SWIFT AGRICULTURAL CHEMICALS FAIRMONT CITY PLANT
FAIRMONT CITY, ST. CLAIR COUNTY, ILLINOIS
This Swift Agricultural Chemicals Corporation Site Health Consultation was prepared by theIllinois Department of Public Health under a cooperative agreement with the Agency for ToxicSubstances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). It is in accordance with approved methodology andprocedures existing at the time the health consultation was begun.
Gail D. Godfrey
Technical Project Officer
Division of Health Assessment and Consultation
The Division of Health Assessment and Consultation, ATSDR, has reviewed this health consultation and concurs with its findings.
Lisa C. Hayes for
Richard E. Gillig
Chief, State Programs Section
Division of Health Assessment and Consultation
In the data tables that follow, the listing of a contaminant does not mean that it will cause adverse health effects from exposures. The tables summarize data from both the 1989 and 1996 investigations. The tables include the following abbreviations:
|J =||estimated value, qualitatively correct but quantitatively suspect|
|B =||analyte found in the associated blank and indicates possible/probable blank contamination|
|P =||alternative analytical method used to analyze for this compound|
|C =||Confirmed by GC/MS (for pesticides)|
|D =||Analyzed at a secondary dilution factor|
|E =||Estimated value of a compound that exceeded the calibration range|
|U =||Compound analyzed for but not detected|
|N =||Spiked sample|
|W =||Post digestion spike for furnace AA analysis|
-: compound analyzed, but not detected in the sample
|Compound/CV||Soil||Soil||Sub-Soil||Soil||ONS Sed||SOIL (BKG)||X101||X102||X103||X104||Field Blank||Comparison Value |
|Zinc||8,210||27,400||2,660||21,600||8,230||147||4,590||9,320||9,480||16,000||17.8B||600/20,000/200,000||I EMEG & RMEG|
- : Compound analyzed, but not detected in the sample.
ppm - parts per million
|Compound/CV||OS Sed||OS Sed||OS Sed||OS Sed||OS Sed||OS Sed||Field Blank||Comparison Value|
|Zinc||3,760||32,700||23,400||839||1,370||1,680||17.8B||600/20,000/200,000||I EMEG & RMEG|
- : Compound analyzed for, but not detected in the sample.
ppm - parts per million
|Comparison Value |
for Water (ppb)
ppb = parts per billion
|Compound/CV||Sediment Concentration Range (in ppm)||Estimated |
|Health Guidelines||USEPAs Oral Slope Factor||Estimated Increased Cancer Risk||Exceeds |
|Source||Health Guideline for Soil in mg/kg/day|
|Benzo(a)Pyrene||ND - 21J||2.6 X 10-6||Acute Oral MRL||0.1||7.3||1.9 X 10-5||NO|
|Heptachlor||ND - 4.8DC||6 X 10-7||C.O. MRL||0.0005||4.5||2.7 X 10-6||NO|
|Aldrin||NA/3.9 (3)||NE/4.9 X 10-7||Chronic Oral MRL||NE||17||NE/8.3 X 10 -6||NO|
|Heptachlor Epoxide||NA/0.039(3)||NE/4.9 X 10-9||C.O. MRL||0.000013||9.1||NE/4.5 X 10-8||NO|
|Dieldrin||0.088-0.36||4.5 X 10 -8||C.O. MRL||.00005||16||7.2 X 10-7||NO|
|Antimony||ND-12.2||1.5 X 10-6||Chronic Oral RFD||0.0004||N Appl||N Appl||NO|
|Arsenic||4.4JN-27.8JN||3.4 X 10-6||Chronic Oral MRL||0.0003||1.5||5.1 X 10-6||NO|
|Beryllium||0.45B-2.1B||2.6 X 10-7||Chronic Oral RFD||0.005||4.3||1.1 X 10-6||NO|
|Cadmium||5.7-344||4.3 X 10-5||C.O. MRL||0.0007||None||None||NO|
|Lead||526-2,200||2.7 X 10-4||NAV||NAV||NAV||-||NO|
|Manganese||182-930||1.16 X 10-4||NAV||NAV||N Appl||N Appl||NO|
|Thallium||ND-2.4JWB||3.0 X 10-6||NAV||NAV||N Appl||N Appl||NO|
|Zinc||17.8B-32700||4 X 10-3||C.O. MRL||0.3||N Appl||N Appl||NO|
|Total Cancer Risk||3.6 X 10-5||NO|
|NA: Compound not analyzed for in the sample.||3 - Highest On-site soil results substituted twice it was not analyzed for in sample|
|1 - See attached sheet with calculations and assumptions||4 - Assumes similar mechanisms and cancer types|
|2 - Calculated using highest sediment concentration|
|NE - Not estimated|
|N Appl - Not Applicable|
|NAV - Not Available|
|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)|
|On-site Surface Soil & Sediment||Contaminated Soil & Sediment||Soil & Sediment||On the site||Ingestion |
|On-site Workers||Past |
|Working outside on the site||25||Table 2|
|Off-site Sediment||Contaminated sediment off the site||Sediment||Children playing in sediment areas.||Ingestion |
|Area Children||Past |
|Playing in and with sediments||20||Table 3|
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
FROM OLD AMERICAN ZINC HEALTH CONSULTATION
Based on information reviewed, the Illinois Department of Public Health concludes that:
- The Old American Zinc site in Fairmont City, Illinois poses a public health threat based on chronic exposure of children to arsenic, cadmium, and lead in the residential soils.
- Nearby residents are exposed to contaminated airborne particulates which originate onsite. This exposure would be the highest during dry windy periods or when site activity is high. The extent of this exposure and resulting health effects (if any) cannot be determined without sufficient air monitoring data.
- Worker exposure to on-site contaminants certainly occurs. The highest exposures would likely occur during activities which disturb the waste material.
- Exposures to site related contaminants would have likely been higher in the past,particularly during smelter operation.
Cease/Reduce Exposure Recommendations
- Reduce exposure of children to contaminated residential soils as much as possible by using appropriate reduction methods (e.g. covering bare soil with vegetation, "clean" soil, mulch, rock, or asphalt; restricting access to areas with bare soil by fencing; reducing or eliminating soil contact activities such as digging; washing hands and face prior to eating or drinking; and cleaning shoes to reduce the amount of soil being tracked into the house.
- Remove or contain contaminants that have been left exposed on the surface soil in such a way that they are not released to the air or allowed to move by surface run-off.
- Protect both the on-site workers and nearby residents from site contaminant exposure bytaking precautions (e.g. dust reduction methods, protective equipment) to reduce exposuresduring any on-site activities that involve disturbing the site wastes.
Site Characterization Recommendations
- Monitoring of air at exposure points to determine airborne exposure to contaminants. Exposure points would include nearby residences and, if warranted, onsite workers. Baseline air monitoring would be important in determining exposure and could later be used with additional air monitoring to determine the effectiveness of the chosen remedial activity.
- Performing additional soil sampling in the neighborhoods adjacent to the site to provide a more accurate determination of the extent of off-site soil contamination.
- Performing additional sampling for mercury in the arsenic leaching area to determine the extent of mercury contamination in that area.
Comparison Values Used in Screening Contaminants for Further Evaluation
Environmental Media Evaluation Guides (EMEGs) are developed for chemicals based on their toxicity, frequency ofoccurrence at National Priority List (NPL) sites, and potential for human exposure. They are derived to protect the mostsensitive populations and are not cut off levels, but rather comparison values. They do not consider carcinogeniceffects, chemical interactions, multiple route exposure, or other media-specific routes of exposure, and are veryconservative concentration values designed to protect sensitive members of the population.
Reference Dose Media Evaluation Guides (RMEGs) are estimates of a daily oral or inhalation exposure to a particularchemical that is unlikely to produce any noncarcinogenic adverse health effects over a lifetime. They are conservativevalues designed to protect sensitive members of the population.
Cancer Risk Evaluation Guides (CREGs) are estimated contaminant concentrations based on a one excess cancer in amillion persons exposed to a chemical over a lifetime. These are also very conservative values designed to protectsensitive members of the population.
|Ingestion Dose (ID)||= Concentrations X Ingestion Rate (IR) X Exposure Factor (EF) X 10-6 |
Body Weight (BW)
Where IR is 100 mg; BW is 16 kg; and the EF is 0.02
EF = Exposure Frequency X Exposure Duration/Exposure Time
EF = 2 days/week X 26 weeks X 10 years/365 days X 70 years
EF = 520/25550
EF = 0.02
|ID = concentration x||(IR X EF X 10-6) |
ID = Concentration (0.125 X 10-6)
ID = (Concentration) 1.25 X 10-7
ID = 12.2 (1.25 X 10-7/day)
= 1.5 X 10-6 mg/kg/day
ID = 27.8 mg/kg (1.25 X 10-7/day)
= 3.4 X 10-6 mg/kg/day
ID = 2.1 mg/kg (1.25 X 10-7/day)
= 2.6 X 10-7 mg/kg/day
ID = 344 mg/kg (1.25 X 10-7/day)
= 4.3 X 10-5 mg/kg/day
ID = 2,200 mg/kg (1.25 X 10-7/day)
= 2.75 X 10-4 mg/kg/day
ID = 930 mg/kg (1.25 X 10-7/day)
= 1.16 X 10-4 mg/kg/day
ID = 2.4 mg/kg (1.25 X 10-7/day)
= 3.0 X 10-6 mg/kg/day
ID = 32,700 mg/kg (1.25 X 10-7/day)
= 4.0 X 10-3 mg/kg/day
ID = 21 mg/kg (1.25 X 10-7/day)
= 2.6 X 10-6 mg/kg/day
ID = 4.8 mg/kg (1.25 X 10-7/day)
= 6 X 10-7 mg/kg/day
ID = 0.039 mg/kg (1.25 X 10-7/day)
= 4.9 X 10-9 mg/kg/day
ID = 3.9 mg/kg (1.25 X 10-7/day)
4.9 X 10-7 mg/kg/day
ID = 0.36 mg/kg (1.25 X 10-7/day)
4.5 X 10-8 mg/kg/day
1 - Not analyzed for in off-site sediment, concentration used is highest on-site soil.