PUBLIC HEALTH ASSESSMENT

ELECTROSONICS/SPOFFORD PLACE (FORMER)
CHESTERFIELD, CHESHIRE COUNTY, NEW HAMPSHIRE

VI. CONCLUSIONS

Based on all available information, DHHS concludes that, although some exposures may becurrently occurring, the exposures are not at levels expected to cause long-term, adverse healtheffects. Therefore, the site does not currently pose a public health hazard. Since there areopportunities for exposure but adverse health effects from these exposures are unlikely, DHHS hascategorized current conditions at the site as No Apparent Public Health Hazard according to ATSDRhazard classification system. However, site remediation is needed because, in the future, changesin the land use or a large flood of Partridge Brook could increase exposure to site contaminants atlevels that could cause adverse health effects.

The Former Electro-Sonics site was a Public Health Hazard in the past because groundwatercontamination with VOCs resulted in significant exposures for two residential wells (No. 3 was notat levels high enough to cause adverse effects). The most serious exposures were for the residentsusing water from Residential Well Nos. 1 and 2, where exposure to vinyl chloride, TCE and 1,1-dichloroethylene could potentially cause a low to moderate theoretical risk of cancer.

Again, the estimates of exposure and risk of cancer is a conservative estimate, i.e., it is an exampleof the highest degree of possible exposure (based on well monitoring data). Calculation of cancerrisk is based on the most recent literature, and may be based on partly on animal exposures. Therefore, an increase of cancer is a potential risk. The actual risk for any one person getting canceris probably lower than the calculated risk.

DHHS identified four possible completed exposure pathways at the Former Electro-Sonics site. Three of these pathways occurred in the past only. Conclusions regarding each pathway as well asother site-related issues are listed below.

Completed Exposure Pathways

1. Children or adults who wade or play in the brook (the area of the brook adjacent to the northernparcel of the site) could be exposed to elevated concentrations of chromium and other chemicals;however, these exposures are not expected to affect their health.

2. Former employees of Electro-Sonics may have been exposed to high levels of metals in the soilin the earthen basement of Building No. 2; however, it is presumed that workers did not spent largeamounts of time in the basement and these exposures should not result in long-term health effects.

3. Former employees of Electro-Sonics may have been exposed to VOCs in the air of the basementof Building No. 2; however, these exposures would not have been high enough to result in long-termhealth effects.

4. Residents using Residential Well Nos. 1, 2 and 3 have been exposed to VOCs in the drinkingwater from these wells. (see above for more details on the public health implications of exposure)

Potential Exposure Pathways

5. People who trespass on the site could be exposed to waste from the former subsurface leach fieldand alleyway; the gravel cap currently prevents exposure, but there is potential for erosion that couldexpose contaminated soil. There also may be other contamination which has not been characterized

6. The contamination in the subsurface leach field and alleyway is near Partridge Brook. Additionally, there is uncharacterized contamination from previous oil spills. A flood could washthe contaminated material into the brook and carry them to the nearby Connecticut River.

7. Exposures for workers to water from the site supply well could not be evaluated. It does notappear that hand washing would result in an exposure resulting in adverse health effects. It is notknown if workers engage in other activities that would result in further exposure.

Eliminated Exposure Pathways

8. There are no known current exposures to site contaminants in nearby residential well water. Residents near the site had charcoal aeration filtration systems installed on their wells. Well waterwas tested after installation of filters; contamination of these wells was eliminated.

9. Access to the basement of Building No. 2 is blocked. Neither workers in the building nortrespassers can enter this area.

10. Workers in Building No. 2 have been informed of the high levels of contamination in the sitesupply well. They have been advised not to drink water from this well.

11. There is no evidence that the undeveloped southern parcel of the former Electro-Sonics site iscontaminated. Therefore, it is unlikely that people who walk on this property would not be exposedto any contaminants from the site.

12. Local groundwater hydrology and the deep water table is such that there is little likelihood of VOCs migrating from the water table into residences.

VII. RECOMMENDATIONS

1. People should be discouraged from walking on the area of the northern parcel of the site. "NOTRESSPASSING" signs should be posted in the northern parcel to prevent people from crossingover the area of the former subsurface leach field and in the alleyway between Building Nos. 1 and2.

2. A visible advisory should be posted (if not already) in Building No. 2, warning of the high levelsof contamination in the well water. Even though workers currently do not drink this water, andexposures through hand washing and bathroom use is well below comparison values, workers shouldbe advised of the high levels of contamination.

3. Wells without filtration systems but with future potential for contamination should be testedperiodically to ensure that contaminants are not at levels above their comparison values.

VIII. PUBLIC HEALTH ACTION PLAN

The purpose of the Public Health Action Plan is to ensure that this Public Health Assessment notonly identifies any current and potential exposure pathways and related health hazards, but alsoprovides a plan of action to mitigate and prevent adverse human health effects resulting fromexposures to hazardous substances in the environment. The first section of the Public Health ActionPlan contains a description of completed and ongoing actions taken to mitigate environmentalcontamination. In the second section there is a list of additional public health actions that areplanned for the future.

(A) Completed or Ongoing Actions

1. Between 1992 and 2001, a series of environmental investigations characterized the nature andextent of contamination at the site.

2. In 2001, DES placed a gravel cover over in the area between Building Nos. 1 and 2. This was inresponse to odors coming from recent soil test pits.

3. Beginning in 1999, DES tested up to 26 residential wells in the vicinity of the site and periodicallyre-tests wells in the area. Wells with contamination were fitted with charcoal aeration filtrationsystems. Wells were re-tested after the treatment systems were installed.

(B) Planned Actions

1. EPA is working with DES on a cleanup strategy for the site.

2. DHHS will review new data for the site and provide health advice to EPA and DES whennecessary.

3. DHHS will provide residents affected by contaminated well water with information aboutoccupational physicians. An occupational physician may be able to determine if someone exposedto VOCs will suffer any future adverse health effects.

4. DHHS will attempt to locate residents who moved away and may have consumed contaminatedwater from the wells with the highest levels of contamination. These individuals will be given thesame information as those currently living near the site.

5. DHHS will advise the residents of Spofford Village of contamination in Partridge Brook near anddownstream from Electro-Sonics. It may be possible that there is additional contamination not characterized in the Public Health Assessment document.

IX. PREPARERS OF THE REPORT

Report Authors

Todd C. Hudson, Environmental Health Risk Analyst
Melinda Carpenter, Assistant State Epidemiologist
Gayle Bagley, Health Promotion Advisor

Bureau of Environmental and Occupational Health
Office of Community and Public Health
New Hampshire Department of Health and Human Services
6 Hazen Drive
Concord, New Hampshire 03301

ATSDR Technical Project Officer

Gregory Ulirsch
Division of Health Assessment and Consultation
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
1600 Clifton Road, Mailstop E-32
Atlanta, Georgia 30333

ATSDR Regional Representative

LCDR Gary D. Perlman MPH
ATSDR New England Regional Representative
1 Congress Street, Suite 1100 (HBT)
Boston, Massachusetts 02114-2023

X. REFERENCES

Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). 1990a. Toxicological profile forcadmium. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Atlanta, Georgia.

Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). 1990b. Toxicological profile for 1,1-dichloroethane. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Atlanta,Georgia.

Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). 1994. Toxicological profile forcopper. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Atlanta, Georgia.

Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). 1996. Toxicological profile for 1,2-dichloroethylene. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Atlanta,Georgia.

Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). 1997a. Toxicological profile fortrichloroethylene. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Atlanta,Georgia.

Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). 1997b. Volatile organic compoundsin drinking water and adverse pregnancy outcomes, interim report, United States Marine CorpsBase, Camp LeJeune, North Carolina. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, PublicHealth Service, Atlanta, Georgia.

Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). 1997c. Toxicological profile for vinylchloride. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Atlanta, Georgia.

Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). 1999a. Toxicological profile for lead. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Atlanta, Georgia.

Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). 1999b. Toxicological profile for zinc. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Atlanta, Georgia.

Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). 1999c. National exposure registry,trichlroethylene (TCE) sub-registry, baseline through follow-up 3, Technical Report. U.S.Department of Health and Human Services, Atlanta, Georgia.

Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). 2000. Toxicological profile forchromium. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Atlanta,Georgia.

Barton HA and Clewell HJ. 2000. Evaluating noncancer effects of trichoroethylene: dosimetry,mode of action, and risk assessment. Environ Health Perspect 108(Suppl. 2): 323-334.

Bove FJ, et al. 1995. Public drinking water contamination and birth outcomes. Am J Epidemiol141:850-862.

Bradley LJN, Magee BH, Allen SL. 1994. Background levels of polycyclic aromatichydrocarbons (PAH) and selected metals in New England urban soils. J Soil Contam, 3(4):349-361.

Burg JR and Gist GL. 1999. Health effects of environmental contaminant exposure: an intrafilecomparison of the trichloroethylene sub-registry. Arch Environ Health 54(4):231-241.

Cohn P, et al. 1994. Drinking water contamination and the incidence of leukemia and non-Hodgkinslymphoma. Environ Health Perspect 102:556-561.

Goldberg SJ, et al. 1990. An association of human congenital cardiac malformations and drinkingwater contaminants. J Am Coll Cardiol 16(1):155-164.

Hofman HT, Birnstiel H, Jobst P. 1970. Inhalation toxicity of 1,1- and 1,2-dichloroethane. ArchPharmakol 266:360-361.

Herren-Freund SL, Pereira MA. 1986. Carcinogenicity of by-products of disinfection in mouse andrat liver. Environ Health Perspect 69:59-65.

Klaunig JE, Ruth RJ, Pereira MA. 1986. Carcinogenicity of chlorinated methane and ethanecompounds administered in drinking water to mice. Environ Health Perspect 69:89-95.

Lash LH, et al. 2000. Metabolism of trichoroethylene. Environ. Health Perspect 108(Supp. 2):177-200.

Massachusetts Department of Public Health. 1997. Woburn childhood leukemia follow-up study. Bureau of Environmental Health Assessment, Boston, Massachusetts.

Maxwell NI, DE Burmaster, Ozonoff D. 1991. Trihalomethanes and maximum contaminant levels:the significance of inhalation and dermal exposures to chloroform in household water. RegulToxicol Pharmacol 14:297-312.

National Toxicology Program. 2000. Report on Carcinogens, 9^th Edition. Available online at http://ntp-server.niehs.nih.gov/NewHomeRoc/AboutRoC.html .

New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services. 1998. Risk characterization andmanagement plan (RCMP). Concord, New Hampshire.

Pastino GM, Yap WY, Carroquino M. Human variability and susceptibility to trichoroethylene.Environ Health Perspect 108(Suppl. 2):201-214.

Plaa GL, Larsen RE. 1965. Relative nephrotoxic properties of chlorinated methane, ethane andethylene derivatives in mice. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 7: 37-44.

Quast JF, McKenna MJ, Rampy LW, et al. 1986. Chronic toxicity and oncogenicity study on inhaledvinylidene chloride in rats. Fund Appl Toxicol 6:105-144.

Risk Assessment Information System (RAIS). 1994. Toxicity summary for 1,1-dichloroethane. Prepared for the Oak Ridge Reservation Environmental Restoration Program, Oak Ridge,Tennessee.

Sanborn, Head and Associates. 2001. Supplemental site investigation, former Electro-Sonics site,Chesterfield (Spofford Village), New Hampshire. Concord, New Hampshire.

U.S. Environmental protection Agency (USEPA). 1991. Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund: Volume I - Human Health Evaluation Manual, part B. Office of Research and Development, U.S.Environmental protection Agency, Washington, DC.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 1993. Reference Dose: Description and Use inHealth Risk Assessments. Integrated Risk Information System, U.S. EPA, Washington, DC. http://www.epa.gov/iris/index.html

Wartenberg D, Reyner D, and Scott CS. 2000. Trichoroethylene and cancer: epidemiologicevidence. Environ Health Perspect 108(Suppl. 2):161-176.

CERTIFICATION

The Public Health Assessment for the Electro-Sonics Site was prepared by the New Hampshire Department of Health and Human Services 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 Public Health Assessment was began.

Gregory V. Ulirsch, M.S.
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 Public Health Assessment and concurs with its findings.

Alan W. Yarbrough
for Roberta Erlwein
Chief, SSAB, DHAC, ATSDR

APPENDIX A: TABLES

* Indicates that the analyte was undetected at specified reporting limit.
† Indicates that analyte value was obtained from a diluted analysis.

* Risk-Based Concentration, a health-based comparison value developed by EPA Region IV.
† Preliminary Remediation Goal, a health-based value developed by EPA Region IX

* Protective Concentration Level, a health-based comparison value developed by the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission.

* Average Daily Dose, measured in mg/kg/day, based on exposure through hand washing.

* Average Daily Dose, measured in mg/kg/day, based on exposure through hand washing.
† Maximum Exposure Guideline, Developed by the Maine Department of Human Services.

* Exposure estimate for all routes of exposure; estimation derived according to Maxwell et al. (1991).
† Exposure dose for a 70 kg adult drinking 2 liters of water per day.
‡ Exposure dose for a 28 kg child drinking 1 liter of water per day.

* Exposure estimate for all routes of exposure; estimation derived according to Maxwell et al. (1991).
† Exposure dose for a 70 kg adult drinking 2 liters of water per day.
‡ Exposure dose for a 28 kg child drinking 1 liter of water per day, for 17 years, and for a 70kg adult drinking 2 liters of water per day, for 18 years.

APPENDIX B: FIGURES

Figure 1. Intro Map

APPENDIX C: NEEDS ASSESSMENT SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE

Public Health Assessment
Former Electro-Sonics Facility
Chesterfield, Cheshire County, New Hampshire

Community Needs Assessment
Site: Former Electro-Sonics
Spofford Village-Chesterfield, NH

If you are interested in being on our mailing list, please provide your name and address below.

Name:______________________________________________________________

Address: ____________________________________________________________

Telephone: (home) ___________________ (work) ____________________________

Email:_______________________________

1. How long have you lived at this address? __________________________
   
   
2. Is this a seasonal home? Yes No
   If yes, how long do you stay each year? ______________
   
   
3. Do you have young children (6 years old or younger) who live with you? Yes No
   
   
4. How would you like to receive news about the Former Electro-Sonics site? (Check all that apply.)

   Telephone
   Mail
   Newspapers (which one(s)?) ______________ )
   Cable/TV
   Community meeting
   Other

   
   
5. Do you or does anyone in your home...
   
   

   walk on or around the Former Electro-Sonics site property	Yes	No
   play or wade in the stream	Yes	No
   eat fish from the stream	Yes	No
   use the stream for other purposes	Yes	No
   Describe: _________________________
   walk in the woods around the site	Yes	No

   
   
   
6. Have you seen any thing near or on the Former Electro-Sonics Site that could cause you harm?
   (E.g. fence children can climb, chemical spills, unsafe buildings, etc.)

   
   No
   Yes      If yes, please describe: _____________________________
   
   ________________________________________________________
   
   ________________________________________________________

7. Do you feel outdoor activities near the site are putting you at risk? (E.g. swimming, gardening,
   fishing)
   
   No
   Yes,  please describe what activities: _________________________
   
   ________________________________________________________
   
   ________________________________________________________

8. Have you smelled odors coming from the site?

   No
   Yes    If yes, please describe the odor and when it occurs: _________
   
   ________________________________________________________
   
   ________________________________________________________
   

9. What is your general feeling about this site? (Please check one.)
   
   It does not affect my health.
   It does affect my health.
   I am not sure.
   

10. What is your level of interest in this site? (Please check one.)
    
    Very interested
    Somewhat interested
    Not interested
    
    
11. Do you have any other health-related questions or concerns about the Former Electro-Sonics site
    that you would like us to discuss in the Public Health Assessment?
    
    _______________________________________________________________________
    
    _______________________________________________________________________
    
    _______________________________________________________________________
    

    The Department of Health & Human Services can provide physicians with information about the
    potential health problems linked to previously disposed of chemicals at the site. Would you like
    your physician to be added to our mailing list?

    
    Physician Name________________________________________________
    
    Address______________________________________________________

    Telephone:____________________________________________________

Thank you for taking the time to fill out this survey. Please feel free to call us at (603) 271-4664 or toll-free in New Hampshire at (800) 852-3345 extension 4664. You may also write to us at:

NHDHHS, Bureau of Health Risk Assessment
6 Hazen Drive
Concord, NH 03301
Fax: (603)271-3991
Email: healthrisk@dhhs.state.nh.us
Internet: http://www.dhhs.state.nh.us/dhhs/hlthriskassess/default.htm

Deadline for mailing survey:   August 2, 2002

Next Section     Table of Contents