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

PUBLIC HEALTH ASSESSMENT

PREFERRED PLATING CORPORATION
EAST FARMINGDALE, SUFFOLK COUNTY, NEW YORK


APPENDIX A


Figure 1. Preferred Plating Site location map


Figure 2. Preferred Plating site map



APPENDIX B

Table 1. Preferred Plating Site - On-Site Shallow Soil
Sampling Data from the 1989 and 1992 Remedial Investigation Reports and Comparison Values.
(All values in milligrams per kilogram)


  1988 Samples 1991 Samples Typical
Background
Range**
Comparison
Value for
Soil***
Source****

Frequency
of
Detection

Range
of
Detection
Frequency
of
Detection
Range
of
Detection

Metals

             
               

*cadmium

5/5 1.6-50 6/7 0.91-25.5 <0.5-1 10 ATSDR EMEG

*chromium

5/5 9.1-323 7/7 3.1-48.6 10-40 250 EPA RfD

lead

5/5 29-83 7/7 2.1-23.8 10-300 -- --
               

Organic Compounds*****

           
               

bis(2-ethylhexyl)
phthalate

5/5 0.063-0.98 0/7 ND NDT 2.3 NYS CREG
               

butylbenzyl
phthalate

5/5 0.11-3.6 0/7 ND NDT 3,220 NYS RfG

ND - not detected
NDT - not determined

*Contaminant selected for further evaluation.

**References: Clarke et al., 1985; Conner et al., 1957; Frank et al., 1976; McGovern, 1988; Shacklette and Boerngen, 1984

***Comparison values for organic compounds are based on ingestion of soil and homegrown vegetables; comparison values for metals (inorganics) are based on ingestion of soil.

****NYS CREG = New York State Cancer Risk Evaluation Guideline
NYS RfG = New York State Risk Reference Guideline
ATSDR EMEG = ATSDR Environmental Media Evaluation Guideline
EPA RfD = EPA Reference Dose

*****Only those organic compounds which were detected in at least one sample are listed.


Table 2. Preferred Plating Site - Subsurface Soil Sampling Data from the 1989 and 1992 Remedial Investigation Reports and Comparison Values.
(All values in milligrams per kilogram)


 

1988 Samples

1991 Samples

Typical
Back-
ground
Range**
Comparison
Value for
Soil***
Source****
  Angle Borings Monitoring Wells Waste
Storage Tanks
Sanitary
Leaching Pits
Non-source
  Freq. Range Freq. Range Freq. Range Freq. Range Freq. Range

Metals

                         
                           

*cadmium

36/50 0.66-45.4 2/17 0.68-2.0 27/29 1.1-468 9/9 1.4-45.6 8/16 0.63-37.6 <0.5-1 10 ATSDR EMEG

*chromium

49/50 2.9-200 13/17 1.5-94.1 29/29 14.1-1890 9/9 24.5-252 16/16 2.3-86.1 10-40 250 EPA RfD

lead

33/50 0.46-43.9 15/17 0.45-27.5 28/28 1.4-158 9/9 1.6-82.6 16/16 0.8-7.6 10-300 -- --
                           

Organic Compounds

                     
                           
acetone 16/26 0.019-0.197 2/17 0.020-0.050 1/24 0.270 0/9 ND 1/23 0.160 NDT 2 NYS RfG

benzene

8/26 0.001-0.028 0/17 ND 1/24 0.011 0/9 ND 0/23 ND NDT 0.05 NYS CREG

bis(2-ethylhexyl)
phthalate

2/26 0.084-0.70 5/17 0.038-0.860 0/24   0/9 ND 0/23 ND NDT 2.3 NYS CREG

butylbenzyl
phthalate

0/26 ND 1/17 0.091 0/24   0/9 ND 0/23 ND NDT 3220 NYS RfG

2-butanone

0/26 ND 0/17 ND 1/24 0.022 0/9 ND 0/23 ND NDT 2.2 NYS RfG

chloroethane

0/26 ND 0/17 ND 3/24 0.83-5.9 0/9 ND 0/23 ND NDT -- --

1,1-dichloroethane

0/26 ND 0/17 ND 3/24 0.46-20.0 0/9 ND 0/23 ND NDT 33 NYS RfG

*trans-1,2-di-
chloroethene

0/26 ND 0/17 ND 4/24 0.094-15.0 0/9 ND 0/23 ND NDT 1 NYS RfG

ethylbenzene

2/26 0.002-0.006 0/17 ND 5/24 0.077-0.60 0/9 ND 0/23 ND NDT 200 NYS RfG

4-methyl-2-
pentanone

0/26 ND 1/17 0.020 0/24   0/9 ND 0/23 ND NDT 19.6 NYS RfG

*tetrachloroethene

0/26 ND 0/17 ND 4/24 0.008-5.4 0/9 ND 0/23 ND NDT 0.06 NYS CREG

toluene

0/26 ND 1/17 0.001 7/24 0.002-3.6 3/9 0.002-0.006 0/23 ND NDT 230 NYS RfG

*1,1,1-trichloro-
ethane

2/26 0.003-0.004 0/17 ND 3/24 0.099-270.0 0/9 ND 0/23 ND NDT 76 NYS RfG

*trichloroethene

0/26 ND 0/17 ND 5/24 0.003-5.0 0/9 ND 0/23 ND NDT 0.2 NYS CREG

xylene

0/26 ND 0/17 ND 7/24 0.006-2.5 0/9 ND 0/23 ND NDT 4620 NYS RfG

ND - not detected
NDT - not determined

*Contaminant selected for further evaluation.

**References: Clarke et al., 1985; Conner et al., 1957; Frank et al., 1976; McGovern, 1988; Shacklette and Boerngen, 1984.

***Comparison values for organic compounds are based on ingestion of soil and homegrown vegetables; comparison values for metals (inorganics) are based on ingestion of soil.

****NYS CREG = New York State Cancer Risk Evaluation Guideline
NYS RfG = New York State Risk Reference Guideline
ATSDR EMEG = ATSDR Environmental Media Evaluation Guideline
EPA RfD = EPA Reference Dose



Table 3. Preferred Plating Site - On-Site Groundwater Sampling Data from the 1989 and 1992 Remedial Investigation Reports
and the 1992 Remedial Design Report and Comparison Values.
(All values in micrograms per liter)


                  Standards/Guidelines Comparison
Value****
Source*****
 

EBASCO - July 1989

EBASCO - May 1989** Malcolm Pirnie - 1990** US EPA
Aug. & Nov. 1990
New York State U.S. EPA
 

Not Filtered
Upgradient

Downgradient

Not Filtered

Filtered Not Filtered Filtered Not Filtered Filtered Ground-
water
Drinking
Water
Drinking
Water

Metals

                         
                           

*cadmium

8.4-78.7 ND-399 178 105 190-250 150-180 194-268 181-211 10 5 5 5 EPA LTHA

*chromium

43.2-363 56.3-5850 417 3.7 <50-230 <50 20-307 10-15 50 50 100 100 EPA LTHA

*lead

18.9-326 4.6-437 24 - <7-30 <7 20-55 15-20 25 50 15*** -  
                           

Organic Compounds

                       
                           

*benzene

1 12 NA NA 8.4-23.9 NA 4.4-5.6 NA 0.7 5 5 0.7 NYS CREG

*1,1-dichloroethane

ND ND NA NA 4.6-8 NA 1.7-4.7 NA 5 5 - 700 EPA RfD

*1,2-dichloroethane

2 5 NA NA 2.8 NA 1.7-2.8 NA 5 5 5 0.38 ATSDR CREG

*ethylbenzene

ND ND NA NA 6.1-7 NA ND NA 5 5 700;30ps 700 EPA LTHA

*tetrachloroethene

ND 11 NA NA ND NA 1.0-4.1 NA 5 5 5 0.7 NYS CREG

*toluene

ND ND NA NA 7.0 NA 5.9-6.0 NA 5 5 1,000;40ps 1,000 EPA LTHA

*1,1,1-trichloroethane

10 13 NA NA 5.3-16.7 NA 3.8-8.4 NA 5 5 200 200 EPA LTHA

*trichloroethene

6 8 NA NA 2-4.8 NA 1.9-2.8 NA 5 5 5 3 NYS CREG

*xylene

ND ND NA NA 31 NA ND NA 5 5 10,000;20ps 10,000 EPA LTHA

ND - not detected
NA - not analyzed
ps - proposed secondary MCL

*Contaminant selected for further evaluation.

**Samples are from downgradient monitoring wells.

***There is a maximum contaminant level goal (MCLG) of zero for lead and an action level of 15 mcg/L at the tap.

****Comparison value determined for a 70 kilogram adult who ingests 2 liters of water per day.

*****ATSDR EMEG = ATSDR Environmental Media Evaluation Guideline
ATSDR CREG = ATSDR Cancer Risk Evaluation Guideline
EPA LTHA = EPA Lifetime Health Advisory
NYS CREG = New York State Cancer Risk Evaluation Guideline
NYS RfG = New York State Risk Reference Guideline
EPA RfD = EPA Reference Dose

Table 4. Preferred Plating Site - On-Site Deep Groundwater Data from the 1989
Remedial Investigation Report and Comparison Values (two samples each well).
No organic compounds were detected in the deep
groundwater monitoring wells.
(All values in micrograms per liter)


  Monitoring Wells Standards/Guidelines Comparison
Value***
Source****
 

New York State

U.S. EPA
  Upgradient Downgradient Groundwater

Drinking
Water

Drinking
Water

*cadmium

8.4, 11.4 ND, 23.1 10 5 5 5 EPA LTHA

*chromium

43.2, 70.4 56.3, 479 50 100 100 100 EPA LTHA

*lead

18.9, 23.5 4.6, 26.5 25 50 15** -- --

ND - not detected

*Contaminant selected for further evaluation.

**There is a maximum contaminant level goal (MCLG) of zero for lead and an action level of 15 mcg/L at the tap.

***Comparison value determined for a 70 kilogram adult who ingests 2 liters of water per day.

****EPA LTHA = EPA Lifetime Health Advisory



Table 5. Preferred Plating Site - On-Site Storm Drain Liquids and Solids Sampling Data from the 1989 Remedial Investigation Report and
Comparison Values.


      Standards/Guidelines     Typical**
Background
Comparison
Values***
Source****
 

Storm Dry-well Liquids

New York State U.S. EPA Storm Dry-well Solids
  Freq. of
Detection
Range of
Detection
Ground-
water
Drinking
Water
Drinking
Water

Freq. of
Detection

Range of
Detection
 

---------------------micrograms per liter-----------------------

---------------------milligrams per kilogram--------------------------

Metals

                   
                     

*cadmium

3/3 4.0-6.0 10 5 5 3/3 19-49 <0.5-1 10 ATSDR EMEG

chromium

3/3 6.0-10.0 50 50 100 3/3 85-140 10-40 250 EPA RfD

*lead

3/3 20-23 25 50 15+ 3/3 649-1000 10-300 -- --
                     

Organic Compounds

               
                     

*benzene

0/3 ND 0.7 5 5 1/3 0.061 NDT 0.05 NYS CREG

*bis(2-ethylhexyl)
phthalate

0/3 ND 50 50 4p 2/3 38-66 NDT 2.3 NYS CREG

butylbenzyl phthalate

0/3 ND 50 50 100p 2/3 180-200 NDT 3220 NYS RfG

2-butanone

1/3 10 50 50 - 0/3 ND NDT 2.2 NYS RfG

ethylbenzene

0/3 ND 5 5 700;30ps 3/3 0.038-0.69 NDT 200 NYS RfG

2-hexanone

1/3 9 50 50 - 2/3 0.4-0.53 NDT -- --

4-methyl-2-pentanone

1/3 4 50 50 - 0/3 ND NDT 19.6 NYS RfG

toluene

2/3 1-2 5 5 1000;40ps 3/3 0.074-1.5 NDT 230 NYS RfG

trichloroethene

2/3 2 5 5 5 1/3 0.019 NDT 0.2 NYS CREG

xylene

0/3 ND 5 5 10,000;20ps 3/3 0.19-3.3 NDT 4620 NYS RfG

ND - not detected
NDT - not determined
p - proposed maximum contaminant level (MCL)
ps - proposed secondary MCL

+There is a maximum contaminant level goal (MCLG) of zero for lead and an action level of 15 mcg/L at the tap.

*Contaminant selected for further evaluation.

**References: Clarke et al., 1985; Conner et al., 1957; Frank et al., 1976; McGovern, 1988; Shacklette and Boerngen, 1984

***Comparison values for organic compounds are based on ingestion of soil and homegrown vegetables; comparison values for metals (inorganics) are based on ingestion of soil.

****NYS EMEG = New York State Environmental Media Evaluation Guideline
NYS CREG = New York State Cancer Risk Evaluation Guideline
NYS RfG = New York State Risk Reference Guideline
ATSDR EMEG = ATSDR Environmental Media Evaluation Guideline
EPA RfD = EPA Reference Dose


Table 6. Preferred Plating Site - Off-Site Monitoring Well
Sampling Data from the 1989 Remedial Investigation Report and Comparison Values (two samples each well).
(All concentrations in micrograms per liter)


 

Monitoring Wells

Standards/Guidelines Comparison
Value***
Source****
  Off-site
1,500
Feet South
Off-site
2,250
Feet South
New York State U.S. EPA
  Ground-
water
Drinking
Water

Drinking
Water


Metals              

cadmium

ND ND 10 5 5 5 EPA LTHA

chromium

7.3, 9.6 ND, 15.1 50 100 100 100 EPA LTHA

*lead

ND, 30.3 ND, 9.1 25 50 15** -  

Organic Compounds

           

acetone

ND ND, 32 50 50 - 700 EPA RfD

butylbenzyl
pthalate

ND, 1 ND 50g 50 100p 1,400 EPA RfD

*1,1-dichloroethane

- 2, 3 5 5 - 700 EPA RfD

*1,2-dichloroethane

ND 5, 5 5 5 5 0.38 ATSDR CREG

*tetrachloroethene

ND, 1 15, 17 5 5 5 0.7 NYS CREG

*trichloroethene

ND, 1 5, 5 5 5 5 3 NYS CREG

*1,1,1-trichloro-
ethane

ND 9, 9 5 5 200 200 EPA LTHA

ND - not detected
g - guidance value
p - proposed maximum contaminant level (MCL)

*Contaminant selected for further evaluation.

**There is a maximum contaminant level goal (MCLG) of zero for lead and an action level of 15 mcg/L at the tap.

***Comparison value determined for a 70 kilogram adult who ingests 2 liters of water per day.

****ATSDR CREG = ATSDR Cancer Risk Evaluation Guideline
EPA RfD = EPA Reference Dose
EPA LTHA = EPA Lifetime Health Advisory
NYS CREG = New York State Cancer Risk Evaluation Guideline


Table 7.

Preferred Plating Site - Off-Site Residential, Commercial and Industrial Private Well Sampling Data
from the 1989 Remedial Investigation Report and NYS DOH Files and Comparison Value
[All values in micrograms per liter (mcg/L)]


Contaminant

Residential Commercial Industrial Comparison Values

Water Quality Standards/Guidelines

Cancer** Source*** Noncancer** Source***

New York State

U.S. EPA

Ground-
water

Surface
Water
Drinking
Water
Drinking
Water

*chlorobenzene

7 1 - 5 20 5 100 - - 140 EPA RfD

dichlorobenzene

- 1 - 4.7**** 30 5 75;5ps 1.5 EPA CPF 75 EPA LTHA

1,1-dichloroethane

0.8 0.7 - 5 5g 5 - - - 700 EPA RfD

cis-1,2-dichloroethene

- 2 - 5 - 5 70 - - 70 EPA LTHA

*tetrachloroethene

1 4 - 5 0.7 5 5 0.7 EPA CPF 70 EPA RfD

trichloroethene

- 2 - 5 3g 5 5 3 EPA CPF 52 EPA RfD

*chromium

- 58.5 50-8000 50 50 100 100 - - 100 EPA LTHA

lead

- 10.6 - 25 50 15***** 15 - - - -

g = guidance value
p = proposed MCL
s = secondary MCL

*Contaminant selected for further evaluation.
**Comparison value determined for a 70 kg adult who drinks 2 liters of water per day.
***EPA LTHA = US EPA Drinking Water Lifetime Health Advisory
EPA RfD = US EPA Reference Dose
EPA CPF = US EPA Cancer Potency Factor
****Applies to toal of 1,2- and 1,4-isomers.
*****The maximum contaminant level goal (MCLG) for lead is zero and the action level is 15 mcg/L at the tap.



APPENDIX C

Response to Public Questions and Concerns
Preferred Plating

This summary was prepared to answer questions and concerns from the public on the Preferred Plating draft Public Health Assessment. The public was invited to review the draft Public Health Assessment through a mailing to the site's contact list. The public review period was from March 31 to May 3, 1993 and responses were received by the New York State Department of Health. Similar comments may have been grouped together, and some comments may have been consolidated to incorporate several similar concerns raised by more than one person. We thank the staff of the Suffolk County Department of Health Services (SC DHS) for comments on the draft Public Health Assessment. The document has been revised based on their comments. If you have any questions, please contact Ms. Nina Knapp of the Health Liaison Program at the toll-free number 1-800-458-1158, extension 402.

COMMENT #1

Was an investigation conducted to determine if those individuals with Hodgkin's Disease had an increased exposure of benzene in the workplace or at home?

RESPONSE #1

The study of 1992 Hodgkin's disease in ZIP codes 11701, 11735 and 11758 did not look at individual exposures to chemicals; it only compared incidence of cancer in the study area to the incidence rates in New York.

COMMENT #2

Since concern was raised about increased Hodgkins, it should be obvious that the ATSDR should follow statistics in the area for a rise in cancer, non-carcinogenic health disease, and Hodgkins.

RESPONSE #2

The study showed a similar incidence of Hodgkin's disease for areas of the state with similar population density. In addition, Hodgkin's cases were plotted on a map and there did not appear to be any clustering of the cases in the area. Finally, the number of people exposed to water which was contaminated from the site is small. It would be difficult to relate differences in disease incidence to the site since the exposed population is so small.

COMMENT #3

Since the VOC's were produced in 1951-1976, can't it be assumed that Suffolk County's wells and private wells were contaminated even before sampling occurred and the population was therefore exposed? If so, why is ATSDR HARP not recommending follow-up?

RESPONSE #3

The public health assessment has been revised to reflect new information regarding private wells. The public water supply wells which are downgradient of the Preferred Plating site have not been contaminated from the time sampling began. Because the wells tap the deep Magothy aquifer, it is unlikely that they were contaminated in the past.

COMMENT #4

Is there a time limit on investigation of private wells?

RESPONSE #4

Although the survey of private wells was conducted in 1993 and is believed to be accurate, neither NYS DOH nor SC DHS have placed a time limit on how long we will follow-up on newly identified wells or on information that wells may be present in a particular area. Any wells that are found will be sampled and the results will be evaluated for further action.

COMMENT #5

Should a warning be placed in the deed to the property which warns about contaminated soils and groundwater?

RESPONSE #5

We do not believe a deed notation is necessary because remedial measures, when complete, will adequately address contamination which is a concern for human health.

COMMENT #6

What can be done about stopping the release of 7,000 lbs. per year of Freon 113 from Napco Security Systems?

RESPONSE #6

For more information regarding permitted air releases, contact:

New York State Department of Environmental Conservation
Region I
SUNY Campus
Loop Road, Building 40
Stony Brook, New York 11790-2356
(516) 751-7900

COMMENT #7

Are the printed figures on Table 3, page 30, U.S. EPA Drinking Water Standards correct for organic compounds ethylbenzene, toluene, 1,1,1-trichloroethane, and xylene.

RESPONSE #7

The information for these chemicals is correct in Table 3.

COMMENT #8

The method of communication announcing public meetings is inadequate for the target population involved.

RESPONSE #8

The NYS DOH is cooperating with US EPA to improve the dissemination of meeting notices to the public.

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. #