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



Contaminants and physical hazards on and in the vicinity of the C & R Battery Company, will be discussed in this section. The contamination encountered on the C & R BatteryCompany, Inc. property and adjacent Capitol Oil property will be addressed in On-siteContamination. The contamination or potential for contamination beyond the C & R BatteryCompany, Inc. and Capitol Oil Company property will be addressed as Off-site Contamination. Our analysis will be presented according to the media (soil, water, or air) in which contaminantswere found.

The concentrations of the contaminants were determined in the Remedial Investigation. Themaximum concentration of a specific contaminant found in that investigation will be shown inthe tables presented in this section. This maximum concentration will then be compared toexisting guidelines which are referred to as "comparison values." When a contaminant is ofconcern to the community or its concentration is greater than the corresponding comparisonvalue, it will be further evaluated in the Pathways Analyses section of this assessment. In thedata tables that follow under the On-site Contamination and the Off-site Contaminationsubsections, the listed contaminant does not mean that it will cause adverse health effects fromexposures. Instead, the list indicates which contaminants will be evaluated further in this PublicHealth Assessment.

There are several different comparison values for some contaminants; whereas, othercontaminants may have no established comparison values. The comparison values which wepresent in our tables are what we consider to be the most appropriate value to use for a specificmedia. The types of comparison values used for this evaluation are Environmental Media Evaluation Guides (EMEGs) and Reference Dose Media Evaluation Guides (RMEGs) asdefined in the glossary in Appendix A.

A search was conducted of the EPA Toxic Chemical Release Inventory (TRI) for the zip codewhich includes C & R Battery Company, Inc. for the years 1987, 1988 and 1989. The results ofthat search indicate that several substances that are found on the C & R Battery Company, have been released as air emissions by companies within this zip code. The totalreported air emissions (point and non-point emissions) for the years 1987 through 1989 includealuminum oxide (57,500 pounds), chromium (1,500 pounds), copper (2,800 pounds), lead (500pounds), manganese (2,500 pounds), nickel (1,750 pounds) and sulfuric acid (23,864 pounds).

A. On-site Contamination

Remedial activities by the EPA have taken place on the site which includes C & R BatteryCompany, Inc. property and the adjacent Capitol Oil property. The most recent remedial activitywas conducted during the summer of 1986. Significant modifications were made to the surfaceof the site during that activity. Due to the modifications made to the site, only data obtained afterthese modifications will be used in this portion of the assessment.

Debris Piles

Two debris piles are located on-site which contain mixtures of soil, debris, and crushed/shreddedbattery casings. It has been reported that the larger of the two debris piles consists of materialremoved from the area east of the drainage ditch by EPA during their 1986 removal action.

Four grab samples of soil materials in the debris piles were collected during the RI (collected inSeptember 1988). Analysis of debris samples from both piles indicated that the contaminants ofboth the piles appeared to be similar. The contaminant concentrations found in the debris pilesare also similar to concentration found in sludge materials on the site. Therefore, thecontaminants found in the debris piles are likely typical of the solid waste on the site.

A list of contaminant concentrations found in samples collected from the debris piles is shown inTable 1. This list contains only those contaminants found with concentrations above thecomparison values used. The comparison values shown in Table 1 are calculated for soilingestion by a typical child (200 milligrams per day). If an ingestion rate for a pica child (5,000milligrams per day) were used to calculate the comparison value, several other contaminants(barium, chromium, manganese, and nickel) would exceed their comparison values, but thepresence of a child who exhibits pica behavior on site is unlikely.

Table 1.

Maximum Contaminant Concentrations in Debris Piles
Comparison Values2
Antimony 2,820 20RMEG
Arsenic 63 20RMEG
Cadmium 28 10EMEG
Lead 79,800 NoneNone
    1 mg/kg = milligram/kilogram equivalent to parts per million
    2 The comparison value sources are defined in the Glossary
    Reference - 12

Surface Soils

Surface soils were collected from 31 borings drilled during the RI. These samples were collectedby driving a 2-foot, split-spoon sampler into the ground. Therefore, the laboratory results forthese samples were for soils within 2 feet of the surface. Since surface soils on the mostcontaminated portions of the site were disked and mixed with lime to a depth of 2 feet during theEPA 1986 removal action, the samples collected within 2 feet of the surface likely characterizecurrent surface soils (soils within 3 inches of the surface) at the site.

The maximum contaminant concentrations found in the surface soil samples are presented inTable 2. The comparison values shown in Table 2 are calculated for soil ingestion by a typicalchild (200 milligrams per day). Comparison values for a pica child were not calculated becauseingestion of large quantities of the surface soil on the site does not appear to be likely and verysmall children are unlikely to play on this site.

Table 2.

Maximum Contaminant Concentrations in On-Site Surface Soil
Comparison Values2
Antimony 6,410 20RMEG
Arsenic 60H3 20RMEG
Cadmium 31 10EMEG
Lead 122,000 NoneNone
    1 mg/kg = milligram/kilogram equivalent to parts per million
    2 The comparison value sources are defined in the Glossary
    3 H = Value is biased high, actual value may be lower
    Reference - 12

The extent of lead contamination in surface soil was evaluated by laboratory results from theborings noted above and two surface samples together with interpretation of X-ray fluorescencereadings. The results of the surface soil lead concentrations were contoured for the RI and arepresented as Figure 3.

Subsurface Soils

The RI evaluated the subsurface soil conditions on-site utilizing trenches, test pits, and borings. These included 8 shallow trenches (3 - 8 feet deep), and 27 test pits (3 to 5.5 feet deep). Only thelaboratory data from the 32 borings were used as the basis for evaluation. The depth of theseborings ranged from 15 feet (24 borings) to 42 feet (8 borings). Samples were collected at 2-footintervals in these borings and 131 of these samples were sent for chemical analyses.

The concentration of lead in the subsurface soils decreases with depth. Contours of the leadconcentration between 3 and 5 feet below the surface are presented in Figure 4. Leadconcentration as high as 1,110 mg/kg persists to a depth of 13 feet (Boring SO-13).

The concentrations of antimony, arsenic, and cadmium generally decrease with depth, and theyare variable beyond a depth of 5 feet. Concentrations of these contaminants at or above thecomparison values shown in Table 2 are found to depths of 30 feet. The concentrations of thesemetals below a depth of 5 feet are no more than twice the background levels at similar depths.

Generally, pH for the subsurface soils ranged from 4.0 to 4.8 in the upper 10 feet of the soilcolumn. The pH value for depths of 10 to 42 feet ranged from 4.6 to 5.3, respectively. The pHvalues for the on-site and off-site subsurface soils appeared to vary little. This may be due to thefact that Virginia soils are reported to be very acidic.

According to a study (21) performed subsequent to the RI, the highest contaminantconcentrations are found in fill and debris materials on-site. These fill and debris materials rangefrom 2 - 4 feet thick and overlay a clayey natural soil. The clayey natural soil has impededdownward migration of the contaminants; however, according to the RI, the soil has not confinedthe contaminants to the fill and debris materials.

Ground Water

Four monitoring wells (MW1-1, MW1-2, MW1-3, and MW1-4) were installed in September1988 in conjunction with the RI. The background monitoring well (MW1-1) is located about 250feet upgradient and southwest of the site (Figures 3 and 4). Monitoring well MW5-1 wasinstalled in March 1989. This well is considered down gradient from the area of the site with thehighest levels of soil contamination. Based on the hydrogeologic data, the ground water appearsto flow northwest.

Monitoring wells MW1-1, MW2-1, MW3-1, and MW4-1 were sampled three times (September15, 1988; September 28, 1988; and March 29, 1989), and MW5-1 was sampled only once onMarch 29, 1989. Comparison of the data among wells shows that the background well (MW1-1)had a pH which ranged from 5.19 to 6.75, while the down gradient well (MW5-1) had the lowestpH (4.09). This indicated the possible presence of on-site battery acid in the ground water. When compared to the background well, all of the wells on-site showed elevated conductivityand total dissolved solids (TDS) values. Maximum contaminant concentrations detected in total(unfiltered) and dissolved (filtered) form are listed in Table 3.

Table 3
Maximum Contaminant Concentrations in On-Site Ground Water


Total Dissolved

Comparison Values2
Antimony 120 NDB3 4RMEG
Arsenic 412 5.1 3RMEG
Cadmium 63.4 8.2E4 2EMEG
Lead 2,130 16.9 NoneNone
    1 µg/l = microgram/liter equivalent to parts per billion
    2 The comparison value sources are defined in the Glossary
    3 NDB = Not detected substantially above level reported in blank
    4 E = Estimated value
    Reference - 12

The contaminant concentrations and pH of on-site ground water samples appear to indicate thatthe on-site soil contamination has affected the ground water.

Dissolved concentrations of manganese (20,100 µg/l) and nickel (331 µg/l) have also beendetected in the on-site ground water at concentrations exceeding their comparison values (1,000and 200 µg/l, respectively). However, it is not substantiated that either manganese or nickelconcentrations are caused by on-site contamination.

Surface Water

The surface water runoff on the site is directed into the drainage ditch, running along the easternboundary of the C & R Battery Company property. This 1800-foot drainage ditch discharges intothe James River about 650 feet north of the site. Since there was no flow in the drainage ditchduring the RI, standing water was sampled. Therefore, no data exist for active runoff from thesite.

The results of the contaminant concentrations found in one surface water sample (SW-03, Figure 2) collected from standing water in the drainage ditch are presented in Table 4. The similarity ofthe total and dissolved results indicates that most suspended solids had settled out of the surfacewater. The pH of this sample was 4.30, but this value is not likely representative of activesurface runoff.

Table 4.

Maximum Contaminant Concentrations in On-Site Surface Water

Total Dissolved

Comparison Values2
Antimony NT3 NT 4RMEG
Arsenic 4.4L4 4.4L 3RMEG
Cadmium 34.2 35.0 2EMEG
Lead 2,260E5 2,230E NoneNone
    1 µg/l = microgram/liter equivalent to parts per billion
    2 The comparison value sources are defined in the Glossary
    3 NT = Not Tested
    4 L = Value is biased low, actual value may be higher
    5 E = Estimated value
    Reference - 12


The drainage ditch contains sediments associated with runoff from the site. The sediments in thisditch were sampled at 3 on-site locations (SD-01, SD-02, and SD-03; Figure 2) spaced at 300-foot intervals along the ditch. The maximum contaminant concentrations detected from this setof samples are presented in Table 5.

Table 5.

Maximum Contaminant Concentrations in On-Site Sediments
Comparison Values2
Antimony Not Detected 20RMEG
Arsenic 23.2 20RMEG
Cadmium 2.8 10EMEG
Lead 14,000 Estimated NoneNone
    1mg/kg = milligram/kilogram equivalent to parts per million

    2The comparison value sources are defined in the Glossary

    Reference - 12

The pH of the drainage ditch sediments was affected by the site. Slightly acidic conditions (pH6.51) were observed in the upgradient portion of the ditch. Moderately acidic conditions (pH4.0) were observed at locations adjacent to, and downstream from, the former acid pond.

X-Ray fluorescence lead analysis was performed on a number of sediment samples collected at50-foot intervals along the ditch. The results indicated that the highest concentration of lead wasfound in the southern portion of the ditch.

B. Off-site Contamination


Soil contamination extends beyond the perimeter of the site. Refer to Figure 3 for theapproximate extent of surface soils containing greater than 500 mg/kg lead. Other contaminants,including antimony (50 mg/kg) and arsenic (4.6 mg/kg), were found in off-site soils. Insufficientdata (2 samples) exist for off-site subsurface soils; therefore, they cannot be addressed at thistime.

Ground Water

It has not been determined if contaminants in the on-site ground water have migrated off-site. The closest down gradient well is a residential well located 600 feet northwest of the site. Thatwell and an additional 32 residential wells in the vicinity of the site have been tested for lead andindicate no results of concern.

Surface Water

The only off-site surface water samples collected during the RI were from the James River at atime when there was no flow from the on-site drainage ditch. Contaminants were not detected,but these results are not representative of conditions when on-site surface water is entering theJames River.


On-site contaminants have been detected in off-site sediments. Sediments deposited in thedrainage ditch and sediments in the James River were tested during the RI. A sample taken fromthe drainage ditch approximately 220 feet north of the site (SD-06, Figure 2) had 167 mg/kg oflead and 10.6 mg/kg of arsenic. Sediments from the James River taken downstream from the siteshowed an almost two-fold increase for lead (18.1 mg/kg) and arsenic (4.5 mg/kg) concentrationswhen compared to samples taken upstream from the site for lead (10.2 mg/kg) and arsenic (2.6mg/kg) concentrations.

C. Quality Assurance and Quality Control (QA/QC)

Contaminant concentrations cited in this Public Health Assessment were derived from the RI. No difficulties, with respect to availability of site information, were encountered in thepreparation of this Public Health Assessment. In preparing this document, VDH has relied on theinformation provided in the referenced documents and assumed that adequate quality assurance and quality control measures were followed with regard to chain-of-custody, laboratoryprocedures, and data reporting. The validity of the analysis and conclusions drawn for this PublicHealth Assessment are determined by the availability and reliability of the referencedinformation.

D. Physical and Other Hazards

No physical hazards were observed on the site. The C & R Battery Company, Inc. property ismostly fenced with a secured front gate. Access to that property is limited to authorizedindividuals accompanied by U.S. EPA personnel. The Capitol Oil Company property is alsofenced. However, there is an approximately 50-foot wide strip between the two properties that isnot fenced. This unfenced strip of property includes an open storage building that may present aphysical hazard.


In order to determine if humans are being exposed to contaminants migrating from the site, thehuman exposure pathways that lead to human exposure have been evaluated. Pathway analysisconsists of five elements: a source of contamination, transport through an environmentalmedium (i.e. water, soil, air), the point of exposure, a route of exposure, and an exposedpopulation.

Exposure pathways are categorized as completed or potential. Completed exposure pathwayshave all five elements and indicate that exposure to a contaminant has occurred in the past, iscurrently occurring, or is likely to occur in the future. Potential exposure pathways indicate thatexposure to a contaminant could have occurred in the past, could currently be occurring, or mayoccur in the future. An exposure pathway can be eliminated from consideration if at least one ofthe five elements is missing and will never be present.

A. Completed Exposure Pathway

In the past, there was a completed exposure pathway for on-site workers. 1983 air monitoring ofthe personal breathing zone on-site indicated that lead concentrations exceeded the OccupationalSafety and Health Administration (OSHA) standard of 50 µg/m3. In 1984, two employees werefound to have elevated blood lead levels, indicating that exposure was occurring. Theseexposures were probably a result of the active battery recovery activities occurring at the time. Activities stirred up the contaminated soil suspending lead contaminated dust into the air whichwas then inhaled by workers. It is assumed that workers were exposed during the 15 years of theactive battery recovery (from 1970 to 1985).

B. Potential Exposure Pathways

Based on currently available site information and medical and toxicologic knowledge, thepotential exposure pathways now and in the future, for this site, include:

  1. Ingestion of contaminants in ground water, soils, fugitive dust, and fish.
  2. Inhalation of contaminants associated with fugitive dusts.

Surface Water

Surface water from the site is a potential environmental pathway for human exposure. Thechemical analysis data available for the samples collected from stagnant water in the drainageditch may not truly represent the chemical quality of storm runoff leaving the site. However, theavailable data do indicate that surface water in the drainage ditch contains total and dissolvedcontaminant concentrations above comparison values used (Table 2). In order to adequatelyevaluate this potential environmental pathway, data are needed for contaminant concentrations atpossible points of exposure. The possible points of exposure include, but are not limited to, thedrainage ditch outside the fenced portion of the site and the James River.

While this pathway is potential, it is not possible to define a potentially exposed population. There are no indications that children have played in the drainage ditch possibly because of itsremote and densely vegetated location. Although data are limited, it does not appear thatrecreational users of the James River are or will be an exposed population because no swimmingareas appear to exist in the vicinity of the site. However, this possibility cannot be completelyruled out.

Ground Water

Ground water on the site contains total concentrations of contaminants far above comparisonvalues (Table 3). Arsenic, cadmium, and lead are site-related contaminants that have beendetected in on-site ground water at concentrations exceeding the respective comparison values. The dissolved concentrations of these contaminants are also above comparison values. It ispossible that the off-site ground water will be a future environmental pathway by the dissolved,relatively mobile, contaminants migrating to private wells used for drinking water.

The possible points of exposure are drinking water wells in the vicinity of the site and water fromthe James River. Residential wells are hydraulically connected to the contaminated aquiferunderlying the site; however, they have not yet been affected by the site.

The ingestion of contaminants in ground water may occur if private wells in the area becomecontaminated. The potentially exposed population in the vicinity of the site includes residenceswhich rely exclusively on private wells for their drinking water supply. Residents using drinkingwater from the 3 wells about 600 feet north and northwest of the site are the likely futurereceptors. This human exposure pathway has not been completed in the past and is not presentlycompleted, as evidenced by test results of the drinking water wells.


Fugitive dust generated from surface soils which are on or near the site is a potential pathway forhuman exposure. Contaminant concentrations in on-site soils are significantly elevated. Past airmonitoring on-site found lead concentration which exceeded OSHA standards (50 µg/m3). Thepossible points of exposure include workers on the Capitol Oil Company property, andresidences and businesses down-wind from the site.

The exposed population for ingestion and inhalation of contaminated fugitive dust includes on-site workers and down-wind receptors. These exposures would most likely occur when soils aredisturbed, such as, during remedial activities or borrow operations on the property northwest ofthe site. Borrow activities may presently expose workers and down-wind receptors. Remedialactivities will likely create exposure in the future if adequate precautions are not taken. Therefore, dust control measures are recommended and air monitoring would be prudent. Thispathway will likely remain a potentially completed pathway until the completion of remedialactivities.


There is very little vegetation on-site, and it is unlikely that contaminants could be passedthrough the flora food chain and affect on-site fauna. However, transport of dissolvedcontaminants to the James River through the drainage ditch during rainfall could result in thecontamination of some aquatic organisms. Edible fish are a potential environmental pathway,but no data are available to evaluate if contaminants are present in the fish in the vicinity of thesite.

The potential exposed population for ingestion of contaminated aquatic organisms are localrecreational fisherman. No commercial fishing activities are known to take place in the vicinityof the site. The existing surface water and sediment data (Tables 4 and 5, respectively) indicatethat lead would be the most significant contaminant. Lead does bioconcentrate, butbiomagnification has not been detected (4). The bioconcentration factors are relatively high forbenthic organisms; such as oysters, but much lower for carnivorous fish. Lead is also toxic tofish; therefore, even if contaminated they may die prior to being caught. While human exposureto site contaminants through fish consumption is not highly likely, it cannot be ruled out basedupon the available data.

C. Eliminated Exposure Pathway


It is possible that humans could be exposed to soil on and adjacent to the site through ingestionor dermal contact. Figure 3 shows the area with lead concentrations in soil above 500 mg/kg. The possible points of exposure include surface soils near the site, but outside of the restrictedaccess areas. The potentially exposed population for ingestion of contaminated soils would bechildren playing in the vicinity of the site. However, there are no indications that children play inthe immediate vicinity of the site. This pathway is not likely to be a completed pathway.

The exposed population for direct dermal contact with contaminants is on-site workers andchildren playing in the vicinity of the site. Children have not been observed playing in thevicinity of the site and on-site workers are anticipated to wear protective clothing. Therefore,this potential exposure pathway is not completed presently and is not anticipated to be acompleted human exposure pathway in the future.


The following chemicals have been identified as contaminants of concern at the site: antimony,arsenic, cadmium, and lead. In the past, workers were exposed to lead and possibly othercontaminants. Currently, no exposure pathways are completed, thus health effects would not beexpected to occur. The important potential exposure pathways include ingestion of contaminatedground water and inhalation of contaminated fugitive dust. Ingestion of surface water from theJames River and ingestion of fish, while unlikely, may be potential exposure pathways, butadditional data are needed in order to fully evaluate these pathways.

A. Toxicologic Evaluation

This section emphasizes site-specific chemicals and their potential public health implications. To assess health effects that could result from exposure to site contaminants, daily exposuredoses which an individual may receive are estimated. The estimated daily dose is compared to ahealth guideline which define levels of exposure at which adverse health effects are likely tooccur. ATSDR has developed Minimal Risk Levels (MRLs) to evaluate noncarcinogenicadverse health effects for routes of exposure such as ingestion and inhalation, and for exposuredurations including acute (less than 14 days), intermediate (15 days to 364 days), and chronic(greater than 365 days). When MRLs are not available, the EPA Reference Dose (RfD) is used. The RfD is an estimate of daily exposure below which noncancer adverse health effects wouldnot be expected to occur.


Antimony has been detected in surface soils (6,410 mg/kg) and ground water (120 µg/L total) onthe site. The EPA drinking water standard (Maximum Contaminant Level - MCL) forantimony is 6 µg/L. Antimony has not been determined to be carcinogenic.

Estimated doses from ingestion of antimony in on-site groundwater exceed the EPA RfD. Chronic ingestion of antimony could result in dry throat, nausea, sleeplessness, loss of appetite,and dizziness. Liver and kidney degenerative changes are late manifestations of chronicexposures (1).

Inhalation of antimony in fugitive dust is a potentially completed pathway. Elemental antimonyand its chemical forms are generally regarded as primary skin irritants. Lesions generally appearon exposed, moist areas of the body, but rarely on the face (1). Inhalation of antimony in fugitivedust can be an irritant to the nose and throat. Antimony is absorbed from the lungs into thebloodstream. Principal systems or structures that are affected include certain enzyme pathways,heart, lungs, and the mucous membranes of the respiratory tract (1).


Arsenic has been detected at the site in the surface soils (60 mg/kg) and ground water (412 µg/L,total). The EPA Drinking Water Health Advisory level and Virginia ground water standard(currently under review) for arsenic are both 50 µg/L. Arsenic has been classified as a Class A human carcinogen by EPA based on sufficient human evidence when there is chronic exposure(2).

Estimated doses from ingestion of arsenic in on-site groundwater exceed the EPA RfD. Ingestedarsenic is quickly absorbed through the lining of the stomach and intestine and enters thebloodstream. This method of entry varies somewhat for different chemical forms of arsenic. Typical effects of ingestion include decreased production of red and white blood cells, abnormalheart function, blood vessel damage, liver and/or kidney injury, and impaired nerve function. Evidence from animal studies suggests that high oral doses during pregnancy may be damagingto the fetus, but this has not been documented in humans (2).

Arsenic, when inhaled, is absorbed through the lungs into the bloodstream. Inhalation exposureto inorganic arsenic dusts and fumes may produce the same types of systemic health effects asthose produced by ingestion. However, this route of exposure is not common and the healtheffects are usually mild. Of much greater concern is the ability of inhaled arsenic to increase therisk of lung cancer (2).


Cadmium has been detected in surface soils (31 mg/kg) and ground water (63.4 µg/L, total). EPA has established a Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) of 5 µg/L for cadmium indrinking water. The Virginia ground water standard (currently under review) is 0.4 µg/L. Cadmium has been classified as a Class B carcinogen by EPA. It is a probable humancarcinogen, based on limited evidence of carcinogenicity in humans and sufficient evidence ofcarcinogenicity in animals (3).

Estimated doses from ingestion of cadmium in on-site groundwater exceed the EPA RfD. Cadmium can enter the blood by absorption from the stomach or intestine after ingestion ofwater, or by absorption from the lungs after inhalation. Approximately 1 to 5 percent of thecadmium that is taken in orally is absorbed into the blood, while approximately 30 percent to 50percent of that inhaled is taken up by the blood. Once cadmium enters the body, it is readilyretained. Low doses of cadmium from chronic exposure may build up significant levels in thebody. Inhalation effects of cadmium following long-term, low-level ( <0.1 mg/m3) exposureinclude kidney damage, lung damage, and lung cancer (3).


Lead has been detected at the site in surface soils (122,000 mg/kg) and ground water (2,130 µg/Ltotal; 16.9 µg/L dissolved). The Virginia ground water standard for lead is 50 µg/L; however,this level is currently under review. The EPA classifies lead as class B2 carcinogen. Lead hasnot been shown to be carcinogenic in humans, but cancer has been experimentally induced inanimals at high doses.

The primary threat to human health arises from the inhalation and ingestion of lead-bearing dust. Lead has the potential for accumulating in the bones and the half-life of lead in the human bodyis estimated to be 1,460 days. Lead is a potential mutagen with chromosome damage reported inoccupationally exposed persons (4).

Workers were exposed in the past to elevated levels of lead. Exposure to levels found in on-sitegroundwater and surface soil could increase blood lead levels to the point that health effects arepossible. Chronic exposure to lead may cause anemia, pallor, a "lead line" on gums, anddecreased hand-grip strength. Recovery is slow and not always complete. The central nervoussystem is affected when large amounts of lead are ingested or inhaled. This results in severeheadache, convulsions, coma, delirium, and possible death. The kidneys also can be damagedafter chronic exposure to lead (14).

Exposure to lead by children occasionally produces progressive mental deterioration. The historyof exposed children (blood lead levels 30-50 µg/dL) indicated normal development during thefirst 12-18 months of life or longer, followed by a steady loss of motor skills and speech. Theymay have severe hyperkinetic and aggressive behavior disorders and a poorly-controlledconvulsive disorder. The lack of sensory perception severely impairs learning (10).

Per day, children ingest less lead in their diets and inhale less lead than adults, but on a dose-per-body-weight basis, children may have 2 to 3 times the exposure. Furthermore, children are morelikely than adults to absorb lead from extraneous sources, such as, ingestion of foreign objects,dust, paint chips, and inhalation of resuspended dusts. Preliminary data suggest children absorb50 percent of ingested lead, a rate 5 times greater than adults (15). There is no evidence thatchildren have been or are being exposed to elevated levels of lead at this site.

Exposure of pregnant women to lead is dangerous because of the great sensitivity of the fetusduring development. Exposure of a mother to lead results in the transfer of lead to the fetus andmay cause premature birth, reduced birth weight, and decreased intelligence quotient in theinfant. The current maximum blood lead level recommended by the Centers for Disease Controlis <10 µg/dL for children.

B. Health Outcome Data Evaluation

There are limited health outcome data for this site and no data have been collected since 1986. Existing health outcome data indicate that on-site exposures of humans to lead occurred while C& R Battery was operating. Virginia Occupational Safety and Health (VOSH), Department ofLabor and Industry, had extensive involvement with the C & R Battery site, including airmonitoring of the personal breathing zone and analysis of blood lead levels in workers. The firstinspection in 1983 revealed numerous violations of the U.S. Occupational Safety and HealthAdministration (OSHA) standards. Air monitoring of the personal breathing zone on-site atseveral work stations indicated that lead concentrations ranged to 112 µg/m3 (micrograms of leadper cubic meter of air). This was well above the existing OSHA standard of 50 µg/m3. Twoemployees were found to have elevated blood lead levels in 1984 (65 µg/dL [micrograms of leadper deciliter of blood] and 80 µg/dL).

In June 1986, the Chesterfield County Health Department collected blood samples from 9children who were residents of the area between Interstate Highway 95 and the James River onBellwood Road, Gresham Avenue, and Haven Avenue. In addition, 6 children who wereprovided day care in the same area were sampled for blood lead levels. All 15 children hadblood lead levels below the detection limit (6 µg/dL). Blood lead level data collected fromchildren in the area do not indicate that exposure to off-site contamination is occurring.

C. Community Health Concerns Evaluation

There is little community concern related to this site, possibly because the site is in a highlyindustrialized area. Members of the community and of the Chesterfield County publicadministration have maintained an interest in all activities at the site, but specific public healthconcerns have not been raised.

Next Section       Table of Contents 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. #