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

PRELIMINARY PUBLIC HEALTH ASSESSMENT

ST. LOUIS AIRPORT
HAZELWOOD INTERIM STORAGE/FUTURA COATINGS COMPANY
ST. LOUIS, ST. LOUIS COUNTY, MISSOURI


LIST OF TABLES

TABLE 1. ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLING DATA AS REPORTED IN 1988 FOR THEST. LOUIS AIRPORT STORAGE SITE

TABLE 2. ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLING DATA AS REPORTED IN 1988 FOR THEHAZELWOOD INTERIM STORAGE SITE

TABLE 3. OFF-SITE RADIONUCLIDE LEVELS AS REPORTED IN 1988 FROM THELATTY PROPERTIES

TABLE 4. MAXIMUM CONTAMINATION LEVELS AS REPORTED IN 1990 ALONGTHE HAUL ROADS ASSOCIATED WITH THE SLAPS NPL SITE




Table 1.

ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLING DATA AS REPORTED IN 1988 FOR THE ST. LOUIS AIRPORT STORAGE SITE1
ContaminantGroundwaterSurface WaterSedimentSoils2
Uranium5,500 pCi/L0.4 pCi/L1.7 pCi/g1,600 pCi/g3
Th-232ND4NDND63
Th-23050background4.12,600
Ra-2261backgroundbackground5,600


1 - The Maximum contaminant level for these radionuclides in drinking water is 5 pCi/L for radium and 15 pCi/L for gross alpha activity except for uranium.
2 - The concentration of thorium and radium in soils should not exceed 5 pCi/g above background over the first 15 cm of depth and 15 pCi/g averaged over 15 cm at depths greater than 15 cm (40 CFR 192). There are no standards for the concentration of uranium in soils.
3 - Value is for Uranium-238
4 - No Data




Table 2.

ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLING DATA AS REPORTED IN 1988 FOR THE HAZELWOOD INTERIM STORAGE SITE1
ContaminantGroundwaterSurface WaterSedimentSoil2
Uranium87 pCi/L5 pCi/L1.7 pCi/g800 pCi/g3
Th-232ND4NDND5
Th-230640.94.8750
Ra-2263.70.31.2700


1 - The Maximum contaminant level for these radionuclides in drinking water is 5 pCi/L for radium and 15 pCi/L for gross alpha activity except for uranium.
2 - The concentration of thorium and radium in soils should not exceed 5 pCi/g above background over the first 15 cm of depth and 15 pCi/g averaged over 15 cm at depths greater than 15 cm (40 CFR 192). There are no standards for the concentration of uranium in soils.
3 - Value is for Uranium-238
4 - No Data



Table 3.

Human Health Effects at Various Hydrogen Sulfide Concentrations in Air
LocationU-238 Th-232Th-230 Ra-226
Wagner Electric
Corporation
18 (1)5 (1)810 (0.5)11 (0.5)
General
Investment
Fund
100 (0.5)5 (5)5,700 (0.5)89 (0.5)
Crow-St. Louis< 20 (8)4 (8)460 (0.5)10 (0.5)
SLT
Warehouse
Company
< 39 (2)5 (5)15 (1)4 (2)
Graham
Engineering
Corporation
< 30 (8)7 (8)12 (0.5)4 (8)
Values are expressed in pCi/g soil with the value in parenthesis the depth, in feet, at which thatlevel of contamination was found.



Table 4.

MAXIMUM CONTAMINATION LEVELS AS REPORTED IN 1990 ALONG THE HAUL ROADS ASSOCIATED WITH THE SLAP NPL SITE
LocationU-238Th-232Th-230Ra-226
Latty Avenue48.2 (1.5)9.5 (2)1,41339.9 (1.5)
McDonnell
Boulevard
59 (0.5)9 (8)2,900 (0.5)64 (0.5)
Hazelwood
Avenue
72 (0.5)9 (2)4,810 (0.5)42 (0.5)
Pershall Road73 (0.5)8 (1)4,900 (0.5)92 (0.5)


Values are expressed in pCi/g soil with the value in parenthesis the depth, in feet, at which that level of contamination was found.


LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE 1. LOCATION OF THE SLAP, HIS, AND FUTURA SITES

FIGURE 2. LOCATION OF THE SLAPS VICINITY PROPERTIES

FIGURE 3. BOUNDARIES OF THE HIS AND FUTURA SITES

FIGURE 4. LOCATION OF THE LATTY AVENUE VICINITY PROPERTIES

FIGURE 5. SLAPS ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING LOCATIONS

FIGURE 6. SURFACE WATER, GROUNDWATER, AND SEDIMENT SAMPLINGLOCATIONS AT THE HISS

Location of the SLAP, HIS, and Futura sites
Figure 1. Location of the SLAP, HIS, and Futura sites

Location of the SLAP vicinity properties
Figure 2. Location of the SLAP vicinity properties

Boundaries of the HIS and Futura sites
Figure 3. Boundaries of the HIS and Futura sites

Location of the Latty Avenue vicinity properties
Figure 4. Location of the Latty Avenue vicinity properties

Figure 5. SLAPS environmental monitoring locations
Figure 5. SLAPS environmental monitoring locations

Surface water, groundwater, and sediment sampling locations locations at the HISS
Figure 6. Surface water, groundwater, and sediment sampling locations locations at the HISS



APPENDIX A - DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY DOSE CALCULATIONS

The following section was not available in 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 ServicesBranch
E-56
1600 Clifton Road NE, Atlanta, Georgia 30333


APPENDIX B - PUBLIC COMMENTS

The following section was not available in 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 ServicesBranch
E-56
1600 Clifton Road NE, Atlanta, Georgia 30333


APPENDIX C - ATSDR RESPONSE TO PUBLIC COMMENTS

ATSDR received comments from eight sources concerning the St. Louis Airport, HazelwoodInterim Storage, Futura Coatings Company in St. Louis, Missouri. The comment period for thishealth assessment was published in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch and an article in the newspaperappeared on Tuesday, May 14, 1991. The comment period ran from May 15 to June 13, 1991. The responses were entered into a tracking system, photocopied, and distributed to the healthassessment author. Where multiple comments from an individual were received, the commentswere numbered. For Appendix B, all personal identifiers were removed from the commentsreceived and placed in chronological order. The comments are addressed in chronological orderas received.

May 30, 1991

  1. The ATSDR Health Assessment for the St. Louis Airport, Hazelwood Interim Storage, Futura Coatings Company is written for several audiences, both technical and public. The technical audience includes the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), other federal agencies involved with the site, state agencies, and the parties responsible for the site (owners or caretakers). In this respect the technical aspects of the assessment are a necessity. Because of the technical nature, ATSDR has attempted to structure certain sections of the health assessment to the public. These sections include the Summary, Human Exposure Pathways, and the Public Health Implications.
  2. The determination of the size of a population that would be necessary to detect an increase in cancers is risk analysis. The National Academy of Science in their Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation report (BEIR V) did publish risk factors for excess cancer mortalities for populations exposed to ionizing radiation. In a population of 100,000 males exposed over a lifetime to 100 mrem per year, the excess cancer mortality rate is estimated to be on the order of 520 excess deaths. For females under these same conditions, the excess death from cancer was estimated to be 600 individuals. However, there is much disagreement among radiation specialists as to the long term health effects of low doses of radiation. A statement of these studies has been included in the Public Health Implications section.
  3. ATSDR believes that the commenter's remarks concerning radon stand on its own merit. A statement has been added in the Toxicological Implications section.
  4. The dose calculations of ATSDR and DOE indicate the potential dose deposited directly to the bone surface after the internalization of radioactive materials. This dose is above and beyond that which might be received from the naturally occurring background radiation. ATSDR disagrees with the comment that "it is also considerably smaller than differences in radiation exposures due to the varying radon levels in a home." The National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP) in Report 78 state that the lung dose as a result of radon is low. However, the major lung damage is from the radon decay products. The NCRP estimates that the average dose to the lung bronchial epithelium for adults is 180 mrad per year and for a 10 year old the average dose is 300 mrad per year. These doses are 10 to 20 times higher than the bone doses calculated by ATSDR or DOE.
  5. A response to this question requires a comparative risk assessment which is not in the purview of ATSDR.
  6. The 15 mrem estimate was calculated using current methodology and data of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. The variation for these calculations is determined by the amount of contaminated soil a ball player might receive if they ingested a gram of soil. In some cases, it is conceivable that a very intense ball player may have ingested much more than a gram; however, it is believed that the average ball player would ingest much less. ATSDR is not aware of any studies involving soil ingestion in athletic events.
  7. ATSDR has developed a Public Health Assessment Guidance Manual which describes five levels of public health concern. At the time this health assessment was prepared, the St. Louis Airport Site would have been classified as a Potential Public Health Hazard. Under the new guidance manual, the site has been reevaluated and upgraded to an Indeterminate Public Health Hazard. The manual states that this category is used for sites in which there is incomplete information. Although ATSDR believes humans have been exposed to levels of contaminants that could cause adverse health effects, data or information from this site are not available for all environmental media, such as biota, to which human may have been exposed.
  8. It is the opinion of ATSDR that an estimate of the number of person-sieverts would notbe beneficial for this site. This is because exposure depends on many factors includingthose related to life styles, use of the environment around the site, and in some instances,biological aspects. The International Commission on Radiological Protection Report 26,paragraph 219 states that "because of its complexity, assessments of collective doseequivalent involve the use of simplifications and approximations, particularly when alarge population is irradiated at low dose levels. Because of this, they may involveconsiderable uncertainties and these must be borne in mind when the assessments arebeing used to appraise the detriment associated with a practice."

    A response to the cost benefit analysis requires a risk assessment which is not in the purview of ATSDR.

June 7, 1991

ATSDR believes that the commenter's remarks concerning this site stand on its own merit.

June 10, 1991 (a)

  1. The ATSDR health assessment is not designed to generate new data for an existing site. However, the health assessment is to review the existing documents associated with a site. This information is garnered from government and public documents and commentsfrom citizens. The health assessment does not serve as an epidemiological study, but itcan suggest that an epidemiological study be considered. This indeed has been stated inthe Recommendations section of the health assessment as the site is being considered forfollow-up health studies.

    Although it is true that radiation can cause genetic disorders, radiation is not specific formale or female genes. In cases of Down's Syndrome where there is a breakage andrealignment of human chromosome 21, the radiation doses resulting in chromosomebreakage are orders of magnitude higher that those found at this site.

  2. The majority of the radioactive materials found at this site are predominately alpha emitters with an emission of gamma radiation associated with the decay. Many of these resulting gamma ray emissions are very weak and are easily diminished in air. In cases of internalization of alpha emitters, the damage resulting from alpha radiation is twenty times more serious than damage resulting from gamma radiation. When alpha emitters, such as those found at this site, are internalized, they can result in bone cancers or lung cancer. In the case of radon exposure, it is not the radon that causes the most damage, but the alpha particles resulting from the decay of the radon progeny.
  3. ATSDR believes that the commenter's remarks concerning this site stand on its own merit.
  4. ATSDR believes that the commenter's remarks concerning this site stand on its own merit.

June 10, 1991 (b)

    ATSDR believes that the commenter's remarks concerning this site stand on its own merit.

June 12, 1991 (a)

An additional statement has been added to Part C. DEMOGRAPHICS, LAND USE, ANDNATURAL RESOURCE USE indicating that some neighborhoods may use the creek forrecreational purposes.

June 12, 1991 (b)

  1. This comment has been addressed in the Summary section and the Background section of the health assessment.
  2. Uranium-235 is found at the site; however, its concentration in the waste piles is low. Uranium-235 can be the main component in nuclear weapons or reactors and because ofits value, is rarely disposed of as waste. The term enriched uranium refers to thechemical and physical processes whereby the amount of uranium-235 in natural uranium(0.3 percent) is amplified to a higher or enriched amount of uranium-235. This enricheduranium can then be used as previously described. The health effects of uranium-235 arebelieved to be the same as natural uranium in which the chemical toxicity resulting in renal damage is the major cause for concern.

    Radon-219 is a decay product of uranium-235, although present at the site was notdiscussed in the health assessment because of its short half-life, 3.96 seconds. After 40seconds, the amount of radon-219 remaining is about 0.1 percent of the original amount. Of the decay products of radon-219, the member with the longest half-life is thallium-207with a half-life of 4.8 minutes. After 48 minutes, the amount of thallium-207 remaining isalso 0.1 percent of the original amount. In fact, if you speculate that the waste uranium-235 has been at the site for 25 years, then the ratio of radon-219 present with respect tothe uranium-235 is 1/443,000 of uranium-235.

  3. ATSDR believes that the commenter's remarks concerning this site stand on its own merit.
  4. ATSDR believes that the commenter's remarks concerning this site stand on its own merit.

June 13, 1991 - Missouri Department of Health

  1. ATSDR addresses this comment in the Health Outcome Data Evaluation section of the public health assessment. ATSDR believes that the commenter's remarks concerning this site stand on its own merit.
  2. ATSDR addresses this comment in the Health Outcome Data Evaluation section of thepublic health assessment. ATSDR believes that the commenter's remarks concerning this site stand on its own merit.

June 13, 1991

  1. ATSDR believes that the levels of radionuclides found at these sites are high levels from an environmental point of view as many samples exceeded ambient background levels of the St. Louis, Missouri area.
  2. The spelling correction for Futura has been made in the health assessment. The properties in question have now been referred to Latty Avenue Vicinity Properties. The figure in question was derived from a draft document released by Bechtel in 1988.
  3. The health assessment has been corrected to reflect the commenter's concern.
  4. The health assessment stated that materials had been placed in a second pile. The initial reference (Bechtel, 1987a) stated that materials were stored in a supplementary pile at HISS. The health assessment has been corrected to reflect the commenter's concern.
  5. ATSDR believes that the commenter's remarks concerning this site stand on its own merit.
  6. The values in the health assessment were derived from Tables I1-I12 of Bechtel document. The values in those tables for each month were averaged over the 12-month period and the averages reported in the health assessment.
  7. ATSDR believes that the commenter's remarks concerning this site stand on its own merit.
  8. ATSDR believes that the commenter's remarks concerning this site stand on its own merit.
  9. The health assessment has been corrected to reflect the commenter's concern.
  10. The health assessment has been corrected to reflect the commenter's concern.

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. #