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

PUBLIC HEALTH ASSESSMENT

CAMILLA WOOD PRESERVING COMPANY
(a/k/a ESCAMBIA TREATING COMPANY INCORPORATED
CAMILLA, MITCHELL COUNTY, GEORGIA


APPENDICES

APPENDIX A - COMPARISON VALUES

Health Comparison Values

Health Comparison Values (CVs) are contaminant concentrations found in specific media (air, soil, or water) and used to select contaminants for further evaluation. The CVs used in this document are listed below.

Environmental Media Evaluation Guides (EMEGs) are estimated contaminant concentrations in media where there is no chance for noncarcinogenic health effects to occur. The EMEG is derived from U.S. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry's (ATSDR) minimal risk level (MRL).

Remedial Media Evaluation Guides (RMEGs) are estimated contaminant concentrations in media where there is no chance for noncarcinogenic health effects to occur. The RMEG is derived from U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) reference dose (RfD).

Cancer Risk Evaluation Guides (CREGs) are estimated contaminant concentrations that would be expected to cause no more than one excess cancer in a million persons exposed over a lifetime. CREGs are calculated from EPA's cancer slope factors (CSF).

Risk-Based Concentrations (RBCs) are the estimated contaminant concentrations in which there is no chance for carcinogenic or noncarcinogenic health effects. The RBCs used in this public health assessment were derived using provisional reference doses or cancer slope factors calculated by toxicologists of EPA's Region III (13).

EPA Action Levels (EPA AL) are the estimated contaminant concentrations in water where evaluation is needed to determine if action is needed to eliminate or reduce exposure. Action levels can be based on mathematical models.

EPA Soil Screening Levels (EPA SSL) are estimated contaminant concentrations in soil where additional evaluation is needed to determine if action is needed to eliminate or reduce exposure.


APPENDIX B ON-SITE CONTAMINANT TABLES

TABLE B1 - CONTAMINANTS ABOVE A COMPARISON VALUE IN ON-SITE SOIL

CONTAMINANT RANGE IN SOIL
mg/kg1
SAMPLES > DL2 SAMPLES > CV3 CV in mg/kg1 CV SOURCE4
ARSENIC ND - 3,400 81/127 81/115 0.5/20 CREG/EMEG
BENZO(a)ANTHRACENE ND - 27 112/127 41 0.9 EPA SSL
BENZO(a)PYRENE ND - 19 112/127 36 0.1 CREG
BENZO(b)FLUORANTHENE6 ND - 55 117/127 82 0.9 EPA SSL
BERYLLIUM ND - 3,400 2/127 2/15 0.2/300 CREG/RMEG
CADMIUM ND - 3,400 14/127 1 10 EMEG
CHROMIUM 2.6 - 3,400 127/127 1 300 RMEG
CYANIDE ND - 3,400 1/127 1 1,600 RMEG
DIBENZ(a,h)ANTHRACENE ND - 2 52/127 7 0.09 EPA SSL
HEPTACHLOR EPOXIDE ND - 0.1 13/127 1 0.08/0.7 CREG/EMEG
INDENO(1,2,3-c,d)PYRENE ND - 16 113/127 58 0.9 EPA SSL
IRON 600 - 24,000 127/127 1 23,000 RBC
LEAD 4 - 3,400 127/127 1 400 EPA SSL
MERCURY ND - 3,400 16/127 1 23 EPA SSL
OCTACHLORODIBENZO-p-DIOXIN ND - 7 40/127 12 1 note 7
PENTACHLOROPHENOL ND - 130 88/127 21/05 6/2,000 CREG/RMEG
SILVER ND - 3,400 3/127 1 300 RMEG
THALLIUM ND - 3,400 1/127 1 5.5 HEAST
VANADIUM ND - 3,400 53/127 1 550 EPA SSL
1 - mg/kg is milligrams of contaminant per kilogram of soil.
2 - DL is detection limit.
3 - CV is comparison value.
4 - A brief description of these sources can be found in Appendix A on page 18.
5 - The first number is the number of samples above the carcinogenic CV (CREG) and the second is the number above the noncarcinogenic CV (EMEG or RMEG).
6 - The analytical method used did not differentiate between benzo(b) - and benzo(k)fluoranthene so it was assumed that all was benzo(b)fluoranthene.
7 - 2,3,7,8-tetrachlordibenzo-p-dioxin toxic equivalent factor (tcdd tef) action level of 0.001 ppm divided by toxicity factor for octoachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin of 0.001.


TABLE B2 - CONTAMINANTS IN ON-SITE GROUNDWATER ABOVE A COMPARISON VALUE

CONTAMINANT RANGE IN WATER IN MG/L1 SAMPLES > DL2 SAMPLES > CV3 CV IN MG/L1 CV SOURCE4
LEAD ND - 0.07 19/22 16 0.015 EPA AL
NAPHTHALENE ND - 3.7 13/22 9 0.2 RMEG
PENTACHLOROPHENOL ND - 4.3 8/22 8/35 0.0003/0.3 CREG/RMEG
ARSENIC ND - 0.03 6/22 6/05 0.00002/0.003 CREG/EMEG
DIMETHYLPHENOL (NOT 2,4) ND - 0.06 4/22 4 0.006 RMEG6
HEPTACHLOR EPOXIDE ND - 0.2 1/22 1/15 0.000004/0.0001 CREG/RMEG
BENZENE ND - 0.006 1/22 1/05 0.001/40 CREG/RMEG
(3-AND/OR 4-)METHYLPHENOL ND - 0.7 4/22 1 0.5 RMEG
TOTAL MERCURY ND - 0.6 1/22 1 0.005 EMEG
1 - MG/L is milligrams of chemical per liter of water.
2 - DL is detection limit.
3 - CV is comparison value.
4 - A brief description of these sources can be found in Appendix A on page 18.
5 - The first number is the number of samples above the carcinogenic CV (CREG) and the second is the number above the noncarcinogenic CV (EMEG or RMEG).
6 - This is the RMEG for 2,6-dimethylphenol.


TABLE B3 - CONTAMINANTS IN ON-SITE SEDIMENT ABOVE A COMPARISON VALUE

CONTAMINANT RANGE IN SEDIMENT
IN MG/KG1
SAMPLES > DL2 SAMPLES > CV3 CV in mg/kg1 CV SOURCE4
BENZO(a)PYRENE ND - 2.3 9/11 8 0.1 CREG
BENZO(b)FLUORANTHENE5 ND - 14 9/11 5 0.9 EPA SSL
BENZOFLUORANTHENE (not b or k) ND - 7 6/11 5 0.9 EPA SSL6
INDENO(1,2,3-c,d)PYRENE ND - 4 9/11 5 0.9 EPA SSL
ARSENIC ND - 12 3/11 3/07 0.5/20 CREG/EMEG
BENZO(a)ANTHRACENE ND - 1.7 5/11 2 0.9 EPA SSL
BENZOPYRENE (NOT A) ND - 6 2/11 2 0.1 CREG8
1 - MG/KG is milligrams of contaminant per kilogram of sediment.
2 - DL is detection limit.
3 - CV is comparison value.
4 - A brief description of these sources can be found in Appendix A on page 18.
5 - This was identified as benzo(b and/or k)fluoranthene in the environmental data. Since the comparison value for benzo(b)fluoranthene is ten times lower (0.9 ppm) than the CV for benzo(k)fluoranthene (9 ppm), 0.9 ppm was used as the CV.
6 - The comparison value for benzo(b)fluoranthene was used here.
7 - The first number is the number of samples above the carcinogenic CV (CREG) and the second is the number above the noncarcinogenic CV (EMEG ).
8 - This is the comparison value for benzo(a)pyrene.


TABLE B4 - CONTAMINANTS IN ON-SITE SURFACE WATER ABOVE A COMPARISON VALUE

CONTAMINANT RANGE IN WATER
IN MG/L1
SAMPLES > DL2 SAMPLES > CV3 CV in mg/l*1 CV SOURCE4
ARSENIC ND - 0.02 5/11 5/05 0.002/0.3 CREG/EMEG
* These comparison values are multiplied by 0.01 because it is assumed that daily ingestion of surface water for a child is 10 milliliters (ml) rather than the 1 liter (1,000 ml) used for drinking tap water.
1 - MG/L is milligrams of chemical per liter of water.
2 - DL is detection limit.
3 - CV is comparison value.
4 - A brief description of these sources can be found in Appendix A on page 18.
5 - The first n umber is the number of samples above the carcinogenic CV (CREG) and the second is the number above the noncarcinogenic CV (EMEG ).


APPENDIX C- EXPOSURE PATHWAYS TABLES

TABLE C1 - COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL EXPOSURE PATHWAYS1
Pathway Name: Source Medium Exposure
Point
Exposure Route Receptor Population Time of Exposure Exposure Activities Estimated Number Exposed Chemicals
Bennett Street area soil CWP Soil Yards near that portion of Bennett St. between Thomas and Lincoln Sts. Ingestion
Inhalation
Residents of homes with contaminated soil Past, Present Future Contact with soil in yards 1002 arsenic, benzo(a)pyrene, dibenz(a,h)anthracene,
pentachlorophenol, dioxin
1 An exposure pathway is considered completely if there is good evidence that people are or have been exposed to site contaminants.
2 The approximate number of exposed people is the estimate of persons who reside in the approximately 20 homes that sampling indicates may have been contaminated.



TABLE C2 -
POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL EXPOSURE PATHWAYS1
Pathway Name: Source Medium Exposure
Point
Exposure Route Receptor Population Time of Exposure Exposure Activities Estimated Number Exposed Chemicals
Off-site Surface Water CWP Water draining off CWP Off-site drainage ditches Ingestion Individuals who contact surface water coming off the south side of CWP Past
Present
Future
Contact with surface water < 502 arsenic
Off-site Sediment CWP Sediment moving off CWP Off-site drainage ditches and the flood plain for that ditch Ingestion Individuals who contact sediment coming off the south side of CWP Past
Present
Future
Contact with sediment < 502 arsenic,
benzo(a)anthracene,
benzo(b)fluoranthene,
benzo(a)pyrene, and
indeno(1,2,3-c,d)
pyrene
1 These exposure pathways are considered potential because it is not known whether contaminants from the source, CWP, have actually moved off-site due to the lack of sampling data.

2 This is a very rough estimate of the number of individuals who potentially could have contact with surface water or sediment in the ditches draining the south side of the site. The south side of CWP is not near a residential area so the number of people with the opportunity for significant contact is small.

APPENDIX D - CALCULATION OF EXPOSURE DOSES

Appendix D - Calculation of Exposure Doses from Ingestion of Contaminated Soil

The exposure doses for soil ingestion were calculated in the following manner. The maximum concentration for a contaminant was multiplied by the soil ingestion rate for adults, 0.0001 kg/day; or children, 0.0002 kg/day. This product was divided by the average weight for an adult, 70 kg (154 pounds) or for a child, 10 kg (22 pounds). Those calculations assumed that there was frequent daily exposure to soil contaminated at the specified level. The results of the actual calculations are recorded in Table D1.

Calculation of Risk of Carcinogenic Effects

Carcinogenic risks from the ingestion of soil were calculated using the following procedure. The adult exposure doses for ingestion of soil, (calculated as described previously), were multiplied by EPA's cancer slope factor (CSF) for that contaminant and the results are in Table D1 (14).

The actual risk of cancer is probably lower than the calculated number. The method used to calculate EPA's cancer slope factor assumes that high dose animal data can be used to estimate the risk for low-dose exposures in humans (15). The method also assumes that there is no safe level for exposure (16). There is little experimental evidence to confirm or refute those two assumptions. Lastly, the method computes the 95% upper bound for the risk, rather than the average risk, which results in there being a very good chance that the risk is actually lower, perhaps several orders of magnitude (17). One order of magnitude is 10 times greater or lower than the original number, while two orders of magnitude are 100 times, and three orders 1,000 times.


TABLE D1 - CALCULATION OF EXPOSURE DOSE FROM INGESTION OF CONTAMINATED SOIL

Maximum Contaminant Level Level in Parts Per Million (ppm) Estimated Adult Exposure Doses in mg/kg/day1 Estimated Child Exposure Doses in mg/kg/day1 Health Guideline in mg/kg/day1 Source of Guideline Cancer Risk
Arsenic 4 0.000006 0.00008 0.0003 MRL2 8 in 1,000,000
Benzo(a)pyrene 2.2 0.000003 0.00004 none none 2 in 100,000
Dioxin equivalents 0.0011 0.000000001 0.00000002 none none 1 in 1,000,000
Dibenz(a,h)
Anthracene
0.2 0.0000002 0.000004 none none 2 in 1,000,000
Pentachlorophenol 13 0.00002 0.0003 0.03 RfD3 2 in 1,000,000

1 - mg/kg/day is milligrams of substance per kilogram of body weight per day.
2 - MRL is ATSDR's minimum risk level. See page 18 for a fuller description.
3 - RfD is EPA's reference dose. See page 18 for a fuller description.



1. Conversation between Wayne Hall (ATSDR) and Astrid Aponte (EPA).

2. The 1998 environmental sampling data were provided to ATSDR by EPA as electronic files.



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. #