The health hazards posed by chromium-contaminated soils in residential and industrial areas: conclusions of an expert panel.
Between 1905 and 1971, over 2 million tons of residue from chromite ore processing was generated in Hudson County, New Jersey, of which substantial amounts were used as fill and tank diking. A panel of medical, toxicology, and risk assessment experts was convened in early 1990 to evaluate the potential health hazards posed by the resulting chromium contaminated soil. The Panel concluded that soils containing concentrations of 75 ppm hexavalent chromium [Cr(VI)] and 1000 ppm total chromium compounds (about 95% was trivalent chromium [Cr(III)]) did not pose a significant health hazard to nearby residents and workers. They also determined that exposure to chromium from Hudson County sites posed a negligible cancer hazard to residents. Using risk assessment methods, the Panel estimated that the plausible incremental cancer risk to individuals at residential sites would be substantially less than 1 in 1,000,000. The average measured levels of airborne Cr(VI) at typical industrial sites were more than 1000-fold lower than the current OSHA Permissible Exposure Limit (PEL). The maximum plausible increased cancer risk for an average worker at a dusty industrial site was estimated to be less than 1 in 100,000. The Panel also concluded that chromium-containing crystals, which have occasionally been found in Hudson County buildings, do not pose a significant hazard. However, they suggested that were the concentration to exceed 5000 ppm Cr(VI) in the crystals, site-specific health risk assessments would be conducted and remediation considered. The Panel evaluated the dermal hazard posed by chromium-contaminated soil and acknowledged that there is a small group of persons (approximately 0.1% of the United States population) who currently have a dermal sensitization to Cr(VI) primarily through occupational exposure. Based on published studies of human volunteers, the Panel concluded that a small percentage (less than 5%) of persons already sensitized may respond to Cr(VI) in solution at concentrations above 35 ppm. They decided that a much higher concentration in soil, perhaps 350 ppm Cr(VI), would be necessary to elicit dermatitis because only a fraction of the chromium in soil is soluble. The Panel concluded that it was highly unlikely (if not impossible) for a person to become dermally sensitized to Cr(VI) or Cr(III) at the soil concentrations found in most areas in Hudson County.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)
Paustenbach
D J
DJ
ChemRisk, McLaren/Hart Environmental Engineering, Alameda, California 94501.
Rinehart
W E
WE
Sheehan
P J
PJ
D000393:Air Pollutants / Q000032:analysis; D002857:Chromium / Q000633:toxicity*; D005506:Food Contamination / Q000032:analysis; D006801:Humans; D007221:Industry; D009515:New Jersey; D012306:Risk; D012987:Soil / Q000032:analysis; D012989:Soil Pollutants / Q000633:toxicity*; D014881:Water Supply / Q000032:analysis
D000393:Air Pollutants; D012987:Soil; D012989:Soil Pollutants; D002857:Chromium