DOCSLIB.ORG

Lead NAAQS, Final

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Lead NAAQS, Final Regulatory Impact Analysis of the Proposed Revisions to the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Lead (This page intentionally left blank) October 2008 Regulatory Impact Analysis of the Proposed Revisions to the National Ambient Air Quality Standards U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards Health and Environmental Impact Division Air Benefit-Cost Group Research Triangle Park, North Carolina (This page intentionally left blank) ES.1 OVERVIEW This Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) estimates the incremental costs and monetized human health benefits of attaining a revised primary lead (Pb) National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). There are important overall data limitations and uncertainties in these estimates. They are described in section E.S.4 below. Hypothetical control strategies were developed for final NAAQS of 0.15 μg/m3 plus several alternative lead standards. These alternatives include at least one more stringent and one less stringent alternative than the selected standard, consistent with the OMB Circular A-4 Guidelines. This summary outlines the basis for and approach used for estimating the incremental costs and monetized benefits of these standards, presents the key results of the analysis, and highlights key uncertainties and limitations. This Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) provides illustrative estimates of the incremental costs and monetized human health benefits of attaining a revised primary lead (Pb) National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) within the current monitoring network of 189 monitors representing 86 counties. Many of the highest-emitting lead sources do not have nearby Pb-TSP monitors, and it is important to note that there may be many more potential nonattainment areas than have been analyzed in this RIA. It is important to note at the outset that overall data limitations are very significant for this analysis, compared to other NAAQS reviews. One critical area of uncertainty is the limited TSP-Pb monitoring network (discussed in chapter 2). Because monitors are present in only 86 counties nationwide, the universe of monitors exceeding the final NAAQS level of 0.15 µg/m3 represent only 16 counties. It is important to note that data limitations prevented us from identifying a full range of controls which would bring eight of these counties all the way to attainment of the final NAAQS. It is also important to note that because many of the highest- emitting Pb sources in the 2002 NEI do not have nearby Pb-TSP monitors (see section 2.1.7), it is likely that there may be many more potential nonattainment areas than have been analyzed in this RIA. In addition, EPA would prefer to use a detailed air quality model that simulates the dispersion and transport of lead to estimate local ambient lead concentrations with the hypothetical alternative emission control strategies expected under the NAAQS. Although models with such capabilities are available for pollutants for which EPA frequently conducts air quality analyses (e.g., particulate matter and ozone), regional scale models are currently neither available nor appropriate for lead.1 As discussed in Chapter 3, EPA developed an air quality assessment tool to estimate the air quality impacts of each lead emissions control strategy. In setting primary ambient air quality standards, EPA’s responsibility under the law is to establish standards that protect public health, regardless of the costs of implementing a new standard. The Clean Air Act requires EPA, for each criteria pollutant, to set a standard that 1 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2007c), Review of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Lead: Policy Assessment of Scientific and Technical Information, OAQPS Staff Paper, section 2.4, EPA-452/R-07-013, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, RTP, NC. ES-1 protects public health with “an adequate margin of safety.” As interpreted by the Agency and the courts, the Act requires EPA to create standards based on health considerations only. The prohibition against the consideration of cost in the setting of the primary air quality standard, however, does not mean that costs or other economic considerations are unimportant or should be ignored. The Agency believes that consideration of costs and benefits is essential to making efficient, cost effective decisions for implementation of these standards. The impacts of cost and efficiency are considered by states during this process, as they decide what timelines, strategies, and policies are most appropriate. This RIA is intended to inform the public about the potential costs and benefits associated with a hypothetical scenario that may result when a new lead standard is implemented, but is not relevant to establishing the standards themselves. The analysis year for this regulatory impact analysis is 2016, consistent with the attainment year for the final lead NAAQS. For the purposes of this analysis, we assess attainment by 2016 for all areas. Some areas for which we assume 2016 attainment may in fact need more time to meet one or more of the analyzed standards, while others will need less time. This analysis does not prejudge the attainment dates that will ultimately be assigned to individual areas under the Clean Air Act, which provides flexibility to postpone compliance dates, provided that the date is as expeditious as practicable. EPA presents this RIA pursuant to Executive Order 12866 and the guidelines of OMB Circular A-4.2 These documents present guidelines for EPA to assess the benefits and costs of the selected regulatory option, as well as one less stringent and one more stringent option. OMB Circular A-4 also requires both a benefit-cost, and a cost-effectiveness analysis for rules where health is the primary effect. Within this RIA we provide a benefit-cost analysis. ES.2 Summary of Analytic Approach Our assessment of the selected lead NAAQS includes several key elements, including specification of baseline lead emissions and concentrations; development of illustrative control strategies to attain the standard in 2016; development of an air quality assessment tool to assess the air quality impacts of these control strategies; and analyses of the incremental impacts of attaining the alternative standards. Figure ES-1 provides an illustration of the methodological framework of this RIA. Additional information on the methods employed by the Agency for this RIA is presented below. Overview of Baseline Emissions Forecast and Baseline Lead Concentrations The baseline lead emissions and lead concentrations for this RIA are based on lead emissions data from the 2002 National Emissions Inventory (NEI) and lead concentration values for 21 lead monitors included in the 2003-2005 Pb-TSP NAAQS-review database. Consistent with the PM2.5 NAAQS RIA and ozone RIA, no growth factors were applied to the 2002 NEI emissions estimates to generate the emissions or air quality projections for 2016. Where 2 U.S. Office of Management and Budget. Circular A-4, September 17, 2003. Found on the Internet at <http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/circulars/a004/a-4.pdf>. ES-2 possible, however, we adjusted these values to reflect the estimated control efficiency of MACT standards with post-2002 compliance deadlines, because the 2002 NEI and observed lead concentrations during the 2003-2005 period would not reflect the impact of MACT controls reasonably anticipated to be in place by 2016. The analysis includes similar adjustments for compliance measures simulated by the September 2006 revision to the PM2.5 NAAQS (as included in the illustrative PM2.5 control strategy described in the PM2.5 NAAQS RIA) and measures listed in the 2007 Missouri Lead SIP revisions.3 Development of Illustrative Control Strategies Our analysis of the emissions control measures required to meet the selected standard is limited to controls for point source emissions at active sources inventoried in the 2002 NEI. To identify point source lead emissions controls for our analysis, we collected information on PM control technologies, assuming that the control efficiency for PM would also apply to lead emissions. Most of this information was obtained from EPA's AirControlNET database, but a limited number of controls were identified from New Source Performance Standards and operating permits that apply to facilities with similar Source Classification Codes as the point sources included in our analysis.4 Controls identified through this process include major emissions controls, such as fabric filters, impingement-plate scrubbers, and electrostatic precipitators; and minor controls, such as increased monitoring frequency, upgrades to continuous emissions monitors, and diesel particulate filters for stationary sources. In addition, we modeled replacement of the large primary lead smelter in Jefferson County, Missouri with a more modern, lower-emitting smelter. To identify the least-cost approach for reaching attainment in each area, EPA developed a linear programming optimization model that systematically evaluates the changes in air quality and costs associated with controlling each source to find the optimal control strategy for each area. The optimization model first identifies the measures that each source would implement if it were controlled as part of a local lead attainment strategy. Based on these controls, the optimization model then identifies sources to control such that each area would reach attainment at the least aggregate cost possible for the area. It is important to remember that, compared to recent NAAQS RIAs, our current knowledge of the costs and nature of lead emissions controls is relatively poor. Lead in ambient air has not been a focus for all but a few areas of the country for the last decade or more; the selected standard of 0.15 μg/m3 represents a substantial tightening of the existing NAAQS. As a result, although AirControlNET contains information on a large number of different point source controls, we would expect that State and local air quality managers would have access to additional information on the controls available to the most significant source.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Aquatic ERA Summary Report
    SUMMARY REPORT TECK COMINCO METALS LTD. AQUATIC ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT Issue Date: SeptemberDecember 20102007 Prepared by: Stella Swanson Golder Associates, Calgary, (now Swanson Environmental Strategies Ltd.) Prepared for: Teck Cominco Metals Ltd. (now Teck Metals Ltd.) Trail, British Columbia Table of Contents INTRODUCTION 1 Background to the Risk Assessment .............................................................. 1 Study Area Description ................................................................................... 2 OVERALL APPROACH USED FOR THE ERA 3 The Past: Cominco smelter Bottom-Up and Top-Down Perspectives ......................................................... 3 Problem Formulation: The First Step in Risk Assessment .............................. 5 Sequential Analysis of Lines of Evidence (SALE): a New Method for Assembling a Weight-of-Evidence for Risk ................................................ 5 Description of the SALE Process .................................................................... 6 The Present: Teck Cominco External Review of the ERA Approach ............................................................ 7 smelter RESULTS OF THE PROBLEM FORMULATION: THE FIRST STAGE OF THE RISK ASSESSMENT 7 Risk Management Goal and Objectives .......................................................... 7 Meeting the Risk Management Objectives ............................................. 7 Assessment Endpoints and Measures: Specific Aquatic Ecosystem Components and Characteristics to be Protected ...................................
    [Show full text]
  • Teck in Its Tweens: an Update on 12 Years of Litigation Over the Canadian Smelter
    Teck in its Tweens: An Update on 12 Years of Litigation Over The Canadian Smelter Kelly T. Wood Assistant Attorney General Just over the border from Northeast Washington, in the town of Trail, B.C., the Teck Metals (formerly Teck Cominco) smelter hovers over the Columbia River like a bird of prey. In 2002 and 2003, swimmer Christopher Swain swam the length of the Columbia—from its Canadian headwaters to the Pacific Ocean—in an effort to bring attention to pollution and blockage issues. Passing the Teck smelter, Swain recalled the sight as he took slow freestyle-swim breaths beneath the smelter: “Water. Mordor. Water. Mordor. Water. Mordor . .” The Trail smelter is currently the largest lead/zinc smelter in the world, a title it recently regained after a downturn in emerging markets caused the prices of metals to take a dive, and a number of other smelters to close, in the early 2010s. For a period of 100+ years, Teck discharged hazardous byproducts from its smelting operations into the Columbia River, both liquid effluent and granulated slag. Up to 145,000 tons of slag went into the Columbia on an annual basis, the vast majority of which was dutifully carried downstream the 10 river miles to Washington. So much slag (millions of tons) washed downstream from the Trail smelter, that a “black sand” beach formed in a backwater eddy north of the town of Northport. Over time, Teck slag physically decays in the river, leaching heavy metals to the surrounding environment. And, other metals in Teck’s liquid effluent discharges also adsorbed to river sediment and settled into the quiescent waters of Lake Roosevelt.
    [Show full text]
  • Download Download
    Blaylock’s Bomb: How a Small BC City Helped Create the World’s First Weapon of Mass Destruction Ron Verzuh our years into the Second World War, the citizens of Trail, British Columbia, a small city with a large smelter in the moun- tainous West Kootenay region near the United States border, were, Flike most of the world, totally unaware of the possibility of creating an atomic bomb. Trail’s industrial workforce, employees of the Consolidated Mining and Smelting Company of Canada (CM&S Company), were home-front producers of war materials destined for Allied forces on the battlefields of Europe. They, along with the rest of humanity, would have seen the creation of such a bomb as pure science fiction fantasy invented by the likes of British novelist H.G. Wells.1 They were understandably preoccupied with the life-and-death necessity of ensuring an Allied victory against the Nazis, Italian fascists, and the Japanese. It was no secret that, as it had done in the previous world conflict, their employer was supplying much of the lead, zinc, and now fertilizer that Britain needed to prosecute the war.2 What Trailites did not know was that they were for a short time indispensable in the creation of the world’s first weapon of mass destruction. 1 H.G. Wells, The Shape of Things to Come (London: Penguin, 2005) and The World Set Free (London: Macmillan and Co., 1914). Both allude to nuclear war. 2 Lance H. Whittaker, “All Is Not Gold: A Story of the Discovery, Production and Processing of the Mineral, Chemical and Power Resources of the Kootenay District of the Province of British Columbia and of the Lives of the Men Who Developed and Exploited Those Resources,” unpublished manuscript commissioned by S.G.
    [Show full text]
  • Contamination of the Upper Columbia River And
    American Bar Association Tort Trial & Insurance Practice Section Toxic Torts and Environmental Law Committee Reaching Across the 49th Parallel: The Origins and Transformation of Canada/U.S. Environmental Disputes Phoenix, AZ April 2-4, 2009 Cont ami na tion of the Upper ClColumbi a River and the Transboundary Application of CERCLA: Pakootas v. TCM Metals, Ltd. Presented by: Richard A. Du Bey Short Cressman & Burgess PLLC | Seattle, WA | (206) 682-3333 | [email protected] 1 Superfund (CERCLA) 42 U.S.C. §§ 9601 et seq. (1980) • Provides a Federal “Superfund” to clean up uncontrolled or abandoned hazardous-waste sites . ..., . , and other . releases . into the environment • Potentially responsible parties (PRPs) are held strictly jointly and severally liable for total cleanup cost 2 Superfund (CERCLA) 42 U.S.C. §§ 9601 et seq. (1980) • Provides for enforcement by Tribal, State and Federal governmental aggfencies for the clean up pf of hazardous substances and each of the three sovereiggyns may assert statutory claims for Natural Resource Damages (NRD) 3 Tribal Interests at Risk • Indian Reservations are the remaining homeland of Indian Tribes • Tribes entitled to use and enjoy their reservation homeland and associated on and off-Reservation natural resources • Tribal rights to natural resources have significant economic, cultural and spiritual value 4 Case Study: the Upper Colum bia River • Lake Roosevelt created by Grand Coulee Dam in 1942 • 150 miles between Grand Coulee Dam and US/Canada border •Collllville Reservation west of LLkake Roosevelt • Spokane Reservation east of Lake Roosevelt 5 Area of Concern Cominco Smelter 6 The Grand Coulee Dam 7 Source of Contamination • Contamination from world’ s largest lead- zinc smelter 16 km upstream from border • 1992 USGS sediment study identified elevated levels of metals in sediments • 1994 WA Dept.
    [Show full text]
  • By Peter N. Gabby
    LEAD By Peter N. Gabby Domestic survey data and tables were prepared by Amy M. Baumgartner, statistical assistant, and the world production tables were prepared by Glenn J. Wallace, international data coordinator. Domestic lead mine production decreased by 4% compared more than 4,600 t (45,900 short tons) of lead remained in the with that of 2003. alaska and Missouri were the dominant NDS. at the rate lead has been selling from the stockpile for producing States with a 95% share. Other appreciable lead the past 2 years, the inventory will probably sell out in 2006. mine production was in Idaho, Montana, and Washington. Lead was produced at 0 U.S. mines employing about 880 people. Production The value of domestic mine production was more than $523 million. Lead concentrates produced at the Missouri mines were Primary.—In 2004, domestic mine production of recoverable processed into primary metal at the only remaining domestic lead decreased by about 20,000 t, or about 4%, compared with that smelter-refineries, also located in Missouri. of 2003. The major share of the U.S. mine output of lead continued Secondary lead, derived principally from scrapped lead-acid to be derived from production in Alaska and Missouri. Appreciable batteries, accounted for 88% of refined lead production in the lead mine production also was reported in Idaho, Montana, and United States. Nearly all the secondary lead was produced by 6 Washington. Domestic mine production data were collected by companies operating 4 smelters. the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) from a precious-metal and Lead was consumed in about 0 U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Teck Cominco Metals Ltd
    SUMMARY REPORT TECK COMINCO METALS LTD. PHASE 4 HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT Issue Date: March 2009 Table of Contents INTRODUCTION ............................................................................... 1 Background to the Risk Assessment .......................................... 1 Study Area Description ............................................................... 3 RISK ASSESSMENT APPROACH ................................................... 4 Problem Formulation: Refining the Conceptual Site Models ...... 4 Welcome to the City of Trail Toxicity Assessment: Evaluating Dose-Response Relationships ............................................................................ 10 Risk Characterization: Integrating Exposure and Toxicity ........ 11 PHASE 4 ASSESSMENT RESULTS .............................................. 13 Residential Scenario ................................................................. 13 Glenmerry in fall Commercial and Agricultural Scenarios .................................... 15 Fish Consumption ..................................................................... 17 Off-Road Vehicle Use ............................................................... 17 SENSITIVITY OF RISK RESULTS TO SELECTED INPUTS AND ASSUMPTIONS ..................................................................... 18 Trail wildlife USE OF BIOMONITORING TO ASSESS EXPOSURES ............... 21 SETTING REMEDIATION GOALS ................................................. 22 CONCLUSIONS .............................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 2005 Minerals Yearbook LEAD
    2005 Minerals Yearbook LEAD U.S. Department of the Interior February 2007 U.S. Geological Survey LEAD By Peter N. Gabby Domestic survey data and tables were prepared by Amy M. Baumgartner, statistical assistant, and the world production tables were prepared by Glenn J. Wallace, international data coordinator. Domestic lead mine production decreased slightly compared Production with that of 2004. Alaska and Missouri were the dominant producing States with a 93% share. Other appreciable lead Primary.—In 2005, domestic mine production of recoverable mine production was in Idaho, Montana, and Washington. Lead lead was 426,000 t, a decrease of 4,000 t compared with that of was produced at 10 U.S. mines employing about 860 people. 2004. The major share of the U.S. mine output of lead continued The value of domestic mine production was more than $574 to be derived from production in Alaska and Missouri. Lead million. Lead concentrates produced at the Missouri mines were mine production also was reported in Idaho, Montana, and processed into primary metal at the only remaining domestic Washington. Domestic mine production data were collected by smelter-refi nery, also located in Missouri. the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) from a precious-metal and Secondary lead, derived principally from scrapped lead-acid base-metal voluntary survey on lode-mine production. All lead- batteries, accounted for 89% of refi ned lead production in the producing mines responded to the survey. The lead concentrates United States. produced from the mined ore were processed into primary metal Lead was consumed in about 110 U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Industrial Minerals Industrial Minerals
    37th FORUM on the GEOLOGY of INDUSTRIAL MINERALS MAY 23-25, 2001 VICTORIA, BC, CANADA Industrial Minerals with emphasis on Western North America Editors: George J. Simandl, William J. McMillan and Nicole D. Robinson Ministry of Energy and Mines Geological Survey Branch Paper 2004-2 Recommended reference style for individual papers: Nelson, J. (2004): The Geology of Western North America (Abridged Version);in G.J. Simandl, W.J. McMillan and N.D. Robinson, Editors, 37th Annual Forum on Industrial Minerals Proceedings, Industrial Minerals with emphasis on Western North America, British Columbia Ministry of Energy and Mines, Geological Survey Branch, Paper 2004-2, pages 1-2. Cover photo: Curved, grey magnesite crystals in a black dolomite matrix. Mount Brussilof magnesite mine, British Columbia, Canada Library and Archives Canada Cataloguing in Publication Data Forum on the Geology of Industrial Minerals (37th : 2001 : Victoria, B.C.) Industrial mineral with emphasis on western North America (Paper / Geological Survey Branch) ; 2004-2) "37th Forum on the Geology of Industrial Minerals, May 23-25, 2001, Victoria, B.C. Canada." Includes bibliographical references: p. ISBN 0-7726-5270-8 1. Industrial minerals - Geology - North America - Congresses. 2. Ore deposits - North America - Congresses. 3. Geology, Economic - North America - Congresses. I. Simandl, George J. (George Jiri), 1953- . II. McMillan, W. J. (William John). III. Robinson, Nicole D. IV. British Columbia. Ministry of Energy and Mines. V. British Columbia. Geological Survey Branch. VI. Title. VII. Series: Paper (British Columbia. Geological Survey Branch) ; 2004-2. TN22.F67 2005 553.6'097 C2005-960004-7 Recommended reference style for individual papers: Nelson, J.
    [Show full text]
  • ||||||||||||| Hazen Research, Inc
    EXPERT OPINION OF PAUL B. QUENEAU AND REBUTTAL OF THE EXPERT OPINION OF J.F. HIGGINSON PAKOOTAS, ET AL. v. TECK COMINCO METALS ET AL. May 12, 2011 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION 6 II. QUALIFICATIONS 6 Employment History Books Technical Presentations and Journal Publications Patents Projects That Involved Zinc and Lead Extractive Metallurgy III. CASES IN WHICH PAUL B. QUENEAU TESTIFIED AS AN EXPERT AT TRIAL OR BY DEPOSITION IN THE PAST FOUR YEARS 14 IV. BASES AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION 14 V. THE PURPOSE OF THIS REPORT 14 VI. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 16 A. Lead Blast Furnace (BF) and Fumed Slag Discharges (1920 to 1997) B. Non-Slag Discharges (1920 to 2005) VII. TRAIL OPERATIONS IN ONE PARAGRAPH 18 VIII. OVERVIEW OF METAL AND BYPRODUCT PRODUCTION AT TRAIL 18 A. Stages of Growth at Trail: 1896 to 1995 Overview Location of the Trail smelter Copper ore feedstock and copper matte product Roasting to remove sulfur Production of sulfuric acid from roaster offgas Copper smelting to produce matte product and slag waste Expert Opinion and Rebuttal of Paul B. Queneau Pakootas et al. v Teck Cominco Metals Ltd. Page 2 Handling furnace offgas Production of lead Acquisition of key mines Production of electrolytic zinc and copper (1916) Separation of lead from zinc by flotation (1923) Fuming of lead blast furnace slag (1930) Production of fertilizer from Trail byproducts (1931) Suspension roasting of zinc sulfide concentrates (1936) Minimizing loss of lead tankhouse electrolyte Establishing a major source of captive electric power (1942) Support of World War II efforts Recovering dust and fume from furnace offgas Minor metal recovery The modernization of Trail B.
    [Show full text]
  • LEAD by Gerald R
    LEAD By Gerald R. Smith Domestic survey data and tables were prepared by Joshua I. Martinez, statistical assistant, and the world production tables were prepared by Glenn J. Wallace, international data coordinator. Domestic lead mine production increased by 2% compared with for lead of 54,400 t (Defense National Stockpile Center, 2003a). that of 2002. Alaska and Missouri were the dominant producing Under the fiscal year 2004 authority, disposal of lead from the States with a 96% share. Other appreciable lead mine production NDS inventory during the final 3 months of calendar year 2003 was in Idaho and Montana. Lead was produced at 10 U.S. amounted to 11,500 t (12,700 short tons), leaving about 112,000 mines employing about 800 people. The value of domestic mine t (123,000 short tons) of lead at yearend. Announcements were production was more than $430 million. A significant portion of made by the DNSC in February 2003 and November 2003 the lead concentrates produced from the mined ore was processed awarding the sale of lead from the NDS in negotiated long-term into primary metal at two smelter-refineries in Missouri. contracts extending for a contract period of 360 calendar days Secondary lead, derived principally from scrapped lead-acid (Defense National Stockpile Center, 2003b, c). The long-term batteries, accounted for 82% of refined lead production in the sales included several grades of lead totaling about 21,600 t United States. Nearly all the secondary lead was produced by 7 (23,800 short tons). companies operating 15 smelters. During 2003, U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • The Availability of Indium: the Present, Medium Term, and Long Term Martin Lokanc, Roderick Eggert, and Michael Redlinger Colorado School of Mines Golden, Colorado
    The Availability of Indium: The Present, Medium Term, and Long Term Martin Lokanc, Roderick Eggert, and Michael Redlinger Colorado School of Mines Golden, Colorado NREL Technical Monitor: Michael Woodhouse NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy Operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications. Subcontract Report NREL/SR-6A20-62409 October 2015 Contract No. DE-AC36-08GO28308 The Availability of Indium: The Present, Medium Term, and Long Term Martin Lokanc, Roderick Eggert, and Michael Redlinger Colorado School of Mines Golden, Colorado NREL Technical Monitor: Michael Woodhouse Prepared under Subcontract No. UGA-0-41025-20 NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy Operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications. National Renewable Energy Laboratory Subcontract Report 15013 Denver West Parkway NREL/SR-6A20-62409 Golden, CO 80401 October 2015 303-275-3000 • www.nrel.gov Contract No. DE-AC36-08GO28308 NOTICE This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States government. Neither the United States government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights.
    [Show full text]
  • Terrestrial Ecological Risk Assessment for the Teck Metals Ltd
    • Terrestrial Ecological Risk Assessment for the Teck Metals Ltd. Smelter at Trail, BC. MAIN REPORT Revised May 2011 This document was jointly prepared and co-authored by: Intrinsik Environmental Sciences Inc. Swanson Environmental Strategies Ltd. Delphinium Holdings Inc. Teck Metals Ltd. (This page intentionally left blank) INTRINSIK ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES INC. SWANSON ENVIRONMENTAL STRATEGIES LTD. DELPHINIUM HOLDINGS INC. TECK METALS LTD. TERRESTRIAL ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT FOR THE TECK METALS LTD SMELTER AT TRAIL, BC. Table of Contents Page EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................ i 1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................ 1 1.1 Purpose ....................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Overview of Approach .................................................................................................. 3 1.3 Consultation and External Review ................................................................................ 6 1.4 Management Goals and Objectives ............................................................................. 6 1.5 Report Organization ..................................................................................................... 8 2.0 PROBLEM FORMULATION ........................................................................................... 9 2.1 Area
    [Show full text]