Application of AERMOD to Native Application of AERMOD to Native American Human Health Risks from American Human Health Risks from Chemical Weapons Incineration at the Chemical Weapons Incineration at the Umatilla Chemical DepotUmatilla Chemical Depot

Rodney SkeenRodney Skeen

May 2013May 2013

22

Presentation OverviewPresentation Overview

Background on CTUIR and UMCDBackground on CTUIR and UMCD Human health risk assessment basicsHuman health risk assessment basics Site specific dataSite specific data Human health risk resultsHuman health risk results Process modification to reduce riskProcess modification to reduce risk AERMOD and Transportation RiskAERMOD and Transportation Risk SummarySummary

33

Historical Territory of the CTUIRHistorical Territory of the CTUIR

UMCDF

Reservation

44

Army granted 14,000 acres in 1941 for Army granted 14,000 acres in 1941 for munitions depot (expanded to over 19,000)munitions depot (expanded to over 19,000)

Chemical munitions have been stored since Chemical munitions have been stored since 19621962

Site stored 12% of the original U.S. stockpile of Site stored 12% of the original U.S. stockpile of chemical agentschemical agents– Nerve agents GB (sarin) and VXNerve agents GB (sarin) and VX– Blister agent HDBlister agent HD

On-site incinerator destroying munitionsOn-site incinerator destroying munitions Incinerator started in 2004, operated until Incinerator started in 2004, operated until

2012, full closure complete in 2014.2012, full closure complete in 2014.

Umatilla Depot (UMCD)Umatilla Depot (UMCD)

55

Simple Question to AnswerSimple Question to Answer

What What operating conditionsoperating conditions for the UMCDF ensure for the UMCDF ensure that emissions do not create unacceptable risks that emissions do not create unacceptable risks to surrounding populations?to surrounding populations?

66

Acceptable LimitsAcceptable Limits

2004 HHRA Work Plan established the 2004 HHRA Work Plan established the following limits:following limits:– No individual No individual Cancer Risks Cancer Risks above above 1E-61E-6– Total Cancer Risk below 1E-5Total Cancer Risk below 1E-5– Individual Individual Hazard Quotient Hazard Quotient below below 0.250.25– Total HI for specific effect and organ below Total HI for specific effect and organ below 0.250.25– Acute Inhalation HQ for individual compounds Acute Inhalation HQ for individual compounds

below below 1.01.0– Ecological Screening Quotients below Ecological Screening Quotients below 1.01.0

77

Example Conceptual ModelExample Conceptual Model

88

Steps to Risk AssessmentSteps to Risk Assessment

Identify emissions characteristicsIdentify emissions characteristics (flow (flow rate, particulates, composition, rate, particulates, composition, temperature, etc)temperature, etc)

Model contaminant transportModel contaminant transport and and deposition through the airdeposition through the air

Estimate exposure mechanismsEstimate exposure mechanisms– Exposure routs (inhalation, dermal contact, Exposure routs (inhalation, dermal contact,

ingestion)ingestion)– LifestyleLifestyle

Estimate toxicityEstimate toxicity of each compound of each compound Compute dose and riskCompute dose and risk

99

Modeling Transport and Deposition – Modeling Transport and Deposition – Data RequirementsData Requirements

Meteorological dataMeteorological data Topography dataTopography data Land useLand use Building geometric dataBuilding geometric data Source geometry dataSource geometry data Source emission dataSource emission data Risk data Risk data

} Air Modeling

1010

Tools in Risk AssessmentTools in Risk Assessment

Air transport and deposition modeled Air transport and deposition modeled using Lakes Environmental using Lakes Environmental implementation of AERMODimplementation of AERMOD

Risk and ecological risks modeled using Risk and ecological risks modeled using modified versions of Lakes Environmental modified versions of Lakes Environmental IRAP-h and EcoRiskIRAP-h and EcoRisk

1111

Emissions Characteristics (1) –Emissions Characteristics (1) –Four Point SourcesFour Point Sources

LABSTK

MDBSTK

BRASTK

COMSTK

N

LaboratoryBrine Reduction

Area

MunitionsDemilitarization

Building Pollution

Abatement System

Personnel andMaintenance

Building

1212

Emission Characteristics (2) – Emission Characteristics (2) – Common StackCommon Stack

Common stack receives emissions from Common stack receives emissions from four four very different furnacesvery different furnaces (Liquid incinerators (Liquid incinerators 1&2, Deactivation Furnace, Metal Parts 1&2, Deactivation Furnace, Metal Parts Furnace)Furnace)

Use of each furnace Use of each furnace varies by type of varies by type of munitionsmunitions begin processed begin processed

Time weighted scaling methodologyTime weighted scaling methodology was was developed to estimate a single emissions rate developed to estimate a single emissions rate for evaluating for evaluating chronic riskschronic risks

Upset for each furnace evaluatedUpset for each furnace evaluated separately separately for estimating for estimating acute risksacute risks

1313

Emission Characteristics (2) –Emission Characteristics (2) –Common Stack FurnacesCommon Stack Furnaces

MPF

DFS

LIC

All furnaces have All furnaces have afterburners, wet afterburners, wet pollution abatement, pollution abatement, and carbon filtersand carbon filters

1414

Source Emission DataSource Emission Data

Emissions data collected from trial burns at Emissions data collected from trial burns at UMCDF and other demilitarization sitesUMCDF and other demilitarization sites

Particle size distribution data also collectedParticle size distribution data also collected

ParameterParameter Common Common StackStack

BRA BRA StackStack

MDB MDB StackStack

LAB StackLAB Stack

Base Elevation (m)Base Elevation (m) 183183 183183 183183 182182

Stack Height (m)Stack Height (m) 30.530.5 19.819.8 36.636.6 12.212.2

Gas Temperature (K)Gas Temperature (K) 340.1340.1 449.8449.8 294.3294.3 298.7298.7

Exit velocity (m/s)Exit velocity (m/s) 1.751.75 13.0113.01 12.7312.73 18.318.3

Diameter (m)Diameter (m) 1.521.52 1.371.37 2.192.19 0.640.64

Time of Operation (yr)Time of Operation (yr) 1010 1010 1010 1010

1515

Common Stack Emission Distribution – Common Stack Emission Distribution – What you don’t know may kill you....What you don’t know may kill you....

4.72%

1.14%

87.33% 2.93%

3.88%

Inorganics Speciated Oganics Volatile Unspeciated TOE

Semivolatile Unspeciated TOE Nonvolatile Unspeciated TOE

Emissions Distribution for Common Stack(Based on HHRA Values)

Less than 2% of emitted organics

were identifiable

1616

Meteorological Data (1)Meteorological Data (1)

Six years of on-site surface dataSix years of on-site surface data– 2 meter temperature2 meter temperature– 10 meter speed, direction, STDEV, temperature10 meter speed, direction, STDEV, temperature– 30 meter speed, direction, STDEV, temperature30 meter speed, direction, STDEV, temperature– Solar insulation, precipitation, pressureSolar insulation, precipitation, pressure

Upper air data from Spokane WashingtonUpper air data from Spokane Washington Merged using AERMET ViewMerged using AERMET View

1717

Topography DataTopography Data

ColumbiaRiver

UmatillaRiver

Topography Topography data taken from data taken from USGS DEM USGS DEM maps maps downloaded downloaded from Lakes from Lakes Environmental (Environmental (www.webgis.com))

Data imported Data imported using ISC-using ISC-AERMOD View AERMOD View Map toolMap tool

1818

Land UseLand Use

Range Land

AgriculturalLand

Water Body

1919

Example Deposition Map – Example Deposition Map – Unitized Vapor Phase Air Concentration Unitized Vapor Phase Air Concentration

(ug/m(ug/m33 per g/s) per g/s)

2020

Deposition Grid and Evaluation Deposition Grid and Evaluation PointsPoints

50 km

Receptor Locations

2121

Where you go

What you do

What you eat

ScenarioScenario

ExposureExposure

What contaminants are in each medium – air, water, soil, food…

×× == DOSEDOSE

How toxic is each chemical

RISKRISK

Estimating Exposure (Dose)Estimating Exposure (Dose)

2222

Accounting for Cultural ContactAccounting for Cultural Contact

Harvesting

Cooking

Drying

2323

Cultural Contact ThroughCultural Contact ThroughSweat Lodge ActivitySweat Lodge Activity

Rocks

Water

Characteristics • 100% humidity• 150 F• Active behavior

2424

Native American Native American Subsistence Scenario (NASS)Subsistence Scenario (NASS)

Live 70 years in one location (whole life)Live 70 years in one location (whole life) Active lifestyleActive lifestyle No vacationNo vacation 100% of produce grown locally100% of produce grown locally 100% Meat/Fish from impacted area100% Meat/Fish from impacted area Different dietary pattern Different dietary pattern

– Higher caloric intake (2500 kcal/day).Higher caloric intake (2500 kcal/day).– High fish intakeHigh fish intake– Consumption of whole animalConsumption of whole animal

Unique exposure pathwaysUnique exposure pathways– Sweat lodgeSweat lodge– Native medicinesNative medicines– Cultural practices (hunting, fishing, gathering, weaving, tanning)Cultural practices (hunting, fishing, gathering, weaving, tanning)

2525

Base Model ResultsBase Model ResultsLocation Scenario Cancer Risk Hazard Index

Off Site Farmer Adult 2.6E-04 0.33

Off Site Farmer Child 3.0E-05 0.41

Off Site Fisher Adult 2.1E-06 0.11

Off Site Fisher Child 1.4E-06 0.28

Off Site Native Adult 3.0E-04 0.41

Off Site Native Child 2.3E-05 0.42

Off Site Resident Adult 2.0E-06 0.11

Off Site Resident Child 1.4E-06 0.28

On Site Farmer Adult 1.5E-02 7.80

On Site Farmer Child 1.6E-03 9.84

On Site Fisher Adult 1.2E-04 2.73

On Site Fisher Child 8.0E-05 6.65

On Site Native Adult 1.6E-02 9.83

On Site Native Child 1.3E-03 10.00

On Site /Off Site Worker Adult 5.2E-06 0.15

Admin Area/Off Site Military Adult 2.0E-06 0.11

Some areas of concern, lets look at details ….

2626

Base Model Results- Base Model Results- Point Source Contribution to Point Source Contribution to Non-Cancer Chronic RiskNon-Cancer Chronic Risk

Stack

Hazard Index (% of Total)

NativeAdult

NativeChild

FisherChild

FarmerAdult

FarmerChild

ResidentChild

BRASTK 59.4% 59.6% 59.7% 59.4% 59.5% 59.7%

COMSTK 1.8% 1.8% 1.8% 1.8% 1.8% 1.8%

LABSTK 5.9% 5.9% 5.9% 5.9% 5.9% 5.9%

MDBSTK 32.9% 32.7% 32.6% 32.9% 32.7% 32.6%

Total HI 0.41 0.42 0.28 0.33 0.41 0.28

BRA stack was the largest point source contributor.BRA stack was the largest point source contributor. GB, VX, and HD created more than 99% of the non-cancer GB, VX, and HD created more than 99% of the non-cancer

risk, but are undetected compounds assumed present at risk, but are undetected compounds assumed present at just below the detection limit for the continuous monitoring just below the detection limit for the continuous monitoring units.units.

2727

Rethinking Assumptions (1)Rethinking Assumptions (1)

Reviewed process data and realized that Reviewed process data and realized that the confirmatory agent monitoring system the confirmatory agent monitoring system has lower detection limit. These units rely has lower detection limit. These units rely on a collection tube and are periodically on a collection tube and are periodically sampled.sampled.

Off-site shipment of brine for treatment is Off-site shipment of brine for treatment is viable alternative to operation of Brine viable alternative to operation of Brine Reduction Area (BRA)Reduction Area (BRA)

Re-analyzed risk at lower HD/GB/VX Re-analyzed risk at lower HD/GB/VX emission levels and no BRA operation emission levels and no BRA operation during HD campaignduring HD campaign

2828

Rethinking Assumptions (2)Rethinking Assumptions (2)

Location Scenario Cancer Risk Hazard Index

Off Site Farmer Adult 1.5E-04 0.0038

Off Site Farmer Child 1.7E-05 0.0051

Off Site Fisher Adult 1.2E-06 0.0016

Off Site Fisher Child 7.7E-07 0.0035

Off Site Native Adult 1.6E-04 0.0050

Off Site Native Child 1.3E-05 0.0055

Off Site Resident Adult 1.1E-06 0.0013

Off Site Resident Child 7.7E-07 0.0035

On Site Farmer Adult 8.1E-03 0.0988

On Site Farmer Child 8.9E-04 0.1284

On Site Fisher Adult 6.6E-05 0.0323

On Site Fisher Child 4.5E-05 0.0816

On Site Native Adult 9.0E-03 0.1088

On Site Native Child 6.9E-04 0.1270

On Site /Off Site Worker Adult 4.0E-06 0.0031

Admin Area/Off Site Military Adult 1.1E-06 0.0013

• Non-cancer risksAre all below actionlevels• These operational changes were made

2929

Base Model Results- Base Model Results- Point Source Contribution to Point Source Contribution to Cancer Chronic RiskCancer Chronic Risk

Over 99% of the Over 99% of the cancer riskcancer risk from COMSTK is a result of the unidentified from COMSTK is a result of the unidentified non-volatile TOE fraction which was assigned a surrogate toxicity based on non-volatile TOE fraction which was assigned a surrogate toxicity based on geometric mean of the compounds in the corresponding boiling point groupgeometric mean of the compounds in the corresponding boiling point group

EPA Guidance does not require quantitative evaluationEPA Guidance does not require quantitative evaluation of this fraction of this fraction because of its uncertainty. Was evaluated by Army because of CTUIR because of its uncertainty. Was evaluated by Army because of CTUIR concernsconcerns

Stack

Cancer Risk (% of Total)

Native Adult Native Child FarmerAdult

FarmerChild

BRASTK 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

COMSTK 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

LABSTK 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

MDBSTK 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

Total CR 3.0E-04 2.3E-05 2.6E-04 3.0E-05

3030

Rethinking Assumptions (3) –Rethinking Assumptions (3) –CSF of Unidentified Non-Volatile CSF of Unidentified Non-Volatile OrganicOrganic

Eleven D/F and one PCB cause large increase in CSF Eleven D/F and one PCB cause large increase in CSF geometric meangeometric mean

0.001

0.01

0.1

1

10

100

1000

10000

100000

1000000

CS

F (

kg

-da

y/m

g)

CSFo

Geometric Mean

Dioxins/Furans

7,12-Dimethylbenz(a)anthracene

Benzidine

Mean if D/F are setat detection levels

3131

Rethinking Assumptions (4)- Rethinking Assumptions (4)- Including D/F at detection limitsIncluding D/F at detection limits ACTIONACTION: Modified sampling : Modified sampling

and analysis methods to and analysis methods to identify more of the organic identify more of the organic fraction and to lower fraction and to lower detection limits.detection limits.– GravFrac=Polystyrene? (FTIR)GravFrac=Polystyrene? (FTIR)

Included D/F and other PAH Included D/F and other PAH compounds at their compounds at their Detection LimitDetection Limit

Two on-site scenarios still Two on-site scenarios still predicted to be above predicted to be above action levelsaction levels

99% of predicted risk still 99% of predicted risk still driven by unidentified non-driven by unidentified non-volatile organicvolatile organic– Unidentified means the real Unidentified means the real

risk is uncertainrisk is uncertain FTIR suggests FTIR suggests

unspeciated is unspeciated is polystyrenepolystyrene

Location ScenarioCancer Risk (if PAH at

DL)

Cancer Risk (if Not PAH)

On Site Farmer Adult 1.8E-04 1.6E-05

On Site Farmer Child 2.5E-05 3.1E-06

On Site Fisher Adult 1.4E-06 1.1E-06

On Site Fisher Child 9.7E-07 8.5E-07

On Site Native Adult 2.0E-04 1.9E-05

On Site Native Child 2.0E-05 2.9E-06

Combined Worker Adult 2.7E-08 2.3E-08

Combined Military Adult 9.7E-08 8.3E-08

4.72%

1.14%

87.33% 2.93%

3.88%

Inorganics Speciated Oganics Volatile Unspeciated TOE

Semivolatile Unspeciated TOE Nonvolatile Unspeciated TOE

Unspeciated Computed from

total mass measurement

ClosureClosure

Remaining Remaining Compounds of Compounds of concern have concern have resulted in resulted in implementing a implementing a closure sampling closure sampling strategy in the strategy in the zone of potential zone of potential plume plume depositiondeposition

Soil Sampling Soil Sampling Results will be Results will be used for risk used for risk based closure.based closure.

3232

Sampling Area

Modeling Truck Accident and Modeling Truck Accident and Chemical Agent Spill with AERMODChemical Agent Spill with AERMOD

3333

Point or Area Source

Emission Rate (g/s)

Exposure Point

Vapor Concentration

Exposure Time

Exposure ScenariosExposure ScenariosConcerned Motorist Concerned Motorist - - 10 minutes of exposure 10 minutes of exposure in spill areain spill areaFirst Responder First Responder – 1 – 1 hour at 25 metershour at 25 metersGeneral Public General Public – 2 – 2 hours at maximum hours at maximum concentration within 50 concentration within 50 m and Secondary m and Secondary Isolation Boundary.Isolation Boundary.

3434

DOT SecondaryIsolation

Zone(Set by First Responders)

SpillArea

First Responder Scenarioevaluated at 25 m

Primary Isolation Zone Boundary.

Concerned Motorist Scenario

Evaluated Within Spill Area.

General Public Scenario

Evaluated Within the Area

Between 50 m and the Secondary

Isolation Zone.

50 m Boundary

Agent Based On

Placard Only (m)

Small Spill Large SpillPrimary Isolation Zone (m)

Secondary Isolation Zone (m)

Primary Isolation Zone (m)

Secondary

Isolation Zone (m)

GB 25 60 400 800 2300VX 25 30 100 60 400HD 25 30 100 60 500

USDOT Emergency Response Guidebook

EvaluationEvaluationCompared dose with Compared dose with Acute Exposure Acute Exposure Guideline LevelsGuideline Levels

3535

ConclusionsConclusions

AERMOD used to model emission from a chemical AERMOD used to model emission from a chemical munitions incinerator at Umatilla, Oregonmunitions incinerator at Umatilla, Oregon

Emissions use to evaluate future health risks to Emissions use to evaluate future health risks to Native Americans using the impacted lands.Native Americans using the impacted lands.

Risk results led to operation changes and Risk results led to operation changes and modified closure strategy.modified closure strategy.

AERMOD also applied modeling plume AERMOD also applied modeling plume development development

3636

Contact InformationContact Information

Rod Skeen, Ph.D., P.E.Division Leader(541) 429-7420

rodskeen@ctuir.org

Barbara Harper, Ph.D.Division Leader(541) 429-7950

Barbaraharper@ctuir.org