Skip directly to search Skip directly to A to Z list Skip directly to site content

HEALTH CONSULTATION

MATERIALS EXCHANGE CORPORATION CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION LANDFILL
(a/k/a WEST COAST MATERIALS)
HOMOSASSA SPRINGS, CITRUS COUNTY, FLORIDA


SUMMARY

This is the third health consultation the Florida Department of Health (DOH) has prepared forthis142-acre landfill at 5353 Grover Cleveland Boulevard in Homosassa Springs, Florida. In the1980s, Monex deposited 1.25 million tons of flyash from a coal-fired electric-generatingcomplex in this landfill. Nearby residents are concerned that fugitive dust has caused off-sitesoil contamination. They are also concerned that buried material poses a threat to nearbygroundwater, which is their drinking water source.

In a March 10, 2000, Health Consultation, DOH reviewed the limited existing environmentaldata and recommended additional testing. In a second Health Consultation evaluating resultsfrom five down-gradient private wells, DOH found no volatile organic chemicals or metalsabove state or federal drinking water standards. Subsequently, DOH found private wells closerto the site. In October and November 2000, the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP)and their consultant sampled groundwater from four on-site monitoring wells and 12 nearbyprivate wells. They also collected and analyzed four on-site and four off-site soil samples. Inthis health consultation, DOH evaluates these soil and groundwater sampling results.

DOH classifies this site as an "indeterminate public health hazard." Although the available datado not indicate a current public health problem, additional off-site soil and groundwater data areneeded to evaluate the public health threat from this site.

On-site and off-site soil contained metals at levels that are acceptable for current site use. However, the soil samples were taken from the top 2 feet and DOH usually considers the top 3inches of soil in determining peoples' exposure. This sampling difference is important at thissite because of the community's concern about wind-blown flyash. Because of the possibility ofhigher surface soil concentrations, DOH recommends retesting the top 3 inches of off-site soil.

One on-site monitor well had elevated concentrations of metals. One off-site private well hadelevated concentrations of lead. The lead levels in this off-site private well were not elevated,however, when it was retested. Another off-site private well contained oil and grease. Someother off-site private wells contained trace levels of chloroform, dichlorofluoromethane, 1,1-dichloroethene, and chloromethane. Although the levels of these chemicals are unlikely to causeillness, they do indicate possible contamination from the landfill. These off-site private wellsshould be routinely tested to ensure they do not become a public health threat.

The Citrus County Health Department will sample 12 private off-site wells twice a year for 5years. The DOH Drinking Water Toxics section will fund the analyses of the samples by theDOH laboratory. The DEP Superfund Site Screening Section has indicated an interest inadditional soil sampling on or near the site.

If the site use changes, DOH would need additional on-site environmental data to determine the public health risk.


BACKGROUND

The Materials Exchange Corporation site, now called West Coast Materials, is a privately ownedand operated construction and demolition (C&D) landfill. This landfill is about 3.5 miles east ofUS 19 (Figure 1), at 5355 Grover Cleveland Boulevard. On April 2, 1999, a resident living nearthis landfill petitioned the federal Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR)to evaluate the potential public health threats posed by this site. The ATSDR asked the FloridaDepartment of Health (DOH) to prepare a health consultation for this site. In a March 10, 2000,Health Consultation, DOH reviewed the limited existing environmental data and recommendedadditional soil, surface water, and groundwater testing. DOH also recommended continuous air-monitoring. In a second health consultation evaluating results from five down-gradient privatewells, DOH found no volatile organic chemicals or metals above state or federal drinking waterstandards; however, these wells were not the closest wells to the site. DOH recommendedtesting the down-gradient wells closest to the site.

This, our third health consultation, evaluates analytical results for soil and groundwater samplestaken during a site investigation in late October and early November 2000. Site investigatorsincluded personnel from the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) Superfund sitescreening section, Ecology and Environment (E&E, DEP's contractors), and the Citrus CountyHealth Department.

History
Mr. Fred Parsons operated a sand mine on the site in the 1970s. From 1980 to 1990, Monex (also known as Monier Ash) disposed of 1.25 million tons of coal flyash in 30 acres near the center of the property. The flyash came from the Florida Power Energy Complex north of Crystal River. Nearby residents reported dust in their yards from the flyash trucks. Residents reported that the drivers had covered their truck-beds when they entered the landfill, but they removed the covers when the ash was dumped and this light material blew out on the trucks' return trips. Residents are concerned not only about inhaling metals from dust, they are also concerned that metals from the flyash may have leached into the groundwater.

In 1992, Materials Exchange Corporation, Inc. purchased the site and the Florida Department ofEnvironmental Protection (DEP) permitted a second burial area on the site for construction anddemolition (C&D) waste. Beginning in 1993, this second area received about one million cubicyards of waste every 2 years from Citrus and several other counties to the south. Residentsbegan complaining of odors in 1994. DEP attributed the odors to rotting drywall (gypsum)which can produce hydrogen sulfide under anaerobic (no oxygen) conditions.

In 1997, West Coast Materials, Inc. purchased the site. The second burial area closed in 1998,after receiving about 2.5 million cubic yards of C&D waste. A third area is currently receivingC&D waste. DEP permitted four subareas within this third area, one for each of the four years ofthe current permit. Figure 2 shows the two closed burial areas and one active waste area on the142-acre property. A portion of the second construction and demolition burial area is closed. The operators are depositing debris in another portion of this area and they are still mining athird area for sand. West Coast Materials, Inc. has applied to DEP to operate a Class III landfillin the western area of the site (4).

Demographics
Eleven single-family homes and five mobile homes are within 500 feet of the site property boundaries. Farther than 500 feet to the west and northwest of the site are both undeveloped and residential areas. The areas to the east, north, and immediately west of the site are planned for low residential density. The areas farther west and south of Grover Cleveland Boulevard are planned for medium residential density.

According to 1990 census data, roughly 5,200 people live within a 2-mile radius of the site.About half use private wells. Average family incomes in this area range from about $20,000 to$25,000 per year. Most of the population is Caucasian (99%), with the remaining 1% composedof Hispanics, Asians, Native Americans, and others. Four public schools with about 3,200students are within 2 miles of the site.

Local Hydrology
A surficial aquifer does not exist on or down-gradient from the site. The Floridan aquifer system is the first source of water encountered. Groundwater elevations are between 32 and 80 feet below the land surface. Mining activities and the limited number of monitoring wells complicate the interpretation of groundwater flow direction.

The Floridan aquifer system is the primary source of drinking water in Citrus County. Threepublic supply wells and 50 commercially operated potable supply wells serving a population of9,917 exist within four miles of the site. Figure 2 shows the closest wells. Private drinking waterwell GW-7 is approximately 500 feet from the western perimeter of the site. However, GW-15is closest to past landfill operations. It is about 2,250 feet from the first closed construction and demolition debris burial area.


ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE COLLECTION, ANALYSIS AND RESULTS

Soil

Sample Locations - E&E collected eight soil samples with a stainless steel bucket auger fromzero to two feet below the ground surface. They collected these samples on November 2, 2000, in the following locations (4):

  • on the site in potential source areas,
    • - three samples from drainage retention areas down gradient from flyash and construction and demolition debris burial areas,
      - one soil sample from near the maintenance area.

  • off the site in potentially affected areas,
    • - three samples from two properties west of the site,
      - one sample from a property south of the site, and

  • one background sample at the intersection of West Miller Street and at the power line right-of-way northeast of the site.

See E&E's Table 4-1 (at the end of the report) and Figure 2 for sample locations.

Analytical Results - DOH assumes that E&E and DEP followed standard quality assurance andquality control procedures in collecting and analyzing these soil samples. The DEP laboratory inTallahassee analyzed each soil sample for volatile organic chemicals, base-neutral/acidextractable organic compounds, pesticides, polychlorinated biphenyls, metals, and cyanide. Inaddition, DEP analyzed the background sample and the soil sample they collected near themaintenance shed for oil and grease, and total recoverable petroleum hydrocarbons.

DOH evaluated these soil analytical results. Most of these chemicals were not present aboveinstrument detection levels with the following exceptions. Traces of semi-volatile chemicals(polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons - remnants of incompletely burned organic materials) werefound in one on-site soil sample and traces of organochlorine pesticides were found in two on-site samples. All the on-site and off-site soil samples showed varying levels of metals. Thedetection of metals in soil is common because metals can be natural components of soil.

DOH screened all of the identified chemicals using health-based screening levels. No off-sitesoil chemical values exceeded ATSDR's health-based screening values (2). The three on-sitesoil-arsenic levels that exceed our screening value for residential site use and cancer are shownin the following table. All other on-site chemicals detected were below health-based screeninglevels.

Chemicals in On-site Soil Collected in October and November 2000
(units-milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg), or parts per million.)
Chemical ATSDR
CREG1
MECSS-2
original/DUP
MECSS-3 MECSS-4
Arsenic 0.51 1.8I/3.0 2.3 I 3.1

1 ATSDR cancer risk evaluation guide for 1x 10-6 excess cancer risk (2). A one-in-one-millionexcess cancer is a governmental risk management decision of an "acceptable level ofrisk" (5). The federal government makes such risk management decisions to limitpeople's exposures to toxic chemicals.

I - Value reported is less than the minimum quantitation limit and greater than or equal to the minimum detection limit.

Discussion of Likelihood of Exposure to and Health Effects from Soil Chemicals - While thearsenic levels in on-site soil are above the ATSDR cancer risk evaluation guide, it is unlikelythat these levels currently pose a risk to public health. This is because the assumptions we maketo calculate an average person's dose are unlikely to be met. First, these levels of arsenic werefound in sediments/soils in the drainage retention areas and near the truck maintenance shed. Under non-drought conditions, the drainage retention area will likely be underwater and no oneis likely to come in contact with sediments from these areas, including site workers. In addition,workers probably do not have daily contact with the soil near the maintenance shed.

To calculate a daily exposure amount (dose), DOH assumes that a person would eat or inhale100 milligrams of soil per day (about the weight of one postage stamp), each day, for a periodgreater than a year. We also assume an average person weighs about 140 pounds. At this time itis unlikely that anyone would ingest or inhale this much soil. The landfill is only open 5 days aweek, and much of the activity on the site takes place in trucks and other vehicles. The highestarsenic levels measured on the site could increase the risk of lung and skin cancer for individualswho might disturb contaminated soil and who might be exposed for extended periods, if the siteuse changed. Such exposure is currently unlikely; therefore, skin and lung cancers are alsocurrently unlikely.

With the present site use, it is unlikely children would have daily exposure to on-site soil as thesite is fenced and gated along the road to restrict access. DOH's assumed ingestion level (fordaily dose calculations) for children is higher than for adults, 200 milligrams of soil per day. The dose DOH calculated for children ingesting 200 mg of soil with 3.1 mg/kg of arsenic, daily,for 10 years, is 26 times lower than the lowest dose linked with lung cancer in humans. Therefore, even residential use of this site would be unlikely to increase the risk of cancersassociated with arsenic ingestion even for the youngest members of the population, includingthose who might deliberately eat soil.

The concentrations of chemicals in the top 2 feet of off-site soil are unlikely to cause illness.DOH usually considers the top 3 inches in determining peoples' exposure. DEP's contractorE&E took these soil samples from 0 to 2 feet deep and mixed them before analysis. Such asample may not be representative of what people are generally exposed to, except if they aredoing extensive digging. Mixing the surface soil with deeper soil may have diluted highersurface concentrations. Because of the possibility of higher surface soil concentrations, DOHrecommends retesting the top 3 inches of soil, especially off the site. Soil samples taken fromonly the top 3 inches would allow DOH to better assess the effects fugitive flyash could have forresidents from incidental ingestion or from breathing dust from dry weather conditions.

Groundwater

Sample Locations
On-site Monitoring Wells - DEP contractors collected six groundwater samples on November 1, 2000 from on-site monitoring wells (GW-1 through GW-6, (4)). The following list gives general monitoring well locations:

  • two potential source/impact area monitoring wells, MW-7A and MW-13B, down gradient of the flyash and the first closed C&D burial area,
  • three samples from potentially impacted monitoring wells, MW-15, MW-16, and MW-17 on the northwestern and western perimeters of the site, and
  • one background sample up gradient of the burial areas, from monitoring well MW-12.

See Table 4-1 (from E&E's report at the end of the report) and Figure 2 for sample locations.

Off-site Private Drinking Water Wells - DEP's contractor E&E and Citrus County HealthDepartment staff collected groundwater samples from twelve private wells on October 31, 2000.The following list indicates the general proximity of the private wells to the site:

  • seven west of the site (MECGW-7 through MECGW-13),
  • one northwest of the site (MECGW-14),
  • one southwest of the site (MECGW-15), and
  • three south of the site-across Grover Cleveland Boulevard (MECGW16 through MECGW-18).

All these wells are shown on Figure 2 and described on E&E's Table 4-1. Each well was purgedfor at least 15 minutes at the faucet closest to the holding tank or well. On Jan 10, 2001, theCitrus County Health Department resampled MECGW-11 and MECGW-9 for lead.

Analytical Results
On-site Monitoring Wells - The DEP laboratory in Tallahassee analyzed each sample for volatile organic chemicals, base-neutral/acid extractable organic compounds, pesticides, polychlorinated biphenyls, metals, and cyanide. DOH assumes that E&E and DEP followed standard quality assurance and quality control procedures in collecting and analyzing these groundwater samples. Most of the chemicals were not present above instrument detection levels, with the following exceptions. Two monitoring wells contained trace levels of Endosulfan Sulfate (a chlorinated insecticide) and three contained trace levels of chloroform. All of the monitoring wells contained trace levels of metals.

DOH screened all of the chemicals identified in the monitoring wells using health-basedscreening levels (1, 3). The following table lists chromium, lead, and vanadium found in on-sitegroundwater that exceed these screening levels (all other on-site chemicals detected were belowhealth-based screening levels).

Chemicals in On-site Groundwater Collected in late October and early November 2000(units-micrograms per liter (g/L), or parts per billion)
Chemical Screening Value Monitoring Well MECGW-3 DUP
Depth - 47.5'
Monitoring Well MECGW-5
Depth - 50.8'
Chromium301, 1002, 100311.9152
Lead15 315.094.6
Vanadium304, 10057.9108

1 RMEG - Reference Dose Media Evaluation Guide for Children - ATSDR
2 RMEG - Reference Dose Media Evaluation Guide for Adults - ATSDR
3 MCL - Maximum Contamination Level, Florida Primary Drinking Water Standard (Enforceable)
4EMEG - Intermediate (exposure period greater than 10 days and less than 365 days) Environmental Media Evaluation Guide for Children - ATSDR
5EMEG - Intermediate (exposure period greater than 10 days and less than 365 days) Environmental Media Evaluation Guide for Adults - ATSDR

Off-site Private Potable Wells - The DOH Laboratory in Jacksonville analyzed each of the 12private well samples for volatile organic chemicals, semi-volatile organic compounds, andmetals. In addition, the DEP Laboratory in Tallahassee analyzed the three private well samplesfrom south of the site for oil, grease, and total recoverable hydrocarbons. DOH assumes thatE&E, Citrus County Health Department, and DOH and DEP Laboratory staff followed standardquality assurance and quality control procedures in collecting and analyzing these groundwatersamples. Most of the chemicals were not present above instrument detection levels, with thefollowing exceptions. Five private wells contained trace levels of chloroform, one containedtrace levels of dichlorofluoromethane, one contained trace levels of 1,1-dichloroethene, and onecontained trace levels of chloromethane. All of the private wells contained trace levels ofmetals.

DOH screened all of the chemicals identified in the private potable wells using health-basedscreening levels (1, 3). The following table shows lead in one off-site private well that exceedsthe enforceable state Maximum Concentration Level (all other chemicals detected off-site werebelow health-based screening levels). The detection of oil and grease and total recoverablepetroleum hydrocarbons in one off-site potable well may be related to the maintenance area on the site.

Chemicals in Off-site Groundwater(We give all values in micrograms per liter (g/L), or parts per billion.)
Chemical Screening Value Private Well
MECGW-16
sampled 10/31/00
Private Well
MECGW-11
sampled 10/31/00
Private Well
MECGW-11
sampled 1/10/01
Lead151U1209.1
Oil & Grease Not Available8,000NANA

1MCL - Maximum Contamination Level, Florida Primary Drinking Water Standard (Enforceable)
U - Undetected (chemical not present above the instrument detection level)
NA - Not Analyzed

Discussion of Likelihood of Exposure to and Health Effects from Groundwater Chemicals -Metals are considered key indicators for monitoring groundwater at flyash disposal sites. Elevated metals concentrations in groundwater are sometimes attributable to suspended solids. Although sample MECGW-5-the sample with the metals that exceeded our screeningvalues-had a high turbidity reading, the second highest turbidity value came from the on-sitebackground well that had only low or non detectable metal concentrations. With so fewmonitoring wells and limited data from those few wells, DOH is unable to draw conclusionsabout on-site groundwater quality.

Although elevated levels of lead were found in groundwater on and off the site, the resample ofMECGW-11 did not confirm the presence of elevated lead. DOH recommends continued off-site sampling of private wells, to assure drinking water quality. Although the DOH laboratorydid not analyze the private well samples for vanadium, because vanadium was detected in on-sitegroundwater future private well testing should include vanadium.

ATSDR's Child Health Initiative
ATSDR and DOH, through ATSDR's Child Health Initiative, recognize that the unique vulnerabilities of infants and children demand special emphasis in communities faced with the contamination of their environment. Children are at a greater risk than adults from certain kinds of exposure to hazardous substances emitted from waste sites. They are more likely exposed because they play outdoors and because they often bring food into contaminated areas. They are shorter than adults, which means they breathe dust, soil, and heavy vapors close to the ground. Children are also smaller, resulting in higher doses of chemical exposure per body weight. The developing body systems of children can sustain permanent damage if toxic exposures occur during critical growth stages. Probably most important, however, children depend completely on adults for risk identification and risk management decisions, housing decisions, and for access to medical care. ATSDR has screening values for most of these metals, calculated specifically for children's exposures.


CONCLUSIONS

DOH classifies this site as an "indeterminate public health hazard." DOH was not able todetermine the public health threat from groundwater because of the limited amount of data. Although the available data do not indicate a current public health problem, four soil and fivegroundwater samples are inadequate to evaluate the public health threat for future use of this142-acre site. If the site use changes (flyash mining, residential development, schoolconstruction, etc). DOH would need additional environmental data to determine the publichealth risk.

  1. Concentrations of metals in the top 2 feet of off-site soil are not likely to cause illness. DOH usually considers the top 3 inches of soil, however, in determining peoples'exposure. Soil samples from zero to 2 feet deep may not be representative of whatpeople are generally exposed to. Mixing surface soil with deeper soil may have dilutedhigher surface concentrations. Because of the possibility of higher surface soilconcentrations, DOH recommends retesting the top 3 inches of off-site soil.


  2. One on-site monitor well had elevated concentrations of metals. One off-site private wellhad elevated lead that was not confirmed when this well was retested. Another off-siteprivate well contained oil and grease. Some of the off-site private wells contained tracelevels of chloroform, dichlorofluoromethane, 1,1-dichloroethene, and chloromethane. Although the levels of these chemicals are unlikely to cause illness, they do indicatepossible contamination from the landfill.

RECOMMENDATIONS

To assure that nearby residents are not exposed to metals in soil, or metal or other chemicals intheir potable water, DOH makes the following specific recommendations:

  1. Collect five additional surface soil samples (0-3" deep) from the residences nearest thesite entrance and the road. Analyze for arsenic, chromium, vanadium, and other metalsassociated with flyash.


  2. Test the nearest 12 private wells for metals (EPA method 200.8) and purgeable organicchemicals (EPA method 524.2). In addition, test MECGW-16 for oil and grease (EPA1664) and total recoverable petroleum hydrocarbons (FL-PRO). Test these wells twice ayear for 5 years.

PUBLIC HEALTH ACTION PLAN

DOH will continue to work with ATSDR, DEP, the Citrus County Health Department, andnearby residents to protect public health.

  1. The Citrus County Health Department will sample 12 private off-site wells twice a yearfor 5 years. The DOH Drinking Water Toxics section will fund the analyses of thesamples by the DOH laboratory.


  2. The DEP Superfund Site Screening Section has indicated an interest in additional sampling on or near the site. DOH will propose adding an additional five surface (0-3")soil samples to DEP's future work plans. If they agree with our recommendation, DEP'sconsultant E&E will be collecting the soil samples during possible future site-relatedinvestigation.

PREPARERS OF THE REPORT

Florida Department of Health Author
Connie Garrett, P.G.
Bureau of Environmental Epidemiology
Division of Environmental Health
(850) 245-4299


Florida Department Of Health Designated Reviewer
Randy Merchant
Manager, Bureau of Environmental Epidemiology
Division of Environmental Health


ATSDR Designated Reviewer
Debra Gable
Technical Project Officer
Division of Health Assessment and Consultation
ATSDR


REFERENCES

  1. State of Florida, Department of Environmental Protection, 1996. Drinking WaterStandards, Monitoring and Reporting, Chapter 62-550.


  2. ATSDR Drinking Water Comparison Values.


  3. ATSDR Drinking Water Comparison Values.


  4. Site Inspection Report for the Materials Exchange Corporation Site, Homosassa Springs,Citrus County, Florida, February 2001, prepared for DEP by Ecology and Environment,inc.


  5. Kamrin, M.A., 1988. Toxicology - A Primer on Toxicology Principles and Applications. Lewis Publishers. Chelsea, MI.

FIGURES

Site Location Map
Figure 1. Site Location Map

Water Level Elevation Isopleth Map
Figure 2. Water Level Elevation Isopleth Map


TABLES

Table 4-1.

Sample Locations, Rationale and Laboratory Analysis for the Material Exchange Corporation Site
Homosassa Springs, Citrus County, Florida
Sample Type Sample Designation Sample Location Rationale Laboratory Analysis
Soil MECSS-1 Surface soil: northwest of site north of West Miller St. near the power line right-of way Background location VOCs, SVOCs, Pest/PCBs, Metals, Cyanide, Oil and Grease, TRPH[Fl-PRO]
MECSS-2 Surface soil: DRA II downgradient from the fly ash landfill and C & D Phase 1 Cell 1. Potential source/impact area VOCs, SVOCs, Pest/PCBs, Metals, Cyanide
MECSS-3 Surface soil: DRA IV downgradient from the Phase 1 C & D landfill and Phase 2 Cell 1. Potential source/impact area VOCs, SVOCs, Pest/PCBs, Metals, Cyanide
MECSS-4 Surface soil: 55-feet north of northeast corner pf the maintenance shed/area. Potential source area VOCs, SVOCs, Pest/PCBs, Metals, Cyanide, Oil and Grease, TRPH[Fl-PRO]
MECSS-5 Surface soil: near DRA I downgradient from Phase 1 C & D landfill. Potential source/impact area VOCs, SVOCs, Pest/PCBs, Metals, Cyanide
MECSS-6 Surface soil: Eastern boundary of the Dixon property west of the site. Potential impact area VOCs, SVOCs, Pest/PCBs, Metals, Cyanide
MECSS-7 Surface soil: Northeast corner of Samstag property west of the site along Grover Cleveland Blvd. Potential impact area VOCs, SVOCs, Pest/PCBs, Metals, Cyanide
MECSS-8 Surface soil: Southern boundary of the Grant property west of site along Grover Cleveland bld. Potential impact area VOCs, SVOCs, Pest/PCBs, Metals, Cyanide
Groundwater
(monitoring wells)
MECGW-1 Existing monitoring well MW-12B Background location VOCs, SVOCs, Pest/PCBs, Metals, Cyanide
MECGW-2 Existing monitoring well MW-7A, downgradient from the fly ash disposal area. Potential source/impact area VOCs, SVOCs, Pest/PCBs, Metals, Cyanide
MECGW-3 Existing monitoring well MW-13B, downgradient from the Phase 1 C & D landfill. Potential source/impact area VOCs, SVOCs, Pest/PCBs, Metals, Cyanide
MECGW-4 Existing monitoring well MW-16, downgradient from site at western perimeter. Potential impact area VOCs, SVOCs, Pest/PCBs, Metals, Cyanide
MECGW-5 Existing monitoring well MW-17, downgradient from site at western perimeter. Potential impact area VOCs, SVOCs, Pest/PCBs, Metals, Cyanide
MECGW-6 Existing monitoring well MW-15, downgradient from site at western perimeter. Potential impact area VOCs, SVOCs, Pest/PCBs, Metals, Cyanide
Groundwater (private supply wells) MECGW-7 Dixon residence well, west of the site. Potential impact area VOCs, SVOCs, Pest/PCBs, Metals, Cyanide
MECGW-8 Tanner residence well west of the site. Potential impact area VOCs, SVOCs, Pest/PCBs, Metals, Cyanide
MECGW-9 Gardner residence well, west of the site. Potential impact area VOCs, SVOCs, Pest/PCBs, Metals, Cyanide
MECGW-10 Martineau residence well, west of the site. Potential impact area VOCs, SVOCs, Pest/PCBs, Metals, Cyanide
MECGW-11 Wagner residence well, west of the site. Potential impact area VOCs, SVOCs, Pest/PCBs, Metals, Cyanide
MECGW-12 Leeper residence well, west of the site. Potential impact area VOCs, SVOCs, Pest/PCBs, Metals, Cyanide
MECGW-13 Copeland residence well, west of the site. Potential impact area VOCs, SVOCs, Pest/PCBs, Metals, Cyanide
MECGW-14 Deland residence well, northwest of the site. Potential impact area VOCs, SVOCs, Pest/PCBs, Metals, Cyanide
MECGW-15 Grant property well southwest of Phase 1 C & D landfill. Potential impact area VOCs, SVOCs, Pest/PCBs, Metals, Cyanide
MECGW-16 Jackson residence well located south of the maintenance area across Grover Cleveland Boulevard. Potential impact area VOCs, SVOCs, Pest/PCBs, Metals, Cyanide, Oil and Grease, TRPH[F1-PRO]
MECGW-17 Goldsmith residence well located south of the maintenance area across Grover Cleveland Boulevard. Potential impact area VOCs, SVOCs, Pest/PCBs, Metals, Cyanide, Oil and Grease, TRPH[F1-PRO]
MECGW-18 Cummings residence well located south of the maintenance area across Grover Cleveland Boulevard. Potential impact area VOCs, SVOCs, Pest/PCBs, Metals, Cyanide, Oil and Grease, TRPH[F1-PRO]
Quality Assurance/Quality Control MECSS-RB NA Soil sampling equipment rinsate blank VOCs, SVOCs, Pest/PCBs, Metals, Cyanide
MECSS-2DUP Surface soil: DRA II downgradient from the fly ash landfill and C & D Phase 1 Cell 1. Duplicate soil sample VOCs, SVOCs, Pest/PCBs, Metals, Cyanide
MECSS-TB NA Trip blank for soil samples VOCs
MECGW-RB NA Groundwater sampling equipment rinsate blank VOCs, SVOCs, Pest/PCBs, Metals, Cyanide
MECGW-3DUP Existing monitoring well MW-13B, downgradient from the Phase 1 C & D landfill. Duplicate groundwater sample VOCs, SVOCs, Pest/PCBs, Metals, Cyanide, Oil and Grease
MECGW-16DUP NA Duplicate groundwater sample Oil and Grease TRPH[F1-PRO]
MECGW-TB1 NA Trip blank for groundwater samples to DOH laboratory VOCs
MECGW-TB NA Trip blank for groundwater samples to FDEP laboratory VOCs

Key:
DRA = drainage retention area.
NA = Not applicable.


CERTIFICATION

The Florida Department of Health, Bureau of Environmental Epidemiology, prepared theMaterials Exchange Corporation (MEC) Landfill Health Consultation under a cooperativeagreement with the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. It followed approvedmethodology and procedures existing at the time it began.

Debra Gable
Technical Project Officer,
SPS, SSAB, DHAC


The Division of Health Assessment and Consultation, ATSDR, has reviewed this health consultation, and concurs with its findings.

Richard Gillig
Branch Chief,
SSAB, DHAC, ATSDR

Table of Contents

  
 
USA.gov: The U.S. Government's Official Web PortalDepartment of Health and Human Services
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, 4770 Buford Hwy NE, Atlanta, GA 30341
Contact CDC: 800-232-4636 / TTY: 888-232-6348

A-Z Index

  1. A
  2. B
  3. C
  4. D
  5. E
  6. F
  7. G
  8. H
  9. I
  10. J
  11. K
  12. L
  13. M
  14. N
  15. O
  16. P
  17. Q
  18. R
  19. S
  20. T
  21. U
  22. V
  23. W
  24. X
  25. Y
  26. Z
  27. #