United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Water
Regulations and Standards
Washington. OC 20460
Water
June, 1985
Environmental Profiles
and Hazard Indices
for Constituents
of Municipal Sludge:
Tetrachloroethylene
-------
PREFACE
This document is one of a series of preliminary assessments dealing
with chemicals of potential concern in municipal sewage sludge. The
purpose of these documents is to: (a) summarize the available data for
the constituents of potential concern, (b) identify the key environ-
mental pathways for each constituent related to a reuse and disposal
option (based on hazard indices), and (c) evaluate the conditions under
which such a pollutant may pose a hazard. Each document provides a sci-
entific basis for making an initial determination of whether a pollu-
tant, at levels currently observed in sludges, poses a likely hazard to
human health or the environment when sludge is disposed of by any of
several methods. These—methods include landspreading on food chain or
nonfood chain crops, distribution and marketing programs, landfilling,
incineration and ocean disposal.
These documents are intended to serve as a rapid screening tool to
narrow an initial list of pollutants to those of concern. If a signifi-
cant hazard is indicated by this preliminary analysis, a more detailed
assessment will be undertaken to better quantify the risk from this
chemical and to derive criteria if warranted. If a hazard is shown to
be unlikely, no further assessment will be conducted at this time; how-
ever, a reassessment will be conducted after initial regulations are
finalized. In no case, however, will criteria be derived solely on the
basis of information presented in this document.
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
PREFACE i
1. INTRODUCTION 1-1
2. PRELIMINARY CONCLUSIONS FOR TETRACHLOROETHYLENE IN MUNICIPAL
SEWAGE SLUDGE .- 2-1
Landspreading and Distribution-and-Marketing 2-1
Landfilling ^ 2-1
Incineration 2-1
Ocean Disposal 2-1
3. PRELIMINARY HAZARD INDICES FOR TETRACHLOROETHYLENE IN MUNICIPAL
SEWAGE SLUDGE 3-1
Landspreading and Distribution-and-Marketing 3-1
Landf illing 3-1
Incineration 3-1
Index of air concentration increment resulting
from incinerator emissions (Index 1) 3-1
Index of human cancer risk resulting from
inhalation of incinerator emissions
(Index 2) '. 3-3
Ocean Disposal 3-5
4. PRELIMINARY DATA PROFILE FOR TETRACHLOROETHYLENE IN MUNICIPAL
SEWAGE SLUDGE 4-1
Occurrence 4-1
Sludge 4-1
Soil - Unpolluted 4-1
Water - Unpolluted 4-1
Air 4-2
' Food 4-2
Human Effects 4-3
Ingestion 4-3
Inhalation 4-3
11
-------
TABLE OP CONTENTS
(Continued)
Page
Plant Effects 4-5
Phytotoxicity • 4-5
Uptake 4-5
Domestic Animal and Wildlife Effects 4-5
Toxicity 4-5
Uptake 4-5
Aquatic Life Effects 4-5
Toxicity 4-5
Uptake 4-5
Soil Biota Effects 4-5
Physicochemical Data for Estimating Fate and Transport 4-6
5. REFERENCES 5-1
APPENDIX. PRELIMINARY HAZARD INDEX CALCULATIONS FOR
TETRACHLOROETHYLENE IN MUNICIPAL SEWAGE SLUDGE A-l
-------
SECTION 1
INTRODUCTION
This preliminary data profile is one of a series of profiles
dealing with chemical pollutants potentially of concern in municipal
sewage sludges. Tetrachloroethylene ,(€2014) was initially identified as
being of potential concern when sludge is incinerated.* This profile is
a compilation of information that may be useful in determining whether
C2C14 poses an actual hazard to human health or the environment when
sludge is disposed of by this method.
The focus of this document is the calculation of "preliminary
hazard indices" for selected potential exposure pathways, as shown in
Section 3. Each index illustrates the hazard that could result from
movement of a pollutant by a given pathway to cause a given effect
(e.g., sludge •*• air •*• human toxicity). The values and assumptions
employed in these calculations tend to represent a reasonable "worst
case"; analysis of error or uncertainty has been conducted to a limited
degree. The resulting value in most cases is indexed to unity; i.e.,
values >1 may indicate a potential hazard, depending upon the assump-
tions of the calculation.
The data used for index calculation have been selected or estimated
based on information presented in the "preliminary data profile",
Section 4. Information in the profile is based on a compilation of the
recent literature. An attempt has been made to fill out the profile
outline to the greatest extent possible. However, since this is a pre-
liminary analysis, the literature has not been exhaustively perused.
The "preliminary conclusions" drawn from each index in Section 3
are summarized in Section 2. The preliminary hazard indices will be
used as'a screening tool to determine which p'ollutants and pathways may
pose a hazard. Where a potential hazard is indicated by interpretation
of these indices, further analysis will include a more detailed exami-
nation of potential risks as well as an examination of site-specific
factors. These more rigorous evaluations may change the preliminary
conclusions presented in Section 2, which are based on a reasonable
"worst case" analysis.
The preliminary hazard indices for selected exposure routes
pertinent to incineration are included in this profile. The calculation
formulae for these indices are shown in the Appendix. The indices are
rounded to two significant figures.
* Listings were determined by a series of expert workshops convened
during March-May, 1984 by the Office of Water Regulations and
Standards (OWRS) to discuss landspreading, landfilling, incineration,
and ocean disposal, respectively, of municipal sewage sludge.
1-1
-------
SECTION 2
PRELIMINARY CONCLUSIONS FOR TETRACHLOROETHYLENE IN MUNICIPAL SEWAGE SLUDGE
The following preliminary conclusions have been derived from the
calculation of "preliminary hazard indices", which represent conserva-
tive or "worst case" analyses of hazard. The indices and their basis
and interpretation are explained in Section 3. Their calculation
formulae are shown in the Appendix.
I. LANDSPREADING AND DISTRIBUTTON-AND-MARKETING
Based on the recommendations of the experts at the OWRS meetings
(April-May, 1984), an assessment of this reuse/disposal option is
not being conducted at this time. The U.S. EPA reserves the right
to conduct such an assessment for this option in the future.
II. LANDFILLING
Based on the recommendations of the experts at the OWRS meetings
(April-May, 1984), an assessment of this reuse/disposal option is
not being conducted at this time. The U.S. EPA reserves the right
to conduct such an assessment for this option in the future.
III. INCINERATION
Incineration of municipal sewage sludge is not expected to increase
the amount of C2C14 contamination above background urban levels
(see Index 1). Also, the incineration of municipal sewage sludge
is not expected Lo increase the risk of human cancer, due to C2C14
inhalation, above the preexisting risk attributable to background
levels in urban air (see Index 2).
IV. OCEAN DISPOSAL
Based on the recommendations of the experts at the OWRS meetings
(April-May, 1984), an assessment of this reuse/disposal option is
not being conducted at this time. The U.S. EPA reserves the right
to conduct such an assessment for this option in the future.
2-1
-------
SECTION 3
PRELIMINARY HAZARD INDICES FOR TETRACHLOROBTHYLENE
IN MUNICIPAL SEWAGE SLUDGE
I. LANDSPREADING AND DISTRIBUTION-AND-MARKETING
Based on the recommendations of the experts at the OWRS meetings
(April-May, 1984), an assessment of this reuse/disposal option is
not being conducted at this time. The U.S. EPA reserves the right
to conduct such an assessment for this option in the future.
II. LANDPILLING
Based on the recommendations of the experts at the OWRS meetings
(April-May, 1984), an assessment of this reuse/disposal option is
not being conducted at this time. The U.S. EPA reserves the right
to conduct such an assessment for this option in the future.
III. INCINERATION
A. Index of Air Concentration Increment Resulting from
Incinerator Emissions (Index 1)
1. Explanation - Shows the degree of elevation of the
pollutant concentration in the air due to the incinera-
tion of sludge. An input sludge with thermal 'properties
defined by the energy parameter (EP) was analyzed using
the BURN model (Camp Dresser and McKee, Inc., 1984).
This model uses the thermodynamic and mass balance rela-
tionships appropriate for multiple hearth incinerators to
relate the input sludge characteristics to the stack gas
parameters. Dilution and dispersion of these stack gas
releases were described by the U.S. EPA's Industrial
Source Complex Long-Term (ISCLT) dispersion model from
which normalized annual ground level concentrations were
predicted (U.S. EPA, 1979). The predicted pollutant
concentration can then be compared to a ground level~con-
centration used to assess risk.
2. Assumptions/Limitations - The fluidized bed incinerator
was not chosen due to a paucity of available data.
Gradual plume rise, stack tip downwash, and building wake
effects are appropriate for describing plume behavior.
Maximum hourly impact values can be translated into
annual average values.
3. Data Used and Rationale
a. Coefficient to correct for mass and time units (C) =
2.78 x 10~7 hr/sec x g/mg
3-1
-------
b. Sludge feed rate (DS)
i. Typical = 2660 kg/hr (dry solids input)
A feed rate of 2660 kg/hr DW represents an
average dewatered sludge feed rate into the
furnace. This feed rate would serve a commun-
ity of approximately 400,000 people. This rate
was incorporated into the U.S. EPA-ISCLT model
based on the following input data:
EP = 360 Ib H20/mm BTU
Combustion zone temperature - 1400°F
Solids content - 28%
Stack height - 20 m
Exit gas velocity - 20 m/s
Exit gas temperature - 356.9°K (183°F)
Stack diameter - 0.60 m
ii. Worst = 10,000 kg/hr (dry solids input)
A feed rate of 10,000 kg/hr DW represents a
higher feed rate and would serve a major U.S.
city. This rate was incorporated into the U.S.
EPA-ISCLT model based on the following input
data:
EP = 392 Ib H20/mm BTU
Combustion zone temperature - 1400°F
Solids content - 26.6%
Stack height - 10 m
Exit gas velocity - 10 m/s
Exit gas temperature - 313.8°K (105°F)
Stack diameter - 0.80 m
c. Sludge concentration of pollutant (SC)
Typical 0.181 mg/kg DW
Worst 13.707 mg/kg DW
The typical and worst case sludge concentrations of
the pollutant are the median and 95th percentile
values statistically derived from data provided in a
study of 40 publicly-owned treatment works (POTWs)
(U.S. EPA, 1982). (See Section 4, p.4-1.)
d. Fraction of pollutant emitted through stack (FM)
Typical 0.05 (unitless)
Worst 0.20 (unitless)
These values were chosen as best approximations of
the fraction of pollutant emitted through stacks
(Farrell, 1984). No data was available to validate
3-2
-------
these values; however, U.S. EPA is currently testing
incinerators for organic emissions. \
\
e. Dispersion parameter for estimating maximum annual
ground level concentration (DP)
Typical ~3.4 yg/m3
Worst 16.0 ug/m3
The dispersion parameter is derived from the U.S.
EPA-ISCLT short-stack model.
f. Background concentration of pollutant in urban
air (BA) =5.0 yg/m3
This value is the approximate average of urban air
concentrations in the United States (U.S. EPA,
1985). (See Section 4, p.4-2.)
4. Index 1 Values
Sludge Feed
Fraction of Rate (kg/hr DW)a
Pollutant Emitted
Through Stack
Typical
Worst
Sludge
Concentration
Typical
Worst
Typical
Worst
0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0'
2660
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
10,000
. i.o
1.0
• i.o
1.0
a The typical (3.4 Mg/m3) and worst (16.0 pg/m3) disper-
sion parameters will always correspond, respectively,
to the typical (2660 kg/hr DW) and worst (10,000 kg/hr
DW) sludge feed rates.
5. Value Interpretation - Value equals factor by which
expected air concentration exceeds background levels due
to incinerator emissions.
6. Preliminary Conclusion - Incineration of municipal sewage
sludge is not expected to increase the amount of C2C14
contamination above background urban levels.
B. Index of Human Cancer Risk Resulting from Inhalation of
Incinerator Emissions (Index 2)
1. Explanation - Shows the increase in human intake expected
to result from the incineration of sludge. Ground level
concentrations for carcinogens typically were developed
3-3
-------
based upon assessments published by the U.S. EPA Carcino-
gen Assessment Group (CAG). These ambient concentrations
reflect a dose level which, for a lifetime exposure,
increases the risk, of cancer by 10"^. For non-
carcinogens, levels typically were derived from the Amer-
ican Conference of Government Industrial Hygienists
(ACGIH) threshold limit values (TLVs) for the workplace.
2. Assumptions/Limitations - The exposed population ' is
assumed to reside within, the impacted area for 24
hours/day. A respiratory volume of 20 m3/day is assumed
over a 70-year lifetime.
3. Data Used and Rationale
a. Index of air concentration increment resulting from
incinerator emissions (Index 1)
See Section 3, p. 3-3.
b. Background concentration of pollutant in urban air
(BA) = 5.0 ug/m3
See Section 3, p. 3-3.
c. Cancer potency = 5.8 x 10~3 (mg/kg/day)"*
The estimate of cancer potency for human inhalation
• of C2C14 has been derived from that for ingest ion.
However, evidence for carcinogenicity of this com-
pound-by the inhalation route is much .weaker than
for the oral route. This issue is under review by
the U.S. EPA Carcinogen Assessment Group (U.S. EPA,
1983). (See Section 4, p. 4-4.)
d. Exposure criterion (EC) = 0.60 Ug/m3
A lifetime exposure level which would result in a
10~6 cancer risk was selected as ground level con-
centration against which incinerator emissions are
compared. The risk estimates developed by CAG are
defined as the lifetime incremental cancer risk in a
hypothetical population exposed continuously
throughout their lifetime to the stated con-
centration of the carcinogenic agent. The exposure
criterion is calculated using the following formula:
Ec = 10"6 x 103 llg/mg x 70 kg
Cancer potency x 20 m3/day
3-4
-------
4. Index 2 Values
Sludge Feed
Fraction of Rate (kg/hr DW)a
Pollutant Emitted Sludge
Through Stack Concentration 0 2660 10,000
Typical
Typical
Worst
8.3
8.3
8.3
8.3
8.3
8.4
Worst Typical 8.3 8.3 8.3
Worst 8.3 8.3 8.5
a The typical (3.4 pg/m^) and worst (16.0 Ug/m-*) disper-
sion parameters will always correspond, respectively,
to the typical (2660 kg/hr DW) and worst (10,000 kg/hr
DW) sludge feed rates.
5. Value Interpretation - Value > 1 indicates a potential
increase in cancer risk of > 10~6 (1 per 1,000,000).
Comparison with the null index value at 0 kg/hr DW indi-
cates the degree to which any hazard is due to sludge
incineration, as opposed to background urban air
concentration.
6. Preliminary Conclusion - The incineration of municipal
sewage sludge is not expected to increase the risk of
human cancer, due to the inhalation of C2C14, above the
preexisting risk attributable to background levels in
urban air.
IV. OCEAN DISPOSAL
Based on the recommendations of the experts at the OWRS meetings
(April-May, 1984), an assessment of this reuse/disposal option is
not being conducted at this time. The U.S. EPA reserves the right
to conduct such an assessment for this option in the future.
3-5-
-------
SECTION 4
PRELIMINARY DATA PROFILE FOR TETRACHLOROBTHYLENE
IN MUNICIPAL SEWAGE SLUDGE
I. OCCURRENCE
A. Sludge
1. Frequency of Detection
Data not immediately available.
2. Concentration
Minimum—Data not immediately available.
Maximum—-42.109 Ug/g (DW)
Median—0.181 mg/kg (DW)
95th percentile—13.707 mg/kg (DW)
U.S. EPA, 1982
Statistically
derived from
sludge concen-
tration data
presented in
U.S. EPA, 1982
Soil - Unpolluted
1. Frequency of Detection
Data not immediately available.
2. Concentration
Data not immediately available.
Water - Unpolluted
1. Frequency of Detection
C2C14 detected in 9 of 105 drinking
water samples between November 1976
and January 1977
2. Concentration
a. Freshwater
Highest level reported = 45 JJg/L.
In all samples taken in California,
Oregon, and Washington, C£Cl4 was
either not detected or was found at a
concentration of 1 pg/L or less.
U.S. EPA, 1980
(p. C-l)
U.S. EPA, 1985
(p. 3-16)
4-1
-------
b. Seawater
Liverpool Bay, England
Mean 0.12 Mg/L U.S. EPA, 1980
Maximum 2.6 Mg/L (p« C-l)
c. Drinking water
Mean concentration 0.81 Mg/L U.S. EPA, 1980
(p. C-l)
D. Air
1. Frequency of Detection
Data available from a wide variety of U.S. EPA, 1985
urban and nonurban areas. (p. 3-10)
2. Concentration
Survey of eight locations in the United U.S. EPA, 1980
States indicated concentrations up to (p. C-3)
6.7 Mg/m3.
A measurement taken at Phoenix, Arizona U.S. EPA, 1985
in 1979 showed concentrations up to (p. 3-10,3-15)
3.7 Mg/ro3. An approximate average
urban value of 0.8 ppb (s 5
was estimated.
B. Food
Data not immediately available.
4-2
-------
II. HUMAN EFFECTS
A. Ingestion
1. Carcinogenicity
a. Qualitative Assessment
No data found related to humans. U.S. EPA, 1983
NCI reports hepatocellular car- (p. 9-39)
cinoma in male and female mice,
when exposed to oral doses of C2C14
in the range of 386 to 772 mg/kg/day.
b. Potency
Cancer potency for mice is U.S. EPA, 1983
3.5 x ID'2 (mg/kg/day)-1 (p. 9-35)
c. Effects
Hepatocellular carcinoma in mice. ^ U.S. EPA, 1983
(p. 9-39)
2. Chronic Toxicity
Data not presented because cancer
potency will be used to assess hazard.
3. Absorption Factor
C2C14 is rapidly and virtually completely U.S. EPA, 1985
absorbed into the body from the gastro- (p. 5-2)
intestinal tract, presumably because of
its high lipid solubility.
4. Existing Regulations
No regulations found pertaining to human
ingestion of
B. Inhalation
1. Carcinogenicity
a. Qualitative Assessment
IARC classifies C2C14 as a group U.S. EPA, 1984
3 compound. This rating is based on (p. 11)
limited evidence for assessing human
cancer risk associated with exposure
to C2C14.
4-3
-------
b. Potency
The cancer potency for human inhala- Derived from
tion is 5.8 x 10~3 (mg/kg/day)"1. U.S. EPA, 1983
This estimate has been derived from (p. 9-35)
that for ingestion of 3.5 x 10~2
(mg/kg/day)"*, assuming that the
effective dose by inhalation is 0.17
of that for ingestion. However,
direct evidence for carcinogenicity
of this compound by the inhalation
route is much weaker than that for
the oral route. This issue is cur-
rently undergoing review by the
U.S. EPA Carcinogen Assessment Group.
c. Effects
None demonstrated for inhalation U.S. EPA, 1984
route. -(p. 14)
2. Chronic Toxicity
a. Inhalation Threshold or MPIH
Data not presented because cancer
potency will be used to assess
hazard.
b. Effects
Data not immediately available.
3. Absorption Factor
The effective dose by inhalation is U.S. EPA, 1983
0.17 of that by ingestion. (p. 5)
4. Existing Regulations
ACGIH
TWA-TLV SOppm U.S. EPA, 1984
STEL ZOOppm (p. 12)
OSHA 8 Hour
TWA 100 ppm U.S. EPA, 1984
(p. 12)
4-4
-------
III. PLANT EFFECTS
A. Phytotoxicity
No adverse effects on chlorophyll a or cell U.S. EPA, 1980
numbers of the freshwater alga, Selenastrum (p. B-3)
Capriconutum, were observed at exposure con-
centrations as high as 816,000 Ug/L.
B. Uptake
Data not immediately available.
IV. DOMESTIC ANIMAL AND WILDLIFE EFFECTS
A. Toxicity
See Table 4-1.
B. Uptake
Data not immediately available.
V. AQUATIC LIFE EFFECTS
A. Toxicity
1. Freshwater
a. Acute
See Table 4-2.
b. Chronic
See Table 4-3.
2. Saltwater
Data not immediately available.
B. Uptake
Bioconcentration factor for bluegills is 4.9. U.S. EPA, 1980
(p. B-3)
Bioconcentration factor for rainbow trout U.S. EPA, 1980
is 39. (p. B-4)
VI. SOIL BIOTA EFFECTS
Data not immediately available.
4-5
-------
VII. PHYSICOCHEMICAL DATA FOR ESTIMATING FATE AND TRANSPORT
Chemical Class: Halogenated aliphatic U.S. EPA, 1984
hydrocarbon (p. 1)
Vapor Pressure: 17.8 mm Hg at 25°C
Water Solubility:. 150 mg/L at 25°C
Octanol/Water Partition
coefficient: ' 398
Soil Mobility: 2.5
(predicted as retardation
factor for soil depth of
140cm and organic carbon
content of 0.087Z)
Half-life in air: 47 days
Half-lives in water: 1 to 30 days.
4-6
-------
TABLE 4-1. SUMMARY OF THE ANIMAL EFFECTS OF SUBCHRONIC INHALATION EXPOSURE TO TETRACHLOROETHYLENE
Species
Dose
(Concentration)
Exposure Period
Effects
References
Rats
15 ppm
Rats
Rats
Mice
Rabbits
t
Rabbits
70, 230 or
470 ppm
100-400 ppm
15-74 ppm
15 ppm
15 ppm
4 hours/day for
5 months
8 hours/day
5 days/week, for
150 exposures
(7 months)
7 hours/day,
5 days/week,
for 6 months
5 hours/day for
3 months
3-4 hours/day for
7-11 months
3-4 hours/day for
7-11 months
EEC changes and protoplasmal
swelling of cerebral cortical
cells, some vacuolated cells
and signs of karyolysis.
70 ppm = No pathological findings.
230 ppm = Similar, but less severe
pathological findings as with
higher dose; congestion and light
granular swelling of kidneys.
,400 ppm = Congested livers with
cloudy swelling; no evidence of
fatty degeneration or necrosis;
evidence of kidney injury including
increased secretion, cloudy swelling
and desquamation; congestion of spleen,
No abnormal growth, organ function
or histopathologic findings.
Decreased electroconductance of
muscle and "amplitude" of muscular
contraction.
Depressed agglutinin formation.
Moderately increased urinary
urobilinogen, pathomorphological
changes in the parenchyma of
liver and kidneys.
U.S. EPA, 1984
(p. 4)
U.S. EPA, 1984
(p. 4)
U.S. EPA, 1984
(p. 4)
U.S. EPA, 1984
(p. 4)
U.S. EPA, 1984
(p. 4)
U.S. EPA, 1984
(p. 5)
-------
TABLE 4-1. (continued)
Species
Dose
(Concentration)
Exposure Period
Effects
References
Rabbits
Guinea
pigs
I
GO
Monkeys
100-400 pptn
0, 100, 200
or 400 ppm
100-400 ppm
7 hours/day,
5 days/week,
for 6 months
7 hours/day,
5 days/week, for
132 or 169
exposures
7 hours/day,
5 days/week,
for 6 months
No abnormal growth, organ function
or histopathologic findings.
100 ppm: Increased Liver weights
in females. -~.^
200 ppm: Increased liver weights
with some fatty degeneration in
both sexes; slight increase in
hepatic lipid content; several
small fat vacuoles in liver
400 ppm: More pronounced liver
changes than at 200 ppm; cirrhosis;
increased liver weight; increase
in neutral fat and esterified
cholesterol in the liver; moderate
central fatty degernation.
No abnormal growth, organ function
or histopathologic findings
U.S. EPA, 1984
(p. 5)
U.S. EPA, 1984
(p. 5)
U.S. EPA, 1984
(p. 5)
-------
TABLE 4-2. ACUTE VALUES FOR TETRACHLOROETHYLENE
vO
LC50/EC50 Species Acute
Species Method3 (yg/L) Value (yg/L)
FRESHWATER SPECIES
Cladoceran, S, U 17,700 17,700
Daphnia magna
Midge, S, M 30,840 30,840
Tanytarsus dissimills
Rainbow trout, FT, M 4,800
Salmo gairdneri
Rainbow trout FT, M 5,800 . 5,280
Salmo gairdneri
Fathead minnow, FT, M » 13,460
Pimephales promelas
Fathead minnow, FT, M 18,400
Pimephales promelas
Fathead minnow, S, U 21,400 15,700
Pimephales promelas
Bluegill, S, U 12,900 12,900
Lepomis macrochirus
SALTWATER SPECIES
Mysid Shrimp, S, U 10,200 10,200
Mysidopsis bahia
References
U.S. EPA,
(p. B-6)
U.S. EPA,
(p. B-6)
U.S. EPA,
(p. B-6)
U.S. EPA,
(p. B-6)
U.S. EPA,
(p. B-6)
U.S. EPA,
(p. B-6)
U.S. EPA,
(p. B-6)
U.S. EPA,
(p. B-6)
U.S. EPA,
(p. B-6)
1980
1980
1980
1980
1980
1980
1980
1980
1980
a S = Static
FT = Flow-through
U = Unmeasured
M = Measured
-------
TABLE 4-3. CHRONIC VALUES FOR TETRACHLOROETHYLENE
-p-
1
0
Species Method3
FRESHWATER SPECIES
Fathead minnow, E-L
PimepliaJ.es promelas
SALTWATER SPECIES
Mysid Shrimp, LC
Mysidopsis bahia
Chronic
Limits Value Acute/Chronic
(Vig/L) (ug/D Ratiob References
500-1,400 840 16 U.S. EPA,
(p. B-7)
300-670 450 23 U.S. EPA,
(p. B-7)
1980
1980
a E-L = Embryo-larval
LC = Life cycle or partial life cycle
D Acute values used to calculate ratio are those presented in Table 4-2.
-------
SECTION 5
REFERENCES
Camp Dresser and McKee, Inc. 1984. Development of Methodologies for
Evaluating Permissible Contaminant Levels in Municipal Wastewater
Sludges. Draft. Office of Water Regulations and Standards, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.
Farrell, J. B. 1984. Personal Communication. Water Engineering
Research Laboratory, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Cincinnati, OH. December.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1979. Industrial Source Complex
(ISC) Dispersion Model User Guide. EPA 450/4-79-30. Vol. 1.
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle
Park, NC. December.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. " 1980. Ambient Water Quality
Criteria for Tetrachloroethylene. EPA 440/5-80-073. Office of
Water Regulations and Standards, Washington, D.C.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1982. Fate of Priority
Pollutants in Publicly-Owned Treatment Works. Final - Report.
Volume 1. EPA 440/1-82-303. Effluent Guidelines Division,
Washington, D.C. September.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1983. Health Assessment Document
for Tetrachloroethylene. EPA-600/8-82-005b. Review Draft.. Office
of Health and Environmental Assessment. Environmental Criteria and
Assessment Office, Research Triangle Park, NC. December.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1984. Health Effects Assessment
for Tetrachloroethylene. Final Draft. Prepared for the Office of
Emergency and Remedial Response. Environment Criteria and
Assessment Office, Cincinnati, OH. September.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1985. Health Assessment Document
for Tetrachloroethylene (Perchloroethylene). Final Report.
EPA-600/8-82-005F. Environmental Criteria and Assessment Office,
Research Triangle Park, NC. June.
5-1
-------
APPENDIX
PRELIMINARY HAZARD INDEX CALCULATIONS FOR TETRACHLOROETHYLENE
IN MUNICIPAL SEWAGE SLUDGE
I. LANDSPREADING AND DISTRIBUTION-AMD-MARKETING
Based on the recommendations of the experts at the OWRS meetings
(April-May, 1984), an assessment of this reuse/disposal option is
not being conducted at this time. The U.S. EPA reserves the right
to conduct such an assessment for this option in the future.
II. LANDFILLING
Based on the recommendations of the experts at the OWRS meetings
(April-May, 1984), an assessment of this\reuse/disposal option is
not being conducted at this time. The U.S. EPA reserves the right
to conduct such an assessment for this option in the future.
III. INCINERATION
A. Index of Air Concentration Increment Resulting from Incinerator
Emissions (Index 1)
1. Formula
_ . . (C x PS x SC x FM x DP) + BA
Index 1 = ; =7
**
where:
C = Coefficient to correct for mass and time units
(hr/sec x g/mg)
DS = Sludge feed rate (kg/hr DW)
SC = Sludge concentration of pollutant (mg/kg DW)
FM = Fraction of pollutant emitted through stack (unitless)
DP = Dispersion parameter for estimating maximum
annual ground level concentration (yg/m3)
BA = Background concentration of pollutant in urban
air (pg/m3)
2. Sample Calculation
1.000004 = [(2.78 x 10"7 hr/sec x g/mg x 2660 kg/hr DW x 0.181 mg/kg DW x 0.05
x 3.4 yg/m3) + 5.0 yg/m3] * 5.0 pg/m3
A-l
-------
B. Index of Human Cancer Risk Resulting from Inhalation of
Incinerator Emissions (Index 2) -
1. Formula
[(Ii - 1) x BA] + BA
Index 2 =
EC
where:
II = Index 1 = Index of air concentration increment
resulting from incinerator emissions
(unitless)
BA = Background concentration of pollutant in
urban air (pg/m3)
EC = Exposure criterion (pg/m3)
2. Sample Calculation
8.33337125 = K 1.000004 - 1) x 5.0 Ug/m3] f 5.0 ug/m3
0.6 yg/m3
IV. OCEAN DISPOSAL
Based on the recommendations of the experts at the OWRS meetings
(April-May, 1984), an assessment of this reuse/disposal option is
not being conducted at this time. The U.Ef. EPA reserves the right
to -conduct such an assessment for this option in the future.
A-2
------- |