HomeMy WebLinkAbout070108 ASMNT OF URBAN LANDFILL
u;
.f!
~
,.g::::
y
t'll
'l)
~
t'll
....
t:l
.~
~
>-.
....
u
o
....
t:l
o
.....
....
t'll
....
~
rJ'J
'l)
~
oc
o
o
N
=
o
'.c
('is
~
=
(j)
IJl
(j)
~
-
. ....
y
=
::s
o
U
C
. ....
U
~
....
~
-5
t'll
'l)
~
t'll
.....
t:l
.~
~
>-.
....
.....
u
o
....
t:l
o
.-
....
('$
....
~
rJ'J
~
00
o
o
N
-
. ....
U
=
::s
o
U
C
. ....
U
u;
.f!
~
-5
t'll
'l)
~
~
o
>-.
....
.-
u
o
....
t:l
o
....
~
....
t:l
'l)
rJ'J
!l)
~
00
o
o
N
=
o
. ....
~
('is
~
=
(j)
IJl
(j)
"""
~
-
. """
y
=
::s
o
U
C
.....
u
~
....
~
-5
t'll
'l)
~
t'll
'S
.~
~
~
o
e-
....
u
o
...
t:l
o
....
....
t'll
....
t:l
IJJ
""
'l)
~
-
. """
u
=
::s
o
U
C
.....
u
~
o
>-.
....
U
o
...
oc
o
o
N
>.
~
.....
U
~
....
~
,.g::::
y
t'll
'l)
~
t'll
.....
t:l
.....
~
~
~
o
e-
u
o
....
t:l
o
....
....
('$
....
Q
'l)
""
!l)
~
oc
o
o
N
>>
"'S
,.....,
=
o
. ....
~
('is
~
=
(j)
IJl
(j)
"""
~
-
. """
U
=
::s
o
U
C
.....
u
u;
.f!
~
-5
t'll
'l)
~
00
o
o
N
=
o
. ....
~
=
(j)
IJl
~
-
'0
=
::s
o
U
C
.....
u
~
o
>-.
...
.....
u
o
....
00
o
o
N
>>
"'S
,.....,
>.
~
'....
U
u;
.f!
~
,.g::::
y
t'll
'l)
~
~
o
>-.
....
.....
u
o
....
Q
o
.....
...
t'll
...
t:l
'l)
""
~
~
00
o
o
N
=
o
. ....
~
('is
~
=
(j)
IJl
(j)
~
-
. ....
y
=
::s
o
U
>.
~
.....
U
00
o
o
N
>.
~
.....
U
>-.
....
....
u
o
...
oc
o
o
<'1
>.
~
, """
u
>-.
...
....
u
o
...
00
o
o
N
>>
"'S
,.....,
>.
~
.....
U
00
o
o
N
>>
"'S
,.....,
=
o
. ....
~
('is
~
=
(j)
IJl
CI)
"""
~
-
. """
U
=
::s
o
U
>.
~
.....
U
..
..
....................
..,~GtlIA8~~:'\
r~~~ .~.~z.'
10- ! Vl
(;;. '!.~)
(I::: 1Y"t.)
(V_._~>..
~: .)
,', " ~J
{~C;. ~ ~ ,;-J
l ~1 ~.......~.J
""~\: III R "I\\\.::;....~
.................
~
-
IIII I
City of Virginia Beach
2405 Courthouse Drive · Room 345 · Virginia Beach, Virginia 23456-9056
FINAL DRAFT
Preliminary Assessment
of Potential Public
Health Risk Associated
with Municipal Solid
Waste Landfi lis
June 2008
Report Prepared By:
Malcolm Pirnie, Inc.
701 Town Center Drive
Suite 600
Newport News, Virginia 23606
0153-403 (757) 873-8700
MALCOLM
PIRNIE
",I I
Table of Contents
Ii
Contents
1. Executive Summary
1-1
2. Introduction
2-1
2.1. Background & Methodology Overview.......................................................................... 2-2
3. Potential Release of Pollutants from Municipal Solid Waste Landfill
Facilities 3-1
.
3.1. Release of Pollutants to Ambient Air ............................................................................ 3-2
3.1.1. Fugitive Landfill Gas (LFG) Emissions ..........................................................3-2
3.1.2. Particulate Matter (PM).................................................................................. 3-6
3.1 .3. Combustion By-Products .................. ........... .......... ............................. ........... 3-7
3.1.3.1. Controlled Combustion of Landfill Gas .....................................3-7
3.1.3.2. Diesel Exhaust Emissions ........................................................ 3-8
3.1.3.3. Landfill Fires .............................................................................3-8
3.2. Pollutants Released to Subsurface........................ ....................... .............. .................. 3-9
3.2.1. Soil-Gas Phase..............................................................................................3-9
3.2.2. Pollutants Released to Groundwater........................................................... 3-10
3.3. Pollutants Released to Surface Water ........................................................................ 3-11
4. Preliminarv Review of Potential Health Effects and Hazards 4-1
4.1. Systemic Toxicity and Carcinogenicity.......................................................................... 4-2
4.2. Health Effects Associated with Criteria Air Pollutants................................................... 4-3
4.2.1 . Ozone............................................................................................................ 4-3
4.2.2. Particulate Matter .......................................................................................... 4-3
4.2.3. Nitrogen Oxides.............................................................................................4-4
4.2.4. Sulfur Dioxide ................................................................................................ 4-4
4.2.5. Carbon Monoxide ..........................................................................................4-4
4.3. Health Effects Associated with Combustion By-Products............................................. 4-4
4.3.1. Diesel Engine Exhaust .................................................................................. 4-4
4.3.2. Controlled Combustion of Landfill Gas for Energy Recovery or Other
Pu rposes ....................................................................................................... 4-5
4.4. Explosion Hazard .......................................................................................................... 4-5
4.5. Asphyxiation Hazard..................................................................................................... 4-6
5. Qualitative Assessment of Public Health Risks 5-1
5.1. Air Emissions................................................................................................................ 5-3
5.1.1. Fugitive Landfill Gas Emissions ....................................................................5-3
5.1.1.1. Systemic Toxicity and Carcinogenicity of NMOCs Contained in
LFG ........................................................................................... 5-3
5.1.1.2. Systemic Toxicity Associated with Criteria Pollutants .............. 5-4
Particulate Matter.......................................................................................... 5-4
Combustion of Landfill Gas ........................................................................... 5-4
Diesel Engine Exhaust Emissions................................................................. 5-4
Landfill Fires.................................................................................................. 5-5
5.1.2.
5.1.3.
5.1.4.
5.1.5.
..
. .
City of Virginia Beach
Preliminary Assessment of Potential Public Health Risk
0153-403
/(1;\;:::
:.:,....~/-,
.~- ....":'. ;.'
8
I ,
Table of Contents
5.2. Pollutants Released to Subsurface............................................................................... 5-5
5.2.1. Subsurface Landfill Gas Migration ................................................................5-6
5.2.2. Pollutants Released to Groundwater............................................................. 5-6
5.3. Pollutants Released to Surface Water.......................................................................... 5-7
6. Case Studies
6-1
7. Conclusions and Recommendations
7-1
8. References
8-1
, Tables
Table 1
Table 2
Table 3
Table 4
Pollutants in Landfill Gas With Emissions Estimates ................................................... 3-4
Combustion By-Product Pollutants............................................................................... 3-7
Pollutant Categories for Landfill Leachate.................................................................. 3-10
Summary of Sources, Release Mechanisms, Toxicity Endpoints,
Risk-Based Screening Levels And Regulatory Values for Selected Pollutants ........... 4-2
Lower and Upper Explosive Limits for Several Components of Landfill Gas............... 4-6
Table 5
..
. .
City of Virginia Beach
Preliminary Assessment of Potential Public Health Risk
0153-403
,(j{;.'-';~;.,
.., i \"
\~~)/
~
Ii
-
I,
"II I
MALCOLM
PIRNIE
INlll!:PENOENT ENVIRONMENTAL
ENGINEERS, SCIENTISTS
AND CONSULTANTS
I<
.'
.,
"
I,
,
I,
[
I,
1:
l
l' 1
,
{,
r:
r:
I,
I, 0'
[
"II I
<I
I'
it
1. Executive Summary
~
Ii
.
The City of Virginia Beach requested Malcolm Pirnie, Inc. evaluate the feasibility of
using Landfill No.2 in an urban setting for long-term solid waste disposal operations
prior to any broader evaluation of solid waste program objectives and public input
process. More specifically the City requested preliminary qualitative assessment of
potential public health risk associated with on-going municipal solid waste landfill
(mswlf) operations. Efforts included library and web-based literature searches and
review of pertinent information related to the potential release of pollutants via emissions
to ambient air, subsurface vapor, groundwater or surface water to the surrounding
environment; and evaluation of public health risk from exposure to the various pollutants
potentially released. Approximately 77 technical references were identified, collected,
and reviewed. Although our efforts were not intended to be exhaustive given both
schedule and budget constraints and limitations, the resulting documentation provides a
thorough qualitative evaluation of potential health risk associated with mswlf operations
in an urban environment.
I
Design and operation of modern mswlf facilities equipped with pollution control and
abatement technology reduce both the potential source and opportunity for release of
pollutants to the surrounding public and environment. In addition, dispersion and
attenuation of pollutants effectively reduces resultant concentrations in air, subsurface
vapor, groundwater and surface water. Although numerous pollutants may be contained
within the municipal solid waste (msw) stream and could be released from a mswlf, they
are typically in low concentrations relative to other sources in urban settings and not
likely to contribute significantly to incremental risk to public health and safety. The case
studies reviewed corroborate this finding and have not identified any long-term adverse
health effects associated with mswlf facilities.
l
..
. .
City of Virginia Beach
Preliminary Assessment of Public Health Risk
0153-403
B
I11I I
MALCOLM
PIRNIE
""
INDEPENDENT ENVIRONMENTAL
ENGINEERS, SCIENTISTS
AND CONSULTANTS
..
..
.
I,
.
.,
,
t
I
[,
,
"
2
[
(,
t
l~
,II I
2. Introduction
The City of Virginia Beach (City) has formed its own executive leadership team to
provide guidance and oversight of on-going strategic solid waste management planning
efforts for a post-SPSA (2018) era parallel to broader Hampton Roads Regional Planning
District Commission efforts. Several key issues establish the background and context of
any subsequent analysis of waste management systems component and service
alternatives including whether or not the City retains a useful permit for long-term waste
disposal. The City subsequently requested Malcolm Pirnie, Inc. evaluate the feasibility
of using Landfill No.2 in an urban setting for long-term municipal solid waste (msw)
disposal operations prior to any broader evaluation of solid waste program objectives and
the public input process.
More specifically the City retained Malcolm Pirnie, Inc. to evaluate the feasibility of
'urban landfill' development at Landfill No.2 via performance of a preliminary
qualitative assessment of potential public health risk associated with municipal solid
waste landfill (mswlf) operations, including library and web-based research and
subsequent identification of potential environmental pollutants; as well as evaluation of
public health risk posed by their release.
.
Section 2 Introduction includes background and purpose of the assessment as
well as an overview of the methodology.
.
Section 3 Potential Release of Pollutants to Surrounding Environment
provides a review of available literature pertaining to various possible pollutant
sources and release mechanisms, as well as a discussion of their anticipated
relative magnitude associated with a release from a 'modern' mswlf facility.
.
Section 4 Preliminary Review of Potential Health Effects provides a
discussion of potential health effects associated with exposure to the identified
target list of pollutants as well as a summary of risk-based and regulatory
threshold values for comparison purposes.
.
Section 5 Qualitative Assessment of Public Health Risk develops an opinion
with regard to potential public health risk and hazard associated with operation of
a mswlf facility in an urban setting equipped with modern pollution abatement
and control devices. Consideration is given to the relative contribution of potential
pollutants from mswlf operations relative to other urban sources.
..
. .
City of Virginia Beach
Preliminary Assessment of Public Health Risk
0153-403
{t1~1i\
\~;:
G
"II I
Section 2
Introduction
. Section 6 Case Studies includes summaries of several pertinent studies found in
the literature review.
· Section 7 Conclusions and Recommendations provides an opinion
concerning the potential for public health risk associated with long-term
operations of a mswlf facility in an urban environment.
2.1. Background & Methodology Overview
MakolmPirnie, Inc. performed a qualitative assessment of public health risk associated
with on-going operations of mswlf facilities in a typical urban setting. Specific
objectives included the following:
.
Identification of the character and nature of pollutants potentially released to
ambient air, sub-soils, groundwater and surface water and the anticipated relative
magnitude of their potential release. Furthermore, while pollutants from various
types of mswlf sources were considered, magnitude of potential release to the
surrounding environment focused on operation of 'modern' facilities equipped
with properly designed and engineered pollution abatement and control systems
(such as liners, leachate collection and removal, landfill gas collection, and
stormwater control systems).
.
Identification of relative toxicity of identified pollutants including appropriate
risk- and/or regulatory-based threshold values for comparison purposes.
.
Research of relevant case studies related to public health and hazard potential
associated with mswlf development and operations.
.
Qualitative assessment of the potential for public health risk due to potential
release of pollutants. Efforts did NOT include quantitative risk assessment or
evaluation of risk posed to environmental receptors (as opposed to human-health).
The effects of certain 'greenhouse gas' air pollutants (primarily methane and
carbon dioxide) on global climate change and public health were not discussed.
While global climate change may contribute to public health risk, the effects are
generally more widespread in nature and not related, per se, to the immediate
consideration of 'urban landfill' development.
..
. .
City of Virginia Beach
Preliminary Assessment of Potential Public Health Risk
0153-403
;~~tiit:
,,"'! /,.
>1. "~::::~;'
G
1111 ,
MALCOLM
PIRNIE
INDEPENDENT ENVIRONMENTAL
ENGINEERS. SCIENTISTS
AND CONSULTANTS
..
"
II
I
I,
i,
.,
[,
[
[I
[,
3
o
IIII
3. Potential Release of Pollutants from Municipal
Solid Waste Landfill Facilities
Potential release of pollutants from municipal solid waste landfill (mswlf) facilities are
discussed according to various potential exposure pathways (ambient air, subsurface
(vapor and groundwater) as well as surface water); the source of contaminants (fugitive
emissions such as landfill gas and dust, combustion byproducts including diesel and
landfill gas flare exhaust, as well as leachate from within the waste mass); and finally the
various specific kinds of pollutants and relative anticipated magnitude that can be
expected from these sources.
Overall various kinds of potential pollutants are identified as potentially released from a
mswlf via air, subsurface and/or surface water. However the quantity and concentration
of these various potential pollutants is generally found to be relatively small in
comparison to other typical pollutants found in an urban environment. The discussion is
comprehensive inasmuch as it serves to enable further detailed qualitative assessment but
does not necessarily reflect their relative toxicity or risk potential.
Efforts included collection and review of available data via library and web-based
research as input to characterizing the nature of potential pollutants associated with
mswlf operations. There is a wealth of data regarding performance of older non-
compliant landfill facilities permitted, designed and operated prior to development and
implementation of current regulatory standards. However, research and literature review
efforts show limited data or actual studies related to potential release of pollutants from
mswlf facilities equipped with modern pollution abatement equipment (including liners,
leachate collection and removal, landfill gas and stormwater collection and control
systems). This is likely due to a combination of factors including relatively "new"
advancements made in development and operations of state-of-the-art facilities pursuant
to USEPA Subtitle D legislation (promulgated in October 1991 and effective October
1993). Consequently extrapolation was required to estimate the anticipated magnitude
of potential pollutants released from a 'modern' mswlf facility.
..
. .
City of Virginia Beach
Preliminary Assessment of Public Health Risk
0153-403
:it'J";;(\;\i;,.
;'1 ,..
\~/
B
III1
Section 3
Potential Release of Pollutants from MSWLF
3.1. Release of Pollutants to Ambient Air
Several researchers have documented the lack of data on fugitive air emissions from
'modern' mswlfs (Thorneloe, 2004; Sullivan and Michels, 2000, as cited in Soltani-
Ahmadi, 200; and Sullivan and Stege, 2000) and have recently begun to characterize
these air emissions (Thorneloe, 2004; Sullivan and Stege, 2000). Air emissions may be
either controlled or uncontrolled (often termed "fugitive") and can be complex in nature
due to their originating from multiple potential sources. A diverse range of potential air
pollutants may be included in these various sources such as volatile organic compounds
(VOCs), particulate matter and combustion byproducts.
In general, emission sources and associated potential air pollutants include the following:
.
Routine disposal operations resulting in fugitive emissions of landfill gas from the
waste mass and active disposal area (not otherwise collected within the facility's
landfill gas collection and control system) containing methane as well as non-
methane organic compounds (NMOCs), some of which may be characterized as
photo-reactive and precursors to ground-level ozone and/or as hazardous air
pollutants (HAPs) with the potential to cause adverse human health effects
following direct exposure.
.
Exposure of uncovered waste materials or unstabilized and/or denuded soil areas
subject to wind erosion resulting in generation of fugitive dust containing
particulate matter.
.
Combustion byproduct emissions from landfill gas combustion for destruction or
energy recovery; diesel engine exhaust emissions from trucks as well as on-site
stationary or mobile machinery and equipment; as well as infrequent but
nevertheless possible landfill fire events. Each of these combustion sources
represents generation of potential air pollutants such as particulate matter and
other complex volatile organic compounds.
Inasmuch as specific categories of pollutants (particulate matter, for instance) may be
derived from multiple sources (fugitive dust and diesel engine exhaust) the following
discussion is often inter-woven between these subject matter.
3.1.1. Fugitive Landfill Gas (LFG) Emissions
Fugitive landfill gas generated from waste decomposition that is not otherwise captured
by the facility's landfill gas collection and control system may be potentially released to
ambient air. The amount of landfill gas and concentration of various pollutants in the gas
stream are site-specific and dependent on the waste composition, types of organic
compounds in the waste, as well as porosity, density, pH, moisture content and
..
I .
City of Virginia Beach
Preliminary Assessment of Potential Public Health Risk
0153-403
/71";;~~;
:",'1 i~"
\'\:.~~/
EJ
1111
Section 3
Potential Release of Pollutants from MSWLF
temperature of the waste mass (all of which are dynamic and changing as the waste mass
decomposes).
Primary air pollutants derived from lfg include both NMOCs (via both controlled
combustion and fugitive emissions) as well as other combustion by-products which are
discussed in greater detail in subsequent sections of this report.
NMOCs typically comprise less than 1 percent of total landfill gas volume. The
composition of this small fraction of the total gas stream is extremely diverse. For
instance, more than 130 different NMOCs were identified in landfill gas reported by
Hickman (1988) and Gendebien et aI. (1992 as cited in Bridges et aI., 2000). In addition,
Herrera et aI. (1988, as cited in Soltani-Ahmadi, 2000) identified 116 different trace
organic compounds in landfill gas from mswlfs in Great Britain; and Eklund et aI. (1998)
detected over 70 individual NMOCs from a large mswlf in New York.
The NMOCs include multiple VOCs some of which may be photo-reactive chemicals
that contribute to ozone formation and/or HAPs regulated by the USEP A due to potential
adverse human health effects. For emissions inventory purposes the USEP A suggests
default NMOC concentrations in uncontrolled landfill gas of between 595 to 2,420 parts
per million by volume (ppmv) for landfills known to contain only municipal solid waste
and those with known co-disposal of municipal and non-residential solid waste,
respectively (USEPA, 2006b and 1998).
Default concentrations and categorization (HAP/Photo-reactive VOC) of specific
regulated NMOCs are summarized Table 1. The table indicates established default
emission rates for 46 NMOCs in landfill gas (36 of which are defined as photo-reactive
chemicals and 27 of which are regulated HAPs (USEP A, 2005)). Some of the typical
compounds (aromatic and halogenated hydrocarbons) are both photo-reactive and
potentially hazardous to human health. Default concentrations are typically on the order
of fractions of parts per billion (ppb) for any given compound and confirm the relative
low magnitude and concentration of NMOC air pollutants found in lfg. The total
concentration of HAPs in landfill gas generated is typically estimated to be about 115
ppmv and comprises less than 0.02 percent of uncontrolled landfill gas emissions.
The quantities and concentration of VOCs (and HAPs, by extension) anticipated to be
released via fugitive landfill gas emissions are very small in comparison to other
industrial and non-industrial sources found within urban environments. For example the
USEP A (2002) reports the following sources and their relative contribution to total
annual VOC emissions for the nation:
.
On-road mobile - 23%
.
Solvent usage - 21 %
l
.
City of Virginia Beach
Preliminary Assessment of Potential Public Health Risk
0153-403
4j.;~i\
." j I"~
\~.~J/
'...~:' ..<
B
1111 I
Section 3
Potential Release of Pollutants from MSWLF
· Prescribed and wildfires - 19%
· Non-road mobile - 13%
· Industrial processes - 8%
· Residential wood burning - 8%
· Waste disposal- 2%
· Industrial, commercial, and residential fuel burning - 1 %
I
It is readily apparent that waste disposal activities contribute only a very small fraction of
the total VOC emissions in a typical urban environment when compared to other
common emission sources (e.g. on-road vehicles) and is comparable to other sources such
as fuel combustion from industrial, commercial and even residential development.
Table 1. Typical Pollutants in Landfill Gas
I
Default Concentration CATEGORY
POLLUTANT in Landfill Gas HAP Photo-
(lJglm3) Reactive
Compound
1,1, 1-Trichloroethane (methyl 1.52E-02 X
chloroform)
1,1,2,2- Tetrachloroethane 7.62E-03 X X
1, 1-Dichloroethane (ethylidene 9.51 E-03 X X
dichloride)
1, 1-Dichloroethene (vinylidene 7.93E-04 X X
chloride)
1 ,2-Dichloroethane (ethylene 1.66E-03 X X
dichloride)
1 ,2-Dichloropropane (propylene 8.32E-04 X X
dichloride)
2-Propanol (isopropyl alcohol) 1.23E-01 X
Acetone 1.67E-02
Acrylonitrile 1.37E-02 X X
Benzene 6.10E-03 X X
Bromodichloromethane 2.10E-02 X
Butane 1.20E-02 X
Carbon disulfide 1.80E-03 X X
Carbon monoxide 1 1.62E-01
..
. .
City of Virginia Beach
Preliminary Assessment of Potential Public Health Risk
0153-403
B
,III I
Section 3
Potential Release of Pollutants from MSWLF
Default Concentration CATEGORY
POLLUTANT in Landfill Gas HAP Photo-
(lJg/m3) Reactive
Compound
Carbon tetrachloride 3.00E-05 X X
Carbonyl sulfide 1.20E-03 X X
Chlorobenzene 1.20E-03 X X
Chlorodifluoromethane 3.30E-03
Chloroethane (ethyl chloride) 3.30E-03 X X
Chloroform 1.47E-04 X X
Chloromethane 2.50E-03 X
Dichlorobenzene (for 1 A-isomer) 1.26E-03 X X
Dichlorodifluoromethane 7.76E-02
Dichlorofluoromethane 1.10E-02 X
Dichloromethane (methylene 4.97E-02 X
chloride)
Dimethyl sulfide (methyl sulfide) 1.99E-02 X
Ethane 1.09E+00
Ethanol 5.13E-02 X
Ethyl mercaptan (ethanethiol) 5.79E-03 X
Ethylbenzene 2.00E-02 X X
Ethylene dibromide 7.68E-06 X X
Fluorotrichloromethane 4.27E-03 X
Hexane 2.32E-02 X X
Hydrogen sulfide 4.95E-02
Mercury 2.40E-06 X
Methyl ethyl ketone 2.09E-02 X X
Methyl isobutyl ketone 7.66E-03 X X
Methyl mercaptan 4.90E-03 X
Pentane 9.71E-03 X
Perchloroethylene 2.53E-02 X
(tetrachloroethylene)
Propane 2.00E-02 X
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 1.13E-02 X
Toluene 1.48E-01 X X
Trichloroethylene (trichloroethene) 1.52E-02 X X
Vinyl chloride 1.88E-02 X X
Xylenes 5.26E-02 X X
..
. .
City of Virginia Beach
Preliminary Assessment of Potential Public Health Risk
0153-403
,/;;j.'~;"
.., J ."
\~-...;:!).'
B
"II I
Section 3
Potential Release of Pollutants from MSWLF
In addition, although metals are not typically thought of as components of landfill gas,
Lindberg et al. (2001) nevertheless measured total gaseous mercury, methylated mercury
compounds, and dimethyl mercury at various facilities in Florida. (Sources of mercury (a
volatile metal with known health effects) include fluorescent lights, batteries and
electrical switches). Once again though, the USEP A reports less than 0.1 percent of total
mercury emissions in the nation (1994) were attributable to mswlf emissions (ATSDR,
2001). On an annual basis mercury emissions from mswlf generated landfill gas are
significantly less than that resulting from conventional home heating oil burners
(A TSDR, 2001).
3.1.2. Particulate Matter (PM)
Particulate matter (PM) can be comprised of dust, dirt, soot, smoke, and liquid droplets
and can be large enough to be visible in air or small enough to be undetectable to the
naked eye. Some PM is formed when gaseous pollutants (such as sulfur dioxide, nitrogen
oxides (NOx) or photo-reactive organic compounds) react with sunlight and water vapor
in the atmosphere. Sources of PM at mswlf facilities include the following:
.
Dust generation resulting from truck traffic, movement and operation of mobile
machinery/equipment as well as application of daily earthen cover soil to the
working landfill face.
.
Waste placement at the active disposal area.
.
Landfill gas including both fugitive emissions not otherwise captured in the
facility's landfill gas collection and control system and controlled combustion
byproducts subsequent to landfill gas flaring or energy recovery.
.
Diesel engine exhaust emissions (discussed in greater detail in a subsequent
section of this report).
Particulate matter can be associated with adverse health effects. Respirable particulates
of primary concern when evaluating the potential for adverse human health effects and
can be classified by size categories:
.
PM 10 and PM2.5 (equal to or less than 10 and 2.5 microns in aerodynamic
diameter, respectively).
.
Ultrafine PM (less than 0.1 microns in aerodynamic diameter).
The generation of specific types of PM, namely the formation of liquid droplets from
photo-reactive VQCs, as well as fate and transport in ambient air, is extremely complex,
and dependent not only upon the physicochemical properties of the pollutants/particles
but also meteorological and even local topographic conditions affecting dispersion and
..
. .
City of Virginia Beach
Preliminary Assessment of Potential Public Health Risk
0153-403
({J)t,
B
,
,
"II I
Section 3
Potential Release of Pollutants from MSWLF
fall-out. Currently, although only PM10 and PM2.5 are regulated due to health concerns,
ultrafine PM has also been shown to contribute to adverse health effects. These ultrafine
particles can remain in the atmosphere for days or weeks and travel significant distances.
3.1.3. Combustion By-Products
Other air emissions include combustion byproducts associated with diesel engine exhaust
from on-site stationary or mobile machinery and equipment; operation of landfill gas
control equipment (flare station for instance) for destruction and/or energy recovery
purposes; as well as rare instances of subterranean landfill fires.
Primary air pollutants resulting from combustion (combustion byproducts) and respective
sources are summarized in Table 2.
Table 2. Combustion By-Product Pollutants
POLLUTANT COMBUSTION SOURCE(S)
Carbon monoxide Diesel fuel
POM (PAHs) Diesel fuel, landfill gas, waste
NOx Diesel fuel, landfill gas, waste
Sulfur oxides (SOx) Diesel fuel, landfill gas, waste
Acrolein Diesel fuel, landfill gas, waste
Acetaldehyde Diesel fuel
Benzene Diesel fuel
1,3-Butadiene Diesel fuel
Formaldehyde Diesel fuel, landfill gas, waste
Dioxins/furans Diesel fuel, landfill gas, waste
Hydrogen chloride Landfill gas, waste
Hydrogen cyanide Landfill gas, waste
Hydrogen fluoride Landfill gas, waste
Isocyanates Landfill gas, waste
Phenol Landfill gas, waste
Various other organic HAPs and VOCs Landfill gas, waste
3.1.3.1. Controlled Combustion of Landfill Gas
Controlled combustion of landfill gas can contribute to formation of ultrafine PM
(described previously) consisting of sulfate, nitrate, chloride and ammonium compounds,
organic and elemental carbon, as well as metals. In addition the formation of
dioxins/furans occurs during the combustion of organic material in the presence of
chlorine and PM under low combustion temperatures and short combustion time
.
City of Virginia Beach
Preliminary Assessment of Potential Public Health Risk
0153-403
B
iill I
Section 3
Potential Release of Pollutants from MSWLF
(ATSDR,2001). Fortunately, however, the controlled combustion of landfill gas is
typically less conducive to producing dioxins/furans than many other typical sources (i.e.,
residential and commercial coal and oil combustion, backyard trash burning, residential
fire places, car exhaust, and cigarette smoke) (A TSDR, 2001). The USEP A estimates
that, in the nation, uncontrolled waste burning (i.e., backyard trash burning) is among the
largest sources of dioxins/furans in the environment (USEP A, 2003b) and that the
amount of dioxins/furans in a controlled landfill gas combustion process (such as an
enclosed flare system) is relatively small (USEPA, 2006b).
3.1.3.2. Diesel Exhaust Emissions
Sources of diesel engine exhaust include stationary and mobile machinery (such as
bulldozers, compactors, trucks, backhoes and generators) and equipment (electrical
generators for instance).
In their regulatory analysis of non-road diesel engines the USEPA focused on several air
pollutants (in addition to diesel PM discussed previously) including benzene, 1,3-
butadiene, formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, acrolein, dioxins/furans, polycyclic organic
matter (PaM). (PaM is comprised of organic compounds with multiple benzene rings
mainly adhered to particles including polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PARs) which
may be present in both gas and particle phases. In addition, there are more than 100
individual compounds in the chemical class PARs which consist of annelated aromatic
(benzene) rings formed by incomplete combustion).
Other emissions from diesel engines include carbon monoxide, NOx and sax, as well as
ultrafine PM (discussed previously). The general u.S. population may be exposed to
low concentrations of NOx, especially those living near combustion sources found in
urban environments, such as heavy motor vehicle traffic. According to the USEP A,
motor vehicles constituted 55 percent of the man-made sources of NOx for the nation in
2003 and utilities constituted another 22 percent. Industrial, commercial, and residential
sources (primarily fuel burning) together constituted 22 percent of the nation's total man-
made NOx emissions.
Inasmuch as the USEPA has estimated that total non-road diesel engines make up nearly
half of the mobile source inventory for PM2.5 emissions and about one quarter of the
mobile source inventory for NOx emissions for the nation (USEP A, 2004), it is apparent
that mswlfs contribute only a very small fraction of potential diesel exhaust emissions in
an urban environment.
3.1.3.3. Landfill Fires
Although infrequent, landfill fires may also release pollutants to ambient air in the form
of smoke and soot (particulate matter) which ultimately deposit on the ground in adjacent
areas, as well as to groundwater and surface water attributable to fire-fighting
.
City of Virginia Beach
Preliminary Assessment of Potential Public Health Risk
0153-403
;;(4:5\:'
G
"II I
Section 3
Potential Release of Pollutants from MSWLF
suppressants (A TSDR, 2001). Subsurface fires within the waste mass (as opposed to
fires which are evident at the landfill surface) are difficult to suppress and may burn for
long periods and are capable of generating significant quantities of carbon monoxide.
FEMA (2002) has summarized several case studies of landfill fires. Primary pollutants
associated with these rare events are listed in Table 2 and may be comprised of any of the
compounds associated with the waste deposited within the landfill. The resulting heat
generated from the fire event may cause potentially hazardous components of the waste
stream (e.g., household hazardous waste such as pesticides, paints, solvents, cleaners, or
chemical additives) to volatilize (ATSDR, 2001)); compounds formed by waste
decomposition and commonly found in landfill gas; combustion byproducts (described
previously) and compounds associated with fire suppression.
3.2. Pollutants Released to Subsurface
Pollutants may potentially be released in the subsurface environment to soil-gas or
groundwater via either direct discharge of landfill gas or leachate (leakage through liner
system). Release of landfill gas to the subsurface may result in migration of gas-phase
constituents through the unsaturated (vadose) zone or phase partitioning from landfill gas
(containing VOCs) in the vadose zone to groundwater in the underlying aquifer system.
3.2.1. Soil-Gas Phase
The presence of both liners and landfill gas collection and control systems largely abates
potential release of leachate and/or gas constituents to the subsurface (USEP A, 2006b).
Regardless landfill gas may be potentially released to the subsurface environment (as
soil-gas) albeit typically in limited concentrations and quantities. Potential for lateral
migration outward from the waste mass is dependent on soil properties and presence of
preferential pathways such as utility trenches that could serve as conduits for landfill gas
transmission. The USEP A has determined that the horizontal migration of landfill gas
through the subsurface environment is usually limited to a few tenths of a mile from the
landfill boundary. Availability of preferential pathways for subsurface gas migration
such as utility trenches beneath roadways may increase potential lateral migration.
Nevertheless subsurface gas migration (where present) has the potential to accumulate in
confined spaces and represents a hazard to human health attributable to explosion and/or
asphyxiation if and when present in certain concentrations with air. Lateral gas migration
may also contribute to groundwater contamination due to phase partitioning between
waste constituents contained within soil-gas in the unsaturated vadose zone and the
directly underlying groundwater aquifer.
Constituents of concern include methane as well as trace amounts of NMOCs within the
gas stream.
..
. .
City of Virginia Beach
Preliminary Assessment of Potential Public Health Risk
0153-403
f1'1~;<\;;"
... f~'
),,:=.!i
G
1III I
Section 3
Potential Release of Pollutants from MSWLF
3.2.2. Pollutants Released to Groundwater
Pollutant releases to groundwater could potentially result from either direct discharge of
leachate or contaminated stormwater runoff, as well as phase partitioning from landfill
gas contained in the vadose (unsaturated zone) directly overlying the uppermost aquifer
(discussed previously).
Potential pollutants arising from phase partitioning with soil-gas may include various
VOCs contained within the landfill gas stream as described previously. Predominately
volatile and some semi-volatile organic compounds are of concern when landfill gas has
the potential to contaminate groundwater. In the context of groundwater contamination
and vapor intrusion, VOCs are those compounds with a greater tendency to volatilize
(i.e., with higher Henry's Law constants and lower molecular weights) as opposed to
VOCs defined as photoreactive compounds in landfill gas.
.
In addition, Christensen et al. (1994) describes categories of pollutants potentially present
in leachate from municipal, commercial, and mixed industrial sources (excluding
chemical waste) as shown in Table 3. The main pollutants of concern in groundwater
from MSW landfill leachate are the chlorinated aliphatic compounds, BTEX (an acronym
for benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes), and chlorobenzenes.
Table 3. Typical Pollutants Found in MSWLF Leachate
POLLUTANT CATEGORY EXAMPLE(S)
Dissolved organic matter Methane, fatty acids, and more refractory compounds (e.g.,
fulvic-like and humic-like)
Anthropogenic-specific organic compounds (ASOCs) Aromatic hydrocarbons, phenolic compounds, halogenated
(present at low concentrations) hydrocarbons
Inorganic macro-components Calcium, magnesium, sodium, potassium, ammonium, iron,
manganese, chloride, sulfate, hydrogen carbonate
Heavy metals Cadmium, chromium, lead, copper, nickel, zinc
Other compounds (present at very low concentrations) Borate, sulfide, arsenate, selenate, barium, lithium, mercury
Relatively newly identified compounds Phenoxyalkanoic acid herbicides (e.g., mecoprop)
Microorganisms
Dissolved organic compounds contained in leachate may be readily attenuated by
sorption and degradation in a subsurface groundwater environment. In addition,
inorganic compounds and heavy metals which may be contained in typically mswlf
leachate may also be readily attenuated in groundwater by ion exchange,
reduction/oxidation, complexation, sorption and precipitation. However many
..
. .
City of Virginia Beach
Preliminary Assessment of Potential Public Health Risk
0153-403
B
I111 I
Section 3
Potential Release of Pollutants from MSWLF
anthropogenic-specific organic compounds (ASOCs) are typically not very well
attenuated in natural groundwater systems and represent significant potential pollutants in
leachate if released to the environment.
Lu et aI. 1985 (as cited in Christensen et aI., 1994) reported the presence of several
bacteria in leachate including fecal coliform, Streptococcus faecalis, S. durans, S.
equinus, Salmonella typhimurium, Acinetobacter sp., and Listeria monocytogenes.
However, the relatively low pH and increased iron, zinc, or volatile fatty acid
concentrations in leachate likely increase the inactivation of coliform bacteria. Most
pathogenic bacteria remaining are likely rendered inactive within the landfill or in the
reduced zone of any groundwater plume surrounding the waste mass.
Andreottola and Canus (1992) (as cited in Christensen et aI., 1994) reported the presence
of mainly saprophytes I in leachate (including Aspergillus, Penecillium, and Fusarium
and only one pathogenic fungus, Allescheria boydii). Investigation by Suflita et aI.
(1992, cited in Christensen et aI., 1994) on pathogenic viruses and protozoa in leachate
showed little or no survival in the reduced landfill leachate environment. Most recently,
Christensen et aI. (1994) concluded that microorganisms (bacteria, fungi, viruses,
protozoa) do not appear to be of environmental concern in landfill leachate.
3.3. Pollutants Released to Surface Water
Mechanisms for the release of pollutants to surface water include stormwater runoff and
groundwater discharge. Potential pollutants are similar in nature to those encountered in
leachate and described previously.
I A saprophyte is any organism that lives on dead organic matter
..
. .
City of Virginia Beach
Preliminary Assessment of Potential Public Health Risk
0153-403
:'!CQ't:
....::'-.-.
B
..
..
,
"
,
,
,
,
[I
,
l,
(,
l
[
. [
[
[I
[I
II
I:
(I
(I
[
f
l.
1111 I
MALCOLM
PIRNIE
INOEPENDlNT ENVlRONMENTAL
ENGINEERS, SCIENTISTS
AND CONSULTANTS
4
o
,,' I I
4. Preliminary Review of Potential Health Effects
and Hazards
For the purpose of detailed qualitative assessment the following discussion focuses on
know health affects for each of the previously identified potential pollutants without
consideration to mitigating factors. For instance known toxicity or health effects for any
given pollutant do not necessarily mean that a release of that constituent represents
discernible public health risk. Resulting dosage (quantity and concentration) to a human
health receptor, taking into account any subsequent dispersion or attenuation readily
anticipated along various environmental pathways, will ultimately determine potential
public health risk.
,
Information on the toxicity (systemic toxicity and carcinogenicity) of potential pollutants
identified previously is presented and focuses largely on those associated with public
health exposure via ambient air and groundwater pathways. Health risk- and regulatory-
based threshold values for various potential pollutants are provided for comparison
purposes and subsequent qualitative assessment of public risk. Furthermore potential
health hazards (explosion and asphyxiation) associated with lateral migration of landfill
gas released to the subsurface (containing methane and other NMOCs) are also evaluated.
The previously identified potential pollutants can be generally sub-divided into a few
categories for ease of discussion:
.
Organic compounds and several inorganic pollutants with known systemic
toxicity (ability to cause non-carcinogenic effects such as liver toxicity) and
carcinogenicity (ability to cause cancer) associated with controlled and fugitive
landfill gas emissions.
.
"Criteria Air Pollutants" regulated by the USEP A in accordance with The Clean
Air Act and corresponding National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQs).
These include including carbon monoxide, particulate matter, nitrogen dioxide,
ozone, and sulfur dioxide and are also associated with controlled and fugitive
landfill gas emissions as well as rare subterranean landfill fires.
.
Diesel engine exhaust emissions associated with routine operation of stationary or
mobile machinery and equipment.
.
Explosion and asphyxiation hazards associated with lateral subsurface migration
of landfill gas.
-
City of Virginia Beach
Preliminary Assessment of Public Health Risk
0153-403
'~r1J}
-'.: :.~.~
G
.
,',' I
Section 4
Preliminary Review of Potential Health Effects and Hazards
4.1. Systemic Toxicity and Carcinogenicity
Readily available sources of information on the potential toxicity of the previously
identified pollutants were reviewed. Two of these sources are the USEP A Integrated
Risk Information System (IRIS) (USEPA, 2008b), which comprises a database of reports
containing descriptive and quantitative toxicological information on the health effects
that might result from exposure to various compounds that may be found in the
environment; and the ATSDR ToxFAQsTM, a series of summaries excerpted from the
A TSDR Toxicological Profiles and Public Health Statements of the most frequently
asked questions about exposure to various compounds and possible human health effects
from that exposure.
Potential systemic health effects as well as information on pollutants that are known or
suspected carcinogens are summarized in Table 4. Although effort was made to focus on
potential chronic health effects from long-term exposure this information is not always
available. The listed health effects are general categories typically following artificially
high exposures in laboratory animal tests or at very high level human exposure under
varied exposure concentrations and occupational conditions. In most cases, the
toxicological information from the USEP A and the A TSDR is derived by extrapolation
from observed effects from high dose exposure to laboratory animals to low dose
environmental exposure to humans.
In addition, inasmuch as health effects from exposure to pollutants are both receptor- and
dose-dependent, responses among a group of similarly exposed individuals can be
expected to vary considerably. For instance, a healthy individual without any respiratory
illness might tolerate higher levels of air pollution without noticeable effect; whereas an
individual who is asthmatic may be very sensitive to even slight decreases in ambient air
quality (e.g., increased ground-level ozone). Consequently there is significant
uncertainty surrounding the potential for adverse human health effects and at what
concentrations those effects might occur.
The table also provides USEPA risk-based as well as regulatory-based thresholds for
comparison purposes. Exceedence of risk-based comparison values by target list
pollutant concentrations may indicate potential for adverse human health effects
depending on the actual exposure pathway, whereas exceedance of regulatory-based
comparison values may be indicative of approaching levels of concern associated with
pending health risk.
In general, considerable dilution of fugitive or controlled (post-thermal destruction)
landfill gas emissions occurs upon release to ambient air likely reducing the
concentrations of individual pollutants below typical exposure limits. However, A TSDR
(2001) acknowledges that while concentrations of individual NMOCs from landfill gas in
ambient air are not likely to cause obvious and immediate adverse health effects, possible
..
. .
City of Virginia Beach
Preliminary Assessment of Potential Public Health Risk
0153-403
;(~>;
G
d~~W~-gr
or.gaxis
CDJDl~~~
I~ :J ::] CD <D (t)
~ <1l <1l
a
m
c
3
~
a
o
'"
a-
o
~
lJ)
rrrrr
"""""
G)G)G)G)G)
;l>;l>;l>;l>;l>
-:;" -::;- :;" -=;" -::;"
~~~~~
i
l
i
I
lIJ
~~~~~~~~~Q~~~~~~
:;;<1l;:l.~oo.o.o.::lo::>.::>.~~<1l'
c ~o.o'<oaa:j~.OUNQ.orCJ
~ Q.c <g ~cococo ~~g g ~ ~.a:S
a ~;a~~~g-~39:<D:J~~
<1> 3~.mE~g.~;g~. -a~'
(J) Q)g. Q~og.~~g. m(1)
~ iif~ ~2=a: p;-i
~ ..., z ~... CD (/)
"09 l\)
;!!:~ i:.l
~ "-.J
Cx>
~
a
a
9
a
iii'
lJ)
~
<1l
x
:::r
'"
c
!!l.
(Jl
c
~ ~ ~
g= ~ r;
?;s. ffi
l6-"
(j);!!:
~
r
I
r
"
aaO
" " .
. ' a
" "."
"
r r
" " r
~~~~~~~~r;;~~aa
~ ." -" -" -" -" ." ~ G) a -" " "
. ' "
" "
.~
;l>;l>;l>
::-_,::-_,;l>=, ;l>;l>;l>;l>;l>;l>;l>""':;":;';l>;l>;l>
.., ::;":;"::;"::;"::;"::;"::;"G>G>G>::;"::;'::;"
::iE::iE::iE
;l>
:;'
-<
<1l
lJ)
-<
<1l
lJ)
-<-<
<1l <1l
lJ) lJ)
-<-<-<-<
<D CD (I) CD
(J) (J) (/) (J)
a
z
(Jl
'[
~ "
~ " :0.:
;II
.g ;' ",
r
:0.0.0
:o=-
m
.0
r
:r-
:0
OJ.a
0::0
:0
:0
,
"
a
CT
.",
CT
m
~^
zo~
aCTo
~~
<1l
"
^
~
o
~
r
~ z
.z a
zz
aa
z
a
-oJ
W
: : : ~: : : : :
b
l\)
Wl\)......~
:.....o~~
: : : ~~ffi~: :
bb66
0-.......00
I\JNCDCD
~o:"'~
l~H~ fi1 ~, :
6666
......I.I\)-"N
: : : ~ : : :I;ii\: : : :
: : : i: : I:ii:: : ~:
+ +
8 ~
: : : ~ : :111: ~ :
i' >0
::ili!!: ~ ~ ~lil!, ~ ~ ~
:::::: i:!I:~: t~,,::::::~:::: :;:;:;':I':':~: ~~::
CD ~ U1
"
'"
lO
<1l
Q,
w
: : :
::::) ::::) 0 0
: :
o ::J 0 n
0>
i\>
o
: : : m:
+
o
o
UJ.+:a............
~ ffi ~ ~ : >, : :
66 b 61::
......1\)0-"
I
: : 0 ~ 0 0, : ": : :
~.I>-
~~
~~: :
00
o-oJ
: : : ::) :
o 0
,
"
im
g'
: : : : : : ~: : CJ1: : : 10,,: ,':: : :
, ..
,', -,
: : : : :: :::
~
g: : : : :
o
: : : : : :
: : : : : :
.
: ......: : : : : : : : : : : : :: :
,',
;;? ~ Q
"aaa-
;s::OlOO
..... C CD :J
o i>> ~ 3
CD ~ 0
3 -, ~
Plg.~
lif~O:
~ Z <1l
"09
~~
r r r
a(3PP
:0(-, a a
"," :0 :0
" " "
~ ~ ~ ~
: :
: :
: : : :
"
: : : : : : : : : : : : : : : :
: '" : : : :
: : : : : : : : : : : : : : : :
o
o
o
: : : : : 8: :
~
l\)
,e:
: : ':
..
"""~,~,
: : : : : :
j\)fd
o
.I>-
0>
o
: 0:
~
o
: : : : : ~: :
~
l\)
~,
:: :
)
,
"
-oJ-oJ
~Q)
00
: : : :
"
: li!!~",i i ~
Wi. ~ ~
3. i(Jl c: lD
lD;l> (Jl III
III ::;. n m Ie
(I) ::;:"Q,
iii' j')' Jo (Jl
(/)21n
n III ii
Ill~ ~ ii ceo 2.
: g 2. g ~
:3,sOlr
Ii"" 0. r III
'iI ~ III ii
,>lD~ii u;
: :in:;. ... ii'..
III
Ii;':
....' (Jl S!:
:\<: _ CD Z
o H'~o,!!l 3. a
: : ~: S )1.-.
o 3.. 11I0." ::;. g
'" - O!!!.
III c
!!!.
~
;S::::I:aa
CD '< Dl D)
g. g. a- a-
D) 0 0 0
::1 co ::1 :J
<1l ~ 3 Q,
lJ) 0 0
~6 ~
g:~CD
<1l
rr
""
.G)~
aa
," ."
""
r
"
r r~ r
""a"
G) G) :0 G)
"
;l> ;l>;l>;l>!';
)> _=;" v::;" v::;'" ;:;" ~...,
:;' G) G) G) G) G)
::iE ::iE::iE::iE::iE
'"
:0
:0
Ii
,
'"
;;.
z
a
: :
l\)
o
: ~:
+
o
o
: :
: ::1 :
""
: : "', : ~:
l\)
: : .: ~ :
o~
~ ~ "
co",
"
: :
: : :
';
!"
'.
I:
: : "" : : :
,
: .,1 : : :
: : I\) :
: :::
L
: .~' : : :
"
-g
2.
S
Dl
3.
~!;
I: :3
tl!;
<1l =
if :0 -g
n<1l2.
j;iDc
::s I>> Dr
iii' Ie 3.
3
-g
2.x
SI>>
Dl III
aa.
III 0
~c
Jolll
-g!:
.!!!.~
~~
mlB
<;l>
-i Z (Jl
~g';i
_. n _
n Dl III
~5~.o'
Jlt) ~ n )(
- n"
m
:3
~ i
n m a
:;' < III
o _ a:
cg g ~
:3 n
j')' III
~
'"
~
Jo
3
ii!
41
3'
III
!{l< Z
_ III C III
~a:!.e.
;:'Dl;.g
... -" I>>
0.:3-
IIllC
:lE
a
!!1
,1
I'
~(/)~ :0
iig~~
I ::s ::s ca c
I Q,Q,_"ji'
!!l ~ 2. S'
0. Dl III :::
CIS' <
.. (/)
ii
:3
Q.
III
a.
III
"
'~II:I~ Jo ii
n :::r
: S. ~
CDu. S :S
.. ~,
lE' :;'
I: -.
(') III III
~::Te.(/)
~ n c
~. !i ;.
n III n
.. III
,,~
(/) I: III
C g;: ...
"0 j')' 0
~:lE ;
... Dl ,::i
li"",
.. (Jl
ii
:3
0.
;'Jo!!l
~2ge-
~:lE::T
!!l. 1lI
1lI ..
..
III
..
(/)
I:
(Jl
c:
::
::
Jo
::D
-<
o
'T\
(Jl
o
c:
::D
(')
m
!fl
:0
m
r
m
;l>
(Jl
m
::
m
(')
x
Jo
Z
iii
::
!fl
-i
o
><
c;
~
m
z
C
-g
o
z
91
::D
iii
~
lD
;l>
(/)
m
a
(Jl
(')
:0
m
m
z
Z
C)
r
m
<
m
r
(Jl
Jo
z
C
:0
m
C)
c:
S
o
:0
-<
<
Jo
r-
c:
m
(/)
'T\
o
:0
(Jl
m
r
m
(')
iri
C
-g
o
r-
r
c:
~
z
ul
~
lD
r
m
""
1
"
.
'"
i~rrN~mlx~~~~~~~~~~mm~o-~~~o~~~ooooOOOOO~?>
~. tn. .!c ~ st, .g::r:3. ~ Q. ~-" <D CD CD CD c :f :f ~~ Cr iil N :- :- O' ~ W N C)" 2: 2: ::T 2: 2: Q) Q) Q) a -~ ~
I~~~ro~ ro~&~C~~~~~Q~~6~a666~666~QQgQQrrrrrr3~S
i~~~~~~O~~~~&~~~S~i5Q~555Q555QO~gaSgggag~
~:f~~_I'~"",',~2:a~CD~_~CD~:3'CD:3~ON~~::TO::T::T::T030~-'CD~-~_'~CD
Q.~ ~ -0 .. Q. ~ & ro Q 0 ~ ro & a. lil ~ g: 6 ~ 0 g g; ~ ~ g i ~ 3 i g: ~ ;;;- ~ iii' & :!,
> ::T -::T ", is.::T _ ,,0 rr~ 0 ~ 0' ~ 0 0 -, 0 ro 0 EO 0 0 ~::T ~ 0 N C iil c ~ ro
~~ ~ :, i ro~~ ~ ~~"'~o 0 ro'Q 0 ~~~~Q iiilil ~ :;:ro 0 ~ [&""0
~o 0" ~ro ~,<-~Q33 03o::Tro::TO~~~~ro 3roro-l6-3
:o~ - ro ~ Q ~ ffi g 0: ~ 0: i ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ lil lil lil ro ~ g. ~
~~ ~ grogro~iro ~i~ro ro~~~~ i l6- i
~; ro ~ ro ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~
@-8 ~ ~ ro ro :;:
::T Q
o 0
.:; 3
ro
~
~
~
~
~"~
@ffig-
~ ~ ~
ro ~ 0
~~
:f-.....
@!'J
~ w
ro n
"a.
:0
'<
m
~
ro
'Tl':Jo~~~~~~~>>>
C 1: ::T ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 2 ~
~~:,~NNNNNNND:l:3:J
W ~ CD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Q) Q)
;3. .-. :J ~ cc E rr CD --;- p) (t) "U "0
;~ ~_ <1> ~'":J E~~=OD) ffi g: g:
:, _, 5::::;0 c:~~ a "S,.CD
ItD~ "","OQ3gm<D::T en:J
5- ~~3.~~ffi~ ffi<<>
~ :TCD"ffiS- <D
~ CD:J:J CD :J
~ ffi (D CD ffi CD
ro
-
ooc~ooooooooooooo ..
""~~",,,,""""""""""I r
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~,rr~
rrr~rrrrrrrrrrrrr
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
QQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQ
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
k
;,;
I
,
^
r-
~~
a:~
^
r or
I"
:0 " " " " " ",,"i
. ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~1
zz&zzSSSzwSzSSzzz'
oowoo~~~o~~o~~ooo,
fj" ao-a ~cr aC'" v'<>
(~ CD CD CD (1) m CD (i) f:n:':!
0)-'-"0>0>0>
<0:;':;''''''''''
~I ~~~~~~I
I\) WI\)f\)~"""1\)
~ 0>0'>:--
(0 <.oeo--
:W1:~~~
6 66b
w ./>oWw
N' ./>0
~ Co
: m 10:
+ m
~ g
:....
~ : :~ :J :J 0 0 0 : : 0 : 0 0 :J : :J
"
c2l
ro
N
~
W
-'
\IN-''f\)NN
CD :O~:;:"Co<OCo
~: iH~ffiM1X1X1:
b 66b6bO
f\) NI\)U)UJO......
N NN~
'" "''''~
:W1:~ry1~
6 000
I\) UJI\J<J,)
w
0,
: x:;
+
21
I ~ " : 0 :
~ : (') ~ ~ 0 (') 0 :
: (') : 0 (') :J
: : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : :
---
: : : : : : : : : : ~: : : :
: : : : : : : : : : : : : :
~-,.
: : : I : I : : : : : : : : : I
: : : : : : : : : : : : : :
,:" ,~ w 9 9 9
: 'i:~o~'i?o:
1>00./>o~t:
o
: ~ :
./>0
00<0
~~~:
./>0./>00
O~UJOOO
I ~..o-..J~~~:
<ogocococo
~
o 990
1i5lctctg
o
>
QQ.'" Q>
~~Q ~'"
~
-<
ro
w
"
o
rr
~
rr
<0
~,
g
r
r~
Q
rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
QQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQ
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
QQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQ
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-<-<-<-<-<-<-<-<
CD <D to to to CD to CD
(/) en (I) en (/) (/) en (I)
o
z
(fl
r
or-ono
- oz z z
~ Z!fl.(fl,(fl
(fl~::Il;o^
o
-<
ro
w
-<-<-<
ro ro ro
w w w
-<-<-<
ro ro ro
w w w
-<
ro
w
~~ ~
w w w
-<-<-<-<
CD to to CD
(/) (/) (/) (/)
-<
ro
w
"
o
w
w
0'
<0
^~
~ 0
o rr
~~
ro
o
- r
0'
rOzO
(flZ
, (fl
::Il
r-
o
Z
!fl
;0
^
r-
o
iiir-
1-^
~
3
or-
01- ~
r-!fl
m^
r-
rOr 0
, Z' ::Il Z
^(fl^ !fl
^
o
r
^'
, ::Il
:I:'
, ^
r
~
a:
or
""
o 0
~ rr
-, ~
rrrr
<0<0
"
o
rr
~
rr
<0
""
o 0
rr~
~O'
COCO
"""
000
w w w
w w w
0'0'0'
COCO co
"
o
rr
~
rr
<0
" ""
a a a
rr rrrr
~ ~ ~
rr rrrr
co com
~
Co
~:
+
~
...............0101UJUJUJ01..J:lo
~~~~~~~~~g
'rr:nr:n'r'rr:nr:n'r'r'r:
0000000000
f\)....l.f\)UJ(rJf\)....l.(rJ(rJo
:-"CO
o'
:m~
+ r:n
00
wN
~-..J!,>~!,>f\)~!,>
~w@~gCo~g:
:mcommmomm
+r:n+++r:n++
00000000
....l.f\)f\)f\)f\).....0....l.
COo:>
ww
COUl
mm
+ '
00
~N
NUlUl
i:.,J~N
N~~
mmm
+ + +
000
O./>o~
~-.J~
i'Il~g
:mmm
6b6
~N~
: 0 :
~: ~ (') 0 ~ :J 0 0 ~ ~ 0 : : :J 0 : :J 0 ~ ~ J 0 J :J
~ 0 0 :J :J :
o :J (') 0 ~
!'>......f\)~!'>01......:-":--..J~
Otnoo....l.f\)tnOtOOf\)
~~~~~~x:;~m~:
b66bb666bb
f\)f\)f\)(rJ(rJf\)....l.(rJ(rJo
,
~ : "
,. :
: :
./>0
Co
o
: m:
+
o
o
,
,
,
: : :
,
: en :
"
,
I' I
: :
~
: : :
Co
~:
+
o
N
~ ~
~o,
:~~
00
w~
:-"......~:-"~.,J:lo:-"~
oi\:>WNCOo,./>oCO
:n\~~~~n\X:;~
b6bbb6bb
f\)......f\)(rJf\)..........l.......
Wo:>CO
ooi:.n~
OlNW
mmm:
+ + +
g~~
~~~
:....~co
mmm
. + '
000
~w~
~ ~
~m
m-.J
+ r:n
00
N~
:J (') 0 ~ :J 0 0 ~ ~ 0 :
: ~ 0 : ~ 0 ~ :J J 0 :J ~
~ 0 0 :J :J :
o :J (') 0 ~
"
,
: : : : : : : : : : : :
9 N-~
5;21\)0108:01:
:s 00
"
o
O-.J
:01:0001:
go
Ul
~
801-..J:
:~:8
:~: :8:O1:~::
'"
i
,
I,
:'
I ,I
,
:Pf\)
~-.J
, "
: ,: Ol ~
; ~o
,
: :
: :
: :
: : :
: : : : : : :
: :
: :
: :
: : :
: : : : : : :
: : :
:: :::::::::::::::::::::::
: : :
: : : : : : :
,
~" : ~ I
o 0:>
o
,"
N
:~
oi'
I,
: ~:
Ol
:~~CD:
o
W
:~R;:
o
.;:..+:-.!'J
:oo-..J
oog
: ~ : f\) : 01 0
o tn m}8
: ~ :
8~~:
W
: ~ :
N
:8~CD:
goCO
o
~ !R ,:::J
:g~g:
o 0
N
co
: "'0:
8
!:::1
: 1./>0 I ~ Ol
g ./>0 om
o
~
Ol
: "'0:
8
N
COw
Ig8
o
.!'J!'J::J
188~
(fl!;
o ~
~g;
CD =
~:Jl"
o CD 2.
&':S
~'lll a
3
"
2.:J:
sl!l
aa;2~
'" 0 - m
":;:cCD,,
$;"'<>
"ll!:
.!!!,...
....Z(fl
a g ~
_0 n ...
!2. ! ~ ....
~ n -. 0
N! n ~.
n
m
~
0-
&> ~
n m a
S' < '"
o _ c:
CS g ~
~. lil
~
NW
Coi\:>
WCO
mm
, +
00
NW
'l; > ~
~39: ~
"'lf~ =-
~. .
m;.g>~g'
III :;.,~ m III
(1)0 _" D.
~n'>(fl
eni:l~
wUlY: ~CDlB
Co :;,~ I!l;ii~ G) ro <e. ::3
co CD "'<'0-'
mm o:!.::3~
6b S.5"'r
NW Q.r- CD
:ECD ~
mli~ iii
IX ... i'
iii' ...
;!ll
'"
~
3'
III
en -< z
~ i ~ g.
?Ill:o<'::3
a. so !!.
l/Icg
:::e
~
~
..en ~ :Jl
III g ~~
s. a ceo =-
!! :E :!. c;
;-;.SD~
... (fl
iii
~
0.
III
a
/A
:t'
>l:
o '::t
S ~
CD .. <
UI ft) _.
;~
r--.g :!.
r~l!~ 9 ~. ~
~J." ... n c
: ~o ~ ;.
nO) CD i
Ii " ~
lll:i~~ ~ ~
I '0 n' 0
~:::ei
~; ~
... en
iii
::3
Q.
III
a
l/I
, en
; 5.
III >
: :, Ii lil g
~:::e'::t
Ii !t
, iil..
"
2.
C
iii
a
>
3
rT
ii' z
aa
~ g'
O!!!.
c
~
~
I
~
'0
!;
,z
100
is:
i.!'l
ia
><
c;
~
m
z
c
"ll
o
Z
yl
:Jl
00
'"
m
>
(fl
m
c
(fl
o
:Jl
m
m
z
Z
G)
r-
m
<
m
r
en
>
z
o
:Jl
m
G)
c:
~
:Jl
-<
<
)>
r-
c:
m
en
"T\
o
:Jl
en
m
!;;
o
iil
o
"ll
o
r
r-
c:
....
>
z
....
en
;
m
r
m
./>0
'1l
III
<0
<D
c.>
Q.
c.>
~~~~~woo~mm WN~ C 0 ro w
.{::l.U)I\).......OIl II" II II \I II" II ncnU"^~CJJ~og
'111~~II~O~~~~OcnIII~~~~~~~a
~'~~~~tli~~~llllo~&~o"~"~
iIII~c~~~cr~<DSl~~o~imoo
_'ooo3~www-mo3aoro~II~~~O
~~~~~~gg~~~~ffg~~=O~&~.~
1~~~o~~~am;~.~~'~g~~~~g'5
_mrom3~__~~3-.~~.~mm~ ~~~
m@@@mm~a ma~o~- ~o ~ 0
~~~i~?~&8offi'~~~~~~~ II ~
w-- _I~_~gaOo=~~aa OJ ~
&~~ Qg~~gg~~~i~E'~~ ~. ~
~~~ i~~~~a~asa~~ow ? a
QWW aw2gw~i~xoo~cnm~ 0 c
_;; i~~~g~m~~~"i~~ z g
~~.~ ~@;;~gQg~=g~~~ en r
39i eiC3C3~::l03al<D03~ " "
&~~ 0 _o~ OQ~cnwc 0 ~
~~m ~. ~~6=5'~~-'oo~3 ~ w
~~ ~ ~~g~~ma~~~w~ [ ~
-. < m m CD CD W ~ o' m ~ ~ 0 a
~~ ~~~~g~~~~~~~ ~ ~
3~ mo~o-o-' ~O ~ r
om ggmmmo~~g~~~ 0 ~
o 33~Q~~c~~~~S ~ ~
~ ~-Q&gw I\)~~~~ m II
S" cn~33C::l~OIl_CD~' '< r
3 ~ffOo@Q~=z~ac ~ ~
~ 8!a;~~>ig~~1 ~ ~="
a ffiCD~_:l~I\)Cora'<
r 3 $l~ ~~~8i:n~!!!.-~ II 0 <0
~ ~;g~~8~Q~~2~ II ~
~ ~ag~~~~mil~~ i r
g _ C<D<D< o.::lN Ill- <D Cl
~ ~~<~~ >>~ 2~ ~ II
P m~~~~ ~;~ ~W ~ ~
Q ~ ~ ~ w ~ JJ ;:.ca ~ ~ :J ~_'"
S-cEre~~ -to;O!e. 9:W' ~
o CD~U1~CT )(......::r CD= m
( iao~~ lS~ ~I "
~ ~~~g~ ~~~ ~ m
Q) :J Q) ::r-o ....a.a. o:J
~ g:JCDi:J .~_~ CT ~
3 ~ ~ ~ Q) cE ffi,g- ~ Q
CD ooCD<m 0)( Q) ~
~ ~8~~g. ~~ g" ~
CD Q) :J ~ CD:J ..J 0 (f)
(f) ~~2.~~ ~ ~ ~
~,-5mm~ ~ 0'
:Jd:00(f):J _ 0 J:
~g2~~ > ::r II
g.~ffi~~ 3 c I
::r:J~:;10 ~ ~ m
mm,~:J a. :J:5'
~ ~ $ $' ~ ~ (f) ~
ii}~g~-g ~ ~
oCDmm~ -::: 3'
~~"o.o.ill co i
a~ a ~ a
ffi 5 3 g'
:J m -g a
oa. S' 3
~ ~ ~ <D
00 a. ~
((i'~ ~ -'0-'
~'2. - :J
m~ c~ 3
a. 3' CD
~ ~ ~ ~
u (Q 3'
~ ~ ~ ~
0' ~ 00 g
~ ~ ~ @
m m ~ ~
~cg' ~ -0
~i ~ 1
~ ~ m
~ "
c 0
g: 0
n' 3
~ g
!: a.
! ~
~ ~
~ 0
-< ~
0'
'<
o
III
o
S'
o
<0
<D
::l
n"
o
~
c
3
III
::l
~
r::r
III
~
<D
a.
o
::l
~
C
<0
<0
<D
!a.
<"
<D
CD
<
a:
<D
::l
o
-~
'3
3
c
::l
<D
~
~
m
.Ol
^
^
a:
::l
<D
~
r
"
r
<'
~
~
"
~
<D
~
"2,
i
o
-<
~
~
m
?
~
~
o
"
~
<D
~
a
a.
c
U
<'
<D
~
~
m
3
'1l
a
r::r
III
r::r
m
"
o
o
3
~
o
C
::l
a.
ui'
~
a
r::r
III
r::r
'<
o
~
o
S"
o
<0
<D
::l
n'
o
~
c
3
III
::l
~
~z
>~2.
~' ! =
~ <D
~ ~
g ~
-~
a III
~ ffi'
0.3
Q ~
o
o
a
Q.
m
a.
III
=;"
<D
3
iii"
~
0'
::l
_"l
Gl
::;:
"
ill
m
III
~
CD
o
<0
a
c
::l
a.
~
~
o
~
CD
~
0"
::l
~
'1l
2-
e
Dr
a
r
'TI
Gl
(f)r
o DI
c ::l
"'9:
lil ==
3: ::ll'1l
CD
n CD 2-
;r me
DI
::l DI -
ii' III a
3
'1l
2- J:
S E
DI ~~
a a.
III 0 mlll
J:C <)>
)>lII
'1l!:
.!,"'
~
-~~~
GlGlGl
::;:::;:::;:
-<
<D
~
o
z
(f)
-l Z (f)
00,<
~. 5 !!
n DI <D
~52.o'
~~n>c
- n"
m
::l
a.
'1l'1l
o 0
~ ~
~ ~
0'0'
mm
c.>
0>
01
m
+
o
o
::l
)>
3
r::r
or z
3. !!.
~ g'
o!!.
C
!!.
~
G> ::ll
g ~ at
s.~. i
I ~. ()
!i
z
!!l.
o'
::l
!!.
!!J
III
::l
a.
DI
a.
III
(f)
c:
3:
3:
)>
~
-<
o
."
(f)
o
c:
~
o
m
!fl
::ll
m
r
m
)>
(f)
m
3:
m
o
J:
)>
z
Iii
3:
!fl
d
)(
o
:;j
m
z
c
'1l
o
z
91
~
Iii
^
iii
)>
(f)
m
C
(f)
o
~
m
m
z
Z
G>
r-
m
<
m
r
(f)
)>
z
C
::ll
m
G>
c:
S
o
~
-<
<
)>
r-
c:
m
(f)
."
o
::ll
(f)
m
r-
m
o
iil
c
'1l
o
r
r-
c:
~
Z
-l
(f)
~
III
r
m
""
1111 I
Section 4
Preliminary Review of Potential Health Effects and Hazards
cumulative effects resulting from long-term exposure to low concentrations of multiple
compounds are not presently known or easily evaluated.
4.2. Health Effects Associated with Criteria Air Pollutants
.
The Clean Air Act requires the USEPA to set National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS) for six common air pollutants, termed "criteria pollutants", which have the
potential to affect human health and the environment in an adverse manner, including
carbon monoxide, lead, PM, nitrogen dioxide, ozone, and sulfur dioxide. Five of these
six criteria pollutants (i.e., carbon monoxide, ground-level ozone, nitrogen dioxide, PM,
and sulfur dioxide) may be associated with fugitive air emissions from mswlf facilities.
Carbon monoxide, as noted previously, may be a product of underground waste
combustion (in association with rare occurrence of landfill fires).
*
4.2.1. Ozone
Ground-level ozone (the main component in smog) can be formed as a result of
atmospheric reactions of VOCs and NOx and can cause coughing, throat irritation,
discomfort in the chest, and irritation of the respiratory system (USEP A, 2003a). Public
health risks associated with exposure to ground-level ozone include decreased lung
function, increased hospital and emergency room visits, increased medication usage,
inflammation of the lungs, aggravation of asthma, and other respiratory symptoms
(USEPA, 2003a and 2004). Most-at-risk subpopulations include children and individuals
with respiratory disease (e.g., asthma), and individuals with a sensitivity to ozone. The
most recent research on the health effects of ozone confirm respiratory effects and
increased emergency room visits from acute exposure with possible cumulative impacts
from chronic exposure to ambient ozone (USEP A, 2006a). The USEP A (2006a)
indicates that the overall body of evidence suggests that ozone directly or indirectly
contributes to non-accidental and cardiopulmonary-related mortality but that more
research is needed to determine the exact mechanisms by which these effects occur.
4.2.2. Particulate Matter
Both short- and long-term health effects of PM inhalation include premature death and
increased hospital admissions and emergency room visits (primarily in the elderly and
individuals with cardiopulmonary disease); increased respiratory symptoms and disease
(children and individuals with cardiopulmonary disease such as asthma); decreased lung
function (particularly in children and individuals with asthma); and alterations in lung
tissue and structure and in respiratory tract defense mechanisms (USEPA, 1997). PMJO
and PM2.5 pose a potential health risk because the particles may be inhaled and
accumulate in the respiratory system. Many health studies conducted on PM2.5 have
shown increased incidence of premature death and a range of serious respiratory (e.g.,
aggravation of lung disease and bronchitis and other symptoms including coughing, chest
discomfort, wheezing, and shortness of breath) and cardiovascular (e.g., chest pain,
..
. .
City of Virginia Beach
Preliminary Assessment of Potential Public Health Risk
0153-403
::'1",'!f"\~,.
:" i }':
\~~~:/
G
1111 I
Section 4
Preliminary Review of Potential Health Effects and Hazards
palpitations, shortness of breath, heartbeat irregularities, and heart attacks) effects
(USEPA, 2003b).
4.2.3. Nitrogen Oxides
Low concentrations of NOx in air can irritate the eyes, nose, throat, and lungs causing
cough, shortness of breath, fatigue, and nausea (A TSDR, 2002b). Fluid build-up in the
lungs can result one to two days after exposure to low concentrations of NOx. The
International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) considers NOx as not classifiable as
to human carcinogenicity.
4.2.4. Sulfur Dioxide
Long-term exposure to persistent concentrations of sulfur dioxide in occupational settings
has been shown to affect lung function; however, these studies were inconclusive since
the workers were also exposed to other compounds. Adults and children living in or near
heavily industrialized areas that may have higher concentrations of sulfur dioxide in
ambient air may experience difficulty breathing, changes in ability to breathe deeply, and
burning of the nose and throat (A TSDR, 1999c). Asthmatics may be more sensitive to
respiratory effects from exposure to low concentrations of sulfur dioxide. The IARC
considers sulfur dioxide to be not classifiable as to carcinogenicity in humans. Studies in
childhood on exposure to sulfur dioxide have been inconclusive since there are many
other compounds also present in ambient air.
4.2.5. Carbon Monoxide
Carbon monoxide may be a byproduct of subterranean waste combustion associated with
the rare occurrence of a landfill fire. Uncontrolled subsurface landfill fires may generate
significant quantities and concentrations of carbon monoxide. Carbon monoxide may
displace oxygen in the blood thereby depriving the heart, brain, and other vital organs of
oxygen (OSHA, 2002). Children, the elderly, smokers whose blood carbon monoxide
concentrations are already higher, and people with heart and lung disease may be
especially susceptible to carbon monoxide poisoning. Carbon monoxide must be present
in high concentrations in order to cause adverse health effects. Carbon monoxide when
released to the ambient air may also contribute to ground-level ozone with indirect
adverse health effects.
4.3. Health Effects Associated with Combustion By-Products
Health effects associated with controlled combustion of diesel fuel and landfill gas
represent specific potentially adverse effects on public health.
4.3.1. Diesel Engine Exhaust
The USEP A (2008b) has quantitative toxicological information available for chronic
systemic (non-cancer) effects from long-term exposure to diesel engine exhaust. This
..
. .
City of Virginia Beach
Preliminary Assessment of Potential Public Health Risk
0153-403
(!C~~J;:
". :~'.."
G
1111 I
Section 4
Preliminary Review of Potential Health Effects and Hazards
information is based on data from an inhalation study in laboratory animals in which the
critical effects were on the respiratory system. Huff et al. (2002) indicate that health risks
from diesel engine exhaust at landfills can be quantified and should be considered in
health risk assessments. The USEPA (2008b) classifies diesel engine exhaust as likely
carcinogenic to humans.
4.3.2. Controlled Combustion of Landfill Gas for Energy Recovery or
Other Purposes
Combustion by-products include formation of several VOCs (e.g., acrolein,
formaldehyde, and phenols), acid gases, PM, PAHs, and dioxins/furans. Individually,
fugitive VOC emissions from landfill gas combustion are not anticipated to cause
significant adverse impact to public health. Potential health effects associated with the
acid gases are usually from short-term exposures to higher concentrations and are mainly
associated with occupational exposures. Health effects associated with long-term
exposure to multiple pollutants is more difficult to assess and presently unknown.
The USEP A has determined that the public health threat from uncontrolled emissions of
landfill gas is greater than that from the small amount of dioxins/furans produced during
controlled landfill gas combustion through flares or energy recovery sytems (A TSDR,
2001). The general population receives approximately 95% of their dioxin/furan
exposure through the diet.
While the primary pathway of concern for combustion byproducts is through inhalation,
deposition of various pollutants on the ground (soil in yards, cars, playgrounds) can be
inadvertently ingested through hand-to-mouth behavior. Additionally, when deposited on
plant surfaces, certain pollutants can be incorporated into vegetation in home gardens or
agricultural crops, which may then be consumed. In their study of a comparison of
airborne risks to public health from MSW landfills versus MSW incinerators in the
United Kingdom, Bridges et al. (2000) recognized that data are inadequate to make
general statements about the risk of inadvertent ingestion of soil pollutants. This is also
true for uptake of deposited pollutants into plants. Dispersion and deposition of
pollutants depends on a variety of site-specific factors. However, there are numerous
sources of air pollutants that may deposit on the ground in an urban area. For many air
pollutants, as discussed in previous sections of this report, the relative contribution from
mswlfs in an urban setting is likely small.
4.4. Explosion Hazard
Landfill gas must be present in the correct proportion to oxygen in order to pose an
explosive hazard. Methane is the predominant pollutant in landfill gas that poses an
explosion hazard. When methane is present in air between the lower explosive limit
(LEL) of 5 percent by volume and the upper explosive limit (UEL) of 15 percent by
volume there is a potential for explosion if an ignition source is provided.
..
. .
City of Virginia Beach
Preliminary Assessment of Potential Public Health Risk
0153-403
fi<j.j"~;:
\~~.!(.:>:
G
1111 I
Section 4
Preliminary Review of Potential Health Effects and Hazards
Other pollutants in landfill gas (e.g., ammonia, hydrogen sulfide, and some NMOCs like
benzene) are flammable but are unlikely to be present in great enough concentration to
pose an explosion hazard. However flammable NMOCs when combined with methane
as a mixed gas can contribute to the total explosive hazard in confined spaces (A TSDR,
2001).
The LELs and UELs presented in Table 5 provide threshold levels for several
components of landfill gas to gauge their relative explosive hazard.
Table 5. Lower and Upper Explosive Limits for Several Components of
Landfill Gas
COMPONENT LEL (%) UEL (%)
Methane 5 15
Hydrogen sulfide 4 44
Ammonia 15 28
Benzene 1.2 7.8
4.5. Asphyxiation Hazard
Landfill gas poses an asphyxiation hazard only when it collects at great enough
concentrations to displace ambient air. The density of methane is greater than that of air,
thus the potential exists for air displacement. When landfill gas is present in sufficient
concentrations and enough air is displaced the environment becomes oxygen-deficient.
Oxygen-deficient environments are defined as having less than 19.5% oxygen by volume.
Oxygen-deficient environments associated with the accumulation of landfill gas typically
occur in confined spaces (e.g., utility room or basement of a home, manhole or utility
trench). Effects of an oxygen-deficient environment on the human body include impaired
night vision, increased respiration, accelerated heartbeat, poor muscle coordination, rapid
fatigue, and intermittent respiration (A TSDR, 2001).
..
. .
City of Virginia Beach
Preliminary Assessment of Potential Public Health Risk
0153-403
lr'!i;:\.,.
n 1 '\;:
\},::,:;./.'
G
I I
1:
[,
r
[,
I:
[,
1:
5
,
~,
,
..
"I I
5. Qualitative Assessment of Public Health Risks
The following preliminary qualitative assessment of potential adverse impact to public
health and safety integrates the identification of potentially harmful pollutants with
known health effects and hazards from exposure to them and develops an opinion
regarding the degree and likelihood of associated risk via various exposure pathways
(including air emissions and subsurface transmission). Consideration is given to the
extent which 'modern' mswlfs may abate or mitigate potential release of these pollutants
via various properly designed and operated pollution control equipment including liner as
well as landfill gas collection and control systems (as well as implementation of best
management practices).
Overall the assessment finds that although potentially harmful pollutants may be found
within the msw stream or produced by operating practices the resulting quantity and
concentration of any possible release to the environment is not sufficient to represent any
incremental risk to public health and safety. Overall typical airborne pollutants, the
primary pathway of concern, are no greater than other urban sources.
Previous sections of this report indicated potential adverse health effects may be
associated with fugitive air emissions and/or explosion/asphyxiation hazards attributable
to subterranean lateral migration of methane and other NMOCs in landfill gas. More
specifically potential adverse health effects and hazards may be associated with the
following pollutants that may be discharged, albeit in relative small quantity and
concentration, from a 'modern' mswlf:
.
Ground-level ozone (the main component in smog) formed as a result of
atmospheric reactions of VOCs and NOx contained in fugitive landfill gas
emissions or carbon monoxide in the rare event of a landfill fire. It directly or
indirectly contributes to non-accidental and cardiopulmonary-related mortality as
well as causing coughing, throat irritation, discomfort in the chest, and irritation
of the respiratory system (USEPA, 2003a). Public health risks include decreased
lung function, increased hospital and emergency room visits, increased
medication usage, inflammation of the lungs, aggravation of asthma, and other
respiratory symptoms (USEP A, 2003a and 2004).
.
Particulate Matter (PM) resulting from typical mswlf sources such as dust
generation, waste placement, fugitive landfill gas emissions not otherwise
captured in the facility's landfill gas collection and control system and controlled
combustion byproducts subsequent to landfill gas flaring or energy recovery as
..
I .
City of Virginia Beach
Preliminary Assessment of Public Health Risk
0153-403
<':Yl/'~Z"
;'~'t ' {\
\\.1/'
- ....~ .:.;-.-'
B
"I I
Section 5
Qualitative Assessment of Public Health Risks
well as diesel engine exhaust. Particulate Matter (PM) may be formed when
pollutants (such as sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides (NOx) or photo-reactive
organic compounds) contained in fugitive landfill gas emissions react with
sunlight and water vapor in the atmosphere. Short- and long-term health effects
of include premature death and increased hospital admissions and emergency
room visits (primarily in the elderly and individuals with cardiopulmonary
disease); increased respiratory symptoms and disease (children and individuals
with cardiopulmonary disease such as asthma); decreased lung function
(particularly in children and individuals with asthma); and alterations in lung
tissue and structure and in respiratory tract defense mechanisms (USEP A, 1997)
as well as a range of serious respiratory (e.g., aggravation of lung disease and
bronchitis and other symptoms including coughing, chest discomfort, wheezing,
and shortness of breath) and cardiovascular (e.g., chest pain, palpitations,
shortness of breath, heartbeat irregularities, and heart attacks) effects (USEP A,
2003b).
.
NMOCs derived from landfill gas. Long-term exposure to multiple NMOCs may
occur with prolonged fugitive landfill gas emissions. Significant uncertainty
exists surrounding the potential for adverse human health effects and at what
concentrations those effects might occur. Although concentrations of individual
NMOCs from landfill gas in ambient air are not likely to cause obvious and
immediate adverse health effects, possible cumulative effects resulting from long-
term exposure to low concentrations of multiple compounds are not presently
known or easily evaluated.
.
Diesel engine exhaust sources including stationary and mobile machinery (such as
bulldozers, compactors, trucks, backhoes and generators) and equipment
(electrical generators for instance) and is classified but the USEP A (2008b) as
likely carcinogenic to humans.
.
Explosion/asphyxiation hazard associated with subterranean lateral migration of
landfill gas containing methane and/or other NMOCs. When methane is present
in air between the lower explosive limit (LEL) of 5 percent by volume and the
upper explosive limit (UEL) of 15 percent by volume there is a potential for
explosion if an ignition source is provided. Flammable NMOCs when combined
with methane as a mixed gas can contribute to the total explosive hazard in
confined spaces (A TSDR, 2001). Similarily, landfill gas may displace air within
enclosed spaces and create an oxygen-deficient environment. Effects of an
oxygen-deficiency include impaired night vision, increased respiration,
accelerated heartbeat, poor muscle coordination, rapid fatigue, and intermittent
respiration (ATSDR, 2001).
..
. .
City of Virginia Beach
Preliminary Assessment of Potential Public Health Risk
0153-403
{f"'\i!.
"'lL,} ,,:
\~~::0'~!
B
'" I I
Section 5
Qualitative Assessment of Public Health Risks
5.1. Air Emissions
In general, considerable dilution of fugitive or controlled (post-thermal destruction)
landfill gas emissions occurs upon release to ambient air likely reducing the
concentrations of individual pollutants below risk-based concentrations. Regardless air
emissions are likely of greatest concern to public health because the sources are so varied
and involve such a wide range of potential pollutants. In addition, numerous air pollution
abatement controls of fugitive air emissions are employed at mswlfs including landfill
gas collection and control, dust suppression, as well as recent changes in both diesel fuel
formulation and diesel exhaust control that mitigate previously identified potential health
effects. Multiple pollution abatement and control measures exist to reduce and minimize
fugitive air emissions.
5.1.1. Fugitive Landfill Gas Emissions
When discussing the potential for impacts on public health and safety, air pollutants,
including NMOCs, in fugitive landfill gas not otherwise captured by the facility's landfill
gas collection and control system are the primary concern. The USEP A requirements for
landfill gas control and destruction efficiencies of 98 percent for NMOC greatly mitigate
public health risks from exposure to pollutants in landfill gas. However, a small
percentage (less than I percent of the total landfill gas volume) of landfill gas consists of
NMOCs with the potential to impact public health.
5.1.1.1. Systemic Toxicity and Carcinogenicity of NMOCs Contained in LFG
In addition to achieving collection and destruction efficiencies direct comparison of
USEPA default NMOC concentrations in uncontrolled landfill gas (shown in Table 1) to
risk-based screening levels (shown in Table 4) indicates potential pollutant
concentrations are significantly less than their respective comparison values. In addition,
significant advances have been made in the design and operational programs including
introduction of source reduction and recycling programs, reduction of household
hazardous waste, and advances in landfill gas collection and control technologies. These
advances have significantly reduced fugitive emissions (Thorneloe, 2004). Furthermore,
uncontrolled fugitive landfill gas emissions may be anticipated to readily disperse in
ambient air upon release such that the concentration at the point of contact for downwind
receptors would be further reduced below health-risk based screening levels.
This overly conservative comparison supports the premise that individual NMOCs in
landfill gas are not likely to pose a public health risk. However, as ATSDR (2001)
acknowledges, possible cumulative effects from long-term exposure to low
concentrations of multiple pollutants are not easily evaluated.
.
City of Virginia Beach
Preliminary Assessment of Potential Public Health Risk
0153-403
(cn}
B
" i I
Section 5
Qualitative Assessment of Public Health Risks
5.1.1.2. Systemic Toxicity Associated with Criteria Pollutants
VOCs contained in fugitive emissions of landfill gas represent precursors for
photochemical smog and acid deposition including ground-level ozone, the main
ingredient in smog that may cause coughing, throat irritation, discomfort in the chest, and
irritation of the respiratory system (USEP A, 2003a). Ground-level ozone and the other
criteria pollutants contribute to poor air quality. High concentrations of criteria pollutants
in air can contribute to adverse health effects and damage to the environment.
USEP A established NAAQs to ensure protection of human health and the environment
and prevent damage to property. The USEPA maintains a monitoring network to
determine whether regional ambient air quality is meeting the NAAQS (attainment) or
not (non-attainment). 'Modern' mswlf facilities are required and readily capable of
meeting NAAQS requirements.
5.1.2. Particulate Matter
The potential for public health risk associated with PM emissions from routine operations
(not including diesel exhaust) is dependent upon many site-specific factors including
composition of daily cover materials, dust control strategies, topography, meteorology
and downwind distance of human receptors. Although studies have shown that exposure
to PM in ambient air may contribute to adverse public health effects various control
measures including use of synthetic alternatives to daily cover soil, minimization of
active disposal area, and other dust suppression measures should effectively abate
potential adverse impact to public health and safety.
5.1.3. Combustion of Landfill Gas
Combustion of landfill gas through flaring or for energy recovery serves to reduce the
concentration of many pollutants in landfill gas while producing some others. Landfill
gas control through flaring or energy recovery must destroy 98% of the NMOC but in the
process several VOCs (e.g., acrolein, formaldehyde, and phenols), acid gases, PM, PAHs,
and dioxins/furans are produced. Although several VOCs produced in the combustion
process may cause adverse health effects these pollutants are typically present in low
concentrations and diluted upon release to ambient air subsequent to combustion.
Individually, fugitive VOC emissions from landfill gas combustion are not anticipated to
cause significant adverse impact to public health. Potential health effects associated with
the acid gases are usually from short-term exposures to higher concentrations and are
mainly associated with occupational exposures. Long-term exposure to multiple
pollutants is more difficult to assess.
5.1.4. Diesel Engine Exhaust Emissions
The USEP A Highway Diesel Rule requires petroleum refiners to produce cleaner-burning
or ultra-low-sulfur diesel for highway vehicles beginning June 1,2006. Use of ultra-low-
sulfur diesel allows engine manufacturers to meet new emissions standards, which will be
-
City of Virginia Beach
Preliminary Assessment of Potential Public Health Risk
0153-403
"r""":o~'\"
I,. J, 'i..
,A ;,
\}o.,;:.j
B
Iii! 1
Section 5
Qualitative Assessment of Public Health Risks
phased-in between 2007 and 2010. Once the rule is fully implemented, national
emissions of NOx and PM will be reduced by 2.6 million and 110,000 tons per year,
respectively. This reduction in air pollution is estimated to prevent premature deaths,
reduce annual cases of chronic bronchitis, acute bronchitis in children, asthma attacks,
and respiratory symptoms in asthmatic children.
The USEP A (2004) estimates that requirements in the final rule on control of emissions
from non-road diesel engines and fuel reformulation will result in reductions of NOx and
PM, as well as carbon monoxide, SOx, and air toxics (benzene, 1,3-butadiene,
formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, acrolein) between 2004 and 2030. These emissions
reductions are estimated to prevent premature deaths, hospitalizations, nonfatal heart
attacks, and missed work days due to respiratory symptoms.
In addition, the relative contribution of diesel emissions associated with stationary or
mobile equipment and machinery during routine mswlf operations is likely no more than
that from other sources typical in urban environments including diesel engine exhaust
from highway vehicles. Consequently the incremental contribution of mswlf sources to
NOx emissions contained in diesel exhaust to an urban environment is not significant
when compared to other typical urban sources including heavy motor vehicle traffic as
well as commercial, industrial and residential fuel burning.
5.1.5. Landfill Fires
The potential for the public health risk from exposure to the smoke from landfill fires is
dependent on many factors including the type of waste burning, the concentration of
pollutants in the smoke, individual sensitivity, the duration of exposure, and the ratio of
combustion byproducts in the smoke plume. It is difficult to estimate the potential for
public health risks from a complex mixture of pollutants similar to that likely found in
smoke from landfill fires.
Inhalation of PM in smoke can affect pulmonary function particularly in those with
greater pulmonary sensitivity (e.g., asthmatics, those with emphysema). While short-
term exposure to smoke from a landfill fire is not fatal even at short distances, tingling of
the eyes, nose and throat can occur at distances within a couple thousand feet from the
fire. These effects are associated with formaldehyde and other aldehydes.
5.2. Pollutants Released to Subsurface
Consideration of pollutants released to the subsurface are discussed in terms of available
pathways to potential receptors including subsurface landfill gas migration as well as
release of leachate to groundwater.
.
City of Virginia Beach
Preliminary Assessment of Potential Public Health Risk
0153-403
//r~,;;
dj,h
,..~.,
-.~:~~-;~.-
B
1111 I
Section 5
Qualitative Assessment of Public Health Risks
5.2.1. Subsurface Landfill Gas Migration
The most immediate safety concern associated with subsurface migration of landfill gas
is the accumulation of landfill gas in enclosed, aboveground structures in sufficient
concentrations and in the appropriate proportion with oxygen that it could become an
explosion hazard. Sufficient concentrations of landfill gas accumulated in aboveground
structures may also displace oxygen and cause an asphyxiation hazard. The potential
explosion and asphyxiation hazards from accumulation of fugitive landfill gas emissions
are higher for enclosed structures in close proximity to the landfill. Methane is the
primary compound associated with explosive and asphyxiation hazards. However, some
flammable NMOC, although present at very low concentrations, can contribute to the
overall explosion hazard.
The accumulation of landfill gas has been known to ignite causing fires and explosions
on both landfill property and off site. The ATSDR (2001) briefly summarizes a few of
the many documented situations from 1969 to 1999 where explosions associated with
landfills have occurred. Incidents that occurred from 1969 through 1987 seem to be
associated with subsurface migration of landfill gas before newer regulations required
liners and landfill gas control. Incidents that occurred in 1994 and 1999 were associated
with old landfills or illegal dumping over which parks and playgrounds were built. It is
not known from the A TSDR summaries what types of wastes were buried at these
landfills.
In general, the potential for adverse impact on human health associated with state-of-the-
art mswlf facilities is extremely low given modern pollution abatement equipment
including liners as well as landfill gas collection and control systems which effectively
preclude lateral migration beyond the facility property boundary.
5.2.2. Pollutants Released to Groundwater
Human receptors must either come into direct contact with groundwater (e.g., if the
groundwater is a potable water source) or indirect contact if the water table is
contaminated and conditions are conducive to the migration of vapors through the
unsaturated soil zone (i.e., vadose zone) and into homes or businesses within the
leachate/groundwater plume. Vapor intrusion into buildings is of concern for VOCs that
are less dense than water (e.g., benzene).
The potential for public health risk from pollutants in groundwater is dependent on
whether receptors come into contact with groundwater or in areas where vapor intrusion
is possible. 'Modern' mswlfs have design criteria that serve to mitigate the potential for
groundwater contamination from subsurface landfill gas migration and leachate
migration. The combination of relatively impervious composite liner systems in
conjunction with leachate collection removal effectively limits potential release of
leachate to the environment. The USEP A considers 1 gallon per acre per day a de
..
. .
City of Virginia Beach
Preliminary Assessment of Potential Public Health Risk
0153-403
.rl~'
(:,~~J;
B
" I I
Section 5
Qualitative Assessment of Public Health Risks
minimis liner leakage rate (Koerner, 1999) that is thought to be protective of human
health and the environment. Because pollutants in leachate are attenuated in groundwater
and 'modern' mswlfs have de minimis liner leakage rates, any pollutants that are
nevertheless released to groundwater are likely to be in low concentration. Regardless,
there are numerous cases across the nation where leachate plumes from older mswlf
facilities lacking modern pollution abatement and control devices have been successfully
remediated.
5.3. Pollutants Released to Surface Water
The potential for public health risks from exposure to surface water depends on whether
pollutants from mswlf operations are transported to water bodies in the vicinity of the
landfill and whether human receptors are present to contact the surface water. Pollutant
transport from mswlfs to surface water can occur via groundwater discharge of a leachate
plume or by stormwater runoff. 'Modern' landfills have design criteria that serve to
mitigate the potential for leachate plumes in groundwater and stormwater runoff.
In the event that the capacity for stormwater control at a landfill is exceeded (i.e., in the
event of a precipitation event that exceeds design criteria), contaminated stormwater may
leave the landfill property boundaries. Unless that stormwater is conveyed directly into
an occupied structure, it is unlikely that human receptors would contact the stormwater.
The potential for public health risks from contaminated stormwater are considered
minimal since direct contact with contaminated stormwater is considered unlikely.
.
City of Virginia Beach
Preliminary Assessment of Potential Public Health Risk
0153-403
:o/''";~''
;;!~,l,,'i;
. ~ ..
\.,.."" ,)
. ..' :~.,;~.
B
I'
I I
I I
! I
i i
I I
I r
! !
I I
II I I
MALCOLM
PIRNIE
INDEPENDENT ENVIRONMENTAL
ENGINEERS, SCIENTISTS
AND CONSULTANTS
6
o
II I I
6. Case Studies
Case studies in general corroborate no known adverse health effects associated with
operation of a mswlf provided with modern pollution control and abatement technology
and equipment.
General investigation by Hamar et al. (1996 as cited in Soltani-Ahmadi, 2000) showed no
difference in VOC concentrations between exposed (living near a landfill) and control
populations. It is generally believed that dispersion and dilution of landfill gas in
ambient air is sufficient to protect populations living near landfills (Soltani-Ahmadi,
2000). No studies were found that specifically assessed the potential public health risks
from diesel emissions associated with mswlfs.
The following are case studies that have examined the potential association between
potential exposure to landfills and adverse health effects.
Fresh Kills Municipal Landfill. Staten Island. New York
Established in 1948 and covering approximately 2,200 acres, this is one of the oldest and
largest landfills in the nation. According to Berger et al. (2000), at the time of the study
the landfill accepted about 14,000 tons of waste per day and operated 24 hours per day,
six days per week. Hundreds of odor complaints from nearby residents were filed with
the New York City Department of Sanitation over the years and residents' considered the
landfill a health concern. Geldberg (1997) reported higher incidences of work-related
dermatologic, neurologic, hearing, and respiratory symptoms among workers at the
landfill as opposed to other New York City Department of Sanitation workers.
The Berger et al. study was conducted by telephone survey in two demographically
similar communities, one immediately adjacent and generally downwind from the landfill
and the other approximately 7 miles from the opposite side and generally upwind of the
landfill. The investigators reported that the proportion of asthma responses was higher
for the community further from the landfill. One suggested explanation was that people
living in the community further from the landfill tended not to report less serious
respiratory conditions. Respondents from the community adjacent to the landfill reported
higher percentage of rotten egg and garbage odors and a higher proportion of eye, nose,
and throat irritations. The investigators recognized that irritation reported by respondents
in the community adjacent to the landfill may be the result of stronger odors or may
indicate a greater perceived risk. While odor perception is subjective, odors can have a
negative impact on the overall quality of life and perception of health. The investigators
also acknowledged that the reported occurrence of symptoms could not be linked to
landfill emissions due to the descriptive nature of the study.
..
. .
City of Virginia Beach
Preliminary Assessment of Public Health Risk
0153-403
::'(1);
B
II I I
Section 6
Case Studies
Berger et al. noted that the results indicate a fairly large number of Staten Island residents
experience respiratory-related symptoms and conditions. Staten Island, within New York
City, is located in a nonattainment area of the NAAQs for, at the time of publication,
,ozone, PM, and carbon dioxide. New York City is still in non attainment for the 8-hour
ozone and PM2.5 standards (USEPA, 2008a). As described previously, ozone and PM
have been shown to exacerbate asthma and other respiratory illnesses.
Huff et al. (2002)
The case studies of quantitative health risk assessments from emissions of landfill gas
summarized by Huff et al. (2002) concluded that potential risk to both on- and off-site
receptors was acceptable and below appropriate health risk-based thresholds associated
with systemic toxicity and/or carcinogenicity.
Huff et al. described the regulatory environment for conducting health risk assessments
for landfill projects. Health risk assessments have become a standard requirement under
the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The National Environmental Policy
Act (NEP A) also has language that indicates full risk assessments may be required. The
authors report increased scrutiny for new landfill siting and landfill expansion projects
which stems in part from public perception of risks associated with newer, larger landfill
projects, including increased scrutiny of diesel exhaust. The CEQA requirements include
evaluation of alternatives and do not include current site conditions in calculating
whether impacts are "significant" but are considered in the baseline evaluation of risk.
Case studies of quantitative health risk assessments at one active 100-million ton landfill
expansion project in California (Landfill I) and one post-closure development of a Class
III landfill adjacent to a Class I hazardous waste landfill (Landfill 2) were summarized.
The assessment for Landfill I included site-specific air dispersion modeling of landfill
gas from fugitive surface and flare emissions and evaluation of the nearest residential
populations within a I-mile radius around the site. Estimated risks for on-site receptors
and off-site residents were considered acceptable. The assessment for Landfill 2 also
included site-specific air dispersion modeling of fugitive surface and landfill gas control
equipment. The inhalation pathway was the only pathway of concern and receptors
included on-site workers and recreational users and off-site residents. Again, estimated
risks for all receptors were considered acceptable.
The authors conclude that health risk assessment is a useful tool in landfill project
planning resulting in more reasonable project development and allowing the evaluation of
project alternatives that might result in lower risks. Site-specific health risk assessment
can also be used to establish reasonable mitigation measures. The authors concluded that
through use of health risk assessment it can be shown that most landfill projects are not
likely to result in human health risks above regulatory thresholds.
..
. .
City of Virginia Beach
Preliminary Assessment of Potential Public Health Risk
0153-403
.ffS"\s',
'" i '"
\\:!/i
B
,I I I
Section 6
Case Studies
Upper Ottawa Street Landfill Site Health Study (Hertz man et aI.. 1987)
Hertzman et al. conducted a comprehensive retrospective epidemiological study of the
Upper Ottawa Street Landfill in Ontario, Canada. This landfill, which operated from the
early 1950s until 1980 when it was sealed with a thin clay cap, accepted municipal,
commercial and solid and liquid industrial wastes. The study included evaluation of
former workers at the landfill and a control group of workers within the same city as well
as residents living within various distances from the landfill at various times during
landfill operation and a control group of residents. The investigators found that the
associations between exposure and heath conditions in the worker populations with the
highest credibility include chronic bronchitis, daily cough, combined respiratory
problems, narcotic symptoms (i.e., producing a general sense of well-being), and mood
disorders. For the residential populations, the association between landfill exposure and
health problems that were the most valid were for narcotic conditions followed by
respiratory, skin, and mood conditions.
The investigators recognized potential bias in the study but concluded that the
consistency of symptoms between workers and residents was significant. The health
problems identified in excess in the study were not unique to chemical exposure nor
based on tissue damage and there was no evidence that workers or residents were
exposed to airborne concentrations of any chemical in sufficient concentrations to cause
these health problems. The study found no evidence of adverse reproductive outcomes
related to exposure to the landfill nor was there evidence of increases in major chronic
diseases among exposed residents. The investigators recognized the limitations of their
study including that the effects of psychological distress is an important correlate of
perceived health status. However, the investigators believed that the lines of reasoning
supporting chemical causation are stronger than those that support perceptual
mechanisms.
Alliance Landfill. Lackawanna County. Pennsylvania (ATSDR. 2005)
The Alliance Landfill began operations in the 1960s as the Empire State Landfill and
encompasses approximately 196 acres of a 512-acre property. The nearest residence is
1,500 feet from the landfill property boundary. At the time of the investigation (2002 to
2005) the landfill was accepting approximately 5,000 tons of waste per day.
Approximately 80% of that waste was MSW, 10.5% was construction and demolition
debris, and 8.1 % was incinerator ash. The landfill cells are double-lined and leachate and
landfill gas collection systems are in place. Permits required the landfill to collect 75%
of the landfill gas and ensure odors did not leave the site. The collected gas was purified
and used for residential and commercial purposes with off-specification gas flared.
Between March 2002 and the time of publication, the landfill received 60 violations and
176 odor complaints from nearby residents. The A TSDR was petitioned to perform a
..
. .
City of Virginia Beach
Preliminary Assessment of Potential Public Health Risk
0153-403
Jf'~~;.,
.', i ",
\?,~~~.~(/
B
,I I I
Section 6
Case Studies
public health assessment by a citizen concerned about "air and particulate" emissions and
incidence of cancer in the community. The landfill closed for approximately one month
in 2003 to address the concerns of the regulatory agency and the issued violations. No
violations were issued since the landfill reopened.
The A TSDR concluded that due to the lack of sufficient data to identify and quantify
landfill-related air contaminants in the community, no determinations could be made on
the potential for adverse health effects associated with emissions from the landfill.
However, since the 2003 landfill shut-down was spurred by concerns over compliance
and emissions controls, the A TSDR categorized Alliance landfill as an intermediate
public health hazard.
..
. .
City of Virginia Beach
Preliminary Assessment of Potential Public Health Risk
0153.403
,fft''0.;,,:,
:<ili"
\;,,'Y/
B
..
..
."
ill,
.'
II,
.
.,
MALCOLM
PIRNIE
INOEl'EHDI!.NT ENVIRONMENTAL
ENGINEERS. SCIE.NTISTS
AND CONSULTANTS
"
"
.,
"
'1
f 7
'1
r
1,
1'1
1'1
1'1
('I 0
II I I
7. Conclusions and Recommendations
Although numerous harmful pollutants can be potentially released from mswlfs the
magnitude of potential release and resulting concentration of contaminants introduced to
the surrounding environment is relatively small when compared to other sources in an
urban setting. 'Modern' mswlf operations reduce the sources of pollutants within the
waste mass and operating area; design criteria abate release of pollutants; and dispersion
and attenuation of the relatively small contribution of fugitive air emissions and
pollutants potentially released to groundwater or surface water likely mitigate potential
adverse impact on public health and safety. Case studies corroborate this finding and
have not identified direct adverse public health impacts from 'modern' mswlf facilities
Based on the information reviewed for this assessment and given the limitations
discussed, it does not appear that operation of 'modern' mswlfs pose unacceptable public
health risk in an urban setting.
In addition, the following approach and/or technologies were identified to further abate
and/or mitigate potential health impacts and should be considered for incorporation into
future operations and development of a 'state-of-the-art' mswlf facility:
.
Establishment of buffer comprised of open or vegetated space between the landfill
and nearest residents. Open space or setback may dilute airborne emissions and
can be created by either developing a setback from the limit of waste to the
facility's property line or by purchasing surrounding properties.
.
Development and utilization of a separate waste receiving building (similar to a
transfer station) where incoming waste materials are processed in an enclosed
environment. Subsequent to processing residual waste materials may be
transferred with larger haul trucks to a smaller, more controlled working face. The
combination of less haul vehicles and smaller working face will minimize
potential fugitive air emissions. If necessary building emissions may be controlled
and treated prior to discharge to further reduce potential impact on ambient air
quality.
.
Incorporation of 'baling' technology either separate or in combination with a
waste receiving building utilizing plastic wrapped waste bales to significantly
reduce potential fugitive air emissions and leachate generation.
..
. .
City of Virginia Beach
Preliminary Assessment of Public Health Risk
0153-403
;:(~);
G
II I I
Section 7
Conclusions and Recommendations
.
Utilization of alternative daily cover (ADC) materials in lieu of conventional
earthen materials to further reduce fugitive air emissions (including potentially
malodorous landfill gas and dust) from the active waste disposal area.
.
Utilizing gravel or paved surfaces on all roadways or dust prone areas.
.
Stabilization of exposed or denuded area via establishing vegetation or utilization
of soil-stabilizers to suppress fugitive dust emissions by forming cohesive bonds
between soil particles.
Accelerated incremental capping and closure of completed landfill side slopes.
.
.
Accelerated and enhanced landfill gas collection and control measures that exceed
minimum regulatory requirements already incorporated into the facility design
and operations basis. A typical landfill incorporates active landfill gas collection
and control system as part of its routine operations. Collection efficiencies are
typically around 85 percent and effectively abate fugitive air emissions once the
system is made operational. (Thermal destruction of collected landfill gas at an
enclosed on-site flare is typically around 98 percent). The City may enhance
abatement efforts by accelerating installation and implementation of the lfgccs.
Additional odor abatement measures may also include incorporation of
'sacrificial' horizontal landfill gas collection headers within the active working
area to further abate fugitive emissions and malodor during short term operations
prior to installation of the permanent landfill gas well-field.
.
Restrict public access onto the landfill surface by providing a public convenience
drop off center from where waste can be loaded onto appropriately sized haul
trucks.
.
Installation of global positioning system (OPS) technology via mobile control
units to optimize efficiency of compaction equipment and associated diesel
emISSiOns.
.
Augmentation of liner system that exceed minimum regulatory requirements to
include incorporation of multiple protective liner and containment systems via
additional impervious liner elements such as geomembranes or geosynthetic clay
liners.
..
. .
City of Virginia Beach
Preliminary Assessment of Potential Public Health Risk
0153-403
!/fa;~:..
'." A-. 1:-'
\k~i
'..-;;....
G
MALCOLM
PIRNIE
INDE.PENDENT ENVIRONMENTAL
ENGIN!:ERS, SCIENTIS1'S
AND CONSULTAMTS
.
,
t,
r'
~\
I,
I'
II
8
o
1111 I
8. References
Andreottola, G. and P. Cannas. 1992. Chemical and biological characteristics of landfill
leachate, in Landfilling of Waste: Leachate. Christensen, T.H., R. Cossu, and R.
Stegmann, Eds. Elsevier, London. 65.
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (A TSDR). 2006a. Toxicological
Profile for Hydrogen Sulfide. Department of Human Services, Division of Health
Assessment and Consultation. Atlanta, GA. July 2006.
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. 2006b. ToxFAQsTM for Phenol.
September 2006. Accessed on-line at: http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxfaq.html.
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (A TSDR). 2005. Health
Consultation: Alliance Landfill Site, Taylor Borough and Ransom Township, Taylor,
Lackawanna County, Pennsylvania. Department of Human Services, Division of Health
Assessment and Consultation. Atlanta, GA. January 10,2005.
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). 2003a. ToxFAQsTM for
Hydrogen Fluoride. Department of Human Services, Division of Health Assessment and
Consultation. Atlanta, GA. September 2003. Accessed on-line at:
http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxfaq.html. .
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). 2003b. ToxFAQsTM for
Trichloroethylene. Department of Human Services, Division of Health Assessment and
Consultation. Atlanta, GA. July 2003. Accessed on-line at:
http://www .atsdr.cdc. gov /toxfaq .html.
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). 2002a. ToxFAQsTM for
Hydrogen Chloride. Department of Human Services, Division of Health Assessment and
Consultation. Atlanta, GA. April 2002. Accessed on-line at:
http://www .atsdr.cdc. gov /toxfaq .html.
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). 2002b. ToxFAQsTM for
Nitrogen Oxides. Department of Human Services, Division of Health Assessment and
Consultation. Atlanta, GA. April 2002. Accessed on-line at:
http://www .atsdr.cdc. gov /toxfaq .html.
..
. .
City of Virginia Beach
Preliminary Assessment of Public Health Risk
0153-403
"r,';;"j"";Jz\",
.~~' ~-',
i"}:-:$/.::
-.~-; :-.,'
B
I11I I
Section 8
References
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (A TSDR). 2001. Landfill Gas
Primer: An Overview for Environmental Health Professionals. Department of Human
Services, Division of Health Assessment and Consultation. Atlanta, GA. November
2001.
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). 1999a. ToxFAQsTM for
Chlorinated Dibenzo-p-Dioxins (CDDs). Department of Human Services, Division of
Health Assessment and Consultation. Atlanta, GA. February 1999. Accessed on-line at:
http://www .atsdr.cdc. gov /toxfaq .html.
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). 1999b. ToxFAQsTM for
Methyl Mercaptan. Department of Human Services, Division of Health Assessment and
Consultation. Atlanta, GA. July 1999. Accessed on-line at:
http://www .atsdr.cdc. gov /toxfaq .html.
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). 1999c. ToxFAQsTM for
Sulfur Dioxide. Department of Human Services, Division of Health Assessment and
Consultation. Atlanta, GA. June 1999. Accessed on-line at:
http://www .atsdr.cdc. gov /toxfaq .html.
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). 1997. ToxFAQsTM for
Tetrachloroethylene. Department of Human Services, Division of Health Assessment
and Consultation. Atlanta, GA. September 1997. Accessed on-line at:
http://www .atsdr.cdc. gov /toxfaq .html..
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). 1995. Toxicological
Profile for Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs). Department of Human Services,
Division of Health Assessment and Consultation. Atlanta, GA. February 1999.
Berger, S.A., P.A. Jones, M.C. White. 2000. Exploratory Analysis of Respiratory Illness
Among Persons Living Near a Landfill. Journal of Environmental Health. Vol. 62, Issue
6, pp. 19.
Bridges, 0., J.M. Bridges, and J.P. Potter. 2000. A generic comparison of the airborne
risks to human health from landfill and incinerator disposal of municipal solid waste.
The Environmentalist. Vol. 20, pp. 325-334.
Christensen, T.H., P. Kjeldsen, H-J. Albrechtsen, G. Heron, P.R. Nielsen, P.L. Bjerg, and
P.E. Holm. 1994. Attenuation of landfill leachate pollutants in aquifers. In: Critical
Reviews in Environmental Science and Technology. Vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 119-202. 1994.
..
. .
City of Virginia Beach
Preliminary Assessment of Potential Public Health Risk
0153-403
(~r~%
B
1111 I
Section 8
References
Eklund, B., E.P. Anderson, B.L. Walker, and D.B. Burrows. 1998. Characterization of
Landfill Gas Composition at the Fresh Kills Municipal Solid-Waste Landfill.
Environmental Science and Technology. Vol. 32, pp. 2233-237.
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). 2002. Landfill Fires: Their
Magnitude, Characteristics, and Mitigation. United States Fire Administration, National
Fire Data Center. Arlington, V A May 2002/FA-225.
Gendebien, A, Pauwels, M., Constant, M., Ledrup-Damanet, M.J., Nyns, E.J.,
Willumsen, H.-C., Batson, J., Fabry, R. and Ferrero, G.-L. 1992. Landfill gas from
environment to energy. Eur 14017 1 EN CEC. Luxemborg.
Geldberg, K. 1997. Health Study of New York City Department of Sanitation Landfill
Employees. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine. Vol. 153, No.1, pp.
3-50.
Hamar, G.B., M.A McGeekin, B.L. Phifer, and D.L. Ashley. 1996. Volatile Organic
Compound Testing of a Populaiton Living Near a Hazardous Waste Site. Journal of
Exposure Analytical Environmental Epidemiology. Vol. 6, No.2, pp. 274-255.
Herrera, T.A., R. Lang, G. Tchobanoglous, D.P.Y. Chang, and R.G. Spicher. 1988.
Trace Constituents in Municipal Landfill Gas. California Waste Management Board.
Sacramenta, CA
Hertzman, c., M. Hayes, J. Singer, and J. Highland. 1987. Upper Ottawa Street Landfill
Site Health Study. Environmental Health Perspectives. Vol. 75, pp. 173-195.
Hickman, H.L. 1998. Regulating municipal solid waste management in the United
States. In Proceedingsof Conference on Landfill Gas and Anaerobic Digestion in Solid
Waste, Chester, UK.
Huff, R.H, AJ Tinker, and P.S. Sullivan. 2002. Human Health Risk Assessment Issues
For Landfills. In: The Solid Waste Association of North America Proceedings from the
25th Annual Landfill Gas Symposium. Monterey, CA March 25-28, 2002. pp.221-232.
International Agency for Research on Cancer (lARC). 2008. lARC Mongraphs on the
Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risk to Humans. Accessed online at:
http://monographs.iarc.frIENG/Classification/index.php. Last updated March 28, 2008.
Koerner, Robert M. 1999. Designing with Geosynthetics. Fourth Edition. Prentice Hall,
Inc., New Jersey. p. 408.
..
. .
City of Virginia Beach
Preliminary Assessment of Potential Public Health Risk
0153-403
:/f"l~~~;;
;C. A}:
'~:~,-;.;::.:"'~ .:
B
1111 I
Section 8
References
Lindberg, S.E., D. Wall schlager, E.M. Prestbo, N.S. Bloom, J. Prive, and D. Reinhart.
2001. Methylated mercury species in municipal waste landfill gas sampled in Florida,
USA. Atmospheric Environment. Vol. 35. Issue 2. pp. 4011-4015. August 2001.
Lu, J.C.S., B. Eichenberger, and RJ. Stearns. 1985. Leachate from Municipal Landfills
- Production and Mangement. Noyes, Park Ridge, NJ.
Occupational Safety and Health Administation (OSHA). 2002. OSHA Factsheet:
Carbon Monoxide Poisoning. U.S. Department of Labor. Accessed online at:
http://www .osha.gov /OshDoc/data General Facts/carbonmonoxide-factsheet. pdf.
Soltani-Ahmadi, H. 2000. A Review of Literature Regarding Non-Methane and Volatile
Organic Compounds in Municipal Solid Waste Landfill Gas. Solid Waste Association of
North America.
Suflita, J.M., c.P. Gerba, R.K. Ham, A.c. Palmisano, W.L. Rathje, and J.A. Robinson.
1992. The world's largest landfill. Environ. Sci. Technol. Vol. 26. pp. 1486.
Sullivan, P. and M. Michels. 2001. The Time is Now for Changes to the AP-42 Section
on Landfills. Proceedings, 23rd Annual Landfill Gas Symposium. SW ANA. San Diego,
CA. USA.
Sullivan, P. and G.A. Stege. 2000. An Evaluation of Air and Greenhouse Gas Emissions
and Methane-Recovery Potential From Bioreactor Landfills. MSW Management. Vol.
10 No.5. September/October 2000.
Thornloe, S.A. 2004. U.S. EPA's Field Test Programs to Update Data on Landfill Gas
Emissions. Air Pollution and Prevention and Control Division. Office of Research and
Development. Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2008a. The Green Book Nonattainment Areas
for Criteria Pollutants. Current as of March 12,2008. Accessed at:
http://www .epa.gov / air/oaqps/ greenbk/
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2008b. Integrated Risk Information System.
Accessed at: http://www.epa.gov/iris
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2006a. Air Quality Criteria for Ozone and
Related Photochemical Oxidants. National Center for Environmental Assessment-RTP
Office and Office of Research and Development. Washington D.C. EPA 600/R-
05/004aF. February, 2006.
.
City of Virginia Beach
Preliminary Assessment of Potential Public Health Risk
0153.403
;:(tJ:,::
B
1111 I
Section 8
References
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2006b. Frequently Asked Questions About
Landfill Gas and How It Affects Public Health, Safety, and The Environment. Office of
Air and Radiation. Washington D.C. October, 2006.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2006c. 2006 Edition of the Drinking Water
Standards and Health Advisories. Office of Water. Washington D.C. EPA 822-R-06-
013. August, 2006.
u.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2005. Landfill Gas Emissions Model
(LandGEM). Version 3.02. Office of Research and Development National Risk
Management and Research Laboratory (NRMRL) and Clean Air Technology Center
(CA TC) Research Triangle Park, North Carolina. May 2005.
u.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2004. Final Regulatory Analysis: Control of
Emissions from Nonroad Diesel Engines. Office of Transportation and Air Quality.
Washington D.C. EPA20-R-04-007. May 2004.
u.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2003a. Air Quality Index: A Guide to Air
Quality and Your Health. Office of Air and Radiation. Washington D.C. EPA-454/K-
03-002. August 2003.
u.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2003b. Questions and Answers About Dioxins.
Interagency Working Group on Dioxin. Accessed online at:
http://www .cfsan.fda. gov / ~ Ird/dioxinqa.html#f3.
u.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2002. 2002 National Emissions Inventory
Booklet. Accessed online at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/eiinformation.html.
u.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1998. Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission
Factors. Volume I: Stationary Point and Area Sources. Office of Air Quality Planning
and Standards and Office of Air and Radiation. Washington D.C. AP-42 Fifth Edition
January 1995.
u.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1997. Fact Sheet: USEPA's Revised Particulate
Matter Standards. July 17, 1997.
..
. .
City of Virginia Beach
Preliminary Assessment of Potential Public Health Risk
0153.403
trl~1')
..,>~!,
B