ASSESSMENT OF PROPOSED CREMATORY EMISSIONS

SPRING HILL MEMORIAL PARK AND FUNERAL HOME 5239 MAIN STREET SPRING HILL, TENNESSEE 37174
EnSafe Project Number 0888811171

Prepared for:

THE CITY OF SPRING HILL 199 TOWN CENTER PARKWAY SPRING HILL, TENNESSEE 37174 Prepared by:

EnSafe Inc. 220 Athens Way, Suite 410 Nashville, Tennessee 37228 (615) 255-9300 (800) 588-7962 www.ensafe.com

November 2011

Table of Contents 1.0 2.0 3.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................ 1 APPROACH ................................................................................................................... 4 DISPERSION MODELING ................................................................................................ 6 3.1 Methodology ...................................................................................................... 6 3.1.1 General Modeling Approach ...................................................................... 6 3.1.2 Emission Rate Calculation ......................................................................... 6 3.1.3 Meteorological Data ............................................................................... 11 3.1.4 Receptors and Terrain ............................................................................ 11 3.1.5 Emission Source .................................................................................... 11 3.1.6 Building Downwash ................................................................................ 15 3.2 Modeling Results .............................................................................................. 15 COMPARISON OF PREDICTED CONCENTRATIONS WITH SCREENING LEVELS .................. 16 4.1 Screening Level Selection .................................................................................. 16 4.1.1 Sources of Screening Levels Considered................................................... 16 4.1.2 Discussion and Selection of Long-term Screening Levels............................ 17 4.1.3 Discussion and Selection of Short-term Screening Levels ........................... 17 4.2 Comparison of Predicted Ambient Air Concentrations with Selected Screening Levels .............................................................................................................. 18 DISCUSSION OF RESULTS ........................................................................................... 23 CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................................ 24 REFERENCES .............................................................................................................. 25 Figures Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure 1 2 3 4 5 Facility Location — Topographic Map .................................................................... 2 Facility Location — Aerial View ............................................................................. 3 Receptor Grid ................................................................................................... 12 Receptor Grid — Near Facility ............................................................................ 13 Facility Layout .................................................................................................. 14

4.0

5.0 6.0 7.0

i

Tables Table 1 Table 2 Table 3 Table 4 Crematory Emission Rates for Mercury, Dioxins and Furans Identified in the Scientific Literature ........................................................................................................... 7 Facility Emission Rates and Source Parameters ................................................... 15 Sources of Screening Levels Considered for Long-Term Exposure Analysis ............. 16 Modeling Results and Comparisons to Risk-Based Screening Levels ....................... 19

Appendices Appendix A Appendix B Emission Rate Calculations Modeling Files and Descriptions

ii

Assessment of Proposed Crematory Emissions Spring Hill Memorial Park and Funeral Home Spring Hill, Tennessee November 2011

1.0

INTRODUCTION

EnSafe was engaged by the City of Spring Hill, Tennessee to review and document relevant scientific, engineering and public health information — including potential air quality impacts, to facilitate the City’s evaluation of a crematory proposed for construction by Spring Hill Memorial Park and Funeral Home (Spring Hill Memorial) located at 5239 Main Street, Spring Hill, Tennessee. The proposed facility location is shown on Figure 1. An aerial view of the facility is shown on Figure 2. In Phase 1 of this project, EnSafe researched the published scientific literature and regulatory studies related to crematories, gathered information regarding the cremation process, and estimated the potential emissions from the proposed crematory. The findings of that first phase were summarized in the EnSafe report issued to the City of Spring Hill titled, Air Emissions from

Potential Spring Hill Crematory, September 2011.
Subsequent to the issuance of the aforementioned report, the Spring Hill Board of Mayor and Aldermen (BOMA) requested that EnSafe proceed with the second and third phases of the project which were (Phase 2) to perform an air dispersion modeling analysis using an appropriate U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) air dispersion model and emission rates for mercury, dioxins and furans to predict the ambient air quality impacts from crematory emissions, and (Phase 3) to use the air dispersion modeling results from Phase 2 to evaluate the predicted airborne pollutant concentrations regarding their potential public health effects. summarizes the results of the Phase 2 and Phase 3 analyses. The pollutants mercury, total dioxins and total furans were selected for this analysis for two reasons. The first is that in order for the proposed crematory to begin construction, and subsequently operation, Spring Hill Memorial must obtain an air quality permit from the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation — Division of Air Pollution Control (TDAPC) and that permit will limit emissions of particles (soot) and visible emissions (smoke) to levels considered by TDAPC to meet ambient air quality standards. Primary and secondary ambient air quality standards define levels of air quality that are believed to be adequate, with an appropriate margin of safety, to protect public health and welfare. The second is that of the remaining pollutants likely to be emitted from the crematory, based on discussions with the BOMA and comments by members of the public during BOMA meetings, it is apparent that mercury, dioxins and furans are the primary pollutants of public health concern. A full list of the potential air pollutants from the proposed crematory are discussed in EnSafe’s September 2011 report.
1

This report

±

X:\Scratch\Julie\Projects\Crematory_Emiss_Topo.mxd

Figure 1 Assessment of Proposed Crematory Emissions Facilty Location - Topographic Map Spring Hill Memorial Park & Funeral Home Spring Hill, Tennessee
Legend
Property Line

0

850

1,700

2,550

Basemap Source: USGS Godwin, Tennessee Quadrangle Topographic Map http://services.arcgisonline.com/arcgis/services/USA_Topo_Maps © 2011 National Geographic Society, i-cubed

3,400 Feet

REQUESTED BY: J. Aslinger DRAWN BY: M. Senne Date: 11/8/2011 PROJECT NO: 0888811171
(615) 255-9300 WWW.ENSAFE.COM NASHVILLE, TN

±

Stack
"

New

Existing

Property Line

X:\Scratch\Julie\Projects\Crematory_Emiss.mxd

Figure 2 Assessment of Proposed Crematory Emissions Facilty Location - Aerial View Spring Hill Memorial Park & Funeral Home Spring Hill, Tennessee
Legend
Property Line New Existing Stack

0

120

240

360

Basemap Source: Esri World Imagery http://services.arcgisonline.com/arcgis/services/World_Imagery © 2011 Esri, i-cubed, USDA FSA, USGS, AEX, GeoEye, AeroGRID, Getmapping, IGP

480 Feet

REQUESTED BY: J. Aslinger DRAWN BY: M. Senne Date: 11/8/2011 PROJECT NO: 0888811171
(615) 255-9300 WWW.ENSAFE.COM NASHVILLE, TN

"

Assessment of Proposed Crematory Emissions Spring Hill Memorial Park and Funeral Home Spring Hill, Tennessee November 2011

2.0 APPROACH USEPA’s air dispersion model, AMS (American Meteorological Society) and EPA Regulatory MODel, AERMOD (version 11103) was used to predict ambient air concentrations of mercury, dioxins and furans in the area surrounding the proposed crematory. AERMOD was used to predict both long-term (chronic) and short-term (acute) ambient air concentrations of mercury, and the long-term ambient air concentrations of dioxins and furans. No short-term ambient air concentration was predicted for dioxins and furans because there is no short-term screening level available for comparison to the predicted concentrations. The long-term concentrations were based on predicted maximum annual average ambient air concentrations of each pollutant. Two types of short-term ambient air concentrations were analyzed for mercury. These were based on the predicted maximum hourly concentration and the predicted maximum 8-hour average concentration of each pollutant. In both the long-term and short-term analysis, with regard to mercury, both the USEPA emission rates and the highest reported mercury content emission rates were modeled. For the purposes of predicting long-term ambient air concentrations, it was assumed that the average cremation takes three hours (half hour for warm-up, two hours for the cremation, and half hour cool-down) and that a cremation would occur at the proposed Spring Hill Memorial crematory every three hours throughout the year. That is, that there would be approximately 2,920 cremations performed per year, which is roughly ten times the number of cremations planned according to Ms. Pam Stephens of Spring Hill Memorial (Pam Stephens, Personal Communication, August 31, 2011). conservatism to the long-term impact analysis. For the purposes of predicting short-term ambient air concentrations of mercury, it was assumed that all the mercury in the body being cremated is emitted in only one of the three hours of the cremation. This, too, was done to provide an added level of conservatism to the analysis and because it has been reported, based on studies done in Japan, that most of the mercury in the body is emitted in the first hour of the cremation process (Draft Report, Crematory Toxic This was done to provide an added level of

Emissions Inventories, Risk Assessments, and Risk Reduction Measures, David Craft, Monterey Bay (California) Unified Air Pollution Control District, et al, July 2011, p. 11).

4

Assessment of Proposed Crematory Emissions Spring Hill Memorial Park and Funeral Home Spring Hill, Tennessee November 2011

The predicted long-term ambient air concentrations of dioxins and furans as well as the long and short-term ambient air concentrations of mercury in the vicinity of the proposed crematory were then compared to published screening levels for each pollutant. In addition, at the request of the BOMA, predicted ambient air concentrations of these pollutants at select locations in the community, such as neighborhoods, parks, schools and churches, were also compared to the same screening levels. These comparisons are shown in Table 4 and discussed in detail in Section 4.0 of this report.

5

Assessment of Proposed Crematory Emissions Spring Hill Memorial Park and Funeral Home Spring Hill, Tennessee November 2011

3.0 DISPERSION MODELING 3.1 Methodology The following methodology was followed in accordance with general USEPA and TDAPC modeling guidance. 3.1.1 General Modeling Approach As stated earlier USEPA’s air dispersion model, AERMOD (version 11103) was used for this analysis since it is the preferred model listed in USEPA’s Guideline on Air Quality Models. AERMOD handles all types of terrain and also includes building downwash and cavity impact evaluations which were judged to be important in this analysis. Default model options were used, including the rural setting since the 3-kilometer area immediately surrounding the facility is predominately rural. 3.1.2 Emission Rate Calculation There is a wide range of emission rates for mercury, dioxins and furans emissions from crematories discussed in the scientific literature. Table 1 summarizes those emission rates identified by EnSafe during Phase 1 of this project. As discussed in EnSafe’s September 2011 report, USEPA maintains an extensive database of recommended emission factors for a wide range of air pollutants from many types of air emission sources. These emission factors are provided in USEPA’s Factor Information Retrieval System (FIRE) database. These factors are used extensively by federal, state and local regulators for estimating potential air quality impacts from new sources of air pollutants. As also discussed in EnSafe’s September 2011 report, the most extensive regulatory guidance for permitting crematories found by EnSafe is the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) Permit Handbook, which recommends the use of emission factors from the USEPA FIRE database in conducting assessments of air quality impacts from crematories in the San Francisco Bay area of California. For these reasons, the primary emission rates for mercury, dioxins and furans used in this dispersion modeling analysis were developed from emission factors from the FIRE database. In addition to these USEPA emission rates, and in order to provide the most conservative air quality impact analysis possible, an emission rate for mercury was also developed from the highest mercury body content found in the published literature search conducted by EnSafe during Phase 1 of this project. That emission rate indicated a mercury content of 8.6 grams per body (g/body) (Summary of References on Mercury Emissions from Crematoria, John Reindl, November 2008, p. 7). By comparison, the USEPA mercury emission factor is based on a mercury content of roughly 1.5 g/body. Assuming an average mercury content of 0.5 g/silver dental amalgam, these two emission rates relate to an average of approximately 17 and 3 silver dental amalgams per body, respectively.
6

Assessment of Proposed Crematory Emissions Spring Hill Memorial Park and Funeral Home Spring Hill, Tennessee November 2011
Table 1 Crematory Emission Rates for Mercury, Dioxins and Furans Identified in the Scientific Literature 1-Hour Long-Term Long-Term Mercury 8-Hour Mercury Dioxin Furan Emission Rate2 Emission Rate3 Emission Rate1 Emission Rate1 (grams/sec) (grams/sec) (grams/sec) (grams/sec) Reference 4.15E-04 1.55E-04 9.87E-10 1.48E-09 Based on EPA FIRE Database Based on CANA/EPA Test at Woodlawn Mortuary in 1999 — 1.50E-04 2.81E-05 average of 3 runs made with cremation unit operating at 1400O F Based on CANA/EPA Test at Woodlawn Mortuary in 1999 — 1.83E-04 3.44E-05 average of 3 runs made with cremation unit operating at 1600O F Based on CANA/EPA Test at Woodlawn Mortuary in 1999 — 4.78E-05 8.96E-06 average of 3 runs made with cremation unit operating at 1800O F Based on Dioxins and Furans in Australia: Air Emissions, 1.03E-13 May 2002, Page 38, Chapter 6.1.9, Crematoria Based on Dioxins and Furans in Australia: Air Emissions, 1.03E-13 May 2002, Page 38, Chapter 6.1.9, Crematoria Based on low end of range of mercury per body (0.0094 grams) 2.61E-06 9.79E-07 as reported in unpublished draft report Summary of References on Mercury Emissions from Crematoria, November 3, 2008 Based on high end of range of mercury per body (8.6 grams) as 2.39E-03 8.96E-04 reported in unpublished draft report Summary of References on Mercury Emissions from Crematoria, November 3, 2008 Based on Characterizing the Emissions of Polychlorinated Dibenzo-p-dioxins and Dibenzofurans from Crematories and 5.18E-09 Their Impacts to the Surrounding Environment, Environmental Science & Technology, 2003, 37, pp 62-67 Based on Characterizing the Emissions of Polychlorinated Dibenzo-p-dioxins and Dibenzofurans from Crematories and 5.18E-09 Their Impacts to the Surrounding Environment, Environmental Science & Technology, 2003, 37, pp 62-67 Based on 0.0011 lbs of mercury per body burned from 1.39E-04 5.20E-05

Long-Term Mercury Emission Rate1 (grams/sec) 1.38E-044 7.50E-05 9.17E-05 2.39E-05

8.71E-07 7.96E-04

4.62E-05

Amendment to County General Ordinance Code Sections 6.20.30 and 17.52.580 RE: Crematoria, County of Alameda CA,
August 2010 Proposed emission rate for Colorado based on a study done by Tetra Tech, Pollution Prevention Crematoria Project Final Report, June 2007

2.94E-04

8.82E-04

3.31E-04

7

Assessment of Proposed Crematory Emissions Spring Hill Memorial Park and Funeral Home Spring Hill, Tennessee November 2011
Table 1 Crematory Emission Rates for Mercury, Dioxins and Furans Identified in the Scientific Literature 1-Hour Long-Term Long-Term Mercury 8-Hour Mercury Dioxin Furan Emission Rate2 Emission Rate3 Emission Rate1 Emission Rate1 (grams/sec) (grams/sec) (grams/sec) (grams/sec) Reference Proposed emission factor from Emission Factor Development For Mercury Emissions from Crematoria for Application to 3.28E-04 1.23E-04 Facilities in Minneapolis, Minnesota prepared by Barr Engineering Company, March 14, 2008 based on EPA/CANA Test at Woodlawn Crematorium Low end of range of emission factors from Sweden based on numbers of dental amalgams per body cremated as reported in Emission Factor Development For Mercury Emissions from 1.00E-03 3.75E-04

Long-Term Mercury Emission Rate1 (grams/sec)

1.09E-04

3.33E-04

Crematoria for Application to Facilities in Minneapolis, Minnesota prepared by Barr Engineering Company,

5.46E-04

1.64E-03

6.14E-04

March 14, 2008 High end of range of emission factors from Sweden based on numbers of dental amalgams per body cremated as reported in Emission Factor Development For Mercury Emissions from

Crematoria for Application to Facilities in Minneapolis, Minnesota prepared by Barr Engineering Company,

4.62E-04

1.39E-03

5.20E-04

1.85E-04

5.54E-04

2.08E-04

March 14, 2008 Emission factor from Swedish EPA based on numbers of dental amalgams per body cremated as reported in Emission Factor Development For Mercury Emissions from Crematoria for Application to Facilities in Minneapolis, Minnesota prepared by Barr Engineering Company, March 14, 2008 Low end of range of emission factors from Norway based on numbers of dental amalgams per body cremated as reported in Emission Factor Development For Mercury Emissions from

Crematoria for Application to Facilities in Minneapolis, Minnesota prepared by Barr Engineering Company,
March 14, 2008

8

Assessment of Proposed Crematory Emissions Spring Hill Memorial Park and Funeral Home Spring Hill, Tennessee November 2011
Table 1 Crematory Emission Rates for Mercury, Dioxins and Furans Identified in the Scientific Literature 1-Hour Long-Term Long-Term Mercury 8-Hour Mercury Dioxin Furan Emission Rate2 Emission Rate3 Emission Rate1 Emission Rate1 (grams/sec) (grams/sec) (grams/sec) (grams/sec) Reference High end of range of emission factors from Norway based on numbers of dental amalgams per body cremated as reported in 1.36E-03 5.10E-04

Long-Term Mercury Emission Rate1 (grams/sec)

4.54E-04

Emission Factor Development For Mercury Emissions from Crematoria for Application to Facilities in Minneapolis, Minnesota prepared by Barr Engineering Company,

2.15E-04

6.45E-04

2.42E-04

March 14, 2008 Low end of range of emission factors from Switzerland based on numbers of dental amalgams per body cremated as reported in Emission Factor Development For Mercury Emissions from

Crematoria for Application to Facilities in Minneapolis, Minnesota prepared by Barr Engineering Company,

4.12E-04

1.23E-03

4.63E-04

March 14, 2008 High end of range of emission factors from Switzerland based on numbers of dental amalgams per body cremated as reported in Emission Factor Development For Mercury Emissions from

Crematoria for Application to Facilities in Minneapolis, Minnesota prepared by Barr Engineering Company,

2.68E-04

8.05E-04

3.02E-04

March 14, 2008 Average emission factor from Canada based on numbers of dental amalgams per body cremated as reported in Emission

Factor Development For Mercury Emissions from Crematoria for Application to Facilities in Minneapolis, Minnesota prepared by
Barr Engineering Company, March 14, 2008 Low end of range of emission factors from UK based on numbers of dental amalgams per body cremated as reported in

4.54E-05

1.36E-04

5.10E-05

Emission Factor Development For Mercury Emissions from Crematoria for Application to Facilities in Minneapolis, Minnesota prepared by Barr Engineering Company,
March 14, 2008

9

Assessment of Proposed Crematory Emissions Spring Hill Memorial Park and Funeral Home Spring Hill, Tennessee November 2011
Table 1 Crematory Emission Rates for Mercury, Dioxins and Furans Identified in the Scientific Literature 1-Hour Long-Term Long-Term Mercury 8-Hour Mercury Dioxin Furan Emission Rate2 Emission Rate3 Emission Rate1 Emission Rate1 (grams/sec) (grams/sec) (grams/sec) (grams/sec) Reference High end of range of emission factors from UK based on numbers of dental amalgams per body cremated as reported in 8.32E-04 3.12E-04

Long-Term Mercury Emission Rate1 (grams/sec)

2.77E-04

Emission Factor Development For Mercury Emissions from Crematoria for Application to Facilities in Minneapolis, Minnesota prepared by Barr Engineering Company,
March 14, 2008

Notes:
1 2 3 4

Based on a 3-hour cremation process — 0.5 hour warm-up, 2-hour cremation, and 0.5 hour cool down. Based on all the mercury in the body being emitted in the first of the three hours of the cremation process. Based on all the mercury in the body being emitted in the first hour of the cremation process and cremations occurring consecutively every three hours. Thus in an 8-hour period the maximum possible number of hours in which mercury emissions occur is three. Scientific notation (e.g., 2.2E-06) is used extensively in this report.

10

Assessment of Proposed Crematory Emissions Spring Hill Memorial Park and Funeral Home Spring Hill, Tennessee November 2011

The description of the development of the specific emission rates used in the analysis along with emission rate calculations for the proposed facility are provided in detail in Appendix A of this report. 3.1.3 Meteorological Data USEPA recommends the use of five years of meteorological data from a nearby, representative National Weather Service (NWS) site or at least one year of on-site collected data for use in dispersion modeling studies. Since there is no on-site data available, the nearest NWS site with appropriate data collected is at the Nashville International Airport. Five years of surface and upper air meteorological data from Nashville, Tennessee were obtained and processed with the USEPA program AERMET (version 11059). The data set for years 2006 through 2010 were evaluated but did not have enough complete data for use in dispersion modeling. Thus, the five most recent meteorological data years for the analysis are 2001 through 2005. Surface parameters required for AERMET were calculated using the USEPA program AERSURFACE (version 08009) by evaluating land use in the 1 kilometer area surrounding the Nashville NWS site. A profile base of 600 feet is used in the analysis. 3.1.4 Receptors and Terrain The receptor grid was developed following modeling guidelines. A 25-meter spaced grid was used along the facility property line. A 50-meter spaced grid was used out to 500 meters from the facility, 100-meter spacing out to 2.5 kilometers, 500-meter spacing out to 5 kilometers, and 1-kilometer spacing out to 10 kilometers. In addition to this grid, discrete receptors were added to represent several locations of special interest to the community, including nearby neighborhoods, parks, churches, and schools. The receptor grid, in UTM NAD27, is shown on Figures 3 and 4. All receptor elevations and critical hill heights were calculated from a seamless, 1/3 arc second NED data file using the USEPA program AERMAP (version 11103). 3.1.5 Emission Source The modeling analysis evaluated emissions from the proposed crematorium stack. The source base elevation was set to the same as the building base elevation as extracted by AERMAP. The facility source location, in UTM NAD27, is shown on Figure 5. The stack diameter, stack temperature, stack exit velocity and stack height above the roof line were provided by the cremation unit vendor, Matthews Cremation, and are based on actual measurements made under operating conditions during stack testing of the same cremation unit model Spring Hill Memorial plans to purchase (email from Eduardo Romero to John Shipp, October 20, 2011). The source parameters and emission rates are summarized in Table 2.
11

Assessment of Proposed Crematory Emissions Spring Hill Memorial Park and Funeral Home Spring Hill, Tennessee November 2011
Figure 3 Receptor Grid

3966000

3964000

3962000

3960000

3958000

3956000

3954000

3952000

3950000

3948000

3946000 496000 498000 500000 502000 504000 506000 508000 510000 512000 514000 516000

12

Assessment of Proposed Crematory Emissions Spring Hill Memorial Park and Funeral Home Spring Hill, Tennessee November 2011
Figure 4 Receptor Grid — Near Facility

3957600

3957400

3957200
Harvey Park

3957000
Nearby Neighborhood First Baptist

3956800

3956600

3956400
Evens Park

3956200

3956000

Elementary School Presbyterian Church Children's Home

3955800 505600

505800

506000

506200

506400

506600

506800

507000

507200

507400

UTM meters NAD27

13

Assessment of Proposed Crematory Emissions Spring Hill Memorial Park and Funeral Home Spring Hill, Tennessee November 2011
Figure 5 Facility Layout

3956900

3956850

3956800

3956750

Proposed Building 3956700 Stack

3956650 Existing Building

3956600

3956550 506350

506400

506450

506500

506550

506600

506650

506700

506750
UTM NAD27

14

Assessment of Proposed Crematory Emissions Spring Hill Memorial Park and Funeral Home Spring Hill, Tennessee November 2011
Table 2 Facility Emission Rates and Source Parameters Parameter Values Stack Height 8.84 m (29 ft) Stack Diameter 0.51 m (1.67 ft) Stack Temperature 922 K (1200 °F) Stack Exit Velocity 6.1 m/s (20 ft/s) Horizontal (E) 506,556.1 m UTM Coordinates NAD27 Vertical (N) 3,956,695.8 m Stack Base Elevation Above MSL b (m) 228.69 m Mercury: USEPA Emission Rate — 1-hour/Acute 4.15E-04 g/s Mercury: Max Emission Rate — 1-hour/Acute 2.39E-03 g/s Mercury: USEPA Emission Rate — 8-hour/Acute 1.55E-04 g/s Mercury: Max Emission Rate — 8-hour/Acute 8.96E-04 g/s Mercury: USEPA Emission Rate — Annual/Chronic 1.38E-04 g/s Mercury: Max Emission Rate — Annual/Chronic 7.96E-04 g/s Total Dioxins USEPA Emission Rate 9.87E-10 g/s Total Furans USEPA Emission Rate 1.48E-09 g/s

Notes:
a b

Stack height above ground level. MSL = mean sea level. c Scientific notation (e.g., 2.2E-06) is used extensively in this report.

Due to the extremely low emission rates for dioxins and furans, the modeling for these pollutants was evaluated using a single run with a “unitized” emission rate of 1 gram per second. The resulting unitized concentrations were then multiplied by the emission rate to produce the final results for each compound. 3.1.6 Building Downwash The facility’s existing and proposed buildings and emission source were entered into the BPIP-PRIME model (version 04274) in order to include building downwash in the modeling analysis. The facility layout, in UTM NAD27, is shown on Figure 5. The proposed building and stack base elevations were set to the same as the existing building base elevation as extracted by AERMAP. 3.2 Modeling Results A listing of

The results of the modeling analysis are discussed in detail in Section 4.0 and summarized in Table 4 along with comparisons of the results with selected screening levels. the modeling files and their descriptions are included in Appendix B.

15

Assessment of Proposed Crematory Emissions Spring Hill Memorial Park and Funeral Home Spring Hill, Tennessee November 2011

4.0 COMPARISON OF PREDICTED CONCENTRATIONS WITH SCREENING LEVELS 4.1 Screening Level Selection The purpose of the risk screening process is to determine whether the emissions of mercury, dioxins and furans from the proposed crematory pose a risk to human health by comparing predicted ambient air concentrations to appropriate screening levels for air. Since the proposed crematory is located near residential areas, residential land use was assumed when selecting the appropriate screening levels. Therefore, potential exposure was evaluated by selecting screening levels that consider the inhalation of contaminants through air in a residential setting and assuming exposure would occur over a lifetime. 4.1.1 Sources of Screening Levels Considered Many sources of screening levels were considered for this analysis, including the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) minimal risk levels (MRLs), USEPA Average Daily Intake (ADI) from their Dioxin Reassessment report, USEPA Regional Screening Levels (RSLs), World Health Organization (WHO) Time-Weighted Averages, California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) Reference Exposure Levels (RELs), the U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), and others (see Section 7.0 for summary of references). Environmental screening levels are available for dioxins and mercury in the sources above, but none are available for furans. Some furans are toxicologically similar to dioxins, so many guidance documents recommend using the same screening levels for dioxins and furans. Therefore, for the purposes of this analysis, the predicted ambient air concentrations of furans were compared to the screening levels for dioxins. Screening levels considered for long-term exposure are summarized in Table 3.
Table 3 Sources of Screening Levels Considered for Long-Term Exposure Analysis Potential Contaminants Sources Considered Dioxin/Furans (µg/m3)3,4 Mercury (µg/m3)4 ATSDR MRL — 2.0E-01 40 CFR 61.52(a) 1 — 2.3E09 40 CFR 61.52(b) 2 — 3.2E09 USEPA ADI 2.2E-06 — WHO Ambient Air 1.0E-07 5.0E-03 — 1.0E-02 WHO Time-Weighted Average — 1.0 OEHHA Chronic REL 4.0E-05 3.0E-02 USEPA RSL mercury salts — 3.1E-02 USEPA RSL 6.4E-08 3.1E-01

Notes:
1 2 3 4

Mercury ore facilities may not exceed 2300 grams mercury emissions per 24-hour period Sludge incineration and drying facilities may not exceed 3200 grams mercury emissions per 24-hour period µg/m3 — micrograms per cubic meter Scientific notation (e.g., 2.2E-06) is used extensively in this report.

16

Assessment of Proposed Crematory Emissions Spring Hill Memorial Park and Funeral Home Spring Hill, Tennessee November 2011

4.1.2 Discussion and Selection of Long-term Screening Levels USEPA developed RSLs to determine if further evaluation or some other action is warranted based on reported or modeled concentrations of pollutants. The USEPA User’s Guide for RSLs indicates that these screening levels should not be used as cleanup “standards” until other options have been evaluated and considered. RSLs are not regulations. RSLs are guidelines based on USEPA toxicity values and exposure models that reflect a residential scenario. USEPA calculated the screening levels using the methods outlined in their Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund (RAGS) and Soil Screening Guidance documents, which indicate that long-term exposure occurs for a duration of seven years or more, and that screening levels based on residential land use represent exposure over a lifetime (Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund. Volume I: Human Health Evaluation

Manual

(Part

A).

Interim

Final,

Office

of

Emergency

and

Remedial

Response,

USEPA/540/1-89/002USEPA). USEPA’s RSL’s are screening levels that consider the inhalation of contaminants through air in a residential setting, assuming exposure over a lifetime. USEPA’s screening levels for ambient air based on a residential scenario would, therefore, be a conservative selection, would be protective of the public, and are well-known and established risk-based screening tools. Consequently, USEPA’s RSLs for residential air were selected as the primary screening levels for comparison to the maximum annual average air concentrations that were predicted using AERMOD. As previously discussed, the screening level for dioxins was used as the screening level for furans. Additionally, the screening level for elemental mercury was used for comparison with the predicted ambient air concentrations of mercury, as opposed to screening levels for mercury salts or organic mercury compounds, because the emission factors used to estimate emissions from the crematory are for mercury vapor and this is most likely the form in which almost all the mercury is emitted. 4.1.3 Discussion and Selection of Short-term Screening Levels As indicated above, USEPA RSLs were used, assuming long-term exposure occurs over a lifetime. However, short-term, or acute exposure, could also occur in the vicinity of the proposed crematorium, so the scientific and regulatory literature was also searched for short-term screening levels. No short-term screening level is available from USEPA for dioxin, furan, or mercury; however, 1-hour and 8-hour RELs are available from the California OEHHA for mercury. The 1-hour REL available from OEHHA is 0.6 µg/m3, and the 8-hour REL is 0.06 µg/m3. Although the California OEHHA RELs were identified in the literature, there are some uncertainties associated with using them in this analysis, including the following:
17

Assessment of Proposed Crematory Emissions Spring Hill Memorial Park and Funeral Home Spring Hill, Tennessee November 2011

The predicted ambient air concentrations were for elemental mercury vapor only, but the REL is based on a group of compounds including mercury salts. This could result in an overstatement of the risk considering that mercury salts are generally considered more toxic than elemental mercury.

Short-term health effects are possible if sufficient exposure occurs, but short-term toxicity thresholds have not been well documented by the scientific community.

Mercury accumulates in the body, so short-term repeated exposures could result in toxic effects that are unanticipated by the OEHHA short-term REL which could result in an understatement of risks.

OEHHA RELs are based on various health effects compiled in December 2008, which could under- or over-state exposure and risk for children or other sensitive populations.

No other short-term screening levels were identified in the literature; therefore the OEHHA RELs were used as screening levels, notwithstanding the uncertainties outlined above in order to provide some context for the short-term ambient air concentrations of mercury predicted by the AERMOD modeling. 4.2 Comparison of Predicted Ambient Air Concentrations with Selected Screening Levels Table 4 provides a detailed comparison of both the long-term and short-term predicted ambient air concentrations of mercury and the long-term ambient air concentrations of dioxins and furans with the corresponding screening levels.

18

Assessment of Proposed Crematory Emissions Spring Hill Memorial Park and Funeral Home Spring Hill, Tennessee November 2011
Table 4 Modeling Results and Comparisons to Risk-Based Screening Levels Max Unit Predicted Concentration (µg/m3/g/s) Max Predicted Concentration (µg/m3) Screening Level (µg/m3)* Percent of Screening Level (%)

Chemical/Emission Rate Entire Modeling Domain Mercury — USEPA Emission Rate Mercury — Max Emission Rate Mercury — USEPA Emission Rate Mercury — Max Emission Rate Mercury

Time Frame

Emission Rate (g/s)

Above?

1-hr/ Acute 8-hr/Acute Annual/Chronic Annual/Chronic Annual/Chronic

4.15E-04 2.39E-03 1.55E-04 8.96E-04 1.38E-04 7.96E-04 9.87E-10 1.48E-09

n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 32.9 32.9

0.14 0.80 0.038 0.22 0.005 0.026 3.25E-08 4.88E-08

0.6 0.6 0.06 0.06 0.03 0.03 6.40E-08 6.40E-08

23 133 63 367 17 87 51 76

NO YES NO YES NO NO NO NO

- USEPA Emission Rate

Mercury — Max Emission Rate Dioxins — Total Furans — Total

Special Receptor — Nearby Neighborhood to the North Mercury — USEPA Emission Rate Mercury — Max Emission Rate Mercury — USEPA Emission Rate Mercury — Max Emission Rate Mercury — USEPA Emission Rate Mercury — Max Emission Rate Dioxins — Total Furans — Total 1-hr/ Acute 8-hr/Acute Annual/Chronic Annual/Chronic Annual/Chronic 4.15E-04 2.39E-03 1.55E-04 8.96E-04 1.38E-04 7.96E-04 9.87E-10 1.48E-09 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 22.8 22.8 0.14 0.80 0.029 0.17 0.0031 0.018 2.25E-08 3.38E-08 0.6 0.6 0.06 0.06 0.03 0.03 6.40E-08 6.40E-08 23 133 48 283 10 60 35 53 NO YES NO YES NO NO NO NO

Notes: * Screening Levels were obtained from USEPA and OEHHA as described in Section 4.1.2.
No screening level was identified for furans. The dioxin screening level is used as a surrogate for the furans.

19

Assessment of Proposed Crematory Emissions Spring Hill Memorial Park and Funeral Home Spring Hill, Tennessee November 2011
Table 4 Modeling Results and Comparisons to Risk-Based Screening Levels Max Unit Predicted Concentration (µg/m3/g/s) Max Predicted Concentration (µg/m3) Screening Level (µg/m3)* Percent of Screening Level (%)

Chemical/Emission Rate

Time Frame

Emission Rate (g/s)

Above?

Special Receptor — Harvey Park — 4001 Miles Johnson Parkway Mercury — USEPA Emission Rate Mercury — Max Emission Rate Mercury — USEPA Emission Rate Mercury — Max Emission Rate Mercury — USEPA Emission Rate Mercury — Max Emission Rate Dioxins — Total Furans — Total 1-hr/ Acute 8-hr/Acute Annual/Chronic Annual/Chronic Annual/Chronic 4.15E-04 2.39E-03 1.55E-04 8.96E-04 1.38E-04 7.96E-04 9.87E-10 1.48E-09 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 1.26 1.26 0.037 0.21 0.0051 0.029 0.00017 0.001 1.24E-09 1.87E-09 0.6 0.6 0.06 0.06 0.03 0.03 6.40E-08 6.40E-08 6 35 9 48 1 3 2 3 NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

Special Receptor — Evens Park — 575 Maury Hill Street Mercury - USEPA Emission Rate Mercury - Max Emission Rate Mercury - USEPA Emission Rate Mercury - Max Emission Rate Mercury - USEPA Emission Rate Mercury - Max Emission Rate Dioxins – Total Furans – Total 1-hr/ Acute 8-hr/Acute Annual/Chronic Annual/Chronic Annual/Chronic 4.15E-04 2.39E-03 1.55E-04 8.96E-04 1.38E-04 7.96E-04 9.87E-10 1.48E-09 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 0.33 0.33 0.013 0.072 0.0019 0.011 0.00005 0.00026 3.26E-10 4.89E-10 0.6 0.6 0.06 0.06 0.03 0.03 6.40E-08 6.40E-08 2 12 3 18 0 1 1 1 NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

Notes: * Screening Levels were obtained from USEPA and OEHHA as described in Section 4.1.2.
No screening level was identified for furans. The dioxin screening level is used as a surrogate for the furans.

20

Assessment of Proposed Crematory Emissions Spring Hill Memorial Park and Funeral Home Spring Hill, Tennessee November 2011
Table 4 Modeling Results and Comparisons to Risk-Based Screening Levels Max Unit Predicted Concentration (µg/m3/g/s) Max Predicted Concentration (µg/m3) Screening Level (µg/m3)* Percent of Screening Level (%)

Chemical/Emission Rate

Time Frame

Emission Rate (g/s)

Above?

Special Receptor — First Baptist — 5219 Main Street Mercury — USEPA Emission Rate Mercury — Max Emission Rate Mercury — USEPA Emission Rate Mercury — Max Emission Rate Mercury — USEPA Emission Rate Mercury — Max Emission Rate Dioxins — Total Furans — Total 1-hr/ Acute 8-hr/Acute Annual/Chronic Annual/Chronic Annual/Chronic 4.15E-04 2.39E-03 1.55E-04 8.96E-04 1.38E-04 7.96E-04 9.87E-10 1.48E-09 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 6.65 6.65 0.11 0.63 0.022 0.13 0.00092 0.0053 6.56E-09 9.86E-09 0.6 0.6 0.06 0.06 0.03 0.03 6.40E-08 6.40E-08 18 105 37 217 3 18 10 15 NO YES NO YES NO NO NO NO

Special Receptor — Spring Hill Presbyterian — 5344 Main Street Mercury — USEPA Emission Rate Mercury — Max Emission Rate Mercury — USEPA Emission Rate Mercury — Max Emission Rate Mercury — USEPA Emission Rate Mercury — Max Emission Rate Dioxins — Total Furans — Total 1-hr/ Acute 8-hr/Acute Annual/Chronic Annual/Chronic Annual/Chronic 4.15E-04 2.39E-03 1.55E-04 8.96E-04 1.38E-04 7.96E-04 9.87E-10 1.48E-09 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 0.56 0.56 0.012 0.070 0.0022 0.013 0.00008 0.00044 5.53E-10 8.30E-10 0.6 0.6 0.06 0.06 0.03 0.03 6.40E-08 6.40E-08 2 12 4 22 0 1 1 1 NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

Notes: * Screening Levels were obtained from USEPA and OEHHA as described in Section 4.1.2.
No screening level was identified for furans. The dioxin screening level is used as a surrogate for the furans.

21

Assessment of Proposed Crematory Emissions Spring Hill Memorial Park and Funeral Home Spring Hill, Tennessee November 2011
Table 4 Modeling Results and Comparisons to Risk-Based Screening Levels Max Unit Predicted Concentration (µg/m3/g/s) Max Predicted Concentration (µg/m3) Screening Level (µg/m3)* Percent of Screening Level (%)

Chemical/Emission Rate

Time Frame

Emission Rate (g/s)

Above?

Special Receptor — Elementary School — 5359 Main Street Mercury — USEPA Emission Rate Mercury — Max Emission Rate Mercury — USEPA Emission Rate Mercury — Max Emission Rate Mercury — USEPA Emission Rate Mercury — Max Emission Rate Dioxins — Total Furans — Total 1-hr/ Acute 8-hr/Acute Annual/Chronic Annual/Chronic Annual/Chronic 4.15E-04 2.39E-03 1.55E-04 8.96E-04 1.38E-04 7.96E-04 9.87E-10 1.48E-09 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 0.45 0.45 0.012 0.067 0.0023 0.014 0.00006 0.00036 4.44E-10 6.67E-10 0.6 0.6 0.06 0.06 0.03 0.03 6.40E-08 6.40E-08 2 11 4 23 0 1 1 1 NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

Special Receptor — Children’s Home — 804 Branham Hughes Circle Mercury — USEPA Emission Rate Mercury — Max Emission Rate Mercury — USEPA Emission Rate Mercury — Max Emission Rate Mercury — USEPA Emission Rate Mercury — Max Emission Rate Dioxins — Total Furans — Total 1-hr/ Acute 8-hr/Acute Annual/Chronic Annual/Chronic Annual/Chronic 4.15E-04 2.39E-03 1.55E-04 8.96E-04 1.38E-04 7.96E-04 9.87E-10 1.48E-09 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 1.11 1.11 0.034 0.19 0.0039 0.022 0.00015 0.00088 1.10E-09 1.65E-09 0.6 0.6 0.06 0.06 0.03 0.03 6.40E-08 6.40E-08 6 32 7 37 1 3 2 3 NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

Notes: * Screening Levels were obtained from USEPA and OEHHA as described in Section 4.1.2.
No screening level was identified for furans. The dioxin screening level is used as a surrogate for the furans.

22

Assessment of Proposed Crematory Emissions Spring Hill Memorial Park and Funeral Home Spring Hill, Tennessee November 2011

5.0 DISCUSSION OF RESULTS Based on the results of the dispersion modeling analysis of emissions from the proposed crematorium performed using emissions estimated from USEPA emission factors, no predicted long-term ambient air concentrations of mercury, total dioxins, or total furans exceeded the selected EPA long-term screening levels at any location in the vicinity of the proposed crematorium. Based on the results of the dispersion modeling analysis of emissions from the proposed crematorium performed using emissions estimated from the highest mercury body content found in the published literature (8.6 g/body), the maximum 1-hour and 8-hour ambient air concentrations of mercury exceeded the short-term California OEHHA screening levels at some locations in the vicinity of the proposed crematory. It should be noted, in the case of the maximum 1-hr emissions, that in the dispersion modeling analysis it was assumed that all the mercury in the cremated body was emitted in one hour. That 1-hour emission rate was then assumed to occur every hour of the 5 years that was modeled (See Section 3.1.3 for a discussion of the meteorological data used in the analysis.) This is the most conservative assumption that could be made. This approach ensured that the highest mercury emission rate coincided with the one hour during those 5 years when the meteorological conditions would result in the maximum concentration in each receptor grid in the modeling domain, including the special receptors modeled at the request of the BOMA. In the case of the maximum 8-hr emissions, in the dispersion modeling analysis it was assumed that there would be three consecutive cremations occurring (that is, there would three consecutive cremation cycles of three hours each – half hour for warm-up, two hours for the cremation and half hour cool-down) and that all the mercury was emitted in the first hour of each cremation. Thus it was assumed that there would be three maximum 1-hr emissions every 8 hours. This, too, is the most conservative assumption that could be made. This approach, like that of the 1-hr approach discussed above, ensured that the maximum mercury emission rate modeled coincided with the eight hour period when the meteorological conditions resulted in the maximum concentration in each receptor grid in the modeling domain. These very conservative assumptions were made to address the uncertainty related to both the emission rates and screening levels selected for the analysis. Given that (1) the number of cremations per year is expected to be much lower than assumed in the analysis, (2) the short-term screening levels selected were conservative (see Section 4.1.3), and (3) the short-term screening level exceedances resulted from an emission rate based on the highest mercury body content found in the literature at the time when the meteorological conditions resulted in the highest concentrations in each receptor grid, it is unlikely that the predicted emissions would result in adverse health effects.
23

Assessment of Proposed Crematory Emissions Spring Hill Memorial Park and Funeral Home Spring Hill, Tennessee November 2011

6.0

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the results of dispersion modeling of emissions from the crematory performed using emissions estimated from USEPA emission factors, no predicted short-term or long-term ambient air concentrations of mercury or long-term ambient air concentrations of total dioxins or total furans exceeded the selected screening levels at any location in the vicinity of the proposed crematorium. This indicates that the risk of adverse public health impacts resulting from emissions of these pollutants is low.

24

Assessment of Proposed Crematory Emissions Spring Hill Memorial Park and Funeral Home Spring Hill, Tennessee November 2011

7.0

REFERENCES Minimal Risk Levels. Downloaded October 2011 from : http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/mrls/index.asp.

Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry.

California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment Toxic Air Contaminant Program. September 2008 Mercury Reference Exposure Level Technical Support Document. Downloaded October 2011 from: http://oehha.ca.gov/air/hot_spots/2008/AppendixD1_final.pdf#page=214. California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment Toxic Air Contaminant Program. September 2000 Chlorinated Dibenzo-p-Dioxins and Chlorinated Dibenzofurans. Reference Exposure Level Technical Support Document. Downloaded October 2011 from: http://www.oehha.ca.gov/air/hot_spots/2008/AppendixD3_final.pdf#page=90. U.S. USEPA 1989. Risk assessment guidance for Superfund. Volume I: Human health evaluation manual (Part A). Interim Final. Office of Emergency and Remedial Response. USEPA/540/1-89/002. U.S. USEPA 1991a. Human health evaluation manual, supplemental guidance: "Standard default exposure factors". OSWER Directive 9285.6-03. U.S. USEPA 1991b. Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund, Volume I: Human Health Evaluation Manual (Part B, Development of Risk-Based Preliminary Remediation Goals). Office of Emergency and Remedial Response. USEPA/540/R-92/003. December 1991. U.S. USEPA. 1994. USEPA Dioxin Reassessment. Vol. 1, p. 37 (Figure II-5). U.S. USEPA. 1997a. Exposure Factors Handbook. Office of Research and Development, Washington, DC. USEPA/600/P-95/002Fa. U.S. USEPA 2000. Exposure and Human Health Reassessment of 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-Dioxin (TCDD) and Related Compounds. Part I: Estimating Exposure to Dioxin-Like Compounds. Volume 3--Properties, Environmental Levels, and Background Exposures. Draft Final Report. USEPA/600/P- 00/001. Office of Research and Development, Washington, DC. September.

25

Assessment of Proposed Crematory Emissions Spring Hill Memorial Park and Funeral Home Spring Hill, Tennessee November 2011

U.S. USEPA, 2001. WATER9. Version 1.0.0. Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC. Web site at http://www.USEPA.gov/ttn/chief/software/water/index.html. U.S. USEPA 2002. Supplemental Guidance for Developing Soil Screening Levels for Superfund Sites. OSWER 9355.4-24. December 2002. http://www.USEPA.gov/superfund/health/conmedia/soil/index.htm. U.S. USEPA 2009. Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund Volume I: Human Health Evaluation Manual (Part F, Supplemental Guidance for Inhalation Risk Assessment) Final. OSWER 9285.7-82. January 2009. Document, memo and website http://www.USEPA.gov/oswer/riskassessment/ragsf/index.htm. U.S. USEPA 2011. Regional Screening Levels and User’s Guide. May 2011. website

http://www.USEPA.gov/reg3hwmd/risk/human/rb-concentration_table/usersguide.htm. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Cumulative Estimated Daily Intake. Website

http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/sda/sdNavigation.cfm?sd=edisrev. World Health Organization 2000. Air Quality Guidelines. Downloaded October 2011 from:

http://www.euro.who.int/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/74732/E71922.pdf.

J:\Nashville\A-L\Henry Henry Underwood\Spring Hill Modeling Report 1108 FINAL DRAFT.docx

26

Appendix A Emission Rate Calculations

MERCURY CHRONIC EXPOSURE USEPA Emission Rate Based on USEPA FIRE Database emission factor of 3.29E-03 lbs mercury per body and 3 hours per cremation ((3.29E-03 lbs/body) X (453.59 g/lb) / (3 hrs/body))/ (3600 sec/hr) = 1.38E-04 g/sec Maximum Mercury Emission Rate Based on high end of range of mercury per body (8.6 g/body) as reported in unpublished draft report Summary of References on Mercury Emissions from Crematoria, John Riendl, November 3, 2008, and 3 hours per cremation (8.6 g/body) / (3 hrs/body) / (3600 sec/hr) = 7.96E-04 g/sec ACUTE EXPOSURE 1-Hour Maximum Emission Rate

USEPA Emission Rate
Based on USEPA FIRE Database emission factor of 3.29E-03 lbs mercury per body and all mercury emitted in one hour ((3.29E-03 lbs/body) X (453.59 g/lb) / (1 hr/body))/ (3600 sec/hr) = 4.15E-04 g/sec

Maximum Mercury Emission Rate
Based on high end of range of mercury per body (8.6 g/body) as reported in unpublished draft report Summary of References on Mercury Emissions from Crematoria, John Riendl, November 3, 2008, and all mercury emitted in one hour (8.6 g/body) / (1 hr/body) / (3600 sec/hr) = 2.39E-03 g/sec 8-Hr Average Emission Rate

USEPA Emission Rate
Based on USEPA FIRE Database emission factor of 3.29E-03 lbs mercury per body and a maximum of three 1-hour emissions per 8-hour period (4.15E-04 g/sec) X 3/8 = 1.55E-04 g/sec

Maximum Mercury Emission Rate
Based on high end of range of mercury per body (8.6 g/body) as reported in unpublished draft report Summary of References on Mercury Emissions from Crematoria, November 3, 2008, and a maximum of three 1-hour emissions per 8-hour period (2.39E-03 g/sec) X 3/8 = 8.96E-04 g/sec TOTAL PCDD (DIOXINS) CHRONIC EXPOSURE Based on USEPA FIRE Database emission rate of 2.35E-08 lbs/body burned and an average cremation time of 3 hours per cremation (2.35E-08 lbs/body) X (453.59 g/lb) / (3hrs/body) / (3600 sec/hr) = 9.87E-10 g/sec TOTAL PCDF (FURANS) CHRONIC EXPOSURE Based on USEPA FIRE Database emission rate of 3.53E-08 lbs/body burned and an average cremation time of 3 hours per cremation (3.53E-08 lbs/body) X (453.59 g/lb) / (3hrs/body) / (3600 sec/hr) = 1.48 E-09 g/sec

 

Appendix B Modeling Files and Descriptions

 

Modeling Files and Descriptions File AERMET files.zip 13897-01.ISH 13897-02.ISH 13897-03.ISH 13897-04.ISH 13897-05.ISH BNA2001.fsl BNA2002.fsl BNA2003.fsl BNA2004.fsl BNA2005.fsl BNA01_S1 [.INP, .RPT, .SUM] BNA02_S1 [.INP, .RPT, .SUM] BNA03_S1 [.INP, .RPT, .SUM] BNA04_S1 [.INP, .RPT, .SUM] BNA05_S1 [.INP, .RPT, .SUM] BNA01_S2 [.INP, .RPT, .SUM] BNA02_S2 [.INP, .RPT, .SUM] BNA03_S2 [.INP, .RPT, .SUM] BNA04_S2 [.INP, .RPT, .SUM] BNA05_S2 [.INP, .RPT, .SUM] BNA01_S3 [.INP, .RPT, .SUM] BNA02_S3 [.INP, .RPT, .SUM] BNA03_S3 [.INP, .RPT, .SUM] BNA04_S3 [.INP, .RPT, .SUM] BNA05_S3 [.INP, .RPT, .SUM] AERSURFACE files.zip BNA land use.zip BNA_1km.log BNA_1km.out Met data files.zip BNABNA5Y.sfc BNABNA5Y.pfl BPIP-PRIME Files.zip Spring_Hill.pip Spring_Hill.so Spring_Hill.sum Spring_Hill.tab AERMAP Files.zip Spring_Hill.map Spring_Hill.mot Spring_Hill.rcf Spring_Hill.srf AERMOD Files.zip Spring_Hill_HG-01.dta Spring_Hill_HGm-01.dta Spring_Hill_HG-08.dta Spring_Hill_HGm-08.dta Spring_Hill_HG-AN.dta Spring_Hill_HGm-AN.dta Spring_Hill_D-F.dta Spring_Hill_HG-01.grf Spring_Hill_HGm-01.grf Description Raw Nashville, TN surface met data file, 2001 Raw Nashville, TN surface met data file, 2002 Raw Nashville, TN surface met data file, 2003 Raw Nashville, TN surface met data file, 2004 Raw Nashville, TN surface met data file, 2005 Raw Nashville, TN upper air met data file, 2001 Raw Nashville, TN upper air met data file, 2002 Raw Nashville, TN upper air met data file, 2003 Raw Nashville, TN upper air met data file, 2004 Raw Nashville, TN upper air met data file, 2005 AERMET Stage 1 [input, report, summary] file, 2001 AERMET Stage 1 [input, report, summary] file, 2002 AERMET Stage 1 [input, report, summary] file, 2003 AERMET Stage 1 [input, report, summary] file, 2004 AERMET Stage 1 [input, report, summary] file, 2005 AERMET Stage 2 [input, report, summary] file, 2001 AERMET Stage 2 [input, report, summary] file, 2002 AERMET Stage 2 [input, report, summary] file, 2003 AERMET Stage 2 [input, report, summary] file, 2004 AERMET Stage 2 [input, report, summary] file, 2005 AERMET Stage 3 [input, report, summary] file, 2001 AERMET Stage 3 [input, report, summary] file, 2002 AERMET Stage 3 [input, report, summary] file, 2003 AERMET Stage 3 [input, report, summary] file, 2004 AERMET Stage 3 [input, report, summary] file, 2005 Land use data for Nashville, TN Airport AERSURFACE log file AERSURFACE output file AERMOD surface met data file, combined five year file: 2001 — 2005 AERMOD profile met data file, combined five year file: 2001 — 2005 BPIP-PRIME BPIP-PRIME BPIP-PRIME BPIP-PRIME AERMAP AERMAP AERMAP AERMAP AERMOD AERMOD AERMOD AERMOD AERMOD AERMOD AERMOD AERMOD AERMOD input file output file output file output file

input file output file receptor output file sources, buildings output file input file: Mercury — USEPA emission rate, 1-hour/Acute input file: Mercury — Max emission rate, 1-hour/Acute input file: Mercury — USEPA emission rate, 8-hour/Acute input file: Mercury — Max emission rate, 8-hour/Acute input file: Mercury — USEPA emission rate, Annual/Chronic input file: Mercury — Max emission rate, Annual/Chronic input file: Dioxins/Furans, unit emission rate, Annual/Chronic plot file: Mercury — USEPA emission rate, 1-hour/Acute plot file: Mercury — Max emission rate, 1-hour/Acute

File Spring_Hill_HG-08.grf Spring_Hill_HGm-08.grf Spring_Hill_HG-AN.grf Spring_Hill_HGm-AN.grf Spring_Hill_D-F.grf Spring_Hill_HG-01.out Spring_Hill_HGm-01.out Spring_Hill_HG-08.out Spring_Hill_HGm-08.out Spring_Hill_HG-AN.out Spring_Hill_HGm-AN.out Spring_Hill_D-F.out

AERMOD AERMOD AERMOD AERMOD AERMOD AERMOD AERMOD AERMOD AERMOD AERMOD AERMOD AERMOD

Description plot file: Mercury — USEPA emission rate, 8-hour/Acute plot file: Mercury — Max emission rate, 8-hour/Acute plot file: Mercury — USEPA emission rate, Annual/Chronic plot file: Mercury — Max emission rate, Annual/Chronic plot file: Dioxins/Furans, unit emission rate, Annual/Chronic output file: Mercury — USEPA emission rate, 1-hour/Acute output file: Mercury — Max emission rate, 1-hour/Acute output file: Mercury — USEPA emission rate, 8-hour/Acute output file: Mercury — Max emission rate, 8-hour/Acute output file: Mercury — USEPA emission rate, Annual/Chronic output file: Mercury — Max emission rate, Annual/Chronic output file: Dioxins/Furans, unit emission rate, Annual/Chronic