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 ------- |