become pregnant, nursing mothers, and young children not eat shark, swordfish, king mackerel, or tilefish. FDA also advises that women who are pregnant or could become pregnant may eat an average of 12 ounces of fish purchased in stores and restaurants each week. EPA recommends that women who are or could become pregnant, nursing mothers, and young children follow the FDA advice for coastal and ocean fish caught by family and friends. EPA and FDA both recommend that the public check with state or local health authorities for specific consumption advice about fish caught or sold in the local area. The EPA and FDA advisories are available through the EPA fish advisory website.
Cutting Out The Risks
Avoid eating fish from the waters listed in the above table.
Eat smaller fish of a species as long as it is of legal length.
Eat smaller portions of fish and eat fewer meals of fish.
Women of child bearing age and children may want to avoid eating any species of fish suspected to be a problem.
Dress and cook the fish in a manner that reduces contaminants.
Toxic chemicals tend to concentrate in the fatty tissue found in the:
When cleaning fish, always skin it and trim away fatty areas as shown below:
APPENDIX C: RESPONSE TO PUBLIC COMMENTS
This appendix summarizes the comments received at the public meetings on March 12 and May 1, 2003, or submitted during the comment periods January 1-30 and May 1-16, 2003. The comments and the agency's responses are provided below. All of the references in the comments to specific pages refer to the initial release of this public health assessment for public comment. The page numbers (and reference numbers) in some cases are different in this final document. However, in ATSDR's replies the references to specific pages, etc. are to this the final document.
The EPA memorandum provided the source of its information: Nigel Bunce, Environmental Chemistry, Winnipeg, Canada: Wuerz Publishing Ltd, 1991, pages 293-294. The breakdown of organic chemicals in the environment is well documented in the literature. In fact, the World Health Organization's 1991 Environmental Health Criteria 128–Chlorobenzenes Other than Hexachlorobenzene document in Section 1.3.1 Degradation says, "Chlorobenzenes are removed from the environment principally by biological, and, to a lesser extent, by non-biological mechanisms; ... In air, chemical and photolytic reactions are presumed to be the predominant pathways for chlorobenzene degradation, with residence times in the range of 13-116 days...."
The commenter provided no specific citation to support his contention that chlorobenzenes form more complex chemicals (PCBs) when exposed to sunlight, rather then degrading. In fact, the World Health Organization supports ATSDR's position that chlorobenzenes degrade in the environment.
The health assessment used the Dioxin and Furan Testing Data supplied to the Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control (DNREC) by Metachem (25) and recent dioxin analyses by EPA (24), not the CPA data, to draw conclusions about the level of dioxin exposure. The dioxin data used (see Tables 9 and 10) were from analysis of Standard Chlorine and Metachem products, and waste water treatment effluent, activated carbon filters on the waste water treatment plant, outdoor air, and indoor air samples at the Metachem facility. The commenter provided no data or information to show that the actual data used in the health assessment are not representative of dioxin concentrations at Metachem or in its products. ATSDR has received and included in the final health assessment additional dioxin analyses performed by EPA and its contractors. The new data do not change our conclusions.
ATSDR evaluates all the Superfund sites to determine if people are being exposed. If exposure is occurring, ATSDR provides advice to EPA and the communities on how they can prevent exposures and thus prevent potential health problems. EPA and state environmental agencies have the regulatory authority and responsibility to isolate or remove contamination from Superfund sites.
No. ATSDR and DHHS do not have regulatory authority over chemical plants. Congress has given that authority and responsibility to EPA.
ATSDR apologizes for the confusion that occurred. The notice could have been written to better convey that message. The notice said, "Your discussion is confidential." If you had to stand up in a public meeting type format to discuss your concerns, your discussion would not be confidential. The only way ATSDR can provide confidentiality is to talk to each individual one-on-one. Although the protocol was not what you expected, ATSDR hopes you appreciated the opportunity to speak privately with staff.
ATSDR tried to be straightforward in its Fact Sheets to provide clear answers to the community's concerns. It is unfortunate that the commenter thought that the Fact Sheets sounded like company propaganda. ATSDR does not condone the actions of Standard Chlorine or Metachem that resulted in leaks and spills that have heavily contaminated the site. Because residents do not live close to this facility and industrial complex, the community has not been exposed to the contamination caused by these companies. If people are not exposed to the chemicals in sufficient amounts to cause illness, they will not have adverse health effects.
This is correct. The paragraph does discuss anecdotal observations of local residents and what could be the source(s) of the smell.
To the best of ATSDR's knowledge, cerebral palsy, gall stones, and cervical cancer are not related to exposure to any of the chemicals used or manufactured by Standard Chlorine or Metachem Products. ATSDR encourages you to see your family doctor regarding your continuing stomach pains. The headaches and the skin rashes on your son's and girl friend's feet could be related to exposure to any of a number of different chemicals. ATSDR recommends that your girl friend and son work with your family doctor or a dermatologist to determine what is causing their skin rashes, so that they can avoid future exposures to the products or chemical to which they are allergic.
When you live in an industrial area, you cannot avoid some degree of exposure to chemicals when breathing the outside air. However, Delaware has several air monitoring stations in the area, and the levels of chemicals they have found are only occasionally high enough to cause respiratory problems, therefore local residents should not be overly concerned. During the summer whenever the state issues an ozone alert, ATSDR recommends that residents stay indoors as much as possible to reduce your exposure. One of the main contributors to the formation of ozone is vehicular emissions, so anything you can do to reduce or eliminate car emissions and emissions from lawn mowers, boat motors, and other combustion engines will benefit your health.
Maintain good health by eating a healthy diet, getting plenty of sleep and exercise, and avoiding smoking. Stress can also affect your health and resistance to diseases. If you have a high level of stress in your life, ATSDR recommends that you learn how to manage the stress. Do not be overly concerned about living in Delaware.
If you work in an industrial plant, obey the safety rules and wear all the personal protective equipment that is recommended by the company or union. Your health is more important then ribbing by fellow employees. Be proactive if you think employee exposures are occurring.
Work with your local zoning officials and DNREC permitting staff to maintain buffers between industrial and manufacturing complexes and residential areas, when they exist. Because of our lifestyles and the conveniences we all want, it is unrealistic to expect "zero" pollution; however, you can encourage companies to upgrade their facilities with new or better equipment that produces less pollution. There has been a decline in air pollution in Delaware over the last 7-10 years (see Figure 3). Encourage your regulatory agencies to keep this decline going while maintaining the economic stability that industry provides.
ATSDR put this person in contact with the Delaware Office of Drinking Water. The state staff have been working with the Artesian Company on the treatment system to remove the BCEE contaminants. The state staff agreed to sample this family's water and to advise them regarding the in-house filter.
From what ATSDR staff have read and heard about Standard Chlorine and Metachem Products and pictures the staff have seen, ATSDR agrees with you. There were lots of leaks and spills over the years, and it may not be possible to remove all the contamination. The EPA and DNREC data show that the soil at the site and sediments in Red Lion Creek and its tributary are contaminated. The Columbia aquifer is contaminated, and it has a layer of chlorinated benzene products on the bottom in some areas under the site. However, recent ground water sampling data show that the site-related contaminants have not migrated north across Red Lion Creek or east to the Delaware River.
ATSDR staff members talked to EPA and DNREC staff about this comment. They are now analyzing for nitrobenzene in soil samples on the site. ATSDR does not have any information at this time regarding chloronitrobenzene contamination.
ATSDR staff have not seen studies that link autism with the chlorobenzenes manufactured by Standard Chlorine or Metachem Products. More research is needed on what causes autism.
ATSDR's approach is to first determine IF residents are being or have been in the past exposed to any chemicals from the site in sufficient doses to cause adverse health effects. If no exposure is occurring or has occurred, then no health effects can occur that are due to the site. ATSDR has data from recent ground water and drinking water samples at and around the site that show the community is not being exposed to the contaminated ground water. The Delaware air sampling data going back to the early 1990s show chlorobenzene levels below concentrations known to cause health effects. The only pathway ATSDR found that residents might have been exposed to is if they ate fish from Red Lion Creek in spite of the warnings against doing that. ATSDR found that sufficient data exist to determine that exposure to site chemicals has not occurred in the communities around the site, and therefore, health effects occurring in the community are not due to Metachem. As discussed in the previous release of this document, ATSDR does think that workers at the site may have been exposed to the chemicals and therefore may have the potential for health effects related to their employment.
For many years there have been warnings by all the states along the Delaware River advising against eating fish caught in the river, because it is so polluted. Dumping titanium and ferrous chloride into the river adds to the contamination and reinforces ATSDR's warning against eating fish caught in the Delaware River.
ATSDR does not support the way Standard Chlorine and Metachem Products have polluted the site, groundwater, and sediments and water in the Red Lion Creek and its tributary. They did not properly maintain their equipment, with the result of several large spills and numerous leaks and spills that have heavily contaminated the area. Both companies left a legacy of environmental contamination.
However, ATSDR cannot ignore the fact that the community has not been exposed to the contamination caused by these companies. If people are not exposed to the chemicals in sufficient amounts to cause illness, they won't have adverse health effects. It is ATSDR's duty to let the community know whether members are exposed to contaminants from Superfund sites. ATSDR tried to be straightforward in the health assessment and the fact sheets to provide clear answers to the community's concerns about health effects caused by this site. It is probably difficult for local residents to accept that a site as polluted as this one is could be classified as no public health hazard, but if the residents don't come in contact with the chemicals by some means, they won't be affected. Fortunately, the residents do not live close to the facility and industrial complex. The buffer between residential areas and the facility has prevented exposures that could cause adverse health effects.
ATSDR hopes not. Encourage your son to take care of his health and wear any personal protection equipment furnished or recommended by Motiva or his union. He should be aware of his surroundings and minimize his exposure to the chemicals as much as possible.
Diabetes and high blood pressure are not known to be caused by benzene exposure. Leukemia can be caused by long-term exposure to high levels of benzene; however, it does not usually occur so rapidly (within 2-3 years). In the data ATSDR's staff reviewed, the maximum concentration of benzene measured at any of the air monitoring stations in your area (see Tables 5, 6, and 7) was 2.17 ppb, well below levels expected to cause leukemia.
ATSDR does not have regulatory authority over industrial facilities, so that the agency cannot address these concerns. The commenter should direct these concerns to state and federal environmental protection agencies (EPA and DNREC).
The only figure in the public comment release of this document that was generated by Metachem self-reporting was Figure 4. That figure has been replaced in the final document with a figure prepared by EPA and DNREC contractors based on their recent ground water sampling.
ATSDR has separated the chemicals used or produced by Standard Chlorine and Metachem Products from the rest of the chemicals found in environmental samples and evaluated those chemicals as if this facility was responsible for the whole concentrations. ATSDR evaluated data from samples taken in the past, as well as recent samples of air, soil, sediment, fish, and ground water. The data clearly show that even though the site itself is VERY contaminated, the local residents have not been exposed to the chemicals at concentrations that could cause adverse health effects. See also the replies to comments 6 and 16.
The most current data available at the time the document was written was reviewed and included in each release of this public health assessment. Unfortunately, it takes four to six weeks for a health assessment to go through internal review and approval, printing, and mailing, so any data released while the document is being processed can't be included in that edition of the document. The environmental agencies released several important data packages between the time the public comment release of this health assessment was written and mailed out to the community and we had several meetings with the public. That data has been included in this edition.
The same thing happened this time. This document was completed in mid-August. In late August and early September, EPA released data from a major soil and sediment sampling effort, so we have added this discussion at the last minute. The recent EPA data include dioxin sampling in selected locations, as well as chlorinated benzene sampling both onsite and offsite. Those data are not included in this edition, however, we have reviewed the new EPA data and concluded that it does not change any of our conclusions or recommendations, so it is not necessary to stop the publication of this document to include the new data. The concentrations of chlorinated benzenes detected in the soil and sediment samples is about the same (actually less) then the maximum values found earlier that are discussed in the text already. It does appear (as would be expected) that over the years the contaminants have continued to migrate deeper and spread further, so there will be more material to be remediated, but the contamination is not in areas where the public will come in contact with it. Since the community is not exposed to the contaminated soils and sediments, their health will not be adversely affected by the chemicals present in the environment.
ATSDR is aware that one of the dioxin samples taken on-site did show a much higher concentration then previously found anywhere on the site. However, the community does not have access to this area, so exposure is not possible. ATSDR staff will maintain contact with staff from EPA and DNREC regarding their activities at the Metachem Products NPL Site even after this public health assessment is released.
Yes, ATSDR agrees. Wind speed and direction were included in the air sampling reports from DNREC and Battelle that ATSDR reviewed.
Yes, the Red Lion Creek does flow into the Delaware River, which flows into the ocean. The river is contaminated by industry in several states before it gets to Delaware and New Jersey, both of which allow their industry also to discharge waste waters to the river. The people of Delaware and New Jersey are impacted to some extent by the chemicals from all the industry.
ATSDR obtained the 1994 report to the Cancer Task Force as well as the Battelle study that included fence line and community air samples. The Battelle data are provided in Table 6 and discussed in the Inhalation Pathway section. The maximum fence line benzene concentration in the Battelle samples was 0.051 ppm. The average benzene concentration in the community air samples was 0.58 ppb or 0.00058 ppm. ATSDR staff also looked at recent EPA air monitoring data on site and concluded that there are no data indicating that local residents' health has been affected by air emissions from the Standard Chlorine/Metachem site, in the past or currently.
The Delaware air program Web site contains several reports that the state has done to summarize the previous year's air data, as well as historical trends (see Figure 3 and reference 16). ATSDR suggests that the commenter contact the Delaware air program to see if staff there would do an area risk assessment. ATSDR's focus in this public health assessment is to determine whether the local residents are affected by chemicals from the Standard Chlorine and Metachem site.
ATSDR does not know what portion of the cancer incidences in Delaware are due to occupational exposure, genetics, personal life styles, or environmental exposures.
There is already a remediation system that is pumping the Columbia aquifer and treating the
water before it is discharged into the Delaware River. The weekly reports by the EPA On-Scene
Coordinator (OSC) provide a running total on the gallons of water pumped and treated and the
gallons of chlorinated benzenes recovered. The OSC reports are available on the EPA Web site
at: http://www.epaosc.net/site_profile.asp?site_id=03H6 . The monitoring reports are under
Documents at the bottom of the page. EPA and DNREC are evaluating the system to determine
what upgrades are needed to improve its effectiveness. ATSDR added to the text that the
Columbia aquifer is closer to the surface in low-lying areas.
EPA specified in its Record of Decision for this site how the ground water should be remediated. So far, only a portion of the plan has been implemented. Cleaning up ground water contamination is a slow and difficult process. It is too early to say if it would actually be possible to "completely cleanup" the Columbia aquifer. The best that can be achieved with known technologies may be to contain the contaminated groundwater under the site, so that it does not spread to other wells; to prohibit drilling of wells in the contaminated areas; to monitor the site to make sure the contamination is not spreading off-site; and to reduce the toxicity of the ground water by continuing to pump and treat the water. ATSDR only makes recommendations to assure the public is not being exposed. EPA can prevent exposures by containing the contamination or remediating it.
EPA has been operating a portion of the facility since July 17, 2003. As of the time of this reply (late-August), the air monitors have not detected emissions that would cause health effects in the community.
It is ATSDR's understanding that tests have shown that biological treatment (which was originally proposed for cleaning up the site) will not work. EPA is re-evaluating feasible treatment options. They recently announced that they are studying the use of in-situ chemical oxidation, not incineration.
ATSDR agrees. ATSDR recommended continued air monitoring in the initial release of this public health assessment, as well as in this, the final document.
Yes, private wells on-site, on neighboring properties, and on the north bank of Red Lion Creek have been sampled this last year. All public and private drinking water wells within a 1.5-mile radius of the site were also sampled in December 2002 and January 2003. So far, the contamination has not spread beyond the industrial area.
ATSDR staff use other references (not MSDSs) as sources of health information and toxicological studies, so ATSDR does not have MSDS sheets for the chemicals used at Metachem. EPA may have MSDS sheets for the chemicals if you want to ask that agency. The Toxicity of Site-Related Chemicals section of this health assessment discusses the predominant chemicals used or manufactured at the plant and the health effects they can cause.
ATSDR identified Standard Chlorine and Metachem workers as probably exposed in the past. ATSDR does not have data showing the concentrations of the various chemicals that workers were exposed to in the air and well water before the plant was closed, so that ATSDR cannot say for sure whether they might have health effects.
ATSDR sometimes establishes a registry of individuals identified as receiving a known dose of a chemical or a unique combination of chemicals. The purpose is to study what health effects may occur in the individuals as a result of the exposure. At this site, the communities have not been exposed to chemicals from the site (if they obeyed the fish advisories), so a registry would not provide useful information.
In the initial release of this public health assessment, ATSDR recommended that the state post warning signs at locations where people are likely to fish or enter the water, such as boat ramps, bridges, piers, and parks, if signs were not already present. Delaware staff told us they visited these locations and put up new signs if the signs were missing or difficult to read due to weathering.
The following information was copied from the Delaware Office of Drinking Water Web page at: http://www.state.de.us/dhss/dph/hsp/odwhomeowner.htm . If you would like to talk to staff in the
Office of Drinking Water's main office, the telephone number is (302) 739-5410. Additional
information is available on the Delaware Web site:
Private water supplies should be tested annually for nitrate and coliform bacteria to detect contamination problems early. Test them more frequently and for more potential contaminants, such as radon or pesticides, if you suspect a problem. Water test kits are available for a charge of $4.00 each at any of the environmental health field offices serving the three respective counties. If you use a private laboratory to conduct the testing, nitrate and bacteria samples will typically cost between $10 and $20 to complete. Testing for other contaminants will be more expensive. For example, testing for pesticides or organic chemicals may cost from several hundred to several thousand dollars.
EPA does not test individual homes and cannot recommend specific labs to test your drinking water, but states such as Delaware do certify water testing labs within their respective borders. Many laboratories are available to test water quality, as are cited on "List of Delaware's Certified Private Water Testing Laboratories". Most laboratories mail back the sample results within days or several weeks.
If a contaminant is detected, the results will include the concentration of the contaminant and an indication of whether this concentration exceeds a drinking water quality standard. If a standard is exceeded in your sample, retest the water supply immediately and contact your public health department for assistance. Some problems can be handled quickly. For example, high bacteria concentrations can sometimes be controlled by disinfecting a well. Filters or other on-site treatment processes may also remove some contaminants. Other problems may require a new source of water, or a new, deeper well. If serious problems persist, you may need to rely on bottled water until a new water source can be obtained.
Environmental Health Field Services offices are located in the three respective counties and are open daily from 8:00 a.m. until 4:30 p.m. Those offices are:
New Castle County Environmental Health Field Services
2055 Limestone Road, Suite 100
Wilmington, DE 19808
Phone: (302) 995-8650
Fax: (302) 995-8323Kent County Environmental Health Field Services
805 River Rd., Third Floor
Dover, DE 19901
Phone: (302) 739-5305
Fax: (302) 739-7013Sussex County Environmental Health Field Services
546 S. Bedford St., Room 1001
Georgetown, DE 19947
Phone: (302) 856-5496
Fax: 302-856-5065List of Delaware's Certified Drinking Water Testing Laboratories
Bacteriology
Atlantic Coast
City of Wilmington Water Division Laboratory
ENVIROCORP, Inc.
McCall Laboratories
United Water Delaware
Chemistry
Atlantic Coast
Batta Laboratories
ENVIROCORP, Inc.
McCall Laboratories
Mid-Atlantic Environmental Laboratories
Obtain a copy of the Delaware Fish Consumption Advisories and show your doctor from which creeks you ate fish. The advisory lists the contaminants of concern in the various bodies of water. Once your physician knows what chemicals you may have been exposed to and what illnesses you have, the physician should be able to advise you on whether any illnesses are related to eating the fish. If your physician needs information on any of the chemicals, he/she can contact the Delaware Division of Public Health at 302-739-4071 or 302-739-5617 or ATSDR at 888-422-8737.
The fish advisories are updated periodically. You can get a current copy of the Fish Consumption
Advisories from the Delaware Division of Public Health, the Division of Fish and Wildlife or
from their Web site at http://www.dnrec.state.de.us/fw/advisory.htm .
Not that we know of. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regulates work place conditions. Workers can contact the nearest OSHA office if they have questions about exposures in the work place.
EPA uses several continuous air monitoring stations on-site and hand-held air sampling equipment to determine what kind of respiratory protection equipment the workers need to wear.
ATSDR agrees that it may be important to consider both cancer mortality and incidence data when evaluating communities that have been exposed to carcinogens at concentrations likely to cause health effects. However, the local residents have not been exposed to carcinogens by this site. ATSDR included a brief discussion of cancer incidence rates in Delaware because the community is concerned about cancer.
It is ATSDR's understanding that the Delaware Division of Fish and Wildlife catches various species of fish in Delaware bodies of water. The fish are analyzed for a variety of chemicals, and the fish advisories are updated as needed. ATSDR recommends that you ask the restaurant where the shellfish or fish you plan to eat were caught, and decide how much you should eat based on the Fish Consumption Advisories.
Both companies caused contamination of the site. The two large spills occurred while Standard Chlorine owned the site, but from pictures, inspection reports, and reports by former employees, Metachem Products continued Standard Chlorine's legacy of environmental pollution. It doesn't matter which company caused what contamination; the primary concern of ATSDR staff is whether local residents have been exposed to any of the chemicals.
ATSDR staff found no evidence that the community has been exposed to concentrations of chemicals from this site that could cause adverse health effects; therefore, body burden testing, a community health study, or an exposure investigation is not recommended, so ATSDR does not need a community assistance panel at this site.
EPA is conducting the environmental (including soil) sampling for the Metachem site. Contact EPA regarding community participation in the environmental studies.
The symptoms you attribute to paradichlorobenzene are what one would expect when exposed to high concentrations–not concentrations that are likely to exist in ambient air about three miles from a spill of this chemical. If your pediatrician would like to consult with one of the ATSDR physicians or toxicologists regarding chemical exposures, he/she can contact ATSDR at 888-422-8737.
ATSDR obtained the Battelle study and has included a discussion of that study's data in this health assessment. Unfortunately, the study's authors did not included the actual concentrations of chemicals found in the samples taken in Llangollen Estates. However, they characterized the concentrations as typical background concentrations. None of the chemicals from Standard Chlorine that Battelle detected at off-site locations were at levels that would cause adverse health effects.
ATSDR has. The health comparison values that ATSDR uses take into account the unique vulnerabilities of children and pregnant women. See the Children's Susceptibility section.
Hepatotoxic means "causing injury to the liver." Thyroxine is an iodine-containing hormone produced by the thyroid gland. None of the chlorinated benzene products manufactured by Standard Chlorine or Metachem Products are classified by any US government agency as a human carcinogen.
ATSDR has reviewed all the toxicological data available on chlorinated benzenes and prepared the peer-reviewed summary of the current knowledge on their potential to cause health effects in Toxicological Profile for 1,4-Dichlorobenzene (34) and Toxicological Profile for Chlorobenzene (31). Chlorobenzene and 1,4-Dichlorobenzene, the companies' primary products, are not carcinogens.
EXAMPLES of other lies in your document are:
For consistency, ATSDR policy requires staff to provide in the Site Description section of a public health assessment the number of people living within one mile of the facility being evaluated. In the Discussion section of the health assessment, ATSDR discusses the various ways the public is or might have been exposed. The authors are required to discuss in that section the number of people believed to be exposed by the various routes of exposure regardless of the distance from the facility.
The memo does exist and ATSDR's quotations are accurate and not out of context. EPA has reviewed the draft health assessment and did not comment that the quotations incorrectly represented the opinions and conclusions made in their memo.
The paragraph is a discussion of an EPA memo regarding allegations about the site that EPA investigated. The commenter disagrees with the references EPA and ATSDR used to draw their conclusions on the issue of whether sunlight degrades chlorobenzene into hydrocarbons and hydrochloric acid; or sunlight causes chlorobenzenes to combine into more complex compounds like dioxins and furans. See comment number 1 for further discussion of this issue.
ATSDR believes that EPA meant that Metachem did not sell its chemicals directly to the consumers or local residents; rather the company sold its chemicals to other companies who then used the chemicals to manufacture consumer products–thus, the chemicals Metachem manufactured were "intermediate products", not final products. Other companies made products such as moth balls and room deodorizers from paradichlorobenzene or used the chemicals in their manufacturing processes to manufacture other chemicals–that is, as a "chemical intermediate."
ATSDR obtained the recent EPA soil sampling data and included it in the Dermal Pathway section. It is true that EPA did find dioxins on-site in the parts per million range (1,000,000 ppt is the same as 1 ppm). However, the public is not exposed to on-site soils–or to the air inside the warehouse.
The commenter states that it is a fact that the crops are contaminated with dioxin; however, he provided no analytical data to support his allegation. It is still ATSDR's opinion that the Metachem facility has not contaminated the crops grown in the fields near the site. See the Crops section for further discussion.
The referenced section says "If people comply [emphasis added] with the Delaware fish advisories, we do not expect any adverse health effects due to eating fish caught near Metachem." The state fish advisories say not to eat ANY fish from the Delaware River. If the commenter is concerned that fish from the Delaware River migrate into the Red Lion Creek, then ATSDR advises that he not eat even three fish from the creek.
The fact that there are warnings in documents against burning chlorinated benzene products does not mean that the company did not burn its waste products. In fact, this was the only comment that raised the issue of not burning waste products–all other community members were concerned because they think Metachem did burn its waste products in the boiler. ATSDR believes that Metachem did burn wastes in its boiler, and therefore this sentence has not been changed.
PCBs and dioxins are larger, more complex chemical compounds then 1,4-dichlorobenzene. Therefore, 1,4-dichlorobenzene can not "break down to PCBs and dioxins." The commenter did not provide documentation to support his theory that the vapors from moth balls and deodorizers (made of 1,4-dichlorobenzene) form more complex chemicals (PCBs and dioxins) when exposed to the air. ATSDR is not aware of any scientific evidence that supports this theory. Also, see the reply to comment 1.
As discussed above and in the reply to comment number 1, ATSDR disagrees with the commenter. He provided no references to support his theory.
ATSDR has added a statement warning that people should not ingest any of these chemicals to make sure people understand that serious adverse health effects can occur if they ingest these chemicals. In the next sentence on page 20 of the health assessment, the discussion said that these people had adverse health effects, including skin blotches and lower numbers of red blood cells. ATSDR thought people would realize they were not being advised to eat it, but a warning has been added to make sure the meaning is clear.
Actually, ATSDR describes two cases of documented ingestion of paradichlorobenzene in the Toxicological Profile for 1,4-Dichlorobenzene (34): the 21-year-old pregnant woman who consumed 1-2 toilet bowl deodorizer blocks per week throughout pregnancy and a 19-year-old black woman who ingested 4-5 pellets of moth balls daily for about 2.5 years. The black woman had symmetrical lesions with a bizarre pattern of increased skin pigmentation over most of her body. After she discontinued this practice, the skin discolorations and lesions gradually disappeared over the next 4 months.
The document lists sources of benzene to which people are exposed. Gasoline fumes and exhaust are just two of the sources mentioned. There are no comparisons between the site and these other sources.
