Great Lakes Binational Toxics Strategy

GLBTS Links

______________________

Dioxin / Furans

Stakeholders Minutes - November 18, 1999
Workgroup Biannual Meeting

Workgroup Leaders:
Sandro Leonardelli, EC
Nan Gowda, EPA

Facilitator:
John Menkedick, Battelle

The objectives for the day were to discuss progress since the April Stakeholder meeting, begin application of the decision tree process, and determine next steps towards identifying and prioritizing options for reduction.

Introduction

The meeting opened with a brief introduction and an update of workgroup progress since the last stakeholder meeting in April. The workgroup held conference calls in June, July, September and October, with a focus on discussion of major sources and development of a decision tree process to set priorities for action.

Discussion

Application of the Decision Tree - Residential Wood Combustion

The discussion opened with a presentation of available information on residential wood combustion (RWC) in Canada by Sandro Leonardelli (EC).

In the 1999 Canadian Inventory, RWC emissions were estimated to be the third largest source of dioxin emissions, and are projected to be the second largest source (as iron sintering plant emissions decrease) in 1999.
Testing has focused on RWC emissions defined as those that would occur as a result of hardwood/softwood combustion in fireplaces and woodstoves.
It was noted that some types of wood burned in residential settings can have fairly high chlorine contents.
It was also noted that RWC also accounts for 46% of B(a)P emissions. There is a need, however, for further improving emission estimates for RWC to give a better sense of the best practices for achieving reductions.

The potential for linking to the broader BNS communication plan that is being discussed by the Integration Group was raised, as communication and outreach were expected to be a major focus of reduction efforts aimed at RWC.

Members of the workgroup expressed concern about this source relative to other sources, and questions were asked regarding opportunities/options for regulatory reductions efforts.

After further discussion of RWC within the context of the Dioxin Decision Tree Process, the workgroup concluded that, at this time, the RWC sector should be designated as high priority for future workgroup dioxin reductions activities.

It was acknowledged that a designation of high priority for the initial source discussion could change, dependent on the assessment of subsequent sources. It was agreed that if too many high priority sources were identified, the priority for each could be re-visited.

Application of the Decision Tree - Open Barrel Burning

The workgroup proceeded with a discussion of open barrel burning within the context of the Dioxin Decision Tree Process.

A question was asked whether the source category included agricultural burning. Opinion of several workgroup members was that it did not, but the government agreed to check on this with Dwain Winters (EPA).

Joe Stepun (WLSSD) related that in Minnesota they are conducting surveys regarding open burning and looking at the possibility of using waste incineration permits to regulate open burning. Emission estimate testing was conducted in MN in 1994-97 on open burning. Open burning has been determined to have an immediate local impact in Minnesota. He also noted that the combustion of garbage in residential fireplaces is another issue of concern in Minnesota.

Tom Hornshaw (IL-EPA) noted that in Illinois, there are statewide regulations on open burning, however, enforcement of these regulations is relaxed.

Education and outreach applicable to achieving reductions in dioxin emission from open burning were also discussed. Local fire departments were mentioned as a resource that may have big potential for conducting successful communication efforts geared at encouraging the public to reduce open burning, or to modify open burning practices to release less dioxins.

After consideration of the available information, the workgroup concluded that at this time, open barrel burning should also be designated as high priority for future workgroup dioxin reductions activities.

Application of the Decision Tree - Medical Waste Incinerators (MWI)

Background information prepared for the meeting related to MWI was summarized. Major points included:

Confidence ratings for both the emission factor and the activity level were low.
There are less stringent emission limits for small “rural” (<200 pounds / hour) facilities in the U.S.
Many facilities have been closing, raising the question of where their waste is being transferred to.
U.S. State contacts revealed some transfer of medical waste to MWC or pyrolysis facilities with different emissions guidelines.
There are differences between Canada and the U.S. in regulatory status.

It was noted that, in Canada, none of the approximately 69 operating MWI facilities are subject to the Ontario Guideline A-1. Furthermore, this sector is not being addressed under the Canada Wide Standards process.

Scott Sederstrom (Great Lakes Center for Occupational & Environmental Safety & Health) noted that Illinois is the only state that required consideration of waste separation, reuse, and recycling when implementing the federal HMIWI regulations.

The issue of the closing down of facilities was discussed. It was noted that many MWI facilities are operating at much less than full capacity, therefore the closing of these facilities may not result in medical waste being shifted to non-medical waste incinerators.

The issue of potential for cross-media transfer of pollutants was discussed, including:

New technology
Transfer of dioxin to water or the waste stream
Cooperation between regulators, the regulated community, and non-governmental organizations
Regulations regarding fly ash

It was noted that, generally, recycling and reuse are favored to reduce the magnitude of the waste stream. There are also new technologies available for reducing the mass of waste materials, although it was undetermined at the meeting whether these technologies/opportunities were applicable to medical waste incineration

A question was asked on whether there were effective regulations regarding fly ash:

Land disposal bans on waste containing dioxin and characteristics of leachate testing requirements (in the U.S.) were discussed.
The need for more information on the dioxin content and fate of fly ash was discussed

A proposal was made regarding the prioritization of the MWI sector:

As air emissions from MWI are presently under extensive regulatory control, this aspect of the sector could receive a low priority designation regarding future workgroup efforts. However, the workgroup may want to further consider the issue of MWI ash disposal as an aspect of MWI that may warrant future workgroup attention.

Announcements

Werner Braun (CGLI) announced that CGLI has been gathering 30 year trend data for dioxin in several media in the Great Lakes Basin and have plotted the information using a first order kinetics format. They hope to be able to present the information soon at an upcoming workgroup meeting.

Next Steps / New Action Items

NOTE: A sign-up sheet for workgroup members interested in participating in sector specific subgroups was sent around the room during the meeting.

Volunteers for RWC efforts included:

Evelyn Strader (CGLI)
Fardin Oliaei (MPCA)
Dan Hopkins (EPA)
John Crouch (Hearth Products Association)

Volunteers for open burning efforts included:

Tom Hornshaw (Illinois EPA)
Evelyn Strader (CGLI)
Joe Stepun (WLSSD)
Fardin Oliaei (MPCA)

The workgroup will continue application of the decision tree process at the next dioxin workgroup teleconference call, which is scheduled for December 7, 1999.

Participant Roster

Werner Braun, Council of Great Lakes Industries
John Crouch, Hearth Products Association
Tony DeFalco, National Wildlife Federation
Phil Doyle, EPA-GLNPO
Herb Estreicher, Covington & Burling
Greg Filyk, Environment Canada - Transboundary Air Issues Branch
Stephane Gingras, Great Lakes United
Nan Gowda, USEPA Region 5
Douglas Green, Piper, Marbury, Rodnick and Wolfe LLP
Dan Hopkins, USEPA
Tom Hornshaw, Illinois EPA
Mark Johnson, Weyerhauser Company
Denis Kemp, Falconbridge Limited
Sandro Leonardelli, Environment Canada
Jeffrey Lynn, International Paper
Alexandra McPherson, Great Lakes United (GLU)
John Menkedick, Battelle
Fardin Oliaei, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
Dale Phenicie, Council of Great Lakes Industries
Scott Sederstrom, Great Lakes Center for Occupational & Environmental Safety & Health
Joseph Stepun, Western Lake Superior Sanitary District