# OAR Box 1131 Prepped by Ollie Stewart



## Document

Number: 

# 146 ) H-l-2 6

Docket Number: 

# A-83-2 2

Printed 4/21/2008 2:34:13 PM Sheet 146 of 162 p. 1

# li ! E 8 E 1 W Wil l 3 199 ? 

# X KALLIANC E

MIWAWA 

### Technologie

s Corporatio

n

Februar y 12 , 198 8 

## EP

A AI R DOCKE

T 

# -TZ-I'Ja^

DATE :

TO :

FROM :

SUBJECT : Dav e McLam b

Willia mBattye 

# kM

Reconciliatio n o f Populatio n Estimate s Aroun d Majo r Poin t Source s o f Lead Emission s

I n respons e t o Items (1 ) an d (2 ) unde r Wor k Assignmen t 2 3 (EP AContrac t No
. 69-02-4317 , I hav e reviewe d an d compare d th

e TRC estimat e an

d our tw

o estimate s o f population s aroun d lea d emissio n sources . I hav e als o revise d our 198 7 estimate s t o incorporat e change s suggeste d b yDonna Sledge , an

d t o reflec t the lis t o f secondar

ylead smelter s receive d fro mth e Lea d Industrie s Associatio n i n Octobe r 1987

. Revision s t o the 198 7 Analysi s

I n the 198 7 analysis , we had assume d a typica l distanc e o f 60 0 meter s betwee n plan t cente r an

d plan t boundaryfo r secondar ysmelters , an

d 40 0 meter s fo r batteryplants

. Thi s assumptio n wa s base d o n a revie wo f a topographi c map s fo r a smal l numbe r o f plants

. Donna aske d tha t w e us e smalle r distance s t o represen t the typica l case , base d o n the exampl e o f primar ysmelters , wher e plan t boundarie s ar e sometime s withi n 20 0 meter s o f th e plan t center
. I n Tabl e 1 , I hav e revise d the populatio n estimate s fo r thes e two categorie s using plan t boundarydistance s o f 20 0 meter s fo r secondar ysmelter s an

d 15 0 meter s fo r batteryplants

. Th e Tabl e 1 estimate s als o us e the 198 7 LI Asecondary smelte r list , reproduce d i n Tabl e 2

.
Difference s i n Populatio n Estimate s

A s yo u know , the 198 7 analysi s use d HEM-SHEA R t o estimat e th e affecte d populatio n aroun

d lea d poin t sources . I n 1985 , w e had estimate d affecte d population s using th e HEM-SHE D mode l an d 198 3 list s o f emissio n sources . TRC' s estimate s o f affecte d population s (1986 ) wer e base d o n a surveyo f the emissio n sources . Ou r 198 5 estimate s covere d tota l population s an d population s o f childre n withi n 1 kilomete r o f lead-aci d batteryplants , 2 kilometer s o f secondar ylead smelters , an d 5 kilometer s o f primarylead smelters

. TRC' s 198 6 estimat e an d our 198 7 estimat e bot h covere d severa- 1 differen t exposur e areas , including the 1 km , 2 km , an d 5 k mzones . Thi s memo doe s no t addres s the size s o f area s affecte d b yemission s fro

mlead sources , bu t onl yaddresse s the difference s i n populatio n estimate s fo r th e 1 km , 2 km , an d 5 k mzones . 50 0 Eastown

e Drive , Chape l Hill

. Nort h Carolin a 2751 4 919-489-655 0P. 3



# /X ALLIANC E Technologie s Corporatio n 

## -2 -

TABL E 1 . REVISION S T O ESTIMATE S O F EXPOSE D POPULATION S

Distanc e fro

m plan t cente r (km )

Secondary 0.2 0 - 0.3 5 - 0.5 0 - 0.6 5 - 0.8 0 - 0.9 5 - 1.1 0 - 1.2 5 - 1.4 0 - 1.5 5 - 1.7 0 - 1.8 5 - Total s Smelter s 0.3 5 0.5 0 0.6 5 0.8 0 0.9 5 1.1 0 1.2 5 1.4 0 1.5 5 1.7 0 1.8 5 2.0 0

BatteryPlant s 0.1 0 - 0.2 5 - 0.4 0 - 0.5 5 - 0.7 0 - 0.8 5 - Total s 0.2 5 0.4 0 0.5 5 0.7 0 0.8 5 1.0 0 Tota l

populatio n

1,79 2 3,45 5 10,35 5 10,44 6 8,60 8 10,08 3 9,68 7 9,76 4 10,87 0 11,97 5 13,08 0 14,18 6 114,30 1

29,65 2 52,92 4 62,19 7 54,47 0 61,74 2 61,01 5 322,00 0 Childre n



### 19 1 36 8 1,10 2 1,11 2 

### 91 6 1,07 3 1,03 1 1,03 9 1,15 7 1,27 4 1,39 2 1,51 0 12,16 5

3,15 6 5,63 2 6,61 9 5,79 7 6,57 1 6,49 4 34,26 9 Sensitiv e

Pregnan t wome n



### 3 0 5 8 

### 17 4 17 6 14 5 17 0 16 3 16 4 18 3 20 1 22 0 23 9 1,92 3



### 49 9 89 1 1,04 7 

### 91 7 1,03 9 1,02 7 5,41 8 a

group s Adul t 

### me n

15 5 29 9 89 5 90 3 74 4 87 2 83 7 84 4 94 0 1,03 5 1,13 1 1,22 6 9,88 0

2,56 3 4,57 4 5,37 6 4,70 8 5,33 7 5,27 4 27,83 2 Population s o f sensitiv e group s wer e derive dfor m th e tota l estimat e an d relativ e populatio ngrou psize s fro m th e lea dcriteri a document .P. 4



# / k ALLIANC E Technologie s Corporatio n 

## -3 -

TABL E 2 . REVISE D LIS T O F SECONDAR YSMELTER S

Plan t name Alc o Pacifi c 

### Exid e Eas t Penn Exid e Genera l Smeltin g an dRefinin g 

### GN B GN B Gophe r Gul f Coas t Lea d Interstat e Lea dCo . Maste r Metal s Pacifi c Chlorid e Metal s Refine dMetal s Refine dMetal s Ros s Metal s Rot hBrother s 

### RS R RS R RS R Sander s Lea d Schuylkil l Metal s Schuylkil l Metal s Standar dIndustrie s Cit y Gardeni a Dalla s Lyon s Statio n Readin g Colleg e Grov e Frisc o Lo s Angele s Eaga n Tamp a Leed s Cleveland Columbu s Beac hGrov e Memphi s Rossvill e Syracus e Indianapoli s Stat e



### C A T X P A P A T N T X C A M N F L A L O H G A I N T N T N N Y I N Cit y o f Industr y

CA Middletow

n Troy MoundCit y Bato nRoug e SanAntoni o 

### N

Y A L M O L A T XP. 5



## f< 

# ALLIANC E JFjMp^p ^ Technologies Corporatio n -4 -

Table 3 compare s the thre e populatio nestimates . Dat a presente dfo r the Allianc e 198 7 estimat e incorporat e th e revision s discusse dabove . Becaus e th e TR C estimat e addresse donl y children , the compariso ni s mad e onthi s basis . Th e estimate s diffe r considerabl y fo r secondar y

smelter s an

dbatter y

plants , wit hth e larges t difference , a facto r o f 8 , betwee nthe Allianc e 198 5 an d198 7 estimate s fo r secondar y smelters . Two majo r factor s presen t themselve s a s possibl e explanation s fo r the discrepancies . First , differen t analytica l method s wer e use di neac ho f the thre e studies , and , second , the thre e analyse s covere ddifferen t set s o f plants . Change s i nplan t list s aros e bot ha s a resul t o f update s mad e t o the list s an da s a resul t o f plan t opening s an d closure s betwee n1983 , whe nplan t list s wer e develope dfo r the firs t Allianc e estimates , an

d1987 .
Change s i nplan t list s affec t the populatio nestimate s bot hb y virtu e o f th e number s o f plant s covered , an dbecaus e o f populatio ndensit y difference s fro

m plan t t o plant . Th e differenc e i npopulatio nfro m the Allianc e 198 5 an d198 7 secondar y

smelte r estimate s i s a facto r o f 4. 5 ona pe r plan t basis , compare d t o th e facto r o f 8 cite dabov e fo r the straigh t populatio nestimates .
Th e facto r o f 4. 5 mus t resul t fro m a combinatio no f th e difference s betwee n populatio ndensitie s among the plant s covere di nthe tw o analyses , an

dthe difference s i nmethodology . I t i s difficul t t o quantif y the impac t o f eithe r o f thes e factors . Base donou r SHEA Rresult s fo r secondar y smelter s an

d batter y

plants , I wa s abl e t o compar e the relativ e populatio ndensitie s fo r citie s o nthe 198 3 secondar y smelte r lis t us e i nthe firs t Allianc e analysis , andth e lates t smelte r lis t use di nth e TR C analysi s an dou r mos t recen t analysis . Th e differenc e i npopulatio ndensit y betwee ncitie s ononl y the 198 3 list , an

dcitie s o nonl y

the lates t lis t wa s a facto r o f 3.8 . Becaus e SHEA R
wa s no t rerunfo r al l smelter s onthe 198 3 list , the figure s fo r the 198 3 lis t
ar e base do nincomplet e samples . Dat a wer e onl y availabl e fo r 1 9 o f 4 2 locations . Bu t th e abov e lis t indicate s tha t the populatio ndensit y difference s coul daccoun t fo r a substantia l differenc e i nthe populatio n estimate . I nfact , populatio ndensit y i nindividua l citie s range dove r 2 order s o f magnitude .

Th e impac t o f methodolog y canb e isolate db

y studyin g the estimate s fo r primar y smelter s an

drefineries , sinc e lis t o f primar y smelter s an

drefinerie s change d th e least . Th e difference betwee nthe TR C estimat e an dth e 198 7 Allianc e estimat e fo r primar y smelters , whic har e base donidentica l plan t lists , i s onl y 3 percen t ona pe r plan t basis . Th e 198 5 Allianc e estimate , whic h include s the close dBunke r Hil l primar y smelter , differ s fro m the othe r tw

o estimate s b

y 2 3 percen t o na pe r plan t basis .P. 6



# / * ALLIANC E

Technologie s Corporatio n 

## -5 -

TABL E 3 . COMPARISO N O F POPULATIO N

ESTIMATE S

Primar y

Smelters/Refinerie s Numbe r o f plant s Childre n Childre npe r plan t Density—children/k m

—people/k m

Secondar y

Smelter s ( 2 km ) Numbe r o f plant s Childre n Childre npe r plan t Density—children/k m

—people/k m

Batter y

Plant s ( 1 km ) Numbe r o f plant s Childre n Childre npe r plan t Density—children/k m

—people/k m ( 5 km ) 

### TR C (1986 )



### 6 15. 0 250 0 31. 9



### 2 3 19. 7 

### 85 7 68. 3



### 9 8 15. 8 

### 17 5 51. 4 Alliance

198 7 (revised )



### 6 14. 6 243 3 31. 1 

### 28 9

2 3 12. 2 

### 63 5 54. 6 

### 50 8

8 7 34. 3 

### 39 4 125. 4 116 7 Alliance 198 5



### 7 21. 0 300 0 38. 2 

### 36 4

6 0 187. 3 312 2 

### 24 8 238 7



### 13 2 25. 0 

### 18 9 60. 3 

### 57 9P. 7



## # 4 #4f 4 

# ALLIANC E #^^ 4 Technologie s Corporatio n • 6

-

Because o f limit s t o the resolutio no f bot hHEM-SHE D an dHEM-SHEA

R(determine d b y th e siz e o f censu s enumeratio nbloc k groups ) bot hmodel s woul dlos e accurac y a s the stud

y are a i s decreased . Therefore , secondar y smelte r estimate s woul d b e les s accurat e tha nestimate s fo r primar y smelters , an

destimate s fo r batter y plant s b

y HEM woul db e the leas t accurate .

I nsummary , i t i s difficul t t o pinpoin t the sourc e o f the difference s amon g the thre e populatio nestimates . Fo r the larges t discrepancy , i nthe cas e o f secondar y

lea dsmelters , a larg e portio no f the discrepanc y ca nb e explaine db y change s i nthe locatio nan dsiz e o f the plan t populatio na s a whol e betwee n 198 3 an

dth e present . However , a residua l differenc e o f a t leas t 2 5 percen t remain s tha t mus t b e attribute dt o uncertaintie s i nmethodology . I nfact , give nthe resolutio no f SHE D an dSHEAR , accurac y o f thes e method s a t scale s o f 1 an d2 kilometer s i s probabl y no bette r thanplu s o r minu s 5 0 percent .

However , the accurac y o f the TRC analysi s i s als o subjec t t o limitations . A s note dabove , the TR C analysi s wa s base dona surve y o f emissio nsources . Respons e t o the surve y wa s 10 0 percen t fo r primar y smelters , bu t onl y 5 0 percen t fo r secondar y smelter s an

dbatter y

plants . I naddition , method s use d b y the individua l plant s to develo ppopulatio ncount s ar e undocumente dan d thei r accurac y

i s unknown .

Th e 1987/8 8 SHEA

Restimat e i s simila r t o th e TR C estimat e fo r primar y an d secondar y

smelters , bu t differ s b y a facto r o f tw

o for batter y

plants . Thi s difference , while substantial , i s probabl y withi nthe limit s o f accurac y o f th e methods . (Coincidentally , the 198 5 SHE D estimat e i s ver y simila r o na per plan t basi s t o the TR C estimate. ) A reasonabl e estimat e o f populatio nwoul d probabl y

b e a naverag e o f the count s obtaine db y th e tw o methods , HEM

modelin g an d plan t surveys . Th e 198 7 SHEA Rmodelin g result s shoul db e use di nplac e o f the 198 5 SHE D results . I t i s no t possibl e to determin e whic ho f thes e tw o model s give s a bette r populatio nestimate , bu t th e 198 5 result s (SHED ) shoul d b e discounte dbecause o f th e ag e o f the plan t list s use dt o produc e the m (1983) .P. 8



# X k ALLIANC E #jMM 4 Technologie s Corporatio n 

### -7 -

REFERENCE S

Memo fo r R . Hil l an dW . Battye , Allianc e Technologie s Corp. , t o J . Haine s an dD . Sledge , Ambien t Standard s Branch . Estimatio no f Population s Livin g Nea r Majo r Lea dEmissio nSources . Octobe r 9 , 10987 .

Memo fro

m W . Battye , Allianc e Technologie s Corp . t o J . Haine s an dJ . Cohen , Ambien t Standard s Branch . Estimate dNumber s o f Childre nResidin g Nea r Lea dPoin t Sources . Apri l 6 , 1985 .
Hoffnagle , G.F. , an dW.A . Klinger . Exposur e t o Airborn e Lea dfro m Stationar y

Sources : a

nEvaluatio no f Propose dNationa l Ambien t Ai r Qualit y

Standard s fo r Lead . Prepare db y TR C Environmenta l Consultant s fo r the Lea dIndustrie s Association . Marc h1986 .
Ai r Qualit y

Criteri a fo r Lead . EPA-600/8-83-028 . 1986 . U . S . Environmenta l Protectio nAgency .

Lette r fro

m R . Putnam , Putna m Environmenta l Services , t o J . Haines , Ambien t Standard s Branch . Lis t o f Secondar y LeadSmelters . Octobe r 8 , 1987 .