Updates to an
Air Toxics Emission Inventory
for the
Southeast Chicago Area
John Summerhays^
Air and Radiation Branch
Region V
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
January 1989
-------
1
Table of Contents
Page
Tables iii
Introduction 1
Newly Inventoried Source Categories 1
Hazardous Waste Treatment Storage and Disposal Facilities 1
Municipal Waste Landfills 12
Asbestos from Demolition and Renovation of Buildings 15
Revisions to Previously Documented Inventory 17
'>
Revisions for Steel Industry 17
Revisions for Chrome Plating 23
Revisions for Municipal Waste Incineration " 24
Revisions for Wastewater Treatment Plants 24
Revisions for Roadway Vehicles 26
Review of Company Submittals under Section 313 30
Summary of Revised Inventory 33
References 42
-------
11
Tables
Number Page
1 Substances Included in Inventory 2
2 Emissions from Hazardous Waste Treatment, Storage, and
Disposal Facilities 5
3 Equations Used to Estimate Storage Tank Emissions 13
4 Emissions Estimates for the SCA Incinerator 14
5 Emissions Estimates for Municipal Waste Landfills 16
6 Species Fractions for Point Source Particulate Emissions 19
7 Particulate Emissions Estimates Bas^ on Specie^'Fractions 21
' '{
8 Emissions from Coking Operations 22
9 Emissions Estimates for the East Chicago Incinerator 25
10 Emissions Estimates for Wastewater Treatment Plants 27
11 Roadway Vehicle Species Fractions 29
12 Roadway Vehicle Emissions Totals 31
13 Emissions Estimates Provided by Companies 34
14 Status of Tables from July 1987 Report 35
15 Point Source Particulate Emissions Sorted by SCC 36
16 Summary of Emissions by Pollutant by Source Type 39
-------
Introduction
Region V has conducted a broad study of air toxics exposure in the Southeast
Chicago area. A previous report, dated July 1987, documents the basic features
of an inventory of emissions in the Southeast Chicago area. This previous
report, entitled "|Aij]_Joxics Enmsion Inventory for the Southeast Chicago
Area", describes the area inventoriiedT-td'en'tTfies the pollutants inventoried,
and provides the procedures and input data used and the results obtained for
point sources, area sources, mobile sources, and wastewater treatment plants.
This report is intended to be an addendum to the previous report on the emis-
sions inventory, to describe additions and modifications to the inventory that
have been made since the previous report was prepared. One of the important
revisions since July 1987 concerns the carcinogenicity of the inventoried
pollutants. The inventory still covers the same 51 pollutants, but a sub-
stantially increased number of these pollutants were judged to have weak
evidence of carcinogenicity or unreliable unit ri,sk fact6rs,i- Itufe, the list of
pollutants addressed in this study includ.e 3.2;^fifantifiably^tarcfhogenic pollu-
tants. The correspondingly reorganized list or pollutants in this study is
shown in Table 1.
The discussion that follows is divided into three main sections. The first
section discusses additions to the inventory, and-includes subsections on
hazardous waste treatment, storage and disposal facilities (TSDFs), a subsection
on municipal solid waste landfills, and a subsection on asbestos from the
demolition and renovation of buildings. The second section discusses modifica-
tions to the July 1987 inventory, and includes subsections on the steel industry,
chrome platers, municipal waste incineration, wastewater treatment plants, and
roadway vehicles. The final section summarizes the revised emissions inventory.
Newly Inventoried Source Categories
This section discusses the inventorying of source categories that were not-
addressed in the July 1987 report. Modification of the treatment of previously
considered source categories, including the addition of two pollutants (asbestos
and cadmium) to the inventory for roadway vehicles, are discussed in a later section,
Hazardous Waste Treatment Storage and Disposal Facilities
Most of the inventory of air emissions from hazardous waste treatment, storage
and disposal facilities (TSDFs) was compiled by the Midwest Research Institute
(MRI). MRI has documented its assessment in a report entitled "Estimation of
Hazardous Air Emissions in Southeast Chicago Contributed by TSDFs". The
discussion that follows summarizes this report by MRI.
MRI i nventbrie'd'. TSDF a-i r emissions by a three step process. The first step was
to compile data oh the quantity of wastes handled by each facility. These data
were organized according to waste codes under the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act (RCRA); i.-., the data showed for each RCRA facility the quantity
of each RCRA waste st-'.:- that the facility treats, stores, or disposes.
The second step in MRI's -valuation was to estimate the composition of the
handled wastes. Some C.^-A waste codes (the "R and U codes") are specific
-------
Table 1. Substances Included in Inventory
CHLORINATED VOC (15)
Allyl Chloride
Carbon Tetrachloride
Chloroform
Dloxin
Epichlorohydrln
Ethylene Dlbromide*
Ethylene Dichloride
Hexachlorobenzene
Methyl Chloride
Methylene Chloride
Perchloroethylene
Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs)
Trichloroethylene
Vinyl Chloride
Vinylidene Chloride
NON-CHLORINATED VOC (11)
Acrylamide
Acrylonitrile
Benzene
Butadiene
Coke Oven Emissions
Ethylene Oxide
Formaldehyde
Gasoline Vapors
Polycyclic Organic Matter (POM)
Propylene Oxide
Styrene
INORGANIC (6)
Arsenic
Asbestos
Beryl 1i urn
Cadmi urn
Chromium
Radionuclides
NON-CARCINOGENS (19)
, Ac.etone :. ^
..Diejtjjtffolamine "$'
Dirttethylnitrosamine
Dioctylphthalate
Ethyl Aery late
Ethylene
Isopropylidene Diphenol
Melamirie
Mercury
Methylene Dianiline
Nickel
Nitrobenzene
Nitrosomorpholine
Pentachlorophenol
Propylene Dichloride
Terephthalic Acid
Titanium Dioxide
Tol uene
Xylene
*Although ethylene dibromide is not, strictly speaking, chlorinated,
it is halogenated and is included among chlorinated compounds due
to chemical, similarity.
-------
chemicals (e.g., 1)019 is benzene). These waste streams may be assumed to be
100 percent the respective chemical. However, most waste is identified by
process of origin (e.g., F001, for spent decreasing solvents), by industry of
origin (e.g., K087, for tar sludge from coking), or by rationale for listing
(e.g., 0002, for corrosive wastes). These waste streams are generally complex
mixtures whose compositions vary significantly from company to company. For
some waste streams, studies have been done to evaluate the range of chemical
compositions of the waste streams. For other waste streams, estimates of
chemical compositions were based on engineering judgement. For all waste
streams, the composition estimates contain substantial uncertainty but reflect
the best data available to MRI. These composition data were then used in
conjunction with the data on total quantities of each waste stream handled by
each facility to estimate the amount of each pollutant handled by each facility.
The third step in MRI's process was to estimate how much of the pollutant quan-
tities at each facility are emitted into the atmosphere. Different methods are
used for different types of facilities.-' For incinerators re^ulat/ed under RCRA,
regulations require that organic constituents^WFat least $9.99-"percent
destroyed or removed. MRI therefore estimated'emissions from these facilities
as 0.01 percent of the organic pollutant quantities handled. This estimate
should be conservative, insofar as 99.99 percent is a required minimum destruc-
tion and removal efficiency, and the relatively easily destroyed organics at a
given facility may be substantially more completely destroyed. This estimation
method is not applicable to inorganic pollutants, but the low concentrations
of inorganic contaminants generally fou'nd in incinerated waste and the require-
ment for particulate matter control devices presumably lead to minimal emissions
of inorganic contaminants from these facilities.
For the hazardous waste landfill in the study area (CID landfill), MRI used a
recently developed emissions estimation method. This method estimates emissions
that result from diffusion of volatile organics through the landfiTl's cover
soil and from "barometric pumping" (i.e., pumping of soil gases into the
atmosphere.due to normal variations in atmospheric pressure). Although methane
generation from biodegradation can also lead to emissions due to flushing
contaminated soil vapor into the atmosphere, these emissions were assumed negli-
gible, since the toxic wastes are assumed to inhibit biodegradation. Diffusion
through the soil cover was estimated using a series of equations considering
the surface area of the landfill, the atmospheric diffusion coefficient, the
soil gas concentration of the contaminant, and the ratio of soil gas space to
total cover soil volume. Barometric pumping was estimated with a series of
equations which estimate the total soil gas volume, the increase in gas volume
(which will vent to the atmosphere) attributable to a normal decline in atmo-
spheric pressure, and the contaminant concentration in the soil gas. Emissions
were then calculated by multiplying the volume of vented soil gas times the
soil gas concentration. A final adjustment to the emissions estimates from
both diffusion, through the cover and barometric pumping was to compute a one
year average.reflects mj the slow dec!ine in. soil gas concentration.
Emissions from storage tanks were based on U.S. EPA's standard guidance on
emissions estimation 'Cf. "Compilation of Air Pollution Emission Factors," known
as AP-42). This method accounts separately for "breathing losses" (attributable
to vapor escaping during idle storage due to normal variations in atmospheric
pressure), for "workinq "osses" (attributable to losses during the filling of
-------
tanks), and for spills. All tanks were conservatively assumed to be fixed roof
tanks. The equation for breathing losses considered the molecular weight and
vapor pressure of the contaminant, the diameter and height of the vapor space
in the tank, the diurnal temperature variation, and adjustment factors for
paint color and condition and for turnover frequency. The equation for working
losses simply multiplies the volume of vapor displaced (which equals the volume
of material stored) times the mass of contaminant per unit volume of vapor
(which equals the contaminant vapor pressure times molecular weight). The
actual equations are presented in Table 3 later in this report. MRI estimated
that 0.001% of all handled material would be emitted through spillage.
Emissions estimation for drums used similar procedures as was used for storage
tanks. Breathing losses are assumed to be zero, since the drums are assumed
generally to be totally closed. Working losses are again equal to volume of
vapor displaced times the mass of contaminant per unit volume of vapor, with a
further adjustment for incomplete saturation. ..This adjustment reflects the
fact that unlike storage tanks, in which the vapor may be a&&um.eprave a vapor spa'ce that is not
saturated with vapor from the liquid. MRI estimated that the vapor displaced
during drum filling is 20% saturated, such that emissions are 20% of emissions
under full saturation conditions. Finally, MRI estimated spillage losses as
0.01% of materials handled in drums.
Emissions for tank trucks were calculated with the same equations as for drums,
with some slight modifications of inputs. Saturation during refilling was
estimated to be 50%, not 20%. Spillage losses were estimated to be 0.001%, not
0.01%. Breathing losses were again assumed to be insignificant, since tank
trucks were presumed not to be used for storage.
The above discussion has made several references to equations used by MRI.
These equations are all presented and described in the previously cited MRI
report. This report also documents input data used in these equations and
provides detailed results of MRI's calculations. Table 2, showing emissiens of
each pollutant from each operation at each TSDF in the study area, is essentially
a reproduction of Appendix A of MRI's report.
In addition to the emissions estimates developed by MRI, a few additional TSDF
emissions estimates were developed as part of this study. These additional
emissions estimates all apply specifically to the facility known as the SCA
incinerator, and are generally based on data other than the RCRA data obtained
by MRI. The first estimate is for incinerator emissions of polychlorinated
biphenyls (PCBs). Since PCBs are regulated under the Toxic Substances Control
Act (TSCA) rather than PCRA, the RCRA waste information obtained by MRI did not
show any incinerated PC!3s. The quantity of PCBs incinerated at this facility
(39,993,000 pounds of wdste containing 10% PCBs over a 10 month period) was
identified directly by SCA. TSCA requires 99.9999% destruction and removal
efficiency for PCBs. ;n fact, the emissions estimate used in this study was
based on trial burn r-rs^lts showing 99.999952% destruction and removal efficiency,
i.e., showing PCB emissions to be 0.000048% of the quantity of PCBs incinerated.
The second emission es*.;---.e for the SCA incinerator is for dioxins and furans.
These pollutants were <--.: identified in any of the RCRA waste streams but are j
emitted as by-products .' ;reineration, which were also addressed with the resul oq
-------
Table 2. Emissions Froi Hazardous Uaste Treatment
Storage and Disposal Facilities
FACILITY
AKZO CHEN IE AMERICA RESEARCH. LAB
,;
ALLIED TUBE AND CONDUIT CORP.
ASHLAND CHEMICAL CO.
ASHLAND CHEMICAL CO.
COMPOUNDS
NORTHING EASTING ZONE PRESENT
430.6 4626.2 16 ACETONE
BENZENE
BUTADIENE (1.3)
CARBON TETRACHLORIDE
CHLOROFORM
ETHYLENE Dl CHLORIDE
HEXACHLOROBENZENE
METHYL CHLORIDE
METHYLENE CHLORIDE
PERCHLOROETHYLENE
TOLUENE
TRICHLOROETHYLENE
VINYL CHLORIDE
VINYLIDENE CHLORIDE
ACETONE
BENZENE
CARBON TETRACHLORIDE
CHLOROFORM
DIOCTYL PHTHALATE
ETHYLENE Dl CHLORIDE
HEXACHLOROBENZENE
METHYLENE CHLORIDE
PERCHLOROETHYLENE
TOLUENE
TRICHLOROETHYLENE
VINYL CHLORIDE
VINYLIDENE CHLORIDE
452.6 4609.6 16 ACETONE
ACRYLONITRILE
BENZENE
ETHYL ACRYLATE
STYRENE
TOLUENE
VINYL CHLORIDE
XYLENE
ACETONE
ACRYLONITRILE
BENZENE
CARBON TETRACHLORODE
CHLOROFORM
DIOCTYL PHTHALATE
ETHYL ACRYLATE
ETHYLENE Dl CHLORIDE
HEXACHLOROBENZENE
DRUMS
(LB5)
0.06
1.06
2.18
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
6.35
0.91
0.00
1.87
0.01
0.03
0.01
0.04
. 15.42
' 0.22
0.00
0.09
0.02
12.00
4.49
35.30
12.29
27.87
50.29
0.07
1.95
4.20
2.92
7.87
473.39
4.29
0.01
0.19
0.00
0.70
O.Oi
0.00
0.42
0.00
0.00
0.00
TRUCKS TANKS LANDFILL EIATION
(LBS) (LBS) (LBS) (US)
13.11
64.28
279.17
388.72
... O.QQ
133.33
:.-... 0:00
. J.I 2. 26
-*0.14
:tt.87
162.99
ERI
1052.60
^75
JT-!
16.48
49.49
- ..; :
i9.ii
LOSS M
(IBS'
0.08
1.08
2.18
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
6.35
0.91
0.00
1.87
0.01
0.03
13.13
64.32
294. b9
388.94
0.00
133.42
0.02
24.26
64.63
85.18
17S.28
ERR
1102.89
0.07
l.9£
119.75
t.20
19.40
57.36
473.39
23.40
0.01
0.19
0.00
0.70
0.01
0.00
0.42
0.00
0.00
0.00
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
ATE 1
M)
-------
CID II
i53.2 4613.
CID PROCESS INu
453.2 4613.7
CONTINENTAL CAN TO. 15
DEUEY AND ALMAV CHEHICA1. Cd.
437.6
436.2
4627.3
ELECTROHOTIVE- DIV. OF CMC
429.4 4626.8
PFRCHLORQETHYLENE
STYRENE
TOLUENE
TRICHLOROETHYLENE
VINYL CHLORIDE
VINYLI DENE CHLORIDE
JtYLF-NE
It, ACETONE
BENZENE
CARBON TETRACHLORIDE
CHLOROFORM
DIOCTYL PHTHALATE
ETHYLENE DICHLORIDE
HEXACHLOROBENZENE
HETHYLENE CHLORIDE
PERCHLOROETHYLENE
TOLUENE
TRICHLQROETHYLENE
VINYL CHLORIDE
VINYLIDENE CHLORIDE
XYLENE
16 ACETONE
BENZENE
EPICHLOROHYDRIN
FORHALDEHYDE
STYRENE
TOLUENE
XYLENE
4629.7 16 TOLUENE
GENERAL ELECTRIC CO.
434.2 4626.5
16 ACETONE
CHLOROFORM
ETHYLENE DICHLORIDE
PERCHLOROETHYLENE
TOLUENE
TRICHLOROETHYLENE
16 ACETONE
BENZENE
CARBON TETRACHLORIDE
CHLOROFORM
ETHYLENE DlCHLORIDE
HEXACHLOROBENZENE
HETHYLENE CHLORIDE
PERCHLOROETHYLENE
TOLUENE
TRICHLOROETHYLENE
VINYL CHLORIDE
VINYLIDENE CHLORIDE
XYLENE
16 STYRENE
TRICHLOROETHYLENE
0.13
0.29
1.91
0.75
13«.33
2.27
0.43
0.00
0.30
0.00
0.00
0.03
0.11
O.OB
9.33
9.34
10.57
2.06
0.09
5.30
8.58
0.01
0.02
5.93
0.08
0.04
0.01
0.00
1.07
0.59
31.68
10.71
19.33
0.05
0.09
0.44
V
10770.95
6.39
5506.61
41.85
0.00
264.32
1013.22
35506.61
1167.40
16343.61
33326.00
7533.04
660.79
1311.59
0.13
0.29
1.91
0.75
134.33
2.27
0.43
IQ77G.9E
0.39
5506.61
41.65
0.00
264.32
1013.22
35506.6!
1167.40
16343.61
33326.00
7533.04
660.79
1321.59
0.30
0.00
0.00
0.03
0.11
o.oe
9.33
1C-. 57
2.06
n >)<4
5.30
0.01
o.c.
0.01
O.Oi-
1.07
0.59
31.66
10.71
19.33
O.Of
(1.44
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
a
o
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
66
66
60
66
68
68
68
66
68
68
68
68
68
68
66
68
68
68
68
68
66
68
68
68
68
68
68
68
68
66
66
68
66
68
68
68
6t
68
68
60
''J
-------
HYDBOS.OL INC.
JOHNSON AND JOHNSfIN PROD. IN.C.
437.7 4624.8
LITHO STRIP
nCKESSON CHEMICAL CO.
449.6 4597.6
ACETONE
BENZENE
HETHYLENE CHLORIDE
PE8CHL080ETHYLENE
STYRENE
TOLUENE
TEICHLOROETHYLENE
XYLENE
16 ACETONE
ACRYLONITRILE
ALLYL CHLORIDE
BENZENE
BENZYL CHLORIDE
BUTADIENE (1.3)
CARBON TETRACHLORIDE
DIOCTYL PHTHAUTE
EPICHLOROHYDRIN
ETHYL ACHYLATE
ETHYLENE DICHLOKIDE
FORMALDEHYDE
HEXACHLOROBENZENE
HETHYL CHLORIDE
HETHYLENE CHLORIDE
NITROBENZENE
PERCHLOROETHYLENE
STYRENE
TOLUENE
TRICHLOROETHYLENE
VINYL CHLORIDE
VINYL I DENE CHLORIDE
XYLENE
ACETONE
ACRYLONITRILE
BENZENE
BENZYL CHLORIDE
BUTADIENE (1,3)
CARBON TETRACHLORIDE
ETHYL ACRYLATE
STYRENE
TOLUENE
VINYL CHLORIDE
XYLENE
16 ACETONE
ACRYLONITRILE
BENZENE
BENZYL CHLORIDE
BUTADIENE (1,3)
CARBON TETRACHLORIDE
ETHYL ACRYLATE
HETHYL CHLORIDE
HETHYLENE CHLORIDE
PERCHLOROETHYLENE
2.54
1.19
2.64
0.38
0.13
1.21
0.78
0.71
1.44
0.00
0.00
1.26
0.02
10.68
2.94
0.00
0.00
0.01
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.01
0.14
0.48
0.01
2.07
0.01
3.90
2.03
0.12
35.73
0.46
303.41
83.35
0.25
3.95
13.53
58.63
4.77
2.76
0.01
2.97
0.04
25.20
6.93
0.02
0.32
30.16
5.57
2.03
0.12
35.73
0.46
303.41
83.35
0.25
3.95
13.53
58.63
"4.77
2.76
0.01
2.97
0.04
25.20
6.93
0.02
0.32
30.16
5.57
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
68
68
68
68
68
68
68
68
68
68
68
68
68
66
68
68
68
66
68
66
68
68
68
68
68
68
68
68
68
68
68
68
68
68
68
63
68
68
68
68
68
66
68
68
68
68
68
68
6B
68
66
68
-------
MCKESSON ENVIROSYSrEMS
448.1 4610.9
METAL FINISHING RESEARCH
NALCll iHtfll.'AI CO.
136.2 4624.1
UOP INC.- PROCESS DIV
STYRENE
TOLUENE
TRICHL080ETHYLENE
VINYL CHLORIDE
XYLENE
16 ACETONE
NETHYLENE CHLORIDE
PERCHLOROETNYLENE
TOLUENE
TRICHLOROETHYLENE
XYLENE
BENZENE
TOLUENE
VINYL CHLORIDE
16 ACETONE
ACRYLAHIDE
ACRYLONITRILE
ALLYL CHLORIDE
BENZENE
BUTADIENE 11.3)
CARBON TETRACHLORIDE
CHLOROFORM
ETHYLENE DICHLORIDE
FORMALDEHYDE
HEXACHLOROBENZENE
METHYL CHLORIDE
NITROBENZENE
PERCHLOROETHYLENE
STYRENE
TOLUENE
TRICHLOROETHYLENE
VINYLI DENE CHLORIDE
XYLENE
ACETONE
ACRYLONITRILE
BENZENE
BENZYL CHLORIDE
BUTADIENE (1,3)
CARBON TETRACHLORIDE
CHLOROFORM
DIOCTYL PHTHALATE
ETHYL ACRYLATE
ETHYLENE DICHLORIDE
HEXACHLOROBENZENE
METHYL CHLORIDE
NETHYLENE CHLORIDE
PERCHLOROETHYLENE
STYRENE
TOLUENfc
TRICHLOROETHYLENE
VINYL CHLORIDE
VINYLI DENE CHLORIDE
0.33
8.02
31.56
4.88
7.45
0.34
712.59
102.85
0.05
502.97
0.94
1.97
12.45
508.19
0.25
0.00
0.00
0.00
4.07
3.48
0.03
0.00
0.22
0.06
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.48
0.41
1.53
0.21
', 0.2fl
0.14
0.12
0.01
2.03
0.03
17.17
5.83
0.02
0.00
0.01
0.01
0.00
0.22
0.02
1.08
0.22
0.94
0.67
5.33
3.61
0.25
0.00
0.00
0.00
4.07
3.48
0.03
0.00
0.22
0.06
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.48
0.41
1.53
0.21
0.28
0.14
0.12
0.01
2.03
0.03
17.17
5.83
0.02
0.00
0.01
0.01
0.00
0.22
0.02
1.08
0.22
0.94
0.67
5.33
3.61
3
3
3
3
*
{*
Bf / -
i
|Bji
j^^HK :
* ^
jv
3°
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
j
0
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
.0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
' "J
60
68
68
68
68
66
66
68
68
68
68
68
68
68
68
68
68
68
68
68
66
68
68
68
68
68
68
68
68
68
68
68
68
66
68
68
SJ
ft'
68 -i
8
i*.
Si"
Ivl
ii U"
9
!'!
* -
-------
XYLENE
VISKASE CORP.
VlbMSE >. dKf .
UHITCO CHEMICAL CORP.
AMERICAN CAN COMPANY
GENERAL AMERICAN TRANSPORTATION
BEAVER OIL AND SLUDGE REMOVAL
434.2 4624.9 16 ACETONE
ACRYLONITRILE
BENZENE
BENZYL CHLORIDE
BUTADIENE ll.3>
CARBON TETRACHLORIDE
ETHYL ACRYLATE
METHYL CHLORIDE
HETHYLENE CHLORIDE
PERCHLOROETHYLENE
STYRENE
TOLUENE
TRICHLOKOETHYLEME
VINYL CHLORIDE
XYLENE
I'M. 4 4624.9 16 ACETONE
ACRYLONITRILE
BENZENE
CARBON TETRACHLORIDE
CHLOROFORM
DIOCTYL PHTHALATE
ETHYL ACRYLATE
ETHYLENE DI CHLORIDE
HEXACHLOROBENZENE
METHYLENE CHLORIDE
PERCHLOROETHYLENE
STYRENE
TOLUENE
TRICHLOROETHYLFNE
VINYL CHLORIDE
VINYLI DENE CHLORIDE
XYLFNE
4.?7.2 4626.8 16 ACETONE
XYLENE
4,2.2 4612.7 16 ACETONE
TOLUENE
XYLENE
460.3 4609.3
427.3 4624.9
16 ACETONE
BENZENE
STYRENE
TOLUENE
XYLENE
16 ACETONE
BENZENE
CARBON TETRACHLORIDE
CHLOROFORM
DIOCTYL PHTHALATE
ETHYLENE DICHLORIDE
HEXACHLOROBENZENE
0.27
0.27
66
0.59
0.00
0.56
0.01
4.73
1.30
0.00
0.06
1.68
0.48
0.06
0.21
0.4S
0.91
0.23
0.0C.
'.1.01
0.00
0.02
0.00
0.00
0.02
0.00
0.00
-0.05
0.01
0.01
0.04
0.03
1.99
u.OB
0.16
1.27
3.46
9.69
4.92
26.93
3.91
22.64
2.40
27.11
27.27
16.94
5.85
19.35
0.59
0.00
0.56
0.01
4.73
1.30
0.00
0.06
1.68
C.«B
>.06
o.r.i
0.49
0.91
0.25
O.i»5
0.01
0.00
0.02
0.00
0.00
0.02
0.00
0.00
0.05
0.01
0.01
0.0*
0.0)
1.99
0.08
0.16
1.27
6.16
91.96
22.91
0.33
0.00
0.14
0.00
3.91
22.64
2.40
27.11
27.27
6.16
91.96
22.91
0.33
0.00
0.14
0.00
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
8
8
8
6
8
8
8
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
68
68
68
68
66
68
68
68
68
68
66
68
68
68
68
68
68
68
68
68
68
68
68
68
68
68
68
68
68
68
68
68
68
68
68
68
68
68
68
68
68
66
68
68
68
68
68
68
68
-------
SCA CHEHICAL SERVICES
STAUFFER CHEHICAL COMPANY
CHEH-CLEAR
AMERICAN CHEM SERV
460.4 4606.7
451.8 4614.1
465.3 4596.6
IEROJ (NO. 1)
423.4 4633.9
HETHYLENE CHLORIDE
PERCHLOROETHYLENE
STYRENE
TOLUENE
TRICHLOROETHYLENE
VINYL CHLORIDE
ViHYLiL-ENt OHLOHDE
XYLENE
ACETONE
ACRYLONITRILE
BENZENE
CARBON TETRACHLORIPE
CHLOROFORM
OIOCTYL PHTHALATE
EPICHLORIl'hIN
ETHYL ACRYLATF
ETHYI.ENE DICHLiiklDE
FORMALDEHYDE
HEXAi'HLORDBENZENF
METHYLENE CHLORIDE
PERCHLOROETHYLENb
STYRENE
TOLUENE
TRICHLOROETHYLENE
VINYL CHLORIDE
VINYL I DENE CHLORIDE
XYLENE
16 BENZENE
STYRENE
TOLUENE
XYLENE
16 ACETONE
ETHYL ACKYLAfF
FJRNALDEHiOE
TOLUENE
XYLFNE
16 ACETONE
BENZENE
HETHYLENE CHLORIDE
STYRENE
TOLUENE
TRICHLOROETHYLENE
XYLENE
16 HETHYLENE CHLORIDE
PERCHLOROETHYLENE
TRICHLOROETHYLENE
39.12
7.56
9.41
40.82
27.82
48.83
75.52
18.17
Vf 15*0- 26
' 10328.21
"> ERR
54646.49
19030. 10
7241.98
2617.1.53
,99318.85
10350.86
^6558.40
3754.52
237.43
28.96
65.51
0.05
0.04
11.79
10.fc9 10.69
15.32 15.32
41.90 41.30
6.40 o.oO
11 v»0. 26
V / ESS
li-jJO. 10
321 l.U
10350.86
26558.40
3754.52
237.43
26.96
65.51
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
40000
400HO
40000'
40000
40000
,40000
40000
40000
400CO
40000
40000
40000
aOOOO
40000
40000
^0000
40000
40000
40000
60 40000
60 40000
60 40000
60 40000
10
10
10
to
10
i:>
10
to
10
10
10
10
10
10
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
G
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
-68
68
68
68
68
68
68
66
140
140
140
140
140
140
140
140
UO
140
140
140
140
140
140
140
140
140
140
140
140
140
140
68
68
68
68
68
68
6B
a
XEROX (NO. 2)
423.4 4633.8
16 HETHYLENE CHLORIDE
PERCHLOROETHYLENE
TRICHLOROETHYLENE
237.43
28.96
65.51
237.43
28.96
65.51
10
10
10
0
0
0
-------
11
of the PCB trial burn. Measurements during the trial burn did not detect any
of the most toxic and best studied dioxin, i.e., 2,3,7,8 tetrachlorodibenzo-
dioxin (TCDD). However, emissions of other polychlorinated dibenzodioxins
(PCDDs) were detected and measured, as were various polychlorinated dibenzofurans
(PCDF). A July 15, 1988, memorandum from Mardi Klevs of the Air and Radiation
Branch of Region V of USEPA to Carl Nash describes the details of the derivation
of estimates of SCA emissions of dioxins, furans, and PCBs. This memorandum
calculates ratios of emissions of PCDDs, 2,3,7,8 tetrachlorodibenzofuran
(TCDF), and other PCDFs to emissions of PCBs as found in the trial burn. This
memorandum then multiplies these ratios times the estimated annual PCB emissions
to obtain estimates of annual emissions of PCDD, TCDF, and other PCDFs.
An additional calculation, not described the Klevs memorandum, attempts to
address the different toxicities of different dioxin and furan compounds. In
order to assess the combined impacts of different dioxins and furans, USEPA has
developed toxicity equivalency factors'that express the eVtilma,tedi toxicities of
specified types of dioxins or furans relativ^'/ro the toxicity of'2,3,7,8 TCDD.
For example, the toxicity equivalency factor' fkr 2-,3,7,8 TCDF is 0.1, meaning
that 10 grams of 2,3,7,8 TCDF emissions are estimated to be equivalent in
toxicity to 1 gram of 2,3,7,8 TCDD emissions. Clearly these toxicity equivalency
factors are highly uncertain, since they do not reflect the depth of study
that commonly underlie estimates of unit risk factors. A further complication
here is that the toxicity equivalence factors that USEPA has estimated are for
a more disaggregated categorization of"dioxins and furans than the categorization
for which trial burn results were available. Nevertheless, toxicity equivalence
factors are the best means of evaluating the combined impact of multiple dioxin
and furan compounds. Thus, toxicity equivalence factors for the dioxin/furan
categories measured in the trial burn were approximated from toxicity equivalence
factors developed for more disaggregated categories.
The following table summarizes the ratios of dioxins and furans versus PCB
emissions, the resulting emissions estimate, the approximated toxicity equivalence
factor, and the resulting estimate of equivalent TCDD emissions:
Emissions
Species/PCB ratio (Ibs/yr)
TCDD not detected 0
PCDD 0.0015 0.0035
TCDF 0.0024 0.0055
PCDF . : 0'."021:J, . 0.050
Approximated
Toxicity
Equivalence
Factor
1
0.1
0.1
0.01
Total :
Equivalent
TCDD
Emissions
(Ibs/yr)
0.00035
0.00055
0.00050
0.00140 Ibs/yr
-------
12
The final set of emissions estimates for the SCA incinerator is for temporary
storage. RCRA does not regulate temporary storage, and so the RCRA data
available to MRI did not describe this source of emissions. Nevertheless
this site is known to have temporary storage facilities. Therefore,
supplemental calculations used the equations used by MRI for fixed roof storage
tanks to estimate emissions from temporary storage. Table 3 presents the
equations used. Table 3 also shows the values assumed for each parameter.
Note that two factors in the equation for working losses are tank volume and
annual number of turnovers, which when multiplied equals the volume of material
stored. The actual calculations used the quantities of each material stored as
estimated by MRI, rather than relying on separate estimates of tank volume and
turnover numbers. Thus, uncertainties in the assumed values for tank volume
and numbers of turnovers will not significantly affect emissions estimates.
A further factor affecting breathing losses is the ratio of the volumes of
particular contaminants stored to total volume stored. The total volume of
hazardous waste handled in a year by SCA.,"according to the j^CRA, records obtained
by MRI, was 2,112,000 gallons. If for exampl!ey*t of that 4folume<'stored was a
given substance, then the emissions of that s'udistance would be 1% of the emissions
of pure storage of that substance. The volumes of each substance reflect MRI's
estimates. The breathing emissions estimate for pure stored substance, based
on the equation in Table 3, was multiplied by these ratios of substance through-
put to total throughput to estimate breathing losses for each pollutant.
Spillage was assumed to be already accounted for "by MRI. Thus an estimate of
total emissions from temporary storage-was obtained by adding breathing losses
and working losses.
Table 4 shows pollutant-specific information for temporary storage at the SCA
incinerator. For each pollutant, this table shows the vapor pressure at standard
temperature, the emissions estimates for incineration and for temporary storage,
and the total emissions estimate. Note that no PCB emissions are estimated
from temporary storage, since the vapor pressure of this substance is negligible.
Municipal Waste Landfills
In addition to waste classified as hazardous under RCRA and TSCA, other wastes
contain some of the pollutants inventoried in this study. The term "municipal
waste" is used here to represent both residential refuse and industrial waste,
excluding waste streams regulated under RCRA and TSCA. The Southeast Chicago
area includes both municipal waste landfills and a municipal waste incinerator.
The following discussion describes the estimation of emissions for municipal
waste landfills. A later section of this report describes modifications to the
emissions estimates for the area's municipal waste incinerator.
MRI estimated emissions for municipal waste landfills. Full details of MRI's
emission estimation procedure are provided in a December 30, 1987, memorandum
from.Chuck Vaught and Rebecca Nicholson of MRI to Harriet Croke of the Air and
Radiation Branch in Region :v of USEPA, entitled "Estimation of Hazardous Air
Emissions from Sanitary Landfills". This procedure included three steps:
identifying landfills, estimating the total quantity of landfill gas (mostly
methane) from each landfill, and estimating the concentration of each individual
pollutant in the landfill gas. The identification of landfills was based on
information provided by Illinois EPA. Landfills in the Southeast Chicago
study area include the CID Landfill, Land and Lakes, Paxton, Refuse Depot,
-------
13
Table 3. Equations Used to Estimate Storage Tank Emissions
Breathing losses (Mg/year) = 1.02xl(T5 MW(_P )°-68D1'73H0-51T°-5FnCKr
V(T4J^P) P C
Working losses (Mg/year) = 1.09xlO"8 MyPVNKnKc
Parameters
Value Assumed
for SCA
y = molecular weight
P = true vapor pressure of product
D
C*
V
N
T
FP*
K*
tank diameter, ft
tank diameter factor (dimensionless)
tank capacity, gal
number of turnovers per year (dimensionless)
average diurnal temperature change in °F
paint factor (dimensionless)
average vapor space height, ft
product factor (dimensionless) = 1.0 for VOL
turnover factor (dimensionless)
stand and val ues
standard values
(see Table 4)
4 meters = 13.1 feet
0.66
13,300 gal
see text
20°F.
1
2 meters =6.6 feet
1
1
* Fuller explanation of these parameters is given in
"Compilation of Air Pollution Emission Factors,"
known as AP-42
-------
14
Table 4. Emissions Estimates for the SCA Incinerator
(in pounds/year)
Pollutant
Acetone
Acrylonltrile
Benzene
Carbon Tetrachloride
Chloroform
Dioctyl Phthalate
Dioxins
Epichlorohydrin
Ethyl Acrylate
Ethylene Dichloride
Formaldehyde
Hexachlorobenzene
Methyl ene Chloride
Perch!oroethylene
PCBs
Styrene
Toluene
Trichloroethylene
Vinyl Chloride
Vinylidene Chloride
Xylene
Vapor
Pressure*
(mrnHg)
266
114
95
113
208
0
0
17
40
82
3500
0
438
19
0
7
30
75
?660
591
.3
Incineration
Emissions
4.9
0.3
2.9
2.0
0.01
' °-2.r . ,.
o.b'di
0.03
0.4
o.oi
4.4
0.2
15.4
22.2
2.3
4.1
18.7
94.8
0.05
0.04
11.7
Temporary
Storage
Emissions
55.5
1.4
14.1
12.6
0.1
"^°"°;":
0.0
0.02
0.9
0.06
76.9
0.0
248.3
25.6
0.0
2.1
35.0
372.2
1.5
1.2
6.3
Total
60.4
1.7
17.0
14.6
0.1
0.2
0.001
0.05
1.3
0.07
81.3
0.2
263.7
47.8
2.3
6.2
53.7
467.0
1.5
1.2
18.0
* Zero vapor pressure " ites essentially no measurable volatilization
-------
15
Fitz Mar, and Lansing/Sexton. Landfill gas is recovered at the CID Landfill,
Refuse Depot, and Fitz Mar, and so no emissions were assumed for these landfills.
Emissions were estimated for Land and Lakes, Paxton, and Lansing/Sexton.
The second step estimated total landfill gas generation based on the volume of
each landfill. Volume is a straightforward geometric calculation based on the
landfills' depths below ground, heights above ground, and horizontal areas.
Each landfill's volume was then multiplied by 207 cubic feet of landfill gas
per year cubic yard of landfill volume, a figure derived from a study of several
landfills in the Eastern United States.
The third step used landfill gas concentrations of inventoried pollutants found
in a national study of landfill gas. Concentrations measurements were not made
in Southeast Chicago, but the landfilled waste composition and therefore the
landfill gas composition in Southeast Chicago may be assumed sufficiently
similar to the landfill waste composition for the studied landfills to use the
national landfill data. ;,"..* :: ., , ..
..
A special issue in interpreting the available
-------
Table 5. Emissions Estimates for Municipal Waste Landfills
Pollutant
Acetone :'-
Benzene
Methylene Chloride
Perchloroethylene
Tol uene
Trichloroethylene
Vinyl Chloride
Vinylidene Chloride
Xylene
Total
Gas Generation
(mmcf/yr)
Mean
entration
ppm)
4.8
2
32
11
27
3.1
6.9
0.8
16
Land & Lakes Landfill
Areas 1&2 Area 3
Emissions Emissions
(Ib/yr) (Ib/yr)
892
501
8720
5848
7963
1306
1382
249
5447
1282
mmcf/yr
903
507
8823
5918
8058
1321
1399
252
5512
1293
mmcf/yr
Paxton
Area 1
Emissions
(Ib/yr)
170
95
1661
1114
1517
249
263
47 .
' 1038
244
mmcf/yr
Landfill
Area 2
Emissions
(Ib/yr)
305
171
2981
1999
2722
446
-- ;473
5> '. 85
1862
% 438
mmcf/yr
Lansing/
Sexton
Emissions
(Ib/yr)
692
388
6757
4532
6171
1012
1071
193
4221
994
mmcf/yr
Total
Emissions
(Ib/yr)
2962
1662
28942
19411
26431
4334
4588
826
18080
4251
mmcf/yr
-------
17
total asbestos emissions from demolition and renovation of asbestos-containing
buildings in the Southeast Chicago source area was estimated to be 0.0185 tons
per year. These emissions were assumed spatially distributed according to the
distribution of households.
Revisions to Previously Documented Inventory
Subsequent to the July 1987 report on the general emissions inventory, improved
information became available for some source categories. In particular, improved
information became available on various aspects of steel industry emissions,
the number of chrome platers and typical plant emissions, on volatilization
from wastewater treatment plants, and on species fractions from roadway vehicles.
The following sections describe the inventory modifications that were made to
incorporate these improved information.
Revisions for Steel Industry
Emission estimates for the steel industry.,: 1 ik^those for ii*her-'industrial
sources, were documented in the July 1987 report e-ntitled "Air Toxics Emissions
Inventory for the Southeast Chicago Area". A review of that inventory,
considering the relative cancer potencies of the various pollutants, suggested
that the steel industry is a significant source of air toxicants in the area.
Therefore, a more intensive review of this portion of the inventory was conducted,
An important part of the review of the-steel mill portion of the inventory was
conducted by the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (IEPA) and the Indiana
Department of Environmental Management (IDEM). IEPA reviewed the particulate
emissions estimates for each operation for each Illinois mill. IEPA suggested
several corrections which were incorporated into the inventory. The IDEM review
focused on coke by-product recovery plants, which the IDEM has carefully
investigated in the processing of developing emission control regulations. (The
emissions inventory reflects the current situation of no control regulations,
although IDEM's regulations have been adopted and will result in emission
controls in the near future). The emissions inventory was revised to reflect
IDEM's data on coke production and by-product recovery plant emissions estimates.
A second important source of information in the Indiana portion of the emissions
study area was the fine particulate matter ("PMin") emissions inventory that
has been prepared by Midwest Research Institute (MRI). Although this inventory
was. designed to estimate maximum allowable emissions rather than the actual
emissions that this study addresses, MRI's inventory of steel mill emissions
was useful both for providing emission factors to use for various operations
and to provide a "reasonableness test" of the Southeast Chicago inventory.
USEPA also conducted its own independent revaluation of steel mill emissions.
The first aspect of USEPA's review concerned the operating status of major
units at each of the steel mills in the study area. The inventory as of July
1987 is bas'ed.'on p'artkulate matter emissions estimates contained in the National
Emissions Data System 'NEDS), which reflects sometimes outdated judgements of
which units are operating and which units may be considered permanently shut
down. The first step )' the review was to develop an independent list of major
operating or operable units based on information available to USEPA Region V's
Air Compliance Branch personnel. This list was designed to include all currently
operating units plus al1 jnits which are not operating now but which may
-------
18
reasonably be expected to recommence operation. For cases in which it is clear
that either one of two similar units but not both can be expected to be operated,
emissions for only one unit were included. Thus, this inventory is designed to
estimate actual emissions assuming full utilization of existing steel production
facilities.
The review of the operational status led to some additions and some deletions of
emissions points. This in turn led to a need to estimate emissions for added
sources. Fortunately, for these sources (all located in Indiana), typical
operating rate information was available from IDEM's emissions inventory system,
and emission factors were available from MRI's study. (MRI evaluated both total
suspended particulate matter and fine particulate matter; this study used total
suspended particulate emissions factors.)
The second aspect of USEPA's review was to evaluate emissions estimates for
operating and operable units. Independent emissions estimates were made for
each major unit based on information ava.il able "'from inspections of|compliance
with existing regulations. In most cases, jthijsxfropari son "Bed £d'a confirmation
of NEDS estimates of particulate emissionsj tHogigh modified emissions estimates
based on modified assumptions about emission control or based on modified
operation rates were substituted for NEDS estimates for a small number of
sources.
The third aspect of USEPA's review focused on what'fraction of particulate matter
should be estimated to be arsenic, cadmium, hexavalent chromium, and nickel.
This aspect of the review involved a more intensive review of available literature
describing studies of these species fractions. Whereas the inventory described
in the July 1987 inventory report relied principally on the Receptor Model
Source Characterization Library, the more intensive review obtained data from
several studies specifically devoted to the iron and steel industry.
Table 6 shows the revised particulate species fractions obtained from the more
intensive literature review. This table identifies the type of operations, the
species fractions, the standard classification codes (SCC) for which each of
species fractions were applied, and the study from which the species fractions
were obtained. This table is comparable to Table 2 of the July 1987 report.
Indeed, the species fractions for non-steel sources shown in that table are
shown again in Table 6. This is done so that Table 6 represents a complete
substitute for Table 2 of the July 1987 report, even though these non-steel
source species fractions are mostly unchanged. (The only other species fractions
changed are for municipal waste incinerators, in accordance with discussion
above.)
A special issue related to species fractions concerns the differentiation
between total chromium and hexavalent chromium. Of the different chemical
forms of chromium-, only the hexavalent form has been clearly established as
being carcinogenic.- Unfortunately, standard measurement methods cannot distin-
guish hexavalent chromium from other forms of chromium. However, limited
information was available from a special study of chromium emitted from steel-
making furnaces, documented in two reports prepared by USEPA entitled "Chromium
Emissions from Electric Arc Furnaces and Argon-Oxygen Decarburization Vessels
in the Steel Industry" (October 1985) and "Chromium Emissions from Basic Oxygen
-------
19
Table 6. Particulate Matter Species Fractions
(All data in weight percent)
Blast Furnace
Basic Oxygen
Furnace
Electric Arc Furnace:
Alloy Steel
Carbon Steel
Gray iron
foundries
Asphalt roofing
Glass mfg.
Gypsum mfg.
Lime and cement
manufacturing
Refinery heater
(gas-fired)
Refinery cat. cracker
Municipal incin.*** .0012
Arsenic
.058
.015
.00012
.041
.013
.040
'.040
.040
.03
.012
.023
.050*
r :
.0012
Species
Cadmium
.006
.001
.00011
.050
.002
.060
.060
.060
.006
.006
.003
.050*
.010 .
.123
Fraction
Chromium Nickel
.054 .040
.089 1.622
.0003
.016
.110
.660
2.1
.2
3.0
.038 .067
.550*
.218 .004
.550* .550*
.011 .00012
.550* .550*
.43
'.042 .281
Applicable
SCCs
1-01 -002 -01, -02, -03, -23;
1-02-002 -01, -02, -04
1-01-004-01; 1-02 -004-01, -04;
1-02-005-01, -04; 3-06-001-03**
3-03-003-02, -08, -14
1-02-007-07; 3-03-004-01;
3-03-003-03, -04, -06, -12, -13, -99
1-02-007-04; 3-03-008-01, -02,
-08, -09, -21 to -27, -99;
; 3-05-040-2I,-23,-25»-99;
,v;^0-007-OrW "-'
Reference
M.I
M.I
S.4
M.I
S.3
"3-03-009-10 to -17, -31 to -34, -99 S.3
3-04-007-04, -06, -15, -99,
3-04-050-001
3-03-009-01, -04, -07
3-03-009-08
3-03-008-04, -05, -11, -12. -13,
-14, -17, -19, -20
3-04-003-01, -20, -31, -40
-50, -51
3-05-001 -01, -02, -03, -04, -05
3-05-015-01, -02, -06, -08, -10
3-05-015-01, -02, -03, -04
3-05-006-06
3-05-016-01 , -02, -04, -07, -08
-09, -10, -14, -15, -99
3-06-001-04
3-06-002-01
5-01-001-02
M.I
S.5
S.3
M.I
M.I
M.I
M.I
M.I
M.I
M.I
M.4
Where this table shows species fraction of .550% and .050%, the original
| study reported values of "trace" (0.1 to 1.0%) and "below detection limits" (<0.1%).
SCC 3-06-001-03 is for oil-fired process heaters at refineries.
*** For municipal waste incinerators species fraction for chromium reflects hexavalent chromium.
Additional species, fractions: Municipal waste incinerators - beryllium --0.0012%
mercury - 0.880%
Refinery catalytic cracker - mercury - 0.003%
-------
20
Process Furnaces in the Steel Industry" (November 1985). These reports suggest
that roughly 0.1 percent of total chromium emissions from these source types
are in the hexavalent form.
The final step in estimating emissions is to multiply total suspended parti-
culate emissions times species fractions for individual pollutants. The results
of these calculations are shown in Table 7. This table shows total emissions of
arsenic, cadmium, hexavalent chromium, and nickel emissions for each steel mill
in the area. This table also shows emissions of these pollutants from other
sources in the area, so that this table is a complete replacement for Table 13
of the July 1987 report.
Emission estimates for coke ovens and for coke by-product recovery plants were
also modified, particularly in Indiana as a result of IDEM's investigations.
The modified values are shown in Table 8, a table which completely replaces
Table 11 of the July 1987 report. , **
»' '.
In addition to the review of emission estimatfcs^an important change was made
in other inputs to the dispersion model for cotte ovens and roof vents for basic
oxygen furnaces and electric arc furnaces. The previous approach to these
sources used the simple approach of treating all emissions from an operation as
emanating from a single point. In actuality, these source have emissions from
a long and narrow area. Therefore, a better simulation of the impacts of these
sources is to distribute emissions along the full area where. emissions emanate.
The Industrial Source Complex-Long Term (ISCLT) model, used in this study to
assess dispersion of emissions from industrial facilities, allows three options
of source geometry: point, volume, and area sources. Treatment as point sources ';
as noted above, understates the initial dispersion of these emissions. Treat-
ment as volume sources allow consideration of the initial horizontal and vertical
distribution of emissions as well as plume rise. Treatment as area sources
considers the horizontal distribution of emissions but does not consider either
initial vertical dispersion or plume rise. Ignoring initial vertical dispersion
and ignoring plume rise should have counter-balancing effects, so that area
source treatment should give results similar to the results of volume source
treatment. For this reason, and because data on initial vertical dispersion
were not readily available, this study addressed coke ovens and steel furnace
roof vents as area sources in the context of ISCLT.
One constraint of ISCLT is that area sources must be treated as squares. The
ideal treatment of long, narrow sources is with numerous small, contiguous
squares. For example, a coke battery which is 12 meters wide and 96 meters
long might ideally be treated as 8 sequential 12 meter squares. However,
similar results with fewer modeling resources required may be obtained with
fewer emission squares. With the above example, satisfactory concentration
estimates .may be obtained by dividing the total emissions into 4 squares, each
12 meters square , centered at 6 meters, 34 meters, 62 meters, and 90 meters
along the battery. The exact number of squares used for a given source was
chosen on the basis of the relative length and width of the source, but in all
cases was between 3 and 5 squares. Dimensions for Indiana sources were obtained
from the MRI inventory, and Illinois sources were assumed to have dimensions
similar to analogous Indijna operations.
-------
s^TICULATE EMISSIONS ESTIMATES BASEL- ON
SPECIES FRACTIONS
15.40
1540
1540
1540
1540
1540
1540
1540
1540
1540
1540
1540
1540
1540
15*0
1540
1540
1540
1540
8310
23-::'
2360
2350
2360
2360
2360
2360
2350
2360
2360
c
%
1 1
13
21
40
44
54
58
59
72
79
80
81
93
106
10i-
vi~
121
2 ±
1 17
120
121
210
229
305
309
316
317
316
H ? SMITH PAPER co
SHELL OIL COMPANY .
CORN PRODUCTS-ARGO P
BORG-WARNER CORP - S
CALUMET STEEL COMPAN
GENERAL MOTORS - ELE
VULCAN MATLS-LIME PL
ACME RIVEP.DALE
STICKNEY TERMINAL
MARBLEHEAD LIME CO
MARBLEHEAD LIME CO
USX - SOUTH WORKS
ACME CHICAGO
LTV STEEL CHICAGO
ACME COKE PLANT
CINDERS
HECKETT ENGINEERING
LAKE-RIVER TERMINALS..
NATIONAL CAN CORP -
COM ED - WILL COUNTY
(4 IF SCO DEAN H MITCHE
USX GARY WORKS
usx GARY WORKS
COMMONWEALTH EDISON
LEVER BROTHERS COMPA
BLAW KNOX FOUNDRY AN
EAST CHICAGO MUNICIP*
INLAND STEEL I
INLAND STEEL I I
LTV STEEL INDIANA
ARSENIC
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0. 1
0.0
0.3
0.0
:. 0.0
to^
-.'Of. 1
o". i
0.5
0. 2
0.0
0. 0"
0.0
0. 0
0.5
0. 1
0. 2
1 . 2
0.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.6
0.6
0. 4
ARSENIC
.. 5.7
CADMIUM
0 . 0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.4
0.0
o.o
0 ." '$*
0. 1
0.0
0.6
0. 3
0.0
0. 0
0.0
0. 0
0. 1
0.0
0 . 3
1 . 1
0. 1
0.0
0.0
0. 1
0.9
0. 7
0. 3
. CADM ! UM
5.0
CR-TOTAL
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
4.4
0.0
0. 0
" u' 0.0
5.0
0.6
3.9
0. 1
3. 1
0. 1
0.0
0. 0
0.5
0. 1
0.3
25. 4
0.6
0. 1
O.C
29.9
8.5
3. 7
17. 3
CR-TOTAL
107. 7
NICKEL
0. 1
0.0
. 0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.2
0. 3
0.0
0.0
3.0
0. 1
0. 1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.4
o.:
o.o
0.2
0.4
1. 3
0.0
0.2
0.0
0. 7
0. 1
NICKEL
7. 3
TU ; £, p^ -
, cpc -
HAS EMISSION; OF BERYLLIUM AND MERCURY
-------
22
Table 8. Emissions from Coking Operations
(All data in tons per year)
Coke Ovens*
Byproduct Plants
Acme Steel
LTV Steel
(Chicago)
Inland Steel
U.S. Steel
"Coke oven emissions"
74.11 tpy
38.50
157.12
157.94
Benzene
474.3 tpy
225.8
1506.9
1136.3
Toluene
75.2 tpy
35.8
239.0
180.2
Xylene
26.2
12.5
83.1
62.7
Total
427.67 tpy
''"3343.3 tpy 530.3 tpy
184.5 tpy
*These are total emissions of "coke oven emissions" (benzene soluble organics)
that are emitted from charging and leaks at the coke ovens.
-------
c
23
In addition to modifications made to assumptions about source geometry, a more
general review of stack parameters was conducted. This review led to minor
revisions to a few data on stack heights, stack gas temperatures, and stack gas
volumes.
Revisions for Chrome Plating
Since July 1987, IEPA has been seeking to identify electroplaters in the State.
This effort has led to a more refined list of electroplaters than was previously
available. Illinois EPA identified 38 facilities that apparently perform electro-
plating in the Illinois portion of the emissions study area. An additional 3
facilities were identified by examining the yellow pages of the telephone directory
for a total of 41 electroplating facilities.
Electroplating is done both by "job shops", which are in the business of
performing electroplating for other companies,; and by "captive sh&ps", which
are facilities operated by manufacturers as pai#*.t>f their opi manufacturing
operations. Captive shops are difficult to identify. The list of 41 electro-
platers probably contains a few captive shops but is also likely to omit some
job shops. Thus, it is has been estimated that 41 job shops exist in the
Illinois portion of the Southeast Chicago area.
Also since July 1987, improved information has become available on what portion
of electroplaters perform chromium plating and what amounts of hexavalent
chromium will be emitted by a typical chromium plating facility. According to
a survey by Finisher's Management magazine, approximately 45% of electroplater
job shops in the Central United States perform chromium plating. According to
an analysis by Midwest Research Institute for use in a background information
document for a NESHAP for chromium electroplaters, the total national emissions
from chromium electroplaters is estimated to be 344,088 pounds per year of
hexavalent chromium. This estimate is based on development of a small , a
medium, and a large model chromium plating facility, estimation of the national
number of facilities of each size category, and consideration of the existing
frequency and effectiveness of available methods of emissions control.
As noted above, information available in the Southeast Chicago area was judged
to indicate only the number of job shop electroplaters. Of these 41 electroplaters,
estimates for the Central United States suggest that 45%, or about 18, perform
chromium electroplating. This is about 1.2% of the national estimate of 1499
job shops that perform chromium electroplating. This suggests that hexavalent
chromium emissions from chromium electroplaters in the Illinois portion of the
Southeast Chicago area are about 1.2% of the national emissions estimate of
344,088 pounds per year. These calculations yield an estimate of 4225 pounds
(2.11 tons) of hexavalent chromium per year.
A final step'..in-inventorying chromium plating emissions is to estimate the
spatial distribution of emissions. The actual distribution has zero emissions
at some of the 41 identified electroplaters (where chromium plating is not
performed), nonzero emissions at others of the identified facilities, and non-
zero emissions at some unidentified facilities (including numerous captive
shops). Unfortunately, th,is kind of distributional information is not available.
Therefore, emissions wer-.- distributed by assuming an equal distribution of the
area total 4225 pounds ^r year, so that each Identified facility was assumed
to emit 103 pounds of he.
-------
24
The emissions estimates described above do not include chromium electroplating
in Indiana, where insufficient information was available to identify specific
facilities. Therefore, in Indiana, manufacturing employment was used as a
surrogate to indicate the probable emissions from chromium electroplating. The
area in Illinois with 4225 pounds of hexavalent chromium emissions from chromium
electroplating has an estimated 164,336 manufacturing employers. This suggests
emissions of 0.0257 pounds of hexavalent chromium per manufacturing employee.
Since the portion of Indiana in the Southeast Chicago study area has an estimated
54,040 manufacturing employees, this area was estimated to have 1389 pounds (0.695
tons) per year of hexavalent chromium emissions from chromium electroplating.
Revisions for Municipal Waste Incineration
The emissions study area includes one municipal waste incinerator, a mass burn
incinerator located in East Chicago, Indiana. Emissions estimates for this
facility were based on data developed in a national study;of^munie^pal waste
incinerators, entitled Municipal Waste Com,bus,tij9.: it ion was used.
-------
25
Table 9. Emissions Estimates for the East Chicago Municipal Incinerator
Emissions
Pol 1 utant (pounds/year)
Dioxin 0.4
Formaldehyde 777.4
Hexachlorobenzene* 47.8
PCBs 0.3
Polycyclic Organic Matter 7.2
Arsenic ../.-' 1,7
':'. /#- ,..;;M-'
Beryllium : .'''l/f/
Cadmium 176.8
Chromium (hexavalent) 59.8
Mercury 1266.0
Nickel 404.0
* Although different chlorinated benzene compounds have different toxicities,
emissions of any of these compounds were conservatively treated as
hexachlorobenzene emissions and included in this total.
-------
26
No change has been made to the estimations of "losses". However, the relative
importance of volatilization and biodegradiation has been further investigated.
This investigation attempted to focus on styrene, which was considered represen-
tative of the air toxicants from these wastewater treatment plants. Unfortunately,
direct studies of volatilization versus biodegradiation have not been conducted
for styrene. However, studies of volatilization versus biodegradiation have
been conducted for other similar nonpolar solvents such as benzene and toluene.
These studies differentiate between "acclimated conditions" versus "unacclimated
conditions", i.e. whether or not the treatment plant has been receiving a
steady flow of the contaminant, thereby allowing the micro-organism population
in the treatment facility to become optimized for biodegrading that contaminant.
For solvents like benzene and toluene, available studies suggest about 20 to 30
percent volatilization for acclimated conditions and 50 to 60 percent volatili-
zation for unacclimated operation. For styrene, which has a somewhat higher
propensity to volatilize (i.e., a higher Henry's Law constant), it may be
estimated that 30 to 40 percent volatilizes-in. acclimated, conditions and 75 to
85 percent volatilizes in unacclimated condition*. A rev tetf* of:: tjfie seven days
of influent monitoring data suggest relatJvetyptable influent concentrations,
i.e., acclimated conditions. The conservative-end of the range was used for
styrene, and the same volatilization percentage was also applied to all other
contaminants as well. Thus, all prior emissions estimates were multiplied by
40 percent. The resulting emissions estimates are shown in Table 10.
Revisions for Roadway Vehicles
The Office of Mobile Sources has conducted an intensive investigation of roadway-
vehicle emissions of carcinogenic substances as reported in Air Toxics Emissions!
From Motor Vehicles by Penny Carey. Although this report is oriented toward
national emissions and national exposure, the report also provides species
fractions and other information directly useful for estimating emissions from
roadway vehicles in the Southeast Chicago area. Since this report generally
reflects broader investigations, the relevant data from this report were gene-
rally used in place of the corresponding data from the July 1987 report on the
Southeast Chicago emissions inventory. In addition, the discussion below will
note a significant further modification in the estimation of total exhaust
organic emissions, as suggested in a direct communication from Penny Carey.
The first steps in inventorying mobile source emissions remain as described in
the July 1987 report. That is, county total volatile organic compound emissions
were interpolated to 1985 from 1980 and 1987 data given in the Chicago area
ozone State Implementation Plans. These county totals were adjusted from
conditions appropriate to the State Implementation Plans (summer temperature,
an area-wide mix of vehicle types, and the use of the MOBILE 2 emission factor
model) to conditions appropriate for a Southeast Chicago air toxics study
(annual average temperature, a mix of vehicle types developed for the southern
portion of "the ".Chicago area, and the use of the MOBILE 3 emission factor model).
As described jn the July 1987 report, this process also subdivided emissions
into freeway emissions and emissions on other roadways, and reassigned all
evaporative emissions to occur on non-freeway roads.
-------
27
Table 10. Wastewater Treatment Plant Emissions Estimates
(in tons per year)
Pollutant Calumet VIest-Soutnwest
Benzene .7 .1
Methylene chloride 1.3* 8.1*
Perchloroethylene .6 6.0*
TMchloroethylene .3 1.8*
Chloroform .3* .5*
Vinylidene chloride .01
Ethylene dichloride .2 .6
Methyl chloride .08
Styrene 1.8 " ' ' .^.8 ;.v
Hexachlorobenzene** .3 ,, ^-^'- ^2*-'"
Toluene 4.8 "" . 2.8
Xylene 3.5 13.8
Acetone 120.4 82.5
* Because contaminant quantities in the treated effluent are a significant
fraction of the quantities in the raw influent (suggesting limited
volatilization), these estimates are based on the difference between
influent and effluent quantities.
f
** Although different chlorinated benzene compounds have different toxicities,
emissions of all these compounds were conservatively treated as hexachlorobenzene
emissions and included in these totals.
-------
28
The July 1987 inventory report described an additional upward adjustment of
exhaust volatile organic compound emissions to correct for suspected undermea-
surement of emissions. In particular, preliminary data suggested that measure-
ment of exhaust emissions with an unheated sampling train might result in 23%
of the mass of organic emissions adsorbing to the sampling train and not being
included in the measurement. Since the MOBILE models are based on such mea-
surements and thus may reflect only 77% of exhaust emissions, the inventory
described an upward adjustment to include the other 23% of emissions. (Evapo-
rative emissions estimates did not reflect this suspected measurement problem
and were not adjusted.)
However, as indicated in correspondence from Penny Carey, further data on the
impact of using unheated sampling trains has led to doubt that any adjustments
for measurement method are appropriate. Subsequent data have suggested that
the losses from adsorption on unheated sampling trains may be relatively minor.
Furthermore, most of the species fractions are derived as ratios of species
emissions to unadjusted total volatile organic emissions;, these species
fractions should be used with unadjusted estjjnj£«s of totajfvoljallle organic
emissions. In equation form, this calculatiprfproceeds as follows:
(unadjusted total x species emission factor
organic emissions) (unadjusted total organic = species emissions
emission factor)-
For these reasons, the roadway vehicle emissions estimates now include no
adjustment for measurement method.
The next step in inventorying roadway vehicle emissions is the application of
species fractions. Table 11 shows the species fractions now being used to
derive Southeast Chicago area emissions estimates for roadway vehicles. The
species fraction for benzene was previously derived with assistance from the
Office of Mobile Sources and remains unchanged. For butadiene, which is
difficult to distinguish from butane in standard gas chromatographic analyses,
a new fraction developed by the Office of Mobile Sources is used. Although
this new fraction reflects improved data on butadiene versus butane content
of exhaust emissions, the new percentage is nearly identical to the previous
percentage. Ethylene dibromide was not addressed by the Office of Mobile
Sources study and thus remains unchanged. For formaldehyde, a new species
fraction was derived from fractions specific to different vehicle types (as
obtained from the Office of Mobile Sources study) in conjunction with the
Southeast Chicago area mix of vehicle types. The revised species fraction is
about two times higher for non-freeway roads and about three times higher for
freeways. Polycyclic organic matter was addressed in a different fashion in
the Office of-Mobile Sources study than in the Southeast Chicago study, and
so no new species -.fraction was available. (Table 11 corrects a misleading
reference in-the July 1987 report of identifying polycyclic organic matter as
"Benzo(a)pyrene", which is only one of the numerous compounds constituting
polycyclic organic matter.) For gasoline vapors, the Office of Mobile Sources
considered evaporative emissions to be a different, less toxic mixture of compounds
than the whole gasoline mixture used in the animal study from which the cancer
unit risk was derived. Nevertheless, the Southeast Chicago study is continuing
-------
29
Table 11. Highway Vehicle Species Fractions
Pollutant
Asbestos**
Benzene
Butadiene
**
Cadmium
Ethyl ene dibromide
Formaldehyde
Gasoline vapors
Species Fraction (in %)
Exhaust Evaporative
4 ug/mile
(0.0002*70.0004%)*
3.14%
0.35%
1.9 ug/mile '\ .
(0.00008X/O.OOQ2*!)'#
.0025%/.0018%*
1.61%/2.26%
0
1.09%
Polycyclic organic matter ,040%/.061%*
.0017%
0
100%
0
Acetone
Ethyl ene
Toluene
Xylene
.072%
9.82%/9.36%*
6.59%
5.84%
0
0
6.3
3.8
* Separate figures are for arterial/freeway exhaust emissions. The differences
result from the differences in vehicle mix.
** Emissions are best estimated using the noted emission factor in micrograms
per mile. Percentages are shown for reference only.
-------
30
to make the conservative assumption that evaporative emissions may be treated
as equivalent to gasoline vapors and analyzed using the cancer risk factor for
gasoline vapors.
Table 11 shows two additional pollutants which could be inventoried on the
basis of the study, i.e., asbestos and cadmium. Asbestos is used in brake
linings, and was estimated to be emitted at a rate of 4 micrograms per mile.
Cadmium is a contaminant associated with lead in leaded gasoline, and was
estimated to be emitted at a rate of 0.67 micrograms per mile.
The next pollutant in Table 11 is ethylene. In the Southeast Chicago study,
this compound is not addressed as a carcinogen. The Office of Mobile Sources
study nevertheless addressed this pollutant, and so Table 11 reflects the
improved information developed in the Office of Mobile Sources study. Table 11
also shows species fractions for toluene, xylene, and acetone. These pollutants
are not considered carcinogens in the Southeast Chicago study and were not
addressed in the Office of Mobile Sources study. Therefore, these, species
fractions remain unchanged from those in the -;«Ju^* 1987 report. :;'
; ''-''-'f
The multiplication of county total organic emissions times species fractions,
performed separately for freeway versus nonfreeway emissions, yields county
total species emissions estimates. The final step in inventorying roadway
vehicle emissions is to assess the spatial distribution of these emissions. As
described in the July 1987 report, data on the spatial distribution of vehicle
miles traveled on freeways and other roadways was used to assess the spatial
distribution of freeway and non-freeway emissions.
Table 12 shows the revised inventory that resulted from the revisions described
above. Comparison of this table with Table 8 of the July 1987 reports shows that
apart from the addition of asbestos and cadmium to the inventory, the modifications
described here yield a fairly modest change in emissions estimates for roadway
vehicles.
Review of Company Submittals under Section 313
Section 313 of the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act requires
companies to submit various data including emissions estimates for a list of
several hundred compounds, including most of the pollutants in this study.
These submittals were reviewed, comparing these emissions estimates to the
emissions estimates derived by other means. The following discussion describes
this comparison and identifies changes in the Southeast Chicago area inventory
that resulted.
Many of the facilities in the Southeast Chicago area inventory did not submit
Section 313 data. For these facilities, review of Section 313 data obviously
provided no reason to -.hd.nge prior emissions estimates.
Conversely, many of tht? area facilities that submitted emissions estimates
under Section 313 wer-.- nut included in the traditional air pollution data bases
used to develop the Southeast Chicago area inventory. This review indicated
numerous relatively s;::j.'l facilities. For these facilities, a screening was
-------
31
Table 12. Highway Vehicle Emissions Totals (in tons/year)
Pollutant Arterial Exhaust Freeway Exhaust Evaporative Total
Asbestos
Benzene
.
But ad i ene
Cadmium
Ethyl ene di bromide
Cs«vw«^1 As\^MtAt\
Forma iflenyae
/*a en 1 4 n A wanAPC
uaSO 1 1 fie VajJUi o
Polycyclic orgamcs
Acetone
Ethyl ene
Toluene
Xyl ene
.03
634.0
?n 7
/ U . /
.01
.3
OOC 0
Jt J. t
81
. 1
1 A C
l*t. 0
i QPA n
iyo4. u
1331.3
1179.2
.01
89.2
inn
1 U . U
.004
.05
CA A
O'T.'T
*>*<&'
* , ^&y^>
'"' ''.* '/
Q
O
? 1
C.I
OCC Q
&OO.O
187.9
166.4
.04
172.7 895.9
on f.
.02
.5 .8
OOQ C
JO.7.D
;^846;'5 15846.5
»Vflt ^ W~ \/ J i w V^T w*V
Q Q
.. ig g
oocn Q
999.0 2518.2
601.3 1946.9
-------
32
performed to identify significant facilities. This screening was based on a
toxicity index. Specifically, for each facility, emissions of each pollutant
were multiplied times the pollutant's cancer risk factor, and then the
pollutant-specific results were summed to obtain a facility total toxicity
index. Griffith Microscience, submitting emissions estimates of about 66.2
tons per year of ethylene oxide and 0.4 tons per year of propylene oxide, was
the only facility added to the inventory based on Section 313 data. (A few
additional facilities have somewhat significant emissions that appear to result
from degreasing operations, but degreasing emissions are already included in
the inventory based on area source inventorying methods).
Finally, for many facilities, emissions estimates were available both from
the previously described inventory and from Section 313 submittals. For these
facilities, it was necessary to judge which of two sets of emissions estimates
to use. These judgements differ according to the method used to develop the
existing inventory.
For one group of facilities with two sets .of ,emji$s1ons estimates;*"the previously
described inventory reflects responses to a questionnaire developed by Region V.
For these facilities, company responses to a questionnaire are being compared
to company submittals under Section 313. Although the Section 313 submittals
cover a later year than the Region V questionnaires, one would expect the two
sets of emissions estimates to be very similar. Instead, the Section 313
emissions estimates were almost always higher. Most remarkably, Keil Chemical
reported 60 tons per year of ethylene dichloride emissions under Section 313
but reported only 0.004 tons per year of ethylene dichloride emissions to
Region V. The submittal by 3M under Section 313 reported emissions of 7 tons
per year of formaldehyde, 853.5 tons per year of toluene, and 367.7 tons per
year of xylene, whereas the 3M response to Region V reported no formaldehyde
emissions and somewhat lower emissions of the other pollutants. (This corrects
the July 1987 inventory report, which stated that 3M had reported no emissions
in its questionnaire response.) The submittal by Amoco under Section 313
reported that its Whiting facility emitted 15.5 tons per year of benzene, .about
0.9 tons per year of butadiene, and about 0.1 tons per year of chromium, whereas
the questionnaire response to Region V reported only 0.39 tons per year of
benzene emissions and no butadiene or chromium emissions. Since there was no
clear basis for judging either the Section 313 submittals or the questionnaire
responses more reliable, a decision was made to use the more conservative emis-
sions estimates submitted under Section 313. In addition, Section 313 sub-
mittals by Nalco, by Ford Motors, and by Sherwin 'Williams reported more emis-
sions of some substances but no emissions of other substances that were reported
as having non-zero emissions in the questionnaire response. For these facili-
ties, the Section 313 submittals were not clearly more conservative than the
questionnaire responses, and so the questionnaire responses were used. Finally,
given that Section 313 allows emissions under 1000 pounds per year to be reported
in ranges, .the .submittal by Stauffer Chemical under Section 313 appears to
indicate the. sajne emissions as "its questionnaire response.
A second method used to estimate emissions from industrial facilities was to
multiply estimates of total volatile organic emissions or total suspended
particulate emissions times the fractions of individual species included in
these totals. Most of the facilities that were inventoried by this method and
also submitted Section 313 submittals were steel industry facilities. For
these facilities, the Section 313 submittals indicated substantially lower
emissions of some substances and no emissions of other substances included in
-------
33
the species fraction-based inventory. For these facilities, the previous
emissions estimates were retained in preference to the Section 313 estimates.
Since USEPA seems likely to have better knowledge of the participate emissions
factors and the applicable species fractions (particularly for trace contaminants
such as cadmium and arsenic) than the companies, the USEPA emissions estimates
were judged more reliable than the company submittals under Section 313.
Table 13 shows the questionnaire responses, as modified based on the review of
Section 313 data. As noted, the review of Section 313 data resulted in modifi-
cation of emission estimates for Keil Chemical, 3M, and Amoco (Whiting facility),
and the addition of emissions estimates for Griffith Microscience.
This section has described refinements of the inventory based on a comparison
of Section 313 submittals to independently derived emissions estimates. It is
also interesting to note what this comparison cannot provide. Most importantly,
Section 313 does not address area sources. Thus, Section 313 submittals provide
no information on emissions from roadway vehicles, dry cleaning,, .gasoline
marketing, home heating, or any other of the j&yjffificant co$i!s'umefl-oriented
source types. Similarly, emissions estimates' are generally not available under
Section 313 for wastewater treatment plants or for facilities that handle
hazardous or municipal waste. A second important limitation of Section 313
data concerns the compounds covered. Some of the pollutants in the Southeast
Chicago study, most notably coke oven emissions and polycylic organic matter,
are mixtures of a broad class of compounds. Section 313 focuses on individual
compounds and only addresses a 1imited .number of the constituents of these
mixtures. Finally, since Section 313 submittals reflect company emissions
estimates with little or no quantitative review, careful judgement should be
made about the quality of any emissions estimate that is used. The comparison
described above illustrates the kinds of refinements of urban air toxics emissions
inventories that may be made on the basis of a review of Section 313 submittals.
Summary of Revised Emissions Inventory
The inventory revisions described in this addendum indicate modifications to
some of the tables of emissions estimates provided in the July 1987 inventory
report. For completeness, this section will identify which tables in the July
1987 report remain largely unchanged and which tables need modification. This
section wil\ also provide substitute tables for those tables needing signifi-
cant modifications. This section culminates with a table providing a summary
of emissions estimates for all pollutants for all source types in the Southeast
Chicago emissions study area.
Table 14 identifies which tables in the July 1987 report remain unchanged,
which tables have minor changes, and which tables have been substantially
changed. For the substantially changed tables, Table 14 further identifies
the table number of the substitute table provided in this addendum.
Most of the replacement tables have already been provided earlier in this report.
An additional replacement table immediately following Table 14 is a table
showing emissions estates derived by the species fraction method sorted by
Standard Classification Code. This replacement table reflects various inventory
changes, particularly m the steel industry emissions estimates.
-------
34
Table 13. Emissions Estimates Provided by Companies
Nalco Chemical
Methyl chloride
Benzyl chloride
Diethanolamine
Epichlorohydrin
Formaldehyde
Pentachlorophenol
3M
Desoto
Titanium dioxide
Acrylamide
Ethyl aerylate
Melamine
Propylene oxide
Styrene
Formaldehyde
Tol uene
Xylene
.0016 tpy
.048
.065
.10
.278
.003
.20 tpy
,025
.375
.25
.075
,95
.080
.7
Stolt
Clark
Formaldehyde
Tol uene
Xylene
Terminal s
Perchloroethylene
Trichloroethylene
Methylene Chloride
Benzene
Tol uene
Xyl ene
Acetone
Oil
Benzene
7.05
853.5
367.65
1.73
6.55
5.68
1.09
3.09
1.45
1.17
15. t|
tpy
tpy
2.1
MORECO (Formerly Motor Oil Refining)
McKesson Chemical
Trichloroethylene
Perch) roetbi ene
Arsenic
Beryl 1i urn
Cadmi urn
Chromium
Nickel
Benzene
Carbon Tet.
Chioreform
Methylene Chloride
Nitrobenzene
PCB
Trichloroethylene
Tol uene
.047 Ib/yr,
.0011
.18
32
.015
.3
.77
.77
77
.41
039
.77
Xylene
Acetone
2.9 tpy
2.0
7.2
5.7
6.8
Griffith Microscience
Ethylene Dichloride 60. tpy
Union Oil
Benzene
Amoco
18.
Koppers
Styrene
.83 tpy
Benzene
Butadiene
Chromium
Tol uene
Xylene
Ford
Motor
Benzene
Methylene Chloride
Perchloroethylene
Toluene
Xylene
Acetone
Sherwin Williams
Titanium Dioxide
Chromium
Toluene
Xylene
Methylene Chi or >
Ethyl Acrylate
Acetone
1
1,
70,
165,
1,
.06 tpy
Conoco
Benzene
3.59 tpy
15.5 tpy
.955
.125
529.5
67.. 5
.09 tpy
Marbon Div ./Anderson Devel .
Styrene .19 tpy
Butadiene 8.75
PMC
Formaldehyde
Toluene
.06 tpy
.001
.55
.51
.002
.227
.07
.0015 tpy
Keil
Shell
Ethylene Dichloride 60.0 tpy
Diethanolamine
Benzene
.88 tpy
Stauffer, IN
Perchloroethylene .010 tpy
Methylene Chloride .113
*Emissions estimates base! - "irvnittals under Section 313.
Emissions
Trumbull Asphalt
Diamond Shamrock
Signode
imated to be zero for
Stauffer, IL Getty
Texaco Dynagel
lovite PVS
Unienema
Mobil Chemical
-------
35
Table 14. Status of tables in July 1987 Report
1. Substances included in Inventory
2. Particulate Matter Species Fractions
3. Species Fractions Used in Area Source Inventory
4. Emission Factors Used in Area Source Inventory
5. Roadway Vehicle Species Fractions
6. Summary of Emissions from All Source Types .....
7. Area Source Emission Totals
8. Highway Vehicle Emissions Totals
9. Wastewater Treatment Plant Emissions Estimates
10. Emissions Estimates for Facilities Receiving
Questionnaires
11. Emissions from Coking Operations
12.
13.
Point Source Emission Estimates Based on Organic
Species Fractions
Point Source Emission Estimates Based on Particulate
Matter Species Fraction
14. Point Source Emission Estimates Sorted by SCC
15.
16.
Organic Species Fraction-based Estimates for Facilities
Receiving Questionnaires
Particulate Matter Species Fraction-based Estimates for
Facilities Receiving Questionnaire
Replacement
Status*
replaced
replaced
unmod.
unmod .
replaced
replaced ..
replaced
replaced
replaced
replaced
minor
replaced
replaced
unmod.
unmod.
Table Number
1
6
-
-
11
16
12
10
13
8
-
7
15
-
.
* unmod. - unmodified
minor -. only.'minor changes made
replaced '-.replacement table provided
-------
TABLE 15. PARTICIPATE SPECIES EMISSIONS. SORTED BY sec
ARSENIC CADMIUM CHROMIUM* NICKEL
10 lO&ZOtiF*^ ' 0 . 5 0 0.05 0. 4 7 0. a 2
lOtOC-202 :.:::? '"'.02 0.22 0.24
101^020-3 O.OS 0.01 0.05 0.12
10100223 0.*5 0.07 0.61 0.53
10200202 0.06 0.01 0.08 0.14
1020O204 0.27 0.03 0.26 0.30
10200401 0.05 0.00 0.27 4.97
10200404 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.10
10200501 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02
10200602 0.34 0.39 4.83 0.81
10200704 0.37 0.39 5.05 0.00
10200707 0.27 0.39..,, .,4.09 ,.0.00
30100999 0.25 0.37 ' .'; 4,09 ";; ^. p'S-T
30300302 0.25 0.37.: .il^'.OS *6.0O
30300303 0.31. 0.44 :''?'4.-I'l 0.00
30300304 0.90 1.16 4.34 0.00
30300306 0.65 0.85 4.24 0.00
30300307 0.25 0.38 4.09 0.00
30300308 0.26 0.38 4 ..-09 0.00
30300312 0.25 0.38 4.09 0.00
30300313 0. -'1 0.44 4.11 0.00
30300314 C..-.6 O.al 4.09 0.00
30300399 0.26 -0.41 4.09 0.00
30300301 0.25 0.37 4.08 .0.00
30300802 0.30 0.33 4.50 0.00
30300808 0.29 . 0.38 4.38 0.00
30300609 0.30 0.38 4.74 0.00
30300811 0.28 0.36 4.64 0.00
30300812 0.31 0.36 7.01 0.00
30300313 0.48 0.42 24.65 0.00
30300314 0.30 0.36 6.43 0.00
30300817 0.39 0.40 15.20 0.00
30300821 0.23 0.38 4.31 0.00
303008,22 0.26 0.37 4/16 0.00
30300323 0.26 0.37 4.15 0.00
30300824 0.27 0.37 4.21 0.00
30300825 0.29 0.38 4.32 0.00
30300899 .''.25 0.37 4'. 07 0.00
30300901 :. 1-5 0.52 9.24 0.00
30300904 '.24 0.50 8.63 C.OO
3G300907 .28 0.42 4.62 0.00
303009O8- "'.' .41 0.51 4.54 0.00
30300910 : ."' "' . 2't- 0.3T ' 4.05- 0.00
30300911 ' . .:= 0.38 a.09 0.00
30300912 !.2~ 0-. 40 a.37 0.00
-------
15. CO NT D
Ah.-ENIC CADMIUM CHROMIUM* NICKEL
3020091;:
30300914 .
30300915.
30300917
30300931
30300932
30300933
30300934
30300999
30400352
30400701
30400704
30400706
30400715
30400799
30405001 .
30501602
30501604
30501607
rG5 . 15O9
30501610
30501614
30501515
30501699
30504021
30504023.
30504025.
30504099
; 9000 701
50100102
V
TOTALS
A .
-4
'"
2.
0 . 26 '<'.'.
"j .
w' ,
._* ,
'_' .
0 .
0 .
0 .
0.
0.
0.
0 .
'J .
'. .
1
_
1
1
1
1
1
0
0
1
0
'_'
^
.a
^.
^J
^
1
i
1
1
3
1
1
1
0. 00
0 .
1
o.
'-' .
j .
'-' .
0 .
0 .
r,
'_' .
I '.
'.' .
'_'
'_'
0
0
o
''_,'
,~)
'-
r\
0
00'
0
.j
'_'
0
0
r\
.i
*j
(j
_
_
1
: . oo .
A = £ E
r
l-j
-.
i .:
-
0 .
0.
Cj .
0 .
G.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
o .
0.
1*!
("l
0.
0 .
o .
o.
0.
r> _
0.
0 .
CADM
5.
24
39
ie
36
18
18
17
16
16
Q,l "
01
20 ;;
02
r\ '"^
0 1
00
00
00
oo
' j 0
;"t M
0 0
00
0 0
00
00'
OO1
<~'p ."i
00
09
!UM
~\ <~\
24.
4.
1.
3.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
'".;" 0.
,,,.- jgf.
.''.'' '/. 2 .
" 0.
0.
0.
0.
0"."
0.
0.
0.
o.
V
0.
r> .
0.
0.
f\
0 .
o .
29 .
£7
30
96
90
89
98
87
72
71
04
03
20
19
18
10
05
04
07
00
00
01
00
00
00
03
03
18
09 '
06
90
CHROMIUM*
107.
73
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
'/.;$
'"o.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
o.
0.
0
0.
( J
0.
0 .
0.
0 .
0..
0.
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
PAf
60 '
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
20
NICKEL
7 .
26
"CHRC'M ! '.
'.-_ OH=GMIUM. NOT JUST HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM
-------
38
The July 1987 report organized emissions estimates essentially according to the
method of inventory. Thus, the categories in that report include point sources
(subdivided into steel mills and other point sources), area sources, mobile
sources, and wastewater treatment plants.
This update will summarize emissions according to a different organization. The
new categories include steel mills, other industrial activities, consumer-
oriented sources, roadway vehicles, wastewater treatment plants, and the newly
inventoried waste handling facilities. Steel mills remain the same category.
However, other industrial sources, in addition to the previous "other point
sources", also includes some source types previously identified as area sources
that are performed at industrial facilities. Specifically, this category now
includes chrome plating, degreasing, and barge loading. Consumer-oriented
sources include the remainder of the previous set of area sources. Consumer-
oriented sources include a variety of activities engaged in by the general
public, including as refueling automobiles,,, burning wood in fireplaces and wood
stoves, and air conditioning of commerical bufldings. Roadway vehicles is
simply a new term for the category previously1 Itffeled mobile sotrfces. ("Mobile
sources" sometimes includes non-roadway vehicles such as trains and air planes,
but these are minor source types and were not included in this study.)
The final table in this report, Table 16, provides a revised summary of emis-
sions of all pollutants from all source types in the Southeast Chicago study
area. The first part of this table shows emissions for those pollutants with
enough evidence of carcinogencity and e-nough quantitative cancer potency data
to justify performing a quantitative cancer risk assessment. The second part
of this table shows emissions for other pollutants in this study.
The list of pollutants considered in this study identifies 51 pollutants,
including 32 pollutants for which quantitative cancer risk assessment is justi-
fiable and 19 pollutants which are considered noncarcinogens or which may not
reasonably be quantitatively analyzed. This study found non-zero emissions of
43 of the 51 listed pollutants. These pollutants with non-zero emissions
include 30 of the 32 pollutants analyzed as carcinogens and 13 of the 19 pollu-
tants not analyzed as carcinogens.
The July 1987 report includes several observations about the process of developing
an urban air toxics emissions inventory, and also discusses various aspects of
the inventory warranting further investigation. The time that has passed between
July 1987 and January 1989 has suggested an additional observation about the
evolving nature of studies of this type. As new information became available
during the last year, new priorities developed as to which aspects of the
inventory most warranted further investigation. Even as this report is being
written, additional information is becoming available suggesting further modifi-
cations which could be made. In that sense, the inventory as revised reflects
a "snapshot" of'Southeast Chicago area emissions estimated according to the
best methods available as of January 1989, but developed with the understanding
that future inventorying methods may provide quite different estimates. Notwith-
standing the rapid pace at which new information is being developed, it is
hoped that future readers of this addendum and the other associated reports on
air toxics in Southeast Chicago will continue to find this a reasonable assess-
ment of air toxics in the Southeast Chicago area.
-------
Table 16. Emissions
Steel
Compound* Mills
Ac ryl amide
Acrylpnitrile
Arsenic 3.9
Asbestos
Benzene 3044.2
Beryl 1 i urn
Butadiene .2
Cadmium 4.3
Carbon Tet.
Chloroform
Chromium** .07
Coke Oven Em. 388.0
Dioxin
Epichlorohydrin
Eth. Di bromide
Eth. Dichloride
Eth. Oxide
Formaldehyde 14.6
Gas. Vapors
Hex-chl-benz.
Methyl Chi .
Methyl ene Chi.
Perchloroeth.
PCB'-s
in Source Area
Other
Industrial
Sources
.02
1.0
1.2
55.2
.0008
.5
.2
.0003
.0003
2.5
.0002
.09
54.6
61.5
12.6
216.2
.07
.3
287.3
383.7
.0002
39
by Source Category and Pollutant
Consumer Mobile Waste
Sources Sources Facilities
.002
.02 .04
37.1 812.8 12.0
"''V'.vX'- ''f ""^'
;! >' fc 73.1 " .2
.02
2.7
31-. 1 . 2
.5
.0000007
.00002
.8
.2
11.2
110.0 353.5 .04
4737.2 14376.0
.5
10.9 .0003
1084.0 61.9
802.0 .7
.001
(in metric tons/y
Sewage
Treatment
Plants Total
.02
1.0
5.1
.06
.7 3962.0
.0008
74.0
4.6
2.7
.7 32.0
3.2
388.0
.0002
.09
.8
.7 55.5
72.7
491.7
19329.2
1.3 1.8
.07 11.3
8.6 1441.7
6.0 1192.3
.001
-------
40
Table 16. (Continued)
Other
Sewage
Steel
Compound* Mills
POM
Prop. Oxide
Styrene
Trichloroeth.
Vinyl Chi.
Vinylidene Chi.
Industrial Consumer Roadway
Sources Sources Vehicles
.02 16.9 8.0
.9
11.5
374.7
2.3
.4 ,.:''; ''..-
Waste
Facilities
1.5
27.8
4.0
- , -8 ;
-. ,*'v .. ' ''
Treatment
Plants
2.4
1.9
.01
Total
24.9
.9
15.4
404.4
6.3
1.2
'f
*Abbreviations:
Carbon Tet. - Carbon tetrachloride
Eth. . - Ethylene
Gas. - Gasoline
Hex-chl-benz. - Hexachlorobenzene
Chi. - Chloride
PCB's - Polychlorinated biphenyls
POM - Polycyclic organic matter
Prop. - Propylene
**Estimates are for hexavalent (+6) form of chromium.
-------
41
Table 16. (Continued)
b. Other Pollutants
Other
Sewage
Steel
rnmnnund* Ml 1 1 S
VUtllpUUIIvi III i I «J
Acetone 9.2
Diethanolamine
Dioctyl-
phthalate
Ethyl Acrylate
Ethylene 195.7
Mercury
Nickel 4.0
Nitrobenzene
Pentachlorophenol
Titanium
Dioxide
Industrial Consumer Roadway
Sources Sources Vehicles
466.5 15.0
.06
? <&*
, : t ,i>J f*7.
.5 '' 'yf -.
140.1 2042.0
.6
5.3 14.8
.0002
.003
.2
Waste Treatment
Facilities Plants Total
13.5 184.1 692.6
06
* VJU
.0001 .0001
V ~rf .
35.5 36.1
2377.8
.6
21.4
.0002
.003
.2
Toluene
Xylene
497.4
176.2
2450.6
960.4
337.7
64.3
2284.5
1766.2
37.1
6.9 5624.1
11.0 15.7 2993.8
-------
43
Miscellaneous References
M.I. Receptor Model Source Composition Library, Office of Air Quality Planning
and Standards, EPA Report #450/4-85-002, November 1984.
M.2. C. Hester, R. Barker, "Bases of Risk Assessment Inputs of Chromium
Electroplating Operations - Chromium Electroplating NESHAP," Midwest
Research Institute, memorandum to A. Smith, August 29, 1988.
M.3. D.F. Bishop, "Volatilization of Organics from Chicago Area Sewage Treat-
ment Plants," Water Engineering Research Laboratory, U.S. EPA, memorandum to
S. Rothblatt, June 2, 1988.
M.4. P.M. Carey, Air Toxics Emissions From Motor Vehicles, Office of Mobile
Sources, U.S. EPA, Report # EPA-AA-TSS-PA-86-5, September 1987.
M.5. P.M. Carey, "Review of Southeast Chicago',,'Alp Toxics St^dy*1','Office of
Mobile Sources, U.S. EPA, Memorandum Ito /J^nh Summerhays, October 20, 1988.
M.6. Municipal Waste Combustion Study, Office of Solid Waste, U.S. EPA,
Report # EPA 530-SW-87-021, 1987.
------- |