PUBLIC HEALTH ASSESSMENT
OKLAHOMA REFINING COMPANY
CYRIL, CADDO COUNTY, OKLAHOMA
Figure 1. Oklahoma Refining Company
Figure 2. Site-Specific map of the ORC
Superfund Site indicating waste sources.
Figure 3. Location of LNAPL Detected in
Rush Springs Sandstone Aquifer
Figure 4. Oklahoma Refining Company -
Active Area
Figure 5. Oklahoma Refining Company -
Inactive Area
Only contaminants at levels of concern for which there is a completed or potential exposurepathway are discussed in the contaminant tables. For purposes of these estimations, an adult is assumed to weigh 70 kg (150 pounds), and a child is assumed to weigh 10 kg (22 lbs.).
| = | Cancer Risk Evaluation Guide | |
| = | Environmental Media Evaluation Guide | |
| = | Minimum Detection Limit | |
| = | Not Detected | |
| = | parts per million | |
| = | parts per billion | |
| = | Reference Dose Media Evaluation Guide |
| 1991 REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION REPORT | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| CONTAMINANT | CONCENTRATION RANGE | COMPARISONVALUE FOR INGESTION - REFERENCE ADULT | |
| ppm | ppm | Source | |
| Arsenic | ND - 200 | 0.4 | CREG |
| Barium | 1.5 - 546 | 49,000 | RMEG |
| Beryllium | ND - 1.3 | 0.16 | CREG |
| Chromium | 1.3 - 24,020 | 700,000* | RMEG |
| Lead | 5.1 - 20,530 | None | None |
* Assumes chromium III species in soil.
| 1991 REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION REPORT | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| CONTAMINANT | CONCENTRATION RANGE | COMPARISON VALUE FOR INGESTION - REFERENCE ADULT | |
| ppm | ppm | Source | |
| Benzene | ND - 40 | 24 | CREG |
| Benzo(a) anthracene | ND - 300 | None | |
| Benzo(a)pyrene | ND - 280 | 0.096 | CREG |
| Benzo(b) fluoranthene | ND - 120 | None | |
| Benzo(k) fluoranthene | ND - 40 | None | |
| Chrysene | ND - 456 | None | |
| Dibenzo(ah) anthracene | ND - 34 | None | |
| Indeno(1,2,3 cd)pyrene | ND - 84 | None | |
| 1991 REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION REPORT | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| CONTAMINANT | CONCENTRATION RANGE | COMPARISONVALUE FOR INGESTION - REFERENCE ADULT | |
| ppm | ppm | Source | |
| Arsenic | ND - 345 | 0.4 | CREG |
| Barium | 46 - 1446 | 49,000 | RMEG |
| Beryllium | ND - 1.4 | 0.16 | CREG |
| Chromium | 5.5 - 310 | 700,000 | RMEG |
| Lead | 6.7 - 1119 | None | |
| 1991 REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION REPORT | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| CONTAMINANT | CONCENTRATION RANGE | COMPARISONVALUE FOR INGESTION - REFERENCE ADULT | |
| ppm | ppm | Source | |
| Benzene | ND - 0.09 | 24 | CREG |
| Benzo(a) anthracene | ND - 5.3 | None | |
| Benzo(a)pyrene | ND - 3.5 | 0.096 | CREG |
| Benzo(b) fluoranthene | ND - 6.5 | None | |
| Benzo(k) fluoranthene | ND | None | |
| Chrysene | ND - 24 | None | |
| Dibenzo(ah) anthracene | ND | None | |
| Indeno(1,2,3 cd) pyrene | ND | None | |
| 1991 REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION REPORT | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| CONTAMINANT | CONCENTRATION RANGE | COMPARISONVALUE FOR INGESTION - REFERENCE ADULT | |
| ppm | ppm | Source | |
| Arsenic | ND - 23 | 0.4 | CREG |
| Barium | 36.00 - 236 | 49,000 | RMEG |
| Beryllium | 0.16 | 0.16 | CREG |
| Chromium | 4.60 - 1533 | 700,000 | RMEG |
| Lead | 8.3 - 130 | None | |
| Organic compounds of concern were not detected or did notexceed comparison values in on-site sediment. | |||
| 1991 REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION REPORT INORGANIC COMPOUNDS | ||
|---|---|---|
| CONTAMINANT | CONCENTRATION RANGE | |
| Groundwater* | Surface water | |
| ppb | ppb | |
| Arsenic | ND - 4950 | ND - 96,550 |
| Barium | ND - 6820 | 20 - 1340 |
| Beryllium | ND - 70 | ND - 160 |
| Chromium | ND - 570 | ND - 1340 |
| Lead | ND - 24,520 | ND - 610 |
| * maximum values may represent concentrations floating onthe water table in LNAPLs or in the hydrocarbon layer. No ATSDR comparison values are listed becausegroundwater and surface water were and are not being usedby people as drinking water. | ||
| 1991 REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION REPORT ORGANIC COMPOUNDS | ||
|---|---|---|
| CONTAMINANT | CONCENTRATION RANGE | |
| Groundwater* | Surface water: Drainage Ditch, Seeps | |
| ppb | ppb | |
| Benzene | ND - 13,000,000 | ND - 130 |
| Benzo(a)anthracene | ND | ND - 3 |
| Benzo(a)pyrene | ND | ND - 2 |
| Benzo(b) fluoranthene | ND | ND |
| Benzo(k) fluoranthene | ND | ND |
| Chrysene | ND | ND - 9 |
| Dibenzo(ah) anthracene | ND | ND |
| Indeno(1,2,3 cd) pyrene | ND | ND |
| * maximum values may represent concentrations floating onthe water table in LNAPLs or in the hydrocarbon layer. | ||
| 1982-1983 INSPECTION REPORT 1991 REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION REPORT | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| CONTAMINANT | CONCENTRATION RANGE | COMPARISON VALUE FOR INGESTION- PICA CHILD | |
| ppm | ppm | Source | |
| Arsenic* | 3.3 - 24.5 | 0.4 | CREG |
| Barium* | ND - 170 | 140 | RMEG |
| Chromium | 7 - 21 4.70 - 17 | 2000 | RMEG |
| Lead | ND - 25 ND - 20 | None | None |
| * Local background concentrations of arsenic and barium in creeksediment also exceed the comparison values. No volatile or semivolatile organic compounds exceededcomparison values for the pica child. If there is no reportedconcentration range for a contaminant from the 1991 RI, it wasanalyzed for but did not exceed a comparison value. | |||
| 1982-1983 INSPECTION REPORT 1984 MONITORING PROGRAM: Arsenic and chromium mean conc. only 1991 REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION: Not listed because Conc. < MDL | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| CONTAMINANT | CONCENTRATION RANGE | COMPARISONVALUE FORINGESTION* | |
| ppb | ppb | Source | |
| Arsenic | ND - 280 14.03 - 67.81 | 0.02 | CREG |
| Barium | ND - 3210 | 700 | RMEG |
| Beryllium | <MDL | 0.0081 | CREG |
| Chromium | ND <CV | 10,000 | RMEG |
| Lead | <MDL | None | None |
| * Based on use as drinking water ** Local background concentrations of arsenic and barium increek water also exceed the comparison values. No organic compounds in the 1991 RI for creek water exceededcomparison values for the pica child. | |||
PATHWAYS
| PATHWAYNAME | EXPOSURE PATHWAY ELEMENTS | TIME | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SOURCE | POINT(S) OF EXPOSURE | ROUTE OF EXPOSURE | EXPOSEDPOPULATION | ||
| Creek Water | OklahomaRefiningCo. (ORC) | Off site in GladysCreek &tributaries | Incidental Ingestion, DermalContact | Children/adults using (orplaying in) the creek | Past* |
| Creek Sediment | ORC | Off site in GladysCreek &tributaries | IncidentalIngestion, DermalContact | Children/adults using (orplaying in) the creek | Past* |
| Ambient Air- General airquality may bepoor because ofindustries. | ORC andothers | On site, Off site | Inhalation | All historical on-siteworkers and off-siteresidents in the generalvicinity of the refineryduring its operation | Past** |
| * Exposure could also occur in the present or future if on-site traps release contaminants to the creek or ifpreventative measures are not taken during remedial activities. ** Possible current and future exposures due to the active refinery. | |||||
| PATHWAY NAME | EXPOSURE PATHWAY ELEMENTS | TIME* | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SOURCE | POINT OFEXPOSURE | ROUTE OFEXPOSURE | EXPOSEDPOPULATION | ||
| Waste Material | OklahomaRefining Co.(ORC) | On-site pits, ponds,traps | Inhalation, Ingestion, Dermal Contact | Site workers, Trespassers | Primarily Past |
| Sediment | ORC | On-site drainageditch & banks aboveGladys Creek | Ingestion, Dermal Contact | Site workers, Trespassers | Primarily Past |
| Soils | ORC | near tanks, north ofrailroad, exclusiveof wasteimpoundments | Ingestion, Dermal Contact, Inhalation | Site workers, Trespassers | PrimarilyPast |
| Surface Water | ORC | On-site ponds &traps | Dermal Contact | Site workers, Trespassers | PrimarilyPast |
| Groundwater | ORC | Residences | Dermal Contact, Inhalation | Residents | Future** |
| Food Chain | ORC | Off site in nearbyfields irrigated withcreek water. Onsite. | Ingestion | Those eating crops orcattle fed crops fromlands irrigated by GladysCreek water during theORC operation. | Past |
| * During remedial activities at the site, we have assumed that on-site remedial workers will be adequately protected andthat appropriate measures and controls will be used to insure the protection of public health. We have also assumed thatappropriate deed restrictions will be applied to prevent future exposure to on-site contaminants. **Future exposures could occur if contamination migrated off-site and private wells in the contaminated area were stillused for non-potable purposes. | |||||
| Exposed Populations and Potentially ExposedPopulations | Affected by a Completed orPotential Exposure Pathway* For: | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Location | Approx. No. ofPersons | Heavy Metals(lead, chromiumetc.) | PAHs | |
| Residents downstream of ORC on GladysCreek Past | 20 | Creek Sediment | No record | |
| Other nearby residentsduring operation ofORC | with on-site exposure (intruders) | 25 | Air Soil Surface Water Food chain | Air Soil Surface Water |
| without on-siteexposure | 500 | Air Soil Food chain | Air | |
| Previous Refinery Workers | 250 | Air Soil Surface Water | Air Soil Surface Water | |
| Current Refinery Workers | 100? | Possibly Air, Soil Surface Water | Possibly Air, Soil Surface Water | |
* potential exposure pathways are shown in italics
PUBLIC HEALTH EDUCATION FACT SHEET
The following section was not availablein electronic format for conversion to HTML at the time of preparation of this document. To obtain a hard copy of the document, please contact:
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry
Division of Health Assessment and Consultation
Attn: Chief, Program Evaluation, Records, and Information Services
Branch, E-56
1600 Clifton Road NE, Atlanta, Georgia 30333
