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

Table 1.

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

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

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

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

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 (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)

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

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

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

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 (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)

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.

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