BoRit Asbestos Site

BoRit Asbestos SiteUpdate on Public Health Documents

Presentation to the BoRit Community Action Group

August 7, 2013

Barbara Allerton, Christine Lloyd, and Dr. Farhad AhmedPennsylvania Department of HealthOverview of:Health Education and Outreach

BoRit Health Consultation (HC) on Groundwater Monitoring Data - Final Version (with public comments)

BoRit Public Health Assessment (PHA) Initial/Public Comment Release

Public Health Recommendations and Next Steps

BoRit Public Health Activities Timeline6/05Community RequestDocuments (HC= Health Consultation, PHA=Public Health Assessment) Health Professional EducationPublic MeetingsCommunity Activity20051/09Community Open House4/09Earth Day Community Cleanup7/08Air HC (public comment version) & Community Fact Sheet2008200612/06 1/07Historical Review & Community Fact Sheet20073/09Final Air HC3/07Grand Rounds(2)8/08Public Meeting8/11Cancer Update Factsheet3/09Public Meeting20095-6/09Doctor Visits and Patient Poster9/11Nurse Association Presentation2010201120121/09Cancer HC & Community Fact Sheet8/10Air Data Review & Spring Cleanup FlyerRegular CAG Meetings and HERS Workgroup Meetings7/13PHA (public comment version)12/10Nurse Association Presentation9/09Grand Rounds

11/11Senior Center Presentation8/12Ground-waterHC (public comment version)3/13Mont Co Health Alliance9/12WACA Picnic4/12, 6/12 -Community Cupboard Mtgs20137/13Ground-waterHC (final version)7/13UPenn Ambler REACH mtgs w/science teachers4/13ATSDR Focus GroupHealth Education/Outreach

EPA Risk Assessment vs. PADOH/ATSDR Health Assessment

Groundwater HC: Final VersionPurpose: to provide a summary of the groundwater sampling data, answer community concerns, and offer conclusions and recommendations

Groundwater HC: Final VersionIn August 2012, PADOH released an initial HC summarizing the EPA groundwater sampling data and the public drinking water supply dataPublic comments and responses in the final version of the HC The Technical Assistance Services for Communities (TASC) Phase II GW report (released at same time as initial HC)PADOH reviewed the TASC report in the final HC

Groundwater Sampling Results* Also detected in the field blank

Asbestos Sampling Results in Public Water SupplySampling of potential asbestos-containing pipes

Groundwater HC ConclusionsExposure to groundwater beneath the site is not expected to harm peoples health- Asbestos levels below EPAs MCL in groundwater wellsManganese, carbon tetrachloride, PCE and Bis(2-ethylhexy)phthalate were detected above MCL in a few wells but not current exposure pathway

Asbestos sampling in public drinking water supply, not expected to harm peoples health - Samples collected in asbestos containing pipes, below MCL of 7 million fibers per liter (MFL) - 2011 sampling of Ambler supply wells, asbestos was below MCL

Conclusions (cont.)3. Cannot make a conclusion on private wells No private well sampling data availablePublic water is the main source of drinking water in the areaNo private wells are documented in Ambler Borough or Upper Dublin, but there are some private wells in Whitpain Twp.Likely at a different aquifer and depth than EPA site sampling Public Comments: Manganese in public waterIs manganese in the public drinking water supply?Testing not required under the Safe Drinking Water ActHowever, PADEP SE Office supplied raw well data (Nov. 2012)Levels are similar to background, as reported in the TASC report

* Wells # 8 and 14 are above the EPA secondary MCL of 50 g/L but prior to treatment. Well #4 is closest to the site.

Public comments: Manganese health effects Manganese was detected at 9,620 g/L in one GW well. What are the health effects from exposure?

Value exceeds the EPA lifetime health advisory (LTHA) value of 300 g/L and the secondary MCL of 50 g/L (based on aesthetics, such as taste and odor, not on health endpoints)Health agencies are not aware of people drinking this levelThese levels would make water highly unpotable with visual levels of contamination (e.g., black to brown color, black staining, and or bitter metallic taste).

Manganese: Health effects (cont.)Food is the primary source of manganese exposureNot a carcinogenBased on WHO and ATSDR Tox profile:Limited data show ingestion at high levels is tied to neurological effectsSome evidence, although not conclusive, that children exposed to high levels of manganese in drinking water may develop developmental effects, including behavior and learning.Public comments: Asbestos Sampling In Spring 2011, Ambler was granted a waiver for sampling asbestos, as part of PADEPs waiver process. Were all the supply wells sampled, including well #4 (closest to the site)?

According to PADEP:Well #4 was sampled for asbestos Three of the four samples showed no levels of asbestosOne sample initially showed 1 chrysotile fiber greater than 0.5 microns. Upon reanalysis, that result could not be confirmedAsbestos levels were below the MCLWaiver expires in 2019Public Comments: TASC ReportTASC report states a cone of influence can occur when a water well is actively pumping and drawing water from farther away and even uphill.

PADOH agree that this is possibleTASC report states that GW near the site is under confined conditions and is unlikely influenced by the shallow GW near the BoRit site Public wells at a depth of 300 to 438 feet and site GW wells are less than 100 feetIf EPA and/or Ambler Borough collect additional GW information to establish a cone of influence PADOH will evaluate these data.Recommendations/Next StepsIf EPAs GW investigations indicate contaminant(s) at levels of health concern offsite, EPA should conduct a private well survey near the site to establish if private well users could be impacted by site-related contamination

PADOH recommends that EPA continue sampling the groundwater and surface water near the site, to monitor contaminant trends over time

PADOH supports the removal actions at the site and recommends EPA continue plans for a permanent remedy for the site that will reduce any public health hazards

Public Health Assessment (PHA)Purpose:

Provide a comprehensive public healthreview of relevant pathways, new dataReview EPAs environmental sampling data collected for the site RI/FSAir sampling, water and soil data, both on-site and off-siteActivity Based Sampling (ABS)Assess potential cancer risk frominhalation exposuresReview health outcome dataProvide public health recommendations

Exposure Pathways at the SitePast occupational exposuresAsbestos workers at the plants were most at risk

Past residential exposuresTake home fibers clothing brought home by workersPlaying on waste piles, soil in yardsDust from near-by plants while in operation Difficult to evaluate historical air data -lack of sampling detail, data inconsistencies, and sampling/analytical methods

Potential current exposures of concernAggressive disturbance of restricted site soils

Asbestos Evaluation ProcessAsbestos is primarily an inhalation hazard

EPAs Asbestos Framework documentNo reliable methods to predict asbestos concentrations in air given concentrations in other environmental mediaActivity Based Sampling (ABS)

Work w/ EPA risk assessors to develop a site-specific screening values for inhalation

Two air screening values were developed: Residential Value =0.001 f/cc PCME During ABS scenario = 0.04 f/cc PCME

Surface Water ResultsConclusions: Sample collected at reservoir seep = 5.1 MFLSurface water not expected to harm public health. Public is not currently using the surface water as a drinking water source Occasional recreational exposures to surface water are not expected to be a public health concern

Community Air Sampling 7 sampling locations: 6 in the community and 1 background

Ambient Air Monitoring Results Conclusions:Three PCME detections (along trail, adult community center and warehouse)Results from ambient air samples along the site perimeterand in the community did not show levels of asbestos exceeding EPA screening values for residential exposure (0.001 f/cc) Asbestos is not migrating off-site to the local community at levels that would harm their health.

Ambient Air Sampling/RainMaximum Ambient Asbestos Concentration vs. Rainfall in the Days or Week before Sampling

If rainfall exceeded 0.25 inches, EPA waited 24 hours. If rainfall exceeded 0.5 inches, EPA waited 48 hours

ABS BoRit site* (raking/mowing)Park 6 locationsPile 3 locationsReservoir 1 location Trails (hiking and mowing)2 locations, both sides of the CreekResidential Yards (raking) 8 locations, both sides of the siteFormer K&M Buildings

*ABS samples were collected on-site prior to the installation of clean cover at the site

ABS ResultsABS risk-based screening value = 0.04 f/cc

Conclusions on ABS samplingOn-site exposures to asbestos fibers when soils and ACM are aggressively disturbed could harm peoples health

Off-site (residential areas and walking trails) current exposures to the airborne asbestos levels (when soils are aggressively disturbed) are not expected to harm peoples health

Estimated Cancer Risk EvaluationsNext step in the site evaluation is to calculate an estimated excess cancer risk for the various exposure scenarios and populations based on:

Evaluate unacceptable cancer riskExcess cancer risk greater than 1E-04 or the probability of developing cancer greater than 1 in 10,000

Cancer Risk Evaluation: On-siteAssumes 2 hrs a day/50 days per year for trespassers. 4 hrs a day/100 days per year for workers

Conclusions: Some estimated cancer risks on-site exceeded 1x10-4Exposures to trespassers and workers disturbing on-site soils (pre EPA mitigation actions) poses a public health risk

Cancer Risk Evaluation: ResidentialAssumes 2 hours day/100 days year, based on maximum personal air monitor data during ABS

Conclusions: Estimated cancer risks are below 1x10-4Exposures to residents while soil is disturbed does not pose a public health risk

Cancer Risk Evaluation: Trails and K&M BuildingExposure based on 2 hours per day/50 days year

Conclusions: Estimated cancer risks are below 1x10-4These buildings have been removed since the samplingThere is still the potential for ACM in the soil near these buildings as well as additional former manufacturing properties

31Asbestos-Related DiseasesBreathing asbestos fibers increases the risk of developing of cancer and non-cancer health effectsCancer: Malignant mesothelioma - Cancer of the membrane lining the chest cavity and covering the lungs or lining the abdominal cavity Lung cancer also known as bronchogenic carcinomaLaryngeal cancer cancer of the voice box

Non-cancerAsbestosis restrictive lung disease caused by asbestos fibers scarring the lungPleural plaques, thickening and effusions

Risk factors for Lung Carcinoma Depends on:Level, frequency, and duration of exposureTime elapsed since exposureAge at time of exposureSmoking history (synergistic w/ asbestos)Individual susceptibility factorsLatency period: 20-30 years

Cancer Registry Data ReviewPADOH updated the cancer incidence data review Review included cancers reported to the PA cancer registry from 1992-2008

Previous analysis included 1996-2005

Especially interested in asbestos-related cancers:MesotheliomaLung and bronchus cancers

Cancer Incidence: All Cancers Ambler 19002 (1992- 2008)

SIR = Standard Incidence Ration (Observed cases/expected cases)- Screened Lower Rate ( Z-Score < than 1.96 )Z-Score = Statistical Significance of study area compared to state. A Z score of 1.96 equals a 95% level of statistical significance

Conclusions: Total cancer ate in Ambler is lower than the overall rate for PA This lower incidence was statistically significant

Cancer Incidence: Mesothelioma Ambler 19002 (1992- 2008)

SIR = Standard Incidence Ration (Observed cases/expected cases)

Conclusions: Rate is 3.1 times higher than expected, difference is statistically significant .Men had 2.7 times and women had 4.5 times the expected rateRates for Blue Bell and Fort Washington were not elevatedElevated mesothelioma rates most likely due to past occupational exposure

Frequency of Mesothelioma Cases by Site and SexAmbler Zip Code 19002 (1985-2008)*

*PA Cancer Registry (24 years)

Cancer Incidence: Lung and Bronchus Cancer Ambler 19002 (1992- 2008)

SIR = Standard Incidence Ration (Observed cases/expected cases)- Screened Lower Rate ( Z-Score < than 1.96 )Z-Score = Statistical Significance of study area compared to state. A Z score of 1.96 equals a 95% level of statistical significance

Conclusions: Cancer rate is less than expected The low incidence rates were statistically significant compared with the rate for Pennsylvania as a whole

38Overall Conclusions in the PHACurrent Ambient Air:Based on 2008-2011 air sampling data, CURRENT exposures to asbestos in air in the community not a health concernCurrent Surface Water and Offsite Soils:Exposures to asbestos in surface water, along trails near the site, and in nearby residential yards not a health concern Current Onsite Soils:Exposures to trespassers disturbing soils on site (pre EPA mitigation actions poses a public health risk Past Ambient Air:Data incomplete and has confounders, but indications that PAST ambient air levels of asbestos may have been a health concernHealth Outcome Data:1992-2008 shows a statistically significant increase in the incidence of mesothelioma in Ambler, compared to state wide rates

RecommendationsAny activity that disturbs on-site soils should be avoided by visitors/trespassers tothe site

Residents should not remove/disturb pipe or tiles along the Creek or near the site

EPA should continue to restrict access until remediation is completed

EPA should continue to maintain warning signs at the site

Next StepsPADOH and ATSDR will: Continue to share information with local health care providers.

Evaluate future environmental sampling data

Remain interested in learning of non-work related asbestos disease in the community. Residents can contact the PADOH Division of Environmental Health Epidemiology at (717) 346-3285 Review cancer data for the community on a periodic basis.

The University of Pennsylvania study:History of community and occupational exposures and household exposures in families of asbestos workers in Ambler Developing educational tools to document these experiences

Questions or To Submit Public Comments:A copy of the PHA is available at: : www.epaosc.net/borit

Send comments (by September 30, 2013) to:chlloyd@pa.govPADOHBureau of Epidemiology, Christine Lloyd Room 933, Health and Welfare Building625 Forster StreetHarrisburg, PA 17120 (717) 787-3350 Sheet1Chemical Compound Result MCLArsenic 7.6 ppb 10 ppbManganese 9620 ppb NoneAsbestos 0.51 mfl 7.0 mflCarbon Tetrachloride 5.8 ppb 5.0 ppbTetrachloroethene 22 ppb 5.0 ppb

Contaminant Maximum ResultMCL Asbestos0.51 MFL7 MFLBis(2-ethylhexy)phthalate *55 ppb6 ppbManganese9620 ppbNone, Secondary MCL of 50 ppbCarbon Tetrachloride5.8 ppb5.0 ppbTetrachlorethylene22 ppb5.0 ppb

Sheet2

Sheet3

Sheet1Chemical Compound Result MCLArsenic 7.6 ppb 10 ppbManganese 9620 ppb NoneAsbestos 0.51 mfl 7.0 mflCarbon Tetrachloride 5.8 ppb 5.0 ppbTetrachloroethene 22 ppb 5.0 ppb

Contaminant Maximum ResultMCL Asbestos0.517 MFLBis(2-ethylhexy)phthalate *556 ppbManganese5620 ppbNone, Secondary MCL of 50 ppbCarbon Tetrachloride5.8 ppb5.0 ppbTetrachlorethylene22 ppb5.0 ppb

Exposed PopulationExposure FrequencyExposure YearsTrespassers or visitors to the site aggressively disturbing on-site soil 2 hours per day/50 days per yearAdult- 24 yearsChildren - 6 yearsAdult and Children- 30 yearsResidential lawn maintenance/ playing scenarios, off-site ABS data 2 hours per day/100 days per year Adult -24 yearsChildren -6 yearsAdult and Children - 30 yearsRecreational jogging/walking and soil disturbance on walking trails1 hour per day/100 days per year Adult- 24 yearsChildren - 6 yearsAdult and Children -30 yearsTrespassers to the former K&M/Nicolet Buildings horseplay activities and ABS data inside the buildings 2 hours per day/100 days per year Adult-24 yearsChildren -6 yearsAdult and Children -30 yearsResidential from ACM disturbance in K&M/Nicolet Buildings - community air data during horseplay/ABS in the buildings 2 hours per day/100 days per year Adult- 24 yearsChildren -6 yearsAdult and Children 30 yearsOn-site workers - aggressively disturbing the on-site soil 4 hours per day/100 days per year Adult workers- 20 years

Sheet2LocationPopulationExposure DurationTWFExposure YearsIURMean ABS Air level-PCME (f/cc)Cancer Risk from MeanMaximum ABS Air level- PCME (f/cc)Cancer Risk from MaximumPile Adult Trespassor2 hrs day/50 days yr0.011240.1210.0944.29E-050.135.93E-05Child Trespassor2 hrs day/50 days yr0.01160.0550.0482.49E-060.0653.37E-06Adult/Child2 hrs day/50 days yr0.011300.1730.0483.91E-050.0655.30E-05On-site Worker4 hrs day/100 days yr 0.046200.0670.0948.22E-050.131.14E-04Park Adult Trespassor2 hrs day/50 days yr0.011240.1210.115.02E-050.462.10E-04Child Trespassor2 hrs day/50 days yr0.01160.0550.0844.36E-060.21.04E-05Adult/Child2 hrs day/50 days yr0.011300.1730.0846.85E-050.21.63E-04On-site Worker4 hrs day/100 days yr 0.046200.0670.119.62E-050.464.02E-04IUR = Inhalation Unit Risk, for less than lifetime exposuresTWF = Time weighted factorsPCME = Phase contrast microscopy equivalent

Sheet3

Sheet4Residential LocationPopulationExposure DurationTWFExposure YearsIURMean ABS Air PCME (f/cc)Cancer Risk from MeanMaximum ABS PCME (f/cc)Cancer Risk from MaximumLocationPopulationExposure DurationTWFExposure YearsIURMean ABS level-PCME (f/cc)Cancer Risk from MeanCancer Risk from Maximum1 - No detectionsPile 2Adult 2 hrs day/100 days year 0.023240.121**0.00121.14E-06 Adult 2 hrs day/50 days yr0.011240.1210.0944.29E-05ERROR:#REF!Child 2 hrs day/100 days year 0.02360.055**0 Child 2 hrs day/50 days yr0.01160.0550.0482.49E-06ERROR:#REF!Adult/Child2 hrs day/100 days year 0.023300.173**0 Adult/Child2 hrs day/50 days yr0.011300.1730.0483.91E-05ERROR:#REF!3 - No detectionsOn-site Worker4 hrs day/100 days yr 0.046200.0670.0948.22E-05ERROR:#REF!4Adult 2 hrs day/100 days year 0.023240.121**0.00948.90E-06Park Child 2 hrs day/100 days year 0.02360.055**0.00941.01E-06Adult 2 hrs day/50 days yr0.011240.1210.115.02E-05ERROR:#REF!Adult/Child2 hrs day/100 days year 0.023300.173**0.00941.59E-05Child 2 hrs day/50 days yr0.01160.0550.0844.36E-06ERROR:#REF!5Adult 2 hrs day/100 days year 0.023240.121**0.000777.29E-07Adult/Child2 hrs day/50 days yr0.011300.1730.0846.85E-05ERROR:#REF!Child 2 hrs day/100 days year 0.02360.055**0.00151.61E-07On-site Worker4 hrs day/100 days yr 0.046200.0670.119.62E-05ERROR:#REF!Adult/Child2 hrs day/100 days year 0.023300.173**0.00152.54E-066Adult 2 hrs day/100 days year 0.023240.121**0 Assumes 2 hrs a day, 50 days per year for trespassors. For workers, 4 hours a day, 100 days per yearChild 2 hrs day/100 days year 0.02360.055**0.00044.31E-08Location/ AnalyteAverageRange# Samples > 7 MFLAdult/Child2 hrs day/100 days year 0.023300.173**0.00046.77E-07Reservoir7 - No detectionsTotal Asbestos (MFL)58.3ND to 160.335 of 168 - No detectionsChrysotile (MFL)58.3ND to 160.335 of 16CreeksGreen River Trails - 2010 Total Asbestos (MFL)6.22ND to 304 of 14Adult Recreational2 hrs day/50 days year0.011240.1210000Chrysotile (MFL)6.22ND to 304 of 14Child Recreational2 hrs day/50 days year0.01160.0550000Adult/Child2 hrs day/50 days year0.011300.1730000Walking Trails - 2011 Adult Recreational2 hrs day/50 days year0.011240.1210000Public Well #Manganse concentration (g/L) - prior to filtrationSampleLocationTotal Asbestos (MFL)Total Asbestos (MFL)EPA MCL (MFL)Child Recreational2 hrs day/50 days year0.01160.05500002