Skip directly to search Skip directly to A to Z list Skip directly to site content
PUBLIC HEALTH ASSESSMENT

RAMAPO LANDFILL
RAMAPO, ROCKLAND COUNTY, NEW YORK

APPENDIXES

APPENDIX A

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1.

Figure 2
Figure 2.

Figure 3
Figure 3.

Figure 4
Figure 4.

Figure 5
Figure 5.

Figure 6
Figure 6.

APPENDIX B

Tables

Table 1.

Ramapo Landfill.
Summary of On-Site Shallow Soil Data (0-8 inches).
Remedial Investigation.
[All values in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg)]


Compound Name Frequency of
Detection
Range of
Detection (excluding
non-detects)
Typical
Background
Range*
Comparison
Values for
Soil**
Source****


Semivolatile Organics

1,4-Dichlorobenzene 1/9 .370 ND 0.4 NYS CREG
1,2-Dichlorobenzene 1/9 .094 ND 324 NYS RfG
Benzo(a)anthracene 4/9 .042-.200 *** NA
Benzo(a)pyrene 4/9 0.062-.160 <1-1.3 0.005 NYS CREG
Benzo(b)fluoranthene 5/9 0.073-0.170 *** NA
Benzo(ghi)perylene 4/9 0.048-0.130 *** NA
Benzo(k)fluoranthene 5/9 0.061-0.180 *** NA
Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate 4/9 0.048-.480 ND 2.3 NYS CREG
Chrysene 4/9 0.064-0.230 *** NA
Acenaphthene 1/9 .190 *** 235 NYS RfG
Fluoranthene 5/9 0.064-0.442 *** 746 NYS RfG
Fluorene 1/9 0.170 *** 328 NYS RfG
Indeno(123cd)pyrene 3/9 0.061-.140 *** NA
Naphthalene 1/9 1.10 ND 1.4 NYS RfG
Phenanthrene 4/9 0.081-.390 *** NA
Pyrene 5/90.073-0.310 *** 67 NYS RfG
2-Methylnaphthalene 1/9 .200 ND NA
Dibenzofuran 1/9 .150 ND NA
N-nitrosodiphenylamine 1/90.110 ND 0.4 NYS CREG
Anthracene 1/9 0.043 *** 7,470 NYS RfG
Butylbenzylphthalate 3/90.100-0.160 ND 3,220 NYS RfG
Di-n-octylphthalate 1/9 0.043 ND 489 NYS RfG

Inorganics

Aluminum 9/9 4610-16,900 7,000-100,000 NA
Arsenic 9/9 0.93-2.3 10-20 50 ATSDR EMEG
Barium 9/9 27.4-122 300-500 3,500 USEPA RfD
Cadmium 3/90.84-1.7 <0.5-1 10 ATSDR EMEG
Calcium 9/9 805-10,000 100-400,000 NA
Chromium 9/9 12.6-22.7 10-40 250 USEPA RfD
Cobalt 9/9 4.0-9.6 <0.3-70 NA
Copper 9/9 8.6-48.3 <1-25 6,500 USEPA RfD
Iron 9/9 17,200-47,000 10,000-40,000 NA
Lead 9/9 5.3-15.9 10-300 NA
Magnesium 9/9 1,500-4,710 50-6,000 NA
Manganese 9/9 88.1-335 500-3,000 5,000 USEPA RfD
Antimony 3/9 4.7-7.3 0.6-10 20 USEPA RfD
Beryllium 1/9 0.24 <1-7 0.16 ATSDR CREG
Selenium 3/9 0.22-0.65 0.1-4 150 ATSDR EMEG
Nickel 9/9 10.9-19.8 <5-20 1,000 ATSDR EMEG
Potassium 9/9 511-1,430 50-30,000 NA
Sodium 9/9 113-857 3,000-50,000 NA
Vanadium 9/9 14.6-40.8 3-500 350 USEPA RfD
Zinc 9/9 26.2-76.6 50-100 10,000 USEPA RfD

Pesticides/PCBs

Heptachlor Epoxide 1/9 .026 ND 0.02 NYS CREG
Dieldrin 1/9 .0034 0.001-0.049 0.001 NYS CREG
alpha-chlordane 1/9 .016 ND 0.1 (total) NYS CREG
gamma-chlordane 1/9 .020 0.34 0.1 (total) NYS CREG

Volatile Organics

2-Butanone 1/9 .190 ND 2 NYS RfG
Benzene 1/9 .042 ND 0.05 NYS CREG
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 1/9 .002 ND 0.01 NYS CREG
Chlorobenzene 1/9 .730 ND 26.5 NYS RfG
Ethylbenzene 2/9 .260 ND 200 NYS RfG
Total xylenes 1/9 .570 ND 4,620 NYS RfG

NA = not available
ND = not determined

Note: Only detected results are reported

*References: Adriano (1986); Clarke et al. (1985a,b); Connor et al. (1957); Davis and Bennett (1983); Dragun (1988); Frank et al. (1976); Klein (1972); McGovern (1988); Schacklette and Boerngen (1984)

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

***Based on reported background levels for total polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons of <1 to 13milligrams per kilogram in soil (ATSDR, 1990e; Edwards, 1983).

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


Table 2.

Ramapo Landfill.
Summary of Off-site Surface Water Data.
Remedial Investigation.
[All values in micrograms per liter (mcg/L)]
(see Table 7 for Comparison Values)


Compound Name Frequency
of Detection
Range of
Detection
(excluding
non-detects)
Concentration
Detected
in Upstream
Samples


Volatiles

Benzene 1/8 0.08 ND;ND
Toluene 2/8 0.08;0.2 ND;ND
Vinyl chloride 2/8 0.7;2 ND;2

Inorganics

Aluminum 4/8 120-995 ND;120
*Antimony 1/8 38 ND;ND
Arsenic 1/8 2 ND;ND
Barium 8/8 9-83 12;14
Calcium8/8 3,190-110,000 3,190;4,570
Copper 3/8 3-6 ND;ND
*Iron 7/8 74-2,630 93;163
Lead 6/8 1-3 ND;2
Magnesium 8/8 853-33,100 853;1,100
*Manganese 8/8 7-1,120 20;45
Mercury 5/8 0.3-1 ND;4
Nickel 1/8 25 ND;ND
Potassium 8/8 260-42,100 259;432
Sodium 8/8 2,700-109,000 2,700;2,740
Vanadium 1/8 5 ND;ND
Zinc 6/8 4-55 ND;36
*Thallium 2/8 5 ND;5

ND - Not detected
Note: Only detected results are reported

*Contaminant selected for further evaluation.


Table 3.

Ramapo Landfill.
Summary of Off-site Sediment Data.
Remedial Investigation.
[All values in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg)]


Compound Name Frequency
of Detection
Range of
Detection
(excluding
non-detects)
Concentration
Detected in
Upstream
Samples
Comparison
Value*
(Soil
Contaminants)
Source**


Semivolatile Organics

Benzo(k)fluoranthene 1/7 0.071 ND NA
4-Methylphenol 1/7 0.19 ND NA
Benzo(a)anthracene 1/7 0.065 ND NA
Benzo(b)fluoranthene 1/7 0.150 ND NA
Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate 2/7 0.045-0.120 ND 2.3 NYS CREG
Chrysene 1/7 0.083 ND NA
Fluoranthene 2/7 0.040-0.140 ND 746 NYS RfG
Phenanthrene 1/7 0.075 ND NA
Pyrene 2/7 0.046-0.160 ND 67 NYS RfG
Benzoic Acid 1/7 0.42 ND 1,470 NYS RfG
Benzo(a)pyrene 1/7 0.070 ND 0.005 NYS CREG

Inorganics

Aluminum 8/8 4050-6470 4660;4270 NA
Arsenic 8/8 0.70-1.50.79;1.2 50 ATSDR EMEG
Barium 8/8 19.9-72.3 19.9;30.1 3,500 USEPA RfD
Beryllium 6/8 0.27-0.99 0.99;0.38 0.16 ATSDR CREG
Cadmium 5/8 1.3-4.3 ND;3.4 10 ATSDR EMEG
Calcium 8/8 773-13,300 1660;773 NA
Chromium 8/8 5.9-13.0 7.0;5.9 200 ATSDR EMEG
Cobalt 8/8 2.1-11.2 2.1;3.9 NA
Copper 8/8 3.8-24.6 3.8;4.5 6,500 USEPA RfD
Iron 8/8 9510-25,400 14,800;9510 NA
Lead 8/8 3.7-22.2 6.0;4.5 NA
Magnesium 8/8 1260-8590 1260;1680 NA
Manganese 8/8 86.7-2970 86.7;203 5,000 USEPA RfD
Nickel 7/8 6.8-32.4 9.0;ND 1,000 ATSDR EMEG
Potassium 8/8 421-958 515;448 NA
Sodium 8/8 39.3-214 114;65.1 NA
Thallium 1/8 0.65 ND;ND 4 USEPA RfD
Vanadium 8/8 9.9-23.9 10.4;9.9 350 USEPA RfD
Zinc 8/8 26.0-82.9 53.6;33.5 10,000 USEPA RfD

Pesticides/PCBs

gamma-Chlordane 1/7 0.012 ND 0.1 NYS CREG

NA - Not available
ND - Not detected
Note: Only detected results are reported.

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

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


Table 4.

Ramapo Landfill.
Summary of Off-Site Subsurface Soil Data.
Remedial Investigation.
[All values in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg)]


Compound Name Frequency
of Detection
(off-site samples)
Range of
Detection
(excluding
non-detects)
Typical
Background
Range*
Comparison
Values for
Soil**
Source****


Semivolatile Organics

Benzo(a)anthracene 1/5 0.042 *** NA
Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate 1/5 0.043 ND 2.3 NYS CREG
Chrysene 1/5 0.043 *** NA
Fluoranthene 1/5 0.075 *** 746 NYS RfG
Phenanthrene 1/5 0.040 *** NA
Pyrene 1/5 0.072*** 67 NYS RfG

Volatile Organics

Acetone 4/6 0.013-0.028 ND 2 NYS RfG
Toluene 1/6 0.002 ND 230 NYS RfG

Inorganics

Aluminum 6/6 6100-11,600 7,000-100,000 NA
Antimony 1/6 5.2 0.6-10 20 USEPA RfD
Arsenic 6/6 1.2-2.9 10-20 50 ATSDR EMEG
Barium 6/6 26.9-50.7 300-500 3,500 USEPA RfD
Beryllium 1/6 0.23 <1-7 0.16 ATSDR CREG
Cadmium 1/6 0.93 <0.5-1 10 ATSDR EMEG
Calcium 6/6 1150-15,100 100-400,000 NA
Chromium 6/6 11.1-31.8 10-40 250 USEPA RfD
Cobalt 6/6 4.7-9.4 <0.3-70 NA
Copper 6/6 10.3-25.9 <1-25 6,500 USEPA RfD
Iron 6/6 16,000-32,000 10,000-40,000 NA
Lead 6/6 1.5-11.2 10-300 NA
Magnesium 6/6 2620-5170 50-6,000 NA
Manganese6/6 155-382 500-3,000 5,000 USEPA RfD
Nickel 6/6 10.3-14.2 <5-20 1,000 ATSDR EMEG
Potassium 6/6 866-1410 50-30,000 NA
Sodium 6/6 70.4-240 3,000-50,000 NA
Vanadium 6/6 15.1-34.5 3-500 350 USEPA RfD
Zinc 6/6 17.7-35.3 50-100 10,000 USEPA RfD
Selenium 1/6 0.51 0.1-4 150 ATSDR EMEG
Thallium 1/6 1.5 NA 4 USEPA RfD

NA = not available
ND = not determined
Note: Only detected results are reported

*References: Adriano (1986); Clarke et al. (1985a,b); Connor et al. (1957); Davis and Bennett (1983); Dragun (1988); Frank et al. (1976); Klein (1972); McGovern (1988); Schacklette and Boerngen (1984)

**Comparison values for volatile and semi-volatile organics based on ingestion of soil andhomegrown vegetables; comparison values for metals based on ingestion of soil.

***Based on reported background levels for total polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons of <1 to 13milligrams per kilogram in soil (ATSDR, 1990e; Edwards, 1983).

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


Table 5.
Ramapo Landfill.
Summary of Groundwater Data (Off-Site Monitoring Wells) - Round 1.
Remedial Investigation.
[All values in micrograms per liter (mcg/L)]
(see Table 7 for Comparison Values)


Compound Name Frequency
of Detection
Range of
Detection

Semi-volatile Organics

*Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate 10/16 2-30
Diethylphthalate 2/16 3-5

Volatile Organics

1,1-Dichloroethane 2/17 3-5
Benzene 5/17 1-3
Chlorobenzene 2/17 1-3
Chloromethane 2/17 3
Toluene 1/17 1
Carbon disulfide 1/17 2
4-Methyl-2-pentanone 2/17 3-4
2-Hexanone 1/17 2
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 1/17 2

Inorganics

*Aluminum 16/17 138-18,900
Arsenic 2/17 2.8-26
Barium 17/17 9-441
Calcium 17/17 22,100-187,000
*Chromium 17/17 16.1-587
Cobalt 1/17 17.8
Copper 14/17 3.1-78
*Iron 16/17 406-229,000
Lead 16/17 1.2-11.8
Magnesium 17/17 5,690-42,700
*Manganese 17/17 51.9-8,700
*Nickel 15/17 15-331
Potassium 17/17 1,050-34,200
*Sodium 17/17 11,400-166,000
Vanadium 4/17 5.3-51.6
Zinc 17/17 7.1-79.33

Pesticides/PCBs

delta-BHC 1/17 1.9
gamma-BHC 1/17 0.06


*Contaminant selected for further evaluation
Note - Only detected results are reported.


Table 6.

Ramapo Landfill.
Summary of Groundwater Data (Off-Site Monitoring Wells) - Round 2.
Remedial Investigation.
[All values in micrograms per liter (mcg/L)]
(see Table 7 for Comparison Values)


Compound Name Frequency
of Detection
Range of
Detection


Semivolatile Organics

*Di-n-octylphthalate 1/22 130
*Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate 4/22 2-9
Diethylphthalate 3/22 2-5
Naphthalene 1/22 3
Butylbenzylphthalate 1/22 2

Volatile Organics

Chloromethane 1/22 2
Benzene 10/22 2-2.9
*Chlorobenzene 4/22 1.2-16
Toluene 2/220.3-0.6
Acetone 3/22 23-35
1,1-Dichloroethane 5/22 0.5-2.8
1,2-Dichloroethane 2/22 0.1-0.2
Dichlorodifluoromethane 1/22 0.2
cis-1,2-dichloroethene 4/22 0.1-0.9
ortho-Xylene 1/22 0.7
Isopropylbenzene 5/22 0.5-3.7
Propylbenzene 2/22 0.5-0.8
1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 3/22 1.8-1.9
tert-Butylbenzene 1/22 1.5
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 2/22 0.8-1.4
p-Isopropyltoluene 2/22 1.2-1.7
1,2-Dichlorobenzene 2/22 0.9-1.2
Naphthalene 3/22 0.3-4.2
1,4-Dichlorobenzene 1/22 1.1

Inorganics

*Aluminum 19/22 165-19,000
Arsenic 6/22 2.4-20.5
Barium 21/22 3-559
Cadmium 1/22 4.9
Calcium 22/22 7,300-219,000
*Chromium 22/22 5.5-1,290
Cobalt 12/22 9.8-42.3
*Iron 22/22 145-43,800
*Lead 20/22 1.7-34.1
Magnesium 22/22 1,920-51,100
*Manganese 22/22 14.6-31,200
*Nickel 17/22 17.6-153
Potassium 22/22 717-196,000
*Sodium 22/22 2,250-147,000
Vanadium 9/22 5.9-40
Zinc 22/22 3.7-107
Copper 18/22 3.2-62.3
Mercury 4/22 0.2-2

*Contaminant selected for further evaluation.
Note: Only detected results are reported.


Table 7.

Ramapo Landfill
Public Health Assessment Comparison Values for Contaminants
Found in Sources of Drinking Water.
[all values in micrograms per liter (mcg/L)]


Chemical Standards/Guidelines

U.S. EPA

Comparison
Values
Source***
NEW YORK STATE

Ground
Water
Surface
Water
Drinking
Water
Drinking
Water


Volatile Organics

1,1-Dichloroethane 5 5g 5 -- 700 EPA RfD
Benzene 0.7 0.7 5 5 0.7 NYS CREG
Chlorobenzene 5 20 5 100 140 EPA RfD
Chloromethane 5 -- 5 -- 3 EPA LTHA
Toluene 5 5g 5 1,000;40ps 1,000 EPA LTHA
Carbon disulfide -- -- 50 -- 700 EPA RfD
4-Methyl-2-pentanone 50 50g 50 -- 350 EPA RfD
2-Hexanone 50g 50g 50 -- --
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 5 -- 5 -- 1.3 ATSDR CREG
Vinyl chloride 2 0.3g 2 2 0.02 EPA CPF
Acetone 50 -- 50 -- 700 EPA RfD
1,2-Dichloroethane 5 0.8 5 5 0.38 ATSDR CREG
Dichlorodifluoromethane 5 -- 5 -- 1,000 EPA LTHA
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 5 -- 5 70 70 EPA LTHA
ortho-Xylene 5 5g 5 1,000;20ps 10,000 EPA LTHA
Isopropylbenzene 5 -- 5 -- --
Propylbenzene 5 -- 5 -- --
1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 5 5g 5 -- --
para-Isopropyltoluene 5 -- 5 -- --
1,2-Dichlorobenzene 4.7e -- 5 600;10ps 600 EPA LTHA
1,4-Dichlorobenzene 4.7 30 5 75;5ps 1.5 EPA CPF
tert-Butylbenzene -- -- 5 -- --
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 5 5g 5 -- --

Semi-Volatile Organics

Di-n-octylphthalate 50g 50g 50 -- 140 EPA RfD
Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate 50 4g 50 6 2.5 EPA CPF
Diethylphthalate 50g 50g 50 4 5,000 EPA LTHA
Naphthalene 10g 10 50 -- 20EPA LTHA
Butylbenzylphthalate 50g 50g 50 100p 1,400 EPA RfD

Pesticides

delat-BHC ND 0.01 5 -- --
gamma-BHC ND 0.01 0.2 0.2 0.03 EPA CPF

Inorganics

Aluminum -- -- -- 50-200s --
Antimony 3g 3g -- 6 3 EPA LTHA
Arsenic 25 50 50 50 11 EPA RfD
Barium 1,000 1,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 EPA LTHA
Cadmium 10 10 5 5 5 EPA LTHA
Calcium -- -- -- -- --
Chromium 50 50 100 100 100 EPA LTHA
Cobalt -- -- -- -- --
Copper 200 200 1,000 1,300 --
Iron 300 300 300 300s --
Lead 25 50 50 15* --
Magnesium 35,000g 35,000 -- -- --
Manganese 300 300 300 50s 3,500 EPA RfD
Mercury 2 2 2 2 2 EPA LTHA
Nickel -- -- -- 100 100 EPA LTHA
Potassium -- -- -- -- --
Sodium 20,000 -- ** -- --
Thallium 4g 4g -- 2 0.4 EPA LTHA
Vanadium -- -- -- -- 20 EPA LTHA
Vinyl chloride 2 0.3g 2 2 --
Zinc 300 300 5,000 5,000s 2,100 EPA LTHA

e = applies to total of 1,2- and 1,4-isomers
g = guidance value
p = proposed maximum contaminant level (MCL)
s = secondary MCL

*Maximum contaminant level goal (MCLG) of zero for lead and an action level of 15 mcg/L atthe tap.

**No designated limit; water containing more than 20,000 mcg/L should not be used for drinkingby people on severely restricted sodium diets; water containing more than 270,000 mcg/L should not be used for drinking by people on moderately restricted sodium diets.

***ATSDR CREG = ATSDR Cancer Risk Evaluation Guide
EPA LTHA = EPA Drinking Water Lifetime Health Advisory
EPA CPF = EPA Cancer Potency Factor
EPA RfD = EPA Reference Dose
NYS CREG = NYS Cancer Risk Evaluation Guideline



APPENDIX C

RAMAPO LANDFILL
RESPONSES TO PUBLIC COMMENTS

Comment #1

One local resident asked how the data gap involving on-site air monitoring would be solved.

Response #1

Additional on-site monitoring will be performed prior to, during and following remedialconstruction activities at the site. The proposed landfill cap design includes the installation of agas venting system. Landfill gas emissions from this system will be monitored for methane, aswell as other contaminants. If necessary, appropriate measures will be taken to treat emissions toensure protection of human health and the environment.

Comment #2

A question was raised concerning the Quality Assurance and Quality Control (QA/QC) section ofthe report. Specifically, how did the QA/QC violations occur involving pesticides and PCBanalysis of several leachate and subsurface soil samples collected during the remedialinvestigation.

Response #2

According to the remedial investigation report, pesticides and PCBs data had to be rejected for anumber of samples due to holding time violations by the laboratory and could not be re-sampled.

Comment #3

The summary discusses the increased risk to persons on the landfill resulting from xylene andethylbenzene in ambient air; however, the Pathways Analyses section (page 23) indicates theVOCs tested for are present at levels typical of normal atmospheric conditions.

Response #3

As indicated on page 23 of the report, testing of ambient air for toxic chemicals has been limitedto the on-site baler building and pistol range and one off-site location. These limited dataindicate that VOCs tested for at these specific locations are present at levels typical of normalatmospheric conditions. The statement included in the summary involving a discussion of risk topersons on the landfill resulting from xylene and ethylbenzene in ambient air relates to a sampletaken within an open piezometer which exists about 350 feet west of the baler building. Apiezometer consists of a plastic pipe (1 1/2" - 2" diameter) installed within an open hole augeredinto the

ground. Piezometers are primarily used to obtain groundwater level readings to determinegroundwater flow patterns. Selected piezometers installed on-site were also used to obtainlandfill gas data during the air monitoring program performed at the site in 1990. The actual riskto a person standing next to the piezometer cannot be assessed as a sample of the ambient air(outside of the piezometer) was not collected. Although persons are not known to frequent thepiezometer areas, the landfill gas emissions escaping from the piezometer may contain elevatedconcentrations of toxic gases. These contaminants, once released to ambient air, will likely bedispersed and diluted to levels which would not be expected to cause adverse health effects.

Comment #4

Air sampling data have not been provided so that an evaluation of the conclusions cannot bemade.

Response #4

The "Ambient Air and Soil Gas" subsection includes a discussion of the three air monitoringactivities conducted during the remedial investigation and presents a range of concentrations ormaximum concentrations for methane and volatile organic compounds. A complete list of thechemicals tested for and the testing results are included in the remedial investigation report. Thisreport is available for public review at the Suffern Free Library at Washington and MapleAvenues, Suffern, New York and the Finkelstein Memorial Library at 24 Chestnut Street, SpringValley, New York.

Comment #5

On page 14 "comparison values" need to be defined and the rationale for selection needs to beprovided.

Response #5

Comparison values are one of the factors used to evaluate if the contaminants at a site are likelyto pose a health threat. Each environmental medium (air, soil, water) has its own comparisonvalue for a contaminant. If a contaminant concentration is above its comparison value, thecontaminant is evaluated further to determine if exposure is of public health significance. Ageneral discussion of comparison values and the selection of contaminants for further evaluationis provided on page 11. In the absence of specific comparison values for contaminants inleachate, the sampling results discussed on page 14 were compared to comparison values fordrinking water, and to standards or guidelines for groundwater, surface water, and drinking water(Table 7). The potential for exposure is evaluated in the exposure pathways analysis (pp. 22-26)and the potential for health effects is discussed in the toxicological evaluation (pp. 26-29).

Comment #6

The results for LPSS-1 need to be provided.

Response #6

One purpose of the public health assessment is to determine what chemicals are present atconcentrations which could result in adverse health effects if exposure was to occur. As such,the Environmental Contamination section is intended to inform the reader about the type ofcontamination and to determine which site-related contaminants need to be evaluated for cancerand noncancer health risks. A complete list of the chemicals tested for in the various mediasampled and the testing results are included in the remedial investigation report.

Comment #7

The detection of bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate in the upgradient MW-5 monitoring well, along withthe inconsistency of the concentrations detected in other wells between rounds suggests that thepresence of bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate is questionable. Bis(2-ethylhexyl)-phthalate is a commonlaboratory contaminant and is commonly found in samples as a result of laboratorycontamination. The discussion of bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate as a contaminant of concern maynot be appropriate if bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate is a laboratory contaminant.

Response #7

The Quality Assurance and Quality Control section of the report has been revised and nowincludes a discussion of bis(2-ethylhexyl)-phthalate relative to this comment. As suggested, thepresence of this chemical in various media is suspect given its frequent occurrence (at lowconcentrations) and that it is frequently due to laboratory contamination.

Comment #8

"Level of Concern" needs to be defined for air contaminants in ambient air. The presence ofxylene and ethylbenzene at 1.77 and 0.28 ppm, respectively, in air samples would not appear tobe "typical" atmospheric levels.

Response #8

The term "Levels of Concern" has been deleted from the ambient air/soil gas pathways analysissection. The intended meaning of this phrase in this section is to state that no chemical wasdetected at a level exceeding its comparison value. As noted in Response #3, xylene andethylbenzene were detected inside a piezometer and not in open air. Therefore, these data aredescriptive of soil gas quality and not ambient air quality.

Comment #9

The reference to vinyl chloride as a toxic gas possibly carried by methane should be eliminated. There is no evidence that vinyl chloride exists on-site; this statement implies it does.

Response #9

The reference to vinyl chloride as a toxic gas passible carried by methane has been removed fromboth the Pathways Analyses and Public Health Implications sections.

Comment #10

The response to question #1 of the community concerns indicates that drinking water standardswould have to be significantly exceeded in residential wells before bottled water would beprovided. This is inconsistent with recommendations on page 32, which indicate that bottledwater will be provided to residents with wells contaminated above drinking water standards.

Response #10

Statements in the assessment relative to this comment have been revised to indicate that bottledwater will be provided to residents with wells contaminated above drinking water standards. This provision is not considered an acceptable long-term measure and therefore would remain ineffect until treatment and/or a permanent, alternate water supply is made available.

Comment #11

Provide further data about the landfill's construction. I assume by its origins that there's no liner.

Response #11

Detailed information concerning the landfill's construction is not included in any of thereferences reviewed by the NYS DOH during the preparation of the report. As with manylandfills of similar origin, regulations in effect at the time did not require the placement ofimpermeable liners beneath the fill.

Comment #12

What about performing a statistical cancer evaluation regarding a ratio of cancer and mortalityrates to the general population prior to the start-up of landfill operations, during the operationalperiod, and now.

Response #12

Available data do not indicate that residents have been exposed to levels of contaminants thatwould cause disease. An evaluation of cancer cases in the area would not be useful since there isno site specific exposure information

which could be linked to cases of cancer.

Comment #13

When did the NYS DEC classify the Ramapo River as a source of drinking water supply? Hasthe classification changed based upon the landfill study and public health assessment findings?

Response #13

According to information obtained from the NYS DEC Division of Water, Bureau of WaterQuality Management, the section of the Ramapo River near the site was classified as a Class "A"surface water in 1966. New York State water quality regulations indicate that the best use ofClass "A" surface water is as a source of water supply for drinking, culinary or food processingpurposes and any other usages. Treatment of Class "A" water so as to make it suitable fordrinking water include full treatment equal to coagulation, sedimentation, filtration anddisinfection, with additional treatment if necessary to reduce naturally present impurities. Thewater supply itself will be considered satisfactory for drinking water purposes only after all NewYork State Department of Health drinking water standards are met.

Comment #14

How do you address the physical and psychological aspects of living next to a landfill?

Response #14

The NYS DOH is aware of the psychological impacts of living in a community near a landfilland in June 1992 we co-sponsored a workshop with the ATSDR to discuss this issue. If anyonewould like additional information, they may contact the Health Liaison Program at 1-800-458-1158 extension 402.



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. #