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

PUBLIC HEALTH ASSESSMENT

REILLY TAR & CHEMICAL CORPORATION
(INDIANAPOLIS PLANT)
INDIANAPOLIS, MARION COUNTY, INDIANA


ENVIRONMENTAL CONTAMINATION AND OTHER HAZARDS

The tables in this section list the contaminants of concern. We evaluate these chemicals in the subsequent sections of this public health assessment and determine whether exposure to them has public health significance. ATSDR selects and discusses a chemical as a contaminant of concern based upon the following factors:

  1. the chemical has no comparison value and/or may be toxic to humans at specified levels;
  2. the comparison of on-site and off-site concentrations with public health assessment comparison values for (1) noncarcinogenic endpoints and (2) carcinogenic endpoints;
  3. an evaluation of the field data quality, laboratory data quality, and sample design; and
  4. community health concerns related to a particular chemical.

In the data tables that follow under the On-site Contamination and Off-site Contamination subsections, the listed chemical does not mean that it will cause adverse health effects from exposures. Instead, the list indicates which chemicals will be evaluated further in the public health assessment.

Comparison values for this public health assessment are contaminant concentrations in specific media that are used to select contaminants for further evaluation. Sample data provided are documented in the Final RI report.

The data tables include the following acronyms:

CREG = Cancer Risk Evaluation Guide. CREGs are estimated contaminant concentrations based on a one excess cancer in a million persons exposed over a lifetime. They are calculated from EPA's cancer slope factors.
DWEL = Drinking Water Equivalent Level. DWEL is a lifetime exposure level specific for drinking water at which adverse, noncarcinogenic health effects would not be expected to occur.
LTHA = Lifetime Health Advisory (for drinking water). The LTHA is derived from the Drinking Water Equivalent Levels for noncarcinogens. For noncarcinogenic organic and inorganic compounds, LTHAs are 20% and 10% respectively of the DWEL. For possible carcinogens, the LTHA is divided by an additional factor of 10.
MCL = Maximum Contaminant Level (for drinking water). MCLs represent contaminant concentrations that EPA deems protective of public health (considering the availability and economics of water treatment technology) over a lifetime (70 years) at an exposure rate of 2 liters of water per day.
NAS = National Academy of Sciences. It has been suggested by the NAS, that where water supplies contain more than 20 ppm, dietary restriction to less than 1 g is difficult to achieve and maintain.
ppm = Parts per million
ppb = Parts per billion
RfD = Reference Dose. EPA's estimate of the daily exposure to a contaminant that is unlikely to cause noncancer adverse health effects.

The Toxic Chemical Release Inventory (TRI) is an EPA database that contains information on chemical releases of industries in the United States. It is used to determine the potential sources of contamination near NPL sites. A computer search was conducted of all available toxic release inventory (TRI 87-90) data to determine the number of industries near the site within the city of Indianapolis (zipcode = 46241) and the types of chemicals they generate. There are approximately 11 industries in the vicinity of the site. About seven of these industries generate or release chemicals in common with contaminants found at the site such as ammonia and benzene.

All chemicals found in sampled media have been assessed for adverse health effects and are listed in the tables in Appendix B at the end of this public health assessment. These tables also include the location of all samples and the range of detected concentrations of each chemical.

The following media and/or areas were sampled during the RI:

  1. On-Site Subsurface Soil - Lime Pond
  2. On-Site Subsurface Soil - Abandoned Railroad Trench
  3. On-Site Subsurface Soil - Former Sludge Treatment Pit
  4. On-Site Subsurface Soil - South Landfill Test Pit
  5. On-Site Soil Boring - South Landfill
  6. On-Site Subsurface Soil - Former Drainage Ditch
  7. On- and Off-Site Surface Soil
  8. On- and Off-Site Surface Water
  9. On- and Off-Site Groundwater

A. On-Site Contamination

Subsurface Soil - Lime Pond

The lime pond was a lagoon constructed in 1953 to receive waste discharges from one of the chemical operations on the Oak Park property. Until 1965, discharges from process areas on the Oak Park property flowed to the lime pond. Solid material deposited in the pond is primarily lime from boiler blowdown operations. Drums containing unidentified liquids and solids were buried in trenches immediately east and possibly north of the lime pond (EPA Fact Sheet; EPA Revised CERCLA RI Report).

During Phase II of the RI, six soil borings (see Figure 2, Appendix A) within the pond revealed lime sludge from the surface to a depth of 4-7 feet. Buried drums, black sludge, and fill materials were found in a soil boring east of the pond. As a result of this finding, seven test pits were excavated in the area (see Figure 3, Appendix A) during the Phase III Continuing Studies Program and revealed buried drums east of the lime pond. A total of 25.5 drums were exposed during the lime pond test pit operations.

The majority of the drums were found in test pits TP16-1 (eight drums), TP16-2 (11 drums), and TP16-3 (five drums). A single crushed drum was observed in TP16-4, and one-half of a crushed drum was found in TP16-6. Test pits TP16-5 and TP16-7 did not contain any drums; however, sufficient metal debris capable of providing a magnetic anomaly was observed in each of these pits.

In the test pits containing drums, the drums were found from less than 6 inches to approximately 3 feet below the ground surface. The condition of the drums ranged from sound (a few small dents and no gashes) to partially or completely crushed. Many of the drums were missing lids and contained sludge or sludgy soil. Other drums were observed to have lids intact and bungs, and were assumed to contain liquids. A few drums, particularly those most badly crushed, were empty.

Other materials observed in the test pits included: sludge, pallets, planks, cross-ties, buckets, hoses, metal strapping, metal pipes, sheet metal, bricks, clay tile, concrete, glassware, plastic sheets, and gloves.

A total of five volatile organic compounds (VOCs), acetone, benzene, ethylbenzene, methylene chloride, and total xylenes, were detected in the lime pond samples. Acetone and methylene chloride had the greatest number of detections, but may have been introduced to the samples during laboratory analysis. No chlorinated ethanes or ethenes were detected in any of the lime pond samples.

Three semi-volatile organic compounds (SVOCs), 16 polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), and eight pyridine and pyridine derivatives were detected in the lime pond samples.

The contaminants of concern in the on-site subsurface soil at the lime pond area are listed in Table 1.

Table 1. Contaminants of Concern in On-Site Subsurface Soil Lime Pond Samples,
May 1989.

Chemical Field
ID
Concentration Range
ppb
Comparison Value
ppb Source
bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate LP16-5-2
LP16-5-1
4,300-240,000 50,000 CREG
dibenzofuran LP16-4-3 42 * -
2-methylnaphthalene LP16-1-3
LP16-4-3
130-340 * -

ppm ppm
lead LP16-2-1
LP16-1-1
1-17 * -
mercury LP16-5-1 <1 * -
    * No comparison value available

Subsurface Soil - Abandoned Railroad Trench

The railroad trench was used as an unloading and loading area. The tracks were located below ground level to facilitate these operations. During the 1960s, the trench was filled with drums of coal tar enamel and foundry sand. During Phase II of the RI (May 1989), six test pits were dug along the trench (see Figure 4, Appendix A). Three (TP17-1, TP17-2, and TP17-4) of the six test pits were excavated to the railbed, while the other test pits (TP17-3A; TP17-5-1; and TP17-5-11, a duplicate) were excavated in fill materials. A surface layer of 3-6 inches of crushed stone was encountered at each test pit. Beneath this lie the fill materials used to fill the trench when it was abandoned. The fill consisted of black, brown, and gray sand and gravel; foundry sand; coal cinders; coal tar wastes; wood debris; and drums. Most of the drums were open-top and contained a variety of materials including water (assumed to come from trench infiltration), soil, and various unidentified wastes. Many of the drums were in poor condition, being either crushed, punctured, or corroded. (EPA Fact Sheet; CERCLA Final RI Report)

A total of eight VOCs were detected in the abandoned railroad trench. One of the six samples showed no VOCs (TP17-5-1D, a duplicate of TP17-5-1). The original sample contained only methylene chloride, a common laboratory contaminant (TP17-5-1). No chlorinated ethanes or ethenes were detected in any of the abandoned railroad soil samples. Seven SVOCs (including phenols), and 21 metals were detected in the abandoned railroad trench samples.

The contaminants of concern in the on-site subsurface soil at the abandoned railroad trench area are listed in Table 2.

Table 2. Contaminants of Concern in On-Site Subsurface Soil Abandoned Railroad Trench Samples,
May 1989.

Chemical Field ID Concentration Range - ppb Comparison Value
ppb Source
benzo(a)anthracene TP17-4-1
TP17-1-1
78,000-670,000 * -
benzo(a)pyrene TP17-2-1
TP17-3A-1
51,000-420,000 120 CREG
benzo(b)fluoranthene TP17-2-1
TP17-3A-1
64,000-1,000,000 * -
benzo(g,h,i)perylene TP17-2-1
TP17-1-1
30,000-230,000 * -
benzo(k)fluoranthene TP17-2-1
TP17-5-1
54,000-540,000 * -
chrysene TP17-4-1
TP17-1-1
87,000-740,000 * -
dibenz(a,h)anthracene TP17-1-1 130,000 * -
dibenzofuran TP17-4-1
TP17-1-1
6,500-880,000 * -
di(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate TP17-2-1
TP17-1-1
15,000-160,000 50,000 CREG
indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene TP17-2-1
TP17-1-1
25,000-200,000 * -
mercury TP17-2-1
TP17-1-1
<1-3 ppm * -
1-methylnaphthalene TP17-3A-1
TP17-1-1
23,000-520,000 * -
2-methylnaphthalene TP17-4-1
TP17-1-1
2,600-1,000,000 * -
naphthalene TP17-4-1
TP17-1-1
8,300-2,300,000 * -
phenanthrene TP17-4-1
TP17-1-1
79,000-7,500,000 * -
    * No comparison value available

Subsurface Soil - Former Sludge Treatment Pit

From the early 1950s to 1979, wastewater sludge from the coal tar refinery and synthetic chemical operations was dried in the sludge treatment pit. The pit was used for thickening sludge by evaporation prior to off-site disposal (EPA Fact Sheet; EPA CERCLA Final RI Report).

During Phase II of the RI (May 1989), samples were collected from two test trenches excavated in the vicinity of the former sludge treatment pit (see Figure 5, Appendix A).

Ten VOCs, three SVOCs (including phenols), 18 PAHs, seven pyridine derivatives, and a total of 20 metals were detected in the former sludge treatment pit samples.

The contaminants of concern in the on-site subsurface soil at the former sludge treatment area are listed in Table 3.

Table 3. Contaminants of Concern in On-Site Subsurface Soil Former Sludge Treatment Pit Samples,
May 1991.

Chemical Field ID Concentration Range - ppb Comparison Value
ppb Source
benzo(a)anthracene TP18-2-S3D
TP18-2-S2
130-120,000 * -
benzo(a)pyrene TP18-2-S3D
TP18-1-S2
54-120,000 120 CREG
benzo(b)fluoranthene TP18-2-S3D
TP18-1-S2
120-190,000 * -
benzo(g,h,i)perylene TP18-1-S3
TP18-2-S1
250-66,000 * -
benzo(k)fluoranthene TP18-2-S2
TP18-1-S2
56,000-91,000 * -
dibenzofuran TP18-1-S3
TP18-2-S2
120-400,000 * -
indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene TP18-1-S3D
TP18-2-S1
210-56,000 * -
lead TP18-2-S3
TP18-1-S2
3-594 ppm * -
1-methylnaphthalene TP18-1-S1
TP18-2-S1
3,000-180,000 * -
2-methylnaphthalene TP18-2-S3D
TP18-2-S2
60-400,000 * -
naphthalene TP18-1-S3
TP18-2-S2
97-1,300,000 * -
pentachlorophenol TP18-1-S2 31,000 5,800 CREG
phenanthrene TP18-1-S3
TP18-2-S2
470-1,400,000 * -
    * No comparison value available

Subsurface Soil - South Landfill Area

The south landfill area received construction debris and soil. In addition, various solid and semi-solid wastes from the coal tar and synthetic chemical operations were deposited there, as were coal cinders from plant boilers and foundry sand from the Chrysler Corporation. (EPA Fact Sheet; EPA CERCLA Final RI Report)

During Phases II (May 1989) and III (June 1990) of the RI, soil samples were collected from 15 test pits (see Figure 6, Appendix A) and five soil borings (see Figure 7, Appendix A) in the south landfill area. Test pit samples are usually used to help characterize the waste materials disposed at the site. The Phase II subsurface investigation of the south landfill area was confined to the eastern portion in the vicinity of a waste material impoundment and former dug well/fire pond. All chemicals detected in the test pit and soil boring samples are listed in the tables in Appendix B.

Twelve VOCs were detected in some of the samples. Four of the samples taken from the test pits had no VOCs (TP19-1-S1-1, TP19-1-S2-1, TP19-3-S1-1, & TP19-4-S1-1). Fifteen other test pit samples contained only methylene chloride and/or acetone, both common laboratory contaminants, which may have been introduced to the samples during laboratory analysis. Test pit and soil boring detection depths ranged from 5 to 55 feet.

Among samples taken from the five soil borings drilled in the south landfill area (vicinity of the former fire pond), four samples, including the duplicate samples, had no VOCs. Two other soil boring samples contained only acetone and/or methylene chloride.

Ten SVOCs (including phenols) were detected in samples taken from test pits in the south landfill area. Dibenzofuran and bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate were the two chemicals detected most frequently. There were 18 PAHs detected in the test pit samples. The highest number was detected in sample TP19-4-S2-1, which was taken from the sludge.

There were 12 SVOCs (including phenols) and 17 PAHs detected in the soil boring samples taken from the south landfill area. Four samples (TP19-15-S1-1, SB19-3-2D, SB19-3-3, and SB19-5D) showed no PAHs. The soil boring sample with the highest detection was SB19-4-3.

Fourteen pyridine and pyridine derivatives were detected in the south landfill area. Twenty-eight of the 35 test pit samples had no pyridine derivatives. All fourteen chemicals were detected in soil samples TP19-2-S1-1 and TP19-2-S2-1, which were both taken from location TP19-2 along the eastern boundary of the south landfill. Only one to five pyridine chemicals were detected in the other test pit samples.

Twelve of the 18 soil boring samples had no pyridines detected. The greatest number of maximum detections occurred in sample SB19-4-3, which sampled waste material taken from a depth of 19-20 feet on the eastern margin of the south landfill.

Twenty-three metals were detected in the test pit samples, and 18 were detected in the soil boring samples.

The contaminants of concern in the on-site soil boring at the south landfill area are listed in Table 4.

As test pit samples are usually used to help characterize the waste materials disposed at the site, the contaminants of concern in on-site subsurface soil are limited to those found in the soil borings (Table 4).

Table 4. Contaminants of Concern in On-Site South Landfill Area Soil Boring Samples,
May 1989 (Phase II)
.

Chemical Field ID Concentration Range - ppb Comparison Value
ppb Source
benzo(a)anthracene SB19-1-1
SB19-4-3
65-680,000 * -
benzo(a)pyrene SB19-1-3
SB19-4-3
46-340,000 120 CREG
benzo(b)fluoranthene SB19-1-3
SB19-4-3
43-400,000 * -
benzo(g,h,i)perylene SB19-4-1
SB19-2-1
120-180,000 * -
benzo(k)fluoranthene SB19-1-1
SB19-4-3
51-250,000 * -
chrysene SB19-1-1
SB19-5-8
72-900,000 * -
dibenzofuran SB19-1-3
SB19-4-3
82-2,400,000 * -
2-ethyl pyridine SB19-4-1
SB19-4-3
130-1,000,000 700,000** RfD
3-ethyl pyridine SB19-4-1
SB19-4-3
110-730,000 700,000** RfD
indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene SB19-2-3
SB19-2-1
48-140,000 * -
lead SB19-1-3
SB19-1-1
3-329 (ppm) * -
2-methyl-5-ethyl pyridine SB19-4-1
SB19-4-3
130-810,000 700,000** RfD
1-methylnaphthalene SB19-1-3
SB19-4-3
40-1,000,000 * -
2-methylnaphthalene SB19-1-1
SB19-4-3
73-2,500,000 * -
    *    No comparison value available
    **    Since a RfD for these pyridine derivatives does not exist, the RfD for pyridine has been used as a surrogate.

Subsurface Soil - Former Drainage Ditch Area

Before 1970, wastewater and stormwater were carried by the trench into the Raymond Street storm sewer. The water entering the trench came from sources that included the tar storage tanks, the refinery, and the boiler operations. (EPA Fact Sheet; EPA CERCLA Final RI Report)

Soil samples (Table 5) were collected from five test pits (see Figure 8, Appendix A) in May 1989 during Phase II of the RI. Soil encountered in the test pits consisted of brown and grey coarse sand and gravel. In most of the test pits (TP20-2, TP20-3, TP20-3A, TP20-4, and TP20-5), a thin layer of gravel and/or cinders was encountered at approximately 2 feet beneath the ground surface.

The estimated volume of fill materials in the former drainage ditch was calculated to be between 5,600 and 15,800 cubic yards. These estimates were based on the current ditch length of approximately 1,000 feet and the historical length of 1,220 feet. The width was taken to be between 15 and 50 feet. The observed depth of oily contamination ranged from 2 to 10 feet.

Seven VOCs were detected in the former drainage ditch area. Three samples (TP20-1-1, TP20-4-1, and TP20-5-1) contained only methylene chloride and acetone, both common laboratory contaminants, which may have been introduced to the samples during laboratory analysis. Samples were collected at a depth of 3 to 5 feet and consisted of oily clay from the west end of the ditch.

No benzene or chlorinated ethanes or ethenes were detected in any of the samples collected in the former drainage ditch area.

Three SVOCs, 17 PAHs, 8 pyridine derivatives, and 21 metals were detected in the former drainage ditch area.

The contaminants of concern in the on-site subsurface soil at the former drainage ditch area are listed in Table 5.

Table 5. Contaminants of Concern in the On-Site Subsurface Soil in the Former Drainage Ditch Area Samples,
May 1989 (Phase II).
Chemical Field ID Concentration Range - ppb Comparison Value
ppb Source
benzo(a)anthracene TP20-3-1
TP20-4-1
12,000-2,600,000 * -
benzo(a)pyrene TP20-2-1
TP20-4-1
12,000-960,000 120 CREG
benzo(b)fluoranthene TP20-1-1
TP20-4-1
55-1,300,000 * -
benzo(g,h,i)perylene TP20-2A-1
TP20-3-1
25,000-29,000 * -
benzo(k)fluoranthene TP20-3-1
TP20-4-1
34,000-1,300,000 * -
chrysene TP20-3-1
TP20-4-1
21,000-3,100,000 * -
dibenzofuran TP20-5-2
TP20-4-1
410-9,200,000 * -
indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene TP20-3-1
TP20-2A-1
20,000-21,000 * -
mercury TP20-2A-1
TP20-4-1
<1-2 (ppm) * -
1-methylnaphthalene TP20-3A-1
TP20-4-1
130-3,000,000 * -
2-methylnaphthalene TP20-3A-1
TP20-4-1
45-6,000,000 * -
phenanthrene TP20-3A-1
TP20-4-1
200-31,000,000 * -
    * No comparison value available

Surface Soil

Surface soil samples were collected at 38 on-site locations in July 1990 during Phase III of the RI (see Figure 9, Appendix A). The surface soil samples were collected from the top 6 inches of soil, which would include ATSDR's definition of both surface soil (<3 inches) and subsurface soil (>3 inches); therefore, this subsection is identified as subsurface soil. The samples were analyzed for SVOCs (including phenols), PAHs, pyridine derivatives, and metals. (EPA Fact Sheet; EPA CERCLA Final RI Report)

Eight SVOCs (including phenols), 18 PAHs, three pyridine derivatives, and 22 metals were detected in the subsurface soil samples.

The contaminants of concern in the on-site subsurface soil are listed in Table 6.

Table 6. Contaminants of Concern in On-Site Subsurface Soil Samples,
July 1990 (Phase III).
Chemical Field ID Concentration Range - ppb Comparison Value
ppb Source
benzo(a)anthracene SS5-1
SS03-3
42-2,400,000 * -
benzo(a)pyrene SS5-1
SS03-3
73-2,000,000 120 CREG
benzo(b)fluoranthene SS31-1
SS03-3
120-3,500,000 * -
benzo(g,h,i)perylene SS5-1
SS03-3
140-1,300,000 * -
benzo(k)fluoranthene SS31-1
SS03-3
120-640,000 * -
chrysene SS5-1
SS03-3
75-2,700,000 * -
dibenz(a,h)anthracene SS5-1
SS03-3
44-550,000 * -
dibenzofuran SS28-1
SS03-3
57-140,000 * -
indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene SS31-1
SS03-3
62-1,200,000 * -
lead SS5-1
SS27-1
9-1,310 (ppm) * -
mercury SS01-1
SS13-1
<1-3 (ppm) * -
1-methylnaphthalene SS29-1
SS4-1
50-13,000 * -
2-methylnaphthalene SS29-3
SS13-1
67-25,000 * -
phenanthrene SS37-1
SS03-3
57-2,800,000 * -
    * No comparison value available

Surface Water

The total pyridine derivative concentration found at the on-site sampling location was several orders of magnitude greater than the total derivative concentrations reported in off-site Phase I samples. This sampling location, unlike those sampled during Phase I, consisted of a pool of surface water runoff. The analytical results for this surface water runoff collection point prompted Reilly Industries to initiate measures to contain all surface runoff from this specialty chemical operation.

The Phase II (Round 1) surface water sampling program was completed in July 1989 (see Figure 10, Appendix A). One surface water sample was collected from water which had ponded at the northern end of the drainage ditch on the Maywood property. During a consultation with the EPA Remedial Project Manager, this sampling location was chosen because, at the time of the investigation, it was the only surface water to be found at the site. The sample was collected as a grab sample from the upper surface water layer (0 to 0.5 feet in depth) and was analyzed for VOCs, pyridine derivatives, and metals. Samples were not analyzed for SVOCs during Phase II of the RI. (EPA Fact Sheet; EPA CERCLA Final RI Report)

The VOCs found in Phase II surface water samples (Table 8) were methylene chloride, acetone, toluene, styrene, and total xylenes. Because methylene chloride and acetone are common laboratory contaminants, and both chemicals were detected in associated laboratory method blanks, their detection in surface water is suspect. Metals were also detected in the surface water.

The contaminants of concern in the on-site surface water are listed in Table 7.

Table 7. Contaminants of Concern in On-Site Surface Water Sample, July 1989
Phase II, Round 1).
Chemical Field ID Concentration Range ppb Comparison Value
ppb Source
arsenic SW01-W1-1 13 * -
3-ethyl-4-methyl pyridine SW01-W1-1 61 35** RfD
2-ethyl pyridine SW01-W1-1 96 35** RfD
3-ethyl pyridine SW01-W1-1 35 35** RfD
4-ethyl pyridine SW01-W1-1 39 35** RfD
2,3-lutidine SW01-W1-1 22 35** RfD
2,6-lutidine SW01-W1-1 35 35** RfD
3,4-lutidine SW01-W1-1 42 35** RfD
3,5-lutidine SW01-W1-1 400 35** RfD
2-methyl-5-ethyl pyridine SW01-W1-1 39 35** RfD
2-picoline SW01-W1-1 240 35** RfD
3 & 4-picoline SW01-W1-1 6,600 35** RfD
pyridine SW01-W1-1 5,000 35 RfD
sodium SW01-W1-1 589,000 20,000 NAS
    *    No comparison value available
    **    Since a RfD for these pyridine derivatives does not exist, the RfD for pyridine has been used as a surrogate.

Groundwater

On-site groundwater sampling was done in two phases. Sampling data from Phases II and III are reported here. These water samples were analyzed for SVOCs (including phenols), VOCs, pyridine and pyridine derivatives, PAHs, ammonia, and metals.

In July and October 1989, as part of the Phase II, RI activities, two rounds of groundwater samples were collected (see Figure 11, Appendix A). The wells sampled included new wells constructed during Phase II and selected wells sampled during Phase I (see Phase II, Off-site Contamination). (EPA Fact Sheet; EPA CERCLA Final RI Report).

In July 1990, as part of the Phase III RI activities, groundwater samples were collected from selected wells during Phases I (see Phase II, Off-site Contamination) and II, and from wells constructed during Phase III (see Figure 12, Appendix A). (EPA Fact Sheet; EPA CERCLA Final RI Report).

During the Phase II groundwater sampling, 12 VOCs were detected. Two additional VOCs were detected during the Phase III sampling, bromodichloromethane and 1,2-dichloroethane. Methylene chloride and acetone were detected in both sampling phases. Because they are both common laboratory contaminants, and both chemicals were detected in associated laboratory blanks, their detection in the groundwater samples are suspect.

Four SVOCs were detected during the Phase II sampling. They included phenol, 2,4-dimethylphenol, bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate, and di-n-octyl phthalate. Six SVOCs were detected during the Phase III sampling. They included bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate, 3,4-methylphenol, 2,6-dimethylphenol, 2,5-dimethylphenol, 3,5-dimethylphenol, and 3,4-dimethylphenol.

Because PAHS were detected in parts per trillion, they were not of significance in the Phase II and III groundwater sampling.

There were 21 inorganic chemicals detected in the Phase II sampling.

All chemicals detected during the Phase II and III samplings are listed in the tables in Appendix B. The highest chemical concentration found in either Phase II or III was used as the criteria for selecting a contaminant of concern. Contaminants of concern for Phases II and III on-site groundwater samplings are listed in Table 8.

Table 8. Contaminants of Concern in On-Site Groundwater Samples.

Chemical Phase Field ID Concentration Range Comparison Value
Value Source
Organic Chemicals (Concentrations in ppb)
ammonia III RI07-W3-1
RI17-W1-1
<1-53 30 LTHA
benzene II RI11S(1)
RI05S(1)
1-7,700 1.2 CREG
bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate II RI02D(1)
RI04D(1)
5-83 2.5 CREG
chloroform II RI07D(1) RI05D(1) 3-25 350 EMEG
3-ethyl-4-methyl pyridine III RI06-W1-1
RI17-W1-1
6-140 35** RfD
2-ethyl pyridine III RI06-W1-1
RI18-W1-1
9-3,100 35** RfD
3-ethyl pyridine III RI11-W2-1
RI18-W1-1
9-800 35** RfD
2,3-lutidine II RI06D(2)
RI04D(1)
2-1,400 35** RfD
2,4 & 2,5-lutidine II RI11S(1)
RI04D(1)
3-2,700 35** RfD
2,6-lutidine III RI15-W2-1
RI18-W1-1
2-2,000 35** RfD
3,4-lutidine III RI04-W1-1
RI17-W1-1
3-180 35** RfD
3,5-lutidine III RI19-W3-1
RI04-W3-1
3-2,600 35** RfD
2-methyl-3-ethyl pyridine II RI06D(2)
RI04D(1)
4-1,700 35** RfD
2-methyl-5-ethyl pyridine II RI12S(2)
RI04D(1)
2-1,200 35** RfD
2-picoline III RI17-W3-1
RI18-W1-3
4-250,000 35** RfD
3 & 4-picoline III RI17-W3-1
RI18-W1-1
7-24,000 35** RfD
pyridine III RI17-W3-1
RI18-W1-1
6-35,000 35 RfD
trichloroethylene III RI20-W1-1
RI09-W1-1
1-110 5 MCL
Inorganic Chemicals (Concentrations in ppm)
arsenic III RI05D(1)
RI04D(1)
2-72 * -
chromium III RI01D(1)
RI09S(1)
12-228 180 RfD
lead III RI05D(1)
RI01S(1)
2-344 15 Action Level
nickel III RI03D(1)
RI01S(1)
9-406 100 LTHA
    *    No comparison value available
    **    Since a RfD for these pyridine derivatives does not exist, the RfD for pyridine has been used as a surrogate.

B. Off-Site Contamination

Surface Soil

Off-site surface soil samples were collected in July 1990, during Phase III of the RI, at 10 locations (see Figure 9, Appendix A). Approximate sample locations and distances from the site were surface soil sample numbers 38 through 40, 600 feet east (near residential area); number 41, 400 feet south; numbers 42 through 46, 1,200 feet west; and number 47, 600 feet north (near residential area). The samples were collected from the top 6 inches of soil, which would include ATSDR's definition of both surface soil (<3 inches) and subsurface soil (> 3 inches); therefore, this subsection is identified as subsurface soil. The samples were analyzed for SVOCs (including phenols), PAHs, pyridine derivatives, and metals (Table 9) (EPA Fact Sheet; EPA CERCLA Final RI).

Nine SVOCs (including phenols), 18 PAHs, and 18 metals were detected in the off-site subsurface soil. No pyridine derivatives were detected.

The contaminants of concern in the off-site subsurface soil are listed in Table 9. Calcium in general does not pose a health risk to humans; therefore, it will not be discussed further in this public health assessment.

Table 9. Contaminants of Concern in Off-Site Subsurface Soil Samples,
July 1990 (Phase III).
Chemical Field ID Concentration Range
ppb
Comparison Value
ppb Source
benzo(a)anthracene SS40-1
SS39-1
38-2,400 * -
benzo(a)pyrene SS40-1
SS39-1
46-2,900 120 CREG
benzo(b)fluoranthene SS40-1
SS39-3
100-3,500 * -
benzo(g,h,i)perylene SS44-1
SS39-1
140-2,700 * -
benzo(k)fluoranthene SS43-1
SS39-3
240-6,200 * -
chrysene SS40-1
SS39-1
66-3,400 * -
dibenz(a,h)anthracene SS44-1
SS39-1
45-720 * -
dibenzofuran SS38-1
SS41-1
67-210 * -
indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene SS44-1
SS39-1
120-2,100 * -
1-methylnaphthalene SS38-1
SS41-1
64-360 * -
phenanthrene SS43-1
SS39-1
110-3,300 * -

ppm ppm
arsenic SS47-1
SS40-1
4-13 * -
cadmium SS43-1
SS45-1
1-9 0.4 EMEG
calcium SS39-1
SS43-1
23,700-105,000 * -
chromium SS38-1
SS45-1
9-28 10 RfD
lead SS40-1
SS45-1
22-913 * -
 
    * No comparison value available

Surface Water

In April 1988 (Phase I) eight off-site surface water samples were collected from five locations (Figure 10, Appendix A): 1) Eagle Creek (SW-1, SW-2, and SW-3), 2) Blue Lake (SW-4 and SW-5), 3) the unnamed pond on General Motors Allison Gas Turbine property (SW-6), 4) the surface water impoundment located northwest of the site (SW-7), and 5) at the northern end of the former drainage ditch area where water was ponded at the time of the Phase II sampling (SW-1). (EPA Fact Sheet; EPA CERCLA Final RI Report)

All Phase I surface water samples were analyzed for VOCs, SVOCs (including phenols), PAHs, pyridine derivatives, ammonia, metals, cyanide, and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), and pesticides (Table 10).

Reilly Industries, Inc. and EPA agreed during a Phase I review meeting in August 1988 that Phase I surface water detections of site-related contaminants were sufficiently lowered to dismiss the need for sediment sampling in subsequent phases of the RI. Sediment sampling was not performed in Eagle Creek. (EPA CERCLA Final RI Report)

The VOCs detected in the Phase I surface water samples included methylene chloride and acetone. Because methylene chloride and acetone are common laboratory contaminants, and both chemicals were detected in associated laboratory method blanks; their detection in the surface water samples is suspect.

Chlorinated ethanes and ethenes were not detected at surface water sampling points upgradient of the site or on the site; nor were chlorinated ethanes and ethenes detected in locations SW-5 and SW-6, immediately downgradient of the site. Chlorinated ethanes and ethenes have been detected at SW-4, but not at the upgradient location SW-5, and chlorinated ethane and ethene concentrations at groundwater monitoring well RI-15, upgradient from SW-4, are lower than that reported at SW-4. Furthermore, the greatest of the Eagle Creek chemical detections corresponds with the most upstream sampling point.

The SVOCs (including phenols) identified in Phase I surface water samples were 4-nitrophenol (SW-5), bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate (SW-1 through SW-7), and di-n-octyl phthalate (SW-2 and SW-3). All of the phthalate concentrations were also detected in the associated blanks, and probably represent laboratory contaminants.

The concentration found of 4-nitrophenol was well below the detection limit and should be considered an estimate and/or false result.

Because PAHs were detected in parts per trillion, they were not of significance in the Phase I surface water samples.

Five pyridine derivative chemicals were detected in the surface water samples during Phase I of the RI.

The site investigation focuses on unfiltered metal sample results since those provide worst-case results. Antimony, beryllium, cadmium, cobalt, selenium, silver, and vanadium were not present at concentrations above their limits of detection. No cyanide was detected in the off-site surface water samples during Phase I of the RI.

Ammonia concentrations in surface water samples were not detected at sampling locations SW-4, SW-6, and SW-7. Ammonia was detected at SW-5 on the west side of Blue Lake, and at all three sampling locations along Eagle Creek. The ammonia detected in SW-5 may be indirectly attributable to the site, or may be directly attributable to foundry sand used to fill Blue Lake when analyses were performed in the mid 1970s.

PCB and pesticide analyses were performed on all off-site surface water samples during Phase I of the RI; none were detected.

The contaminants of concern in the off-site surface water are listed in Table 10.

Table 10. Contaminants of Concern in Off-Site Surface Water Samples,
April 1988 (Phase I).
Chemical Field ID Concentration Range - ppb Comparison Value
ppb Source
2,4 & 2,5-lutidine SW-5
SW-5A
4-5 35* RfD
3,5-lutidine SW-3
SW-5A
3-18 35* RfD
    * Since a RfD for these pyridine derivatives does not exist, the RfD for pyridine has been used as a surrogate.

Groundwater

In April 1988, during Phase I of the RI, 26 groundwater samples were collected from various accessible site area wells and water supply sources (see Figure 13, Appendix A).

As part of Phase I, Reilly Industries performed an inventory of existing public, private residential, commercial, and industrial groundwater supply wells within several township sections immediately surrounding the general Reilly Industries site area.

An initial well inventory database was developed by Reilly Industries personnel in 1983 from available Indiana Department of Natural Resources (DNR) records. This database included logs for over 1,400 wells which existed within a 3-mile radius of the site. The well inventory area is bounded by Morris Street north of the site, Pershing Street east of Eagle Creek (east of the site), Kentucky Avenue southeast of the site, and Holt Road west of the site.

The well inventory was compiled in July 1987. The 135 total number of well records identified includes all documented wells within the RI/FS designated well inventory area and may include several well records outside the inventory area, but within the well inventory boundaries. The wells identified included 13 industrial/commercial water supply wells (ICW), four residential wells (RW), eight groundwater monitoring wells (MW), and two industrial-treated water supply sources (TWS). Of the ICW wells, two were in excess of 60 feet; eight were in excess of 80 feet, but not more than 150 feet; two are to be determined; and one is in excess of 400 feet. There were no records of depth for the four residential wells except RW-4 at 130 feet. The eight groundwater monitoring wells had depths in excess of nearly 30 feet, but not more than 45 feet. There was no documentation recorded for the depths of the two TWS.

The following well identifications were used interchangeably: ICW-5/BB-8, ICW-6/BB-5; ICW7/PW5-1; ICW-8/PW5-3; ICW-10/PW8-1; ICW-11/PW8-3; TWS-1/PW8-2; USGS83/MW-4; USGS87/MW-5; and ICW-12/LRM.

    BB = Bridgeport Brass (now Olin Brass)
    PW = Production Well, Detroit Diesel Allison Plant
    USGS = United States Geological Survey
    LRM = Laser Robotics Machine

Note that one out of the previously-mentioned 13 ICWs is on-site (ICW-1). The remaining wells including RWs, MWs, and TWSs are off-site. Residential well locations were identified as RW-1, RW-2, RW-3, and RW-4. The samples were analyzed for VOCs, SVOCs (including phenols), PAHs, pyridine and pyridine derivatives, pesticides/PCBs, metals, cyanide, and ammonia. (EPA Fact Sheet; EPA CERCLA Final RI Report)

Thirteen VOCs detected in the Phase I groundwater samples included methylene chloride and acetone. Because methylene chloride and acetone are common laboratory contaminants, and both chemicals were detected in associated laboratory blanks, their detection in the groundwater samples is suspect.

Four SVOCs (including phenols), 12 pyridine derivatives, 18 metals, cyanide, and ammonia were detected in the Phase I groundwater samples.

Because PAHs were detected in parts per trillion, they were of no significance in the Phase I groundwater samples.

Nine wells from the Phase I sampling program (ICW-3, 5, 6, 8, 10, & 11; MW-4 & 5; and RW-1) were included during Phase II between July and October 1989. These wells were selected based on the detection of certain key constituents in Phase I, and in order to provide water quality data in areas not intensively monitored by the Phase II monitoring well installation program. Samples were analyzed for VOCs, pyridines, and ammonia.

Four wells from the Phase I sampling program (RW-1 and ICW 5, 6, & 11) were included during Phase III in July 1990. Sampling of Phase I wells was undertaken in order to facilitate evaluation of changes in detected analytes over the course of the RI. Samples were analyzed for VOCs, pyridines, and ammonia.

The contaminants of concern in the off-site groundwater are listed in Table 11.

Table 11. Contaminants of Concern in Off-Site Groundwater Samples. (Phase I, April 1988; July/October 1989, Phase II; July 1990, and Phase III).

Chemical Phase I Phase II Phase III Comparison Value
Field ID Concentration Range-ppb Field ID Concentration Range-ppb Field ID Concentration Range-ppb ppb Source
ammonia ICW-7
MW-3A
<1-51 (ppm) - - ICW6-W1-1
ICW11-W1-1
1-16 (ppm) 30 (ppm) LTHA
arsenic ICW-9
MW-4
2-43 - - - - * -
benzene MW-8
RW-1A
1-600 ICW-6 (2)
ICW-5 (2)
2-260 RW1-W1-1
ICW5-W1-1
17-300 1.2 CREG
bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate ICW-6
MW-3A
2-170 - - - - 2.5 CREG
1,2-dichloroethane (total) - - ICW-8 (1) 2-10 - -
3-ethyl-4-methyl pyridine ICW-11
MW-3
4-170 - - - - 35** RfD
2-ethyl pyridine ICW-11
MW-3
4-82 ICW-5 (2)
ICW-5 (1)
5-6 ICW5-W1-1 3 35** RfD
3-ethyl pyridine RW-1
MW-3
2-290 RW-1 (1)
ICW-11 (1)
2-6 - - 35** RfD
lead ICW-1
MW-4
2-2,340 - - - - 15 Action Level
2,3-lutidine RW-1
MW-3
10-200 RW-1 (1)
ICW-5 (1)
6-14 ICW11-W1-1
ICW5-W1-1
6-8 35** RfD
2,4 & 2,5-lutidine RW-1
MW-3
25-350 ICW-5 (2)
RW-1 (2)
15-35 ICW5-W1-1
RW1-W1-1
6-11 35** RfD
2,6-lutidine ICW-11
MW-3
10-78 ICW-11 (1)
RW-1 (2)
6-13 ICW11-W1-1
RW1-W1-1
3-10 35** RfD
3,4-lutidine TW-1
MW-3
4-82 RW-1 (1)
ICW-11 (1)
3-6 ICW11-W1-1
RW1-W1-1
3-4 35** RfD
3,5-lutidine TWS-1
MW-3
31-510 MW-4 (1)
RW-1 (2)
3-270 ICW11-W1-1
RW1-W1-1
30-180 35** RfD
2-methyl-3-ethyl pyridine TWS-1
MW-3
3-110 ICW-11 (1)
RW-1 (2)
3-17 ICW5-W1-1
RW1-W1-1
8-12 35** RfD
2-methyl-5-ethyl pyridine ICW-11
MW-3
7-260 ICW-5 (2)
RW-1 (2)
5-40 ICW5-W1-1
RW1-W1-1
5-27 35** RfD
3 & 4-methyl-phenol - - RW-1 (2) 570 - - * -
2-picoline ICW-11
MW-3
16-930 ICW-11 (1)
ICW-5 (1)
8-14 ICW11-W1-1
ICW5-W1-1
3-6 35** RfD
3 & 4-picoline ICW-5A
MW-3
32-1,100 ICW-11 (2)
ICW-11 (1)
6-21 ICW11-W1-1 2 35** RfD
sodium ICW-4
ICW-13
6,790-340,000 - - - - 20,000 NAS
thallium ICW-10
TWS-1
2-3 - - - - 0.4 LTHA
trichloroethylene MW-1
RW-3
2-86 ICW-6 (2)
ICW-6(1)
8-9 ICW6-W1-1 6 5 MCL
vinyl chloride ICW-7
ICW-9
2-9 RW-1 (1) 7 - - 0.2 EMEG
    * No comparison value available
    ** Since a RfD for these pyridine derivatives does not exist, the RfD for pyridine has been used as a surrogate.

C. Quality Assurance and Quality Control

In preparing this public health assessment, the ISDH relies on the information provided in the referenced documents and assumes that adequate quality assurance and quality control measures were followed with regard to chain-of-custody, laboratory procedures, and data reporting. The validity of the analysis and conclusions drawn for this public health assessment are determined to be complete and comprehensive except for the samples from the on- and off-site groundwater, the on-site subsurface soil, and the off-site surface water, which showed laboratory contamination with acetone and methylene chloride. All other samples were deemed reliable for use.

D. Physical and Other Hazards

As discussed in the Site Visit subsection, the site is completely fenced with no opportunity for residents to be at risk of any hazards on-site. The most significant potential physical threat or hazard from the site is to on-site workers. There are mounds of broken concrete and blacktop pavement, and other debris on the southern section of the site as a result of structures that have been razed in the past. There is also a lime pond on-site which could pose a hazard because it is not fenced.

PATHWAYS ANALYSES

To determine whether nearby residents are exposed to contaminants migrating from the site, ATSDR evaluates the environmental and human components that lead to human exposure. For an exposure pathway to be complete, five elements must be present: a source of contamination, transport through an environmental medium, a point of exposure, a route of human exposure, and an exposed population.

ATSDR categorizes an exposure pathway as a completed or potential exposure pathway if the exposure pathway cannot be eliminated. Completed pathways require that the five elements exist and indicate that exposure to a contaminant has occurred in the past, is currently occurring, or will occur in the future. Potential pathways, however, require that at least one of the five elements is missing, but could exist. Potential pathways indicate that exposure to a contaminant could have occurred in the past, could be occurring now, or could occur in the future. An exposure pathway can be eliminated from the public health assessment evaluation if at least one of the five elements is missing and will never be present. Table 12 identifies the completed exposure pathways for the Reilly site and Table 13 identifies the potential exposure pathways for the Reilly site. The discussion that follows these tables incorporates only those pathways that are important (pose a real or perceived health risk) and relevant to the site. We also discuss some of those exposure pathways that have been eliminated.

A. Completed Exposure Pathways

Off-Site Groundwater Pathway

The off-site groundwater is contaminated with VOCs, PAHs, and inorganic chemicals. Contaminants are found principally on the northern half of the site and migrating with groundwater flow to the east-southeast into the industrial well field operated by neighboring industries.

In the vicinity of the site, upper and lower ground-water zones have been identified within the sand and gravel outwash aquifer. At some locations, especially directly beneath the site, these zones are separated by one or more fine-grained, discontinuous and less permeable layers. Stratigraphic and hydraulic-test data collected during the RI indicate that the upper and lower zones of the surficial aquifer are hydraulically connected.

Discontinuous fine sand and clay till layers permit the migration of contaminated groundwater from the shallow zone to the deeper zone. The two-year monthly water-level monitoring program indicates that withdrawals from neighboring industrial wells significantly impacts the migration of contaminated groundwater in both the shallow and deep zones.

The bedrock ridge present on-site creates a partial groundwater divide in the northeast corner of the site based on water level and water quality data. Water quality data indicate, however, that the divide may affect contaminant migration in both the deep and shallow zones.

The direction of the groundwater flow is northwest to southeast with several industries in the direction of the plume. Several industries in the vicinity use groundwater for industrial purposes. As a result, workers in these industries may be exposed through volatilization of contaminants. Two such industries are the General Motors Plant and the Bridgeport Brass Company.

Environmental personnel for the General Motors facility stated that groundwater was not used in a manner that would allow workers to be in contact with or breathe volatilized chemicals. All use was in a closed system with the exception of cooling water that flows through an outdoor, elevated cooling tower. Volatilized chemicals would be rapidly diluted in outdoor air causing the concentrations in the ground level breathing zone of workers to be negligible.

The Bridgeport Brass Company indicated that some of the groundwater which is pumped from the aquifer is used in cooling water vats and acid pickling vats as part of their manufacturing process. In such uses it would be expected that volatilization could occur causing the chemicals to be present in the air inside of the building. Knowledge of the degree of ventilation and the manufacturing process at this company is limited.

In the past, private wells were used by some individuals surrounding the site. Off-site groundwater is a past completed pathway for individuals who used private wells as their primary source of water. These individuals were possibly exposed to site-related contaminants by ingestion, inhalation, and dermal contact. Municipal water has been made available to the local residents. Private wells may still be in use, however, for watering lawns and gardens, swimming pools, or washing cars.

Table 12. Completed Exposure Pathways

PATHWAY NAME EXPOSURE PATHWAY ELEMENTS TIME
SOURCE ENVIRONMENTAL MEDIA POINT OF EXPOSURE ROUTE OF EXPOSURE EXPOSED POPULATION
Off-Site
Groundwater
Reilly Tar &Chemical Groundwater Off-Site Ingestion, Dermal Contact Residents who use private wells Pass
Present
Future
Off-Site Groundwater Reilly Tar & Chemical Groundwater Off-Site Exposure to Volatilized Contaminants Industries which use groundwater for industrial purposes Past
Present
Future

B. Potential Exposure Pathways

On-Site Subsurface Soil Pathway

The surface soil and subsurface soil in the five areas of investigation on the site principally contain waste materials characterized by pyridine derivatives and PAHs. Metals, ammonia, and chlorinated ethanes and ethenes were not found in significant concentrations in these areas.

We assume that Reilly employees and remedial workers are aware of, and follow the health and safety guidelines for this industry. If these guidelines are not followed, there is a risk of exposure to the contaminants found in subsurface soil located in southern areas 1 and 2 of the site. On-site construction or routine site activities may disturb subsurface soil, uncovering contaminants. Dermal contact and incidental ingestion are the primary routes of exposure for this medium. The inhalation exposure pathway dose not present a significant risk to these individuals.

Off-Site Surface and Subsurface Soil Pathway

Results of the subsurface soil sampling show that the area surrounding the site is contaminated with PAHs and inorganic chemicals at levels of health concern. These samples, however, are a mixture of surface and subsurface soil samples. These samples have been combined and considered as subsurface soil samples only. To adequately characterize the surface soil surrounding the site, additional surface soil samples are needed.

Migration of on-site contaminants to areas surrounding the site is possible, but unlikely, through windblown dust. The on-site soil is largely covered and generally damp enough, however, that little dust arises. Much of the site is covered with gravel, pavement, or grass, which limits dust formation. Windblown dust is not expected to pose a health risk to the surrounding community.

Surface water can provide a vehicle for contaminants to migrate off-site from surface soil and eventually to the subsurface soil. Water soluble contaminants released on the surface soil are likely to infiltrate to subsurface soil, and eventually groundwater, when it rains.

Residents in the area may incidentally ingest, inhale, or have dermal contact with the contaminated surface soil while preparing a garden for planting or any other digging activities. This is a potential exposure pathway.

Table 13. Potential Exposure Pathways

PATHWAY NAME EXPOSURE PATHWAY ELEMENTS TIME
SOURCE ENVIRONMENTAL MEDIA POINT OF EXPOSURE ROUTE OF EXPOSURE EXPOSED POPULATION
On-site Subsurface soil Reilly Tar & Chemical Soil Reilly Tar & Chemical Incidental Ingestion, Dermal Contact Reilly Employee, Remedial Worker Past Present Future
Off-site Surface and Subsurface Soil Reilly Tar & Chemical Soil Area Around Reilly Tar & Chemical Incidental Ingestion, dermal contact Area Residents Past
Present
Future

PUBLIC HEALTH IMPLICATIONS

A. Toxicological Evaluation

The contaminants of concern regarding the site are ammonia, arsenic, benzene, bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate, 1,2-dichloroethane, lead, 3- & 4-methylphenol, pyridine and derivatives (lutidine & picolines), sodium, thallium, trichloroethylene, and vinyl chloride. Pyridine derivatives were detected in several media. No standards were available, however, to determine the extent of health concern from these derivatives. A toxicological profile for each contaminant of concern is provided below.

Ammonia

Ammonia can enter the body through breathing ammonia gas or swallowing water or food containing this chemical. Once swallowed, ammonia will get into the bloodstream and be carried throughout the body within minutes. Once in the bloodstream, it changes rapidly to other unharmful substances, and the rest leaves the body within a couple of days through the urine.

Based on available data, we cannot say with certainty whether or not ammonia causes cancer or birth defects. The health effects resulting from long-term human exposure to water containing specific levels of ammonia are not known. ATSDR has not developed a chronic Minimal Risk Level (MRL) for this chemical. The MRL is an estimate of levels posing minimal non-cancerous health risk to humans. Ammonia was found at 51,000 ppb in the off-site groundwater. The estimated daily exposure dose was considerably less than the level of lowest observed adverse health effects in animals. Additional information on ammonia is needed to adequately assess adverse health effects at varying dose levels.

Arsenic

Inorganic arsenic has been determined to be a cancer causing agent. The single most characteristic effect of long-term oral exposure to inorganic arsenic is a pattern of skin changes. This includes a darkening of the skin and the appearance of small "corns" or "warts" on the palms, soles, and torso. While these skin changes are not considered to be a health concern, a small number of the corns may ultimately develop into skin cancer. Swallowing arsenic has also been reported to increase the risk of cancer in the liver, bladder, kidneys, and lungs. (ATSDR Toxicological Profile for Arsenic)

Despite all the adverse health effects associated with inorganic arsenic exposure, there is some evidence that a small amount of arsenic in the normal diet (10-50 ppb/day) may be beneficial to human health. Arsenic was found at 43 ppb in the off-site groundwater. Possible health effects associated with the levels of arsenic found here are irritation of the stomach and intestines with symptoms such as pain, nausea, vomiting and diarrhea.

The estimated daily dose calculation for adult and child residents was less than the EPA chronic oral RfD. The RfD is EPA's estimate of the daily exposure to a contaminant that is unlikely to cause non-cancer adverse health effects. Information is not available for a cancer risk evaluation of this chemical. The ingestion of off-site groundwater contaminated with arsenic is a past completed pathway for individuals living near the site. Residents within a 1-mile radius are all currently connected to municipal water.

Benzene

Benzene is a naturally-occurring substance produced by forest fires and is present in many plants and animals, but benzene is also a major industrial chemical made from coal and oil. How benzene affects health depends on the level and duration of exposure.

Benzene is harmful to the tissues that form blood cells. It is also a cancer causing agent. Leukemia (cancer of the tissues that form white blood cells) has occurred in some workers exposed to benzene for periods of less than five years and up to 30 years. In addition, human studies indicate that benzene is harmful to the immune system, increasing the chance for infections and perhaps lowering the body's defenses against tumors. Human data on adverse reproductive outcomes are limited. (ATSDR Toxicological Profile for Benzene)

Benzene was found in the off-site groundwater at 600 ppb. An estimated daily ingestion dose was calculated. The value was less than the level of no observed adverse health effects in humans. There is a low increased cancer risk for adults and children who drank water from private wells. This risk is calculated assuming an individual drank the contaminated water every day for 45 years (adult), or 12 (child) years.

Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate

Bis or di(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate (DEHP) is a manmade chemical that is added to plastics to make them flexible. DEHP dissolves very slowly in water. DEHP does not evaporate easily, and thus very little will be present in the air even near sources of production. This chemical can enter the body by contaminated food, water, or air. Almost all of the DEHP that enters the body from food, water, or air is taken up into the blood from the lungs and intestines. Small amounts may also enter the body by skin contact. (Draft Toxicological Profile for Di(2-ethylhexyl)Phthalate)

Most of what is known about the health effects of DEHP comes from animal studies, especially studies of rats and mice. Because DEHP appears to affect rats and mice differently than humans and other animals, it is difficult to predict the health effects in humans using information from animal studies. There have been no studies of workers exposed to DEHP that indicate it causes cancer in humans.

DEHP was found at 170 ppb in the off-site groundwater. The estimated daily ingestion dose was considerably less than EPA's chronic oral RfD for this chemical. There is no apparent increased cancer risk for adults and children who drank water from private wells.

1,2-Dichloroethane

The chemical 1,2-dichloroethane is a manmade liquid that is not found naturally in the environment. It can enter the body through the skin, mouth, or by inhalation. Experiments in animals show that once 1,2-dichloroethane enters the body, it leaves very quickly through the urine. (ATSDR Toxicological Profile for 1,2-dichloroethane)

This chemical was found in the off-site groundwater at 10 ppb. The health effects resulting from long-term exposure of humans to drinking water containing specific levels of 1,2-dichloroethane are not known. It is, however, a probable cancer causing agent in humans. There is no apparent increased cancer risk for children and adults who drank water from private wells.

Lead

Lead is found in the earth's crust as a naturally-occurring metal. Due to human activities (use of leaded gasoline), lead has spread to the air, drinking water, rivers, lakes, oceans, dust, soil, and thus, animals and plants. Lead can enter the body through inhalation (lead dust), ingestion (lead contaminated foods), and only small portions will absorb through the skin.

Lead is stored first in the soft tissues (liver, kidneys, lungs, brain, spleen, muscles, and heart). After several weeks, it travels to and is stored in bone and teeth. Symptoms associated with lead exposure include possible decrease in memory; weakness in the fingers, wrists, or ankles; and anemia. Children are more sensitive to the effects of lead than adults.

Lead exposure can cause premature birth, smaller babies, decreased intelligent quotient scores (IQ) and reduced post-natal growth. (ATSDR Toxicological Profile for Lead).

Lead was found at 2,340 ppb in the off-site groundwater. ATSDR has not derived an MRL for lead. An RfD does not exist for lead because no thresholds have been demonstrated for the most sensitive effects in humans. The RfD is an estimate of daily human exposure to a contaminant for a lifetime below which health effects (non-cancer) are unlikely to occur. The maximum concentration detected does exceed EPA's Action Level of 15 ppb.

A quantitative estimate of the lead carcinogenic risk from oral and inhalation exposure has not been determined. Quantifying the cancer risk for lead involves many uncertainties, some of which may be unique to lead. Age, health, nutritional state, body burden, and exposure duration influence the absorption, release, and excretion of lead.

3- & 4-Methylphenol

Cresols, or methylphenols can enter the body through inhalation, ingestion, and dermal contact. Most of the cresol that enters the body leaves within one day through urine. (ATSDR Toxicological Profile for Cresols)

The EPA has determined that cresols are possible human carcinogens. Animal studies suggest that cresols probably would not produce birth defects or affect reproduction in humans.

This chemical was found in the off-site groundwater at 570 ppb. ATSDR has not established a MRL for chronic exposure to varying levels of this chemical. Additional information on cresols is needed to adequately assess adverse health effects at varying dose levels.

Pyridine

In general, pyridines cause irritation of the conjunctiva of the eye and cornea, and mucous membranes of the upper respiratory tract and skin. It occasionally causes skin sensitization. Repeated low-level exposure may lead to transient effects on the central nervous system, and gastrointestinal tract (Sittig. Handbook of Toxic and Hazardous Chemicals). No data are available to assess the carcinogenic or reproductive effects of this chemical in humans or animals (HSDB, June 1992).

When pyridines enter the body by mouth, more than half of it is absorbed. Within one day, most of what was absorbed leaves the body through urine. (ATSDR Toxicological Profile for Pyridine)

Numerous pyridine derivatives were found in the off-site groundwater samples. The reactivity of the pyridine family is very similar. The highest concentration of pyridines found was 290 ppb. The calculated daily dose exposure of adult and child residents to the derivatives of pyridine was higher than the EPA chronic oral RfD of 0.001 mg/kg/day. There is no information on health effects in humans who eat food or drink water containing pyridines.

Lutidine (Pyridine)

The lutidines are derivatives of pyridine (dimethylpyridine). Because this chemical is not naturally occurring, and is produced by a limited number of industries, there is no information available in the literature. We can only assume that these pyridine derivatives are similar to the picolines and pyridines in the health effects. (See pyridine for health effects and RfD.)

Picolines (Pyridine)

The picolines (2-methylpyridine, 3-methylpyridine, 4-methylpyridine) are derivatives of pyridine. They are colorless liquids with a sweetish odor, and are produced from the distillation of coal tar. Routes of human exposure to the picolines is by inhalation, dermal contact, and ingestion. They are also found in cigarette smoke.

Picolines cause symptoms resembling those observed with pyridine. Dermal exposure to 4-picoline (4-methylpyridine) is severely toxic. The chemicals 2-picoline and 3-picoline (2-methylpyridine and 3-methylpyridine) are severe dermal irritants. They all show no mutagenic activity, however, in animal studies. (See pyridines for RfD and additional health effects.) (HSDB 6/17/92)

Sodium

Long-term ingestion of high concentrations of sodium are believed to be associated with the development of hypertension and would complicate clinical treatment of hypertensive patients on salt-restricted intakes. Sodium was found in elevated levels (340,000 ppb) in the off-site groundwater. These levels are not seen as a health threat to the community because the water is not currently used for human consumption.

Because intake restrictions of sodium are often part of hypertensive therapy, the levels of sodium in the off-site groundwater could represent a significant health concern to past residents who used private wells. Typically, prescribed low-sodium diets attempt to limit sodium intake from food and water to either 2, 1, or 5 grams (g) in a 24-hour period. It has been suggested by the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) that, where water supplies contain more than 20,000 ppb, dietary restriction to less than 1 g is difficult to achieve and maintain. (NAS, Drinking Water and Health)

Thallium

Thallium is a soft, heavy metal insoluble in water and organic solvents. It is usually obtained as a by-product from the flue dust generated during the roasting of pyrite ores in the smelting and refining of lead and zinc. It is used commercially to kill rats, fungi, and insects.

Thallium may be a skin irritant and sensitizer, but these effects occur rarely in industry. It is an extremely toxic and cumulative poison. Early symptoms usually include fatigue, limb pain, metallic taste in the mouth, and loss of hair, although loss of hair is not always present as an early symptom. (Sittig. Hazardous and Toxic Effects of Industrial Chemicals)

Thallium was found in the off-site groundwater at 3 ppb. ATSDR has not produced a toxicological profile for this chemical as yet. The health effects resulting from long-term exposure of humans to drinking water containing specific levels of thallium are not known.

Trichloroethylene

Trichloroethylene (TCE) is a manmade chemical that does not occur naturally in the environment. It is mainly used as a solvent to remove grease from metal parts.

TCE can easily enter the body through ingestion, inhalation, or dermal contact. This chemical is not likely to build up in the body. It has caused rashes in some individuals who were exposed dermally. We do not know if this chemical causes cancer or will affect human reproduction. (ATSDR Toxicological Profile for Trichloroethylene)

The health effects resulting from long-term exposure of humans to drinking water containing specific levels of TCE are not known. TCE was found in the off-site groundwater at 86 ppb. The estimated daily dose was considerably less than the level of lowest observed adverse health effects in animals.

Vinyl Chloride

The most likely way that individuals may be exposed to vinyl chloride is by breathing it. Vinyl chloride does not enter the body by passing through the skin. Most of the vinyl chloride is gone from the body a day after being inhaled or swallowed. (ATSDR Toxicological Profile for Vinyl Chloride)

Based on animal studies, it has been determined that vinyl chloride is a known carcinogen. Studies of long-term exposure in animals show that increases in cancer may occur from very low levels of vinyl chloride in the air. A chronic MRL has not been determined for this chemical. The health effects resulting from long-term exposure of humans to drinking water containing specific levels of vinyl chloride are not known. Vinyl Chloride was found at 9 ppb in the off-site groundwater. The estimated daily dose was considerably lower than the cancer effect level and the lowest observed level for serious adverse health effects in animals.

B. Health Outcome Data Evaluation

As discussed in the Health Outcome Data subsection, cancer mortality data on Marion County, the state of Indiana, and the United States are available by race, gender, and year. The cancer rates of Marion County were compared to Indiana and U.S. cancer rates by race, gender, and year. The human organs that are affected by chemicals of concern identified in this public health assessment are the central nervous system, liver, and kidneys. The cancer rates for Marion County for these organs of concern are comparable to state and U.S. rates for all race/gender groups (U.S. Cancer Mortality Rates and Trends). Cancer rates for sites such as lung and esophagus were higher in some groups when compared to United States cancer rates. These rates, however, are influenced more by individual life styles and behavior such as smoking and diet than by potential exposure to the chemicals of concern identified here.

An environmental exposure study was conducted by the ISDH and the MCHD in response to health complaints and to determine whether an excess number of cancers, adverse reproductive outcomes, illnesses, or disease symptoms exist in the Oak Park community near the Reilly Tar and Chemical manufacturing facility (Bennington, M. and Steele, G.; Oak Park Health Study, June 1986). There were 1,101 individuals involved in the survey. A comparison of the mortality information of the Oak Park residents did not reveal a significant difference when compared to a non-exposed population for all cause mortality. The study also concluded that the rate of occurrence for adverse reproductive outcomes, such as miscarriages, abortions, and birth defects, of the Oak Park residents were equal to or less than those living outside the study area. The study concluded that the Oak Park area had rates of adverse health outcomes equal to or less than all other areas of the entire study population, including those areas that were not exposed to groundwater, air, or both pathways of exposure.

C. Community Health Concerns Evaluation

We have addressed each of the community health concerns as follows:

1.Is benzene a carcinogenic chemical?

Human studies indicate that benzene is harmful to the immune system, increasing the chance for infections and perhaps lowering the body's defenses against tumors. Human data on adverse reproductive outcomes are limited.

Benzene is considered to be a cancer causing agent in humans. Leukemia (cancer of the tissues that form white blood cells) has occurred in some workers exposed to benzene for periods of less than 5 years and up to 30 years.

2.Does the site present any health risks?

The site did pose a health risk in the past through ingestion of contaminated groundwater in private wells, however, the results of the Oak Park Health Study suggest that no adverse health effects resulted from those exposures. Copies of this study are available upon request. Currently, the data and information evaluated does not indicate any site-related health risks, though it should be noted that off-site surface soil and ambient air data were not available.

3.Should there be a concern about odors in the air that come from the site?

We do not know. The health problems reported in the Oak Park Study are indicative of an exposure to some type of an airborne irritant and/or allergen. There have been no known attempts to monitor the air at this site. We will, however, make a recommendation that air monitoring be done.

4.What are the acceptable levels of contaminants in the groundwater?

The acceptable level of a contaminant in groundwater depends on the chemical contaminant. It is typically the level at which no adverse health effects have been shown to occur either in animal or human studies.

5. Are families at risk from drinking the water?

They are at risk only if they drink water from private wells.



Next Section       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. #