PUBLIC HEALTH ASSESSMENT
SOLVENTS RECOVERY SERVICES OF NEW ENGLAND
SOUTHINGTON, HARTFORD COUNTY, CONNECTICUT
DEFINITION AND PURPOSE OF THE PUBLIC HEALTH ASSESSMENT
The purpose and definition of a public health assessment is to evaluate data and information on the release of hazardous substances into the environment in order to assess any current or future impact on public health, develop health advisories, or other recommendations, and to identify studies or actions needed to evaluate and mitigate or prevent human health effects (55 Federal Register 5136, of Federal Regulations Part 90.)
In addition, this public health assessment was written for the residents of Southington, Connecticut for their information and use to identify the public health implications associated with Solvents Recovery of New England (SRSNE.)
The public health assessment will also be utilized by the United States Environmental Protection Agency as well as other federal, state and local agencies for their information and assessment of the site.
ATSDR PUBLIC HEALTH HAZARD CATEGORIES
ATSDR has 5 categories that define the level of the public health hazard posed by a site. These are:
A: Urgent Public Health Hazard
B: Public Health Hazard
C: Indeterminate Public Health Hazard
D: No Apparent Public Health Hazard
E: No Public Health Hazard
In general, the categories are defined as follows:
CATEGORY A: URGENT PUBLIC HEALTH HAZARD
This category is used for sites that pose an urgent public health hazard as the result of short-term exposures to hazardous substances. The criteria for this category is that evidence exists that exposures have occurred, are occurring, or are likely to occur in the future. The estimated exposures to the receptor community are to a substance or substances at concentrations in the environment that, upon short-term exposures (less than 1 year), can cause adverse health effects.
CATEGORY B: PUBLIC HEALTH HAZARD:
This category is used for sites that pose a public health hazard as a result of long-term exposures to hazardous substances. The criteria for this category is that evidence exists that exposures have occurred, are occurring or are likely to occur in the future. The estimated exposures received by the receptor community are to a substance or substances at concentrations in the environment that, upon long-term exposures (greater than 1 year), can cause adverse health effects.
CATEGORY C: INDETERMINATE PUBLIC HEALTH HAZARD:
This category is used for sites with incomplete information. The criteria for this category is that the limited available data do not indicate that humans are being or have been exposed to levels of contamination that would be expected to cause adverse health effects. In addition, data or information are not available for all environmental media (air, soil or water) to which humans may be exposed. The community-specific health outcome data is either insufficient or does not exist, thus there is no known evidence to indicate that the site has impacted or can impact human health.
CATEGORY D: NO APPARENT PUBLIC HEALTH HAZARD:
This category is used for sites where human exposure to contaminated media is occurring or has occurred in the past, but the exposure was or is below a level to cause a health hazard.
CATEGORY E: NO PUBLIC HEALTH HAZARD.
This category is used for sites that do not pose a public health hazard. The criteria for this category is that there is no evidence of current or past human exposure to contaminated media. Future exposures to contaminated media are not likely to occur.
Solvents Recovery Services of New England (SRSNE) is a National Priority List (NPL) hazardous waste site located in Southington, Connecticut. SRSNE functioned as a hazardous waste treatment facility processing waste solvents from l955 until May 1991, when the facility closed down all operations permanently. Ground water and soil, on and off-site have been contaminated with waste solvents and metals due to improper past disposal practices. The area around SRSNE is mainly residential and commercial with some agricultural land and open space to the west and south. Two public wells located to the south of SRSNE were found to be contaminated with volatile organic compounds (VOCs). VOCs were identified above background levels in the late l970's and were taken out of service. According to the Southington Water Department records, wells number 4 and 6 yielded between approximately 6 to 36 percent of the towns water supply during the years they were in operation (from 1966 to 1977, 1980.) In addition, one (1) private well near the site has been found to be contaminated at levels that exceeded Maximum Contaminant levels (MCL.) and this residence is being connected to the public water supply. Two (2) other private wells in the area have been found to contain solvents at levels which exceed MCLs. However, an investigation by the Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection has determined that the source of these other contaminants was not SRSNE. The properties have been provided with bottled water.
Additional exposures to nearby residents likely occurred due to the
incineration of waste sludges 
on site from l966 until l974.
Citizens in the area have expressed concerns about increased rates
of cancer near SRSNE. A preliminary investigation by the
Connecticut Department of Health Services (DHS) has found small
age-specific increase in bladder cancers for the entire town.
Based primarily on well documented past exposures that occurred from approximately the mid 1960s to 1979, the potential for present and future exposures this site has been determined to be a public health hazard. Through contaminated ground water used for public drinking water a large portion of the town was exposed to site related compounds for an undetermined amount of time. In addition, airborne exposures occurred in the past through incineration of waste sludges. Currently, potential air exposures may be occurring due to the air stripping of contaminated ground water. Although the major exposure route (contaminated public wells) has been eliminated, there is still concern among the residents about potential adverse health effects resulting from the air emissions generated from the groundwater recovery system. Current air emissions generated from the ground water recovery system should be assessed or controlled to assure public health. Residential private wells in the immediate area should be monitored for contaminations on the fringe of the zone of ground water contamination emanating from SRSNE. A more detailed investigation into the increased rate of bladder cancers will be conducted.
A. SITE DESCRIPTION AND HISTORY
Solvents Recovery Service of New England, Inc. (SRSNE) is a U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) designated National
Priorities List (NPL) site located in the town of Southington,
Connecticut, in Hartford County. The 3.7-acre site (Book 164: page
54: Southington Tax Assessor Office Records) is located 600 feet
South of Lazy Lane and immediately adjacent to the Conrail right of
way to the east (Appendix 1). The Quinnipiac River is located
approximately 500 feet to the east of the site along the eastern
edge of the former Cianci property. A drainage ditch is located
just east of the SRSNE property boundary. The former Cianci
property (now owned by SRSNE) is located just east of the Conrail
right-of-way. This property was previously occupied by a
construction company. During the rest of this report the former
Cianci property will be considered off-site. To the west of the
SRSNE property are two (2) properties, a private residential lot
owned by Yorski, and the Jadel Farms, Inc. (former Delahunty
property). Just south of the site is a property owned by Jadel
Farm Inc. Entrance to the site is controlled by two fences on the
access road from Lazy Lane (see Appendix 1). Access to the former
Cianci property is from Lazy Lane. However, the former Cianci
property is open and accessible to individuals in the community.
Just south of the Cianci property is the Town of Southington
wellfield property.
Solvents Recovery of New England operated as a hazardous waste treatment and handling plant from 1955 to March of 1991. In March 1991, the facility was ordered to shut down operations by the State of Connecticut Superior Court as per the negotiations that occurred under the Partial Stipulated Judgement (February 27, 1991) between SRSNE and the Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection. In addition, SRSNE's liability insurance was canceled in March 1991, and thus final closure of the facility occurred on May 29, 1991.
The SRSNE facility includes: two buildings; a shed; two above/ground fuel blending tanks (9,000- and 12,000-gallon capacity); a fuel storage area with four empty above/ground tanks; the dispersing area; a truck-loading containment area; a drum-storage area; and 25 ground water recovery wells with an associated air-stripping tower. Asphalt pavement occupies 80 percent of the 3.5 acre site. Stormwater in the blending tank, drum storage, and truck loading and unloading areas collects in three sumps and is pumped to the air-stripping tower of the ground water recovery system as per the National Priority Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit.
Portions of an off-site ground water recovery system were installed on the Town of Southington property. This recovery system is not operational at this time since the Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection has not granted SRSNE a discharge permit for these wells, due to concerns over waste water discharges to the Quinnipiac River.
The town of Southington's production wells 6 and 4 are located 1,400 and 2,000 feet south of the SRSNE property boundary, respectively. Topographically the site is located in an area characterized by rolling hills. The site is generally flat, approximately 165 feet above sea level.
The SRSNE Inc., facility began its solvent-recovery operations in
l955. From 1988 to May 1991, the facility performed two types of
waste management activities: (1) fuel blending; and (2) waste
transfer. From l955 to l988 the facility operations included the
distillation of recoverable solvents in batch stills. From 1957 to
l967 the distillation process generated unusable solvent sludges
which were disposed of in two (2) unlined on-site lagoons .
According to CT DEP Water Compliance inspection records, (Dibble, page 5, January 30, 1968) the sludges were also disposed of at the Old Turnpike Landfill approximately 6 miles south of SRSNE from l966 to l967.
The Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) water compliance inspections records indicate that after the lagoons were filled (1967), the surface water runoff from the SRSNE site continued to contaminate the ditch, stream, and wetlands on the Cianci Property with solvents and oils.
An on-site open pit incinerator for the thermal destruction of solvent and metal sludges was installed in l966 and operated until l974. Fly ash from the incinerator was disposed of on-site just north of the incinerator. In l982 the incinerator was dismantled. Since then, the incinerator and fly ash disposal areas have been paved over with asphalt. A review of CT DEP Air Compliance records for SRSNE and the Town of Southington indicate that the incinerator was an active air pollution source. A review of complaints filed in the CT DEP air compliance unit records indicated that the vegetation along the southern neighboring properties was either covered with black fly ash or dead as a result of incinerator particulate emissions. Heavy metal contamination (such as lead, mercury and cadmium) of soils and vegetation on neighboring properties was also identified (Houseman l974). In l974 the incinerator emissions were identified as a potential airborne health hazard (Housman CT DEP l974). A study conducted in l974 by the CT DEP air compliance unit indicated that the projected emissions of lead from the SRSNE incinerator were in excess of the recommended standard at that time (5 ug/m3).
Composite sampling of mixing tank sludge, performed prior to the material being fed into the open burning pit, contained the following concentrations of metals, cadmium 400 ppb; lead 22,000 to 24,000 ppb; chromium 8,194 to 16,433 ppb; copper 73,663 to 313,283 ppb; mercury 1,528 to 1,880 ppb and zinc 2,267 to 19,279 ppb.
Fecal coliform bacteria were also found in the discharge pipe that carried cooling water, boiler blow-down, and surface run off from the process area in the late l970's. High concentrations of mixed solvents were found in the facility's septic system, which suggests that SRSNE may have disposed of wastes into their septic system.
In l988 the three batch stills were removed and spent solvents received by SRSNE were transferred to other facilities for recovery until the facility closed in March 1991. According to an EPA Inspection report (February 2, l989) 75 percent of SRSNE's waste volume received was fuel-blended and the remaining 25 percent was transferred for off-site disposal, incineration, or recovery. The facility processed between 3 and 5 million gallons of liquid hazardous wastes and 100,000 pounds of solid hazardous wastes annually. The liquid wastes included unrecoverable spent/solvent-based fuels, spent chlorinated solvents, and wastes generated from their fuel-blending operations. Solid hazardous wastes included gloves, rubber, cloth, rags, plastics, asphalt, and mine wastes. The facility processed approximately 170,000 gallons of state-regulated wastes annually which included spent lubricating, and hydraulic oils, and antifreeze. Waste water generated on-site included non-contact cooling water from the fuel-blending operations; well overflow, generated from the ground water recovery system; boiler blow down, generated from boiler steam condensate, and stormwater runoff.
In l985, SRSNE constructed twenty-five (25) recovery wells on-site, which are intended to operate continuously, creating a hydraulic barrier to prevent migration of ground water away from the site. However, according to a 1989 EPA inspection report (EPA Inspection Report February 1-2, 1989; page 13), the ground water recovery system was not operating as a continuous hydraulic barrier to prevent off-site migration of contaminated ground water as the system is unable to obtain the necessary drawdown needed to prevent off-site migration. In addition, according to the NUS Phase I investigation findings of the Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS, l99l), contaminated ground water is migrating. According to SRSNE officials, the average daily flow of waste water discharged into the Quinnipiac River from the ground water recovery system ranges between 6,000 gallons per day (gpd) to 14,000 gpd.
On August 14 1990, a site visit was performed by the Connecticut Department of Health Services The site visit consisted of interviews with Ernest Gedeon, Director of Environmental Compliance, and James Hulm, Vice President of SRSNE, and a walk-through of the site and former Cianci property. The following observations were made:
A second site visit was conducted on July 17, 1991 by the CT DHS, and the CT DEP. The site visit consisted of an interview with Mr. Brian Nadeau of SRSNE and a walk-through of the site. The following observations were made:
C. DEMOGRAPHICS, LAND USE, AND RESOURCE USE
The Town of Southington had a l980 Census Population of 36,879 persons. The area surrounding the site represents a mixture of commercial, residential, light industrial, and agricultural uses. Residential and agricultural areas are located within l00 feet of the site's north-western, western, and southern property boundaries. Residential and commercial areas also are located just east of the former Cianci property. The nearest school is North Central Elementary School which is located approximately 5,000 feet south of the site. The school has a student population of approximately 26l. The SRSNE site is located in the Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area #5440, County #003, and Census Tracts 4302 and 4306. Approximately 25 percent of the population in both tracts is over 60 years of age and another l3 percent is under five years of age. The population is 98 percent white divided equally between male and females.
The Southington Water Company's Curtiss Well field is located approximately l,200 feet south of SRSNE. Production wells 4 and 6 are located in this field. Well 4 was installed in l966 and well 6 in l976. The wells were identified as contaminated with VOCs and possibly heavy metals in l976 and l977. According to the Southington Water Company, all public water well sources are pumped into the town's distribution system and therefore blended together. According to the Southington Water Department records, wells number 4 and 6 yielded between approximately six (6) to thirty-six (36) percent of the towns water supply during the years they were in operation (from 1966 to 1979.) However, those residences located in the immediate vicinity of these wells could have received as much as 90 percent of their water supply from these wells. Town Production Well was deactivated in 1979 and Town Production Well 6 was deactivated in 1980.
It should be noted that during the years 1976 and 1979 when the wells were identified as containing VOCs, there were no Federal or State Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCL) in place for VOCs. In the late 1970's there were SNARL's (Significant No Adverse Response Levels) which were later replaced by the State of Connecticut Action Levels which are still in effect today.
The Curtiss well field is not being used as a water supply at the present time. The nearest private drinking water well is located alongside of the entrance to the SRSNE facility. Seventeen (l7) private water wells are located within l,000 feet of the site. There are approximately 279 private drinking-water wells within l mile of the site.
The Quinnipiac River is used for fishing and swimming. Wetlands can be found throughout the former Cianci property as the area is characterized by poor drainage. Freshwater wetlands also are located approximately 3,000 feet south of the SRSNE. Two ponds are located on private properties approximately 300 feet to the north and south of SRSNE facility.
1. Tumor Incidence in Southington, CT
On March 17, 1990, correspondence was received by the Connecticut State Department of Health Service (DHS) from a resident of Southington, Connecticut stating that there appeared to be an excess number of tumor (cancer) cases occurring in the neigh-borhood. In response, the DHS gathered data from the Connecticut Tumor Registry for the town of Southington.
Information on the total number of tumors in Connecticut was collected for the years 1979 to 1988. Age-specific tumor incidence rates (the rate of new tumors occurring in individuals in a specific age group) for each of the tumor sites (bladder, breast, leukemia, non-Hodgkins lymphoma, and brain) and all sites combined were calculated for Southington and seven (7) surrounding towns. The age-specific incidence rates were compared with those for the State of Connecticut. Standardized Incidence Ratios (SIR) were calculated to control for the effect of age on tumor incidence and to determine whether the number of tumors occurring in Southington were more than would be expected. The results are discussed in the Public Health Implications section.
2. Infant and Perinatal Mortality Rates
Since infants are especially sensitive to many environmental conditions, preliminary trend assessment of infant (1 to 11 months) and perinatal (fetal deaths, age greater than 20 weeks and neonatal deaths age 1 to 28 days) mortality rates was performed by CT DHS Division of Health Surveillance & Planning Unit. Infant and perinatal mortality rates were calculated for Southington and the surrounding towns for the years 1947 to 1988 and compared with those of the state for the same period by the DHS Division of Health Surveillance & Planning. The results are discussed in the Public Health Implications section.
In the summer of 1990, Southington residents expressed their concern that there is a higher than expected number of children being diagnosed/classified as learning disabled. A preliminary review of the average prevalence rate of children in Southington with Learning Disabilities was conducted by the CT DHS Division of Environmental Epidemiology and Occupational Health.
According to the Learning Disabilities Act of l969, learning disabled children are defined as follows: Children with special (specific) learning disabilities exhibit a disorder to one or more of the basic psychological processes involved in understanding or in using spoken and written language. These may be manifested in disorders of listening, thinking, talking, reading, writing, spelling or arithmetic. They include conditions which have been referred to as perceptual handicaps, brain injury, minimal brain dysfunction, dyslexia, developmental aphasia, etc. They do not include learning problems which are due primarily to visual, hearing, or motor handicaps, to mental retardation, emotional disturbances or to the environmentally disadvantaged. The causes of most learning disabilities remain unknown.
Prevalence rates were calculated for twelve (12) public schools in Southington and compared with the prevalence rate of learning disabilities for the state for the l988-l989 school year. The results of this preliminary investigation are discussed in the Public Health Implications section.
The Connecticut Birth Defects Registry was accessed to evaluate whether increased rates of birth defects exist in Southington. Birth defects data was available for the years l983, l985 and l986. Results are discussed further in the Public Health Implications section.
A citizens group has formed in Southington to represent their interest in the investigation of SRSNE (SAFE - Southington Association for the Environment). Southington residents have been expressing their concerns and filing complaints about SRSNE's operations since its onset in the late l950's. A public meeting was held in Southington on July 26, l990, to discuss EPA's environmental assessment of the site and pending legal actions against SRSNE. Residents expressed anger and concern over the contaminants they believe they have been exposed to as a result of SRSNE's past and present operations.
A second public meeting was held in Southington on July 18, 1991, by the USEPA to discuss the site status and the Remedial Investigation Phase I Report. Specific health concerns expressed by the local residents at the meetings include the following:
Public Comments on the Public Health Assessment
The public comment period for reviewing this public health assessment took place from November 1 to December 31, 1991. The locations for reviewing the public health assessment included the Southington Health Department, the Town Clerk's Office, and the Public Library. In addition, the Southington Association for the Environment (SAFE) held a town meeting on December 2, 1991 to discuss the public health assessment with residents and collect their comments.
All written comments that were received by CT DHS were responded to and can be viewed in Response to Comments in Appendix 6.
ENVIRONMENTAL CONTAMINATION AND PHYSICAL HAZARDS
Various contaminants have been detected in ground water, surface water, soils, and air. Tables I, II, and III include a listing of the potential contaminants of concern which have been identified both on-site and off-site.
Several consultant reports (Wehran 1982; Warzyn 1980; Ecology and the Environment l982; YWC l985, l986, l987, l988; and Roy F. Weston l988, l989) focused on both on-site and off-site contaminant migration. NUS corporation has been contracted by the EPA to perform a Remedial Investigation/ Feasibility Study on the SRSNE and former Cianci properties. With the exception of ambient air data (NUS July 1991), no US EPA RI/FS data was included in this report.
A review of previously performed hydrogeologic studies indicates the contamination of off-site drinking water wells 4 and 6 may have occurred from SRSNE and possibly other sources. These other sources include facilities that were hydraulically upgradient and within 200 feet of the Curtiss Wellfield. Several of these facilities are no longer in operation. They are as follows:
According to the Warzyn Report (l980), there are possibly two other unidentified sources of contamination, including a source near the Cianci production well and a source located upgradient from the Southington Form Tool Company.
TABLE 1: ON-SITE CONTAMINATION
| Contaminant | Surface Soil (ppb) | Groundwater (ppb) |
| 1,1 dichloroethane | ND - 58,000 (1) | 470 - 2,500 (4) |
| Ethyl Benzene | 15 - 720,000 (1) | 8410 (4) |
| trans-1,2-dichloroethene | ND - 2,300 (1) | 3,500 - 28,930 (4) |
| 1,1,1 Trichloroethane | ND - 260,000 (1) | 32,000(4) - 60,000 (2) |
| Trichloroethlene | ND - 500,000 (1) | 33,270 (4) |
| Methyl Ethyl Ketone | ND - 44,000 (1) | 25,000 (4) |
| Methlene Chloride | 69 - 7,400 (1) | ND - 31,000 (4) |
| Acetone | ND - 10,000 (1) | 6,750 (4) - 10,000 (4) |
| Toluene | ND - 500,000 (1) | 23,310 - 38,000 (4) |
| Tetrachloroethylylene | 10 - 820,000 (1) | 3, 510 - 17,000 (4) |
| Isopropanol | ND - 230, 000 (1) | ND - 12, 580 (4) |
| 1,1,2,2 tetrachloroethylene | - - - - | 18 - 23,000 (5) |
| Vinyl Chloride | - - - - | ND - 190 (4) |
| 1,2 trichloroethylene | - - - - | 25,000 - 5,000 (5) |
|
|
||
| PCB's | 590 - 3,100 ppm (3) | 0.01 ppm (3) |
| Dioxin/furan | 0.32 - 5.34 ppb (3) | - - - |
| Phthalates, naphalenes, phenols | 30 - 48,000 ppb (3) | 13 - 100 ppb (3) |
| Cyanide | 0.01 ppb (10/87) (6) | |
| Chromium | 11 - 420 ppm (3) | 13 ppb (10/87) (6) |
| Lead | 15 - 2,160 ppm (3) | - - - |
| Cadmium | 4 - 240 ppm (3) | - - - |
| Barium | ND - 682 ppm (3) | - - - |
| Mercury | 0.1 - 3.1 ppm (3) | - - - |
|
|
||
| (1) YWC (8/85) | ||
| (2) Warzyn (4/80) | ||
| (3) Roy F. Weston (6/88; 4/89) | ||
| (4) NPDES Permit (5/90) | ||
| (5) EPA (1980) | ||
| (6) NPDES Permit (10/87) | ||
| ppb = parts per billion | ||
| ppm = parts per million | ||
| - - - = no data | ||
| ND = not detected | ||
TABLE II-A: OFF-SITE CONTAMINATION
| Contaminant | Groundwater (ppb) |
Quinnipiac Surface Water (ppb) Upstream-Downstream |
Private Residential Wells (ppb) |
Cianci Wells (ppb) |
* CT Action Level (ppb) |
**EPA MCL (ppb) |
| Acetone | 10,000 (1) | 51-120 (4) | - - - - | - - - - | - - - - | - - - - |
| Ethyl Benzene | 440-12,000 (2) | - - - - | - - - - | - - - - | - - - - | 680 |
| 1,1-dichlorethane | 400 (3) | - - - - | - - - - | 1,100 (6) | - - - - | - - - - |
| t,1,2-dichloroethylene | 1,000-10,000 (1) | - - - - | 190 (5) | - - - - | - - - - | 70# |
| 1,1,1, Trichloroethane | 1,000-10,000 (1) | ND-35 (4) | 12 (5) | 9,600 (7) | 200 | 200 |
| 1,2 dichloroethylene | - - - - | - - - - | 200 (5) | 11,000 (8) | 5 | 5 |
| Trichloroethylene | - - - - | ND-16 (4) | 120 (5) | 40,000 (6) | 5 | 5 |
| Tetrachloroethylene | - - - - | ND-16 (4) | 17 (5) | 3,500 (8) | 5 | 10 |
| Chloroform | - - - - | 42-63 (4) | - - - - | - - - - | - - - - | 100 |
| Methylene Chloride | 40,000 (7) | - - - - | - - - - | 16,000 (8) | 25 | 25 |
| Tetrahydrofuran | 1,000-10,000 (1) | 11-42 (4) | - - - - | - - - - | - - - - | - - - - |
| 1,1-dichloroethylene | 57,000 (7) | - - - - | 200 (5) | 484 (9) | 7 | 7 |
| Methyl Isobutyl Ketone | 2,900-5,000 (1) | - - - - | - - - - | - - - - | - - - - | - - - - |
| Isopropyl alcohol | 1,000-10,000 (1) | ND-780 (4) | - - - - | 210,000 (10) | 1,000 | - - - - |
| Xylene | 10,000 (1) | - - - - | - - - - | 2,000 (6) | - - - - | 400# |
| Total VOC's | - - - - | - - - - | - - - - | 6-108.3 (11) | - - - - | - - - - |
| 1, 4-dioxane | - - - - | 500-1700 (4) | - - - - | - - - - | 20 | - - - - |
| Sodium | - - - - | - - - - | 19,100-54,600 (11) | - - - - | - - - - | - - - - |
| Lead | - - - - | - - - - | 33.8 (11) | - - - - | 50 | 50 |
| Mercury | - - - - | 0.0007 | - - - - | - - - - | - - - - | 2 |
| Chromium | - - - - | 0.27 | - - - - | - - - - | - - - - | 50 |
| Cadmium | - - - - | 0.026 | - - - - | - - - - | - - - - | 10 |
| Copper | - - - - | 0.25 | - - - - | - - - - | - - - - | - - - - |
| Mangenese | - - - - | - - - - | - - - - | - - - - | 5,000 | - - - - |
| Barium | - - - - | - - - - | 1,000 (11) | - - - - | - - - - | 1,000 |
|
|
||||||
| (1) Roy F. Weston (1988) | (7) EPA (1982) | |||||
| (2) Warzyn (1980) | (8) YWC (1985) | |||||
| (3) YWC (1984) | (9) YWC (1983) | |||||
| (4) CT DEP (1987) YWC (1987) | (10) YWC (1986) | |||||
| (5) CT DHS (1990) | (11) EPA (1990) | |||||
| (6) EPA (1980) | ||||||
| ppb = parts per billion | * CT Action Levels Drinking Water | |||||
| -- = no data | ** EPA MCL = Maximum Contaminant Level | |||||
| ND = not detected | # Current EPA Guideline Level | |||||
TABLE II-B. OFF-SITE CONTAMINATION PUBLIC WATER WELLS
| Contaminant | Well #4 (ppb) (1) |
Well # 5 (ppb) (1) |
Well #6 (ppb) (1) |
CT Action Level (ppb) (3) |
EPA MCL (ppb) |
| 1,1-dichloroethylene | 210 (2/79) | - - | - - | 7 | 7 |
| 1,1-dichloroethane | 990 (7/79) | - - | - - | - - | 5 |
| t,1,2-dichloroethane | 390 (7/79) | 6 (2/79) | - - | - - | - - |
| 1,1,1, trichloroethane | 3500 (7/79) | 300 (2/79) | 120 (11/78) | 200 | 200 |
| tetrachloroethylene | 22 (7/79) | - - | - - | 5 | 10 |
| Carbon tetrachloride | 35 (7/79) | 8.9 (2/79) | - - | 5 | 5 |
| Hexane | 91 (7/79) | - - | - - | - - | - - |
| Methane | 400 (7/79) | 480 (12/77) | 130 (11/78) | - - | - - |
| Methylene Chloride | 12 (7/79) | - - | - - | 25 | 25 |
| Chlorobutane | 930 (7/79) | - - | - - | - - | - - |
| 1,1,2 trichloroethylene | 120 (7/79) | 4.5 (2/79) | - - | - - | - - |
| trichloroethylene | 22 (7/79) | 45 (2/79) | 11 (11/78) | 5 | 5 |
| Methyl Ethyl Ketone | - - | - - | 20 (11/78) | - - | - - |
|
|
|||||
| (ppm) (2) | (ppm)(2) | (ppm)(2) | |||
| Lead | ND-0.07 (10/76; 7/76; 2/77; 7/76; 5/77; 2/78) |
ND-0.007 (10/76 8/76; 3/77; 7/77) |
ND-0.06 (7/76 5/77; 2/78) |
50 | 50 |
| Mercury | ND-0.003 (2/77; 5/77; 2/78) | ND-0.0018 (8/76) | ND-0.003 (7/76; 5/77; 2/78 |
||
|
|
|||||
| (1) Southington Water Department - Newlands Sanitary
Labs (2) Connecticut Department of Health Laboratory (3) State of Connecticut Action Levels (4) USEPA Maximum |
|||||
The on-site contamination presented in Table I includes sampling data for soil and ground water, and reflects all contaminants of concern identified and their range of concentrations. These chemicals are those which are present in high concentrations relative to background levels or screening values, or have high levels of toxicity.
On-site contamination of the 3.7-acre site is extensive. SRSNE has been located at the subject site for 35 years. For approximately 10 years, SRSNE disposed of millions of gallons of a wide range of organic and metal chemicals into the ground in two unlined lagoons. These lagoons were drained and covered. However, large amounts of chemical wastes remained in the ground. An open-pit incinerator was used to burn still-bottoms and the potentially hazardous waste fly ash generated was subsequently disposed of on site. Waste chemicals were discharged directly into the Quinnipiac River. There is evidence that SRSNE may have also disposing of solvents into the facility's septic system. Historically poor housekeeping practices (i.e. chemical spills, leaking storage containers) would have also contributed to the on-site soil and ground water contamination.
Ground water contamination due to SRSNE's operations is documented as far back as l965 (Shulman L., CT DEP, June 7, 1965) when SRSNE's bedrock well was reported to be contaminated with volatile organic compounds. The majority of the ground water contaminants present at SRSNE have been detected at or near bedrock. Contaminants in the aquifer beneath the site have migrated off-site, contaminating soil and ground water to the south and east and possibly along the northern property boundary.
Soil samples collected by various consultants (YWC, l985-l986 Roy F. Weston l988) indicate the presence of volatile organic compounds (VOCs), semi-volatile organics (SVOCs), pesticides, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and dioxin. The VOCs detected include; acetone, methyl ethyl ketone, 1,1,1-trichloroethane, trichloroethylene, tetrachloroethylene, toluene, isopropanol, ethyl benzene, and 1,1 dichloroethane. The soil concentrations range from ND to 820,000 ppb with some of the highest concentrations being tetrachloroethylene, and toluene. SVOCs consisted primarily of phenols phthalates, and naphthalenes and ranged from 30 ppb to 800 ppb. Various PCBs (Arochlors 1248, 1254, and 1260) were detected in the soils ranging from 590 to 3,l00 ppm. The presence of dioxins and furans were also identified in the area of the lagoons ranging from 0.032 to 5.34 ppb. Dioxins and furans occur in a number of different forms (isomers). In Table I, the range of all dioxins/furans are listed without differentiation.
VOC air emissions are generated at the SRSNE facility principally from the groundwater recovery system air-stripping tower. The ground water recovery system processes up to 14,000 gallons per day of contaminated ground water, depending on seasonal variations in precipitation. At the present time the facility generates a total of approximately 5 tons per year of VOC emissions. Air measurements of some of the contaminants are discussed further in the "Off-Site Contamination" section.
The off-site contamination presented in Tables II-A and II-B represents the contaminants of concern identified in the ground water on the neighboring properties, which include the former Cianci property and the Southington Water Department property. Table II-B also represents data from three (3) public water supply wells 4, 5, and 6, and from nearby private drinking water wells. The data on Table II-B represents the maximum concentrations detected. It is important to note that well #5 is located approximately 4 miles south of SRSNE and its' contamination is not directly site related. However, SRSNE generated wastes which were disposed of near well #5 (e.g., Old Southington Landfill) and since water from all three (3) wells that were contaminated was blended and distributed through the town's water supply system, thus exposing a large portion of the town, the data is included here.
Historical off-site ground water sampling data shown in Table II-A indicates that these compound have existed at concentrations exceeding 200,000 ppb (EPA l980; YWC l985, l986). Other compounds identified by the EPA (l980) in concentrations which range from 2,000 to l00,000 ppb include:
During July l990, a residential well sampling program was conducted by the CT DHS to ascertain the extent of private drinking-water well contamination, and to conduct a private well use survey. Two rounds of sampling were performed on residential wells located on Curtiss Street, Lazy Lane, Little Fawn Road, and Ridgewood Road. Seventeen (17) wells were tested and one (1) was found to be contaminated with VOCs and provided with bottled water by the CT DEP. However, the individual in the home with the contaminated private well had been drinking bottled water for more than ten years. The CT DEP is in the process of arranging extension of public water to this residence. The private well data is provided on (Table II-A.)
Trace amounts of VOCs, below current standards, were detected in four other private wells sampled during this same survey. These include methyl tert-butyl ether (1.6 ppb); trichloroethylene (0.6 ppb); 1,2-dichloroethylene (0.5 ppb), and chloroform (0.9 ppb.)
In June and July of 1990, the CT DEP delineated an area considered at risk for possible ground water contamination from SRSNE activities. The CT DEP compiled a list of all private wells in the area of concern, and verified those homes in the area served by public water. In addition, the CT DEP sampled two (2) private residential wells located west of SRSNE, not previously sampled by the CT DHS.
In response to citizens concerns, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) offered to sample any private well within two (2) miles of SRSNE at the residents request. The EPA sampled 64 wells in October of 1990. The well sampling results are as follows: seven (7) wells with elevated sodium; three (3) wells with elevated lead; (above the proposed MCL of 20 ppb) and five wells with VOCs below Federal and State actions levels.
The CT DEP conducted follow-up sampling on contaminated wells in December 1990 and the results are as follows: Five (5) wells had detectable levels of VOCs below Federal and State action levels; three (3) wells had detectable levels of lead; six (6) wells had sodium levels above 20 ppm; and two (2) wells had elevated VOCs which exceeded action levels and were subsequently provided with bottled water. The CT DEP is in the process of arranging extension of public water to these residences. The contamination of these wells is not related to SRSNE. The three (3) wells identified as contaminated with lead were re-sampled by the CT DEP, two showed lower lead concentrations (below the EPA a action level of 15 ppb). The residents with elevated sodium results were notified of the possible health risks and one resident was placed on bottled water.
TABLE III. OFF SITE CONTAMINATION AMBIENT AIR
| VOC'S |
Range Detected (ug/m3)(1)
|
Hazard Limiting Value* (ug/m3)
|
|
|
8-Hour
|
30-Minute
|
||
| Carbon Tetrachloride |
0.5-0.8
|
300
|
l,500
|
| Tetrachloroethene |
0.3-0.9*
|
--
|
--
|
| Ethylbenzene |
0.3-1.1*
|
8,700
|
43,500
|
| Total Xylenes |
2.6-23.6*
|
8,680
|
43,400
|
| Chlorobenzene |
0.6-8.5*
|
7,000
|
35,000
|
| 1,1 - Dichlorethylene |
0.2-1.6
|
l5,800
|
79,000
|
| * indicates breakthrough of VOC's from the front cartridge to the backup cartridge, when the sorptive capacity of the front cartridge has been exceeded. | |||
| VOC'S (Downwind only) |
Range Detected (ug/m3)(1)
|
Hazard Limiting Value (ug/m3)
|
|
|
8-Hour
|
30-Minute
|
||
| 1,1,1 Trichloroethane |
4.4-11.0
|
38,000
|
l90,000
|
| Trichloroethylene |
0.5-0.9
|
l,350
|
6,750
|
| Toluene |
4.2-12.0
|
7,500
|
37,000
|
| Heptane |
0.7-1.0
|
7,000
|
35,000
|
| Benzene |
0.8-1.9
|
l50
|
750
|
| * Hazard Limiting Value (HLV) = Ambient air limits set by the CT DEP (1) NUS (July 1991) | |||
Quinnipiac River surface water data are summarized on Table II-A. The volatile organic compounds that have been consistently detected in Quinnipiac River samples include: acetone, chloroform, tetrachloroethylene, tetrahydrofuran, trichloroethene, isopropyl alcohol, and 1,1,1, trichloroethane. For all the compounds measured the downstream measurements were higher, indicating SRSNE as a source.
A recent consultant report submitted to EPA as part of its remedial investigation (NUS, October 1990) revealed that several VOC's were detected in ambient air samples at all sampling locations, including those taken upwind of SRSNE. The VOC's identified in the ambient air are listed on Table III.
It is alleged that SRSNE disposed of hazardous wastes in several sites located throughout Southington. The following is a list of those sites that have been identified or are suspected to date. These sites are currently being investigated by the CT DEP.
The Quinnipiac River bank just south of Lazy Lane is being investigated by the U.S.EPA as part of the RI/FS.
C. QUALITY ASSURANCE AND QUALITY CONTROL
Several consulting firms (YWC, Warzyn, Wehran, and Roy F. Weston) have conducted soil and ground water sampling both on site and off-site. The QA/QC procedures used by each of these consultants was not evaluated by the Connecticut Department of Health Services. Conclusions contained in this Public health assessment are based on all the data reviewed. The accuracy of these conclusions is determined by the availability and reliability of the data. As indicated in Table II-B, elevated concentrations of lead and mercury were detected in three public drinking water wells in 1976. The levels ranged from ND to 0.07 ppm for lead which exceeds the current EPA MCL of 0.05 ppm. However, it should be noted that there exists some controversy regarding the reliability of the data analysis. Subsequent sampling in 1976 and 1977 did not detect lead and mercury contamination in the three wells. The well water samples may have become contaminated during collection or laboratory preparation for analysis.
No physical hazards were observed during our site visit on July, l7 1991.
A. ENVIRONMENTAL PATHWAYS (Fate and Transport)
GROUND WATER - Contaminants disposed of on soil or in lagoons can be flushed down into the soil and underlying ground water by precipitation and surface water runoff. Once in the ground water these contaminants can move vertically and horizontally with the ground water flow and thereby contaminate nearby wells. The principal overburden (soil) materials present throughout the site are characterized by fairly loose sediments capable of transmitting contaminants through ground water (USGS l96l; Warzyn l980; Werhan l982). These deposits range from l2 to greater than 80 feet thick throughout the Southington area. Discontinuous lenses of silty and clay soils occur throughout the overburden deposits. The thickness of these lenses ranges from 5 to l4 feet. The permeability of these deposits range from medium to high indicating fairly easy migration for many contaminants.
The underlying bedrock is the New Haven Arkose of the Newark Group, Upper Triassic age. The New Haven Arkose is characterized by interbeds of grayish-orange, pink to very pale orange conglomeratic arkose, and grayish to dark-reddish brown siltstone. This bedrock type has a moderate amount of fractures that will also allow contaminants to migrate in ground water. The depth to the bedrock ranges from approximately 7 to 30 feet in the immediate site area (Wehran l982). Mazzaferro (l979) reports that the bedrock averages approximately 4,000 feet in thickness.
The SRSNE site was regraded in the late 1970's and as a result, several feet of fill material overlie the soil deposits. In addition, much of the site has been covered with concrete and asphalt pavement.
The ground water flow in the area occurs under unconfined conditions within the soil (stratified drift deposits) and fractured bedrock. Glacial till deposits act as a semi-confining layer to the underlying bedrock aquifer within this layer. Under non-pumping conditions, when the ground water recovery wells are not pumping, ground water flows east toward the Quinnipiac River. The overburden beneath the site increases in thickness toward the Quinnipiac River. Between SRSNE and the river is a zone of ground water discharge, whereas west of SRSNE is a zone of recharge area where rain/surface water infiltrates into ground water. The depth to ground water ranges from near ground level to approximately 20 feet (Warzyn l980).
A review of the extensive ground water sampling data and various hydrogeologic investigations suggest that a majority of the contaminated ground water in the overburden has migrated in towards the south, southeast. However some information (Ecology and Environment 1982) suggests that lesser amounts may have moved hydraulically to the northwest; and transverse to the direction of flow.
In l982 Ecology and Environment Consultants prepared Isocon maps (Isocon maps show contour lines of equal concentrations) depicting the ground water contamination plume(s) originating from the SRSNE site. The report suggests that parts of the contamination plume extends north of the site, and transverse to ground water flow. Wells located just northwest and transverse to ground water flow have become contaminated. These wells include a private drinking-water well. This contamination may be related to (l) movement of contaminants as dense, non-aqueous phase liquids, (2) movement of ground water through bedrock fractures with poorly characterized hydraulic properties, and (3) additional source areas. Separate phase contaminants (contaminants not in solution with water) may exist in the underlying bedrock due to the large quantities of liquid wastes disposed of on the SRSNE site as well as the former Cianci property. A review of ground water sampling analyses conducted from l980 to l986 (EPA l980; YWC l985; l986) shows decreasing concentrations. However, current data on ground water contaminants are not available and will be acquired by NUS during the Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study.
According to the Water Quality Classification Map of Connecticut, (Murphy, 1987.) The ground water on-site has an adopted water quality classification of GB/GA. GB/GA Class ground waters are not suitable for direct human consumption without treatment due to waste discharges, spills, or leaks of chemicals. The goal of the State of Connecticut is to prevent further degradation of class GB ground waters by preventing any additional discharges which could cause irreversible contamination and to restore the ground water in the area to drinking water class GA. Ground waters with the adopted water quality classification of GA are presumed suitable for human consumption without the need for treatment.
SURFACE WATER - In general, the land slopes toward the Quinnipiac River, which is the main drainage feature in the area. The Quinnipiac River is to the east of the former Cianci property and flows south and then west between Southington Production wells 4 and 6. The nearest surface water body is a tributary of the Quinnipiac River which flows just southeast of the site. The potential environmental pathways for contaminant migration to the Quinnipiac River from the SRSNE site are:
The discharge effluent consists of a mixture of organic compounds, many of which have been shown to accumulate in sediment and some of which bioaccumulate in fish tissue. PCBs were detected in the effluent (October l988) at concentrations of 4.l ppb. PCBs are the most likely contaminant to bioaccumulate in fish tissue, although the levels measured in the effluent are quite low.
As part of the facilities NPDES permit the company is required to perform biotoxicity monitoring of its effluent. Biotoxicity testing with fathead minnows (Pimephales promelas) and a variety of water flea (Daphnia pulex) has been conducted on SRSNE's effluent discharges since l987. A review of the biotoxicity data indicates that periodically the effluent samples have been toxic to the water flea.
The water quality classification of Bc for the Quinnipiac River in the Southington area indicates that the river is considered to be an important fisheries resource. The CT DEP's Branch of Environmental Conservation, Bureau of Fisheries and Wildlife has an active stocking program for the Quinnipiac River immediately downstream from Southington. Designation of the Quinnipiac River as a fisheries resource implies human use of the resource and, therefore, potential of human consumption of fish in the area.
SOIL - The on-site disposal of hazardous waste sludge and incinerator fly ash, as well as poor housekeeping practices (leaking chemical storage containers, chemical spills etc.) have extensively contaminated the soil. Sampling data from the SRSNE site indicates the most contaminated area is where the former primary sludge lagoon was. The VOCs, SVOCs, PCBs and dioxins can potentially migrate through the unconsolidated loose soil and sub-soil and thereby contaminate ground water.
A study conducted in l974 by the DEP indicated that the projected emissions of lead from the open pit incinerator exceeded the recommended standard at that time (5 ug/m3). Heavy metal contamination of soils and vegetation on neighboring properties from these air emissions was identified in l974 (Housman DEP l974). Heavy metals detected included lead, cadmium, and mercury. On-site soil is no longer an important exposure source because 80% of the facility was paved in the summer of 1990.
AIR - VOC emissions are presently generated daily from the ground water recovery system's air stripping tower. While no VOC emissions above state regulatory standards had been detected from the operation of the ground water recovery system, off-site ambient-air monitoring conducted by NUS in July of 1990 did find numerous VOC's. Some of these VOC's were used at SRSNE and were found downwind from the facility at levels that exceed national background levels (USEPA TEAM Study 1987). Given the complex characteristics related to air transport, including variable sampling conditions, wind velocity, direction and surrounding topography, some of the VOC's detected upwind from the facility may be attributable to SRSNE. The List of VOC's detected only in downwind locations have been documented as having been routinely handled by SRSNE and therefore appear to be directly attributable to emissions from the SRSNE facility.
Historically, the storage tanks at the facility were not equipped with air pollution control devices and therefore every time a tank was filled, a volume of air saturated with organic vapors was displaced into the atmosphere. Three sumps are located within the blending tank, drum storage and truck loading and unloading areas. These sumps pump stormwater runoff to the recovery system 's air stripping cooling tower. If a spill had occurred in these areas, during the years the facility was operating the potential existed for free liquids (solvents etc.) to be pumped into the cooling tower generating toxic air emissions.
In l989, a release of an ethyl acrylate vapor cloud occurred during fuel blending operations. The CT DEP received complaints from local residents of nausea and strong odors.
FOODCHAIN - Biotoxicity testing indicates that periodically, the effluent discharged by SRSNE has the potential to be toxic to biota. In addition contaminated ground water may move directly into the river. Fish sampling has not been performed to date. The potential exists for the contamination of fish found in the Quinnipiac River. However most of the contaminants of concern are not known to bioaccumulate. PCBs and dioxins are the most likely site contaminant to accumulate in fish. These contaminants have not been detected in the river in sampling conducted to date.
Based on the information reviewed, completed and potential pathways exist for humans to be exposed to contamination on-site and off-site from past operations at SRSNE. These exposures can occur through contaminated drinking water, ambient air and food (fish).
PAST COMPLETED EXPOSURE PATHWAYS
There is inconclusive evidence which suggests that Town well 4 might also have been contaminated with lead and mercury for an unknown period of time. Well 4 was identified as contaminated in l976 by the Southington Water Department and operated until l977.
Several contaminants of concern--VOCs, heavy metals, dioxins, and PCBs--have been identified with respect to the SRSNE facility. Multiple routes of exposure have been identified both on and off-site. As indicated in the previously described human exposure pathways, Southington residents and persons engaged in on-site activities have a potential for exposure by multiple routes to a variety of VOCs, heavy metals, dioxins, and PCBs. However, the most important route of exposure in terms of public health implications was probably the contamination of public water supply wells with VOCs. The public health implications for each contaminant of concern are discussed below (ATSDR Toxicological Profiles and other health documents are shown in the Reference section):
VOCs have been detected in four (4) public and three (3) private residential wells above the current State Action Levels and EPA Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCL) and local residents have consumed this water at certain times [Note: The contamination present in two (2) of the public water wells and in two (2) of the private water wells are not site related.] In addition a complex mixture of low levels of VOCs have been measured in ambient air near the site exposing nearby residents.
As indicated in Tables I, II-A, II-B, and III elevated concentrations of a variety of VOCs have been identified in soils, ground water, and air both on-site and off-site. The reported soil concentrations (e.g., toluene ND to 500,000 ppb; tetrachloroethylene l0 to 820,000 ppb) and ambient air levels (e.g., toluene 4.2-l2.0 ug/m3) for VOC's are above background. Persons involved in remediation activities are at risk for more high level VOC exposures and therefore are more likely to potentially suffer some of the acute effects (CNS) described below for each chemical.
l,l-dichloroethylene (l,l-DCE)
As indicated in Table II, DCE levels as high as 2l0 ppb were measured in public well water exceeding the current EPA MCL of 7 ppb. Ambient air levels were also detected at a range of 0.2-l.6 ug/m3. Hepatotoxicity has been observed in humans following repeated inhalation of DCE at much high concentrations. Other studies in humans indicate that inhalation of DCE can cause central nervous system (CNS) toxicity and irritation of the mucous membranes. There is also evidence based on animal studies that DCE may also be toxic to the kidneys. Most of these effects occurred at higher levels than found at the site.
Under certain conditions (heat, and an alkali environment) DCE can generate chloroacetylenes which are highly neurotoxic. The potential exists for chloroacetylenes to form at hazardous waste sites where DCE is present.
Trichloroethylene
Trichloroethylene at levels as high as l20 ppb were measured in one residential well and between ll and 45 ppb in public drinking water wells. These levels exceed the current EPA MCL of 5 ppb. Trichloroethylene was also detected in ambient air at levels ranging between 0.5-0.9 ug/m3, however these levels do not exceed the state Hazard Limiting Value (HLV) and are close to background levels found in some parts of our country. HLVs are state established standards for toxics in ambient air.
Inhalation and oral ingestion studies indicate that the bone marrow, CNS, liver, and kidney are principal targets of high level trichloroethylene exposure in animals and humans. Carcinogenicity studies have indicated that an association may exist between leukemia in humans and exposure to well water contaminated with chlorinated organic compounds including trichloroethylene (Kotelchuck and Parker l979; Parker and Rosen l98l; Lagakos et. al. l986 a,b). The EPA has classified trichloroethylene in Group B2 - probable human carcinogen.
Tetrachloroethylene
Tetrachloroethylene was detected at levels as high as l7 ppb in a private residential well and 22 ppb in a public drinking water well. These levels exceed the current EPA MCL of 5 ppb. Ambient air levels were documented between 0.3-0.9 ug/m3 which are near background levels.
Inhalation and oral ingestion studies at high level tetrachloroethylene exposure indicate that the main target organs appear to be the CNS, liver, and kidneys. The levels found at the site do not usually approach these levels. Tetrachloroethylene may be concentrated in breast milk of mothers who have been exposed. The effects of exposing infants to tetrachloroethylene through breast milk are unknown. In addition tetrachloroethylene inhalation exposures can cause eye and upper respiratory irritation, headaches, dizziness, and drowsiness at high levels. The EPA recommended a Group B (probable human carcinogen) weight-of-evidence classification for tetrachloroethylene.
Carbon Tetrachloride
Carbon tetrachloride was detected at levels ranging from 8.9 to 35 ppb in public drinking water wells. These levels exceed the current EPA MCL of 5 ppb. Levels in ambient air samples, ranging between 0.5-0.8 ug/m3 were detected and are near background levels found in other non-contaminated locations.
Inhalation and oral ingestion exposure to high levels of carbon tetrachloride indicate that the main target organs are the liver and kidney, lung, and brain. The most immediate effects are usually to the brain. Common effects are headache and dizziness along with nausea and vomiting. Kidney failure is often the main cause of death in people exposed. Persons with a history of alcohol consumption are more susceptible to the effects of carbon tetrachloride. These effects are not expected at the concentrations found at the site for nearby residents.
Based on animal and occupational exposure studies, carbon, tetrachloride may be a potential liver carcinogen. However, studies have not been performed on the effects of long-term exposure of humans to low levels of carbon tetrachloride, so effects of such exposure are unknown at the present time.
Toluene
Although not identified in drinking water, toluene was identified in ground water monitoring samples at concentrations which ranged from 11,000 to 23,000 ppb. These levels exceed the current EPA MCL of l,000 ppb. Toluene was also in ambient air at levels ranging between 4.2-l2.0 ug/m3. These air levels are quite low but may exceed background for toluene in ambient air. Inhalation exposure to toluene at much higher levels ranging from 200,000 to 300,000 ppb can cause; CNS depression, dizziness, nausea and respiratory irritation. However, studies have not been performed on the health effects of short or long-term exposure to toluene at low levels. None of the available studies suggest that toluene is carcinogenic.
Ethyl Benzene
As indicated in Tables I and II elevated levels of ethylbenzene were detected in ground water monitoring wells but not in drinking water (440-l2,000 ppb). The current EPA MCL is 680 ppb.
At high levels (100,000 to 500,000 ppb) ethylbenzene in the air for short periods of time can cause eyes and throat irritation (Yant et al., 1930; Thienes and Haley 1972). Ethylbenzene is also toxic to the central nervous system causing dizziness and vertigo in humans. Animal studies indicate that exposure to ethylbenzene at high concentrations in the air may cause liver and kidney damage, nervous system and blood changes. No studies were found which provide evidence regarding adverse cardiovascular, gastrointestinal, blood, immunological, musculoskeletal, liver, kidney or reproductive effects in humans following oral exposure to ethylbenzene. No studies were found which provide evidence regarding adverse respiratory, cardiovascular, gastrointestinal, hematological, musculoskeletal, hepatic, or renal effects in humans or animals after dermal exposure to ethylbenzene (ATSDR 1990.) Liquid ethylbenzene applied directly to the skin of animals caused irritation by reddening and exfoliation and applied to the eyes caused irritation and slight injury (Wolf et al. 1956; Smyth et a;. 1962.) One long-term study in animals suggests that ethylbenzene may cause tumors (Maltoni 1985.) However, no studies were found regarding carcinogenic effects in humans to date (ATSDR 1990.)
Methylene Chloride (DCM)
As indicated in Tables I and II methylene chloride (dichloromethane), or DCM, levels as high as 3l,000 ppb have been detected in ground water monitoring wells. The current State of Connecticut Action Level is 25 ppb.
The primary health effects of high level DCM exposure are to the CNS. Studies in humans indicate that inhalation of DCM can cause sluggishness, irritability light-headedness, nausea and headaches. The symptoms disappear after exposure ends. High levels of DCM in the air (above 500 ppb) can irritate the eyes, nose, and throat. If DCM comes in contact with skin it can cause mild skin irritations. Eye exposure to DCM may cause severe (temporary) eye irritation. None of the available studies suggest that DCM is carcinogenic.
l,l,l-Trichloroethane (Methyl Chloroform)
As indicated in the environmental contamination section 1,1,1,-trichloroethane levels as high as 3,500 ppb were detected in the public drinking water supply. The current EPA MCL is 200 ppb. The main effect of 1,1,1 trichloroethane is CNS depression. Kidney and liver damage are minimal and have not occurred when used as an anesthetic agent. Inhalation exposures at l,000,000 ppb showed no significant response in humans exposed for as long as 70 minutes (Casarett and Doull's Toxicology 1985). Studies have not been performed on the effects of long-term exposure on humans to low levels of 1,1,1 -trichloroethane.
As indicated in Table I, elevated concentrations of lead, (2,l60 ppm), chromium (420 ppm), cadmium (240 ppm), barium (682 ppm) and mercury (3.l ppm) were detected in the soils on site. Heavy metals are a potential health concern to local residents due to easy access to the former Cianci Property and to persons involved in remediation activities. In addition, the open pit incinerator may have contaminated neighboring residential properties with lead. Therefore, the potential exists for dermal, inhalation and ingestion exposures to lead contaminated soils on nearby residential properties. The potential also exists for the ingestion of fish contaminated with mercury. In addition past exposures to the community metals occurred through contaminated drinking water and air contaminated by incinerated sludges.
As indicated in Table II-B, elevated concentrations of lead and mercury were detected in three public drinking water wells in 1976. The levels ranged from ND to 0.07 ppm for lead which exceeds the current EPA action level of 15 ppb. However, it should be noted that there exists some controversy regarding the reliability of the data analysis. Subsequent sampling in the latter part of 1977 and 1978 did not detect lead and mercury contamination of the three wells. The well water samples may have become contaminated during collection or laboratory preparation for analysis. Lead was also detected in one private well, at 0.03 ppm, which is above the EPA proposed action level of 15 ppb.
Mercury
Chronic mercury toxicity depends on the chemical form (elemental, organic compounds, inorganic salts) and the route and duration of exposure. Elemental mercury and the inorganic mercury salts are generally poorly absorbed orally, while organic mercury salts are generally well absorbed orally. Mercury toxicity consists of tremors, personality disorders, excitability, hallucinations and delirium. Long-term exposure to either organic or inorganic mercury can permanently damage the brain, kidneys, and developing fetuses.
There is no conclusive evidence to indicate that long-term mercury exposure occurred through the public drinking water wells. Mercury has not been shown to be carcinogenic in humans to date.
Lead
Public exposure to lead from the site was most likely to have occurred due to incineration of sludges during the l970s. Lead in private drinking water wells could potentially be due to lead plumbing fixtures in individual homes and may not be site related. Exposure to high levels of lead can cause the brain and kidneys of humans to be badly damaged. Lead exposure can increase blood pressure in middle-aged men. If a pregnant women is exposed to lead it can be carried to the unborn child and cause premature birth, low birth weight, or even spontaneous abortion. Studies indicate that long term exposure to low levels of lead can cause brain damage and lowered I.Q. in children. Lead interferes with heme biosynthesis, resulting in a reduction of the hemoglobin concentrations in blood. Although not likely to cause adverse health effects alone, long term exposure to lead in drinking water would contribute significantly to the overall body burden of lead and increase the percentage of exposed individuals at risk from lead toxicity due to other sources. Such levels could have adverse effects on the mental development of fetuses exposed via the mother drinking such water.
There is no conclusive evidence to indicate that long term lead exposure occurred through the public drinking water wells. Although lead has not been shown to be carcinogenic in humans, animal studies suggest that lead should be thought of as a possible carcinogen.
PCBs, DIOXINS, and FURANS
As indicated in Table I, dioxins/furans were documented in soils and PCBs were identified in soil and ground water on the SRSNE site.
PCBs, furans and dioxins are easily absorbed through the skin from contaminated soils or other materials. The four major toxic effects of high level exposure to these compounds are chloracne, the wasting syndrome, hepatotoxicity and immunotoxicity. Animal studies suggest that these compounds become concentrated in human breast milk. Although due to limited exposures this is not expected near SRSNE. Human and animal studies indicate that moderate PCB exposure to fetuses can cause miscarriages and decreased mental development after birth. Also, animals which have been exposed to low levels of PCB exposure have developed liver cancer. Despite these potential outcomes, adverse effects from PCBs and dioxins are not likely to occur at this site due to lack of documented exposure routes to nearby populations.
B. HEALTH OUTCOME DATA EVALUATION
A number of health outcomes were evaluated for the Town of Southington, including cancer, infant and perinatal mortality, learning disabilities and birth defects. While these analyses may generate clues regarding the association between certain chemical exposures and disease outcomes, it must be stressed that such an association is not sufficient to establish a casual link. Many other factors may also contribute to the onset of disease, including diet, tobacco use, family history, age, race, occupation and socioeconomic factors. In sum, the tools of epidemiology are very limited in terms of proving causation because of the complexity of factors that are involved in the development of disease.
The preliminary review of the tumor (cancer) incidence data for the Town Southington using the Standardized Incidence Rate (SIR) (standardized to eliminate affects of age distributions) indicates that there is not a cancer epidemic occurring in Southington. However, cancer rates were statistically elevated for bladder cancer (ages 40-49) and elevated though not statistically significant, for testicular cancer (ages 20-29) for the period l979 to l988 (Appendix 2). In Appendix 2 expected rates of bladder and testicular cancer are estimated based on Connecticut rates and then compared to actual rates seen in Southington. The terms upper and lower 95 percent confidence intervals give ranges of tumor rates that might occur by chance. When a rate falls outside of the 95 percent confidence interval, one can assume that the difference in rates has a real cause and did not occur by chance. This is often referred to as a "statistically significant" difference. Bladder cancer is a plausible outcome of exposure to site related compounds, since some solvents such as benzene have been associated with that tumor type. One of the original community concerns was an unusually high number of testicular cancers in young men around the site. The total number of observed tumors (all sites) was less than expected for the period l979 to l988. Further analyses into the elevation of bladder and testicular cancers is presently being conducted. More detailed spatial and temporal analysis of the tumors is planned.
2. Infant and Perinatal Mortality Rates
Plots of the infant and perinatal mortality rates for Southington reflect elevated rates with respect to the state and surrounding towns for years l949 to l965 (appendix 3). It has been theorized that infant mortality rates or miscarriage rates may be sensitive indicators of adverse environmental exposures. Although the present rates are below those of the state and surrounding towns, the historical fluctuation in rates may warrant further detailed investigations with respect to past environmental contamination in the Town of Southington. This may prove to be difficult due to the absence of environmental data from that time-period.
Rates of diagnosed learning disability were evaluated due to concerns expressed by some citizens living near the site. The rate of learning disabilities in the Southington school district are similar to the overall rate for the State of Connecticut (based on rate calculations for learning disabilities in the l2 public schools in Southington, 1988-1989) (appendix 4). The prevalence of learning disabilities ranged from 5-l0 per 100 children in specific Southington schools. The school with the highest rate also has a large special education program and other children in the area are bussed in to receive the school's services. The detection and reporting of learning disabilities varies widely between towns and individual schools and therefore it is difficult to assess differences based on environmental effects such at chemical exposure.
Increased rates of birth defects have been associated with proximity to hazardous waste sites. Therefore, the CT State Birth Registry data was reviewed. Birth defects data was reviewed for the years l983, l985, and l986 and compared with the state average (Appendix 5). No significant evidence of excess birth defects were identified for Southington for this period. In the years reviewed, the observed number of affected infants was less than expected. The Connecticut Birth Defects Registry does not date back prior to 1983.
C. COMUNITY CONERNS EVALUATION
The community health concerns identified in the Community Concerns section are addressed either in the Conclusions and Recommendation section or in the Response to Public Comments (Appendix 6).
Next Section Table
of Contents
