13.07.2015 Views

Human and Ecological Risk Assessment - Earthjustice

Human and Ecological Risk Assessment - Earthjustice

Human and Ecological Risk Assessment - Earthjustice

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Section 4.0<strong>Risk</strong> CharacterizationMercury0.10.0195th %0.001Hg (mg/L)0.00010.00001maxNaturalpHmin50th %5th %0.0000010.0000001BraytonPointPleasantPrairieSalemHarborV<strong>and</strong>erbilt StudyFacility C St. ClairFacilityFacility L CCW -LFEPRI -LFCCW -SIOther Data SetsEPRI - SIKey to data sets:V<strong>and</strong>erbilt = U.S. EPA (2006c)CCW = CC Constituent Database (this analysis)EPRI = EPRI Leachate data (from U.S. EPA, 2006c)EPA = Leach 2000 data (from U.S. EPA, 2000, as cited in U.S. EPA, 2006c)LF = l<strong>and</strong>fillsSI = surface impoundmentsFigure 4-3. CCW mercury concentrations compared with other leachate data.4.4.3.2 WMU Locations <strong>and</strong> CharacteristicsThe locations of the specific sites in the United States where CCW is disposed areknown, <strong>and</strong> EPA used the soil <strong>and</strong> climatic characteristics of these sites in the Monte Carloanalysis. Because most locations were facility front gates or centroids, the exact location of theCCW l<strong>and</strong>fill or surface impoundment was not known. To account for this uncertainty, soil datawere collected for an area around the plant <strong>and</strong> soil type distributions were sampled in the MonteCarlo analysis. Climate center assignments were combined with the soil texture distributions toselect infiltration <strong>and</strong> recharge rates to use in the analysis.WMU area, depth, volume, <strong>and</strong> liner type were not varied in the Monte Carlo analysisbecause values for these variables were known from the EPRI survey data. More uncertainparameters, such as depth below grade, were varied within reasonable ranges. These data wereused in the source model calculations to generate the distribution of environmental releases usedby the fate <strong>and</strong> transport modeling.Three st<strong>and</strong>ard WMU liner scenarios (clay, composite, <strong>and</strong> unlined) were assigned toeach facility based on best matches to data in the EPRI survey on liner type. Infiltration throughthese liners was then modeled using assumptions, models, <strong>and</strong> data developed in support ofEPA’s Industrial Subtitle D guidance. How well these assumptions <strong>and</strong> models represent theperformance of CCW WMU l<strong>and</strong>fills <strong>and</strong> surface impoundments is an uncertainty in thisanalysis.April 2010–Draft EPA document. 4-51

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!