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

PRELIMINARY PUBLIC HEALTH ASSESSMENT

LI TUNGSTEN CORPORATION
GLEN COVE, NASSAU COUNTY, NEW YORK


APPENDIX A


Figure 1. Site Location Map


Figure 2. Site Plan


Figure 3. 1989 Toxic Chemical Release Inventory
Facilities Located near Li Tungsten Site



APPENDIX B

Table 1.
Li Tungsten On-Site Soil Data and Comparison Values.
Data from the 1990 NUS Corporation Final Draft Site
Inspection Report (Volumes 1-5).
(All values in milligrams per kilogram)


Individual
Contaminants
Surface Soil
(0-3")
Typical
Background
Range**
Comparison
Values
Source***

Semi-Volatiles        
         

di-n-butylphthalate

0.690 ND 4,100 NYS RfG

fluoranthene

0.610 **** 746 NYS RfG

benzo(a)anthracene

0.56 **** ---  

chrysene

0.54 **** ---  

bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate

--- ND 2.3 NYS CREG

benzo(b)fluoranthene

0.980EN **** ---  

benzo(k)fluoranthene

0.93EN **** ---  

benzo(a)pyrene

0.440 <1-1.3 0.005 NYS CREG

benzo(g,h,i)perylene

0.380 **** ---  

pyrene

0.630 **** 67 NYS RfG

phenanthrene

0.890 **** ---  
         

Pesticide/PCBs

       
         

4,4'-DDE

0.034 0.01-7 0.01 NYS CREG

4,4'-DDT

0.071 0.01-6 0.07 NYS CREG

*Aroclor-1248

4.7 <0.01-0.04a 0.03a NYS CREG

*Aroclor-1254

2.9 <0.01-0.04a 0.03a NYS CREG
         

Inorganics

       
         

aluminum

32,300E 7,000-100,000    

*antimony

796E 0.6-10 20 EPA RfD

*arsenic

3700 10-20 15 ATSDR EMEG

barium

492E 300-500 3,500 EPA RfD

*cadmium

49E <0.5-1 10 NYS EMEG

*chromium

172E 10-40 250 ATSDR EMEG

*iron

327,000 10,000-40,000    

*lead

16,000E 10-300 NA  

*manganese

25,100E 500-3,000 5,000 EPA RfD

*mercury

13E 0.01-3.4 1.6 NYS RfG

*nickel

9,130 <5-20 1,000 ATSDR EMEG

vanadium

117 3-500 350 EPA RfD

zinc

2,980E 50-100 10,000 EPA RfD

Only detected results are reported.
NA - not available
ND - not detected
E - estimated value
a - Total PCBs

* - contaminant of concern in soil

**References: Clark et al. (1985); Connor et al. (1957); Frank et al. (1976) ; McGovern (1988); Shacklette et al. (1984); Dragun (1988); ATSDR (1991a)

***NYS RfG = New York State risk reference guideline in soil
ATSDR EMEG = ATSDR environmental media evaluation guide
US EPA RfD = US EPA risk reference dose in soil
NYS CREG = New York State cancer risk evaluation guide in soil

****Based on reported background levels for total polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons of <1 to 13 mg/kg in soil from relatively rural areas of the eastern United States (ATSDR, 1990f; Edwards, 1983 )


Table 2.

Surface Soil - Samples, Analyzed for Radionuclide at
Perimeter of Li Tungsten Site.
Data from the NYS DOH Li Tungsten Site Files (1989 NYS DOH sampling data).
(All units are in pCi/g)


Sample
(Map)
Location U-238 Th-232 Ra-226

(1) Herb Hill Rd.
Hydrant
1.3 +/- 0.3 1.00 +/- 0.13 0.8 +/- 0.08

(2)

Garvies Pt. Road
Runoff area
4.5 +/- 0.7 1.4 +/- 0.2 1.6 +/- 0.16

(3)

Garvies Pt. Road
Opposite Haskins Fuel
<0.6 0.9 +/- 0.2 2.0 +/- 0.2

(4)

Fence on LIMCO
Property
<0.4 0.68 +/- 0.18 0.35 +/- 0.08

(5)

The Place-fence gate
<0.6 0.6 +/- 0.3 0.56 +/- 0.15
(6) Fence Gate
Dickerson Lane
2.5 +/- 0.7 1.3 +/- 0.3 1.39 +/- 0.18

(7)

Basketball Area <0.3 0.35 +/- 0.15 0.31 +/- 0.07

Refer to Figure 2 for locations of sample points.
The typical background range for U-238, Th-232 and Ra-226 radionuclides is from 0.2 to 2 pCi/g.
pCi/g = picocurie per gram
U-238 = Uranium 238
Th-232 = Thorium 232
Ra-226 = Radium 226

Table 3.

Li Tungsten On-Site Groundwater Sampling Data (Monitoring Wells) and
Comparison Values (Standards/Guidelines).
Data from the 1990 NUS Corporation Final Draft
Site Inspection Report (Volumes 1-5).
(All values in micrograms per liter)


Individual
Contaminants
Ground
Water
Standards/Guidelines

New York State

US EPA

Ground
Water

Drinking
Water
Drinking
Water

Volatiles

       
         

*acetone

600 50 50 ---

*trans-1,2-dichloro-
ethene (total)

110 5 5 100

*2-butanone

84 50 50 ---

*1,1,1-trichloroethane

450 5 5 200

*trichloroethene

130 5 5 5

*tetrachloroethene

1,100 5 5 5
         

Inorganics

       
         

*aluminum

171,000     50-200**

*antimony

3,390 3g --- 10p or 5p

*arsenic

2,800 25 50 50

barium

963 1000 1000 2000

*cadmium

53.6 5 10 5

*chromium

369 50 50 100

*iron

384,000 300 300 300s

*lead

209 25 50 50;5p

*manganese

37,300 300 300 50s

mercury

0.48 2 2 2

*nickel

525 NA NA 100p

vanadium

3,840E NA NA ---

*zinc

6,200E 5000 5000 5000s

Only detected results are reported.
NA - not available
ND - not detected
E - estimated value
mcg/L - micrograms per liter
p - proposed maximum contaminant level (MCL)
s - secondary MCL
g - guidance value
*Contaminant of concern in groundwater
**Secondary standard: US EPA, Federal Register, Vol. 50, page 46975, November 13, 1985
***Total PCBs


Table 4.

Li Tungsten On-Site Surface Water Data
Data from the 1990 NUS Corporation Final Draft
Site Inspection Report (Volumes 1-5).
(All values are in micrograms per liter)


Individual
Contaminants
Surface
Water
Comparison Values

New York State

US EPA

Surface
Water

Drinking
Water
Drinking
Water

Volatiles

       
         
acetone

15

--- 50 ---

trans-1,2-dichloro-
ethene (total)

--- 5g 5 100
         

Pesticide/PCBs

       
         

4,4'-DDD

0.17 0.01** 5 ---

*Aroclor-1248

2.6 0.01*** 1g*** 0.5a

*Aroclor-1254

2.2 0.01*** 1g*** 0.5a
         

Inorganics

       
         

aluminum

931 --- --- 50-200****

*antimony

877 3g --- 10p or 5p

*arsenic

145E 50 50 50

barium

--- 1000 1000 2000

cadmium

13.2E 10 10 5
*iron 4,530 300 300 300s

*lead

195 50 50 50;5p

*manganese

29,500 300 300 50s

mercury

0.84 2 2 2

*nickel

76,000 NA NA 100p

*zinc

1530E 300 5000 5000s

Only detected results are reported.
NA - not available
ND - not detected
E - estimated value
g - guidance value
p - proposed maximum contaminant level
s - secondary MCL
a Total PCBs as decachlorobiphenyl
*Contaminant of concern in surface water
**Applies to total DDT, DDD and DDE
***Total PCBs
****Secondary Standard: US EPA, Federal Register, Vol. 50, page 46975, November 13, 1985



Table 5.
Li Tungsten On-Site Sediment Data and Comparison
Values Samples Collected from On-Site Waste Samples.
Data from the 1990 NUS Corporation Final Draft
Site Inspection Report (Volumes 1-5).
(All values are in milligrams per kilogram)


Individual
Contaminants
Sediment Typical
Background
Range**
Comparison
Values
Source***

Semi-Volatiles

       
         

benzo(a)anthracene

JN **** ---  

chrysene

JN **** ---  

bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate

0.58 ND 2.3 NYS CREG

benzo(b)fluoranthene

JN **** ---  

benzo(k)fluoranthene

JN **** ---  

pyrene

--- **** 67 NYS RfG
         

Pesticide/PCBs

       
         

4,4'-DDD

0.15 0.01-5 0.83 NYS CREG

4,4'-DDE

0.17 0.01-7 0.01 NYS CREG

*Aroclor-1248

50.0 <0.01-0.04a 0.03a NYS CREG

*Aroclor-1254

1.6 <0.01-0.04a 0.03a NYS CREG

Heptachlor epoxide

0.067E ND 0.02 NYS CREG
         

Inorganics

       
         

aluminum

12,600 7,000-100,000    

*antimony

3,290E 0.6-10 20 EPA RfD

*arsenic

1,770 10-20 15 ATSDR EMEG

barium

387 300-500 3500 EPA RfD

cadmium

10.1 <0.5-1 10 NYS EMEG

chromium

78.7 10-40 250 ATSDR EMEG

*iron

145,000 10,000-40,000    

*lead

5,140 10-300    

*manganese

65,100E 500-3000 5000 EPA RfD

*mercury

9E 0.01-3.4 1.6 NYS RfG

*nickel

3,330E <5-20 1000 ATSDR EMEG

vanadium

56.5E 3-500 350 EPA RfD

zinc

551E 50-100 10,000 EPA RfD

Only detected results are reported.
ND - not detected
E - estimated value
J - estimated value, compound present below Contract Required Quantitation Limit (CRQL) but above Instrument Detection Limit (IDL)
N - presumptive evidence of the presence of the material
a - Total PCBs

*Contaminant of concern

**References: Clark et al. (1985); Connor et al. (1957); Fank et al. (1976) ; McGovern (1988); Shacklette et al. (1984); Dragun (1988); ATSDR (1991a)

***NYS RfG = New York State risk reference guideline in soil
ATSDR EMEG = ATSDR environmental media evaluation guide
EPA RfD = EPA risk reference dose in soil
NYS CREG = New York State cancer risk evaluation guide in soil

****Based on reported background levels for total polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons of <1 to 13 mg/kg in soil from relatively rural areas of the eastern United States (ATSDR, 1990f; Edwards, 1983 )



Table 6.
On-Site Air Sample Analytical Results - Li Tungsten Site.
Data from the 1990 NUS Corporation Final Draft
Site Inspection Report (Volumes 1-5).
(All values in micrograms per cubic meter, mcg/m3)
(Maximum Concentration Shown)


Contaminant Concentration Background* Comparison
Values
Source**

Summary of Detected Inorganic Acid Gases

     
         

Fluoride

16.5 NA NA -
         

Volatile Organic Compounds

     
         

Methylene Chloride

9.2 0.16-5.3 2 NYS RfG

Chloroform

2.5U 0.1-10 0.04 EPA CREG

1,1,1-Trichloroethane

2.8U 0.6-2.3 1,000 EPA RfC

Carbon Tetrachloride

3.5U 0.8-12 0.07 EPA CREG

1,3-Dimethyl-2,2-Dioloxane

4.2J NA NA NA

Trichlorofluoromethane

26.4J 0.67-2.13 70 EPA RfC

2-Methylbutane

2.4J NA NA NA

2,2-Dimethyl-1,3-Dioloxane

7.1J NA NA NA
         

Inorganics

       
         

Cadmium

0.06 0.0005-0.0073 0.0005 NYS CREG

Copper

0.12 0.08-0.18 NA NA

Chromium

0.03 0.0028-0.01 0.00005 NYS CREG

Iron

22.17** NA NA NA

Nickel

0.11 0.003-0.01 0.004 EPA CREG

Zinc

0.35 0.009-13.2 50 EPA RfG

Silver

0.76 <0.001 NA NA

Sodium

1.97 NA NA NA

Aluminum

1.79 0.2-1.0 NA NA

Manganese

2.83 0.025 0.3 NYS RfG

Selenium

0.13 <0.01 NA NA

Thallium

0.56 0.0002-0.001 NA NA

Titanium

0.22 NA NA NA

Vanadium

0.19 0.005-0.15 0.2 NYS RfG

Only detected results are reported.
U - not detected, below limits
B - analyte also found in blank
J - estimated value
NA - not available

*References: Brodinsky and Singh 91982); ATSDR (1989c,d,f; 1990b,e,g; 1991a); NYS DOH (1988; 1989a,b; 1990a,b)
**NYS RfG = New York State Risk Reference Guidelines
EPA CREG = US EPA Cancer Risk Evaluation Guideline
EPA RfC = US EPA Risk Reference Concentration

***This elevated value is believed to have been caused by a particle of rust scale from the drums that had fallen on the filter during sampling.


Table 7.

Sediment, Clam and Fish Samples Analyzed for Radionuclides
Taken from the Glen Cove Creek - Li Tungsten Site.
Data from NYS DOH Li Tungsten Site Files.

Glen Cove Data
pCi/g


Sample

U-238 U-235 Th-232 Ra-226 Cs-137 K-40

Sediment 1
1.6 +/- 0.6 <0.3 0.4 +/- 0.2 0.44 +/- 0.14 x0.17 +/- 0.06 8.9 +/- 1.7

Sediment 2
(Marsh)

1.5 +/- 0.9 <0.4 0.9 +/- 0.4 0.6 +/- 0.2 0.30 +/- 0.09 15 +/- 3

Flounder
(Summer)

<0.13 <0.4 <.02 <.01 <.005 3.6 +/- 0.3

Flounder
(Winter)

<0.09 <.04 <.017 <.009 .006 +/- .005 5.7 +/- 0.4

Hardshell Clam
(Harbor)

<.17 <.04 <.03 <.012 <.005 2.2 +/- 0.3

Softshell Clam
(Marsh)

<.11 <.04 .08 +/- .03 <.014 .008 +/- .007 1.4 +/- 0.2

Note: Flounder and crab are edible flesh only.

pCi/g = picocurie per gram

U-238 = Uranium 238 Ra-226 = Radium 226

U-235 = Uranium 235

Cs-137 = Cesium 137

Th-232 = Thorium 232

K-40 = Potassium 40



Table 8.

Li Tungsten Off-Site Surface Water Data
Glen Cove Creek.
Data from the 1990 NUS Corporation Final Draft
Site Inspection Report (Volumes 1-5).
All values are in micrograms per liter)


Individual
Contaminants

Surface
Water
Comparison Values

New York State

US EPA
Surface
Water
Drinking
Water
Drinking
Water

Volatiles        
         
*tetrachloroethene 19 0.7g 5 5
         
Inorganics        
         
aluminum --- NA --- 50-200**

*iron

871 300 300 300s

lead

--- 50 50 50;5p
*manganese 173 300 300 50s

nickel

--- NA --- 100p

zinc

--- 300 5000 5000s

Only detected results are reported.
NA - not available

g - guidance value
p - proposed maximum contaminant level
s - secondary MCL

*Contaminant of concern in surface water
**Secondary Standard: US EPA, Federal Register, Vol. 50, page 46975, November 13, 1985


Table 9.
Li Tungsten Off-Site Sediment Data Glen Cove Creek
Data from the 1990 NUS Corporation Final Draft
Site Inspection Report (Volumes 1-5).
(All values are in milligrams per kilogram)


Individual
Contaminants
Sediment

Typical
Background
Range**

Comparison
Values
Source***
Minimal
Health
Risks

Volatiles        
         

2-butanone

44E ND 2 NYS RfG
         

Semi-Volatiles

       
         
di-n-butylphthalate --- ND 4100 NYS RfG

fluoranthene

6.8 **** 746 NYS RfG

benzo(a)anthracene

2.4 **** ---  

chrysene

3.0 **** ---  

bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate

7.2 ND 2.3 NYS CREG

benzo(b)fluoranthene

3.6 **** ---  

benzo(k)fluoranthene

2.5 **** ---  

benzo(a)pyrene

2.5 <1-1.3 0.005 NYS CREG

pyrene

3.8 **** 67 NYS RfG

phenanthrene

2.7 **** ---  
         

Pesticide/PCBs

       
         

4,4'-DDD

0.070 0.01-5 0.83 NYS CREG
         

Inorganics

       
         

aluminum

6,000E 7,000-100,000    

arsenic

20.1E 10-20 15 ATSDR EMEG

barium

--- 300-500 2500 EPA RfD

cadmium

8.3E <0.5-1 10 NYS EMEG

chromium

34.5E 10-40 250 ATSDR EMEG

iron

21,000E 10,000-40,000    

lead

254E 10-300    

manganese

245E 500-3000 5000 EPA RfD

mercury

0.45E 0.01-3.4 1.6 NYS RfG

*nickel

82.3E <5-20 1000 ATSDR EMEG

vanadium

28.8E 3-500 350 EPA RfD

*zinc

1,720E 50-100 10,000 EPA RfD

Only detected results are reported.
ND - not detected
E - estimated value
a - Total PCBs
* - contaminant of concern
**References: Clark et al. (1985); Connor et al. (1957); Frank et al. (1976); McGovern (1988); Shacklette et al. (1984) ; Dragun (1988); ATSDR (1991a)
***NYS RfG = New York State risk reference guideline in soil
ATSDR EMEG = ATSDR environmental media evaluation guide
EPA RfD = US EPA risk reference dose in soil
NYS CREG = New York State cancer risk evaluation guide in soil
****Based on reported background levels for total polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons of <1 to 13 mg/kg in soil from relatively rural areas of the eastern United States (ATSDR, 1990f; Edwards, 1983 )


Table 10. Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) Data for Facilities
Near the Li Tungsten Site - Air Releases of
Chemicals (Stack Plus Fugitive) in Pounds Per Year.
Data from the 1989 Toxic Release Inventory.


Facility
Chemical
Release

Photocircuits Corp.

 
   

1,1,1-trichloroethane

300,000

sulfuric acid

1,000

glycol ethers

75,750

ammonia

1,500

lead

1,000*

hydrochloric acid

1,500

chlorine

500

formaldehyde

500

methylene chloride

348,750
   

Pall Corp.

 
   

methylene chloride

4,800

isopropyl alcohol

1,350
   

Limco Mfg. Corp.

 
   
methyl ethyl ketone
(2-Butanone)
18,549

tetrachloroethene

8,740*
   

Pass and Seymour

 
   

tetrachloroethene

35,750*

* - Li Tungsten site contaminant of concern.

APPENDIX C

Li Tungsten

Responses to Public Comments

Comment #1

An analysis of the dredged sediments previously removed from Glen Cove Creek could be useful to ascertain the extent of the runoff from Li Tungsten, Mattiace, and Genzale (dredged in 1965 and deposited at Captain's Cove Condominium site).

Response #1

We do not know if analytical data exist for sediments last dredged from Glen Cove Creek, but the NYS DOH is making attempts to locate data to determine if they can be used to evaluate the extent Li Tungsten may have contributed to sediment contamination of Glen Cove Creek. The sediment data is noted in the preliminary public health assessment.

The Genzale Plating Company is not part of the Glen Cove Industrial area and contamination found at Genzale will not affect the Glen Cove area. The Genzale site is in the Hamlet of Franklin Square in the Town of Hempstead.

Comment #2

The public beach located at Hempstead Harbor at the end of Garvies Point Road should be investigated for health effects from hazardous sites now being investigated.

The contamination of Glen Cove Creek is dismissed too lightly as an issue; to be addressed only if the Creek is dredged. As stated, the Creek is used by area residents as a center for recreational boating, however with three marinas and a fishing club, the large number of users bring increased health risks. Fishing is carried out not only in its mouth, but also in the harbor proper and the entrance to the breakwater. In addition to the part located at its mouth, a much used public beach is located immediately to the south in the Village of Sea Cliff. Of major concern with the Creek is the release of surface water contaminants and probably more important, contaminated sediment to the harbor, its adjacent beaches, fish and wildlife through tidal action and storms.

Potential exposure pathways involving Glen Cove Creek are identified but appear to be understated. A large number of people use the creek for recreational purposes. If creek sediments migrate with tidal action and storms, they represent a present exposure pathway and as stated there may be a concern since fish are taken for human consumption.

Although this assessment deals with the Li Tungsten Site, it is evident that contamination of Glen Cove Creek is no less a health threat. Whether caused by Li Tungsten or a combination of sources (as is probable), the Creek should be treated as a potential threat to the community.

Response #2

There are many potential sources that may have contributed to the contamination of Glen Cove Creek and Hempstead Harbor and the tidal influences associated with these water bodies have influenced the transport of contaminants in the Creek. The potential exposure pathways associated with the Creek will be evaluated during the proposed remedial investigation for the Li Tungsten site. The NYS DOH will look at all available analytical data pertaining to the sampling of Glen Cove Creek in relation to Li Tungsten, other sources and the beach area at the mouth of Hempstead Harbor and then make a determination if additional sampling or actions are needed. The NYS DOH have made recommendations to the US EPA that the proposed remedial investigation at Li Tungsten include sampling and analysis of surface water, sediment, and fish and clams from Glen Cove Creek.

Comment #3

What is the half-life of the radioactive material making up the ore and slag material stored on-site?

Response #3

The text of the preliminary public health assessment has been revised to include the half-lives of the radioactive material in the ore and slag found on-site. Also, the definition of a half-life was included (see "Radiation" of On-Site Contamination section).

Comment #4

Why is the radioactive slag not being removed? These hazardous waste sites should be remediated in such a way as to be returned to their original, safe condition so that in the future the site can be used in a productive manner.

Response #4

The slag piles remaining on-site contain radioactive materials at relatively low, naturally occurring levels. They were not considered for removal during the US EPA's Emergency Removal Action because the materials are not extremely radioactive and do not pose an imminent health hazard to anyone that may come in contact with them. Also, the large quantity of slag material on-site would be difficult to remove and dispose of quickly. The removal of the radioactive slag piles will be considered during future remedial activities.

The proposed remedial investigation and feasibility study to be performed will require a detailed examination of the site to understand its potential impact on public health and the environment. The proposed feasibility study will use the information gathered from the remedial investigation to develop a number of remedial alternatives that will ultimately eliminate the threat posed by the site to public health or the environment. The proposed use and possible future uses of the site will be taken into consideration by the US EPA, the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYS DEC) and the NYS DOH when evaluating the possible remedial actions that could be carried out.

Comment #5

The public's health should be evaluated for evidence of contamination in addition to other recommendations made.

Response #5

Two health outcome studies were completed and related to this site are mentioned in the Health Outcome Data Evaluation section of this preliminary public health assessment. One is a cancer incidence study of the Glen Cove area and the other is the preliminary occupational exposure assessment of former Li Tungsten employees. The NYS DOH in conjunction with the ATSDR's Health Activities Recommendation Panel (HARP) will reevaluate any new health outcome data if it becomes available and may determine the need for additional actions at the site.

Comment #6

Does the community really understand the severity of the contamination?

Response #6

It is likely that some members of the community do understand the potential dangers associated with contamination that is believed to be restricted to the site. However, some community members may not be informed and the US EPA, NYS DEC and NYS DOH will try to educate all interested persons about the presence of contamination on the Li Tungsten property. This education process has already begun through three public meetings that were held in the City of Glen Cove in June 1989, March 1993 and May 1993 regarding the Li Tungsten site. Also, action will be taken to inform the community about proposed site investigations that will provide a more detailed picture of the type and amount of contaminants that may be in the soil, groundwater, buildings, surface water, and/or the air at the site. Additional meetings are expected to be held by the US EPA during and after the proposed site investigation and the US EPA will provide notice of the public meetings in a newspaper and will also mail notices to persons that are on the US EPA's Glen Cove area mailing list. Individuals who wish to place their names on the US EPA's mailing list may do so by contacting Yvette Harris (Public Affairs Specialist) at the US EPA by calling (212) 264-9368. Individuals who wish to receive a copy of the preliminary public health assessment for the Li Tungsten site may contact Nina Knapp (Health Liaison Program) at the NYS DOH by calling the toll free number 1-800-458-1158; extension 402. Additionally, copies of the site related information, including the preliminary public health assessment will be available for review in the following document repositories:

Glen Cove Public Library
Glen Cove Road
Glen Cove, New York 11542

US EPA Document Control Center
Room 2930
26 Federal Plaza
New York, New York 10278

Comment #7

The effect of the contamination on the area to the south of the site and Glen Cove Creek needs to be addressed.

The effects of the southerly groundwater contamination on water supplies located to the south of Glen Cove Creek should be addressed. In addition, airborne contamination located to the south of the site should be monitored. Although located a distance from the site, residential areas there are located at elevated heights and may be along prevailing wind paths.

Lack of off-site groundwater monitoring presents a critical data gap. Intermittent exposure to PCBs in on-site surface water is listed as posing an increase in cancers. Runoff from the site through storm sewers from Herb Hill Road drains directly into Glen Cove Creek. Outfall pipes should be sampled for PCBs.

Response #7

  1. Groundwater exists beneath the site in two separate aquifers, the shallow Upper Glacial Aquifer and the deeper Lloyd Aquifer. The two aquifers are separated from each other by a confining clay unit that is about 112 feet thick. The clay unit acts as a barrier to downward groundwater movement. The presence of the clay makes it difficult for contaminants in the Upper Glacial Aquifer to be transported down to the deeper Lloyd Aquifer. For this reason, groundwater investigations at the Li Tungsten site and other sites in this area have focused on the contamination in the Upper Glacial Aquifer. Since the Upper Glacial Aquifer flows from the site towards Glen Cove Creek and discharges into the Creek, it is unlikely that water supplies south of the Glen Cove Creek will be affected from the contaminants in the Upper Glacial Aquifer coming from the Li Tungsten site. However, the proposed remedial investigation to be done at this site will include a detailed groundwater investigation that will further define the vertical and horizontal extent of contamination. If any of the groundwater data indicates that contamination from the Upper Glacial Aquifer is being transported to the deeper Lloyd Aquifer, then recommendations will be made for further investigations.
  2. The limited air sampling done on and off-site is explained in more detail in the On-site Contamination - Air Section of the preliminary public health assessment. An on-site air monitoring program will be undertaken during any future drilling or excavation activities that take place on-site. The air monitoring will be done to ensure that on-site contaminants are not transported off-site to the surrounding community during any drilling or excavation activities. The air will be monitored downwind from any drilling or excavation activities. If contaminants in the air reach or exceed predetermined action levels, then work activities will stop and actions will be taken to minimize or prevent the release of contaminants into the air.
  3. The proposed remedial investigation to be done at the site will include soil borings adjacent to the existing storm sewer system to determine the extent which the sewer system contributes as a migration pathway and contaminant source to the groundwater and Glen Cove Creek. The soil boring samples will include analysis for PCBs.

Comment #8

Will health follow-ups of former employees be done over a long period of time?

Response #8

The Health Outcome Data Evaluation section of the health assessment discusses a preliminary medial surveillance program which concluded that former workers do not face an increased risk of health effects due to their past work exposures at Li Tungsten. No follow-up studies are anticipated. However, if additional data become available suggesting that human occupational exposures occurred that are likely to cause illness and disease, the NYS DOH in conjunction with the ATSDR will reevaluate this site for any indicated follow-up.

Comment #9

Will investigations include a study of the potential effect of contamination on wildlife, i.e., waterfowl?

Response #9

The primary purpose of this preliminary public health assessment is to evaluate available data regarding a particular hazardous waste site and identify the current or future impact on public health so that health advisories, recommendations or studies are carried out to prevent public health effects. The effects of contamination on fish and wildlife would only be considered in this health assessment if fish or wildlife are suspected to be taken for human consumption. Recommendations have been made by the NYS DOH for the sampling and analysis of fish and clams from Glen Cove Creek. The NYS DOH also issued an advisory on eating certain sportfish and wildlife taken in New York State. This advisory is reported yearly and is available from the NYS DOH. Individuals who wish to receive a copy of the NYS DOH's Health Advisory for Chemicals in Sportfish and Game may contact Nina Knapp (Health Liaison Program) at the NYS DOH by calling the toll free number 1-800-458-1158; extension 402.

Comment #10

Information should include distance to Garvies Point Preserve, public beach.

Maps should include measurement scale in feet.

Response #10

Changes have been made to the text and map to include distance and measurements.

Comment #11

More information is needed on the significance of tidal changes on contaminant transport in Glen Cove Creek.

Response #11

Glen Cove Creek is a tidal estuary. The Creek generally flows southwest to Hempstead Harbor, but is also affected by the tides. While future investigations of Glen Cove Creek may include a detailed study on contaminant transport due to tidal influences, the proposed remedial investigation and feasibility study for the Li Tungsten site do not. Instead, other factors will be considered so that samples taken from Glen Cove Creek will be most representative of actual conditions. This will include the consideration that samples be taken at different times of the year to account for seasonal variations and that all available data (past and future) from Glen Cove Creek be reviewed. Also, because there are many potential sources that may have contributed to the contamination in Glen Cove Creek, all future samples taken from Glen Cove Creek for Li Tungsten site investigations will include the analysis of tungsten. Since tungsten is specific to the Li Tungsten site and not likely to be found at other sites in large quantities, the sampling and analysis for tungsten in the Creek will help to identify the extent that Li Tungsten contributed to contamination found in Glen Cove Creek. Also, all sample locations in Glen Cove Creek will be selected while taking into account the tidal actions of the Creek.

Comment #12

Define the number of increased concerns for a low, moderate, high increased rate.

Response #12

To evaluate the potential health risks from contaminants of concern associated with the Li Tungsten site, the New York State Department of Health assessed the risks for cancer and noncancer health effects. Increased cancer risks were estimated by using site-specific information on exposure levels for the contaminant of concern and interpreting them using cancer potency estimates derived for that contaminant by the US EPA or, in some cases, by the NYS DOH. The following qualitative ranking of cancer risk estimates, developed by the NYS DOH, was then used to rank the risk from very low to very high. For example, if the qualitative descriptor was "low", then the excess lifetime cancer risk from that exposure fell in the range of greater than one per million to less than one per ten thousand. Other qualitative descriptors are listed below:

Excess Lifetime Cancer Risk
 
Risk

Qualitative Descriptor
equal to or less than one per million
  very low
greater than one per million to less
than one per ten thousand
  low

one per ten thousand to less than one
per thousand

  moderate

one per thousand to less than one per ten

  high
equal to or greater than one per ten   very high

An increased excess lifetime cancer risk is an estimate of the probability that a person may develop cancer sometime in his or her lifetime following exposure to that contaminant. It is not a specific estimate of expected cancers.

For noncarcinogenic health risks, the contaminant intake was estimated using exposure assumptions for the site conditions. This dose was then compared to a risk reference dose (estimated daily intake of a chemical that is likely to be without an appreciable risk of health effects) developed by the US EPA, ATSDR and/or NYS DOH. Results were compared to the following qualitative ranking scale of minimal to high:

Qualitative Descriptions for
Noncarcinogenic Health Risks
 

Estimated Exposure Compared
to Risk Reference Dose
Qualitative
Descriptor

equal to or less than the risk
reference dose

minimal

greater than one to five times
the risk reference dose

low

greater than five to ten times
the risk reference dose

moderate

greater than ten times the
risk reference dose

high

Comment #13

Please define "Public Health Hazard" as it pertains to the classification of the site.

Response #13

The Li Tungsten site is a "public health hazard" because the site fulfills the definition of a public health hazard as defined in the Health Assessment Guidance Manual prepared by the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR), U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The criteria are:

"Evidence exists that exposures have occurred, are occurring, or are likely to occur in the future." And:

"The estimated exposures are to a substance or substances at concentrations in the environment that, upon long-term exposures (greater than 1 year), can cause adverse health effects to any segment of the receptor population. The adverse health effect can be the result of either carcinogenic or noncarcinogenic toxicity from a chemical exposure." And/or:

"Community-specific health outcome data indicate that the site has had an adverse health effect on human health that requires intervention."

The exposure pathway that fulfills the ATSDR criteria for a public health hazard is the fact that trespassers have entered site properties and may have been exposed to polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and metals in on-site waste water, surface soils, and sediment and may have been exposed to external gamma radiation from on-site drums and piles of low level radioactive slag and ore. Trespassers are also at risk from being physically injured from the many physical hazards at the site.

Comment #14

Define the comparison values on Tables 1, 5 and 6.

Response #14

A public health assessment comparison value is a contaminant level in water, soil or air that is not likely to cause health effects given the potential for exposure. Comparison values are used to determine which site-associated contaminants found in water, soil or air need to be further evaluated for cancer and noncancer health risks. Comparison values in Tables 1, 5 and 6 were calculated as follows:

For Tables 1 and 5 of Preliminary Draft Public Health Assessment
for the Li Tungsten Site - Summary of Basis for Comparison
Values for Soil and Sediment

CANCER

NYS CREG Cancer risk evaluation guideline, developed by the NYS DOH, is the contaminant concentration in soil that corresponds to an estimated increased lifetime cancer risk of one in a million, assuming an adult is exposed to the soil and food grown in the soil.
NYS RfG Risk reference guideline, developed by the NYS DOH, is the contaminant concentration in soil that is unlikely to cause adverse noncarcinogenic health effects, assuming a child is exposed to the soil and food grown in the soil.
ATSDR CREG Cancer risk evaluation guideline, developed by the ATSDR, is the contaminant concentration in soil that corresponds to an estimated increased lifetime cancer risk of one in a million, assuming a 70 kilogram adult ingests 100 milligrams soil per day.
EPA CPF Cancer potency factor, developed by the US EPA, determines the contaminant concentration in soil that corresponds to an estimated increased lifetime cancer risk of one in a million, assuming a 70 kilogram adult ingests 100 milligrams soil per day.

NONCANCER


ATSDR EMEG Environmental media evaluation guide, developed by the ATSDR, is the contaminant concentration in soil that is unlikely to cause adverse noncarcinogenic health effects assuming a 10 kilogram child ingests 200 milligrams soil per day.

EPA RfD

Risk reference dose, developed by the US EPA, determines the contaminant concentration in soil that is unlikely to cause adverse noncarcinogenic health effects, assuming a 10 kilogram child ingests 200 milligrams of soil per day.

 

For Table 6 of Preliminary Draft Public Health Assessment
for Li Tungsten - Summary of Basis for Comparison Values for Ambient Air

NYS CREG
EPA CREG
Cancer risk evaluation guideline, developed by the NYS DOH or US EPA, respectively, is the contaminant concentration in ambient air that corresponds to an estimated increased lifetime cancer risk of one in a million assuming a 70 kilogram adult inhales 20 cubic meter of air per day.

NYS RfG
EPA RfC

Risk reference guideline, developed by the NYS DOH, or risk reference concentration, developed by the US EPA, is the contaminant concentration in ambient air that is unlikely to cause adverse noncarcinogenic health effects assuming a 70 kilogram adult inhales 20 cubic meters of air per day.

Comment #15

Information should be enclosed on the number of samples taken, percent where pollutants were found and percent where pollutants were present in excess of applicable standards.

Response #15

The preliminary public health assessment report for the Li Tungsten site is "preliminary" because the assessment was based on limited available data. Because data are limited it was decided to present the highest value detected from each set of data. Copies of all site related reports whose data was taken for this preliminary public health assessment will be available for review in the following document repositories:

Glen Cove Public Library
Glen Cove Road
Glen Cove, New York 11542

US EPA Document Control Center
Room 2930
26 Federal Plaza
New York, New York 10278



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. #