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

HEALTH CONSULTATION

EASTERN MICHAUD FLATS CONTAMINATION
POCATELLO, BANNOCK AND POWER COUNTIES, IDAHO


V. CONCLUSIONS

Based on a review of available data and discussions with local, state, tribal, and federalenvironmental and health officials, ATSDR concludes the following:

  • Transport of Emissions from FMC and Simplot. FMC and Simplot have released, andcontinue to release, large quantities of toxic chemicals to the air. According to monitoringand modeling studies, these chemicals have transported, and continue to transport, tovirtually every location in the EMF study area, including locations in Chubbuck, Pocatello,and portions of the Fort Hall Indian Reservation. Ambient air concentrations of these toxicchemicals clearly vary from location to location within this region; the public healthimplications of the levels of contamination are reviewed below.

  • Air Quality in Chubbuck and Pocatello from 1975 to the present. Levels of airpollution throughout Chubbuck and Pocatello have been and continue to be a public healthhazard as a result of emissions from FMC, Simplot, and other sources. The unhealthy levelsof air pollution in these cities occurs infrequently and is usually associated with a smallnumber of days with particular meteorological conditions (inversions). ATSDR believespotentially unhealthy levels of air pollution in these cities will likely occur periodically inthe future, unless emissions of particulate matter from FMC and Simplot and other sourcesare reduced. The components of air pollution causing the health hazard are PM (short-termand long-term) and sulfates (short-term only); insufficient monitoring data are available tocomment on long-term exposures to sulfates. These components periodically reached levelsthat are associated with increased incidence of respiratory and cardiac conditions. Populations at greatest risk for suffering adverse health effects include individuals with pre-existing heart or lung disease, the elderly, children, and asthmatics.
  • Some population living near the phosphate plants may have also been exposed between1977-1985 to levels of sulfur dioxide above levels of health concern. This population'sexposures to PM, as well as sulfur dioxide, likely increased their risk for adverse respiratory health effects.

    Between 1994 and 1998, long-term average ambient air concentrations of PM10 throughoutChubbuck and Pocatello were notably lower than in previous years, thus reducing healthrisks associated with chronic exposures. However, the recent severe inversions in thePortneuf Valley clearly show that potentially unhealthy acute exposures to PM can stilloccur and probably will occur in the future unless air emissions from FMC and Simplot andother major sources are reduced.

  • Air Quality on the Fort Hall Indian Reservation. The highest concentrations of site-related contaminants in the entire EMF study area are consistently measured on the Fort HallIndian Reservation, at a location between FMC and Interstate 86. These elevated levels ofair pollution pose a public health hazard to individuals who are exposed to the air in thispart of the reservation. Deed restrictions will prevent people from living in this area ofconcern, but access to this area is not restricted and potentially unhealthy exposures may still be occurring.

  • Residents of the Fort Hall Indian Reservation who live immediately north of Interstate 86might also have been exposed to potentially unhealthy levels of air pollution from 1975 tothe present, but this cannot be confirmed since no ambient air monitoring has ever beenconducted in this area. Thus, ATSDR cannot derive reliable estimates of past or presentexposure for residents on most of the Fort Hall Indian Reservation, though some level ofexposure to emissions from FMC and Simplot undoubtedly exists. Due to the data gaps,ATSDR considers current and past inhalation exposures among residents who live on theFort Hall Indian Reservation at locations north of Interstate 86 to be an indeterminate public health hazard.
  • Air monitoring devices need to be installed on the Fort Hall Indian Reservation at locationsnorth of Interstate 86 to characterize potential exposures and fill this important data gap.

  • Review of Community Concerns. The health concerns expressed by community membersin the EMF study area (i.e., increased incidence of asthma, upper respiratory illness, andheart disease) are reasonably consistent with adverse health outcomes reported in theepidemiological research for both acute and chronic exposures to elevated levels of PM2.5and PM10. However, this consistency does not suggest that any given incident of thesehealth outcomes is caused solely by inhalation exposures to PM2.5 or PM10. Rather,causality of any given disease is usually a result of multiple factors, such as smoking or exposure to indoor air contaminants.

  • Exposures to Acid Aerosols. The phosphate plants release several acids (e.g., sulfuricacid, phosphoric acid, and hydrofluoric acid) and chemicals that react in the air to form acids(e.g., phosphorous pentoxide, a signature constituent of the FMC emissions). Though theseacids are respiratory irritants, the available data suggest that exposures to these individualacids in the EMF study area are not at levels of health concern. However, since the availabledata are limited, routine sampling of ionic species is needed to confirm this conclusion.

  • Exposures to Metals and Other Inorganics. Neither short-term nor long-term exposuresto the elemental forms of the metals and other inorganics detected in PM in the EMF studyarea are likely to result in adverse health effects. For non-carcinogenic adverse healtheffects, the concentrations of individual metals were well below levels in the scientificliterature that showed adverse health effects in humans and animals. For adversecarcinogenic health effects, the concentration of metals is not likely to result in anappreciable increased risk of cancer in the exposed population. However, this conclusion islimited by the fact that data on annual average concentrations for metals are not available for time periods before 1994, when levels of PM, and hence heavy metals, were notably higher. For some metals, the paucity of toxicological data and the lack of data on the exact chemicalspecies found in the ambient air prevents a complete assessment of the public healthimplications of exposure.

  • Uncertainty in Acid and Metals Analyses. Although ATSDR's evaluation did notindicate a public health concern for individual metals and acids, there is some uncertaintywith this analysis. Current science provides little evidence as to whether the mix of these aircontaminants may increase or decrease their toxicological effects because of cumulativeexposures. Some of the metals (e.g., cadmium) were detected at levels in the fine fractionthat were similar or greater than levels found in highly urbanized areas of the United States. In addition, many of the metals detected in the EMF study area are transition metals. Thereis growing biological evidence that indicates that urban combustion particles (i.e., fine PM)can penetrate past the primary defense mechanisms of the lung, can elicit inflammatorychanges in the lung and systematically (throughout the body), contain a constituent (solubletransition metals) that by itself can be demonstrated to produce lung damage, can produceelectrocardiogram changes including arrhythmia (heart irregularities), and can kill animals with pre-existing heart and lung disease. The extent to which ATSDR's evaluation of exposures to metals in the EMF study area is able to capture these concerns is not known. However, the epidemiological evidence does indicate that PM, a measure of a mix ofcontaminants present in air, including most of the metals and acids detected in the EMFstudy area, is a good surrogate measure for estimating the short-term and long-term adversecardiopulmonary health effects from exposure. From this standpoint, ATSDR evaluated andmade definitive public health statements regarding the cumulative health effects of theexposure to the mix of metal and acid contaminants present in the EMF study area asmeasured by PM.

  • Potential Exposures to phosphine and hydrogen cyanide. Though the monitoring datacollected in the last 2 years suggest that off-site exposures hydrogen cyanide from FMC arenot at levels of health concern for the non-worker population, no information is available toquantify exposures that might have occurred in earlier years. Moreover, phosphine may havereached levels of health concern at the FMC fenceline; however, these levels of healthconcerns were obtained using unreliable methods. ATSDR recommends that moremonitoring be performed to confirm these data. Thus, the complete public healthimplications of off-site exposures to phosphine and hydrogen cyanide cannot be determinedbased on available data. ATSDR notes, however, that ongoing operation of FMC's PondManagement Plan should ensure that emissions do not reach levels of health concern in thefuture.

  • Potential Future Exposures. Continued measures to reduce all major emissions sources ofPM are needed to ensure that the decreasing airborne levels of PM in the EMF study areacontinue, and continued monitoring is needed to verify this trend. In general, future trends ininhalation exposure to PM and, consequently, the risks for PM-related illnesses will parallel the future trends in airborne levels of PM.

  • Exposures to Radionuclides. The findings of this health consultation (i.e., air pathwayexposures and populations-at-risk) will be used by ATSDR in a future health consultation toaddress the concerns of the Shoshone-Bannock Tribe regarding potential exposures toairborne radionuclides.

VI. RECOMMENDATIONS

ATSDR recommends the following actions to ensure that residents of Chubbuck, Pocatello, and theFort Hall Indian Reservation are not exposed to unhealthy levels of air pollution that may originatefrom FMC, Simplot, or other emissions sources in the EMF study area:

  • Given the weight-of-evidence suggesting that levels of air pollution throughout the EMFstudy area have reached potentially unhealthy levels as recently as December 1999, ATSDRrecommends that the existing IDEQ and at least the "primary" Shoshone-Bannock ambientair monitoring stations continue to operate to characterize air quality. More specifically,both PM2.5 and PM10 should continue to be monitored; sampling filters on days with highparticulate levels should continue to be analyzed for levels of the same metals, otherinorganics, and ionic species that are currently measured; and sampling filters from at leastone station should be routinely analyzed for concentrations of these same constituents suchthat their annual average levels--an important parameter for evaluating healthconcerns--can be calculated.

  • ATSDR recommends that IDEQ continue to issue warnings on days when levels of airpollution are expected to reach potentially unhealthy levels and to communicate thesewarnings to the local media. Residents in the EMF study area are encouraged to heed thesewarnings, which generally recommend residents, especially persons with respiratoryconditions, to remain indoors and to avoid moderate levels of exercise as much as possible. By following these precautions, residents can best protect themselves from air pollution inthe EMF study area as it occasionally reaches potentially unsafe levels.
  • Note: IDEQ currently characterizes air quality in Pocatello and Chubbuck on a daily basisusing an Air Quality Index (AQI). The AQI ranges from zero (no pollution) to fivehundred (large amounts of pollution). This index is updated on a daily basis and canbe accessed through the hotline number at 208-236-6173 or on the Web at http://www.state.id.us/deq/ro_p/pro_air/aqi_report_pro.shtml. If further informationis requested, residents should contact IDEQ at 208-236-6160.

  • ATSDR recommends that at least one ambient air monitoring station be installed to measureambient air concentrations of particulate matter on the Fort Hall Indian Reservation, north ofInterstate 86, and near where people live. Such monitoring is needed to quantify the extentof inhalation exposures to site-related contaminants among residents of the reservation. Toensure that future monitoring efforts generate data useful for conducting public healthevaluations, ATSDR will comment on relevant sampling plans or proposals, if requested.

  • To minimize the amount of particulate matter released to the air in the EMF study area,ATSDR recommends that EPA, IDEQ, the Shoshone-Bannock Tribes, and the cities ofChubbuck and Pocatello continue to develop and implement air pollution control initiativesand enforce the existing ones. Additionally, to ensure that emissions of hydrogen cyanideand phosphine do not reach levels of health concern, ATSDR recommends that EPAcarefully oversee, possibly by periodically collecting audit samples, the ongoing operation ofFMC's Pond Management Plan. Moreover, ATSDR recommends that OSHA-approvedmethods be used to determine if phosphine has reached levels of health concern at the FMCfenceline.

  • ATSDR recommends that a public health evaluation be performed to assess potentialinhalation exposures to airborne radionuclides. ATSDR has already committed to completesuch an evaluation.

Knowing that FMC and Simplot continue to emit toxic chemicals to the air, though in lowerquantities than have been emitted in the past, ATSDR is committed to reviewing ambient airmonitoring data, emissions monitoring data, and health outcome data as they become available forthe EMF study area. The Public Health Action Plan (Section VII) provides additional information on future site-related activities.


VII. PUBLIC HEALTH ACTION PLAN

The Public Health Action Plan (PHAP) for this health consultation describes the actions taken orplanned for the EMF site. The purpose of the PHAP is to ensure that this health consultation notonly identifies public health hazards, but provides a plan of action designed to mitigate and preventadverse human health effects resulting from future exposure to hazardous substances in theenvironment. ATSDR is committed to following up on this plan to ensure that it is implemented. As needed, ATSDR will revise this PHAP by identifying the actions completed and those inprogress. The public health actions taken or to be implemented are as follows:

Actions Completed

  1. In 1990, ATSDR completed a public health assessment of the EMF site.

  2. In 1995, ATSDR completed a health study of persons residing on the Fort Hall IndianReservation by investigating concerns related to a number of respiratory and renal disorders.

  3. In 1997, ATSDR completed a Site Review and Update for the EMF site.

  4. From 1997 to 1999, the Idaho Division of Health, Bureau of Environmental Health andSafety (IDOH-BEHS) under a cooperative agreement with ATSDR, collaborated with theSoutheastern District Health Department in Pocatello and the Shoshone-Bannock TribalHealth and Human Services in Fort Hall to complete several health education and outreachactivities. The following actions were completed during this time frame:

    • conducted environmental health needs assessments among residents of FortHall and Pocatello between August and October 1997.
    • conducted an environmental health needs assessment among health careproviders serving the Pocatello area between November 1997 and April 1998.
    • conducted a needs assessment among educators in Pocatello School District 25 and the Fort Hall School District in April 1999.
    • formed the Fort Hall/Pocatello Environmental Health Education Working Group to develop and implement an environmental health education strategy to address concerns and needs identified in the needs assessment.
    • participated in several public availability sessions and meetings conducted byeither ATSDR or EPA.
    • developed an environmental health education/outreach strategy forimplementation in Fort Hall and Pocatello. Activities implemented to dateinclude 1) forming a technical advisory group; 2) publishing articles in thelocal newspapers discussing identified priority environmental health issues;3) conducting continuing medical education seminars for health careproviders; 4) conducting community environmental health presentations;and, 5) distributing educational materials at several local health fairs andcommunity events

  5. In 1998, ATSDR completed three health consultations that addressed the public healthimplications related to contamination of groundwater, surface water, and sediment.

  6. In 2000, ATSDR, working with IDOH-BESH, developed a fact sheet to accompany thepublic release of this health consultation.

Action Planned

  1. Using the results of this health consultation, ATSDR will evaluate of the public health implications of airborne radionuclides in the EMF study area.

  2. ATSDR will evaluate the cancer incidence on the Fort Hall Indian Reservation and in the Pocatello area.

  3. After completing the health evaluations for airborne radionuclides and cancer incidence, ATSDR will prepare a comprehensive public health assessment that aggregates the overall public health issues for the EMF site.

  4. IDOH-BESH, under the cooperative agreement with ATSDR, will continue to conducthealth education/outreach activities, as needed.

  5. ATSDR's Division of Health Studies is considering the feasibility of conducting a healthstudy that would examine the effect(s) of air pollution on the cardiopulmonary health ofpersons who resided in the vicinity of the site.

  6. The Shoshone-Bannock Tribe is developing plans to site two new PM2.5 monitors on theFort Hall Indian Reservation. These plans include the possibility of having them located at a different site than the current locations of the Primary, Background, and Sho-Ban monitors.

ATSDR will reevaluate and expand the Public Health Action Plan (PHAP) when needed. Newenvironmental, toxicological, health outcome data, or the results of implementing the aboveproposed actions may warrant additional actions at this site.


VIII. SITE TEAM/AUTHORS

Gregory V. Ulirsch
Technical Project Officer/Environmental Health Scientist
Superfund Site Assessment Branch
Division of Health Assessment and Consultation, ATSDR

Debra Gable
Technical Project Officer
Superfund Site Assessment Branch
Division of Health Assessment and Consultation, ATSDR


Technical Consultation provided to ATSDR by:

John Wilhelmi
Eastern Research Group
Lexington, MA


VIII. REFERENCES

ARS, 1998. Ambient air monitoring data provided by Air Resource Specialists. December, 1998.

ATSDR, 1990. Preliminary Public Health Assessment for the Eastern Michaud FlatsContamination Site. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. 1990.

ATSDR, 1992a. Toxicological Profile for Barium. Agency for Toxic Substances and DiseaseRegistry. July, 1992.

ATSDR, 1992b. Toxicological Profile for Vanadium. Agency for Toxic Substances and DiseaseRegistry. July, 1992.

ATSDR, 1995. Fort Hall Air Emissions Study: Fort Hall Indian Reservation. Agency for ToxicSubstances and Disease Registry. November, 1995.

ATSDR, 1996. Written correspondence from Barry Johnson (ATSDR) to Tony Galloway (Sho-Ban Tribes). August, 1996.

ATSDR, 1997a. Site Review and Up-Date for Eastern Michaud Flats Contamination, Pocatello,Bannock County, Idaho. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. March 1997.

ATSDR, 1997b. Toxicological Profile for Cyanide. Agency for Toxic Substances and DiseaseRegistry. September, 1997.

ATSDR, 1998a. Health Consultation: Groundwater Contamination at the Eastern Michaud FlatsContamination. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. October, 1998.

ATSDR, 1998b. Health Consultation: Surface Soil Contamination at the Eastern Michaud FlatsContamination. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. October, 1998.

ATSDR, 1998c. Health Consultation: Surface Water and Sediment Contamination at the EasternMichaud Flats Contamination. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. October, 1998.

ATSDR, 1998d. Toxicological Profile for Sulfur Dioxide.  Agency for Toxic Substances andDisease Registry. December, 1998.

ATSDR, 1999a. Toxicological Profile for Aluminum. Agency for Toxic Substances and DiseaseRegistry. July, 1999.

ATSDR, 1999b. Toxicological Profile for Cadmium. Agency for Toxic Substances and DiseaseRegistry. July, 1999.

ATSDR, 2000a. Toxicological Profile for Arsenic. Agency for Toxic Substances and DiseaseRegistry. September, 2000.

ATSDR, 2000b. Toxicological Profile for Beryllium. Draft for Public Comment. Agency forToxic Substances and Disease Registry. September, 2000.

ATSDR, 2000c. Toxicological Profile for Chromium. Agency for Toxic Substances and DiseaseRegistry. September, 2000.

ATSDR, 2000d. Toxicological Profile for Manganese. Agency for Toxic Substances and DiseaseRegistry. September, 2000.

Bechtel, 1993. Air Dispersion Modeling for Monitoring Site Locations. Bechtel Environmental,Inc. January, 1993.

Bechtel, 1995. Remedial Investigation Report for the Eastern Michaud Flats Site. Part III: AirQuality Characterization Air Monitoring Report, Volume I. Bechtel Environmental, Inc. September, 1995.

Bechtel, 1996. Remedial Investigation Report for the Eastern Michaud Flats Site. Part I: Executive Summary. Bechtel Environmental, Inc. August, 1996.

Bechtel, 1998. RCRA Pond Emission Study. Bechtel Environmental, Inc. October, 1998.

Dockery et al., 1993. Dockery DW, Pope CA, Xu X, Spengler JD, Ware JH, Fay ME, Ferris BG,Speizer FE. An Association Between Air Pollution and Mortality in Six U.S. Cities. The NewEngland Journal of Medicine 329(24):1753-1759. December, 1993.

FMC, 1999a. OP-FTIR Air Monitoring System Quarterly Report: First Quarter 1999. FMCPhosphorous Chemicals Division. 1999.

FMC, 1999b. OP-FTIR Air Monitoring System Quarterly Report: Second Quarter 1999. FMCPhosphorous Chemicals Division. 1999.

FMC, 1999c. OP-FTIR Air Monitoring System Quarterly Report: Third Quarter 1999. FMCPhosphorous Chemicals Division. 1999.

FMC, 1999d. OP-FTIR Air Monitoring System Quarterly Report: Fourth Quarter 1999. FMCPhosphorous Chemicals Division. 1999.

FMC, 2000. OP-FTIR Air Monitoring System Quarterly Report: First Quarter 2000. FMCPhosphorous Chemicals Division. 1999.

FR, 1999. Federal Rulemaking for the FMC Facility in the Fort Hall PM-10 Nonattainment Area;Proposed Rule. Federal Register, Vol. 64, No. 29. February, 1999.

Godleski, et al., 2000. Mechanisms of Morbidity and Mortality from Exposure to Ambient AirParticles. Health Effects Institute. February, 2000.

Hartman, 1999. Written correspondence from Rob Hartman (FMC) to John Wilhelmi (EasternResearch Group, Inc.). March, 1999.

IDEQ, 1991. Power/Bannock Counties PM-10 Receptor Modeling: Background and PreliminaryWork. Idaho Division of Environmental Quality. January. 1991.

IDEQ, 1998a. Idaho Environment 1998. Idaho Division of Environmental Quality. 1998.

IDEQ, 1998b. CMB Receptor Modeling for the Special Winter Study in Pocatello, Idaho. IdahoDivision of Environmental Quality. September. 1998.

IDEQ, 1999a. Portneuf Valley Particulate Matter (PM10) Air Quality Improvement Plan. IdahoDivision of Environmental Quality. March, 1999.

IDEQ, 1999b. Database of results from chemical analyses of particulate filters. Provided by DianeRiley, Idaho Division of Environmental Quality. May, 1999.

IDEQ, 1999c. Written correspondence from Tom Edwards (IDEQ) to John Wilhelmi (EasternResearch Group). February, 1999.

IDEQ, 1999d. Written correspondence from Tom Edwards (IDEQ) to Greg Ulirsch (ATSDR). December, 1999.

IDEQ, 2000a. Release of preliminary ambient air monitoring data. Personal communicationbetween Tom Edwards (IDEQ) and John Wilhelmi (Eastern Research Group). January, 2000.

IDEQ, 2000b. CMB Analysis for PM10 Scenario for 1999, Pocatello, Idaho. 2000.

IDH, 1975. Implementation Plan for the Control of Air Pollution in the State of Idaho. IdahoDepartment of Health/Idaho Air Pollution Control Commission. February, 1975.

IDHW, 1988. Air Quality Annual Report - 1987. Idaho Department of Health and Welfare. July,1988.

IDHW, 1991. Power/Bannock Counties PM-10 Receptor Modeling:  Background and PreliminaryWork. Idaho Department of Health and Welfare. January, 1991.

Jones et al., 1964. Environmental and Clinical Aspects of Bulk Wheat Fumigation with AluminumPhosphide. American Industrial Hygiene Association Journal. 25: 375-379. 1964.

Krewski, et al., 2000. Particle Epidemiology Reanalysis Project. Health Effects Institute. July,2000.

Neill, 1980. Airborne Particulate Size Analysis in the Pocatello Area. D.T. Neill, Idaho StateUniversity Energy Experiment Station. May, 1980.

NIOSH, 1994. NIOSH Pocket Guide to Chemical Hazards. National Institute for OccupationalSafety and Health. June, 1994.

OMNI, 1991a. Dispersion Modeling Protocol for the Pocatello Nonattainment Area. OMNIEnvironmental Services, Inc. September, 1991.

OMNI, 1991b. Source Apportionment Analysis of the Pocatello Nonattainment Area. OMNIEnvironmental Services, Inc. October, 1991.

Pope et al., 1995. Pope CA, Thun MJ. Namboodiri MM, Dockery DW, Evans JS, Speizer FE,Heath CW. Particulate Air Pollution as a Predictor of Mortality in a Prospective Study of U.S.Adults. American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine. 151:669-674.

Pope, C.A., 2000. Epidemiology of Fine Particle Air Pollution and Human Health: BiologicalMechanisms and Who's at Risk? Environmental Health Perspectives. 108 (Supplement 4): 713-723.

Samet, et al., 2000. The National Morbidity, Mortality, and Air Pollution Study Part II: Morbidity,Mortality, and Air Pollution in the United States. Health Effects Institute. June, 2000.

Schwartz, J., 1999. Air Pollution and Hospital Admissions for Heart Disease in Eight U.S.Counties. Epidemiology. 10(1): 17-22.

Severson, 1999. Personal communication between Jim Severson (FMC) and Debra Gable(ATSDR). March, 1999.

Sho-ban, 1989. Air Quality Monitoring Plan and Particulate Exposure Assessment. Shoshone-Bannock Tribes Air Quality Program. April, 1989.

Sho-Ban, 1996. Written correspondence from the Shoshone-Bannock Tribes to Barry Johnson(ATSDR). August, 1996.

TRC, 1993. Power-Bannock Counties PM10 SIP Dispersion Modeling Study. TRCEnvironmental Corporation. March, 1993.

USEPA, 1992. Pocatello PM10 Saturation Study. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,Environmental Services Division. April, 1992.

USEPA, 1996. Air Quality Criteria for Particulate Matter. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,National Center for Environmental Assessment. EPA/600/P-95/001aF. April, 1996.

USEPA, 1997. Fact Sheet: EPA's Revised Particulate Matter Standards. U.S. EnvironmentalProtection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards. July, 1997.

USEPA, 1998. Air quality monitoring data downloaded from the Aerometric Information RetrievalSystem (AIRS). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. December, 1998.

USEPA, 1999a. Technical Support Document; Federal Implementation Plan for the FMC Facilityin the Fort Hall PM-10 Nonattainment Area. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10. January, 1999.

USEPA, 1999b. Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS): On-Line Database. U.S.Environmental Protection Agency, National Center for Environmental Assessment. June, 1999.

USEPA, 1999c. Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) State Files Documentation for RY 1997. Preparedfor the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. March 22, 1999.

USEPA, 1999d. Fort Hall Source Apportionment Study: Final Report. Prepared for the U.S.Environmental Protection Agency. EPA 600/R-99/103. September, 1999.

Willis, Ellenson, and Conner, 2000. Monitoring and source apportionment of particulate matternear a large phosphorus production facility. Journal of the Air and Waste Management Association, submitted. 2000.


FIGURES

General Study Area for EMF Health Consultation
Figure 1. General Study Area for EMF Health Consultation

Windrose Prepared from Meteorological Data Collected at the Pocatello Municipal Airport between 1985 and 1989
Figure 2. Windrose Prepared from Meteorological Data Collected at the Pocatello Municipal Airport between 1985 and 1989

Monitoring Locations
Figure 3. Monitoring Locations

Area of Impact of PM10 and 2.5 Exposures in EMF Study Area (1975-1993)
Figure 4. Area of Impact of PM10 and 2.5 Exposures in EMF Study Area (1975-1993)

The Fort Hall PM10 Nonattainment Area and the Portneuf Valley PM10 Nonattainment Area
Figure 5. The Fort Hall PM10 Nonattainment Area and the Portneuf Valley PM10 Nonattainment Area


TABLES

Table 1.

1997 and 1998 TRI Air Emissions Data for FMC and Simplot
Facility Pollutant Pounds Released to the Air, by Reporting Year
1997 1998
Emissions Data
Reported by FMC
Antimony compounds 130 130
Arsenic compounds 27 30
Barium compounds 1,656 1,000
Cadmium compounds 3,631 2,520
Chromium compounds 2,505 2,350
Copper compounds 84 80
Cyanide compounds 13,152 232,136
Hydrogen fluoride 5,311 Not reported
Manganese compounds 14 10
Nickel compounds 284 270
Phosphine 16,992 35,170
Phosphorous (yellow or white) 0 0
Selenium compounds 1,975 1,940
Zinc compounds 1,657 1,130
Emissions Data
Reported by Simplot
Ammonia 121,000 425,000
Hydrogen fluoride 33,000 36,000
Methanol Not reported 15,000
Nitrate compounds 0 0
Nitric acid 0 0
Phosphoric acid 0 0
Sulfuric acid aerosols 39,830 67,850

Notes: The table only lists emissions to the air. As required by TRI, the facilities also reported releases of the listed compounds to other media (e.g., surface water and soils).
TRI data are self-reported, and the accuracy of the TRI data for these two facilities is not known.
The TRI regulations require facilities to disclose releases of a wide range of hazardous air pollutants, but not for all toxic contaminants. Therefore, the data in this table should not be viewed as a comprehensive emissions inventory.
Source of information: USEPA 1999c.


Table 2.

PM10 Emissions Data for the Fort Hall Nonattainment Area and the Portneuf Valley Nonattainment Area
Sources in the Fort Hall PM10 Nonattainment Area (USEPA 1999a)
Source Name Estimated PM10 Emissions (tons per year)
FMC727
Paved Roads571
Agricultural Windblown Dust310
All Other Sources198
Sources in the Portneuf Valley Nonattainment area (IDEQ 1999a)
Source Name Estimated PM10 Emissions (tons per year)
Unpaved Roads1,230
Windblown Dust (Agricultural)894
Windblown Dust (non-Agricultural)492
Paved Roads419
Agricultural Tilling376
Fires363
Residential Heating237
Residential and Commercial Construction175
Road Construction142
Simplot135
All Other Sources362

Notes: The Fort Hall Nonattainment Area is located in the southernmost portion of the Fort Hall Indian Reservation and does not include the town of Fort Hall. Approximately 500 people live within the Fort Hall Nonattainment Area (USEPA 1999a).
The Portneuf Valley Nonattainment Area spans approximately 100 square miles and includes the cities of Chubbuck and Pocatello (IDEQ 1999a). Roughly 75,000 people live within this nonattainment area (USEPA 1999a).
The emissions data in this table are estimates and might understate or overstate actual emissions levels.


Table 3.

Overview of Monitoring Studies of Metals and Other Inorganics
Elements with at least one ambient air concentration higher than corresponding health-based comparison values (further evaluation of these elements is presented in the "Public Health Implications" section of this report):
Aluminum
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chromium
Manganese
Vanadium
Elements with all measured concentrations lower than corresponding health-based comparison values (these elements are not evaluated further in the report):
Antimony
Chlorine
Cobalt
Copper
Iron
Lead
Mercury
Molybdenum
Nickel
Selenium
Silver
Strontium
Thallium
Tin
Titanium
Zinc
Elements detected in the EMF study area, but for which ATSDR and EPA have not developed health-based comparison values (a brief evaluation of these elements is presented in the "Public Health Implications" section of this report):
Bromine
Calcium
Carbon
Cesium
Gallium
Germanium*
Gold*
Indium*
Iodine
Lanthanum
Magnesium
Palladium*
Phosphorous
Potassium
Rhodium
Rubidium
Scandium
Silicon
Sodium
Sulfur
Tellurium
Tungsten
Uranium
Yttrium
Zirconium

Notes: Elements in this table refer to those that were measured by x-ray fluorescence, which includes some elements (like bromine) that are typically not categorized as metals.
Refer to Appendices A.2, A.3, and A.9 for a detailed review of the ambient air monitoring data that led to the above classifications.
Many of the elements listed above are potentially radionuclides. As explained earlier, this health consultation does not evaluate public health hazards for exposures to radionuclides. A future ATSDR health consultation will address this topic.
* denotes elements that were reported as detected by air monitoring studies, but the measurement uncertainty exceeded the actual concentration. As a result, it is not certain whether these elements are present in the air in the vicinity of the EMF site. Therefore, these elements are not discussed further in the "Public Health Implications" section of this health consultation.



Next Section     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. #