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

PUBLIC HEALTH ASSESSMENT

HANFORD 1100-Area (USDOE)
RICHLAND, BENTON COUNTY, WASHINGTON


CONCLUSIONS

The 1100-Area of the Hanford Nuclear Reservation poses no apparent public health hazard fromcurrently known site-related contaminants. No one can come into contact with the contaminantsidentified in surface soil or groundwater.

Available environmental data and current land use indicate that no one is exposed, has beenexposed, or is about to be exposed in the near future to 1100-Area contaminants at levels ofhealth concern.

ATSDR investigators found that, depending on decisions yet to be made about land use, futureexposures could take place in decades to come (after the year 2018). Because exposure is notimminent, data inadequacies do not affect the conclusion that there is currently no apparenthazard. Additional information could help to evaluate the future public health significance of thefollowing data gaps:

  1. Although the public does not now have access to the 1100-Area, transfers of parts of the reservation to the public are under consideration (6). DOE representatives have stated, "The 1100-Area . . . is to remain zoned industrial in the future," but there is no formal commitment to restrict future land use (see Appendix A, ref. 7, and p 7-40, ref. 4). Some people prefer unrestricted use (6). Thus, it is not clear how the public would use the transferred areas.
  2. In the absence of a formal commitment to restrict future use of the 1100-Area, ATSDRinvestigators will need to evaluate data that are either unavailable or qualitatively orquantitatively inadequate. Following are examples of such data:
  • post-remediation soil data for operable units EM-2, EM-3, and IU-1;
  • post-remediation groundwater data for Operable Unit IU-1;
  • quantitation of lead at the battery acid pit surface (top 3 inches);
  • quality and quantity of soil lead analyses at the northeast corner of the Horn Rapids Landfill;
  • unconfirmed identification of aldrin at the paint and solvent pit; and
  • unconfirmed identification of TMO at the antifreeze and degreaser pit.

RECOMMENDATIONS

  1. If portions of the 1100-Area are transferred from DOE to the public, the transfer should include sufficient safeguards (e.g. institutional controls should be considered to protect public health) to protect the public from exposure to unremediated sites and to guard against the breaching of barriers created in the course of remediation (e.g., caps). In the absence of safeguards, remediation plans should protect the public in case of residential use. For example, remediation of the Horn Rapids Landfill should address remaining concentrations of lead before the land is made available for use which could be residential.
  2. In the absence of limited access, the following specific additional information should be supplied:
  • post-remediation soil data for operable units EM-2, EM-3, and IU-1;
  • post-remediation groundwater data for Operable Unit IU-1;
  • the concentration of lead at the surface of the battery acid pit;
  • reliable additional data confirming or refuting high estimated lead concentrations in thenortheastern corner of the Horn Rapids Landfill subsurface and at 0-3 inches deep; and
  • the identities and quantities of the substances tentatively identified as aldrin at the paint andsolvent pit and as TMO at the antifreeze and degreaser pit.
  1. Substance-specific research on TMO should be initiated if its identity is confirmed at the antifreeze and degreaser pit and it is not removed.
  2. If the existence of completed or potential pathways is indicated by additional data, ATSDRinvestigators should conduct site reviews and updates, health consultations, and exposure assessments when resources are available.

Health Activities Recommendation Panel (HARP) Recommendations

The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980(CERCLA), as amended, requires ATSDR to perform public health actions needed at hazardouswaste sites. To determine whether public health actions are needed, the data and informationdeveloped in the Hanford 1100-Area Public Health Assessment were evaluated by the ATSDRHealth Activities Recommendation Panel (HARP) for follow-up health actions. Because peoplehave not been exposed to Hanford 1100-Area contaminants at levels of health concern in thepast, are not currently being so exposed, are unlikely to be so exposed for more than 20 yearsinto the future, and it is not practical to plan public health activities that far in advance, nofollow-up health actions related to the 1100-Area are indicated at this time. Exposures tocontaminants from other Hanford NPL sites (e.g., the 100, 200, and 300 areas) and public healthactivities appropriate to those exposures will be addressed as part of public health assessmentsand health consultations for those sites.

Public Health Action Plan

The Public Health Action Plan for the Hanford 1100-Area NPL Site contains a description ofactions to be taken by ATSDR and other government agencies at and in the vicinity of the siteafter the completion of this public health assessment. The purpose of this public health actionplan is to ensure that this public health assessment not only identifies public health hazards butalso provides a plan of action designed to mitigate and prevent adverse human health effectsresulting from exposure to hazardous substances in the environment.

ATSDR's staff will conduct the following public health actions:

  1. Based on the determinations of the ATSDR Health Activities Recommendation Panel, the1100-Area is not being considered for follow-up public health actions at this time.

    Exposures to contaminants from other Hanford NPL sites (e.g., the 100, 200, and 300areas) and public health activities appropriate to those exposures will be addressed as partof public health assessments and health consultations for those sites.

  2. To protect public health after DOE releases the 1100-Area for development, ATSDRrepresentatives have recommended that formal steps, such as deed restrictions, be takento restrict public access to the 1100-Area for the long term or that additional informationbe provided for all four operable units. For EM-1, more information is needed about leadin soil and to confirm the identities of aldrin and tetramethyloxirane. For EM-2 and EM-3, information is needed about post-remediation soil contamination. For IU-1,information is needed about post-remediation soil and groundwater contamination. Whenthese data are provided, ATSDR representatives will review the data to determinewhether actions are needed to protect the public from exposure to 1100-Area contaminants.

The Record of Decision for the Hanford 1100-Area was signed by representatives of the U.S.Department of Energy, the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, and the WashingtonDepartment of Ecology in September 1993 (9). The ROD presents the selected remedies foroperable units EM-1, EM-2, EM-3, and IU-1.

DOE personnel and contractors will initiate the following actions in accordance with the RODand the subsequent U.S. Department of Energy Remediation Design and Remedial Action Plan(9,41).

  1. DOE's proposed plans for remediating the contaminated areas in operable unit EM-1 are as follows:

    a)off-site incineration of Discolored Soil Site (1100-6) soil that has a DEHP concentration greater than 71 ppm;
    b)off-site disposal of Rainwater Pool soil that has a total PCB concentration greater than 1 ppm;
    c)off-site disposal of Horn Rapids Landfill soil that has a total PCB concentration greater than 5 ppm;
    d)capping of the Horn Rapids Landfill with 24 inches of uncontaminated soil to prevent inhalation of fugitive dust contaminated by friable asbestos;
    e)monitoring of groundwater migrating under the Horn Rapids Landfill to ensure natural attenuation of its TCE concentration to 5 ppb before the year 2018 or before the groundwater reaches the Columbia River.
  2. DOE will conduct Limited Field Investigations and Focused Feasibility Studies of EM-2, EM-3, and IU-1. Solid wastes and contaminated media will be remediated to the regulatory values of the Environmental Protection Agency and Washington State (8).

DOE plans to relinquish control of parts of Hanford, including the 1100-Area, after the year2018. DOE plans no formal restriction on land use as part of the transfer (4,6,7).


PREPARERS OF REPORT

Jo A. Freedman, PhD, DABT
Toxicologist
Energy Section A
Federal Facilities Assessment Branch

Marcie Gallagher
Environmental Engineer
Energy Section A
Federal Facilities Assessment Branch

Michael D. Brooks, CHP
Health Physicist
Energy Section A
Federal Facilities Assessment Branch

Jeff A. Kellam
Environmental Health Scientist
Army Section
Federal Facilities Assessment Branch

ATSDR Regional Representative:
Greg Thomas
ATSDR, EPA Region X, Seattle, WA


REFERENCES

  1. US Department of Energy. Facts About Hanford: Hanford History. Undated.

  2. US Environmental Protection Agency. Superfund: Progress at National Priorities ListSites: Washington 1992 Update. Office of Emergency and Remedial Response, Office ofSolid Waste and Emergency Response, Office of Program Management, Washington,1992; PB93-963246.

  3. US Department of Energy. Phase 1 Remedial Investigation Report for the Hanford Site1100-EM-1 Operable Unit. 1990 Aug; DOE/RL90-18 UC-600.

  4. US Department of Energy. Final Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study-Environmental Assessment Report for the 1100-EM-1 Operable Unit; 1992 Dec 30;DOE/RL 92-67 DOE/EA-0829 Draft B.

  5. King, JC. Re: Hanford Annexation. Letter from J. C. King, City Manager, Richland,WA to J. D. Wagoner, Manager, Richland Operations Office, US Department of Energy,Richland. 1992 Sept 9.

  6. Hanford Future Site Uses Working Group. Report on Future Land Use Scenarios forGeographic Area. Draft Final Report. 1992 Nov 13.

  7. Monhart J. Letter from Jane Monhart, Director, Richland Operations Division,Northwestern Area Programs Office, Environmental Restoration, US Department ofEnergy to Dr. M. Bashor, Associate Administrator, Office of Federal Programs, ATSDR. 1993 Oct 29.

  8. US Department of Energy. Preliminary Draft LFI/FFS for 1100EM-2, 1100-EM-3, 1100-IU-1. Addendum to DOE/RL 92-67, 1993.

  9. Washington State Department of Ecology, US Department of Energy, US EnvironmentalProtection Agency. Record of Decision, USDOE Hanford 1100 Area, Hanford Site,Richland, WA. 1993 Sept.

  10. US Department of Energy. Hanford Site Environmental Report for Calendar Year 1990. 1991; PNL-7930 UC-602.

  11. US Department of Energy. Phase I Remedial Investigation Report for the 300-FF-5Operable Unit. 1993 July; DOE/RL 93-21 Volume 1.

  12. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry Record of Communication. K. Duncan, Water Quality Coordinator, Richland Water and Waste Utility Department,Richland, WA. 1993 Oct 12.

  13. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry Record of Communication. KevinOates, US Army Corps of Engineers, Richland, WA. 1993 May 6.

  14. Wright, R. Faximile message from Roger Wright, Engineer for the City of RichlandWater and Waste Utility Department, Richland, WA, to Jo A. Freedman, Ph.D, DABT, ATSDR. 1994 May 24.

  15. Washington State Department of Ecology. Water Well Reports within Sections 34 and35. Compiled 1994 June.

  16. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry Record of Communication. K. Duncan, Water Quality Coordinator, Richland Water and Waste Utility Department,Richland, WA. 1993 Nov. 1.

  17. US Department of Energy. Sampling and analysis of the 100 Area Springs. 1992 May;DOE/RL-92-12, Revision 1.

  18. US Department of Energy. Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study Work Plan for the1100-EM-1 Operable Unit Hanford Site. Richland, WA. 1989 Aug; DOE/RL 88-23.

  19. Foote A. Handout from Alden Foote, US Army Corps of Engineers, at 1100-Area SiteVisit. 1994 April 19.

  20. Dragun J and Chiasson A. Elements in North American Soils. Green Belt, MD:Hazardous Materials Control Resources Institute, 1991.

  21. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry Record of Communication. Doug Sherwood, US Environmental Protection Agency, Richland, WA. 1993 Aug 17.

  22. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry Record of Communication. Alden Foote. US Army Corps of Engineers. Richland, WA. 1994 June 15.

  23. Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Air Contaminants: Final Rule. FederalRegister 1989 Jan 19; 54: 2923-2960.

  24. Duncan K. Richland Water Sampling Data. Mailed 1994 Feb 24.

  25. Wright, R. Handout from Roger Wright, Richland City Waste and Water Department, at1100-Area Site Visit. 1994 April 19.

  26. Bauer JD. Letter from James D. Bauer, Program Manager, Office of EnvironmentalAssurance, Permits, and Policy, Richland Operations Office, US Department of Energy,to Sally L. Shaver, Chief of the Federal Programs Branch, Division of Health Assessmentand Consultation, ATSDR. 1994 March 4.

  27. US Army Corps of Engineers. Groundwater Data Quality Report for 1100-EM-1Operable Unit, First and Second Quarter 1991. 1991 Sept 26; 903-1215.

  28. US Department of Energy. Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study Work Plan for the300-FF-5 Operable Unit, Hanford Site. Richland, WA. 1990 June; DOE/RL 89-14.

  29. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. Toxicological profile for lead. Atlanta: US Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service; 1990June. Report No: TP-88-17.

  30. Xintaras C. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. Impact of lead-contaminated soil on public health. Atlanta: US Department of Health and HumanServices, Public Health Service; 1992 May.

  31. Integrated Risk Information System. On-line. Cincinnati, OH: US EnvironmentalProtection Agency, Health and Environmental Assessment Office, Environmental Criteriaand Assessment Office, 1993.

  32. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. Toxicological profile for selectedPCBs (Aroclor-1260, -1254, -1248, -1242, -1232, -1221, and -1016, draft for publiccomment. Atlanta: US Department of Health and Human Services, Public HealthService; 1992 Feb.

  33. US Environmental Protection Agency. Workshop Report on Toxicity EquivalencyFactors for Polychlorinated Biphenyl Congeners. US Department of Commerce,National Technical Information Service. 1991 June; PB-92-114529.

  34. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. Toxicological profile for di(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate, draft for public comment. Atlanta: US Department of Health andHuman Services, Public Health Service; 1992 Feb.

  35. Cary EE. Chromium in air, soil, and natural waters. In: Langard S. editor. Topics inenvironmental health, 5. Biological and Environmental Aspects of Chromium. NewYork: Elsevier Science Publishers, 1982: 49-64.

  36. US Environmental Protection Agency. Addendum to the Health Assessment Documentfor Chromium: Noncarcinogenic Effects. Interim Report. Cincinnati, OH: Office ofHealth and Environmental Assessment, Environmental Criteria and Assessment Office,Cincinnati, OH for the Office of Emergency and Remedial Response, Washington. 1987.

  37. Saleh FY, Parkerton TF, Lewis RV, Huang JG, Dickson KL. Kinetics of chromiumtransformations in the environment. Sci Total Environ 1989; 86:25-41.

  38. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. Toxicological profile for arsenic,draft for public comment. Atlanta: US Department of Health and Human Services,Public Health Service; 1992 Feb.

  39. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. Toxicological profile foraldrin/dieldrin, draft for public comment. Atlanta: US Department of Health and HumanServices, Public Health Service; 1992 Feb.

  40. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. Toxicological profile fortrichloroethylene, draft for public comment. Atlanta: US Department of Health andHuman Services, Public Health Service; 1992 Feb.

  41. US Department of Energy. Remediation Design and Remedial Action Plan for the 1100 Area Hanford Site. 1994 June 9; DOE/RL-94-08 Rev. 0.


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. #