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

PUBLIC HEALTH ASSESSMENT

PASLEY SOLVENTS & CHEMICALS INC.
GARDEN CITY, NASSAU COUNTY, NEW YORK


APPENDIX A

Figures


Figure 1. Pasley Site Before Tank Demolition


Figure 2. Site Location Plan


Figure 3. Surface Soil Sampling Locations


Figure 4. Onsite Subsurface Sampling Locations


Figure 5. Location of Monitoring Wells


Figure 6. Toxic Chemical Inventory Sites Near Pasley Solvents Site



APPENDIX B

Tables

Table 1.

Pasley Solvents and Chemicals
List of Chemicals

Chlorinated Solvents

Ethylene Dichloride
Propylene Dichloride
Methylene Chloride
1,1,1-Trichloroethane
Carbon Tetrachloride
Trichloroethene
Tetrachloroethene
Chloroform, Tech. N.F.

Alcohols

Methanol
Denatured Ethyl Alcohol
Isopropanol 91%
Isopropanol 95%
Isopropanol, Anhydrous 99%
Normal Propanol
Normal Butanol
Isobutanol
Secondary Butanol
Primary Amyl Alcohol
Methyl Amyl Alcohol
2-Ethyl Hexanol
Isodecanol
Isooctanol
Cyclohexanol

Glycol Ethers

Methyl "Cellosolve" - EM
"Cellosolve" Solvent - EE
Butyl "Cellosolve" - EB
Methyl "Carbitol" - DM
"Carbitol" Solvent - DE
Butyl "Carbitol" - DB

Amines

Diethylamine
Triethylamine
Isopropylamine
Diisopropylamine
Butylamine 95-97%
Diethylamine Triamine
Triethylamine Triamine
Tetraethylamine Pentamine
Monoethanolamine
Triethanolamine
Monoisopropanolamine
Morpholine
Ethylamine Diamine
Cycloexylamine

Esters

Methyl Acetate
Ethyl Acetate
Isopropyl Acetate 95%
Normal Propyl Acetate
Normal Butyl Acetate
Isobutyl Acetate 95%
Secondary Butyl Acetate
Primary Amyl Acetate
Methyl Amyl Acetate
Methyl "Cellosolve" Acetate
"Cellosolve' Acetate EEA
Butyl "Cellosolve" Acetate
"Carbitol" Acetate
"Butyl" Carbitol Acetate

 

Table 1.

Pasley Solvents and Chemicals
List of Chemicals (page 2)

 

Glycols

Ethylene Glycol
Diethylene Glycol
Triethylene Glycol
Propylene Glycol - Ind.
Propylene Glycol - U.S.P.
Dipropylene Glycol
Hexylene Glycol



Aliphatic Naphthas

Hexane
Heptane
Petroleum Ether
Laktane (Lactol Spirits)
Solvent #1 (Rubber Solvent)
V M & P Naphtha
Varsol #1
Varsol #2 (46 Spirits)
Varsol #3
Mineral Spirits
140 Solvents
460 Solvents

Aromatic Solvents

Benzene
Toluene
Xylene
Solvent 100
Solvent 150
Heavy Aromatic Naphthas
Solvent A
Solvent A-80
Solvent B
Solvent B-90
Solvent C
Solvent D
Solvent D-80

Ketones

Acetone
Methyl Acetone
Methyl Ethyl Ketone
Diacetone, Acetone Free
Disobutyl Ketone
Cyclohexanone
Methyl Isoamyl Ketone
Isophorone
Methyl N-Butyl Ketone

Miscellaneous

Anti-Freeze
Safety Solvents
Lacquer Thinners
Polyethylene Glycols
Cyclohexane
Ethyl Ether USP & Anhydrous
Tetrahydrofuran
Dimethyl Formamide
Styrene Monomer, Tech
2-Nitro Propane
Dichloroethyl Ether
Isopropyl Ether
Dimethyl Acetamide
Glycerine - 96% USP
Glycerine - 99% USP
Surface Active Agents
      "Surfactants"
"Special Blend of Lacquer
      Thinners, as per Clients
      formulations"
Special Blends
"Special Chlorinated Blends
      as per Clients
      Specifications"
Special Fluorocarbon Blends
      for the Electronic
      Industry

Table 1.

Pasley Solvents and Chemicals
List of Chemicals (page 3)

Aromatic Solvents

Solvent E
Solvent F
Solvent F-80
Solvent H-J
Solvent H-CC

Plasticizers

Dimethyl Phthalate
Diethyl Phthalate
Dibutyl Phthalate
Dioctyl Phthalate
Tricresyl Phosphate

Miscellaneous

Special Blends meeting US
      Government, Federa, FDA
      and Military Standards
Special Spot Removers for
      Textile Industry

Source: Final Work Plan, Pasley Solvents and Chemicals Site (Ebasco, 1988)


Table 2.

Pasley Solvents and Chemical Site
Tank Inventory, 1981

Tank #

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
Oil Tank
Oil Tank
Oil Tank
Unnumbered

Tank Size (Gal.)

15,000
15,000
10,000
10,000
10,000
10,000
10,000
10,000
5,000
1,000
550
550
5,500
7,500
550
550
75,000
75,000
75,000
4,500

Chemical/Material

Acetone
Toluol
Trichloroethene
Tetrachloroethene
1,1,1-Trichloroethane
Mineral Spirits
Isopropyl Alcohol
Methanol
Lacquer Thinner
Methyl Ethyl Ketone
Lactol Spirits
Empty
Xylol
Hexane
Solvent 100
Solvent 150
Empty
Empty
Empty
Methylene Chloride

Source: Pasley Solvents & Chemical, Part 360, Permit Application (Ebasco, 1988)


Table 3.

Downgradient Public Water Supply Well Information
(see Table 7 for Public Health Assessment Comparison Values)

 


Well
No.
Latitude Longitude Well
Depth
(Feet)
Municipal
System
Status Treated Raw Water
Quality Data
VOC Detections

79 404252 733714 428 Village of
Hempstead
Active No

1989: PCE-ND to 4.5 mcg/L
TCE-0.8 to 1.5 mcg/L
1990: PCE-ND to 5.3 mcg/L
TCE-ND to 1.0 mcg/L

80 404256 733712 478 Village of
Hempstead

Active No No VOC contamination
81 404305 733709 420 Village of
Hempstead

Active No 1993: Dichlorodifluoro-
methane-ND to 3.6 mcg/L
82 404308 733707 542 Village of
Hempstead

Active No No VOC contamination
83 404306 733713 403 Village of
Hempstead
Active Yes 1977: TCE-27 to 71 mcg/L*
1978: TCE-ND to 145 mcg/L*
PCE-ND to 9 mcg/L*
1979: TCE-43 to 68 mcg/L*
1,1,1-TCA-ND to 1 mcg/L
1980: TCE-39 to 97 mcg/L*
PCE-1 to 2 mcg/L
1981: TCE-8 to 22 mcg/L*
PCE-1 to 2 mcg/L
1982: TCE-7 to 11 mcg/L*
PCE-ND to 5 mcg/L
1983: TCE-5 to 11 mcg/L*
PCE-ND to 10 mcg/L*
1984: TCE - 29 mcg/L*
PCE - 15 mcg/L*
1985: TCE-6 to 13 mcg/L*
PCE-ND to 6 mcg/L*
1986: TCE-4 to 5 mcg/L
PCE-ND to 4 mcg/L
1987: TCE-9 mcg/L*
1988: TCE-9.7 to 14 mcg/L*
PCE-ND to 10 mcg/L*
1,1,1-TCA-ND to 1 mcg/L
1989: PCE - 17 mcg/L*
TCE - 14 mcg/L*
1,1-DCA - 3 mcg/L
cis-1,2-DCE - 3 mcg/L
4425 404259 733715 365 Village of
Hempstead
Active Yes 1977: TCE - 23 mcg/L*
1978: TCE-ND to 32 mcg/L*
1,1,1-TCA-ND to 24 mcg/L*
1979: TCE-16 to 24 mcg/L*
1980: TCE-15 to 32 mcg/L*
PCE-ND to 1 mcg/L
1981: TCE-16 to 17 mcg/L*
PCE-ND to 2 mcg/L
1982: TCE-15 to 23 mcg/L*
PCE-ND to 4 mcg/L
1983: TCE-22 to 24 mcg/L*
PCE - 5 mcg/L
1984: TCE-19 to 20 mcg/L*
1985: TCE-2 to 13 mcg/L*
1986: TCE-17 to 33 mcg/L*
PCE-ND to 14 mcg/L*



Table 3 (page 2).

Downgradient Public Water Supply Well Information
(see Table 7 for Public Health Assessment Comparison Values)

Well
No.
Latitude Longitude Well
Depth
(Feet)
Municipal
System
Status Treated Raw Water
Quality Data
VOC Detections

              1987: TCE-10 to 33 mcg/L*
PCE-ND to 36 mcg/L*
1988: TCE-2 to 36 mcg/L*
PCE-6 to 86 mcg/L*
7298 404303 733714 444 Village of
Hempstead
Active No 1979: TCE-ND to 1 mcg/L
1980: TCE-ND to 2 mcg/L
1983: TCE-ND to 1 mcg/L
1984: TCE-ND to 2 mcg/L
1985: TCE-ND to 1 mcg/L
1986: TCE-ND to 1 mcg/L
1989: TCE-ND to 0.6 mcg/L
PCE-0.7 to 0.8 mcg/L
1990: TCE-ND to 0.6 mcg/L
PCE-0.8 to 2 mcg/L
1991: PCE-0.5 to 1 mcg/L
10033 404259 733806 541 Garden City Active No No VOC contamination
10034 404258 733806 570

Garden City

Active No No VOC contamination
8474 404325 733630 556 Town of
Hempstead
(Uniondale)
Active No 1992: TCE-0.5 to 1 mcg/L
1993: TCE-1 to 2 mcg/L
8475 404325 733630 481 Town of
Hempstead
(Uniondale)
Active No No VOC contamination

VOC = volatile organic compound
PCE = tetrachloroethene
1,1,1-TCA = 1,1,1-trichloroethane
1,1-DCA = 1,1-dichloroethane
cis-1,2-DCE = cis,1-2-dichloroethene
TCE = trichloroethene
mcg/L = micrograms per liter
ND = not detected
*Contaminant selected for further evaluation

Table 4.

Pasley Solvents and Chemical Site
On-site Soil Gas Results and Public Health Assessment Comparison Values
Volatile Organic Compounds
December, 1988.
(All values in parts per million)

Compound Frequency
of
Detection
Concentration
Range
(ppm)
Typical
Background
Range
Comparison
Values**
Basis***

Benzene 0/24 ND ND 0.000031 EPA CPF
*Ethylbenzene
and Xylenes

1/24 800 ND 0.230/0.069 EPA RfC
*Tetrachloroethene

22/24 5-140 ND 0.00026 EPA CPF
*Toluene 4/24 38-1,000

ND 0.105 EPA RfC
*Trichloroethene 23/24 11-400 ND 0.00011 EPA CPF

ND - not detected
ppm - parts per million
*Contaminant selected for further evaluation.
**Comparison value assumes a 70 kilogram adult inhales 20 cubic meters of contaminated air per day.
***EPA RfC = EPA Reference Concentration
EPA CPF = EPA Cancer Potency Factor

Table 5.

Pasley Solvents and Chemical Site
Summary of On-Site Soil Data and Public Health Assessment Comparison Values
Remedial Investigation
(All values in milligrams per kilogram)




Compound
Frequency
of
Detection
(includes
duplicates)
Range of
Detection
(excluding
non-detects)
Typical
Background
Range**
Comparison
Values for
Soil***
Basis****

Volatile Organics

         
*Vinyl chloride 9/51 .068-.670J ND 0.0003 EPA HEAST
Chloroethane 1/51 .079J ND NA  
*Methylene chloride 24/51 .012J-.740J ND 0.07 EPA CPF
*Acetone 18/51 .030J-14 ND 2 EPA RfD
1,1-Dichloroethane 30/51 .006J-.580J ND 33 EPA RfD
*1,1-Dichloroethene 1/51 .046J ND 0.002 EPA CPF
*Trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 34/51 .015J-82 ND 1 EPA RfD
*Chloroform 14/51 .008J-17 ND 0.2 EPA CPF
2-Butanone 15/51 .039J-.460J ND 2.2 EPA HEAST
1,1,1-Trichloroethane 18/51 .011J-6.90 ND 76 EPA RfD
*Trichloroethene 42/51 .004J-120 ND 0.2 EPA CPF
*Tetrachloroethene 44/51 .01-270 ND 0.06 EPA CPF
*Toluene 27/51 .008J-470 ND 230 EPA RfD
Chlorobenzene 2/51 .011J-.048J ND 27 EPA RfD
Ethylbenzene 14/51 .013J-3.0 ND 200 EPA RfD
Xylene (Total) 22/51 .010J-35 ND 4,620 EPA RfD
*Benzene 4/51 .006J-.087J ND 0.05 EPA CPF
*Trans-1,3-
Dichloropropene

3/51 .014J-0.25 ND 0.008 EPA CPF
Semi-Volatile Organics

         
1,2-Dichlorobenzene 3/11 composites 0.89J-2.8J ND 324 EPA RfD
*Naphthalene 6/11 composites 0.38J-43 ND 14.3 EPA RfD
2-Methylnaphthalene 8/11 composites 0.46J-9.8J ND NA  
Fluorene 1/11 composites 0.47J + 328 EPA RfD
Phenanthrene 9/11 composites 0.37J-5.7J + NA  
Anthracene 2/11 composites 0.53J-2.6J + 7,470 EPA RfD

di-n-Butyl phthalate

9/11 composites 0.29J-150 ND 4,100 EPA RfD
Fluoranthene 7/11 composites 0.36J-11 + 746 EPA RfD
Pyrene 9/11 composites 0.57J=8.4J + 67 EPA RfD
Benzo(a)anthracene 1/11 composites 5 + NA  
*bis(2-Ethylhexyl)
phthalate
1/11 composites 120 ND 2.3 EPA CPF
Chrysene 6/11 composites 0.28J-6J + NA  
Benzo(b)fluoranthene 5/11 composites 0.33J-4.4J + NA  
Benzo(k)fluoranthene 2/11 composites 0.45J-1.8J + NA  
*Benzo(a)pyrene 4/11 composites 0.37J-3.3J <1-1.3 0.005 NYS CPF
Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 1/11 composites 1.6J + NA  
benzo(g,h,i)perylene

2/11composites 0.84J-1.5J + NA  
Inorganics

         
Aluminum 11/11 composites 2670-9630 7000-100,000 NA  
*Antimony 2/11 composites 16.7J-48J 0.6-10 20 EPA RfD
Arsenic 9/11 composites 2.8-17.1J 10-20 15 EPA RfD
Barium 11/11 composites 29.5-425 300-500 3,500 EPA RfD
Calcium 11/11 composites 14,600J-44,300J 100-400,000 NA  
Chromium 11/11 composites 9.9-58.8 10-40 250 EPA RfD
Cobalt 10/11 composites 2.9-7.6 <0.3-70 NA  
Copper 11/11 composites 15.9-74.8J <1-25 6,500

EPA RfD

Cyanide 5/11 composites 0.28J-4.4J ND 1,000 EPA RfD
Iron 11/11 composites 11,100-41,800 10,000-40,000 NA  
*Lead 11/11 composites 134J-1,230J 10-300 NA  
*Magnesium 11/11 composites 2,820-22,800 400-15,000 250,000 NYS RfG

Table 5 (page 2).

Pasley Solvents and Chemical Site
Summary of On-Site Soil Data and Public Health Assessment Comparison Values
Remedial Investigation
(All values in milligrams per kilogram)

Compound Frequency
of
Detection
(includes
duplicates)
Range of
Detection
(excluding
non-detects)
Typical
Background
Range**
Comparison
Values for
Soil***
Basis****

Inorganics (continued)

         
Manganese 11/11 composites 77-265 500-3,000 7,000 EPA RfD
Mercury 3/11 composites 0.14J-0.19J 0.01-3.4 15 EPA RfD
Nickel 10/11 composites 7.7-25.1 <5-20 1,000 EPA RfD
Potassium 11/11 composites 352-975 50-30,000 NA  
Sodium 11/11 composites 49.3-210 3,000-50,000 NA  
Thallium 6/11 composites 1.9J-3.3 <50 4 EPA RfD
Vanadium 11/11 composites 10.1-37.7 3-500 350 EPA RfD
Zinc 11/11 composites 131-712 50-100 10,000 EPA RfD

Note: Only those compounds that are detected either as estimated or trace values are listed in this table.

NA = not available
ND = not determined

J = analyte present. Reported value may not be accurate or precise.

Soil Sampling Depth: 0.5 - 1 ft.

*Contaminant selected for further evaluation.

**References: Adriano (1986); Clarke et al. (1985a,b); Connor et al. (1957); Davis and Bennett (1983); Frank et al. (1976); McGovern (1988); Shacklette and Boerngen (1984)

***Comparison values for volatile and semi-volatile organics based on ingestion of soil and homegrown vegetables; comparison values for metals (inorganics) based on ingestion of soil.

****NYS RfG = New York State Risk Reference Guideline
EPA RfD = EPA Risk Reference Dose
EPA CPF = EPA Cancer Potency Factor
EPA HEAST = EPA Health Effects Summary Tables

+Based on reported background levels for total polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons of <1 to 13 milligrams per kilogram in soil from relatively rural areas of the eastern United States (ATSDR, 1990b; Edwards, 1983).

Table 6.

Pasley Solvents and Chemical Site
Summary of On-Site Soil Boring Data and Public Health Assessment Comparison Values
Remedial Investigation (All values in milligrams per kilogram)

Compound Frequency of
Detection
(includes
duplicates)
Range of
Detection
(excluding
non-detects)
Typical
Background
Range**
Comparison
Values for
Soil***
Basis****

Volatile Organics

         
*Methylene chloride 6/18 .017J-1.2J ND 0.07 EPA CPF
Acetone 11/18 .011J-.13J ND 2 EPA RfD
1,1-Dichloroethane 1/18 .012J ND 33 EPA RfD
trans-1,2-Dichloro-
ethene
1/18 .099 ND 1 EPA RfD
Chloroform 1/18 .009J ND 0.2 EPA CPF
1,1,1-Trichloroethane 2/18 .070-.32J ND 76 EPA RfD
*Trichloroethene 4/18 .10J-2.8 ND 0.2 EPA CPF
4-Methyl-2-pentanone 1/18 3.6 ND NA  
*Tetrachloroethene 11/18 0.21J-21 ND 0.06 EPA RfD
Toluene 11/18 .007J-6.9J ND 230 EPA CPF
Ethylbenzene 9/18 .023J-2.2J ND 200 EPA RfD
Total Xylene 10/18 .012J-8.3J ND 4,620 EPA RfD
*1,2-Dichloroethane 1/18 .098 ND 0.02 EPA CPF
           
Semi-Volatile Organics

         
Naphthalene 10/18 .043J-5.5 ND 14.3 EPA RfD
2-Methylnaphthalene 12/18 .088J-15 ND NA  
Acenaphthene 1/18 .76J + 235 EPA RfD
Dibenzofuran 5/18 .220J-1.1J ND NA  
Fluorene 7/18 .16J-1.4J + 328 EPA RfD
Phenanthrene 12/18 .069J-2.3 + NA  
Anthracene 3/18 .086J-0.24J + 7,470 EPA RfD
di-n-Butylphthalate 18/18 0.42J-0.68 ND 4,100 EPA RfD
Fluoranthene 9/18 .032J-0.23J + 746 EPA RfD
Pyrene 12/18 .021J-.28J + 67 EPA RfD
*bis(2-Ethylhexyl)
phthalate
3/18 .41J-4.9 ND 2.3 EPA CPF
Chrysene 4/18 .019J-.16J + NA  
di-n-Octyl phthalate 4/18 .043J-.17J ND 489 EPA RfD
           
Inorganics

         
Aluminum 18/18 1130-14,600 7,000-100,000 NA  
Arsenic 2/18 1.7-1.8 10-20 15 EPA RfD
Barium 5/18 19.3-38.8 300-500 3,500 EPA RfD
Cobalt 9/18 3.2-8.7 <0.3-70 NA  
Calcium 11/18 138-1,440 100-400,000 NA  
Chromium 12/18 2.2J-29.6 10-40 250 EPA RfD
Copper 18/18 10.7-33.9 <1-25 6,500 EPA RfD
Cyanide 1/18 3.1 ND 1,000 EPA RfD
Iron 13/18 1,970-14,000 10,000-40,000 NA  
Lead 10/18 6.4J-59J 10-300 NA  
Magnesium 18/18 192-1800 400-15,000 250,000 NYS RfG
Manganese 13/18 7.6-190 500-3,000 7,000 EPA RfD
Mercury 7/18 0.19-1.1 0.01-3.4 15 EPA RfD
Nickel 8/18 5.8J-12.1J <5-20 1,000 EPA RfD
Potassium 10/18 130-695 50-30,000 NA  
Silver 3/18 3.2J-5.3 0.1-5 250 EPA RfD


Table 6 (page 2).

Pasley Solvents and Chemical Site
Summary of On-Site Soil Boring Data and Public Health Assessment Comparison Values
Remedial Investigation (All values in milligrams per kilogram)


Compound Frequency of
Detection
(includes
duplicates)
Range of
Detection
(excluding
non-detects)
Typical
Background
Range**
Comparison
Values for
Soil***
Basis****

Inorganics (continued)

         
Sodium 14/18 34.7-152 3,000-50,000 NA  
Vanadium 16/18 3.5-24.6 3-500 350 EPA RfD
Zinc 14/18 31J-202J 50-100 10,000 EPA RfD

Note: Only those compounds that are detected either as estimated or trace values are listed in this table.

Soil boring depth range (below grade): 12-26 ft.

NA = not available
ND = not determined
J = analyte present. Reported value may not be accurate or precise.

*Contaminant selected for further evaluation.

**References: Adriano (1986); Clarke et al. (1985a,b); Connor et al. (1957); Davis and Bennett (1983); Frank et al. (1976); McGovern (1988); Shacklette and Boerngen (1984)

***Comparison values for volatile and semi-volatile organics based on ingestion of soil and homegrown vegetables; comparison values for metals (inorganics) based on ingestion of soil.

****NYS RfG = New York State Risk Reference Guideline
EPA CPF = EPA Cancer Potency Factor
EPA HEAST = EPA Health Effects Summary Tables
EPA RfD = EPA Risk Reference Dose

+Based on reported background levels for total polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons of <1 to 13 milligrams per kilogram in soil from relatively rural areas of the eastern United States (ATSDR, 1990b; Edwards, 1983).


Table 7.
Pasley Solvents and Chemical Site
Summary of On-Site Monitoring Well Data and Public Health Assessment Comparison
Values for Contaminants Found in Sources of Drinking Water
Remedial Investigation (All values in micrograms per liter)

Compound Range of Detection Current NYS and Federal Standards and Guidelines Comparison
Values
Basis**
New York State U.S. EPA
1st Round 2nd Round Ground-
water

Drinking Water

Drinking
Water

Volatile Organics

             
*Methylene Chloride NA 16J 5 5 5 5 EPA CPF
*Acetone 84J-1,400J NA 50 50 -- 700 EPA RfD
*Benzene 3J-43J 4J-20J 0.7 5 5 1.2 EPA CPF
Chloroform 74J 33 7 100d 100d 6 EPA CPF
*1,1-Dichloroethene 84J 62 5 5 7 0.06 EPA CPF
*1,1-Dichloroethane 1J-630 300 5 5 -- 700 EPA RfD
*Trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 3J-25,000 3J-37,000 5 5 100 100 EPA LTHA
*1,1,1-Trichloroethane 2J-3,600 2,800 5 5 200 200 EPA LTHA
*Trichloroethene 1J-140J 11-320 5 5 5 3 EPA CPF
*Tetrachloroethene 1J-160J 5-91 5 5 5 0.7 EPA CPF
*Toluene 1J-1,100 2J-750 5 5 1,000;40ps 1,000 EPA LTHA
*Ethylbenzene 510 340 5 5 700;30ps 700 EPA LTHA
*Chlorobenzene 510 NA 5 5 100 140 EPA RfD
*Xylenes (Total) 1,100 11-2,100 5n 5n 10,000;20ps 10,000 EPA LTHA
Semi-Volatile Organics

             
bis-(2-Ethylhexyl)
phthalate
NA NA 50 50 6 2.5 EPA CPF
di-n-Butyl phthalate 2J-6J NA 50 50 -- 700 EPA RfD
*2-Methylnaphthalene 110 26J-97 50 50 -- -- --
*Naphthalene 270 180 10g 50 -- 20 EPA LTHA
Acenaphthylene NA 1J-7J 50 50 -- -- --
Dibenzofuran 5J 2J 50 50 -- -- --
Fluorene NA 3J-7J 50 50 -- 280 EPA RfD
Phenanthrene 5J 2J-3J 50 50 -- -- --
di-n-Octylphthalate NA NA       140 EPA RfD

Metals

             
Aluminum 138-23,400 NA -- -- 50;200s -- --
Antimony NA NA 3g -- 6 3 EPA LTHA
Barium 25.6-112 NA 1,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 EPA LTHA
Beryllium 0.73 NA 3g -- 4 0.0081 EPA CPF
Cadmium NA NA 10 5 5 5 EPA LTHA
Calcium 13,900-23,800 NA -- -- -- -- --
Chromium 13.1J-27.7J NA 50 100 100 100 EPA LTHA
*Cobalt 16J NA 10 -- -- -- --
Copper 8.7-99.4 NA 200 1,000 1,300 1,300 --
Cyanide 15 NA 100 100+ 200 200 EPA LTHA
*Iron 1570J-99,100J NA 300 300 300s -- --
*Lead 7.3-15.3 NA 25 15++ 15++ -- --
Magnesium 476-4,820 NA 35,000g -- -- 35,000 NYS RfG
*Manganese 67.7-16,000 NA 300 300 50s 175 EPA RfD


Table 7 (page 2).
Pasley Solvents and Chemical Site
Summary of On-Site Monitoring Well Data and Public Health Assessment Comparison

Values for Contaminants Found in Sources of Drinking Water
Remedial Investigation (All values in micrograms per liter)
2

Compound Range of Detection Current NYS and Federal Standards and Guidelines Comparison
Values
Basis**
New York State U.S. EPA
1st Round 2nd Round Ground-
water
Drinking
Water
Drinking
Water

Metals (continued)

             
Mercury 0.30-1.3 NA 2 2 2 EPA LTHA
Nickel 48.3 NA -- -- 100 100 EPA LTHA
Potassium 1880-6270 NA -- -- -- -- --
Silver 5.6J NA 50 50 100s 100 EPA LTHA
*Sodium 26300J-390000J NA 20,000 +++ -- -- --
Thallium NA NA 4g -- 2 0.4 EPA LTHA
Vanadium 7.8-27.6 NA -- -- -- 20 EPA LTHA
Zinc 51.2-859 NA 300 5,000 5,000s 2,000 EPA LTHA

Note: Only those compounds that are detected either as estimated or trace values are listed in this table.

NA = not analyzed
J = analyte present. Reported value may not be accurate or precise.
*Contaminant selected for further evaluation.
**EPA CPF = EPA Cancer Potency Factor
EPA LTHA = EPA Drinking Water Lifetime Health Advisory
EPA RfD = EPA Risk Reference Dose
NYS RfG = NYS Reference Guideline

+10NYCRR Part 170 Sources of water supply.
++There is a maximum contaminant level goal (MCLG) of zero for lead, and an action level of 15 mcg/L at the tap.
+++No designated limit; water containing more than 20,000 mcg/L should not be used for drinking by people on severely restricted sodium diets; water containing more than 270,000 mcg/L should not be used for drinking by moderately restricted sodium diets.

d = drinking water standard for total trihalomethanes produced as a result of disinfection with chlorine. This standard is inappropriate for evaluating environmental contamination not associated with disinfection practices.
g = guidance value
n = applies to each isomer separately unless isomers are analytically indistinguishable
p = proposed maximum contaminant level (MCL)
s = secondary MCL

Table 8.
Pasley Solvents and Chemical Site
Off-Site Soil Gas Results and Public Health Assessment Comparison Values
Volatile Organic Compounds
December, 1988
(All values in parts per million)

Compound Frequency
of
Detection
Concentration
Range
Typical
Background
Range
Comparison
Values**
Basis***

Benzene 0/57 ND ND 0.000031 EPA CPF
Ethylbenzene
and Xylenes
0/57 ND ND 0.230/0.069 EPA RfC
*Tetrachloroethene 17/54 0.7-27 ND 0.00026 EPA CPF
Toluene 0/57 ND ND 0.105 EPA RfC
*Trichloroethene 13/54 0.7-70 ND 0.00011 EPA CPF

ND - not detected

*Contaminant selected for further evaluation.

*Comparison value assumes a 70 kilogram adult inhales 20 cubic meters of contaminated air per day.

***EPA RfC = EPA Risk Reference Concentration
EPA CPF = EPA Cancer Potency Factor


Table 9.
Pasley Solvents and Chemical Site
Summary of Off-Site Soil Boring Data and Public Health Assessment Comparison Values
Remedial Investigation
(All values in milligrams per kilogram)

Compound

Frequency of
Detection
(includes
duplicates)

Range of
Detection
(excluding
non-detects)
Typical
Background
Range*
Comparison
Values for
Soil**
Basis***

Volatile Organics

         
Methylene chloride 2/11 .003J-.007 ND 0.07 EPA CPF

Semi-Volatile Organics

         
Phenanthrene 1/11

.071J

+ NA  

di-n-Butyl phthalate

2/11 .28J-.31J ND 4,100 EPA RfD

bis(2-Ethylhexyl)
phthalate

4/11 .28J-.69 ND 2.3 EPA CPF

Metals

         
Aluminum 11/11 860-3,410J 7,000-100,000 NA  
Calcium 9/11 17.2B-161B 100-400,000 NA  
Chromium 7/11 4.1-11.1 10-40 250 EPA RfD
Copper 11/11 5.2-103J <1-25 6,500 EPA RfD
Iron 11/11 1,630-6,790 10,000-40,000 NA  
Lead 11/11 2.1J-12.3J 10-300 NA  
Magnesium 11/11 63-247 400-15,000 250,000 NYS RfG
Manganese 11/11 4.1-200 500-3,000 7,000 EPA RfD
Mercury 2/11 0.13J-0.59J 0.01-3.4 15 EPA RfD
Nickel 4/11 5.2-11.2 <5-20 1,000 EPA RfD
Potassium 4/11 127-270 NA    
Sodium 2/11 47.0-51.5 NA    
Vanadium 10/11 2.6-8.3 3-500 350 EPA RfD
Zinc 6/11 33.3J-680J 50-100 10,000 EPA RfD

Note: Only those compounds that are detected either as estimated or trace values are listed in this table.

Soil boring depth range (below grade): 5-11 ft.

NA = not available
ND = not determined
J = analyte present. Reported value may not be accurate or precise.

*References: Adriano (1986); Clarke et al. (1985a,b); Connor et al. (1957); Davis and Bennett (1983); Frank et al. (1976); McGovern (1988); Shacklette and Boerngen (1984)

**Comparison values for volatile and semi-volatile organics based on ingestion of soil and homegrown vegetables; comparison values for metals (inorganics) based on ingestion of soil.

***NYS RfG = New York State Risk Reference Guideline
EPA RfD = EPA Risk Reference Dose
EPA CPF = EPA Cancer Potency Factor

+Based on reported background levels for total polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons of <1 to 13 milligrams per kilogram in soil from relatively rural areas of the eastern United States (ATSDR, 1990b; Edwards, 1983).

Table 10.
Pasley Solvents and Chemical Site
Summary of Off-Site Monitoring Well Data
Remedial Investigation (All values in micrograms per liter)
(see Table 7 for Public Health Assessment Comparison Values)

Compound Range of Detection
1st Round 2nd Round

Volatile organics

   
*Acetone 17J-3,800J 25J-400J
*Benzene 4J-650 3J-38
Chloroform 20 25
1,1-Dichloroethene ND 3J
*1,1-Dichloroethane 27 20
*Trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 11-140 2J-65
*Ethylbenzene 42 18
*Tetrachloroethene 2-33 2J-29
Toluene ND 2J
*Trichloroethene 2J-250J 12-150
*1,1,1-Trichloroethane 4J-390 15-180J
*Xylenes (Total) 45 24

Semi-Volatile Organics

   
*bis(2-Ethylhexyl)
phthalate
40 ND

di-n-Butyl phthalate

40 ND
2-Methylnaphthalene 16 9J
*Naphthalene 59 23
di-n-Octyl phthalate

2J ND
Metals

   
Aluminum 155J-97,400 NA
*Antimony 39.9 NA
Barium 24.9-372 NA
*Beryllium 0.5-6.6 NA
Cadmium 4.5J NA
Calcium 10,700-36,000J NA
*Chromium 12.4J-255J NA
*Cobalt 10.9J-45.1J NA
Cyanide 10-70 NA
*Iron 368J-152,000J NA
Magnesium 2,620-8,330J NA
*Manganese 70.5J 12,200J
Mercury 0.2-0.7 NA
*Nickel 18.2J-310J NA
Potassium 1,920-10,200 NA
*Sodium 4,280J-37,000J NA


Table 10 (page 2).
Pasley Solvents and Chemical Site
Summary of Off-Site Monitoring Well Data
Remedial Investigation (All values in micrograms per liter)
(see Table 7 for Public Health Assessment Comparison Values)


Compound Range of Detection
1st Round 2nd Round

Metals (continued)

   
Thallium 5.7J NA
Vanadium 5.9-94.8 NA
Zinc 29.6J-3,200J NA
*Lead 4.5-34.6 NA

Note: Only those compounds that are detected either as estimated or trace values are listed in this table.

NA = not analyzed
J = analyte present. Reported value may not be accurate or precise.

*Contaminant selected for further evaluation.

APPENDIX C

Response to Public Comments

PASLEY SOLVENTS AND CHEMICALS, INC.
RESPONSE TO PUBLIC COMMENTS

Comment #1

Demographic health surveys of the area should be conducted todetermine the number of cancer cases in our area. We areespecially concerned with childhood cancers as two elementaryschools are near the contaminated area.

Response #1

No data exist that would indicate exposure to chemicals from thesite through air or soil gas within the schools near the site.

The New York State Department of Health (NYS DOH) is currentlydeveloping a registry of persons exposed to volatile organiccompounds in drinking water. Persons exposed to VOCs in drinkingwater near the Pasley Solvents site will be considered forinclusion in the registry. The registry will be linked with theNew York State Cancer Registry in order to study the associationbetween contaminated drinking water and cancer.

Comment #2

One citizen raised several questions concerning clean-up issues atthe site.

Response #2

Questions concerning the proposed clean-up plan, costs, payment andscheduling of the clean-up should be referred to Ms. SherrellHenry, Eastern NY/Caribbean Section II, United States EnvironmentalProtection Agency-Region II, 26 Federal Plaza, New York, N.Y.10278.

Comment #3

Figure 2 of Appendix A incorrectly shows the location of the Pasleysite. It should be 5/8" further to the right on the map.

Response #3

Figure 2 has been revised.

Comment #4

How safe are vegetables grown in gardens in the site area.

Response #4

Surface soil in the area is not expected to be impacted by site-related contamination. Therefore, exposure to site contaminantsthrough ingestion of homegrown vegetables in the area is not aconcern.

Comment #5

There are many people with cancer in the area around Pasley. Howmany? Have they been counted officially? Many of my friends havebreast cancer. Is there a map correlating breast cancer in thearea with geographics?

Response #5

The NYS DOH has not evaluated health outcome data for the Pasleysite. Health care facilities in New York State, under law, reportall cases of cancer to the NYS DOH. However, the possibility ofdetecting an increased cancer incidence related to the site issmall because the cancer risks associated with chemicals from thesite are expected to be low. In 1990, the NYS DOH reported onbreast cancer incidence rates for small geographic areas of Nassauand Suffolk counties. The relationship between breast cancerincidence and contaminated drinking water wells and hazardous wastesites was also examined. No association was found between breastcancer incidence patterns and contaminated drinking water wells orhazardous waste sites. The study mapped out incidence rates bywater districts and communities.

Comment #6

One citizen asked if the flora and fauna in the area were affectedby contamination at the site.

Response #6

Birds and animals of the area are potential bioaccumulators of anypersistent chemicals. Because contamination at the site iscurrently limited to subsurface soils and groundwater, exposure ofbirds and other animals is unlikely unless the soil is disturbed(i.e., excavated). Because surface soil in this site is notcontaminated, the flora and fauna of the area have not been tested.

Comment #7

Does the remediation program at the adjacent Purex site affect thedirection of the travel for the Pasley and/or Roosevelt Fieldplumes, and is there any health concern as a result?

Response #7

According to the remedial investigation for the site, groundwaterappears to flow southwest. Whether this is the natural flowdirection or whether it has been partially induced by local orregional pumping of groundwater is unclear. However, the southerlycomponent of flow is consistent with regional patterns. Noadditional health concerns other than those discussed in the publichealth assessment would be posed due to the on-going clean-upprogram at the Purex site.

Comment #8

What are the health implications to the residences and unsuspectingpeople in Garden City and Hempstead who live above the contaminatedplume (from the Pasley site)?

Response #8

Potential health effects of site-specific contaminants arediscussed in the Public Health Implications section of the publichealth assessment.

Comment #9

Will ambient air and soil gas studies be performed to assess thepotential hazard to Garden City residents by use of the schools andthe recreational facilities.

Response #9

Between August 23 and August 26, 1993, the New York StateDepartment of Environmental Conservation and the NYS DOHinvestigated the possibility that contaminants in groundwater orsoil gas may have an impact on the indoor air of two schools,Stewart Avenue and Locust Street Elementary, in the Garden CitySchool District. Soil gas samples were collected at a depth of tenfeet at both schools, and were tested for chlorinated volatileorganic compounds and petroleum compounds. No compounds were foundin these samples. If soil gas is not contaminated, it cannot serveas a source for impacting ambient air and indoor air quality innearby buildings.

Comment #10

Dermal contact of contaminated soils is a concern unless morestringent security measures are implemented at the site to preventtrespassing.

Response #10

Trespassing at the site is not known to be occurring. At thistime, the fencing around the site appears adequate and is aneffective means of deterring persons from entering the siteproperty.

Comment #11

Several comments were received requesting that additional soil gasand groundwater investigations be conducted closer to the sitearound basements of residences, such as was done near the schoolsin the Garden City School District.

Response #11

The NYS DOH agrees that additional studies should be conducted nearthe site to determine the presence of contaminated soil gas andpotential for indoor air contamination at nearby residences andbusinesses. This recommendation remains in the public healthassessment and in correspondence to the US EPA.

Comment #12

Several residents suggested that community/public meetings be heldto discuss community health concerns, impact of environmentalcontamination and other hazards, potential public healthimplications,a nd environmental sampling data.

Response #12

The need for public meetings will be determined by evaluatingcommunity concerns. The determination will be made when the publichealth assessment has been finalized.

Comment #13

Additional information was requested about the possible affects ofcontaminants from the Pasley site on Garden City public drinkingwater, the exact frequency of testing for volatile organicchemicals in its water supply and how the frequency of testing isdetermined.

Response #13

The health effects of site contaminants are discussed in the publichealth implications section of the public health assessment. Ingeneral, public drinking water supply wells in Nassau County aretested for VOCs on a quarterly basis. Restricted wells that arereturned to service following the installation of VOC treatmentsystems are subjected to VOC testing on a monthly basis to ensurethat the systems are operating effectively. Specific questionsconcerning the public drinking water supply in the area near Pasleyshould be referred to Mr. Bruce Mackay, Nassau County Department ofHealth, Bureau of Public Water Supply, 240 Old Country Road,Mineola, New York 11501-4250; (516) 571-3323.

Comment #14

If the Pasley site poses an indeterminate health risk, whatgovernmental agency is responsible for assessing the public healthrisk? Will the proper studies be undertaken in order to fullyeducate Nassau County residents?

Response #14

The NYS DOH and the Agency for Toxic Substances and DiseaseRegistry (ATSDR) are responsible for assessing the public healthrisk(s) posed by the Pasley site. The NYS DOH and ATSDR willcoordinate with the appropriate agencies regarding furtherinvestigation/studies needed to fully evaluate the site from apublic health perspective.

Comment #15

The NYS DOH should update and expand its mailing list.

Response #15

The mailing list has been expanded to include all individuals orbusinesses who contacted us about the draft public healthassessment, all area water districts and the Village of Hempstead.

Comment #16

Will the government provide people near the Pasley site with in-the-home filtration systems to purify the water?

Response #16

Since all homes near the Pasley site are supplied with publicdrinking water supplies, there is no need for any additional in-house treatment to purify the water. The NYS DOH does requiremonitoring of public water supplies to ensure that water deliveredto the public meets the NYS DOH drinking water standards; ifcontaminants exceed the NYS DOH drinking water standards, actionmust be taken to either treat the water or find an alternate sourceof water.

Comment #17

Why weren't public wells tested as part of the remedialinvestigation? Why weren't samples of tap water being taken fromall homes in the area on a regular basis?

Response #17

Public drinking water supply wells were not tested during theremedial investigation since adequate water quality data andinformation about the wells was available through the Nassau CountyDepartment of Health.

Comment #18

Several comments were received criticizing the public healthassessment for not fully addressing other inactive hazardous wastesites in the area around Pasley.

Response #18

The Pasley public health assessment is site-specific and as such isnot an assessment of other sites. The Public Health Implicationssection of the public health assessment uses information aboutemissions from active facilities and groundwater quality inaddition to information on contaminants of concern and exposurepathways from the site to estimate potential exposures. The sourceof the contamination in groundwater does not change the estimatedhealth risks. The NYS DOH will perform an evaluation of publichealth issues related to the Roosevelt Field site.

In June 1993, a report entitled, "A Public Health Hazard:Contaminated Drinking Water" was prepared by the environmentalorganization, Citizens Campaign for the Environment, in response tothe Pasley public health assessment. Copies of this report can beobtained by contacting:

Citizens Campaign for the Environment
518 Broadway
Massapequa, New York 11758
516/798-6556

This report was reviewed by the NYS DOH, and the following letterof response was prepared and submitted to Ms. Sarah Meyland,Executive Director, Citizens Campaign for the Environment.

The following letter was not available in electronic format for conversion to HTML at the time of preparation of this document. To obtain a hard copy of the document, please contact:

Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry
Division of Health Assessment and Consultation
Attn: Chief, Program Evaluation, Records, and Information Services Branch, E-56
1600 Clifton Road NE, Atlanta, Georgia 30333



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. #