From : " Ha rvey, M a rga ret" < Ma rRa ret.

Ha rvev@
po.state.
ct. us>
Date: September 25, 201,4 at2:36:34
pM
EDT
To: "Arthur Bogen (a bogen@va llevcog.org)" <a bogen @va llevcog.org>
Subject: summary of my evaluation of soil data-O'sullivan,s lsland
ln response to a request from the Valley Council of Governments, I have evaluated soil testing data from
the O'Sullivan's lsland Site. The soiltesting was conducted in August20'1,4, at the directlon of VCOG and
in response to recommendations made by the CT Department of Public Health and the CT Department
of Energy and Environmental Protection (DEEP). Soil testing results were provided to me by HRp
Consultants, the firm hired by VCOG to conduct the soil sampling.
Soil samples were collected from the top surface layer of soil (0-6 inch depth interval) in 22 locations
around the site that represent locations where recreational visitors have the greatest
opportunity for
direct contact with soil. Samples were also collected from the 0-1foot depth intervalfrom grid sample
locations across the site. Soil from deeper depths (as deep as 7 feet below ground surface) was also
tested at a number of locations across the site. Overall, the soil sampling scheme provides good
coverage across the site and provides adequate information on which to base an evaluation of exposure
and risk.
ln the 0-6 inch soil samples, low levels of arsenic, lead, petroleum hydrocarbons and
pCBs
(polychlorinated
biphenyls) were detected. ln evaluating these low contaminant concentrations, I
considered the type of exposure that would occur on the site. When the site was completely open and
accessible to the public, visitors used the site for recreational activities including walking, jogging,
bird
watching, biking, fishing, picnicking, and wading. Landscaping activities such as lawn mowing also would
occur. Since the time when portions
of the site were closed to the public (January 201,41, the primary
activity occurring on the site is lawn mowing and possibly other landscaping activities. ln addition,
information has been provided
to me indicating that there are members of the public who are
disregarding the fencing and signage and are accessing the site (primarily for fishing). These current and
past activities could result in direct contact with surface soil, inadvertent ingestion of soil that gets on
hands or food items, and to a much lesser extent, inhalation of soil particles in the air (from windblown
dust).
My first step in evaluating the soil data consisted of calculating average concentrations for each
contaminant. Specifically, I calculated a statistically-based and very conservative estimate of the "true,,
average concentration. Averages provide a reasonable estimate of the contaminant concentration that
people
are likely to come into contact with over time. I then compared average concentrations with
health-based screening values. ln most cases, these screening values are the CT soil cleanup standards
for residential use. Using residential standards is extra protective because o'sullivan's lsland is
recreational, not residential. Users of the site likely would be exposed less frequently than if the site
was their backyard.
Average concentrations of contaminants in surface soil (0-6 inches) are lower than health-based
screening values. This means that exposure to surface soil at the O'Sullivan's lsland site is not
expected to harm people's health.
Soil results from the 0-1 foot depth interval do not represent true surface soil that users of the site
would come into contact with on a regular basis. However, if one assumes that the soil results from 0-1
foot accurately represent concentrations
present in
just
the 0-6 inch soil interval, then exposure to
contaminants in the 0-1 foot depth interval also are not expected to cause harm to people's health' This
is because average concentrations in the 0-1 foot soil interval are below the health-protective screening
values.
ln general, deeper soils at the site had higher concentrations of contaminants than the 0-1 foot samples
and the surface soil samples. Arsenic, lead, petroleum hydrocarbons, PCBs, PAHs (polycyclic aromatic
hydrocarbons), volatile organic chemicals and dioxin were detected in soils at depth. However, only the
average concentrations for lead, petroleum hydrocarbons and PCBs exceeded health-based screening
values. I did not evaluate exposure to soils at depth because I assumed that people are not coming into
direct contact with these soils. The only way for people to come into direct contact with soils at depth is
for digging or other movement of soil to occur that would make the deeper soils directly accessible.
Further discussions will need to occur with DEEP (and possibly EPA as well) regarding additional
characterization of soils at the site. lt will likely be necessary to further delineate the areas of
contamination that were found (particularly in soils at depth) in order to reach a decision about what
remedial actions will be needed to satisfy CT's waste site cleanup regulations.
I am documenting my evaluation in a written health consultation that will be reviewed and approved by
the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). ATSDR is the federal agency funding staff
at DPH to do these types of evaluations at sites with contamination. I expect that it will take a number
of weeks before my health consultation is finalized.
Meg Harvey, MPH
Epidemiologist 4
Environmental & Occupational Health Assessment Program
CT Department of Public Health
410 CapitolAvenue, MS 11EOH
Hartford, CT 06134
Ph. 860-509-77 48, fax 860-509-7785
ma rga ret. ha rvev@ct.gov