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

PUBLIC HEALTH ASSESSMENT

NORTHSIDE SANITARY LANDFILL
ZIONSVILLE, BOONE COUNTY, INDIANA


APPENDICES

Appendix A - Figures

Figure 1. Site Map


Figure 2. Phase I -- Surface Water, Sediment, and Soil Sample Locations


Figure 3. Northside Sanitary Landfill Subsurface Soil and Monitoring Well Sample Locations


Figure 4. Phase II -- Surface Water, Sediment, Soil, and Leachate Sample Locations


Figure 5. Residential Well Sampling Locations


Figure 6. Historical Bioaccumulation Study Sites


Figure 7. Fish Population Assessment



Appendix B - Tables

On-Site Surface Soil Sample Results, Phase I.

(Data used to develop Table 1.)
Chemical Sample
Location
Number
Concentration
Range - ppb
Organic Chemicals
acetone SL022-01
SL020-01
6-7
methylene chloride SL022-01
SL020-01
12-14
Inorganic Chemicals
aluminum SL022-01
SL020-01
8,400-19,000
calcium SL020-01
SL022-01
21,000-97,000
chromium SL021-01
SL020-01
10-20
copper SL020-01
SL022-01
20
iron SL022-01
SL020-01
13,000-23,000
lead SL022-01
SL020-01
8-22
magnesium SL020-01
SL022-01
9,700-26,000
manganese SL022-01
SL020-01
390-460
mercury SL020-01 <1
nickel SL020-01 20
potassium SL021-01
SL020-01
2,000-3,000

All data collected from Final Remedial Investigation Report.


On-Site Subsurface Soil Sample Results, Phase I.

(Data used to develop Table 2.)
Chemical Sample
Depth
(Feet)
Sample
Date
Sample
Location
Number
Concentration
Range - ppb
Organic Chemicals
acetone 0-3
8-9
12/84 SL008-01
SL008-02
65-16,000,000
benzene 9-12
5-9
1/85 SL011-03
SL011-02
6-7
benzoic acid 5-9 1/85 SL011-02 900
bis(2-ethylhexyl)
phthalate
9-12
0-2
1/85
12/84
SL011-03
SL012-01
200-390,000
2-butanone 13-15
8-9
12/84 SL012-03
SL008-02
13-1,100,000
butyl benzyl phthalate 0-5 1/85 SL010-01 200
carbon disulfide 10-13
9-12
1/85 SL010-02
SL011-03
5-6
dieldrin 0-3 12/84 SL014-01
SL008-01
4
di-n-butyl phthalate 0-5
0-2
1/85
12/84
SL015-01
SL013-02
1,700-390,000
di-n-octyl phthalate 0-3
0-2
1/85
12/84
SL011-01
SL012-01
200-390,000
ethylbenzene 0-3
8-12
1/85 SL009-01
SL009-02
280-300
fluorene 3-10 12/84 SL012-02 380,000
methylene chloride 13-15
12-15
12/84 SL012-03
SL008-03
6-7,200
2-methylnaphthalene 5-9
0-2
1/85
12/84
SL011-02
SL012-01
200-390,000
naphthalene 3-10
0-2
12/84 SL012-02
SL012-01
380,000-390,000
phenanthrene 0-3
0-2
12/84 SL014-01
SL012-01
370,000-390,000
toluene 10-13
8-9
1/85
12/84
SL010-02
SL008-02
5-140,000
trans-1,2-dichloroethene 13-15 12/84 SL012-03 13
trichloroethylene 13-15 12/84 SL012-03 51
1,1,1-trichloroethylene 0-3 1/85 SL009-01 410
xylenes, total

0-5
0-3

1/85 SL010-01
SL009-01
6-800
Inorganic Chemicals
aluminum 6-9
0-5
1/85 SL017-03
SL010-01
3,200-11,000
arsenic 9-11 12/84 SL013-03 30
calcium 8-9
11-14
12/84
1/85
SL008-02
SL015-03
21,000-160,000
chromium 0-3
8-9
12/84 SL008-01
SL008-02
10
cobalt 23-30 1/85 SL010-03 20
copper 0-2
5-9
12/84
1/85
SL012-01
SL011-02
10-30
cyanide 0-2 12/84 SL012-01 <1
iron 6-9
8-9
1/85
12/84
SL017-03
SL008-02
8,400-19,000
lead 5-9
2-4
1/85
12/84
SL011-02
SL013-02
2-15
magnesium 0-3
6-9
1/85 SL018-01
SL017-03
3,000-32,000
manganese 13-15
0-3
12/84
1/85
SL012-03
SL018-01
240-470
mercury 0-3
0-2
12/84 SL014-01
SL012-01
<1
nickel 0-3 12/84
1/85
SL008-01
SL011-01
20-200
potassium 8-9
12-15
12/84 SL008-02
SL008-03
1,000-2,000
sodium 0-5 1/85 SL015-01 3,000
vanadium 0-3
10-13
1/85 SL011-01
SL010-02
10-30
zinc 9-12
0-3
1/85
12/84
SL011-03
SL014-01
30-67
         

 

On-Site Groundwater Sample Results, Glacial Till Water Bearing Zone, Phases I & II.

(Data used to develop Table 3.)
Chemical Sample
Date
Sample
Location
Number
Concentration
Range - ppb
Organic Chemicals - Phase I
acetone 4/85 GW08S-01
GW016-01
11-13,000
benzene 2/85
4/85
GW018-01
GW016-01
5-500
di(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate 2/85 GW018-01
GW016-01
10-14
2-butanone 2/85
4/85
GW09S-01
GW016-01
10-1,000
chloroethane 2/85
4/85
GW09S-01
GW016-01
10
di-n-butyl phthalate 2/85 GW10S-01 10
ethylbenzene 4/85 GW018-01
GW014-01
5-50
4-methyl-2-pentanone 4/85 GW08S-01 1
methylene chloride 2/85
4/85
GW018-01
GW016-01
5-500
2-methylnaphthalene 4/85
2/85
GW08S-01
GW016-01
8-110
2-methylphenol 2/85 GW10S-01 10
4-methylphenol 2/85 GW10S-01 10
naphthalene 2/85 GW018-01
GW015-01
10-33
phenol 2/85 GW10S-01 10
phenanthrene 2/85 GW016-01 10
toluene 2/85 GW018-01
GW016-01
19-500
trichloroethylene 2/85 GW09S-01 5
xylenes, total 4/85
2/85
GW08S-01
GW016-01
3-830
Inorganic Chemicals - Phase I
aluminum 2/85
4/85
GW11S-01
GW08S-01
24-63
antimony 2/85 GW014-01
GW018-01
32-33
arsenic 2/85 GW014-01 21
barium 2/85 GW015-01
GW014-01
69-1,110
beryllium 2/85 GW018-01 1
calcium 4/85
2/85
GW08S-01
GW10S-01
54,000-228,000
chromium 2/85 GW09S-01 4
cobalt 2/85 GW11S-01
GW018-01
6-17
copper 2/85 GW09S-01 8
cyanide 4/85
2/85
GW08S-01
GW018-01
3-4
iron 2/85 GW016-01
GW014-01
8-17,000
lead 4/85
2/85
GW08S-01
GW016-01
9-53
magnesium 2/85 GW015-01
GW014-01
22,900-165,000
manganese 2/85 GW11S-01
GW018-01
112-4,330
nickel 2/85 GW10S-01
GW09S-01
32-87
potassium 2/85 GW015-01
GW014-01
1,450-152,000
sodium 2/85 GW015-01
GW014-01
8,930-534,000
vanadium 2/85 GW014-01
GW018-01
4
zinc 2/85 GW014-01
GW10S-01
4-290
Organic Chemicals - Phase II
acetone
GW0105-02
GW016-02
10-550
benzene
GW016-02 22
di(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
GW011S-02
GW010S-02
10-26
2-butanone
GW0095-02
GW014-02
10-370
carbon disulfide
GW016-02 1
di-n-butyl phthalate
GW011S-02 10
2-methyl-2-pentanone
GW014-02 110
methylene chloride
GW010S-02
GW011S-02
7-15
2-methylnaphthalene
GW011S-02
GW014-02
31-110
2-methylphenol
GW016-02 10
naphthalene
GW011S-02
GW016-02
24-110
phenol
GW016-02
GW011S-02
4-10
toluene
GW016-02 28
trichloroethylene
GW011S-02
GW015-02
5-32
xylenes, total
GW011S-02
GW016-02
5-1,100
Inorganic Chemicals - Phase II
aluminum
GW010S-02 300
arsenic
GW014-02 44
barium
GW009S-02
GW014-02
400-900
calcium
GW008S-02
GW010S-02
51,000-207,000
iron
GW018-02
GW014-02
2,230-22,200
lead
GW015-02
GW011S-02
14-30
magnesium
GW015-02
GW014-02
21,000-150,000
manganese
GW016-02
GW018-02
50-4,330
nickel
GW014-02
GW009S-02
70-100
potassium
GW010S-02
GW014-02
6,000-156,000
sodium
GW015-02
GW014-02
9,000-495,000
     

 

On-Site Groundwater Sample Results, Sand & Gravel Water Bearing Zone, Phases I & II.

(Data used to develop Table 3.)
Chemical Sample
Date
Sample
Location
N umber
Concentration
Range - ppb
Organic Chemicals - Phase I
acetone 4/85
2/85
GW08D-01
GW10D-01
5-710
benzene 2/85 GW013-01
GW065-01
5-110
2-butanone 2/85 GW012-01
GW10D-01
13-205
butyl benzyl phthalate 2/85 GW004-01 10
chloroethane 2/85 GW065-01
GW001-01
10-100
1,1-dichloroethane 2/85 GW005-01
GW013-01
5-60
1,1-dichloroethene 2/85 GW013-01 5
diethyl phthalate 2/85 GW002-01 10
di-n-butyl phthalate 2/85 GW004-01 10
methylene chloride 2/85 GW019-01
GW001-01
5-50
trans-1,2-dichloroethene 2/85 GW019-01
GW005-01
5
1,1,1-trichloroethane 2/85 GW013-01 5
trichloroethylene 2/85 GW019-01 5
vinyl chloride 2/85 GW019-01
GW001-01
10-100
Inorganic Chemicals - Phase I
aluminum 4/85
2/85
GW08D-01
GW005-01
50-114
antimony 2/85 GW09D-01
GW065-01
30-58
arsenic 2/85
4/85
GW09D-01
GW08D-01
12-37
barium 4/85
2/85
GW08D-01
GW065-01
96-1,580
beryllium 2/85 GW065-01 1
calcium 2/85 GW004-01
GW065-01
25,000-192,000
chromium 2/85 GW006-01
GW065-01
3-10
cobalt 2/85 GW012-01
GW065-01
7-9
copper 2/85
4/85
GW005-01
GW08D-01
3-5
cyanide 2/85 GW09D-01
GW065-01
4-5
iron 2/85 GW003-01
GW065-01
11-10,400
lead 4/85 GW08D-01 10
magnesium 2/85 GW004-01
GW065-01
12,400-169,000
manganese 2/85 GW004-01
GW013-01
12-1,380
nickel 2/85 GW09D-01
GW001-01
24-87
potassium 2/85 GW005-01
GW065-01
717-147,000
silver 2/85 GS002-01
GW065-01
3-6
sodium 2/85 GW005-01
GW065-01
6,540-536,000
tin 2/85 GW11D-01
GW007-01
13-15
vanadium 2/85 GW09D-01
GW065-01
3-10
zinc 2/85 GW006-01
GW001-01
3-41
Organic Chemicals - Phase II
acetone   GW004-02
GW002-02
10-9,500
benzene   GW001-02 1
di(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate   GW002-02 10
2-butanone   GW007-02
GW002-02
18-4,800
chloroethane   GW001-02 24
1,1-dichloroethane   GW001-02 20
di-n-butyl phthalate   GW002-02 10
di-n-octyl phthalate   GW007-02 1
4-methyl-2-pentanone   GW002-02 220
methylene chloride   GW004-02
GW002-02
5-7
n-nitrosodi-n-propylamine   GW005-02 1
trans-1,2-dichloroethene   GW001-02 23
1,1,1-trichloroethane   GW001-02 2
trichloroethylene   GW001-02 4
vinyl chloride   GW001-02 7

 

On-Site Leachate Liquid Sample Results, Phase II.

(Data used to develop Table 4.)
Chemical Sample
Location
Number
Concentration
Range - ppb
Organic Chemicals
acetone LL002-01 44,000
2-butanone LL002-01 27,000
isophorone LL002-01 69
4-methyl-2-pentanone LL002-01 3,500
methylene chloride LL002-01 2,800
4-methylphenol LL002-01 12,000
Inorganic Chemicals
aluminum LL001-01
LL002-01
2,800-3,600
barium LL002-01 1,200
calcium LL001-01
LL002-01
67,000-660,000
chromium LL002-01 30
iron LL001-01
LL002-01
3,480-65,000
lead LL001-01
LL002-01
10-42
magnesium LL001-01
LL002-01
12,000-160,000
manganese LL002-01 6,220
nickel LL002-01 120
potassium LL002-01 310,000
sodium LL001-01
LL002-01
6,000-345,000
zinc LL002-01 50

 

On-Site Leachate Solid Sample Results, Phase II.

(Data used to develop Table 4.)
Chemical Sample
Location
Number
Concentration
Range - ppb
Organic Chemicals
acetone LS001-01
LS002-01
11-8,600
2-butanone LS001-01
LS002-01
14-690
di(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate LS001-01
LS003-01
110-91,000
butyl benzyl phthalate LS002-01
LS003-01
540-18,000
chlordane LS003-01 2,600
di-n-butyl phthalate LS003-01 13,000
di-n-octyl phthalate LS003-01 10,000
ethylbenzene LS003-01 150
2-hexanone LS002-01 21
4-methyl-2-pentanone LS002-01 650
methylene chloride LS001-01
LS003-01
15-97
4-methylphenol LS002-01 3,400
naphthalene LS002-01 370
phenol LS002-01 1,400
tetrachloroethene LS001-01 8
toluene LS002-01
LS003-01
10-140
trichloroethylene LS001-01 7
Inorganic Chemicals
aluminum LS002-01
LS003-01
4,700-7,400
calcium LS003-01
LS002-01
49,000-78,000
chromium LS001-01 10
iron LS001-01
LS002-01
9,100-16,000
lead LS002-01
LS003-01
9-22
magnesium LS003-01
LS002-01
14,000-22,000
manganese LS001-01
LS003-01
330-1,400
zinc LS002-01
LS003-01
30-63

 

Off-Site Private Well Sample Results, Phase II

(Data used to develop Table 5.)
Chemical Sample
Location
Number
Concentration
Range - ppb
Organic Chemicals
2-butanone RW003-01 16
methylene chloride RW003-01 8
phenol RW001-01
RW002-01
2-6
Inorganic Chemicals
calcium RW005-01
RW002-01
49,000-85,000
iron RW005-01
RW002-01
330-3,300
magnesium RW005-01
RW004-01
17,000-29,000
manganese RW005-01 70
sodium RW002-01
RW003-01
13,000-174,000
zinc RW005-01 120
     

 

Off-Site Surface Water Sample Results, Phase I

 

(Data used to develop Table 6.)
Chemical Sample
Location
Number
Concentration
Range - ppb
Organic Chemicals
acetone SW008-01
SW010-01
15-280
di(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate SW001-01
SW004-01
13-146
2-butanone SW010-01 190
4-methyl-2-pentanone SW010-01 27
methylene chloride SW001-01
SW002-01
6-10
4-methylphenol SW010-01 31
phenol SW010-01 14
trans-1,2-dichloroethene SW010-01
SW008-01
11-15
Inorganic Chemicals
aluminum SW004-01 400
calcium SW002-01
SW004-01
8,000-188,000
cyanide SW006-01
SW005-01
10-30
iron SW001-01
SW010-01
150-1,950
magnesium SW001-01
SW004-01
21,000-42,000
manganese SW005-01
SW004-01
30-440
mercury SW004-01
SW003-01
<1-1
potassium SW010-01 6,000
sodium SW006-01
SW004-01
6,000-14,000
vanadium SW002-01
SW001-01
20-30
zinc SW005-01
SW006-01
20-30
     


Off-Site Bottom Sediment Sample Results, Phase I

(Data used to develop Table 6.)
Chemical Sample
Location
Number
Concentration
Range - ppb
Organic Chemicals
acetone SD010-01
SD004-01
7-49
aroclor-1242 SD004-01 1,700
aroclor-1254 SD004-01 1,800
di(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate SD005-01
SD008-01
220-320
2-butanone SD004-01
SD002-01
7-11
1,2-dichlorobenzene SD008-01 220
methylene chloride SD003-01
SD004-01
5-14
4-methylphenol SD008-01 290
toluene SD005-01
SD002-01
3-10
xylenes, total SD005-01 3
Inorganic Chemicals
aluminum SD002-01
SD004-01
4,100-26,000
calcium SD003-01
SD002-01
21,000-87,000
chromium SD008-01 20
copper SD008-01
SD005-01
10-20
iron SD010-01
SD004-01
7,600-35,000
lead SD002-01
SD004-01
9-31
magnesium SD003-01
SD002-01
7,000-36,000
manganese SD003-01
SD004-01
260-730
mercury SD004-01 <1
nickel SD006-01
SD005-01
20-30
potassium SD005-01
SD004-01
2,000-5,000
vanadium SD005-01
SD004-01
10-50
zinc SD002-01
SD004-01
20-150
     

 

Off-Site Surface Water Sample Results, Phase II.

(Data used to develop Table 6.)
Chemical Sample
Location
Number
Concentration
Range - ppb
Organic Chemicals
acetone SW011-02
SW010-02
10-2,900
benzene SW010-02 250
benzoic acid SW010-02 300
di(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate SW003-02 10
2-butanone SW011-02
SW010-02
10-1,900
chloroform SW007-02 5
1,1-dichloroethane SW008-02 5
di-n-butyl phthalate SW011-02
SW005-02
10-20
2-hexanone SW010-02 500
isophorone SW010-02 10
methylene chloride SW011-02
SW010-02
5-250
4-methylphenol SW010-02 40
naphthalene SW010-02 36
phenol SW011-02
SW010-02
10-38
toluene SW007-02 5
trans-1,2-dichloroethene SW011-02
SW008-02
6-9
1,1,1-trichloroethane SW008-02 5
trichloroethylene SW008-03 5
vinyl chloride SW008-02 10
Inorganic Chemicals
aluminum SW002-02
SW012-02
1,000-1,800
calcium SW002-02
SW010-02
69,000-133,000
cyanide SW011-02 20
iron SW011-02
SW010-02
400-4,000
magnesium SW002-02
SW010-02
18,000-36,000
manganese SW002-02
SW010-02
50-840
potassium SW010-02 31,000
zinc SW012-02
SW002-02
30-50

 

Off-Site Sediment Sample Results, Phase II.

(Data used to develop Table 6.)
Chemical Sample
Location
Number
Concentration
Range - ppb
Organic Chemicals
acetone SD003-02
SD008-03
33-82
aroclor-1254 SD008-03 160
benzo(a)anthracene SD008-02
SD008-03
47-110
benzo(a)pyrene SD008-02
SD008-03
57-110
benzo(b,k)fluoranthene SD006-02
SD008-03
126-380
benzo(g,h,i)perylene SD008-03 78
di(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate SD012-02
SD008-03
98-1,700
2-butanone SD005-02
SD012-02
19-34
butyl benzyl phthalate SD005-02
SD008-03
338-1,400
chrysene SD006-02
SD008-03
46-100
dibenzo(a,h)anthracene SD008-03 49
1,2-dichlorobenzene SD008-03
SD008-02
56-120
dieldrin SD011-02 20
di-n-butyl phthalate SD002-02
SD008-03
54-1,600
di-n-octyl phthalate SD008-02
SD008-03
41-200
fluoranthene SD008-02
SD008-03
88-150
indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene SD008-03 87
methylene chloride SD006-02
SD008-03
12-48
4-methylphenol SD010-02
SD008-03
71-860
phenanthrene SD008-02
SD008-03
84-140
pyrene SD008-02
SD008-03
81-140
Inorganic Chemicals
aluminum SD005-02
SD002-02
3,900-14,000
calcium SD002-02
SD008-03
7,500-74,000
chromium SD008-02
SD008-03
20-30
copper SD008-03 30
cyanide SD010-02 <1
iron SD003-02
SD002-02
8,200-16,000
lead SD012-02
SD008-02
12-37
magnesium SD012-02
SD008-03
5,000-27,000
manganese SD006-02
SD008-03
150-500
zinc SD011-02
SD012-02
20-94
     

 

Appendix C - Comments & Responses

RESPONSE TO COMMENTS
Northside Sanitary Landfill (NSL)


1. COMMENT The report confuses the term "detected constituents" with constituents present at, or the result of, Northside Sanitary Landfill. Several of the detected constituents are naturally occurring and there is no evidence that the detected constituents are attributable to the NSL.

  RESPONSE

The document will be reviewed. All inferences of naturally occurring chemicals being present as a result of the landfill will be adjusted accordingly. Please note, however, that the document does have qualifiers with this regard on the following pages:

page 8 - 1st paragraph, "All chemicals found in sampled media have been assessed for adverse health effects.."

page 9 - 3rd paragraph, "Aluminum is not considered a contaminant of concern because it is one of the most common natural constituents of soil.."

2. COMMENT

There is a complete lack of physical or chemical evidence connecting constituents detected in groundwater at residential wells and constituents detected at NSL. In fact, Finley Creek to the South of NSL is the regional discharge point for groundwater flow, and no residential wells exist between NSL and Finley Creek.

 

  RESPONSE

On-site groundwater samples and on-site leachate samples did show sodium contamination, thus the correlation with the residential wells (please note page 21 of the document under the Pathways Analyses section, last paragraph). Groundwater flow is from the southeast to the northwest (please note Figure 5 of residential well sampling locations). Private wells do exist between the site and Finley Creek.

The Endangerment Species Report also indicated that it is not certain that groundwater does not flow underneath Finley Creek. If it does this would leave all private residential wells that are northwest of the site as potential recipients of contaminants found in on-site groundwater.

3. COMMENT The apparent concern of the ISDH for sodium in the groundwater was never a concern of either the EPA or IDEM.

  RESPONSE

When a public health assessment is written for a site, the primary focus is the health of the community surrounding the site. Any chemical found in a private residential well whether it is site-related or not (in this case, it is not conclusive), is of concern to the ISDH, especially if this is the primary source of drinking water.

Please note that the reason that this chemical was selected for discussion is because the report of the National Academy of Science stating that individuals with hypertension who are on salt-restrictive diets could suffer adverse health effects if concentrations in the primary drinking water source are greater than 20,000 ppb. The concentrations found have, in some cases, been 174,000 ppb. Long-term ingestion of high concentrations of sodium is associated with the development of hypertension.

4.

COMMENT

Groundwater in residential wells is completely void of any detectable concentrations of organic or inorganic chemicals potentially related to NSL. This would lead to the conclusion that NSL could not be the source of sodium.

  RESPONSE Please see page B-15, Appendix B, which contains the data used to create Table 5 in the document. According to the data reviewed, there were six inorganic chemicals found (calcium, iron, magnesium, manganese, sodium, and zinc). Sodium was the only chemical considered to be at a level of health concern. Because the other chemicals were present, there is a potential for migration of site contaminants into the private wells.

5. COMMENT Finley Creek near the landfill is not a recreational body of water.

  RESPONSE

It is quite apparent that Finley Creek is not conducive for all types of recreational activities. There is still a potential, however, for individuals to wade in or play around the creek. Recreation was qualified as such in the document.

6. COMMENT The analytical data used in the development of the public health assessment for this site is over 10 years old. We believe it is a highly questionable practice to alert people that they are at risk today based upon 10-year-old data.

  RESPONSE A public health assessment is written based on all available data. The Environmental Epidemiology Section of the ISDH does not perform any environmental sampling. We are dependent on IDEM and EPA to provide us with sampling data. It is important to note that a public health assessment document is never final. If any pertinent new data is collected after the public comment period of the document, an addendum can be added to the public health assessment. We are required to analyze all data for past, present, and future potential and completed exposure pathways. This of course includes the evaluation of all environmental sampling performed at the site, including the data that are 10 years old. We would appreciate your forwarding to us a copy of the new data so that we can update this document.

7. COMMENT The remedial actions currently in design for implementation in 1994 at the NSL will mitigate all current potential pathways exposure.

  RESPONSE This is very good news. However, it is important to note that until the remedial actions are implemented, the potential pathways of exposure still exist and will remain as such.

8. COMMENT The Consent Decree is the legal instrument prepared by the federal government and approved by the state of Indiana, which directs the cleanup of the site according to the standards determined by the state and the EPA.

  RESPONSE The conclusions reached in the public health assessment are based on an independent review of the available site data. The finding of one agency should not influence the findings and conclusions of another independent agency. Please note that the only portion of the document that does not agree with the RI/FS is the contamination levels of sodium in the private wells. Please recall that there are qualifiers within the document explaining our position on the levels of sodium found in the private well samples.

9. COMMENT

The RI report does not mention 320,000 drums as being deposited in the landfill, and there is no support for this conclusion.

  RESPONSE This information was reviewed and appropriate changes were made to the document.

10. COMMENT

The NSL was not licensed in 1971 to accept hazardous waste. And the term hazardous waste did not exist relative to permitting of waste disposal facilities.

  RESPONSE This information was reviewed and appropriate changes were made to the document.

11.

COMMENT

As stated in the Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study reports, and the Endangerment Assessment, potential public health impacts do not include groundwater.

  RESPONSE Based on the ATSDR guidelines for writing public health assessments, if private wells are located in a known contaminated aquifer, and the private wells are in the path of the groundwater flow, there is a potential for these private wells to become contaminated. The ISDH draws its conclusions independent of other agency conclusions on the same subject matter.

12. COMMENT The Consent Decree and ROD amendment have been finalized and the remedial design is in process. In fact, the intermediate design was submitted in June 1992.

  RESPONSE Please note that this document contains available information up until December of 1992, thus this information would not be included in this version of the document.

13.

COMMENT

There is no program currently in place which provides for groundwater quality monitoring as indicated in item 8 of the site visit (page 5).

  RESPONSE The information was reviewed and appropriate changes were made to the document.

14. COMMENT The concentrations reported in soil, sediment, leachate, and groundwater at NSL (with the exception of one sample at one location) are less than the MCL of 50 g/.

  RESPONSE The EPA's Action Level for lead in groundwater is 15 g/. As stated on page 7, if there is no comparison value for a chemical in a specific media, based on the ATSDR guidelines for writing public health assessments, it is automatically considered a chemical of concern.

15. COMMENT The procedure followed by the ISDH for selecting contaminants of concern does not follow EPA guidance or practice. In addition, the contaminants of concern for groundwater listed in Table 3 of the document differ from those in the RI/FS report.

 

RESPONSE

The ISDH writes public health assessments based on guidelines provided by the Agency For Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. The EPA selects chemicals of concern with the ultimate goal in mind of protecting the environment and selecting a remedial design. The ATSDR and ISDH select chemicals of concern based on the past, present, and future completed and potential pathways of exposure, and the resulting affect on human health.

16. COMMENT Private well RNOO2-01 is not an off-site well. This well is owned by the Bankert family and is located on the site property.

  RESPONSE This information was reviewed and appropriate changes were made to the document.

17.

COMMENT The Health Assessment Report should take into account the potential effects of Finley Creek realignment on biota.

  RESPONSE This comment is beyond the scope and purpose of the public health assessment.

18. COMMENT Landfill gas venting systems are not currently in place at the site. A landfill gas venting system has been designed and is currently under review by both the EPA and IDEM. Once the design is finalized, a landfill gas venting system will be constructed during the remedial action as part of the landfill cover system.

 

RESPONSE

This information was reviewed and appropriate changes were made to the document.

19. COMMENT There are no federal drinking water standards, promulgated or proposed, for sodium. As such, no enforceable standards or guidelines exist. Sodium is not a contaminant associated with the NSL as identified by the federal or state agencies involved in this site since its original inclusion on the National Priority List.

 

RESPONSE

We agree that there are no federal drinking water standards for sodium. There is, however, a research-based guideline provided by the National Academy of Sciences which is accepted by ATSDR. This guideline states that wherein water contains greater than 20,000 ppb of sodium, adverse health affects could occur in hypertensive individuals on medically advised, salt-restrictive diets. The ISDH has associated sodium with the NSL site as it was found in the on-site wells. (Please see Response #3.)

20.

COMMENT Private well RN002-01 is not an off-site well. This well is owned by the Bankert family (NSL owner/operator) and is located on the site property.

 

RESPONSE

The well is, however, is used for drinking purposes and must be addressed regardless of who owns it. This information was reviewed and appropriate changes were made to the document.

21.

COMMENT

There is a direct contradiction to the conclusion regarding sodium presented in the public health assessment report. The public health assessment report for the Envirochem site (directly west of NSL) states that "the source of sodium (in private wells) is not certain".

 

RESPONSE

This conclusion was made because the on-site monitoring wells for Envirochem did not show any sodium. On the other hand, the on-site monitoring wells for the NSL did show concentrations of sodium.

22. COMMENT Sodium is not a carcinogen as noted in the conclusions.

  RESPONSE

We agree, sodium is not a carcinogen. The sentence does not suggest that sodium is a carcinogen but that other site-related chemicals in residential wells, upon longer exposures, can cause adverse health effects, including cancer.

23. COMMENT Sampling of fish in Finley Creek is not necessary. Previous studies support this conclusion.

  RESPONSE This information was reviewed. Previous studies of Finley Creek suggest that the population of fish downgradient from the site is less than that found upgradient. Appropriate changes were made to the document.

24. COMMENT

Impacts from the leachate will be mitigated by the remedial actions currently in design.

 

RESPONSE

We are required to make our conclusions and recommendations based on the status of the site at the time of the writing of the public health assessment.

25. COMMENT

Off-site surface soils were sampled as a part of the supplemental investigation during remedial design.

  RESPONSE This data gathering was performed subsequent to the writing of the public health assessment. Our conclusions and recommendations are based on the status of the site at the time of the writing of the public health assessment.

26. COMMENT Based on the result of the RI/FS, standards were established for the remediation to mitigate potential health impacts.

  RESPONSE We are required to make our conclusions and recommendations based on the status of the site at the time of the writing of the public health assessment.

27. COMMENT

Residential well monitoring is not necessary based on the results of previous investigations, including the RI/FS.

  RESPONSE Regardless of the conclusions of other investigations, the recommendation in this report still stands that private wells should be monitored on a practical basis to ensure that site-related chemicals are not migrating to the private wells.

28. COMMENT

Any response actions taken relative to sodium should not be conducted relative to the remedial actions at the NSL.

  RESPONSE It is a fact that sodium was found in the on-site wells of the NSL site. The information regarding this data was reviewed and appropriate changes were made to the Recommendations section of the document.

29. COMMENT

Off-site groundwater monitoring is not planned for this site. The data do not indicate any need for off-site sampling.

  RESPONSE Based on our review of the data, there is a need for continued private well sampling, especially for those wells that had elevated site-related chemical concentrations.

30. COMMENT The Consent Decree requirements relative to remediations of NSL will protect Finely Creek. Sampling of fish in Finley Creek is not necessary.

  RESPONSE This information was reviewed and appropriate changes were made to the document.

31. COMMENT

Off-site soil was been investigated by EPA and IDEM in June 1993. Based on the results of those studies, the trustees have concluded that no off-site activities relative to the soils are necessary.

  RESPONSE

At the time this public health assessment was written, this information was not available. Our conclusions and recommendations are appropriate based on the data we reviewed.

32. COMMENT The public health assessment should be revised to reflect the facts today, not supposition based on data from nearly 10 years prior. The conclusions should be changed, and the public should be informed the concerns presented in the prior report were in error, or are being mitigated by the RA. The public should not be left with the erroneous conclusion presented in the public health assessment report that they are at risk from drinking groundwater from their supply wells impacted by NSL.

  RESPONSE

The public health assessment is a document that is never considered final. It is important to note, however, that the public health assessment is written based on information or data that are available up until the document is released for public comment. Thus, the conclusions and recommendations are not erroneous, just time dated. Any new data that affect the conclusions and recommendations of this document have been added at the end of the HARP statement.

The conclusions and recommendations contained in the public health assessment with regard to risk from drinking groundwater still stand. We are responsible for reporting information to the public based on the data we reviewed. Our conclusions and recommendations suggest that individuals on salt-restrictive diets because of doctor-diagnosed hypertension should be aware that the levels of sodium found in their wells may prohibit them from following their doctor's orders.

Due to time delays in the release of this document, it is important to note that the remedial investigation and design have been initiated since the public comment period. This has resulted in some of our recommendations being obsolete as the PRPs have already taken care of the concern before the public health assessment for the NSL site is put in final form. The following is a list of completed actions at the NSL site at the time we submitted this document for final printing.

  1. The off-site soils have been investigated. Soil sample results from Old Finley Creek are provided in the intermediate remedial design report, June 1993. Based on the results of those studies, the Trustees have concluded that no off-site activities relative to soils are necessary.
  2. Appropriate health and safety precautions will be undertaken during the RA to mitigate any potential health impacts (as a result of the remediation) on remedial workers or other persons on- or off-site. On-site workers will follow the appropriate OSHA regulations and the site-specific health and safety plan for personal protection.

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. #