HEALTH CONSULTATION
HOOSIER WOOD TREATING
GOSSPORT, OWEN COUNTY, INDIANA
BACKGROUND AND STATEMENT OF ISSUES
In March 2000, the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry issued a health consultation conducted by the Indiana State Department of Health (ISDH) for the Hoosier Wood Treating site. Since that time, issues of most concern have been addressed; however, land use conditions have changed. Private residences are now on the property, and young children now are present on the site. The Indiana Department of Environmental Management (IDEM) requested the Indiana State Department of Health (ISDH) to review new environmental data collected from the Hoosier Wood Treating site and determine if the property is habitable for residency.
The 12-acre Hoosier Wood Treating site is a former wood treatment and storage facility located adjacent to State Highway 67, approximately 0.5 miles northeast of the town of Gosport, Owen County, Indiana. The site is not on the National Priorities List (NPL).
The site is surrounded by a low American wire (approximately 3 feet high) fence and is easily accessible. The site is immediately adjacent to several residences housing families with children. Four families (one with children) live in mobile homes on site. The site property includes three parcels that are owned individually by the families. Approximately 1,062 people live within a 1-mile radius of the site. Wood treatment and storage structures remaining on site include several dilapidated buildings, an abandoned retort pressure treating tank, and a small pond. According to IDEM staff, the property was purchased through an auction. Currently, part of the site is being used as a junkyard and car lot for vehicles as well as for residential living. The owner of the property, who lives on site, has also installed a private well.
The site had been used for pressure treating various wood products. During its time of operation from 1975 to 1994; the facility used creosote, copper chromium arsenic compounds (CCA), and pentachlorophenol (PCP) to treat the wood. The site was abandoned by its previous owners in December 1994.
Between August 1995 and June 1999, when it was abandoned, a number of site visits, sampling events, and removal actions were conducted by IDEM and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to evaluate and remediate the site to nonresidential cleanup standards.
In September 1997, IDEM collected a residential well water sample near the site (exact distance from the site is unknown) after a complaint was received regarding drinking water quality. The sample was analyzed for volatile organic compounds (VOCs), semi-volatile organic compounds (SVOCs), and metals. Iron was detected at 12 parts per million (ppm), and manganese was present at 0.16 ppm. Those levels exceed secondary maximum contaminant levels (SMCLs), which are standards established for taste and aesthetic water qualities rather than public health issues [1]. No VOCs were found in the water, and no other inorganic chemicals were found in the water at levels that exceeded comparison values, screening values used to select contaminants that should be further evaluated if people are coming into contact with the contaminants.
In December 1998, the EPA contractor conducted a site assessment (SA) at the site. IDEM was
also in attendance. The SA included a site reconnaissance, photo documentation, and collection
of soil, sludge 
, and sediment samples. The site originally included the wood treatment building,
the office building, and the furnace building [2,3]. At the time of the site reconnaissance, the site
was still fenced; however, the front gate was in a state of disrepair, and the site was not inspected
on a regular basis. The site still had two buildings, one building foundation, an on-site pond, a
gravel-covered section, one retort tank, and numerous piles of debris.
During the IDEM removal action in 1997, the retort tank had been decontaminated but the tank remained on site. A pit of undetermined size was under the tank and contained oily sludge and water. The sludge pit is partially covered from the elements by the retort tank. Approximately six 55-gallon drums were scattered across the site and exposed to the elements.
Analytical results indicated the presence of 10,215 ppm PCP in the sludge pit beneath the retort tank. In addition, concentrations of up to 870 ppm PCP were detected in surface soils at the east edge of a gravel-covered area and between the wood treatment and former furnace buildings. No metals in any of the samples were detected above EPA removal action levels.
One sediment sample was collected from the on-site pond. Results did not indicate the presence of arsenic, PCP, or other site-related contaminants.
In late April 1999, EPA approved a time-critical removal action to consolidate and dispose of all waste and associated containers. Excavated areas were lined and backfilled with clean soil. During that period, a site visit also was conducted which consisted of a preliminary walkthrough at the site. Also, EPA requested ISDH to evaluate any health risks associated with the site. In early May 1999, removal action began at the site and was completed in June 1999. Analytical results from confirmation samples of soil indicated that all contamination in excavations was well below the EPA removal action level of 530 ppm PCP. The highest concentration detected was 21 ppm at the southeast corner of the wood treatment building.
In June 1999, IDEM issued a letter to the Owen County Auditor with its findings. On the basis of sampling results, IDEM does not believe that further sampling at the Hoosier Wood Treating site is justified. IDEM staff believes that human health and environmental concerns at the site have been addressed by IDEM and EPA actions over the past few years.
In March 2000, ISDH, under a cooperative agreement with the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR), released a health consultation (HC) for Hoosier Wood Treating. The HC stated the site posed a public health hazard because of access to physical hazards, such as the ponds and dilapidated buildings and because groundwater had not been adequately characterized, leaving unanswered whether drinking water wells in the area could become contaminated in the future.
PCP contamination was removed from the site around the sludge pit and surface soil, and the low levels remaining pose no health risk if the land was used for non-residential purposes as proposed [1].
The ISDH recommended:
In October 2000, IDEM collected surface water/drinking water and soil/sediment samples after being notified that the site was being used for business and residential purposes. Also upon sampling, an additional on-site pond was sampled. The collected samples were analyzed for VOCs, SVOCs, metals (arsenic, chromium, copper), and dioxins (Figure 1 and Figure 2) [2].
Arsenic was detected at a maximum concentration of 59 ppm in surface soil and at 12 ppm in subsurface (18-24 inches) soil. No other inorganic chemicals were found at levels exceeding comparison values.
PCP was detected at a maximum concentration of 38 ppm in surface soil. No PCP was detected in subsurface soil. Sediment sample results collected from and around the two on-site ponds (dry, but moist at time of sampling) did not indicate the presence of arsenic or PCP (Table 1).
A drinking water sample collected from an on-site private well and analyzed for VOCs, SVOCs, and metals did not indicate the presence of contamination at that time; however, groundwater at the site has not been adequately characterized. If groundwater contains site-related contaminants and flows in the direction of the on-site private well or other nearby private wells, contaminants could reach those wells in the future [4].
People who are now living on the property are most likely to come into contact with the contaminants present in surface soil. The residents can ingest contaminated soil, inhale contaminated dust, and get the contaminated soil on their skin. Of those ways that people can contact the contamination, ingestion is the route of exposure of most concern. Young children are of greatest concern because they tend to ingest more soil than adults because of their play habits, such as chewing on toys that have fallen to the ground.
Approximately 23 surface and subsurface arsenic soil samples collected by IDEM after soil removal were above the ATSDR comparison value (CV) for a pica child (generally children aged 6 years and younger who ingest unusually high amounts of soil). Six of the samples were above the CV for a nonpica child [5,6]. A total of nine samples contained PCP at levels above the ATSDR CV for a nonpica child.
Ingestion and dermal exposure to arsenic and PCP present in the surface soil are the potential exposure pathways of concern at the Hoosier Wood Treating site on the basis of the environmental data submitted and the fact that residents (including young children) are now living on site. Samples were collected at locations on site, including around the trailers where children live. Past groundwater sampling has shown that residents are not ingesting contaminants through their drinking water; thus, the well water is not considered to be an exposure pathway at this time. The subsurface soil is not a factor because children are not likely to come into contact with it [7,8].
Several factors are considered to determine whether one will be harmed from exposure to a chemical. These factors include the dose (how much), the duration (how long), and how much one comes into contact with the chemical. The estimated dose calculation for adults did not exceed the minimal risk level (MRL--a screening tool to determine whether exposure to a contaminant should be evaluated further) for adults in arsenic or PCP.
A worst-case estimated dose calculation was done for arsenic using a pica child because children who are living on the site are pre-school age and the assumption that at least one of the children exhibits pica behavior is a conservative assumption. These calculations were based on the additional conservative assumptions that a pre-school child could be exposed 7 months/year, 7 days/week, 6 hours/day for 3 years. Exposure to arsenic at the concentrations calculated do not pose a health hazard for a pica child [9]. However, children living on site should not be exposed to arsenic for long periods of time if the exposure can be avoided.
For PCP, the dose estimated is below most of the concentrations at the no observed adverse effect level (NOAEL), the doses at which no harmful effects were found in studies of people or animals exposed to PCP [9]. Therefore, no noncancer, adverse health effects are expected.
ISDH and ATSDR recognize that children are especially sensitive to the toxicity of some contaminants. ISDH and ATSDR also recognize that children react differently than adults when exposed to contaminants in their environment. They are more likely to be exposed for several reasons. Children play outside more often than adults, increasing the likelihood that they will come into contact with chemicals in the environment. Because they are nearer to the ground, children breathe more dust, soil, and heavy vapors. Children are also smaller, resulting in higher doses of chemical exposure per body weight. The developing body system of children can sustain damage if toxic exposures occur during certain growth stages.
Children live on and near the Hoosier Wood Treating site. The site is accessible, and the risk is present for potential exposure to contaminants in soil through ingestion and dermal contact with contaminated soil. The levels of arsenic and PCP found in surface soil should not harm children who come into contact with it. However, a potential exists for the private well that supplies drinking water for the residence to become contaminated with PCP and other chemicals present in the soil. Two on-site ponds (when water is present in them) present a potential physical hazard because unsupervised children could drown in them.
Currently, the Hoosier Wood Treating site poses no public health hazard because contact with the levels of contamination in soil on the property is not expected to result in adverse health effects; however, on-site groundwater has not been adequately characterized to demonstrate that the residential well could not become contaminated in the future. Any future drinking water contamination would have to be evaluated to see if exposure could result in adverse health effects. The two on-site ponds present a potential physical hazard for the children living on site.
Actions that have been completed
Between May 1999 and June 1999, removal activities conducted by EPA at the Hoosier Wood Treating site included [1]:
Actions to be taken within 2002
Garry L. Mills
Environmental Manager
Environmental Epidemiology Section
Indiana State Department of Health
This Hoosier Wood Treating Health Consultation was prepared by the Indiana State Department of Health under a cooperative agreement with the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). It is in accordance with approved methodology and procedures existing at the time the health consultation was begun.
Gail D. Godfrey
Technical Project Officer
Superfund Site Assessment Branch (SSAB)
Division of Health Assessment and Consultation (DHAC)
ATSDR
The Division of Health Assessment and Consultation, ATSDR, has reviewed this health consultation and concurs with its findings.
Lisa C. Hayes
for Richard E. Gillig
Chief, SPS, SSAB, DHAC, ATSDR
Figure 2. Hoosier Wood Treating Residence, PCP Surface Soil Sample Results, October 2000
| Arsenic Surface and Subsurface Soil Sample Results October 2000 |
||
| Maximum Concentration | Comparison Value | |
|
Surface - 59 ppm Subsurface - 12 ppm |
Pica 0.6 ppm |
Child 20 ppm |
| PCP Surface Soil Sample Results October 2000 |
||
| Maximum Concentration | Comparison Value | |
| 38 ppm | Pica 2 ppm |
Child 50 ppm |
Data Qualifier
ppm = parts per million
