Skip directly to: content | left navigation | search
  1. ATSDR > Public Health Assessments & Consultations

PUBLIC HEALTH ASSESSMENT

DEPUE/NEW JERSEY ZINC/MOBIL CHEMICAL CORPORATION
DEPUE, BUREAU COUNTY, ILLINOIS


TABLES

Table 1. Inorganic Concentrations in DePue On-site Solid Waste Materials (in ppm).

  Gob Pile
X112-X113 3-92
ZN10 3-93		 Lithopone Ridges
X114-X115 3-92
LP20 3-93		 Catalyst Waste
DC10 3-93		 Waste/Fill East
Creek X116 3-92
SM40 3-93		 Gypstack
X107 3-92
GY30 3-93
Aluminum NA
14,500-23,500		 11,100-11,200
1,500		 720 6,870
6,400		 855
1,100
Antimony <7.8-<8.4
57		 R-R
18		 <0.2 <5.7
34		 R
3.0
Arsenic 144-164
93		 5.1-236
6.2		 140 124
61		 <0.31
<0.75
Barium 111-140
160		 291-121,000
14,000		 27 993
36		 22.9B
24
Beryllium 1.1-1.0
0.06		 0.74-1.5
0.16		 24 0.63B
0.039		 <0.15
0.099
Boron NA
12		 NA
7.0		 4.8 NA
15		 NA
35
Cadmium 365-591
71 		105-<0.96
8.8		 3.0 81.9
97		 <0.77
0.98
Calcium 9,580-12,000
17,000		 1,760-10,100
2,300		 1,800 5,320
12,000		 125,000
52,000
Chromium 34.9-38.3
12

25.9-46.4
9.5

 69 593
11		 2.6
5.3
Cobalt 31.6-62.0
18		 40.9-<0.58
9.6		 1.7 26.9
11		 <0.46
0.47
Copper 6,200-8,070
1,900		 262-5,900
50		 28 2,040
740		 1.5B
2.8
Cyanide 14.4-30.0
R		 17.6-<1.6
R		 R 1.0
R		 <1.2
R
Iron (total) 103,000-126,000
45,000		 22,800-126,000
14,000		 19,000 56,000
30,000		 706
1,300
Lead 3,040-7,030
1,900		 834-3,656
250		 230 4,400
1,900		 6.7
3.5
Magnesium 829-1,940
8,200		 923-5,840
700		 570 2,530
5,899		 40B
320
Manganese 2,820-3,140
870		 327-1,560
250		 42 1,550
1.3		 3.6
16
Mercury <0.17-<0.12
0.4		 <0.48-<0.16
0.01		 0.1 4.39J
2.8		 <0.12
0.03
Molybdenum NA
<0.5		 NA
<0.5		 9.1 NA
4.9		 NA
0.65
Nickel 27.9-34.4
12		 32.1-32.4
30		 3.3 411
15		 <2.0
1.5
Potassium 320-1,500
920		 273-3,060
134		 6,200 1,010
1,200		 <100
510
Selenium 35.0-13.3
<0.6		 0.66-13.9
<0.6		 <0.6 5.8
<0.6		 R
<0.6
Silicon NA
<0.5		 NA
<0.5		 <0.5 NA
<0.5		 NA
1,000
Silver 17.2-45.9
12		 3.6-53.7
<0.05		 <0.05 21.3
7.2		 0.81B
<0.05
Sodium <849-1,130
140		 <252-<614
8		 38 263B
160		 258B
440
Thallium <0.56-R
5.2		 R-R
1.1		 59 R
3.4		 R
5.5
Vanadium 47.3-53.5
17

54.3-101
1.2

 9,000 26.8
17		 2.4
9.2
Zinc 105,000-148,000
15,000		 656-19,300
1,100		 270 22,500
21,000		 <6.9
21

B = analyte found in blank
NA = not analyzed
U =not detected
R = data rejected
ppm = parts per million


Table 2. Inorganic Concentrations in DePue On-site Soils (in ppm).

  TPA1
8-94		 TPA2
8-94		 TPA3
8-94		 0-6" X109
3-92		 2-6" X111
3-92		 <1 ft X110
3-92		 <1 ft
ISGS1
W plant area		 <1 ft
ISGS4 S of gob pile		 <1 ft
ISGS6 S of Marq to E		 <1 ft
ISGS7 Old dump area		 Background Tiskilwa 3-92
X101 & X102
Aluminum NA NA NA 5,620 6,130 9,280 NA NA NA NA 8,750-11,000
Antimony NA NA NA R R ND NA NA NA NA ND-6.6J
Arsenic NA NA NA 14.3 113 268 NA NA NA NA 4.5-6.0
Barium NA NA NA 56.9 4,860 3,510 NA NA NA NA 104-174
Beryllium NA NA NA 0.35 1.4 1.5 NA NA NA NA 0.56-0.74
Cadmium NA NA NA 20.6 55.0 278 84 (1') 1,400 (3') 27 (1') 300 (5') 0.68-0.71
Calcium NA NA NA 81,100 4,820 4,340 NA NA NA NA 7,020-13,400
Chromium (total) NA NA NA 11.4 28.4 20.9 NA NA NA NA 14.2-19.2
Cobalt NA NA NA 5.6 10.4 30.4 NA NA NA NA 5.2-6.0
Copper 1,100 2,400 190 94.1 717 1,960 3,200 (1') 3,500 (1') 90 (1') 720 (1') 13.7-23.6
Cyanide NA NA NA ND ND ND NA NA NA NA ND
Iron (total) NA NA NA 14,100 199,000 64,700 NA NA NA NA 10,600-16,100
Lead NA NA NA 155 33,400 17,800 37,000 (1') 16,000 (3') 250 (1') 3,300 (1') 117-207
Magnesium NA NA NA 37,100 663 1,590 NA NA NA NA 3,290-6,440
Manganese NA NA NA 444 1,870 2,830 NA NA NA NA 382-576
Mercury NA NA NA ND ND 0.77J NA NA NA NA ND-ND
Nickel NA NA NA 10.7 13.9 24.3 NA NA NA NA 11.9-15.6
Phosphorus 800 1,100 280 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Potassium 140 <100 <100 1,460 704 982 NA NA NA NA 1,900-2,740
Selenium NA NA NA ND 2.1J 8.2 NA NA NA NA 0.17-0.37
Silver NA NA NA 1.9 26.9 34.5 NA NA NA NA ND-ND
Sodium NA NA NA 161 ND ND NA NA NA NA ND-140
Vanadium NA NA NA 14.6 30.9 34.2 NA NA NA NA 20.5-25.5
Zinc 40,000 46,000 60,000 4,510 22,900 65,600 33,000 (1') 29,000 (1') 2,600 (1') 52,000 (1') 124-296

NA = not analyzed        ND = not detected         ppm = parts per million


Table 3. Inorganic Concentrations in DePue Residential Soils (in ppm). Results of Illinois EPA, March 1992 Sampling.

Metal Perimeter area 124,126,132-137 South 125, 127,128,129 East 118,119,
120,121,122,123 		West 130,131 Background
101 & 102		 Soil Comparison Values - ATSDR Source
Pica
Child 		Child Adult
Aluminum 6,470-15,300 10,100-20,100 11,900-17,600 9,360-11,600 8,750-11,000 none none none   
Arsenic 4.7J-16.9J 13.7J-21.4J 9.3-27.2J 17.6J-32.4J 4.5-6.0 0.6 20 200 RMEG
Barium 88.2-5,560 223-3,760 204-996 6,300-8,710 104-174 100 4,000 50,000 RMEG
Beryllium 0.44-0.83 0.66-0.77 0.58-0.86 0.59-0.68 0.56-0.74 4 100 1,000 RMEG
Cadmium 22.2J-98.1J 4.3J-97.3J 4.6J-53.1J 73.6J-90.2J 0.68-0.71 0.4 10 100 CEMEG
Calcium 4,710-48,600 2,810-15,800 2,220-29,300 15,100-7,360 7,020-13,400 none none none  
Chromium 13.8-25.4 17.3-26 18.2-38.8 16.2-17.3 14.2-19.2 6 200 2,000 RMEG VI
Cobalt 4.9-8.2 6-9.2 7.3-10.3 3-4.6 5.2-6.0 none none none  
Copper 26.8J-163J 15.4J-82.7 17.7J-115J 61.7J-65.5J 13.7-23.6 none none none  
Iron 10,800-19,900 19,300-20,500 13,900-23,100 14,900-15,800 10,600-16,100 none none none  
Lead 85.9-440 38.4-729 136-512 542-565 117-207 none none none  
Magnesium 1,980-24,300 1,920-5,320 2,350-17,600 6,040-4,090 3,290-6,440 none none none  
Manganese 305-580 110-1,040 738-1,180 532-604 382-576 300 700 100,000 RMEG
Nickel 9.9-18.6 16.5-20.3 14.7-21.1 11.8-12.5 11.9-15.6 40 1,000 10,000 RMEG
Potassium 1,320-3,300 870-2,780 1,930-3,880 1,920-2,270 1,900-2,740 none none none  
Selenium 0.17J-1.4J 0.33J-1.1J 0.29-1.3 1J-1.1 0.17-0.37 10 300 4,000 CEMEG
Silver ND-1.3J ND-1.4J ND-1.6J ND-ND ND-ND 10 300 4,000 RMEG
Vanadium 18.6-35.8 29.3-42.5 30.4-41.4 23.8-24.3 20.5-25.5 6 200 2,000 RMEG
Zinc 1,.490-6,580 329-6,030 467-3,070 3,780-5,290 124-296 600 20,000 200,000 CEMEG

J=estimated value           NA = not analyzed           ND = not detected
 VI = Chromium comparison value listed for hexavalent chromium


Table 4. Inorganic Concentrations in DePue Residential Soils (in ppm). Results of IDPH, December 1992 Sampling (in ppm).

Metal
(sampling depth) 		n Min Max Sum Mean Median Comparison Concentrations
Soil backgrounds Soil Comparison Values
Local Illinois ranges Pica child Child Adult
Urban Rural
Cadmium
(0-1") 		65 <5 9,100 28,763 442 100 0.68-0.71 <2.5-8.2 <0.2-5.2 0.4 10 100
Cadmium
(1-2") 		20 4 98 980 49 50
Lead (0-1") 65 46 7,355 43,255 666 459 117-207 4.7-647 <7.4-270 NA 1,000 NA
Lead (1-2") 20 36 729 6,081 304 312
Zinc (0-1") 65 3,000 99,500 728,630 11,210 8,000 124-296 23-798 <5.5-400 600 20,000 200,000
Zinc (1-2") 20 329 6,580 62,496 3,125 2,805

ppm = parts per million
NA = not available
Sample depths 0-1" composite of 5 borings collected December 1992 (IDPH).
Sample depths 1-2" collected March 1992 including two background samples from nearby town (Illinois EPA).
Illinois background values from urban and rural locations (Illinois EPA, 1994).
Health comparison soil guidelines for cadmium and zinc (ATSDR, 1998) and Illinois lead soil standard (IDPH, 1994).


Table 5. Inorganic Concentrations in DePue Sediments (in ppm).

  W. Marquette
Storm Grate
X202 4-93		 E. Marquette
Storm Grate
X203 4-93		 Lagoon
X106 3-92
X201 4-93		 Lagoon-Creek
X108 3-92 		South Ditch
1 5-94
2 5-94
3 5-94		 Ditch-Lake
 X105 3-92 		Lake DePue
 X104 3-92 		Lake Turner
Background
X103 3-92
NA 4-93
Aluminum 8,220 16,400 12,700
25,000		 12,100 NA 281,005 32,100 16,900
Ammonia NA NA NA
NA		 NA NA NA NA NA
Antimony <7.8 <32.7 7.2J
<262		 ND NA ND NA 6.4J
Arsenic 8.4 8.2 8.7
28.7		 19.5 <5
<5
<5		 15.3 16.7 8.6
Barium 322 422 70.5
3,780		 710 170
82
97		 214 244 112
Beryllium 0.85 1.2 0.7
8.5		 0.85 NA ND 1.4 0.87
0.83-0.88
Cadmium 36.4 54.0 ND
1,450		 112 81
98
110		 275 12.3 0.96
3.4-8.0
Calcium 64,900 55,800 46,600
28600		 42,900 NA 15,600 19,700 19,300
Chromium (total) 164 23.6 21.0
<35.4		 24.2 4
2
2		 49.0 77.9 31.7
34.5-47.7
Cobalt 29 43.4 10.1
170		 50.8 NA 51.1 14.0 8.1
9.7-10.1
Copper 35,000 110,000 18.9
217,000		 3,400 NA 4,420 73.1 19.7
36.1-46.1
Iron (total) 42,900 14,700 19,700
76,900		 32,600 NA 37,100 31,900 19,300
Lead 698 1,160 12.3
4,050		 354 160
130
130		 128 109 75.6
36.9-55.7
Magnesium 36,800 31,500 25,700
12,000		 9,450 NA 9,620 12,000 9,610
Manganese 4,480 2,400 388
8,880		 2,020 NA 1,390 677 537
524-621
Mercury 0.13 <0.4 ND
<3.2		 ND <0.1
<0.1
<0.1		 <0.93 ND ND
<0.17-<0.20
Nickel 61.9 66.5 24.6
150		 21.8 NA 67.8 47.8 26.8
34.3-41.2
Potassium 294 <967 3,070
7,740		 2,250 NA 5,450 5,450 3,270
Selenium 1.3 2.8 0.56J
14.8		 0.84 <10
<10
<10		 2.5J 1.6J 0.32
0.48-0.82
Silver 5.5 <4.6 ND
<36.9		 2.5 NA 2.2 ND ND
<1.0-<1.2
Sodium 420 569 187 889 NA 508 538 245
Vanadium 18.6 2.4 26.9
<38.5		 27.9 NA 51.4 57.9 37.8
23.8-28.6
Zinc 30,100 55,100 141
213,000		 22,500 NA 64,800 2,170 173
163-370

J = Estimated value
NA = Not analyzed
ND = Not detected
ppm = parts per million


Table 6. Inorganic Concentrations in DePue South Ditch Surface (0-6") Sediments (in ppm) (collected in March 1996).

Sample Numbers 001 003 005 007A 007B 009A 009B 011 013A 013B 014 Lake Turner
(background)
015, 016,017,018
Arsenic 28.4 26.1 8.4 22.9 19.0 18.2 20.9 15.9 14.4 12.9 8.2 6.9-10.3
Beryllium <2.3 <2.8 1.9 1.5 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.6 1.2 1.2 0.95 0.83-0.88
Cadmium 273 679 687 845 386 542 602 541 316 367 405 3.4-8.0
Chromium (total) 19.5 <13.9 <6.2 14.2 18.0 13.8 15.8 21.3 21.8 25.7 13.3 34.5-47.7
Cobalt 47.6 66.2 65.1 61.1 40.7 59.4 60.2 50.0 62.3 58.2 31.3 9.7-10.1
Copper 86,200 67,700 82,900 39,900 39,700 41,100 44,500 48,900 22,300 19,400 15,300 36.1-46.1
Lead 1,430 1,090 580 686 650 528 559 522 405 334 234 36.9-55.7
Manganese 1,830 3,080 2,900 2,580 1,530 2,180 2,340 1,670 2,130 2,250 2,000 524-621
Mercury <1.1 <1.4 <0.62 <0.57 <0.47 <0.51 <0.59 <0.40 0.59 0.46 <0.45 <0.17-<0.20
Nickel <56.8 <69.4 32.6 51.6 47.2 45.9 46.0 52.1 60.3 57.1 25.2 34.3-41.2
Selenium <2.3 <2.8 <1.2 <1.1 <0.93 1.0 <1.2 <0.80 2.0 1.8 <0.91 0.48-0.82
Silver <6.8 <8.3 <3.7 10.1 5.6 8.3 5.4 3.2 1.9 144 <2.7 <1.0-<1.2
Vanadium 16.5 <11.1 12.0 16.2 21.2 12.6 12.8 20.2 19.5 21.0 16.1 23.8-28.6
Zinc 77,800 189,000 105,000 147,000 79,900 157,000 161,000 132,000 113,000 100,000 103,000 163-370

ppm = parts per million


Table 7. Inorganic Concentrations in DePue Surface Waters (in ppm).


Gypstack
S305 3-92
Clearwater Pond
 SW20 3-93 (a)
Gypsum Pond
SW10 3-93 (a)		 Ditch S Lithopone S104 4-93
S105 4-93
SW2 5-94
SW3 5-94		 Leachate 6-75 Lagoon
S304 3-92
SW30 3-93(a)		 Puddle Marquette
IDPH 12-92
S102 4-93
S103 4-93		 Ditch/Lake
S303 3-92
S101 4-93
SW1 5-94 		Lake DePue S302 3-92 Background Lake Turner S301 3-92 Comparison Value -- Child Drinking Water (in ppm) Source
Aluminum 2.63
1.9
1.7		 5.3
0.035
NA		 NA 2.49
0.69 		NA
10
2.2		 0.38
4.6
NA		 1.78 0.12 none  
Ammonia 346
NA
NA		 NA
NA
5.9
8.7		 NA 54.6
NA		 NA
NA
NA		 2.38
NA
7.3		 0.618 ND 3 I EMEG
Antimony ND
0.07
<0.04		 <0.34
0.05
NA
NA		 NA ND
<0.04 		NA
<3.4
<1.7		 ND
NA
NA		 ND ND 0.004 RMEG
Arsenic 0.368
0.19
0.28		 0.0021
0.0022
<0.005
0.006		 0.002 0.0194J
<0.015 		NA
<0.0012
<0.0012		 ND
0.0031
0.007		 0.0023J 0.0026J 0.00002 CREG
Barium 0.056
0.016
<0.005 		0.014
0.05
0.03
0.03		 0.2 0.026
0.22		 NA
0.0056
0.012		 0.054B
0.12
<0.1		 0.066 0.041 0.7 RMEG
Beryllium <0.001
<0.005
<0.005		 0.0021
0.0014
NA
NA		 NA ND
<0.005		 NA
0.007
0.0027		 ND
0.0028
NA		 ND <0.001 0.000008 CREG
Cadmium 0.0385J
0.017
0.031		 11.0
<0.0029
0.009
3.1		 19.0 0.0569J
0.057 		10
12.1
3.8		 0.0868
5.6
5.0		 0.0131J ND 0.005 EMEG
Calcium 299
250
310		 294
265
190
330		 NA 105
52 		NA
376
403		 127
308
350		 110 7.4 none  
Chromium (total) 0.033
0.02
0.03 		<0.0046
<0.0046
NA
NA		 ND ND
<0.01		 NA
<0.0046
0.0046		 ND
<0.0046
NA		 ND ND 0.050 RMEG
(VI)
Cobalt 0.044
0.06
0.03		 0.11
<0.0049
NA
NA		 NA 0.253
0.12		 NA
10.3
3.9		 0.0594
3.2
NA		 0.0229 ND none  
Copper ND
<0.02
<0.02 		0.26
<0.0027
0.02
0.02		 42.0 0.086
0.23 		NA
278
99.3		 0.13
84.4
57		 0.0368 ND 1.3 MCL
Iron (total) 3.34
1.1
0.79		 0.49
4.6
0.19
1.9		 14.0 1.72
1.6		 NA
0.72
0.13		 0.706
14.1
16		 1.33 3.45 none  
Lead ND
<0.04
<0.04		 0.0035
<0.001
<0.003
0.005		 1.0 0.04
0.04		 1.5
2.0
1.9		 ND
0.45
0.43		 ND ND 0.015 MCL
Magnesium 421
170
330		 74.7
122
2.2
140		 NA 47.2
27		 NA
422
200		 55.9
192
240		 44.9 31.1 none  
Manganese 4.81
3.7
3.2		 19.4
0.49
0.16
7.4		 375.0 15.3
7.1		 NA
647
247		 5.04
201
210		 2.18 0.135 0.050 RMEG
Mercury 0.0003
0.0008
0.0005		 0.00024
<0.0002
NA
NA		 ND 0.00006
0.0007		 NA
<0.0002
<0.0002		 0.00005B
NA
NA		 0.00002 0.00009 0.002 MCL
Molybdenum NA
<0.1
<0.1		 NA
NA
NA
NA		 NA NA
<0.1		 NA
NA
NA		 NA
NA
NA		        
Nickel 0.147
0.11
0.11 		0.12
<0.15
<0.02
0.05		 2.8 0.222
0.1		 NA
5.4
2.0		 0.0403
1.7
1.9		 ND ND 0.1 MCL
Potassium 87.3
31
64		 12.3
5.3
NA
NA		 NA 9.83
9.6 		NA
57.7
38.4		 5.19
24.6
NA		 5.74 3.74 none  
Selenium 0.018J
<0.12
<0.12 		0.01
<0.0014
<0.01
<0.005		 ND 0.0110J
<0.12 		NA
0.034
<0.007		 0.01J
0.032
<0.025		 0.01J ND 0.020 CEMEG
Silver ND
<0.01
<0.01		 <0.0048
<0.0048
NA
NA		 0.03 ND
0.08J 		NA
<0.0048
<0.0048		 ND
<0.0048
NA		 ND ND 0.050 RMEG
Sodium 675
300
550		 73.7
138
NA
NA		 NA 29.8
29 		NA
163
93.5		 61.7
115
NA		 54.1 28.3    
Sulfate 3,480
NA
NA		 NA
NA
350
1,300		 NA 650
NA		 NA
NA
NA		 342
NA
4,900		 222 86 400 P MCL
Sulfide ND
<0.5
<0.5		 NA
NA
<1
<1		 NA ND
<0.5		 NA
NA
NA		 2.38
NA
<1		 0.618 ND none  
Vanadium 0.022
<0.01
<0.01 		<0.005
<0.005
NA
NA		 NA 0.007
0.06 		NA
<0.005
<0.005		 ND
<0.005
NA		 0.009 ND 0.020 LTHA
Zinc 0.52
8.9
1.4		 571
0.78
0.84
190		 3,800 62.7
40 		448
5,780
2,190		 26.5
1,790
1,900		 5.31 0.018 3 RMEG

NA = not analyzed        ppm = parts per million        ND = not detected        J = estimated value         R = rejected data
(a) sample reanalyzed by U.S. EPA contract laboratory.


Table 8. Inorganic Concentrations in DePue On-site Groundwater (in ppm).


PS-1 PS-2 PS-3 PS-4 PS-5 PS-6 PS-7 PS-8 PS-9 PS-10 PS-11 PS-12 PS-13 PS-14 PS-15 PS-16 PS-17 1-96 Comparison Value
Child 		Source
Ammonia <0.05 <0.05 14 26 14 0.93 51 1.1 8.5 20 0.24 <0.05 31 35 0.25 1 9 NA 3 IEMEG
Arsenic <0.005 <0.005 0.05 <0.005 0.006 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.01 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 NA 0.003 CEMEG
Barium 0.03 0.02 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.04 0.06 0.04 0.02 0.1 0.04 0.04 0.03 <0.1 <0.01 <0.1 <0.2 NA 0.7 REMEG
Calcium 180 190 600 430 440 210 350 210 320 260 180 170 260 460 490 440 470 NA NONE  
Cadmium <0.0005 <0.0005 0.62 3.7 1.1 <0.0005 0.023 0.12 0.024 <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.005 <0.005 24 1.8 48 12 9.44 0.002 CEMEG
Chloride 35 18 15 63 54 16 22 11 9 18 11 <2 28 36 92 17 33 NA NONE  
Copper <0.01 0.01 <0.01 <0.02 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.1 <0.2 <0.2 390 216 1.3 MCLG
Fluoride 0.3 0.2 9.5 3.5 4.6 0.7 17 4.8 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 3.7 0.6 2.3 NA 1.4-2.4 IPDWR*
Iron 0.04 <0.02 <0.02 0.46 1.1 15 2.8 0.05 0.02 16 <0.02 0.05 <0.02 <0.2 <0.2 8.3 1.4 2.08 NONE  
Magnesium 73 84 84 83 120 82 56 70 32 120 68 89 140 240 120 120 550 NA NONE  
Manganese 0.27 <0.01 18 13 10 0.81 6 0.99 7.8 0.59 0.23 0.01 0.32 170 5.9 73 790 501 0.05 RMEG
Nickel <0.02 <0.02 0.28 0.34 0.23 <0.02 0.05 0.03 0.1 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.2 <0.2 <0.2 7.2 NA 0.1 MCL
Lead <0.003 <0.003 <0.006 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.006 <0.003 <0.003 0.0613 <0.003 0.43 1.3 0.9 0.015 MCL
Nitrate 5.9 11 54 4.7 21 <0.1 14 18 33 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 9 16 7.9 1.1 19 NA 10 MCL
Nitrite <0.1 <0.1 1.2 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.2 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 NA 1 REMEG
Phosphorus 1.4 0.19 3.5 0.88 1.3 0.14 2.9 0.07 0.53 2.7 0.07 0.07 21 0.26 0.34 <0.05 0.18 NA NONE  
Sulfate 330 400 1,900 2,300 2,800 630 950 490 1,100 700 270 220 650 5,600 1,700 4,600 16,000 NA 500 PMCL
Zinc <0.02 <0.02 100 160 240 0.74 32 50 42 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 1,900 230 2,400 7,500 4,860 2 LTHA

According to Golder (1995) samples for metals, chloride, sulfate, and sulfide were collected from monitoring wells MW-1 through MW-3 were collected on December 12, 1992, piezometers PS-4 through PS-7 and PS-9 on January 29, 1994. Piezometers PS-1, PS-2, PS-3 and PS-10 on March 9, 1994. Samples for fluoride, ammonia, nitrate, nitrite, sulfate, sulfide, and total phosphorus were collected from piezometers PS-1 through PS-10 on May 6, 1994. Samples for all analyses were collected from PS-11 on May 7, 1994 and from PS-12 through PS-17 on May 18, 1994.

No levels of selenium or sulfide was detected in the above groundwater samples and have not been included.

*Interim Public Drinking Water Regulations.


Table 9. Metal Concentrations in Lake DePue Fish (in ppm). Collected October 1992; fillets analyzed by USFDA.

 

Species

Normal
Ranges
Carp Buffalo Catfish Crappie Bass ppm
Arsenic (DL=1) ND ND ND ND ND  
Cadmium (DL=0.09) ND ND ND ND ND  
Chromium (total) 0.11 0.10 0.07 0.07 0.09 0.11-0.23A
Lead (DL=0.05) ND ND ND ND ND  
Nickel (DL=0.01) 0.12 0.14 ND 0.08 0.07 0.02-0.11B
Zinc 25.86 8.95 6.11 6.96 5.94 21.7C

AMean concentration in meat and fish (ATSDR Tox. Profile: Chromium)
BRange of mean levels in meat, fish, and eggs (ATSDR Tox. Profile: Nickel)
CGeometric mean in various whole fish (ATSDR Tox. Profile: Zinc)
DL = detection limit
ND = not detected
ppm = parts per million


Table 10. Summary of 1990 USEPA Toxic Chemical Release Inventory for Zip Codes Near DePue (USEPA, 1993).

Pounds of Chemicals
Chemical On-site Air Release
Acetone 25,708  
Copper and compounds 1,000-9,999 5
Di(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate 10,000-99,999  
Methanol 10,141  
Methyl ethyl ketone 1,000-9,999 24,041
Toluene 6,285  
Trichloroethylene 1,000-9,999 56,294

No entries were reported for the following communities:

DePue (61322)           Tiskilwa (61368)
Bureau (61315)           Seatonville (61359)


Table 11. DePue Interior Metal House Dust Concentrations from 15 Residences (in ppm).

Sample Type Units Cadmium Lead Zinc
Range Median Mean(a) Mean(b) Range Median Mean(a) Mean(b) Range Median Mean(a) Mean(b)
27 Carpet
Samples 		ppm (d) ND (n=10)-
128 		18 23 19 27-
2,760 		139 343 250 35-
4,100 		150 1083 967
  Total µg ND (n=10)-
3,875 		44 442 310 7-
64,159 		838 4,446 2149 130-
39,830 		3,247 6,598 5,320
  µg/Square Foot ND (n=10)-
1,582 		3 92 34 0.1-
26,188 		41 1,126 162 2-
11,951 		116 906 481
27 Dust Wipes µg/Square Foot ND (n=25)-
88 		ND 16 13 ND(n=15)-
1,428 		ND 109 57 34-
2,161 		318 458 392

ND        Not Detectable (Below Detection Limit)
(a)         Nondetectable samples calculated as � of the Detection Limit
(b)         Adjusted mean omitting outlying concentration for comparison only (n=26)
ppm = parts per million


Table 12. DePue Blood Cadmium Screening Summary (in µg/L), September 1993.

Ages Concentration Range Mean ND (n) % ND of
age group
0-2
n=1		 <0.5 - 1 100
3-5
n=14		 <0.5-<0.5 <0.5 14 100
6-11
n=24		 <0.5-1.2 0.33 20 83
12-19
n=5		 <0.5-<0.5 <0.5 5 100
20-49
n=26		 <0.5-1.10 0.36 22 84
50-69
n=18		 <0.5-5.1 0.93 11 61
>70
n=18		 <0.5-3.9 1.16 7 36
Total n=106 <0.5-5.1 ONE ADULT EXCEEDED STANDARD 0.57+0.08 80 75

µg/L = micrograms per liter
Note: Results below the detection limit (DL = 0.5 µg/L) were included as 0.25 µg/L for calculations


Table 13. DePue Random Urine Cadmium Screening Summary, September 1993.

Age # of
Volunteers		 Cadmium (µg/L) Creatinine (mg/L)
Normal = 1,000-2,000 (a)		 Normalized Value
(µg/g creatinine)
Action Level = 3.0
0-4 0      
5-9 5 <0.5-<0.5 360-1,370 <0.36-<1.38
10-14 3 <0.5-<0.5 1,120-2,480 <0.2-<0.44
15-18 1 <0.5 2,200 <0.22
19-24 1 <0.5 1240 <0.4
25-29 0 NA NA NA
30-39 2 <0.5-<0.5 1,000-1,050 <0.47-<0.5
40-49 3 <0.5-<0.5 670-1,190 <0.42-<0.74
50-59 3 <0.5-0.9 1,070-1,380 <0.36-0.84
60-69 4 <0.5-<0.5 1,130-3,110 <0.16-<0.44
70-79 11 <0.5-4.8 170-3,410 <0.3-3.48
80+ 0 NA NA NA
Total 33 <0.5-4.8 (28 ND) 170-3,410 (8 LOW; 4 HIGH) ONE ADULT ABOVE ACTION LEVEL

ND = Not Detected (detection limit is 0.5 µg/L).
µg/L = micrograms per liter
mg/L = milligrams per liter
µg/g = micrograms per gram


Table 14. DePue Blood Lead Screening Summary, September 1993.

Age
Range		 Lead Concentrations
(µg/dL) 		Mean (a) Median Comparison Values
Background(b) Health Guidelines
0-2
n=2 		<0.2-3.8 2.4 2.4 4.1 <10
3-5
n=14 		<0.2-9.2 3.6 3.6 3.4 <10
6-11
n=25 		<0.2-28.6 4.1 2.8 2.5 <10
12-19
n=5 		<0.2-<0.2 1.0 <2.0 1.6 <10
20-49
n=27 		<0.2-7.3 2.3 <2.0 2.6 <25
50-69
n=18 		<0.2-8.1 3.6 2.8 4.0 <25
>70
n=18 		1.0-12.0 4.7 3.3 4.0 <25
Total n=109 <0.2-28.6 3.4+0.3 2.7 2.8 ONE CHILD EXCEEDED

µg/dL = micrograms per deciliter
(a)       Results less than the detection limit of 2.0 µg/dl were designated 1.0 µg/dl for mean calculations.
(b)       Blood lead level concentrations from a national survey (Brody, 1994).


Table 15. Organic Contaminants in DePue Environmental Samples (in ppb).

Contaminant On-site Gypstack X107 On-site
Soil X109

Off-site Sediments

Surface Water
Lake DePue S302		 Soil Comparison Values (Pica child)
Lagoon X106 Ditch/Creek X108 Ditch/Lake
X105		 Lake DePue X104
Acetone ND ND ND ND 14J ND ND 200,000 RMEG
Benzo(a)anthracene ND ND ND 120J 110J ND ND none
Benzo(a)fluoranthene ND ND 61J 130J ND ND ND none
Benzo(b)fluoranthene ND ND 170J 320J 190J ND ND none
Benzo(k)fluoranthene ND ND ND ND 97J ND ND none
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)
phthalate		 120J ND 370 120J 750 650 2J 50,000 CREG
Carbon disulfide ND ND ND ND 10J ND ND 200,000 RMEG
Chrysene ND ND 100J 170J 150J 130J ND none
Fluoranthene ND 60J 120J 160J 220J 150J ND 80,000 RMEG
Phenanthrene ND 52J 50J 190J 100J 67J ND none
Pyrene ND 55J 190J 200J 230J 230J ND 60,000 RMEG

ppb = parts per billion
ND= Not detected
J=Estimated value


Table 16. DePue Completed Exposure Pathways.

Pathway name
EXPOSURE PATHWAY ELEMENTS
Source Medium Point of Exposure Route of Exposure Receptor Population Time of Exposure Exposure Activities Estimated Number Exposed Chemicals
Surface Wastes Gob pile,
Ridges,
Gypsum stack 		Solid wastes,
Tailings (fill) 		Site wastes,
Public and commercial areas 		Incidental hand-to-mouth behavior,
Ingestion 		Workers
Trespassers 		Past Contacting wastes,
Incidental hand-to-mouth behavior 		4,000 Site-related metals
Surface Soil Surface wastes,
Airborne deposition,
Surface water,
Fertilizers 		Surface soils,
Soil amendments 		Residential yards,
House dust
Gardens,
Local businesses 		Ingestion
Food 		Residents,
Gardeners,
Consumers 		Past
Present
Future 		Contacting soils and dusts,
Amending soils 		4,000 Site-related metals
Site properties Inhalation
Ingestion 		On-site workers,
Trespassers 		Past Contacting soils 3,000 Site-related metals
Sediments Contaminated soil,
Surface water,
Surface runoff,
Past air deposition 		Sediment receiving settling contaminants Creeks,
Lagoons, Standing water 		Ingestion Fishers,
Hunters,
Waders 		Past
Present
Future 		Recreational activity 1,000 Site-related metals
Lake DePue Ingestion Dredging workers Past Dredging activities 25 Site-related metals
Ambient air Process emissions Fumes,
Particulates 		Off-site areas,
On-site areas 		Inhalation
Ingestion 		Residents,
On-site workers 		Past Breathing fume and particulate 4,000 Site-related metals & inorganic chemicals
Indoor air On-site chemical spill Fumes Municipal storm sewer,
Residential
basements 		Inhalation Residents with basements Past On-site spill,
Breathing fume in home 		1,500 Site-related sulfur-containing compounds


Table 17. DePue Potential Exposure Pathways.

Pathway Name
EXPOSURE PATHWAY ELEMENTS
Source Environmental Media Point of Exposure Route of Exposure Exposed Populations Time
Groundwater Gypsum stack Leachate
Groundwater 		Contaminated well water Ingestion Residents using private wells Present
Future
Surface Water Surface runoff,
Surface wastes,
Contaminated soil,
Contaminated sediments 		Surface runoff and erosion,
Permitted discharge 		Standing water,
Lagoons,
South Ditch,
Lake DePue,
Local creeks,
Illinois River 		Incidental hand-mouth ingestion,
Incidental ingestion while swimming 		Trespassers,
Waders,
Swimmers 		Past
Present
Future
Gardens Contaminated soil,
Contaminated sediments,
Contaminated water 		Garden vegetables Private properties Ingestion Gardeners,
Consumers

Past
Present
Future

Remediation of surface wastes and soil Surface wastes
Surface soils
Airborne deposition
Surface water 		Soil,
Remedial wastes 		Residential yards, Area businesses Inhalation,
Ingestion 		Residents,
Local employees 		Future
On-site remediation Inhalation,
Ingestion 		On-site remediation workers Future
Remediation of sediments Creek sediments
South Ditch
Lake sediments 		Sediments,
Remedial wastes 		Areas of re-
mediation and
recreation 		Incidental hand-mouth ingestion Remediation workers,
Recreational individuals 		Future
Biota Surface water runoff,
Contaminated soils,
Contaminated sediments 		Biota Fish
Game animals 		Ingestion Fishermen,
Hunters 		Past
Present
Future


Table 18. Comparison of DePue Estimated Residential Soil Exposures to Health Guidelines.

Metals Soil Ranges1 mg/kg

Health Guidelines for
Ingestion (ATSDR, 1999)

Estimated Ingestion (mg/kg/day)

Dose(s)
mg/kg/day 		Source(s) Child
16 kg; 200 mg/day
4 days/wk
39 wks/yr
5 yrs 		Pica Child
16 kg; 5000 mg/day
4 days/wk
39 wks/yr
5 yrs 		Group Exceeding
Guidance Level
Arsenic 4.7J-32.4J 0.0003
0.0001-0.0008 		Chronic MRL
Chronic RfD 		0.00002-0.0002 0.0006-0.004 Pica Child
Barium 88-8,710 0.07 Chronic RfD 0.0005-0.05 0.01-1.2 Pica Child
Beryllium 0.44-0.86 0.002 Chronic RfD 0.000002-0.000005 0.00006-0.0001 None
Cadmium 4.3J-98J 0.0002 Chronic MRL 0.00002-0.0005 0.0006-0.01 Children
Chromium VI 13.8-38.8 0.003 Chronic RfD 0.00007-0.0002 0.002-0.005 Pica Child
Cobalt 3-10.3 None None 0.00002-0.00005 0.0004-0.001 Unknown
Copper 15.4J-163J None None 0.00008-0.0009 0.002-0.02 Unknown
Lead 38.4-729 None None 0.0002-0.004 0.005-0.1 Unknown
Magnesium 1,920-24,300 None None 0.01-0.1 0.3-3 Unknown
Manganese 110-1,180 0.14 Chronic RfD (food) 0.0006-0.006 0.01-0.16 Pica Child
Nickel 9.9-21.1 0.02 Chronic RfD 0.00005-0.0001 0.001-0.003 None
Selenium 0.29-1.3 0.005
0.005 		Chronic MRL
Chronic RfD 		0.000002-0.000007 0.00004-0.0002 None
Vanadium 18.6-42.5 0.003 Chronic MRL 0.0001-0.0002 0.002-0.006 Pica Child
Zinc 329-6,280 0.3
0.3 		Chronic MRL
Chronic RfD 		0.002-0.03 0.04-0.8 Pica Child

1 Illinois EPA off-site soil concentrations from March 1992 sampling event
mg/kg = milligrams per kilogram
mg/kg/day = milligrams per kilogram per day


FIGURES


Figure 1. Illinois Counties and County Seats


Figure 2. DePue Area Bureau County


Figure 3. Village of DePue


Figure 4. New Jersey Zinc/Mobil Mining & Minerals site features


ATTACHMENT

Multiple Sclerosis Case Confirmation and Incidence Rates Associated with a Small North
Central Illinois Community

The following attachment was not available in electronic format for conversion to HTML at the time of preparation of this document. To obtain a hard copy of the document, please contact:

Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry
Division of Health Assessment and Consultation
Attn: Chief, Program Evaluation, Records, and Information Services Branch E-56
1600 Clifton Road NE, Atlanta, Georgia 30333


ATTACHMENT

Public Comments and Responses to Comments

A section of the following attachment was not available in electronic format for conversion to HTML at the time of preparation of this document. To obtain a hard copy of the document, please contact:

Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry
Division of Health Assessment and Consultation
Attn: Chief, Program Evaluation, Records, and Information Services Branch E-56
1600 Clifton Road NE, Atlanta, Georgia 30333


The Illinois Department of Public Health (IDPH) responses to the "Summary of Comments" in the comment package received in October 1998 as follows, numbered according to the original statements.

  1. The statement in the public health assessment (PHA) that "the site is a public health hazard" is the appropriate conclusion category. IDPH selected that category using ATSDR criteria and guidance.

    IDPH screened volunteers in DePue in 1993 because the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (IEPA) asked for our department's opinion regarding an immediate clean up. The results of the biological screening indicated that this site should not be considered an "urgent public health hazard," and IDPH did not recommend an immediate clean up. IDPH did not conduct a "medical evaluation" of the community, nor did we conduct a case-controlled "study." IDPH was able to screen volunteers for two metals (lead and cadmium) quickly and with very limited funds. Only venous blood samples and random urine samples were collected and analyzed. Blood samples reflect only recent lead and cadmium exposure. Although cadmium in urine can reflect accumulated body burden, levels respond to recent exposure. Levels rise sharply when the critical level for renal damage is reached.

    The PHA is not a quantitative risk assessment as developed by USEPA, nor is the PHA process considered "risk assessment modeling." The objective of the PHA is to evaluate current, past, and possible future exposures and to provide information on health implications of those exposures.

  2. IDPH agrees that the efforts made by the DePue Group with IEPA oversight has served to improve exposure conditions. Additional statements about improved conditions have been added to the PHA. When IDPH is informed of successful mitigating activities and is given data packages, we are able to consider the impact activities have on reducing exposures and can issue statements reflecting that impact.

  3. Please refer to answer #1. IDPH again emphasizes that the cadmium screening, as with blood lead screening, was done to answer the question as to whether immediate action was needed to stop exposure. The screening was not population comprehensive and cannot be used to indicate levels of past exposure or the potential for future exposure.

  4. Again, IDPH agrees that the selected exposure conditions are conservative. When evaluating conditions that can impact human health, especially the health and well being of children, IDPH and ATSDR feel that the evaluation must be conservative. IDPH also agrees that current conditions, clean up efforts, and the considered worker protection activities serve to reduce exposures. Clean up efforts may also reduce off-site metal concentrations, and therefore, future exposures should be less problematic.

  5. The phrase "of concern" has been changed to "of interest" for all metals. Exposure frequency values have been revised for children and adults.

    The arsenic evaluation was based on screening values developed by ATSDR. The ATSDR air guideline at that time was lower than some of the concentrations found in the ambient air samples (0.0002 microgram/cubic meter). IDPH agrees that the arsenic screening values are very low concentrations, sometimes lower than background levels. The discussion of arsenic in air has been removed from the current document because any exposure that occurred at the levels and duration of time found would not be expected to result in adverse health effects.

    The discussion of cadmium has been revised to reflect the current conditions at the site.

    No screening values are available for lead concentrations in soil. Limited information is available to determine how much lead in different environmental media contribute to increased blood lead levels. The sentence has been modified to clarify the issue.

  6. IDPH feels that we have stated that many sources of metals exposure exists in our environment and that some metals are nutrients at community meetings, health professional education activities, and within the PHA drafts during the years that IDPH has been involved at this site. We feel that we have been careful during educational activities to present these issues regarding common metal exposures and will continue to do so.

  7. IDPH is aware of the safety factors included in the development of health comparison values; however, EPA's RfDs and ATSDR's minimal risk levels might not protect hypersensitive (allergic) individuals.

  8. IDPH appreciates the information provided by the DePue Group regarding the site's past and current operations and have revised statements which were unintentionally confusing or misleading. The specific comments included in Appendix A have, for the most part, been considered in revising the statement, phrase, or word in question. IDPH thanks all the members of the DePue Group for their careful and thorough perusal.

  9. We have included a glossary developed by ATSDR to assist readers. Thank you for this suggestion.

  10. Dr. Schiffer's report has been more fully discussed within the body of the PHA.

  11. We appreciate the DePue Group's investigation of the pH data, and those discussions have been removed from the PHA. IDPH must depend upon EPA to complete the QA/QC activities associated with the USEPA risk assessment guidance on data usability and often are not provided with the laboratories' documentation. That is the rationale behind including the qualifying statement in the PHA.

Appendix A. The specific comments were considered while finalizing the PHA and were helpful in developing a clearer, more concise document. Our response to your specific comments are included as an attachment.

As you know, the DePue site has been very dynamic in recent years. Therefore, we have experienced some difficultly keeping current and continuously updating any document that attempts to maintain a general summary of activities. This PHA is somewhat preliminary because a comprehensive site-wide remedial investigation has yet to be completed. Because the site was listed on the National Priorities List, ATSDR is required to release the PHA within one year of listing or proposed listing, although important sampling efforts are currently underway. IDPH expects additional site reviews and updates will be necessary as environmental assessments and remediation activities continue, data packages become available, and reports are finalized. At this time, many earlier concerns listed in earlier drafts of the PHA have been addressed DePue Group actions as well as by IDPH and other agencies.

Responses to Comments in Appendix A
Page Para Line Response
1-2     First two pages are a summary which has been revised to include the DePue Group's general suggestions, while some of the more specific details suggested here are considered in later sections of the PHA.
1 1 1 Sentences revised.
1 1 3 Sentence revised.
1 2 6 Sentence modified and moved to end of summary section.
1 3 3 Sentence modified.
1 3 6 Summary modified.
2 2 2 Sentence modified and moved.
2 2 6 Sentence revised
2 3 2 Document discussions were expanded to include two conclusions: that no urgent public health hazard was demonstrated by the health outcome data (biological screening), and that the site is considered a public health hazard because exposures have occurred in the past and the opportunity for potential exposures remain for some metals.
3 2 2 Sentence revised.
3 2 4 Sentence modified.
3 2 4 Sentence revised.
3 2 13 Sentence added.
3 3 1 Sentence modified.
3 5 9 Sentence revised.
4 1 1 Sentences modified.
4 1 6 Sentence modified.
4 1 10 Sentence modified.
4 1 16 Sentence added.
4 2 2 Comments on improved fencing added in description of each area.
4 2 3 Sentence revised.
4 2 5 Sentence revised.
4 3 5 Sentence revised.
4 4 1 First sentence deleted. Statement from Gibb moved to paragraph describing main smelting operations area.
5 1 4 Sentence modified.
5 1 7 Sentence modified.
5 2 1,4,6,11 Sentence modified. Part of one sentence deleted. Suggested sentence added. Remainder of paragraph modified.
5 3   Paragraph regarding gypstack area modified.
6 2 2 Sentence modified.
6 2 3 Sentence modified.
6 3 4 Statement included regarding process of soil erosion and sedimentation.
6 3 4 Sentence revised.
7 2   Paragraph removed.
7     Bullets incorporated into discussions of the management of each area: smelting operations; inorganic compound manufacturing; gypstack; south ditch; Lake DePue. Operation years provided in comments incorporated into discussions.
8 2 2 Paragraph incorporated into previous discussion of fertilizer manufacturing.
10 2 2 Sentence modified into 2 sentences.
10 6 4 IEPA could not find any information on private well sampling. Sentence modified.
11 2 4 Sentences modified.
11 3 5 Sentence revised.
12 3 3 Sentence revised.
12 4 item 3 Labeling of the comparison values double checked. Table on air data removed since IEPA approved discontinuing sampling because values were not high concentrations. The most conservative comparison value is used; sometimes that value has a cancer endpoint, and sometimes other health endpoints are considered.
14 2 1 Sentence revised.
14 2 2 Sentence revised.
14 2 9 Sentence revised.
14 4 5 Sentence revised.
15 1 2 Sentence modified.
15 2 1 Sentence revised.
15 2 2 Sentence modified.
16 4 1 Sentence revised.
16 5 2 Data associated with pH values deleted.
17 1 2 Sentence modified.
17 1 3 Sentence added.
17 5 1 Sentence revised.
17,18 7   Bullets removed and statements developed into text.
19 1 3 Sentence revised.
19 4 1 Section revised.
20 2 3 Paragraph deleted.
20 2 4 Sentence revised.
20 3 4 Sentence revised.
20 3 1 Sentence modified.
20 5 1 Sentence modified.
21 1 3 Paragraph modified.
21 1 5 Paragraph modified.
21 4   QA/QC statement qualifies assumptions that data were validated as required by EPA.
21 6 1 Paragraph revised.
22 2 10 Sentence revised.
22 4   Paragraph modified.
23 2   Paragraph modified.
23 1 4 Sentence inserted regarding worker training.
23 2 7 Sentence modified.
23 2 9 Sentence modified.
23 4 5 Sentence modified
23 5 4 Sentence modified.
24 1 1 Sentence revised.
24 2 2 Sentence modified.
24 2 4 Sentence revised.
24 2 11 Sentence revised.
24 3 3 Sentence moved to earlier paragraph and modified.
24 4 1 Paragraph on conservation areas modified..
25 1 8 ATSDR's MRLs and EPA's RfDs may not protect hypersensitive (allergic) individuals. Statement modified.
25 3 2 Statement added regarding the extrapolation between animal experimentation and the development of protective human comparison values.
25 3 5 Sentence modified.
25 5 7 The data that were evaluated are included in the tables. Including discussions of each eliminated metal adds considerable length to the document. Statement referring to these data included.
25 6   Paragraph revised so that exposure parameters are consistent with Table 19. Table 19 revised as well. IDPH concurs that frozen soil during cold months of the year should not be included in the exposure calculations.
26 3 1 Paragraph modified.
26 3 1 The ATSDR comparison values for arsenic are conservative. Arsenic is a human carcinogen, and the CREG for air, based on the concept of one-in-a-million excess cancer rate, is 0.0002 micrograms per cubic meter. Comparison values are used only to select contaminants for further evaluation. In reviewing the air data, the large majority of quarterly samples were below detection limits, so exposure was minimal. Table on air data removed from PHA. Also, because arsenic concentrations in soil are not expected to exceed comparison values and because a second source may be in the vicinity (coal-fired power plant), arsenic has been eliminated as a contaminant of interest.
26 4   Exposure calculations adjusted for a typical (non-pica) child, keeping body weight consistently 16 kilograms and adjusting exposure frequency to 3/4 of the year (39 weeks). Because these calculated potential doses remain above current MRLs for ingestion of cadmium, cadmium remains a contaminant of interest.
26-28     Paragraphs revised.
27 1   Statement revised.
27 1 1 More discussion included regarding common lead sources.
27 2 6 Statement revised.
27 4 3 Paragraph expanded to clarify.
28 1   IDPH does not have resources to speciate soil samples; the DePue Group is welcome to do so and to submit the information to EPA and IDPH.
29 2 5 Additional discussion included regarding common cadmium exposures.
30 5 1 ATSDR criteria for selecting the site conclusion category were followed. IDPH will add a second conclusion statement that no immediate concern exists, as demonstrated by the biological screening data.
30 5 12 The blood and urine screening was not a comprehensive study of the exposed population. The limited number of people tested, and the tests performed, were designed only to answer the question of whether immediate intervention was needed to stop exposure. The conclusion category is correct.
31 3 6 Sentence modified
31 4 2 Sentence modified.
61   Table 16 Table 16 removed. General discussion of air sampling conducted in 1990s included in text.
62   Table 17 Table revised.
63,64   Table 18 Table revised.
65,66   Table 19 Exposure parameters revised to be consistent with text for child and adult. Pica child exposure values removed. Calculations checked.


CERTIFICATION

This DePue/New Jersey Zinc/Mobil Chemical Corporation Site public health assessment was prepared by the Illinois Department of Public Health under a cooperative agreement with the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. It is in accordance with approved methodology and procedures existing at the time the public health assessment was begun.

Gail D. Godfrey
Technical Project Officer
SPS, SSAB, DHAC, ATSDR

The Division of Health Assessment and Consultation, ATSDR, has reviewed this public health assessment and concurs with its findings.

Richard Gillig
Chief, SPS, SSAB, DHAC, ATSDR

Table of Contents








Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, 1825 Century Blvd, Atlanta, GA 30345
Contact CDC: 800-232-4636 / TTY: 888-232-6348 
USA.gov: The U.S. Government's Official Web Portal
DHHS
Department of Health and Human Services