PUBLIC HEALTH ASSESSMENT
BYRON JOHNSON SALVAGE YARD
BYRON, OGLE COUNTY, ILLINOIS
| Chemical | Maximum Concentration (ppm) | Comparison Value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| ppm | source | ||
| INORGANICS | Â | Â | Â |
| Antimony | 25.0 | 0.8 | RMEG |
| Chromium | 113 | (III)2000 (VI)10 | RMEG1 |
| Copper | 805 | None | Â |
| Iron | 107,000 | None | Â |
| Lead | 485 | None | Carcinogen |
| Magnesium | 26,683 | None | Â |
| Mercury | 1.7 | 60 | RMEG1 |
| Nickel | 565 | 40 | RMEG1 |
| Zinc | 27,729 | 600 | RMEG1 |
| Total Cyanide | 133 | 40 | RMEG1,2 |
| ORGANICS | Â | Â | Â |
| Toluene | 7.9 | 400 | RMEG1 |
| Xylenes | 13 | 4,000 | RMEG1 |
ppm = parts per million
1 = pica child
2 = RMEG for free cyanide
| Chemical | Disposal Area (ppm) | Comparison Value | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| West | East | North | ppm | Source | |
| ORGANICS | Â | Â | Â | Â | Â |
| Tetrachloroethylene | 0.430 | ND | ND | .04 | CREG |
| Toluene | 960 | 0.026 | ND | 40 | EMEG1 |
| Xylenes | 280 | ND | ND | 40 | EMEG1 |
| INORGANICS | Â | Â | Â | Â | Â |
| Chromium | 2,390 | ND | ND | 10* | RMEG1 |
| Copper | 2,820 | ND | 200 | None | Â |
| Lead | 116 | ND | 77.0 | None | Carcinogen |
| Nickel | ND | ND | 54.1 | 40 | RMEG1 |
| Zinc | 403 | 347.0 | 3,460 | 600 | RMEG1 |
| Total Cyanide | 835 | 15.0 | 1.0 | 40** | RMEG1 |
ppm = parts per million
1 = pica child
* = Chromium VI RMEG
** = Free cyanide RMEG
ND = Not Detected above background concentrations
| Chemical | Sediment (ppm) | Comparison Value | Water (ppb) | Comparison Value | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Salvage Yard | Dirk's Farm | ppm | Source | Meyers Spring | ppb | Source | |
| Trichloroethylene | | | | Â | | 3 | |
| Copper | | | | Â | | 650 | |
| Zinc | | | | RMEG1 | | 2,000 | |
| Total Cyanide | | | | RMEG | | 200* | |
ppb = parts per billion * = Free Cyanide LTHA or RMEG
ppm = parts per million 1 = Pica child
ND = Not Detected
| Pathway Name: | Source | Medium | Exposure Point | Exposure Route | Receptor Population | Time of Exposure | Exposure Activities | Estimated Number Exposed | Chemicals (identify by name or reference to table in document |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Area Wells | Salvage Yard & Dirk's Farm | Ground-water | Residential Wells | Ingestion Inhalation Dermal | Area Residents | Past Present Future | Using contaminated household water. | 500 | Table 7 |
| Surface Water Runoff | Salvage Yard & Dirk's Farm | Surface Water | Meyers Spring | Ingestion Inhalation Dermal | Recreational Enthusiasts | Past Present Future | Swimming Water sports | 100 | TCE cyanide |
| Pathway Name: | Source | Medium | Exposure Point | Exposure Route | Receptor Population | Time of Exposure | Exposure Activities | Estimated Number Exposed | Chemicals (identify by name or reference to table in document |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Surface Soil and Sediment | Salvage Yard & Dirk's Farm | Soil and Sediment | Salvage Yard, Dirk's Farm, waterways, motorsport park, | Ingestion Inhalation Dermal | Trespassers, Hunters, Area Residents | Past Future | Contacting contaminated soil and sediments | 100 | Tables 2 & 3 |
| Ambient Air | Salvage Yard & Dirk's Farm | Air | On or near the site | Inhalation | Area Residents | Past | Breathing | 100 | Tables 2 & 3 |
| Consumable Biota | Salvage Yard & Dirk's Farm | Biota | On or near the site | Ingestion | Hunters, Fishers | Past Present Future | Eating contaminated biota | 100 | Tables 2 & 3 |
| Chemical | Salvage Yard | Dirk's Farm | Comparison Value | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Galena-Platteville | St. Peter | Galena-Platteville | µg/L | Source | |
| ORGANICS | Â | Â | Â | Â | Â |
| Acetone | ND | ND | 61,000 | 1,000 | RMEG1 |
| Benzene | 5 | ND | 53 | 1 | CREG |
| 2-Butanone | 170 | ND | 5,700 | 6,000 | RMEG1 |
| Carbon Tetrachloride | 91 | ND | NA | 0.3 | CREG |
| Chloroform | ND | ND | 11 | 100 | EMEG1 |
| 1,1-Dichloroethane | 8 | ND | 35 | None | Carcinogen |
| 1,1-Dichloroethylene | 190 | 3 | ND | 90 | EMEG1 |
| 1,2-Dichloroethane | 6 | 6 | 6 | 0.4 | CREG |
| 1,2-Dichloroethylene | 1,900 | 20 | 11 | 70 | LTHA* |
| trans-1,2-Dichloroethylene | 750 | 20 | 25 | 200 | RMEG1 |
| Ethyl Benzene | 31 | ND | 590 | 1,000 | RMEG1 |
| 4-methyl-2-pentanone | ND | ND | 9,900 | None | Â |
| Tetrachloroethylene | 170 | 10 | 28 | 0.7 | CREG |
| Toluene | 130 | ND | 46,000 | 2,000 | RMEG1 |
| 1,1,1-Trichloroethane | ND | ND | 270 | 200 | MCL |
| Trichloroethylene | 2,100 | 550 | 300 | 3 | CREG |
| Vinyl Chloride | 340 | ND | 120 | 0.2 | EMEG1 |
| Xylene | 120 | ND | 2,400 | 20,000 | RMEG1 |
| INORGANICS | Â | Â | Â | Â | Â |
| Arsenic | 170 | ND | 47 | 3 | EMEG1 |
| Cadmium | 45 | ND | 62 | 7 | EMEG1 |
| Chromium | 126 | 92 | 500 | 100** | LTHA |
| Lead | 280 | 49 | 11,200 | 15 | MCL2 |
| Nickel | 109 | 86 | 790 | 100 | LTHA |
| Zinc | 1,090 | 1,460 | 11,990 | 3,000 | RMEG1 |
| Total Cyanide | 1,532 | 20 | 18 | 200 | RMEG1 |
| * LTHA for cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene | 1 = Child | 2 = USEPA Action Level |
| µg/L = micrograms per liter | ** = Chromium VI | ND = Not Detected |
| Chemical | Maximum Aquifer Concentration (µg/L) |
|---|---|
| Arsenic | 170 |
| Cadmium | 45 |
| Chromium | 126 |
| Cyanide (total) | 1,532 |
| Lead | 280 |
| 1,1-Dichloroethylene | 190 |
| 1,2-Dichloroethylene | 1,900 |
| Tetrachloroethylene | 70 |
| Toluene | 46,000 |
| Trichloroethylene | 2,100 |
| Trans-1,2-dichloroethylene | 750 |
| Vinyl Chloride | 340 |
µg/L = micrograms of contaminant per liter of water
Comparison Values Used In Screening Contaminants For Further Evaluation
Environmental Media Evaluation Guides (EMEGs) are developed for chemicals based on theirtoxicity, frequency of occurrence at National Priority List (NPL) sites, and potential for humanexposure. They are derived to protect the most sensitive populations and are not action levels, butrather comparison values. They do not consider carcinogenic effects, chemical interactions,multiple route exposure, or other media-specific routes of exposure, and are very conservativeconcentration values designed to protect sensitive members of the population.
Reference Dose Media Evaluation Guides (RMEGs) are another type of comparison valuederived to protect the most sensitive populations. They do not consider carcinogenic effects,chemical interactions, multiple route exposure, or other media-specific routes of exposure, andare very conservative concentration values designed to protect sensitive members of thepopulation.
Cancer Risk Evaluation Guides (CREGs) are estimated contaminant concentrations based on aprobability of one excess cancer in a million persons exposed to a chemical over a lifetime.These are also very conservative values designed to protect sensitive members of the population.
Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) have been established by USEPA for public watersupplies to reduce the chances of adverse health effects from contaminated drinking water. Thesestandards are well below levels for which health effects have been observed and take intoaccount the financial feasibility of achieving specific contaminant levels. These are enforceablelimits that public water supplies must meet.
Lifetime Health Advisories for drinking water (LTHAs) have been established by USEPA fordrinking water and are the concentration of a chemical in drinking water that is not expected tocause any adverse non-carcinogenic effects over a lifetime of exposure. These are conservativevalues that incorporate a margin of safety.
Attachment 3. General Areas of Waste Disposal and Soil Sampling at Dirk's Farm
Attachment 4. Approximate Areas of Groundwater Contamination Plumes
