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

PUBLIC HEALTH ASSESSMENT

ICG ISELIN RAILROAD YARD
JACKSON, MADISON COUNTY, TENNESSEE


APPENDICES

Appendix A. -

Figures


Figure 1. Site Location Map



Figure 2. Site Map



Figure 3. GIS Spatial Analysis Map



APPENDIX B

CONTAMINANTS DETECTED IN ON-SITE AND OFF-SITE
ENVIRONMENTAL MEDIA AT THE ICG ISELIN
RAILROAD YARD NPL SITE, JACKSON, TENNESSEE

TABLES 1 - 12

Data Tables

Samples collected during the SRI are indicated by a date following the location the sample was taken.

    Data tables include the following abbreviations:

  1. B


  2. D
  3. GW
  4. J
  5. j
  6. JUD
  7. LTHA
  8. MW
  9. mg/kg
  10. mg/l
  11. N
  12. ND
  13. P
  14. RI
  15. RI(1)
  16. RI(2)
  17. SB
  18. SD
  19. SRI
  20. SS
  21. SW
  22. TW
  23. =Organics - Analyte present in analytical method blank
    =Inorganics- Concentration less than Contract Required Detection Limit but greater than or equal to Instrument Detection Limit
    =Results from diluted sample
    =Groundwater
    = Estimated Concentration
    = Concentration considered an estimated value based on data validation
    =Municipal well
    = Lifetime Health Advisory for drinking water
    = Monitoring Well
    = milligrams per kilogram (parts per million) - solid
    = milligrams per liter (parts per million) - liquid
    = Spiked sample recovery not within control limits
    = Not Detected
    = Percent difference for detected concentrations between two GC columns is >25%
    = Remedial Investigation
    = Remedial Investigation Sampling Round 1
    = Remedial Investigation Sampling Round 2
    = Subsurface Soil
    = Sediment
    = Supplemental Remedial Investigation
    = Surface Soil
    = Surface Water
    = Temporary Well

ATSDR uses several types of medium-specific screening values to assist in selecting the contaminants that will be evaluated for public health significance. For this assessment, the specific screening values include Environmental Media Evaluation Guides (EMEGs), Cancer Risk Evaluation Guides (CREGs), and Reference Dose Media Evaluation Guides (RMEGs). EMEGs are media-specific estimates that pose a minimal risk to humans. They are based on ATSDR's minimal risk levels (MRLs) or EPA's reference doses (RfDs). The RfD is an estimate of daily human exposure to a contaminant for a lifetime below which (non-cancer) health effects are unlikely to occur (12). CREGs are estimated contaminant concentrations that are based on one excess cancer for a million persons exposed over a lifetime and are calculated from EPA's cancer slope factors. RMEGs are calculated from EPA's Reference Doses and are based on their estimates of the daily exposure to a contaminant that is unlikely to cause adverse health effects.

Appendix B, Table 1 - Contaminants Detected in On-Site Groundwater (Monitoring Wells), Above Environmental Screening Values at the ICG Iselin Railroad Yard National Priorities List Site, Jackson, Madison County, Tennessee
Contaminant Concentration Range
(mg/l)
Sample
Date
Ref. Sample
Location
Screening Value
(mg/l)
#Detects/
#Analyses
Minimum Maximum Value Source
Benzene ND
ND
0.002J
0.001J
09/92
12/92
RI(1)
RI(2)
MW02
MW07
0.001 CREG (A) 1/14
2/14
Bromodichloromethane ND 0.001 03/95 SRI TW5 2
0.0006
EMEG
CREG (B2)
1/10
Dibromochloromethane ND 0.001 03/95 SRI TW5 3
0.0004
EMEG
CREG (C)
1/10
1,4-Dichlorobenzene ND
ND
0.003J
0.003J
0.003
09/92
12/92
12/95
RI(1)
RI(2)
SRI
MW07
MW07
MW07
0.075 LTHA (2B) 1/14
2/14
2/2
1,1-Dichloroethane ND
ND
ND
0.011
0.007J
0.0033
09/92
12/92
12/94
RI(1)
RI(2)
SRI
MW02
MW02
TW04b

None (C) 1/14
2/14
1/10
1,1-Dichloroethene ND 0.0027 12/95 SRI GW11b 0.09
0.0006
EMEG
CREG (C)
6/19
2-Methylnaphthalene ND
ND
0.063
0.037
09/92
12/92
RI(1)
RI(2)
MW02
MW02

Unknown 1/14
3/14
Dibenzofuran ND
ND
0.003J
0.004J
09/92
12/92
RI(1)
RI(2)
MW02
MW02

Unknown 1/14
3/14
2-Propanol ND 2.8JN 12/94 SRI TW04a
Unknown 7/10
Carbazole ND 0.0004J 12/92 RI(2) MW02
Unknown 1/14
Trichloroethene ND
ND
0.11
0.11
12/94
12/95
SRI
SRI
TW04a
GW11c
0.003 CREG (B2) 4/10
17/19
Vinyl Chloride ND 0.0096 12/95 SRI GW6c 0.0002 EMEG (A) 7/19
Arsenic ND
ND
0.0249
0.0240
12/92
09/92
RI(2)
RI(1)
MW02
MW07
0.003
0.0002
EMEG
CREG (A)
4/14
4/14
Iron 0.0611B 58 09/92 RI(1) MW06
Unknown 14/14
Cyanide ND 0.401 12/92 RI(2) MW03a 0.2 RMEG 3/14
Manganese ND
0.0152
2.14
2.25
09/92
12/92
RI(1)
RI(2)
MW07
MW07
0.05 RMEG 12/14
14/14
Sodium 4.55B
4.23B
44.8
42.1
09/92
09/92
RI(1)
RI(2)
MW02
MW02a

Unknown 14/14
14/14


Appendix B, Table 2 - Contaminants Detected in Soil (Unspecific Depth), Above Environmental Screening Values at the ICG Iselin Railroad Yard National Priorities List Site, Jackson, Madison County, Tennessee
Contaminant Concentration Range (mg/kg) Sample
Location
Ref. Screening Value (mg/kg) #Detects/
#Analyses
Minimum Maximum Value Source
2-Hexanone ND 0.014 SS08 RI(1)
Unknown 1/21
Naphthalene ND 32J SS11 RI(1)
Unknown 6/21
2-Methylnaphthalene ND 94
0.043J
SS11
SB32a
RI(1)
SRI

Unknown 9/21
Dibenzofuran ND 3.5J SS10 RI(1)
Unknown 3/21
Carbazole ND 0.34J SS17a RI(1)
Unknown 2/21
Dieldrin ND 0.46 SS13 RI(1) 0.04
0.1
CREG (B2)
EMEG
7/21
Carcinogenic PAHs ND 6.45 SS17a RI(1) 0.1 CREG (B2)*
Antimony ND 24.2N SS21 RI(1) 20 RMEG 7/21
Arsenic 2.2B 84.7 SS15 RI(1) 0.5
0.6
CREG (A)
EMEG
21/21
Cadmium ND 5.2 SS15 RI(1) 40 EMEG (B1) 21/21
Chromium 8.3 198 SS19 RI(1) 60 CREG (A) 21/21
Copper 10.1 801 SS21 RI(1)
None 21/21
Lead 6.1 693 SS21 RI(1)
Unknown 21/21
* = Environmental Screening Value for Benzo(a)pyrene


Appendix B, Table 3 - Contaminants Detected in On-Site Subsurface Soil Borings (>6"), Above Environmental Screening Values at the ICG Iselin Railroad Yard National Priorities List Site, Jackson, Madison County, Tennessee.
Contaminant Concentration Range (mg/kg) Sample
Location
Sample
Date
Ref. Screening Value (mg/kg)
Minimum Maximum Value Source
Naphthalene ND
1.67

2.2J
12J
24.5
0.15J
42
SB05
SB4a
SB25
SB4a
06/92
12/94
12/94
12/94
RI(1)
SRI
SRI
SRI

Unknown
1-Methylnaphthalene 1.6
0.193J
113
92
SB4a
SB4a
12/94
12/94
SRI
SRI

Unknown
2-Methylnaphthalene ND
1.3

0.235J
58
124
0.27J
159
SB05
SB4a
SB34
SB4a
06/92
12/94
12/95
12/94
RI(1)
SRI
SRI
SRI

Unknown
Carcinogenic PAHs ND

0.038J
0.503
5.551
0.6696
SB13
SB25
SB3a
06/92
12/94
12/94
RI(1)
SRI
SRI
0.1 CREG (B2)*
Dibenzofuran
0.37J SB25 12/94 SRI
Unknown
Carbazole
0.86 SB25 12/94 SRI
Unknown
Styrene 0.0005J 0.0009J SB26 12/94 SRI 10,000 RMEG (2B)
1,1-Dichloroethane
0.0006J SB24 12/94 SRI
None (C)
1,1,1-Trichloroethane 0.0006DJ 0.002J SB25 12/94 SRI
None
Arsenic ND
0.66
7.8
10.5
SB22
SB34
06/92
12/95
RI(1)
SRI
0.5
20
CREG (A)
EMEG
Cadmium
2.0 SB34 12/95 SRI 40 EMEG(B1)
Chromium 3.2 111j SB22 06/92 RI(1) 60 CREG (A)
Lead ND
2.6N
1470j
344N
SB22
SB34
06/92
12/95
RI(1)
SRI

None (B2)
* = Environmental Screening Value for Benzo(a)pyrene


Appendix B, Table 4 - Contaminants Detected in On-Site Surface Soil (0"-3"), Above Environmental Screening Values at the ICG Iselin Railroad Yard National Priorities List Site, Jackson, Madison County, Tennessee
Contaminant Concentration Range (mg/kg) Sample
Location
Ref. Screening Value (mg/kg) #Detects/
#Analyses
Minimum Maximum Value Source
Dieldrin 0.00069J 0.064Pj SS35 SRI 0.04 CREG (B2) 4/4
2-Methylnaphthalene 0.090J 0.094J SS33 SRI
Unknown 7/7
Dibenzofuran 0.068J 0.075J SS35 SRI
Unknown 7/7
Carbazole 0.12J 0.14J SS33-RE SRI
Unknown 7/7
Carcinogenic PAHs
5.548JD SS33-DL SRI 0.1 CREG (B2)*
Arsenic
31.5 composited
SS22-SS25
SRI 20
0.5
EMEG
CREG (A)
1/1
Lead 8.1N 2020N SS30 SRI
Unknown 7/7

* = Environmental Screening Value for Benzo(a)pyrene



Appendix B, Table 5 - Contaminants Detected in Air Samples Above Environmental Screening Values On and Near the ICG Iselin Railroad Yard National Priorities List Site, Jackson, Madison County, Tennessee.
Contaminant Concentration Range (mg/m3) Sample
Location
Ref. Screening Value (mg/m3)
Minimum Maximum Value Source
Methylene chloride 0.002 0.023 Upwind RI 0.003 CREG (B2)
Arsenic 0.001 0.002 On-site SRI 0.000002 CREG (A)
Chromium 0.0001 0.0002 On-site SRI 0.000008 CREG (A)
Iron ND 0.002
0.002
0.002
0.004
Downwind
Upwind
Downwind
On-site
RI
SRI
SRI
SRI

Unknown
Inorganic Mercury 0.0001 0.0003 On-site SRI 0.00014 EMEG
Nickel 0.0001 0.0002 On-site SRI 0.00004 CREG (2)
Phosphorous ND 0.002 Upwind RI
None


Appendix B, Table 6 - Contaminants Detected in On-Site Surface Water Samples Above Environmental Screening Values at the ICG Iselin Railroad Yard National Priorities List Site, Jackson, Madison County, Tennessee.
Contaminant Concentration Range (mg/l) Sample
Date
Ref. Sample
Location
Screening Value (mg/l) #Detects/
#Analyses
Minimum Maximum Value Source
2-Hexanone ND 0.082 08/92 RI(1) SW04
Unknown 1/6
4-methyl-2-pentanone ND 0.026 08/92 RI(1) SW04
Unknown 1/6
Chromium ND
ND
1.38
0.0939
09/92
11/92
RI(1)
RI(1)
SW07
SW07
0.003 CREG (A) 1/6
2/8
Lead ND 0.156 09/92 RI(1) SW07 0.015 Action Level 1/6
Manganese 0.191
ND
ND
0.369
0.923
2.01
11/92
08/92
11/92
RI(1)
RI(1)
RI(2)
SW01
SW02
SW03
0.05 RMEG 2/2
5/6
8/8


Appendix B, Table 7 - Contaminants Detected in On-Site Sediments, Above Environmental Screening Values at the ICG Iselin Railroad Yard National Priorities List Site, Jackson, Madison County, Tennessee
Contaminant Concentration Range (mg/kg) Sample
Location
Sample
Date
Ref. Screening Value (mg/kg)
Minimum Maximum Value Source
1,1-Dichloroethane ND 0.002J SD08 06/92 RI(1)
None
Dieldrin ND 0.06J SD02 06/92 RI(1) 0.04 CREG (B2)
carcinogenic PAHs
5.61J SD11 12/95 SRI 0.1 CREG (B2)
Aluminum 686 1870 SD11 12/95 SRI
Unknown
Arsenic 5.7
1.6B
39.8
9.8B
SD02
SD11
06/92
12/95
RI(1)
SRI
0.5 CREG (A)
Antimony 6.5BNj 29.7BNj SD02 06/92 RI(1) 20 RMEG
Cadmium ND 14.5 SD02 06/92 RI(1) 40 EMEG (B1)
Chromium 27.2

3.9
1950
0.44
86.1
SD03
SD8a
SD11
06/92
12/94
12/95
RI(1)
SRI
SRI
60
300
CREG (A)
RMEG
Iron 12200
2550
136000
25000
SD02
SD11
06/92
12/95
RI(1)
SRI

Unknown
Lead 37.3

3.8N
569
0.36
240N
SD02
SD8a
SD11
06/92
12/94
12/95
RI(1)
SRI
SRI

None (B2)
Mercury
0.79 SD11 12/95 SRI
None
Manganese 159 9290 SD02 06/92 RI(1) 7000 RMEG


 
Appendix B, Table 8 - Contaminants Detected in Neutralization Tank Sludge, Above Environmental Screening Values at the ICG Iselin Railroad Yard National Priorities List Site, Jackson, Madison County, Tennessee
Contaminant Concentration (mg/kg) Screening Value (mg/kg)
Value Source
1,1-Dichloroethane 58
None (C)
1,1-Dichloroethene 1.1J 500
1
EMEG
CREG (C)
Vinyl Chloride 1.3J 1 EMEG
1,4-Dichlorobenzene 150J
None (2B)
Naphthalene 26J
None
2-Methylnaphthalene 54J
Unknown
Arsenic 10.9 20
0.5
EMEG
CREG (A)
Cadmium 35 40 EMEG (B1)
Chromium 756 300
60
RMEG
CREG (A)
Nickel 73.9 1000 RMEG (2)
Silver 75700 300 RMEG


Appendix B, Table 9 - Contaminants Detected in Off-Site Groundwater (Monitoring Wells), Above Environmental Screening Values at the ICG Iselin Railroad Yard National Priorities List Site, Jackson, Madison County, Tennessee
Contaminant Concentration Range (mg/l) Sample
Date
Ref. Sample
Location
Screening Value (mg/l) #Detects/
#Analyses
Minimum Maximum Value Source
Chromium ND
ND
0.0649
0.280
09/92
12/92
RI(1)
RI(2)
MW01A
MW01
0.1 LTHA (A) 3/14
3/14
Aluminum ND
ND
16
64.9
09/92
12/92
RI(1)
RI(2)
MW01A
MW01

Unknown 6/14
7/14
Iron ND 97.5 12/92 RI(2) MW01
Unknown 13/14
Lead ND 0.0306 12/92 RI(2) MW01 0.015 Action Level 4/14
Mercury ND 0.0023J 12/92 RI(2) MW01
None 3/14
Nickel ND 0.861 12/92 RI(2) MW01 0.2 RMEG (2) 1/14
Vanadium ND
ND
0.124
0.418
09/92
12/92
RI(1)
RI(2)
MW01A
MW01
0.03 EMEG 2/14
3/14


Appendix B, Table 10 - Contaminants Detected in Off-Site Groundwater (Municipal Wells), Above Environmental Screening Values at the ICG Iselin Railroad Yard National Priorities List Site, Jackson, Madison County, Tennessee
Contaminant Concentration Range (mg/l) Sample
Date
Sample
Location
Ref. Screening Value (mg/l) #Detects/
#Analyses
Minimum Maximum Value Source
Tetrachloroethene ND
ND
0.004J
0.003J
09/92
12/92
JUD06
JUD06
RI(1)
RI(2)
0.0007 CREG (B2) 1/14
1/14
Trichloroethene ND
ND
0.005J
0.004J
09/92
12/92
JUD08
JUD08
RI(1)
RI(2)
0.002 CREG (B2) 1/14
3/14
Mercury ND 0.0045 09/92 JUD07 RI(1)
None 1/14
Benzene ND 0.001J 12/92 JUD07 RI(2) 0.001 CREG (A) 2/14


Appendix B, Table 11 - Contaminants Detected in Off-Site Surface Water, Above Environmental Screening Values near the ICG Iselin Railroad Yard National Priorities List Site, Jackson, Madison County, Tennessee
Contaminant Concentration Range (mg/l) Sample
Date
Ref. Sample
Location
Screening Value (mg/l) #Detects/
#Analyses
Minimum Maximum Value Source
Manganese 0.198
0.313
0.366
0.389
11/92
12/94
RI(2)
SRI
SW05
SW09
0.05 RMEG 4/4
4/4


Appendix B, Table 12 - Contaminants Detected in Off-Site Sediments, Above Environmental Screening Values at the ICG Iselin Railroad Yard National Priorities List Site, Jackson, Madison County, Tennessee
Contaminant Concentration Range (mg/kg) Sample
Location
Sample
Date
Ref. Screening Value (mg/kg)
Minimum Maximum Value Source
Aluminum 457 12200 SD06 06/92 RI
Unknown
Arsenic 1 3.2 SD06 06/92 RI 0.6
0.5
EMEG
CREG
Barium
122 SD06 06/92 RI 100 RMEG
Copper <5.25 256 SD10 12/94 SRI
None
Iron 1850 11400 SD06 06/92 RI
None
Lead 2.2 8.7 SD06 06/92 RI
None
Manganese 284
98.2j
1120
770
SD06
SD10
06/92
12/94
RI
SRI
300 RMEG
Vanadium ND 28.6 SD06 06/92 RI 6 EMEG

* = Environmental Screening Value for Benzo(a)pyrene



Appendix B, Table 13 - Contaminants Detected Above Environmental Screening Values for Unspecific Soil Samples Taken From the Terrace Above the ICG Iselin Railroad Yard National Priorities List Site, Jackson, Madison County, Tennessee
Contaminant Maximum Concentration (mg/kg) Screening Value (mg/kg)
Value Source
Aluminum 4720
Unknown
Antimony 2.4BN 0.8 RMEG
Arsenic 3.2N 0.5
0.6
CREG (B1)
RMEG
Barium 139 100 RMEG
Iron 15100
Unknown
Lead 90.3
Unknown
Manganese 760 300 RMEG
Vanadium 15.8 6 EMEG



APPENDIX C

ENVIRONMENTAL EXPOSURE PATHWAYS

TABLES 1 - 3


Appendix C, Table 1 - Completed Environmental Exposure Pathways at the ICG Iselin Railroad Yard National Priorities List Site, Jackson, Madison County, Tennessee
On-Site Exposure Pathways Elements
Source Environmental
Medium
Pathway
Status
Point of
Exposure
Route of
Exposure
Exposed
Populations
Number
Exposed
Site Activities Soils less than 3" below the surface Past, Present, Future Areas near former site operations and maintenance buildings; Rail Tie Pile/Dump Inhalation, Dermal absorption; Incidental ingestion Anyone who comes into contact with the contaminated soil without using proper personal protective equipment or taking personal hygiene measures Not Known
Site-Related and Non-Site-Related Activities Air Past, Present, Future Outdoors Inhalation On-site workers and Residents in the vicinity of the site Less than 1000 persons
Old Floor Drainage System; Wastewater Lagoon; and Site-Related Activities Surface Water
Sediment
Past, Present, Future Drainage ways; Intermittent Tributary; Jones Creek Inhalation, Dermal absorption, Incidental ingestion People who come into contact with contaminated water bodies and sediments Not Known
Off-Site Exposure Pathways Elements
Site and Non-Site Related Sources Surface Water
Sediment
Past, Present, Future Jones Creek Incidental ingestion (surface water only), Dermal absorption, Inhalation People using Jones Creek for recreational purposes Not Known
Not Known
(assumed to be background)
Soil on Terrace above site Past, Present, Future Outside in vicinity of Washington-Douglas Elementary School Incidental ingestion, Inhalation, Dermal Absorption Residents in the vicinity of the Washington-Douglas Elementary School, esp. children Less than 1000


Appendix C, Table 2 - Possible Environmental Exposure Pathways at the ICG Iselin Railroad Yard National Priorities List Site, Jackson, Madison County, Tennessee
On-site Exposure Pathways Elements
Source Environmental
Medium
Pathway
Status
Point of
Exposure
Route of
Exposure
Exposed
Populations
Number
Exposed
Former Site Activities and Other Sources Groundwater (On-site) Future Water Exit Point Ingestion, Dermal absorption, Inhalation People who use water from the contaminated aquifer None Currently Known
Lye Vat Sludge Past (prior to pollution abatement system installation) On-site Drainage Ditches Incidental ingestion, Dermal absorption, Inhalation People on the site in the area of drainage ditches Not known
Site Activities Soil more than 3" below the surface Past , Present, Future Areas near former site operations and maintenance buildings; Rail Tie Pile/Dump Inhalation, Dermal absorption; Incidental ingestion Anyone who digs into the soil, unless the contaminated soils are removed from the site None Known
Off-Site Exposure Pathways Elements
Groundwater Groundwater Past, Present, Future Water Exit Point Inhalation, Incidental ingestion, Dermal absorption Anyone who puts a well into the contaminated aquifer None Known
Groundwater Municipal Water Past At Sampling Point Inhalation, Dermal absorption, Incidental Ingestion Anyone who comes into contact with the contaminated water prior to treatment None Known


Appendix C, Table 3 - Non-Apparent Environmental Exposure Pathways at the ICG Iselin Railroad Yard National Priorities List Site, Jackson, Madison County, Tennessee
On-site Exposure Pathways Elements
Source Environmental
Medium
Pathway
Status
Point of
Exposure
Route of
Exposure
Exposed
Populations
Number
Exposed
Neutralization Tank Sludge Past (since pollution abatement system installed), Present, Future Neutralization Tank Dermal absorption None Expected None Known
Former Site Activities and Other Sources Groundwater (On-site) Past, Present Water Exit Point Ingestion, Inhalation, Dermal absorption People who use water from the contaminated aquifer None Known
Site Processes Surface Water and Sediment Past Present, Future Wastewater Lagoon Dermal absorption, Incidental ingestion, Inhalation None Expected None Known
Off-Site Exposure Pathways Elements
Groundwater Municipal Water Present, Future At Tap Ingestion, Dermal absorption, Inhalation None Expected (Water is treated prior to reaching end user Not Expected



APPENDIX D

COMPARISON OF ESTIMATED EXPOSURE DOSE
TO HEALTH GUIDELINES

TABLES 1 - 2

Appendix D, Table 1 - Results of Comparison of Estimated Exposure Dose to Health Guidelines for Persons Exposed to On-Site Contaminants at the ICG Iselin Railroad Yard National Priorities List Site, Jackson, Madison County, Tennessee
Contaminant Pathway
Medium
Health Guideline (mg/kg/day) Cancer
Class
Value Source Exceeded by
Estimated
Exposure Dose
2-Hexanone Surface Soil
Surface Water

Unknown

2-Methylnaphthalene Surface Soil
Unknown

4-Methyl-2-pentanone Surface Water
Unknown

Naphthalene Surface Soil
Unknown

Carbazole Surface Soil
None

Dibenzofuran Surface Soil
Unknown

Dieldrin Surface Soil
Sediment
0.00005 MRL NO
NO
B2
carcinogenic PAHs Surface Soil
Sediment
0.1 aMRL NO
NO
B2
Aluminum Sediment
Unknown

Antimony Surface Soil
Sediment
0.0004 RfD NO
Arsenic Surface Soil
Sediment
0.0003 MRL NO
NO
A
Cadmium Surface Soil
Sediment
0.0007 MRL NO
NO
B1
Chromium Surface Soil
Sediment
0.005 RfD NO
NO
A
Copper Surface Soil
Sediment

None

Iron Sediment
Unknown

Lead Surface Soil
Sediment

None
B2
Manganese Surface Water
Sediment
0.005 RfD
None
NO
Mercury Sediment 0.002 iMRL NO


Appendix D, Table 2 - Results of Comparison of Estimated Exposure Dose to Health Guidelines for Persons Exposed to Off-Site Contaminants At and Near the ICG Iselin Railroad Yard National Priorities List Site, Jackson, Madison County, Tennessee
Contaminant Pathway
Medium
Health Guideline (mg/kg/day) Cancer
Class
Value Source Exceeded by Estimated
Exposure Dose
Tetrachloroethene Municipal Well Water 0.01 RfD NO B2
Aluminum Sediments
Terrace Area Soils

Unknown

Antimony Terrace Area Soils 0.0004 RfD NO
Arsenic Sediments
Terrace Area Soils
0.0003 MRL NO
NO
A
Barium Sediments
Terrace Area Soils
0.07 RfD NO
NO

Copper Sediments
None

Iron Sediments
Terrace Area Soils

Unknown

Lead Sediments
Terrace Area Soils

None
B2
Manganese Surface Water
Sediments
Terrace Area Soils
0.005 RfD
None
None
NO
Vanadium Sediments
Terrace Area Soils
0.0003 iMRL NO
NO

Unknown = Health guideline not available aMRL = ATSDR's acute Minimal Risk Level
MRL = ATSDR's Minimal Risk Level RfD = EPA's Reference Dose
iMRL = ATSDR's intermediate Minimal Risk Level * = Health guideline for Benzo(a)pyrene
None = Health guideline not available



APPENDIX E

RESPONSE TO PUBLIC COMMENTS


The data from the Supplemental Remedial Investigation (RI) Report, submitted on May 17, 1996, need to incorporated into this document.

    This information has already been incorporated into the document (Reference #5).

Please change the name of the Site from "ICG Iselin Railroad Yard" to "Iselin Rail Yard Site." ICG (Illinois Central Gulf Railroad Company) was only one of several companies to operate at the Site, and ICG has been reorganized and no longer operates under this name. The facility has been known as the "Iselin Site" since it began operations in the early 1900s.

    ATSDR uses the name the site was given when proposed for the NPL (as stated in the Federal Register).

Page vi, fourth paragraph, second sentence. Ecological sampling was conducted during the Phase II Remedial Investigation to assess if adverse conditions existed at the Site.

    The sentence has been amended to showed that it refers to human biological data.

Page vi, fourth paragraph, last sentence. Please delete this sentence. Additional air sampling was conducted at the site during Phase II of the Remedial Investigation. The additional air sampling is presented in the Supplemental RI Report for the Iselin Rail Yard Site dated May 1996.

    The paragraph has been rephrased. Because historical air data are not available, past exposure to air contaminants (if any), could not be quantified or qualified. It cannot be determined if any of the contaminants of concern in the contaminated soil, surface water, and sediments pose a threat via inhalation exposure because recent air sampling data is limited.

Page vi, fifth paragraph, second sentence. Please delete aluminum, copper, and phosphorous from this sentence. These constituents are not suspected to be carcinogenic in humans.

    Aluminum has not been classified for carcinogenicity. No studies were located regarding cancer in humans or animals following chronic exposure via ingestion of or dermal contact with aluminum or its compounds. The studies regarding cancer following inhalation exposure to aluminum or its compounds were inconclusive due to the addition of other variables which could have contributed to the development of the carcinogenic effect. The available information has not shown that aluminum is a potential carcinogen.

    Copper was deleted from the sentence.

    Phosphorous is not classifiable as to carcinogenicity due to lack of human and animal data.

Page vi, last paragraph, second sentence. Ground water levels were measured from all on-Site and off-Site ground water monitoring wells on August 19, 1996. A water table configuration map was generated from this data and submitted to TDEC-DSF in September 1996. The natural direction of ground water flow at the Site is well defined, and information available from JUD should enable ATSDR to assess the influences on ground water flow at the Site from pumping the JUD wells.

    This information had not been made available to ATSDR at the time that the public comment version of this document was written. ATSDR will attempt to retrieve this information. Thank you for making us aware of its existence.

Page 2, first paragraph, last sentence. Please clarify that the operations that ceased producing wastewater in 1986 were limited to railroad activities.

    This has been reflected in the document.

Page 2, last paragraph, first sentence. Following this sentence, please add the following sentence: Field work performed by RMT, Inc., for the Phase II Remedial Investigation continued through December 1995.

    The historical data is given chronologically. Your comment is already in the document. See the last paragraph of the Site Description and History section.

Page 3, last paragraph, first sentence. Why are racial demographics of neighboring residents relevant to a health study? Please delete reference to racial percentage.

    The public health assessment as defined by ATSDR is not a health study. Demographic data is required in ATSDR public health assessments. It is one of the elements ATSDR is required to address under Section 104(i)(6)(A) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980, as amended [42 U.S.C. 9604(i)(6)(A)].

Page 4, third paragraph, first sentence. The JUD south well field is not down-gradient of the Site. Ground water flow is to the south-southwest. The JUD south well field is west and northwest of the Site.

    "Down-gradient" was removed from the sentence.

Page 4, third paragraph, second sentence. Is the number of wells stated (10) all of the JUD wells or just the number of wells in the JUD south well field? It may be helpful to provide data on the number of wells in both the JUD south and north well fields.

    The JUD south well field consists of 13 wells.

Page 4, fourth paragraph, fourth sentence. The sentence "Local ground water flow is toward the JUD south well field" is not correct.

    That statement was removed from the document.

Page 4, fourth paragraph, last sentence. The Supplemental RI and other information available from JUD should enable ATSDR to assess whether pumping the wells in the South Well Field influences ground water flow at the Site.

    Statement removed from the document.

Page 6, last paragraph, first sentence. Please explain that Tables 1 through 13 in Appendix B list all carcinogens regardless of whether comparison levels were exceeded.

    Carcinogens whose maximum concentration exceeded the CREG and those which are known carcinogens but do not have a CREG are included in the tables of Appendix B.

Page 7, first paragraph, first sentence (continuation from page 6). This sentence states that it is prudent to compare concentrations of organic and inorganic constituents detected in surface soils, subsurface soils, and sediments to background or normal soil/sediment levels. Where is this comparison presented in the assessment? In addition, surface soil samples collected during the Remedial Investigation at the Site were collected from both 0-6 inches and 0-3 inches. Soil samples collected from both of these intervals meet the US EPA criteria for a surficial soil sample.

    Unlike the risk assessment conducted by EPA which is quantitative, the ATSDR public health assessment is a qualitative document. Most public health assessments mention the rationale for preparing the document, however, the exact numbers and calculations are not always included. The comparison was made but the numbers were not included in the public health assessment.

    ATSDR defines surface soil as soil samples taken from the top 0-3 inches of soil. For the purpose of this public health assessment any soil sample taken at the depth of 0-6 inches is called unspecific soil and those samples taken at a depth greater than six inches is called sub-surface soil.

Page 7, third paragraph, second sentence. Please replace the word "access" with "assess."

    Document reflects the change.

Page 7, forth paragraph,, second sentence. Arsenic and manganese are naturally occurring compounds in the soils at the Site.

    A sentence acknowledging this fact was added to the paragraph.

Page 7, fifth paragraph, second sentence. Please replace the sentence "The direct push technology advances a water sampling device directly into the soil to a selected depth without the need to drill boreholes and without making drill cuttings." with the following sentence: The direct push technology advances a water sampling device through the soil to a selected depth below the water table without drilling a borehole or generating drill cuttings.

    Paragraph modified to reflect this change.

Page 8, second paragraph, third and fourth sentences. Not all of the samples collected at the average depth of 30-feet below land surface or greater detected 1,1-dichloroethene, trichloroethene, and vinyl chloride. The location of the highest concentration of VOCs detected in the ground water samples were located on the east side of the Site, up-gradient from the potential source areas at the Site and down-gradient from the landfill adjacent to the Site.

    The paragraph was modified to reflect this change.

Page 8, third paragraph, first sentence. For the purpose of the Remedial Investigation, (following the TDEC-DSF approved Work Plan), surface soil samples were collected from 0-6 inches and 0-3 inches. Soil samples collected from both of these intervals meet the US EPA criteria for a surficial soil sample.

    A paragraph was added to the unspecific soil subsection to reflect the samples that were taken in December 1995.

Page 9, second paragraph, seventh sentence. Please provide an explanation of why chromium is assumed to be hexavalent.

    This is a very conservative approach which will allow for the greatest protection of public health.

Page 9, second paragraph, last sentence. Please provide an explanation of why all detected carcinogenic PAHs were compared to ATSDR's screening value for benzo(a)pyrene.

    The paragraph was modified. All carcinogenic PAHs were converted to their relative potency to benzo(a)pyrene.

Page 9, last paragraph, first sentence. Please replace the word "are" with "were." Air samples collected on that day only show what was present at the time of the sampling.

    Document reflects this change.

Page 11, second paragraph, third and fourth sentence. The wastewater treatment facility is inoperative. It does not receive any process water from the Site. The majority of the rail tie pile is covered with soil. Additional air sampling was conducted at the Site during Phase II of the Remedial Investigation. The additional air sampling is presented in the Supplemental RI Report for the Iselin Rail Yard Site dated May 1996.

    The air sampling did not cover the area of the rail tie pile/dump and the wastewater treatment facility.

Page 11, Section 1, Ground Water. Please include a discussion describing the TDEC ground water investigation at the former landfill located up-gradient of the Site. Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) have been detected in the ground water monitoring wells installed by TDEC up-gradient of the Site at the adjacent landfill, and the VOCs have been determined to be migrating onto the Iselin Rail Yard Site.

    Paragraph modified.

Page 11, last paragraph, seventh sentence. Delete the Seventh Sentence. See the Supplemental RI for additional data.

    The Supplemental RI was used to make the indicated determination.

Page 12, fifth paragraph, second sentence. It should not be stated that the samples were contaminated unless the levels measured are significantly greater than average concentrations for these metals in the region. Also, please delete the word "heavy" in this sentence. Not all of the metals listed are heavy metals.

    The levels of the indicated metals were above normal background so only change to the statement was deletion of "heavy".

Page 15, second paragraph, second sentence. Please state if there is evidence that children younger than six years old have played at the Site.

    This information is based on conversations with local residents during the ATSDR public availability sessions. At the time of the ATSDR site visit, children were not observed playing on the site.

Page 15, third paragraph, first sentence. Please add the word "possibly" between "site" and "were." There is no historical air analysis available showing that exposure to constituents in air actually occurred by nearby residents or persons on Site.

    In addition, there is no evidence to show that nearby residents or persons on the Site were not exposed to constituents in the air. It is quite likely that during the time the site was in full operation, workers and others were exposed to airborne constituents. It is also quite likely that some of these airborne constituents traveled beyond the Site's boundary.

    "Likely" was inserted instead of "possibly".

Page 15, third paragraph, fifth sentence. Please change the word "release" to "released."

    Document reflects this change.

Page 15, third paragraph, eighth sentence. Constituents that are not Site-related should not be discussed in this assessment. As stated under "Pathways Analysis" on page 14,, "...the possible environmental exposure pathways are evaluated to help determine whether individuals have been, are being, or will be exposed to site-related contaminants." The first element required in this analysis is that the contaminant of concern is possibly related to the Site.

    In the sentence to which you refer, the sources are on-site exposure points, releases, and activities which may have contributed to airborne releases.

    Document not modified.

Page 15, last paragraph, first sentence. There is no known "on-site waterbodies" associated with the Site.

    Based upon the documents reviewed by ATSDR, portions of Jones Creek and the Unnamed Intermittent Tributary are on the site. It is possible that children while trespassing upon the site at the very least waded in these waterbodies.

Page 16, second paragraph. It is not appropriate to discuss contamination that is not related to the Iselin Site in this assessment. Please delete this entire paragraph.

    The soils in the area of the school are discussed because the concentration of some of the contaminants exceeded ATSDR environmental screening values. Since the school houses a headstart program, the participants are considered to be a highly susceptible population.

    Document not modified.

Page 16, third paragraph, second sentence. New ground water sampling data presented in the Supplemental RI should assist in making this determination.

    Document has been modified.

Page 17, first paragraph, last sentence. Please replace "potable purposes" with "a primary water supply." Potable purposes would most likely exclude dermal contact. Also, please state that TDEC-DSF would not allow a water supply well to be installed at the Site.

    Document reflects these changes.

Page 17, last paragraph, second sentence. Please replace the sentence "Contaminants from the site may enter the aquifer and therefore be transported to nearby wells" with the following: Contaminants from the Site may enter this aquifer, and therefore be transported to the nearby wells.

    Modification made.

Page 18, first paragraph. Please state that PCE has never been detected in the ground water at the Site. Also, if the PCE is not thought to be Site-related, exposure to PCE through the JUD distribution system should not be mentioned in this assessment.

    The municipal wells are discussed in this document because a concern had been raised about VOCs in the water. Recently available data seems to support the statement that the site is not responsible for the VOC contamination in the wells.

Page 20, Exposure Dose Estimation. Where are the calculated exposure doses presented in the report? Also, example calculation for each exposure pathway would be beneficial to include in the assessment for the benefit of the public who may not be familiar with these calculations.

    The public health assessment is a qualitative document, therefore, those calculations are not included in most of the documents. The general formula for oral exposure was included in this document and summary tables to show the results of the comparison of the estimated exposure doses to health guidelines are presented in Appendix D.

Page 20, Exposure Dose Formula. What method was used to calculate the contaminant concentration for use in the exposure dose (ED) calculation?

    As stated in the text, the maximum concentration of the contaminant found in the specified medium of the specified pathway was used.


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. #