Zonolite Company/W.R. Grace, Dunn Road, Brutus, New York
Table of Contents || Return to Map || Return to State Listing

EPA
Region		 Location of facility Type of facility Amount
of ore
received
(in tons)		 Did
EPA
visit
the
site?		 Were
samples
taken?		 Results of
evaluation
2 Dunn Road, Brutus, New York Former exfoliation facility 114,467 Yes-April 19, 2000 Yes According to an EPA database compiled from W.R. Grace shipping invoices, 114,467 tons of Libby ore were shipped to this site between 1966 and 1991. This facility was commonly known as the "Weedsport facility" because of its close proximity to the Village of Weedsport in New York state. From 1963 through 1989, this property was leased by Zonolite/W.R. Grace and, during this time, the company manufactured products from expanded vermiculite ore. Most of the vermiculite ore was obtained from the Libby mine. This site was located in a largely rural area. Four silos used in the vermiculite operations were removed sometime after Grace terminated operations at the site and, at the time of EPA's investigation, the remaining building on the property was vacant. In June 2001, EPA collected 54 soil samples from the site and from nearby properties, including residences. The samples were analyzed using polarized light microscopy (PLM) and transmission electron microscopy (TEM). Of the samples collected and analyzed using PLM, (1) a sample collected between the inactive railroad tracks and the former processing building contained 2.25-percent asbestos, (2) a sample collected from the east end of the inactive railroad tracks contained 1.25-percent asbestos and (3) another sample collected from an undeveloped property east of the site contained 1.5-percent asbestos. The remaining samples ranged from non-detect to 0.75 percent asbestos. Of the 4 surface soil samples that EPA collected from nearby residential properties, 1 contained less than 0.1-percent asbestos and the remaining 3 did not contain detectable levels of asbestos. EPA concluded that the site presented low health risks and the sampling results were not significant enough to support further action at the site. EPA’s conclusions were based on several factors, including the fact that the site was located in a fairly remote rural area with a fairly low population and therefore there was a very low probability of human contact with the few areas on the site where asbestos was found. Also, EPA reasoned that even if there were trespassers, the entire area was normally covered with shrub, grass, and trees—or snow and ice in the winter—resulting in what EPA believed to be a miniscule probability that asbestos would be inhaled by trespassers. EPA included the caveat that, should the property be developed, appropriate engineering controls should be used. In March 2002, EPA was informed that material from the Weedsport site was dumped in three areas off-site. In September 2003, EPA sampled these three areas and found no detectable levels of asbestos in all the samples except one. The one sample was analyzed using TEM and had less than 0.1-percent asbestos. EPA concluded no action was needed for these three areas. In June 2006, EPA conducted air sampling inside the former exfoliation building to determine possible health effects to future workers. After analyzing the air sampling results, EPA concluded that there was Libby asbestos present inside the building at concentrations above 0.002 fibers per cubic centimeter, but because the building was vacant and not being used, there was no exposure occurring. In addition, EPA concluded that if the building's usage changes in the future, there would be potential for exposure to elevated concentrations of asbestos from the Libby ore. In its final decision, EPA determined that on the basis of the conditions existing at the site at that time, the site was not eligible for a removal action. The Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry’s health consultation report for this site can be found at ATSDR.

GAO-09-6R