The Impact on Environmental Health from Cemetery Waste in Middle Tennessee

Overview

Richardson and colleagues investigated whether arsenic (As) and formaldehyde leaching from arsenic-treated wood caskets and formaldehyde-based embalming fluids could contaminate soil and groundwater at a cemetery in Clarksville, Tennessee. Six soil samples were collected at approximately 2 m depth, close to the buried caskets, from plots spanning burial years 1928 to 1979. Two groundwater samples were also collected downhill from the burial area. All samples were analyzed using EPA Method 8315A for formaldehyde and EPA Method 3050B for arsenic. With one exception (the 1952 soil plot, which showed 2 mg kg-1 of formaldehyde), all results were below the respective method detection limits (MDL) for both analytes. The authors concluded that there is a low likelihood of waterway contamination or transmission of As or formaldehyde to livestock or humans from this cemetery site. This is a site-specific environmental screening study; it contains no food occurrence data and no food-chain measurements.

Study design

The study design was observational and descriptive. Ground-penetrating radar (GPR) was used to locate buried caskets and determine their depth before soil sampling. Burial plot dates were chosen to represent different historical embalming fluid compositions: 1928 and 1950 (pre-isopropanol change); 1952 and 1957 (post-isopropanol change but still formaldehyde-based); 1969 and 1979 (post-polyacrylic acid/paradichlorobenzene/orthodichlorobenzene change). The 2 m sampling depth corresponds to the bottom of a standard grave (graves range 1.5 to 3 m depth) and was chosen to characterize conditions immediately surrounding the caskets. Groundwater samples were collected from the downhill portion of the cemetery, in the direction of local surface-water bodies (the Cumberland River and Red River are proximate). Water flow direction was determined through topographic analysis, field observations, and surface water mapping in consultation with cemetery representatives. Soil series at the site is Sengtown gravelly silt loam, characterized by pronounced downward water movement through the soil profile.

Key numbers

Table 1 (p. 7) reports modified reporting limits, method detection limits, and measured results for all eight samples:

Arsenic (As) in soil and groundwater (mg kg-1):

Formaldehyde in soil and groundwater (mg kg-1):

The single positive result for formaldehyde (1952 soil, 2 mg kg-1) is at the modified reporting limit and is described by the authors as a low, potentially negligible concentration whose origin (embalming practice vs. natural environmental factors) cannot be determined from this dataset alone (p. 9). No arsenic was detected in any soil or groundwater sample.

The Visual MINTEQ speciation modeling (Table 2, p. 8) of arsenic at a simulated concentration of 0.01 M As(V) at the site’s near-neutral to alkaline pH shows that 73.44% of total As remains dissolved in the soil solution (predominantly as HAsO4(2-) at neutral pH), and that calcium arsenate precipitation accounts for approximately 26.56% of total As under the calcium-rich conditions of the limestone-derived Sengtown series soils.

Methods (brief)

Soil sampling used a skid steer with perforation tools to drill boreholes at GPR-identified casket locations. Soil was collected from approximately 2 m depth (6 ft). Groundwater samples were taken from the downhill end of the cemetery near potential surface-water drainage paths.

Formaldehyde analysis followed EPA Method 8315A: approximately 10 to 20 g of soil was extracted with acetonitrile and a mechanical shaker; the extract was centrifuged to separate solvent from soil; derivatization with 2,4-dinitrophenylhydrazine (DNPH) or o-Phthaldialdehyde (OPA) was performed when needed; concentration was quantified by high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) with UV-visible spectrophotometer detection at approximately 360 nm. Quality control used TNI/NELAC Standards and the laboratory’s Quality Assurance Manual.

Arsenic analysis followed EPA Method 3050B: 0.5 g of soil was predigested with 10 mL trace-metal-grade HNO3 for 1 hour in a Hot-Block TM Environmental Express block digester, heated to 115 degrees C for 2 hours, diluted with deionized water to 50 mL, filtered through 0.45 micrometer membranes, and determined by inductively coupled plasma atomic emission spectrometry (ICP-AES) at Pace Laboratories, Madisonville, KY.

Arsenic speciation across the soil pH range was modeled using Visual MINTEQ version 3.1 with an initial As(V) concentration of 0.01 M arsenate. Modeled species included H3AsO4, H2AsO4-, AsO4(3-), and HAsO4(2-), plus calcium interaction at equivalent Ca(2+) concentration.

LOD/LOQ: Method detection limits are reported per sample in Table 1 (ranging 6.81 to 7.34 mg kg-1 for As; 0.8 to 0.9 mg kg-1 for formaldehyde). Modified reporting limits are also reported in Table 1. No certified reference materials (CRM) or recovery percentages are reported in the published text.

The authors note that EPA Method 3050B may underestimate total As in calcareous soils due to incomplete dissolution of As species tightly bound within mineral structures or organic complexes (p. 7, citing Shahbazi and Beheshti 2019).

Evidence Fitness

EF-4 (Modeled or limited evidence, context only). This source does not support any food occurrence claim. All As measurements were below detection limits (MDL 6.81 to 7.34 mg kg-1) in a small sample of cemetery soils from a single site. The one detected value (formaldehyde, 1952 soil, 2 mg kg-1) is at the reporting limit and is of ambiguous origin. The study’s finding is effectively a null result: cemetery waste at this site does not appear to pose a detectable soil or groundwater contamination risk for As or formaldehyde. The site-specific character (single Tennessee cemetery, n=6 soils, specific burial-year range), the absence of CRM recovery data, and the absence of any food-chain pathway measurement all limit the generalizability and evidence fitness. The study is relevant to the wiki as environmental-pathway context for arsenic speciation in calcareous soils and as a data point on the environmental fate of embalming-related arsenic.

Limitations

The authors state four limitations explicitly (Section 4, p. 10):

1. Small sample size (n=6 soil, n=2 groundwater) limits statistical inference and generalizability.
2. Single geographic location (one middle Tennessee cemetery) means results cannot be extrapolated to all burial sites statewide or nationally.
3. Limited variation in cemetery plot dates: a larger range of dates, including pre-20th-century plots, may be needed to capture earlier embalming practices.
4. The 1952 formaldehyde detection raises unresolved questions about temporal persistence and origin that require more extensive spatial and temporal sampling.

The authors also note that the study does not address the potential for contamination from other burial materials (plastics, varnishes, embalming fluid other than formaldehyde) placed in the ground alongside caskets.

Regulatory context

No U.S. federal soil regulatory standard for cemetery-derived arsenic or formaldehyde is cited in the paper. The study compares results to EPA standards for hazardous waste classification to assess public health risk; all values fall below those thresholds. The OSHA permissible exposure limit (PEL) for formaldehyde is cited as 0.75 ppm (8-hour time-weighted average) for occupational air exposure (p. 2), and OSHA classifies formaldehyde as cancer-causing and toxic. The CDC lists inorganic arsenic as associated with skin conditions, increased risk of diabetes, high blood pressure, and several cancers (p. 2). These are cited as the toxicological basis for evaluating the environmental pathway risk, not as direct food regulatory standards.

Implications

Certification: This study does not support any HMT&C analyte limit or occurrence data point. All As results are below detection; there is no food-chain measurement. The study may be cited as environmental-pathway context in discussions of how cemetery-adjacent agricultural soils should be treated as a potential but, at this site, undetected arsenic source.

Courses: Useful illustration of near-null environmental screening results and the complexity of attributing a single trace detection (the 1952 formaldehyde result) to a specific source. Also illustrates GPR-assisted soil sampling design and EPA Method 3050B application in a non-agricultural soil context. The Visual MINTEQ pH-speciation modeling provides a teaching resource for how arsenic speciation shifts with pH in calcareous soils.

App: Does not support any ingredient contamination profile update. No food matrices sampled.

Microbiome: Not addressed in the paper.

Provenance notes

The paper’s first author is Richardson (P. Richardson, Austin Peay State University), not Wang. The cite-key wang2024-as-cemetery-soil-remediation reflects the original intake key assigned during bulk ingest and is retained for continuity; the actual author attribution is Richardson et al. 2024. The paper title on publication is “The Impact on Environmental Health from Cemetery Waste in Middle Tennessee.” DOI: 10.3390/ijerph21030267. Published in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 2024, vol. 21, article 267. License: CC BY 4.0 (MDPI). PDF retrieved from PMC OA S3 (PMC10970330). PDF SHA-256: 31cb776805187ccc5ef4fb4b9e94a320c665b613635c0977be7f46eef0b34988.

Funding: Austin Peay State University Office of Student Research and Innovation (OSRI@APSU.EDU) under the 2023 Student Research Grant. No conflicts of interest declared.

Related evidence

• Arsenic
• supply-chain/soil-contamination

Update history

The five most recent substantive edits to this page, classified major (evidence or structure moved), correction (a published value or statement was wrong and has been fixed), or minor (narrative rewritten without changing the underlying evidence). Each description is derived from what the edit did to this page; the linked commit is the authoritative record, routine regeneration passes are excluded, and the full version history lives in git.