905-D-95-002
REGION 5
Risk Assessment for the Waste Technologies Industries (WTI)
Hazardous Waste Incinerator Facility (East Liverpool, Ohio)
DRAFT — DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
Volume II:
INTRODUCTION
Prepared with the assistance of:
A.T. Kearney, Inc. (Prime Contractor: Chicago, IL);
with Subcontract support from: ENVIRON Corp. (Arlington, VA), Midwest Research Institute (Kansas City, MO)
and EARTH TECH, Inc. (Concord, MA) under EPA Contract No. 68-W4-0006
NOTICE: THIS DOCUMENT IS A PRELIMINARY DRAFT.
It has not been formally released by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency as
a final document, and should not be construed to represent Agency policy.
It is being circulated for comment on its technical content.
-------
VOLUME n
INTRODUCTION TO THE RISK ASSESSMENT FOR THE
WASTE TECHNOLOGIES INDUSTRIES (WTI)
CONTENTS
Page
List of Acronyms Used in WTI Risk Assessment iii
I. OVERVIEW I-l
A. Introduction I-l
B. Structure of the Report 1-2
II. FACILITY BACKGROUND II-l
A. Facility Location and Setting II-l
B. Description of Facility II-3
C. Description of Incinerator II-5
III. RISK ASSESSMENT HISTORY AT WTI III-l
A. Introduction III-l
B. Previous Risk Assessments for the WTI Facility III-l
IV. PEER REVIEW COMMENTS AND KEY ASSUMPTIONS IV-1
A. Peer Review Comments IV-1
B. Identification of Key Assumptions IV-4
V. REFERENCES V-l
External Review Draft
Volume H i . Do Not Cite or Quote
-------
CONTENTS (Continued)
FIGURES
Figure II-1 Location of the WTI Facility II-9
Figure II-2 Vicinity of WTI Incinerator IMO
Figure II-3 Industrial Operations in the Ohio River Valley
Near the WTI Facility 11-11
Figure II-4 WTI Incinerator Site Plan 11-12
Figure II-5 Schematic of Incineration System 11-13
Figure II-6 Process Flow Diagram 11-14
APPENDICES
II-1 WTI Permitted Waste Code List
II-2 Chronology of WTI's Regulatory History
External Review Draft
Volume II ii Do Not Cite or Quote
-------
LIST OF ACRONYMS USED IN WTI RISK ASSESSMENT
ABS ABSORPTION FACTOR (UNITLESS)
ACFM ACTUAL CUBIC FEET PER MINUTE
ADOM ACID DEPOSITION AND OXIDANT MODEL
AEERL AIR AND ENERGY ENGINEERING RESEARCH LAB
AHH ARYL HYDROCARBON HYDROXYLASE
AIHA AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL HEALTH ASSOCIATION
AIHC AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL HEALTH COUNCIL
APC AIR POLLUTION CONTROL
APCE AIR POLLUTION CONTROL EQUIPMENT
AQUIRE AQUATIC INFORMATION AND RETRIEVAL DATABASE
ARCHIE AUTOMATED RESOURCE FOR CHEMICAL HAZARD INCIDENT
EVALUATION
ARIP ACCIDENT RELEASE INVENTORY PROGRAM
ASL ABOVE SEA LEVEL
ASTM AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR TESTING AND MATERIALS
ATSDR AGENCY FOR TOXIC SUBSTANCES AND DISEASE REGISTRY
AWFCOs AUTOMATIC WASTE FEED CUT-OFFs
AWQC AMBIENT WATER QUALITY CRITERIA
BAF BIOACCUMULATION FACTOR
BaP BENZO(A)PYRENE
BCFs BIOCONCENTRATION FACTORS
BEHP BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL)PHTALATE
BIF BOILERS AND INDUSTRIAL FURNACE
BLEVE BOILING LIQUID EXPANDING VAPOR EXPLOSION
BMP BIOMAGNIFICATION FACTOR
BPIP BUILDING PROFILE INPUT PROGRAM
BSAFs BIOTA-SEDIMENT ACCUMULATION FACTORS
BTFs BIOTRANSFER FACTORS
BVPSMT BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION METEOROLOGICAL TOWER
CAA CLEAN AIR ACT
CAB CARBON ABSORPTION BED
CALEPA CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CARB CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCES BOARD
CAS CHEMICAL ABSTRACTS SERVICE (REGISTRY NUMBER)
CCMS COMMITTEE ON THE CHALLENGES OF MODERN SOCIETY
CDC CENTERS FOR DISEASE CONTROL
CDD CHLORINATED DIBENZO-p-DIOXIN
CDF CHLORINATED DIBENZOFURAN
CEPPO CHEMICAL EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS AND PREVENTION OFFICE
111
-------
CES COASTAL ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
CFR CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS
C12 CHLORINE
CM CHEMICAL CONCENTRATION IN FOOD
CNS CENTRAL NERVOUS SYSTEM
C02 CARBON DIOXIDE
COMPDEP COMPLEX TERRAIN DEPOSITION MODEL
CWQE CARBONIC WATER QUALITY CRITERIA
ODD DICHLORODIPHENYLDICHLOROETHANE
DDE DICHLORODIPHENYLDICHLOROETHYLENE
DERA DETAILED ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT
DFP DI-ISOPROPYLFLUOROPHOSPHATE
DNOP DI(n)OCTYL PHTHALATE
DRE DESTRUCTION AND REMOVAL EFFICIENCY
DSSI DIVERSIFIED SCIENTIFIC SERVICES INC.
EBL ELEVATED BLOOD LEAD
ECOCs ENVIRONMENTAL CHEMICALS OF CONCERN
ECIS ENHANCED CARBON INJECTION SYSTEM
ED EXPOSURE DURATION
EF EXPOSURE FREQUENCY
EHS EXTREMELY HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES
EPCRA EMERGENCY PLANNING AND COMMUNITY RIGHT-TO-KNOW ACT
ERA ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT
ER-L EFFECTS RANGE-LOW
ERNS EMERGENCY RESPONSE NOTIFICATION SYSTEM
ERPG EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLANNING GUIDELINE
ESP ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATOR
ETE EXPOSURE TOXICITY EQUIVALENTS
FDA FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION
FEMA FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY
FI FRACTION INGESTED FROM CONTAMINATED SOURCE
FID FLAME IONIZATION DETECTOR
FR FEDERAL REGISTER
FRV FINAL RESIDUE VALUES
GEP GOOD ENGINEERING PRACTICE
GC/MS GAS CHROMATOGRAPHY/MASS SPECTROMETRY
HC1 HYDROGEN CHLORIDE
HEAST HEALTH EFFECTS ASSESSMENTS SUMMARY TABLE
Hg MERCURY
HHRA HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
His HAZARD INDICES
HPDM HYBRID PLUME DISPERSION MODEL
HSDB HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCE DATA BANK
HMIS HAZARDOUS MATERIALS INFORMATION SYSTEM
IV
-------
HQ HAZARD QUOTIENT
HWFAB HAZARDOUS WASTE FACILITY APPROVAL BOARD
IARC INTERNATIONAL AGENCY FOR RESEARCH ON CANCER
ICAP INDUCTIVELY COUPLED ARGON PLASMA
IDLH IMMEDIATELY DANGEROUS TO LIFE OR HEALTH
IEUBK INTEGRATED EXPOSURE UPTAKE BIOKINETIC
IRIS INTEGRATED RISK INFORMATION SYSTEM
ISC INDUSTRIAL SOURCE COMPLEX
ISCST2 INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX SHORT TERM 2
IR FOOD INGESTION RATE
JACADs JOHNSTON ATOLL CHEMICAL AGENT DISPOSAL SYSTEM
Kd SOIL-WATER PARTITIONING COEFFICIENTS
KOC ORGANIC CARBON PARTITIONING COEFFICIENT
KQW OCTANOL WATER PARTITIONING COEFFICIENT
kp PLANT SURFACE LOSS COEFFICIENT
LADD LIFETIME AVERAGE DAILY DOSE
LC50 MEDIAN LETHAL CONCENTRATION
LD50 MEDIAN LETHAL DOSE
LEPCs LOCAL EMERGENCY PLANNING COMMITTEES
LEL LOWEST EFFECT LEVEL
LHS LATIN HYPERCUBE SAMPLING
LOAEL LOWEST OBSERVED ADVERSE EFFECT LEVEL
LOEC LOWEST EFFECT CONCENTRATION
LOCs LEVELS OF CONCERN
MDB MUNITIONS DEMILITARIZATION BUILDING
MEI MAXIMUM EXPOSED INDIVIDUAL
MEK METHYL ETHYL KETONE
MOE MINISTRY OF THE ENVIRONMENT, ONTARIO
NAAQS NATIONAL AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
NATO NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY ORGANIZATION
NCDC NATIONAL CLIMATIC DATA CENTER
NHANES NATIONAL HEALTH AND NUTRITION EXAMINATION SURVEY
NFPA NATIONAL FIRE PROTECTION ASSOCIATION
NOAA NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION
NOAEL NO OBSERVED ADVERSE EFFECT LEVEL
NOECS NO OBSERVABLE EFFECT CONCENTRATIONS
NOEL NO OBSERVED EFFECT LEVEL
NIOSH NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH
NOx NITROGEN OXIDES
NPS NATIONAL PARK SERVICES
NPDES NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM
NRC NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL
NWS NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE
NYDEC NEW YORK DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION
-------
ODA
OAQPS
OCDD
OCDF
ODNR
ODPS
OEPA
OHM/TADS
ORD
ORNL
ORSANCO
OSTP
OSW
OSWER
PAHs
PCB
PCDD
PCDF
PCE
PCI
PDA
PDF
PDNR
PeCDF
PEM
PERA
PFO
PH
PHYTOTOX
PIC
POHCs
POW
ppb
PSS
QC
RAC
RfC
RfD
RCRA
RFG
RREL
RTECS
OHIO DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
OFFICE OF AIR QUALITY PLANNING & STANDARDS
OCTACHLORODIBENZODIOXIN
OCTACHLORODIBENZOFURAN
OHIO DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
OHIO DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY
OHIO ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
OIL AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS/TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE DATA
SYSTEM
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
OAK RIDGE NATIONAL LABORATORY
OHIO RIVER SANITATION COMMISSION
OFFICE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY
OFFICE OF SOLID WASTE
OFFICE OF SOLID WASTE AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE
POLYCYCLIC AROMATIC HYDROCARBONS
POLYCHLORINATED BIPHENYL
POLYCHLORINATED DIBENZO-p-DIOXIN
POLYCHLORINATED DIBENZOFURAN
PERCHLOROETHYLENE
PORTER CONSULTANTS, INC.
PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURAL
PROBABILITY DISTRIBUTION FUNCTIONS
PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
PENTACHLORODIBENZOFURAN
PALUSTRINE EMERGENT
PRELIMINARY ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT
PALUSTRINE FORESTED
(A measure of acidity/basicity)
COMPUTER DATABASE OF ORGANIC CHEMICALS & EFFECT ON
PLANTS
PRODUCTS OF INCOMPLETE COMBUSTION
PRINCIPLE ORGANIC HAZARDOUS CONSTITUENTS
PALUSTRINE OPEN WATER
PARTS PER BILLION
PALUSTRINE SCRUB-SHRUB
QUALITY CONTROL
REFERENCE AIR CONCENTRATION
REFERENCE CONCENTRATION
REFERENCE DOSE
RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND RECOVERY ACT
RECIRCULATED FLUE GAS
RISK REDUCTION ENGINEERING LABORATORY
REGISTRY OF TOXIC EFFECTS OF CHEMICAL SUBSTANCES
VI
-------
SAB SCIENCE ADVISORY BOARD OF THE U.S. EPA
SARA SUPERFUND AMENDMENTS AND REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 1986
SCC SECONDARY COMBUSTION CHAMBER
SCS SOIL CONSERVATION SERVICE
SERA SCREENING LEVEL ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT
SETAC SOCIETY OF ENVIRONMENTAL TOXICOLOGY AND CHEMISTRY
SF SLOPE FACTORS
SLC SCREEN LEVEL CONCENTRATION
SOx SULFUR OXIDES
SRE SYSTEM REMOVAL EFFICIENCY
STORET STORAGE AND RETRIEVAL OF WATER-RELATED DATA
TANKS2 U.S. EPA TANK CALCULATION PROGRAM
TCDD TETRACHLORODIBENZO-p-DIOXIN
TEF TOXICITY EQUIVALENCY FACTOR
TEQ TOXICITY EQUIVALENT
TFE TRIFLUOROETHANE
THC TOTAL HYDROCARBON
TOC TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON
TSDF TREATMENT, STORAGE AND DISPOSAL FACILITIES
UBK UPTAKE BIOKINETIC
UCL UPPER CONFIDENCE LIMIT
USDC UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
USDHHS UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
USDOE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
USDOT UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
USEPA UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
USFWS UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
USGS UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
USLE UNIVERSAL SOIL LOSS EQUATION
USPCI UNITED STATES POLLUTION CONTROL, INC.
UST UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANKS
VOC VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS
VOST VOLATILE ORGANIC SAMPLING TRAIN
WTI WASTE TECHNOLOGIES INDUSTRIES
WVDNR WEST VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
VII
-------
I. OVERVIEW
A. Introduction
Waste Technologies Industries (WTI) received a Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA) hazardous waste permit in 1983 to construct and operate a hazardous waste
incineration facility in East Liverpool, Ohio. The facility uses a rotary kiln incinerator for
thermal destruction and can incinerate approximately 50,000 to 80,000 tons of waste
annually. Commercial operation of the incinerator started hi 1993.
In 1991, U.S. EPA initiated a comprehensive study of the potential health risks to the
public associated with the facility. Several preliminary assessments of potential human health
risks due to routine stack emissions have been completed since that time.1 In each of the
preliminary assessments, as additional site-specific information became available, it was used
to refine earlier assumptions. The current assessment involves a comprehensive approach
which makes use of extensive site-specific data and infonnation on local population behavior
that were not available in previous assessments.
In November 1993, U.S. EPA released a project plan for this multipathway assessment
of the WTI facility. The WTI Risk Assessment Project Plan (U.S. EPA 1993a) was
reviewed by an independent panel of experts hi the fields of combustion engineering,
atmospheric dispersion modeling, exposure assessment, and toxicology. Consistent with the
approach outlined hi the Project Plan and with comments from the peer reviewers, three
major components of the assessment were defined: 1) a detailed analysis of human health
impacts from routine emissions, referred to as the Human Health Risk Assessment (HHRA);
2) a screening ecological assessment of impacts from routine emissions, referred to as the
Screening Ecological Risk Assessment (SERA); and 3) an analysis of the potential impacts
from accidental release scenarios developed based on operations at WTI, referred to as the
Accident Analysis.
1 The preliminary assessments include an evaluation of potential human health risks
associated with inhalation of contaminants released from the incinerator stack performed hi
1992 (Preliminary risk assessment of inhalation exposures to stack emissions from the WTI
incinerator; U.S. EPA 1992) and two screening-level analyses of indirect, multipathway
exposure to stack emissions (i.e., exposure to stack gas constituents deposited on soil and
concentrated hi the food chain) performed hi 1993 and 1994 (U.S. EPA 1993b; 1994).
External Review Draft
Volume E I_l Do Not Cite or Quote
-------
The primary objective of the HHRA is to estimate the potential risks to public health
due to routine atmospheric emissions from the WTI facility, particularly risks posed by
indirect exposures associated with contaminant uptake through the food chain.
The SERA is performed as part of the WTI Risk Assessment to determine the potential
significance of risks to ecological receptors (e.g., plants, fish, wildlife) from exposure to
routine emissions from the facility. The SERA for the WTI facility uses conservative
assumptions and approaches designed to overstate risk. Thus, the SERA serves to identify
particular chemicals, exposure scenarios, and receptors that may be associated with the
greatest potential risks.
The Accident Analysis is performed as part of the WTI Risk Assessment to evaluate the
likelihood and potential off-site consequences of accidents that may occur during operation of
the facility. Because it is not possible to identify and assess all accidents that could
hypothetically occur at the WTI facility, a subset of accidents reflecting a range of severity
of consequence and likelihood of occurrence are evaluated. The results of the analysis
provide a basis for evaluating the adequacy of existing accident prevention measures and
emergency response procedures.
B. Structure of the Report
As a preface to this assessment, this volume (Volume EQ provides a description of the
facility, and its location and setting in the three-state area of Ohio, Pennsylvania, and West
Virginia; an overview of previous risk assessments conducted by U.S. EPA for this site,
including the preliminary assessment of inhalation exposure and the screening-level risk
analyses of indirect exposure; and a summary of comments provided by the Peer Review
Panel on the Project Plan.
To assess the potential for adverse effects of facility emissions on either human health
or the ecosystem, the nature and magnitude of chemical emissions from the facility has to be
characterized and the atmospheric transport of these emissions to downwind receptors has to
be quantitatively described. Volume IH of this assessment presents the results of the
emissions characterization. Volume IV describes the selection of an atmospheric transport
model, the input parameters used in the model, and the results of air dispersion and
deposition modeling of facility emissions. The results presented hi Volumes HI and IV are
subsequently used in characterizing exposure for routine stack and fugitive emissions to
human and ecological receptors in the site vicinity.
The results of the WTI Risk Assessment are contained in three volumes as follows:
External Review Draft
Volume n 1-2 Do Not Cite or Quote
-------
• Volume V: Human Health Risk Assessment (HHRA)
The HHRA is designed to provide estimates of: (1) individual risks based on
central tendency exposure; (2) individual risks based on maximum environmental
concentrations; (3) risks to highly exposed or susceptible subgroups of the
population (e.g., subsistence fanners and school children); (4) risks associated with
specific activities that may result in elevated exposures (e.g., subsistence fishermen
and deer hunters); and (5) population risk. This is achieved by evaluating the area
that is most affected by facility emissions and identifying subgroups to characterize
the population in the area. This approach allows for the estimation of risks to
specific segments of the population taking into consideration activity patterns,
number of individuals, and actual locations of individuals in these subgroups with
respect to the facility. The fate and transport modeling of emissions from the
facility to estimate exposures to identified subgroups is described in Volume V and
the associated appendices. As part of this process of characterizing human health
risks, uncertainties are described qualitatively and quantitatively.
• Volume VI: Screening Ecological Risk Assessment (SERA)
The SERA includes an evaluation of available biotic information from the site
vicinity to provide a preliminary description of potential ecological receptors (e.g.,
rare, threatened and endangered species; migratory birds; and important game
species), and important ecological habitats (e.g., wetland areas). A conceptual site
model is developed that describes how stressors associated with the WTI facility
might affect the ecological components in the surrounding environment through the
development and evaluation of specific ecological endpoints. Finally, an estimate
of the potential for current and/or future adverse impacts to the biotic component
of the environment is provided, based on the integration of potential exposures of
ecological receptors to WTI emissions and lexicological threshold values.
• Volume VII: Accident Analysis
In this part of the assessment, several accident scenarios are identified that could
result in significant releases of chemicals into the environment. These scenarios
include ruptures of storage tanks, large magnitude on-site spills, mixing of
incompatible wastes, and off-site releases caused by transportation accidents. In
evaluating these scenarios, both probability and consequence are assessed, so that
likelihood of occurrence is coupled with magnitude of effect in characterizing short
term risks.
External Review Draft
Volume H I_3 Do Not Cite or Quote
-------
. FACILITY BACKGROUND
A. Facility Location and Setting
The WTI Hazardous Waste Treatment Facility is located approximately 30 miles (50
kilometers) northwest of Pittsburgh on the Ohio River in East Liverpool, Columbiana
County, Ohio, as shown in Figure n-1. The facility is located directly across the Ohio River
from West Virginia and less than a mile and a half west of the Pennsylvania-Ohio border. In
the immediate vicinity of the WTI facility, the area is mixed residential and commercial,
with some light industrial activity present.
The WTI facility is situated on 21.5 acres of land adjacent to the Columbiana Port
Authority Facility property. The WTI facility and the Port Authority tract of land is zoned
for general industrial activity. The site is bordered on the north by Conrail railroad tracks,
on the west by GRH Co., an industrial supply company, and Environmental Computer
Systems, and on the south and east by the Ohio River. The area immediately surrounding
these properties is zoned medium-high-density residential use. Much of the local residential
property, which includes an elementary school (East Elementary School), is located on a
terrace approximately 1,000 feet north of the site and at a ground elevation approxunately 50
feet higher than that of the site. Figure E-2 shows the general area and topography in the
immediate vicinity of the WTI facility.
The Ohio River forms the Ohio/West Virginia border immediately south of the site and
is approxunately 1,200 to 1,500 feet wide along this stretch. The topography of the area is
gently rolling, except in the immediate vicinity of the site where the Ohio River forms a
steep river valley oriented in the east northeast direction. Considering the local and regional
topographic elevations near the site, it is likely that winds are channeled along the valley,
with predominant wind flow to the east northeast.
The region of Ohio, West Virginia, and Pennsylvania in the general vicinity of the WTI
facility is largely rural with scattered beef, dairy, and agricultural farms. In addition, large
tracts of land in this area are reserved for state parks and game lands. The closest towns to
the WTI facility include East Liverpool, Ohio (located primarily west of the facility);
Chester, West Virginia (approxunately one mile southeast of the site across the Ohio River);
Wellsville, Ohio (six miles west of the site); and Midland, Pennsylvania (five miles east of
the site). According to the 1990 census, the population of East Liverpool is approxunately
14,000 and the population of neighboring Chester, West Virginia, is approximately 3,000.
External Review Draft
Volume H H-1 Do Not Cite or Quote
-------
The population of Columbiana County, in which the facility is located, is 108,000, according
to the 1990 census. The total population within one, three, five, and ten miles of the site is
estimated to be approximately 3,800, 23,400, 37,600, and 72,300, respectively, based on the
1990 census.
A variety of industrial operations are located in the Ohio River valley in the vicinity of
WTI, as shown in Figure n-3. In East Liverpool/Chester, there are several industrial
facilities, including storage tank facilities, an asphalt roofing plant, and a china manufacturer
(e.g., Ferro Corporation, Mason Color & Chemical Works, Inc., and Homer Laughlin China
Co.). Upriver from the WTI facility, several steel-related facilities operate in Midland and
Shippingport, Pennsylvania. The Midland/Shippingport area, approximately five miles east
of the site, contains a specialty steel operation, several petroleum storage facilities, and
nuclear and coal-fired power plants (e.g., J&L Specialty Products Corporation, Keywell
Corporation, Beaver Valley Nuclear Power Station, and Bruce Mansfield Coal-Fired Power
Plant). Approximately 15 miles upriver from the site in Monaca, Pennsylvania, are located
several more large industrial facilities (e.g., Arco Chemical Company and Zinc Corporation
of America).
Several industrial plants are located downriver from East Liverpool, in the
Wellsville/Stratton area, eight miles southwest of the WTI facility. A large refinery is
located near Wellsville as are several other industrial facilities (e.g., Quaker State
Corporation Congo Refinery, Airco Industrial Gases, and Sterling China Co.). Several miles
downriver from Wellsville is the large W.H. Sammis coal-fired power plant in Stratton,
Ohio.
For purposes of assessing the potential impacts of the facility on ecological populations,
a 1,250 square mile area around the WTI facility was evaluated. The assessment area is
composed of a mixture of terrestrial, wetland, and aquatic communities. The terrestrial
component consists of (mostly deciduous) forests and woodlots, woody scrub, agricultural
areas, and rural residential or urban areas. Agricultural activities consist mostly of hay
harvesting and livestock fanning.
A total of 360 lacustrine and palustrine wetland areas greater than 10 acres have been
identified within the assessment area; numerous wetlands smaller than 10 acres are also
present but were not quantified. In addition, 189 non-intermittent rivers and streams are
present within the assessment area, including the Ohio River. Twenty-five major lakes,
ponds, and reservoirs (more than 20 acres in size) have been identified within the assessment
area. Eight state parks, two state forests, four major wildlife management areas, and
numerous smaller areas (e.g., state game lands) with ecological value are located within, or
in the immediate vicinity of, the assessment area. Due to its large size and the diversity of
habitat types present, the assessment area supports large and diverse plant and animal
External Review Draft
Volume n H-2 DO Not Cite or
-------
communities, composed of large numbers of plant, mammal, bird, reptile, amphibian, fish,
and other species, some of them rare or endangered.
B. Description of Facility
The WTI hazardous waste incineration system is designed to thermally oxidize
hazardous wastes regulated under Subtitle C of RCRA. The facility contains a single, rotary
kiln incinerator for organic waste destruction, and has a permit for a second hazardous waste
incinerator and an inorganic waste treatment plant. The facility accepts wastes from a broad
range of waste-generating industries located primarily in the Ohio River Valley (WTI 1982).
The WTI facility received construction and operating permits from U.S. EPA, Region 5
hi 1983 and from the Hazardous Waste Facility Approval Board (HWFAB)2 hi 1984. In
addition, WTI currently holds permits from the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency
(OEPA) divisions of Ah- Pollution Control and Water Pollution Control. The applications
for these permits contain facility operating information that are applied in this study. The
following information on waste management on-site and incinerator operation was taken from
WTI's application to U.S. EPA for a RCRA operating permit (WTI 1982).
WTI treats liquid, solid, and semisolid RCRA waste hi the incinerator. The waste is
shipped to the facility either packaged (in lined boxes, fiber packs, metal cans and drums, or
reusable containers) or hi bulk (by dump trucks or truck tank wagons). The facility
incinerates both characteristic hazardous wastes (i.e., wastes classified as hazardous on the
basis of defined hazardous characteristics) and listed hazardous wastes (i.e., wastes identified
as hazardous under RCRA regulations). These hazardous wastes are required to be treated in
accordance with applicable regulations and the facility's operating permits. A more complete
discussion of the types of waste that may be received and treated by WTI is contained hi the
facility's RCRA permit application and hi the RCRA permit. Appendix n-1 lists WTI's
permitted waste codes. WTI has not been authorized to accept dioxins, asbestos, radioactive
wastes, war gases, or polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) hi concentrations exceeding 50 parts
per million. In addition, WTI is not permitted to accept several chlorinated wastes limited
under RCRA as "F" series wastes (F020 through F023, and F026 through F027), nor are "P-
list" (acutely hazardous) wastes currently permitted to be accepted by the facility. Although
P-list wastes are included in WTI's RCRA permit, incineration of these wastes by WTI has
been prohibited by U.S. EPA until final permit conditions are issued.
2 The HWFAB, which was later renamed the Hazardous Waste Facility Board (HWFB),
is a state regulatory body that works in conjunction with the Ohio Environmental Protection
Agency.
External Review Draft
Volume II n-3 Do Not Cite or Quote
-------
Facility operations are conducted in various structures on-site, including a guard house,
administrative and maintenance buildings, truck holding and sampling area, drum processing
facility, organic waste tank farm, incinerator feed building, and the incinerator and its
associated systems. A map of the site that shows these buildings is provided in Figure n-4.
Wastes shipped to the facility are pre-approved and registered on a computerized waste
tracking system. On arrival at the facility, the waste is weighed and the associated
paperwork reviewed to verify compliance with regulatory requirements and consistency with
information previously provided by the generator. The waste is sampled, if appropriate, in
accordance with the facility waste analysis plan and, after approval, directed to the
appropriate process treatment area. The computerized waste tracking system monitors the
proper disposition of the waste by providing handling instructions for waste after it enters the
facility until final disposal.
The general handling and management of wastes received by the facility, prior to
incineration, is described below. Several of these activities have the potential to result in
fugitive emissions.
• Containers of bulk materials (solid or liquid) are sampled upon arrival at the
facility.
• Bulk solid wastes are emptied into waste pits, and a clamshell bucket transfers the
waste from the pits into the feed hopper for the kiln.
• Bulk liquid wastes delivered to the facility in tanker trucks are unloaded under a
roof in a diked, concrete area. During unloading, the tankers are purged with a
nitrogen blanket.
• Drummed wastes are unloaded in the drum processing building and the contents
are pumped to tanks in the waste tank farm or to pump-out tanks to the south of
the drum processing building. At least one out of every ten drums of each waste
stream is normally sampled.
• Drums containing non-pumpable liquids (e.g., sludges and slurries) are extruded,
mixed with pumpable waste, and stored in tanks on the south side of the drum
processing building. Drums that do not contain free liquid are opened and are fed
directly to the incinerator.
External Review Draft
Volume n H-4 Do Not Cite or Quote
-------
• Waste blending occurs in the indoor tank farm. All waste handling, storage, and
treatment areas are concrete diked and contain collection sumps for the capture of
spilled materials. In addition, all handling areas are serviced by overhead
ventilation hoods that vent to the incinerator or the carbon adsorption bed (CAB)
system.
There are three different waste water systems at the WTI facility: A, B, and C. System
"A" collects uncontaminated storm water from such areas as roofs and the employee parking
lot, and the water is discharged directly to the Ohio river. System "B" collects storm water
from "inactive" process areas such as sumps and plant roadways where contamination is
possible but not normally expected. "B" water is retained in three 200,000-gallon tanks and
is tested prior to discharge to the Ohio River. If required based on the test results, "B"
water would be treated prior to discharge. System "C" collects water from active process
areas such as diked tank areas, washdowns, and other areas where some contact with
hazardous waste can reasonably be expected. "C" water is stored in one 250,000-gallon,
open-top tank prior to treatment and is a potential source of fugitive emissions. Water is
treated via sand filtration and activated carbon, and once properly decontaminated, can be
used as process feed water in the incineration system.
C. Description of Incinerator
WTI, an Ohio partnership, presently owns and operates this facility, with Von Roll
(Ohio), Inc., as managing partner. Von Roll (Ohio), Inc., as well as the other WTI
partners, are each wholly owned by Von Roll America, Inc., which in turn is owned by the
Swiss-based Von Roll AG. Von Roll AG has designed, constructed, and operated hazardous
waste incineration facilities worldwide, including Germany, Austria, Denmark, and Sweden.
The WTI facility is required to comply with all applicable regulations and emissions
requirements governing its operation. Federal and state permits require that hazardous
organic wastes fed to the incinerator be thermally oxidized to meet a destruction and removal
efficiency of at least 99.99 percent. The facility's RCRA permit (U.S. EPA 1983) limits the
heat input rate of the incinerator to less than 97.8 million British thermal units per hour
(BTU/hr lower heat value). On average, WTI expects the incinerator to operate between
7,400 and 7,900 hours per year, with an average yearly mass throughput ranging between
52,000 and 77,000 tons per incinerator. Monitoring of the chlorine and BTU content of the
feed (three-hour operating average) to the incinerator is required to ensure compliance with
the RCRA permit conditions.
The incineration system consists of waste feed mechanisms, a rotary kiln, a secondary
combustion chamber, a heat recovery boiler, air pollution control devices, a flue gas stack,
External Review Draft
Volume H n-5 Do Not Cite or Quote
-------
slag and fly ash removal equipment, and computerized process control and instrumentation
equipment. Figure n-5 is a drawing of the incinerator system.
The wastes fed to the incinerator are in the form of loose solids, drums and containers,
and liquids. An overhead crane and bucket is used to deliver loose solids to the kiln via a
feed chute that extends into the first zone of the kiln. Drums and containers are pushed by a
hydraulic ram feeder into the kiln feed chute. Finally, the front wall of the kiln is equipped
with five steam-atomized pumpable waste lances, which are used to introduce liquids and
other pumpable slurries into the kiln.
The rotary kiln is a refractory-lined cylindrical shell 15 feet hi diameter and 43 feet
long that rotates at approximately 3 revolutions per hour. Wastes enter the rotary kiln and
are oxidized at the internal kiln temperature of approximately 1,800 to 2,200° F. Solids and
other nonburnable wastes generally melt under the intense heat and form a residual viscous
slag. The kiln is slightly tilted to provide a solids residence time of one to two hours.
Gases from the kiln pass to the secondary combustion chamber to provide for greater
destruction of organic compounds.
Residence time in the incinerator, defined as the time required for flue gas to travel
from a point midway down the rotary kiln to the point at which secondary combustion air is
injected into the secondary combustion chamber, is 2.5 seconds. The secondary combustion
chamber, which measures 61 feet high by 21 feet by 22 feet, achieves burnout of residual
combustion material hi the combustion gas by providing additional residence time while
maintaining the gas at an elevated temperature. Recirculated flue gas ("RFG") is injected at
two different points within the secondary combustion chamber (referred to as "secondary
RFG" and "tertiary RFG") to increase the destruction efficiency of residual organics in the
combustion gas by increasing mixing. If necessary, fossil fuel may be fired in the secondary
combustion chamber to maintain the temperature. The combustion gases leave the secondary
combustion chamber at a temperature which generally ranges between 1,350 and 1,500° F.
The gas is further cooled as it passes through heat recovery boilers, causing a small
quantity of particles to be removed from the gas stream. The waste heat recovery boiler uses
heat generated from waste incineration to generate steam for plant use. Flue gas exits the
boiler at approximately 700° F (371° C).
After leaving the boiler, the combustion gases pass through an air pollution control
system consisting of a spray dryer, an electrostatic precipitator (ESP), flue gas quench, and a
four-stage wet scrubber system, as described below.
• The spray dryer rapidly cools the combustion gases to approximately 385° F
(196° C) using an atomized spray of treated "blowdown" water from the scrubber
system (described below). The scrubber blowdown stream, which at most
External Review Draft
Volume n H-6 Do Not Cite or Quote
-------
facilities would become a waste water requiring discharge, has been eliminated at
WTI by evaporation in the spray dryer. Salts and other residues, which are
dissolved or suspended in the scrubber blowdown stream, become entrained in the
combustion gas stream and are subsequently collected in the ESP (described
below). Besides eliminating the need to dispose of a waste water stream, the
evaporation of the scrubber water quickly cools the combustion gas below the
temperature range believed to be most favorable to the formation of
dioxins/furans.
• Dry, powdered, activated carbon is introduced into the combustion gas stream at
two different points in the duct work (the location of these points and the quantity
of carbon injected at each point has been claimed confidential by WTI under 40
CFR Part 2). Contaminants in the gas stream such as dioxins/furans are adsorbed
and tightly bound onto the surface of the carbon particles, thus reducing the
concentration of these contaminants. Because of the relatively large size of the
carbon particles, they are easily controlled by the particle collection devices
installed at the WTI plant (i.e., ESP and scrubbers). The carbon particles are
captured along with the other dust collected in the ESP, and the fly ash is taken
off-site for further treatment and disposal. The system that introduces the dry
activated carbon into the duct work is referred to as the enhanced carbon injection
system ("ECIS").
Because the dioxin/furan collection efficiency of the ECIS is assumed to be
directly dependent on the concentration of activated carbon in the duct work, the
RCRA permit requires that the carbon feed rate be equal to or greater than the rate
recorded during the initial ECIS compliance stack test.
• The ESP removes particles from the flue gas stream by passing the gas between
electrically charged rods and plates. The electric field attracts particles in the gas
stream and captures them, removing over 99% of the particles. At the WTI
facility, the ESP utilizes a rigid electrode design with each of the three fields (in
series) operating at secondary voltages between 40 and 55 kilovolts. After the
ESP, the flue gas passes through a quench unit, which saturates the gas with water
and lowers the temperature of the gas stream to approximately 170° F. The gas is
then drawn into the scrubber unit.
External Review Draft
Volume D n-7 Do Not Cite or Quote
-------
• The wet scrubber system is designed to remove acid gases, such as HC1, SO2, and
C12, and residual fine particles from the gas stream. The system is comprised of
two packed-bed scrubbers followed by a venturi scrubber stage. Each of the three
stages is followed by a mist eliminator. The venturi stage is comprised of a
multitude of venturi-type "Ring Jets" for the removal of submicron-sized particles
and aerosols from the flue gases. Sumps for each stage in the scrubber vessel
serve as reservoirs for the scrubber liquor, which is recirculated to the various
scrubber stages and fed to the quench unit. The pH of the liquor being fed to the
second packed bed is adjusted to aid hi the control of acidic contaminants such as
SO2. In order to remove contaminants which collect hi the scrubber liquor, a
continuous bleed or "blowdown" of scrubber liquor from the first stage scrubber
sump is pumped to a neutralization tank for conditioning (pH adjustment with lime
and treatment with activated carbon) prior to being evaporated in the spray dryer
for evaporation.
Finally, in addition to the operating parameters and control devices described above, the
waste feed rate and exit gas flow conditions greatly influence the emission rate and
dispersion of flue gas constituents. These process parameters are shown in Figure n-6, and
reflect the facility operating continuously at the permit maximum of 97.8 million BTU per
hour at the design feed rate of 17,780 Ib/hour as provided in the RCRA permit application
for the facility. The flue gas is discharged into the atmosphere at the stack height of 150
feet.
External Review Draft
Volume n II-8 Do Not Cite or
-------
HANCOCK
West Virginia.
Pennsylvania
Ohio <- I
1
Pennsylvania
-------
VOLUME II
VICINITY OF WTI INCINERATOR
External Review Draft
Do Not Cite or Quote
FIGURE
II-2
-------
c ucucf\lJtWCj\J999GBIl
MIDLAND, PA
- J&L SPECIALITY PRODUCTS
- KEYWELL CORPORATION
•MONACO, PA
/ - ARCO CHEMICAL COMPANY
- ZINC CORPORATION OF AMERICA
EAST LIVERPOOL, OH
- FERRO CORPORATION
- MASON COLOR & CHEMICAL WORKS. INC.
- WTI
WELLSVILLE, OH
- STERLING CHINA COMPANY
NEWELL, WV "
- AIRCO INDUSTRIAL GASES
- HOMER LAUGHLIN CHINA COMPANY
- QUAKER STATE CORPORATION CONGO REFINERY
WTI
Facility
SHIPPINGPORT, PA
- BEAVER VALLEY NUCLEAR POWER STATION
- BRUCE MANSFIELD COAL-FIRED POWER STATION
0 8
Scale in Kilometers
IT
INDUSTRIAL OPERATIONS IN THE OHIO RIVER VALLEY NEAR THE WTI FACILITY
External Review Draft
FIGURE
II-3
-------
c. %orud\OI.W}G ,13991GB/'
Waste Water
Treatment
Bldg.
Utility
Bridge
^^\ P
^^,~- Truck Unloading
•--.. Station
Container
Processing
Facility
jt*^^^ \ wntWMtiw
^'' Boiler \
"Slack ,.-x"'X Incinerator
HVAC
,S
IOTE: Nol lo Scale
Based on VonRoll drawing^ c-01-1-00001
VOLUME II
WTI INCINERATOR SHE PLAN
External Review Draft
Do Not Cite or Quote
FIGURE
TI-4
-------
UCONOMV
CMNUITWN
OUMKM
v p T cT^err
ww^?$^$$fc^z^^",
W.-JM/M.'//^'/.^//.?/. •'////<•••/...'.-..-•:.....:<.•;.'....,..: ::/.-
ADAPTED FROM:
f'm !•> A
Tt( hnt)linj\t
It'/'/
VOLUME II
SCHEMATIC OF INCINERATION SYSTEM
External Review Draft
Do Not Cite or Quote
FIGURE
II-5
-------
^
^
mwr wu 1— JO
CDOUMC 1— 10
f«AI OOWMCM [— I
^ss-vss,., (4 <
cm 1 1
tonum
r*M
U J
T G
, SCOMAM
-^
1 BUCNCM «IK»a»AIION
1 UMCC^^ WATER
5^r^^=-
tS «=*""«
H
ouHinn
1«/M
-j^r
,j«j_
-s-
-H-
cr/iH
14. XKMt
n «oiu» AIM *HD t«.ts
r ttoSti'it
Ji KHCAT «, $««.
a*
IK/**,
r,s(
ss-
1&
jona
CM
~>T~
_**'
JS2L
ff/w
TC5*
T
»
-M0~
T
^5T
"HT1
^ii_
ncu.
nic
«os.
PStC
*J
_ii-
-*£-
vtt
ttMPCK»KM ftftx)
*v>
m»
-Sr
!•»*»_
S*LTS
-rHr
Tar
•*
OAX
Ti«-
cawasnwH <««>
MfO
M^M
UL1S
J.'.J1-
ASM
HIT
isaii.
C^OH),
-®—41 "'-"
-®—4>
HS>->
-®—41 "ssr
I AU. «11N ftED IS INCLUDED IM CI«CAU I
.- MI. sec TOO a iNCunCD ID srtc**i •
i FOR CASE 11L
» ei *M> s VISIE ncf) (i» ci M s)
U TOUUD •OIUJI OUIUI OCKN TEUIVunmC
IIQNS Or THIS DRAWtNG i^' ' BEEN
THIS DRAWING IS FOR PERMmIt'j 1MFORUAT1QN ONLY AND IS NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES
FIGURE H-6 PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM OF WTI INCINERATOR
^
j^5
TTASTE TECHNOLOGIES INDUSTRIFS
INDUSTRIAL HASTE MANAGEMENT FACIUTY
EAST UVERPOOU OHIO
voHftoa
PROCESS ODW DIAGRAM
CASE III
"""« «"»w 36*7
P-06-2-31O12
VOLUME II
External Review Draft
Do Not Cite or Quote:
-------
APPENDIX H-l
WTI Permitted Waste Code List
Volume n External Review Draft
Appendix H-l Do Not Cite or Quote
-------
EPA Hazardous
Waste Number Description of the Waste
Characteristic Waste:
D001 Waste which exhibits characteristics of ignitabiiity in
accordance with the description in 40 CFR Section 261.21, but
is not listed as a hazardous waste in 40 CFR Section 261
Subparts D
D002 Waste which exhibits characteristics of corrosivity in accor-
dance with the description of 40 CFR Section 261.22 but is not
listed as a hazardous waste in 40 CFR Section 261 Subpart D
D003 Waste which exhibits characteristics of reactivity in accordance
with the description in 40 CFR Section 261.23 but is not listed
as a hazardous waste in 40 CFR Section 261 Subpart D
D004 -17 Waste which exhibits characteristics of EP toxicity in accor-
dance with the description in 40 CFR Section 261.24 and is not
listed as a hazardous waste in 40 CFR Section 261 Subpart D.
These wastes include the following:
EPA Hazardous
Waste Number Contaminant
D004 Arsenic in excess of 5.0 milligrams per liter
D005 Barium in excess of 100.0 milligrams per liter
0006 Cadmium in excess of 1.0 milligrams per liter
D007 Chromium in excess of 5.0 milligrams per liter
D008 Lead in excess of 5.0 milligrams per liter
D009 Mercury in excess of 0.2 milligrams per liter
DO 10 Selenium in excess of 1.0 milligrams per liter
D011 Silver in excess of 5.0 milligrams per liter
VOLUME H External Review Draft
APPENDIX H-l Do Not Cite or Quote
-------
EPA Hazardous
Waste Number Contaminant
D012 Endrin (1,2,3,^,10,10-hexachloro-l, 7-epoxy-
l,4,4a,5,6,7,S,2a-octahydro-l, 4-endo, endo-5,
S- dimethano naphthalene) in excess of 0.02
milligrams per liter
D013 Lindane (1,2,3,4,5,6^ hexachlorocyclohexane,
gamma isomer) in excess of 0.
-------
EPA Hazardous
Waste Number
Description of the Waste
Generic Waste:
F001
F002
F003
F004
F005
F006
The following spent halogenated solvents used in degreasing:
tetrachioroethylene, trichloroethyiene, methylene chloride,
1,1,1-trichloroethane, carbon tetrachioride, and chlorinated
fluorocarbons; and sludges from the recovery of these solvents
in degreasing operations
The following spent halogenated solvents: tetrachioroethylene,
methylene chloride, trichloroethyiene, 1,1,1-trichloroethane,
chlorobenzene, l,l,2-trichloro-l,2,2-trifiuoroethane, ortho-
dichlorobenzene, and trichlorofluoromethane; and the still
bottoms from the recovery of these solvents
The following spent non-halogenated solvents: xylene, acetone,
ethyl acetate, ethyl benzene, ethyl ether, methyl isobutyl
ketone, n-butyl alcohol, cyclohexanone, and methanol; and the
still bonoms from the recovery of these solvents
The following spent non-halogenated solvents: cresois and
cresylic acid, and nitrobenzene; and the still bonoms from the
recovery of these solvents
The following spent non-haiogenated solvents: toluene, methyl
ethyl ketone, carbon disulfide, isobutanol, and pyridine; and the
still bonoms from the recovery of these solvents
Wastewater treatment sludges from electroplating operations
except from the following processes: (1) sulfuric acid anodizing
of aluminum; (2) tin plating on carbon steel; (3) zinc plating
(segregated basis) on carbon steel; (*) aluminum or zinc-
aluminum plating on carbon steel; (5) cleaning/stripping
associated with tin, zinc and aluminum plating on carbon steel;
and (6) chemical etching and milling of aluminum
VOLUME E
APPENDIX H-l
External Review Draft
Do Not Cite or Quote
-------
EPA Hazardous
Waste Number
Description of the Waste
F007
POOS
F009
P010
F011
P012
F019
Spent cyanide plating bath solutions from electroplating
operations (except for precious metals electroplating spent
cyanide plating bath solutions)
Plating bath sludges from the bottom of plating baths from
electroplating operations where cyanides are used in the process
(except for precious metals electroplating plating bath sludges)
Spent stripping and cleaning bath solutions from electroplating
operations where cyanides are used in the process (except for
precious metals electroplating spent stripping and cleaning bath
solutions)
Quenching bath sludge from oil baths from metal heat treating
operations where cyanides are used in the process (except for
precious metals heat-treating quenching bath sludges)
Spent cyanide solutions from salt bath pot cleaning from metal
heat treating operations (except for precious metals heat
treating spent cyanide solutions from salt bath pot cleaning)
Quenching wastewater treatment sludges from metal heat
treating operations where cyanides are used in the process
(except for precious metals heat treating quenching wastewater
treatment sludges)
Wastewater treatment sludges from the chemical conversion
coating of aluminum
Treatment: Wastes F001 - F005 will be incinerated. Wastes
F006 - F012 and F019 will be treated by the Organic or
Inorganic Waste Treatment Operations or by the General
Wastewater Treatment System depending upon the nature and
extent of the contamination. In general, any waste which
contains a toxic organic component will be treated by the
Incineration Systems. The process by which a specific waste
will be treated will be determined after analysis of a sample of
the waste.
VOLUME H
APPENDIX n-1
External Review Draft
Do Not Cite or Quote
-------
IV. PEER REVIEW COMMENTS AND
KEY ASSUMPTIONS
A. Peer Review Comments
In preparation for conducting the WT1 Risk Assessment, a Project Plan was developed
describing the approach and procedures to be applied in estimating exposures and risks and
submitted for peer review (U.S. EPA 1993a). Prospective peer reviewers were nominated
by representatives of government, environmental groups, and industry. U.S. EPA's Council
of Science Advisors, which developed U.S. EPA's peer review policy, selected a group of
scientists with expertise in toxicology, combustion engineering, atmospheric dispersion, and
exposure assessment from the pool of nominees. The peer review was conducted by a panel
of 13 independent scientists, who met in open session on December 8-9, 1993. The Peer
Review Panel was specifically charged with evaluating the scientific basis for the risk
assessment procedures described in the Project Plan, to ensure that the resulting assessment
reflects sound scientific principles and methods.
The panel evaluated the technical merits of the Project Plan and prepared comments in
four principal subject areas: combustion engineering, atmospheric dispersion modeling,
exposure assessment and toxicology. Detailed comments and recommendations of the Peer
Review Panel are contained hi the report, "Report on the Technical Workshop on WTI
Incinerator Risk Issues" (U.S. EPA 1993c). In conducting the WTI Risk Assessment, a
concerted attempt has been made to incorporate the recommendations provided by the Peer
Review Panel. Major modifications to the proposed risk assessment process that followed
from the peer review recommendations included: (1) additional performance tests to develop
more reliable estimates of emissions from the incinerator stack, particularly for dioxin
emissions; (2) refined dispersion modeling taking into consideration the complex nature of
the local terrain to obtain better predictions of chemical concentrations in air and particle
deposition onto the ground; (3) an ecological risk assessment; and (4) a comprehensive
evaluation of accidental release scenarios.
In addition to these major modifications, a number of other significant changes were
incorporated to address specific recommendations of the Peer Review Panel. Summary
recommendations extracted from Section 3 of the peer review comments document (U.S.
EPA 1993c) are listed below.
External Review Draft
Volume H rv-l Do Not Cite or Quote
-------
Incineration Systems. The process by which a specific waste
will be treated will be determined after analysis of a sample of
the waste.
EPA Hazardous
Waste Number
Description of the Waste
Organic Chemicals:
K009
K010
K011
'K013
K015
K016
K017
K018
K019
K020
K021
Distillation bottoms from the production of acetaldehyde from
ethylene
Distillation side cuts from the production of acetaldehyde from
ethylene
Bottom stream from the wastewater stripper in the production
of acrylonitrile
Bottom stream from the acetonitrile column in the production
of acrylonitrile
Bottoms from the acetonitrile purification column in the
production of acrylonitrile
Still bottoms from the distillation of benzyl chloride
Heavy ends or distillation residues from the production of
carbon tetrachloride
Heavy ends (still bottoms) from the purification column in the
production of epichlorohydrin
Heavy ends from the fractionation column in ethyl chloride
production
Heavy ends from the distillation of ethylene dichloride in
ethylene dichloride production
Heavy ends from the distillation of vinyl chloride in vinyl
chloride monomer production
Aqueous spent antimony catalyst waste from fluorometnanes
production
VOLUME H
APPENDIX n-1
External Review Draft
Do Not Cite or Quote
-------
• Sensitivity and uncertainty analyses were recommended to estimate the uncertainty
of the model's concentration and deposition outputs.
Exposure Assessment (Human Health)
• Food consumption data could be updated using the most recent survey data on
ingestion rates, supplemented with information from local slaughterhouse, home
garden and fish surveys, to identify the fraction of locally derived food. In
addition, several population groups were identified for possible inclusion as high-
end subgroups.
• Although the high-end approach was deemed adequate for addressing variability, a
tiered approach to uncertainty analysis was suggested to address sensitivity and
uncertainty.
• An evaluation of upset conditions, fugitive emissions, and accidents was
recommended.
• The physical (vapor versus particle) and chemical form of several of the metals
was identified as important in influencing transport.
Toxicology
• In addition to the HHRA, it was recommended that an ecological risk assessment
be conducted.
• Several additional compounds were identified for inclusion in the HHRA,
including benzo(a)pyrene, benzo(b)fluoranthene, chrysene, dibenzo(a,h)anthracene,
fluoranthene, anthracene, heterocyclics, nickel, copper and aluminum.
• A consideration of additive and synergistic effects was recommended when
appropriate data are available.
As discussed above, these comments and recommendations have resulted in additional
testing and analyses being conducted, where possible, as part of the WTI Risk Assessment.
Subsequent sections of this report cite specific steps that were taken in addressing the
recommendations.
External Review Draft
Volume E IV-3 Do Not Cite or Quote
-------
EPA Hazardous
Waste Number
Description of the Waste
K104
K105
Combined wastewater streams generated from
nitrobenzene/aniline production
Separated aqueous stream from the reactor product washing
step in the production of chlorobenzenes
Inorganic Chemicals:
Treatment: Waste K009-K011, K013-K030, KOS3, KOS5, K093-
K096 and K103-K105 will be incinerated.
K071
K073
K106
Brine purification muds from the mercury cell process in
chlorine production, where separately prepurified brine is not
used
Chlorinated hydrocarbon waste from the purification step of the
diaphragm cell process using graphite anodes in chlorine
production
Wastewater treatment sludge from the mercury cell process in
chlorine production
Treatment: K071, K073 and K106 will be treated by the
Organic or Inorganic Waste Treatment Operations or by the
General Wastewater Treatment System depending upon the
nature and extent of the contamination. In general, any waste
which contains a toxic organic component will be treated by the
Incineration Systems. The process by which a specific waste
will be treated will be determined after analysis of a sample of
the waste. Permit conditions such as those which restrict the
concentration of mercury in the flue gas eminating from the
stack and in the wastewater discharged to the East Liverpool
Sanitary Sewer may impose limitations on the quantity and
concentration of mercury in these wastes.
VOLUME H
APPENDIX H-l
External Review Draft
Do Not Cite or Quote
8
-------
V. REFERENCES
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). 1983. Hazardous waste management
permit, Waste Technologies Industries. EPA Identification # OHD980613541. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). 1992. Preliminary risk assessment of
inhalation exposures to stack emissions from the WTI incinerator. July 1992.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). 1993a. WIT phase II risk assessment
project plan, EPA ID number OHD980613541. Region 5, Chicago, Illinois. EPA
Contract No. 68-W9-0040, Work Assignment No. R05-06-15. November.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). 1993b. Memorandum from W.
Farland, Director, Office of Health and Environmental Assessment to B. Grant,
Attorney, Office of General Counsel, U.S. EPA, and G. Goldman, Trial Attorney, U.S.
Department of Justice. Office of Research and Development. February 8.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). 1993c. Report on the technical
workshop on WI7 incinerator risk issues. EPA/630/R-94/001. December.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). 1994. Memorandum from W. Farland,
Director, Office of Health and Environmental Assessment to WTI Workgroup entitled:
Update of WTI screening level analysis. October 26.
Waste Technologies Industries (WTI). 1982. Application to the United States Environmental
Protection Agency, Volumes 1, 2, and 3. As revised November 11.
External Review Draft
Volume n V-l Do Not Cite or Quote
-------
EPA Hazardous
Waste Number
incinerated.
Description of the Waste
Explosives:
K044
K045
K046
K047
Wastewater treatment sludges from the manufacturing and
processing of explosives
Spent carbon from the treatment of wastewater containing
explosives
Wastewater treatment sludges from the manufacturing,
formulation and loading of lead-based initiating compounds
Pink/red water from TNT operations
Treatment: Waste K044-KW7 will be treated by the Organic or
inorganic Waste Treatment Operations or by the General
Wastewater Treatment System depending upon the nature and
extent of the contamination. In general, any waste which
contains a toxic organic component will be treated by the
Incineration Systems. The process by which a specific waste
will be treated will be determined after analysis of a sample of
the waste.
Petroleum Refining:
K04S
K049
K050
K051
K052
Dissolved air flotation (DAF) float from the petroleum refining
industry
Slop oil emulsion solids from the petroleum refining industry
Heat exchanger bundle cleaning sludge from the petroleum
refining industry
API separator sludge from the petroleum refining industry
Tank bottoms (leaded) from the petroleum refining industry
Treatment: Waste K04S-K052 will be treated by the Organic or
VOLUME H
APPENDIX H-l
External Review Draft
Do Not Cite or Quote
10
-------
APPENDIX H-l
WTI Permitted Waste Code List
Volume H External Review Draft
Appendix E-l Do Not Cite or Quote
-------
General Wastewater Treatment System depending upon the
nature and extent of the contamination. In general, any waste
which contains a toxic organic component will be treated by the
Incineration Systems. The process by which a specific waste
will be treated will be determined after analysis of a sample of
the waste.
EPA Hazardous
Waste Number
Description of the Waste
Veterinary
Pharmaceuticals:
KOS4
K101
K102
Wastewater treatment sludges generated during the production
of veterinary Pharmaceuticals from arsenic or organo-arsenic
compounds
Distillation tar residues from the distillation of aniline-based
compounds in the production of veterinary Pharmaceuticals
from arsenic or organo-arsenic compounds
Residue from the use of activated carbon for decolonization in
the production of veterinary Pharmaceuticals from arsenic or
organo-arsenic compounds
Treatment: Waste KOS4, K101 and K102 will be treated by the
Organic or Inorganic Waste Treatment Operations or by the
General Wastewater Treatment System depending upon the
nature and extent of the contamination. In general, any waste
which contains a toxic organic component will be treated by the
Incineration Systems. The process by which a specific waste
will be treated will be determined after analysis of a sample of
the waste.
VOLUME H
APPENDIX H-l
External Review Draft
Do Not Cite or Quote
12
-------
EPA Hazardous
Waste Number Description of the Waste
•
Characteristic Waste:
D001 Waste which exhibits characteristics of ignitability in
accordance with the description in 40 CFR Section 261.21, but
is not listed as a hazardous waste in 40 CFR Section 261
Subparts D
D002 Waste which exhibits characteristics of corrosivity in accor-
dance with the description of 40 CFR Section 261.22 but is not
listed as a hazardous waste in 40 CFR Section 261 Subpart D
D003 Waste which exhibits characteristics of reactivity in accordance
with the description in 40 CFR Section 261.23 but is not listed
as a hazardous waste in 40 CFR Section 261 Subpart D
D004 -17 Waste which exhibits characteristics of EP toxicity in accor-
dance with the description in 40 CFR Section 261.24 and is not
listed as a hazardous waste in 40 CFR Section 261 Subpart D.
These wastes include the following:
EPA Hazardous
Waste Number Contaminant
D004 Arsenic in excess of 5.0 milligrams per liter
D005 Barium in excess of 100.0 milligrams per liter
D006 Cadmium in excess of 1.0 milligrams per liter
D007 Chromium in excess of 5.0 milligrams per liter
D008 Lead in excess of 5.0 milligrams per liter
D009 Mercury in excess of 0.2 milligrams per liter
O010 Selenium in excess of 1.0 milligrams per liter
D011 Silver in excess of 5.0 milligrams per liter
VOLUME H External Review Draft
APPENDIX H-l Do Not Cite or Quote
-------
EPA Hazardous
Waste Number
Description of the Waste
P003
P004
P005
P006
P007
POOS
P01lU>
P012<1>
P013<1)
P01*<»
P016
P017
P01S
P020
P02lU)
P022
P023
P024
P026
P027
P02S
P029(1)
P030W
2-Propenal, (Acrolein)
l,2AMO,10-Hexachloro-l,*,^5,8,8a-texahydro-l,<»:5,S-endo,
exo-dimethanonaphthalene, (Aldrin)
2-Propen-l-ol, (Allyl alcohol)
Aluminum phosphide
3(2HMsoxazolone, 5-(aminomethyl)-,
(MAminomethyD-3- isoxazolol)
^-aAminopyridine, (4-Pyridinamine)
Phenol, 2,ft,6-trinitro-, ammonium salt, (Ammonium picrate)
Arsenic acid
Arsenic (V) oxide, (Arsenic pentoxide)
Arsenic (ffl) oxide, (Arsenic trioxide)
Barium cyanide
Benzenethiol, (Thiophenol)
Beryllium dust
Methane, oxybis (chloro-, (Bis(chloromethyl)etner)
2-Propanone, 1-bromo-, (Bromoacetone)
Strychnidin-10-one, 2,3-dimethoxy-, (Brucine)
Phenol, 2,*Miirutro-6-(l-rnethylpropyO-, (Dinoseb)
Calcium cyanide
Carbon disuliide, (Carbon bisulfide)
Acetaldehyde, chloro-, (Chloroaceta Idehyde)
Benzenamine, 4-chloro-, (p-Chloroaniline)
Mo-Chlorophenyl)thiourea, (Thiourea, (2-chlorophenyl)-)
Propanenitrile, 3-chloro-, (3-Chloropropionitrile)
Benzene, (chloromethyl)-, (Benzyl chloride)
Copper cyanides
Cyanides (soluble cyanide salts), not elsewhere specified
VOLUME H
APPENDIX H-l
External Review Draft
Do Not Cite or Quote
14
-------
EPA Hazardous
Waste Number
Description of the Waste
Generic Waste:
F001
F002
F003
F004
F005
F006
The following spent halogenated solvents used in degreasing:
tetrachloroethylene, trichloroethylene, methylene chloride,
1,1,1-trichloroethane, carbon tetrachioride, and chlorinated
iluorocarbons; and sludges from the recovery of these solvents
in degreasing operations
The following spent halogenated solvents: tetrachloroethylene,
methylene chloride, trichloroethylene, 1,1,1-trichloroethane,
chlorobenzene, l,l,2-trichloro-l,2,2-trifluoroethane, ortho-
dichlorobenzene, and trichlorofluoromethane; and the still
bottoms from the recovery of these solvents
The following spent non-halogenated solvents: xylene, acetone,
ethyl acetate, ethyl benzene, ethyl ether, methyl isobutyl
ketone, n-butyl alcohol, cyclohexanone, and methanol; and the
still bottoms from the recovery of these solvents
The following spent non-halogenated solvents: cresols and
cresylic acid, and nitrobenzene; and the still bottoms from the
recovery of these solvents
The following spent non-halogenated solvents: toluene, methyl
ethyl ketone, carbon disulfide, isobutanol, and pyridine; and the
still bottoms from the recovery of these solvents
Wastewater treatment sludges from electroplating operations
except from the following processes: (l)sulfuric acid anodizing
of aluminum; (2) tin plating on carbon steel; (3) zinc plating
(segregated basis) on carbon steel; (*) aluminum or zinc-
aluminum plating on carbon steel; (5) cleaning/stripping
associated with tin, zinc and aluminum plating on carbon steel;
and (6) chemical etching and milling of aluminum
VOLUME E
APPENDIX H-l
External Review Draft
Do Not Cite or Quote
-------
EPA Hazardous
Waste Number Description of the Waste
P054"' Ethyienimine, (Aziridine)
P057 Acetamide, 2-fluoro-, (Fluoroacetamide)
P058 Acetic acid, f luoro-, sodium salt,
(Fluoroacetic acid, sodium salt)
P059 4,7-Methano-lH-indene, l,»,5,6,7,S,S-heptachloro-
3a,<(,7,7a-tetrahydro-, (Heptachlor)
P060 l,2,3,4,10,10-HexacWoro-l,*,4a,5,S,8a-hexahydro-l,'»:
endo-dimethanonaphthalene,
(Hexachlorohexahydro-exo, exo-dimethanonaphtnalene)
P062 Tetraphosphoric acid, hexaethyl ester,
(Hexaethyl tetraphosphate)
P064 Isocyanic acid, methyl ester, (Methyl isocyanate)
P065UX2) Fulminic acid, mercurytil) salt, (Mercury fulminate)
P066 Acetimidic acid, N-[(methylcarbamoyl)oxy]thio-, methyl
ester, (Methomyl)
P067 2-Methylaziridine, (1,2,-Propylenimine)
P068 Hydrazine, methyl-, (Methyl hydrazine)
P069 Propanenitrile, 2-hydroxy-2-methyl-, (2-Methyllactonitrile)
P070 Propanal, 2-methyl-2-(methylthio)-, O-[(methylamino)
carbonyO oxime, (Aldicarb)
P071 O,O-Dimethyl O-p-nitrophenyl phosphorothioate,
(Methyl parathion)
P072 Thiourea, 1-naphthaienyl-, (alpha-Naphthylthiourea)
P075 Pyridine, (S>-3-(l-methyl-2-pyrrolidinyi)-, and salts,
(Nicotine and salts)
P077 Benzenamine, *-nitro-, (p-Nitroaniline)
P081^ 1,2,3-Propanetriol, trinitrate-, (Nitroglycerine)
VOLUME H External Review Draft
APPENDIX n-1 Do Not Cite or Quote
16
-------
EPA Hazardous
Waste Number
Description of the Waste
Wood Preservation:
K001
Bottom sediment sludge from the treatment of wastewaters
from wood preserving processes that use creosote and/or
pentachlorophenol
Treatment: Waste K001 .will be incinerated.
Inorganic Pigments:
K002
K003
K004
K005
K006
K007
KOOS
Wastewater treatment sludge from the production of chrome
yellow and orange pigments
Wastewater treatment sludge from the production of molybdate
orange pigments
Wastewater treatment sludge from the production of zinc
yellow pigments
Wastewater treatment sludge from the production of chrome
green pigments
Wastewater treatment sludge from the production of chrome
oxide green pigments (anhydrous and hydrated)
Wastewater treatment sludge from the production of iron blue
pigments
Oven residue from the production of chrome oxide green
pigments
Treatment: Wastes K002 - KOOS will be treated by the Organic
or Inorganic Waste Treatment Operations or by the General
Wastewater Treatment System depending upon the nature and
extent of the contamination. In general, any waste which
contains a toxic organic component will be treated by the
VOLUME H
APPENDIX H-l
External Review Draft
Do Not Cite or Quote
-------
EPA Hazardous
Waste Number
Description of the Waste
Pill
PH*<1)
PI 16(D
PUS
PH9<1>
P120(1)
P122
P123
(1X2)
Pyrophosphoric acid, tetraethyi ester,
(Tetraethylpyrophosphate)
Thallium (m) oxide, (Thallic oxide)
Thallium (I) selenite
Suif uric acid, thallium(I) salt, (Thalliumtt) suliate)
Hydrazinecarbothioamide, (Thiosemicarbazide)
Methanethiol, trichloro-, (Trichloromethanethioi)
Vanadic acid, ammonium salt, (Ammonium vanadate)
Vanadium (V) oxide, (Vanadium pentoxide)
Zinc cyanide
Zinc phosphide
Camphene, octachloro-, (Toxaphene)
U001
U002
U003
U004
U005
U006
U007
UOOS
U009
U010
U011
U012
U014
Acetaldehyde, (Ethanal)
2-Propanone, (Acetone)
Ethanenitrile, (Acetonitrile)
Ethanone, 1-phenyl-, (Acetophenone)
Acetamide, N-9H-fluoren-2-yl-, (2-Acetylaminofluorene)
Ethanoyl chloride, (Acetyl chloride)
2-Propenamide, (Acrylamide)
2-Propenoic acid, (Acrylic acid)
2-Propenenitrile, (Acrylonitrile)
Azirino (2',3*:3,*)pyrrolo(l,2-a)indole-*,7-dione,6-amino-S- ^
((aminocarbonyl)oxy)methyl]-l,la,2,S,8a,Sb-hexahydro-8a-
methoxy-5-methyl-, (Mitomycin C)
lH-l,2,^Triazol-3-amine, (Amitroie)
Benzenamine, (Aniline)
Benzenamine, *,4'-carbonimidoylbis(N,N-dimethyl-, (Auramine)
VOLUME H
APPENDIX H-l
External Review Draft
Do Not Cite or Quote
18
-------
EPA Hazardous
Waste Number
Description of the Waste
K022
K023
K024
K025
K026
K027
K02S
K029
K030
K083
KOS5
K093
K095
K096
K103
Distillation bottom tars from the production of phenol/acetone
from cumene
Distillation light ends from the production of phthalic anhydride
from naphthalene
Distillation bottoms from the production of phthalic anhydride
from naphthalene
Distillation bottoms from the production of nitrobenzene by the
nitration of benzene
Stripping still tails from the production of methyl ethyl
pyridines
Centrifuge and distillation residues from toluene diisocyanate
production
Spent catalyst from the hydrochlorinator reactor in the
production of 1,1,1-trichloroethane
Waste from the product steam stripper in the production of
1,1,1-trichloroethane
Column bottoms or heavy ends from the combined production of
trichloroethylene and perchloroethylene
Distillation bottoms from aniline production
Distillation or fractionation column bottoms from the
production of chlorobenzenes
Distillation light ends from the production of phthalic anhydride
from ortho^xylene
Distillation bottoms from the production of phthalic anhydride
from ortho-xylene
Distillation bottoms from the production of 1,1,1-
trichloroethane
Heavy ends from the heavy ends column from the production of
1,1,1-trichloroethane
Process residues from aniline extraction from the production of
aniline
VOLUME E
APPENDIX H-l
External Review Draft
Do Not Cite or Quote
-------
EPA Hazardous
Waste Number
Description of the Waste
U039
U041
U042
U043
U045
U046
U047
U048
U049
U050
U051
U052
U053
U055
U056
U057
U058
U059
U060
U061
U062
U063
U064
U066
U067
U06S
U069
U070
Phenol, Vchloro-3-methyl-, Cf-Chloro-m-cresol)
Oxirane, 2-(chloromethyl)>, (l-Chloro-2,3-epoxypropane)
Ethene, 2-chloroethoxy-, (2-Chioroethyl vinyl ether)
Ethene, chloro-, (Vinyl chloride)
Methane, trichloro-, (Chloroform)
Methane, chloro-, (Methyl chloride)
Methane, chloromethoxy-, (Chloromethyl methyl ether)
Naphthalene, 2-chloro-, (beta-Chloronaphthalene)
Phenol, 2-chloro-, (o-Chlorophenol)
Benzenamine, '^-chioro-2-methyl-,
(4-Chloro-o-toluidine, hydrochioride)
1,2-Benzphenanthrene, (Chrysene)
Creosote
Cresylic acid, (Cresols)
2-Butenal, (Crotonaidehyde)
Benzene, (1-methylethyl)-, (Cumene)
Benzene, hexahydro-, (Cyclohexane)
Cyclohexanone
2H-l,3,2-Oxazaphosphorine, 2-{bis(2-chloro-ethyl)aminqI
tetrahydro-,oxide 2-, (Cyclophosphamide)
5,12-Naphthaeenedione, (8S-cis)-S-acetyl-10-[(3-amino-
2,3,6-trideoxy-alpha-L-lyxo-hexopyranosyl)oxyl]-7,S,9,10-
tetrahydro-6,8,1 Utrihydroxy-1-methoxy-, (Daunomycin)
Oichloro diphenyl dichloroethane, (ODD)
Dichloro diphenyl trichloroethane, (DDT)
S-(2,3-Dichloroallyl) diisopropylthiocarbamate, (Diallate)
Dibenz(a,K}anthracene, (I,2:5y6-Dibenzanthracene)
Dibenz[a,i]pyrene, (l,2:7,S-Dibenzopyrene)
Propane, l,2-dibromo-3-chloro-, (l,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane)
Ethane, 1,2-dibromo-, (Ethylene dibromide)
Methane, dibromo-, (Methylene bromide)
1,2-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, dibutyl ester, (Dibutyl phthaiate)
Benzene, 1,2-dichloro-, (o-Dichlorobenzene)
VOLUME H
APPENDIX E-l
External Review Draft
Do Not Cite or Quote
20
-------
EPA Hazardous
Waste Number
Description of the Waste
Pesticides:
K031 By-product salts generated in the production of MSMA and
cacodylic acid
K032 Wastewater treatment sludge from the production of chlordane
K033 Wastewater and scrub water from the chlorination of
cydopentadiene in the production of chlordane
K034 Filter solids from the filtration of hexachiorocyclopentadiene in
the production of chlordane
K035 Wastewater treatment sludges generated in the production of
creosote
K036 Still bottoms from toluene reclamation distillation in the
production of disulf oton
K037 Wastewater treatment sludges from the production of disulf oton
K038 Wastewater from the washing and stripping of phorate
production
K039 Filter cake from the filtration of diethylphosphorodithioic acid
in the production of phorate
K040 Wastewater treatment sludge from the production of phorate
K041 Wastewater treatment sludge from the production of toxaphene
K042 Heavy ends or distillation residues from the distillation of
tetrachlorobenzene in the production of 2,4,5-T
K043 2,6-Dichlorophenol waste from the production of 2,4-D
K097 Vacuum stripper discharge from the chlordane chlorinator in the
production of chlordane
K09S Untreated process wastewater from the production of
toxaphene
K099 Untreated wastewater from the production of 2,*-D
Treatment: Waste K031-K043 and K097-K099 will be
VOLUME H
APPENDIX H-l
External Review Draft
Do Not Cite or Quote
-------
EPA Hazardous
Waste Number
Description of the Waste
U097
U09S
U099
U101
U102
U105
U106
U107
U10S
U109
U110
Ulll
U112
U113
Ull*
U115
U116
U1L7
U11S
U119
U120
U121
Hydroperoxide, 1-methyl-l-phenylethyl-,
(alpha^ipha-Dimethylbenzylhydroperoxide)
Carbamoyl chloride, dimethyl-, (Dimethylcarbamoyl chloride)
Hydrazine, 1,1-dimethyl-, (1,1-Dimethylhydrazine)
Hydrazine, 1,2-dimethyl-, (1,2-Dimethylhydrazine)
Phenol, 2,4-dimethyl-, (2,4-Oimethylphenol)
1,2-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, dimethyl ester, (Dimethyl
phthalate)
Sulf uric acid, dimethyl ester, (Dimethyl sulf ate)
Benzene, l-methyl-l-2,4-dinitro-, (2,4-Dinitrotoluene)
Benzene, l-methyl-2,6-dinitro-, (2,6-Dinitrotoluene)
1,2-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, di-n-octyl ester,
(Di-n-octyl phthalate)
1,4-Diethylene dioxide, (1,4-Dioxane)
Hydrazine, 1,2-diphenyl-, (1,2-Diphenylhydrazine)
1-Propanamine, N-propyl-, (Dipropylamine)
N-Nitroso-N-propylamine, (Di-N-propylnitrosamine)
Acetic acid, ethyl ester, (Ethyl acetate)
2-Propenoic acid, ethyl ester, (Ethyl acrylate)
1,2-Ethanediylbiscarbamodithioic acid,
(Ethylenebis(dithiocarbamic acid))
Oxirane, (Ethylene oxide)
2-Imidazolidinethionem, (Ethylene thiourea)
Ethane, l,l'-oxybis-, (Ethyl ether)
2-Propenoic acid, 2-methyl-, ethyl ester, (Ethylmethacrylate)
Methanesulfonic acid, ethyl ester, (Ethyl methanesulfonate)
Benzo[j,k]fluorene, (Fluoranthene)
Methane, trichlorofluoro-, (Trichloromonofluoromethane)
VOLUME H
APPENDIX H-l
External Review Draft
Do Not Cite or Quote
22
-------
Inorganic Waste Treatment Operations or by the General
Wastewater Treatment System depending upon the nature and
extent of the contamination. In general, any waste which
includes a toxic organic component will be treated by the
Incineration Systems. The process by which a specific waste
will be treated will be determined after analysis of a sample of
the waste.
EPA Hazardous
Waste Number
Description of the Waste
Iron and Steel:
K061
K062
Emission control dust/sludge from the primary production of
steel in electric furnaces
Spent pickle liquor from steel finishing operations
Treatment: Waste K061 and K062 will be treated by the
Organic or Inorganic Waste Treatment Operations or by the
General Wastewater Treatment System depending upon the
nature and extent of the contamination. In general, any waste
which contains a toxic organic component will be treated by the
Incineration Systems. The process by which a specific waste
will be treated will be determined after analysis of a sample of
the waste.
Secondary Lead:
K069
K100
Emission control dust/sludge from secondary lead smelting
Waste leaching solution from acid leaching of emission control
dust/sludge from secondary lead smelting
Treatment: Waste K069 and K100 will be treated by the
Organic or Inorganic Waste Treatment Operations or by the
VOLUME II
APPENDIX H-l
External Review Draft
Do Not Cite or Quote
11
-------
EPA Hazardous
Waste Number
Description of the Waste
U149
U150
U152
U153
U154
U155
U156
U157
U158
U159
U160<2)
U161
U162
U163
U164
U165
U166
U167
U168
U169
U170
U171
U172
Propanedinitrile, (Malononitrile)
Alanine, 3-[p-bis(2-chloroethyl)amino]phenyl-, L-, (Meiphalan)
Mercury
2-Propenenitrile, 2-methyl-, (Methacrylonitrile)
Methanethiol, (Thiomethanol)
Methanol, (Methyl alcohol)
Pyridine, 2-[(2-(dimethylamino)-2-thenylamin§-, (Methapyriiene)
Carbonochloridic acid, methyl ester, (Methyl chlorocarbonate)
Benzfj^ceanthrylene, l,2-dihydro-3-methyl,
(3-Methylcholanthrene)
Benzenamine, *,4'-methylenebis(2-chloro-,
2-Butanone, (Methyl ethyl ketone)
2-Butanone peroxide, (Methyl ethyl ketone peroxide)
4-Methyl-2-pentanone, (Methyl isobutyl ketone)
2-Propenoic acid, 2-methyl-, methyl ester,
(Methyl methacrylate)
Guanidine, N-nit^oso-^4-methyl-N^litro-,
(N-Methyl-N'-mtro-N-nitrosoguanidine)
*(lH)-Pyrimidinone, 2,3-dihydro-6-methyl-2-thioxo-,
(Methylthiouracil)
Naphthalene
1,4-Naphthalenedione, (1,4 Naphthaquinone)
1-Naphthylamine, (alpha-Naphthylamine)
2-Naphthyiamine, (beta-Naphthylamine)
Benzene, nitro-, (Nitrobenzene)
Phenol, *-rtitro-, (p-Nitrophenol)
Propane, 2-nitro- , (2-Nitropropane)
1-Butanamine, N-butyl-N-nitroso-, (N-Nitrosodi-n-butylamine)
VOLUME H
APPENDIX H-l
External Review Draft
Do Not Cite or Quote
24
-------
EPA Hazardous
Waste Number
Description of the Waste
Ink Formulation:
K086
Solvent washes and sludges, caustic washes and sludges, or
water washes and sludges from cleaning tubs and equipment
used in the formulation of ink from pigments, driers, soaps, and
stabilizers containing chromium and lead
Treatment: Waste K086 will be treated by the Organic or
Inorganic Waste Treatment Operations or by the General
Wastewater Treatment System depending upon the nature and
extent of the contamination. In general, any waste which
contains a toxic organic component will be treated by the
Incineration Systems. The process by which a specific waste
will be treated will be determined after analysis of a sample of
the waste.
Coking:
K060
KOS7
Ammonia still lime sludge from coking operations
Decanter tank tar sludge from coking operations
Treatment: Waste K060 and K087 will be incinerated.
Other Waste:
P001
P002
3-(alpha-acetonylbenzyl)-*-hydroxycoumarin and salts,
(Warfarin)
Acetamide, N-(aminothioxomethyl)-, (l-Acetyl-2-thiourea)
VOLUME E
APPENDIX H-l
External Review Draft
Do Not Cite or Quote
13
-------
EPA Hazardous
Waste Number
Description of the Waste
U232
U233
U235
U236
U238
U239
U240
U242
U243
U2W
U246
U247
2,4,5-Trichlorophenoxyacetic acid, (2,4,5-T)
Propionic acid, 2-(2,4,5-trichloropnenoxy)-, (Silvex)
Benzene, 1,3,5-trinitro-, (sym-Trinitrobenzene)
1-Propanol, 2,3-dibromo-, phosphate (3:1),
(Tris(2,3-dibromopropyl) phosphate)
2,7-Naphthalenedisulfonic acid, 3,3'-[(3,3'-dimethyl-(l,r-
biphenylM,4WylJ}-bis(azo)bis(5-amino-4-hydroxy)-,
tetrasodium salt, (Trypan blue)
Carbamic acid, ethyl ester, (Ethyl carbamate (urethan))
Benzene, dimethyl-, (Xylene)
2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid, salts and esters,
(2,42-D, salts and esters)
Phenol, pentachloro-, (Pentachlorophenol)
1-Propene, 1,1,2,3,3,3-hexachloro-, (Hexachloropropene)
Bis(dimethylthiocarbamoyl) disulf ide, (Thiram)
Bromine cyanide, (Cyanogen bromide)
Ethane, l,l,l,-trichloro-2,2-bis(p-methoxyphenyl),
(Methoxychlor)
VOLUME H
APPENDIX H-l
External Review Draft
Do Not Cite or Quote
26
-------
EPA Hazardous
Waste Number
Description of the Waste
P034
P036
P037
P038
P039
P0«)
POftl
P042
P0«3
P0*5
P046
P047
P050
P051
Phenol, 2-cyciohexyl-*,6-dinitro-,
(4,6-Dinitro-o- cyclohexyiphenol)
Phenyl dichioroarsine, (Dichiorophenyiarsine)
l,2,3,*,10,10-Hexachloro-6,7-epoxy.i,«t4at5,6t7,8,8a-octahydro-
endo,exo-l,'»:5,&-dimethanonaphthaienc, (Oieidrin)
Arsine, diethyl-, (Diethylarsine)
O, O-Diethyi S- [2-(ethylthio)ethy(] phosphorodithioate,
(Disulioton)
Phosphorothioic acid, O,O-diethyl O-pyrazinyl ester,
(O,O-Diethyl O-pyrazinyl phosphorothioate)
Phosphoric acid, diethyl p-nitrophenyi ester,
(Diethyl-p-nitrophenyl phosphate)
1,2-Benzenediol, *- [l-hydroxy-2-(methyl-amino)ethyl] -,
(Epinephrine)
Phosphorofluoric acid, bis(l-methylethyl)-ester,
(Diisopropyl iluorophosphate)
Phosphorodithioic acid, O,O-dimethyl S- [2-(methylamino)-
2-oxoethyl] ester, (Dimethoate)
3,3-Dimethyl-l-(methylthio)-2-butanone, O- [(methylamino)
carbonyl] oxime, (Thiof anox)
Ethanamine, l,l-dimethyl-2-phenyl>,
(alpha,alpha- Dimethylphenethylamine)
Phenol, 2,4-dinitro-6-methyl>, (4,6-Dinitro-o-cresol and salts)
Phenol, 2,4-dinitro-, (2,4-Dinitrophenol)
2t<*-Dithiobiuret, (Thioimidodicarbonic diamide)
5-Norbornene-2,3-dimethanol, 1,^,5,6,7,7-hexachloro,
cyclic sulfite, (Endosulian)
endo, endo-l,4:5,S>dimethanonaphthaiene, (Endrin)
VOLUME H
APPENDIX H-l
15
External Review Draft
Do Not Cite or Quote
-------
EPA Hazardous
Waste Number
Description of the Waste
P082
P084
P085
P088
P089
P092
P093
P09*
P097
P098(1)
P099(1)
P101
P102
P103
P105(1X2)
P108
PI 09
PiiO
N-Nitrosodimethylamine, (Dimethylnitrosamine)
.Ethenamine, N-methyl-N-nitroso-, (N-Nitrosomethylvinylamine)
Diphosphoramide, octamethyl-, (Octamethylpyrophosphoramide)
Osmium oxide, (Osmium tetroxide)
7-Oxabicycio [2.2.1] heptane-2,3-dicarboxyUc acid, (Endothall)
Phosphorothioic acid, O,O-diethyl O-(p-nitrophenyl) ester,
(Parathion)
Mercury, (acetato-O)phenyl-, (Phenyimercuric acetate)
Thiourea, phenyl-, (N-Phenylthiourea)
Phosphorothioic acid, O-O-diethyl S»(ethylthio)methyl ester,
(Phorate)
Phosphorothioic acid, O,O-dimethyl O-£p-
((dimethyiamino)-sulfonyl)phenyl] ester, (Famphur)
Potassium cyanide
Potassium silver cyanide
Propanenitrile, (Ethyl cyanide)
2-Propyn-l-ol, (Propargyl alcohol)
Caroamimidoselenoic acid, (Seienourea)
Silver cyanide
Sodium azide
Sodium cyanide
Strontium sulfide
Strychnidin-10-one, and salts, (Strychnine and salts)
Dithiopyrophosphoric acid, tetraethyl ester,
(Tetraethyldithiopyrophosphate)
Plumbane, tetraethyl-, (Tetraethyl lead)
VOLUME H
APPENDIX H-l
External Review Draft
Do Not Cite or Quote
17
-------
EPA Hazardous
Waste Number
Description of the Waste
U015
U016
U018
U020
U021
U022
U023(2)
U024
U025
U026
U027
U02S
U029
U030
U031
U034
U035
U036
U037
U03S
L-Serine, diazoacetate (ester), (Azaserine)
Benz[c]acridine, (3,4-Benzacridine)
Benzene
Benzfajanthracene, (1,2-Benzanthracene)
Benzene (less than ten percent concentration)
Benzenesulionic acid chloride, (Benzenesulfonyl chloride)
(l,r-BiphenyD-4,*'-diamine, (Benzidine)
Benzofajpyrene, (3,4-Benzopyrene)
Benzene, (trichloromethyl)-, (Benzotrichlbride)
Ethane, I,l'-£methylenebis(oxy3bis[2-chloro-,
(Bis(2-chloroethoxy) methane)
Ethane, l,l'-oxybis fjZ-chloro-, (Dichloroethyl ether)
2-Naphthylamine, N,N'-bis(2-chloro-methyl)-, (Chlornaphazine)
Propane, 2,2toxybis(2-chloro-, (Bis(2-chloroisopropyl) ether)
1,2-Benzenedicarboxyiic acid, D>is(2-ethyl-hexyl)} ester,
(Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate)
Methane, bromo-, (Methyl bromide)
Benzene, l-bromo-4-phenoxy-, (4-Bromophenyl phenyl ether)
1-Butanol, (n-Butyl alcohol)
Chromic acid, calcium salt, (Calcium chromate)
Acetaldehyde, trichloro-, (Chloral)
Butanoic acid, 4-[Bis(2-chloroethyl)aminq] benzene-,
(Chlorambucil)
4,7-Methanoindan, l,2,4,5,6,7,8,S-octachloro-3a,V,7,7a-
tetrahydro-, (Chlordane, technical)
Benzene, chloro-, (Chlorobenzene)
Benzeneacetic acid, 4-chloro-alpha-(4-chlorophenyl)-alpha-
hydroxy, ethyl ester, (Ethyl 4,4'-dichlorobenzilate)
VOLUME D
APPENDIX H-l
External Review Draft
Do Not Cite or Quote
19
-------
violations of RCRA requirements and alleged endangerment of human
health.
07/09/92 The U.S. EPA Issues the results of the first phase of a two-phased
risk assessment regarding inhalation exposure from the operation
of the WTI facility. The second phase is to be conducted after
the incinerator emissions can actually be tested and additional
meteorological data collected.
07/30/92 WTI completes construction. Only one incinerator is built, and
the permitted inorganic treatment process is not built.
08/24/92 U.S. EPA Region 5 inspects the WTI facility to determine whether
construction had been completed as required under the RCRA permit.
09/30/92 The U.S. EPA authorizes WTI to begin accepting hazardous waste and
start the shakedown period. Under the RCRA regulations and the
permit,, a new facility is only allowed to burn hazardous waste for
a total of 720 hours before the trial burn must commence.
11/12/92 Wheeling Federal District Court allows WTI to begin the shakedown
period under its RCRA permit.
11/13/92 WTI begins receiving hazardous waste and begins the shakedown
period.
01/12/93 Greenpeace and others file suit in Federal District Court for the
Northern District of Ohio (Cleveland) against U.S. EPA, Ohio EPA,
and WTI to prevent the trial burn from proceeding; a Temporary
Restraining Order is requested, and the Court grants this on
01/15/93.
01/29/93 The U.S. EPA's Office of Research and Development prepares a draft
screening level analysis of potential cancer risk due to long term
multipathway exposure to dioxin/furan emissions from WTI.
03/05/93 Federal District Court lifts the Temporary Restraining Order,
allowing trial burn to proceed, but also issues a preliminary
injunction against any limited commercial operation after the
trial burn until the U.S. EPA reviews and approves the results.
03/10/93 WTI begins the trial bum. Testing continues through 3/18.
03/16/93 The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals (Cincinnati) issues a stay of
the Cleveland District Court's preliminary Injunction, allowing
WTI to go into limited commercial operation after the trial burn
while it evaluates the merits of the appeal.
03/22/93 United States Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens denies an
emergency request to overturn the Sixth Circuit Court stay.
VOLUME H
APPENDIX H-2
External Review Draft
Do Not Cite or Quote
-------
EPA Hazardous
Waste Number
Description of the Waste
U071
U072
U073
U076
U077
U078
U079
UO&O
UOS1
U082
UOS3
U084
U085
UOS6
U087
U088
U089
U090
U091
U092
U093
U09*
U095
Benzene, 1,3-dichloro-, (m-Dichlorobenzene)
Benzene, 1,4-dichioro-, (p-Dichlorobenzene)
(l,l'-BiphenyiM,«'-diamine, 3,3'-dichloro-,
(3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine)
2-Butene, 1,4-dichloro-, (l,4»Dichloro-2-butene)
Ethane, 1,1-dichloro-, (Ethylidene dichloride)
Ethane, 1,2-dichloro-, (Ethyiene dichloride)
Ethene, 1,1-dichloro-, (1,1-Dichloroethylene)
Ethene, trans-l,2-dichloro-, (1,2-Dichloroethylene)
Methane, dichloro-, (Methylene chloride)
Phenol, 2,4-dichloro-, (2,4-Dichlorophenol)
Phenol, 2,6-dichloro-, (2,6-Dichlorophenol)
1,2-Dichlorooropane, (Propylene dichloride)
Propene, 1,3-dichloro-, (1,3-Dichloropropene)
l,2:3,4-Diepoxybutane, (2,2'-Bioxirane)
Hydrazine, 1,2-diethyl-, (N,N-Diethylhydrazine)
Phosphorodithioic acid, O,O-diethyl-, S-methylester,
(O,O-Diethyl-S-methyl-dithiophosphate)
1,2-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, diethyl ester, (Diethyl phthalate)
4f»'-Stilbenediol, alpha^lpha'-diethyl-, (Diethylstilbestrol)
Benzene, l,2-methylenedioxy>4-propyl-, (Dihydrosafroie)
(l,r-Biphenyl)-4,*'-diarmne, 3,3'-dimethoxy-,
(3,3'-Dimethoxybenzidine)
Metnanamine, N-methyl-, (Dimethylamine)
Benzenamine, N,N'-dimethyl-4-phenylazo>,
(Dimethylaminoazobenzene)
7,12-Dimethylbenze[a} anthracene,
(1,2-Benzanthracene, 7,12-dimethyl-)
(l^'-BiphenylM^'-diamine, 3,3'-dimethyl-,
(3,3'-Dimethylbenzidine)
VOLUME E
APPENDIX H-l
External Review Draft
Do Not Cite or Quote
21
-------
07/19/93 Greenpeace/Swearingen/Spencer file in the D.C. Circuit Court of
Appeals regarding the U.S. EPA's 04/93 decision to allow post
trial burn operation.
07/23/93 The City of Pittsburgh files in the Third Circuit Court of Appeals
(Philadelphia) regarding the U.S. EPA's decision to allow post
trial burn operation.
08/05/93 WTI begins 3-day ECIS performance test.
08/30/93 WTI submits results of ECIS performance test, demonstrating
significantly lower dioxin/furan emissions.
09/29/93 The U.S. EPA completes final draft of proposed project plan for
phase 2 of risk assessment.
10/06/93 Court grants motion to transfer the Third Circuit appeals to the
D.C. Circuit. On 10/28/93, the D.C. Circuit Court subsequently
grants motion to consolidate Pittsburgh's appeals with
Greenpeace's appeal.
11/19/93 The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals overturns the 03/05/93
Cleveland District Court preliminary injunction.
12/08/93 The independent peer review panel meets for two days in
Washington, D.C., to analyze the draft project plan for the risk
assessment.
02/15/94 WTI conducts 5-run quarterly ECIS test over a period of 4 days.
02/24/94 WTI begins revised trial burn condition 2.
04/19/94 WTI submits results of 02/94 trial burn, demonstrating compliance
with 99.99% destruction and removal efficiency performance
standards during all runs.
04/25/94 WTI conducts quarterly ECIS performance test, with the 5 test runs
continuing through April 27.
07/15/94 WTI submits to U.S. EPA its application for renewal of RCRA
permit. Renewal application includes two kilns but does not
include the inorganic treatment process.
08/29/94 WTI conducts quarterly ECIS Performance Test. WTI conducts two
additional test runs for a total of seven runs, and conducts
extensive speciation of the volatile and semi-volatile organic
compounds captured from the stack gas during the test runs.
10/26/94 The U.S. EPA completes an update of the screening level analysis
of potential dioxin/furan risks, using site specific data.
12/05/94 UTI begins fourth and final quarterly ECIS performance test.
VOLUME H External Review Draft
APPENDIX H-2 Do Not Cite or Quote
4
-------
EPA Hazardous
Waste Number
Description of the Waste
U122
U123
U124
U125
U126
U127
U128
U129
U130
U131
U132
U133
(2)
(1)
U136
U137
U140
U141
ims
Methylene oxide, (Formaldehyde)
Methanoic acid, (Formic acid)
Furfuran, (Furan)
2-Furancarboxaldehyde, (Furfural)
1-Propanoi, 2,3-epoxy-, (Glycidylaldehyde)
Benzene, hexachloro-, (Hexachlorobenzene)
1,3-Butadiene, 1,1,2,3,4,4-hexachloro-, (Hexachiorobutadiene)
Hexachlorocyciortexane (gamma isomer), (Lindane)
1,3-Cyclopentadiene, 1,2,3,4,5,5-hexa-chioro-,
(Hexachlorocyclopentadiene)
Ethane, 1,1,1,2,2,2-hexachloro-, (Hexachioroethane)
2,2'-Methylenebis(3,4,6-trichioropnenoi), (Hexachlorophene)
Diamine, (Hydrazine)
Hydrogen fluoride, (Hydrofluoric acid)
Hydroxydimethylarsine oxide, (Cacodylic acid)
l,10-(l,2-phenylene)pyrene, (Indeno [l,2,3-cd]pyrene)
Methane, iodo-, (Methyl iodide)
Ferric dextran, (Iron dextran)
1-Propanol, 2-methyl-, (Isobutyl alcohol)
Benzene, 1,2-methylenedioxy-^propenyl-, (Isosairole)
Decachlorooctahydro-l,3,4-metheno-2H-cyclobuta[c, d]-
pentalen-2-one, (Kepone)
Lasiocarpine
Acetic acid, lead salt, (Lead acetate)
Phosphoric acid, Lead salt, (Lead phosphate)
Lead subacetate
2,5-Furandione, (Maleic anhydride)
l,2-Dihydro-3,6-pyradizinedione, (Maleic hydrazide)
VOLUME H
APPENDIX E-l
External Review Draft
Do Not Cite or Quote
23
-------
EPA Hazardous
Waste Number
Description of the Waste
U173
U170
U176
U177
U178
U179
U180
U1S1
U1S2
U183
U184
U185
U186
U187
U188
U189
U190
U191
U192
U193
U194
U196(D
U197
U200
U201
U202
U203
Etnanoi, 2,2'-(nitrosoimino)bis-, (N-Nitrosodiethanolamine)
Ethanamine, N-ethyl-N-nitroso-, (N-Nitrosodiethylamine)
Carbamide, N-ethyl-N-nitroso-, (N-Nitroso-N-ethylurea)
Carbamide, N-methyl-N-nitroso-, (N-Nitroso-N-methylurea)
Carbamic acid, methylnitroso-, ethyl ester,
(N-Nitroso-N-methylure thane)
Pyridine, hexahydro-N-mtroso-, (N-Nitrosopiperidine)
Pyrrole, tetrahydro-N-nitroso-, (N-Nitrosopyrrolidine)
Benzenamine, 2-methyl-5-nitro, (5-Nitro-o-toluidine)
1,3,5-Trtoxane, 2,4,5-trimethyl-, (Paraldehyde)
Benzene, pentachloro-, (Pentachlorobenzene)
Ethane, pentachloro-, (Pentachloroethane)
Benzene, pentachloro-nitro-, (Pentachloronitrobenzene)
1,3-Pentadiene, (1-Methylbutadiene)
Acetamide, N-(4-«thoxyphenyl)-, (Phenacetin)
Benzene, hydroxy-, (Phenol)
Sulfur phosphide, (Phosphorous sulfide)
1,2-Benzenedicarboxylic acid anhydride, (Phthalic anhydride)
Pyridine, 2-methyl-, (2-Picoline)
3,5-Dichloro-N-(l,l-dimethyl-2-propynyl)benzamide,
(Pronamide)
1,2-Oxathiolane, 2,2-dioxide, (1,3-Propane sultone)
1-Propanamine, (n-Propyiamine)
Pyridine
1,4-Cyclohexadienedione, (p-Benzoquinone)
Yohimban-16-carboxylic acid, ll,17-dimethoxy-18-Q3,4,5-
trimethoxy- benzoyDoxy]-, methyl ester, (Reserpine)
1,3-Benzenediol, (Resorcinol)
l,2-Benzisothiazolin-3-one, 1,1-dioxide, (Saccharin and salts)
Benzene, l,2-methylenedioxy-4-allyl-, (Safrole)
VOLUME H
APPENDIX H-l
External Review Draft
Do Not Cite or Quote
25
-------
and the potential for noncancer health effects were estimated using the limited site-specific
data available along with generic exposure assumptions.
Operations at the WTI facility had not yet begun when the preliminary risk assessment
was performed. Thus, a conservative approach was adopted in estimating incinerator stack
emissions based primarily on data from operating hazardous waste incinerators. Given the
less sophisticated air pollution control equipment at many of these facilities compared to
WTI, it was assumed that emission estimates derived from these data were a conservative
representation of expected WTI facility emissions. After the preliminary risk assessment was
completed, WTI performed several trial burns and performance tests that provide site-specific
emissions data for use in the WTI Risk Assessment.
Atmospheric dispersion and transport of stack gas emissions were modeled in the
preliminary risk assessment using the COMPLEX-1 and ISCLT air dispersion models and a
combination of meteorological data from Shippingport, Pennsylvania, approximately 5 miles
east of the site, and Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, approximately 30 miles southeast of the site.
Site-specific meteorological data has since become available from a monitoring location at the
WTI facility and is used in the WTI Risk Assessment.
Exposure in the preliminary risk assessment was conservatively estimated for a
hypothetical Maximally Exposed Individual (MEL) residing at the point of maximum
predicted annual average ground-level air concentration continuously for a lifetime. Specific
populations hi the vicinity of the facility and the deposition of constituents onto the ground
surface and subsequent indirect exposure pathways were not considered in the preliminary
risk assessment.
The results of the preliminary risk assessment are summarized below:
• The maximum estimated inhalation cancer risk for any single organic stack gas
constituent was approximately 1 x 10"6, for dioxins and furans. The risks for the
next most significant organic compound, benzene, was 7 x 10~7. Cancer risks
associated with inhalation of metals were found to be lower than for dioxins and
benzene.
• Adverse noncancer health effects from exposure to organic compounds emitted
from the facility were not anticipated to occur. A similar result applied to the
metals, although the potential for exceedances of the threshold level for lead was
identified, as discussed below.
• The threshold level established for lead, based on the National Ambient Air
Quality Standard (NAAQS), was estimated to be exceeded if lead emissions were
External Review Draft
Volume H m_2 Do Not Cite or Quote
-------
EPA Hazardous
Waste Number
Description of the Waste
U205M
U206
U207
U208
U209
U210
U211
U212
U213
U21*
U215U)
U216
(1)
U218
U219
U220
U221
U222
U223
U225U)
U226
U227
U22S
U230
U231
Selenious acid, (Selenium dioxide)
Sulfur selenide, (Selenium disulfide)
D-Glucopyranose, 2-deoxy-2(3-methyl-3-nitrosoureido),
(Streptozotocin)
Benzene, 1,2,4,5-tetrachloro-, (1,2,4,5-Tetrachiorobenzene)
Ethane, 1,1,1,2-tetrachloro-, (1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane)
Ethane, 1,1,2,2-tetrachloro-, (1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane)
Ethene, 1,1,2,2-tetrachloro-, (Tetrachloroethylene)
Methane, tetrachloro-, (Carbon tetrachloride)
Phenol, 2,3,4,6-tetrachloro-, (2,3,4,6-Tetrachlorophenol)
Furan, tetrahydro-, (Tetrahydrofuran)
Acetic acid, thalliumd) salt, (Thallium (I) acetate)
Carbonic acid, dithallium (I) salt, (Thallium (I) carbonate)
Thallium (I) chloride
Thallium (I) nitrate
Ethanethioamide, (Thioacetamide)
Carbamide, thio-, (Thiourea)
Benzene, methyl-, (Toluene)
Toluenediamine, (Diaminotoluene)
Benzenamine, 2-methyl-, hydrochloride,
(O-Toluidine hydrochloride)
Benzene, 1,3-dUsocyanatomethyl-, (Toluene diisocyanate)
Methane, tribromo-, (Bromoform)
1,1,1-Trichloroethane, (Methylchloroform)
Ethane, 1,1,2-trichloro-, (1,1,2-Trichloroethane)
Trichloroethene, (Trichloroethylene)
Phenol, 2,*,5-trichloro-, (2,4,5-Trichlorophenol)
Phenol, 2,*»,6-trichloro-, (2,4,6-Trichlorophenol)
VOLUME H
APPENDIX H-l
External Review Draft
Do Not Cite or Quote
27
-------
information. Similar to the preliminary risk assessment, the screening analysis used a
maximally exposed individual approach based on the highest predicted ground-level air
concentration. Furthermore, various aspects of the fate, transport, and food chain modeling
were performed using conservative approaches and assumptions with the likely result that
actual risks from dioxins and furans were overstated.
The screening-level analysis of indirect exposure was based on air concentrations of
dioxin compounds estimated in the preliminary risk assessment. All other transport and food
chain modeling, and exposure modeling were uniquely generated for the analysis. Four
scenarios were developed: 1) a subsistence farm, where all beef consumed came from home
stock; 2) a "high-end" farm, where a portion of the beef consumed came from home stock;
3) a residence with a home garden; and 4) a schoolyard. Pathways of exposure included:
beef consumption for the farm scenarios only; vegetable ingestion for the residence and farm
scenarios; and soil ingestion, dermal contact, and inhalation for all scenarios.
Lifetime cancer risk estimates resulting from the limited period of operation were
estimated for each of these scenarios. For the schoolyard and residence scenarios, predicted
cancer risks were found to be less than 10~7. For both farm scenarios, risks were estimated
to be less than 10~7, except for consumption of beef, which was estimated to be in the 10'5
range for both farm scenarios.
In October 1994, U.S. EPA updated the screening-level analysis of risks conducted in
1993 (U.S. EPA 1994) because additional time was required to complete the current WTI
Risk Assessment based on recommendations of the Peer Review Panel. The update included
additional site-specific information regarding: climatic data, emission rates, and period of
operation. In addition, the analysis was conducted assuming a 2.1-year period of limited
commercial operation (instead of the one year assumed in the initial screening analysis) and
involved a more rigorous evaluation of the fate and transport of dioxin/furan compounds.4
The exposure assumptions and scenarios used hi the initial screening analysis remained
unchanged.
These changes to the screening-level risk analysis resulted in an estimated reduction in
predicted risks by more than a factor of ten. Estimated dioxin cancer risks due to
consumption of beef by a subsistence fanner (i.e., assuming 100 percent of beef diet is
derived from livestock raised on a farm at the point of maximum impact) decreased from
4 x 10"5 to 1 x 10"6 in the updated analysis. Estimated excess cancer risks for other pathways
also decreased; residential and school-yard scenarios were not estimated to exceed 4 x 10'9
4 The dioxin/furan fate and transport modeling used hi the screening level analysis is the
same as that used in the dioxin exposure assessment (U.S. EPA 1994b) and this WTI Risk
Assessment.
External Review Draft
Volume n HI-4 Do Not Cite or Quote
-------
APPENDIX H-2
Chronology of WTI's Regulatory History
Volume H External Review Draft
Appendix H-2 Do Not Cite or Quote
-------
CHRONOLOGY OF SIGNIFICANT EVENTS
REGARDING HASTE TECHNOLOGIES INDUSTRIES
RISK ASSESSMENT
09/04/81 WTI applies for a permit under the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act ("RCRA") for a hazardous waste facility which
Includes two rotary kiln Incinerators plus an Inorganic treatment
process.
12/15/82 The U.S. EPA holds a public hearing regarding draft permit.
06/24/83 The U.S. EPA Issues the RCRA permit.
08/09/83 The State of West Virginia appeals the RCRA permit decision
because the U.S. EPA had not sought public comments from that
State.
03/29/84 The U.S. EPA Administrator remands the RCRA permit to U.S. EPA
Region 5 for an additional public comment period pending the final
decision on petitions.
04/19/84 The U.S. EPA Issues a public notice of a second public comment
period.
12/17/84 The U.S. EPA Administrator denies the appeal.
01/25/85 The U.S. EPA makes the RCRA permit effective as of this date.
However, the Permittee does not actually proceed with construction
for approximately 5 years. Reasons for this Include WTI's
pursuing resolution of an appeal of the Ohio Hazardous Waste
Facilities Board permit (finally resolved by the Ohio Supreme
Court on 12/24/86) and WTI's seeking additional Investment
capital.
10/29/90 WTI requests a permit modification to add a spray dryer to the
incineration system. In the original permitted design, combustion
gases would have flowed from the waste heat boiler directly into
the electrostatic precipitator, whereas the proposed spray dryer
would quench the combustion gases immediately prior to the
precipitator.
09/90 WTI breaks ground on facility, Including test piles, grading, and
relocation of underground utilities. WTI proceeds with the
construction of only one incinerator and no Inorganic treatment
process.
02/03/92 The U.S. EPA approves the permit modification to add the spray
dryer.
04/21/92 The Attorney General of West Virginia files suit against WTI,
U.S. EPA, and the Ohio EPA in Federal District Court for the
Northern District of West Virginia (Wheeling), because of alleged
VOLUME H
APPENDIX H-2
External Review Draft
Do Not Cite or Quote
-------
Combustion Engineering
• Additional incinerator stack testing was suggested to reduce the uncertainty
associated with the organic emission estimation procedure. Alternatively, a waste
feed chemical composition profile could be developed, which can be used to
estimate organic emission rates from an understanding of the combustion chemistry
of the incineration process.
• Several recommendations focused on attempting to resolve the differences in
dioxin emissions measured in the March 1993 trial burn and the August 1993
performance test and to determine the most appropriate test to use in the risk
assessment. Additional testing of stack emissions for dioxins was also encouraged.
• The existing trial burn data, which provided system removal efficiencies for some
metals, was recommended to be used to develop emissions data for metals that
were not tested (taking into consideration the sources and behavior of different
metals within the incinerator train). In addition, it was suggested that
thermodynamic predictions be used to predict the physical/chemical form of metal
emissions.
• In addition to routine incinerator stack emissions, it was suggested that fugitive
emissions, and emissions during upset conditions and accidents, be evaluated.
Modeling/Atmospheric Dispersion
• In developing an appropriate meteorological data set for the air dispersion
modeling, it was suggested that site-specific meteorological observations be
combined with Beaver Valley Nuclear Power Station data collected at multiple
elevations.
• Wet deposition estimates were recommended to be refined using local precipitation
data.
• Fumigation conditions and terrain-induced downwash were identified as having the
potential to cause locally elevated concentrations. Further, evaluation of such
conditions by modeling or by conducting wind tunnel studies was suggested.
External Review Draft
Volume n IV-2 Do Not Cite or Quote
-------
04/02/13 WTI transmits a report to the U.S. EPA showing that the
incinerator failed to achieve the required destruction and removal
efficiency (ORE) of 99.99X during 2 of the 9 trial burn test runs.
04/12/93 The U.S. EPA Imposes additional restrictions on WTI, precluding it
from operating under the conditions maintained during the two
failed trial burn test runs.
04/26/93 WTI reports that 1t failed during the trial burn to meet the stack
emission limits for mercury during 2 days of the trial burn. The
incineration system demonstrated essentially no system removal
efficiency for mercury during the trial burn.
05/07/93 U.S. EPA Region 5 issues revised interim stack emission limits and
waste feed rates for toxic and carcinogenic metals, in response to
the report from WTI that mercury emissions exceeded the allowable
limits. The new mercury feed limits are based on zero system
removal efficiency.
05/08/93 WTI submits complete results of the March 1993 trial burn.
06/16/93 The U.S. EPA Issues a letter expressing concern over dioxin levels
in the trial burn report and requesting details of how WTI will
lower Its dioxin emissions. The U.S. EPA asks WTI to only burn
low chlorine wastes until matter is resolved.
06/17/93 WTI proposes to reduce chlorine feed.
06/18/93 The U.S. EPA sends a letter telling WTI that Its June 17, 1993,
reduced chlorine proposal is unacceptable, and suggests that the
facility not go back into operation until after a meeting in
Chicago.
06/24/93 WTI meets with U.S. EPA in Chicago, where WTI seeks to install a
device referred to as an enhanced carbon injection system ("ECIS")
to meet lower emission levels of dioxin/furan. WTI submits its
initial permit modification request on the next day.
06/28/93 WTI submits a request for temporary authorization to install,
test, and operate the ECIS while the permit modification is being
processed.
07/08/93 The U.S. EPA Issues temporary authorization to Install, test, and
operate the ECIS.
07/16/93 U.S. EPA Deputy Administrator decides that the Agency will arrange
independent scientific peer reviews of both the proposed project
plan and the draft final report regarding phase 2 of the WTI risk
assessment.
VOLUME H
APPENDIX H-2
External Review Draft
Do Not Cite or Quote
-------
B. Identification of Key Assumptions
Throughout the WTI Risk Assessment, site-specific data are used to reduce uncertainties
associated with the assessment of risks (human and ecological) and the analysis of potential
accidents. In many cases, however, data are not available and assumptions are required to
fill the resulting data gaps. In addition, there are many assumptions used in this assessment
that are inherent to the risk assessment process or the models or methodologies applied.
The assumptions used in this assessment are identified, and those assumptions potentially
affecting the risk estimates (referred to as "key assumptions") are evaluated. Within each
volume of this assessment, the key assumptions are tabulated as part of the discussion of
uncertainties. In addition, the basis for each key assumption is identified to provide the
purpose or reasoning behind the assumption. Finally, the tables of key assumptions provide
an indication of the potential effect of the assumptions on the risk estimates. A relative
estimate of the magnitude of the effect (low, medium, or high) is indicated, as well as the
expected direction of the effect (overestimate, underestimate, or unknown). In this manner,
the tables of key assumptions indicate the importance of each assumption hi terms of the
effect on the risk estimates if alternate assumptions within the plausible range were adopted.
It is anticipated that these tables of key assumptions will assist the reader hi evaluating the
results of the HHRA, SERA, and Accident Analysis by identifying the sources of greatest
uncertainty.
External Review Draft
Volume n IV-4 Do Not Cite or Quote
S
-------
12/08/94 The U.S. EPA lifts restrictions on feeding aqueous waste to the
front wall of the kiln. Aqueous waste feed to the secondary
combustion chamber remains prohibited.
01/13/95 D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals dismisses the consolidated petitions
for review by Greenpeace and the City of Pittsburgh. .
VOLUME H External Review Draft
APPENDIX H-2 Do Not Cite or Quote
------- |