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

PUBLIC HEALTH ASSESSMENT

ATLAS TACK SITE
(a/k/a ATLAS TACK CORPORATION)
FAIRHAVEN, BRISTOL COUNTY, MASSACHUSETTS


CONCLUSIONS

The primary compounds and environmental medium of concern at the site are cadmium, lead, and PAHs in soils. At the time of this public health assessment, the populations with opportunities for exposure are the few employees of Atlas Tack working on the site and persons trespassing on the site. In the past, employees of Atlas Tack, contractors working on the site, and persons trespassing on the site would have had opportunities for exposure. It was also possible that in the past residents in nearby neighborhoods might have had opportunities for exposure to compounds in ambient air that, although difficult to quantify, might have been of health concern. Although there are opportunities for exposure under past and current conditions, MDPH does not have specific information as to whether adverse health effects actually have occurred as a result of exposure opportunities at this site. However, given that there are currently opportunities for exposure (e.g., cadmium, lead, and PAHs in soil) on the property and there were contaminants found at levels of health concern, the site poses a public health hazard under these present conditions. Besides exposure opportunities to chemical contaminants, physical hazards (e.g., dilapidated structures) are present at the site and the site is accessible to trespassers through holes in or downed portions of the fence. There were also physical hazards on the site in the past (e.g., lagoon).

ATSDR requires that one of five conclusion categories be used to summarize findings of healthconsultations and public health assessments. These categories are: 1) Urgent Public HealthHazard, 2) Public Health Hazard, 3) Indeterminate Public Health Hazard, 4) No Apparent PublicHealth Hazard, 5) No Public Health Hazard. A category is selected from site-specific conditionssuch as the degree of public health hazard based on the presence and duration of humanexposure, contaminant concentration, the nature of toxic effects associated with site-relatedcontaminants, presence of physical hazards, and community health concerns.

Based on ATSDR criteria, ATSDR would classify the Atlas Tack site under past site conditionsas a "Public Health Hazard" as a result of long term opportunities for exposure to site workersand persons trespassing on the site to elevated concentrations of metals (e.g., cadmium and lead)in soil at the site as well as the presence of physical hazards. Under current site conditions,ATSDR would classify the Atlas Tack site as a "Public Health Hazard" because, although thereare fewer employees currently working on the site, and there might be less trespassing, theopportunities for exposure as well as the physical hazards are still present as they were in the past.


RECOMMENDATIONS

  1. The fence surrounding the site should be kept in good repair to prevent access to the site and security should be improved, particularly with regard to children and others trespassing on the site.

  2. Opportunities for exposures to contaminants in areas within the Commercial Area (i.e., pickling trench, tack wash, and plating pit) that are accessible should be prevented through remediation activities or the implementation of institutional controls (e.g., removal, covering, etc.).

  3. Opportunities for exposures to contaminants in soil in the fill area to the east of the formerlagoon area and the Commercial and Industrial Debris Area should be prevented throughremediation activities or the implementation of institutional controls (e.g., removal, fence, etc.).

  4. During future remedial action activities, it should be verified that soil samples from on-site locations near the fence that is adjacent to the residential area south of the site provide a complete characterization of potential exposures opportunities to adjacent residents.

  5. EPA should provide to MDPH any additional data or information that may warrant further public health assessment.

PUBLIC HEALTH ACTION PLAN

  1. MDPH will schedule a meeting with the Fairhaven Board of Health to discuss andplan for the implementation of education and outreach activities (e.g., information regardingpotential health concerns at the site) in coordination with the Fairhaven Board of Health and other involved agencies (e.g., Fairhaven School Department, EPA).

  2. MDPH will provide input to EPA and local officials on measures to enhancesecurity measures at the site. This will include identifying strategies to prevent trespassing by children and others onto the site.

  3. Upon receipt from EPA of any additional data that EPA believes may warrantfurther public health assessment, MDPH will review this information and determine, inconsultation with EPA, an appropriate public health response (e.g., health consultation, technical assistance).

  4. Because of the proximity of the residential neighborhood to the site, there mightbe public health concerns associated with site remedial activities. Therefore, if members of thecommunity or others (e.g., local health officials) express health or exposure-related concerns toMDPH with regard to data or information (e.g., plans for remedial activities) generated by theenvironmental regulatory agencies or others, MDPH will discuss these concerns with thoseindividuals and determine an appropriate response (e.g., health consultation, technical assistance, education and outreach).

This document was prepared by the Bureau of Environmental health assessment of the Massachusetts Department of Public Health. If you have any questions about this document, please contact Suzanne K. Condon, Assistant Commissioner, 7th Floor, 250 Washington Street, Boston, Massachusetts 02108.


TABLES

Table 1.

Demographic Characteristics of Fairhaven
  Census Tract 6553 Census Tract 6554 Town of Fairhaven
Characteristics Persons % of persons Persons % of persons Persons % of persons
             
Age            
under 5 169 4.8 170 4.0 757 4.7
5-14 465 13.2 545 12.9 2,095 13.0
15-44 1445 40.9 1600 38.0 6,231 38.6
45-64 743 21.0 1190 28.2 3,926 24.3
65 & over 706 20.0 710 16.8 3,150 19.5
             
Sex            
male 1643 46.5 2058 48.8 7,628 47.2
female 1890 53.5 2157 51.2 8,531 52.8
             
Race            
Not Hispanic or Latino 3503 99.2 4185 99.3 16,024 99.2
White alone 3374 95.5 4055 96.2 15,489 95.9
Black or African American alone 34 1.0 13 0.3 94 0.6
American Indian and Alaska Native alone 12 0.3 8 0.2 38 0.2
Asian alone 23 0.7 23 0.5 71 0.4
Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander alone 0 0 0 0 3 0.0
Some other race alone 28 0.8 34 0.8 150 0.9
Two or more races 32 0.9 52 1.2 179 1.1
Hispanic or Latino 30 0.9 30 0.7 135 0.8
White alone 23 0.7 16 0.4 76 42.5
Black or African American alone 1 (<0.1) 1 (<0.1) 3 (<0.1)
American Indian and Alaska Native alone 1 (<0.1) 0 0 4 (<0.1)
Asian alone 0 0 0 0 0 0
Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander alone 0 0 0 0 0 0
Some other race alone 4 0.1 11 0.3 42 0.3
Two or more races 1 (<0.1) 2 (<0.1) 10 0.1

Data Sources: 2000 US Census


Table 2a.

Data summary of 0- through 2-ft soil contaminants of concern from the commercial area of the Atlas Tack site. Concentrations are listed as parts per million, ppm, by dry weight unless otherwise noted.
Compounds Detects/
Samples
Minimum
(mg/kg)
Mean(13)
(mg/kg)
Maximum
(mg/kg)
Comparison Values(14)
(mg/kg)
Background Levels
(mg/kg)
Antimony 9/23 ND 18.4 118 J RMEG (child) = 20
RMEG (adult) = 300
N/A
Arsenic 27/27 0.55 12.4 96 J Chronic EMEG (child) = 20
Chronic EMEG (adult) = 200
CREG = 0.5
Range: <0.1-73
Mean: 7.4
Cadmium 9/24 ND 99.1 1,500

Chronic EMEG (child) = 10
Chronic EMEG (adult) = 100

N/A
Calcium 23/27 ND 1,830 325,000

N/A

Range: 100-280,000
Mean: 6,300
Chromium (total) 27/27 5.8 157 2,430

Trivalent Chromium
RMEG (child) = 80,000
RMEG (adult) = 1,000,000
Hexavalent Chromium
RMEG (child) = 200
RMEG (adult) = 2,000

1-1000
Copper 23/27 ND 2,700 54,000 RBC = 3,100 Range: <1-700
Mean: 22
Cyanide 8/27 ND 1,040 16,900 J RMEG (child) = 1,000
RMEG (adult) = 10,000
N/A
Iron 27/27 2,410 60,100 305,000 RBC = 23,000 Range: 100->100,000
Mean: 25,000
Lead 27/27 3.7 850 5,950 EPA std (res.) = 400 Range: <10-300
Mean: 17
Nickel 25/27 ND 150 1,700 RMEG (child) = 1,000
RMEG (adult) = 10,000
Range: <5-700
Mean: 18
Vanadium 27/27 5.8 38.1 635 Int. EMEG (child) = 200
Int. EMEG (adult) = 2,000
Range: <7-300
Mean: 66
Zinc 26/27 ND 20,100 190,000 J Chronic EMEG (child) = 20,000
Chronic EMEG (adult) = 200,000
Range: <5-2,900
Mean: 52
Benzo(a)anthracene 7/10 ND 22 210 J CREG = 1 0.169-59
Benzo(b)fluoranthene 8/10 ND 16.1 150 J CREG = 1 15-62
Benzo(k)fluoranthene 8/10 ND 20 190 J CREG = 1 0.3-26
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 8/10 ND 95.8 950 J CREG = 10 0.9-47
Benzo(a)pyrene 6/10 ND 20.2 190 J CREG = 0.1 0.165-0.220
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate 2/10 ND 6.37 49 RBC = 46 N/A
Chrysene 9/10 ND 24.1 230 J CREG = 10 0.251-0.640
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene 4/10 ND 2.16 14 J CREG = 0.02 N/A
Fluoranthene 7/10 ND 42.6 410 RMEG (child) = 2,000
RMEG (adult) = 30,000
CREG = 100
N/A
Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 8/10 ND 12.9 120 J CREG = 1 8-61
4-Nitroaniline 2/10 ND 4.9 14 J N/A N/A
Phenanthrene 7/10 ND 44.3 430 J CREG = 100 N/A
Pyrene 9/10 ND 39.6 380

RMEG (adult) = 2,000
RMEG (child) = 20,000
CREG = 100

N/A
PCB Arochlor 1260 6/8 ND 10.3 36 J

CREG = 0.4

 
Beta-BHC 1/8 ND 0.0701 0.012 N/A N/A

The background concentrations for metals in soil are from the USGS Professional Paper 1270 (Shacklette 1984). The backgroundconcentrations for PAHs are from the ATSDR Toxicological Profile for PAHs (ATSDR 1995b).

RBC Risk-based concentration calculated by EPA Region III. The values are calculated using reference doses and cancer slope factors with "standard" exposure scenarios.
J The associated value is estimated.
N/A Not Available
ND Not Detected

Data Sources:
-- Weston 1995. Remedial Investigation Report.
-- USACE 1998. Update of Baseline Human Health Risk Assessment and Development of Risk-Based Cleanup Levels


Table 1.

Data summary of 0- through 2-ft soil contaminants of concern from the noncommercial area of the Atlas Tack site. Concentrations are listed as parts per million, ppm, by dry weight unless otherwise noted
Compounds Detects/
Samples
Minimum
(mg/kg)

Mean(15)
(mg/kg)
Maximum
(mg/kg)

Comparison Values (16)
(mg/kg)
Background Levels (mg/kg)
Antimony 4/10 ND 41.5 162 J RMEG (child) = 20
RMEG (adult) = 300
N/A
Arsenic 18/18 2.4 23.8 72.5 J Chronic EMEG (child) = 20
Chronic EMEG (adult) = 200
CREG = 0.5
Range: <0.1-73
Mean: 7.4
Cadmium 12/14 ND 242 3,000 J Chronic EMEG (child) = 10
Chronic EMEG (adult) = 100
N/A
Chromium (total) 18/18 8.3 145 768 J

Trivalent Chromium
RMEG (child) = 80,000
RMEG (adult) = 1,000,000
Hexavalent Chromium
RMEG (child) = 200
RMEG (adult) = 2,000

1-1000

Copper 18/18 24 10,200 70,000 J RBC = 3,100 Range: <1-700
Mean: 22
Cyanide 15/18 ND 284 3,010

RMEG (child) = 1,000
RMEG (adult) = 10,000

N/A
Iron 18/18 10,600 124,000 350,000 J RBC = 23,000 Range: 100->100,000
Mean: 25,000
Lead 18/18 31 1,080 2,790 J EPA std (res.) = 400 Range: <10-300
Mean: 17
Nickel 18/18 5.4 1,370 17,900 J RMEG (child) = 1,000
RMEG (adult) = 10,000
Range: <5-700
Mean: 18
Zinc 18/18 50.7 5,050 21,500 Chronic EMEG (child) = 20,000
Chronic EMEG (adult) = 200,000
Range: <5-2,900
Mean: 52
Anthracene 14/19 ND 3.58 18 RMEG (child) = 20,000
RMEG (adult) = 200,000
CREG = 10
N/A
Benzo(a)anthracene 15/19 ND 11.2 66 J CREG = 1 0.169-59
Benzo(b)fluoranthene 17/19 ND 11.8 70 J CREG = 1 15-62
Benzo(k)fluoranthene 15/19 ND 5.76 34 J CREG = 1 0.3-26
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 13/19 ND 3.13 17 J CREG = 10 0.9-47
Benzo(a)pyrene 16/19 ND 9.49 59 J CREG = 0.1 0.165-0.220
Chrysene 16/19 ND 10.2 70 CREG = 10 0.251-0.64
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene 7/19 ND 1.28 1.5 J CREG = 0.02 N/A
Fluoranthene 19/19 0.051 21.8 150 RMEG (child) = 2,000
RMEG (adult) = 30,000
CREG = 100
0.2-166
Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 12/19 ND 4.83 29 J CREG = 1 8-61
Pyrene 19/19 0.054 20.6 140

RMEG (child) = 2,000
RMEG (adult) = 20,000
CREG = 100

0.145-147

PCB Arochlor 1260 10/19 ND 14.9 260

CREG = 0.4

N/A
Aldrin 2/19 ND 0.128 0.22 J Chronic EMEG (child) = 2
Chronic EMEG (adult) = 20
CREG = 0.04
N/A
4,4'-DDT 16/19 ND 2.9 46

Int. EMEG (child) = 30
Int. EMEG (adult) = 400
CREG = 2

N/A
Dieldrin 1/19 ND 0.222(17) 0.059 Chronic EMEG (child) = 3
Chronic EMEG (adult) = 40
CREG = 0.04

N/A

Endosulfan Sulfate 3/19 ND 0.226 0.094 N/A N/A
Endrin Ketone 1/19 ND 0.219 0.073 N/A N/A

Data Sources:
-- Weston 1995. Remedial Investigation Report
-- USACE 1998. Update of Baseline Human Health Risk Assessment and Development of Risk-Based Cleanup Levels

The background concentrations for metals in soil are from the USGS Professional Paper 1270 (Shacklette 1984). The background concentrations for PAHs are from the ATSDR Toxicological Profile for PAHs (ATSDR 1995b).
J The associated value is estimated.
N/A Not Available
ND Not Detected
RBC Risk-based concentration calculated by EPA Region III. The values are calculated using reference doses and cancer slope factors with "standard" exposure scenarios.


Table 3.

Data summary of contaminants of concern in sediment from Boys Creek at the Atlas Tack site. Concentrations are listed as parts per million, ppm, by dry weight unless otherwise noted
Compounds Detects/
Samples
Minimum
(mg/kg)
Mean(18)
(mg/kg)
Maximum
(mg/kg)
Comparison Values
(mg/kg)(19)
 Background Concentrations(20) (mg/kg)

Arsenic 11/11 1.9 16.7 39.8 Chronic EMEG (child) = 20
Chronic EMEG (adult) = 200
CREG = 0.5
Sediment = 2
Soil = <0.1-73
Cadmium 2/11 ND 2.6 15 Chronic EMEG (child) = 10
Chronic EMEG (adult) = 100
Sediment = ND
Soil = N/A
Calcium 11/11 537 2,650 5,270 N/A Sediment = 519
Soil = 100-280,000
Iron 11/11 511 78,700 196,000 N/A Sediment = 3,480
Soil = 100- >100,000
Magnesium 11/11 1,210 3,690 8,220 N/A Sediment = 1,120
Soil = 50-50,000
Potassium 11/11 327 1,170 2,600 N/A Sediment = 430
Soil = 50-37,000
Sodium 11/11 2,670 12,400 37,400 N/A Sediment = 4,770
Soil = 500-500,000
Benzo(a)anthracene 9/9 0.06 0.38(21) 1.3 J CREG = 1

 Sediment = ND
Soil = 0.169-59

Benzo(a)pyrene 9/9 0.07 0.44(21) 1.6 J CREG = 0.1 Sediment = ND
Soil = 0.165-0.220
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene 1/10 ND 0.36(21) 0.25 J CREG = 0.02 Sediment = ND
Soil = N/A
Carbazole 1/9 ND 0.41(21) 0.079 J N/A Sediment = ND
Soil = N/A
Endosulfan II 1/10 ND 0.016 0.0094 N/A Sediment = ND
Soil = N/A

J The associated value is estimated.
N/A Not Available
ND Not Detected

Data Source: Weston 1995. Remedial Investigation Report.


Table 4.

Data summary of contaminants of concern from surface water for the Atlas Tack site
Compound Detects/
Samples
Minimum
(mg/L)
Mean(22)
(mg/L)
Maximum
(mg/L)
Comparison Value(23)
(mg/L)
Antimony 3/24 ND 7.53 24.6 J RMEG (child) = 4
RMEG (adult) = 10
Arsenic 14/24 ND 7.32 36.7 J Chronic EMEG (child) = 3
Chronic EMEG (adult) = 10
CREG = 0.02
MCL = 50
Barium 14/24 ND 18.83 104 RMEG (child) = 700
RMEG (adult) = 2,000
MMCL = 2
Cadmium 1/11 ND 1.2 2 Chronic EMEG (child) = 2
Chronic EMEG (adult) = 7
MMCL = 5
Calcium 24/24 15,900 178,083 314,000 N/A
Iron 24/24 187 2,837.5 17,100 RBC = 11,000
Lead 16/24 ND 119.6 1,870 J MDEP Action Level = 15
Magnesium 24/24 3,200 575,708 1,150,000 N/A
Manganese 24/24 9.2 204.6 801 RMEG (child) = 500
RMEG (adult) = 2,000
Mercury 15/24 ND 0.33 2.5 J MCL = 2
Potassium 24/24 2,300 173,550 330,000 N/A
Silver 12/24 ND 30.9 95 RMEG (child) = 50
RMEG (adult) = 200
Thallium 2/10 ND 16.4 65.2 J MCL = 2
Aldrin 2/11 ND 0.003 0.007 J

Chronic EMEG (child) = 0.3
Chronic EMEG (adult) = 1
CREG = 0.002

Alpha-BHC 1/11 ND 0.003 0.005 N/A

J The associated value is estimated.
N/A Not Available
MCL Maximum Contaminant Level for Drinking Water (EPA)
ND Not Detected
RBC Risk-based concentration calculated by EPA Region III. The values are calculated using reference doses and cancer slope factors with "standard" exposure scenarios.

Data Sources:
-- Weston 1995. Remedial Investigation Report.
-- Rizzo 1999. Comments on Proposed Clean-up.


Table 5.

Data summary of contaminants of concern in groundwater at the Atlas Tack site
Compound Detects/
Samples
Minimum
(mg/L)
Mean(24)
(mg/L)
Maximum
(mg/L)
Comparison Value(25)
(mg/L)
Aluminum 13/13 524 34,700 112,000 RBC = 37,000
Arsenic 5/21 ND 3.6 11.2 Chronic EMEG (child) = 3
Chronic EMEG (adult) = 10
CREG = 0.02
MCL = 50
Barium 20/21 ND 230 1,280 RMEG (child) = 700
RMEG (adult) = 2,000
MCL = 2,000
Beryllium 4/13 ND 2.2 8.3 RMEG (child) = 20
RMEG (adult) = 70
MCL = 4
Cadmium 12/21 ND 42.4 657 Chronic EMEG (child) = 2
Chronic EMEG (adult) = 7
MCL = 5
Calcium 13/13 9,370 53,400 127,000 N/A
Chromium 13/21 ND 51.7 214 MCL = 100
Copper 14/21 ND 677 8,060 RBC = 1,500
Cyanide 13/30 ND 51.1 668 RMEG (child) = 200
RMEG (adult) = 700
MCL = 200
Iron 13/13 1,270 71,900 208,000 RBC = 11,000
Lead 13/21 ND 130 2,220

MDEP Action Level = 15

Magnesium 13/13 4,580 18,100 39,600 N/A
Manganese 13/13 91.8 1,650 7,890 RMEG (child) = 500
RMEG (adult) = 2000
Nickel 13/13 8.2 191 557 RMEG (child) = 200
RMEG (adult) = 700
MCL = 100
Potassium 13/13 2,440 12,600 55,900 N/A
Sodium 13/13 6,450 29,200 136,000 N/A
Vanadium 12/13 ND 52.7 267 Int. EMEG (child) = 30
Int. EMEG (child) = 100
Zinc 15/21 ND 1,959 11,300 Chronic EMEG (child) = 3,000
Chronic EMEG (adult) = 10,000
Benzene 2/23 ND 39.4 310

CREG = 0.6
MCL = 5

Benzyl acid 1/22 ND 5.2 9

N/A

4-Chlorophenyl-phenylether 1/23 ND 5 5

N/A

Ethylbenzene 3/23 ND 37.5 160 RMEG (child) = 1
RMEG (adult) = 4
MMCL = 0.7
Methylene chloride 2/23 ND 93.1 820 Chronic EMEG (child) = 600
Chronic EMEG (adult) = 2,000
CREG = 5
4-Methylphenol 3/23 ND 16.7 490 RBC = 390
3-Nitroaniline 1/23 ND 21.5(26) 0.8

 N/A

Phenanthrene 1/23 ND 4.9 2 N/A
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 1/23 ND 33.7(29) 1 Chronic EMEG (child) = 400
Chronic EMEG (adult) = 1,000
CREG = 0.2
Toluene 7/23 ND 7,790 220,000 Int. EMEG (child) = 200
Int. EMEG (adult) = 700
MCL = 1,000
Carbazole 1/23 ND 5.1 10

N/A

Endrin Ketone 1/22 ND 0.053 0.11 N/A

N/A Not Available
MCL Maximum Contaminant Level for Drinking Water (EPA)
ND Not Detected
RBC Risk-based concentration calculated by EPA Region III. The values are calculated using reference doses and cancer slope factors with "standard" exposure scenarios.

Data Sources:
-- Weston 1995. Remedial Investigation Report.
-- Rizzo 1999. Comments on Proposed Clean-up.


Table 6.

Data summary of contaminants of concern in hard shell clams from Boys Creek at the Atlas Tack site. Concentrations are listed as parts per million, ppm, by dry weight unless otherwise noted
Compounds Detects/
Samples
Minimum
(mg/kg)
Mean(27)
(mg/kg)
Maximum
(mg/kg)
Comparison Values(28)
(mg/kg)
Background Concentrations(29)
(mg/kg)
Arsenic(30) 4/4 8.2 11.7 14.3 0.03 17.7
Calcium 4/4 5,530 6,600 7,420 N/A 5,710
Magnesium 4/4 9,190 9,815 10,600 N/A 9,010
Mercury 4/4 0.66 0.76 0.85 1 (0.5)(31)

1.4

Potassium 4/4 12,300 12,800 13,500 N/A 10,000
Sodium 4/4 64,400 70,200 76,000 N/A 10,500
Acenaphthylene 1/4 ND 0.99 0.26 N/A ND
Benzo(a)anthracene 1/4 ND 0.99(32) 0.25 0.06

 ND

Benzo(b)fluoranthene 1/4 ND 0.98(32) 0.21 0.06 ND
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 2/4 ND 1.0 1.3 N/A ND
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate 4/4 1.0 2.5 5.1 2.9 15.0
2-Methylnaphthalene 1/2 ND 0.82(32) 0.25 N/A ND
2-Nitrophenol 1/2 ND 3.8(32) 1.2 N/A ND
Pentachlorophenol 1/2 ND 3.5(32) 0.45 0.33 ND
4,4'-DDT(33) 1/2 ND 1.0(32) 0.29 0.12 ND

N/A Not Available
ND Not Detected

Data Source: Weston 1995. Remedial Investigation Report.


Table 7.

Data summary of contaminants of concern in soft shell clams from Boys Creek at the Atlas Tack site. Concentrations are listed as parts per million, ppm, by dry weight unless otherwise noted
Compounds Detects/
Samples
Minimum
(mg/kg)
Mean(34)
(mg/kg)
Maximum
(mg/kg)
Comparison Values(35)
(mg/kg)
Background Concentrations(36)
(mg/kg)
Antimony 2/3 ND 3.2 4.2 1.6 ND
Arsenic(37) 3/3 10.4 12.0 15.1 0.03 5.4
Iron 3/3 857 1,810 2,620 RBC = 410 309
Lead 1/3 ND 4.5 8.6 N/A ND
Mercury 3/3 0.79 0.82 0.89 1 (0.5)(38)

1.4

Bis(2-ethylhexyl)
phthalate
3/31.63.55.52.92.2

N/A Not Available
ND Not Detected
RBC Risk-based concentration calculated by EPA Region III. The values are calculated using reference doses and cancer slope factors with "standard" exposure scenarios.

Data Source: Weston 1995. Remedial Investigation Report.

Table 8.

Data summary of contaminants of concern in ribbed mussels deployed in Boys Creek at the Atlas Tack site. Concentrations are listed as parts per million, ppm, by dry weight unless otherwise noted
Compounds Detects/
Samples
Minimum
(mg/kg)
Mean(39)
(mg/kg)
Maximum
(mg/kg)
Comparison Values(40)
(mg/kg)
Lead 3/3 0.0010 0.0013 0.00197 0N/A
PCB (total) 3/3 1.0 1.3 1.7

2 (1)(41)

4,4'-DDD 3/3 0.037 0.099 0.21

0.1(42)

4,4'-DDE3/30.0690.0930.160.1(42)
4,4'-DDT(43)3/30.0300.0430.0680.1(42)
Heptachlor1/10.00630.00630.0063RBC = 0.0007
Heptachlor Epoxide3/30.0050.0070.0090.004

N/A Not Available
ND Not Detected
RBC Risk-based concentration calculated by EPA Region III. The values are calculated using reference doses and cancer slope factors with "standard" exposure scenarios.

Data Source: Weston 1995. Remedial Investigation Report.


Table 9.

Data summary of 0- through 2-ft soil contaminants of concern from the residential area adjacent to the Atlas Tack site. Concentrations are listed as parts per million, ppm, by dry weight unless otherwise noted
Compounds Detects/
Samples
Minimum
(mg/kg)
Mean(44)
(mg/kg)
Maximum
(mg/kg)
Comparison Values(45)
(mg/kg)
Background Levels
(mg/kg)
Arsenic3/30.831.542.5 J Chronic EMEG (child) = 20
Chronic EMEG (adult) = 200
CREG = 0.5
Range: <0.1-73
Mean: 7.4

J The associated value is estimated.

The background concentrations for metals in soil are from the USGS Professional Paper 1270 (Shacklette 1984). The backgroundconcentrations for PAHs are from the ATSDR Toxicological Profile for PAHs (ATSDR 1995b).


Table 10.

Fairhaven Cancer Incidence by Sex, 1993 - 1997 Expected and Observed Case Counts, with Standardized Incidence Ratios
  Exp Obs SIR   Exp Obs SIR
Bladder, Urinary Melanoma of Skin
Male 12.42 14 113 Male 6.88 6 87
Female 5.06 5 99 Female 5.59 10 179
Total 17.49 19 109 Total 12.47 16 128
Brain and Central Nervous System Multiple Myeloma
Male 3.64 6 165 Male 2.28 3 NC*
Female 3.36 3 NC* Female 2.26 0 NC*
Total 7.00 9 129 Total 4.54 3 NC*
Breast Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma
Male 0.78 0 NC* Male 9.19 9 98
Female 74.00 66 89 Female 9.00 16 178#+
Total 74.78 66 88 Total 18.19 25 137
Cervix Uteri Oral Cavity and Pharynx
        Male 7.51 9 120
Female 4.29 5 117 Female 3.98 3 NC*
        Total 11.49 12 104
Colon / Rectum Ovary
Male 31.24 25 80        
Female 32.86 27 82 Female 8.74 11 126
Total 64.10 52 81        
Esophagus Pancreas
Male 4.32 5 116 Male 4.60 7 152
Female 1.69 1 NC* Female 5.37 7 130
Total 6.01 6 100 Total 9.96 14 141
Hodgkin's Disease Prostate
Male 1.61 0 NC* Male 74.96 67 89
Female 1.31 0 NC*        
Total 2.91 0 NC*        
Kidney and Renal Pelvis Stomach
Male 6.83 7 103 Male 5.27 4 NC*
Female 4.41 7 159 Female 3.52 7 199
Total 11.24 14 125 Total 8.79 11 125
Larynx Testis
Male 4.11 2 NC* Male 2.16 5 232
Female 1.21 1 NC*        
Total 5.33 3 NC*        
Leukemia Thyroid
Male 5.00 4 NC* Male 1.26 1 NC*
Female 4.02 11 273~+ Female 3.34 2 NC*
Total 9.02 15 166 Total 4.61 3 NC*
Liver and Intrahepatic Bile Ducts Uteri, Corpus and Uterus, NOS
Male 2.36 2 NC*        
Female 1.09 0 NC* Female 14.44 24 166#+
Total 3.46 2 NC*        
Lung and Bronchus All Sites / Types
Male 39.10 46 118 Male 241.92 245 101
Female 31.47 37 118 Female 238.90 264 111
Total 70.56 83 118 Total 480.81 509 106

Exp = expected case count, based on the Massachusetts average age-specific incidence rates for this cancer
Obs = observed case count
SIR = standardized incidence ratio [ (Obs / Exp) X 100]
* = SIR and statistical significance not calculated when Obs < 5
+ indicates number of observed cases is statistically significantly higher than the expected number of cases
- indicates number of observed cases is statistically significantly lower than the expected number of cases
# indicates statistical significance at the p <= 0.05 level
~ indicates statistical significance at the p <= 0.01 level, as well as at the p <= 0.05 level
^ indicates statistical significance at the p <= 0.001 level, as well as at the p <= 0.05 and p <= 0.01 levels


FIGURES

Atlas Tack Site Location Map
Figure 1. Atlas Tack Site Location Map

Atlas Tack Corporation Superfund Site
Figure 2. Atlas Tack Corporation Superfund Site

Main Manufacturing Building
Figure 3. Main Manufacturing Building

Commercial and Noncommercial Areas of the Atlas Tack Site
Figure 4. Commercial and Noncommercial Areas of the Atlas Tack Site

Building Sample Locations
Figure 5. Building Sample Locations


CERTIFICATION

The Public Health Assessment for the Atlas Tack site, Fairhaven, Bristol, Massachusetts was prepared by the Massachusetts Department of Health under a cooperative agreement with the federal Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). It is in accordance with approved methodology and procedures existing at the time the health assessment was initiated.

Roberta Erlwein, MPH
Technical Project Officer
Superfund Site Assessment Branch (SSAB)
Division of Health Assesment and Consulation (DHAC)
ATSDR


The Division of Health Assessment and Consultation (DHAC), ATSDR, has reviewed this health assessment and concurs with its findings.

Richard E. Gillig, M.C. P.
Section Chief, SPS, SSAB, DHAC, ATSDR


REFERENCES

ATSDR. 1991. Toxicological Profile for Copper. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry,Atlanta. GA.

ATSDR. 1993. Public health assessment Guidance Manual, Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, FL.

ATSDR. 1995a. Toxicological Profile for Asbestos. Agency for Toxic Substances and DiseaseRegistry, Atlanta, GA.

ATSDR. 1995b. Toxicological Profile for Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs). Agencyfor Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, Atlanta, GA.

ATSDR. 1997a. Toxicological Profile for Cyanide. Agency for Toxic Substances and DiseaseRegistry, Atlanta, GA.

ATSDR. 1997b. Toxicological Profile for Nickel. Agency for Toxic Substances and DiseaseRegistry, Atlanta, GA.

ATSDR. 1999a. Toxicological Profile for Cadmium. Agency for Toxic Substances and DiseaseRegistry, Atlanta, GA.

ATSDR. 1999b. Toxicological Profile for Lead. Agency for Toxic Substances and DiseaseRegistry, Atlanta, GA.

ATSDR. 2000a. Toxicological Profile for Arsenic. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry,Atlanta. GA.

ATSDR. 2000b. Toxicological Profile for Chromium. Agency for Toxic Substances and DiseaseRegistry, Atlanta, GA.

Costa. 1999. Town of Fairhaven, shellfish warden. (personal communication, November 24,1999).

Craffey, Paul. 1999. Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection. (personalcommunication, September 20, 1999; September 28, 1999).

Craffey, Paul. 2000. Letter to William Sweet, Senior Regional Representative, ATSDR Region Iin re "EPA's comments on Initial Release Public health assessment: Atlas Tack Corp. SuperfundSite." May 19, 2000.

Craffey, Paul. 2001. Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection. (personalcommunication, June 29, 2001).

EPA. 1998. Cadmium- CASRN 7440-43-9. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, IntegratedRisk Information System. www.epa.gov/IRIS/subst/0141.htm

EPA. 1999. Second Unilateral Administrative Order for Removal Action - CERCLA Docket #I-99-0043. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - Region I, Boston, MA.

EPA. 2000. Decision Summary for Record of Decision - Atlas Tack Corp. Superfund Site. U.S.Environmental Protection Agency - Region I, Boston, MA. March 2000.

EPA. 2001a. Environmental Protection Agency 40 CFR 745. Lead; Final Identification ofDangerous Levels of Lead; Final Rule

EPA. 2001b. Air Quality Criteria for Particulate Matter, Volume II, Second External ReviewDraft, Environmental Protection Agency, March 2001.

Fowle, Patricia. 2001. Fairhaven Health Agent. (personal communication, July 2, 2001).

MDPH. 1982. Childhood Leukemia in Fairhaven. Massachusetts Department of Public Health,Division of Environmental Public health assessment. June 28, 1982.

MDPH. 1987. Greater New Bedford PCB Health Effects Study, 1984-1987. MassachusettsDepartment of Public Health, Massachusetts Health Research Institute, U.S. Centers for DiseaseControl. June 1987.

MDPH. 1997. Galary Residential Property - Fairhaven, Bristol County, Massachusetts.Massachusetts Department of Public Health, Bureau of Environmental Public health assessment.March 7, 1997.

MDPH. 2000a. Cancer Incidence in Massachusetts, 1993-1997: City and Town Supplement.Massachusetts Department of Public Health, Bureau of Health Statistics, Research andEvaluation, Massachusetts Cancer Registry. November, 2000.

MDPH. 2000b. Massachusetts Department of Public Health, Lead Poisoning PreventionProgram. Massachusetts Community Health Information Profile, Pb Poisoning Cases -Fairhaven.

NIH. 2001. Facts about dietary supplements: iron. National Institute of Health, Clinical Center.June 2001.

Rizzo. 1999. Comments on Proposed Cleanup Plan - Atlas Tack Site - Fairhaven,Massachusetts. Rizzo Associates, Inc. and Menzie-Cura & Associates, Inc.

Shacklette and Boerngen. 1984. Element concentrations in soils and other surficial materials ofthe conterminous United States. U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1270.

USACE. 1985. Species profiles: life histories and environmental requirements of coastal fishesand invertebrates (Mid-Atlantic) - mummichog and striped killifish. B.J. Abraham. U.S. Fish andWildlife Service Biological Report 82 (11.40). U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, TR EL-82-4.

USACE. 1996. Structural Assessment - Atlas Tack Building. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,New England Division, Waltham, MA.

USACE. 1998. Update of Baseline Human Health Risk Assessment and Development of Risk-Based Cleanup Levels - Atlas Tack Corporation. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, New EnglandDistrict, Waltham, MA.

Weston. 1995. Remedial Investigation Report - Atlas Tack Corporation - Vols 1-5. Roy F. Weston, Inc., Wilmington, MA.


13. Mean values calculated by using one half the method detection limit for samples in which the compound was below detection.
14. See On-Site Contamination section for a discussion of the following: RMEG (child), RMEG (adult), Chronic EMEG (child), Chronic EMEG (adult), Int. EMEG (child), Int. EMEG (adult), and CREG
15. Mean values were calculated using one-half the method detection limit for samples in which the compound was below detection.
16. See On-Site Contamination section for a discussion of the following: RMEG (child), RMEG (adult), Chronic EMEG (child), Chronic EMEG (adult), Int. EMEG (child), Int. EMEG (adult), and CREG
17. Mean value is greater than the maximum value due to a detection limit greater than twice the maximum value.
18. Mean values were calculated using one-half the method detection limit for samples in which the compound was below detection.
19. See On-Site Contamination section for a discussion of the following: RMEG (child), RMEG (adult), Chronic EMEG (child), Chronic EMEG (adult), Int. EMEG (child), Int. EMEG (adult), and CREG
20. The background concentrations for sediment were derived by collecting and analyzing samples from a background station at nearbyWest Island. The background concentrations for metals in soil are from the USGS Professional Paper 1270 (Shacklette 1984). The background concentrations for PAHs are from the ATSDR Toxicological Profile for PAHs (ATSDR 1995b).
21. Mean value is greater than the maximum value due to a detection limit greater than twice the maximum value.
22. Mean values were calculated using one-half the method detection limit for samples in which the compound was below detection.
23. See On-Site Contamination section for a discussion of the following: RMEG (child), RMEG (adult), Chronic EMEG (child), Chronic EMEG (adult), Int. EMEG (child), Int. EMEG (adult), and CREG.
24. Mean values were calculated using one-half the method detection limit for samples in which the compound was below detection.
25. See On-Site Contamination section for a discussion of the following: RMEG (child), RMEG (adult), Chronic EMEG (child), Chronic EMEG (adult), Int. EMEG (child), Int. EMEG (adult), and CREG.
26. Mean value is greater than the maximum value due to a detection limit greater than twice the maximum value.
27. Mean values were calculated using one-half the method detection limit for samples in which the compound was below detection.
28. See On-Site Contamination section for a discussion of the following: RMEG (child), RMEG (adult), Chronic EMEG (child), Chronic EMEG (adult), Int. EMEG (child), Int. EMEG (adult), and CREG.
29. The background concentrations were derived by collecting and analyzing samples from a background station at nearby West Island.
30. The specific form of arsenic is not identified (i.e., organic or inorganic). Inorganic arsenic is recognized as a human poison. In contrast, studies have shown organic arsenic to be much less toxic. The arsenic found in shellfish tends to exist in an organic form that is essentially non-toxic (ATSDR 2000a).
31. The FDA Action level for mercury in fish tissue is 1 mg/kg. The Massachusetts Department of Public Health halves this level for protection of sensitive populations. These levels usually apply to fish, but are just as applicable for shellfish.
32. Mean value is greater than the maximum value due to a detection limit greater than twice the maximum value.
33. The FDA Action level for DDT in fish is 5 mg/kg.
34. Mean values were calculated using one-half the method detection limit for samples in which the compound was below detection.
35. See On-Site Contamination section for a discussion of the following: RMEG (child), RMEG (adult), Chronic EMEG (child), Chronic EMEG (adult), Int. EMEG (child), Int. EMEG (adult), and CREG.
36. The background concentrations were derived by collecting and analyzing samples from a background station at nearby West Island.
37. The specific form of arsenic is not identified (i.e., organic or inorganic). Inorganic arsenic is recognized as a human poison. In contrast, studies have shown organic arsenic to be much less toxic. The arsenic found in shellfish tends to exist in an organic form that is essentially non-toxic (ATSDR 2000a).
38. The FDA action level for mercury in fish tissue is 1 mg/kg. The Massachusetts Department of Public Health halves this level for the protection of sensitive populations. These levels usually apply to fish, but are just as applicable for shellfish.
39. Mean values were calculated using one-half the method detection limit for samples in which the compound was below detection.
40. See On-Site Contamination section for a discussion of the following: RMEG (child), RMEG (adult), Chronic EMEG (child), Chronic EMEG (adult), Int. EMEG (child), Int. EMEG (adult), and CREG.
41. The FDA has a tolerance level for PCBs of 2 mg/kg. The Massachusetts Department of Public Health uses half of this level for the protection of sensitive populations. These levels usually apply to fish, but are just as applicable for shellfish.
42. The screening value for DDT (sum of 4,4'- and 2,4'- isomers of DDT, DDE, and DDD).
43. The FDA Action level for DDT in fish is 5 mg/kg.
44. Mean values were calculated using one-half the method detection limit for samples in which the compound was below detection.
45. See On-Site Contamination section for a discussion of the following: RMEG (child), RMEG (adult), Chronic EMEG (child), Chronic EMEG (adult), Int. EMEG (child), Int. EMEG (adult), and CREG.




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. #