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

PUBLIC HEALTH ASSESSMENT

JOSLYN MANUFACTURING AND SUPPLY COMPANY
BROOKLYN CENTER, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA


Table 3. Surface Water Sample Analytical Results
Joslyn Site West Area

Analyte B(a)P Potency Factor (MDH) TCDD Toxic Equivalency Factor (WHO 98) MPCA Surface Water Standards / Criteria WA-7OW
Nov-00
cPAHs, mg/kg        
Benzo(a)anthracene 0.1    0.027 0.005
Chrysene 0.01     0.009 
Benzo(b)fluoranthene 0.1     0.007 
Benzo(k)fluoranthene 0.1     0.004 
Benzo(a)pyrene 1   0.0005  0.003 
Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 0.1     0.005 
Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 0.36     <.003
         
B(a)P Equivalents        0.0057
         
PAHs, mg/kg        
Acenaphthene     20 0.02 
Anthracene     0.035 0.017 
Fluoranthene     1.9  0.019 b
Fluorene     3.9 0.02 
Napthalene     81 0.027 b 
Pyrene       0.015 b 
         
Pentachlorophenol     5.5  <0.5
         
Dioxins, ng/kg        
2,3,7,8-TCDD   1  0.0000038 <.00191 
1,2,3,7,8-dioxin (penta)   1   <.00675 
1,2,3,4,7,8-Dioxin (hexa)   0.1   <.00562 
1,2,3,6,7,8-dioxin (hexa)   0.1   .0128 j 
1,2,3,7,8,9-dioxin (hexa)   0.1   <.00541 
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-dioxin (hepta)   0.01   0.2800 
Dioxin (octa)   0.0001   3.4500 
         
Furans, ng/kg        
2,3,7,8-TCDF   0.1   <.00417 
1,2,3,7,8-dibenzofuran (penta)   0.05    <.00317
2,3,4,7,8-dibenzofuran (penta)   0.5   <.00298 
1,2,3,4,7,8-dibenzofuran (hexa)   0.1   0.0136 j 
1,2,3,6,7,8-dibenzofuran (hexa)   0.1   0.00989 j 
2,3,4,6,7,8-dibenzofuran (hexa)   0.1   <0.00501 
1,2,3,7,8,9-dibenzofuran (hexa)   0.1    <0.00735
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-dibenzofuran (hepta)   0.01   0.1250 
1,2,3,4,7,8,9-dibenzofuran (hepta)   0.01    <0.00688
Dibenzofuran (octa)   0.0001    0.3340
         
TCDD Equivalents        0.0080
         
Carbon, total organic, %        11.9
Notes:
mg/kg = milligrams per kilogram
ng/kg = nanograms per kilogram
  = Exceedance of MPCA surface water standard or criteria
b = Potential false positive based on blank data validation procedure
j = Reported value is less than stated lab quantitation limits and is considered and estimated value

Source: Barr 2001b


Table 4. Soil-Water Leach Sample Analytical Results
Joslyn Site West Area

Analyte B(a)P Potency Factor (MDH) TCDD Toxic Equivalency Factor (WHO 98) MPCA Surface Water Standards / Criteria Loc.:
Date:
WA-7OW
Nov-00
WA-6MID
Oct-00
WA-6S
Oct-00
cPAHs, mg/kg              
Benzo(a)anthracene 0.1    0.027   0.0018    
Chrysene 0.01       0.033    
Benzo(b)fluoranthene 0.1       0.01    
Benzo(k)fluoranthene 0.1       0.006    
Benzo(a)pyrene 1   0.0005    0.05    
Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 0.1       0.005     
Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 0.36       <0.003    
               
B(a)P Equivalents          0.0098    
               
PAHs, mg/kg              
Acenaphthene     20   0.57    
Anthracene     0.035   0.22    
Fluoranthene     1.9    0.41    
Fluorene     3.9   0.42    
Napthalene     81   50    
Pyrene         0.26    
               
Pentachlorophenol     5.5   <.50    
               
Dioxins, ng/kg              
2,3,7,8-TCDD   1 0.0000038   <0.000875 0.0103 <0.00366
1,2,3,7,8-dioxin (penta)   1     <0.00115  0.132 0.048
1,2,3,4,7,8-Dioxin (hexa)   0.1     <0.00159 0.687 0.243
1,2,3,6,7,8-dioxin (hexa)   0.1     <0.00172 1.71 1.26
1,2,3,7,8,9-dioxin (hexa)   0.1     <0.00155 0.857 0.432
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-dioxin (hepta)   0.01     <0.0055 53.7 e 39.6 e
Dioxin (octa)   0.0001     0.0302 519 e 313 e
                
Furans, ng/kg               
2,3,7,8-TCDF   0.1     <0.00118 0.0217 <.00445
1,2,3,7,8-dibenzofuran (penta)   0.05     <0.00126 0.144 0.018
2,3,4,7,8-dibenzofuran (penta)   0.5     <0.00121 0.26 0.03
1,2,3,4,7,8-dibenzofuran (hexa)   0.1     <0.000690 1.1 0.412
1,2,3,6,7,8-dibenzofuran (hexa)   0.1     <0.000686 0.674 1.65
2,3,4,6,7,8-dibenzofuran (hexa)   0.1     <0.000784 0.467 0.189
1,2,3,7,8,9-dibenzofuran (hexa)   0.1     <0.00114 0.426 0.0575
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-dibenzofuran (hepta)   0.01     <0.00101 17.9 23.9 e
1,2,3,4,7,8,9-dibenzofuran (hepta)   0.01     <0.00156 1.24 0.843
Dibenzofuran (octa)   0.0001     <0.00659 78.6 e 95.3 e
                
TCDD Equivalents         0.000003 1.66 1.17
                
Carbon, total organic, %         1.8    
Notes:
mg/kg = milligrams per kilogram
ng/kg = nanograms per kilogram
  = Exceedance of MPCA surface water standard or criteria
e = Estimated value, exceeded the instrument calibration range

Source: Barr 2001b


Table 5. Surface Water Sample Analytical Results
Twin Lakes

Analyte B(a)P Potency Facto (MDH) MPCA Surface Water Standards / Criteria LS1
1/25/1985
LS1
5/30/1985
LS2
1/25/1985
LS2
5/30/1985
LS3
1/25/1985
LS3
5/30/1985
LS4
1/25/1985
LS4
5/30/1985
LS5
1/25/1985
LS5
5/30/1985
LS6
1/25/1985
LS6
5/30/1985
List 1 PAHs, ug/L                            
Benzo(a)anthracene 0.1 0.027 0.057 <0.001 <0.0020 0.005 <0.0020 <0.0010 0.21 0.0021 0.0051 <0.0010 0.0034 <0.0010
Chrysene 0.01   0.064 c <0.001 c 0.0024 c 0.0057 c 0.0020 c <0.0010 c 0.29 c 0.0026 c 0.0064 c <0.0010 c 0.0077 c <0.0010 c
Benzo(b)fluorathene 0.1   <0.005 c <0.001 c <0.0020 c 0.015 c <0.0020 c <0.0010 c 0.72 c <0.0010 c <0.0020 c 0.0022 c 0.022 c <0.0010 c
Benzo(a)pyrene 1 0.0005 0.038 <0.001 <0.0020 0.0058 <0.0020 <0.0010 0.18 0.0014 <0.0020 <0.0010 0.0034 <0.0010
Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 0.1   0.048 <0.0017 <0.0034 0.007 <0.0034 <0.0017 0.21 0.0027 <0.0034 <0.0017 0.0058 <0.0017
Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 0.36   <0.007 <0.0014 <0.0028 <0.0014 <0.0028 <0.0014 0.031 <0.0014 <0.0028 <0.0014 <0.0028 <0.0014
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene     0.043 <0.001 <0.0020 0.0091 <0.0020 <0.0010 0.2 0.0029 <0.0020 <0.0010 0.0049 <0.0010
Quinoline     0.0099 <0.001 0.0061 <0.0010 0.029 0.015 0.035 0.0027 0.015 0.002 0.006 <0.0010
Sum, List 1     0.26 nd 0.0085 0.048 0.031 0.015 1.9 0.014 0.026 0.0042 0.053 nd
B(a)P Equivalents     0.051 nd nd 0.009 nd nd 0.31 0.013 0.001 nd 0.007 nd
                             
List 2 PAHs, ug/L                            
Acenaphthene   20 0.0059 <0.0013 <0.0026 <0.0013 <0.0026 <0.0013 0.021 <0.0013 <0.0026 <0.0013 <0.0026 <0.0013
Acenaphthylene     <0.005 <0.001 <0.0020 <0.0010 <0.0020 <0.0010 0.0087 <0.0010 <0.0020 <0.0010 <0.0020 <0.0010
Acridine     <0.009 <0.0018 <0.0036 <0.0018 <0.0036 <0.0018 0.025 <0.0018 <0.0036 <0.0018 <0.0036 <0.0018
Anthracene   0.035 0.0053 <0.001 <0.0020 <0.0010 <0.0020 <0.0010 0.042 <0.0010 <0.0020 <0.0010 <0.0020 <0.0010
Benzo(k)fluoranthene     <0.005 <0.001 c <0.0020 c c <0.0020 c <0.0010 c c <0.0010 c <0.0020 c c c <0.0010 c
2,3-Benzofuran     dlnd 0.0057 dlnd 0.0085 0.0023 0.0052 dlnd 0.0051 dlnd 0.0041 0.0036 0.0042
Benzo(e)pyrene     0.18 <0.001 <0.0020 0.0055 <0.0020 <0.0010 0.25 0.0014 <0.0020 0.0014 0.0049 <0.0010
Benzo(b)thiophene     <0.005 <0.001 <0.0020 <0.0010 <0.0020 0.018 <0.0010 <0.0010 <0.0020 <0.0010 0.0023 <0.0010
Biphenyl     <0.005 <0.0018 <0.0020 <0.0010 <0.0020 0.0056 <0.0010 0.017 0.003 <0.0010 <0.0020 <0.0010
Carbazole     0.0087 <0.0011 <0.0022 <0.0011 0.0062 <0.0011 0.047 <0.0011 0.0042 <0.0011 0.004 <0.0011
Dibenzothiophene     dlnd dlnd dlnd dlnd dlnd dlnd 0.027 dlnd dlnd dlnd dlnd dlnd
Dibenzofuran     0.015 <0.002 <0.0040 <0.0020 <0.0040 <0.0020 <0.020 <0.0020 <0.0040 <0.0020 <0.0040 <0.0020
2,3-Dihydroindene     <0.007 0.0026 s <0.0020 0.012 0.0043 0.0094 s <0.014 0.0029 s 0.0029 0.0031 s 0.0053 0.0022 s
Fluoranthene   1.9 0.12 0.0019 0.005 0.022 0.0096 0.008 0.67 0.011 0.024 0.0047 0.025 0.0015
Fluorene   3.9 0.012 <0.0014 <0.0028 <0.0014 <0.0028 <0.0014 0.015 <0.0014 <0.0028 <0.0014 <0.0028 <0.0014
Indene     <0.005 0.0022 s <0.0020 0.0052 <0.0020 <0.0010 <0.010 0.0016 s <0.0020 <0.0010 <0.0020 0.0013 s
Indole     <0.014 <0.0029 <0.0058 <0.0029 <0.0058 <0.0029 <0.029 <0.0029 <0.0058 <0.0029 <0.0058 <0.0029
Isoquinoline     0.01 dlnd 0.0024 dlnd dlnd 0.012 0.028 dlnd 0.014 dlnd 0.0093 0.0022
1-Methylnapthalene     0.017 0.0016 0.012 <0.0012 0.01 0.0027 0.035 <0.0012 0.0085 <0.0012 0.0048 <0.0012
2-Methylnapthalene     0.019 0.0028 s 0.0065 0.0023 s 0.01 0.0032 s 0.018 0.0020 s 0.011 <0.0020 0.0064 0.0022 s
Napthalene   81 0.019 0.012 s 0.012 0.0020 s 0.016 0.0096 s 0.027 0.010 s 0.012 0.0092 s 0.013 0.0093 s
Perylene     0.007 <0.0010 <0.0020 0.0011 <0.0020 <0.0010 0.031 <0.0010 <0.0020 <0.0010 <0.0020 <0.0010
Phenanthrene   2.1 0.073 <0.0010 0.0061 0.0052 0.01 <0.0010 0.3 0.0013 0.016 0.0018 0.019 <0.0010
Pyrene     0.12 0.0034 0.0042 0.021 0.011 0.0064 0.69 0.0093 0.021 0.0064 0.023 0.0025
Triphenylene     c <0.001 c c c c <0.0010 c c c c <0.0010 c c <0.0010 c
Sum, List 2     0.62 0.0034 0.051 0.1 0.081 0.08 3.2 0.062 0.12 0.031 0.15 0.027
                             
Phenolics, ug/L                            
4-chloro-3-methylphenol     <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5
2-Chlorophenol     <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5
O-Cresol     <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5
M-Cresol     <5 c <5 c <5 c <5 c <5 c <5 c <5 c <5 c <5 c <5 c <5 c <5 c
P-Cresol     <5 c <5 c <5 c <5 c <5 c <5 c <5 c <5 c <5 c <5 c <5 c <5 c
2,4-Dichlorophenol     <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5
2,4-Dimethylphenol     <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5
2,4-Dinitrophenol     <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25
2-methyl- 1,4,6-dinitrophenol     <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25
2-Nitrophenol     <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5
4-Nitrophenol     <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5
Pentachlorophenol (PCP)   5.5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 p
Phenol     <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol     <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5
Notes:
  = Exceedance of MPCA surface water standard or criteria
p = Small peak in chromatogram below method detection limit
c = Coeluting compound (concentrations reported with the List 1 compound). Coeluting compounds are Chrysese/Triphylene and Benzo(b)fluoranthene/Benzo(k)fluoranthene.
s = Statistical analysis indicates a potential false positive value
dlnd = Not detected. Detection limit not determined.
nd = Not detected

Source: Barr 1986


APPENDIX III: SCREENING CRITERIA FOR DIOXINS, PCP, AND PAHS

ATSDR has adopted an interim policy for evaluating dioxin contamination in residential soils on or near waste sites (ATSDR 1997). The policy sets an initial screening level for dioxin (as expressed using TEFs) of 50 parts per trillion (ppt, equivalent to 0.05 ppb) in surface soil. If sample results exceed this value but are less than 1 ppb, further evaluation may be needed based on site-specific factors. ATSDR has developed the following decision framework for the evaluation of dioxins in surface soil in residential settings:

Screening Level Evaluation Level Action Level
< 50 ppt (0.05 ppb) TEFs >0.05 ppb but <1 ppb TEF >1 ppb TEF
• Based on a minimal risk level of 1 picogram per kilogram per day (pg/kg/day; pub. by ATSDR in 1989)

Evaluation of site-specific factors, such as:

• Bioavailability
• Ingestion rates
• Pathway analysis
• Soil cover
• Climate
• Other contaminants
• Community concerns
• Demographics
• Background exposures
Potential public health actions considered, such as:
• Surveillance
• Research
• Health studies
• Community education
• Exposure investigations

If dioxin levels in surface soil in residential areas exceed 1.0 ppb, a more active approach may be called for. This may involve educating residents on how to reduce or avoid exposure, and conducting more extensive research on past exposure and possible health impacts. Other actions to prevent or limit exposure could also be recommended, including response actions or cleanup. While the exposure scenario contemplated above is a residential one that may not be directly applicable to other scenarios, the ATSDR guidance may be a useful reference.

The EPA has set a preliminary remediation goal (PRG) of one part per billion (ppb, equivalent to one microgram per kilogram (µg/kg) of soil) of dioxin or TEFs in surface soil involving a residential exposure scenario (EPA 1998). Using EPA standard default exposure factors for reasonable maximum exposure scenarios, this exposure level corresponds to an excess lifetime cancer risk of 2.5 x 10-4, which is approaching the upper limit of EPA's acceptable risk range for Superfund site cleanups of 10-4 to 10-6 (EPA 1998). For commercial or industrial settings, a range of values between 5 ppb to 20 ppb is recommended.

The MPCA has developed a residential SRV for dioxin (as expressed using the dioxin TEF approach) of 200 ppt (0.2 ppb). This is based on a relatively standard, conservative exposure scenario, with an exposure duration period of 33 years. The SRV based on a recreational land use scenario is identical. The SRVs for PCP are 71 mg/kg and 67 mg/kg for residential and recreational exposures, respectively. The SRVs for PAHs vary, with cPAHs usually expressed in total benzo(a)pyrene equivalents. As previously stated, SRVs represent the concentration of a contaminant in soil at or below which normal dermal contact, inhalation, and/or ingestion is unlikely to result in an adverse human health effect. The SRVs are generic criteria, and the exceedance of an SRV only indicates the potential that the contamination could pose an unacceptable long-term human health risk. The MPCA has also established a site-specific surface water criterion for the site of 0.0038 picograms of TCDD per liter (MPCA 2001). This criterion is protective of both wildlife and human health.

MDH has developed a multi-media Health Risk Value (HRV) of 0.07 pg/kg/day for TCDD for incremental exposures from a specific source (MDH 2001a). While the HRVs were primarily developed for use in evaluating contaminants in air, the multi-media HRVs are designed to be protective of human health based on daily, long term inhalation, ingestion, or dermal contact with contaminants whose primary entry into the environment is from air emissions. Bioconcentration is a primary driver for the development of multi-media HRVs. The TCDD HRV is derived from chronic animal studies.

All of the above screening levels were developed prior to the completion of EPA's most recent draft dioxin reassessment, which proposes increasing the cancer potency slope factor by approximately six-fold. Use of this proposed cancer potency slope factor to develop new screening criteria could result in correspondingly lower screening levels or site cleanup goals.


APPENDIX IV: MDH FISH CONSUMPTION ADVISORY

MDH Fish Consumption Advisory page 1

MDH Fish Consumption Advisory page 2

MDH Fish Consumption Advisory page 3

MDH Fish Consumption Advisory page 4


APPENDIX V: PUBLIC COMMENTS SUMMARY AND RESPONSE

A draft version of this document was made available for public comment from April 8 to June 7, 2002. Comments were received from five individuals, two local government representatives, the MPCA, and an environmental consultant on behalf of the responsible party for the site. The comments and MDH's response are summarized below:

Comment: Several comments were directed towards the fence and signage at the site, expressing concern that people could still access the site by climbing over or going around the fence.

MDH Response: MDH shares this concern, and is recommending that soil and sediment contamination be removed or covered so that potential exposure to contaminants is minimized.

Comment: Several comments were directed towards the development portion of the former Joslyn site, as opposed to the West Area. Specific comments were in regards to a proposed road across the development, utilities, and stormwater runoff from the developed portion of the site into the West Area and adjacent private property.

MDH Response: The Public Health Assessment is specific to the West Area of the Joslyn site, not the development portion to the east. The only issue with regards to the development portion of the site addressed in the Public Health Assessment is stormwater management. MDH recommends that the discharge of stormwater from the development portion of the site be studied and modified if necessary to minimize potential transport of contaminants to Twin Lakes. MDH is also recommending that soil samples be collected to the south of the West Area to determine if it has been impacted as a result of stormwater runoff.

Comment: Several comments were directed towards water quality in Twin Lakes, and the potential for fish to be contaminated.

MDH Response: There is little recent data available as to water quality in Twin Lakes. However, the contaminants of concern (PCP, PAHs, and dioxins) tend to preferentially bind to organic matter and sediments as opposed to staying in the water column. MDH is therefore recommending that sediment and fish tissue samples be collected and analyzed rather than surface water to determine if Twin Lakes has been impacted by contaminants from the site.

Comment: One comment was received regarding the potential for past exposures from drinking water from private wells near the site and from dust that may have blown off the site when it was operating and being cleaned up.

MDH Response: These issues were discussed in previous MDH documents on the site, and as there is no new information available to better assess these potential exposures there is no reason to address them in this document.

Comment: One comment was submitted regarding the health statistics review, namely applicability of data from the Minnesota Cancer Surveillance System (MCSS) for the entire zip code 55429 to potential exposures from the site.

MDH Response: MDH states in the document that while this area is much larger than the area immediately surrounding the site, it is the smallest area available for review in the MCSS.

Comment: Several comments related to clarifications, misspellings, or incorrectly labeled figures were received.

MDH Response: MDH has made corrections to the document where possible.

Comment: A comment from the MPCA was received indicating that the MPCA sediment screening criteria in the draft document and data tables were incorrect.

MDH Response: The references to sediment screening criteria were removed and the data tables corrected.

Comment: Several pages of comments were received from the environmental consultant on behalf of the responsible party for the Joslyn site. The comments had to do with clarifying certain facts with regards to specific borings, samples, or cleanup actions taken at the site, clarifications to certain statements made by MDH, addressing community concerns stated in the document, and certain recommendations made by MDH.

MDH Response: MDH made certain factual corrections to the document where warranted, and attempted to address other comments that reflected the differing viewpoint of the responsible party.


CERTIFICATION

This Joslyn Manufacturing and Supply Company Site, West Area, Public Health Assessment was prepared by the Minnesota Department of Health under a cooperative agreement with the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). It is in accordance with approved methodology and procedures existing at the time the public health assessment was begun.

Alan W. Yarborough
Technical Project Officer, SPS, RPB, DHAC


The Division of Health Assessment and Consultation, ATSDR, has reviewed this public health consultation and concurs with its findings.

Lisa C. Hayes
fir Director, DHAC, ATSDR


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. #