1 / 42

BoRit Asbestos Site

BoRit Asbestos Site. Update on Public Health Documents Presentation to the BoRit Community Action Group August 7, 2013 Barbara Allerton, Christine Lloyd, and Dr. Farhad Ahmed Pennsylvania Department of Health. Overview of:. Health Education and Outreach

cheung
Download Presentation

BoRit Asbestos Site

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. BoRit Asbestos Site Update on Public Health Documents Presentation to the BoRit Community Action Group August 7, 2013 Barbara Allerton, Christine Lloyd, and Dr. Farhad Ahmed Pennsylvania Department of Health

  2. Overview 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

  3. 1/09 Community Open House 4/09 Earth Day Community Cleanup 3/07 Grand Rounds (2) 5-6/09 Doctor Visits and Patient Poster 9/11 Nurse Association Presentation 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 7/08 Air HC (public comment version) & Community Fact Sheet 3/09 Final Air HC 8/11 Cancer Update Factsheet 12/06 – 1/07 Historical Review & Community Fact Sheet 3/09 Public Meeting 8/08 Public Meeting BoRit Public Health Activities Timeline 7/13 UPenn Ambler REACH mtgs w/science teachers 11/11 Senior Center Presentation 4/12, 6/12 -Community Cupboard Mtgs 4/13 ATSDR Focus Group 9/12 WACA Picnic 9/09 Grand Rounds 3/13 Mont Co Health Alliance 12/10 Nurse Association Presentation 2011 2012 2013 1/09 Cancer HC & Community Fact Sheet 8/12 Ground-water HC (public comment version) 7/13 PHA (public comment version) 6/05 Community Request 8/10 Air Data Review & Spring Cleanup Flyer 7/13 Ground-water HC (final version) Documents (HC= Health Consultation, PHA=PublicHealth Assessment) Regular CAG Meetings and HERS Workgroup Meetings Health Professional Education PublicMeetings CommunityActivity

  4. Health Education/Outreach

  5. EPA Risk Assessment vs. PADOH/ATSDR Health Assessment

  6. Groundwater HC: Final Version • Purpose: to provide a summary of the groundwater sampling data, answer community concerns, and offer conclusions and recommendations

  7. Groundwater HC: Final Version • In August 2012, PADOH released an initial HC summarizing the EPA groundwater sampling data and the public drinking water supply data • Public 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

  8. Groundwater Sampling Results * Also detected in the field blank

  9. Asbestos Sampling Results in Public Water Supply Sampling of potential asbestos-containing pipes

  10. Groundwater HC –Conclusions • Exposure to groundwater beneath the site is not expected to harm people’s health - Asbestos levels below EPA’s MCL in groundwater wells • Manganese, 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 people’s 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

  11. Conclusions (cont.) 3. Cannot make a conclusion on private wells • No private well sampling data available • Public water is the main source of drinking water in the area • No 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

  12. Public Comments: Manganese in public water Is manganese in the public drinking water supply? • Testing not required under the Safe Drinking Water Act • However, 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 μg/Lbut prior to treatment. Well #4 is closest to the site.

  13. Public comments: Manganese health effects Manganese was detected at 9,620 μg/L in one GW well. What are the health effects from exposure? • Value exceeds the EPA lifetime health advisory (LTHA) value of 300 μg/L and the secondary MCL of 50 μg/L (based on aesthetics, such as taste and odor, not on health endpoints) • Health agencies are not aware of people drinking this level • These levels would make water highly unpotablewith visual levels of contamination (e.g., black to brown color, black staining, and or bitter metallic taste).

  14. Manganese: Health effects (cont.) • Food is the primary source of manganese exposure • Not a carcinogen • Based on WHO and ATSDR Tox profile: • Limited data show ingestion at high levels is tied to neurological effects • Some evidence, although not conclusive, that children exposed to high levels of manganese in drinking water may develop developmental effects, including behavior and learning.

  15. Public comments: Asbestos Sampling In Spring 2011, Ambler was granted a waiver for sampling asbestos, as part of PADEP’s 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 asbestos • One sample initially showed 1 chrysotile fiber greater than 0.5 microns. Upon reanalysis, that result could not be confirmed • Asbestos levels were below the MCL • Waiver expires in 2019

  16. Public Comments: TASC Report TASC 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 possible • TASC 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 feet • If EPA and/or Ambler Borough collect additional GW information to establish a “cone of influence” PADOH will evaluate these data.

  17. Recommendations/Next Steps • If EPA’s 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

  18. Public Health Assessment (PHA) Purpose: • Provide a comprehensive public healthreview of relevant pathways, new data • Review EPA’s environmental sampling data collected for the site RI/FS • Air sampling, water and soil data, both on-site and off-site • Activity Based Sampling (ABS) • Assess potential cancer risk from inhalation exposures • Review health outcome data • Provide public health recommendations

  19. Exposure Pathways at the Site • Past occupational exposures • Asbestos workers at the plants were most at risk • Past residential exposures • Take home fibers clothing brought home by workers • Playing on waste piles, soil in yards • Dust 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 concern • Aggressive disturbance of restricted site soils

  20. Asbestos Evaluation Process • Asbestos is primarily an inhalation hazard • EPA’s Asbestos Framework document • No reliable methods to predict asbestos concentrations in air given concentrations in other environmental media • Activity 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

  21. Surface Water Results Conclusions: • Sample collected at reservoir seep = 5.1 MFL • Surface 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

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

  23. Ambient Air Monitoring Results Conclusions: • Three PCME detections (along trail, adult community center and warehouse) • Results from ambient air samples along the site perimeter and 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.

  24. Ambient Air Sampling/Rain Maximum 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

  25. ABS • BoRit site* (raking/mowing) • Park – 6 locations • Pile – 3 locations • Reservoir – 1 location • Trails (hiking and mowing) • 2 locations, both sides of the Creek • Residential Yards (raking) • 8 locations, both sides of the site • Former K&M Buildings *ABS samples were collected on-site prior to the installation of clean cover at the site

  26. ABS Results • ABS risk-based screening value = 0.04 f/cc

  27. Conclusions on ABS sampling • On-siteexposures to asbestos fibers when soils and ACM are aggressively disturbed could harm people’s 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 people’s health

  28. Estimated Cancer Risk Evaluations • Next 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 risk • Excess cancer risk greater than 1E-04 or the probability of developing cancer greater than 1 in 10,000

  29. Cancer Risk Evaluation: On-site Assumes 2 hrs a day/50 days per year for trespassers. 4 hrsa day/100 days per year for workers Conclusions: Some estimated cancer risks on-site exceeded 1x10-4 • Exposures to trespassers and workers disturbing on-site soils (pre EPA mitigation actions) poses a public health risk

  30. Cancer Risk Evaluation: Residential Assumes 2 hours day/100 days year, based on maximum personal air monitor data during ABS Conclusions: Estimated cancer risks are below 1x10-4 • Exposures to residents while soil is disturbed does not pose a public health risk

  31. Cancer Risk Evaluation: Trails and K&M Building Exposure based on 2 hours per day/50 days year Conclusions: Estimated cancer risks are below 1x10-4 • These buildings have been removed since the sampling • There is still the potential for ACM in the soil near these buildings as well as additional former manufacturing properties

  32. Asbestos-Related Diseases • Breathing asbestos fibers increases the risk of developing of cancer and non-cancer health effects • Cancer: • 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 carcinoma • Laryngeal cancer – cancer of the voice box • Non-cancer • Asbestosis –restrictive lung disease caused by asbestos fibers scarring the lung • Pleural plaques, thickening and effusions

  33. Risk factors for Lung Carcinoma Depends on: • Level, frequency, and duration of exposure • Time elapsed since exposure • Age at time of exposure • Smoking history (synergistic w/ asbestos) • Individual susceptibility factors • Latency period: 20-30 years

  34. Cancer Registry Data Review PADOH 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: • Mesothelioma • Lung and bronchus cancers

  35. 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

  36. 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 rate • Rates for Blue Bell and Fort Washington were not elevated • Elevated mesothelioma rates most likely due to past occupational exposure

  37. Frequency of Mesothelioma Cases by Site and Sex Ambler Zip Code 19002 (1985-2008)* *PA Cancer Registry (24 years)

  38. 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

  39. Overall Conclusions in the PHA • Current Ambient Air: • Based on 2008-2011 air sampling data, CURRENT exposures to asbestos in air in the community not a health concern • Current 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 concern • Health Outcome Data: • 1992-2008 shows a statistically significant increase in the incidence of mesothelioma in Ambler, compared to state wide rates

  40. Recommendations • Any activity that disturbs on-site soils should be avoided by visitors/trespassers to the 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

  41. Next Steps… • PADOH 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

  42. 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.gov PADOH Bureau of Epidemiology, Christine Lloyd Room 933, Health and Welfare Building 625 Forster Street Harrisburg, PA 17120 (717) 787-3350

More Related